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 (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 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 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 (a) Analysis - General Business Information - Financial Statements - Issues with Financial Statements - Financial Ratios/Equations  FAR (b) Analysis - Discussion (pg.4)

10 Part I-General Standards (cont’d)  FAR (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 (d) Analysis -Integrity -Business Ethics -POGO Investigation -Determining an Ethical Business  FAR (e) Analysis -Discussion (pg.9)

12 Part I-General Standards (cont’d)  FAR (f) Analysis -Discussion  FAR (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