Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About formerfed

  • Rank
    Contributing Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Washington DC

Recent Profile Visitors

12,842 profile views
  1. Educating industry on how to improve responding is very important. That is one key purposes of debriefings. But often another reason keeps getting pushed back is avoiding protests because that’s not spelled out well in policies and guidance. Larger and more important acquisitions usually are prepared by proposal experts. Those experts are either employees of the companies responding or paid consultants. They are skilled in responding to precisely what the RFP calls for while emphasizing the established trade offs. More importantly business development people from companies have spent a long time well gathering information. When I first left the government, I was shocked at first attending a class where I learned that 60% of B&P costs of proposal winners on large acquisitions gets spent before the RFP is even released. So when these companies don’t win, they want to know why. The two things they seek answers on is were they evaluated properly and what did the winner provide they didn’t. If they get direct and responsive answers to those questions, protests usually don’t happen.
  2. A couple fantastic stories about this plane https://oppositelock.kinja.com/favorite-sr-71-story-1079127041 https://theaviationgeekclub.com/the-story-of-the-sr-71-blackbird-that-outran-gaddafis-sams-during-a-bda-flight-of-libya-in-support-of-operation-eldorado-canyon/
  3. MV2009, Your choices on labeling it are limited since an acquisition is key. If it were me, I would call it an assisted acquisition and clearly spell out the details in the document. Your file documentation is key including reasons why the Interagency agreement wasn’t done upfront. If it’s just a discovery or a late need realized that another agency could meet, I would spell that out. The best way to avoid after the fact criticism is make your case clear and convincing it was sound.
  4. Read FAR 17.502 procedures and the OMB OFPP memo link. Here’s what the OMB memo says So I don’t see your situation qualifying as an assisted acquisition. This, plus the FAR 17.502 language which says prior to issuance of a solicitation, the agreement must be signed seems to negate use of an assisted acquisition. That said, I think the language is sufficiently unclear to that contract administration services could be considered an assisted acquisition even though the award wasn’t part. Now that just leaves what to call the actual transfer of the equipment/ services.
  5. Sorry if I came across like that. In the absence of more information from the OP, Joel Hoffman’s response above seems correct to me. The obligation is valid and the only change is something in scope - using more ODCs than less travel. The overall contract amount remains unchanged and it’s just a switch of funds at the sub object class level.
  6. If you want to help, please cite the basis of that position. You may be giving bad information
  7. The problem is just FAR 15.506 items may not let unsuccessful offerors know why they lost. Joel’s approach is different - it’s showing unsuccessful sources why someone else won. If you’re confident in your decision, why not?
  8. Off topic, but written rather than oral debriefings is another example of how professionalism in our field is going away. It’s now like KOs are afraid and don’t know how to defend their decisions. They are scared of direct questions so they hide. That’s why so many protests happen. Rant over. OP, just in case they are serious about Procurement Integrity, you need immediate answers. I wouldn’t let them put you off until after award. If they tell you it’s not truly a violation, waiting is at your discretion.
  9. Procurement Integrity violations can be potentially very serious. I would immediately request a meeting with the KO and head of the office. Read the FAR details on how violations get treated. If the KO feels you violated the Act, you need to address it now. But based on the other things you said, it’s probably either a mistake or poor choices of wording. For example, the KO may have used integrity violations because they couldn’t verify your scoring in the technical evaluation. Regardless I would get answers on whether it’s really a Procurement Integrity issue as soon as possible.
  10. Thanks Bob. I heard a little about this but hadn’t seen the entire bills. 808 in the House version is a real challenge - streamline DoD 5000. Revising training of the acquisition workforce in Senate version, think it’s 841, has some both good and bad features in my opinion.
  11. I forgot all about Boyle. I did more looking on recent developments and there are definitely cases relevant to OPs example. Another related and parallel issue is agent relationships. So it seems the contractor could be immune from claims or liability using one or both of these arguments.
  12. Did you make a mistake asking under Contracting Workforce? The better spot is Schedules, GWACS, MACS and IDIQs. If that’s an error maybe Bob will move it.
  13. fizzy, Thats what I implied in my first post - talk with the supervisor and manager to get candid feedback. I went off with more general comments as other posts were made getting away from the OP. You’re exactly right in that nobody here knows about the OP and their situation. And we both agree that the supervisor and the employee need to have a discussion. You did bring up a point which I’m not sure if my interpretation is what you intended, but open and frank discussions is difficult. Difficult for the employee and supervisor. If one doesn’t want to be open and honest, not much comes out of it.
  14. Good question Don. It’s easy in a place where the applicant is in the same place as you. Otherwise references are invaluable. That’s why networking is important. It’s pretty easy to ask around and find out what others think. As far as the attributes, ask for examples during interviews and include lots of questions about details and specifics while the applicant is responding.
  • Create New...