GAO | The Contracting Education Academy

March 13, 2020 By cs

Risk is high that GSA’s latest telecom contract suffers same fate as last two

The General Services Administration’s Enterprise Infrastructure Solutions (EIS) program is facing the same fate as its predecessor — delays in transition will cost the government millions of dollars and push IT modernization further back on the priority list.

The difference between the failure of Networx and the potential problems EIS is facing, however, is the recognition by some lawmakers that it’s not entirely GSA’s fault.

The House Oversight and Reform Subcommittee on Government Operations wants to hold agency chief information officers and other leadership accountable for not moving fast enough to take advantage of the new contract.

“We learned a tremendous amount of lessons and, in fact, I credit GSA for incorporating those lessons learned from the Networx transition into their guidance and disseminating those lessons to the agencies,” said Carol Harris, director of IT acquisition management issues at the Government Accountability Office, during a subcommittee hearing on March 4. “Now the onus is on the agencies to get their house in order and move quickly to ensure that they are moving onto EIS as quickly as possible.”

Keep reading this article at: https://federalnewsnetwork.com/hearings-oversight/2020/03/risk-is-high-that-gsas-latest-telecom-contract-suffers-same-fate-as-last-two/

March 5, 2020 By cs

GAO declines to limit DoD’s ‘experimental purchasing’ authority

In its recent decision in Air Tractor, Inc., the Government Accountability Office (GAO) held that the Department of Defense (DoD) may, at its own discretion, begin a project with agreements under its prototyping Other Transaction (OT) authority, and award later phases of the same project on a sole source basis under its experimental purchasing authority.

In the decision, GAO discussed distinctions between these avenues, and gave a broad reading to the DoD’s authority to award contracts for experimental work.

The past few years have seen a swell of interest in DoD’s ability to sidestep the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and use more flexible OT authority to enter into contracts. Thus far, the majority of this interest has centered on DoD’s OT authority to enter into prototype projects, now codified at 10 U.S.C. § 2371b.

One of the most powerful features of DoD’s prototype OT authority is that DoD may award a sole source follow-on production contract for a successful prototype. Congress included some limitations on this authority to award sole source follow-on production contracts at 10 U.S.C. § 2371b(f). For example, in its decision in Oracle America, Inc., GAO confirmed that DoD must comply with all notice and other specific preconditions at the prototyping stage in order to award a sole source follow-on production contract.

However, prototype OT authority is not DoD’s only authority to award sole source contracts. The Competition in Contracting Act (CICA) itself allows for sole source awards in certain circumstances. In DRS Sustainment Systems, GAO held that DoD need not comply with 10 U.S.C. § 2371b(f) to award a sole source production contract where DoD invokes one of CICA’s exceptions to separately justify the sole source award. In addition, under 10 U.S.C. § 2373, DoD has authority to make sole source purchases for items it “considers necessary for experimental or test purposes in the development of the best supplies that are needed for the national defense.”

In Air Tractor, GAO held that DoD properly relied on its “experimental purchasing” authority under 10 U.S.C. § 2373 to purchase a set of full production light attack aircraft for use in “experiments” to determine the best use of such planes in combat support. GAO found that this purchase was acceptable because it met the requirements of § 2373 alone, regardless of the Air Force’s initial use of its § 2371b prototype OT authority to compare various candidate aircraft. GAO confirmed that while it will exercise jurisdiction to ensure agency compliance with various statutory authorities to award non-procurement contracts, GAO will not impose requirements beyond those stated in the statutes. In upholding the Air Force’s acquisition strategy, the Air Tractor decision provides valuable insight as to the broad scope of § 2373 “experimental purchasing” authority.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/Government-Public-Sector/895672/GAO-Declines-To-Limit-DoD39s-Experimental-Purchasing-Authority

March 3, 2020 By cs

Overstock.com protest could delay GSA commercial e-marketplace pilots until April or beyond

The General Services Administration (GSA) recently responded to an Overstock.com protest of the agency’s commercial e-marketplace solicitation, which could delay pilots until April — assuming revisions aren’t ordered.

