Transcript Contract Support Costs Presentation

Always open to new ideas and suggestions
BIA CSC Workgroup
Tribal/Interior Budget Council Presentation
July 23, 2014
Workgroup Members
Primary Tribal Representatives
Tribe (BIA Region)
Phone
Amy Fredeen
Patty LeBlanc
Vickey Hanvey
Lisa D. Drum
907-793-3431
337-923-4973
918-931-0745
402-837-5391 x108
Cordel Shortey
Greg Anderson
Jim Mackay (Co-Chair)
Cook Inlet (Alaska)
Chitimacha (Eastern)
Cherokee (Eastern Oklahoma)
Omaha (Great Plains)
Great Lakes Indian Fish & Wildlife Commission
(Midwest)
Navajo (Navajo)
Port Gamble (Northwest)
Susanville (Pacific)
Darwin St. Clair, Jr.
Chairman, Eastern Shoshone (Rocky Mt.)
307-332-3532
Rhonda Butcher
Linda Austin
Potawatomi (Southern Plains)
Ysleta del Sur Pueblo (Southwest)
405-275-3121
915-859-7913 x7725
Valerie Barr
Ft. McDermott Paiute Shoshone Tribe (Western)
775-532-8259
Annette Crowe
715-682-6619 x2141
928-871-6033
360-297-2646
530-260-3240
Alternate Tribal Representatives
Tribe (BIA Region)
Phone
James Angaiak
Nunapitchuk (Alaska)
907-527-5665
DeMakus Staton
Eastern Band of Cherokee (Eastern)
828-497-7032
(Eastern Oklahoma)
Jeremy Gone
Omaha Tribe (Great Plains)
402-837-5391
Mary Peterson
Lac du Flambeau (Midwest)
715-588-3348
Rachel Arviso
Navajo (Navajo)
928-871-6033\6041
(Northwest)
Elizabeth Hansen
Redwood Valley Rancheria (Pacific)
707-485-0361
(Rocky Mt.)
(Southern Plains)
Peggy L Vigil
Mescalero Tribe (Southwest)
575-464-9328
Terry Rambler
San Carlos Apache Tribe (Western)
928-475-2361 x5
Federal Members
BIA Region
Phone
Terry Parks (Co-Chair)
OIS - DSD
202-513-7625
Hankie Ortiz
Deputy Director, OIS
202-208-2874
Judy Mitchell
OIS - DSD
202-208-4506
Kirk G Meyer
Eastern
615-564-6962
Yvonne LaRocque
Great Plains
605-226-7426
Michelle McCormick
Midwest
612-725-4588
Sunshine Jordan
Pacific
916-978-6024
Stella Corbin
Rocky Mt.
406-247-7984
Nick Longley
Office of Self Governance
360-699-1010
Recommendations made by the BIA CSC Workgroup
The BIA Contract Support Cost Workgroup has not received any correspondence in regards to these recommendations.
Submitted October 08, 2013:
1. Co-Chair to report to the Tribal/Interior Budget Council (TIBC) on CSC Workgroup activities and be part of the
TIBC budget subcommittee.
2. Clarify the Shortfall Report’s definitions in Column C (total award) and Column H (exclusions). This is to be
clarified by the Solicitor’s Office in conjunction with Tribal Technical Advisory Attorneys.
3. Speed up funding delivery to Tribes. Funds have taken much longer to reach Tribes this year. Funding should not be
subject to unauthorized processes or approvals. Using FBMS and ASAP requires a Tribe to register with SAMS and
have a DUNS number. Enrollment in SAMS and having a DUNS number are not requirements of the P.L. 93-638
contracting process. The process needs to be reviewed to see if the funds can be disbursed in a more expeditious
manner.
4. Sequestration. Let Tribes know in advance what may happen. Communication between the BIA and Tribes is
important. Tribes are required to prepare their annual budgets and prepare their indirect cost rate proposals, but no
potential funding amount is being given. It is better to err on the side of caution than to not have any potential
figures and have to guess.
5. Spending plan. The BIA spending plan should be shared with all the Tribes. Again, communication from the BIA to
Tribes will help in understanding the cuts/budget process. Do not put Tribes in a position to guess and speculate
wrongly.
6. Pilot Program – negotiating lump sum Direct Contract Support. This was an unsuccessful program under the
National Business Center, but can be successful utilizing Bureau personnel (Tribal Awarding Officials) and Tribal
staff. The CSC Workgroup recommends that the Assistant Secretary send out an All Tribes letter asking four Tribes
to volunteer for this pilot project (two compact Tribes and two contract Tribes). The participating Tribes should be
held harmless if the negotiated amount is less than 15% of salaries.
