Written by students who passed Immediately available after payment Read online or as PDF Wrong document? Swap it for free 4.6 TrustPilot
logo-home
Exam (elaborations)

Contracting Officer warrant board questions(Practice Questions to prepare for warrant board)

Rating
-
Sold
-
Pages
39
Grade
A+
Uploaded on
24-07-2022
Written in
2021/2022

You are the PCO for a major competitive negotiated source selection. The RFP, which reflects the user's requirements and is based on the user's budget, has a requirement for 220 cargo loaders to be delivered at 55 per year over the next four years. One offeror proposes to deliver all 220 loaders in the first year at a dramatically reduced price. Can you accept the offeror's proposal? What factors should you consider in your decision? You can accept the offeror's proposal under certain circumstances. Firstly, what did the RFP say about alternate proposals? Is this a situation where requirements are changed and the other offerors should be allowed to propose on the basis of the changed requirements? You need to ask the user if he wants all 220 in the first year and are the operating locations physically able to accommodate their loaders in the first year. Finally, the offeror could be taken into discussions and asked to conform to the RFP with there being the possibility of not being selected for award or elimination from the competitive range if the proposal is not made compliant with the RFP. You are the PCO on a new $2B aircraft development program. The program is in contract negotiations for a Fixed Price Incentive (Firm Target) System Development and Demonstration contract award to a sole source contractor. The program director, a fast-burning young colonel, e-mails you that she is very concerned with the aircraft's ultimate speed at the full specification payload. She would like the contractor to achieve the faster, desired objective speed rather than the mandatory threshold speed, and thinks that an objective performance incentive would be the way to go to achieve her goal. You are asked to go to her office and discuss the matter and the issues involved in using such an incentive. What do you tell the colonel? There are a number of considerations for the colonel: The desired additional speed should provide benefit to the Government in order to justify the expenditure of funds to achieve it. The colonel should be able to articulate the justification. The situation is very amenable to a classic performance incentive that would allow the contractor to earn profit for achieving the desired speed above and beyond what the final FPIF profit would be for achieving threshold speed. If the contractor perceives this can't happen, he will either not sign up to the incentive or will ignore it from Day One. The incentive and resulting payment have to be structured so as to be based on observable, measurable results that would determine how much is earned by the contractor. Subjectivity is not allowable under current AF policy without HCA approval. We have to be very careful to understand what possible unintended consequences could be caused by the existence of this feature in the contract. For example, will the contractor reduce aircraft weight beyond safe limits in order to help achieve the payment? Also, will the contractor consume excessive schedule to get the extra speed? There has to be a cost incentive in place so that the contractor doesn't spend an unconstrained amount of money to win the payment, such as under a CPFF contract. The FPIF share line serves this purpose when balanced against the incentive. The incentive has to be balanced with the FPIF share line so that the contractor doesn't spend more money to achieve the desired speed than he has potential to earn by receiving the payment. Similarly, the contractor can't be allowed to spend an excessive amount of money with little cost penalty to achieve success. 00:07 01:14 In some cases, Contracting Officers are also Grants Officers. They can award Grants and Assistance Instruments as well as contracts. What is Assistance? How does it differ from Acquisition? What gives the Grants Officers their authority to enter into assistance? What are the types of Assistance? When the principal purpose is to transfer a thing of value, to carry out a public purpose of support or stimulation authorized by law of the United States, it is Assistance. Acquisition, by contrast, has the principal purpose of acquiring property or services for the direct benefit or use of the United States Government. Federal agencies must be authorized by statute to support or stimulate a public purpose. The statutory authority from Congress must exist either in broad legislation or in a program-specific statute. Absent that statutory authority, a Grants Officer may not use an assistance instrument. Authorities to issue Assistance can be of three types: (1) Provide to the Secretary of Defense by statute, e.g., 10 U.S.C. 2391; (2) Authority provided to DoD components that requires no delegation by the Secretary of Defense, e.g., 10 U.S.C. 2358; (3) Authority coming indirectly from statutes, i.e., federal statute authorizing a program that is consistent with using a grant or cooperative agreement. Two types of Assistance are Grants and Cooperative Agreements. They differ in the following way: In a Grant, substantial involvement is not expected between the agency and the recipient. In Cooperative Agreement, substantial involvement is expected between the agency and the recipient. Cooperative Agreements, then, are particularly useful in the research arena when the Government is interested in being involved in program decisions or may be doing some testing or research themselves. You are the Contracting Officer on a new Research and Development program. Proposals were recently received in response to a Broad Agency Announcement, and a Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type is anticipated. The proposal most favored by the technical team was priced significantly under what was estimated for the effort. The contractor proposed fee in an amount that equates to 20% of the estimated cost. The users have more than enough funds to cover the proposal and want you to accept the price as is. How