Floor Checks and Interviews: Preparing Employees for DCAA Spot Audits

DCAA floor check

DCAA auditors arrived unannounced at your facility at 9:30 AM requesting floor checks—direct observation and interviews with employees at their workstations. Your engineering staff confidently described their work but couldn’t explain their timesheet charge codes, your technicians said they “usually charge to whatever project seems right,” and your administrative staff admitted supervisors approve timesheets “automatically without really looking at them.” Two weeks later, DCAA issued findings questioning $420,000 in labor costs, citing systematic labor mischarging evidenced by employee statements demonstrating lack of understanding about proper time recording, inadequate supervisor review, and disconnection between actual work performed and timesheet charges. Here’s what contractors miss about floor checks: DCAA doesn’t just examine accounting records and system documentation—auditors interview employees directly to verify that timekeeping practices described in policies actually occur in daily operations, that workers understand charging requirements, and that supervisors perform meaningful review rather than perfunctory approval. Understanding how to prepare employees for floor check interviews isn’t about scripting responses or coaching evasion—it’s about ensuring your workforce genuinely understands timekeeping requirements, consistently follows proper procedures, and can articulate practices accurately because they actually perform compliant time recording every day.

The Legal Framework Governing DCAA Floor Checks and Interviews

Federal audit regulations grant DCAA comprehensive access to contractor facilities, records, and personnel as part of contract cost verification responsibilities. FAR 52.215-2, Audit and Records—Negotiation, requires contractors to provide access to records and personnel supporting contract costs, with “personnel” explicitly including employee interviews enabling auditors to verify accounting system operation and cost accuracy through direct observation and questioning. This isn’t optional courtesy—it’s contractual obligation with floor check refusal constituting audit obstruction triggering serious compliance consequences.

The timekeeping adequacy standards under DFARS 252.242-7006 require accounting systems to provide accurate labor distribution supporting direct and indirect cost accumulation. DCAA verifies timekeeping adequacy not only through system documentation review but through floor checks observing actual timekeeping practices, interviewing employees about how they record time, questioning supervisors about approval procedures, and comparing employee descriptions to documented policies. When floor check observations contradict system documentation, DCAA concludes that accounting system deficiencies exist regardless of written procedure adequacy, because systems failing operational testing don’t meet regulatory standards. Understanding DCAA compliance requirements means recognizing that floor checks represent critical verification mechanism distinguishing theoretical compliance from operational reality.

FAR 31.201-2(d) mandates adequate accounting systems and internal controls ensuring cost accuracy, with adequacy assessed through both design evaluation and operational testing. Floor checks constitute operational testing par excellence—auditors observe whether employees actually record time daily, whether supervisors actually review timesheets meaningfully, whether charge codes actually match work performed, and whether practices actually align with documented procedures. System adequacy requires both proper design and effective operation, with floor checks specifically evaluating the operational dimension that document review cannot assess.

The critical consideration involves DCAA Contract Audit Manual 5-104, establishing floor check procedures including: observing employees at work locations, verifying activities match timesheet charges, interviewing employees about timekeeping practices, questioning supervisors about review procedures, and comparing observations to accounting system documentation. These procedures aren’t punitive gotcha tactics—they’re systematic verification methods ensuring labor costs billed to government reflect actual work performed rather than approximations, estimates, or convenient allocations disconnected from reality.

What Contractors Must Understand About Floor Check Challenges

Here’s what contractors miss about floor checks: employees articulate what they actually do, not what policies say they should do. DCAA compliance explained emphasizes that well-meaning employees honestly describing actual practices reveal compliance gaps when reality diverges from documented procedures. Your engineer explaining “I usually fill out my timesheet Friday afternoon based on what I remember from the week” has just told DCAA that daily time recording requirements aren’t followed. Your supervisor stating “I approve everyone’s timesheets Monday morning, takes about five minutes for the whole team” has revealed that meaningful review doesn’t occur. These honest descriptions of non-compliant practices create the audit findings that theoretical policy compliance cannot overcome.

The charge code understanding gap emerges when employees cannot explain what their timesheet codes represent, which contracts codes correspond to, or why they selected specific codes. This is where audits go sideways—employees perform legitimate work and accurately record hours but charge time based on convenience, supervisor direction, or arbitrary allocation rather than actual contract work performed. When DCAA asks “why did you charge to this code?” and receives responses like “that’s what my supervisor told me to use,” “I’m not sure, it was already selected in my timesheet,” or “I just pick whichever contract seems related,” auditors conclude that labor distribution doesn’t reflect actual work and therefore costs charged to government lack reliability supporting reimbursement.

The work description mismatch surfaces when employee descriptions of daily activities don’t align with projects charged on timesheets. Your software developer describing work on “the new user interface module” while timesheets show charging to “systems integration contract” reveals potential mischarging when contracts involve different scope. Your technician explaining work on “customer prototype assembly” while charging to “overhead” indicates improper direct/indirect classification. These disconnections between work performed and time charged demonstrate the labor mischarging that floor checks specifically target for identification.

The supervisor approval disconnect appears when supervisors cannot describe their approval process, explain what they review, or identify instances where they questioned timesheet accuracy. DCAA timekeeping requirements mandate meaningful supervisor review as essential control over labor accuracy, not rubber-stamp approval. When supervisors admit they “just approve everyone because they trust their employees,” “don’t really have time to review in detail,” or “approve in bulk without looking at individual charges,” they’ve described control failure allowing systematic mischarging regardless of whether individual employees intend proper charging.

The contemporaneous recording failure manifests when employees describe completing timesheets weekly, bi-weekly, or from memory rather than recording actual daily activity. Daily time recording isn’t bureaucratic preference—it’s regulatory requirement ensuring accuracy that memory-based reconstruction cannot provide. When employees explain “I keep a notepad and enter everything Friday,” “I usually remember what I did and fill it in later,” or “I know roughly how I spend my time so I allocate accordingly,” they’ve admitted violating daily recording requirements that create the basis for questioned labor costs.

The documentation understanding gap emerges when employees cannot explain what support they maintain for time charged, whether they retain task orders or work assignments, or how they demonstrate time was charged correctly. While employees aren’t expected to maintain audit files, understanding that work assignments, emails directing tasks, project documentation, and other records support timesheet accuracy demonstrates awareness that time charging requires substantiation beyond personal assertion.

