tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7970420612682214219.post6505531442194185815..comments2024-03-13T20:03:07.699-04:00Comments on Spriggs Law Group: LPTA IS FAR PART 14Spriggs Law Grouphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06448337445002061566noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7970420612682214219.post-7473206727858610412013-04-05T03:00:46.880-04:002013-04-05T03:00:46.880-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Mens Fashion Onlinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06453425920653225697noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7970420612682214219.post-80054153005499229752013-03-18T23:09:43.619-04:002013-03-18T23:09:43.619-04:00In the Best Value Continuum LPTA was a Trap. Here ...In the Best Value Continuum LPTA was a Trap. Here was the problem (after evaluating about 150 of all types of Part 15 procurements). The problem in writing RFP's for •15.101-2 -- Lowest Price Technically Acceptable Source Selection Process (LPTA) was that it was an OBJECTIVE submission and review. All you did was set a bar to pass by a half-inch or a mile. It didn't matter. You set what was Technically Acceptable. During Tech reviews you had NO discretion in choosing who passed, and who failed. If you failed by that half inch, you failed.<br /> <br />•15.101-1 -- Tradeoff Process. This Process was SUBJECTIVE in nature. You submit and review in an entirely different atmosphere. Tradeoff was just that. If here you missed by that half inch, you still had a chance. You were working a Tradeoff first of what technical part was more important than the others. You had to state this in your evaluation plan. Again, back to LPTA all factors were Objective and equal. And in Tradeoff, some factor were more important than others, and they were Subjective.<br /> <br />The worst part was having what you may believe was going to be an eligible LPTA offeror miss the mark because the Objective question was answered wrong. Yes it happened, and yes there was a lot of crying in the debriefing, and yes threats of a Protest were made, but I never lost one of them.<br /><br />Rick Seufert - Seufert ConsultingAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7970420612682214219.post-77713782290070385902013-03-17T23:19:56.829-04:002013-03-17T23:19:56.829-04:00Actually, I thought FAR Part 15 is contracting by ...Actually, I thought FAR Part 15 is contracting by negotiation rather than best value contracting (which could be an element of negotiations). At any rate, your logic is compelling that LPTA should fall under FAR Part 14 since it appears any award would be based on "price-related factors" and determining if the"lowest priced" contractor would be "technically acceptable" could be part of "fact finding" rather than "negotiations."<br /><br />Ed Norton, GSAC NCMA Webmaster and VPGSAC NCMAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15039347257660466959noreply@blogger.com