Clauses whereby the subcontractors take over contract

[lacylu]

Has anyone heard of a clause or language that could assist me whereby the subcontractors as a team will be responsible for the work if the Prime does not manage the subs .I have created a "key subcontractor" clause similar to key personnel clause . It is really the solution of the subcontractors together as a team that is important.

[joel hoffman]

Nope and it looks fishy. Is this pre-award and is this a sole source, negotiated contract?

EDITED for posterity after five days of no response by the OP to at least three requests for clarification. Without further clarification, it looked suspiciously to me like somebody intends(ed) to hire a prime under some type of preference or sole source contracting program so that they can get certain subcontractors that they really want to perform the work or certain major aspects of the work and that they want to be assured of continued participation and coordination in the event that the prime doesnt fufill its "role". I hope that I am wrong. If I am right, "they" should reconsider what they really intend(ed) to do.

[Guest Vern Edwards]

... whereby the subcontractors as a team will be responsible for the work if the Prime does not manage the subs.

That is not at all clear. I do not know what you mean. Try again. "Responsible" in what way? Responsible to whom?

[Boof]

Don't see how you could have such a clause. We have T4D the prime and awarded several bridge contracts to all the subs via J&A but those a separate documented actions. .

Different situation but somewhat related......They are changing the FAR to state that if a contractor has too much pass through costs then you should consider award directly to their sub. Easy to say but not implement. This would require a new competition or a J&A if sole source could be justified..

[napolik]

I do not know how you can make the subcontractors responsible to the government for the work to be performed by the prime contractor. As a legal and practical matter, I do not know how the government can fail to hold the prime contractor fully responsible for performance under the prime contract.

FAR 9.6 addresses contractor team arrangements (CTA). Note that FAR 9.604(e) says that a CTA cannot fail to “ …Hold the prime contractor fully responsible for contract performance, regardless of any team arrangement between the prime contractor and its subcontractors.”

The GSA schedule program encourages use of CTAs that appear to create multiple prime contractors: “Each team member has privity of contract with the government and can interact directly with the government.”

http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/200553?utm_source=FAS&utm_medium=print-radio&utm_term=contractorteamarrangements&utm_campaign=shortcuts

Here is a more detailed discussion of GSA CTAs:

http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/202253

[bob7947]

lacylu:

You have received several responses and requests for information from users that would like to help you.

Please help yourself by responding to them.

[Guest Vern Edwards]

It's been five days since we've heard from the OP. Hopefully, she's okay.

We should have a 24 hour rule. If an OP does not respond to a request for info or clarification within 24 hours from the date of the first request, we drop the thread. After 48 hours, Bob should delete the thread, but that would be work for him.

[Guest jrt132]

I don't think a thread should be deleted. The speculative discussion between group members provides great insight and typically references to conduct individual research on a topic, if one desires.

[Guest Vern Edwards]

According to my dictionary, "insight" means "an accurate and deep understanding of someone or something." I don't know how you can get an accurate and deep understanding of anything from the kind of speculation we see at Wifcon when someone asks a question and the Wifcon denizens frantically seek clarification, which seeking deteriorates into groundless and pointless speculation when the OP disappears.

I want to understand a question before I try to answer it. But if you want to spend time reading that speculative stuff, thinking that you're learning something, be my guest. I withdraw my recommendation.

[Guest jrt132]

Hi, Vern.

I appreciate your comment. Insight is a poor word choice. I have often searched Wifcon to seek clarify for a particular topic as it relates to a specific contractual event, action, issue, etc. I may not find my exact contractual issue, but I do typically find the general topic. I then review the discussion for references, how it applies to me, and try to identify the information I need. I then conduct my own research and discuss with peers to come to my own conclusion regarding my specific contractual issue.

I do agree that it is very frustrating when a OP goes missing. The individuals posting responses often, like yourself, share their valuable time to help the community. I truly appreciate time time provided by posters. The least an OP can do is stay involved or explicitly withdraw from the conversation. Then a poster can decide to continue the speculative discussion or not. I think something should be done to ensure folks are not wasting time answering an un-involved OP, but I still think there is value in leaving the speculative discussions on the board.

JRT