Contract Reporting ScorecardGuide v 1.0
Abstract:
This scorecard measures organizations’ compliance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 4.6 – Contract Reporting, which requires that contract actions and modifications be reported to the Federal Procurement Data System – Next Generation (FPDS-NG) in a timely fashion.[1]
Update Frequency:
Data from EDA-Management Reporting Server (MRS)[2]is imported and calculated against the FPDS-NG data on a monthly basis.
Scorecard Features and Calculations:
The FPDS Scorecard is composed of four related reports, each of which can be generated independently. The “Contract Reporting Scorecard” demonstrates the extent to which the awards in EDA-MRS have a corresponding record in FPDS-NG based on matching unique procurement instrument identifiers (PIIDs) (e.g. PIIN / SPIIN). The “Contract Reporting Drilldown” is identical to this report, but just displays DoDAAC level information.
For the “Contract Reporting Scorecard,” the “Period” in the report’s upper left hand corner indicates the report’s date range as selected by the user. Based on this selection, the report identifies all contracts uploaded to EDA-MRS with an “issue date” in the specified month(s). Column A reflects the total number of these unique Procurement Instrument Identifiers (PIIDs) from each service for a given month. Column B depicts the number of CARs in FPDS with matching PIIDs. Column C, though, depicts the total number of PIIDs in FPDS with “date signed” across the specified date range. Note that Column C and Column B will have different values as Column C represents a simple count of FPDS contracts with “date signed” across the specified range, whereas Column B depicts the number of matches between EDA (across the aforementioned date range) with the entire universe of FPDS data. These deltas appear due to the fact that there are discrepancies between the “issue dates” listed in EDA and the “date signed” reported to FPDS, as well as certain conflicts between issuing offices listed in both systems. Last, Column D depicts the percent of total EDA reported actions that have a match in FPDS (i.e. Column B divided by Column A). Note that the “Contract Reporting Drilldown,” also contained within the scorecard, is identical to this report, but simply displays DoDAAC, as opposed to agency, level information.
The “Contract Reporting Scorecard (FPDS Office Count)” contains many of the same features as the report described above. After having matchedPIIDs in EDA-MRS to PIIDs in FPDS in the fashion described above, the report aggregates and compares the associated DoDAACs. Specifically, the report takes the issuing offices present in EDA-MRS across the specified time range (Column A), finds DoDAACs with matching PIIDs in the full set of FPDS records (listed under Column B), and displays the difference between these two numbers in Column C. Last, Column D depicts the percent of offices found in EDA-MRS that have at least one corresponding record in FPDS.
The “Contract Reporting Scorecard (Actions Missing from FPDS)” report simply lists information regarding each unique PIID contained within EDA-MRS across the selected date range that does not have a match in FPDS-NG.
Note that some actions across all reports may be listed under an “unknown” category. These actions are those issued by recently created DoDAACs, which have not yet been incorporated into EDA’s DoDAAC hierarchy. Updates to this structure are made periodically, and will result in these “Unknown” being re-categorized as appropriate.
[1] See FAR Subpart 4.6 at
[2] A separate server built to take the reporting load off of the transactional EDA production server. Data contained within EDA-MRS is theset of authoritative DoD contracts in Portable Document File (PDF, index file), X12 (synopsis file), and Procurement Data Standard (PDS) formats.