The training deficiency becomes apparent when employees reveal they’ve never received timekeeping training, don’t understand why accurate charging matters, or weren’t informed about compliance requirements. Untrained employees cannot comply with requirements they don’t understand, with training gaps creating systematic non-compliance across your workforce that floor checks expose through employee interviews revealing fundamental misunderstanding about basic timekeeping obligations.

Five Essential Steps for Floor Check Preparation and Employee Readiness

Step 1: Implement Comprehensive Timekeeping Training for All Employees

Develop structured timekeeping training program covering: daily recording requirements explaining why time must be recorded each day, charge code selection guidance describing how to identify proper codes, direct versus indirect cost distinction clarifying what work charges to contracts versus overhead, timesheet accuracy importance explaining government reimbursement reliance on accurate labor distribution, and correction procedures establishing how to fix errors. Deliver training to all employees including new hire orientation, annual refresher sessions, and targeted training when compliance issues emerge.

Create practical training materials using real-world scenarios relevant to your business including example situations showing proper charge code selection, common charging mistakes to avoid, and decision trees helping employees classify ambiguous activities. Avoid abstract policy recitation in favor of concrete examples employees can apply to actual work situations. Include supervisor-specific training addressing approval responsibilities, review procedures, and questioning techniques identifying potential charging errors before approval.

Implement training documentation requiring employee acknowledgment confirming they received training, understand requirements, and agree to follow procedures. Maintain training records demonstrating compliance commitment while supporting audit defense when DCAA questions whether employees were adequately instructed about timekeeping obligations. Periodic refresher training addresses compliance drift and reinforces requirements that daily routine may obscure.

Step 2: Deploy Clear Charge Code Structure with Employee-Accessible Guidance

Establish logical charge code structure that employees can understand and navigate including clear code naming conventions, organized hierarchies grouping related codes, and intuitive selection processes minimizing confusion. Avoid cryptic code numbers without meaningful description—”Contract-ABC-Labor” communicates purpose better than “1234567” requiring reference lookup. Provide employees readily accessible charge code reference materials including code listings with descriptions, project scope summaries helping employees identify appropriate codes, and contact information for charging questions.

Implement automated charge code validation preventing common mistakes including controls blocking invalid codes, warnings flagging unusual charges requiring confirmation, and default code logic suggesting appropriate selections based on employee role and project assignments. Technology supporting proper charging reduces errors while demonstrating organizational commitment to accuracy that DCAA recognizes during floor checks when employees describe user-friendly systems supporting compliance rather than fighting confusing structures.

Create charging guidance addressing common scenarios including: how to charge time spanning multiple projects, how to classify meetings and administrative time, how to handle training and professional development, when travel charges directly to contracts versus indirect costs, and how to address rework or correction of prior deliverables. Scenario-based guidance provides answers to questions employees actually encounter, preventing improper charging guesses when employees lack clear direction.

Step 3: Establish Meaningful Supervisor Review and Approval Procedures

Develop detailed supervisor approval procedures requiring specific review activities including: validating hours align with employee schedules and known availability, confirming charge codes match assigned project work, questioning unusual patterns or unexpected charges, reviewing for proper direct versus indirect classification, and documenting approval with dated electronic signature or written certification. Train supervisors that approval represents management certification of accuracy, not administrative formality, with supervisors accountable for labor charging accuracy on approved timesheets.

Implement approval quality monitoring assessing supervisor compliance with review procedures through: periodic sampling of approved timesheets evaluating approval thoroughness, management interviews with supervisors about their review process, and exception reporting identifying supervisors with concerning approval patterns like identical timesheet distributions suggesting insufficient scrutiny. Address identified approval deficiencies through targeted retraining, management counseling, or procedural corrections preventing systematic review failures that floor checks would expose.

Create supervisor approval tools supporting effective review including reports showing employee historical charging patterns enabling identification of unusual changes, project status summaries providing context for evaluating time distribution reasonableness, and automated alerts flagging potential issues requiring closer examination. These tools demonstrate organizational investment in approval effectiveness while enabling supervisors to perform meaningful review efficiently rather than treating thoroughness and efficiency as competing objectives.

Step 4: Conduct Regular Internal Floor Check Simulations

Perform periodic internal floor checks mimicking DCAA procedures including: randomly selecting employees for interviews, observing work activities and comparing to timesheet charges, asking employees about charging practices and code selection, questioning supervisors about approval procedures, and comparing employee responses to documented policies. Conduct simulations without advance warning preventing artificial compliance during mock exercises that doesn’t reflect normal operations.

Document simulation findings identifying compliance gaps, employee misunderstandings, procedural deviations, or training deficiencies requiring correction. Treat simulation findings as opportunities for improvement rather than employee punishment, creating learning environment where mistakes discovered internally enable correction before DCAA identifies problems. Implement corrective actions addressing simulation findings including targeted retraining, procedure clarifications, system improvements, or control enhancements.

Brief employees on floor check purpose and expectations without scripting responses or coaching evasion. Explain that DCAA conducts floor checks verifying timekeeping procedures operate as documented, that employees should answer questions honestly about actual practices, and that candid responses help identify improvements supporting both compliance and operational effectiveness. Emphasize that floor checks aren’t investigations targeting employee punishment but verification procedures ensuring cost accuracy benefiting everyone through efficient audit processes and maintained contract relationships.

Step 5: Create Comprehensive Documentation Supporting Timekeeping Practices

Maintain detailed documentation demonstrating compliant timekeeping operations including: written policies describing recording requirements, approval procedures, charge code guidance, and correction protocols; training records documenting employee instruction and acknowledgment; timesheet records with approval evidence and dates; supervisor review documentation showing comments and concerns raised; and monitoring reports demonstrating systematic oversight. Organized documentation enables efficient floor check support while demonstrating organizational discipline that DCAA recognizes as compliance indicator.

Develop work assignment documentation practices ensuring employees maintain records supporting time charged including: task assignments from supervisors documenting directed work, project correspondence describing activities performed, deliverable records connecting work to contracts, and meeting documentation showing time spent in project activities. While employees shouldn’t maintain formal audit files, basic work records support accurate charging and enable verification that time distribution reflects actual activities.

