Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About jlbdca

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

4,401 profile views
  1. Multiple Award Schedule is a unique IDIQ that does not allow teaming to win the contract itself. Schedule holders necessarily have to add subs postaward, particularly those with subcontracting plans. GSA only cares about your supply when it's a product, where dealers and resellers need to evidence their relationships and sometimes must rely on pricing information from manufacturers in their own Schedule negotiations. To FormerFed's comment, a Schedule offeror need only disclose federal sales when there are no commercial sales. On a services offer, this goes labor category by la
  2. Also, being an SDVOSB is going to be a big help at the VA.
  3. You may map the sub's rates into your Schedule rates, establish a Schedule contractor teaming arrangement (CTA) whereby the other firm also has privity of contract with the government and uses its own Schedule rates (assuming they have a GSA Schedule), or add their labor as an ODC. On a FFP, I'm having a hard time seeing why sub lcats can't be mapped into the prime's.
  4. Contractors call a preaward agreement laying out how they intend to bid an opportunity a "teaming agreement." This agreement becomes input to a subcontract, usually at contract award. What a sub isn't going to see in FPDS is the prime's load on their portion of the deal. Every company I've worked for has attempted to hide markups from subs on FFP deals.
  5. Schedule orders of any size may be protested at GAO. Schedules 70, 84, others, allow for the purchase of solutions including both product and services; GWACs tend to be for one or the other. Schedule CTAs provide additional flexibility. The universe of MAS contract holders is much larger than any other contract.
  6. I have, on multiple occasions, negotiated GSA Schedule contracts using indirects and blended salary data, presenting a cost buildup to justify pricing. The company may have rung a bell now difficult to unring when it presented fully loaded most-favored-customer rates from a CPFF contract. Woulda, coulda, shoulda, but it would have been better to state on the CSP that there were no customers, including federal, from which fully loaded commercial rates could be devised, ie, T&M or FP-LOE. Instead, provide the cost buildup, and in the pricing narrative propose "all commercial customers"
  7. First, the Price Reduction Clause is a clause in your underlying schedule contract, not part of the False Claims Act. Two, it's not clear to me whether your question is around the disclosures on the CSP as part of a schedule proposal/modification or around compliance with an existing contract. The "similar situation" you describe deals with the former; I believe your question revolves around the latter. If the latter, you should receive your schedule contract, including FPR, to determine your basis of award (BOA customer). Sales to customers outside your basis of award will not trigg
  8. One of the customers listed on the CSP is your basis of award; this is the result of your negotiation. GSA tends to allow its contractor partners to believe they must offer GSA their "best price" (i.e., the most-favored customer and the basis of award customer must be the same), but this is not true. For example, why should GSA receive the same discount as a distributor who warehouses product and assists the offeror with marketing and sales?
  9. Sorry, regarding second question: You decide how to structure your disclosures to GSA on the CSP. Generally, you would strategize so your disclosures guide the negotiation. The basis of award is a customer or category of customers for purposes of the PRC. Ignore everything else you read about it. It may be your most-favored customer, or it may not.
  10. The PRC won't be generally be triggered by selling at a higher price than the Schedule price, although that depends on your discount relationship. Only sales within your basis of award can trigger the PRC, exclusive of any deviations.
  11. Presumably the OP meant basis of award, which is the customer or category of customers that triggers the price reductions clause.
  12. T&M requires a competent project manager on the client and contractor sides. Such contracts are routinely used successfully in the commercial sector. For the government, they reduce risk the contractor will understaff. There is different risk on both sides than FFP, which can be mitigated through skilled project management, and which I hope is a prereq on any engagement. That contractors need not receive acceptance for payment is a huge advantage to them.
  13. If you are asking specifically about Federal Supply Schedule CTAs, then yes, all members of the CTA must (1) hold an appropriate schedule contract and (2) be small on that contract. This has been true since set-asides were added to Part 8.4. You may be thinking of the backdoor set-asides contracting officers used to achieve by using size status as an eval factor, including the primary eval factor, in which case they could (and still can) specify all or only one member of the CTA be small.
  14. Agreed. My experience is GSA KOs will only allow a federal agency as BOA when the company has no commercial sales, and will typically stipulate that should the contractor gain a commercial client (including a federal prime), it must notify the KO and the BOA will change to commercial customers.
  15. A new CSP is generally not required if you can affirm the new product or service fits within the previous CSP, and the previous CSP is still valid. I'd explicitly state that in your mod. You do need to provide supporting material, such as invoices, etc., for the addition. Note also you're modding your contract; the price list is the catalog file that's uploaded to Advantage.
  • Create New...