Jump to content

apsofacto

Members
  • Posts

    316
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by apsofacto

  1. You are correct, of course. A 'neither favorable nor unfavorable' rating is a *relative* weakness in any competition where a competitor has a favorable rating. Isn't the neutral rating requirement designed to allow firms to break in to new areas of business? If it fails, should it be scrapped entirely? As an aside, there is a lot of discussion at Federal Computer Week about past performance . . . though not this issue.
  2. Hi, Boof. I'm researching this myself- the first step seems to be that you just acknowledge that you will never be able define your requirement sufficiently in advance, and are therefore paying your Contractor by the hour (or on a cost reimbursible basis). I don't understand why the normal procurement process can't accomodate this- it seems very simple. There is probably an art to packaging the work via task order that I'm not fully appreciating, but again, nothing that the current processes cannot accomodate. There are also some claimed efficiencies in consolidating the deliverables (e.g. annotating source code sufficiently enough to eliminate reports) that I don't claim to understand.
  3. I'm not addressing the legality of anything here, just floating a trail ballon. The cost realism analysis seems like a thin reed which is required to support a whole lot of weight. They require a lot of knowledge from the Project Management side as to exactly how the Contractor will perform the work; They are very subjective; and Are therefore susceptible to pressure from within and without the contracting office; and They are performed for requirements which, by their nature, are difficult to get a handle on (hence the CPFF contract type). I'm sure there are many good cost realism analyses floating around, just worrying they are outnumbered by the bad ones. *In particular* Steward's are probably quite good since he has a track record of avoiding overruns, but the tool *in general* doesn't fill me with confidence about mitigating the moral hazard issues Vern raises. Also, sorry for the premature posting- still getting used to the forum. Thanks!
  4. I think Best and Final Offers is one of these as well, though there is a rogue reference to it in FAR 22.404-2. I keep trying to say Final Proposal Revision but it's not easy fighting habit. Still, it doesn't appear to bother the GAO folks: http://www.gao.gov/search?search_type=Solr&o=0&facets=&q=%22Best+and+Final+Offer%22&adv=0&criteriaCounter=1&shownCriteriaCounter=1&referenceSearch=1&adv_begin_date=mm%2Fdd%2Fyyyy&adv_end_date=mm%2Fdd%2Fyyyy
×
×
  • Create New...