Hello All,

I am in need of some clarification. It is said that a Performance Based-IDIQ Contract does not procure or specify a firm quantity of services (other than a minimum or maximum quantity) In a situation where a staffing matrix is provided by the contractor--stating how many personnel they will use to fulfill the PWS requirements, is submitted and based on that number they are found either acceptable or unacceptable--this belief does not seem right.   To explain a little further--this particular solicitation outlines how the proposal will be evaluated. It specifies that IF the proposal does not meet the requirement (based on the SSEB guidelines) the proposal will be found unacceptable.  SO a proposal submits a staffing matrix (for example they stated they would provide 50 people to fulfil the requirements) the SSEB finds the proposal acceptable, the staffing matrix (provided by the contractor) is used to develop the contract price. After negotiations, the government has accepted the proposal based on the staffing, supplies etc and developed the final contract price based on the CLINs outlined in the staffing matrix which becomes part of the pricing matrix.  This pricing matrix is used to pay the contractor against the T.O. based on the CLIN structure.  Now, after the contract is awarded, the contractor staffs the facilities with 25 people. The have received multiple failures in performance for 3 months consecutively. The contractor's response when questioned about their staff, "You cannot tell us how to staff".  I do not believe this is accurate because they are being paid based on the amount of staff on the matrix and that was included in the contract and the T.O.s are based on the CLIN annotated on the matrix.  Can someone please point me in the right direction or tell me which is right or wrong and why.

I'm bumping this up in case you have not seen it.

Does your contract require a staffing level input, or a performance outcome?  You wrote,

On 6/14/2022 at 9:20 PM, LynnPerformance said:

...they are being paid based on the amount of staff on the matrix...

It is possible that your contract requirement and your payment approach do not align -- in other words, you might have a sloppily-written contract.

You should probably be paying based on the performance outcome, rather than the staffing input.  And, you should have let competition, not the offeror's staffing matrix, determine the contract price.

On 6/14/2022 at 9:20 PM, LynnPerformance said:

The have received multiple failures in performance for 3 months consecutively. The contractor's response when questioned about their staff, "You cannot tell us how to staff".

What is the real problem?  Performance failures?  Or failure to staff as promised in the contract?  Pick only one -- which one is the real problem?

On 6/14/2022 at 9:20 PM, LynnPerformance said:

Can someone please point me in the right direction or tell me which is right or wrong and why.

l cannot say much about the contract you have described, because the description is not clear. But I will say the following:

First, in general, some IDIQ contracts require the contractor to perform custom services on order, such as studies or equipment repair; others require the contractor to perform standard jobs on order, such as routine equipment maintenance.

Second, IDIQ contracts for custom services should not include a work statement. They should include only a description of the scope of the contract, i.e., the kinds of custom services that may be ordered. Work statements are included in individual orders. IDIQ contracts for standard jobs should include a standard work statement for each standard job that may be ordered. Individual orders should refer to the appropriate standard work statement.

Third, IDIQ contracts do not have a contract price. Instead, they include unit prices, maximum quantities or dollar values, and minimum quantities or dollar values. IDIQ contracts for custom services should include task input unit prices, usually labor rates and the prices of materials. Those unit prices are used to price individual orders based on the kind and quantity of input to be provided and the outcome to be achieved. IDIQ contracts for standard jobs should include task output unit prices, i.e, a price for performing each kind of standard job.

While the above is generally true, there are some strange "IDIQ" contracts out there in the contracting jungle. The one you have described sounds like one of those.

I do not understand the IDIQ contract that you have described. I  cannot understand why an IDIQ contract, under which a contractor is obligated to perform only on order, whether for custom services or standard  jobs, would include a "staffing matrix." That seems to indicate that the contractor is required to keep some staff "on call" as it were. That's not consistent with IDIQ contracting.

And I cannot understand why an IDIQ contract would have a "contract price." A minimum quantity/value and a maximum quantity/value, yes. But not a price. The notion of a "final contract price" at the time of contract award is inconsistent with IDIQ contracting as I know it.

Speaking for myself, I cannot point you in the "right direction," because I do not recognize and understand the contract that you have described.