Implement continuous documentation improvement addressing gaps or deficiencies identified through internal reviews, simulation findings, or operational challenges. Treat documentation as living compliance infrastructure requiring regular updates ensuring accuracy and relevance rather than static artifacts created once and never modified. Current, accurate documentation supporting actual practices provides foundation for successful floor checks demonstrating genuine compliance rather than theoretical policy creation.

The Investment in Floor Check Preparation

Implementing comprehensive floor check preparation program costs between $8,000 and $30,000 for small to mid-sized contractors depending on workforce size and training infrastructure requirements. This includes training development and delivery, procedure documentation, simulation conduct, and system improvements. Annual maintenance costs typically run $3,000 to $10,000 for ongoing training, periodic simulations, and documentation updates.

Let me show you the value: contractors with well-prepared employees pass floor checks demonstrating operational compliance supporting efficient audits with minimal findings. They avoid the substantial questioned costs that result when floor checks reveal systematic labor mischarging, inadequate supervision, or policy-practice disconnections. They maintain positive DCAA relationships through demonstrated compliance commitment that auditors recognize when employees accurately describe compliant practices.

Contractors with unprepared employees face massive questioned labor costs when floor check interviews reveal systematic non-compliance, experience accounting system disapproval when floor checks demonstrate control failures, and suffer audit inefficiency through extended verification procedures when initial observations raise reliability concerns. They incur crisis training costs implementing rushed preparation after floor check findings, though retrospective training cannot fix historical compliance failures that floor checks already documented.

Understanding Floor Check Scope Across Audit Types

DCAA conducts floor checks during various audit types including: accounting system audits verifying timekeeping adequacy, incurred cost audits testing labor distribution accuracy, forward pricing audits evaluating estimating system reliability, and defective pricing audits investigating cost or pricing data accuracy. Your floor check preparation must support all audit contexts, with employee readiness representing foundational compliance capability applicable across DCAA’s audit portfolio rather than isolated requirement for specific audit types.

Floor check frequency and intensity vary based on contractor compliance history, audit risk assessment, and specific audit objectives. Contractors with strong compliance records may experience brief, targeted floor checks, while those with deficiency histories face extensive verification including large employee samples, detailed questioning, and comprehensive observation. Building genuine compliance rather than superficial preparation remains the only reliable strategy across varying floor check scenarios.

Your Path to Floor Check Success

The floor check landscape rewards contractors who invest in genuine workforce compliance through comprehensive training, meaningful procedures, and systematic monitoring rather than superficial preparation hoping employees improvise acceptable responses. DCAA evaluates employee responses against documented procedures and regulatory requirements, with credibility depending on consistency between employee descriptions and actual practices.

For contractors seeking floor check preparation support, Hour Timesheet provides intuitive platforms employees understand and supervisors can effectively review, creating the user-friendly infrastructure supporting compliant operations that floor checks verify. Our systems generate approval documentation and audit trails demonstrating control operation when DCAA conducts verification procedures.

Your workforce represents your compliance front line during floor checks. Invest in training, procedures, and systems ensuring employees genuinely understand and consistently follow timekeeping requirements that floor check interviews will test.

Additional Resources

Related Hour Timesheet Articles:

Official Regulatory References:

Internal controls and DCAA compliance

Your company passed its initial DCAA accounting system audit three years ago, but during this year’s incurred cost audit, auditors discovered that supervisors routinely approved timesheets without review, accounting staff processed journal entries without supporting documentation, and unallowable costs accumulated in indirect pools without identification or exclusion. DCAA issued a significant deficiency determination questioning $680,000 in indirect costs, citing inadequate internal controls allowing systematic cost misclassification and management override of accounting procedures. Here’s what contractors miss about internal controls: establishing compliant accounting systems represents only the foundation—maintaining control effectiveness requires ongoing discipline through documented procedures, systematic monitoring, management oversight, and corrective action processes ensuring controls function as designed rather than degrading into informal practices that look compliant on paper but fail in operation. Understanding how to design, implement, and maintain effective internal controls isn’t about creating bureaucracy—it’s about building systematic safeguards preventing the cost accounting errors, timesheet manipulation, unallowable cost charging, and allocation mistakes that transform compliant systems into deficient operations triggering questioned costs and business system disapproval.

The Legal Framework Governing Internal Control Requirements

Federal acquisition regulations establish specific internal control expectations ensuring contractor accounting systems produce reliable cost data supporting government contract billing. FAR 31.201-2(d) requires contractors to maintain adequate internal controls and accounting systems for accumulating and billing costs, with adequacy encompassing both system design and operational effectiveness. This provision makes internal controls a regulatory requirement rather than optional best practice—your accounting system must include controls preventing cost misclassification, detecting errors, and ensuring compliance with cost accounting standards.

The business system criteria under DFARS 252.242-7006 explicitly require contractors to maintain adequate internal control procedures providing reasonable assurance that costs are properly accumulated, segregated, and allocated. These requirements extend beyond basic accounting design to encompass control procedures including: segregation of duties preventing single individuals from controlling entire transaction cycles, management review and approval of significant transactions and adjustments, reconciliation procedures detecting discrepancies, and monitoring mechanisms ensuring ongoing control effectiveness. Understanding DCAA compliance requirements means recognizing that system adequacy depends equally on control design and control operation.

DFARS 252.242-7006(c)(7) specifically mandates that accounting systems exclude unallowable costs from billing, invoicing, and indirect rate calculations. This requirement necessitates internal controls systematically identifying costs FAR prohibits, segregating unallowable amounts in separate accounts, and preventing their inclusion in government contract charges through both direct billing and indirect allocation. Control failures allowing unallowable cost charging represent significant deficiencies regardless of dollar magnitude, as they demonstrate fundamental system inadequacy in distinguishing allowable from prohibited expenses.

The critical consideration involves FAR 42.302(a)(12), assigning DCAA responsibility for examining and evaluating contractor internal control systems as part of accounting system audits. DCAA doesn’t simply verify that control procedures exist—auditors test whether controls operate effectively by examining transactions, interviewing personnel, observing processes, and evaluating whether actual practices align with documented procedures. Control designs failing operational testing trigger deficiency findings even when written procedures appear adequate, because paper controls providing no actual protection fail regulatory adequacy standards.

