Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center

Do federal supply schedule contracts still have value?

By

Over the past several months, there has been a confluence of congressional and agency actions that will have a significant impact on Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) contract holders.

These changes are so significant that they will likely cause companies with FSS contracts to question whether having an FSS makes sense.

These changes could also cause companies to restructure the segments of their companies that are responsible for selling to the federal government.

Keep reading this article at: https://governmentcontractsnavigator.com/2018/03/22/do-federal-supply-schedule-contracts-still-have-value/

Are contractors worrying too much over GSA’s data rule?

By

Many government contractors are worried, fearful and in disbelief about the General Services Administration’s implementation of its Transactional Data Rule.

There are calls for delays in implementation and more training for contracting officers and contracting specialists. There are worries that contracting officers will continue to ask for the dreaded, outdated, lawsuit inducing data that the TDR is supposed to replace — commercial sales practices (CSPs) and the price reduction clause disclosures.

And maybe most of all, industry is concerned about the cost to collect and transmit the data back to GSA.

Despite all of these fears, we know very little about the impact, cost or problems with GSA collecting transactional data, which it says is information generated when the government purchases goods or services from a vendor. The rule requires vendors to report specific details such as descriptions, part numbers, quantities and prices paid for the items purchased.

Keep reading this article at: http://federalnewsradio.com/reporters-notebook-jason-miller/2017/02/contractors-worrying-much-gsas-data-rule/

SBA and GSA, OFPP not seeing eye-to-eye on ‘rule of two’ application

By

SBA logoA major dispute is brewing in the small business community. Just four months after the Supreme Court’s June 16, 2016 unanimous decision on the Kingdomware case, the Small Business Administration (SBA) is taking a stand on the “rule of two” that is stressing out industry and agencies alike.

As a quick reminder, the nation’s highest court ruled in the Kingdomware case that the Veterans Affairs Department (VA) must continue to apply the “rule of two” for veteran-owned small businesses even if the agency surpassed its annual prime contracting goal. The “rule of two” states if an agency can find two or more qualified small businesses during market research of a contract under the Simplified Acquisition Threshold (SAT) — between $3,500 and $150,000 — it must set aside the solicitation.

Now the SBA is expanding that Supreme Court ruling to apply to all task and delivery orders under SAT if the request for proposals comes under the General Services Administration’s Schedules.

Keep reading this article at: http://federalnewsradio.com/reporters-notebook-jason-miller/2016/12/sba-gsa-ofpp-not-seeing-eye-eye-rule-two-application/

Here is a copy of the SBA’s memo telling its PCRs that the should apply small business preferences to all task orders and all delivery orders because they are considered contracts pursuant to the Kingdomware decision: http://www.wifcon.com/dgc_memo.pdf

GSA wants transaction-level purchasing data from contractors

By

The General Services Administration (GSA) is changing the reporting requirements for federal contractors.

GSA Schedule ContractThe agency has formalized a new rule that requires vendors to report transaction-level data from orders on Federal Supply Schedule and governmentwide acquisition contracts, as well as indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity agreements.

Information gathered under the Transactional Data Reporting rule might include detailed descriptions, quantities and prices for items bought, according to a Federal Register notice.

The rule, which began with a pilot for FSS contracts over the summer, aims to help GSA analyze government spending patterns more broadly, according to the agency.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.nextgov.com/cio-briefing/2016/11/gsa-wants-transaction-level-purchasing-data/133235

GSA launches phase two of ‘Making It Easier’

By

The General Services Agency launched the Making It Easier initiative in April to help government improve the way it buys good and services, and after a series of successful programs, the agency is ready for phase two.

making-it-easierLaunched on Oct. 24th, the next phase adds a slew of new efforts for both the contracting community and federal agencies. They include new quick-start guides designed to get prepare prospective contractors as they seek business across GSA’s many acquisition vehicles; a Multiple Award Schedule (MAS) Modification Improvement process designed to streamline changes in schedule solicitations; and restructured help desks that will give customers a single point of entry.

In addition, GSA planned to release a report describing the full scope of the “Making It Easier” initiative, its impact on stakeholders and prospects for fiscal 2017.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.nextgov.com/technology-news/2016/10/gsa-launches-phase-2-making-it-easier/132572

Oracle to leave GSA schedule: A signal of broader change?

By

GSA logoOracle is leaving the General Services Administration’s schedules program. It’s not going to just stop selling directly through the IT schedule, but the software giant will no longer use third-party resellers either, according to multiple sources.

Let that sink in for a second. One of the largest software vendors in the world is telling GSA, thanks, but we can live without you.