should you advise the user and what factors should you consider in determining a reasonable fee? The statutory limitation on fee for CPFF type contracts do no permit exceeding 15% of estimated cost for experimental, developmental, or research performed under a CPFF contract. Since the proposed amount of fee is outside the statutory limitations you need to determine what a fair and reasonable rate is that falls within the limitations. The FAR recommends a structured approach for determining fee such as Weighted Guidelines. If a cost reasonableness review determines the estimated costs to be acceptable, we can still negotiate and adjust the fee. You are the Contracting Officer for a well established transport aircraft program. The program is nearing the end of production. A Program Manager approaches you requesting that you issue a Broad Area Announcement (BAA) to support the development of a source list to supply active noise reducing headsets. The headsets are commercially available from multiple sources and the PM wants to receive performance specification sheets from each offeror and then request sample headsets be submitted for testing. The end result of the effort will be the development of a source list that can be used by various government entities to individually procure the needed headsets for their specific requirements. The PM tells you that he will not be procuring any of the headsets as a result of the BAA. What do you advise the PM? You should advise the PM that BAAs are a method of solicitation and can only be used if the Government intends to award a contract. You might suggest that the development of the source list could be achieved by issuing a Sources Sought Synopsis with the synopsis specifying the 2 step process (spec sheets first and then sample headsets from selected offerors), and the ultimate intent of the process, e.g., a source list for use by individual users in future procurements. You might also advise the PM that there could be liability issues associated with the use, handling, and return of the headsets to the offerors and that it might be appropriate for the Government to cover shipping and any damage/wear to the units for the testing. A. Under what circumstances is ratification of an unauthorized commitment permitted? B. In general, what are the generic procedures for handling ratification actions? C. Who are the approval authorities for ratifications? A. If the contract award would have been proper if executed by a warranted PCO, the price can be determined to be fair and reasonable, and there must have been enough of the proper type of funding available to pay for the item both at the time of the commitment and at the time of the ratification. B. An investigation is required to be completed within 30 days of discovery of the unauthorized commitment explaining how and why it occurred, how future occurrences will be avoided, and describing any corrective actions taken against responsible individuals. Legal review is also required. C. The ratification approving official for all unauthorized commitments valued at or above $1M is the SPE. The ratification approving official for all Non-DISA unauthorized commitments (regardless of amount) and DISA unauthorized commitments valued below $1M is the HCA. (DARS 1.602-3(b)(2)) You are the Contracting Officer for a much-delayed effort. On Friday you finally receive the necessary authority to release the contract for signature. It's late on Friday afternoon when you e-mail the modification to the contractor for signature. The only person at the contractor's office on Friday afternoon is the Company President's 17 year old daughter who is working there as a summer-hire secretary. She knows her father urgently wants the contract modification so she signs the document and returns it to your office. You note the last name is the same as the President's so assume that he's the one who signed the modification. Is this a legal agreement? Probably not. The elements of a contract are - offer, acceptance, consideration, for a lawful purpose, certainty of terms, and legal capacity. It is unlikely that a 17 year old summer hire would have the authority to bind the company, regardless of her relationship to the Company President. Courts may generally find that individuals lack "the age majority" if they are under 18 years of age. The law in a given jurisdiction may never actually use the term "age of majority" and the term thereby refers to a collection of laws bestowing the status of adulthood. The age of majority is a legally fixed age, concept, or statutory principle, which may differ depending on the jurisdiction, and may not necessarily correspond to actual mental or physical maturity of an individual. In practical terms, there are certain specific actions which a person who attains the age of majority is permitted to take, which they could not do before. These may include entering into a binding contract, buying stocks, voting, buying and/or consuming alcoholic beverages, driving motor vehicles on public roads, and marrying without obtaining consent of others. The ages at which these various rights or powers may be exercised vary as between the various rights and as between different jurisdictions. For example, the ages at which a person may obtain a license to drive a car or consume alcoholic beverages vary considerably between and also within jurisdictions. You are the Contracting Officer for a follow-on buy source selection. The current effort has had the same Program Manager for over 10 years. She began as the PM while still a Military Officer and then retired and was re-hired as an A&AS employee to continue to manage the program. She has extensive experience on the program and is considered a Primary "Go To" person for all Program-related managerial issues. The Program Director wants to utilize the PM's experience to the fullest extent possible and has proposed that the PM be listed as chief of the technical evaluation team and also a voting member of the source selection board. Is it permissible to have a non-Government employee (A&AS contractor) as chief of the technical evaluation team and a voting member of the source selection board? It is not permissible to have a