Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

Don Mansfield

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Don Mansfield

  1. Kickstarter and the GCPC

    I'm not advocating for it. I just don't see what prohibits it. The reason I posted this in the Section 809 forum is because I was a fly on the wall at the Panel's meeting on Tuesday and this issue was discussed. The speaker, a CCO from a Federal research lab, related a story about how one of the scientists at the lab had asked if they could use the GCPC to purchase items (i.e., the creator's rewards) on Kickstarter. She assumed that this was improper use of the GCPC. When one of the panelists asked why she thought it was improper, she deferred to another panelist (who happened to be the senior procurement executive of the speaker's agency). That panelist explained that it would violate the Anti-Deficiency Act, because the Government would not be guaranteed a deliverable. Everyone else on the panel seemed to buy that explanation and the discussion that followed was how appropriation laws would need to be changed to accommodate that particular use of the GCPC. I don't see how not being guaranteed a deliverable would violate the ADA. The government awards a lot of contracts for R&D where there is no guarantee of a deliverable. The SPE believed that because R&D contracts require a final report, they meet the requirement for having a "deliverable" and thus, there would be no ADA violation. The SPE also thought that the Government could fund a Kickstarter project under grant authority. The argument seemed half-baked. I was disappointed how the rest of the panelists accepted it with little debate. It may be prohibited to use the GCPC on Kickstarter, but it should take more convincing than it did.
  2. LPTA Question

    But then he won't get to code the action as PBA.
  3. Kickstarter and the GCPC

    From the Web site:
  4. Kickstarter and the GCPC

    Todd, According to the terms and conditions (see my post above), the creator must complete the project and fulfill each reward. Assume that the Government would fund a project where the reward was the item being developed. The item would be for the direct benefit of the Government. Wouldn't this be a procurement contract? Note that at the time of the "pledge", there's no obligation by either party. The obligation is contingent on a future event (i.e., the creator receiving sufficient pledged funding). If this event occurs, the creator is required to perform in accordance with the terms and conditions and the GCPC is charged for the amount of the pledge.
  5. Small Business Set Aside Under $150k Subcontracting with Large Business

    No. There's no limitation on subcontracting under $150K.
  6. CPIF- Fee Payment

    Did you read FAR 52.216-10( c )?
  7. Kickstarter and the GCPC

    joel, Regarding the existence of a contract, here's what the site says:
  8. Kickstarter and the GCPC

    No. Someone is using Kickstarter to obtain funding for the development of a widget. The Government sees the project on Kickstarter and wants to acquire the widget, so it provides funds. If development is successful, the Government gets the widget. If it's not, they don't. Everything is below the micro-purchase threshold. Now I have. See joel's post. Why assume that there's no contract? The Government gets the product if development is successful, doesn't get it if it's not.
  9. Kickstarter and the GCPC

    Assume that the Government is funding the development of a widget. However, there's a possibility that development will fail and the Government won't receive anything.
  10. FAR 52.237-3, Continuity of Services clause

    No, I don't think the clause permits the Government to extend the contract indefinitely.
  11. FAR 52.237-3, Continuity of Services clause

    Batman, Since you referred to a task order, I'm going to assume that the basic contract contains FAR 52.216-18. If so, paragraph (b) states: I would argue that FAR 52.237-3 applies to your task order by operation of FAR 52.216-18.
  12. LPTA Question

    Desparado, Vern took you where I was trying to lead you. While you're doing your thinking, I suggest you read "PERFORMANCE-BASED CONTRACTING: INCORPORATING THE PROPOSAL IN THE CONTRACT" in the September 2000 edition of the Nash & Cibinic Report (14 No. 9 Nash & Cibinic Rep. ¶ 47). Here's an excerpt:
  13. LPTA Question

    Yes, but you said that their approach would be binding. Performance-based acquisition means an acquisition structured around the results to be achieved as opposed to the manner by which the work is to be performed. If the offeror's approach is binding, wouldn't the contract require that the work be performed in a specific manner (i.e., using their proposed "approach")?
  14. Yes. The sentence could have been written like this:
  15. LPTA Question

    How is that performance-based? (I'm assuming that your reference to a performance work statement means that you intend to use performance-based acquisition).
  16. LPTA Question

    Desparado, Is the offeror going to be bound to the "approach" that they propose?
  17. Follow the Rules Act

    It is codified at 5 U.S.C. 2302( b )(9). The words "rule" and "regulation" are not defined.
  18. Follow the Rules Act

    This is interesting. The law didn't define "rule" or "regulation". Does "rule, or regulation" only include what is contained in the Code of Federal Regulations? Or does it extend to the DFARS PGI, the AFFARS, the nonregulatory parts of the GSAM, etc.? What about policies issued by the HCA?
  19. www.farsite.hill.af.mil

    They redesigned it. Here's a link to the old site: http://farsite.hill.af.mil/farsite.html
  20. Voting member of a source selection board?

    Seeker, Reading between the lines, FAR 7.503(c)(12)(ii) assumes the fiction that a source selection board uses voting to make decisions. However, there's no requirement to use voting to make decisions and some source selection boards use other methods to make decisions or recommendations. The DoD guide is just thoughtlessly repeating what's in the FAR. You may want to check The Source Selection Answer Book by Vern Edwards (if you can find a copy). My copy is on loan.
  21. I don't see how you would be a subcontractor under the prime contract. Once a contract is awarded to the prime, what part of the contract work do you perform?
  22. A little guidance/advice please

    AZBuman, Only you can answer your question. However, I think you may be undervaluing your experience as a QA specialist. I see that as setting you apart from other 1102s (in a good way).
  23. Price Analysis - Modifications

    The FAR doesn't require a price analysis of the cumulative value of the contract as a result of a proposed modification.
  24. business development and contingent fees

    Pepe, Contingent fee arrangements are ok if they are with "bona fide employees" or "bona fide agencies". By definition, these classes do not exert "improper influence". It doesn't matter if a "business development person" is an employee or an independent contractor, what matters is whether or not they exert improper influence. I think this answers your questions.
  25. Read this. Read it NOW!

    For the real reason why we have sticklers for blue rules see