TOPICS
TOPICS
Acquisition councils beef up subcontracting oversight
Last week, the councils responsible for the Federal Acquisition Regulation proposed a rule that would increase oversight of subcontracting arrangements in federal contracts.
The rule would require agencies to evaluate how well contractors manage their subcontractors, who often perform a significant portion of work. Contracting officers would be required to consider those evaluations when making future contracting awards. If enacted, the rule would apply to contracts worth over $100,000.
"Subcontract management efforts will be recorded for use in past performance evaluations during source selection," the councils stated.
Currently, contracting officers do not have to evaluate management of subcontractors and generally have limited oversight over subcontracting relationships. FAR Part 42, which describes contract administration and audit rules, states that the prime contractor is responsible for subcontract management, and the agency is required to get involved only if there appears to be a problem.
Scott H. Amey, general counsel of the Project on Government Oversight, a Washington-based watchdog group, said the proposed rule would lead to more responsible contract administration by requiring more complete performance evaluations: "Past performance evaluations evidence a contractor's ability to perform successfully, which protects taxpayer dollars."
While no comments have yet been publicly submitted - they are due by Aug. 22 - Amey anticipated resistance from industry groups. "Contractors will complain that the rule is too subjective, but they lobbied for the best value contracting and therefore their complete contracting track records should be considered by the government [when making contract awards]," Amey said.
The evaluation of subcontractor management will include how well the prime contractor meets its small business goals through subcontracting.
Cathy Garman, senior vice president of public policy at the Contract Services Association, an industry group, said small business participation in subcontract work often is overlooked. "We've been trying to bring more sunlight onto subcontracts so people can recognize their value....a lot of excellent work is being done at the subcontract level that people haven't yet focused on," she said.
Garman said that while she hasn't yet studied the proposed rule, she plans to do so and submit a comment before the August deadline.
COMMENTS
- You go Taxpayer! The government's contract is with the prime not the subcontractors. How do primes "manage" subcontractors? Same way the government "manages" good and bad contractors! I'm sure if I gave thought to government contracting for oh, say 30 seconds, I could come up with more pressing issues than finding another documentation nightmare for more report gathering to fill a square before making an award to document the file on "subcontracting management". Let's see now, we are evaluating a contractor for our fence project. Contractor A has with excellent past performance, the lowest cost, and significant experience in rough terrains, but, oh my, his subcontractors run amuck! (I personally saw them gallivanting in the river!) Don't award! GovExec.com reader Posted June 28, 2005 6:14 PM
- This has to be a joke! "The rule would require agencies to evaluate how well contractors manage their subcontractors" The p[eople involved cqannot even manage themselves! How are they going to evaluate management of subs? This is just another step in contract management that will encourage operators to avoid small firms because of the increased work load. How well a prime manages their subs is not a function of the contracting process! How well does the prime perform in terms of delivery of the product? That is the question that should be examined and listed for all FAR contracting operators to see and consider in their choice of primes. How a prime manages they subs is not relevant in itslef but how the prime delivers the product should be the criterion! If mismanagement of subs does not impact product delivery then it is not a problem for the government! taxpayer Posted June 28, 2005 6:19 AM
