realquiet

I am reviweing a price proposal where the supplier added about 35% to their unit prices to account for risk, associated with their suppliers. Is this allowable? They will not quantify the risk. Only describe that they have certain risk from their lower tiered suppliers. In my opinion, we challenge their proposal. However, I am being told to find a way to justify it. What is the proper thing to do? I thought according to FAR 31.205-7, this type of risk is unallowable. Thoughts on how I can complete my PAR? We have PO history. Thanks, Realquiet

Hi General_Correspondence, Thank you very much for your input; I've been a cost/price analyst for about 15 years, and, believe it or not, I've never heard of, or, used CALC.gsa. Neither had my colleagues (with many years experience). We are very excited about the prospect of this tool; and, we recognize that it cannot be used as THE sole data point; however, it will be very useful in conjunction with the other tools we employ; the more tools the merrier. In fact, we are well aware of the fact that GSA cannot be used as the SOLE basis of determining a fair and reasonable price, Shay

general_correspondence, Does the data from this website hold up to a DCAA/DCMA audit review of a Cost/Price Analysis Report? Or, is it data that they'll throughout as unreliable? Do the rates include fee?

I am a cost analyst. My company gets lots of proposals that include fully burdened rates. We have no visibility into their OH, G&A, etc. Just their fully burdened rates (never even a base rate). We do have labor categories so we are able to go to websites like salary.com, bls, etc. to find comparable base rates. My question is, what do you use to account for the indirect rates when you are checking the reasonableness of a proposed rate? Do you use Global Insight Burdened Wage Calculator? Do you have another way to account for it? This is always the trickiest part of determining the re