Acq_4_life

The program office has an issue with Contractor A's employee that provided support services for their office. Three months ago, Contractor A dismissed the employee because the employee stopped coming into work. Contractor B hired the same employee to provide similar services to the same program office. Due to performance issues, the program office did not want the contractor to bring this employee aboard to provide these services for their office under a different contract. The program office contacted me and questioned whether they could contact the contractor's HR department regarding this employee. My response to the program office: Our agency is only authorized to award non-personal services contracts. This means that the contractor providing these services are not subject to the supervision and control usually prevailing in relationships between the government and its employees. Under a non-personal services contract, a contractor dictates its employees' compensation, benefits, hiring, etc. We (the government) specify the details in the SOW and review, approve, and pay for work products, not individual performance, hiring firing, etc. The program office responded back and questioned whether the government has to (knowingly) accept a contractor's employee whose performance is unacceptable. How should I handle this? I would appreciate any recommendations you can provide.

Question: How should Section B of the solicitation be structured for educational support services povided by a University? Scenario: The agency intends to award a firm-fixed-price contract with University ABC to provide the infrastructure to develop, enhance and maintain a curriculum of courses that will result in the earning of a certificate or MS degree and a Ph. D degree. A draft RFP was forwarded to provide the University with an opportunity to formulate comments and questions regarding the draft RFP documents and to facilitate the proposal process by providing the requirement in advance of the Final RFP. The University responded with the following comment, “The format of the price schedule does not agree with the University budget formatting”. Section B is structured as: CLIN 0001, Administrators (Director, Associate Director); CLIN 0002, Administrative Staff (Administrative Director, Program Coordinator); CLIN 0003, Computing Staff, (IT Systems Analyst); CLIN 0004, Survey Practicum (Practicum I & II); CLIN 0005, Faculty Resources (Full-Time, Part-Time Faculty); CLIN 0006, Junior Fellowship Program; CLIN 0007, Graduate Assistants. Due to the fluctuating requirements that are subject to change, the C/O suggests that Section B be structured as follows: CLIN Supplies/Services 0001 Ongoing Support Services and Infrastructure The Contractor shall provide all requirements as set forth in Section ____ of the SOW, in accordance with the Contractor’s proposal. 0002 Survey Practicum The Contractor shall provide a Practicum that meets the base functionality and requirements set forth in Section ____ of the SOW, in accordance with the Contractor’s proposal. 0002A Survey Practicum (Additional Functionality) The Contractor shall provide additional functionality and requirements within the scope set forth in Section ____ of the SOW, should these requirements be requested through a Contracting Officer’s change request.* *The Contractor shall not exceed the base functionality described in Section ____ and the contractor’s proposal without specific authorization from the Contracting Officer. If changes are required by the Consortium, a change proposal shall be submitted that clearly notes any additional costs. This change proposal must be accepted by the Contracting Officer prior to adding additional funding to CLIN 0002A to increase the base price of the Survey Practicum. I did not provide the full structure of Section B; I just wanted to give you an idea of how it is structured. Instead of providing a detailed basis of estimate for all requirements, the University is planning to submit a total cost for their Faculty Salaries, Other Personnel, Fringe Benefits, Practicum, Supplies, Overhead, etc. Is this acceptable for a firm-fixed price contract. Please advise.

I really appreciate all the responses received on this discussion thread. It helped me a lot! Thanks again!

napolik, I like it too. Thanks. C Culham, I thought RFQ was used for dollar thresholds under $150K.

formerfed, I plan to revise the RFP solicitation and omit any language pertaining to FAR Part 15. Thanks for your response.

Don Acquisition, I do not agree with the recommendations that legal provided. My C/O agrees and requests that I revise the RFP and exclude any language that pertains to FAR Part 15.

C Cuham, Thanks for providing the desk reference; it is very informative. If I have any additional questions, I will contact GSA's contract representative. Thanks again.

C Culham/Vern, I just received legal's reveiw on the RFP solicitation. See comments below: "a. Award without discussions - As presented there is no clear indication that award will be made without discussions. According to FAR 15. 305(a)(3) if award will be made without conducting discussions, offerors may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of proposals or to resolve minor or clerical errors. Award will be made without discussions if the solicitation states that the Govnt intends to evaluate proposals and make award without discussions. Please refer to the FAR part mentioned above." "b. Past Performance - As presented the evaluation of Past Performance is against the rule established in FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv). Accordingly, in the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorable on past performance. Please refer to FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv).

