CHILINVLN

Very familiar with the SBIR website, but really just looking for a 101 answer on - you will need to do X, Y, and Z. If it helps, the end customer is DOD, so would DOD be able to do it, or would it be better to route through GSA? I'm trying to understand the path of least resistance.

Apologies if this is an elementary question to many, but this is new territory for me. Scenario - Organization A as a prime is holding a Phase 3 SBIR and Organization B, is a subcontractor, doing all of the work on a complete pass-through. In fact, Organization B has in writing from Organization A, that Organization A holds no rights to anything clearly understands that Organization B has the expertise, the solution, and the customer relationship. Situation - The Phase 3 SBIR will be ending in the next 12-18 months for Organization A. Organization B is looking for an alternative path on where to move the work and potentially move out from Organization A. Customer is receptive and supportive to the idea of doing a SBIR with Organization B as a follow on, however, customer is unaware of the SBIR process and needs some handholding on the best way to facilitate. Question - What is the best approach in obtaining a SBIR, what things do I need to be aware of and how to I advise the customer on next steps on who to speak with? Can Organization B justify starting with a Phase 3 SBIR if the solution is already well known, commercialized, and still going through continued development? I know of a few small companies that have nearly 25-50M routing through a couple SBIRS with mutiple orders placed against the SBIR, just not quite sure how they are doing that and could use some guidance.

Excellent, thank you.

Received this from the KO when requesting a debrief. I've never seen this type of response before and wanted to validate. This procurement was done under FAR Part 13.5, “Simplified Procedures for Certain Commercial Items” (ref Basis for Award, page 5 of the combo). FAR 13.106-3(d) would apply in this case and allows for “a brief explanation of the basis for the contract award decision” if it was based on factors other than price alone. As such, your reference to FAR 15.506 would not be applicable.

I often hear and see so many different interpretations on how to handle this particular topic and really would like some opinions from this group on the same. Scenario: Company A holds an annual event, can be an anniversary party, holiday party, etc. and the typical all employees and spouses are invited. Company A would also like to invite key clients that Company A has worked with for many years. These are clients who we directly and indirectly support on Federal contracts and in some cases, the client may be in a TPOC or COR position. Company A events are often held at an offsite location, is a catered dinner (plate or buffet), music, etc. No gifts, prizes, or otherwise are distributed. The clients that Company A would like to invite, would only be attending the event, eating an optional meal, and would be mingling in conversations and sharing pleasantries. Not that it matters, but these federal clients are folks we consider "friends" and have been close to for years. Question: Is this acceptable for the organization to do, where does the company draw the line, and what steps would we need to take to reduce/mitigate risk to make this happen? Do we give them the option to join and charge a fee vs extending an invitation? Do we just put a statement on the invitation that the event meal has a value less than $25? Appreciate any advice on this topic.

I don't think my message was clear. We are not purchased equipment on behalf of the Government, our Development team is being provided equipment from the Government that is lackluster in nature and the Government admits they have equipment issues and expect us to perform regardless. The program manager wants our corporate office to provide everyone on the team high end laptops to use, offline from the agency, to develop software to meet the objectives of the SOW demonstrating that we are willing to go above and beyond to get the job done. Issue is, the contract itself currently does not state this is authorized, only references GFE will be issued, but I'm wondering on if we can potentially recoop this cost we will incur as well as what other associated risk we have with this approach.

My organization has a single award BPA to perform software development for a particular agency. Within this BPA, it states that GFE will be issued and used. However, the program team states the delays on GFE are upwards of 8 weeks and upon receipt, are essentially useless, and the Government is expecting the team to perform Day 1. Of course, they want to execute to the best of their ability but are demanding our corporate office to supply them laptops (CFE) to do the work. While I plan to have a discussion with the CO and raise concerns that these are Government delays outside of our control and essentially state we can work around this, but it would require a contract mod to authorize CFE, which I feel we should price (we're looking at 100k extra in equipment that was not originally priced), my question is: What potential risks are we looking at by developing on our equipment vs GFE? I'd really appreciate some insight into this as I would like to ask the right questions and raise the right concerns. I'm not overly technical is this particular area and any help would be appreciated.

Interested to know thoughts on this. We have a FFP contract with 7 FTEs in place providing labor support to a mailroom. CO states they want to descope the contract down to 4 FTE's halfway into our option year, but hopes to increase back up to 7 on the next option period due to COVID. Question is, since this is FFP, what approach can I take to minimize reduced revenue, if any? We bid this very lean with the anticipation of the overall profit being spread over the entire option period and labor set. Cutting the resourcing from 7 down to 4 halfway into the option period on a FFP contract completely changes those profit projections significantly. Can we push back? Any thoughts or questions we should/can ask?

It's a company owned asset, not sure why it would be considered compensation to the driver. If Verizon buys a van and they have Johnny drive the van, does that count as Johnny's compensation? No.

General business question. CPA states I should leave the CEO vehicle on the company as an asset and have him listed as a driver on our corporate auto insurance.

It was purchased by the company, classified as an asset, and we originally planned to take depreciation on it and the CEO was only going to be listed as a "Driver".

Apologies in advance, not sure where else to ask this question and hoping for some thoughts. We do not have a CFO, I'm currently a VP and leading our Contracts, Legal, and Finance/Accounting Departments, so I figured I would ask here first prior to engaging a consultant. My company recently created an Executive Automobile Allowance Policy, which is non-accountable, and provides C level executives a flat amount of $ per month as a perk to use towards person vehicle ownership, if they so choose. Three executives have leases that are under the company name and paid by the company, so we are transferring those to the employee and they will be responsible for the payment, insurance, etc. That's the easy part. Problem, the CEO recently purchased a vehicle and the company wrote a check and paid in full and it's now an asset (as of 1 month ago). I'm looking for a recommendation on how to handle this with the CEO so that it's fair with the other C level executives. My thoughts are: 1. I can keep the vehicle owned by the company and have the CEO removed from receiving the monthly allowance. However, I'm concerned about keeping the vehicle on our insurance and having him drive for liability purposes. 2. If we transfer the vehicle to the CEO (which is fully paid off), that's essentially an advance, or equity draw? If we did that, how would the financial aspect be worked out? 3. Other options I'm unaware of?

Research, filing, red line markups to teaming agreements, consulting agreements, basically, pre-award support under the direction of a VP. Anything where we need true legal support, we outsource to one of our attorneys on retainer.

We hired a "Legal Clerk" to support our internal legal department. However, our Corporate Lawyer resigned and we essentially outsource anything of significance. Our Legal Clerk is fantastic, but the question came up that this individual can't be called a "Legal Clerk" unless they are working under the supervision of a lawyer. I can't find anything online that clearly supports this as accurate. Curious to know if it's something I need to be concerned about, or not. If so, what is the best solution, retitle them to "Legal Associate" or something along those lines? Employees is still in Law School currently as general FYI.

Good link and I appreciate your feedback.