All, Some or None IDIQ

With regard to a single award you are contemplating, have you considered the statutory multiple award preference at FAR 16.504(c)?

if you are procuring using the procedures of Part 15, the basis is always best value (FAR 15.101).

dreambig101,

I see a question mark in your post, but I don't see a question. What is your question?

Todd Davis said:

if you are procuring using the procedures of Part 15, the basis is always best value (FAR 15.101).

dreambig101: As Todd Davis points out, the tradeoff and lowest price, technically acceptable (LPTA) processes are both found in the "best value continuum," and both seek the best value. It is misleading and imprecise to describe tradeoff or other source selections as simply "best value." LPTA seeks the best value. Tradeoff seeks the best value.  FAR Part 15 offers tradeoff, LPTA, or a combination thereof.

dreambig101 said:

if we are doing all, some or none would we still use best value for the basis of award?

This illustrates why the contracting profession should stop calling tradeoff or other source selections simply "best value."

dreambig101 said:

I am currently working on an RFP that will result in in the award of up to two (2) Indefinite Delivery – Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts. We would like to award this requirement on an all, some or none basis to either a single source or multiple sources through a full and open competitive process.

Is there a conflict between the first and second sentence? To PepeTheFrog, "All, some, or none" implies more (possibilities) than "award of up to two (2)."

Within the construction and design-build industry, the term "best-value" generally refers to a competitive procedure that considers both price/cost and quality in the award.