OPT TO EXTEND 52.217-8

[general_correspondence]

Should contractors include a price/cost proposal for this portion of a government RFP with their initial proposal response?

[C Culham]

19 minutes ago, general_correspondence said:

Should contractors include a price/cost proposal for this portion of a government RFP with their initial proposal response?

Acknowledging that this OP question is in the subcontractor topic area let me see if I can hit the highlights.

If the clause is in the proposed solicitation for a prime contract typically the government does not provide the opportunity for an offeror to propose pricing for the clause.   Reason -  its inclusion is usually due to the anticipation found in FAR 37.111.   This does not mean an offeror could not attempt to negotiate something with regard to the clause, but I never saw it occur in my career.

If a prime flows the clause down to a sub any discussion about the clause is between the prime and sub.   Then, and if thought appropriate by the prime, the prime could attempt to negotiate with the government but as noted above not usual course however.    

[Neil Roberts]

 

6 hours ago, general_correspondence said:

Should contractors include a price/cost proposal for this portion of a government RFP with their initial proposal response?

   I do think it would be appropriate to submit a proposal especially if services are the primary but not sole task, there are significant subcontracts for services or the period of performance of the existing service contract exceeds one year. If you do that and have subcontracts, you should obtain appropriate proposals from them. Alternatively, in lieu of the proposal and clause, I would propose to include a provision that contractor agrees to accept a future Government contract modification to extend performance of services for a period that does not exceed 6 months, subject to an equitable adjustment under the changes clause procedure.