Browse by Subject
Browse by Category
If a contractor is performing a task that has to continue while the contracotr is on leave, who can/should perform the task while that contractor takes a vacation for two weeks? Should the company under contract backfill with one of their employees or is it appropriate for civilian management to assign the task to a civilian employee while the contractor is out on vacation?
Contracting for "Agile" has been something that has come up in contracting circles in the past few years, but probably hasn't been taken seriously because DoD hasn't come out with any official guidance for contracting to follow, until now: OUSD (A&S) has come out with the attached document entitled, "Contracting Considerations for Agile Solutions; Key Agile Concepts and Sample Work Statement Language" dated 18 November 2019.
It is a fairly comprehensive document, and we can expect to see more coming out on Agile Contracting in the future, but this document is a great start for those trying to lean forward with Agile. There are lots of great references to other "Agile Contracting" resources, located within the document.
Attachment is below:
Contracting Considerations for Agile Solutions v1.0.pdf
The DAU Provision and Clause Matrix continues to be updated regularly, on the 1st and 15th of each month pending significant changes. Additionally, the matrix has been expanded with the latest update on 21 October, to include all AFFARS and NMCARS clauses. After Don Mansfield's departure from DAU in June of 2019, I have become the Learning Asset Manager (LAM) for this tool, and I am committed to keeping it an updated and relevant tool in the DAU toolbox. Should you have any questions about the matrix, you can send them to me at email@example.com. You can download the DAU Provision and Clause Matrix at https://www.dau.mil/tools/t/FAR,-DFARS,-VAAR,-DEAR-Provision-and-Clause-Matrix.
DAU has updated the Provision and Clause Matrix to incorporate changes made by Defense Publication Notice (DPN) 20190215. The DPN affected provisions and clauses implementing "Antiterrorism Training Requirements for Contractors (DFARS Case 2017-D034)", "Use of Commercial or Non-Government Standards (DFARS Case 2017-D014)", "Modification of DFARS Clause 'Transportation of Supplies By Sea' (DFARS Case 2018-D028)" and "Extension of Supply Chain Risk Management Authority (DFARS Case 2018-D072)." You can download the matrix at https://www.dau.mil/tools/t/FAR,-DFARS,-VAAR,-DEAR-Provision-and-Clause-Matrix.
I am in the process of developing a course that is delivered over 7 weeks entirely in BB, ILT, asynchronous. We plan on meeting up once a week in office hours, but, other than that students can work on the course anytime. The course relies on videos, job aids and BB graphics with hands on examples/case studies. Question: Does anyone in the CON department know if CON has something similar to this? ILT, asynchronous.
Second question: The new CON subway tool: How many CON people do you have assigned to this? Is there a plan into the future for maintenance? (CCM is looking at a admin tool/website and we are curious about workload.)
We are trying to get a maintenance BPA in place for a Generator that supplies emergency power to our SCIF. We put out a SOW, held a site visit and got the quotes back. They were for 2 line items one for the actual maintenance contract and another for emergency calls. We didn't specify how we were awarding this BPA and now we have a problem. One vendor has a lower line 1 but a higher line 2 so I am at a stand still.
We highly encourage comments, examples, feedback and continued discussion.
The DAU Provision and Clause Matrix has been updated to incorporate changes made by Defense Procurement Notice (DPN) 20181031. The DPN removed three clauses from the DFARS: 252.211-7000, Acquisition Streamlining; 252.228-7004, Bonds and Other Security; and 252.236-7009, Option for Supervision and Inspection Services. The DPN also made changes to the clause at DFARS 252.219-7009, Section 8(a) Direct Award, so the date of the clause was changed. The matrix can be downloaded at https://www.dau.mil/tools/t/FAR,-DFARS,-VAAR,-DEAR-Provision-and-Clause-Matrix.
The DAU Provision and Clause Matrix has been updated to include changes made by Class Deviation 2018-O0021--Commercial Item Omnibus Clause for Acquisitions Using the Standard Procurement System. The class deviation rescinds and supersedes Class Deviation 2013-O0019. Pursuant to the class deviation, contracting officers may deviate from FAR 52.212-5 when using the Standard Procurement System. The matrix can be downloaded at https://www.dau.mil/tools/t/FAR,-DFARS,-VAAR,-DEAR-Provision-and-Clause-Matrix.
The DAU Provision and Clause Matrix has been updated to incorporate changes made by class deviation 2018-O0020: Permanent Supply Chain Risk Management Authority. The matrix can be downloaded from https://www.dau.mil/tools/t/FAR,-DFARS,-VAAR,-DEAR-Provision-and-Clause-Matrix.
The DAU Provision and Clause Matrix has been updated to incorporate changes made by class deviations 2018-O0018: Micro-Purchase Threshold, Simplified Acquisition Threshold, and Special Emergency Procurement Authority; and 2018-O0019: Contractor Personnel Performing in Japan. The matrix can be downloaded from https://www.dau.mil/tools/t/FAR,-DFARS,-VAAR,-DEAR-Provision-and-Clause-Matrix.
