Procurement of New Software for Processing Tax Returns Order Instructions: Assignment 2: Competition Requirements
Federal Acquisition Review (FAR) Part 15 – Negotiations states “Exchanges of information among all interested parties, from the earliest identification of a requirement through receipt of proposals, is encouraged.” When planning a competitive solicitation, the agency must provide needed information in order to develop a thorough request that takes into account the agency’s objectives for quality, schedule, and costs.
Imagine that you are a contracts officer for the IRS, and your supervisor has tasked you with the procurement of a new software system for processing tax returns.
Write a two to three (2-3) page paper in which you:
Analyze the proposal adequacy checklist (http://www.acqnotes.com/acqnote/tasks/proposal-adequacy-checklist-pac) for organizing a proposal, and summarize the intrinsic value of two (2) of the suggestions on the checklist. Prepare and articulate an argument in support of your position.
Debate whether or not the offeree should let an offeror’s mistake within a proposal go uncorrected, even if such action would cause the offeror to withstand a loss.
Suggest one (1) judicial remedy available to the offeror to prevent his / her loss. Provide an argument in support of your position.
Use at least three (3) quality academic resources in this assignment. Note: Wikipedia and similar websites do not qualify as academic resources.
Format your assignment according to the following formatting requirements:
Typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides.
Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, your name, your professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page is not included in the required page length.
Include a reference page. Citations and references must follow APA format. The reference page is not included in the required page length.
The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:
Identify and apply the appropriate Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clauses to meet compliance in contracting actions and dispute resolution requirements.
Explain the basic elements and compliance issues of the federal procurement framework (contract formulation, solicitation, costs, payment, financing, administration, and closeout).
Use technology and information resources to research issues in procurement and contract law.
Write clearly and concisely about procurement and contract law using correct grammar and mechanics.
Procurement of New Software for Processing Tax Returns Sample Answer
Proposal Title: Procurement of a New Software System for Processing Tax Returns
Proposal Adequacy Checklist
In the submission of a procurement proposal, it is significant that the PCO putts together an efficient bid package that finalizes the contract. On the other hand, there is a need that the PCO ensures that there is a checklist developed to monitor and ensure that all the areas of the contract are effectively covered and the pertinent information within the contract is included for the contracting parties (Dolgui, & Proth, 2013). The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) plays an integral role in the formation of contracts and is a regulatory body of law that ensures the U.S Federal Government’s procurement process is governed.
This regulatory body was consequently established with the aim of simplifying the complexities involved in the procurement process between government agencies (Benaroch, Lichtenstein, & Fink, 2016). The central purpose of this body’s establishment is to ensure proper provisions are made through a universal contracting and procurement system. The body, therefore, helps in conducting assessments and monitoring functions on all the processes of procurement through the development of guidelines that need to be adhered to.
Intrinsic Value of Two of the Suggestions in the Checklist:
The first item detailed in the checklist is under FAR 52.215-20, as provided in section 52.215-20 that requires the offeror to make a submission of an exception on the certified costs and pricing data for the item contracted at either the prime or sub-contracting level. The second value that is essential in the checklist is part #14, FAR 15.408 under Table 15-2. On Section 2, under paragraph A, providing the services and materials section. In this case, as a PCO, it is essential that all listings for the services and materials are included in the proposal since these are the functions that will be billed (Dolgui, & Proth, 2013). In the checklist, the materials are inferred to as Bill of Materials (BOM), with FAR refereeing to this listings are Consolidated Bill of Materials (CBOM). As determined, the list of material and services in the checklist provide adequate information on the summaries of parts, materials, and services that are performed during the contract period.
In this case, it can be justified that the two elements provided in the checklist serve as essential in the procurement process since they determine the manner in which pricing structures are placed on the services and materials contracted (Han, & Mithas, 2013). Price, therefore, remains a significant element in the process since the government would want to engage vendors who offer fair and reasonable prices. As detailed, the government reserves the right to assess the price reasonableness and some of the pertinent information on the pricing data in order to approve the contracting process.
Debate on the Offeree’s Intent When a Mistake is made in a Proposal by the Offeror
In accordance to FAR 14.407, there are likelihoods of having mistakes in the proposal, mistakes may be corrected before or after the awarding of a contract has been done in any case such a mistake is not identified during this period. However, some mistake may be considered as simple since they are likely to result from clerical errors such as the placement of a decimal point where it should not be put, a factor that would advantage the offeree as compared to the offeror (Han, & Mithas, 2013). It is essential to realize that such errors and mistakes may be perceived as expensive and costly especially when they are not identified upon an award of a contract. In such a case, the offeree may take consideration of two options in regard to this case, to either reject or nullify the proposal on a basis on a known error or to take an advantage of the errors and mistake and take the proposal as it is, thus the offeree is considered as liable by the terms and the conditions stipulated in the proposal.
However, in an event where the offeror remits such a proposal to the offeree, the offeree may choose to enlighten the offeror on the errors and give a proposition on the submission of such a request, usually done in a duly written format addressing such exceptions (Han, & Mithas, 2013). The offeror, on the other hand, is mandated to grant the offeree a representative as bound by the contract to review the proposal with the aim of making verifications in any case the errors still exist.
On the other hand, it is essential to consider that liable charges on the mistakes identified in the proposal may be addressed to both the parties that engage in the contracting process. If an offeror sends the proposals to the offeree with some errors on it, the court is subjected to uphold a review process that will see the offeree, determined as a recipient bound by the terms of the proposal to adhere to the terms and conditions of the contents of the proposal. These statutes are also applied to acceptances (Han, & Mithas, 2013). Any violation of the stipulated procedures results in a breach of the contracting process. In this case, the process of procurement will begin with a determination of IRS needs in order to accomplish the mission of the organization. As the program officer, I will be in a position to determine the requirements that can be fulfilled and those that cannot within the procurement process such as the preparation of the preliminary specifications of the software systems. In this case, it is essential to determine that in contracting, considering the clauses since many of these clauses are considered as non-negotiable is important. Before contracting, it is necessary to review all the clauses that are contained in the solicitation even though some are bound to resemble the commercial clauses.
Judicial Remedy for the Offeror
In therefore arriving at a verdict, the court would, in this case, consider the offeror as a preferred party, thus validating a rule on business expediency. However errors according to some jurisdictions may be treated as not agreeable in the contracting process, thus both parties are conceived to have failed to arrive at an agreement. When this contract is breached by a contractor, the termination clause comes into play. A breach, in this case, may occur in the event that the supplier fails to deliver the software system or makes progress that would endanger the performance of the contract (Han, & Mithas, 2013). Consequently, this gives me as the contracting officer at IRS to terminate such a contract for default as determined in the clause FAR 52.249-81 (A) (1).
Procurement of New Software for Processing Tax Returns References
Benaroch, M., Lichtenstein, Y., & Fink, L. (2016). Contract Design Choices And The Balance Of Ex Ante And Ex Post Transaction Costs In Software Development Outsourcing1. MIS Quarterly, 40(1), 57-82.
Dolgui, A., & Proth, J. (2013). Outsourcing: definitions and analysis. International Journal Of Production Research, 51(23/24), 6769-6777. doi:10.1080/00207543.2013.855338.
Han, K., & Mithas, S. (2013). Information Technology Outsourcing And Non-It Operating Costs: An Empirical Investigation. MIS Quarterly, 37(1), 315-331.
