I agree and want to thank him for his input and help as well. Lisa Thompson ------------- At 08:33 AM 6/8/00 -0400, you wrote: >Todd, > >Thank you for your advise and research in response to Leah's query (I've printed >it for my file for the next time I draw a blank when faced with a similar >situation). I am writing to remark about your P.S.: "Researched and posted at >8:13 PM CST - Not on Government Time or Dime." Maybe you are ONR and this was a >DOE question, but I find it EXTREMELY valuable to have the input of >professionals from the agencies on this discussion group and I would never >object to anyone using government time to interact and dessiminate information >with your "customers"! I sure hope your supervisors feel the same! > >Ruth Tallman > > > >"Frye, Todd" wrote: > >> There are no easy answers to your questions, but here are some important >> points to consider: >> >> 1. Since you use the term, "agreement", I will assume you mean that the >> prime award to Tulsa is an assistance instrument of some type, such as a >> cooperative agreement or grant, vs. a procurement contract. This assumption >> points us towards one likely solution path, vs. the one we would take under >> a procurement contract. >> >> 2. What do the DoE Prime award specific terms and conditions say about the >> handling of subcontracts to commercial concerns? Also, take a look at the >> DoE General Assistance Terms and Conditions at >> http://www.pr.doe.gov/gf3tc.html, specifically referencing contract and >> subaward/subgrant flowdown provisions, with hypertext links to other >> subparts and appendices that address the question of flowdowns more fully. >> In short, they invoke Subpart C of 10 CFR 600, which states, >> >> "10 CFR 600.104 Subawards. >> Unless sections of this subpart specifically exclude subrecipients from >> coverage, all DOE recipients, including State, local and Indian tribal >> governments, shall apply the provisions of this subpart to subrecipients >> performing work under awards if such subrecipients are institutions of >> higher education, hospitals, other non-profit organizations or commercial >> organizations. Thus, this subpart is applicable to those types of >> organizations regardless of the type of recipient receiving the primary >> award. State and local government subrecipients are subject to the >> provisions of 10 CFR part 600, subpart C, ``Uniform Administrative >> Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local >> Governments.'' >> >> 3. Also, you should take a look at 10 CFR 600.126, entitled, "Non-Federal >> audits", which gives DoE Prime assistance recipients the specific authority >> to seek audits of subs in order to protect the interests of the project, the >> prime, and DoE >> >> 4. You don't really say in the sub-award to the commercial concern is for a >> shared part of the technical work, (i.e, a true "subrecipient" relationship) >> or merely the procurment of related items required by the prime (i.e, vendor >> relationship). This distinction is critical for governing the appropriate >> Federal flowdowns and audit issues. More on this subject is found in the >> discussion of subrecipients vs. vendors at OMB Circular A-133, at >> http://www.whitehouse.gov/OMB/circulars/a133/a133.html#b . Scroll down to >> "§___.210 Subrecipient and vendor determinations." >> >> 5. If the commercial concern sub has any intention of getting into >> Federally funded research, even as a subcontractor, it would do well to >> contact the DoE Small Business people, and get ramped up and get "all its >> vacinations" to become a Federal recipient, subrecipient, or >> contractor/subcontractor. Good information about getting started with DoE >> as a small business is found at >> http://www.er.doe.gov/production/grants/grants.html#SBIR >> >> 6. If, on the other hand, they are already in reciept of Federal awards or >> functioning as a subcontractor, they may already have a cognizant Defense >> Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) nearby that oversees their work. DCAA has >> agreements with other agencies to do audits for them, as well as normal DoD >> Agencies. In this case, they should "know better" than to expect that a $1M >> subaward would carry no expectation of closeout audit of some type. >> >> 7. Item the Last: Partner early and often with your Prime DoE >> Grants/Contracting Professionals, and seek guidance from them in writing for >> open issues pertaining to all project obstacles, not just the subcontract >> costs. Also, was the subcontract approved as part of the pre-award proposal >> submitted to DoE by Tulsa? If so, then the subaward can rightly be >> considered a "government directed" subcontract or subaward, and more >> programmatic and cost type oversight would be appropriate by the DoE at that >> point. That is in keeping with the nature of cooperative agreements, which >> envision a more developed involvement of the issuing agency. >> >> 8. Sorry to be so long winded. You ask for the time, I tell you how to >> build a watch. . . . >> >> Good Luck! >> >> Todd >> >> Todd A. Frye, Deputy Regional Director >> ONR CHICAGO >> >> 312 886-5423, ext. 237 >> xxxxxx@onr.navy.mil >> >> P.S. Researched and posted at 8:13 PM CST - Not on Government Time or Dime. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Leah Bevan [mailto:xxxxxx@UTULSA.EDU] >> Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2000 4:41 PM >> To: xxxxxx@HRINET.ORG >> Subject: Audit Requriement for Subrecipient >> >> I am working on a subcontract for a private company which will be issued >> under a prime agreement with DOE. I understand that all the requirements >> of the prime flow down to any subrecipient. We as the recipient of the >> prime require subcontractors to provide us with annual audit reports. >> >> Since the subcontractor is a private company and not subject to audit they >> of course do not want to provide a copy. Over the first budget period (two >> years), their budget will be $1,118,890 which to me is substantial. >> >> Can anyone shine a little light for me? Is there policy/regulations or >> anything in writing I can reference here dealing with small private >> companies and audits? >> >> Thanks for any help, >> Leah Bevan >> Coordinator of Grants and Contracts >> The University of Tulsa >> 600 South College Avenue >> Tulsa, Oklahoma 74104 >> (918) 631-2883 >> Fax: (918) 631-2073 >> >> ====================================================================== >> Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including >> subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available >> via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists") >> ====================================================================== >> >> ====================================================================== >> Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including >> subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available >> via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists") >> ====================================================================== > > >====================================================================== > Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including > subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available > via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists") >====================================================================== > HAPPY TRAILS!!! Lisa L. Thompson Associate Director Office of Research and Sponsored Programs The University of Tulsa Tulsa, OK 74104-3189 phone: (918)631-2716 fax: (918)631-2073 e-mail: xxxxxx@utulsa.edu Never be afraid to try something new. Remember, amateurs built the Ark. Professionals built the Titanic! ====================================================================== Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists") ======================================================================