non-Government employee as a voting member of any source selection board. FAR 7.503(c)(12)(ii). FAR policy states that contracts shall not be used for the performance of inherently governmental functions. OMB may review Agency decisions to determine whether a function is or is not an inherently governmental function, but a list of examples is in FAR 7.503(c). They include: control of criminal investigations or prosecutions, command of military forces, determination of agency policy and application of regulations, determining budget priorities, and direction and control of federal employees. Specifically, included in this list are determining what supplies or services shall be acquired by the Government on a prime contract and being a voting member of any source selection boards You have a contract for engineering services with a basic period of performance and several one year options for continued performance. The contract states that all options must be exercised by 1 October of each year. The basic period of performance has just expired and on 5 October you realize that you never exercised the option for continued performance. There is still an immediate need for the services. How would you try to rectify this situation? Once the option has expired there is no contract. You may have to prepare a J&A (depending on your original authorizations) and enter into a bilateral agreement with the contractor to obtain continued performance by the same contractor. The contractor is entitled to renegotiate the price. The end of the fiscal year 10 is coming up and you get a phone call from HQ telling you that several million dollars just became available - they don't want the money to go to waste and want to give it to you to support your requirements. Your Program Director urges you to use the money to buy spare parts for his aircraft which have been operating 24/7 since "the war" began. The Program Director has estimated the funds will by enough replenishment spares for the remainder of the war. Do you have any concerns? You have two major concerns. First, you have to ask HQ the color of money and year of the funds they want to send you. Do not assume that they are sending you FY10 O&M funds. If they are sending you FY10 O&M funds you can use the funds for "operations and maintenance' but you will have to obligate the money before the end of the fiscal year closes out. Once you have determined the kind and year of money, you can address the Program Director's request. Since the Program Director is asking you to buy replenishment spares, you can use the money to buy these spares assuming the Program Director can show you a bona fide need for the spares. This means you can buy sufficient spares for a current need (which includes a reasonable inventory) but you cannot stockpile. Even if the contractor cannot deliver the spares in FY10, you still have a bona fide need of FY10 if the contractor can deliver the spares in a "reasonable" time. Here the Program Director appears to want you to buy spares sufficient to satisfy his needs for the entire war, a sure indication of his intent to stockpile. You will have to go back to the program director to find out the spares he can actually put on an aircraft right now plus find out what a reasonable inventory is for his program. You cannot use current O&M funds to satisfy a "future" need since that violates the bona fide needs rule. Please define a Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data and its purpose. What are some of the key things you would expect to see or review before accepting the certificate? There are several exceptions to obtaining a Certificate - please list some of them. The definition is as follows: A Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data certifies that to the best of the company's knowledge, the cost or pricing data submitted were accurate, complete, and current as of the date of agreement on price or, if applicable, an earlier date agreed upon between the parties that is as close as practicable to the date of agreement on price. The purpose is to have the company commit as to the accuracy, completeness, and currency of submitted data. If the data is later found to be incorrect or appropriate data was not submitted, the government reserves the right to a downward contract price adjustment for any monetary damages incurred. Key things we would expect to see or review in a Certificate are: The certificate is in the format shown in FAR 15.406-2 Current as of the date of agreement on price or an earlier agreed upon date Signed by an authorized representative of the company and dated as close as practicable to the date when price negotiations were concluded Check for qualifications or new information disclosed by the sweep and evaluate its impact on the negotiated price Exceptions: Adequate Price Competition Prices set by law or regulation Commercial Item Waiver has been granted Mod to a contract/subcontract for commercial items What is the requirement for obligating funds when awarding indefinite-quantity contracts? (1) For indefinite-delivery indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts all supplies and services to be furnished shall be obtained via delivery orders(s) or task order(s) issued by individuals designated in the contract. (2) Upon execution of the contract, an obligation shall be recorded based upon the issuance of a delivery or task order for the cost/price of the minimum quantity specified. Obtaining a certification of availability of funding from the finance office does not satisfy the requirement to record an obligation in the official accounting records of the Government for the minimum order amount established by the award of an IDIQ contract. The Government's actual obligation must be recorded at the time of contract award. Recording and subsequently reporting the required obligation using anything other than a delivery or task order will result in the action not being reported in FPDS-NG. the Recording of Obligations Act is implemented in the DoD Financial Management Regulation (FMR) (DoD 7000.14-R - see paragraph of the FMR). The Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) is responsible for recording contractual obligations.

