Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

Forest Service R&D

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. When I've been sole sourcing actions I've been posting the Justifications to FedBizOpps I have some now that I would like to compete and am considering using a FedBizOpps Market Survey (to issue past performance questionnaires) to find technically qualified contractors to distribute the solicitations to per FAR 35.007. I can read and interpret and to my very best, but my Agency can offer no real guidance and R&D instruction is hard to come by.
  2. Working at a functioning lab after 10 years of Weapons Systems and Reserve Support contracting in DoD has me doing a lot of my own research and interpretation. There are a few R&D classes listed in the traditional learning/training institutions, however I have found that those classes are not really offered very often. Any chance any of you know of a good R&D Contracting source?
  3. There could be other reasons for what might appear to be just an effort to stay under SAT as well. Thanks to downsizing within the Government, my Acquisition team supports four distinctive customer bases. That's not four units within one organization, that's four different customers pursuing four different missions. They may, have the same or similar requirements come in at the same time. I will assign those requirements to the same Specialist. If you are looking at the award(s) then, it may appear that we have made the same procurement two or three times and may assume it was to keep costs down. In reality, each order is being shipped to different addresses with different funding, different area's of the country, etc. They were unrelated requirements.
  4. Unless you can find evidence of discussion between the contracting office and the requirements people that there was an intention to re-award the minimum with each Option Year then (as others have said) you can't assume it was the intention at the time of the basic contract award to include a guaranteed minimum each year. My guess is that the addition of Option Years to this IDIQ has more to do with the local Procurement Policy than any logic related to the actual requirement.
  5. I have quite a bit of experience with this type of approach for an IDIQ, but not a Requirements contract. I would recommend that you reconsider the Requirement approach. I also define Periods of Performance and set up the price schedule in this manner for the solicitation. This will allow the contractor to increase prices each year and still allows future years programming on costs of the contract. Admittedly, I don't much like Requirements contracts; issuing it as an IDIQ takes care of the concern that the contractor won't perform, or won't perform well. Three years in, if the performance fails, the Government can easily move on. I understand Option Years in basic and defined Contracts, but I find them administratively burdensome in Indefinite Delivery efforts.
  6. My experiences with an Ordering Officer is limited to sharing an office with the Admin Staff who was appointed as one 10 years ago and reading over the appointment letter as a curiosity. I'm trying to problem solve now for a unit spread over 20 states with 40 offices, 100 employees and a $10K annual office supply budget. In the past, office supply orders for the unit were placed after coming into Acquisition. This solution is taking up too much time for such a small effort (complaints, orders taking "too long", shipping to the wring address and receipts not coming back to the card holder). I reached back into my memory to pull up the Ordering Officer solution, but I can't think of why this would be preferred to simply giving an admin office a Purchase Card and having the unit be responsible for their own supplies. Finally, if there is a request to obligate the dollars up front (No Year Dollars = no Bona Fide needs rules) what is the flaw in writing a NTE contract from a GSA BPA and appointing an Ordering Officer?
  • Create New...