The series so far has carried a company from deciding to pursue the programs all the way to winning and financing an award. This article is about what happens next, the unglamorous work of holding the award, because winning is the start of an obligation rather than the end of an effort. One idea organizes the subject, that an award is a binding agreement with continuing duties, to perform the work, to report on it, to invoice for it, to survive the audits of it, and to stay in good standing while it runs, and a company that wins but neglects these forfeits the standing and the eligibility that the next award depends on, or worse, exposes itself to liability. The work after the award is therefore not bookkeeping but the second half of the campaign, the half where past performance is built or destroyed. The usual caution holds, that the reporting systems, the audit thresholds, and the certifications change by agency and by year, so the specifics below are current-as-of and the agreement’s own terms and the agency instructions are the authority.

Winning Is the Start

The award is a contract or a grant, and either way it binds. A contract carries the obligations of federal acquisition, and a grant or cooperative agreement carries its own framework, but both impose deliverables, milestones, reporting, and oversight that the company must meet, so the proposal that was a promise becomes a set of duties the moment the award is signed. The company now executes what it proposed, against the schedule and the budget it proposed, and the freedom of the proposal gives way to the discipline of performance, where the technology must actually be built and the claims actually made good. Understanding the award as an agreement with duties, rather than as a prize, is the frame for everything that follows.

Performing and Who to Talk To

Performance runs against the work plan, and it runs through two relationships. The company delivers against its milestones and produces the technical deliverables it promised, the reports and the prototype, managing the inevitable changes through the agreement rather than around it, since a change to the scope or the schedule or the budget is a formal modification and not an informal understanding. It is also responsible for its subcontractors and its STTR research-institution partner, flowing down the requirements the agreement imposes and monitoring their work, since the company answers to the government for the whole team and not only for its own part. Two officials matter, and the distinction between them is worth learning, the technical point of contact or program manager who cares about the work, and the contracting officer or grants officer who holds the legal authority over the agreement, since only the latter can actually change what the company is obligated to do. A company that confuses a friendly word from a technical contact for an authorized change to the contract learns the difference the hard way, so it takes direction on the agreement only from the official empowered to give it. When the work runs long the relief is a no-cost extension, more time and no more money, requested through that same officer, but the darker end of performance is termination, since an agreement can be ended for default when the company fails to deliver, a serious mark that can carry repayment, or ended for convenience at the government’s own choice with a settlement of the costs already incurred. Performance, in other words, is enforced, and failing it has named consequences.

Reporting

Reporting is a continuing condition of the award, not a courtesy. The company files technical progress reports through the award and a final report at its end, the record of what the work achieved, and at the agencies that require it a final deliverable that the next phase or the customer will read. Separately, and consequentially, it reports its commercialization, the revenue and the investment and the transition the technology has produced, and that commercialization report is what feeds the performance benchmarks the eligibility article described, so it is the bookkeeping that keeps the company eligible rather than an idle form. A late report can draw a withheld payment or a formal cure notice rather than only a vague loss of standing, and a company that lets its reporting lapse damages its standing and its benchmarks even when the technical work went well, so the reports are treated as deliverables in their own right.

Invoicing and Getting Paid

The money does not arrive on its own. The company invoices for its work through the agency’s payment system, a cost-reimbursement award billing its actual costs at its provisional rates and a fixed-price or milestone award billing as the milestones are met, and the payment follows the invoice rather than the work, which is the lag the money article warned of. Invoicing promptly and correctly is therefore a cash discipline as much as an administrative one, since a late or rejected invoice extends the gap the company must finance, and the systems and formats differ by agency and must be learned. The company that treats invoicing as a low priority finds its own cash starved by its own delay.

