Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

Don Mansfield

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Don Mansfield

  1. No. Whether or not certified cost or pricing data are required doesn't depend on what you have or what the offeror/contractor submitted. When certified cost or pricing data are required by FAR 15.403-4(a)(1) or (2), then cost analysis is required.
  2. I don't agree with that. By definition, "cost or pricing data" are: I don't agree with that, either. I think it means when certified cost or pricing data are required over or under the $2M threshold.
  3. I don't think that's what @ji20874 was saying. I think you are getting confused by factoring in "what the offeror/contractor submitted" in determining what type of analysis is required. That's irrelevant. Regardless of what the offeror/contractor submitted-- 1. When certified cost or pricing data are required, cost analysis is required and price analysis should also be conducted. 2. When certified cost or pricing data are not required, price analysis is required and cost analysis may be used when a fair and reasonable price cannot be determined through price analysis alone.
  4. @GovtAcctGeek, You do realize that the MPT is now $10k, correct? The FAR hasn't been updated yet, but 30+ agencies have issued class deviations to implement the new threshold. In any case, assuming you don't have the authority to raise Government purchase card limits, you could also consider a BPA as described at FAR 13.303.
  5. That's referring to the prime contract negotiated between the Government and the contractor. The FAR doesn't apply to contractors. It applies to acquisitions (see FAR 1.104). By definition, acquisitions are made by the Government. Not all auditors understand that.
  6. That's why there's a provision for a waiver--if obtaining certified cost or pricing data and doing a cost analysis would be a waste of time.
  7. I think it would be clearer if it said "solely on the basis of the contractor's cost experience." That sentence has confused many students. Joel has it right. There is no right to a change in price due to a differing site condition unless it affects the contractor's cost experience.
  8. I bolded the answer to your question. In this situation, you could potentially make the argument that there was adequate price competition based on FAR 15.403-1(c)(1)(ii)(B) (provided the acquisition is not for DoD, NASA, or the Coast Guard). If you can't do that, you can request a waiver for the submission of certified cost or pricing data from the HCA. However, If no exceptions apply, you must obtain certified cost or pricing data and perform a cost analysis.
  9. No, you're not off base. Generally, a contracting officer doesn't have the authority to award a contract without first determining the prospective contractor responsible. I get what your leadership is trying to avoid, but they shouldn't be asking COs to skip (or rubber stamp) the responsibility determination.
  10. I wouldn't refer to such a contract as a firm-fixed-price contract. I would refer to it as a combination of FFP and cost.
  11. “How do you do simplified acquisition?” is a common question I hear from acquisition personnel that are more familiar with using FAR part 15 procedures to solicit offers and award contracts. The question presupposes that there is a regulated set of procedures that one must follow—similar to what is prescribed in FAR part 15, agency FAR supplements to FAR part 15, agency guidebooks on source selection, and the decisions of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and Court of Federal Claims (COFC). Fortunately, that is not the case. Rather, FAR part 13 (Simplified Acquisition Procedures (SAP)
  12. You need to 1) Modify the contract IAW FAR 1.108(d) to include the new clause before issuing any new orders or exercising an option and 2) include the provision in all solicitations for an order, or notices of intent to place an order, including those issued before the effective date of the rule. FAR 1.108(d)(3) permits the contracting officer to incorporate FAR changes in existing contracts "with appropriate consideration." In this case, the FAC requires it (note the "Unless otherwise specified--" at the beginning of FAR 1.108). The law applies to executive agencies and does not give the
  13. Yes, you can use SAP in this circumstance.
  14. Joel, the question has to do with a contractor making a purchase under a contract--not the Government making the purchase. Funds were obligated when the original contract was awarded. Thanks.
  15. Yes, paid as usual. The catch was that the conference was going to take place outside the PoP. I don't think that's relevant if the cost is incurred during the PoP, but wasn't sure. You're not being dense. You're being helpful (true to your handle). Thanks.
  16. The contractor will seek reimbursement from the Govt. after making payment to the venue. If by "customer" you mean the Government, they will pay after receiving the contractor's invoice.
  17. Allow me to change an assumption. The contractor will make full payment for the venue prior to 30 Sep. The venue requires advance payment in full.
  18. Maybe, but I'm only asking about the cost of the venue. I'm not asking about costs incurred after the PoP end date. Assume yes. A contractor will be required to manage the conference. However, the incumbent may not win the follow-on.
  19. Assume a contractor is performing a cost-reimbursement contract that has a period of performance that ends on Sep. 30. The contractor is required to secure a venue for a conference that will take place in November. To secure the venue, the contractor must enter into a subcontract with the venue prior to Sep. 30. Assuming the cost of the venue is otherwise allowable, would the fact that the conference took place after the period of performance ended affect the allowability of the cost? Assume the contractor uses the accrual accounting method.
  20. @Philistines, I think that you're under the impression that you need a contract clause to support an extension of the ordering period due to the pandemic. If that's what you think, then I disagree. Contract clauses like Excusable Delays and Changes deal with a party's right to an adjustment under prescribed conditions. The presence or absence of such clauses in a contract does not limit the parties' rights to negotiate adjustments to contract terms to adapt to conditions that they did not contemplate during contract formation. Further, such adjustments are not necessarily outside the scop
  21. Yes. The way I see it, you can measure a period of time with a calendar or a stop watch. If you measure the period with a stop watch, it could read less than 12 months even though 12 months have passed on the calendar. Perhaps you had to stop the watch during the pandemic?
  • Create New...