The day has come…the Request for Proposal (RFP) you’ve been watching and waiting for has gone “live.” Your team has made a tentative decision that it wants to submit a proposal for this project. You download the solicitation documents and start looking through the requirements. Contract type, type of work, is subcontracting or limitations in subcontracting required, terms, conditions, pricing…you run down all the key pieces of information that you need to form your risk tolerance decision for the work. But, there are some other key pieces of information that, from a former Contracting Officer and Source Selection Authority’s perspective, to also keep in mind as you make your final “go/no-go” decision to propose and develop your proposal.
Know the Rules for Government Exchanges with Industry Before Receipt of Proposals (FAR Subpart 15.201)
Exchanges of information between the Government and Industry are encouraged. However, any exchange must be consistent with the procurement integrity requirements of FAR Subpart 3.104. This includes not only exchanges but also disclosure, protection, and marking of contractor proposal information and source selection information.
Requests for Information (RFIs) and Draft RFPs for industry input are considered part of the market research process under acquisition planning. These methods are not required but when used allow for more open exchanges between the Government and Industry. Potential offerors can share information to influence the Government’s procurement strategy (but mark anything proprietary accordingly). The Government may also hold conferences or meetings for the purpose of obtaining industry input. Recently one agency did an oral RFI exchange with industry and I was skeptical of how it would go but was pleasantly surprised at how Government posed the questions live and how industry responded (or didn’t when the line that led to exchange of proprietary info was near crossing). (See even an old dog can learn new tricks!)
Exchanges after issuance of the solicitation but before receipt of proposals are used by the Government to improve potential offerors’ understanding of requirements and allow them the chance to determine their ability to meet those requirements. These exchanges often take the form of questions from industry on RFP documents, answers in response from the Government, and pre-proposal conferences. The Contracting Officer oversees and controls these exchanges. If you get information from another source—a team member or someone other than the Contracting Officer—proceed with caution and verify, verify, verify.
Watch for Amendments! (FAR Subpart 15.206)
Changes to the RFP documents are made by formal amendment to the solicitation before the established time and date for receipt of proposals. Amendments must provide sufficient time for potential offerors to digest changes and update proposals. Each amendment will also be announced with its own notice and published in the Government Point of Entry (GPE), typically SAM, GSA eBuy, or other agency portal used to publicize opportunities. Amendment notices will outline the changes made. An oral notice may also be used when time is of the essence, such as the case may be in a contingency or emergency environment, which is then formalized by a written amendment issued by the Contracting Officer.
More often than not, the Government provides answers to RFP questions that may or may not be material in nature or result in an amendment. The Government doesn't always tell you if an amendment is forthcoming either. If in doubt, ASK. Don't wait for an amendment and then ask for a proposal extension later; not likely to happen. Instead put it in your rhythm to ASK questions like this as soon as they come up. Don't make assumptions!
Amendments can also be issued after the close of receipt of offers/proposals. However, if the Contracting Officer determines that such an amendment “...is so substantial as to exceed what prospective offerors reasonably could have anticipated so that additional sources likely would have submitted offers had the substance of the amendment been known to them”, the Contracting Officer must cancel the original solicitation and issue a new one, regardless of the stage of the acquisition.
The worst possible thing is to finish an offer/proposal and realize too late that you haven’t taken an amendment into account. Failure to acknowledge an amendment is grounds to eliminate your proposal from consideration right out of the gate!
Understand the Basics of Different Source Selection Techniques (FAR Subpart 15.1)
Techniques for the selection of sources under competitive procurements fall within a range called the Best Value Continuum. This range equates to the Government’s perceived risk of unsuccessful performance which is then translated into the prioritization of technical factors and cost or price factors and their individual and collective importance.
An agency may use only one or a combination of the Tradeoff Process and the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable Process to arrive at the determination of the best value for the Government. The characteristics of each are found in the table below.
Tradeoff Process | Lowest Price Technically Acceptable Process |
Allows selection of other than the lowest-priced or highest technically rated offeror using tradeoffs between technical superiority and cost or price, as described in the solicitation. | Requires selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price |
The technical factors and significant subfactors that affect contract award and their relative importance are disclosed in the RFP.
The RFP also includes a statement whether all evaluation factor factors other than cost or price (aka “technical factors” when combined, are–
| Technical factors are not ranked by relative importance.
Failure of a proposal to meet the minimum technical acceptability standard of any technical factor or subfactor automatically eliminates the proposal from further consideration. |
Past performance is a required evaluation factor. | Past performance is not a required evaluation factor. |
Factors and significant subfactors establish a list of criteria describing required or desired skills and experience against which the proposal is subjectively evaluated. | Factors and significant subfactors establish objective thresholds of technical acceptability (measures) against which the proposal is evaluated. |
Technical ratings are subjective and use a rating scale of adjectival descriptors, colors, numerical weights, or original rankings. Cost or Price is evaluated, not rated. | Technical ratings are objective and use a go/no-go, pass/fail, or acceptable/unacceptable scale. Cost or Price is evaluated, not rated. |
Provides the greatest flexibility for the Government to achieve the best balance of technical and cost/price acceptability. | Provides the ability to achieve a minimum technical acceptability level on all technical factors and significant subfactors and achieve the lowest evaluated price. |
Any perceived benefits of a higher-priced proposal require supporting documentation to quantify the payment of any additional cost in terms of specific benefits to the Government. | Only the lowest-priced proposal of the proposals found to be technically acceptable is considered for award. |
The point-by-point tradeoff decision is documented and reviewed as required by FAR, any agency FAR supplement, and agency policy. | Tradeoffs are not allowed. |
Award Without Discussions or Competitive Range? (FAR Subpart 15.306(c))
The Government has a choice. It can choose to make a contract award decision based solely on initial proposals and not engage with offerors, or it can establish a competitive range to conduct discussions (aka, negotiations) before an award is made.
What’s a competitive range? Based on the ratings of each proposal against all evaluation criteria, the Contracting Officer will establish a competitive range comprised of all of the most highly rated proposals; those most likely to receive the contract award. It’s a down-selection. The competitive range can be further reduced for purposes of efficiency when documented with the rationale why and the solicitation so states.
The solicitation will disclose the Government’s choice. This choice is important. An award without discussions means you get one shot – the first shot – to get your proposal right. There are no fixes or changes allowed later. However, even when the Government chooses “award without discussions,” it always reserves the right to open discussions with offerors if it is in the Government’s best interest to do so. But don’t rely on it happening. If the Government can avoid discussions before the award, it will; trust me on that. It saves weeks of work and documentation when discussions are avoided. Write your best offer/proposal the first time!
When developing your go / no-go decision matrix, add these elements. Depending on your current risk tolerance, you’ll feel more confident that you’ve covered the bases procedurally as well as technically when making that important decision about expending resources for offer / proposal development.
Comments