If a non-DOD agency has issued multiple IDIQ A-E contracts, can the agency use the contract holders' previously submitted SF330 information to determine the contractor(s) who may compete for specific task orders in lieu of offering all the IDIQ holders an opportunity to qualify for the specific task orders? In this situation, the agency would then request a response to a written RFP from the new "short list" of most highly qualified contractors, rather than all the IDIQ holders.

I believe this approach may not satisfy the fair opportunity to compete requirements under Subpart 16.5 and the selection criteria under 36.6 for A-E services. For example, how can the agency determine capacity to accomplish the work in the required time on a specific task order when it evaluates capability using a SF330 form updated only once a year?

I'd appreciate any comments or observations. Many thanks.

To help sort out your scenario before folks provide responses when you mention RFP to short listed contractors are your referring to simply requesting updated 330's for the intended task or are you suggesting that the short listed firms would get an RFP to price?

To help sort out your scenario before folks provide responses when you mention RFP to short listed contractors are your referring to simply requesting updated 330's for the intended task or are you suggesting that the short listed firms would get an RFP to price?

Thanks for the question Carl. The short listed contractors would get an RFP and be expected to furnish in response a technical approach to the RFP's requirements, labor hours and mixes, proposed ODCs and travel, among other things.

As I understand it, the agency will use the existing SF330s to create the short list. The contractors may only update or supplement their SF330s once a year.

You can't use price as a selection factor in competing task orders for A-E services.

Joel's comment is correct and the reason I asked the clarifying question. While not exactly on point this archive thread in WIFCON may help a little to understand - http://www.wifcon.com/discus/messages/8525/10066.html

With regard to how an agency might set up fair opportunity selection processes for an A-E IDIQ which limit updates to 330's I guess they could do anything they wanted but limiting updates to 330's does not make a lot of sense to me especially in these dynamic times. I could see where firms might merge or otherwise change their capabilities that would either enhance detract from their A-E ability.

You can't use price as a selection factor in competing task orders for A-E services.

Joel, I don't believe price would be a selection factor because the contract holders have established hourly rates for various labor categories. Do you believe that evaluating the task order, in part, based on the number of hours and the labor mix between labor categories constitutes a price selection?

Duh, yes I do think that. Why do you want the detailed information, including ODC and travel costs, plus the number of hours and manpower information?

Its a rule of thumb that one doesn't ask for information in a competition that you won't evaluate.

Duh, yes I do think that. Why do you want the detailed information, including ODC and travel costs, plus the number of hours and manpower information?

Its a rule of thumb that one doesn't ask for information in a competition that you won't evaluate.

I see your point, thanks Joel. I believe the agency in question is trying to get around the price competition restriction by asking for manhours and labor mix only.

I see your point, thanks Joel. I believe the agency in question is trying to get around the price competition restriction by asking for manhours and labor mix only.

longhornjoe, the requirement is to pick the most highly qualified A-E firm for a task order (FAR 16.500(d)), consistent with Subpart 36.6 (see FAR 36.602), using qualifications based evaluation criteria consistent with 36.602-1 (see below). See also 16.505 (a) (8), also quoted below. Once the firm is selected, then we request their proposal, evaluate it and negotiate a fair and reasonable price, but the selection is qualifications based.

FAR 36.602-1 -- Selection Criteria.

"(a) Agencies shall evaluate each potential contractor in terms of its --

(1) Professional qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of required services;

(2) Specialized experience and technical competence in the type of work required, including, where appropriate, experience in energy conservation, pollution prevention, waste reduction, and the use of recovered materials;

(3) Capacity to accomplish the work in the required time;

(4) Past performance on contracts with Government agencies and private industry in terms of cost control, quality of work, and compliance with performance schedules;

(5) Location in the general geographical area of the project and knowledge of the locality of the project; provided, that application of this criterion leaves an appropriate number of qualified firms, given the nature and size of the project; and

(6) Acceptability under other appropriate evaluation criteria."

FAR 16.505 (a) (8):

"In accordance with section 1427( of Public Law 108-136, orders placed under multi-agency contracts for services that substantially or to a dominant extent specify performance of architect-engineer services, as defined in 2.101, shall?

(i) Be awarded using the procedures at Subpart 36.6; and

(ii) Require the direct supervision of a professional architect or engineer licensed, registered or certified in the State, Federal District, or outlying area, in which the services are to be performed."

As soon as you ask for the detailed technical approach, including data which, when combined with contract unit prices, is used to evaluate the potential cost to the government, you are evaluating price or cost. The industry also knows or senses that cost or price is a competitive evaluation factor, using such tactics. I'm surprised that industry puts up with it.

Joel:

You said: "You can't use price as a selection factor in competing task orders for A-E services." You then cited FAR 16.505(a)(8). But that rule says agencies must follow the procedures in FAR 36.6 when placing orders under "multi-agency" contracts for A-E services.

Can you cite a regulation that requires agencies to follow FAR 36.6 when awarding A-E orders under a single-agency IDIQ contract for A-E services?

Vern - I know your question is not posed to me but I have been following the posts and I am in agreement with Joel unless of course additional info is provided that sways me otherwise. However at this point I conclude that FAR 36.6 does apply based on the following.

FAR 36.6 is the regulation that states the requirement. Specifically FAR part 36.601-3( which states - "( Sources for contracts for architect-engineer services shall be selected in accordance with the procedures in this subpart rather than the solicitation or source selection procedures prescribed in Parts 13, 14, and 15 of this regulation."

Further the definition of "contract" under FAR Part 2 does include orders placed under an IDIQ. Here is a related discussion thread on the matter of definition including orders under a IDIQ. http://www.wifcon.com/discus/messages/8522/9575.html

Joel:

You said: "You can't use price as a selection factor in competing task orders for A-E services." You then cited FAR 16.505(a)(8). But that rule says agencies must follow the procedures in FAR 36.6 when placing orders under "multi-agency" contracts for A-E services.

Can you cite a regulation that requires agencies to follow FAR 36.6 when awarding A-E orders under a single-agency IDIQ contract for A-E services?

Vern, FAR 16.500 (d) applies to ID/IQ contracts in general.

Yes, I said "see also 16.505(a)(8)", which applies to multiple agency ID/IQ's.

Vern, FAR 16.500 (d) applies to ID/IQ contracts in general.

Yes, I said "see also 16.505(a)(8)", which applies to multiple agency ID/IQ's.

Joel: I see. I missed your reference to 16.500(d). Thanks.