Fixed-Unit Price Contract

[Acq_4_life]

A solicitation (competitive) for a fixed unit price type contract was issued to acquire the services of a contractor to match sample addresses against the contractor?s database. As described in the Performance Work Statement, the end-user will furnish an automated list of approximately 220,000 to 380,000 sample addresses to obtain published home telephone numbers matched to the listed addresses from the contractor. The contractor is expected to match no less than 30 percent.

Section B of the solicitation required the offeror to propose approximately 70,000 ? 130,000 matches per month. The offeror selected for award proposed an average of 100,000 matches per month.

From March 2010 to February 1, 2011, the contractor has only matched 74,941 ? 78,381 records out of 232,469 ? 233,747 sample addresses provided. However, the highest number of records matched, in March 2011, was 115,865 out of 353,768 sample addresses provided.

The end-user requested a contract change to increase the number of sample addresses so that the contractor can produce a larger number of (170,000) matches; however, the additional sample addresses to be provided to the contractor monthly is within the range of 220,000 to 380,000.

My concerns are: 1) the contractor?s proposed average of 100,000 versus 70,000 ? 130,000; 2) the contractor has only matched 74,941 ? 78,381; 3) the end-user wants to add more funding for the increased matches.

Please advise.

[Guest Vern Edwards]

I see your concerns, but what is/are your question(s)?

[Acq_4_life]

I understand that this contract has already been awarded, but shouldn?t the contractor's proposal at time of award been deemed non-responsive, since the contractor's proposal only provided a unit price for 100,000 matches in lieu of the government's requirement? At this particular point in time, if the contractor?s original proposal was deemed non-responsive, should the government modify the contract to reflect 70,000-130,000 matches?

In addition, all the other offerors proposed a unit price for the range of 70,000-130,000 matches per month.

Sorry if I confused you.

[Guest Vern Edwards]

You wrote:

Section B of the solicitation required the offeror to propose approximately 70,000 ? 130,000 matches per month. The offeror selected for award proposed an average of 100,000 matches per month.

I read that as saying that the contractor could propose between 70,000 to 130,000 matches. It proposed 100,000. How would that be nonresponsive? Did I misunderstand what you meant by the dash between 70,000 and 130,000?

[Acq_4_life]

The solicitation required the offerors to propose a unit price for no less than 70,000 matches and no more than 130,000 matches. Based on the number of sample addresses provided to the contractor monthly, the contractor is required to match no less than 70,000 and no more than 130,000 matches.

The contractor's proposed unit price (0.0425) for 100,000 matches only requires the contractor to match no more than 100,000 matches. What happens if the contractor exceeds 100,000 matches?

[Guest Vern Edwards]

Acq_4_life:

The answers to such questions depend on what the contract says--its actual language. Since I don't have the contract before me, I cannot answer your question. I'm sorry.

[Acq_4_life]

That is okay. I appreciate your responses.