Click here a filler image only no relevency to acquisition, logistic, contracting or program management image of a classical greek architechture representing DAU's strength as a business university instructing in DoD Acquisition
          Home      Contact      About ACC      Privacy      Tutorial      DoD Certificate      Feedback
.

Ch. 8- Monitoring the Contractor

Topic
Long Description

Chapter 8

Monitoring the Contractor

To properly monitor the contractor, the COR must know and understand the contract requirements, as specified in the Statement of Objectives, Statement of Work, or Performance Work Statement (SOO/SOW/PWS). The COR should have a copy of the SOO/SOW/PWS so that he or she has it readily available to verify and enforce contract requirements as stated in the SOO/SOW/PWS. (Interpreting the contract requirements can be difficult if the SOO/SOW/PWS is poorly written, displaying a lack of technical knowledge, inadequate planning or research, lack of communication, differing interpretations, and carelessness). With the proper SOO/SOW/PWS and performance-based metrics, as discussed in Chapter 9, the contract is more likely to be successful.

Note: The COR monitors the contractor based on the contract requirements specified in the SOO/SOW/PWS and according to the COR appointment or designation letter from the contracting officer.

The COR must notify the contracting officer, orally and in writing, if the contractor is not performing well; for example, if contractor performance deviates from the SOO/SOW/PWS. It is the responsibility of the contracting officer—and only the contracting officer—to give verbal or written directions to the contractor. These directions should be made a part of the record in the contract file. The requiring unit should not attempt to interpret the SOO/SOW/PWS for the contractor and may not direct changes or accept substitute performance. Many people have improperly cost the government, or themselves, money by making seemingly nonchalant remarks asking the contractor to act outside the scope of the contract. CORs must ensure their unit leaders do not cross this line.

Contractor Progress Reports

The contract may require the contractor to provide progress reports. Contractor progress reports provide the first early warning of potential changes, delays, or other problems in contractor performance. Submitted by the contractor, these reports summarize progress since the preceding report, so earlier reports are summarized, subsumed, and superseded by the new report. They vary in form from a single-page memo or letter to several hundred pages of detail by task, with supporting graphs and tables. Progress reports address the following topics.

  • Project status
  • Measurement of achievements against objectives
  • Problems encountered
  • Actions taken to correct deficiencies
  • Percentage of work completed
  • Acceptability of the work
  • Work remaining
  • Evaluation

Progress reports do not relieve the contractor of a separate obligation to report anticipated or actual delays to the COR and contracting officer.

For requirements-type contracts, each delivery order must be covered by a separate progress report, except that one report per contract may be used to identify those delivery orders on which no work was performed during the period being reported.

The contractor must forward the progress reports in accordance with the instructions of the contracting officer.

The COR must ensure that each progress report is factually accurate and complete and should check each progress report to determine the following.

Monitoring the Contractor

  • Will the contractor meet the delivery dates? Are any problems foreseen?
  • Are the expenditures in line with the work performed and with the work planned?
  • How does the percentage of work completed compare to the funds expended?
  • How does the status of the deliverables (reports, designs, texts) compare to the progress report?

The COR should discuss any ambiguities or discrepancies with the contractor.

The government should not expect a one-to-one correlation between the expenditures identified in the progress report and those in the invoice. The coverage dates may be different, and the progress reports may not reflect lags in the accounting system.

Assessing Performance

The contractor has the primary responsibility for quality assurance and timeliness of its supplies or services. However, the COR must assess the contractor's performance to ensure that the supply or service delivered conforms to contract requirements. Unsatisfactory performance under a contract may jeopardize a project or may directly affect a unit's ability to perform its mission.

The COR must continually monitor the contractor's performance, both formally and informally, throughout the contract. The COR should consider the following.

  • How well the contractor is doing
  • Whether performance, quality, schedule, and cost requirements are being met
  • Whether the requiring unit is satisfied
  • Whether the processes are working
  • If and where improvements are necessary

The following are key assessment factors.

