top of page


Public·12 members

Far Caspian Best Of

The boys have released a video to accompany Holding On. As they say themselves the video makes no sense, but it shows the band larking around in a house full of IKEA lamp shades, includes fitting themselves into kitchen cabinets and sitting and standing on random pieces of furniture. You can watch the spectacle at: =ctsq5BtbV1s. If you prefer to listen to the song without these visual aids Soundcloud can be your friend: -caspian

Far Caspian | Best Of

Federal government agencies tend to use the best value contracting procurement process as the preferred proposal evaluation criteria. The idea is to use taxpayer dollars to buy the best quality and value of services and products possible. The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) does not give a mathematical formula for how to accept, evaluate and award federal contracts.

Second: The best value analysis then allows the contracting agency to compare proposals to each other. Each proposal evaluation includes a comparison of price and non-price factors as stated in the solicitation.

With government procurement contracts in the evaluation and award phases, the best value trade off process means just what it says. When comparing the strengths and weaknesses of each proposal it all boils down the which company ultimately offers the best value to the government.

When looking at the advantages of best value procurements, value analysis takes place when one that stands out is the notion that the agency must disclose to bidders how their proposal will be evaluated. Another advantage is that the process allows offers to give very competitive bids and be creative by adding value to the government. One of the other advantages of best value procurement approaches is that the contracting agencies spend taxpayer dollars. The rules allow the agency-wide latitude when deciding what the best value in a particular proposal offers. Whereas, dozens of years ago, price was the main factor for award. Since then, the rules allow more choice in deciding what is of better value to the government.

When the agency conducts a best value procurement contract award, the source selection team must document its reasoning. Sometimes, when a best value analysis takes place, agencies just make conclusions and do not adequately document their findings in the process. This can pose a problem for the agency when there is a bid protest.

The FAR and other procurement laws state that the federal government must make it abundantly clear how it intends to evaluate proposals and also state the factors and subfactors with their relative importance in the solicitation. When the government states its factors and subfactors for its best value trade off analysis, it must follow the solicitation requirements to the letter. A common reason why bid protests are sustained in best value government contracting cases is because the protestor articulates where the solicitation says one thing but the government does something else.

Tip: When an agency selects a higher-priced solution in a best value contract award that has been rated technically superior to a lower-priced one, the award decision must be supported by a rational explanation demonstrating that the higher-rated one is, in fact, superior, and explaining why its technical superiority warrants the additional cost.

Tip: In the best value contracting procurement definition, where price is less important than the non-price factors, a government agency must meaningfully evaluate cost or price in making its source selection decision.

There is no black and white or rigid approach the the best value contract award process. The agency has broad discretion to evaluate and award federal contracts. Therefore, when you decide to challenge the contract award, you want to be able to articulate how the agency broke the law or acted unreasonably. Read more information about Commonly Used Evaluation Factors in a Best Value Source Selection Protest.

Despite many advancements, an inexpensive ammonia synthesis catalyst free from hydrogen and nitrogen poisoning, and capable of synthesizing ammonia under mild conditions is still unknown and is long sought-after. Here we present an active nanoalloy catalyst, RuFe, formed by alloying highly active Ru and inexpensive Fe, capable of activating both N2 and H2 without blocking the surface active sites and thereby overcoming the major hurdle faced by the current best performing pure metal catalysts. This novel RuFe nanoalloy catalyst operates under milder conditions than the conventional Fe catalyst and is less expensive than the so far best performing Ru-based catalysts providing additional advantages. Most importantly, by integrating theory and experiments, we identified the underlying mechanisms responsible for lower surface poisoning of this catalyst, which will provide directions for fabricating poison-free efficient NH3 synthesis catalysts in future. 041b061a72


Welcome to the group! You can connect with other members, ge...
Group Page: Groups_SingleGroup
bottom of page