FAR Companion Change

Back to FAR Companion

Summary

PART_48 updated: 53 lines added, 1 lines removed

Diff

--- previous
+++ current
@@ -1 +1,53 @@
-Part 48 - Value Engineering .................................................................................................... 115+Part 48 - Value Engineering
+FC 48.101 Optimizing function and cost.
+Value Engineering (VE) is a technique that serves to eliminate unnecessary acquisition,
+operation, or support costs without impairing essential functions or characteristics. There are
+two primary approaches:
+1. Incentive (Voluntary) Approach:
+○ The contractor uses its own resources to develop Value Engineering Change
+Proposals (VECPs).
+○ The contract provides for sharing of savings and payment of allowable costs only
+if a VECP is accepted.
+○ Aims to reduce costs without upfront government investment.
+2. Program Requirement (Mandatory) Approach:
+○ Directed by the government which requires and funds a specific VE effort.
+○ The contractor performs VE to a defined scope and level of effort, priced
+separately in the contract.
+○ The government shares cost savings with the contractor (usually at a lower rate
+than the voluntary approach, except architect-engineer contracts, which do not
+permit VE sharing).
+○ Focuses VE efforts on areas with high potential for savings.
+FC 48.101 Value Engineering (VE) principles.
+To maximize the benefits of VE, it is a best practice to process Value Engineering Change
+Proposals (VECPs) objectively and expeditiously. It is often important to ensure contractors
+receive a fair share of the savings on accepted VECPs. Timely evaluation and equitable sharing
+incentivize innovation and promote continued contractor participation in VE efforts, leading to
+greater cost savings and improved value for the government.
+FC 48.101 Tailoring VECP sharing periods and rates.
+Contracting officers should establish distinct sharing periods and rates for each VECP
+incorporated into a contract, determined on a case-by-case basis. The sharing period for each
+VECP need not be identical; tailor the period to reflect the specific circumstances of the VECP
+115
+Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Companion
+and the expected duration of savings. In establishing both the sharing period and sharing rate,
+consider the following factors, as appropriate:
+1. Extent of the change.
+2. Complexity of the change.
+3. Development risk (e.g., contractor’s financial risk).
+4. Development cost.
+5. Performance and/or reliability impact.
+6. Production period remaining at the time of VECP acceptance.
+7. Number of units affected.
+This flexibility allows for a more equitable distribution of savings and incentivizes contractors to
+propose VECPs with varying implementation timelines and levels of risk.
+FC 48.101 Profit or fee in VECP savings.
+When evaluating VECPs, remember that the acceptance of a VECP should not generally lead to
+a downward adjustment of the profit or fee on the instant contract. Furthermore, profit or fee
+should be excluded when calculating both instant and future contract savings resulting from the
+VECP.
+Why is this important? Adjusting profit downward would disincentivize contractors from
+proposing VECPs, as it would directly penalize their innovation and efficiency. By excluding
+profit/fee from the savings calculations, you ensure a fair and transparent assessment of the
+VECP's true cost reduction, while maintaining the contractor's earned profit margin on the
+original scope of work. This approach fosters a collaborative environment where contractors are
+motivated to identify and propose value-enhancing changes without fear of profit erosion.