Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

Jamaal Valentine

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Jamaal Valentine

  • Rank
    Gold Member
  • Birthday August 8

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Being good...when I can't be good, being compliant...when I can't be compliant, being liked.

Recent Profile Visitors

9,009 profile views
  1. Problem of the Day

    What if you were doing sealed bidding under SAP?
  2. Problem of the Day

    I wonder what the prescriptions are and if they intentionally turn on the threshold for obtaining certified cost or pricing data ($750,000) rather than actions that require certified cost or pricing data. The threshold is merely a value...applicability could be something else.
  3. What is a procedure?

    Within context, I think of procedures as the contract formation methods of sealed bidding or negotiation. Within each category we have competitive and noncompetitive. Additionally, there are specific procedures for commerical items, simplified acquisitions, supplies, services, construction, etc.. Procedures vary based on the supply or service, contract type, dollar value, sources of supply, competition, place of performance, etc. The scope of many FAR parts explain what policies and procedures that part prescribes. These procedure can be used in whole, part, or in combination as appropriate. FAR 1.102-4(e), explains that "[t]he FAR outlines procurement policies and procedures that are used by members of the Acquisition Team." FAR 1.302, says that "[a]gency acquisition regulations shall be limited to -- (a) Those necessary to implement FAR policies and procedures within the agency…"
  4. How can we speed up the source selection process?

    Centralize contracting officer authority at the last review level or as close to it as practical. Alternatively, the clearance approval authority (or his/her delagte no lower than one level below) can serve as the PCO and individuals within the originating office can serve as ACOs with certain delegated authorities.
  5. "Legitimate Need"

    What is the basis for your thought? You will need more than personal incredulity if you want to be persuasive. The mere existence of FAR 6.202, and 6.302-3 should ease your worries, unless I misunderstand your concern(s). Remember, FAR has the force and effect of law.
  6. "Legitimate Need"

    What is your purpose in defining legitimate need? If you want to interpret its usage in FAR, follow the convention found at FAR 1.108(a): Words and terms. Definitions in Part 2 apply to the entire regulation unless specifically defined in another part, subpart, section, provision, or clause. Words or terms defined in a specific part, subpart, section, provision, or clause have that meaning when used in that part, subpart, section, provision, or clause. Undefined words retain their common dictionary meaning. Other than that, what are the differences between bona fide need and legitimate need, in your judgment? (Relating to your application)
  7. How can we speed up the source selection process?

    Improve requirements definition (describing agency needs) Tie agency needs to evaluation factors Clearly assign roles and responsibilities and hold folks accountable Give PMs/Engineers warrants *Buy more like private individual/entities - fluidly and subjectively, without a lot of fanfare about about anything other than getting the best value … limit the award decision and documentation to a much lower reasonable person type standard. If limiting competition or changing the requirement on the fly makes sense do it, document/justify it, and move toward award. This last piece can be done with the current construct, but many artificially place the bar too high and demand more than the FAR System requires. Risk aversion and overprocessing (ineffective documentation) doesn't appear to help, but extends timelines.
  8. FARSITE out of date

    Yes. Recently reviewed and caught it on a combined synopsis/solicitation that relied on and cited FARSite as "Current to: FAC 2005-96, Effective 06 Nov 2017; and DPN 20171228, Effective 28 Dec 2017" … Another reason to stay away from using the unofficial FAR for official purposes.
  9. January 2018 Volume 1 Report

    Wildly different than what the interim report suggested. I wonder what changed. Team makeup, resources, accountability?
  10. Truth Decay

    Matthew, Solid points. I think it' worth mentioning that anonymous sources are not the issue, per se. Media can protect the identity of a source that has first-hand knowledge of a thing. What I gathered is that something told to somebody by unnamed persons who did not witness the event but were told about it by one or more other unnamed persons who may or may not have witnessed it is the problem. This second type is more along the lines of playing telephone. Essentially, the more unnamed sources and hearsay you have the less desirable and reliable the info.
  11. FAR Part 15 Procurement - Weighted Evaluation Factors

    To aid in making data useful for decision-making. 'Mechanical' evaluations are not generally allowed.
  12. Truth Decay

    Jurying information--or as Daniel Kahneman would say, our slow, deliberate, analytical and consciously effortful mode of reasoning--is tiring. As a result, we often rely on instinctive impulses. Add in cognitive biases and the filter bubbles we are subject to and a crazy cycle of creating and reinforcing flawed theories ensues. I recently 'finished' writing a related article for DAU AT&L Magazine. Hopefully I can submit it by the Feb 1 deadline.
  13. 2018 NDAA Increases Civilian Micro-Purchase Threshold to $10,000

    I wonder if the DoD was intentionally or inadvertently left out of the micro-purchase threshold change. The change to the simplified acquisition threshold for DoD changed because the 10 U.S. Code § 2302a language regarding the threshold references back to the definition in section 134 of title 41. Maybe someone assumed the DoD micro-purchase threshold was written the same way?!?
  14. Is Artificial Intelligence a Solution to Contracting Problems?

    This was discussed in the AT&L Magazine back in 2015: http://dau.dodlive.mil/2015/01/12/a-contract-that-manages-itself-the-time-has-arrived/
  15. Does MIL-SPEC Constitue Brand Name

    Hopefully that helps. How do you know that only two can? Why does it matter? FAR 2.101 states '“Full and open competition,” when used with respect to a contract action, means that all responsible sources are permitted to compete.' MIL-STD, MIL-PRF, MIL-DTL, etc. appear to be separable from brand-name in that they are not manufacturer-centric. Try reviewing FAR 11.002(a). Do you believe FAR 6.302-1 applies to your action? If yes, in what ways? I provided info regarding the original question asked. There is too little info about the contract action to offer much else. Based on FAR 11.002 and what's provided, I don't believe a brand-name or sole source action is required/appropriate.