Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

lotus

Members
  • Content Count

    67
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by lotus

  1. Yes, now that you've pointed them out, but both neither clearly answers the question.
  2. 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?
  3. 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.
  4. 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
  5. 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)?
  6. Sounds like if you were the Govt buyer, you'd toss the offer as non-compliant (non-responsive).
  7. The Govt is asking for prices for 3 optional CLIN’s, 7, 8, & 9, each for the same thing. We figure the first of them can be provided for $130, and the other 2 for $100 each. But the Govt can exercise any of the CLIN’s them or none of them. If we were to offer a prices like this, would the Govt say it is non-compliant? Would they evaluate the price as $390 or $330? CLIN 7, $130 CLIN 8, $130, discounted to $100 if CLIN 7 is also exercised. CLIN 9, $130, discounted to $100 if CLIN 7 is also exercised.
  8. As you might have guessed, this is a current RFQ. And now a mod has been issued that addressed my questions. They were not answered earlier when the Q&A were published, but it is easy to see that the mod was put together at least in part because of my questions. (Maybe others asked the same questions, too.)
  9. Perhaps. But, that is part of the point of asking questions, to gain an understanding of what one does not now understand.
  10. Over the last year or so I've experienced several occasions when I submitted questions in response to an RFQ, only to have those questions not answered when the Q&A were published. I'm wondering why. Most recently my questions were part of package of questions consolidating the questions from people working on the response. Some of the questions were answered when the Q&A were published, but mine were not. Can anyone suggest reasons why this would be? To help, I'm putting edited versions of the two questions that I asked below. Is there something about these questions that would trigger a "no response" response? 1) The pricing spreadsheet asks for proposed hours. We do not see any basis for estimating any number of hours. What is the basis that we should use for estimating hours? 2) On page xx of the RFQ, it is stated “The quote shall include the proposed mix of labor (by category) including the proposed fully burdened rate for each labor category for each year of the 5-year period of performance.” What is the mix that you will evaluate against? What do you consider to be the ideal mix?
  11. For those of you with a history on the buyer side of the fence, ... 1. Is it common in practice for the procurement team, especially those who are professionals in fields other than procurement, to purposely evaluate proposals from their favorite vendors more leniently than they evaluate proposals from others? 2. If a prospective offeror asks many questions, or questions that are hard to answer or inconvenient to answer, do evaluators become biased against that prospective offeror as someone they don't want to work with?
  12. Looking at, §125.6 What are the prime contractor's limitations on subcontracting?, I surmise the travel costs would likely be counted as costs paid to large businesses. I'm wondering how reimbursements to employees would be counted. I'm also wondering why the FAR clause is not in sync with §125.6.
  13. I'm trying to find how to figure the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel mentioned in FAR 52.219-14. I've run across a few opinions with different methods, but none that seem to be defined in the regulation. Here is and example of how I see it. Can anyone point to a contrary authoritative definition of how to make the calculation? In this case the prime meets the 50% test.
  14. Seems outrageous, remarkably unconscionable, but perhaps true. The Govt is the big bully on the block. A fairer interpretation is that if the Govt made an award pursuant to the proposal, it accepted the mappings within the proposal. And the KO and the DoL are the same person, the United States of America.
  15. It is a definitized contract. It was competed procurement. The mapping was clearly shown in proposal.
  16. Thanks for the opinions, guys. Reading through this my reactions are 1. Who would ever bid on SCA work. since it appears the Govt can retroactively demand that higher wages be paid without a price adjustment. 2. I can see why some companies run, not walk, away from SCA work. 3. The contractor is in a no win situation.
  17. In these scenarios, is contractor hosed or can he get increased T&M rates? Scenario 1. Contract is awarded, with 200 SCA positions. In the proposal the then offeror, now contractor, clearly mapped all the SCA positions to General Clerk I in the applicable age determination, and built his rates on that rate as a base. Let's say that rate is $16.00 per hour. Contractor offers the General Clerk I job and pay to incumbent employees. Most take it, a few don't. No requests for SCA wage conformance are made. Questions about the proper wage arise. Eventually the decision is made by DoL and hence the contracting officer that $20.00 per hour is appropriate. Is the contractor hosed? Scenario 2. Essentially the same scenario, but the now contractor files 200 wage conformance requests, stating that $16.00 is appropriate. DoL does its thing and says $20 .00 is appropriate. Is the contractor hosed?
  18. What happens to the KO's career if puts his foot down, saying "you guys dawdled around too long, and I'm happy to watch you suffer the consequences"?
  19. Can an agency let a contract run to near its expiration, then use that it is near its expiration as justification of "unusual and compelling urgency" to award a bridge contract to the incumbent?
  20. Stop and consider, does it matter to you if a person does this? If somebody has 8 eyed 16 armed robot and can turn out the results, is that okay with you? Do you really need a QCP/Contract manager's resume/.../technical approach? Remember, Input -> Process -> Output. Specify the output that you want and the input that you will give to the contractor. He will figure out a process, and you pay him for the output.
  21. Because reasonableness depends on whether you are writing the check or receiving the check.
  22. What are the payment rules that apply to 52.237-3? (b) The Contractor shall, upon the Contracting Officer's written notice, (1) furnish phase-in, phase-out services for up to 90 days after this contract expires and ...
  23. How will you measure technical excellence. I believe you need a standard (between 12 and 14 inches) and a measure (inches), and a way to implement that measure (with a ruler). For courier services you might can create a standard (likely time based). Be careful that it is appropriate though, and think of how it can be gamed. And think of how you will measure results against the standard.
  24. While you are leading the LPTA conclusion, even LPTA criteria are typically subjective. A points scale would help, if the assignment of points were objective (for example, finish in 1 week, 5 points; finish in 4 days, 6 points.)
×
×
  • Create New...