CuriosGeorge Posted April 5, 2023 Report Share Posted April 5, 2023 Hi all, have anyone ever used a SOO as gate criteria before? Does this seem feasible/allowable etc. What were your evaluation factors/criteria? Curios CO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
formerfed Posted April 6, 2023 Report Share Posted April 6, 2023 What do you mean by “gate criteria”? There are several ways to interpret that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vern Edwards Posted April 6, 2023 Report Share Posted April 6, 2023 20 hours ago, CuriosGeorge said: have anyone ever used a SOO as gate criteria before? Save us from the innovators. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voyager Posted April 6, 2023 Report Share Posted April 6, 2023 Curios[sic], check out this thread and try to figure out for yourself whether you’re setting out on the wrong foot in your acq planning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voyager Posted April 7, 2023 Report Share Posted April 7, 2023 Are you asking this question because you are writing an IDIQ’s task ordering procedures? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evonan Posted April 17, 2023 Report Share Posted April 17, 2023 On 4/5/2023 at 2:53 PM, CuriosGeorge said: Hi all, have anyone ever used a SOO as gate criteria before? Does this seem feasible/allowable etc. What were your evaluation factors/criteria? Curios CO! Not sure I fully understand what you're asking honestly. I've used SOO's several times, but not specifically to apply a gating criteria. Can you clarify what you mean by that? In my experience, your proposal instructions and contractor responsibility type items (FAR 9.104, etc. and careful not to call experience and past performance the same thing, especially with SB set-asides....) should be the gating criteria. Again, in general, as not always applicable, a SOO is usually accompanied by a TRD (technical requirements document - titles may differ by agency), possibly a list of RSNs (Required submittal numbers), and I personally request a CSOW (Contractor Statement of Work) in response to a SOO (in general). It should be tailored to your requirement and desired outcome. Generally meaning, a SOO is a statement of 'objectives' or what the government wants as the general outcome and performance IAW some set of standards (TRD - applicable regs, standards, what makes the approach acceptable?). In return you generally get a CSOW that would be considered acceptable or not-acceptable based on the standards you've applied to the posting/requirement. Although, I don't recommend this approach in general, and I've really only used this during high turnover when the program office could not define their requirements very well, or would refuse to do so and some political pressure made the buy a 'hot item.' I might be able to answer a little better if you could define what you mean by a gate criteria, and what you're working on. But also, to the best of my knowledge (could be wrong, going off memory) the only way to 'gate' contractors from becoming the successful awardee before you make the award decision is some form of two-step approach, such as setting a competitive range or short-listing in FAR 36.3 based on your criteria Two-Phase for design-build (generally L&M and whatever required response, TRD, etc.). I don't think a SOO approach would 'gate' much outside of what technical requirements you're using. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
formerfed Posted April 17, 2023 Report Share Posted April 17, 2023 1 hour ago, Evonan said: I might be able to answer a little better if you could define what you mean by a gate criteria, and what you're working on. But also, to the best of my knowledge (could be wrong, going off memory) the only way to 'gate' contractors from becoming the successful awardee before you make the award decision is some form of two-step approach, such as setting a competitive range or short-listing in FAR 36.3 based on your criteria Two-Phase for design-build (generally L&M and whatever required response, TRD, etc.). I don't think a SOO approach would 'gate' much outside of what technical requirements you're using. Here’s a prior discussion that is relevant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joel hoffman Posted April 18, 2023 Report Share Posted April 18, 2023 On 4/5/2023 at 2:53 PM, CuriosGeorge said: Hi all, have anyone ever used a SOO as gate criteria before? Does this seem feasible/allowable etc. What were your evaluation factors/criteria? Curios CO! As is seemingly often the case, an original poster will ask questions which are very broad without context, then not.respond to requests for clarification or more context. According to George’s profile, George joined, posted and last signed into the Forum on 5 April 2023.. George, 13 days later, are you still “Curious”? Please see : “By bob7947 April 18, 2018 in Before You Register, Before You Post, Instructions for Writing Your Question” Please see, in particular: “…4. Don't post and run! Sometimes, you will receive a response or a request for further information within minutes of your post. At least be ready to respond within the same day. If you are gone for too long, Members will forget about your post or get frustrated and not respond again. Stay engaged with them until you are satisfied.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vern Edwards Posted April 18, 2023 Report Share Posted April 18, 2023 Why waste time on this kind of nonsense𑁋a poorly crafted inquiry followed by silence in the face of requests for clarification? The OP deserves no further attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joel hoffman Posted April 18, 2023 Report Share Posted April 18, 2023 Noted. Just, trying to be somewhat polite to a new member after his first time posting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vern Edwards Posted April 18, 2023 Report Share Posted April 18, 2023 I think that by "gate criteria" the OP meant screening criteria. I think the OP was considering the idea of requiring offerors to submit SOWs in response to a SOO, evaluating the SOWs, and then selecting the offerors who submitted the best SOWs to be considered in the next phase of the source selection. I think the OP wanted to know if anyone had done that, yes or no. I think the OP then wanted to know if the idea was "feasible," yes or no. I think the OP then wanted to know what evaluation factors had been used to judge the SOWs. I would be amazed if no one has done that. I think the idea is feasible. (That's not to say I would do it.) I think evaluation factors could be SOW (1) clarity, (2) completeness, (3) practicability, and (4) process design efficiency, to name but some possibilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
formerfed Posted April 18, 2023 Report Share Posted April 18, 2023 If that is what the OP is looking for Vern, the FAAs Screening Information Request (SIR) should give some good ideas. Essentially it asks for information by which FAA can either make subsequent and refined requests or stay with the initial results. From 3.2.2.3.1.2 of FAAAMS: Quote For a given procurement, the FAA may make a selection decision after one SIR, or the FAA may have a series of SIRs (with a screening decision after each one) to arrive at the selection decision. This will depend on the types of products and services to be acquired and the specific source selection approach chosen by the IPT. When it is desired to make a selection decision after one SIR, that SIR should be a request for offer (see below). In general when multiple SIRs are contemplated, the initial SIR should request general information, and future SIRs should request successively more specific information. I believe Energy has used a similar process for some R&D projects as well as TSA for initial passenger screening after 9/11. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vern Edwards Posted April 18, 2023 Report Share Posted April 18, 2023 @formerfedKeep in mind that the FAA is not subject to CICA or the FAR. It need not consider price or cost before eliminating any offeror. Under CICA and FAR, price or cost must be considered before eliminating any offeror from further consideration, unless (1) the offeror submitted a materially unacceptable proposal and (2) the agency intends to award without discussions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
formerfed Posted April 18, 2023 Report Share Posted April 18, 2023 Yeah, I mentioned that thinking the OP could research FAA SIRs for ideas. Your suggestions in that 2015 Wifcon thread I referenced earlier clearly made the point that price/cost must be considered under the FAR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts