Jump to content

C Culham

Members
  • Posts

    2,945
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by C Culham

  1. I have added emphasis to your statement ContractSpecialistTJohn as FAR 8.405-3 is your reference. I might add that it makes no mention of LPTA or any such process but provides the underpinnings for the process to be used. I suggest you re-read, think and apply the principles expressed in the FAR. I do not question Vern's summary view of what FAR 8.405-3 says but there is a little more to it depending on the anticipated use of the multiple award.
  2. Throughout this thread I have thought about this position so I wonder. Admittedly I am detracting from the original post and question which I believe has been answered even by me. So humor me and lets detract as I do believe there is some connection to the original post. Could the FAR part 12 requirement that a commercial item contract be firm-fixed price or T&M be otherwise via a deviation? I will admit I have only done a quick read but I did not find where the requirement for FFP is contained in statute (USC) but rather only in regulation. So I do market research and determine that for a particular need the market place is rampant with contracts that are cost reimbursable, why not my now Federal commercial item contract via deviation? " Deviation means any one or combination of the following: (a) The issuance or use of a policy, procedure, solicitation provision (see definition in 2.101), contract clause (see definition in 2.101), method, or practice of conducting acquisition actions of any kind at any stage of the acquisition process that is inconsistent with the FAR."
  3. It would seem the contract rules and if not stated clearly...ambiguity If looking in the FAR and your answer is not there think FAR 1.102(d) remembering that the contractor is part of the "Team". Good luck on any approach you take.
  4. So my immediate thought was this - If the solicitation was still on the street and you wanted to change the payment terms as you note would you think it would be appropriate to issue an amendment to the solicitation or just wait until you are ready to award to a certain contractor and and then just change the terms willy nilly? I am sure your CO will conclude on what they are willing to do and might even entertain the request. But I wonder, is the contractor asking for the change? And why if so? Remember many payments under contracts are in truth "contract financing" a method from preventing the contractor from having to fund the contract themselves, incur finance fees etc and pass them on to the Government. This goes to the second bullet of @Witty_Username comments. Lots to consider and it depends!
  5. Basic contracting 101. When it comes to a contract vehicle that walks and talks like an IDIQ such as a GWAC the contract vehicle is the authoritative reference on what you can and can not do pursuant to that contract when issuing task or delivery orders. Read the contract first. Trouble finding your answer contact the GWAC owner and asked them for assistance. When it comes to NITAAC they have a very vibrant website to assist on how to use their contracts. In two minutes I found this by searching their site. Note all most all TASK ORDER types are allowed under their GWACS. https://nitaac.nih.gov/resources/videos/e-gos-training-series-creating-request-proposal-rfp
  6. IAA is a must in my view. The matter is "exercise of authority" CO from the agency who was delegated by the agency head (or designee) who has authority to delegate their CO duties to a COR delegate must have the other agency authority to delegate the COR duties. Your agency FAR supplement or policy may provide the opening. I have seen it so and I have also seen it done by those that do not want to "overthink" but I sincerely question it. As I was writing another stated this.... If you are in contracting then the question is a good one to direct to the understaffed "customer" based on what ever your agency policy is for the requirement for having a COR (when, what kind of contracts etc etc). If they are understaff and want to supplement their staffing they need to consult with HR first in my view. The IAA would be up to them, HR and your agreements group to forge. Its kind of like a "color of money" thing in my view. The other agency staff person needs to become your agency to avoid things like supplementing the agency's appropriation. Bottomline it is up to the CO but if I were in the CO's shoes I would only do it if the "customer" came to me with an IAA in hand.
  7. On subcontracting sourcing I can not think of concentrated view of actual opportunities beyond SAM and Subnet of SBA. Of course in a internet search you will find entities that assist for a fee, etc. Have you considered social media and possibly entities that provide for networking via professional get togethers. As mentioned in another post a couple that I know of, Linkedin ("GS-1102 Contracting Series" & "Government Contracting Community") and National Contract Management Association which has a concentration on the Federal sector.
  8. Well there is the classic response - training. Three firms advertise here on WIFCON as a starting place. The FAR Boot Camp might be the the first to tackle. On subcontracting sourcing no doubt PTAC and SBLO's have pointed to SAM.gov. You found WIFCON but how about social media and organizations that have discussion boards related specific to the world of Federal acquisition. Have you found them. Might provide knowledge and possible subcontracting opportunities. A couple that I know of Linkedin ("GS-1102 Contracting Series" & "Government Contracting Community") and National Contract Management Association (NCMA - their "Collaborate" which has several "Communities").
  9. Quick research turned this up as reference was listed on the Dept of Treasury website. Yep a commercial entity but they might be able to help. I know nothing about them other than seeing the entity referenced on Treasury website. https://www.fedmine.us/
