Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'option periods'.
I have researched to better understand the Government and allowing overlapping Period of Performances. I am working on a subcontract for DoD services where, per direction of Govt to Prime, one option year starts before the other ends. I was under the impression that this was not allowable because essential the Govt would be paying for the same service. I search FAR part 17 and 42 hoping to find language that does not permit this, let alone speak to it, and came up empty. Can someone point me in the right direction in FAR or to a GAO case for overlapping PoP references? Thanks for any insight provided.
When an agency intends to exercise an option (usual authority 52.217-9; 30 days) and for various financial, operational, etc. concerns the incumbent contractor informs the agency that the incumbent contractor does not desire to continue performance during the upcoming option period; is that a termination for convenience, termination for default or does the agency just simply not exercise the option and begin the acquisition cycle for a new solicitation? Has anyone experienced this scenario and what are some of the applicable notification requirements/regulations/parameters for an incumbent contractor electing to decline/not accept/reject/not perform (not sure the correct verb to use there) a pre-priced option period? Thanks in advance, Additional Context: DOD, Service Contract
Apologies in advance if this has already been answered, but what is the appropriate method for stating a contract's ceiling price on a contract with multiple optional periods of performance? Should one state the ceiling price for the entire contract, inclusive of options, or state the ceiling price for the current period of performance? I've done it different ways, but I'd like to know if there is a correct way. I usually state a ceiling price and a "total funded amount" when I fund the contract incrementally. When I do this, I include language similar to: "Notwithstanding the contract's stated ceiling price, the Government's liability to the contractor is limited to $XXX,XXXX.XX, the total amount funded on the contract. The contractor shall not perform work under this contract that will cause it to exceed this amount, except at its own risk." When I have options I state the ceiling price as: "The Ceiling Price for this period of performance is $XXX,XXX.XX." If the contract is incrementally funded, I'll add "Total Funded Amount" language similar to the one above. But I always wonder if I should be stating the Ceiling Price based on the estimated value of the entire contract, inclusive of options.