Source: http://www.wifcon.com/discussion/index.php?/tags/RFP/
Timestamp: 2019-12-10 17:09:00
Document Index: 672377279

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 44', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 13', 'art 2', 'art 13', 'art 13', 'art 13', 'art 15', 'art 13', 'art 15', 'art 13', 'art 13']

Showing results for tags 'RFP'. - The Wifcon Forums and Blogs
Showing results for tags 'RFP'.
Lukevan posted a topic in Contract Award Process
In a recently released full & open RFP the Government requires each offeror to provide evidence of an approved purchasing system unless they can prove they do not meet the threshold for a purchasing system review in FAR Subpart 44.3 ($25M). We sell more than $25M annually to the Government so appear to be above the FAR 44.3 threshold, but the Government has never initiated a purchasing system review of our company. We inquired about this with our DCMA ACO a couple of years ago and he indicated we were unlikely to be reviewed and even if he wanted to schedule one it would take at least a year before anyone would be available to audit us. We are primarily a labor services contractor and beyond hiring employees to work under contracts we don't do significant amounts of subcontracting or supply/material purchasing, so I suspect we're considered low-risk from a purchasing perspective (but that's just my guess). The RFP does contain DFAR 252.244-7001 CONTRACTOR PURCHASING SYSTEM ADMINISTRATION-BASIC as well as FAR 52.244-2 SUBCONTRACTS. I understand that DFAR 252.244-7001 defines the requirements for an acceptable purchasing system and outlines the steps that must be taken if the government identifies deficiencies in the system. I also understand that the enabling clause (244.305-71) indicates the Contractor Purchasing System Administration clause should be used in the RFP if the RFP also contains 52.244-2. What's confusing me is that FAR 52.244-2 clearly contemplates a subcontracting process for companies based on whether they do or do not have approved purchasing systems. I can't see anything in the either of these clauses that says something to the effect that only companies with an approved purchasing system can participate in the contract, but that seems to be what the RFP is saying by requiring we must prove our purchasing system is approved. I'm trying to figure out whether I misunderstand the way these clauses work or whether the Government is going a step beyond and requiring an approved purchasing system even though it doesn't have to? This is an RFP primarily for full-time labor services of on-site personnel, so it won't have much supply or material purchasing. I will monitor any responses and reply back with any additional information needed. Thanks for any insight you can provide.
ICE-CO posted a topic in Contracting Workforce
Hello all, I would like to request feedback regarding when to use the term "RFQ" vs "RFP." Based on my research, an RFQ is always used under the SAT (FAR 13) and an RFP is used above SAT. However, there have been instances with commercial (FAR 12) buys under FAR 15 or 13 where RFQ was used. This may be wrong. I've been under different offices and different COs. So I am seeking clarification to see if there is a hard/fast rule or can it come down to CO preference or particular situations. Thank you.
CharliD posted a topic in Schedules, GWACS, MACs, IDIQs
This is applicable to solicitation responses under IDIQ contracts. Most specifically MATOCs for construction services. I thought I knew this stuff until a supervisor wanted to issued RFQs under MATOCs because it was easier and more streamlined. I know that is the guidance, but how far does one take that? Maybe I am overthinking this, but I think a few factors need considered. Here is my thought process and rationale. 1. FAR Part 2 does not define Requests for Quotes (RFQ), specifically. 2. FAR Part 2 does define "solicitation." ""Solicitation" means any request to submit offers or quotations to the Government. Solicitations under sealed bid procedures are called "invitations for bids." Solicitations under negotiated procedures are called "requests for proposals. Solicitations under simplified acquisition procedures may require submission of either a quotation or an offer."" 3. Simplified Acquisition Procedures are detailed in FAR Part 13. IAW FAR 13.004(a), a quotation is not an offer and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract (thus the order issued is an offer and the contractor accepts by commencing performance giving constructive acceptance). 4. Based on the definition of "solicitation" at FAR Part 2, can an RFP be issued under FAR Part 13 when an offer is desired rather than a quote? And can the Government accept the offer received to form a binding contract? Or is constructive acceptance required? 5. Does FAR Part 13 offer advice on when to use an RFQ vs. an RFP (I cannot find it)? 6. Since a certain amount of negotiation can happen under FAR Part 13, would use of an RFP only be appropriate when using evaluation factor other than price or price-related (FAR Part 15)? 7. Do thresholds play into the type of solicitation issued under an IDIQ contract? 8. Does the mere existence of an IDIQ contract automatically move the orders into the simplified acquisition arena? 9. FAR 16.505 paren b addresses placement procedures and does not address solicitation procedures, specifically. Is this semantics? 10. When an IDIQ contract is in place, can an RFQ be issued for projects exceeding the SAT (construction, non-commercial item)? And can the quote submitted be used for form a binding contract? Or is constructive acceptance required? My opinion (prove me wrong via holes in my rationale/interpretation or regulation and case law): 1. Yes, an RFP can be issued under FAR Part 13, pulling in the applicable portions of FAR Part 15. 2. An RFP under FAR Part 13 should only be used if the Government wishes to incorporate evaluation factors other than price and price-related. 3. If the Government issues an RFP under FAR Part 13, then yes, the offer received can be used to form a binding contract and constructive acceptance is not required. 4. Yes, thresholds do have an impact on the type of solicitation issued under an IDIQ contract and the type of response received - legally binding or not (quote vs. bid/proposal) and negotiable or not (bid vs. quote/proposal). 5. The mere existence of an IDIQ contract does not automatically move the orders placed under it into the simplified acquisition arena. 6. An RFQ should not be used under an IDIQ contract if the Government wishes to receive legally binding responses (bids/proposals). 7. Just because the IDIQ includes a provision that required the contractors to provide a response (including "no bid" responses), that does not make the response binding of that response is a quote as requested by the solicitation (RFQ).
Budget Profile in RFP?
uc2004 posted a topic in Contract Pricing Including CAS & Allowable Costs
Does anyone have any experience with providing the overall budget profile for a given procurement as part of the RFP? We typically give "plug numbers" for things such as ODCs, but this would be a "plug number" for the overall yearly budget profile for the effort. Offerors could deviate from it so long as it is supported in their proposal (e.g., they could propose lower). Please let me know.