Property managers recognize that today’s asset tracking best practices demand Auto Identification Technology (AIT) such as printed barcodes or RFID tags. For military asset tracking, the barcode standard is IUID (Item Unique Identification) as defined by MIL-STD-130N, although the optimal asset tracking solution will handle other types of asset tags, as well as those needed to meet new military standards. Soon, one would be hard pressed to find a military asset tracking solution anywhere that doesn’t use IUID barcode technology to monitor an item’s movement or status throughout its lifecycle. The days of using pencils, spreadsheets and keyboards to record item data are heading into the sunset. Now all it takes is the simple wave of a barcode scanner.
Barcode and RFID technology speeds productivity and eliminates transcription errors, offering property managers a quick and easy way to perform an accurate and complete final inventory of government furnished property or end deliverables – and to be audit-ready – when a contract comes to a close. Why is this important? Because it makes the decision to perform a final contract close-out inventory a no-brainer, especially when you consider what can happen if you don’t fully understand the seriousness of making the effort. In a recent article appearing in this month’s issue of The Property Professional online magazine, A2B Tracking Property Management Consultant, Cinda Brockman, lays out a couple of cases in which property administrators either failed to read, misinterpreted or otherwise dismissed FAR clause 52.245-1 (f) (iv):
“The contractor shall periodically perform, record and disclose physical inventory results. A final physical inventory shall be performed upon contract completion or termination. The Property Administrator may waive this final inventory requirement, depending on the circumstances (e.g. overall reliability of the Contractor’s system or the property is to be transferred to a follow-on contract).”
In one case, a contractor Property Administrator accepted shipment from another contractor without notifying the company’s receiving department, so a manual inventory (not an auto-ID best practice) was performed on all assets received. Had notification been made, the PA would have ensured that receiving personnel followed a strict auto-ID process, which would have avoided a highly labor-intensive process to make things right.
In another case, the contractor’s PA had neither requested nor received a waiver and therefore should have followed policies and procedures for performing a final inventory using AIT before having property transferred from one contract to a follow-on. Not adhering to AIT best practices ended up costing countless man-hours and tens of thousands of dollars.
A final inventory is critical to contract close-out. Using AIT best practices such as IUID will make both the decision to perform one, and the process of performing it, quick and easy. I invite you to read the article (page 10) and make the call.