Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center

Transparency in debriefs would improve competition, help small businesses

By

Taxpayers have the right to know how the government is spending their money.

After all, the insights gained from total transparency in the federal procurement process can hold agencies more accountable. For this reason, administrations and congresses have undertaken initiatives to boost transparency and improve oversight of federal government spending on a bipartisan basis.

A few efforts stand out, such as the Clean Contracting Act, USAspending.gov and the DATA Act, but outside of these select few, transparency is still lacking under Federal Acquisition Regulation Part 16 Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity task or delivery order awards. To fix this, it is time that federal agencies be required to provide post-award debriefings to all unsuccessful offerors, regardless of the value of the awarded IDIQ task or delivery order.

Keep reading this article at: https://washingtontechnology.com/articles/2019/01/02/insights-bunting-contract-transparency.aspx

Who’s the ombudsman? Proposed FAR rule requires clarity

By

When GAO lacks jurisdiction to hear a protest over a task or delivery order, contractors have the right to complain to an ombudsman. Implementation of the ombudsman right, however, has been haphazard at best.

Last week, the DoD, GSA, and NASA–the entities comprising the FAR Council–proposed a rule to help alleviate this issue for IDIQ contracts.

Generally, 10 U.S.C. § 2304c and 41 U.S.C. § 4106 require each head of an agency that awards MATOC or delivery order contracts to appoint “a senior agency official who is independent of the contracting officer” as the “task and delivery order ombudsman.” The position requires the appointee to review complaints from contractors in order to ensure “that all of the contractors are afforded a fair opportunity to be considered” in certain circumstances where the underlying contract falls outside of GAO’s jurisdiction.

Keep reading this article at: http://smallgovcon.com/statutes-and-regulations/whos-the-ombudsman-proposed-far-rule-requires-clarity/

Kingdomware doesn’t require recertification for GSA Schedule SDVOSB set-aside orders

By

The Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Kingdomware Technologies, Inc. v. United States does not require SDVOSBs to recertify their eligibility in connection with individual GSA Schedule task orders.

In a recent decision, the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals held that Kingdomware doesn’t affect the SBA’s SDVOSB eligibility regulation for multiple-award contracts, which specifies that if a company qualifies as an SDVOSB at the time of the initial offer for a multiple-award contract, it ordinarily qualifies as an SDVOSB for all orders issued under the contract.

OHA’s decision in Redhorse Corporation, SBA No. VET-263 (2017) involved a GSA RFQ seeking transition ordering assistance in support of the Network Services Program.  The RFQ contemplated the award of a task order under the GSA Professional Services Schedule.  The order was set aside for SDVOSBs under NAICS code 541611 (Administrative Management and General Consulting Services).  The GSA contracting officer did not request that offerors recertify their SDVOSB eligibility in connection with the order.

After evaluating quotations, the GSA announced that Redhorse Corporation was the apparent awardee.  An unsuccessful competitor subsequently filed a protest challenging Redhorse’s SDVOSB status.  The SBA Director of Government Contracting sustained the protest and found Redhorse to be ineligible for the task order.

Keep reading this article at: http://smallgovcon.com/sbaohadecisions/kingdomware-doesnt-require-recertification-for-gsa-schedule-sdvosb-set-aside-orders

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

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/

GAO tackles cybersecurity

By

GAO-GovernmentAccountabilityOffice-SealIn two recent decisions, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) denied protest grounds challenging the ability of contract awardees to satisfy government requirements related to cybersecurity.  This posting analyzes those decisions and their implications for contractors.

  • In Discovery Technologies LLC, GAO denied a protest challenging the awardee’s ability to comply with the Federal Information Security Modernization Act (“FISMA”).  The solicitation, issued by the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) under FAR Subpart 8.4 for GSA Schedule 70 vendors, stated “[t]he Contractor shall be familiar and comply with applicable federal information technology and information management laws, regulations, policies, and standards.”
  • In Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc., GAO denied a protest challenging the Navy’s evaluation under a task order procurement for cybersecurity support.  Among the protester’s challenges was an allegation that the awardee should have received a lower technical score based on its lack of experience in certain areas related to cybersecurity.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?articleid=507776

GSA’s $2.93 billion Alliant contract is biggest GWAC in history

By

The General Service Administration’s Alliant governmentwide acquisition contract (GWAC) had an outstanding year helping agencies achieve their mission through a fast, flexible, and reliable acquisition vehicle. Agencies obligated $2.93 billion dollars to Alliant during FY15, marking Alliant as the largest utilized single GWAC in GSA history by dollar value.

Alliant is GSA’s premier enterprise GWAC, providing flexible access to customized IT solutions from a large, diverse pool of industry partners. Alliant allows for long-term planning of large-scale, complex program requirements.

