Browse by Subject
Browse by Category
From Oct 2015: This FPIF Pricing Model serves two purposes:
The CAS Coverage and Disclosure Statement Determination flowchart is a color coded version of Figure 8-1-1 found in the DCAA Contract Audit Manual, Chapter 8, Section 1, Overview -- Cost Accounting Standards Board Rules and Regulations.
In accordance with 48 CFR 9901.306, Standards Applicability, Cost Accounting Standards promulgated by the Board shall be mandatory for use by all executive agencies and contractors and subcontractors in estimating, accumulating, and reporting costs in connection with pricing and administration of, and settlement of disputes concerning, all negotiated prime contract and subcontract procurements with the United States Government in excess of the Truth in Negotiations Act (TINA) threshold, as adjusted for inflation (41 U.S.C. 1908 and 41 U.S.C. 1502(b)(1)(B)), other than contracts or subcontracts that have been exempted by the Board's regulations.
This flowchart is useful in determining whether a contract or subcontract meets the requirements for exemption from the Cost Accounting Standards. It is also useful in determing whether a CAS-covered contract or subcontract is subject modified or full coverage; and whether a requirement exists to submit a Disclosure Statement.
This flowchart is used in CON 250, Fundamentals of Cost Accounting Standards Part 1; CON 251, Fundamentals of Cost Accounting Standards Part 2; and CON 170, Fundamentals of Cost and Price Analysis.
The Cost Improvement Curve (CIC) Calculator is used in CON 370, Advanced Issues in Cost and Price Analysis, and allows the
user to calculate/predict the cost of items given the cost of another unit and
the percentage slope under either the unit, or cumulative average, formulation
of the CIC.
This template is used in CON 270 to assist students when estimating the cost or price of an item, by taking into account the effect of learning. Learning curve theorizes that people and organizations learn to do
things more efficiently when performing repetitive tasks. The more often
the task is performed or repeated, the more efficient the worker
becomes and the less time it takes to perform those task.The learning curve (cost improvement curve, or
experience curve) is a well-known approach to modeling the effect of
quantity on cost.
The Cumulative Progress Curve Table Lookup provides an
automated table of cumulative progress curve factors required under the unit
formulation of cost improvement curves given a user defined slope percentage.
The DD Form 1547, Record of Weighted Guidelines (WGL) Method Application is taught and applied in CON 170 and CON 270. The DD Form 1547 is used in the DoD whenever a structured approach to profit analysis is required. To facilitate classroom instruction, the DD Form 1547 Weighted Guidelines Tool was created and may be used by those who do not have access to the Automated WGL Tool.
The DD Form 1861, Facilities Capital Cost of Money
is taught and applied in CON 170 and CON 270. The DD Form 1861 is used
in the DoD whenever a structured approach to profit analysis is
required. Facilities capital is
the amount of money committed to long-term liabilities that are subject to
depreciation over more than one accounting period. The FCCOM factors calculated on the CASB-CMF form are transferred to the DD Form 1861 to determine the facilities capital employed. The amount calculated on the DD Form 1861 Block 7(b)(3) is then transferred to the DD Form 1547 Block 28 as a factor in determining the Government's negotiation objective.
Quick reference from the DFARS for determining a profit objective
The FPIF CPIF graphing template is used in CON 270 and allows the user to automatically
calculate key parameters and outcomes for the Cost-Plus-Incentive-Fee (CPIF)
and Fixed-Price Incentive - Firm Target (FPIF) contract types. It also provides
the user with a graphical display of the contemplated contract geometry under
The amount and timing of contract financing has a direct impact on the cost to the Government and the financial outcome to the contractor as measured by the Internal Rate of Return (IRR) and Net Present Value (NPV) of the contract cash flows. The purpose of this tool is to demonstrate the financial impact to both the Government and the contractor of using PBPs versus customary progress payments.
As outlined in Mr. Assad’s Memorandum of April 27, 2011, SUBJ: Cash Flow Tool for Evaluating Alternative Finance Arrangements, this tool was developed to allow the contracting officer and industry to easily determine a Win-Win price that equitably accounts for the cost, benefits and potential risk associated with PBPs.
PBPs offer a unique opportunity for a real "Win-Win" financial arrangement for the Government and the contractor. This opportunity presents itself due to the Government and the contractor having differing views of the time-value of money. The "Win" for the contractor is better cash flow resulting in a more favorable financial outcome as measured by the IRR and NPV of the cash flows at a reduced contract price.
The "Win" for the Government is a lower contract price that more than offsets the additional financing costs of providing a better cash flow to the contractor. The PBP Analysis Tool employs a discounted cash flow analysis to help the contracting officer to determine the Win-Win financial solution for any PBP arrangement. The tool provides a unique and simple to use “what if” feature on the timing of PBP event completion and payment that enables both sides to objectively assess the potential risk of PBPs in determining the Win-Win solution.
Customary progress payments are used as the benchmark for determining a Win-Win arrangement for several reasons. First, in Dr. Carter’s September 14, 2010 memo, he stated “I expect that the basis of negotiations shall be the use of customary progress payments. After agreement on price on the basis of customary progress payments, the contractor shall have the flexibility to propose an alternate payment arrangement for the Government’s consideration,” such as PBPs.
Second, progress payments are the financing method most commonly utilized between the Government and Industry. And third, progress payments are considered by industry to be a low-risk form of financing. For these reasons, the customary progress payment scenario is the right financial benchmark for a risk/reward analysis.
Version 4.0 of the tool is now available (the 4.0 version contains several changes that are explained in the tool itself). The tool allows the user to select between “New Award” and “Conversion”. The “New Award” option is the default selection that assumes the contract will be a new award using PBPs. The “Conversion” option is used when converting an on-going contract from progress payments or any other type of financing to PBPs. The tool uses XNPV and XIRR functions which are standard functions in Excel 2007 and later versions but are only contained in Microsoft's Analysis Toolpak on earlier versions. The steps needed to enable the Analysis Toolpak in Excel 97-2003 are under the "Important Notes" section of the Instructions – Basic tab.
Users should review the following six tabs within the tool before use:
Provide performance based payment tool to Defense Acquisition Workforce.
This tool can be utilized for determining profit on basic construction contracts as well as modifications to construction contracts. This interactive spreadsheet allows the user to enter the different weights for the 7 risk factors and it will calculate the profit percentage based on the weights entered. This tool also provides the guidance for scoring the 7 factors of this alternate structured approach. This is the same tool that is used on CON 244.
This statistics template is used in CON 270 and allows the user to enter up to 50
observations for the automatic calculation of key descriptive statistics
helping define the shape, center and spread for the distribution of the data
entered. A histogram is also automatically produced along with the
identification of any outliers that may exist in the data entered.
Required fields marked with *
Please note that you should expect to receive a response from our team, regarding your inquiry, within 2 business days.