T&M One Individual Billing under Multiple Categories

Generally speaking No but the specifics of the contract will dictate what is allowed. As your post implies the matter of individual qualification is mentioned in the FAR required payment clause (52.232-7) with additional considerations being applicability of the wage requirements - SCA and/or D-B and key personnel requirements if any. There could be others as well, as specified by the contract.

I agree with C Culham but that doesn't mean it won't raise eyebrows on the person reviewing the invoice - esp if the labor rates are quite different.

Is there a presumption of complying with some standard staffing approach or method under a T&M task order? If an awarded prime task order contract included an evaluation factor of the Contractor?s staffing plan, does the Contractor?s adherence to that staffing plan become a requirement under each task order awarded under the prime contract?

What if that plan did not specifically identify or disclose that single individuals may perform under multiple labor categories, does this create a potential problem?

What does the contract or task order say about the staffing plan? What does the contract or task order say about "presumptions"?

Nothing. Currently pre-award in the proposal phase. I was wondering if I need to address this possibility in a proposal response or not. The RFP evaluates the Contractor?s staffing capabilities and methods but does not address this issue. I was wondering if there is an unstated presumption of delivering at least one unique person for each labor category. I don?t think there is. However, I wanted to know if there were any pitfalls or risks.

Thanks.

I don't think anyone can give you an answer about "unstated presumptions."

On the one hand, I would say write the proposal in strict accordance with the instructions and evaluation factors in the RFP. Be careful about addressing matters that the RFP does not instruct you to address, because you cannot be sure how the government would react to any caveats that you include.

If I were in your shoes I would presume that the government will want to hold you to what you say in your proposal, regardless of whether or not there is agreement about whether a "staffing plan" is binding. If you say something in the proposal, I suggest that you be prepared to live with it if you win the contract.

Nothing. Currently pre-award in the proposal phase. I was wondering if I need to address this possibility in a proposal response or not. The RFP evaluates the Contractor?s staffing capabilities and methods but does not address this issue. I was wondering if there is an unstated presumption of delivering at least one unique person for each labor category. I don?t think there is. However, I wanted to know if there were any pitfalls or risks.

Thanks.

Is 52.237-10 in the RFP? If it is, how do you plan on addressing this issue of an employee wearing multiple hats in peforming the contract? This could result in the employee working UCOT which could cause the government some concerns regarding the quality of the work (s)he may do.

Thanks.

No it doesn't, however I am allowed to use my established accounting practice to propose rates based on either 1) recording a standard number of hours per week (e.g., 40 hours) - the labor hours will be billed only on the basis of a standard number of hours, or 2) recording of all hours worked by employees, including uncompensated overtime - the labor hours billed will be based on all hours worked.

Does the solicitation require submission of r?sum?s for any labor categories? Does it contain a "Key Personnel" clause identifying the r?sum?s to specific labor categories?

Yes, but only for a few key labor categories. Specific and unique individuals will be used for those positions. My worry is for the other positions that may be fulfilled by a single individual.

I once saw a company propose the same individual on two positions - one was the program manager at something 1/3rd time and as an investigator/reseracher for the other 2/3rds. They clearly highlighted that in their proposal and spelled out the respective duties. The government agency didn't have a problem with it either