What Contractors Must Understand About Internal Control Challenges

Here’s what contractors miss about internal controls: establishing procedures in written policies doesn’t ensure those procedures operate effectively in daily practice. DCAA compliance explained emphasizes that DCAA evaluates control effectiveness through operational testing examining whether employees actually follow procedures, whether management actually reviews transactions, and whether monitoring actually detects problems. Your comprehensive accounting manual means nothing when employees bypass procedures, managers rubber-stamp approvals without review, and monitoring consists of cursory year-end reconciliations discovering problems too late for correction.

The timesheet approval breakdown represents the most common internal control failure when supervisors approve timesheets without reviewing time distribution accuracy, validating charge codes, or verifying hours worked. This is where audits go sideways—contractors implement electronic approval workflows requiring supervisor sign-off but supervisors treat approval as administrative formality, clicking “approve all” without examining individual timesheets for accuracy, reasonableness, or compliance. When DCAA interviews supervisors who cannot explain their approval procedures, describe what they review, or identify concerns they’ve raised about timesheet accuracy, auditors conclude that timesheet controls exist only nominally without providing actual oversight preventing labor mischarging. DCAA timekeeping requirements mandate meaningful supervisor review as essential control over labor cost accuracy, not mere electronic workflow completion.

The segregation of duties violation emerges when small contractor size concentrates accounting functions in single individuals controlling entire transaction cycles without independent review. The same person who approves purchases, processes invoices, records costs, and reconciles accounts possesses ability to manipulate transactions, conceal errors, and override controls without detection. While small contractors cannot achieve the segregation possible in large organizations, they must implement compensating controls including enhanced management review, periodic surprise audits, and systematic reconciliation procedures providing oversight that segregation would otherwise offer.

The journal entry control weakness manifests when accounting staff post adjusting entries, reclassifications, or corrections without supporting documentation, management approval, or explanatory notation describing entry purpose and authorization. Unrestricted journal entry capability enables manipulation of contract costs, indirect pools, and allocation bases that audits discover through transaction testing. When DCAA selects random journal entries for examination and discovers entries lacking supporting documentation or approval, auditors question whether accounting system controls prevent cost manipulation or whether management possesses adequate visibility into accounting adjustments affecting government contract charges.

The unallowable cost control failure occurs when contractors lack systematic procedures identifying prohibited costs at transaction recording, resulting in unallowable expenses accumulating in indirect pools and allocating to government contracts through overhead rates. Without proactive identification procedures, contractors discover unallowable costs only during year-end incurred cost preparation or DCAA audits—too late to prevent improper charging through months of billing. Effective controls require front-end identification at accounts payable processing, expense report review, and payroll administration, with automatic segregation into dedicated accounts excluding amounts from indirect pools before rate calculations occur.

The monitoring inadequacy becomes apparent when contractors lack systematic procedures detecting control failures, identifying policy violations, or measuring compliance performance. Controls degrade over time without monitoring—employees develop workarounds, managers become complacent, procedures drift from written policies, and problems accumulate undetected until external audits reveal systematic control breakdowns. Effective monitoring requires periodic management reviews examining transaction samples, compliance metrics tracking control performance, and corrective action processes addressing identified problems before they escalate into significant deficiencies.

The documentation insufficiency affects control effectiveness when contractors cannot demonstrate that controls operated as designed because monitoring records, approval evidence, review documentation, and exception reports don’t exist or aren’t retained. DCAA evaluates controls through evidence examination—if you cannot produce timesheet approval records, reconciliation documentation, unallowable cost reviews, or monitoring reports, auditors conclude controls didn’t operate regardless of verbal assertions about procedures followed.

Five Essential Steps for Effective Internal Control Implementation

Step 1: Design Comprehensive Control Framework Addressing Key Risk Areas

Develop systematic internal control framework identifying key risk areas requiring protection including: labor charging accuracy through timesheet controls, cost classification through chart of account controls, unallowable cost exclusion through identification procedures, indirect rate accuracy through allocation controls, and billing accuracy through invoice review procedures. For each risk area, design specific controls addressing the risk through preventive measures stopping problems before occurrence or detective measures identifying problems requiring correction.

Document control procedures with detailed descriptions explaining what control activity occurs, who performs the control, when control operates, what evidence the control creates, and how exceptions are resolved. This documentation provides the control foundation supporting both employee understanding of required procedures and DCAA verification that controls are properly designed. Generic procedure statements like “supervisors approve timesheets” provide inadequate control documentation compared to detailed descriptions: “Supervisors review each employee’s timesheet weekly, validating time distribution reasonableness against known project assignments, questioning unusual charge codes or hour patterns, and documenting review through electronic approval with comments explaining any concerns identified.”

Implement control stratification applying stronger controls to higher-risk transactions while maintaining reasonable efficiency for routine activities. Require enhanced approval for large-dollar transactions, unusual expenses, or first-time vendors while streamlining routine purchases within established parameters. This risk-based approach focuses control resources where protection provides maximum value rather than treating all transactions identically regardless of risk profile.

Step 2: Establish Clear Segregation of Duties with Compensating Controls

Create responsibility matrix documenting which positions perform transaction authorization, recording, custody, and reconciliation functions, ensuring no single individual controls complete transaction cycles without independent oversight. Separate timesheet approval from payroll processing, purchase authorization from invoice payment, and cost recording from account reconciliation, preventing concentration of incompatible functions enabling fraud or error concealment.

Implement compensating controls addressing segregation limitations that small organization size creates. Deploy enhanced management review examining transaction details when segregation proves impractical, conduct periodic surprise audits testing control effectiveness, engage external resources for independent reconciliations or control assessments, and rotate responsibilities periodically preventing entrenchment of informal workarounds or manipulation schemes. Document compensating controls with same rigor as standard segregation, demonstrating to DCAA that you recognize segregation limitations and implemented alternative protections.

