“I want to make sure everyone reads our assessment of the latest Amendment 6 from NITAAC for NIH CIO-SP4. In addition to this summary, my colleague, Tris Carpenter, shared his interpretation of NITAAC’s update on the Mentor Protege Joint Venture (MPJV) experience now allowing two examples.”
“As you might have seen from the recent protest documents on the NITAAC website, there are a few outstanding items that NITAAC still needs to address with teaming. For example, NITAAC remains silent on FAR 9.601(2) teaming in M.1.1 Contract Team Arrangements despite allowing it in M.4.3 Past Performance. My interpretation is that FAR 9.601(2) is allowed and companies can form prime and subcontractor relationships for pursuing CIO-SP4, including large business subcontractors. The reason why this is important – especially in light of the issues and concerns around MPJV – is that companies that propose as a FAR 9.601(2) “may” be able to use more experience from large business subcontractors than a mentor in a MPJV arrangement.”
“So how does NITAAC get past this strange discrepancy while also more clearly meeting the SBA regulations that were intended to help protégé companies in a MPJV? The easiest fix in my opinion…” Read the full post here.
Source: More Insights Into CIO-SP4 Amendment 6 – July 14, 2021. Red Team.