2025 NEWEST CONTRACTING OFFICER WARRANT
BOARD EXAM | COMPREHENSIVE EXAM WITH OVER
150+ ACTUAL QUESTIONS WITH THEIR CORRECT
MARKING SCHEME ANSWERS. A+ GRADED
You are the PCO for a major competitive negotiated source selection. The RFP,
which reflects the user's requirements and is based on the user's budget, has a
requirement for 220 cargo loaders to be delivered at 55 per year over the next
four years. One offeror proposes to deliver all 220 loaders in the first year at a
dramatically reduced price. Can you accept the offeror's proposal? What factors
should you consider in your decision?
You can accept the offeror's proposal under certain circumstances. Firstly, what
did the RFP say about alternate proposals? Is this a situation where requirements
are changed and the other offerors should be allowed to propose on the basis of
the changed requirements? You need to ask the user if he wants all 220 in the
first year and are the operating locations physically able to accommodate their
loaders in the first year. Finally, the offeror could be taken into discussions and
asked to conform to the RFP with there being the possibility of not being selected
for award or elimination from the competitive range if the proposal is not made
compliant with the RFP.
You are the PCO on a new $2B aircraft development program. The program is in
contract negotiations for a Fixed Price Incentive (Firm Target) System
Development and Demonstration contract award to a sole source contractor. The
,program director, a fast-burning young colonel, e-mails you that she is very
concerned with the aircraft's ultimate speed at the full specification payload. She
would like the contractor to achieve the faster, desired objective speed rather
than the mandatory threshold speed, and thinks that an objective performance
incentive would be the way to go to achieve her goal. You are asked to go to her
office and discuss the matter and the issues involved in using such an incentive.
What do you tell the colonel?
There are a number of considerations for the colonel:
The desired additional speed should provide benefit to the Government in order
to justify the expenditure of funds to achieve it. The colonel should be able to
articulate the justification.
The situation is very amenable to a classic performance incentive that would
allow the contractor to earn profit for achieving the desired speed above and
beyond what the final FPIF profit would be for achieving threshold speed. If the
contractor perceives this can't happen, he will either not sign up to the incentive
or will ignore it from Day One.
The incentive and resulting payment have to be structured so as to be based on
observable, measurable results that would determine how much is earned by the
contractor. Subjectivity is not allowable under current AF policy without HCA
approval.
We have to be very careful to understand what possible unintended
consequences could be caused by the existence of this feature in the contract. For
example, will the contractor reduce aircraft weight beyond safe limits in order to
help achieve the payment? Also, will the contractor consume excessive schedule
to get the extra speed?
There has to be a cost incentive in place so that the contractor doesn't spend an
unconstrained amount of money to win the payment, such as under a CPFF
contract. The FPIF share line serves this purpose when balanced against the
incentive.
,The incentive has to be balanced with the FPIF share line so that the contractor
doesn't spend more money to achieve the desired speed than he has potential to
earn by receiving the payment. Similarly, the contractor can't be allowed to spend
an excessive amount of money with little cost penalty to achieve success.
In some cases, Contracting Officers are also Grants Officers. They can award
Grants and Assistance Instruments as well as contracts. What is Assistance? How
does it differ from Acquisition? What gives the Grants Officers their authority to
enter into assistance? What are the types of Assistance?
When the principal purpose is to transfer a thing of value, to carry out a public
purpose of support or stimulation authorized by law of the United States, it is
Assistance.
Acquisition, by contrast, has the principal purpose of acquiring property or
services for the direct benefit or use of the United States Government.
Federal agencies must be authorized by statute to support or stimulate a public
purpose. The statutory authority from Congress must exist either in broad
legislation or in a program-specific statute. Absent that statutory authority, a
Grants Officer may not use an assistance instrument.
Authorities to issue Assistance can be of three types: (1) Provide to the Secretary
of Defense by statute, e.g., 10 U.S.C. 2391; (2) Authority provided to DoD
components that requires no delegation by the Secretary of Defense, e.g., 10
U.S.C. 2358; (3) Authority coming indirectly from statutes, i.e., federal statute
authorizing a program that is consistent with using a grant or cooperative
agreement.
Two types of Assistance are Grants and Cooperative Agreements. They differ in
the following way: In a Grant, substantial involvement is not expected between
, the agency and the recipient. In Cooperative Agreement, substantial involvement
is expected between the agency and the recipient. Cooperative Agreements,
then, are particularly useful in the research arena when the Government is
interested in being involved in program decisions or may be doing some testing or
research themselves.
You are the Contracting Officer on a new Research and Development program.
Proposals were recently received in response to a Broad Agency Announcement,
and a Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type is anticipated. The proposal most favored
by the technical team was priced significantly under what was estimated for the
effort. The contractor proposed fee in an amount that equates to 20% of the
estimated cost. The users have more than enough funds to cover the proposal
and want you to accept the price as is. How should you advise the user and what
factors should you consider in determining a reasonable fee?
The statutory limitation on fee for CPFF type contracts do no permit exceeding
15% of estimated cost for experimental, developmental, or research performed
under a CPFF contract. Since the proposed amount of fee is outside the statutory
limitations you need to determine what a fair and reasonable rate is that falls
within the limitations. The FAR recommends a structured approach for
determining fee such as Weighted Guidelines. If a cost reasonableness review
determines the estimated costs to be acceptable, we can still negotiate and adjust
the fee.
You are the Contracting Officer for a well established transport aircraft program.