Show more Read less
Institution
Course

Content preview

Contracting Officer warrant board
questions
You are the PCO for a major competitive negotiated source selection. The RFP, which
reflects the user's requirements and is based on the user's budget, has a requirement
for 220 cargo loaders to be delivered at 55 per year over the next four years. One
offeror proposes to deliver all 220 loaders in the first year at a dramatically reduced
price. Can you accept the offeror's proposal? What factors should you consider in your
decision? - Answer You can accept the offeror's proposal under certain circumstances.
Firstly, what did the RFP say about alternate proposals? Is this a situation where
requirements are changed and the other offerors should be allowed to propose on the
basis of the changed requirements? You need to ask the user if he wants all 220 in the
first year and are the operating locations physically able to accommodate their loaders
in the first year. Finally, the offeror could be taken into discussions and asked to
conform to the RFP with there being the possibility of not being selected for award or
elimination from the competitive range if the proposal is not made compliant with the
RFP.

You are the PCO on a new $2B aircraft development program. The program is in
contract negotiations for a Fixed Price Incentive (Firm Target) System Development and
Demonstration contract award to a sole source contractor. The program director, a fast-
burning young colonel, e-mails you that she is very concerned with the aircraft's ultimate
speed at the full specification payload. She would like the contractor to achieve the
faster, desired objective speed rather than the mandatory threshold speed, and thinks
that an objective performance incentive would be the way to go to achieve her goal. You
are asked to go to her office and discuss the matter and the issues involved in using
such an incentive. What do you tell the colonel? - Answer There are a number of
considerations for the colonel:
The desired additional speed should provide benefit to the Government in order to
justify the expenditure of funds to achieve it. The colonel should be able to articulate the
justification.
The situation is very amenable to a classic performance incentive that would allow the
contractor to earn profit for achieving the desired speed above and beyond what the
final FPIF profit would be for achieving threshold speed. If the contractor perceives this
can't happen, he will either not sign up to the incentive or will ignore it from Day One.
The incentive and resulting payment have to be structured so as to be based on
observable, measurable results that would determine how much is earned by the
contractor. Subjectivity is not allowable under current AF policy without HCA approval.
We have to be very careful to understand what possible unintended consequences
could be caused by the existence of this feature in the contract. For example, will the
contractor reduce aircraft weight beyond safe limits in order to help achieve the
payment? Also, will the contractor consume excessive schedule to get the extra speed?

,There has to be a cost incentive in place so that the contractor doesn't spend an
unconstrained amount of money to win the payment, such as under a CPFF contract.
The FPIF share line serves this purpose when balanced against the incentive.
The incentive has to be balanced with the FPIF share line so that the contractor doesn't
spend more money to achieve the desired speed than he has potential to earn by
receiving the payment. Similarly, the contractor can't be allowed to spend an excessive
amount of money with little cost penalty to achieve success.

