Contract Pricing:
Defense Contractor Contributions to the Software Productivity Consortium
NSIAD-89-74: Published: Jul 24, 1989. Publicly Released: Jul 24, 1989.
Additional Materials:
- Full Report:
Contact:
Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed selected defense contractors' classification of independent research and development (IR&D) expenses, focusing on whether the contractors could classify an industry consortium's activities and member companies' contributions as IR&D expenses.
GAO found that: (1) the Department of Defense (DOD) allowed member companies to treat their contributions to the consortium as manufacturing and production engineering expenses because the consortium's activities enhanced the production process but were not for resale; (2) some consortium activities would be more appropriately classified as IR&D; (3) there was no evidence that the consortium's activities improved member companies' internal manufacturing and production capabilities; and (4) all but one of the member companies charged their entire consortium contributions to overhead accounts other than IR&D.
Recommendation for Executive Action
Status: Closed - Implemented
Comments: The Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) conducted a nationwide review of the consortium and, using DOD technical assistance, categorized the consortium's efforts as IR&D on manufacturing and production engineering. An accomplishment report is not warranted.
Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct DOD personnel to determine whether: (1) the Software Productivity Consortium's actual activities meet the Federal Acquisition Regulation criteria for IR&D or manufacturing and production engineering; and (2) member companies have properly classified their contributions to the consortium.
Agency Affected: Department of Defense
Explore the full database of GAO's Open Recommendations
»
Explore the full database of GAO's Open Recommendations
Dec 22, 2020
Commercial Space Transportation:
FAA Should Examine a Range of Options to Support U.S. Launch InfrastructureGAO-21-154: Published: Dec 22, 2020. Publicly Released: Dec 22, 2020.
Dec 15, 2020
-
NASA Human Space Exploration:
Significant Investments in Future Capabilities Require Strengthened Management OversightGAO-21-105: Published: Dec 15, 2020. Publicly Released: Dec 15, 2020.
Apr 30, 2020
-
Priority Open Recommendations:
National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationGAO-20-526PR: Published: Apr 23, 2020. Publicly Released: Apr 30, 2020.
Apr 29, 2020
-
NASA:
Assessments of Major ProjectsGAO-20-405: Published: Apr 29, 2020. Publicly Released: Apr 29, 2020.
Jan 29, 2020
-
NASA Commercial Crew Program:
Significant Work Remains to Begin Operational Missions to the Space StationGAO-20-121: Published: Jan 29, 2020. Publicly Released: Jan 29, 2020.
Jan 28, 2020
-
James Webb Space Telescope:
Technical Challenges Have Caused Schedule Strain and May Increase CostsGAO-20-224: Published: Jan 28, 2020. Publicly Released: Jan 28, 2020.
Dec 19, 2019
-
NASA Lunar Programs:
Opportunities Exist to Strengthen Analyses and Plans for Moon LandingGAO-20-68: Published: Dec 19, 2019. Publicly Released: Dec 19, 2019.
Sep 18, 2019
-
NASA:
Actions Needed to Improve the Management of Human Spaceflight ProgramsGAO-19-716T: Published: Sep 18, 2019. Publicly Released: Sep 18, 2019.
Jun 20, 2019
-
NASA Commercial Crew Program:
Schedule Uncertainty Persists for Start of Operational Missions to the International Space StationGAO-19-504: Published: Jun 20, 2019. Publicly Released: Jun 20, 2019.
Jun 19, 2019
-
NASA Human Space Exploration:
Persistent Delays and Cost Growth Reinforce Concerns over Management of ProgramsGAO-19-377: Published: Jun 19, 2019. Publicly Released: Jun 19, 2019.
Looking for more? Browse all our products here
Explore our Key Issues on Space
Explore our other Key Issues here
