The FAR and contracting

A series of regulations known as the federal acquisition regulation controls how the government makes purchases. The federal acquisition ensures that purchasing practices are uniform, standardized, and carried out in a fair and unbiased manner. The government printing office is where you can purchase printed copies of the FAR. Additionally, the FAR is accessible online in PDF or HTML format. Principles serve as the system’s compass.

The FAR makes sure that timely deliveries of high-quality goods are made while preserving public confidence. The method also achieves the goals of public policy. The system makes sure that it only hires contractors who have a proven track record of success and who can carry out their tasks. The system ensures that the administrative cost are kept at minimum without compromising quality. The system is also entitled to carry out business with fairness and integrity. The acquisition team consist of the contractors who provided products and services, the supply, and the procurement communities. Each member of the team is expected to use sound judgment when assessing quality to ensure that customer’s needs are met.

Federal contracts contains provisions that are unique to the government. The government is responsible for terminating contracts that does not meet the standards set. The government is also responsible for making payments to successful contracts. The government will take upon itself to conduct all testing, inspection and accepting goods and services. In my opinion, the government dictates most of the terms during contracting. The government ensure that its relationships with contractors meet the needs of the taxpayers (Hearn, 1990).

The federal government uses different methods for acquiring products and services. Sealed bidding is used where bidders have equal opportunity. The bidding method is characterized by rigid adherence to formal procedures. The award of the contract will only be done on the basis of price and price related factors. The government is not supposed to discuss about the bid with the offerors since it is against the laws. The contract is offered to the lowest bidder and the bidder must have the capacity to execute the contract.

The FAR also participates in competitive negotiation. This kind of contracting provides a more flexible way of awarding a contract. The contracting officer participate in discussions with offer or. The contracting officer assess non-cost factors such as technical skills, managerial experience and past performance. The process begins with request for proposal. The request for proposal state the need for agency and the conditions that bind the contract. The contracting officer will select the proposal of the offeror who has the most advantageous to the government.

The federal authority has terms and conditions that are observed. The government may terminate a contract for convenience. The clause allows the government to terminate a contract any time it deems fit in accordance with government interest. The government also employs the change clause. The clause allows the government to make unilateral changes of the contract during its performance. However, the changes should be within the scope of the contract. The government also employs default clause. The clause allows the government to terminate a contract by default when the contractor breaches the term of contract (Kathuria, 2009). The contractor may breach contract through failing to supply services or products within time specified. The contractor may breach the contract through failing to make progress in a manner that endanger performance of the contract.

The contracting officer should not discriminate the applicant basing on color, sex, race, or national origin. The applicants are to be given equal opportunity and affirmative action. The aspect is in line with socio-economic obligation. Contractors are required to show their outline on how they aim to subcontract the small businesses. The disadvantaged businesses are supposed to be given opportunity so that growth is realized extensively.

In my opinion, the regulations in government contracts are the best since they protect the parties involved. Every individual is supposed to comply with the laws that are stated. However, the applicant may be disadvantaged in case where awarding of contract is biased. The individuals responsible for evaluating the contract may favor certain influential individuals. This will have a greater negative impact on the disadvantaged groups who apply tenders genuinely.

In 2014, fraud in government contracts was reported. Fat Leonard was responsible for the whole scandal and he was arraigned in court. His case involved allegations of bribery and kickbacks. The contracts were overbilled by the contracting officers so that Leonard could fetch high prices than required. Contracting officer like glen were suspended from contracting in September 2013. This happened in the navy procurement practices. When Fat Leonard scandal surfaced, the contract was terminated. The contract was offered to the next lowest bidder at the time (Barak, 2012). The contract was awarded after careful evaluation to ensure that the applicant had met all the competitive range.

Such scandals are a reflections of what happens behind curtains. Leonard is just a reflection of many other people in the government who play dirty so that they can benefit from the government procurement. Such people are above the law. I agree that the law is good and strict enough but by the fact that it does not apply to individuals like Leonard, it has no meaning at all. There may be such individuals like him who have mastered the art and they cannot be caught.

Reference

Barak, G. (2012). Theft of a nation: Wall street looting and federal regulatory colluding.

Rowman & Littlefield.

Hearn, E. E. (1990). Federal acquisition and contract management. Hearn Assoc

Kathuria, S. (2009). Best practices for compliance with the new government contractor

compliance and ethics rules under the federal acquisition regulation. Public Contract

Law Journal, 38(4), 803-856.