Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

PepeTheFrog

Members
  • Content count

    197
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About PepeTheFrog

  • Rank
    Bronze Member

Recent Profile Visitors

2,623 profile views
  1. PP Neutral Rating

    Hear, hear! Use broad, expansive, inclusive language, e.g. "including, but not limited to..." Also, don't forget that a "neutral" (actually, neither favorably nor unfavorably) rating for past performance does not provide the same protection during the tradeoff or source selection decision stage. Consider firm A and firm B, with evaluation factors of past performance, technical, and price. Firm A has no past performance, firm B has excellent past performance. Even if firm A and firm B have the exact same technical rating and underlying strengths and weaknesses, you can determine that firm B is the superior choice, even if firm B has a higher price. Your rationale is that the price premium of $X justifies a lower risk (having excellent past performance instead of no past performance). Bottom line: Having no past performance shields the rating, but doesn't create "immunity" during the tradeoff and source selection decision.
  2. u mad, bro? You might be on the wrong website...4chan is that way! ----->
  3. Advice for New Professionals

    Embrace the fact that you, and you alone, must provide yourself with education and training. Do not rely on anyone other than yourself to increase your knowledge and abilities. Try to read and study more than anyone else in the office.
  4. Advice for New Professionals

    Be willing to switch offices to get promoted. Do not take any career advice from federal employees, other than from the most impressive one percent who did something very similar to what you want to do. When applying for a position on USA Jobs, consider that everyone else will be rating themselves to get a perfect score to "make the cert." Totally ignore anyone who tells you war stories about remaining in the same grade for many, many years. Have a backbone and learn how to be assertive, but not rude or confrontational.
  5. Changing Solicitation to Set-aside while live

    Yes, this process is called an "amendment."
  6. Need Ideas for Empty Website

    Turn it into an online dating site for contracting professionals. Interests: cost accounting standards, limitations on subcontracting clause, requests for equitable adjustment Religion: Christian doctrine Dealbreakers: giving answers not supported by statute, regulation, written policy, or court decisions...using cost-reimbursement contracts for commercial items Recent Books Read: Cost-Reimbursement Contracting (Cibinic, Nash), Contract Management Body of Knowledge (CMBOK), (NCMA) Favorite Movie: WAR DOGS Political Views: Make Contracting Great Again #MCGA Socioeconomic Status: vivacious and flirty WOSB Location: currently living in an aluminum shack in a bombed-out HUBZone where radioactive stray dogs threaten pedestrians
  7. Background

    The easiest and most politically feasible option is to raise thresholds. Raise all the thresholds! Congress can be lazy by simply "tweaking" or amending existing statutes, instead of forcing someone to actually think and perform work by entirely revising or creating new statutes. This does not solve the underlying problem (stupid, burdensome, costly statutes and regulations) but it "cheats" by simply exempting more contracts, contractors, and contracting officers from dealing with them. Raise the thresholds much, much higher so that the "worst offender" regulations apply to a smaller number, i.e.: As Vern Edwards has suggested, raise the TINA threshold to the moon-- $50 million or higher-- $750K is absurd Raise the SAT and commercial FAR 13.5 thresholds (allowing more simplified acquisitions) Raise the subcontracting plan thresholds (avoiding the nonsense involved with subcontracting plan approval, compliance, distorted supply chains) This is a lazy and cynical way of doing things, but seriously, find a threshold and suggest raising it by a very high amount.
  8. business development and contingent fees

    It does. PepeTheFrog was hung up on the word "employee" versus independent contractor. Thank you, Don Mansfield.
  9. 1. Must business development people (who have contingent fee arrangements supplementing their salary) be hired as W-2 employees? 2. Can their services be provided as 1099 independent contractors, or would their contingent fee arrangement violate statutes and regulations against such? 3. For violations of the prohibition on contingent fees: Is the dividing line whether the business development person is a "bona fide employee" versus an independent contractor of the federal contractor firm? Why should that matter? Background: FAR Subpart 3.4 restricts certain contingent fee arrangements for soliciting or obtaining federal contracts. The statutes and regulations "[p]ermit...contingent fee arrangements between contractors and bona fide employees or bona fide agencies" (FAR 3.402(b)). "Bona fide employee" is defined as "a person, employed by a contractor and subject to the contractor’s supervision and control as to time, place, and manner of performance, who neither exerts nor proposes to exert improper influence to solicit or obtain Government contracts nor holds out as being able to obtain any Government contract or contracts through improper influence" (FAR 3.401). The prescription clause for FAR 52.203-5 is FAR 3.404. The clause itself states, in part: "The Contractor warrants that no person or agency has been employed or retained to solicit or obtain this contract upon an agreement or understanding for a contingent fee, except a bona fide employee or agency." PepeTheFrog knows a common practice in government contracts is to create a contingent fee arrangement with business development people. Business development people are expected to find, secure, maintain, and solidify business and contractual relationships with federal clients. Some call them "rainmakers." These contingent fee arrangements for employees could be "you get this small salary $X and 1% of any new contracts under $X million, and 2% of any new contracts above $X million." These contingent fee arrangements for independent contractors could be similar, except instead of a salary, you get a small payment or no payment at all (other than the contingent fee).
  10. Read this. Read it NOW!

    PepeTheFrog is calling for a complete and total shutdown of blue rules in the contracting profession until acquisition officials and our country's representatives can figure out what is going on. Without looking at FPDS-NG data, it is obvious to anybody the foolishness is beyond comprehension. Where this foolishness comes from and why we will have to determine. Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous source selections by people that believe only in blue rules, and have no sense of reason or respect for the contracting profession. PepeTheFrog has friends that use blue rules. They are great people-- but they know we have a problem. Did you see what's happening in DHS last night? The source selection was a yuge failure, bigly. Sad! We have no choice, folks. We have no choice. Make Contracting Great Again! #MCGA
  11. Debriefing request timeline

    If your requested debriefing is pursuant to FAR 15.506(a), the definition of "day" found in FAR 33.101 applies. (See FAR 15.501.) This means if the last day of the timeline falls on Memorial Day (a federal holiday), your timeline is extended to the next day.
  12. PepeTheFrog loves this idea in principle (using verifiable metrics and market competition to evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of government programs and agencies) and also in this specific application. PepeTheFrog thinks the auditing firms would make DCAA look bad.
  13. Increasing Rights in Software--> In-scope Change?

    That is an interesting interpretation but PepeTheFrog is not sure it is accurate. PepeTheFrog seconds Matthew Fleharty's line of questioning on this matter. Is there something interesting to learn from Seeker, or was that a very specific assertion, limited to this scenario, and not related to other contracts for licenses, software, etc.?
  14. Original Intent of FAR Parts and Subparts

    A thank you will never be enough, Vern Edwards. As far as the rest of the frogs, in a contracting profession where Vern Edwards is not there to set things straight: "That's it, man. Game over, man. Game over! What the [xxxx] are we gonna do now? What are we gonna do?" ALIENS (1986), Bill Paxton playing Private Hudson
×