The program is nearing the end of production. A Program Manager approaches
you requesting that you issue a Broad Area Announcement (BAA) to support the
development of a source list to supply active noise reducing headsets. The
BOARD EXAM | COMPREHENSIVE EXAM WITH OVER
150+ ACTUAL QUESTIONS WITH THEIR CORRECT
MARKING SCHEME ANSWERS. A+ GRADED
You are the PCO for a major competitive negotiated source selection. The RFP,
which reflects the user's requirements and is based on the user's budget, has a
requirement for 220 cargo loaders to be delivered at 55 per year over the next
four years. One offeror proposes to deliver all 220 loaders in the first year at a
dramatically reduced price. Can you accept the offeror's proposal? What factors
should you consider in your decision?
You can accept the offeror's proposal under certain circumstances. Firstly, what
did the RFP say about alternate proposals? Is this a situation where requirements
are changed and the other offerors should be allowed to propose on the basis of
the changed requirements? You need to ask the user if he wants all 220 in the
first year and are the operating locations physically able to accommodate their
loaders in the first year. Finally, the offeror could be taken into discussions and
asked to conform to the RFP with there being the possibility of not being selected
for award or elimination from the competitive range if the proposal is not made
compliant with the RFP.
You are the PCO on a new $2B aircraft development program. The program is in
contract negotiations for a Fixed Price Incentive (Firm Target) System
Development and Demonstration contract award to a sole source contractor. The
,program director, a fast-burning young colonel, e-mails you that she is very
concerned with the aircraft's ultimate speed at the full specification payload. She
would like the contractor to achieve the faster, desired objective speed rather
than the mandatory threshold speed, and thinks that an objective performance
incentive would be the way to go to achieve her goal. You are asked to go to her
office and discuss the matter and the issues involved in using such an incentive.
What do you tell the colonel?
There are a number of considerations for the colonel:
The desired additional speed should provide benefit to the Government in order
to justify the expenditure of funds to achieve it. The colonel should be able to
articulate the justification.
The situation is very amenable to a classic performance incentive that would
allow the contractor to earn profit for achieving the desired speed above and
beyond what the final FPIF profit would be for achieving threshold speed. If the
contractor perceives this can't happen, he will either not sign up to the incentive
or will ignore it from Day One.
The incentive and resulting payment have to be structured so as to be based on
observable, measurable results that would determine how much is earned by the
contractor. Subjectivity is not allowable under current AF policy without HCA
approval.
We have to be very careful to understand what possible unintended
consequences could be caused by the existence of this feature in the contract. For
example, will the contractor reduce aircraft weight beyond safe limits in order to
help achieve the payment? Also, will the contractor consume excessive schedule
to get the extra speed?
There has to be a cost incentive in place so that the contractor doesn't spend an
unconstrained amount of money to win the payment, such as under a CPFF
contract. The FPIF share line serves this purpose when balanced against the
incentive.
,The incentive has to be balanced with the FPIF share line so that the contractor
doesn't spend more money to achieve the desired speed than he has potential to
earn by receiving the payment. Similarly, the contractor can't be allowed to spend
an excessive amount of money with little cost penalty to achieve success.
In some cases, Contracting Officers are also Grants Officers. They can award
Grants and Assistance Instruments as well as contracts. What is Assistance? How
does it differ from Acquisition? What gives the Grants Officers their authority to
enter into assistance? What are the types of Assistance?
When the principal purpose is to transfer a thing of value, to carry out a public
purpose of support or stimulation authorized by law of the United States, it is
Assistance.
Acquisition, by contrast, has the principal purpose of acquiring property or
services for the direct benefit or use of the United States Government.
Federal agencies must be authorized by statute to support or stimulate a public
purpose. The statutory authority from Congress must exist either in broad
legislation or in a program-specific statute. Absent that statutory authority, a
Grants Officer may not use an assistance instrument.
Authorities to issue Assistance can be of three types: (1) Provide to the Secretary
of Defense by statute, e.g., 10 U.S.C. 2391; (2) Authority provided to DoD
components that requires no delegation by the Secretary of Defense, e.g., 10
U.S.C. 2358; (3) Authority coming indirectly from statutes, i.e., federal statute
authorizing a program that is consistent with using a grant or cooperative
agreement.
Two types of Assistance are Grants and Cooperative Agreements. They differ in
the following way: In a Grant, substantial involvement is not expected between
, the agency and the recipient. In Cooperative Agreement, substantial involvement
is expected between the agency and the recipient. Cooperative Agreements,
then, are particularly useful in the research arena when the Government is
interested in being involved in program decisions or may be doing some testing or
research themselves.
You are the Contracting Officer on a new Research and Development program.
Proposals were recently received in response to a Broad Agency Announcement,
and a Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type is anticipated. The proposal most favored
by the technical team was priced significantly under what was estimated for the
effort. The contractor proposed fee in an amount that equates to 20% of the
estimated cost. The users have more than enough funds to cover the proposal
and want you to accept the price as is. How should you advise the user and what
factors should you consider in determining a reasonable fee?
The statutory limitation on fee for CPFF type contracts do no permit exceeding
15% of estimated cost for experimental, developmental, or research performed
under a CPFF contract. Since the proposed amount of fee is outside the statutory
limitations you need to determine what a fair and reasonable rate is that falls
within the limitations. The FAR recommends a structured approach for
determining fee such as Weighted Guidelines. If a cost reasonableness review
determines the estimated costs to be acceptable, we can still negotiate and adjust
the fee.
You are the Contracting Officer for a well established transport aircraft program.
The program is nearing the end of production. A Program Manager approaches
you requesting that you issue a Broad Area Announcement (BAA) to support the
development of a source list to supply active noise reducing headsets. The
