Steward

The general thought/hope is to encourage those few over zealous protester firms to take a more zoomed out view (eval criteria example, 30% protest rate on total bids submitted will be considered a significant weakness / low confidence rating, etc) when considering to file a protest at the per opportunity level. To rephrase, understanding the protest is a long shot, perhaps would opt not to file in a few cases. Further- it provides the agency an additional clear weakness/hole in the ship so to speak to substantiate a non-award to the zealous protestor firm

Out of curiosity, has any solicitation successfully included evaluation criteria that takes a look at the volume of protests an offeror files? I ask due to the sheer disruption and often times few bad apples filing protests nearly every single time they lose, has there been any eval criteria that allows an agency to factor that in? This is more focused on small business procurements, rather than large $1B+ where a lot more is at stake financially, etc. The $100M or less range Thank you in advance

Thank you everyone for all of the insights. Company A even after acquiring the division still holds the socio statuses (8(a) and hubzone). Was hoping the Contracting Officer would side with increasing competition by allowing additional pool access. For info, the request was denied by reason of the Government did not plan on adjusting bidder pools. However, with recertification on the IDIQ coming up next year (IDIQ is a base of 5 years with one 5 year option), I am curious to see if company A is able to certify into the other pools since they will still be both 8(a) and Hubzone.

Greatly appreciate the sanity check. It felt like an odd rabbit hole to chase, thanks again!

Apologies, please allow me to try and rephrase. Agency XYZ competed a multi-award IDIQ, specifically with groupings of awards (Regular Small business, 8(a) pool, Hubzone pool, etc) Company A acquired a division of company B which included the novation of an IDIQ award that was awarded in the competition as part of the regular small business pool. Since company A also holds 8(a) and hubzone socio statuses, may they request the novated IDIQ to be modified to also reflect 8(a) and Hubzone so that company A may compete for those additional requirements being competed on the additional pools? Note: When the contract was novated, the modification only indicated a name change but not that the contractor certifies and is able to be added to the other "pools."

Context/background: Company A: 8(a) + Hubzone Company B: Regular Small business Company A acquired a division of Company B which included an agency level IDIQ contract (no task orders). The IDIQ was reviewed and ultimately novated by the Government. Here is the question, can company A request the Government to grant 8(a) and Hubzone status to the IDIQ which was originally won as a regular SB? I couldn't find any language strictly prohibiting this request, hoping for a sanity check. Thank you in advance!

Yes, B is an active 8(a)

Apologies, appreciate the opportunity to clarify and elaborate. Yes, the agency is Federal and subject to FAR. The IDIQ contract is for supplies + services (Corp A is one of 150+ IDIQ holders on an agency vehicle (not GWAC)). It is the only contract Corp A has at said agency.

I wasn't sure if the IDIQ could be sold as an asset to Corp B and the Government undergo novation procedures, I figured this was left field but I had to get a sanity check. I appreciate the sounding board.

This is an odd one, hoping to lean on the community for some guidance. Context: Local agency IDIQ (agency XYZ let's say), Corp A. - 8(a) IDIQ contract holder- Corp B.- See below. Proposed scenario: Can Corp B. buy/acquire just the IDIQ as an asset (rather than acquiring all of Corp A.)? If so, does the Government novation process differ, if not, any guidance to where I can find a clear "NO" to this type of scenario in the regs would be most appreciated.

Thank you here_2_help, I bounced around and wasn't able to land on a definitive answer and now I know why.

Interested to get thoughts from the community on this matter. Scenario: An IDIQ is awarded with a $1 Billion ceiling, no task orders have yet been awarded. Question: Does CAS apply at the IDIQ contract level or only on subsequent task order awards should they exceed the appropriate threshold(s).

I would agree with others that it appears the Govt failed to address the downstream impact on the option period, rather focused solely on extending the base period.

Based on what has been said thus far, no invoices have been paid to date?

Any progress on this matter? Interested in the discussion and final outcome with the ACO.