Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'FAR 16 IDIQ Fair Opportunity'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Instructions and Terms of Use
    • Terms Of Use
    • Before You Register, Before You Post, Instructions for Writing Your Question
  • Contracting Forum
    • What Happened?
    • Polls
    • For Beginners Only
    • About The Regulations
    • COVID-19 And Its Effect on Contracting
    • Contracting Workforce
    • The Good, The Bad, the Ugly
    • Recommended Reading
    • Contract Award Process
    • Contract Pricing Including CAS & Allowable Costs
    • Contract Administration
    • Schedules, GWACS, MACs, IDIQs
    • Subcontracts & Subcontract Management
    • Small Business, Socioeconomic Programs
    • Proposed Law & Regulations; Legal Decisions


  • The Wifcon Blog
  • Don Mansfield's Blog
  • Government Contracts Blog
  • Government Contracts Insights
  • Emptor Cautus' Blog
  • SmallGovCon.com
  • The Contractor's Perspective
  • Government Contracts Legal Forum

Product Groups

There are no results to display.


  • Rules & Tools
  • Legal Opinions
  • News

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Found 1 result

  1. I am a CO on a multi-award ID/IQ contract with a broad statement of work where work is more specifically defined in the SOWs of individual TOs. In the past year or so since the base ID/IQ contracts were awarded, the source selection procedures for competing TOs followed the FAR 15 model. Right now, we are soliciting for a follow-on TO and giving fair opportunity to all contractors. I have read FAR Parts 15 and 16, have read Vern Edward's "Competitive Processes in Government Contracting: The FAR Part 15 Process Model and Process Inefficiency", seeked advise from legal counsel, and have reached out to other COs for their advise on how to streamline the evaluation process using FAR 16 versus FAR 15...and it's been difficult to get anything solid. What we plan on doing is asking each offeror to essentially answer 5 questions pertaining to their technical and staffing approaches. The evaluators are going to review the responses, document the strengths and weaknesses of the responses, and determine which offeror is the most highly qualified from a technical proposal. There will be no proposal scoring, and we're not even developing an evaluation plan. After technical evaluations, we will then factor in pricing and determine which offeror provides the best value. We're not ready to go LPTA on the requirement yet because of the nature of the work and the associated performance risks. Also, we are making sure not to use any of the FAR 15 terms in our RFP such as "competitive range", "discussions", etc. My question really has to do with discussions. If we want to enter into negotiations with only the most highly qualified vendor, is that allowable? Can we request a revised proposal from only that one vendor? What is the proper word to describe this communication...is it "exchanges"? Does anybody have experience with doing a FAR 16 source selection and have any advise on the kind of language we need to include in the instructions to offerors explaining the evaluation methodology? I want to make sure that we clearly communicate our strategy and stick to it because I know that will save us in the end if things go haywire and an offeror protests. Thanks in advance to all who reply. This is my first post.
  • Create New...