Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

jpmackie

Members
  • Content Count

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About jpmackie

  • Rank
    New
  1. With a push to award more FFP contracts (versus T&M/LH/Cost types), what suggestions does anyone have to allocate the risks between the Gov. and the contractor? We all have situations where the contractor (heck, even the customer) scream for T&M and cite risk as their justification. For example, I currently administer an IDIQ (single award) for training services. It is 100% T&M/LH. To allocate risk to both parties, I could have done FFP on the training portion and T&M for the travel. A hybrid would work in this situation. Can we award a FFP and mitigate risk in areas other
  2. Vern - Thank you for your response and the references. I plan on reading some of it tonight. Joel - Thank you as well. As you surmised, there are other considerations that I intentionally did not bring up. Both of your responses are helpful. While I do not believe that firms who are not performing well deserve to have their option exercised, I wanted to make sure there was nothing in the regulatory MAC arena that would guide the decision. The costs aside, it is an administrative burden on my office as well as the customers to juggle more contracts than necessary. Those points I agree wi
  3. I have a quick question that I can't seem to find the answer to in my research. Here is the situation (changed slightly to make it generic enough). Supposed you have a multiple award IDIQ strategy with a base period plus one option to extend the ordering period. 8 proposals are received, 6 of those offerors receive awards. Among the 6 awards, delivery orders are competed throughout the base period. Some awardees are great suppliers, some only receive their guaranteed minimum (possibly due to price or other factors, not necessarily because they are problematic). How do you determine whi
×
×
  • Create New...