7. Fully fund CSC. The Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs Office should be a strong advocate on behalf of the Tribes
to fully support CSC. We are not far away from achieving that goal. Please do not let the progress that has been
achieved since the implementation of the BIA CSC Policy wither away.
8. Advocate the removal of CSC caps for FY 2014. There is no tribal support and no tribal CSC Workgroup support for
Tribe-by-Tribe CSC caps in annual appropriations.
9. Excess CSC funds within a Region should be reallocated to Tribes within that Region, rather than being sent to the
Central Office and then reallocated to Regional Offices for disbursement. Any excess CSC funds from each Region
should then be sent back to the Central Office and given to the appropriate Region/OSG to fund the Tribes with the
lowest CSC funding percentage.
10. OSG Form for CSC Shortfall. This form lacks an OMB number and will be discussed with the OSG Tribes to
determine if it needs to be submitted to OMB for a form number or not.
11. Review AFA CSC contract/compact language to see if the IHS language is appropriate for BIA programs. If it is,
incorporate the language into each Tribe’s AFA with tribal consent.
12. Regional CSC Workgroup Representatives attend Regional meetings and conferences to provide CSC updates to
Tribes. Tribes are requesting that they be made aware of what is happening with the CSC Workgroup. Regional
representatives and alternates can provide an update to their Regional Tribes at:
a. Regional Directors Meeting
b. OSG Meeting
c. TIBC Meeting
13. Alaska Tribes and the 30% Flat IDC Rate (Small and Needy). Many Alaska Tribes/Villages meet the definition of
Small and Needy and do not require an annual audit. The BIA Greenbook defines Small and Needy tribes as follows:
The small tribes designation was given to tribes with a population of 1,700 or less and less than $160,000 in
recurring TPA funds in the lower 48 states and $200,000 in recurring TPA funds in Alaska. Having funds below this
threshold inhibits a tribe’s ability to carry out basic tribal services and programs. A permanent solution that is aimed
at creating a floor for small and needy Tribes nationwide needs to be developed.
Submitted April 02, 2014:
1. Co-Chair to report to the Tribal/Interior Budget Council (TIBC) on CSC Workgroup activities and be part of the
TIBC budget subcommittee (previously submitted).
2. Shortfall Report definitions in Column C (total award) and Column H (exclusions) need to clarified. This is to be
clarified by the Solicitor’s Office in conjunction with Tribal Technical Advisory Attorneys (previously submitted).
3. Pilot Program – negotiating lump sum Direct Contract Support. The CSC Workgroup recommends that the
Assistant Secretary send out an All Tribes letter asking four Tribes to volunteer for this pilot project (two compact
Tribes and two contract Tribes). The participating Tribes should be held harmless if the negotiated amount is less
than 15% of salaries (previously submitted).
4. AFA CSC contract/compact language needs to be reviewed to see if the IHS language is appropriate for BIA
programs. If it is, incorporate the language into each Tribe’s AFA with Tribal consent (previously submitted).
5. Regional CSC Workgroup Representatives should attend Regional meetings and conferences to provide CSC
updates to Tribes. Tribes are requesting that they be made aware of what is happening with the CSC Workgroup.
Regional representatives and alternates can provide an update to their Regional Tribes at:
a. Regional Directors Meeting
b. OSG Meeting
c. TIBC Meeting
(previously submitted).
6. An analysis needs to be done to see the impact of providing a flat amount of $65,000 for Contract Support Costs to
Small and Needy Tribes. The new OMB Super Circular says that the indirect contract support cost rate defaults to
10% if there is no negotiated indirect cost rate, although it is likely this default provision does not apply to the
computation of indirect contract support costs under the ISDEAA. Many of these small and needy Tribes do not
meet the threshold for negotiating a rate and the 10% default rate, if applied, would have a very negative impact on
these Tribes. A permanent solution that is aimed at creating a threshold dollar amount for Small and Needy Tribes
needs to be developed, as many of these Tribes do not have the funds to pay an employee to perform contract
administration. In no case should a Tribe receive more funds for contract support costs than it receives in TPA funds.
7. It is extremely important that there be maximum opportunity for Tribes to participate in the 2014 Tribal Consultation
Sessions on Contract Support Costs. Twelve Tribal consultation sessions to formulate long-term accounting, budget
and legislative strategies should be planned to address the BIA contract support cost situation, one for each of the
BIA’s Regions. For those Tribes that are not able to afford the travel costs, we recommend that the BIA cover the
cost for one Tribal official to attend the consultation session as this is an important issue that was identified in the
House Congressional Record. As an option, the BIA may be able to provide a teleconference session for those that
are unable to attend. Mr. Thompson stated that halfway through the consultations sessions, the BIA would take a
“pause” and reconvene the CSC Workgroup to evaluate the responses to determine if the data needed is being
received and then hold the rest of the Tribal consultations. The entire CSC Workgroup is strongly in favor of this.
