Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

Recommended Posts

From an established MATOC?

Situation:

Awarded a MATOC with 5 IDIQs for A/E services. The scope of the MATOC is for design services associated with construction and most of the services would be subject to the brooks act. During the solicitation phase we received 10 qualifications from A/E firms. The firms were ranked most qualified to least qualified and a price proposal was sent to the five most highly qualified firms. All prices were eventually mutually agreed on and thus how we got the 5 IDIQ contracts.

Now, it’s Task Order time to buy some work, what do you do? 

1. Go directly to the highest qualified firm since we already evaluated qualifications and should know who the most qualified firm would be already?

2. Still follow the selection of firms @ FAR 36.6 since 16.500(d) suggests we should?

3. Follow the ordering procedures @ FAR 16.505 for ordering while providing fair opportunity unless otherwise justified? 

4. Some hybrid model or something else completely?

 

My ordering procedures could say whatever you want them to say. (yes this is not something being actively worked on yet)

I have my own opinion and from what i've seen other people apparently also have their own opinions. What are Wifcon participants opinion or what questions do you have? 

Thanks 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, dsmith101abn said:

I have my own opinion and from what i've seen other people apparently also have their own opinions. What are Wifcon participants opinion or what questions do you have?

This plus a further search of WIFCON Forum should give you what WIFCON participants thing.....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you want a task order for (choose one)--

  • billable hours?  or
  • a real A-E deliverable?

You say you already have prices at the parent IDIQ level -- are those (choose one)--

  • real prices that you can actually use for a task order?  or
  • hourly rates?

Really?  So, the IDIQ contract holders have already been ranked...  Does that ranking apply to your new task order opportunity? (choose one)

  • YES
  • NO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you want a task order for (choose one)--

  • billable hours?  or - Sometimes - I assume you mean a labor hour type task order.  
  • a real A-E deliverable? - Most of the time - I assume you mean a fixed price task order with a final deliverable (100% design).

You say you already have prices at the parent IDIQ level -- are those (choose one)--

  • real prices that you can actually use for a task order?  or
  • hourly rates? - This. Hourly rates that can actually be used for a task order, whether a labor hour type task order or a FFP task order with a deliverable being 100% design. Forgive me I'm not entirely sure how to interpret the first bullet point and differentiate it from the second bullet point the way it is written. 

Really?  So, the IDIQ contract holders have already been ranked...  Does that ranking apply to your new task order opportunity? (choose one)

  • YES
  • NO

Why not both? I have firm A highly qualified at vertical construction and less qualified at horizontal construction. i have firm B highly qualified at horizontal construction and less qualified at vertical construction. I have a requirement for vertical construction, without going thru a qualifications based selection i already know firm A is the most qualified. 

 

Maybe i have a requirement for a  study or technical writing i need done and i don't know who the most qualified would be without going through a qualifications based selection. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@dsmith101abn

1 hour ago, dsmith101abn said:

Now, it’s Task Order time to buy some work, what do you do? 

1. Go directly to the highest qualified firm since we already evaluated qualifications and should know who the most qualified firm would be already?

2. Still follow the selection of firms @ FAR 36.6 since 16.500(d) suggests we should?

3. Follow the ordering procedures @ FAR 16.505 for ordering while providing fair opportunity unless otherwise justified? 

4. Some hybrid model or something else completely?

FAR 16.505(a)(9) says:

Quote

(9) In accordance with section 1427(b) of Public Law 108-136 (40 U.S.C. 1103 note), orders placed under multi-agency contracts for services that substantially or to a dominant extent specify performance of architect-engineer services, as defined in 2.101, shall—

                (i) Be awarded using the procedures at subpart 36.6; and

                (ii) Require the direct supervision of a professional architect or engineer licensed, registered or certified in the State, Federal District, or outlying area, in which the services are to be performed.

 

FAR 16.505(b) does not say that.

Does that suggest anything to you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Vern Edwards said:

Does that suggest anything to you?

It would suggest if one was issuing a task order for A/E services against a multi-agency contract you would have to follow the procedures @ 36.6. If one was to place an order against a MATOC that was not a multi-agency contract, you would have to provide for fair opportunity unless an exception applies, which there is not one for A/E services. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Vern Edwards said:

Yes, but FAR 16.500(d) appears to indicate that you must follow 36.6 even under single-agency contracts. I misled you by my first post. I forgot about FAR 16.500(d).

