Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

contractor100

Members
  • Content Count

    190
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by contractor100

  1. Thanks for the case, policyguy - but I think most contractors understand that they can be thrown out for not following directions. Would love to see a protest that page limitations made it impossible to meaningfully evaluate offers - that's the issue, really. And, per Napolik, make it impossible for the government and the contractor to enter into a contract under which the contractor has an obligation to offer a specific solution, see 2. above. yes, the responses are RFQs, not RFPs. that is just an odd artefact of the GSA schedules. Commercial or not, contractors should have to offer
  2. Agree with you on some of these points, Desperado, but not all. First, none of these were LPTA solicitations! They were best value, with the technical approach weighted most heavily. "...all we really need to know is that your company has a sound technical approach" The "specs" to which I refer are an SOW, listing 50 pages worth of outcomes the government wants from certain professional services. The issue is: If the government's technical requirements ("specs") take 50 pages, how can contractors explain how they will meet those requirements in 10 pages? Many people feel th
  3. Or the risk of a pre-award protest. Contractors have to protest “alleged improprieties in a solicitation that are apparent prior to the closing time for receipt to proposals" before the proposal due date - so if a contracting officer will not clarify an RFP, contractors have a strong incentive to protest.
  4. Everyone was sitting around chatting about the most recent RFQ to cross our desks which: Stated it was "best value" solicitation, with technical the most important of the factors Had a 50+ page SOW, with fairly elaborate specifications Limited the technical approach to 10 pages, 12 point type, one inch margins, double space, "graphics may contain 10 point type" Fixed price quote. Stated "may award without discussions." We have seen at last 15 such RFQs this year, from quite a few different agencies and contracting shops. All RFQs have been task orders on GS
  5. Wasn't questioning whether VA is required to give first priority to the named groups in the order listed in the statute. Of course they do. Was questioning whether this statute is specific authorization to use a cascading procurement, per the SBA reg. Perhaps 8127 only means that the preferences must be applied in order to select which category to set aside a procurement for.
  6. Sorry, our emails crossed. Still don't see how that's an authorization. I don't see an explicit authorization in the VA supplement, not like the one in the DFARS. 215.203-70 Requests for proposals – tiered evaluation of offers. (a) The tiered or cascading order of precedence used for tiered evaluation of offers shall be consistent with FAR Part 19. (b) Consideration shall be given to the tiers of small businesses (e.g., 8(a), HUBZone small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, small business) before evaluat
  7. The cascading order matches exactly what's in 38 U.S. Code § 8127 (the statute at issue in Kingdomware) by putting SDVOSBs first, but I don't see where that statute says they explicitly do a cascading procurement but I am prob. wrong
  8. VA establishing a MAC. Award of the contract will be made using a "tiered evaluation," in which Tier 1 is evaluated first, if not enough awards can be made in Tier 1, evaluation will move to Tier 2 and so on. The task orders under the contract will be awarded using the same scheme. Tier 1 - SDVOSBs that team/subcontract exclusively with SDVOSBs and VOSBs Tier 2 - SDVOSBs that team/subcontract with Small Businesses (Other than SDVOSBs and VOSBs), Joint Ventures that include Small Businesses Tier 3 - SDVOSBs that team/subcontract with Large Businesses, Joint Ventures that
  9. Just want to add, I frequently (at least 50 percent of the time) see SSNs saying things like "An organization that is not considered a small business under the applicable NAICS code should not submit a response to this notice." Does that mean this particular CO does not want to read anything that will not help her with the rule of two analysis? Does that mean that if a CO has NOT written such a commentary, he wants to read marketing materials - carefully crafted and tailored of course- - from large businesses?
  10. So, Jamaal and Pepe, you are saying that CO's actually read responses from large businesses to SSNs - but how is that helpful to the large businesses? Do they get on any kind of "short list" for the opportunity if it comes out large? How does the CO's presumably favorable opinion of them transfer into an advantage in a subsequent open competition? (This is assuming as I say that the large cannot offer some new solution, to sway the competition.) If two qualified small businesses respond, how could the CO not set it aside, no matter what the large business wrote in their white pape