Overstock filed its pre-award bid protest with the Government Accountability Office on Jan. 15 arguing some of the solicitation’s terms are ambiguous and restrict competition. The internet retailer further argued GSA didn’t allow sufficient time for companies to respond, according to a person with knowledge of the situation.

Overstock had until Feb. 24 to respond to GSA’s agency report based on anything it learns. The protest itself is covered by a protective order limiting disclosure to lawyers for the private parties.

Section 846 of the 2018 National Defense Authorization Act directed GSA to work with nontraditional government contractors on allowing agencies to purchase up to $250,000 — the simplified acquisition threshold — in commercial items. GSA’s initial pilot will focus on e-marketplaces like Amazon or Overstock, where competition between sellers occurs at the item level.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.fedscoop.com/overstock-gsa-e-marketplace-protest/

February 25, 2020 By cs

Contractor successfully uses GAO pre-award protest to modify solicitation

When the terms of a solicitation run contrary to the regulations, challenging the solicitation in a pre-award protest may provide contractors the chance to shift the tide in their favor before bids are submitted and an award is made.

In January 2020, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) sustained a pre-award bid protest brought by Noble Supply & Logistics, Inc. that challenged the terms of a General Services Administration (GSA) solicitation. Noble Supply & Logistics, Inc., B-418141, 2020 WL 289546 (Jan. 16, 2020). Noble Supply argued the RFQ’s price evaluation methodology, as written, failed to provide for an evaluation of which offeror presented the best value and the lowest overall cost alternative, in violation of FAR part 8.

In the RFQ, GSA asked holders of GSA 51V Hardware Superstore Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) contracts to bid on four blanket purchase agreements (BPAs) to provide hardware products and services to four military branches. For its price evaluation factor, the RFQ stated that GSA would evaluate price quotations “to ensure that offered pricing, to include flat rates and tiered volume discounts, is fair and reasonable.” The RFQ then stated that GSA would not evaluate whether the award was the “lowest-priced technically acceptable” (LPTA), nor would it conduct a “best value tradeoff source selection methodology.” Thus, GSA would only evaluate the quotes for price reasonableness to determine whether prices were unreasonably high.

Noble Supply argued that this price methodology was contrary to 41 U.S.C. sections 152, 8.404(d) and 8.405-3(a), which require GSA to award BPAs to the awardee that provides the “best value and results in the lowest overall cost alternative.” GAO agreed, explaining that “consideration of the lowest cost is an imperative when using the FSS” and therefore GSA is required to “reach a determination regarding which FSS vendor meets the agency’s needs at the lowest overall cost.” Noble Supply & Logistics, Inc., B-418141, 2020 WL 289546, at *6 (Jan. 16, 2020).

Keep reading this article at: http://www.mondaq.com/Article/891604

January 13, 2020 By cs

3 must-read acquisition provisions in the 2020 NDAA

After a long Congressional conference period the 2020 Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) was finally signed into law, and with it come some changes to the defense acquisition process.

Federal News Network compiled three provisions that are particularly interesting regarding the procurement of military weapons.

These provisions involve intellectual property, middle-tier acquisition, and the establishment of a Defense Civilian Training Corps, and are summarized here:

The 2020 NDAA gives DoD more leeway in experimenting with that policy by creating a pilot program on intellectual property evaluation.
The middle-tier acquisition method allows for rapid prototyping and fielding within five years, as long as certain criteria are met.
The Defense Civilian Training Corps will train civilians for public service in the Department of Defense.

Read the complete Federal News Network article at: https://federalnewsnetwork.com/defense-main/2019/12/three-must-read-acquisition-provisions-in-the-2020-ndaa/

The General Services Administration’s Enterprise Infrastructure Solutions (EIS) program is facing the same fate as its predecessor — delays in transition will cost the government millions of dollars and push IT modernization further back on the priority list.

The General Services Administration (GSA) recently responded to an Overstock.com protest of the agency’s commercial e-marketplace solicitation, which could delay pilots until April — assuming revisions aren’t ordered.

When the terms of a solicitation run contrary to the regulations, challenging the solicitation in a pre-award protest may provide contractors the chance to shift the tide in their favor before bids are submitted and an award is made.

After a long Congressional conference period the 2020 Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) was finally signed into law, and with it come some changes to the defense acquisition process.

Search this Website