Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

lotus

Members
  • Content Count

    51
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About lotus

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. lotus

    Overriding the evaluators

    Rule #1 is the Government must win.
  2. lotus

    Overriding the evaluators

    Change the FAR. It's been done before. Since the SSA can override the evaluations, would it be helpful to submit a question along the lines of what are the selection criteria?
  3. lotus

    Overriding the evaluators

    Okay, so why not have just one evaluator, who is the same person as the source selection authority?
  4. Can the source selection authority override the plain judgement of the evaluators? For oversimplified example, if offerors #1, 2, & 3 are all evaluated as "Good" and #4 is evaluated as "Acceptable" can the SSA override them and say he prefers #4 anyway?
  5. Thanks again, Don. When I think of an index, I normally think of the index at the back of a textbook. Key words and topics are typically indexed. When I think of all facts, I include this in my thinking. Offeror has an internal discussion about the price to offer and decides on how low it can go in negotiations. That the discussion took place is a fact. That a decision was made is a fact. The contents of that decision is a fact. All are relevant to the evaluation of the offer, and the KO would love to know those facts. I'm struggling with indexing those facts.
  6. Thanks Don. It is a reference table for cost buildups. Maybe that's a start, but it hardly seems to include "all facts."
  7. i ran across a cost or pricing requirement at FAR 15.408, Table 15-2, Section I Paragraph B and am having a hard time visualizing what that would look like, and what to include and what to exclude. Facts come from all over the place. Accounting reports. Old text books. Rules of thumb. Magazine articles. Yesterday's lunch. Databases. Conversations. Can anyone point me to an example and provide explanation? -------------------------------------------- I made a mess of this post when I was trying to get rid of all the different fonts used. Bob
  8. So, since the orders do not have wage determinations attached to them, there is no SCA worry? The wage determinations in the GSA schedule contract do not flow down to the orders?
  9. Yes, now that you've pointed them out, but both neither clearly answers the question.
  10. There exists a BPA under a GSA schedule contract. The BPA is task order driven, and there are several task orders, each with a base year and some option years. The BPA does not include any wage determinations, and the task orders do not, either. The GSA Schedule contract does. The GSA schedule is refreshed, going from Refresh #30 to Refresh #31. Refresh #31 incorporates new wage determinations. When and under what conditions do new wage rates affect the existing task orders?
  11. You can include the increases in costs of fringe benefits caused by the wage determination increase. For example, if the wage rate went from $19 to $20, that is a dollar per hour for each hour of vacation to be paid, including the hours already granted but not yet taken. It increases FICA by 7.65 cents times all of the hours to be paid, including vacation and sick time. Workers comp is usually a percentage of payroll, so that is cost increase to be included. FUTA and SUTA are stranger animals. Include them, but do not be surprised if the Govt takes them out, saying there is no cost increase because the employees exceed the $7000 FUTA base and similar SUTA base. If medical costs are formulaic tied to payroll (such as 10% of payroll), then yes, the increases can be added. If they do not increase because of the wage determination change, then sorry, you are out of luck. But, that may be coming from or limited to your H&W payments, not something in addition to them, so you may have no added medical costs. And, this is often overlooked, when you compute the amount to add to each hour, consider only the hours to be worked (billed), which won't include vacation and sick time which the employee will take (may take). If you spread it over 2080 hours, and only work (and bill) 1824, then you won't recover all of your extra costs.
  12. Assuming multiple proposals can be prepared (and it is reasonably likely given that only prices are changing), The proposal offering 3 CLIN's at $130 each runs the risk of losing on price. The proposal offering contingent discounts runs the risk of being tossed as non-responsive. Even if asked, the Govt is unlikely to say in advance what it will do. And if it did take a stance and publish it, it would expose a competitive idea that we'd prefer not be exposed. But, look at the Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990 language Joel Hoffman brought up. ... the Government will evaluate .... by adding to total price for all options. So if it is to evaluate the total price for all options, and there are conditional discounts as described, then it appears that Govt would evaluate the option prices using all of CLIN's as if they were exercised, (e.g. prices of $130 + $100 +$100). That is unless somebody cries "not in the Government's best interest." Is it likely somebody would do that? (It probably matters only if the discounts make the price lower than a competing price.) Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) Except when it is determined in accordance with FAR 17.206(b) not to be in the Government's best interests, the Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). (End of provision
  13. Do you think the CLIN's 8A and 9A, being not in the solicitation, would survive evaluation or be tossed as non-responsive (or non-compliant, or causing a material defect, pick your poison)?
  14. Sounds like if you were the Govt buyer, you'd toss the offer as non-compliant (non-responsive).
×