The Contracting Education Academy

Contracting Academy Logo
  • Home
  • Training & Education
  • Services
  • Contact Us
You are here: Home / Archives for GSA Schedule

January 14, 2021 By cs

COFC confirms ‘rule of two’ analysis applies before agency decides to utilize a multiple-award vehicle

The U.S. Court of Federal Claims (COFC) issued a decision on Nov. 30, 2020 that supported the Small Business Administration’s position regarding the Rule of Two analysis requirements for government acquisitions.

The central question surrounding the case was whether the U.S. Army could cancel a Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 8 service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) set-aside procurement under the General Services Administration’s Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) and move the requirement to a multiple-award indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (MAIDIQ) contract vehicle that the plaintiff, The Tolliver Group, Inc. (Tolliver), did not hold.

In its protest, Tolliver argued, in part, that the Army’s actions violated the Rule of Two because the agency was required to determine whether two or more small businesses were capable of performing the requirement prior to choosing to put the procurement on the MAIDIQ contract.

The COFC’s decision confirms that the Rule of Two analysis applies before an agency elects to procure a requirement from a multiple-award contract (MAC) vehicle under FAR Part 16.5.

The Rule of Two requires contracting officers to set aside any acquisition over the simplified acquisition threshold for small business participation when there is a reasonable expectation that (1) offers will be obtained from at least two responsible small business concerns and (2) the award will be made at fair market prices.

In Tolliver, the Army argued that a Rule of Two analysis was not required because—according the Small Business Jobs Act, as implemented in 15 U.S.C. § 644(r)—federal agencies have the discretion to issue MACs without first conducting a Rule of Two analysis to determine whether it should be set aside for small businesses.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/cofc-confirms-rule-of-two-analysis-83418/

Filed Under: Government Contracting News Tagged With: Army, COFC, Court of Federal Claims, FAR, Federal Supply Schedule, FSS, GSA Schedule, IDIQ, MAC, MAIDIQ, multiple award, multiple award contract, rule of two, SBA, SDVOSB, set-aside, simplified acquisition

December 28, 2020 By cs

Vendors, consultants describe an increase in ‘bullying’ tactics by GSA to get lower schedule prices

The General Services Administration’s schedules program brings in more than $38 billion in revenue each year.

It’s one of the most well-known acquisition programs in the country with a reach across more than 100 agencies, state and local governments and the private sector companies. If a company wants to play in the federal market, usually their first step is to get on the schedule.

This is why recent actions by some GSA contracting officers trying to drive down prices, particularly for services, that some say to an unreasonable level is causing so much concern and eliciting words like “bullying” and “holding hostage” from those vendors facing this pressure that has re-emerged over the last four to six months.

Multiple vendors as well as consultants, lawyers and a major GSA-focused trade association representing hundreds of schedule holders say the pendulum has swung too far in how the Federal Acquisition Service is requiring vendors to renegotiate prices, with some being reduced by as much as 40%.

“We are getting our next five years on the schedule and [were] just finishing our 10 year[s] in total. In our entire time on the schedule, we’ve never gotten an economic price adjustment so we have not increased our rates since 2009 or 2010. GSA deemed our rates fair and reasonable at the time,” said one vendor executive, who requested anonymity for fear of reprisal. “When we recently went to modify our schedule contract, the GSA contracting officer said our prices were no longer fair and reasonable and asked us to reduce five of our rates. That just shocked us. We have multiple blanket purchase agreements and other contracts against these rates so for us to back track was unthinkable.”

Keep reading this article at: https://federalnewsnetwork.com/reporters-notebook-jason-miller/2020/12/vendors-consultants-describe-an-increase-in-bullying-tactics-by-gsa-to-get-lower-schedule-prices/

Filed Under: Government Contracting News Tagged With: e-signature, eMod, eOffer, Federal Supply Schedule, GSA, GSA Schedule, MAS, modification, multiple award contract, offer, Schedules

November 10, 2020 By cs

GSA preparing switch to e-signature for Multiple Award Schedule offers and mods

Contract holders will also see new security measures being implemented in the near future for eOffer and eMod.

In less than one month, contract holders on the General Services Administration’s Multiple Award Schedule will be able to sign offers and contract modifications digitally using DocuSign. The move will come ahead of more changes that will bring additional security to two contract management portals.

On November 30, GSA will be turning on the ability to electronically sign documents in eOffer and eMod, which will become the standard method going forward. But the transition means contract holders need to prepare.

“This change to DocuSign aligns with GSA’s overall IT modernization efforts to support security and provide a solution that is legally recognized internationally,” GSA officials wrote in a post on Interact.

The post notes there will be some downtime during the transition, meaning vendors will “not be able to submit new offers and requests for modifications in eOffer and eMod” from November 25 through 29. That said, vendors will still be able to start the process for new offers and modifications—just not submit them—and will be able to work on tasks already in process.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.nextgov.com/it-modernization/2020/10/gsa-preparing-switch-esignature-multiple-award-schedule-offers-and-modifications/169653/

Filed Under: Government Contracting News Tagged With: e-signature, eOffer, Federal Supply Schedule, GSA, GSA Schedule, MAS, modification, multiple award contract, offer, Schedules

October 16, 2020 By cs

Former GSA contract specialist sentenced to prison for accepting bribes

A former government contract officer with the General Services Administration (GSA), was sentenced last week to a 21-month prison term on a federal bribery charge stemming from a scheme in which he accepted bribes from government contractors during a six-year period. 

