Jump to content

Sascha Kemper

Members
  • Posts

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Kosovo
  1. Got it. Thanks, Jamaal! No, we don't incorporate elements of the successful offeror's proposal into the contract. The other factors are suggested by FAR part 15 and are what lends itself to evaluating the proposals we receive to discern between the offerors.
  2. Evaluation factors would be technical excellence, management capability (might need to leave that one out), and personnel qualifications. Past performance is being reviewed by the contracting office on a pass/fail basis. Your second point is our concern - we have a small number of established partners that make up the offeror pool, but technical approaches (due to what we buy) are not necessarily giveaways for the the evaluators. My CO was looking for best practices' tips for the entire process, e.g. does it work better if we ask offerors to withhold all identifying info, redact certain parts, if we ask offerors to register and then we assign names to use in the proposal. If we use this approach, what's the cleanest way to do it (also for offerors who haven't been asked to do this before). References would be checked by the CO's office, not by the evaluation committee. The problem is we have a small pool of offerors that our CORs know well, so we're trying to remove favoritism or preferences for certain offerors.
  3. My agency procures technical assistance services (development assistance) usually through CPFF contracts (sometimes award fee or firm fixed price). It's largely personnel based assistance (if that makes sense), e.g. helping a host country gain WTO membership, developing Customs systems/offices, agriculture development, banking sector, etc. It could include some hard- and software, but the majority of what we pay for is labor. We have a couple of procurements coming up, but the program descriptions are still being developed.
  4. My supervisory CO has asked me to research how to do a "blind competition," which I understand is a process whereby companies interested in submitting offers do not use their own identity in their technical (and cost?) proposals. The purpose of the blind competition is to establish a true(r) objectivity on behalf of the technical evaluation committee. I have searched the wifcon pages and done a general online search, but have not found any guidance on how to set up a blind competition. I am looking for best ways to set-up/structure a blind competition, e.g. does it work better if offerors are instructed to write their technical proposals in such a way so as to not identify themselves or we ask them to register and then assign a number or other name to them? What are other lessons learned, best practices, guidance, pitfalls, etc.? Thanks in advance for any inputs!
×
×
  • Create New...