Reluctance to use SF 1449 for small purchases

[bob7947]

Post #1 Started by jvanhorne, February 1, 2016, 02:08 PM:

So the client, a small business selling unique patented medical equipment, finds itself stuck with an expired BPA type contract and an agency that can't get around to renewing that contract. In my naivete, I suggest offering to sell using simplified procedures since the largest unit price for the items is under $20k by requesting an order on a SF 1449. Turns out government customers only want to buy on some sort of BPA/FSS type contract. I thought Part 13 procedures were supposed to simplify small purchases. Am I mistaken? What have I missed?

[bob7947]

Post #2, posted by ji20874 on February 1, 2016 at 08:41 PM:

The agency personnel might think they would have to justify a sole-source for every purchase order using a SF-1449, and think their life will be easier by setting up a BPA.

[bob7947]

Post #3, posted by Desparado on February 1, 2016 at 10:30 AM:

The agency personnel may only have authority to purchase off of already established vehicles. Such was the case when I worked for the Army a few years back. Certain purchase card holders had authority to purchase up to $25k using their card, but only against already established contracting vehicles. Are your government customers contracting officers or just cardholders?

[jvanhorne]

So an SF 1449 is pretty much a deal letter? That seem like a shame and a detriment to small businesses trying to get into government contracting. Basically that means get a BPA/FSS or sume such vehicle or don't bother.

[ji20874]

Jon,

No, I think you're looking at it the wrong way. There are many thousands, maybe even hundreds of thousands or more of SF-1449 purchase orders issued by Government agencies every year. The SF-1449 is not dead.

Government purchasing agents make business decisions every day. Given a choice between buying a widget on (1) an order under an already-existing federal supply schedule; or (2) a purchase order under an open market procurement, and assuming pricing and other terms are more-or-less equal between the two, it is honorable and good business sense for the purchasing agent to choose the former rather than the latter.