Establish management oversight procedures requiring executive review of significant transactions, unusual adjustments, or policy exceptions even when normal segregation exists. Management oversight provides additional control layer catching problems that transaction-level controls might miss while demonstrating organizational commitment to control effectiveness that DCAA considers when evaluating overall control environment adequacy.

Step 3: Deploy Systematic Monitoring and Exception Reporting Mechanisms

Implement automated exception reporting identifying control violations, policy deviations, or unusual patterns requiring investigation including: late or missing timesheet approvals, charge code usage outside normal patterns, journal entries exceeding thresholds without approval, unallowable cost account activity, and allocation base variances from expected amounts. Configure systems generating exception reports automatically and distributing to responsible managers, forcing proactive attention to potential control problems rather than relying on periodic manual reviews that might miss issues.

Establish periodic management review procedures requiring systematic control assessment including: monthly timesheet control reviews examining approval timeliness and supervisor comments, quarterly unallowable cost assessments verifying identification procedures operated effectively, semi-annual segregation reviews confirming responsibilities remain properly separated, and annual comprehensive control effectiveness evaluations assessing whether controls achieved intended objectives. Document these reviews with formal reports, management responses to identified issues, and corrective action plans addressing deficiencies, creating the monitoring evidence demonstrating ongoing control oversight.

Deploy compliance metrics measuring control performance including: timesheet approval completion rates, average approval turnaround time, exception frequency by type, unallowable cost identification percentage, and reconciliation completion timeliness. Establish performance targets for each metric, monitor actual performance against targets, and implement corrective action when performance falls below acceptable levels. These metrics provide objective control effectiveness measurement supporting both internal management and DCAA assessment of control adequacy.

Step 4: Implement Rigorous Timesheet Review and Approval Procedures

Develop detailed timesheet approval procedures requiring supervisors to validate: hours worked align with known schedules and project assignments, charge codes match authorized contract work, time distribution appears reasonable compared to project status and deliverable progress, unusual patterns receive explanation and justification, and corrections follow established procedures with documentation supporting changes. Train supervisors that approval represents certification of accuracy and reasonableness rather than administrative formality, with supervisors accountable for labor charging accuracy on timesheets they approve.

Configure timekeeping systems requiring explanatory comments when supervisors identify concerns, make corrections, or approve timesheets containing unusual patterns. These comments create the approval documentation demonstrating supervisors actively reviewed timesheets rather than mechanically approving submissions without examination. Implement escalation procedures requiring management review when significant timesheet issues emerge, preventing supervisors from resolving material problems without appropriate oversight.

Establish timesheet approval monitoring including weekly reports showing approval status, turnaround times, and supervisors with chronic approval delays indicating inadequate control operation. Implement quarterly timesheet control assessments where management examines sample timesheets evaluating approval quality, reviewing supervisor comments, and assessing whether approval procedures operate as designed. This monitoring provides ongoing verification that timesheet controls remain effective rather than degrading into pro forma approvals lacking actual review.

Step 5: Create Comprehensive Control Documentation and Evidence Retention

Maintain detailed control documentation including written procedures, approval evidence, reconciliation workpapers, exception reports, monitoring reviews, and corrective action records. Organize documentation logically with clear filing systems enabling efficient retrieval during audits, management reviews, or operational needs. Inadequate documentation undermines otherwise effective controls by preventing verification that controls operated as designed.

Implement document retention policies ensuring control evidence preservation for adequate periods supporting both operational needs and audit requirements. Retain timesheet approvals, purchase authorizations, journal entry support, reconciliations, and monitoring reports for periods matching contract record retention requirements, preventing the control evidence gaps that create DCAA audit challenges when historical records cannot be produced.

Develop control narrative documentation describing your internal control framework, specific control procedures, monitoring mechanisms, and control effectiveness assessment results. This narrative provides comprehensive control environment description supporting both management understanding and DCAA evaluation, demonstrating systematic control approach rather than ad hoc procedures developed reactively to address individual problems.

The Investment in Effective Internal Controls

Implementing comprehensive internal control framework meeting DCAA standards costs between $20,000 and $70,000 for small to mid-sized contractors depending on organization size, system complexity, and current control adequacy. This includes control design, procedure documentation, system configuration, training, and monitoring implementation. Annual maintenance costs typically run $10,000 to $25,000 for ongoing monitoring, control testing, documentation updates, and continuous improvement.

Let me show you the value: contractors with effective internal controls prevent the cost accounting errors, timesheet manipulation, and unallowable cost charging that create questioned costs during DCAA audits. They demonstrate accounting system adequacy through operational control effectiveness supporting efficient audit processes with minimal findings. They maintain positive DCAA relationships through demonstrated fiscal responsibility and control discipline that auditors recognize and respect.

Contractors with inadequate internal controls face substantial questioned costs when control failures allow systematic cost misclassification, labor mischarging, or unallowable cost accumulation. They experience accounting system disapproval requiring corrective action before new contract awards, creating business development barriers and customer relationship problems. They incur crisis remediation costs implementing emergency control improvements under DCAA pressure, exceeding systematic control development investments while still risking inadequate solutions prolonging deficiency status.

Understanding Internal Control Requirements Across Contract Types

Internal control requirements apply uniformly to all government contractors maintaining cost-reimbursement contracts, time-and-materials contracts, or other arrangements requiring cost visibility and verification. Fixed-price contractors face lighter control expectations since government doesn’t reimburse actual costs, but contractors mixing contract types must maintain comprehensive controls supporting cost-reimbursement work regardless of contract portfolio composition.

DFARS accounting system requirements establishing explicit internal control standards apply specifically to DoD contractors, while civilian agency contracts follow FAR provisions with generally similar expectations but potentially different emphasis areas. Your internal controls must satisfy applicable regulatory standards for your customer agencies, with DoD requirements typically representing the most stringent baseline providing adequate foundation for most civilian agency needs.

Your Path to Internal Control Excellence

The internal control landscape rewards contractors who invest in systematic control design, operational implementation, and ongoing monitoring rather than treating controls as compliance checkbox satisfied through policy documentation alone. DCAA evaluates control effectiveness through operational testing examining actual practices, with adequacy depending on demonstrated control operation rather than procedure existence.