Alliant FY15 Success Analytics

Since contract inception, more than 63 agencies have used  Alliant and awarded an estimated $22.8 Billion in task order value. Seven agencies used Alliant for the first time in FY15. This steady growth can be attributed to numerous factors. For example, approximately 870 federal acquisition and program professionals have received the Alliant GWAC Delegation of Procurement (DPA) training – 248 contracting officials in FY15 – a 23% increase.  During FY15, 96 Statements of Work (SOWs) were submitted for review, representing a 13% increase.

Top Agencies and Vendors

The top three agencies utilizing Alliant, in terms of obligated dollars, are the Air Force at $3.49 billion, the Department of Homeland Security at $3.00 billion, and the Army at $2.83 billion. The Department of State comes in at a close fourth at $2.62 billion.

Currently, the firm SAIC leads obligations – over $2.12 billion spread across 44 task orders. Booz Allen Hamilton Engineering Services follows with $881 million across 12 task orders, and Lockheed Martin follows with $853 million across 21 task orders.

Strong relationships between Government and Industry

As pre-competed vehicles, GWACs can streamline the acquisition process, which naturally leads to saving time and money. Alliant consists of 57 prequalified contractors.  To date, 51 out of 57 primes have received awards.

GSA’s Enterprise GWAC division recently invited representatives from each of the 57 Primes to participate in Alliant’s twice-a-year Program Management Review (PMR). The event spans two days and allows industry to interact with government and participate in collaborative program updates and breakout sessions.  Success on projects through Alliant is a three-part partnership – GSA, the procuring agency, and the company performing the work under the task order.

Source: http://gsablogs.gsa.gov/technology/2016/01/26/alliant-enterprise-gwac-update/

Agencies need not recertify small business status at task order level

By

On October 8, 2015, GAO upheld a $46.5 million IT task order awarded to OBXtek, Inc., finding that the U.S. Department of the Air Force was not required to recertify the contractor as a qualifying small business because OBXtek had small business status on the date of its proposal submittal.

With an estimated value of $46.5 million, this task order is well in excess of the $10 million threshold for GAO to hear protests related to the issuance of task orders under indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contracts. See 10 U.S.C. § 2304c(e)(1)(B); 41 U.S.C. § 4106(f)(1).

OBXtek was listed in the System for Award Management (SAM) as a small business when it submitted its proposal for the task order  on December 19, 2014, but in February 2015, it changed its status in SAM to “other than small.” This change came after OBXtek had properly qualified under the Alliant government-wide acquisition contract, a service-disabled, veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract from the General Services Administration.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?articleid=441210

Task order size status based on proposal date, not award date

By

A contractor was eligible for award of a small business set-aside task order because the contractor was “small” as of the date of its task order proposal–even though the contractor outgrew the size standard by the time the task order was awarded.

In a recent bid protest decision, the GAO held that a contractor may qualify for the award of a set-aside task order based on the date of its initial proposal, even in cases where the agency is prohibited from taking small business credit for the award.

The GAO’s decision in Research and Development Solutions, Inc., B-410581.2 (Jan. 14, 2015) involved a Navy task order solicitation for technical and engineering services.  The solicitation was issued as a small business set-aside under the SeaPort-e IDIQ contract vehicle.

Keep reading this article at: http://smallgovcon.com/gaobidprotests/task-order-size-status-based-on-proposal-date-not-award-date/

Bidder beware: Mind the details when using a GSA Schedule

By

The General Service Administration’s Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) is supposed to be a way for agencies to streamline procurement. However, achieving the desired efficiency requires that the Government buyer use the right contract vehicle for a given requirement. If the Government uses the wrong schedule—or a contractor proposes to provide goods or services that are not available under its schedule contract, and the agency fails to perform a careful evaluation—litigation may effectively eliminate the desired efficiencies. A recent GAO decision, US Investigations Services provides a good example of how thing can go awry.

The FBI issued a task order for services in connection with its National Name Check Program to the awardee using the awardee’s FSS contract. Under the task order, the awardee would research FBI files, assist in responding to FOIA requests, and support the agency in making national security classification determinations.

The protester raised several protest grounds, and GAO sustained one: the labor categories required to perform the task order were not in the awardee’s FSS contract. The agency’s solicitation included four labor categories, and the awardee proposed a single labor category from its FSS contract to satisfy the requirements of three of the categories. GAO compared the labor categories required under the solicitation with the description of the awardee’s category and determined “that the duties, responsibilities and qualifications of the types of employees solicited by the agency are not encompassed within” the awardee’s labor category. The agency was looking for personnel with in-depth knowledge of FBI policy and functions, as well as experience in records management, declassification review, and paralegal services. The awardee’s labor category focused on general aspects of program management, such as developing business methods, identifying best practices, and creating and assessing performance measurements.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?articleid=368660

Contracting News

Read More

Contracting Tips

Read More

GTPAC News

Read More

Georgia Tech News

Read More