NASA FAR supplement: award terms

NASA has issued a proposed rule to create “award terms” for superior performance extending beyond the typical base-plus-four contract. The intro states:

While there are similarities between an award term and an option, such as funds must be available and the requirement must fulfill an existing Government need, the key difference is that an option may be exercised when the contractor’s performance is acceptable, while earning an award term requires sustained excellent performance.

Does anyone think this will motivate contracts to sustained excellent performance from their previous acceptable? Isn’t that what a recompete is for? Will this streamline NASA acquisition? Could we see this catching on across the the government?

——————————
Jason Bakke
Proposal Manager
Censeo Consulting Group (Censeo)
Washington DC
——————————

0

Replies

  1. Perhaps. NASA has always been, in my opinion, one of the better agencies for procurement innovation, and using perhaps outside the box thinking to improve performance. Granted nothing revolutionary here, but certainly the recognition of a problem is a good step in the right direction. 

    ——————————
    Jaime Gracia
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-13-2016 14:30
    From: Jonathan Messinger
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    Good point, Jaime, about the project management bill. I see no reason why that doesn’t get signed into law soon, but we all know the speed of legislation in D.C.

    One question I have to circle back to Jason’s original question… is this a test by NASA? Considering the space agency is one of the pillars of the FAR Council, I could see this getting rolled out across the government, if it’s seen as effective.

    ——————————
    Jonathan Messinger
    Public Spend Forum
    Washington DC
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-13-2016 09:15
    From: Jaime Gracia
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    Project management and accountability are lost on federal projects, as awarding options are almost a formality. Although I am not a fan of legislation to make people do what they should be doing already, the Program Management Improvement and Accountability Act (PMIAA) may be helpful. 

    The PMIAA reforms federal program management policy in four important ways:

    1. Creating a formal job series and career path for program managers in the federal government.
    2. Developing a standards-based program management policy across the federal government.
    3. Recognizing the essential role of executive sponsorship and engagement by designating a senior executive in federal agencies to be responsible for program management policy and strategy.
    4. Sharing knowledge of successful approaches to program management through an interagency council on program management.

    It is currently awaiting the President’s signature, so we shall see if these initiatives get rolled out in the Trump Administration.

    ——————————
    Jaime Gracia
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-11-2016 12:20
    From: John (Jack) Pellegrino
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    Most agencies have difficulty consistently rating “past performance” not to mention establishing what “superior performance” is. That being said, the usefulness ans success will depend on establishing a clear criteria and expectation of what is superior  (is that beyond contact requirements?)  and the consistency of ita application.

    ——————————
    John (Jack) Pellegrino
    Director, Puchasing & Contracting
    County of San Diego (Department of Puchasing & Contracting)
    San Diego CA
    (858) 505-6562
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-09-2016 17:15
    From: Raj Sharma
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    Shouldn’t “sustained excellent performance” be criteria for any option award, forget “award term”?  We need more accountability around performance and options shouldn’t just be considered automatic.  So, no, i don’t expect this to do much given the expectation of excellent performance is so low.  A real shame for taxpayers.

    ——————————
    Raj Sharma
    Public Spend Forum
    Washington DC
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-09-2016 11:47
    From: Jason Bakke
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    NASA has issued a proposed rule to create “award terms” for superior performance extending beyond the typical base-plus-four contract. The intro states:

    While there are similarities between an award term and an option, such as funds must be available and the requirement must fulfill an existing Government need, the key difference is that an option may be exercised when the contractor’s performance is acceptable, while earning an award term requires sustained excellent performance.

    Does anyone think this will motivate contracts to sustained excellent performance from their previous acceptable? Isn’t that what a recompete is for? Will this streamline NASA acquisition? Could we see this catching on across the the government?

    ——————————
    Jason Bakke
    Proposal Manager
    Censeo Consulting Group (Censeo)
    Washington DC
    ——————————

    0
  2. Good point, Jaime, about the project management bill. I see no reason why that doesn’t get signed into law soon, but we all know the speed of legislation in D.C.

    One question I have to circle back to Jason’s original question… is this a test by NASA? Considering the space agency is one of the pillars of the FAR Council, I could see this getting rolled out across the government, if it’s seen as effective.