Good Morning Vern, This provision applies to the award of contracts that will result in Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity, and Fixed Price with Economic Price Adjustment type contracts.

C Culham, I accessed the MOBIS Solicitation and it includes the language prescribed in FAR Part 52.212-1, "The Government intends to evaluate offers and award a contract without discussions with offerors. Therefore, the offeror's initial offer should contain the offeror's best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if later determined by the CO to be necessary." I am assuming that it is okay for me to include this language into the RFQ solicitation to instruct offerors how proposals will be evaluated for a commercial buy. I read the information contained in the MAS Desk Reference and the language you quoted, “Limited communications with Schedule contractors to seek additional or clarifying information is allowed and is not considered formal “exchanges”, pertains to the use of oral presentations. Do you recommend that this language be utilized for the RFQ solicitation?

Question: IAW Part 8.404, Parts 13, 14, 15, and 19 do not apply to BPAs or orders placed against Federal Supply Schedules contracts. Does this preclude Contracting Officials from applying FAR Part 15 to GSA Buys? Scenario: Contract Specialist issued an RFP solicitation against the MOBIS Schedule to award multiple BPAs for Management Support Services. The agency intends to make award without discussions. My understanding is that "discussions" fall under Part 15, and when using GSA Schedules, we want to avoid Part 15 procedures because it would mean that we would have to establish competitive range, etc. In addition, Part 15 procedures expose the Government to protest risks. Please advise.

Very informative! Thank you!

MBrown, I have considered issuing an offering letter to SBA for a replacement contract. I just wanted to get some clarification from other contracting professionals whether the FAR allows options to be added to an existing contract. The modified contract will not exceed $4M. The estimated value increased to $3.9M. MBrown and dcarver, Thanks for your response.

Question: Does the FAR allow contracting officials to add options to a contract prior to its completion? Scenario: I am administering a contract that was sole sourced directly to an 8(a) firm for Program Management Support Services. The period of performance is from 10/01/11 - 09/30/12. Due to the need for continued support, the program office requested that these services continue thru FY14. The former specialist contacted SBA and requested approval to extend the contract by adding 2 option periods and increase the contract value from $3M to $4M. Since SBA authorized the inclusion of additional option periods to be placed in the contract, the C/O requested that I modify the contract to include options. IAW FAR 17.202, (a) Solicitations shall include appropriate option provisions and clauses when resulting contracts will provide for the exercise of options. ( Solicitations containing option provisions shall state the basis of evaluation, either exclusive or inclusive of the option and, when appropriate, shall inform offerors that it is anticipated that the Government may exercise the option at time of award. Based on the FAR Clause cited above, I do not agree with the C/O; however, the FAR states that it is at their discretion..... Please advise.

That is okay. I appreciate your responses.

The solicitation required the offerors to propose a unit price for no less than 70,000 matches and no more than 130,000 matches. Based on the number of sample addresses provided to the contractor monthly, the contractor is required to match no less than 70,000 and no more than 130,000 matches. The contractor's proposed unit price (0.0425) for 100,000 matches only requires the contractor to match no more than 100,000 matches. What happens if the contractor exceeds 100,000 matches?

I understand that this contract has already been awarded, but shouldn?t the contractor's proposal at time of award been deemed non-responsive, since the contractor's proposal only provided a unit price for 100,000 matches in lieu of the government's requirement? At this particular point in time, if the contractor?s original proposal was deemed non-responsive, should the government modify the contract to reflect 70,000-130,000 matches? In addition, all the other offerors proposed a unit price for the range of 70,000-130,000 matches per month. Sorry if I confused you.

A solicitation (competitive) for a fixed unit price type contract was issued to acquire the services of a contractor to match sample addresses against the contractor?s database. As described in the Performance Work Statement, the end-user will furnish an automated list of approximately 220,000 to 380,000 sample addresses to obtain published home telephone numbers matched to the listed addresses from the contractor. The contractor is expected to match no less than 30 percent. Section B of the solicitation required the offeror to propose approximately 70,000 ? 130,000 matches per month. The offeror selected for award proposed an average of 100,000 matches per month. From March 2010 to February 1, 2011, the contractor has only matched 74,941 ? 78,381 records out of 232,469 ? 233,747 sample addresses provided. However, the highest number of records matched, in March 2011, was 115,865 out of 353,768 sample addresses provided. The end-user requested a contract change to increase the number of sample addresses so that the contractor can produce a larger number of (170,000) matches; however, the additional sample addresses to be provided to the contractor monthly is within the range of 220,000 to 380,000. My concerns are: 1) the contractor?s proposed average of 100,000 versus 70,000 ? 130,000; 2) the contractor has only matched 74,941 ? 78,381; 3) the end-user wants to add more funding for the increased matches. Please advise.