The DAU Provision and Clause Matrix has been updated to incorporate changes resulting from Defense Publication Notice 20180824. The change removed the clause at 252.247-7006, Removal of Contractor's Employees, from the DFARS. The matrix can be downloaded here: https://www.dau.mil/tools/t/FAR,-DFARS,-VAAR,-DEAR-Provision-and-Clause-Matrix
The DAU Provision and Clause Matrix has been updated to incorporate changes published in Federal Acquisition Circular 2005-100. The changes to the matrix affected the dates of a handful of provisions and clauses as a result of technical amendments. The matrix can be downloaded here: https://www.dau.mil/tools/t/FAR,-DFARS,-VAAR,-DEAR-Provision-and-Clause-Matrix
FAR 19.705-2, Determining the Need for a Subcontracting Plan, states:
The contracting officer shall take the following actions to determine whether a proposed contractual action requires a subcontracting plan:
(1) Determine whether the proposed total contract-dollars will exceed the subcontracting plan threshold in 19.702(a).
(2) Determine whether a proposed modification will cause the total contract dollars to exceed the subcontracting plan threshold (see 19.702(a)).
(b) Determine whether subcontracting possibilities exist by considering relevant factors such as --
(1) Whether firms engaged in the business of furnishing the types of items to be acquired customarily contract for performance of part of the work or maintain sufficient in-house capability to perform the work; and
(2) Whether there are likely to be product prequalification requirements.
(3) Whether the firm can acquire any portion of the work with minimal or no disruption to performance (with consideration given to the time remaining until contract completion), and at fair market value, when a determination is made in accordance with paragraph (a)(2).
(c) If it is determined that there are no subcontracting possibilities, the determination shall include a detailed rationale, be approved at a level above the contracting officer, and placed in the contract file.
My question relates to the determination that subcontracting possibilities exist when it comes to commercial purchases under FAR 12. For instance, many COTS vendors do not produce everything in-house. It has its own vendors (aka subcontractors) that provide materials or produce components that go into the end product it sells. The government contract does not create NEW opportunities for subcontracting since the vendor already has its set list of providers which it uses for its commercial products.
Is FAR 19.705-2 only addressing the subcontracting opportunities created by the government contract or subcontracting opportunities overall (aka the vendor has no subcontractors while producting its commercial item)?
My interpretation, based on the relevant factors provided in section (b), leads me to believe that even if the government requirement does not create NEW subcontracting opportunities, the fact that the vendor has a list of provides (aka vendors or subcontractors) argues in favor of there being subcontracting opportunities; therefore, a subcontracting plan is required if other criteria are met. I also believe this because of the fact that the government wants companies that get federal dollars to actively think about how the company can help grow small businesses.
The DAU Provision and Clause Matrix has been updated to include changes resulting from FAC 2005-99, DPN 20180629, and Class Deviation 2018-O0017. The most current matrix can be dowloaded here: https://www.dau.mil/tools/t/FAR,-DFARS,-VAAR,-DEAR-Provision-and-Clause-Matrix.
Opened discussions with all Offerors under a MAC task order solicitation. Asked each Offeror questions based on their weaknesses/deficiencies. This is BVTO. All Offerors responded adequately except one. We asked a follow-up question to only one of the Offerors. They responded, we were satisfied. We closed discussions and asked for the Final/Revised offers.
We highly encourage comments, examples, feedback and continued discussion.
Recently received a new/revised WD for a CPIF subcontract that increased salary for a labor category. Pricing did not include overhead, G&A in the price adjustment proposal to the prime contractor.
What elements of cost are applied to SCA pricing adjustments for cost reimbursable contracts and subcontracts?? Can overhead and G&A be applied to the new WD rate??
I am going to solicit a Task Order on our MACC and in this project a small part of it is an Air Compressor that was purchased via GPC many years ago that requires installation. No titles will be transferred and this item will never leave the facility in which it is currently stored. Is this item considered GFP to be furnished to the contractor, and do the normal rules apply? I have asked several other CO's and some say all the rules apply and some say it is overkill. In this case isn't it more of an installation service, such as if we had cubicles that required assembly? Although we are in a sense supplying items that will necessitate contract completion, we never lose control of it and never leaves government inventory.
Have a contract with a FPIF CLIN. The period of performance (PoP) has ended and all final invoicing has been completed. Received the Final Actual Audited Allowable Cost and now we are being asked to provide a modification in Standard Procurement System (SPS)/ Procurement Desktop-Defense (PD2) to reflect final numbers. While in SPS/PD2 we have not been able to see how or where to input the final numbers that were calculated using the FPIF/CPIF tool from DAU. How do we modify the contract to close out a FPIF CLIN using SPS/PD2?
Based on DFARS 215.371-1, am I able to request certified cost or pricing data on only the CLINs I cannot determine fair and reasonable or do I have to request certified cost or pricing data on the entire proposal. DFARS contains the words price and cost analysis as necessary, which makes me believe that you can pick and choose, however how would this effect defective pricing to if only half the proposal was certified?
Required fields marked with *
Please note that you should expect to receive a response from our team, regarding your inquiry, within 2 business days.