Ronnie Simpkins of Maryland pled guilty to the charge in December of last year.

According to the government’s evidence, from 1989 until May 2019, Simpkins was employed by GSA as a Contract Specialist in procurement related positions, and between August 2013 and May 2019.  From February 2010 to August 2017, Simpkins was assigned to a sub-division of the Federal Acquisition Service (FAS) which oversees the administration of GSA Schedule 70 contracts. “Schedules” are long-term government-wide contracts with commercial companies that provide access to commercial products and services at fair and reasonable prices to the government. “Schedule 70 contracts” provide IT solutions, services, and software to federal, state, and local customer agencies. GSA pre-negotiates the vendors’ pricing, terms, and conditions, to streamline the acquisition process while at the same time providing the best value to the end user agency.

According to court papers, Company A, a Northern Virginia corporation, held a GSA Schedule contract, which it actively advertised to prospective federal agency customers.  To maintain its GSA Schedule contract, Company A was required to have annual sales in excess of $25,000 — a requirement that could be waived by GSA’s administrative contracting officer.  Company A was also required to pay an Industrial Funding Fee (IFF) of 0.75% of all its Schedule sales.  Dating back to 2006, Company A maintained its GSA Schedule contract despite reporting no sales and not paying any IFFs since 2006.  Simpkins oversaw the contract dating back to 2009.

Simpkins admitted that, for approximately six years between 2011 and 2017, he accepted cash, meals, and furniture from two Company A officials to use his position to help Company A maintain its GSA Schedule contract.  Simpkins admitted to meeting the Company A officials over a dozen times at various restaurants in Northern Virginia, the Company A officials’ residences, and other places, often outside of normal GSA business hours and on weekends.  At these meetings, the Company A officials treated Simpkins to meals and gave him cash totaling “thousands of dollars into the teens.”  In July 2016, Simpkins accepted more than $2,000 worth of furniture paid for by the officials.  Simpkins admitted to taking more than $12,000 in cash and furniture from the Company A officials.

Simpkins admitted to using his GSA position to help Company A in exchange for these payments.  Specifically, Simpkins recommended and signed Company A’s contracts with GSA, even though Company A:

  • failed to meet program requirements,
  • deliberately neglected to notify GSA, as he was obligated to do, when Company A’s contract under his supervision no longer met program requirements, and
  • advised Company A about ways to avoid contract cancellation despite failing to meet GSA’s program requirements.

United States District Judge Trevor N. McFadden, who presided over the case, sentenced Simpkins to 21 months in prison, followed by one year of supervised release.  The Court also imposed a $10,000 fine and ordered Simpkins to forfeit $12,108.91.

The case was investigated by the FBI’s Washington Field Office Criminal Division and the GSA’s Office of Inspector General, and prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office’s Public Corruption and Civil Rights Section.

Source: https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/former-federal-government-contract-officer-sentenced-prison-accepting-bribes

Filed Under: Government Contracting News Tagged With: abuse, bribe, bribery, conviction, corruption, DOJ, FAS, FBI, felony, fraud, GSA, GSA Schedule, IT, Justice Dept.

June 2, 2020 By cs

GSA terminates McKinsey & Co.’s schedule contract

The General Services Administration has terminated the multiple award schedule contract of McKinsey and Company.

The company and the agency’s inspector general confirmed GSA’s decision in separate emails to Federal News Network.

The decision comes 10 months after a critical inspector general report found McKinsey’s prices were 10% higher than originally proposed, meaning the government paid as much as $65 million in additional costs.

The IG recommended at the time to cancel McKinsey’s schedule contract in part because they didn’t cooperate with the pre-award audit.

“We are disappointed with the GSA’s decision, and that a GSA schedule is not available to our clients at this time,” a McKinsey spokesman said in an email statement. “We attempted to negotiate in good faith and disagree with the GSA’s evaluation. We will nevertheless continue to serve the public sector in the United States.”

Keep reading this article at: https://federalnewsnetwork.com/acquisition-policy/2020/05/gsa-terminates-mckinsey-co-s-schedule-contract/

Filed Under: Government Contracting News Tagged With: audit, GSA, GSA Schedule, KcKinsey, preaward

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • …
  • 20
  • Next Page »

Popular Topics

abuse acquisition reform acquisition strategy acquisition training acquisition workforce Air Force Army AT&L bid protest budget budget cuts competition cybersecurity DAU DFARS DHS DoD DOJ FAR fraud GAO Georgia Tech GSA GSA Schedule GSA Schedules IG industrial base information technology innovation IT Justice Dept. Navy NDAA OFPP OMB OTA Pentagon procurement reform protest SBA sequestration small business spending technology VA
Contracting Academy Logo
75 Fifth Street, NW, Suite 300
Atlanta, GA 30308
info@ContractingAcademy.gatech.edu
Phone: 404-894-6109
Fax: 404-410-6885

RSS Twitter

Search this Website

Copyright © 2023 · Georgia Tech - Enterprise Innovation Institute