I agree with your assessment...obviously you are experienced in this area. I made similar comments on a previous JIEDDO program thread. It is us, the taxpayer who ends up paying the price.
So in your mind is the trend towards fixed price contracts vs cost plus not affecting change orders or mission creep? Wasn’t it designed to help mitigate change orders and mission creep? I am serious can you educate me on this? I’d love to hear your opinion.
I have been out of the business a long time, and the rules probably have changed.
HST, judging FRom the dustups in the most recent large military procurement programs, there is still a lot of wiggle room available for running the cost to the taxpayer and the profits to the contractors up.
Please understand me — men and women of good will work hard to do the right thing for competing interests — unfortunately, the poor suffering taxpayer does not have the best seat at the table.
Yes, fixed price contracts are one effort to gain control of cost runups, but the change order process still works as before.
What has to happen is that the aforementioned competing interests have to work together to ensure they all are treated fairly.
When I was in the business, I tried my best to be an honest broker between my company, the government and the taxpayer. That, my FRiend, is a tightrope walk!
Eventually, I got out because walking that tightrope became too difficult, and was not personally or professionally rewarding enough for me to stay there.
Parenthetically, you will note that the Congress and the public never hear about the contracts that worked as they were supposed to. Many do.