Holdfast Training Services Trial Blog

Contract Stuff

Last week I intimated that there was a potential issue pushing a new contract through the procurement process in time before the base contract to which it would be attached expires.  At the start of the week we got confirmation that the course of action we pursued was OK with the KOR and I received verification that I could have the funds fairly quickly, which was good.  My week then spiralled down into deep, dark, depressing realms of frustration, repeated work and government bureaucracy.

To relate everything I have been required to do will induce eye-stabbing levels of boredom in the reader, and no doubt some level of confusion.  I will therefore ‘paraphrase’ and highlight key points.

One of the many hoops I have to jump through along the procurement process is an Independent Government Estimate (IGE) which is essentially a method of making sure that the contractor isn’t ripping us off.  This is a fairly important part of being responsible for spending tax dollars on behalf of the taxpayer.   Using the Scope of Work I produced I was able to attribute a level of staffing that would be required to fulfill the  requirements of the scope and, using pre-negotiated rates from the base contract, attach a cost.  In parallel to this I sent a Request for Proposal (RFP) to the Contractor who did the same.

When I received the proposal back from the Contractor I had to wait before I could open it because I still had to get sign off on the IGE; to open the proposal prior to this would be illegal.  Office policy dictates that if my IGE and the Contractor Proposal are within 10% of each other I can combine the next stages of the acquisition process into one.  Fortunately, when I was able to open the proposal, the bottom lines read within 6% of each other.  This meant that I could accept the proposal, no questions asked – as long as I could justify and explain the minor discrepancies in a document called the POM/PNM (this document goes against every JSP101 principle and is judged by weight, not content).  On the face of it I could quite easily justify the discrepancies, however when I dug into the weeds I found that the pricing strategies used by myself and the Contractor were wildly different.  The overall level of effort was essentially the same, except it was allocated to different task lines.  This was a bad thing as it meant that the acquisition would have to go through a negotiation stage, which we don’t have time for.  Fortunately, one of the experienced contract officers here recommended that I simply conduct a “scope clarification conference” with the contractor*.

At this juncture it is important to note that negotiating with the contractor without first sending a copy of the Pre-negotiated Objective Memorandum (POM) through the District office is against official policy, however if you call and clarify the scope with him and he sends you an entirely new proposal. Well, that’s fine. Happily the scope was a lot clearer to the Contractor after we had negotiated had our scope clarification conference and I received a second proposal, for a similar amount but broken down in a similar way to the IGE.

Now, the other aspect of this is deciding what pot to pay for the services from.  In order to put the scope together I had canvassed opinion around the stakeholders in the various offices as to what level of effort they would require for the period of performance so that I could write a suitable SOW to meet their requirements.  However when I called a Purchase Request and Commitment (PR&C) meeting to discuss the issue of paying there was a huge reluctance to stump up the cash!  Issues varied from just not having budgeted for what was requested (then I’ll adjust the SOW and you’ll lose your scheduler) to suddenly realising the costs involved are too high to justify.  Fortunately for me there was an adult in the room who was able to bat away some of the niff naff poor drills excuses and so the meeting was actually really useful, and there was resolution on who was paying for what…as long as I adjusted the SOW, IGE and POM/PNM…

Lessons –

1. The importance of an absolutely watertight scope from the outset, written in consultation with the key stakeholders.
2. The importance of lining your funding sources up. Always figure out who is going to pay and then hold them accountable.
3. The importance of not leaving anything contractual to the last minute, and then trying to rush task orders through to buy more time to deal with them.
4. The sheer amount of interpretation that goes on with regards to rules and policy. This is where the area managers earn their crust and put their head on the block.

Health and Safety Stuff

I echo Henrys sentiments with regards to Health and Safety.  I have been on site twice now (not bad in 2 months) and have been assigned some more site based responsibilities.  I will retain responsibility for the contract I am setting up, including running it once it’s/ if it gets through, but I am also shortly to be a Project Engineer on 2 projects.

In outline I am working on a site that is home to (currently) three large scale construction projects; all part of the same programme in all but funding; at various stages of construction (from 0 – 30% project completion; 0 – 90% structural completion).  I will be working on one that is around 7% complete (out of the ground and having cast in place concrete pours on level 2 presently) and one multi level parking structure that was awarded to the principle contractor around 2 weeks ago.  This is due to break ground in c. July.

On my walk around I noticed that the method of access to the second floor slab of one structure was by a wooden ladder, no handrails, which seems to have been erected by a class 2 chippy.  There was no method of holding on, other than to hold the rungs, and no tie down at the top or bottom! Good.  The edge protection, whilst similar in height to UK spec was also knocked up by the same chippy.  There has been a recent revision by the Department of Labor (sic) and Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) which has placed more stringent measures to site working practices.  This might well be a blog in itself.

Chartered Engineer – Professional Engineer Stuff

I have been chatting to the US engineers out here to get a flavour of their ‘route to chartership.’  I won’t go into details for fear of this tome getting even more tomier, but the interesting comparison to draw between the US and UK is that US Professional Engineers (PEs) are pretty much ten a penny out here, compared to the UK, where I gather a Chartered Engineer is rather a rare beast?

And also,

Myself, Danielle, Henry and Jo enjoyed Intercourse immensely.  I would highly recommend it to anybody who visits.

Pun intended.

The sports model.