For contractors seeking internal control compliance, Hour Timesheet provides control-enabled timekeeping platforms with built-in approval workflows, exception reporting, audit trails, and monitoring capabilities supporting the timesheet controls that represent critical internal control foundation. Our systems create the approval documentation and monitoring evidence demonstrating control operation during DCAA assessments.

Your accounting system deserves internal controls providing actual protection rather than paper procedures lacking operational effectiveness. Build control infrastructure ensuring compliance through systematic operation rather than hoping documentation satisfies audit requirements.

Additional Resources

Related Hour Timesheet Articles:

Official Regulatory References:

International Contract Compliance: What You Must Know

Your international expansion strategy looked perfect on paper—establish a lower-cost engineering center in Eastern Europe, leverage manufacturing expertise in Southeast Asia, and tap research talent in your Canadian subsidiary. Then DCAA auditors arrived requesting access to your foreign subsidiary records, demanding timekeeping documentation from your overseas employees, and questioning cost allocations involving international affiliate transactions. Here’s what contractors miss about international operations: DCAA’s audit authority and FAR cost principles don’t stop at U.S. borders. When you charge costs from international operations to U.S. government contracts, those costs must satisfy identical compliance requirements as domestic operations—regardless of foreign subsidiary locations, local business practices, or international accounting standards. Understanding how to maintain DCAA compliance across international operations isn’t optional for global contractors—it’s essential for protecting your entire federal contract portfolio.

The Legal Framework Extending Compliance Internationally

Federal cost accounting requirements apply to all costs charged to U.S. government contracts regardless of where those costs originate geographically. FAR 31.201-2 establishes that allowable costs must be reasonable, meaning they reflect what a prudent businessperson would incur under comparable circumstances. This reasonableness standard applies equally to costs incurred in California and costs incurred in Bangalore—your business justification for international cost structures must satisfy identical scrutiny DCAA applies to domestic operations.

FAR 52.215-2, the Audit and Records clause included in solicitations and contracts, grants DCAA access to “books, documents, papers, and records” supporting costs charged to government contracts. This access right extends to records maintained by subcontractors, affiliates, and subsidiaries when those entities generate costs flowing to government contracts. Your foreign subsidiary’s timekeeping records, payroll documentation, and cost allocation methodologies fall within DCAA’s audit scope when your prime contract includes costs from international operations.

The critical regulation international contractors must understand is FAR 31.205-26, governing material and services costs including requirements for intercompany transactions. When you purchase services from your foreign subsidiary or acquire materials through international affiliates, these related party transactions must demonstrate arm’s-length pricing equivalent to what you’d pay unrelated vendors for comparable items or services. The regulation creates specific documentation requirements proving international affiliate costs charged to government contracts reflect market-based pricing rather than convenient cost allocation schemes.

What International Contractors Must Navigate

Here’s what contractors miss about international compliance: foreign subsidiaries operating under local accounting standards, labor laws, and business practices still must generate records satisfying U.S. government cost accounting requirements when their costs support federal contracts. Your Polish engineering center might follow Polish labor regulations and EU accounting directives, but when Polish engineers charge time to U.S. Defense contracts, their timekeeping must satisfy DCAA standards including daily entry, employee signature, supervisory approval, and prohibition of after-the-fact reconstruction.

The timekeeping challenge gets complicated by time zones, language barriers, and cultural differences in work hour documentation. Many countries use monthly timesheets, flexible work hour systems, or trust-based time reporting completely incompatible with DCAA requirements for contemporaneous daily time entry. Understanding DCAA timekeeping requirements means implementing systems ensuring international employees follow identical timekeeping standards as domestic employees—regardless of local business norms or foreign labor regulations.

Transfer pricing creates the most complex compliance challenge for international operations. When you charge U.S. government contracts for services performed by foreign subsidiaries, DCAA examines whether your intercompany billing rates reflect arm’s-length pricing. If your German subsidiary charges $150 per hour for engineering services your U.S. operation performs at $120 per hour, you need detailed justification explaining the pricing differential through skill level differences, specialized expertise, or market rate variations. Without proper documentation, DCAA presumes the lower domestic rate represents reasonable pricing, disallowing the $30 per hour premium on foreign subsidiary labor.

Material costs sourced internationally face particular scrutiny regarding price reasonableness and proper customs valuation. When you import components from overseas suppliers—especially when those suppliers are affiliated entities—your cost accounting must demonstrate competitive pricing through market research, alternative supplier quotations, or independent cost analysis. The fact that your Chinese manufacturing affiliate is the only source for certain components doesn’t eliminate your obligation to prove pricing reasonableness through benchmarking against comparable items or detailed cost buildup analysis.

DCAA compliance explained for international operations means building documentation systems that bridge U.S. regulatory requirements and foreign operational realities, creating compliant cost accounting while respecting local legal constraints and business practices.

Five Essential Steps for International Contract Compliance

Step 1: Implement Global Timekeeping Standard Operating Procedures

Deploy uniform timekeeping systems and procedures across all locations performing work on U.S. government contracts—domestic and international. Your timekeeping policies must establish identical requirements for time entry frequency, approval workflows, and record retention regardless of employee location. Create detailed guidance translated into local languages explaining DCAA timekeeping requirements and why these standards supersede local business practices when employees work on federal contracts.

Implement DCAA-compliant timekeeping systems with cloud-based access enabling international employees to submit daily time entries with real-time synchronization to your central cost accounting systems. Technology eliminates geography as an excuse for compliance failures—your Polish engineers can submit daily timesheets as easily as your Virginia engineers when you provide proper systems and training.

Establish monthly compliance audits reviewing international employee timekeeping for DCAA requirement adherence including daily entry verification, signature completeness, and supervisory approval documentation. Early identification of compliance gaps enables corrective training before DCAA auditors discover systematic violations affecting multiple accounting periods.

Step 2: Create Comprehensive Transfer Pricing Documentation Systems

Develop detailed transfer pricing policies establishing methodologies for all intercompany transactions between U.S. prime contractors and international subsidiaries or affiliates. Your policies must define pricing bases (cost-plus, market-based, comparable uncontrolled price), document markup percentages with supporting market analysis, and establish approval procedures for intercompany billing rate changes.