  • Cost control.
  • Timeliness (schedule or delivery). Is the contractor on schedule to meet contractual requirements? Did the contractor meet the contractual delivery requirements? Does the contract include a reward for early delivery, or a penalty for late delivery?
  • Quality. Do the supplies or services meet the requirements? Do they conform to the contract specifications, standards, SOO/SOW/PWS, and quality assurance plan?
  • Business relations. Is the contractor responsive, professional, and courteous?
  • Management of key personnel. Are technical experts highly qualified and effective in performing the required services? Do they meet the skill level stated in the contract? Are an appropriate number of personnel assigned to the project? Do delivered supplies reflect the skill and standardization required by the user?
  • User satisfaction. Will the requiring unit be satisfied in terms of cost, quality, and timeliness of the delivered supplies or services? What percentage of the deliverable meets the user's expectations? How long has the contractor taken to address any user complaints? How many user complaints have there been?
  • Compliance. Has the contractor complied with, for example, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, and Department of Labor regulations or local standards?
Acceptable Inspection Methods

The assessment of quality is particularly important, because if the quality of a supply or service does not meet contract requirements, the safety of the requiring unit could be jeopardized. The government has the right to inspect all contract deliverables at any time prior to acceptance. Inspections may be announced or unannounced, but they must not unduly delay work, nor must they include directions that would change the contract. The government also has the right to reject any deliverables that do not meet contract requirements.

For commercial item acquisitions, Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 46.202-1, Contracts for Commercial Items, requires that the government rely on contractors' quality assurance systems as a substitute for government inspection and testing before tender for acceptance, unless customary practices for the supply being acquired include in-process inspection. Any in-process inspection by the government must be consistent with commercial practice.

For services, the COR can monitor contractor performance using a variety of inspection methods. Before an inspection, the COR should check the contract for any specific inspection and testing requirements. The COR should use a systematic approach and should ensure that the inspection methods do not interfere with the contractor's progress—or at least only to the extent that disruption is absolutely necessary. The following subsections briefly describe the most common inspection method and their use.

Random or Stratified Sampling

With random sampling, services are sampled to determine if the level of performance is acceptable. Random sampling works best when the number of instances in which the services are being performed is very large, allowing a statistically valid sample to be obtained. Stratified sampling focuses on selected parts of total contractor output for sampling. Computer programs may be available to assist with establishing sampling procedures. This is the preferred surveillance method, because it is an efficient way to obtain an unbiased, comprehensive evaluation of the contractor's performance. The COR need only make relatively few observations from which he or she can project the quality of the entire lot. The contractor does not know which service output will be observed; consequently, all must be done correctly, and the COR is prevented from biasing the sample by his or her own judgment. The advantage is that the results can be projected to the lot, without inspecting the entire lot.

100-Percent Inspection

This inspection method is too expensive for most cases. As the name implies, all outputs in the designated lot would be observed by the inspector. For example, with a service requirement for required reports, all reports listed in the lot would be examined for acceptance. The government uses 100-percent inspection for stringent performance requirements concerning health and safety.

Periodic Inspection, Judgmental Inspection, or Planned Sampling

This method consists of the evaluation of tasks selected on other than a 100-percent inspection or random basis. This type of sampling is normally used to check the contractor's quality control system to ensure that it is capable of meeting the government's quality requirements. Because defects found as the result of planned sampling cannot be considered statistically valid for evaluating the entire work lot, monetary deductions for other than satisfactory performance are limited to only the work specifically found defective. For this reason, planned sampling should not be used as the only method of surveillance.

When planned sampling is used, work process outputs are selected in accordance with subjective criteria established in the quality assurance surveillance plan. These criteria should be documented and applied consistently throughout the observation period and from one period to the next. Surveillance consistency enables the inspector to detect trends in performance and requires less inspector retraining time and fewer document/report revisions. The advantages to this method are that government inspectors can focus their attention on known problem areas and the contractor or in-house workforce has a greater incentive to improve those deficient areas that they know will be observed. The disadvantage is that because the observations are not selected randomly, comparisons of quality cannot be made between the sampled outputs and the lot.

User Feedback

This method requires documentation and is not usually a primary surveillance method. However, user feedback is a valuable supplement to more systematic surveillance methods. Performance to be observed is not selected by the COR, but is based on written or telephonic complaints made by users. Once the COR receives a complaint, he or she will investigate and, if valid, will document it as a contractor performance deficiency.

Further guidance on these surveillance tools is set forth in Office of Federal Procurement Policy Pamphlet 4, A Guide to Best Practices for Performance-Based Service Contracting, Chapter 5, "The Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan," available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/rewrite/procurement/pbsa/guide_pbsc.html.

The COR should notify the contracting officer whenever supplies or services do not meet requirements. The COR should provide the contracting officer with documentation on the number of observations made, the number and type of problems, actions taken to notify the contractor, and any corrective actions already taken by the contractor. A COR can use the receiving report or other method provided by the contracting officer to document the reasons for rejecting a deliverable.

Contractors will reply to a notice of rejection by one of the following methods.

