2012 NASMRM Training Symposium NGB Cooperative Agreement Program – A Unique Federal/State Partnership Presented By

1. 2012 NASMRM Training Symposium NGB Cooperative Agreement Program – A Unique Federal/State Partnership Presented By Mary Ellen Lewis 23 May 2012

2. Topics of Discussion • NGB CA Program – • A Unique Federal/State Partnership • Overview of the NGB CA Program • Current Challenges • Lessons Learned-Best Practices • Strengthening the Partnership as We Go Forward

3. NGB CA Program – A Unique Federal – State Partnership It IS a unique Partnership: - Between the Federal Government, the Grantor and the Adjutant General of the State Military Department, the Grantee - Through this Partnership Federal Assistance funds flow to the Grantee for the purpose of training, maintaining and equipping the State’s National Guard - Nothing else like it in the Grants and CA world

4. A Unique Federal – State Partnership (Cont’d) - Our Agreements are not competitive --Primarily 3 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Programs – 12.401 O&M 12.400 MILCON 12.404 NG Youth Programs Numbers CFDA lists hundreds of Programs, individuals and organizations can compete for – not the case with our three Programs 4

5. A Unique Federal – State Partnership (Cont’d) - NG’s Authority for Entering into CAs -- 32 USC Section 106 and 107 (O&M) --10 USC Chapter 1803 (Construction) -- 32 USC 501 (StarBase) -- 32 USC 509 (ChalleNGe) Statutory Authority must exist – if Authority is other than listed above, a Special Military Project Cooperative Agreement will be executed 5

6. A Unique Federal – State Partnership(Cont’d) 31 USC Section 6305 – Using Cooperative Agreements A Cooperative Agreement shall be used if the principal purpose of the relationship is to transfer a thing of value to a Non-Federal entity to carry out a public purpose of support and substantial involvement between the executive agency and the recipient is expected in carrying out the activity in the Agreement 6

7. A Unique Federal – State Partnership(Cont’d) 31 USC Section 6305 – Translation: When a Federal entity (NGB) Transfers a thing of value (cash/in-kind assistance) To a Non-Federal entity (State Military Department) To assist or support a public purpose (SMD Operations) That are authorized by Federal law (statutory authority)

8. Overview of the NGB CA Program Who are We? We reside within the NGB Office of the Principal Assistant Responsible for Contracting (NGB-PARC) The Office of the PARC is responsible for policy development, ensuring and assessing compliance, with policy, and all training related to Grants and Cooperative Agreements, Federal Contracts, E-Commerce, Government Purchase Cards, and Contingency Contracting 8

9. Overview of the NGB CA Program NGB Grants and Cooperative Agreements (NGB-PARC-A) Mary Ellen Lewis Chief 703-607-5284 maryellen.lewis@ngb.mil Kate Brown Program Assistant 703-601-4380 katherine.brown7@ngb.mil Dave Shaw Program Analyst Joe Wannemacher Program Analyst 9

10. Overview of the NGB CA Program NGR 5-1, National Guard Grants and Cooperative Agreements Directs policy, procedures and guiding principles for the execution and management of NGB Cooperative Agreements 10

11. Overview of NGB CA Program NGB-PARC-A Responsibilities – Development of policy for the execution and management of CAs Coordinating the staffing and updates of CAs and Appendices Conducting policy reviews of CAs and Appendices Providing policy management and support to ensure that all NGB assistance programs comply with Federal laws, executive orders, regulations and directives Providing support, assistance, training and guidance to NGB and USPFO staffs Appointment of USPFOs as Grants Officers Serving as the proponent office for NGB-Sponsored CA Training 11

12. Overview of the NGB CA Program NG’s Cooperative Agreements Program It’s a Huge Program – FY11 – $1,905,769,993 Awarded Through CAs to the States

13. FY11 CA Awards – Your States 13

14. FY11 CA Awards – Your States (Cont’d) 14

15. Overview of the NGB CA Program Types of Agreements: • Master Cooperative Agreement (MCA) • Separate (Program) Appendices under MCA • Master Construction Cooperative Agreement (MCCA) • Special Military Project Cooperative Agreements • Not under MCA or MCCA 15

16. Overview of NGB CA Program Master Cooperative Agreement (MCA) – The MCA includes standard terms and conditions applicable to all Appendices under the MCA Appendices – Provides guidance, policy, terms and conditions relative to the Program which the Appendix supports ARNG – 12 Program Appendices ANG – 10 Program Appendices 16

