Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

contractor2589

Members
  • Posts

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

2,306 profile views
  1. Yes, that's an approach, but it would result in mass terminations and total destruction of a small business contractor. That's not an issue for this forum, but it's my reality.
  2. OP here. Let's use the example of a multiple-award BPA competitively awarded under a GSA MAS. Presumably, the number and mix of contractors was selected because it was int he best interest of the Government. One of the contractors' MAS is expiring a year into the BPA POP. It seems the options come down to: Just mod the BPA for the expiring contractor and connect it to the new GSA contract. Task orders can be modified for up to 60 months after GSA contract expiration, so...Award the expiring contractor a task/call order with a generalize scope that contains option period CLINs extending the POP to the end of the BPA POP and some kind of reserve/max funding. Compete tasks/calls across the BPA contractor holders (including the expiring contractor with a now invalid BPA but a viable task/call order). IF the expiring contractor is selected for task/call order award, modify the previously awarded task/call order to add scope items and funding as necessary. Sole source the expiring contractor to add them back to the BPA or to award an identical stand alone contract. Continue to compete tasks/calls across all BPA contract holders and the expiring contractor. Per 8.405-6(C), the sole source justification is the fact that maintaining the pool of BPA contractors that were selected through competitive award is a logical follow-on to an original Federal Supply Schedule order and in the interest of economy and efficiency.
  3. We are speaking to our GSA CO and the COs for each agency that has awarded a BPA, and we get answers ranging from "no problem, we will handle it administratively" (whatever that means) to "there is nothing we can do; when your previous GSA contract expires, so does the BPA." GSA is saying they expect a surge of contract terminations (and this related issue) from now until 2027 or so.
  4. OP here. In our case, we have never had an agency just order off our GSA MAS - always through either single- or multiple-award BPAs. For multiple award BPAs, we are trying to find a way to not be kicked out of the contractor pool.
  5. Vested interest here, but the BPA (and its scope) hasn't changed, and the BPA scope is well within both the original and new GSA MAS scope.
  6. Can a blanket purchase order (BPA) be modified to survive the termination of a GSA MAS contract upon which it was awarded? We have a 5-year BPA that extends beyond the expiration of our 20-year GSA MAS contract. I'm hoping to hear that there is a way to mod the BPA to the new GSA MAS contract, which has been awarded with the same rates and escalation. If that's possible, it would not affect labor rates on the BPA.
  7. Wow. Ok. Thanks. So technically a company could get awarded a GSA MAS contract, become a large business the next day, then 4.9 years later get awarded a 5-year SBSA BPA under that MAS contract.
  8. I have looked but could not find a discussion on this, so any info or redirect to a previous topic would be helpful. My question: If a contractor is awarded a GSA MAS contract (for example, something under FSS "OOCORP") when the contractor is a small business, but then grows to exceed the size standard for a particular NAICS, can the contractor continue to compete for small business set-aside work or BPAs issued under that FSS within that particular NAICS until its GSA contract expires? In other words, if a small business set-aside BPA is competed under GSA FSS 00CORP, can a firm that does not meet the size standard compete as prime contractor if the contractor's GSA contract was awarded when the contractor was still a small business for that NAICS? Thanks in advance.
  9. Thanks, all. FYI, the only mention of these add-on items was that one bulleted line in the evaluation criteria ""Special features, such as systems or software, for effective program performance." Anyway, they cancelled the procurement action so I'm moving on. Thanks again.
  10. The evaluation criteria is based on best value with one of the criteria being "Special features, such as systems or software, for effective program performance." The scope does not refer to any such features or systems or tools, and nothing like that is necessary for the work itself. I"m concerned that they already have someone in mind and already know they will provide some add-on feature that they like, and I'm wondering if its legit to say, effectively, that "if you have some other whiz bang thing you can throw in, that would be great too." We have offered such things in previous proposals and had COs tell us they can't evaluate based on items not required by the scope, but here they are alluding to something but being rather coy about it. Makes me feel like I need to dream up something extra to offer them.
  11. I realize that proposals for professional services generally include a technical approach, and innovative approaches are valued, but what if my innovative approach involves delivering, say, a custom software piece that is not required by the scope? Is this me being innovative, or are there prohibitions on evaluating proposals based on "value add" items like that? (I recall there is a restriction here, but my searching the web and this forum has not turned it up. Apologies if this is old turf.)
  12. So, perhaps I should ask in the transmittal letter of our proposal or somewhere that we be allowed to respond to any past performance information that is anything less than exceptional. To say, "please let us explain if you hear bad stuff" sounds terrible.
  13. Makes sense to me. If there were some sort of restriction, I just wanted to know about it. This solicitation is wired for a competitor, so I was just hoping to move the evaluation to something more quantitative. Thanks all.
  14. Are there any restrictions or requirements on how Past Performance is used as an evaluation criteria? We are faced with a solicitation that includes Past Performance as one of the two primary evaluation criteria. The agency states that this evaluation will not be based on the information/references we provide in our proposal, or any kind of quantitative analysis, but rather "subjective judgment" of all available and relevant information the agency can find. This seems like a huge variable that would allow the agency to validate nearly any best value judgment it makes. Frankly, I doubt there is any restriction on including an evaluation criteria like this, but if there are, I would really like to know about them as this solicitation is wired for a particular contractor and this variable is troubling.)
×
×
  • Create New...