  • Submit a proposal to repair or correct the deficiencies
  • Offer to provide an adjustment to cost or price as a basis for accepting nonconforming services
  • Challenge the deficiency assessment

If authorized to reject supplies or services, the COR may approve a contractor's proposed course of action to repair or correct deficiencies. However, only the contracting officer may approve courses of action that require a change in the contract (a price reduction) or result in a dispute (the contractor challenges the assessment). The COR must forward these cases to the contracting officer for resolution.

The contracting officer normally consults with the COR when considering the contractor's reply. The COR can provide advice on the appropriateness of the contractor's corrective action plan, the impact of accepting nonconforming services, and the validity of the contractor's rebuttal.

Documenting Performance

Documenting how well a contractor performs on a contract is an important part of the performance assessment process. When documenting a contractor's performance, the COR should follow the advice below. Comments should be as shown below.

  • Submitted regularly
  • Contractually based and professional
  • Applicable to the monthly reporting period
  • Performance based
  • Specific, fully detailed, and stand alone
  • Based on information gathered during audits, when possible, and supported by the checklist comments

Comments should not be as shown below.

  • Beyond the scope of the contract
  • Requesting information that is not applicable to the contract
  • Requesting contractor personnel actions (hiring, firing, or disciplinary action)
  • Personal (all comments are seen by higher leaders)
  • Simply copied and pasted from one month to the next without verifying whether the condition still exists

Note: When possible, it is helpful for a COR to use a digital camera to document deliveries of supplies and services.

Some examples of poorly—and better—written comments are provided in the following paragraphs.

  • Sample comment 1
    • Poor: "Contractor met the Class I requirements this month."
    • Better: "During October, contractor exceeded the Class I requirement to have all incoming rations and bottled water placed into inventory within 24 hours. The daily average to place stock into inventory was only 4 hours!"
  • Sample comment 2
    • Poor: "Contractor was late in meeting the link-up time."
    • Better: "On 12 October 2006 at 2130 hours, the contractor team linked up with the military escorts at East ECP 1 hour after notification. This didn't meet the contractual requirement of 40 minutes for link-up."
  • Sample comment 3
    • Poor: "Contractor management was especially responsive this month."
    • Better: "On 12 October 2006, contractor responded within 2 hours to a DCMA request for DFAC statistics. This allowed a quick turnaround to the user for a high-visibility area."
  • Sample comment 4
    • Poor: "My audit for MHE showed that several of the guys weren't certified for the forklifts."
    • Better: "On 23 October 2006, an audit revealed that three employees operating 9K forklifts did not have a forklift driver's license when prompted. Their badge numbers were XXX, YYY, and ZZZ."

Note: The COR must always ensure that all comments relate to a specific contract requirement. Contractor performance is judged solely on the contract.

Remedies for Poor Performance

The contracting officer has several remedies available to address items or services that do not conform to contract requirements. The contracting officer will rely heavily on the COR's observations and documentation on supplies or services that do not conform to contract requirements. When unsatisfactory contract performance is identified, the COR should notify the contracting officer promptly so remedial steps can be taken. Silence on the part of the government could be interpreted by the contractor as the government's acceptance of substandard supplies or services. Such situations could adversely affect the government's right to withhold payments, terminate for cause or default, or otherwise exercise certain rights under the contract.

Depending on the contracting officer's evaluation of the seriousness of the unsatisfactory performance, he or she may do the following.

  • Bring the particular deficiency to the attention of the contractor by letter or through a meeting and obtain a commitment for appropriate corrective action
  • Extend the contract schedule if excusable delays in performance are involved (such as combat situations or extreme weather conditions)
  • Withhold contract payments if the contractor fails to comply with delivery or reporting provisions of the contract
  • Terminate the contract for cause or default

After a complete review of the situation, the contracting officer may send an official notice of failure of performance to the contractor. This notice requires the contractor to inform the contracting officer of the cause of the delinquency so a proper determination can be made concerning continuation or termination of the contract. In some cases, liquidated damages can be assessed against the contractor performing the service. Liquidated damages are amounts agreed to in advance that reflect the financial damage the government may incur if the contract is not completed on time.

Table 4 summarizes do's and don'ts for remedies

Note: COR records are vital for determining the amount of money the contractor may be entitled to if a suspension is determined to be unreasonable.


Do'sDon'ts
Exercise government rights, such as warranties. Act without consulting the contracting officer.
Make sure to deal with any problems before the warranty period runs out. Allow interim or final delivery dates to be waived.
Work with the contracting personnel to prevent problems before they arise.
Take actions to protect government rights before delivery is due.

