Arcvue
Arcvue
The ERP for government contractors.
A general ledger built for GovCon—timekeeping, indirect rates, billing, incurred-cost submissions and audit schedules—with forecasting, pricing, pipeline and reporting on top.
One system, not two. The forecasting, pricing and pipeline read the same ledger the close runs on—not a copy of it, and not an export. That is the difference between a number you can act on and a number you have to reconcile first.
What follows is one recorded hour, carried from a timecard to a defended audit schedule. An accounting system should show its work, so this one does—every figure below is re-derivable, and the arithmetic is on the page.
An example set. A single worked hour, drawn as a sample of the arithmetic rather than a total. The pay rate comes from payroll and the billing rate comes from the executed contract, and Arcvue never derives one from the other—so a merit increase cannot quietly reprice a contract.
Arcvue LLC
An employee records eight hours against a contract.
On a Tuesday in June, on a phone, in the field. This is where every number on this page begins, and it is also the first place something refuses: the employee reaches for a charge code they are not authorized on, and it is simply not there. It is absent at the moment of entry, not corrected in a review three weeks later.
That refusal is the whole DCAA argument in one interaction. An audit does not ask whether your timekeeping was corrected—it asks whether it was controlled.
Hours cannot post to the general ledger until a supervisor has approved them. That gate sits on the posting path, so no approval means no cost, no allocation, and no schedule.
A hundred and sixty-eight of them, and the wage is $84.10.
$14,128.80 of direct labor. It is the last simple number on this page, and the only one that comes from your payroll system—everything downstream is computed, and the computation is exactly what an auditor examines.
Three rates sit between the wage and what the work actually cost.
$14,128.80 is not what the hour costs. Fringe, overhead, and G&A each apply to a different base, in a fixed order, and by the time all three have applied the same hour is $24,908.35—76% more than the wage. The gap is why the wrap has to be current at the moment you price, not current as of last year’s submission.
Those rates are not opinions. Each is a pool of real cost divided by a real base—three here, and as many more as your structure runs—and the whole arithmetic, including the proof that dollars in equal dollars out on every tier, is shown at Exhibit 6.
These are provisional rates. On cost-reimbursable work you bill on them and settle the difference at year end; everywhere else they are simply what your cost is, which is what you priced from. Either way, a drift you find in month eleven has already mispriced every proposal you wrote since January—so Arcvue watches the pools as they move and prompts a revision when they drift, instead of letting the year-end true-up be the thing that tells you.
FAR 42.704What you may charge for it comes from a different document entirely.
Everything above this line was cost. Nothing above this line sets the price.
$164.20 an hour—the schedule ceiling of $178.48, less the 8% discount in the award. Nobody typed it in. You load the executed award into the Contracts Register and the model reads Section B: every labor category, one row per category per option period, at the negotiated rate unrounded, with its ceiling hours and the dates it is good between. A multi-year vehicle carrying thirty rate rows takes about as long as opening the file.
You accept the reading and Invoicing bills on it. That is why $164.20 is emphatically not derived from the $84.10 you pay—nobody typed it, and it never touched a pay rate on its way to the invoice. 168.0 hours at $164.20 is $27,585.60 against a cost of $24,908.35: a margin of 9.7%.
Billing rates come from the executed contract document. Pay rates come from the payroll adapter. No billing rate, fixed-fee amount, or fee percentage enters Arcvue from any other source.
The invoice is computed, not assembled.
Your engineer is one of three labor categories on this contract in June. Nobody opens a spreadsheet: the invoice is hours × the contract's own rate for each category, and it comes to $47,526.00.
| Labor category | Hours | Rate | Amount |
|---|---|---|---|
| Senior systems engineer | 168.0 | 164.20 | 27,585.60 |
| Systems engineer | 152.5 | 98.40 | 15,006.00 |
| Technical analyst | 64.0 | 77.10 | 4,934.40 |
| Total | 384.5 | 47,526.00 |
Screen Arcvue invoicing, June 2026. Basis T&M lines are hours × the contract's billing rate per labor category, bounded by each category's validity window. Synthetic sample. The same $47,526.00 appears at Ex. 9 on the accounting page.
It comes back thirty-seven days later, slightly larger.
$47,568.15. The government paid seven days past the statutory thirty, so $42.15 of that deposit is Prompt Payment Act interest. Most systems book the whole amount against the invoice and leave a $42.15 mismatch for somebody to chase at month close or year end. Arcvue splits the interest onto its own line, because a payment that does not equal its invoice is not a rounding problem—it is information.
