Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

APCAcqu&Asst

Members
  • Content Count

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About APCAcqu&Asst

  • Rank
    New

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Location
    Dakar, Senegal

Recent Profile Visitors

2,459 profile views
  1. Great information! Really, thank you. I can use this going forward and feel like I have some resources backing me up. I think we will do a directed sub contractor, ensure they are able to perform as necessary, and I will ensure there is a justification in the Neg Memo, even if it doesn't go through our formal justification approval process.
  2. Hi. Thanks for all these thoughts. I am quite surprised to hear that directing primes to pick certain subs is ok, it seems to go against my contracting instincts. The prime is not meant to only manage the sub who will do all the work. The issue with workload is that the sub is a local organization (we are overseas with USAID) and they need some serious capacity building that would be a big drain on our resources. But the prime could do it as part of the award. This organization seems to be the only one who could perform the work we are doing (predominant capability). So that is why they want to direct it towards them. I like the idea of putting it in the evaluation criteria so everyone proposes the same one, but if its permissible, it would be easier to just direct all offerors to propose this specific sub as one of the terms of their offer... APC
  3. Hi, We have a multiple award IDIQ that we will be preparing a solicitation under (someone told me these arent called RFTOPs anymore, is this true?). Our technical team would like the prime to partner with a certain specific organization as a sub. This organization would likely be eligible for sole sourcing according to the the FAR or our assistance guidelines if we were contracting with them directly. I suggested we do that, but the technical team feels that the management burden of dealing with this sub would be too much for their office to handle. I just wanted to get some opinions on whether this is possible or if there is a specific way to structure this that would make it feasible. Instinctually, I feel that this violates the Fair Opportunity procedures and the rules of competition. The only thing in the FAR that was remotely on point that I could find was FAR 44.203 (B )(3) does not allow any subcontracts that obligate the CO to deal directly with the contractor. Any guidance would be greatly appreciated.
  4. Thank you all for your responses. USAID doesn't provide set asides to small businesses, so I guess given all your answers, I understand why the answer is 'no,' I shouldn't be calling any of these things a set-aside. We do report in FPDS-NG and I was thinking about our agency's small business goals. P.E. We don't set aside for small businesses, so we are not extending such preferences overseas. We do have US policy that allows us to set aside for local entities in the name of building sustainability of our international development programs. Section 7077 of Public Law 112-74, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 (P.L.112-74) titled “Local Competition Authority" is one authority we use. The other is FAR Part 6.302 (5) I believe, along with AIDAR 706.302-5. We use that a lot, and so I was wondering about also adding that to our agencies small business goals, but given the FAR interpretation, that cannot be.
  5. I am currently doing USG contracting overseas. I know that according to FAR 19.000(B ), small business requirements do not apply to me, however, I believe that it is good for my agency to receive credit for small business contracting we do engage in overseas. Therefore, I often have trouble filling out the SF-1449 for solicitations in this regard. I think these are questions that people contracting in the states might have as well. 1. If we do a J&A for a small business (unrelated to the fact that it is a small business), should I/can I still be checking the Small Business Set-Aside (100%) Box? 2. If we end up contracting with a small business and it wasn't originally set aside for that, can we still call it a set-aside to receive credit for the fact that we hired a small business? 3. Given that SBA is mainly interested in supporting American small businesses (though the SBA definition of a small business does not specify where the small businesses are based), would you check the box for small businesses that are not American small businesses? I was just interested in whether you had any thoughts or opinions that could help me shape how I fill out these boxes, which is a question I think about everytime I use the SF-1449. Thanks, Andrea
×
×
  • Create New...