I am working on a competitive 8(a) set aside MATOC source selection. One of the questions posted to ASFI asked about what recourse the Government has if the contractor was awarded an IDIQ contract, but decided not to respond to some of the Request For Task Order Proposals in the future. I wasn't sure how to answer this question. There is currently language in the solicitation that the contractor must contact the Government immediately if they cannot propose, but no explanation of what happens if they don't.

Does anyone have experience with this? The pool of awardee's is only expected to be 3, so it will be important to have all awardee propose on each task order.

What do you want the contractors to commit to? If you make response mandatory, refusal to respond would be a breach that would subject the contractor to termination for default and breach damages. (I have no idea how you would measure the damages.)

The standard IDIQ contract clauses make compliance with an order a contractual obligation. However, the standard clauses say nothing about whether contractors have to respond to RFTOPs. So you have to write something into the contract to state the agreement on that matter between the parties.

You can make response mandatory, but it would be hard to make a response from a company realistic, reasonable, acceptable, etc., if they don't want the job. So if you make response mandatory you could end up getting pro forma responses from time to time. Also, if you make response mandatory there's the little problem of bid and proposal cost recovery. I would think you would want to be fair in that regard to your contractors. Right? Especially since they'll be 8(a).

Not a new problem. In my experience, most agencies have made response optional, or have treated it as such.

Frankly, as a contractor I would not compete for a MATOC that made response to RFTOPs mandatory, unless I knew the agency well and was absolutely convinced it would structure each prospective TO to be a good business deal.

I've seen language that considers the frequency and the overall quality of contractors responses in "off ramp" decisions. In a couple cases agencies used similar language regarding decisions to execise options that extend the period of performance but that's a bit of a stretch.

H.5.1 OFF RAMPS

“Off ramps” will be utilized when a Contractor outgrows their certified size status and is therefore no longer eligible to receive new Task Orders within a specific size category and/or failed to propose on task order requirements. Contractors that outgrow their size status will either “graduate” into the next size category, or be removed from the contract entirely, if they do not recertify in a size category in accordance with Section H.4 REREPRESENTATION REQUIREMENTS. In addition, if a Contractor fails to compete on at least three task order requirements in a given year, it will not be eligible to compete on future Task Orders and the Government may not exercise its option.

http://www.gsa.gov/graphics/fas/Comprehensive_Master_Contract_Through_Mod_0010.pdf

My company has a multiple award contract with the following condition tied to the minimum guarantee:

"For each successful Contractor, irrespective of the number of Domains for which the Contractor has qualified, there will be a one time “minimum guarantee” award amount of $100,000 during the life of the contract. This amount can only be claimed at the end of the contract period, if the Contractor proposes on all Task Order RFTOP’s issued under their qualified domains during the 5 years."

I don't like it. A few years into the contract with no task order awards and lots of B&P $ and effort expended (on some RFTOPs we absolutely KNEW we would not win), I can relate to Vern's comment "I would not compete for a MATOC that made response to RFTOPs mandatory..." Mandatory RFTOP responses--yuk!--don't do it to yourself or your contractors.