Sources said Oracle decided the GSA schedules just weren’t worth the hassle any longer — the compliance requirements, the potential and real threats of False Claims Act lawsuits and the new Transactional Data Reporting (TDR) rule, all played into this decision.

“The federal market is a very small chunk of their business and while it seems big for us, when you look at someone like Oracle’s overall business, they have to expend an exorbitant amount of resources for little payoff,” said Jennifer Aubel, a principal with Aronson Consulting, who said she wasn’t familiar with Oracle’s decision. “With the TDR and even with not having to do price reduction clause reporting, a company like Oracle would still have to do monthly reporting and there is a lot of concerns, including how GSA will keep the data secure.”

Keep reading this article at: http://federalnewsradio.com/reporters-notebook-jason-miller/2016/09/oracle-leave-gsa-schedule-signal-broader-change/

Set-aside decision need not consider compliance with limitation on subcontracting

By

GAO-GovernmentAccountabilityOffice-SealBefore deciding whether to set-aside a solicitation for small businesses under FAR 19.502-2, should the contracting officer first determine whether those small business will be able to provide the needed services while, at the same time, complying with the limitation on subcontracting?

No, according to a recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) bid protest decision. Instead, an agency’s determination whether a small business will comply with the limitation on subcontracting should be made as part of its award decision (following the evaluation of proposals), not during its initial set-aside determination.

Under FAR 19.502-2(b), a procurement with an anticipated dollar amount greater than $150,000 must be set-aside for small businesses where there is a reasonable expectation that offers will be received from at least two responsible small businesses and that award will be made at fair market prices. Though orders under Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) contracts (issued under FAR part 8.4) are exempt from these small business programs, a contracting officer nonetheless has discretion to set-aside FSS orders for small businesses.

Keep reading this article at: http://smallgovcon.com/gaobidprotests/set-aside-decision-need-not-consider-compliance-with-limitation-on-subcontracting/

What vendors need to know about GSA’s new cyber offerings

By

GSA Schedule ContractThe General Service Administration is introducing an additional step to evaluate cybersecurity vendors: an oral exam.

The agency last week posted a draft solicitation for Highly Adaptive Cybersecurity Services, four new IT Schedule 70 Special Item Numbers designed to offer agencies quick access for cyberattack prevention and remediation. The SINs include penetration testing, incident response, cyber hunt and risk and vulnerability assessment services, and the agency is on the hunt for “high-quality cybersecurity vendors.”

That’s where the oral technical evaluation comes in.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.nextgov.com/cybersecurity/2016/08/what-vendors-need-know-about-gsas-new-cyber-offerings/131016/

GSA seeks input from Schedule-holders on contract modification process

By

GSA logoThe U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) is asking for feedback from GSA Schedule contractors on the contract modification process.

GSA’s Federal Acquisition Service (FAS) will use the industry input it receives to improve the GSA Multiple Award Schedules’ (MAS) modification process.

GSA explained that its industry outreach is part of its recently-launched Making it Easier Initiative which includes “improving the Multiple Award Schedule (MAS) modification process in order to make it easier for you, our MAS industry partners, to do business with the government.  We’ve heard your concerns, and want to make sure that your feedback on how to enhance the process is captured and taken into account.”

GSA Schedule contractors can provide comments by responding to the survey questionnaire at: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1i0RX9FmMz56I1OY73k5VaxONDX7yiqQVHlVKlPV1kGw/viewform.

Appeals court says extension constitutes new contract for considering bid protest

By

Award Term ExtensionsOn July 12, 2016, in Coast Professional, Inc. et. al v. United States, No. 2015-5077 (Fed. Cir. July 12, 2016), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overturned a Court of Federal Claims (“CoFC”) decision, finding that the CoFC erred in ruling that it did not have bid protest jurisdiction over the award of task orders characterized as “award-term extensions.”

The Federal Circuit’s decision provides clarity on the scope of Tucker Act’s bid protest jurisdiction, and provides a strong defense against Government arguments that attempt to limit that jurisdiction going forward.

The dispute in Coast Professional focused on “award term extensions” to task orders issued through the Federal Supply Schedule (“FSS”).

In 2008, the Department of Education (“DOE”) issued a Request for Quotations (RFQ) for services related to the collection of defaulted student loans. The RFQ stated that the Task Order would include a base term ending March 31, 2011, with additional option periods up to 24 months.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.insidegovernmentcontracts.com/2016/07/federal-circuit-confirms-that-a-task-order-award-term-extension-constitutes-a-new-contract-for-purposes-of-bid-protest-jurisdiction/

Contracting News

Read More

Contracting Tips

Read More

GTPAC News

Read More

Georgia Tech News

Read More