Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

ji20874

Members
  • Content count

    1,467
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ji20874

  1. CPFF LOE Calculations

    Maybe you don't have a LOE contract. If your contract calls for completion of specific tasks, and you satisfactorily complete them and meet all criteria in the statement of work, then you are entitled to 100% of the fixed fee. Your performance of the work at an actual cost less than the estimated cost should help towards an EXCEPTIONAL rating in CPARS for the Cost Control factor. You are entitled to 100% of the fixed fee if your CPFF contract is of the completion form (contractor calls for specific tasks or outcomes) rather than the LOE or term form (contract obligates the contractor to devote a specified level of effort for a stated time period). See FAR 16.306(d)(1) and (2). So, back to your original posting. In your contract, did you agree to and promise to provide a required LOE per contract year, or did you merely agree to an estimated LOE? Since we don't have your contract, I don't think anyone here can answer your question about fee entitlement without this answer.
  2. CPFF LOE Calculations

    You realize that your failure to provide the promised level of effort is a real failure, right? Unsatisfactory in CPARS and so forth? I'm not aware of a principle that says you get a percentage of the fixed fee based on the percentage of your promise that you deign to deliver. What if the contracting officer allows zero fee, and demands a return of fee already paid?
  3. Zag, The clause at FAR 52.222-20 now has the title "Contracts for Materials, Supplies, Articles, and Equipment Exceeding $15,000" and a date of May 2014. This is still the same subject matter as Walks-HealyWalsh-Healey. Anyway, your contract has an old version of the clause, and the old version is applicable for the life of your contract (see FAR 1.108(d)), but one would have to know what FAR revision was in effect at the time of your contract to give you a definitive answer. But I wonder if FAR Subpart 22.6 has really changed all that much, other than the title? Nothing in the current clause or the current 22.6 requires a flow-down, to 8(a) contractors or anyone else. The prime contractor must ensure that subcontractors comply with the clause, but it can achieve that end by ways other than a flow-down. What are you looking at that requires a flow-down?
  4. Solicitation questions and answers

    lotus, There are no rules. A prospective offeror may ask a question about a solicitation at any time. However, the contracting officer is not required to answer any question.
  5. Buy American Act and Services

    Robert, The Irish firm is okay if your contract is subject to Trade Agreements. Does your contract include the clause at FAR 52.225-3 or -5?
  6. Robert, There is ambiguity in your words "insuring the vehicles against property damage." Are you asking about insurance to cover loss of or damage to Government property? Or are you asking about insurance to provide automobile liability insurance (bodily injury and property damage) covering the operation of automobiles used in connection with performing the contract? These are different, and your words don't make it easy to decide which. If you are asking about insurance to cover loss of or damage to Government property, the answers already given above tell you to consult FAR 28.303 and FAR 45.104. There, you will learn that the Government generally doesn't require such insurance from contractors, but that any particular contract may do so. We don't know what your contract says, so we can't give you a definitive answer -- except to say, read your contract. If you are asking about insurance to provide automobile liability insurance (bodily injury and property damage) covering the operation of automobiles used in connection with performing the contract, the answers already given above tell you to look in your contract for the clause at FAR 52.228-7, Insurance. We don't know what your contract says, so we can't give you a definitive answer -- except to say, read your contract. As for who should bear the cost, well, if the contract requires you to provide the insurance, then you have to bear the cost. But these will be reimbursable costs under your CPFF contract -- allowability of insurance costs is covered by FAR 31.205-19. And of course, I hope you come here only for general learning -- for any question specific to your contract, you need to direct the question to your contracting officer.
  7. Buy American Act and Services

    You're right -- correction made for future viewers...
  8. Buy American Act and Services

    Right -- a services contract subject to Trade Agreements may be awarded to a Delaware corporation wholly owned by Indians with 100% of the work intended be performed in India -- even though India is not a designated country. On the other hand, that same contract could not be awarded to company chartered in the Bahamas Argentina or Brazil wholly owned by Americans with 100% of the work intended to be performed by Americans. The only thing that matters is "the country in which the firm providing the services is established." By definition, a contract subject to Trade Agreements cannot have been awarded as any sort of a small business set-aside, so it will not have the limitations on subcontracting terms common to set-aside contracts.
  9. Robert, See FAR 45.104 and 28.303. And re-read your contract to see if it requires you to provide insurance against loss or damage to government property.
  10. I disagree. This coverage protects the owner/operator of the vehicle from liabilities to third parties. if the OP is asking about insuring against loss or damage to the Government Property (or CAP) generally, rather than automobiles specifically, the normal rules apply -- there is nothing special about an automobile in this regard. FAR 45.104 and 28.303 give guidance.
  11. You asked what is the proper way, and then you explained the facts of way it is done. Is there a problem with the facts you described?
  12. There is no conflict between those passages.
  13. Buy American Act and Services