Maintain comprehensive comparability studies demonstrating your intercompany pricing reflects arm’s-length transactions through analysis of independent vendor prices, published labor rate surveys, or detailed cost buildup justifications. When your Singapore subsidiary charges engineering services to U.S. contracts, you need documentation proving those rates approximate what you’d pay unaffiliated Singapore engineering firms for comparable services.

Build automated systems flagging intercompany transactions for management review before costs flow to government contracts, ensuring transfer pricing complies with documented methodologies and current market benchmarks. Prevention through systematic controls beats retrospective justification when DCAA challenges international affiliate charges.

Step 3: Establish International Records Access Protocols

Create formal agreements with foreign subsidiaries and affiliates granting DCAA audit access to records supporting costs charged to U.S. government contracts. These access agreements must address potential conflicts with foreign privacy laws, data protection regulations, and local legal restrictions on information disclosure while ensuring DCAA receives documentation necessary for cost verification.

Develop procedures for providing DCAA auditors with international records including translation services for non-English documentation, currency conversion methodologies for financial records, and explanatory context for foreign business practices affecting cost accounting. Proactive transparency builds auditor confidence in your international cost controls while satisfying regulatory access requirements.

Implement secure data sharing systems enabling DCAA auditors to review international subsidiary records without requiring physical travel to foreign locations. Cloud-based document repositories with controlled access streamline audit processes while maintaining appropriate confidentiality and security controls over sensitive business information.

Step 4: Deploy Foreign Exchange and Currency Conversion Controls

Establish systematic procedures for converting foreign currency costs to U.S. dollars using consistent methodologies compliant with GAAP and DCAA requirements. Your currency conversion policies must define exchange rate sources (Federal Reserve, OANDA, specific bank rates), timing of conversion (transaction date, month-end, contract-specific rates), and documentation supporting rate application.

Build accounting system controls automatically applying approved exchange rates to international subsidiary costs as transactions flow to U.S. prime contract cost pools, eliminating manual conversion errors and ensuring consistent methodology application. Create comprehensive audit trails documenting exchange rates used, conversion dates, and resulting U.S. dollar amounts supporting DCAA verification procedures.

Implement hedge accounting procedures when you use forward contracts or other instruments managing foreign exchange risk on international contracts. Hedge costs must be properly allocated to benefiting contracts through systematic methodologies demonstrating reasonable business practices and appropriate cost allocation principles.

Step 5: Create International Compliance Training and Certification Programs

Develop comprehensive training programs educating international employees about U.S. government contract requirements including timekeeping standards, cost allowability principles, and documentation obligations. Training must address cultural and business practice differences explaining why DCAA requirements supersede local norms when work supports federal contracts.

Establish annual certification requirements for international managers overseeing government contract work, confirming understanding of compliance obligations and commitment to maintaining required standards. Management certifications create accountability while demonstrating organizational commitment to international compliance.

Deploy ongoing compliance monitoring through quarterly reviews of international operations including timekeeping audits, transfer pricing verification, and documentation adequacy assessments. Systematic monitoring identifies compliance drift before violations accumulate into major audit findings requiring extensive corrective action.

The Investment in International Compliance Systems

Building robust international contract compliance systems costs between $125,000 and $275,000 for contractors with significant international operations depending on number of foreign locations, complexity of intercompany transactions, and existing system capabilities. This includes implementing global timekeeping systems, developing transfer pricing documentation, creating audit access protocols, and establishing compliance training programs. Annual maintenance typically runs $45,000 to $85,000 for ongoing monitoring and system updates.

Let me show you the value: contractors with excellent international compliance systems compete successfully for global programs requiring multinational performance, leverage international talent and cost advantages while maintaining government contract eligibility, and expand into commercial international markets using infrastructure built for government compliance. Your investment in international compliance systems creates competitive capabilities beyond regulatory requirement satisfaction.

Contractors without adequate systems face questioned costs on international subsidiary charges requiring contract price reductions, billing holds while you reconstruct transfer pricing justifications delaying cash flow for months, and competitive disadvantages in source selection when past performance evaluations note international compliance weaknesses. These consequences affect your entire contract portfolio—not just specific international programs.

Understanding DCAA’s Global Audit Jurisdiction

DCAA audit authority extends to all costs charged to U.S. government contracts regardless of where those costs originate globally. The agency maintains regional offices worldwide and coordinates with Defense Contract Management Agency International for audit support in countries with significant U.S. contractor presence. Your Munich subsidiary and your Manila operations face identical DCAA scrutiny as your Memphis headquarters when their costs support federal contracts.

Multi-national contractors must recognize that compliance requirements don’t vary by location—FAR cost principles, CAS requirements, and DCAA audit standards apply uniformly worldwide. You cannot claim local business practices justify non-compliance with U.S. government cost accounting requirements. The burden falls on contractors to implement systems ensuring international operations satisfy U.S. regulatory requirements regardless of conflicts with local norms.

Your Path to Global Contract Success

The international contract compliance landscape rewards contractors who build robust systems enabling global operations while maintaining regulatory compliance. DCAA respects contractors demonstrating systematic international compliance management through uniform policies, comprehensive documentation, and proactive audit cooperation across all geographic locations.

For contractors managing international operations supporting U.S. government contracts, Hour Timesheet provides cloud-based solutions enabling consistent DCAA-compliant timekeeping across global workforces. Our platform delivers the daily time entry, approval workflows, and audit trail capabilities international employees need while maintaining centralized compliance monitoring for management oversight.

Your international operations represent competitive advantages in technical capability and cost efficiency. Protect those advantages through compliance systems ensuring your global workforce supports rather than threatens your federal contract portfolio.

Additional Resources

Related Hour Timesheet Articles:

Official Regulatory References:

Hour Timesheet Login – Find Your Login Page

New Login

Each Hour Timesheet account has its own custom domain as part of the login URL. Your login page follows this format:

https://[yourcompanyname].hourtimesheet.com

For example:

ABC Company would login at: abc.hourtimesheet.com
Smith Industries would login at: smithindustries.hourtimesheet.com
Johnson LLC would login at: johnsonllc.hourtimesheet.com

How to Find Your Specific Login Page

Check Your Welcome Email

When your Hour Timesheet account was first set up, you received a welcome email containing your unique login URL. Search your email inbox for:

Subject line: “Welcome to Hour Timesheet”
From: Hour Timesheet or support@hourtimesheet.com

Look at Your Bookmarks

If you’ve previously logged in and bookmarked your login page, check your browser bookmarks for your Hour Timesheet URL.

