Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

Recommended Posts

What if the contractor is having consistent problems on contracts with your agency but is performing well with other agencies? I think since they are doing well overall, they will be found responsible in terms of FAR 9, because FAR 9 looks at responsibility overall with no regard to a specific agency, i.e., if their CPARS has more good ratings than bad, especially for those contracts which seem to be similar to the one you are about to award, wouldn't a CO have a hard time finding them not responsible?

Edited by Sam101
Grammer
Link to post
Share on other sites

CPARS is only as good as the data in it.  I hope the original poster will record the facts of this contractor’s failure in CPARS. Then, any future contracting officer can make his or her own decision for that future procurement.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sam101 said:

if their CPARS has more good ratings than bad, especially for those contracts which seem to be similar to the one you are about to award, wouldn't a CO have a hard time finding them not responsible?

I don't think so.  Responsibility determinations are made on a contract by contract basis.  You have repeated instances of performance deficiencies in regard to specific contracts issued by an agency.  While the contractor may have been able to perform similar contracts for other components, that does not mean that they can pass muster in regard to FAR 9.104-1 (b) - (e) in regard to the instant contract.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Document the poor performance in the contract file - on every contract wth any contractor, including this one. Document the level of performance  in CPARS

Use negotiated acquisition methods to select a contractor. Include recent, relevant experience  and past performance as relatively important factors.

Use comparative levels of  evaluation criteria for PP - not go/no-go.

Be sure to provide for the government to be able to evaluate broad sources of info for PP - not limited to just CPARS or the projects that the proposer will identify.  Be sure to include any known recently completed  or ongoing projects that would be relevant. 

Require submission of pp information if the offeror knows it and have them provide Owner references for past performance on those projects submitted for recent, relevant experience. State that you reserve the right to contact any or all references to verify or discuss the PP on those or any other projects. State that you reserve the right to contact an owner reference for any known on-going projects.

Make sure that you have documentable information on on-going performance,.

This will allow you to use comparative rating levels to rate the experience and past performance factors, separately.

You don’t have to find the proposer “non-responsible” to be able to select another firm, if you use some type of best-value (vs. lowest price, low bid or lowest-priced, technically acceptable) Acquisition method.

However, for anything other than Low Bid or LPTA, etc. the government must be willing to pay more than the lowest possible price, if the added value would justify paying more - and state that in the solicitation.

This is but an outline. There are numerous sources of info on how to use other than low bid to select a firm that you can have some confidence in that they are likely to succeed and or excel. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...