A solicitation (competitive) for a fixed unit price type contract was issued to acquire the services of a contractor to match sample addresses against the contractor?s database. As described in the Performance Work Statement, the end-user will furnish an automated list of approximately 220,000 to 380,000 sample addresses to obtain published home telephone numbers matched to the listed addresses from the contractor. The contractor is expected to match no less than 30 percent. Section B of the solicitation required the offeror to propose approximately 70,000 ? 130,000 matches per month. The offeror selected for award proposed an average of 100,000 matches per month. From March 2010 to February 1, 2011, the contractor has only matched 74,941 ? 78,381 records out of 232,469 ? 233,747 sample addresses provided. However, the highest number of records matched, in March 2011, was 115,865 out of 353,768 sample addresses provided. The end-user requested a contract change to increase the number of sample addresses so that the contractor can produce a larger number of (170,000) matches; however, the additional sample addresses to be provided to the contractor monthly is within the range of 220,000 to 380,000. My concerns are: 1) the contractor?s proposed average of 100,000 versus 70,000 ? 130,000; 2) the contractor has only matched 74,941 ? 78,381; 3) the end-user wants to add more funding. Please advise.

A time-and-material contract was awarded with a base period and four one-year option periods. The ceiling amount for the base period is $2M with a performance period ending April 29, 2011. The contractor?s invoices for effort performed in the base period totalled $1.9M, leaving an unexpended balance of $12K. The program office requested that the unexpended funds (Working Capital Funds) be carried over into the next performance period (Option 1). I understand that a working capital fund is a no-year fund and is available until expended; however, what are the required procedures for using unexpended funds? Please advise. Thanks.

There are uncertainties in my agency whether an SF30 can be used to amend RFQs under simplified procurements. In reading FAR Part 13.307, it states that "SF30, ......form may be used to modify a purchase order, unless an agency form/automated format is prescribed in agency regulations". This clearly tells me that under simplified procurements, SF30s may only be used to modify purchase orders not amend RFQs. Any feedback??

ji20874 The program office does intend to provide additional funding. Since the letter contract was done by letter, which is how the agency does it here, do I only need to definitize the contract on an SF33/1449? It is a bit frustrating trying to put together contractual documents the right way without proper guidance. I really appreciate your immediate response to my question. It really helps me to put my documentation together in a timely fashion. I noticed many times when a WIFCON member addresses a question; several reviewers may review it without a response. This site really helps those of us, including myself, who are just entering into the 1102 series to understand and apply the concepts of the acquisition process. So, your immediate replies are so important to us. Thank you.

I am in the process of definitizing a letter contract. The Not-To-Exceed amount, based upon the proposal submitted by the contractor, is $50,000.00. The contract definitization schedule allowed 60 days. I am now ready to definitize the contract. The base period of the contract is $1,460,500. The program office only provided available funds in the amount of $460,500, which will only incrementally fund the contract for this amount. In preparing the SF30, what amount do I place on the modification? And do I go back and prepare an SF33/SF1449 and attached the modification? I have no experience with letter contracts. Please help.

A technical and cost proposal was requested from the contractor. The contractor's technical proposal must describe its capabilities and how it intends to perform the requirements stated in the Performance Work Statement. Mainly, the contractor is to develop and enhance the Software and Organization Process Improvements effort, including but not limited to, project management, requirements development and management, configuration management, system life cycle definition, test planning, system designs, quality assurance, risk management, and knowledge management.

I would like to pose the following question, which I'm sure has already been addressed. I received approval from SBA for an 8(a) sole source procurement. I have prepared the solicitation using the commercial contract format contained in FAR Part 12.303. Since one proposal will be requested, what do I put in my solicitation for assessing the 8(a) firm's proposal? I understand that Section M, Evaluation Factors, is not used in 8(a) sole source procurement, but shouldn't I perform some sort of assessment of the 8(a) firm's proposal? Help!