McNew & Associates, Inc. Blog


DCAA Audit Plan – 2012

To our valued clients:

In an effort to keep everyone apprised of the most recent information regarding:

Incurred Cost Audits

DCAA is establishing new virtual incurred cost teams managed by a new virtual branch manager (Denver Vicki Deleon) that will assure that all incurred costs though 2007 will be completed by the end of 2012. This may or may not be successful since there are a lot of audit compliance efforts required by DCAA to perform incurred cost audits.  However, DCAA has established this as a primary audit goal.  Due dates for reports must now be met and will be monitored.  DCAA is putting itself under the gun and therefore, the contractor will be at added risk and time demands

One area of increased scope appears to be a walkthrough of the incurred cost submission to assure compliance with the criteria of FAR 42.703 and 52.216-7.  The requirement for the ICE shows each area included in the Information for Contractors Pamphlet incurred cost submission as a requirement for an adequate incurred cost audit ICE package under 52.216-7 — Allowable Cost and Payment.  The November 4, 2011 11-PPD-020(R) requires:

The most significant changes to the audit program include improved detailed audit steps covering areas such as direct labor costs, contractor compensation costs, and excessive pass-through costs. In addition, the risk assessment procedures have been expanded to better assist in establishing the audit scope and designing the required audit procedures. The risk assessment includes a step to obtain a walk-through of the incurred cost proposal with the contractor to facilitate the process for the auditor to gain an understanding of the basis of the claimed costs and related supporting documentation, significant controls, and the relevant policies/procedures and processes related to significant cost elements.

Policy also has revised the Guide for Determining Adequacy of Contractor Incurred Cost Proposal to provide a more comprehensive guide for use in determining the adequacy of final indirect cost rate proposals at both major and non-major contractors (Enclosure). The auditors must evaluate the contractor’s incurred cost proposal for adequacy upon receipt and immediately notify the contracting officer and contractor, in writing, of significant inadequacies.

This requirement will make the process more detailed.

In addition, DCAA has established significant increases to the number of sample items required to allow a compliant audit examination.  These requirements significantly take more time and effort to provide support data.

Highlights of costs under added scrutiny include:

  • Air Travel
  • Lobbying
  • Subcontract Costs
  • Labor & Materials if no concurrent MAAR was accomplished

Subcontract surveillance after award is a critical effort.  DCAA is looking for prime assurance the subcontract billings received are verified prior to passing the billings to the Government.  Prime contractors should maintain subcontractor briefing, FAR 31 testing, and proper admin of subcontract.  Subcontract costs are now getting extensive scrutiny and the adequacy of the subcontract ICE is critical.    Consultants must have adequate support for costs.  Time cards will be a very good idea for consultants and evidence of prime monitoring.  Demonstrating that the prime has evaluated its subcontract costs will be a future emphasis.  Possible solutions for prime contractors include engaging with third-party audit firms to support auditing of subcontractor proprietary cost information prior to incurred cost submissions.

Reconciliation of labor/payroll to 941s now will not be overlooked or minimized.

Pricing Proposals and FPRAs

DCAA audit effort will be expanded on proposal effort over $10 million FFP and $100 million cost type.  Pre audit “walk though” of pricing proposals is required and causes added burden on the contractor to have an adequate package.  The support of subcontracts on major proposals is a significant audit issue that is causing issues for proposal activity.  Review of prime responsibility for subcontract cost or pricing data is now extensive.  The prime must assess all subcontractors to ensure the sub is responsible and that the price is reasonable.  In general, unless DCAA has current incurred costs audits it will audit prior costs to assure reasonableness of the accounts used for proposal purposes.  FPRAs will require testing back to actual costs as well.  Direct trace to the internal budget for FPRA will be more detailed.  Added internal reviews for DCAA internal compliance will mandate added time and effort.  Due dates for audit service is now at a premium again.  Due dates for DCAA to its customer will put added stress on timely support and submittal of documents.

Denial of Access

This is still a big DCAA concern and push.  Access to records is a continuing big issue.  Generally, documentation supporting the contractor’s assertion (e.g., the contractor’s proposal or other submission) should be readily available. Therefore, unless the request requires analysis by the contractor or there are extenuating circumstances (e.g., the request is for a voluminous amount of data or for data stored at an off-site location), the contractor should provide the documentation upon request. For example, support for proposed labor hours should be provided the same day requested, given the information would have been generated by the contractor prior to submitting the bid proposal.

Systems Audits

New DFARS rules for systems now exists for accounting systems, estimating systems, purchasing systems, earned value management systems (EVMS), material management and accounting systems (MMAS), and property management systems.  DCAA has started its new systems audits on large contractors with the kick off of its new billing and accounting system audits.  The pilot programs for billing and accounting have been slow to implement and the data required is extensive.  The accounting system pilot is difficult to demonstrate.   These are complex and have been very painful for the major contractors.  DCAA is looking for real time system demonstrations.  Example, show how the billing (voucher) actually gets produced, reviewed, entered, etc on a real time basis.  Old system reviews are very outdated and now DCAA is attempting to update new reviews.