Audits and the Settling of Rates

The government checks what it paid for, and the company must be ready. A cost-reimbursement award is subject to audit, the Defense Contract Audit Agency at the defense agencies examining the incurred costs, and each year the company submits an incurred-cost proposal that settles its provisional rates against its actual ones, the true-up the money article described that returns or recovers the difference. A grant, such as those the National Institutes of Health administers through its grants system, carries its own oversight, the single audit that applies once a recipient’s federal spending crosses a threshold, and all of it rests on the records the company kept, so a clean audit trail, the timekeeping and the cost segregation maintained throughout, is what carries a company through an audit rather than a scramble at the end, and those records must be retained for a defined period after the award closes, since an audit can arrive well after the work has ended. The company that kept its books well has little to fear from an audit, and the one that did not discovers the cost of the shortcut.

Compliance and Integrity

The award comes with rules whose violation is not a clerical matter but a hazard. The company certifies its compliance at points through the award’s life, it obeys the regulatory-compliance obligations the agreement imposes, and it operates under the program-integrity rules that guard against fraud, waste, and abuse. A company performing for the defense and mission agencies and handling controlled information takes on a cybersecurity obligation on its own systems too, the controlled-unclassified-information safeguards and the maturity-model certification the department now requires, a continuing burden a small company easily underestimates. The stakes are real, since a false certification or a charge for work not done is exposure under the False Claims Act the data-rights article named, and the program has seen genuine fraud and genuine enforcement, so the obligations are not theoretical. The consequences of a serious failure run to repayment, to suspension, and to debarment from federal awards entirely, which ends a company built on them, so integrity is not a virtue the program hopes for but a condition it enforces.

Closing Out

An award ends with a closeout, and a clean one matters. The company files its final technical report and its final invoice, settles its final rates, accounts for and disposes of any equipment as the agreement requires, and makes its final reporting of inventions and data under the obligations the data-rights article described. A closeout left ragged, with reports unfiled or invoices unsettled or inventions undisclosed, follows the company into its next proposal as a mark against its past performance, while a clean one closes the loop and leaves the company ready for the next award. The closeout is the last act of the award and the first impression for the next.

Continuing Standing

Through all of it the company maintains the standing that lets it keep competing. It keeps its registrations current, renewing the central award registration each year as the eligibility article required, it maintains the compliant accounting system the money article described, and it meets the performance benchmarks that its commercialization reporting feeds. The performance itself becomes the past performance that the proposal article said a future proposal rests on, so a well-run award is an asset that wins the next one and a badly run award is a liability that loses it. Standing is not a separate task but the cumulative result of doing the rest of this article well.

Scale and the UAV Case

The running example finishes its award properly. The small company building its unmanned aircraft files its progress reports on schedule, invoices through the agency system promptly to keep its cash moving, and keeps the timekeeping and cost records that will carry it through the incurred-cost audit and the rate settlement. It reports the commercialization it achieves so that its benchmarks stay healthy, it certifies honestly and does the work it was paid for, and it closes the award out cleanly, final report and final invoice and final invention disclosure all in order. It treats the second half of the campaign as seriously as the first, because the clean record it builds is what makes it eligible and credible for the next phase and the next award.

Out of Scope

Several matters belong elsewhere or to specialists. The detailed mechanics of an audit, the formats of the specific reports, and the law of contract modifications are matters for an accountant, a contract administrator, and the agreement itself rather than for this overview. The strategy of building a portfolio of awards across time is the subject of the next article, the data rights and the money were the subjects of their own, and nothing here is legal, accounting, or compliance advice for a particular award. The specific reporting systems and thresholds change and must be read from the current agency instructions.

Conclusion

After the award the work is to perform what was promised, to report on it, to invoice for it, to survive the audits of it, and to stay in good standing while it runs, and to close it out cleanly at the end. None of this is glamorous, but all of it is binding, since the award is an agreement and not a prize, and the company that holds it well builds the past performance and the eligibility that win the next award while the company that holds it poorly forfeits them or invites the liability the integrity rules carry. Winning is the start of the obligation, and meeting it is the second half of the campaign that the rest of the series began.

References