    FAR Subpart 25.1 and Buy American apply to contracts for supplies, or contracts for services involving the furnishing of supplies. FAR Subpart 25.2 and Buy American apply to construction contracts. But it might be that FAR Subpart 25.4 and Trade Agreements will apply to the acquisition, instead of Buy American. You can read all about it in FAR Part 25.
  14. FAR Part 45 is the wrong place to look. Instead, see FAR Subpart 28.3, Insurance. Cost-reimbursement contracts ordinarily require contractors to to provide automobile liability insurance (bodily injury and property damage) covering the operation of all automobiles used in connection with performing the contract. Your CPFF contract should contain the clause at FAR 52.228-7, Insurance. Even if it doesn't, any contractor subject to Cost Accounting Standard 416 is required to obtain insurance for the perils to which the contractor is exposed. And even if a contractor isn't subject to CAS 416, it may still be required by law (outside the FAR) to provide insurance for certain types of perils and situations. All of this is explained in FAR Subpart 28.3, Insurance. Allowability of insurance costs is covered by FAR 31.205-19.
  15. Types of orders

    The word "calls" is used in FAR 4.1603(a)(3)(vi) and (viii) and also in FAR 4.606(a)(1)(iii). Generally, I think of the issuance of an order under an indefinite-delivery vehicle (as that term is defined in FAR 4.606(a)(1)(ii)) as being done by a contracting officer or purchasing agent on paper (OF Form 347 or DD Form 1155) with a funds citation, and I think of the issuance of a call under a Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA) as a verbal purchase made by a person authorized (such as by FAR 13.303-3(a)(4)) with a single monthly invoice and payment for all purchases made during a month. However, I admit there is tremendous variation (even sloppiness) in the use of "call" and "order" among contracting practitioners. "Call order" is new for me.
  16. UCA - Required Contract Clauses

    The order (DD Form 1155) that references the BOA should incorporate by reference the provisions of the BOA -- see FAR 16.703(d)(2)(ii). I'm just wondering... Is there really a BOA? Is this a DPAS rated order that the contractor must accept?
  17. UCA - Required Contract Clauses

    It seems you received an order under a BOA. There are no clauses to be "read into the UCA." Any clauses that apply should already be in the order itself or in the BOA. Regarding the pricing of the work, you will want to read FAR 16.703(d)(3).
  18. The Problem of Proposal-Based Competition

    Junius, Another way to say it: contracting officers are no longer expected to be professionals that delivery the best possible business solutions to help accomplish an agency's mission -- rather, they are expected to be clerks. "Management and lawyers" want a procurement program that spends money and generates little risk, while caring little or nothing about the best possible business solutions to help accomplish an agency's mission.
  19. Court Order and the FAR

    If a court orders a psych exam, wouldn't the agency have some discretion about how to carry it out? For example, if DOJ was the target of the order, could it use one of it employees to do the exam? or use a VA employee? But if the agency elects to use a contractor, it would be very easy -- a simple purchase order, sole-source or competitive as needed, using the agency's normal procurement authority/processes and appropriated funds. It might get more problematic if a court orders an agency to do something that goes beyond the agency's authorization and appropriations acts, but that isn't the case here.
  20. Tomahawk, So everything is clear? And there is no problem? That's good!
  21. Tomahawk, I recommend you ask the contracting officer for clarification on which parts of the work are FFP and which parts of the work are T&M. Hopefully, the answer will be on a CLIN basis, where certain CLINs are wholly FFP and other CLINs are wholly T&M -- that is generally easier than having blended CLINs. A prospective offeror never has much time before proposals are due, so I suggest you hurry.
  22. Vern makes a good point -- I think my most professionally rewarding and learning years were spent as a contracting officer in program offices working directly with program managers. When arguments arose about my appraisal, I was always in favor of the program manager doing the writing/signing rather than the contracts chief.
  23. You should get rid of that expectation. A business owner can read the FAR as well as a contracting officer, or can hire the expertise to effectively participate in the government market. I think "trust but verify" can apply here. Yes, contracting officers will sometimes release solicitations with poorly-written CLIN schedules and so forth. In those situations, I hope prospective offerors will share recommendations for improving the approach. If they do, the resulting contract might be better for both parties. Where prospective offerors don't share recommendations, or the contracting officer doesn't accept them, prospective offerors have to make a business decision: continue to play or walk away. But this is true for all business arrangements everywhere, not just those with the government. In the commercial market, it is very common for buyers to walk in and explain what they're looking for, and for sellers to advise them that they (the buyers) really don't want that. Maybe the sellers are effective in changing the minds of the buyers, or maybe not. I tend to think sellers (or prospective Government contractors) should be experts in offering and packaging their services, and specifying payment terms -- and that is what a CLIN structure is, after all -- so yes, I think prospective contractors can be helpful to contracting officers in crafting CLIN structures that fit their market sectors.
  24. If you want to know why the prime contractor is doing what it is doing, you must ask the prime contractor. There is no mandatory connection or correlation between the contract type negotiated between the Government and the prime contractor and the contract type negotiated between the prime contractor and any subcontractor.
  25. REA, I most earnestly hope that the CLIN structure IS NOT set up like I asked -- but based on the original posting and the comments, I am wondering. I hope the answer is NO, because indeed that would be very poor tradecraft -- but I have seen a lot of poor tradecraft regarding T&M lately.
×