In some cases, Contracting Officers are also Grants Officers. They can award Grants
and Assistance Instruments as well as contracts. What is Assistance? How does it differ
from Acquisition? What gives the Grants Officers their authority to enter into
assistance? What are the types of Assistance? - Answer When the principal purpose is
to transfer a thing of value, to carry out a public purpose of support or stimulation
authorized by law of the United States, it is Assistance.
Acquisition, by contrast, has the principal purpose of acquiring property or services for
the direct benefit or use of the United States Government.
Federal agencies must be authorized by statute to support or stimulate a public
purpose. The statutory authority from Congress must exist either in broad legislation or
in a program-specific statute. Absent that statutory authority, a Grants Officer may not
use an assistance instrument.
Authorities to issue Assistance can be of three types: (1) Provide to the Secretary of
Defense by statute, e.g., 10 U.S.C. 2391; (2) Authority provided to DoD components
that requires no delegation by the Secretary of Defense, e.g., 10 U.S.C. 2358; (3)
Authority coming indirectly from statutes, i.e., federal statute authorizing a program that
is consistent with using a grant or cooperative agreement.
Two types of Assistance are Grants and Cooperative Agreements. They differ in the
following way: In a Grant, substantial involvement is not expected between the agency
and the recipient. In Cooperative Agreement, substantial involvement is expected
between the agency and the recipient. Cooperative Agreements, then, are particularly
useful in the research arena when the Government is interested in being involved in
program decisions or may be doing some testing or research themselves.

You are the Contracting Officer on a new Research and Development program.
Proposals were recently received in response to a Broad Agency Announcement, and a
Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type is anticipated. The proposal most favored by the
technical team was priced significantly under what was estimated for the effort. The
contractor proposed fee in an amount that equates to 20% of the estimated cost. The
users have more than enough funds to cover the proposal and want you to accept the
price as is. How should you advise the user and what factors should you consider in
determining a reasonable fee? - Answer The statutory limitation on fee for CPFF type
contracts do no permit exceeding 15% of estimated cost for experimental,
developmental, or research performed under a CPFF contract. Since the proposed
amount of fee is outside the statutory limitations you need to determine what a fair and
reasonable rate is that falls within the limitations. The FAR recommends a structured
approach for determining fee such as Weighted Guidelines. If a cost reasonableness

,review determines the estimated costs to be acceptable, we can still negotiate and
adjust the fee.

You are the Contracting Officer for a well established transport aircraft program. The
program is nearing the end of production. A Program Manager approaches you
requesting that you issue a Broad Area Announcement (BAA) to support the
development of a source list to supply active noise reducing headsets. The headsets
are commercially available from multiple sources and the PM wants to receive
performance specification sheets from each offeror and then request sample headsets
be submitted for testing. The end result of the effort will be the development of a source
list that can be used by various government entities to individually procure the needed
headsets for their specific requirements. The PM tells you that he will not be procuring
any of the headsets as a result of the BAA. What do you advise the PM? - Answer You
should advise the PM that BAAs are a method of solicitation and can only be used if the
Government intends to award a contract. You might suggest that the development of
the source list could be achieved by issuing a Sources Sought Synopsis with the
synopsis specifying the 2 step process (spec sheets first and then sample headsets
from selected offerors), and the ultimate intent of the process, e.g., a source list for use
by individual users in future procurements. You might also advise the PM that there
could be liability issues associated with the use, handling, and return of the headsets to
the offerors and that it might be appropriate for the Government to cover shipping and
any damage/wear to the units for the testing.

A. Under what circumstances is ratification of an unauthorized commitment permitted?
B. In general, what are the generic procedures for handling ratification actions?
C. Who are the approval authorities for ratifications? - Answer A. If the contract award
would have been proper if executed by a warranted PCO, the price can be determined
to be fair and reasonable, and there must have been enough of the proper type of
funding available to pay for the item both at the time of the commitment and at the time
of the ratification.
B. An investigation is required to be completed within 30 days of discovery of the
unauthorized commitment explaining how and why it occurred, how future occurrences
will be avoided, and describing any corrective actions taken against responsible
individuals. Legal review is also required.
C. The ratification approving official for all unauthorized commitments valued at or
above $1M is the SPE. The ratification approving official for all Non-DISA unauthorized
commitments (regardless of amount) and DISA unauthorized commitments valued
below $1M is the HCA. (DARS 1.602-3(b)(2))

You are the Contracting Officer for a much-delayed effort. On Friday you finally receive
the necessary authority to release the contract for signature. It's late on Friday afternoon
when you e-mail the modification to the contractor for signature. The only person at the
contractor's office on Friday afternoon is the Company President's 17 year old daughter
who is working there as a summer-hire secretary. She knows her father urgently wants
the contract modification so she signs the document and returns it to your office. You
note the last name is the same as the President's so assume that he's the one who