$47,526.00 × 4.625% × 7 ÷ 365 = $42.15. The rate is Treasury's; the seven days are the ones past the clock.
Every one of those six steps is somebody’s job at a larger firm.
A timekeeping administrator, a cost accountant, a billing analyst, a collections clerk. At a 120-person contractor they are the same two people, and month-end close is what happens to them. So Arcvue reads each document as it arrives—the invoice, the receipt, the statement line—and proposes the account, the contract, and the allowability, each with a stated confidence. Nothing is written that a person has not confirmed, and every confirmation becomes a rule so the same question does not come back. In the month you are following, 412 of 419 documents were coded without anyone touching them—the other seven, the ones a person should actually look at, are the only thing that reached a queue.
The seven are not failures. They are Arcvue declining to invent seven answers—and each one, once answered, becomes a rule so the same question does not come back. The queue, the confidence bands, and the rule it wrote are at Ex. 3.
Screen Arcvue transaction coding, a sample month. Basis 371 + 41 + 7 = 419; the seven escalations are the sub-0.50 confidence band rather than a separate figure. An example set. A sample of the work Arcvue does, not a total. Figures synthetic.
It learns your structure—your chart, your vendors, which contract and project a cost belongs to. It does not learn allowability. That is decided against FAR 31.205 and cited to the clause, so where your history put an unallowable cost somewhere it should not have gone, it does not copy you. It says so.
Before it books anything for you, it reads how you have been booking.
Onboarding is six to twelve months of your closed financials, loaded into your own store. Arcvue reads them in order—every transaction, the account it went to, the vendor it came from, the contract and project it was charged against—and builds your coding model out of them. By the time it reaches today it has your chart, your vendors and your conventions, and it starts on the live books already knowing how you code.
Structure comes from your history. Allowability never does, and cannot—that is decided against FAR 31.205 and cited to the clause on the determination. So where your prior books put a cost somewhere the FAR keeps it out of, Arcvue records the exception with the clause rather than copying you. The full breakdown is at Ex. 11.
Screen Arcvue bookkeeper training. Basis structure is learned from the tenant's own closed books; allowability is decided against FAR 31.205 and is never learned from history. Arcvue does not write back to the system the history came from. An example set. A sample of the work Arcvue does, not a total. Figures synthetic.
What is actually in it.
Seventeen modules, granted per tenant.
The schedules are built and GL-tied, and a controller reviews and signs each one. A schedule with no underlying activity for the year reads No data rather than inventing a figure—an absence and a zero are different facts.
And eighteen months from now, the Tuesday you started on.
The same eight hours, now evidence.
The incurred-cost submission is fifteen lettered schedules, A through O, and it is where all of this is finally tested. Fourteen of the fifteen are built from your own data—the claimed indirect rates and the pools behind them, direct cost by contract, the subcontracts and consultants, unallowable cost, the employee and compensation detail, contract funding status, and the cumulative direct cost by contract. Not assembled in a workbook six weeks after year end by someone who was not there when any of it happened.
The eight hours that employee recorded on a Tuesday in June are in it, carrying the same journal reference they were posted under. That is the only definition of an audit trail that means anything: you can walk it backward.
Schedule L is your organizational chart—typed once and kept, because no ledger holds it. Schedule M is the certificate an officer signs, and a signature is the one thing no accounting system can produce. Arcvue builds the schedule underneath it, so what gets certified is the ledger rather than a workbook somebody rebuilt.
Every step of this on one real transaction, with the workings shown: read Arcvue Accounting.
The one figure here you cannot check in your head.
The rest is arithmetic, and arithmetic does not need a register.
Interest on a receivable is a day-count, and a day-count is where these are usually wrong. So the rate, the days, and the divisor are all shown. The workings behind the harder reconciliations—a pool that must allocate to nothing left over, a balance with two equal sides—are on the accounting page.
No customer’s numbers, names, contracts, or screens appear anywhere on this site. The worked examples are an example set, drawn to show the arithmetic rather than to size anything—and that constraint gets stricter as the site gets more convincing, because a page this specific is implicitly a promise about what a live demonstration will show.
See this page again, on your own numbers.
Everything on this page—the ledger, the close, the rates, the invoice, the submission—runs on your own numbers from the first night, on one system that was built for government contracting rather than adapted to it.