Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About sdvr

  • Rank
    Copper Member
  1. Bid Protests: GAO or the Courts

    @bob7947 Out of curiosity, is it easy to see how many COFC cases went through multiple rounds of Corrective Actions at GAO?
  2. Bid Protests: GAO or the Courts

    Serious and slightly related question. Does anyone feel like the Corrective Action process needs to be looked at? Both Industry and Government seem to lean on it as a crutch. The government knows they can always stop a GAO process and use it if they see an unfavorable outcome. Industry knows that if they can create enough smoke, a CA is likely. I think a lot of issues would be corrected if GAO took a more active route in making sure the CA is a valid plan that will actually work. Instead you have these large procurements that seem to be in a carousal of award, protest, CA, award, protest, CA etc... Just my 2 cents
  3. Nothing shows on GAO. My bet is he drops 100+ on Monday.
  4. Its been one year, any betters on what Latvian does next?
  5. NITAAC vs GSA

    NITAAC has a few GWACS but all 3 have fees paid by the government. CIO-CS is .35%, SEWP in .39% GSA is .75%. None are paid directly by the government, but industry includes that cost.
  6. GSA CTAs

    Thanks to all so far on your input and the references. Under schedule 70, there is a growing trend of OEMs that no longer hold their own schedule, and have moved to a distribution held GSA model. Cisco, Adobe, Redhat (and more) are now only available from distributors, that while they have a GSA schedule, don't typically take orders directly from the US government. The issue becomes when there is a GSA request with just these items, and no other products, services etc. are being provided/requested. I guess I am just venting, but it seems like an outdated model that needs to change.
  7. GSA CTAs

    What if the only items on the order are on one team member's schedule and there are no open market items?
  8. Hi All, During a recent audit GSA has recently pointed us the following statement on their FAQ page- In a Contractor Team Arrangement (CTA) do all members of the team have to contribute some items of value from their GSA Schedule to the solution? Yes, all members of a CTA must contribute items of value from their GSA Schedule contract to the customer agency's solution. Two questions came up- Is there some regulatory (FAR etc...) that backs this? I cant find anything in the schedule or the MAS desk reference that backs this. What defines "items of value" ? More than one item? A certain $ threshold? Social economic status? I am curious if anyone else has seen this come up...
  9. NITAAC vs GSA

    From the contractor side--- NITAAC is typically easier to work with, GSA can be difficult. Pricing should be similar, and the fee from NITAAC is less. Cant speak to the customer side.
  10. THE WALL on FBO

    I am going to propose using the nations landfills and sewage to build a 30 foot high wall of $h!t. With no EPA, we can knock out a few problems at once...
  11. NAICS Codes - Large Business

    Also a vendor can add the NAICS on the fly, there is no approval process.
  12. Is TAA required? If so your chromebook is out... Do you require US based support? Do you have energystar or EPEAT requirements? Does your agency have an approved products list? Are Operating Systems other than Microsoft approved for use ? This isnt easy in the commercial area either, but the questions are more defined and the chain of command is smaller.
  13. From the contractor side, we have done it once. It was mainly a worthwhile process. The ombudsman backed the original decision. When it got to GAO the government elected to do a corrective action. The only reason we went this route was an attempt to avoid a public protest. I also think there is general belief that the ombudsman process cuts into the GAO timeline. Its not correct, but that view make some see the ombudsman process as a risk.
  14. Software as Service can be done in a few different ways... Imagine a per user per month scenario, where charges are based by actual users per month. Still FFP, but billed at the actual usage. Would still have a POP. Also many software companies have converted "subscription licenses" to SaaS. They own the IP and the actual software, and charge for access for the most recent version. I look at SaaS as more of a payment option. Doesn't change the product, or how its being delivered, just how its being billed. Now I have no clue on the PSC question.
  15. From the contractor side, 60 days isn't always enough. I never understood why there is an assumption that a RFP that took 18 months to develop only needs 30 days to respond. Not to mention late extensions or Q/A that change our response parameters. But in the end, a wise proposal writer once said " You never finish a proposal, you just run out of time".