  11. When the government publishes a sources sought notice/synopsis, is there any good reason for a large business to respond? 1 If the CO finds that there are sufficient small businesses to set the procurement aside, I don't see there is any advantage to the large business in having responded, as they will not be able to bid as a prime. 2 If the CO finds that there are NOT sufficient small businesses, does a large business that answered the SSN have any advantage over a large business that did not respond to the SSN? (Leaving aside the possibility that the large business could give
  12. Thanks all! So, Jamaal, you are saying that offices doing interagency purchasing for other agencies, like franchise funds or something, sometimes make this a condition of using their services ? Could you share specific offices? That might explain what I am hearing.
  13. Several different program people (from the same agency) have told me that, if an option is not exercised, their agency may not reprocure the items in the option for 12 months. That is certainly not in the FAR, not do I see it in the supplement - and seems like an insane policy for an agency to adopt. They must have misinterpreted some policy or rule to come up with this. Anyone else ever hear this?
  14. Reviewing a solicitation from SSA right now where the purchases under the BPA are called "call orders."
  15. Good points. That is interesting, I see a lot of FSS BPAs where the orders are called "calls." I guess just borrowed nomenclature.
  16. Thank you, that is very helpful. I agree with you that the BPA clearly cannot qualify as a contract under this definition. But I am still wondering whether the BPA is an "order" or whether the BPA calls are the "orders." It makes quite a difference in how the relationship between the prime and its subs is structured! I am a potential sub; I will see if the prime will request a written interpretation. They are, naturally, inclined to make their own determination.
  17. Good question. The BPA has been awarded. All of the clauses included in the GSA master contract are included in the BPA (by reference and by regulation.) The GSA schedule includes 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting. That FAR clause states it applies to (1) Contracts that have been set aside or reserved for small business concerns or 8(a) concerns; (2) Part or parts of a multiple-award contract that have been set aside for small business concerns or 8(a) concerns; and (3) Orders set aside for small business or 8(a) concerns under multiple-award contracts as described in 8.405-5 and 16
  18. A BPA was setaside against a GSA schedule. The GSA schedule is not setaside for small businesses. The BPA is setaside for small businesses. The BPA has a base ordering period, with up to five optional ordering periods. Does the awardee have to comply with the limitations on subcontracting: 1 For each call on the BPA 2 For the period of the BPA 3 For the individual ordering periods of the BPA The BPA does not address this question. I think it is 1., because the calls are orders and each order under the BPA has effectively been setaside and 125.2(6)(v) applies: (v) A business must c
  19. Getting back to the original question: Does a WOSB have to submit docs to the repository or register in CCR for a prime to count her firm against its subcontract goals? I am not sure what the language below, from the SBA's website (https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/WOSB%20Compliance%20Guide_April2011.pdf), means: I have already checked the box in CCR stating that I am women-owned. Do I have to check any other boxes? Yes. There are actually three different types of WOSBs that can be represented in CCR. The first representation in CCR is a for a women-owned business, which is a bus
  20. Thanks for all the advice. Boat very tippy, cannot provide specific information, very sorry. I appreciate everyone's chipping in, I thought perhaps this structure was the result of some new reg of which I was unaware. I will let all know what happens now the proposal has been submitted!
  21. I've never seen anything like this before either. My best thought is it's a confusion with the requirement to bid indirect costs on materials as a fixed price on time and materials commercial (52.212-4 Alt 1 (I)(ii)(D)(2). Very good idea on the protest, but you are so right about the waves. And yes to the point about separating the overhead out of the direct labor. What is even more odd, which I forgot to mention, is that this is a GSA schedule bid, (using part 12), so that presumably the overhead is already part of the market based rates.
  22. Government is buying audits. There will be five, all to be completed in one year. The RFP states the award will be FFP. The RFP has no instructions to bidders as to what they should be provided as support for the fixed price. The RFP does say that price will be evaluated for fairness and reasonableness. It is under FAR Part 12. The format for pricing consists of a table with three CLINs CLIN 1 - Direct labor for audits. Quantity - 1. Unit - YR CLIN 2 - Overhead for audits. Quantity - 1. Unit - YR CLIN 2 - Travel. NTE. Quantity Unit - LT When the government was asked why direct labor
×
×
  • Create New...