  10. Since OT has come into the discussion a visit to FAR subpart 22.103 in total might help. Note that a normal workweek is defined as a 40 hour period not specific days of the week.
  11. Well I suppose my thoughts here are not commensurate with good discussion but what the heck - Was it really past performance or just the ability to evaluate rather than the required accept low bid or otherwise depend on a responsibility determination that no one really knew how to do? I would pose why "past performance" at all? Informally I offer offer this. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I want to build a house, I have lots of folks tell me about this or that contractor. I choose a contractor that some say is a dirtbag but my success with the contractor is exquisite. Heck GAO might have even told me I should have picked them! Finding a grocery store, car repair shop, my hay guy, cow hauler, my trailer repair shop, my heavy equipment repair shop, the list goes on and on. Could it be relationships are a greater indicator about success than just "How did they do?" And as I thought about this I think back to comments found on WIFCON and that are heard and found elsewhere about the value of CPARS specifically related to junk in junk out. Hand in glove with comments about getting responses to questionnaires that are glowing. More and more the initialization of "evaluation" of past performance seems to have taken the same route of the IFB, almost!
  12. How about this to assist yourself. A little more research beyond your cited case. By example I did two internet searches and found GAO COFC cases that discuss the very topic. I might add that in the world of "it depends" the specific facts of any specific procurement will guide the decision on past performance as a factor or not. There is not a cookie cutter example but darn sure examples of experiences of others that will help in any specific instance you will have. Hint - "Justification not to use past performance as an evaluation factor + GAO" or "COFC".
  13. Possibly another question. When placed in the contract is a form of representation by the subcontractor or are the code/threshold simply listed?
  14. Thank you Blue Jay and Lilly for your support of Bob. And thank you Bob for your support of the acquisition professional.
  15. Does this mean that your agency "policy" has in fact gone through a similar process as described in FAR Subpart 1.3? If so then I would suggest that it is in fact "regulation" and not policy. Which in turn makes this not appropriate. However if the policy is just that and not published nor codified I could see where cherry picking is okay. PS - As to the most recent posts regarding intentions I agree with the stated concerns.
  16. And its related supplements? Just wondering how deep the policy makes your entity reach with regard to performing a procurement. Or is there no supplement that relates to the parent Department/agency of your NAFI? Sometimes a supplement offers further advantages with regard to certain procurements.
  17. Intriguing... "The Federal Acquisition Regulations System is established for the codification and publication of uniform policies and procedures for acquisition by all executive agencies." "Acquisition means the acquiring by contract with appropriated funds..." Just wondering about the hang up as to why the FAR definition of commercial item applies? Yet there is an intent to make it apply? As noted by others but based on the thread so far.... Another angle..... "Commercial service means— (1)Installation services, maintenance services, repair services, training services, and other services if– (i)Such services are procured for support of a commercial product as defined in this section, regardless of whether such services are provided by the same source or at the same time as the commercial product; and (ii)The source of such services provides similar services contemporaneously to the general public under terms and conditions similar to those offered to the Federal Government;..." I really do wonder what the questions are as they relate to your original post. And I wonder about application of the FAR even though catch phrases related specifically to the FAR abound. But let me pose this. If you were personally the owner of the application, and you personally needed the services of the future what would make you comfortable in buying the vouchers? As it seems anything that would make you comfortable can be "devised" in the agreement then would doing the same for the Federal government be prudent?
  18. Market research...... https://www.vmware.com/content/dam/digitalmarketing/vmware/en/pdf/professional-services/vmware-ps-vouchers-for-public-sector-datasheet.pdf
  19. And you are boorish! Relax enjoy that others have reasonable thoughts and facts too!
  20. Thanks for the affirmation! Oh and remember FAC-C certification retention requires CLPs of which a multitudes of off the shelf trainings qualify in achieving. Suggest you might need a nap too!
  21. I know of no such "multitude." Sorry but required FAC-C covers extensively. So are you saying that other trainings of which there are many such as the FAR Boot Camp doesnot? I hope you didn't misunderstand my post? To be clear I did not say the FAR made the distinction only that it covered getting acceptance of a PO in writing in another subpart. Yes So a 1102 can be designated a CO without FAC-C certification? Yes probably but extremely rare. The requirement is therefore prescribed. Again whether the 1102 retains the learning as you note on this topic and much much more that is another matter.
  22. FAR 13.004 also. I no longer have but suspect through experiencing the training myself that specific references of a multitude of FAC-C training documents make the distinction. To become a CO an individual is required to learn the distinction via such documents. Obviously they do not retain the acquired knowledge through FAC-C training.
  23. Yes especially to form a binding contract before performance is begun.
×
×
  • Create New...