woops85

KMY - On Millennia, it was enforced at time of each invoice. Was built into the invoicing requirements that for Cost Plus orders the vendors not only had to show the individual person's billed rate for the period in the back-up but also an average rate for each labor category. If the vendor did not provide, we could reject the invoice and make the resubmit with the info or do the calculation ourselves and short pay the invoice if it was over.

Does the VA's Acquisition Academy have one?

Some examples - not saying right or wrong just how it has been done in past -

On the old Millennia contract, there were loaded labor rates that served as ceiling rates for Cost Plus and T&M orders. On the Cost Plus orders, the average of the labor rates billed for a particular labor category could not exceed the ceiling rate (Joe's billing rate could be higher as long as the average of Joe and Jack's rate were below the labor cat ceiling rate) But that was written into the IDIQ solicitation from the start so vendors knew about it when they proposed. Task Order proposals still needed the full cost build up submitted.

ITES-2S had established rates that only applied to T&M orders and Cost Plus rates could be anything.

Alliant and Alliant SB - no ceiling rates were established.

But the rule doesn't necessarily make a lame duck out of a contract holder. Individual option periods are 5 years and generally the total possible period for a Schedule is 15 years. So only a lame duck if in the last available option period. Unfortunately you can find instances out there where the option was exercised even though the underlying contract had expired simply because no one checked.

In your case, when Acme Inc formed Acme LLC, did it transfer or assign any Acme Inc assets to Acme LLC? Could it do so with the contract? Would the PCO agree to it if legally possible based on the way Acme LLC was formed? Not a lawyer so no clue if it's possible but worth asking. Otherwise I guess you are stuck with using the Option to Extend Services clause (hope it's in the TO) to get yourself the time to recompete.

Talk to the GSA CO for XYZ's schedule. The answer is probably not since it's a wholly owned subsidiary but a lot depends on the was the acquisition of XYZ was done.

For Q3: If XYZ has a facility clearance from DSS and was acquired by a foreign company, the Facility Security Officer needs to be on the phone with DSS now. Chances are XYZ's facility clearance will be suspended pending a determination that adequate controls are in place to ensure that no classified information can pass to the parent company.

It happened under the old GSA Millennia contract - originally awarded to 12 vendors but mergers and acquisitions reduced that field to 8. Has probably also happened on Alliant since the award was made but am not sure. Try the GSA GWAC office or the GSA Schedules folks - you know that it has happened there

I will offer you this - posts like the above, with insufficient information to allow anyone to truly offer you a well thought out answer, will generally get you flamed faster than a hot dog at a weinie roast. Provide enough facts to allow someone to understand your situation while not revealing procurement details that have no business in a public forum. It's a delicate balance but learning to strike it will get you valuable insights and save you a ton of grief on WIFCON.

Try Textbooks.com or similar website that caters to colleges/universities.

How about (6) - we think you answered your own question and don't disagree with your thought in the original post

You have a FFP contract. You bid the contract based on pricing available to you at time of proposal. Did your proposal or the resulting contract say anything about economic price adjustments (up or down)? In your example above, you may wind up selling the other widgets to another customer for the price you negotiate with that customer or oyu may be stuck with 9 widgets for a long long time.

As a Govt employee (and former private sector person), I'd (1) expect you to find the best price available; (2) love to get the price break; and (3) recognize that I may not have a right to expect you to give it to me.

Don't believe the two are related in any way. Similar situation but was pre-award - We had a procurement released as 8(a) set-aside (no vehicle). Incumbent filed a NAICS code challenge with the SBA as soon as solicitation released (they had graduated 8(a)). Because SBA had not ruled, they files a pre-award protest at GAO on day proposals were due to maintain their rights.

My two cents. Get real familiar with what it takes to be CAS or modified CAS compliant. Small businesses are generally exempt from CAS but if you think (hope/want) to grow to become a business that will need to be modified CAS compliant, it's easier to get that structure in place early rather than late. The Govt has a long history of dealing with small businesses and knows that indirect rates can fluctate a lot as a business grows. The good part for the Government is that the rates usually drop as the company's direct labor base grows so when final audited rates come in, the Govt gets a credit.

You can't request a DCAA audit but you can establish a relationship with an independent auditing firm to complete an annual outside audit. When I was in private sector, the number of cost-plus contracts we had dropped to 2 at one point. Both were with parts of the same agency and that agency chose to accept our independently audited rates instead of having their own auditors perform the analysis. I know we sent them the complete audit report (which I assume they reviewed) and they would return a letter that generally accepted the rates as indicated by the outside audit.

