Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by apsofacto

  1. Has strategic sourcing gone too far?

    I emphasized the piece of FrankJon's description above that caught my eye. I thought strategic sourcing requires you to solicit an actual order, not just establish some ordering vehicle. This entails whipping disparate requiring activities into consolidating and standardizing their requirements, or so I thought. So my follow up question is: Is this stuff even strategic sourcing? I'm not a supply chain person, so this is a plea to those who are to educate me.
  2. Require auditors to have more procurement knowledge? Not sure how widespread this problem is, but I have seen strange audit findings in the past that have led to defensive and time-consuming countermeasures from my procurement group. Failing that, perhaps adopting a system of appeal?
  3. Would this principle be applied in a combat zone? Never served, but I imagine there are times a soldier can not purchase things even if he wanted to. Nevertheless a commanding officer could purchase the plates personally. That would be a good move.
  4. Kickstarter and the GCPC

    I think Kickstarter may even agree here, assuming the Government is the sole funder. If there are many other funders, it would be nice to spread the cost of widget development around. If different federal agencies were funding without each others' knowledge, would that tick off the budget people? If the dollar amounts were large? I don't think you get to know who the other funders are. I have contributed to these before and I was one of many small funders. Kickstarter was able to aggregate my contribution with many others and throw a large wad of cash at the "creators". Aggregating lots of small contributions is Kickstarter's main purpose, I think. I can also confirm the funders' credit cards get charged prior to work commencing, not after completion and delivery. The financing issue is a great one to raise.
  5. I believe there is also a ceiling on the executive compensation that can be put in the indirect cost pool. H2H, is that factoid germane to the question? What I could find only addressed the amount of the compensation, didn't seem to address the manner in which they awarded it . . .
  6. This is in no way helpful to you, but I think you could have found them non-responsible during the pre-award phase due to a 'cannot render impartial advice'-type organizational conflict of interest. I had a follow-up question regarding Vern's T4C suggestion, which springs from my paranoia. If the Government sends a T4C notice to the Contractor without ordering the minimum, can the Contractor then request payment of the minimum? Is there a "stand-off", and if so, how would one resolve?
  7. They would run afoul of FAR 52.216-22, right? Government has to order at least the minimum, Contractor has to perform up to the max . . .
  8. I have never issued an unpriced purchase order (they may be horrible and I'm curious if anyone has experience), but it sounds like they were conceived with this circumstance in mind . . .
  9. He deserves better supporters that that!
  10. Increasing Rights in Software--> In-scope Change?

    C Culham beat me to it! That is always the first place I go when these questions come up. I usually think of passages like this form (Overseas Lease Group, Inc., B-402111, January 19, 2010) (emphasis added): I'm in the habit of putting a statement in new contracts like 'The purpose of this Contract is [broad statement]' for this very purpose. Hope that is a good habit, I think it helps put all proposers on notice what kind of changes could occur. Sounds like Fear's cost, schedule and type of work do not change much, so it sounds encouraging from the description.
  11. Still on team Drabkin. Has anyone switched sides since the thread began?
  12. Estimated Delivery Order

    Is this bad, though?
  13. I smell a price realism analysis. Did the solicitation use the word "realism" anywhere?
  14. Hi, Joel, Rent seeking, or good idea? Or both?
  15. I noticed there was an entry about reverse auctions for construction work. We are required by state law to solicit construction via sealed bidding, so reverse auctions are not so outlandish from my perspective. My perspective could be warped, though.
  16. Has this D&F become harder to write over the years? I don't remember it being too much of an obstacle, there was copious parroting of FAR 16.601.c. I know the Obama Administration wanted less T&M.
  17. Proposal Evaluation Team Members

    We have a policy of no supervisor/subordinate relationships on our technical evaluation panels. I'm not aware of a requirement in law for that, and I don't think it was an actual problem before. We make policy by crackpot complaint, though, and that's how that rule was established. If there is more meaningful guidance on this issue I'd like to hear it as well. Thanks, sjst1!
  18. Signing actions above warrant authority?

    I hope its not the one with the cannibal hipsters. That's when I quit watching.
  19. If they gave an assumed contract start date in the solicitation, perhaps they'd assume that date to be correct when evaluating your sliding scale? Don't know if you'd get a consistent result across the whole Government.
  20. Procurement Swamp Article

    I think this is the GAO protest the article references: http://www.wifcon.com/cgen/412746.pdf The article states the GAO did not have a complete administrative record when they generated this decision. The following CoFC decisions are here: http://www.wifcon.com/cofc/16-784.pdf https://ecf.cofc.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2016cv0784-113-0 Thanks as always to Bob for curating these decisions for us.
  21. Meaningful debriefing

    I don't think you want your company associated with garbage!
  22. Request for Assistance

    Thanks to Ji and Vern for resolving! Works better that way. This is now much shorter, but may still meet Jon's needs: Best of luck, Jon!
  23. Request for Assistance

    I think we discussed in another thread about how these breakdown structures can conceal how complicated a sentence can be. My eyes cross a little when I read this: I emphasized and bracketed a period which I frankly do not understand. Are they not capitalizing the following word by mistake? I'll assume not for now. UPDATE: another online FAR has this as a comma, not a period. In sentence form (as opposed to breakdown form) it looks much worse: Noun: Verb: Direct Object:: The Government: authorizes and consents to: all use and manufacture of any invention Is that right?