    ——————————
    Jonathan Messinger
    Public Spend Forum
    Washington DC
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-13-2016 09:15
    From: Jaime Gracia
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    Project management and accountability are lost on federal projects, as awarding options are almost a formality. Although I am not a fan of legislation to make people do what they should be doing already, the Program Management Improvement and Accountability Act (PMIAA) may be helpful. 

    The PMIAA reforms federal program management policy in four important ways:

    1. Creating a formal job series and career path for program managers in the federal government.
    2. Developing a standards-based program management policy across the federal government.
    3. Recognizing the essential role of executive sponsorship and engagement by designating a senior executive in federal agencies to be responsible for program management policy and strategy.
    4. Sharing knowledge of successful approaches to program management through an interagency council on program management.

    It is currently awaiting the President’s signature, so we shall see if these initiatives get rolled out in the Trump Administration.

    ——————————
    Jaime Gracia
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-11-2016 12:20
    From: John (Jack) Pellegrino
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    Most agencies have difficulty consistently rating “past performance” not to mention establishing what “superior performance” is. That being said, the usefulness ans success will depend on establishing a clear criteria and expectation of what is superior  (is that beyond contact requirements?)  and the consistency of ita application.

    ——————————
    John (Jack) Pellegrino
    Director, Puchasing & Contracting
    County of San Diego (Department of Puchasing & Contracting)
    San Diego CA
    (858) 505-6562
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-09-2016 17:15
    From: Raj Sharma
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    Shouldn’t “sustained excellent performance” be criteria for any option award, forget “award term”?  We need more accountability around performance and options shouldn’t just be considered automatic.  So, no, i don’t expect this to do much given the expectation of excellent performance is so low.  A real shame for taxpayers.

    ——————————
    Raj Sharma
    Public Spend Forum
    Washington DC
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-09-2016 11:47
    From: Jason Bakke
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    NASA has issued a proposed rule to create “award terms” for superior performance extending beyond the typical base-plus-four contract. The intro states:

    While there are similarities between an award term and an option, such as funds must be available and the requirement must fulfill an existing Government need, the key difference is that an option may be exercised when the contractor’s performance is acceptable, while earning an award term requires sustained excellent performance.

    Does anyone think this will motivate contracts to sustained excellent performance from their previous acceptable? Isn’t that what a recompete is for? Will this streamline NASA acquisition? Could we see this catching on across the the government?

    ——————————
    Jason Bakke
    Proposal Manager
    Censeo Consulting Group (Censeo)
    Washington DC
    ——————————

    0
  3. Project management and accountability are lost on federal projects, as awarding options are almost a formality. Although I am not a fan of legislation to make people do what they should be doing already, the Program Management Improvement and Accountability Act (PMIAA) may be helpful. 

    The PMIAA reforms federal program management policy in four important ways:

    1. Creating a formal job series and career path for program managers in the federal government.
    2. Developing a standards-based program management policy across the federal government.
    3. Recognizing the essential role of executive sponsorship and engagement by designating a senior executive in federal agencies to be responsible for program management policy and strategy.
    4. Sharing knowledge of successful approaches to program management through an interagency council on program management.

    It is currently awaiting the President’s signature, so we shall see if these initiatives get rolled out in the Trump Administration.

    ——————————
    Jaime Gracia
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-11-2016 12:20
    From: John (Jack) Pellegrino
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    Most agencies have difficulty consistently rating “past performance” not to mention establishing what “superior performance” is. That being said, the usefulness ans success will depend on establishing a clear criteria and expectation of what is superior  (is that beyond contact requirements?)  and the consistency of ita application.

    ——————————
    John (Jack) Pellegrino
    Director, Puchasing & Contracting
    County of San Diego (Department of Puchasing & Contracting)
    San Diego CA
    (858) 505-6562
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-09-2016 17:15
    From: Raj Sharma
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    Shouldn’t “sustained excellent performance” be criteria for any option award, forget “award term”?  We need more accountability around performance and options shouldn’t just be considered automatic.  So, no, i don’t expect this to do much given the expectation of excellent performance is so low.  A real shame for taxpayers.