17. Overview of NGB CA Program

18. Overview of the NGB CA Program 18

19. Overview of the NGB CA Program Military Construction Cooperative Agreement (MCCA) – • ARNG MCCA • Appendices SP,SD,SC • ANG MCCA • Appendices SD, SC, UC 19

20. Overview of the NGB CA Program Special Military Project Cooperative Agreements (Stand-Alone Agreements) • NG Youth Programs ChalleNGe StarBase • ARRA of 2009 (Recovery Act) 20

21. Overview of the NGB CA Program CA Execution – • Agreements signed by USPFO and TAG • Legally binding documents • Usually renewed every 5 years • Funded annually • Managed by a CA PM in your State • Coordinated thru NGB-OPR-PM • Annual Budget • Administration of Appendix 21

22. Overview of the NGB CA Program CPP Negotiated annually between the Grantee and the USPFO, and approved by the USPFO Two methodologies can be used to formulate the CPP: Time Study of Personnel Fee-Per-Action Supervisory time not included, except a supervisor whose time can be allocated and validated to the performance of non-supervisory functions 22

23. Overview of the NGB CA Program Reporting Requirements Recovery Act-funded CAs – Quarterly Reporting SMD reports to federalreporting.gov GOR reviews reports for accuracy and comments FSRS Reporting – Ongoing All CAs with sub-recipient awards over $25,000 SMD reports Sub-recipient data to fsrs.gov – much of the data is pre-populated from CCR and DUNS registrations

24. Current Challenges – Lessons Learned and Best Practices Indirect Costs – BLUF – Indirect Costs the Federal Government will reimburse are Fringe Benefits on Direct Labor (employee’s salary) to include: Worker’s Compensation Unemployment Compensation Life and Health Insurance Retirement Plan Ref: Policy Memorandum dated 11 Feb 08, Subject: NGB Policy on Payment of Indirect Charges – Cooperative Agreements

25. Current Challenges – Lessons Learned and Best Practices Indirect Costs(Cont’d) – Over the past 3 years State’s have come forward with creative ways to seek reimbursement for indirect costs – many stemming from Agreements made between the States and the employee unions, and most related to early retirement incentives. This and other requests/proposals prompted some of the changes you see in Appendix 24, ANG Fire Protection Activities:

26. Current Challenges – Lessons Learned and Best Practices Indirect Costs(Cont’d) – Ancillary charges such as monthly or one-time worker’s compensation payouts; additional prior- or post-year retirement costs; additional costs associated with post-retirement health insurance; early retirement incentives, bonuses or payouts, including post-retirement monthly payment of vacation or annual leave, shall not be authorized.

27. Current Challenges – Lessons Learned and Best Practices Indirect Costs(Cont’d) – Reimbursement of costs associated with arbitration services, professional or otherwise, in the negotiation and settlement of a grievance or other formal complaint filed by an employee or a group of employees, shall not be authorized. These are matters between the State and the employee(s), and such costs shall be borne by the State.

28. Current Challenges – Lessons Learned and Best Practices Indirect Costs(Cont’d) – Reimbursement of costs incurred by, or associated with, the process of collective bargaining between the State and its employees covered by a Bargaining Unit (a legally organized labor union) for the purposes of negotiating matters involving employee issues, such as general working or safety conditions on the job, salary, benefits, job qualifications and the like, shall not be authorized.

29. Current Challenges – Lessons Learned and Best Practices Indirect Costs(Cont’d) – Reimbursement of increased costs relating to employment issues agreed to in a Collective Bargaining Agreement between the State and its employees covered by a Bargaining Unit, such as increases in salaries, benefits, etc., shall not be authorized. Increases in such costs shall be borne by the State.

30. Current Challenges – Lessons Learned and Best Practices Indirect Costs(Cont’d) – Again, the Federal Government, with limited exceptions, will not reimburse Indirect Costs: 1. The Federal Government is experiencing the same cut-backs in funding as the States – You heard it from the NGB Comptroller, Mr. Cabrera on Monday – he described the cuts NGB will experience over the next 5 years – they’re drastic. The Federal Government simply doesn’t have the money to pay these indirect costs.

31. Current Challenges – Lessons Learned and Best Practices Indirect Costs(Cont’d) – 2. If we were to pay indirect costs – those funds would come out of the funding available to train, maintain and equip the State’s National Guard – Congress will not appropriate additional funding.