QuickBooks Myths

1.    QuickBooks is NOT DCAA compliant

 The insinuation that QuickBooks is not DCAA compliant is only partially true.  Yes, out of the box, the software is not “DCAA Compliant”.  However, the accounting system as a whole, can be made DCAA compliant.

 The DCAA Contract Audit Manual (DCAAM 7640.1) describes an accounting system as:

 The contractor’s accounting system consists of methods and records established to identify, assemble, analyze, classify, record, and report an entity’s transactions and to maintain accountability for the related assets and liabilities.  The accounting system should be well-designed to provide reliable accounting data and prevent misstatements that would otherwise occur.

 This definition never mentions accounting software, but rather a system in the whole that provides reliable and accurate information.  This means that the software (QuickBooks) is simply one component of the overall accounting system.  An accounting system includes software, policies and procedures, internal controls, and routine monitoring.  In order to be DCAA compliant, QuickBooks needs to be supplemented with more robust policies and procedures and a few add-ons to make the system fully compliant.

2.    No Labor Distributions for Exempt Salaried Employees 

QuickBooks payroll has the full capability to perform a fully compliant labor distribution IF used correctly.

3.    No Job Costing Capability

 QuickBooks has the full capability to track costs by contract, and yes, even to the CLIN, SLIN, and task level.  QuickBooks falls short at providing a full job cost as it does not    apply indirect costs to the job level.  This can be corrected through monthly procedures.

4.    QuickBooks Cannot Support A Large Government Contract

McNew & Associates has clients processing $30M+ worth of contracts through its QuickBooks accounting system.  Contract size is not an issue so long as the system in compliant.

QuickBooks Deficiencies

  • Cash Basis Payroll
  • No PTO Accruals
  • Failure to calculate indirect rates
  • Lack of Full Job Status Reporting (Thru Gross Profit Only)
  • User Incompetence about System Capabilities

Corrective Measures

MAI has the specific knowledge and capabilities to complete the system.

  • How do we do it?
  • “Turn On” System Modules and Items not appropriately used by client
  • Additional “Add-Ons” to complete Indirect Rates and Job Status Reporting
  • Implement Pro Forma Policies and Procedures
  • Establish Internal Control Procedures
  • Provide Routine Monitoring Procedures

 Proof of Record

  • Over 30 client QB systems converted for DCAA compliance
  • At least half audited by DCAA
  • 100% passing rate with DCAA

McNew & Associates, Inc.                                                     

No Stress…Just Responsibility

719-685-7897

www.mcnewassociates.com

Email:  mcnewassoc@mcnewassociates.com



Audit Guidance on Review of Dependent Health Benefit Costs
February 19, 2010, 10:33 PM
Filed under: DCAA Compliance | Tags: , , , ,

DCAA has found that numerous large defense contractors are inappropriately charging the Government for health benefit costs for dependents that are no longer eligible for such benefits under the contractors’ plans.  Auditors should ensure that the contractor’s forecasted costs and incurred cost submissions do not contain health benefit costs for ineligible dependents.  The cost of health insurance premiums and claims for ineligible dependents and ineligible spousal coverage are unallowable in accordance with FAR 31.205-6(m)(1), Compensation for Personal Services, Fringe Benefits

Auditors should verify that contractors have adequate procedures and penalties should be recommended on any questioned amounts as part of incurred costs audits.  Failure to have adequate control procedures over employee benefit costs should be reported as an internal control deficiency in the contractor’s accounting system and a CAS 405 noncompliance, if applicable. 

Current audits have disclosed that contractors have paid a significant number of dependent medical cost claims for family members who did not qualify as dependents under the contractor’s medical/health care plan.  The reasons for dependent/spousal ineligibility include:

  1. Dependents reached the age where they no longer qualified as a dependent.
  2. Spouses were either divorced or deceased.
  3. Dependents were covered under another plan as well as the contractor’s plan, and the employee failed to notify the contractor of the double coverage as the contractor’s plan required and adjusted premium for double coverage.

The costs of fringe benefits are allowable to the extent that they are reasonable and are required by law, employer-employee agreement, or an established policy of the contractor.  The risk of contractor payments being made related to ineligible dependents applies to both purchased and self insurance plans. 

“MEMORANDUM FOR REGIONAL DIRECTORS, DCAA.” Defense Contract Audit Agency Department of Defense 4 August 2010, 09-PSP-016(R).

McNew & Associates, Inc.                                                     

No Stress…Just Responsibility

719-685-7897

www.mcnewassociates.com

Email:  mcnewassoc@mcnewassociates.com