    ——————————
    Raj Sharma
    Public Spend Forum
    Washington DC
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-09-2016 11:47
    From: Jason Bakke
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    NASA has issued a proposed rule to create “award terms” for superior performance extending beyond the typical base-plus-four contract. The intro states:

    While there are similarities between an award term and an option, such as funds must be available and the requirement must fulfill an existing Government need, the key difference is that an option may be exercised when the contractor’s performance is acceptable, while earning an award term requires sustained excellent performance.

    Does anyone think this will motivate contracts to sustained excellent performance from their previous acceptable? Isn’t that what a recompete is for? Will this streamline NASA acquisition? Could we see this catching on across the the government?

    ——————————
    Jason Bakke
    Proposal Manager
    Censeo Consulting Group (Censeo)
    Washington DC
    ——————————

    0
  4. One could argue five years is arbitrary, why not seven or eight? I entertain the possibility that for steady-state services contracts (which sound a bit like personal services), a longer period of performance might encourage better team continuity. Certainly, I expect to see some “greening” of incumbent teams at renewal. Might longer contracts encourage more strategic employee replacement across the entire PoP, instead of just before or after recompete?

    I also wonder, would the increased pressure to protest longer contracts make up for the reduction in protestable awards.

    ——————————
    Jason Bakke
    Proposal Manager
    Censeo Consulting Group (Censeo)
    Washington DC
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-12-2016 10:08
    From: Spence Witten
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    I suspect that this is more about formalizing the practice of indefinitely extending contracts. I have opportunities I’ve been tracking with PoPs that ended one, sometimes even two years ago, that just keep receiving indefinite extensions. At least this tries to add some measure of rigor to that process.

    Though I agree with Raj. We treat option year renewals as essentially guaranteed. Because 99% of the time they are, regardless of performance.      

    ——————————
    Spence Witten
    Director of Federal Sales
    Lunarline
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-11-2016 12:20
    From: John (Jack) Pellegrino
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    Most agencies have difficulty consistently rating “past performance” not to mention establishing what “superior performance” is. That being said, the usefulness ans success will depend on establishing a clear criteria and expectation of what is superior  (is that beyond contact requirements?)  and the consistency of ita application.

    ——————————
    John (Jack) Pellegrino
    Director, Puchasing & Contracting
    County of San Diego (Department of Puchasing & Contracting)
    San Diego CA
    (858) 505-6562
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-09-2016 17:15
    From: Raj Sharma
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    Shouldn’t “sustained excellent performance” be criteria for any option award, forget “award term”?  We need more accountability around performance and options shouldn’t just be considered automatic.  So, no, i don’t expect this to do much given the expectation of excellent performance is so low.  A real shame for taxpayers.

    ——————————
    Raj Sharma
    Public Spend Forum
    Washington DC
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-09-2016 11:47
    From: Jason Bakke
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    NASA has issued a proposed rule to create “award terms” for superior performance extending beyond the typical base-plus-four contract. The intro states:

    While there are similarities between an award term and an option, such as funds must be available and the requirement must fulfill an existing Government need, the key difference is that an option may be exercised when the contractor’s performance is acceptable, while earning an award term requires sustained excellent performance.

    Does anyone think this will motivate contracts to sustained excellent performance from their previous acceptable? Isn’t that what a recompete is for? Will this streamline NASA acquisition? Could we see this catching on across the the government?

    ——————————
    Jason Bakke
    Proposal Manager
    Censeo Consulting Group (Censeo)
    Washington DC
    ——————————

    0
  5. I suspect that this is more about formalizing the practice of indefinitely extending contracts. I have opportunities I’ve been tracking with PoPs that ended one, sometimes even two years ago, that just keep receiving indefinite extensions. At least this tries to add some measure of rigor to that process.

    Though I agree with Raj. We treat option year renewals as essentially guaranteed. Because 99% of the time they are, regardless of performance.      

    ——————————
    Spence Witten
    Director of Federal Sales
    Lunarline
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-11-2016 12:20
    From: John (Jack) Pellegrino
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    Most agencies have difficulty consistently rating “past performance” not to mention establishing what “superior performance” is. That being said, the usefulness ans success will depend on establishing a clear criteria and expectation of what is superior  (is that beyond contact requirements?)  and the consistency of ita application.

