increasing goals

[Fara Fasat]

Having a frustrating time getting 2010 subcontracting plan approved. Situation is this:

2009 plan had goal of x%. Actual result at end of year was x+2% -- let's call it y. We kept goal for 2010 at x% because of the uncertainty in the economy and the market, and because we considered ourselves fortunate to meet the goal in the first place.

CO has rejected the plan, because we "decreased" our goal from y% to x%, and we cannot do that without a compelling reason. We explained that our goal remained the same -- x%, and that it was our 2009 result that was y%. Using somewhat convoluted logic, she maintains that y% is our "actual percentage goal" from 2009 and that we cannot decrease it. She apparently sees no problem with using "actual" and "goal" together.

Is there any basis for this position? Can we be required to increase our goal to the level of our prior year's result? That would seem to require an ever-increasing goal, and it also provides a disincentive to do more than your goal, if the reward is to push your goals higher.

[formerfed]

Plans are negotiated before accepted. Explain your position further. If the CO seems unreasonable, talk with the CO's management. At some point if the agency doesn't budge, you need to decide how badly you want the contract. Agencies often are ambitious negotiating plans. If you exceeded your goal one year, they want to raise the bar for the next.

[Don Mansfield]

The CO is negotiating with you. There's no rule in the regulations that backs her position, but so what? She wants y% and is negotiating for y%.

[Fara Fasat]

OK, thanks. We'll see how it goes.