Delayn

Thank you.

Awesome! I have been researching all the information you have been providing. I have another question but I am afraid that it will provide too much details of the acquisition. Is there any way we can discuss it in a private forum?

Awesome! I have been researching all the information you have been providing.

Great! I will include this in my statement.

Thank you. Good point!

Thank you very much. I have done internet search and have read GAO cases on responsibility determination and COC. However, I appreciate all the extra help you are providing me. I will take a look at the references you provided. This is really helpful. This is my first time writing a nonresponsibility determination for a SB. So your advice is really helping me realize other angles I had not considered before in writing my determination. I read the FAR and GAO cases. But, the reality is that there are things that are not said in the FAR: they are only learned by experience. Any other areas I should take into consideration???

Thank you. I did not write the CPARS. It was done by someone else within my Agency. The rating was UNACCEPTABLE for all evaluated criteria.

Can you share any sanitized examples of the determinations of nonresponsibility and COC referreral you have written?

Thank you. This is what I suspected.

Thank you very much for your advice. This is really good information. I will make sure the nonresponsibility is well documented. Do you have any sanitized examples you can share?

Thank you for your comments. Thank you. I totally agree with you. Are there any ways to prevent the SBA to issue a COC with such a bad performance?

A solicitation was conducted as a small business set aside for non-commercial repair effort using the LPTA process. The solicitation included past performance as an evaluation factor. The solicitation requested contractors to submit performance information for 3 previous contract, which was going to be evaluated for recency and relevancy. The solicitation also stated that the Government may use other sources including CPARS to evaluate past performance. In addition, the solicitation stated that the contracting officer was going to award to a responsible offeror per FAR Part 9. The LPTA offeror had a recent UNSAT CPARS for a very similar requirement with my Agency since after performance the equipment is unoperable. This offeror is currently performing another contract for a similar requirement that has multiple performance issues and the contractor has threatened the Government to stop work all together. In another contract, this contractor is currently pushing for a POP extension for 4 months and increase price in a task that can be done in 2 weeks. The contract is already behind schedule. This company had similar issues in the past with two other UNSAT CPARS for similar requirements. Per FAR 15.101-2(b)(1), "If the contracting officer elects to consider past performance as an evaluation factor, it shall be evaluated in accordance with 15.305. However, the comparative assessment in 15.305(a)(2)(i) does not apply. If the contracting officer determines that a small business’ past performance is not acceptable, the matter shall be referred to the Small Business Administration for a Certificate of Competency determination, in accordance with the procedures contained in Subpart 19.6 and 15 U.S.C. 637(b)(7))." I have serious concerns about the ability of this company to successfully perform this work. However, the legal counsel mentioned that I cannot use the seriously deficient past performance to determine the contractor unsatisfactorily to perform the contract since the SBA will determine them responsible and ultimately I will have to award the contract to this contractor. Has anyone had a similar situation? What was the outcome? Do you know any case ("Googleble") similar to this one in which the SBA has/has not supported the PCO decision?

Thank you very much.

Here is a little bit more background to my initial question: A CPFF completion TO was awarded with O&M funds for one year. COR requests a POP extension for 6 additional months at no additional cost to the Gov due to Gov delays and weather issues. The COR says that, since the TO was completion, the contractor is required to complete the work. Scenario 1 - The POP extension is requested right before the TO POP expires at the end of the year. Scenario 2 - The POP extension is requested right after the TO award. Leadership says that the first scenario is possible but the second one is lack of planning and would essentially be a multi-year contract. Assume that the TO was awarded in Aug 1 with an initial POP of Aug 1 to Jul 31. With the POP extension, the TO will cross two fiscal years. Are these scenarios possible in spite of having O&M funds, which have a one-year obligation? Do these scenarios fall under multi-year contract? Is leadership correct? If these scenarios are not possible, what would you do to allow the completion of the task order?

Thank you

The services are non-severable. The extension was requested since the Government caused delays in completion.

Agree.

Can you extend the POP at no additional cost to the Government in excess of one year using one year funding (O&M)?

There is a debate in my agency on who is responsible for requesting funding to the Comptroller and at what point in the contract process funding must be provided. Currently the program office submits a requirements package to Contracts and Finance. However, Finance does not want to provide funding or availability of funding promise for the requirement until Contracts submits a request for funding, which must include the contract number, contractor, purpose, and exact amount to be funded. In several occasions, Contracts is ready to award a contract; however finance stops the award since there is no funding for the contract. My opinion is that the Program Office is responsible to request funding to Finance and provide it to Contracts as part of the requirements package. Also my understanding is that Contracts is not supposed to start the contract process until funding or availability of funding notice has been received. This has been an ongoing battle between Finance and Contracts for a couple of years now and the process would not change if I do not show an instruction showing otherwise. Any advice?