Post on 21-Dec-2015
1
Determining Responsible Prospective Contractors
Antwan G. Reid
PIP Level II Presentation
May 20, 2004
2
Introduction
Federal Government Procurement
-Largest consumer in the world
-Importance of finding responsible contractors
-How does a contracting officer determine if a potential contractor is responsible?
(pg.1)
3
Purpose
Gain subject-matter expertise Explore the idea of developing a guide for contracting officers. Find answers to questions developed by
interest in “Determining Responsible Prospective Contractors”.
(pg. 1)
4
Sources
Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) NASA FAR Supplement Books (Business, Financial, Ethics, etc.) Popular Electronic Search Engines
(pg.1)
5
Background
Final Rule Published in the Federal Register by the FAR Council
Language Added to FAR 9.104-1(d) General Accounting Office Opposition to the Final Rule Bush Administration Proposed Revocation Previous Responsibility Rules Reinstated
(pg.1)
6
Components
The guide would analyze and break down the following:
-Part I-General Standards (FAR 9.1)
-Part II-Preaward Surveys (FAR 9.1)
-Part III-Certificates of Competency (FAR 19.6)
(pg.3)
7
FAR 9.102 Applicability
Applies to proposed contracts located -In the U.S. or its outlying areas -Elsewhere (unless inconsistent with laws or customs where the contractor is located) Does not apply to proposed contracts -Foreign, State, or Local Governments -Other U.S. Govt. Agencies -Agencies for the blind or other severely
handicapped
8
FAR 9.103 Policy
Contracts shall be awarded to responsible prospective contractors only.
No purchase or award shall be made unless the contracting officer makes a determination of responsibility.
Award of a contract to a supplier based on lowest evaluated price can be false economy.
Note: Check for debarred or suspended offerors before evaluation and
award.
9
Part I-General Standards
FAR 9.104-1(a) Analysis - General Business Information - Financial Statements - Issues with Financial Statements - Financial Ratios/Equations FAR 9.104-1(b) Analysis - Discussion
(pg.4)
10
Part I-General Standards (cont’d)
FAR 9.104-1(c) Analysis
-Application of Standards (FAR) Importance of NF1680 “Evaluation of
Performance”
-Big Asset in Determining Responsibility
-Input from end users, financial, administrative
(pg.8)
11
Part I-General Standards (cont’d)
FAR 9.104-1(d) Analysis -Integrity -Business Ethics -POGO Investigation -Determining an Ethical Business FAR 9.104-1(e) Analysis -Discussion
(pg.9)
12
Part I-General Standards (cont’d)
FAR 9.104-1(f) Analysis
-Discussion FAR 9.104-1(g) Analysis
-Discussion
(pg. 12)
13
Part II-Preaward Surveys
Preaward Surveys can be accomplished by:
-Data already obtained
-Data from another Govt. agency
-Data from a commercial source
-On-site inspection of plant and facilities
-Any combination of the above
(pg.13)
14
Part II-Preaward Surveys (cont’d)
In Obtaining Information, use the following: -List of Parties Excluded from Fed. Procurement and nonprocurement Programs -Records and experience data -Commercial sources of supplier information -Preaward surveys -Publications, subcontractors, customers, etc.
(pg.14)
15
Part II-Preaward Surveys (cont’d)
Disclosure of Preaward Information -Discussion Contract Audit Responsibilities -Discussion Reports -Discussion (pg.14)
16
Part III-Certificates of Competency (COC)
Background Purpose Referral: C.O. must do the following:
-Withhold contract award
-Refer the matter to the cognizant
SBA Govt. Contracting Area Office
(pg.18)
17
Part III-Certificates of Competency (COC) (cont’d)
Referral must include along with a notice -Solicitation
-Final Offer submitted by the concern -Abstract of bids or C.O.’s Price Neg. Memo. -Preaward survey -Technical data package -Any other justification or documentation
(pg.19)
18
Part III-Certificates of Competency (COC) (cont’d)
Issuing/Denying a Certificate of Competency COC Referrals vs COC’s Issued Resolving Differences between the Agency and
SBA Awarding the Contract
(pg.19)
19
Summary and Conclusion
Summary Conclusions -Contracting officers need to compare the benefits of an evaluation against the cost. -Issue of contracting officers placing more
value on one general standard over another. -Contracting officers comfort level with respect to
evaluating a prospective contractor. (pg. 23)
20
Recommendations
Recommendations -Submission of the “Determining Responsible
Prospective Contractors” guide to the appropriate reviewing committee.
-The creator would remain responsible in order to continuously update the guide.
-NASA Goddard should develop more subject- matter experts.
(pg.23)
21
Questions