8. In light of the BIA supporting full funding of contract support costs and this being a Bureau priority for FY 2014
and 2015, it would seem appropriate to change the name of the “Contract Support Cost Shortfall Report” to just
“Contract Support Cost Report”.
9. Training on contract support costs should be a priority and a Tribal Practitioner Tool Kit (help desk) should be
established to centralize negotiations for direct contract support costs and instill consistency. There are still too
many inconsistencies on how Bureau and Tribal officials treat direct contract support costs. This may be a reflection
of Bureau and Tribal staff not fully understanding the policy despite the BIA Contract Support Cost policy
memorandum being in place since 2007.
10. The CSC Workgroup is having difficulty with the interpretation being expressed by the Solicitor’s Office on the
Trade Secrets Act. The Solicitors Office made a determination that the CSC Workgroup is not allowed to review
CSC data for each Region and Tribe before it is finalized, asserting that to do so would be a violation of the TCA.
The CSC Workgroup was established with Tribal representatives from each BIA Region with the intent of consulting
on the BIA CSC Shortfall Report and providing recommendations on revisions to the BIA CSC policy
memorandum. It is very difficult, if not impossible, to accomplish this goal if the CSC Workgroup is unable to
review this data. We ask your assistance in revisiting the Solicitor’s determination based on the TCA analysis set
out on page 3 of this letter.
Contract Support Cost Payments for 2014
1. The process is taking too long and needs to be reviewed to see if there are ways to streamline the process. I can only
talk about the Susanville Indian Rancheria. The modification to our 93-638 contract for Contract Support Costs is
dated June 27, 2014. Although the language in the modification says that contract support costs shall be based on
the contractors FY 2014 “total need”, the amounts shown are reflective of the tribe CY 13 negotiated Fixed Carry
Forward IDC Rate (the tribe had an established CY 14 negotiated Fixed Carry Forward IDC Rate) and Direct
Contract Support Costs represent the FY 2012 Tribe’s pro-rate share based on program salaries.
2. In my conversation with BIA personnel, many of the contracting officers do not fully understand how to negotiate
Direct Contract Support Costs. They understand the principle of 15% of salaries, but they are unfamiliar with how
to ensure what items can and what items can’t be included in a proposal. The BIA contracting officers that are on
the Contract Support Cost Workgroup do understand the BIA Contract Support Cost Policy, but the full
understanding does not get down to the agency levels.
3. Some Regions are having difficulty in disbursing the funds to their tribes. The BIA Central Office has had to send
additional staff to these Regions so that the tribes can get their funds. This puts additional burdens on the tribes, as
they have to use other funds to operate their BIA programs as they wait for the BIA to provide a modification to
their 93-638 contracts.
4. There are just three things needed to determine the Direct and Indirect Contract Support Costs owed to each tribe:
Salaries for those being paid for with BIA funds, the tribe’s BIA total budget minus capital expenditures and passthroughs, and the tribe’s current approved indirect cost rate from the Interior Business Center.
2015 House Appropriations Committee Report
1. The draft FY 2015 committee report on the Appropriations Committee website provides for full funding of estimated
contract support costs. The Committee expects Indian Affairs to submit a reprogramming request to the Committee
if the final calculated contract support costs exceed the amount provided ($246,000,000) in order to ensure that
contract support costs are fully paid. The Committee recognizes that inconsistencies exist between the Bureau and
Indian Health Service in the ways that contract support costs are estimated and managed, and encourages both the
agencies and the Tribes to recommend ways that the Committee can be helpful in promoting consistency.
Contract Support Cost Consultation Recommendations
1. The BIA CSC Workgroup is tentatively scheduled to meet in September to review the recommendations from the
various consultation sessions. The location has not been finalized, but it will probably be in Washington, DC to
enable Assistant Secretary Washburn to address the workgroup in person.
2. One recommendation that has come out, and it is a difficult one to pass through Congress given the current political
climate, is making CSC Appropriations mandatory. This would ensure that full funding for CSC continue
indefinitely and is not paid for by cuts to Indian programs. Senator Begich (D-AK) plans to introduce a bill by the
end of July that would establish contract support costs as mandatory spending like other legal entitlements. I would
ask the Tribal/Interior Budget Council’s support in encouraging each tribe to contact their Senators to see if they are
willing to co-sponsor the bill.
Conclusion
I would like to thank the Tribal/Interior Budget Council for allowing me to be on the agenda to discuss Contract Support
Costs. The BIA Contract Support Cost Workgroup works well together and is always open to ideas. I have given you a
contact list of the individuals on the workgroup and please feel free to contact any one of us if you have a question.
There is much work to be done yet to ensure that every tribe’s needs are met.