Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

Todzilla

Members
  • Posts

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  1. I am familiar with FAPIIS as well as SAM. Through some personal contacts, the only things other expressed a desire to see was Integrated Dunn and Bradstreet credit and payments analysis reports if available, and searchable access to publicly held annual reports if possible. Thanks guys...
  2. I know the original question pertained to sealed bidding... and FAR 14.408-2 (sealed bidding) says see FAR 15.404-1 (source selection) for guidance in determining price reasonableness as I posted in my second response... go figure. Many things can affect pricing? Really??? How shocking... Seen some COs do some stupid stuff? Join the club. Conducted a lot of procurements? Join the club. Saved a lot of money for the Government? Join the club. Level 3 Certified? Join the club. Over 20 years in the business? Join the club. As far as what you recommend, that's up to you... I really don't care so long as you don't attack me. I'm an operational CO, not a policy person. I read the original question under the assumption the CO had done all their due diligence and analysis and was primarily asking if the issue of the IGE being off would hold up a reasonableness determination by itself. If you don't like my response, that's your opinion. You made different assumptions than I did about the facts surrounding the question. Like assuming the poster was new to construction. You don't know the details and neither do I. Period. Over and out...
  3. My post specifically said, " Vern's recommendation to attempt to figure out the disparity is solid because either the contractors misunderstood something in the solicitation that you could amend OR the requirements office goofed up the estimate (which you need to figure out as it might affect FUTURE estimates)" Please read what is typed. My point was that if you have analyzed everything else and there is no problem with the solicitation, that the poster technically had sufficient information to proceed with a reasonableness determination. I don't recommend blindly doing anything, including assuming the accuracy of a Government estimate. This is ESPECIALLY true in construction where the Government estimators commonly do not account for some site condition that is driving price. In my opinion, those who dogmatically cling to the accuracy of a Government estimate are fools. The original post could be read from the context of what "can" I do OR from the context of what "should" I do... I attempted to answer both. The poster "can" make a price reasonableness determination based upon adequate price competition if everything else is ok. I also recommended that the poster follow Vern's advice to figure out the disparity. You don't know the poster's situation and neither do I... We don't know if the discrepancy is $50K or $5M. To claim advice was rash and/or poor for a situation you are unfamiliar with is maliciously ignorant. You have made some incorrect assumptions and interpretations of my responses. You must be unfamiliar with negotiated source selection... how about asking clarification questions prior to making evaluations...
  4. Sorry to hit your button Joel, but the statement is still true. The original question was about a price reasonableness determination, not cancellation of bids. Note that my last sentence ends with "assuming there are no errors in the solicitation". Your assumptions revolve around an error in the specs or some kind of hang up surrounding the solicitation, which may or may not be the case. The poster didn't mention whether this was a $50K project or a $50M project, and didn't make a reference to any known problems with the solicitation, so your assumptions are being made in the dark. This situation could just as easily been a bad estimate. I have worked in construction contracting and I stand by my statement that many government estimates aren't worth the paper they are written on. At least that has been my experience... perhaps you have been more fortunate. Neither of us know the intricacies of the poster's specific situation. Contracting officers in ANY area should be using their professional judgement and experience in ALL of their decisions... and they shouldn't have warrants if they don't have the judgement or the experience. Cancelling bids should not be done lightly. If there isn't a legitimate reason for doing it, then it is wasteful and unfair treatment to the contractors who have invested their resources in preparing a responsible bid. In accordance with FAR 14.408-2 Responsible bidder?reasonableness of price. (a) The contracting officer shall determine that a prospective contractor is responsible (see Subpart 9.1) and that the prices offered are reasonable before awarding the contract. The price analysis techniques in 15.404-1( may be used as guidelines. And here is FAR 15.404-1((2)(i) regarding proposal price analysis... the very first one listed: "Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the solicitation. Normally, adequate price competition establishes a fair and reasonable price (see 15.403-1©(1))." We definitely have very different connotations of the word "crock"... You are not the only person in this forum with experience. But that's the beauty of this profession... you can have your opinion, I can have mine, and they can be different without either being wrong. Regardless, my response to the question IS accurate.
  5. To Steve, Which branch of DoD?
  6. Using an IGE is only one way of establishing price reasonableness, and a very low ranking one at that. Many Government estimates aren't worth the paper they are written on. Adequate price competition is the best and primary way to establish price reasonableness. If you have two responsible offers, then you are good to go no matter what the IGE says. Vern's recommendation to attempt to figure out the disparity is solid because either the contractors misunderstood something in the solicitation that you could amend OR the requirements office goofed up the estimate (which you need to figure out as it might affect FUTURE estimates), but to directly answer your question... technically speaking, you already have sufficient information to make a price reasonableness determination assuming there are no errors in the solicitation.
  7. Hello to all... I am asking everyone to suspend reality for a bit and help me brainstorm what a "one-stop" pre-award responsiblity/past performance/transparency system for federal contracting officers might include. What data would you like to see or have available to you? What would be useful to you? What features would make life easier for you? My immediate thoughts are: Data: Excluded Parties FPDS type data (which would include termination information) Reps and Certs submitted on federal contracts Past Performance Information (PPIRS data or similar) CCR Information Federal Tax Debt information Public Financial Information Public records of Liens, pending lawsuits, pending disputes Fraud convictions Features/Functionality: Ability to perform searches on individual companies as well as batch reports on individual data fields User input capability from contracting officers to report suspensions, disputes, etc. As user-friendly and intuitive a GUI as possible Open access to all federal contract specialists Full data integration (not just links to disparate databases) I am a long time federal contract specialist and this is not purely a pie in the sky exercise. Please share your thoughts... what else would you like to see? what else would be useful?
×
×
  • Create New...