But what I think you might have is a staff augmentation contract under which the agency wants the contractor to keep a specified staff on hand to do work when and as directed. As such, while it may include IDIQ contract clauses, it would not be designed to work like a true IDIQ contract, which does not require the contractor to do anything except as ordered.

What may be happening is that the contractor is assigning people to work under the contract part-time as needed, but the agency expects the staff to be dedicated to the contract full-time and thinks that's what it is paying for. Now the agency and the contractor are in disagreement about what its obligations are. The contractor thinks staff assignments are none of the agency's business as long as it does what the agency tells it to do.

I'm just speculating, but am I close?

 

 

 

The question with the limited information provided is definitely confusing.  My take is the contractor proposed a certain staffing level which the government used to form the price to provide service.  Then the contractor starts work but isn’t meeting the contract performance standard, likely because they are providing fewer people than proposed.  

Indeed, the original poster, LynnPerformance, needs to provide some clarification to readers.

1. Are you referring to a task order under an IDIQ or to the contract award?

2. If referring to a task order, did the task order specifically incorporate the proposed staffing matrix ?

3.  Does the task order pricing refer to or otherwise clearly correlate with the staffing matrix?

4. Did the task order incorporate the proposal?

5. Are the performance requirements measurable?

6. Are there any specified requirements? A proper performance specification should be measurable and verifiable.

7. Can the contractor substantiate that/how it is meeting the task order requirements?

8. If the contractor says that it has the right to staff the task as it sees fit and it isn’t meeting the task order performance requirements /can’t substantiate its performance, what is the government doing about it? 

On 6/14/2022 at 6:20 PM, LynnPerformance said:

After negotiations, the government has accepted the proposal based on the staffing, supplies etc and developed the final contract price based on the CLINs outlined in the staffing matrix which becomes part of the pricing matrix.  This pricing matrix is used to pay the contractor against the T.O. based on the CLIN structure. 

So what does one of the CLINs for the contract look like?   I am use to seeing them for food services to indicate meals, snacks, or something like the following....

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES                                                                                                                         MAX QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE       MAX AMOUNT

0001         Breakfast FFP Breakfast as described at paragraph 5.14 of the Performance Work Statement..    68,000           EA     $___________       $______________

I dunno. But I do know that the US Government acquires food services from contractors on a routine basis. I recall visiting a Pentagon cafeteria, back in the day, so I could interview the cafeteria operator. In fact, I interviewed several cafeteria operators, not just at DoD facilities but at civilian agency facilities as well as in private industry. Yes, this was a while ago, but NOBODY was under an ID/IQ contract.

Why this particular "food service facility" contract would need to be structured in a manner that is unlike the standard approach is but one of the mysteries associated with this question.

In a contract for food service the unit of performance is ordinarily a type of meal—breakfast, lunch, dinner and maybe snack. The unit price is the price of a particular kind of meal. The contractor is paid for the number of meals served of each type.

The agency may have included a staffing requirement in order to ensure timely service at meal-times and during post-meal cleanup.

If the contract is not clear about the staffing requirement it could lead to conflict if the company tries to increase its profits by cutting the number of staff on hand.

Well, it looks like the original poster may have checked out back on the 15th of June.

I think it’s a waste of time and effort for us to continue to probe and speculate about the original question.  

12 hours ago, Vern Edwards said:

In a contract for food service the unit of performance is ordinarily a type of meal—breakfast, lunch, dinner and maybe snack. The unit price is the price of a particular kind of meal. The contractor is paid for the number of meals served of each type.

The agency may have included a staffing requirement in order to ensure timely service at meal-times and during post-meal cleanup.

If the contract is not clear about the staffing requirement it could lead to conflict if the company tries to increase its profits by cutting the number of staff on hand.

Oftentimes I found a subsidy requirement, where losses were subsidized ... just to reduce any incentive to cut staff or food quality in order to increase profits. In fact, for one contractor, substantially all the profit came from tax credits generated by the work and the people hired. The work was surprisingly complex. (At least, I was surprised.)

This is actually a commercial service. It should be treated as such.