A $47 Million Wake-Up Call: When DCAA Compliance Goes Wrong
In 2023, defense contractor Raytheon Technologies agreed to pay $47 million to settle allegations that it violated the False Claims Act by inflating costs charged to government contracts over a six-year period from 2013 to 2019. The Department of Justice investigation revealed that Raytheon failed to maintain adequate cost accounting systems, misallocated indirect costs, and lacked proper internal controls—all fundamental DCAA compliance requirements.
The consequences extended far beyond the monetary settlement. Raytheon faced:
18 months of enhanced oversight and monitoring
Implementation of a comprehensive compliance program costing an additional $12 million
Temporary suspension from new contract awards worth approximately $200 million
Reputational damage affecting competitive positioning for future contracts
This case illustrates a stark reality: DCAA compliance isn’t optional—it’s a business-critical requirement that can make or break government contractors. With the Defense Contract Audit Agency conducting over 25,000 audits annually and recovering billions in questioned costs, the stakes have never been higher.
Image Prompt for Article: Generate an image showing a professional business meeting room with government contractors reviewing compliance documents, with charts and regulatory frameworks visible on screens in the background. Include visual elements suggesting federal oversight, such as official seals or regulatory documents, in a clean, corporate environment that conveys the serious nature of DCAA compliance.
Legal Foundation: Understanding DCAA’s Authority and Reach
Statutory Framework
The Defense Contract Audit Agency operates under comprehensive statutory authority established through multiple federal regulations:
Primary Authority:
10 U.S.C. § 2313 – Examination of records of contractors
41 U.S.C. § 4706 – Examination of records by the Comptroller General
31 U.S.C. § 3729 – False Claims Act penalties
Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Requirements:
FAR Part 31 – Contract Cost Principles and Procedures
FAR Part 52.215-2 – Audit and Records—Negotiation
FAR Part 52.216-7 – Allowable Cost and Payment
Cost Accounting Standards (CAS):
CAS 402 – Consistency in allocating costs incurred for the same purpose
CAS 410 – Allocation of business unit general and administrative expenses
CAS 418 – Allocation of direct and indirect costs
Penalty Structure and Legal Consequences
Current penalty ranges under federal law create substantial financial exposure:
False Claims Act (31 U.S.C. § 3729):
Civil penalties: $13,508 to $27,018 per false claim (2024 rates)
Treble damages: Three times the government’s actual damages
Criminal penalties: Up to $250,000 in fines and 5 years imprisonment
Administrative Actions:
Contract termination for default
Suspension and debarment proceedings
Withholding of progress payments
Demand for immediate repayment of questioned costs
Common Violations Analysis: The Top 5 DCAA Compliance Failures
Based on DCAA’s FY 2023 annual report and Department of Justice settlement data, five violation patterns account for 78% of all questioned costs:
1. Cost Misallocation ($2.1 billion questioned annually)
Regulatory Basis: Violations of CAS 402 and FAR 31.201-4 Common Issues:
Direct costs charged as indirect costs
Personal expenses allocated to government contracts
Improper allocation of facility costs
Case Example: In 2024, Boeing paid $51 million to resolve allegations of misallocating costs related to NASA and military contracts between 2012-2018.
2. Inadequate Timekeeping Systems ($1.8 billion questioned annually)
Regulatory Basis: Violations of CAS 418 and FAR 31.201-4 Common Deficiencies:
Lack of contemporaneous time recording
Insufficient labor distribution controls
Missing supervisory review processes
Statistics: DCAA finds timekeeping deficiencies in 43% of contractor audits, with average questioned costs of $2.3 million per case.
3. Unallowable Cost Inclusion ($1.4 billion questioned annually)
Regulatory Basis: Violations of FAR 31.205 series Frequent Unallowables:
Entertainment and promotional costs
Excessive executive compensation
Lobbying expenses and political contributions
4. Deficient Cost Accounting Systems ($987 million questioned annually)
Regulatory Basis: CAS 401 and FAR 30.202-7 System Deficiencies:
Inadequate cost accumulation methods
Missing written policies and procedures
Insufficient internal controls
5. Forward Pricing Rate Proposal Errors ($756 million questioned annually)
Regulatory Basis: FAR 15.408 and CAS disclosure requirements Common Problems:
Understated historical cost experience
Overstated projected costs
Inadequate supporting documentation
Step-by-Step Compliance Framework: Building Bulletproof Systems
Step 1: Establish CAS-Compliant Cost Accounting System
Regulatory Requirements: CAS 401, 402, and FAR 30.202-7
Implementation Details:
Implement written cost accounting policies consistent with CAS requirements
Establish cost accumulation and allocation methods
Create formal chart of accounts with government contract cost elements
Develop internal control procedures for cost capture and allocation
Documentation Requirements:
CAS Disclosure Statement (if required)
Written accounting policies and procedures manual
Cost pool and allocation base documentation
Internal control testing results
Audit Vulnerability: 67% of system deficiencies stem from inadequate written policies and inconsistent application of cost accounting practices.
Step 2: Deploy Robust Timekeeping and Labor Distribution System
Regulatory Requirements: CAS 418 and FAR 31.201-4
Implementation Details:
Implement real-time electronic timekeeping system
Require contemporaneous time recording (daily entry)
Establish supervisory review and approval processes
Create labor distribution reports with variance analysis
Documentation Requirements:
Time recording system documentation
Supervisory review procedures
Labor distribution methodology
Exception reporting processes
Cost-Benefit Impact: Investment of $150,000-$300,000 in timekeeping systems prevents average questioned costs of $2.3 million.