Ask Your Administrator

Your company’s Hour Timesheet administrator or the person who set up your account will have your unique login URL.

Check Previous Login History

Look at your browser history for “hourtimesheet.com” – your specific subdomain should appear in your recent browsing history.

First Time Logging In?

If you’re a new employee and haven’t received login credentials yet:

Contact your company’s Hour Timesheet administrator
They will provide you with:
- Your company’s unique login URL

Troubleshooting Login Issues

“This site can’t be reached” or “Page not found”

This usually means you’re using the wrong company subdomain. Double-check your company name in the URL.

Forgot Your Password?

Click the “Forgot Password?” link on your login page to reset your password. Password reset emails will be sent to your registered email address.

Can’t Remember Your Username?

Contact your company administrator or Hour Timesheet support for assistance.

Need Help? Contact Hour Timesheet Support

Our support team is ready to help you access your account:

Phone: (888) 780-9961

Email: support@hourtimesheet.com

Support Hours: Monday – Friday: 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM EST

When contacting support, please have ready:

Your company name
Your email address associated with Hour Timesheet
A description of the login issue you’re experiencing

Security Note

Hour Timesheet takes your data security seriously.

Your company data remains separate and secure
Enhanced access control
Better compliance with DCAA and government contracting requirements

Never share your login credentials with anyone outside your organization.

Still Can’t Find Your Login Page?

If you’ve tried the steps above and still can’t locate your Hour Timesheet login URL, please contact our support team immediately at (888) 780-9961 or support@hourtimesheet.com.

About Hour Timesheet

Hour Timesheet is DCAA-compliant time tracking software designed for government contractors and professional services firms. Whether you’re on a 30-day free trial or a long-time customer, we’re here to ensure you have seamless access to your timekeeping system.

Is your Excel timesheet template costing you?

Discover why thousands of teams are moving from spreadsheets to modern time tracking software

If you’re here, you’re probably searching for an Excel timesheet template to track employee hours. We get it—Excel is familiar, it’s free, and it seems like the obvious choice. But before you download another template, let’s talk about why an Excel timesheet might be costing your business more than you think.

In this guide, we’ll show you the hidden challenges of Excel timesheets and introduce you to a better solution: Hour Timesheet—a modern, cloud-based time tracking platform designed to save you time, reduce errors, and scale with your business.

Excel Timesheet

The Excel Timesheet Challenge: Why Spreadsheets Fall Short

Excel timesheets have been the go-to solution for decades, but they come with serious limitations that become more apparent as your team grows:

Manual Data Entry Nightmare

Every hour logged is manually typed into a cell. Every calculation could have a typo. Every formula could be accidentally deleted. With Excel, you’re one misclick away from hours of cleanup work.

Version Control Chaos

Who has the latest version? Did Sarah update her hours? Which file is the master copy? Email chains full of “Timesheet_Final_v3_FINAL_Updated.xlsx” create confusion and waste valuable time.

Limited Accessibility

Excel files live on someone’s computer or buried in email. Remote workers struggle to access them. Mobile entry is clunky at best. Real-time collaboration? Forget about it.

No Accountability or Audit Trail

Who changed what and when? Excel doesn’t tell you. Tracking edits, approvals, and modifications requires a separate system—if you track them at all.

No Accountability

Why SaaS Time Tracking Software is the Smarter Choice

Modern SaaS (Software as a Service) time tracking platforms solve every problem that Excel creates. Here’s why thousands of companies are making the switch:

Automated Calculations: Say goodbye to formula errors and manual math. Time is tracked automatically with precision.
Real-Time Synchronization: Everyone sees the same data instantly. No more version conflicts or email chains.
Cloud Access Anywhere: Track time from desktop, mobile, or tablet. Work from home, the office, or on the road.
Built-in Reporting: Generate professional reports with one click instead of spending hours manipulating spreadsheets.
Complete Audit Trail: Every change is tracked automatically with timestamps and user information for total accountability.

Introducing Hour Timesheet: Your Excel Alternative

Hour Timesheet is a cloud-based time tracking solution designed specifically for businesses tired of wrestling with spreadsheets. Built by COOs who understand operational challenges, Hour Timesheet delivers everything Excel can’t:

Intuitive Time Entry

Employees can log hours in seconds, not minutes. Simple interfaces replace complex spreadsheet formulas.

Project & Client Tracking

Track time by project, client, or task. See exactly where hours are going without pivot tables or VLOOKUP formulas.

Automated Approvals

Managers can review and approve timesheets with one click. No more chasing down paper or email approvals.

Seamless Integrations

Connect Hour Timesheet with your payroll, accounting, and project management tools. Data flows automatically between systems.

Powerful Reporting

Generate detailed reports instantly. See labor costs, project profitability, and employee productivity at a glance.

The Real Cost of Sticking with Excel

While Excel is “free,” it’s costing your business in hidden ways:

Time Waste: Managers spend 4-6 hours per week managing timesheets and fixing errors. That’s 200+ hours per year.

Payroll Errors: Manual entry errors lead to overpayments, underpayments, and compliance issues that can cost thousands.

Lost Productivity: Every minute spent updating, emailing, and fixing spreadsheets is a minute not spent on revenue-generating activities.

Missed Insights: Without real-time data and robust reporting, you’re making business decisions based on incomplete or outdated information.

Ready to Make the Switch?

Hour Timesheet makes it easy to transition from Excel. Our team will help you migrate your data, train your staff, and get up and running in days—not weeks.

What you get with Hour Timesheet:

Free trial with no credit card required
Easy setup with expert support
Flexible pricing that scales with your team
Mobile apps for iOS and Android
Dedicated customer success team

Stop Fighting with Spreadsheets

Join thousands of teams who’ve discovered a better way to track time.

Start Your Free Trial →

Schedule a Demo

Questions? Our team is ready to help you find the perfect time tracking solution for your business. Reach out today and discover why Hour Timesheet is the Excel alternative you’ve been looking for.

← Older Posts