32. Current Challenges – Lessons Learned and Best Practices Federal – State Expenditures FY08 – FY11 Year Federal State % State 2011 $1,905,769,993 $178,878,890 9.38% 2010 $1,955,914,570 $202,727,584 10.36% 2009 $2,132,243,523 $210,480,934 9.87% 2008 $1,984,753,354 $156,870,950 7.90% 32

33. Current Challenges – Lessons Learned and Best Practices Federal – State Expenditures FY07 – FY00 Year Federal State % State 2007 $1,703,247,080 158,151,93910.77% 2006 1,878,208,659 138,244,608 7.36% 2005 610,655,413 86,021,416 14.00% 2004 1,297,726,079 125,870,413 9.70% 2003 1,147,677,259 97,684,851 8.50% 2002 1,113,084,675 105,382,969 9.47% • 699,476,931 82,773,314 11.80% 2000 989,941,890 94,821,376 9.58% 33

34. Current Challenges – Lessons Learned and Best Practices Oversight and Surveillance of Services Ensure CA PM conducts oversight and surveillance of project or services as work proceeds to ensure services are performed in accordance with the scope of the Agreement, and to ensure deliverables or end product is delivered as required by the Agreement. Impact: Change to NGR 5-1, Chapter 1-4, Responsibilities, and Sample DD 577

35. Current Challenges – Lessons Learned and Best Practices Inspection and Acceptance of Construction (This relates to Oversight and Surveillance, above). Add inspection and acceptance award term to MCCAs and applicable Appendices. Impact: Change to NGR 5-1; change to MCCA, MCA and Appendices.

36. Current Challenges – Lessons Learned and Best Practices Review of Costs Submitted for Reimbursement Emphasis on a thorough review of costs to ensure they are authorized/allowable for reimbursement. Impact: Change to NGR 5-1, Chapter 11-4, Payment Processing (to emphasize responsibilities), and Appendices, Unauthorized Costs, to include reference to 2 CFR Part 225, if in doubt as to whether costs are allowable or not

37. Current Challenges – Lessons Learned and Best Practices Use of Standard Agreement Templates Any changes to the standard Agreement templates require review and approval of the NGB-OPR-PM, NGB-PARC and NGB-JA. Under no circumstances will sub-grants, State contracts, sub-recipient proposals be incorporated into the MCA, MCCA or Appendices. Impact: Change to NGR 5-1, Chapter 3-1, Administration

38. Current Challenges – Lessons Learned and Best Practices Reconciliation and Closeout of Agreement Emphasize requirement for timely closeout, 90-days after the end of the Federal fiscal year, unless TAG submits a written request to the USPFO that Appendix remain open; and proper reconciliation of final balance. Impact: Emphasis to NGR 5-1, Chapter 11-10, Final Accounting and Settlement

39. Current Challenges – Lessons Learned and Best Practices Approval of Requests for Reimbursements, SF 270, by the USPFO or Designee GFEBS procedures require SF 270 be signed by the USPFO or designee. DD 577 signature card for USPFO and designee (if applicable) must be on file with DFAS; NGB-PF will sign DD 577. Impact: Change to NGR 5-1, Chapter 11-4, Payment Processing (ARNG and ANG) and NGR 5-1, Chapter 1-4e., Responsibilities

40. Strengthening The Partnership as We Go Forward By: Working out Issues, processes, and business practices together – At the lowest levels, elevate only if unable to resolve Training together – Attending our NGB CA Training; whether it’s sponsored by the USPFO in your State, Open CA classes, VTC on topics that affect us all

41. Strengthening The Partnership as We Go Forward By: Partnering with NASMRM on future initiatives such as the review and update of NGR 5-1, NGB Cooperative Agreement Training, and any critical issues that have an effect on the execution and management of CAs. Possibly bring back CA training as part of the Symposium and possibly even Fiscal Law – these would be tailored to the NASMRM audience. I’ve been tasked to work on this – form a Working Group and develop a COA to present to NGB-ZC by July 2012

42. Strengthening The Partnership as We Go Forward To take it one step further I will ask for your help Jesse, that together, we find a way to bring an awareness of our CA Program to the TAGs – through training, participating in their venues, i.e., TAG Orientation, NGAUS, Senior Leadership forums, etc – so there’s a greater awareness and understanding of this Program.

43. Thank You – Shawn and Jesse for asking me to participate in this year’s Symposium. All of you that spoke up with a question, those that raised issues you’re facing, or commented on best practices in your State added real value to the discussion and the learning that took place here.