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

13,521 profile views
  1. Not disagreeing with anything posted but I’m not sure if any of Carl’s research applies. Money from foreign governments goes into a special US Trust Fund. It has no fiscal year identity like appropriated funds. So I don’t see the Bona Fide Need rule applying. In other words, needs are those of a foreign government who’s furnishing money and there are no appropriation actions by the US.
  2. After reading Joel’s post, I looked further into this. I’m always skeptical of anything DOL is responsible for (FAR 22) because it’s so biased in DOLs positions. Anyway the GAO decision ji20874 cited has this information from Cibiinic and Nash In this instance it’s a fully funded contract extending over a period that doesn’t include options. It’s not a multi-year contract. Why even go further? The multiple year term isn’t mentioned anywhere in the FAR except for part 22 which DoL uses to administer compensation laws.
  3. To me, it’s neither. Unless I’m missing something it seems like a contract for some defined quantity over a 6.5 year period. There aren’t options and full funding is provided upfront.
  4. Excellent post Carl. Adding more for OPs info plus for anyone else. Schedule contracts awarded by GSA based on the principle of commerciality - items are commercial in nature and pricing supported by data as proof. This includes published commercial price lists, proof of sales including paid invoices, and marketplace sales data. For most items, the offeror submits their commercial price list. They also show relative discounts from that price list to various classes of customers along with pertinent information on the specific sales. For example, Walmart gets a 30% discount becaus
  5. That’s a different subject than the post your responded to. What Tzarina sought clarification on is whether unused or unexpired funds in the base year could be carried forward. I know of no agency using multi year or no year money prohibiting that (exception is use of second year of two year funds for a third year as an example).
  6. As far as I know, this is just internal policies of the financial people to better manage funds. When you get down to it, the funds have all the normal multi-year and no year flexibility.
  7. Actually it happens frequently across the board with lots of supplies and services - production of supplies, commercial items, IT hardware and software, development, professional services, training, etc. Generally the scenario is the government awards based upon conservative estimates of work. The contractor does well and the products and services are well received. Then the government wants more. I’m sure in most cases, business size and much less CAS coverage is overlooked.
  8. FrankJon, looking back through the replies, your initial thoughts may work. You haven’t mentioned what are the differentiators among offerors doing this work bu I assume price is important. You might be concerned about criticism giving a big share of the work to a higher priced offeror. That’s assuming the other factors aren’t a big consideration. If it were me, I might structure an award process where a lower priced offeror might get a larger share. For example, one company gets 60% or 70% of the work. Just something more to think about.
  9. FrankJon, I apologize for the way I came across. Wifcon is a place to learn and share ideas and I posted against that concept. But some of your thoughts reflect inexperience and a lack of understanding. You need to digest and analyze the suggestions of experts like Don and ji20874 rather than just doubting what they say. They are coming from positions of successful experience.
  10. FrankJon, You are wearing everyone’s patience thin here. Apparently you are more interested in finding reasons why you can’t do something than how you can. Ji20874 offered you a very feasible approach citing the FAR authority concerning BPAs and a sufficiently high call limit. You countered that the DFARS doesn’t provide that higher threshold. In case you didn’t know, FAR rules. DFARS supplements the FAR. If the FAR says it’s okay, do it.
  11. Ok, based on the information so far I would go GSA if market research showed a good pool of vendors on Schedule. Pick some vendors, prepare an RFQ describing your approach, and use a simple selection process. Describe your goals in the RFQ and let offerors propose the need pricing. The Schedule contracts allow for EPA as do orders. https://interact.gsa.gov/wiki/can-order-prices-be-escalated-task-order Develop an easy method of ordering. You can ask vendors as part of market research for their ideas as well. Or you can say about half of the work goes to each company. GSA is
  12. Some more basic questions. Why did you start out with requirements contracts? What’s the rational over just IDIQ? How difficult is it to put a simple order selection process in place? What criteria differentiates companies if you did multiple awards? Certainly with $1 Billion annually and the stated need for redundancy, some consideration should be given to this. Back to the original plan of two companies, what would be the reasoning to give 50% of the work to a higher price company? Are the services available from any existing contract vehicles like GSA?
  13. This has gotten very complicated. You are just awarding two or more contracts for a proportional and approximately equal amount of work. You place orders to ensure that equal distribution. Just write that simple ordering procedure as others had said in the solicitation/contract. My advice is just go ahead and do it. It’s becoming unnecessarily confusing and complex.
  14. Funny you mentioned this. A long time ago, GSA Schedules were requirements contracts and all mandatory for GSA use. Many were also mandatory on some other agencies (varied depending upon the commodity). When not mandatory on specific agencies, use was optional and the scope contained similar language. A GSA lawyer described them as a hybrid requirements/indefinite quantity contract.
  • Create New...