    ——————————
    John (Jack) Pellegrino
    Director, Puchasing & Contracting
    County of San Diego (Department of Puchasing & Contracting)
    San Diego CA
    (858) 505-6562
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-09-2016 17:15
    From: Raj Sharma
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    Shouldn’t “sustained excellent performance” be criteria for any option award, forget “award term”?  We need more accountability around performance and options shouldn’t just be considered automatic.  So, no, i don’t expect this to do much given the expectation of excellent performance is so low.  A real shame for taxpayers.

    ——————————
    Raj Sharma
    Public Spend Forum
    Washington DC
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-09-2016 11:47
    From: Jason Bakke
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    NASA has issued a proposed rule to create “award terms” for superior performance extending beyond the typical base-plus-four contract. The intro states:

    While there are similarities between an award term and an option, such as funds must be available and the requirement must fulfill an existing Government need, the key difference is that an option may be exercised when the contractor’s performance is acceptable, while earning an award term requires sustained excellent performance.

    Does anyone think this will motivate contracts to sustained excellent performance from their previous acceptable? Isn’t that what a recompete is for? Will this streamline NASA acquisition? Could we see this catching on across the the government?

    ——————————
    Jason Bakke
    Proposal Manager
    Censeo Consulting Group (Censeo)
    Washington DC
    ——————————

    0
  6. Most agencies have difficulty consistently rating “past performance” not to mention establishing what “superior performance” is. That being said, the usefulness ans success will depend on establishing a clear criteria and expectation of what is superior  (is that beyond contact requirements?)  and the consistency of ita application.

    ——————————
    John (Jack) Pellegrino
    Director, Puchasing & Contracting
    County of San Diego (Department of Puchasing & Contracting)
    San Diego CA
    (858) 505-6562
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-09-2016 17:15
    From: Raj Sharma
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    Shouldn’t “sustained excellent performance” be criteria for any option award, forget “award term”?  We need more accountability around performance and options shouldn’t just be considered automatic.  So, no, i don’t expect this to do much given the expectation of excellent performance is so low.  A real shame for taxpayers.

    ——————————
    Raj Sharma
    Public Spend Forum
    Washington DC
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-09-2016 11:47
    From: Jason Bakke
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    NASA has issued a proposed rule to create “award terms” for superior performance extending beyond the typical base-plus-four contract. The intro states:

    While there are similarities between an award term and an option, such as funds must be available and the requirement must fulfill an existing Government need, the key difference is that an option may be exercised when the contractor’s performance is acceptable, while earning an award term requires sustained excellent performance.

    Does anyone think this will motivate contracts to sustained excellent performance from their previous acceptable? Isn’t that what a recompete is for? Will this streamline NASA acquisition? Could we see this catching on across the the government?

    ——————————
    Jason Bakke
    Proposal Manager
    Censeo Consulting Group (Censeo)
    Washington DC
    ——————————

    0
  7. Shouldn’t “sustained excellent performance” be criteria for any option award, forget “award term”?  We need more accountability around performance and options shouldn’t just be considered automatic.  So, no, i don’t expect this to do much given the expectation of excellent performance is so low.  A real shame for taxpayers.

    ——————————
    Raj Sharma
    Public Spend Forum
    Washington DC
    ————————————————————————-
    Original Message:
    Sent: 12-09-2016 11:47
    From: Jason Bakke
    Subject: NASA FAR supplement: award terms

    NASA has issued a proposed rule to create “award terms” for superior performance extending beyond the typical base-plus-four contract. The intro states:

    While there are similarities between an award term and an option, such as funds must be available and the requirement must fulfill an existing Government need, the key difference is that an option may be exercised when the contractor’s performance is acceptable, while earning an award term requires sustained excellent performance.

    Does anyone think this will motivate contracts to sustained excellent performance from their previous acceptable? Isn’t that what a recompete is for? Will this streamline NASA acquisition? Could we see this catching on across the the government?

    ——————————
    Jason Bakke
    Proposal Manager
    Censeo Consulting Group (Censeo)
    Washington DC
    ——————————

    0
You must be logged in to post a comment.