, signed the modification. Is this a legal agreement? - Answer Probably not. The elements
of a contract are - offer, acceptance, consideration, for a lawful purpose, certainty of
terms, and legal capacity. It is unlikely that a 17 year old summer hire would have the
authority to bind the company, regardless of her relationship to the Company President.
Courts may generally find that individuals lack "the age majority" if they are under 18
years of age.
The law in a given jurisdiction may never actually use the term "age of majority" and the
term thereby refers to a collection of laws bestowing the status of adulthood. The age of
majority is a legally fixed age, concept, or statutory principle, which may differ
depending on the jurisdiction, and may not necessarily correspond to actual mental or
physical maturity of an individual.
In practical terms, there are certain specific actions which a person who attains the age
of majority is permitted to take, which they could not do before. These may include
entering into a binding contract, buying stocks, voting, buying and/or consuming
alcoholic beverages, driving motor vehicles on public roads, and marrying without
obtaining consent of others. The ages at which these various rights or powers may be
exercised vary as between the various rights and as between different jurisdictions. For
example, the ages at which a person may obtain a license to drive a car or consume
alcoholic beverages vary considerably between and also within jurisdictions.

You are the Contracting Officer for a follow-on buy source selection. The current effort
has had the same Program Manager for over 10 years. She began as the PM while still
a Military Officer and then retired and was re-hired as an A&AS employee to continue to
manage the program. She has extensive experience on the program and is considered
a Primary "Go To" person for all Program-related managerial issues.
The Program Director wants to utilize the PM's experience to the fullest extent possible
and has proposed that the PM be listed as chief of the technical evaluation team and
also a voting member of the source selection board.
Is it permissible to have a non-Government employee (A&AS contractor) as chief of the
technical evaluation team and a voting member of the source selection board? - Answer
It is not permissible to have a non-Government employee as a voting member of any
source selection board. FAR 7.503(c)(12)(ii). FAR policy states that contracts shall not
be used for the performance of inherently governmental functions. OMB may review
Agency decisions to determine whether a function is or is not an inherently
governmental function, but a list of examples is in FAR 7.503(c). They include: control of
criminal investigations or prosecutions, command of military forces, determination of
agency policy and application of regulations, determining budget priorities, and direction
and control of federal employees. Specifically, included in this list are determining what
supplies or services shall be acquired by the Government on a prime contract and being
a voting member of any source selection boards

You have a contract for engineering services with a basic period of performance and
several one year options for continued performance. The contract states that all options
must be exercised by 1 October of each year. The basic period of performance has just
expired and on 5 October you realize that you never exercised the option for continued
performance. There is still an immediate need for the services. How would you try to

Written for

Course

Document information

Uploaded on
July 24, 2022
Number of pages
39
Written in
2021/2022
Type
Exam (elaborations)
Contains
Questions & answers

Subjects

$16.49
Get access to the full document:

Wrong document? Swap it for free Within 14 days of purchase and before downloading, you can choose a different document. You can simply spend the amount again.
Written by students who passed
Immediately available after payment
Read online or as PDF

Get to know the seller

Seller avatar
Reputation scores are based on the amount of documents a seller has sold for a fee and the reviews they have received for those documents. There are three levels: Bronze, Silver and Gold. The better the reputation, the more your can rely on the quality of the sellers work.
EvaTee Phoenix University
Follow You need to be logged in order to follow users or courses
Sold
5233
Member since
4 year
Number of followers
3570
Documents
56251
Last sold
8 hours ago
TIGHT DEADLINE? I CAN HELP

Many students don\'t have the time to work on their academic papers due to balancing with other responsibilities, for example, part-time work. I can relate. kindly don\'t hesitate to contact me, my study guides, notes and exams or test banks, are 100% graded

3.8

952 reviews

5
453
4
167
3
174
2
48
1
110

Recently viewed by you

Why students choose Stuvia

Created by fellow students, verified by reviews

Quality you can trust: written by students who passed their tests and reviewed by others who've used these notes.

Didn't get what you expected? Choose another document

No worries! You can instantly pick a different document that better fits what you're looking for.

Pay as you like, start learning right away

No subscription, no commitments. Pay the way you're used to via credit card and download your PDF document instantly.

Student with book image

“Bought, downloaded, and aced it. It really can be that simple.”

Alisha Student

Working on your references?

Create accurate citations in APA, MLA and Harvard with our free citation generator.

Working on your references?

Frequently asked questions