Table 4. Do's and Don'ts for Remedies

Delays

The COR is required to notify the contracting officer about any delay in the delivery or performance schedule. Specifically, the COR must (1) identify and verify the delay, (2) notify the contracting officer of the technical impact of the delay, and (3) assist the contracting officer with evaluating the contractor's response. The COR should be able to correctly identify the cause of a delay and work with the contracting officer for resolution. The technical analysis should be sufficient to support the action taken by the contracting officer to address the delay.

Identifying and Verifying a Delay

A delay has occurred if the contractor fails to meet the delivery or performance schedule in the contract, or if the government caused the contractor to stop performing. The COR should review the contract for any applicable clauses and any modifications to ensure that the performance or delivery schedule was not previously extended by the contracting officer. The COR can confirm the delay by doing the following.

  • Obtaining feedback from government individuals responsible for monitoring the performance or delivery schedule
  • Reviewing the notice and supporting documents from the contractor regarding the delay
  • Reviewing the contractor's claim regarding the delay

The contractor is not liable for any excess costs if the failure to perform the contract arises from causes beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of the contractor. For instance, the delay may have been caused by the government, hostile actions, or natural disasters.

Notifying the Contracting Officer of the Technical Impact of a Delay

Once a delay is confirmed, the COR should prepare documentation to assist the contracting officer with developing the government's position on the delay. Documentation should include facts and relevant information about the delay, such as the following.

  • List of people with factual knowledge of the delay
  • Description of the delay
  • History of performance, indicating when work under the contract began, when work deviated from the performance, and when the work stopped

Listed below are other issues that may be covered in a technical analysis.

  • Information that would support whether the delay was excusable
  • The contractor's progress to date and the remaining obligations
  • Estimate of a reasonable period of additional time to perform
  • Potential alternatives and resolution
  • Pros and cons of each alternative (price, quantity, and quality)
Assisting the Contracting Officer with Evaluating the Contractor's Response

The COR may be asked to assist the contracting officer with evaluating the contractor's response. The contracting officer may ask the contractor to do the following.

  • Substantiate the evidence of the delay
  • Substantiate the costs associated with the delay
  • Demonstrate that the delay was unreasonable
  • Demonstrate that the delay was void of any concurrent or commingled delays

Before allowing the contractor to recover costs as a result of the delay, the contractor's response must provide verifiable documentation of the expenses incurred. The contracting officer, with the assistance of the COR, must consider each expense and determine if the contractor should receive compensation. Compensation may be in the form of money or time extensions.

Fraud

Fraud is the intentional presentation of falsehood as truth with the goal of causing someone to part with something of value. Perpetrators of fraud can receive punishments of prison time from 5 to 10 years, be fined up to $250K, or both. The following are examples of fraud that occur in contracting.

  • Product substitution
  • Cost mischarging
  • Price fixing
  • Fabrication of records
  • Bribes, gratuities, and kickbacks (common in deployed environments)

Note: CORs are not investigators; they should not personally investigate suspected cases of fraud. Rather, CORs should determine the facts of the questionable circumstances and occurrences and advise the contracting officer, commander, supervisor, or cognizant defense criminal investigative agency.

Government Property

Government property means all property owned or leased by the government and includes both government-furnished property (GFP) and contractor-acquired property to which the government has title. Normally, contractors furnish all equipment and material necessary to perform government contracts. However, sometimes it is in the best interest of the government to provide the contractor with GFP for performance of a contract.

The COR may be asked to assist the contracting officer with administering the contractor's use of GFP. The property administrator, if available in a contingency operation, acts on behalf of the contracting officer to oversee government property in the hands of a contractor. If a property administrator is not available, the COR will accomplish these duties.

Note: CORs should (1) inventory the GFP before signing it over to the contractor, (2) deliver government property to the contractor on time so as not to delay contractor performance, and (3) ensure adequate property-control procedures. During contract performance, CORs should report loss, damage, or destruction of GFP to the contracting officer. In addition, CORs should supervise the return of GFP upon contract completion or when the contractor no longer requires the property.

Property Responsibilities

The contractor has certain responsibilities related to GFP.

  • Develop a property control plan
  • Report and investigate loss, damage, and destruction of GFP
  • Use GFP only as authorized in the contract
  • Conduct periodic inventories
  • Request approval of repair or modification to GFP from the property administrator and administrative contracting officer
  • Request disposition of excess government property from the property administrator
  • Submit timely reports, as established in the contract, to the property administrator

The following are COR responsibilities related to GFP.