This is what I had concluded before my post, that you must still use a qualifications based selection when placing orders for A/E services against MATOCs. 

Here's what prompted my question - I've been a CO for about 10 years and have worked in three different civilian agencies. From what i've seen all three of those offices had established MATOCs for construction Design services and selecting firms at the task order level is not done as a qualifications based selection IAW the framework of 36.6. What i've actually been seeing is the CO, with the assistance of an engineer on the Governments side, would determine who would be the most qualified for a specific project based on what they personally knew or what was submitted with the request for qualifications before the award of the IDIQs, and then go directly to a single A/E firm for a price proposal. 

So if you can't use initial SF330s at the time of IDIQ award at the task order level to determine who is the most qualified, and write ordering procedures to state that's how fair opportunity will be provided then I can't figure out how the practice is allowable as the idea of getting 3 firms, holding interviews, etc. isn't happening from what i've seen.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, ji20874 said:

dsmith101abn,

I'll try again.  

Is your task order for a fixed-price final deliverable (100% design)?     YES     NO

the IDIQ would allow for labor hour and fixed-price task orders. for discussion assume task orders would be for a fixed-price final deliverable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, dsmith101abn said:

So if you can't use initial SF330s at the time of IDIQ award at the task order level to determine who is the most qualified, and write ordering procedures to state that's how fair opportunity will be provided then I can't figure out how the practice is allowable as the idea of getting 3 firms, holding interviews, etc. isn't happening from what i've seen.  

FAR 16.505(d) says "consistent with," not in strict accord with. If I were awarding a single-agency multiple award IDIQ contract I would write the contract to say that when providing a fair opportunity for an order I would follow FAR 36.6 procedures, but would rely on the original SF 330s, but would tailor the 36.6 procedure to reduce the time and cost of competition. 

Or something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah what you describe is probably the gist of how it's allowable. I think the ordering procedures in the contracts i've seen need a little creative writing to make it clear we would follow the framework of 36.6 and give fair opportunity. 

JJ, if you were going down a path that leads to a differing opinion feel free to continue. If not I appreciate everyone's input on this topic. I don't have anything further to add but if anyone has other input I'll continue to participate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, dsmith101abn said:

we would follow the framework of 36.6 and give fair opportunity. 

Three final thoughts....

(1) Acknowledgement that you probably understand, but I am compelled to mention anyways that 16.500(d) also provides the out that price not be a consideration factor  in the fair opportunity process of A-E needs under a MATOC.

(2) For creative writing one could look at what agencies have done or are doing by looking at solicitations in SAM.gov   I always look to the USACE as having the most experience in the area of A-E.  I found this (below in quotes)  and I am sorry but in my effort to copy and paste I lost the reference to the specific solicitation that carried this language that I found by researching SAM opportunities.

"3.    SELECTION FOR TASK ORDER NEGOTIATION

3.1. In accordance with applicable provisions of the Brooks Act, the  Competition in Contracting Act, the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act, and FAR 16.500(d), FED will select firms for task order negotiation using the procedures set forth in FAR Subpart 36.6, DFARS Subpart 236.6, and DFARS PGI 236.602-1.

3.2.  The Contracting Officer will ensure fair opportunity is given to all IDC holders by notifying all IDC holders of new task order requirements through a Task Order Requirements Notice (TORN).

a. The TORN will include a description of the work requirements and seek interest from the IDC holders. In some cases, and consistent with USACE policies and procedures, the selecting official may request additional information from the IDC holders specific to the task order that may not be apparent on the Standard Form (SF) 330 that is on file.

b. In most cases, the information provided in response to a TORN will be fairly brief, requiring minimal effort to prepare on the IDC holder’s part."

c. The TORN will also include questions to each IDC holder concerning its concepts and methods for furnishing the requested services as required by FAR 36.602-3(c).

d. Using the selection criteria specified in the TORN, FED will evaluate the Standard Form (SF) 330s on file and responses to the TORN to determine a minimum of three most highly qualified firms for negotiation of the task order."

 

(3) I have vague memory of doing something a little different for MATOC A-E contracts when the need for a TO was below the SAT when I worked for USACE.  It added wording to the wording that was similar to the above quote that generally keyed in on a short selection process as noted in FAR 36.602-5 for the lower value needs.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...