Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

BZMANINTEXAS

Members
  • Content Count

    56
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About BZMANINTEXAS

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday December 22

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Texas

Recent Profile Visitors

4,393 profile views
  1. Has anyone discussed how this effects or does not effect the use of Facebook, Instagram, YouTube or other similar platforms by many Federal Agencies in the promotion of their own agency? Granted setting up an Agency profile is free, however many Agencies use these platforms for advertisement of Jobs, Career Fairs, etc. which are oftern done via "pay per click" and although not necessarily a huge cost, potentially under GPC, they would create a contractual relationship. Would be interested in any view or comment, as none of those vendors are registered in SAM, therefore have not had to state
  2. Has anyone discussed how this effects or does not effect the use of Facebook, Instagram, YouTube or other similar platforms by many Federal Agencies in the promotion of their own agency? Would be interested in any view or comment, as none of those vendors are registered in SAM, therefore have not had to state whether or not the comply or do not comply to the clause.
  3. Noting - our firm is not participating - it was something I ran across and found odd to be in a FFP area, and not on a COST CLIN only. Pages from M95494-19-R-0020.pdf
  4. @ji20874 - not that clause is not in the RFP.
  5. Just browsing my notification emails and on the 14th of May the Marines issued an RFP for their Marketing/Advertising services. I thought I'd take a quick read through it since they announced it would be a FFP Contract action. Come to find out, they want their core services FFP and then the travel and actual media buys as "actual" Cost Reimbursable (no fee) items. There are about 20-attachments to the RFP as exhibits, but I only opened the one excel that dealt with the "Cost/Price" submission. My question lies here. A FFP action for all services identified and they want the prospective co
  6. Late to the party it seems...but general thoughts @RFS2015 - Just because the FAR doesn't state something doesn't make it "illegal or impractical" - If there is an agreement between the Prime and Gov - in this scenario, I would just ask that the Prime provide you a copy of a written statement (or email) from the Gov CO that outlines the policy. If they are unwilling to give you that, then you need to weigh the risk (as you have stated above) of training cost vs your staff. Is the training beneficial, will it increase your staff quality, efficiency, potential to raise your rates to other cont
  7. yeah, thinking it may relate more to how they manage HHS and all of its sub-departments under the big umbrella. Funding for them is annual appropriations, so I think the individual (non acquisition) is misinterpreting the terminology. (imagine that)
  8. Does anyone have a good definition or can briefly describe to me what it means to be in a federated funding environment? I believe this is how HHS and some other Agencies describe their environments, but I am under the assumption that it's not the normal annual appropriation. I'm really trying to find info to get a clear understanding of what that means and how it impacts their acquisition activity.
  9. I agree as well that HUBZones are all SB's but not necessarily SDB's - - per the HUBZone Empowerment (Public Law 105-135). The HUBZone Empowerment Contracting Program, which is included in the Small Business Reauthorization Act of 1997, stimulates economic development and creates jobs in urban and rural communities by providing contracting preferences to small businesses that are located in HUBZones and hire employees who live in HUBZones. https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/small_business.pdf To qualify as a HUBZone, a business must meet the following criteria: It must be a small b
  10. I would be interested if anyone saw this proposed rule when posted and commented as to it potential impact on the Prime and Subcontractor reporting needs. For one I think it lacks a defined definition of "services" and when I reviewed the CMRA website it would appear that subcontractors would have to have registered within SAM in order to report, which I think brings another issue into account as many "subs" don't want to be primes and as such do not wish to be registered in various government databases. https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2014/06/05/2014-12810/defense-federal-acquisiti
  11. In addition the reference to 18 U.S.C. 202 within 3.601-b " For the purpose of sections 203, 205, 207, 208, and 209 of this title the term “special Government employee” shall mean an officer or employee of the executive or legislative branch of the United States Government..." there is no reference to any state or local government
  12. Have you presented your case to the CO for consideration of raising that specific labor rate? If not, why not?
  13. 3.601 (b For purposes of this subpart, special Government employees (as defined in 18 U.S.C. 202) performing services as experts, advisors, or consultants, or as members of advisory committees, are not considered Government employees unless— (1) The contract arises directly out of the individual’s activity as a special Government employee (2) In the individual’s capacity as a special Government employee, the individual is in a position to influence the award of the contract; or (3) Another conflict of interest is determined to exist. 18 U.S.C. 202 "definition" (a) For the purpose of sections 2
  14. Concur with Joel - - Mayo - - as to "Fee pool" - - are you sure you don't have a Cost Plus Award Fee type of contract? There is not a "fee pool" in a CPFF contract action. If the action were to be a CPFF task/delivery order under an IDIQ/Requirements scenario, the "Fixed Fee" would also depend on LOE or Term scenario of the task order as to potential reduction as well, wouldn't it.
×
×
  • Create New...