  • Ensure that the equipment provided or purchased is actually needed for the performance of the contract
  • Ensure the proper utilization, maintenance, and protection of GFP in performance of the contract
  • Treat leased equipment just as any other piece of United States-owned equipment
Property Disposition

Disposal must be conducted according to the applicable laws and regulations (see FAR Subpart 45.6, Reporting, Reutilizing, and Disposal). GFP may be disposed of through numerous processes.

  • It may be scrapped through an approved scrap procedure.
  • It may be transferred, donated, sold, directed to be destroyed, or even abandoned.

Contract Termination

A contractor's failure to perform an action as required by the contract can be considered a default in performance. The contracting officer must issue a formal cure notice immediately. The cure notice specifies the deficiency in contractor performance and directs that it be cured within a specified time, usually 10 days.

If the failure is determined to be inexcusable or a response is not received within the allotted time, the contracting officer initiates withholding action on all contract payments and determines whether a termination for cause (for commercial items), termination for default (for government-unique items), or other action would be in the best interest of the government.

Termination for Convenience of the Government

Under the Termination for Convenience clause, the government has the right to cancel a contract when doing so is in the best interest of the government, notwithstanding the contractor's ability and readiness to perform. The government may terminate a contract for convenience if the supply or service is no longer needed, the contract is no longer affordable, it is impossible for the contractor to perform as specified in the contract (through no fault of the contractor), or the requirement has changed radically.

A termination for convenience allows the contractor to submit a settlement proposal for the work that has been accomplished under the contract up to the effective date of the termination, including the cost associated with any work in progress. The contracting officer and the contractor then negotiate a settlement agreement. The contractor is entitled to be reimbursed for costs for work completed.

Note: The COR's responsibilities are essentially the same in terminations for convenience, default, or cause: keep the contracting officer informed, provide recommendations to the contracting officer and requiring unit, review settlement proposals, and document the file.

Termination for Cause or Default

The government may, by written notice, terminate the contract for the contractor's failure to do the following.

  • Deliver supplies or perform services within a specified time
  • Make progress, thereby endangering contract performance
  • Perform any other provisions of the contract

Because the government is not liable for work not accepted, the termination for cause or default has a greater adverse consequence on contracts for supplies than on service contracts.

A termination for cause or default is improper if the required notice and opportunity to cure the situation is not given to the contractor. The cure notice must provide for a 10-day cure.

Another type of delinquency notice is called show cause. This is used as a means of discovering any excusable cause or default of the contractor's failure to perform. The following are examples of excusable failure to perform.

  • Acts of God
  • Acts of a public enemy
  • Acts of government
  • Natural disasters such as fires, floods, and earthquakes
  • Epidemics
  • Quarantine restrictions
  • Strikes
  • Freight embargoes

Disputes and Appeals

Disputes between a contractor and the contracting officer may occur when a controversy develops as to the interpretation of the contract terms. Any differences with the contractor should not interfere with timely performance of the contract. All contracts contain a disputes clause (FAR 52.233-1, Disputes) that presents the procedures to be followed in case of any unresolved disagreements between contractors and the contracting officer. The COR will play a key role in advising the contracting officer as to the intent of specifications or provisions of the contract that may be the subject of dispute. Therefore, the COR should know the contract and create and keep the documentation required to state a position, in writing, to help the contracting officer. The contracting officer must respond promptly with a written decision, including the reasons for each dispute received. Unless appealed within certain time limits, the contracting officer's decision becomes final and is not subject to review. Because the government must pay interest on claims that are in dispute, the COR must provide the contracting officer with the necessary documentation promptly. DFARS 233.2, Disputes and Appeals, provides specific instructions concerning disputes, contracting officer decisions, and appeals.

CORs should be prepared to submit various forms of documentation and correspondence developed during the course of a contract. CORs also should be prepared to give verbal testimony before the Government Accountability Office, the General Services Administration Board of Contract Appeals, the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals, or a court of the judicial system in connection with disputes or other contractual matters. The completeness, accuracy, and currency of the COR's records may determine who prevails—the government or the contractor.

The following are warning signs of potential disputes.

  • Failure to meet performance deadlines
  • Repeated safety violations
  • Repeated incidents of poor quality work
  • Complaints from site workers
  • Prolonged delays
  • Persistent complaints regarding government employees or inspectors
  • Complaints from subcontractors

Disputes often can be resolved through an alternative disputes resolution (ADR) process. The ADR process offers the following advantages.

