This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Decision 4A_575/2022 (7 August 2023) concerned a dispute arising from a licence agreement for the operation of a telecommunications network in a part of the southern Republic of Sudan (now the Republic of South Sudan), concluded on 15 October 2003 between C. The agreements were not drafted, negotiated, or signed by the father or his sons.
The governmentwide day on November 20 will feature expert panels addressing “what’s next” after the election for the future of federal procurement. Join us as we dive into what lies ahead for federal procurement in 2025 and beyond! Market and Procurement Outlook Panel: What’s Next?
The Federal Government’s procurement spend in FY2023 was $765 billion ($470 billion for defense agencies), [106] and most of the procurement spend was discretionary spending. So, given that discretionary spending is more likely to be cut than mandatory spending, procurement spending cuts will be part of any significant budget cuts.
34] And DFARS 252.216-7000(e) gives the Contracting Officer the option of terminating the cost-increase-impacted portion of the contract/order. [35] However, “[CICA sets forth no standard for determining when modification of an existing contract requires a new competition or falls within the scope of the original competitive procurement.” [57]
These include: (1) negotiations only with the best suited offeror (i.e., Negotiating with the Apparent Successful Offeror The first bright-line violation concerns the way agencies interact with the best suited offeror. Agencies frequently ignore deficiencies and negotiate only with their preferred, but technically unacceptable offeror.
Specifically, the GovCon Order applies for contractors/subcontractors of “[e]xecutive departments and agencies, including independent establishments subject to the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act, 40 U.S.C. Postal Service or the Postal Regulatory Commission. [12] Emphasis on the word some. 102(4)(B). . 6701 et seq.; (iii)
This compliance headache is shared by procuring Agencies, prime contractors, subcontractors, and supply chain vendors, among others. 14,042 is being implemented by each procuring Agency developing its own FAR Subpart 1.4 Generally, procuring Agencies seem to be adopting the FARC-recommended clause without changes.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content