But it's a goal. A goal should be something you strive to achieve, not something you can easily make. If you can easily make it every year, then it's a quota. I would hope that if/when the Fed Govt meets its small business goal (on average, not at each agency), the goal gets raised

What type of task orders are allowed under your IDIQ? Did you state what type of subcontracts you would award (T&M, FFP, Cost Plus) or will it vary based on the task order? The CO may be asking to approve new subs over $500K for cost reasonable purposes, not small business participation purposes.

Rios - Many of the GWACs use 60 months in 52.216-22(d). I know Alliant and AlliantSB do. I think CIO-SP3 does as well. CIO-SP2i originally had 12 months then saw new awards drop off in year 7 and 8 of the contract POP and changed it to 60 months. ITES-2S originally had 6 months but I haven't checked recently to see if they've changed that.

I can remember a few instances at my last organization where we had to jump through hoops because the underlying GSA Schedule had expired a few months before it was time to exercise an option and no one realized it..

Based on my past experience with DoD, if you do as DCarver suggests and tell the PEO that if they want you to seek a waiver they need to draft it, you'll get plenty of time for the required negotiations.

They may be viewing this as a checks and balances - like not having Purchasing and Receiving done by the same person.

Did the Termination Settlement proposal address the settlement of indirect rate adjustments for completed periods of performance? What does the Government CO say?

Verbatim -

I'm more curious about the time lag in these two statements:

(1) "The contract minimum guarantee is $2500 per contract and is applicable to the base year of performance only" and

(2) "If the contractor does not receive a Task Order prior to contract expiration, they may submit an invoice for the minimum guarantee amount immediately following the expiration of the contract."

Statement 1 indicates the minimum guarantee is only applicable to the base year of the contract and makes me assumes the IDIQ has a base plus options (not arguing here the pros and cons of that decision)

But Statement 2 says you cannot invoice for the $2500 until the end of the contract - which could be much longer than the base year if the option(s) are exercised. Unless there is language elsewhere stating that vendors must receive a task order award in the base period in order to have the option exercised, it would be possible for a vendor to be eligible for the minimum guarantee because they didn't get an award during the base period (only period where it's applicable) but not be able to invoice for it until several years later because they got IDIQ options exercised and their contract hasn't ended.

Might want to clean that up a little.

I know what NIH NITAAC did on CIOSP2 was to put in purchase requests in their finance systems with an issue date of the end of the FY (award made in Dec and said minimum guarantee payable at end of FY in which award was made). Then as awards were made, they cancelled the PRs for the vendors who got awards and any remaining PRs were issued around 11PM on 30 Sept to pay out the remaining minimum guarantees.

<p>Per Acquisition.gov HTML version of the FAR as of this morning

16.505(a)

(10)

(i ) No protest under Subpart 33.1 is authorized in connection with the issuance or proposed issuance of an order under a task-order contract or delivery-order contract, except for—

(A ) A protest on the grounds that the order increases the scope, period, or maximum value of the contract; or

33.104.

(B ) A protest of an order valued in excess of $10 million. Protests of orders in excess of $10 million may only be filed with the Government Accountability Office, in accordance with the procedures at 33.104.

(ii ) The authority to protest the placement of an order under this subpart expires on September 30, 2016, for DoD, NASA and the Coast Guard ((10 U.S.C. 2304a(d) and 2304c(e)), and on May 27, 2011, for other agencies (41 U.S.C. 4103(d) and 4106(f)).

Does your contract have a Logistics Annex specific to folks assigned overseas? You did not say whether the person was in Belgium TDY or on PCS basis. Some contracts with folks permanently assigned overseas have a logistics annex that already covers this type of situation,

I know my old office used to routinely write it into Section M that "A failure on any single Pass/Fail criteria will also make the proposal ineligible for award, with no further evaluation of the technical and pricing proposal accomplished by the Government."However the language for Not Acceptable was different, saying instead that getting a Not Acceptable "in any single Factor may result in the overall proposal being determined Not Acceptable and therefore ineligible for award." (emphasis added)

The question you face is what if the technically Acceptable proposals are then found Unacceptable on the cost side? What happens then?

Initial instinct is to agree with the program office but I'd probably do a quick cost analysis on what you've spent on the special unit as direct costs over the last few months versus what you spent on OH and G&A charges during the last few months of actual performance. And then factor in what measurable progress has been made on getting the various incurred but not billed costs reduced. The numbers may tell you it is worth the money to extend again.

Thanks. I asked because my old shop always wrote "transition out" planning into the contracts with the plan required 90 or 120 days before end of POP and the transition actually during the POP and used continuity of services clause for anything after the POP.

Govt2310 - is the transition period mentioned in Section C after the expiration of the contract?