  • Reduced settlement time
  • Expertise and objectivity of a neutral advisor
  • Privacy
  • Reduced costs

The COR supports the ADR process by providing surveillance documentation and reports supporting the government's position.

COR Working File

The COR is required to maintain a working file—in hard copy, electronically, or both. The working file contains records relating to the COR's duties during the life of the contract. In addition, the COR is charged with safeguarding all procurement-sensitive, business-sensitive, and proprietary information in the files.

The contents of the COR working file will vary according to the size and complexity of the contract. Appendix 8 contains a checklist of minimum COR file contents. However, good judgment and experience on the part of the COR will determine what is necessary for CORs to maintain in their files.

Note: The COR working file should be considered confidential and be safeguarded appropriately.

The COR working file is a part of the official contract file and must be maintained according to the contracting officer's instructions. The following are key procedures related to the COR file.

  • Maintain a separate, current COR working file for each contract.
  • As a matter of practice, prepare a memorandum for record no later than 1 business day after significant meetings or discussions with the contractor or the contracting officer, including telephone conversations and trip reports.
  • Clearly index all documents and file them by category, in chronological order, in a suitable folder. Examples of document categories are memoranda for record, inspections, trip reports, minutes of meetings, and conferences. The goal is to organize the records in a way that allows for rapid access to information by the COR and inspection by the contracting officer and other authorized officials.
  • Forward any correspondence received from the contractor to the contracting officer, and retain a copy in the COR working file.
  • Send copies of all correspondence the COR prepares to the contracting officer.
  • Mark the contract number clearly on all documents and file folders.
  • Make the COR working file available for review by the contracting officer and other authorized officials. The contracting officer will schedule an appointment with the COR for review of the COR file. At a minimum, the contracting officer should review the COR file on a yearly basis and annotate the file with the results of the review to include finding and any recommended actions.
  • Retain records that pertain to unsettled claims, open investigations, cases under litigation, or similar matters until final clearance or settlement.
  • Upon completion or termination of the contract (or as otherwise directed by the contracting officer), forward the COR working file to the contracting officer for retention in the official contract file.
  • Upon termination of a COR appointment or designation, promptly transfer the COR files to the successor COR, or forward them to the contracting officer, as instructed by the contracting officer.

Note: The COR should receive the working file related to the contract from the contracting officer during COR training. If key documents are missing from the file, the COR should contact the contracting officer to obtain copies.

Do's and Don'ts for Contract Monitoring

Table 5 outlines the do's and don'ts for contract monitoring.

Do'sDon'ts
Set a level of monitoring consistent with the type of contract, the complexity of the supply or service, and the importance of the contract to the overall program. Assume that "no news is good news."
Read progress reports and immediately act on problems they reveal. Wait until delivery is due or overdue to check progress.
See that the contractor complies with every requirement of the contract. Take action against a delinquent contractor on your own. Work through the contracting officer.
Immediately contact the contracting officer when deficiencies or delinquencies are noted. Order, request, or even suggest that the contractor do work that is not called for by the contract.
Use the contractor's invoices to help monitor the technical progress. Act as if you are the contractor's personnel manager. The COR reviews and approves or disapproves; the contractor supervises contractor personnel.
Assume the contractor billings are correct.

Table 5. Do's and Don'ts for Contract Monitoring

Chapter Acronyms

ADR – Alternative Dispute Resolution

COR – Contracting Officer's Representative

DCMA – Defense Contract Management Agency

DFAC – Dining Facility

DFARS – Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement

FAR – Federal Acquisition Regulation

GFP – Government-furnished Property

PWS – Performance Work Statement

SOO – Statement of Objectives

SOW – Statement of Work

Next Page Previous Page

List of All Contributions at This Location

No items found.

Popular Tags

Page Information

At this page:
3903 Page Views 0 Pages Emailed
1 Meta-card Views 0 Documents and Videos
0 Questions 0 Attachments Downloaded
0 Answers 0 Videos downloaded
0 Relationships and Highlights
ID475197
Date CreatedFriday, September 30, 2011 12:48 PM
Date ModifiedFriday, December 16, 2011 3:42 PM
Version Comment:

Sign In

Login with your CAC

Insert your CAC now, and click this button.


Login with your Password

User Name:

Password:

Forgot your password?

  

Benefits of ACC Membership


ACC Practice Center Version 3.2
  • Application Build 3.2.8
  • Database Version 3.2.8