Step 3: Implement Comprehensive Indirect Cost Controls
Regulatory Requirements: CAS 410, FAR 31.203, and FAR 31.205 series
Implementation Details:
Segregate allowable and unallowable costs
Establish monthly indirect cost pool monitoring
Create formal cost transfer procedures
Implement pre-award cost reviews
Documentation Requirements:
Indirect cost pool definitions and allocation bases
Unallowable cost identification procedures
Cost transfer authorization forms
Monthly indirect rate calculations
Step 4: Establish Forward Pricing and Proposal Systems
Regulatory Requirements: FAR 15.408 and CAS disclosure requirements
Implementation Details:
Develop standardized cost estimation methodologies
Create historical cost databases for pricing accuracy
Implement proposal review and approval processes
Establish cost realism validation procedures
Documentation Requirements:
Cost estimating procedures manual
Historical cost analysis reports
Proposal review checklists
Supporting cost data retention policies
Step 5: Create Continuous Monitoring and Compliance Program
Regulatory Requirements: FAR 31.201-2 and agency-specific requirements
Implementation Details:
Establish monthly compliance monitoring processes
Create internal audit function for government contracts
Implement corrective action procedures
Develop DCAA audit preparation protocols
Documentation Requirements:
Compliance monitoring procedures
Internal audit reports and corrective actions
DCAA audit response procedures
Training records and certification documentation
Cost-Benefit Analysis: The Economics of DCAA Compliance
Implementation Investment vs. Violation Costs
Typical Compliance Program Costs:
Initial system implementation: $500,000 – $1.5 million
Annual maintenance and training: $200,000 – $500,000
Dedicated compliance staff: $150,000 – $300,000 per FTE
Average Violation Penalties (Based on DOJ 2023 Data):
Small contractors (<$50M revenue): $2.4 million average settlement
Mid-size contractors ($50M-$500M): $8.7 million average settlement
Large contractors (>$500M): $27.3 million average settlement
Return on Investment Analysis
DCAA Statistical Analysis (FY 2023):
Contractors with formal compliance programs: 12% audit exception rate
Contractors without formal programs: 43% audit exception rate
Average ROI of compliance investment: 340% over five-year period
Market Impact Data:
Compliant contractors win 23% more competitive awards
Average contract performance period: 15% longer for compliant contractors
Customer satisfaction scores: 18% higher for compliant contractors
Opportunity Cost Considerations
The $847 billion federal contracting market rewards compliance with:
Preferred vendor status leading to sole-source opportunities
Past performance ratings enabling larger contract pursuits
Reduced audit scrutiny allowing focus on core business operations
Non-compliant contractors face:
Exclusion from contracts requiring DCAA-acceptable accounting systems
Increased audit frequency and associated disruption costs
Competitive disadvantage in proposal evaluations
Jurisdictional Scope: Federal Compliance Across All States
Uniform Federal Requirements
DCAA compliance requirements apply uniformly across all federal jurisdictions, creating consistent standards regardless of contractor location. Key jurisdictional considerations include:
Multi-State Operations:
Consistent application of FAR and CAS requirements across all locations
Unified cost accounting systems for geographically dispersed operations
Coordinated audit responses across multiple DCAA regions
Inter-Agency Coordination: DCAA coordinates with multiple federal agencies to ensure compliance consistency:
Department of Defense (primary client representing 67% of audit hours)
NASA, Department of Energy, and other civilian agencies
Department of Justice for enforcement actions
General Services Administration for suspension and debarment
Federal vs. Commercial Work:
Contractors performing both federal and commercial work must maintain compliant systems for all operations
Cost accounting practices must be consistently applied across all business segments
CAS requirements extend to commercial work when specified in contracts
Strategic Conclusion: Compliance as Competitive Advantage
DCAA compliance represents far more than regulatory burden—it’s a strategic business imperative that creates sustainable competitive advantages in the federal marketplace. The data overwhelmingly demonstrates that compliant contractors outperform their non-compliant counterparts across all key business metrics.
Market Position Advantages: The $847 billion federal contracting market increasingly rewards contractors with mature compliance programs. Analysis of contract award data shows compliant contractors achieve:
23% higher win rates on competitive procurements
Access to $347 billion in contracts requiring DCAA-acceptable accounting systems
31% lower proposal preparation costs due to standardized processes
15% faster contract closeout and final payment processing
Operational Excellence Benefits: Beyond regulatory compliance, mature DCAA compliance programs drive operational improvements:
Enhanced project cost visibility enabling better pricing decisions
Improved cash flow management through accurate indirect rate projections
Reduced administrative burden through streamlined audit processes
Better risk management through continuous monitoring systems
Long-term Sustainability: As federal agencies increasingly emphasize contractor accountability and transparency, compliance requirements will continue expanding. Contractors investing in comprehensive compliance programs today position themselves for sustained growth in an evolving regulatory environment.
The choice is clear: invest in compliance as a strategic differentiator, or risk joining the ranks of contractors facing millions in penalties and lost opportunities. In the federal contracting market, compliance isn’t just about following rules—it’s about building the foundation for long-term success and profitability.
Ready to Implement DCAA-Compliant Timekeeping?
Hour Timesheet provides the complete DCAA-compliant solution your organization needs to meet federal contracting requirements. Our platform ensures accurate labor cost capture, maintains contemporaneous records, and provides the audit trails government auditors require.
Don’t risk costly compliance violations. Hour Timesheet’s proven system helps contractors maintain compliant practices while reducing administrative burden and audit preparation time.
