FedSubK Feature: Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) - What is it Good For? Absolutely Nothing When Not Used Correctly.
Who needs a quiet Sunday? I guess I decided I didn’t since I got a slew of questions related to my response to Jackie Robinson-Burnette’s post on LPTA a while back where she posted a picture of a partial started house addition with a blue tarped roof with the tag line “Covered Deck. Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable”. (By the way, great picture, Jackie. It illustrated the concept most people have about LPTA perfectly. You can find Jackie’s post and my comment here.)
If you know anything about me it’s--
(1) I love a chance to talk about the FAR, and
(2) source selection is one of my favorite topics because it was my favorite thing to do as a Contract Specialist and Contracting Officer.
And I did A LOT of source selections. So much so I was THE person that reviewed and critiqued all evaluation criteria written for service contracts within my branch, division, or business line at the three agencies where I worked. I was able to write evaluation criteria that were protest-proof, and I trained evaluation teams on how to evaluate criteria correctly and document their evaluation in such a manner that there were no protest gaps. I was good at it because I always wrote / reviewed solicitations from the perspective of not only the Government but the industry perspective and how it could be interpreted. This allowed us to shore up gaps before moving forward.
And this takes me back to one of the most controversial and polarizing things in source selection, use of the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) evaluation method. If you’ve been in the Federal marketplace for any amount of time you know what it is and the history behind its popularity and bad rap. For those that don’t, let’s go over it quickly.
What is LPTA?
FAR Subpart 15.101-2 covers the LPTA process and states LPTA is a source selection process that is right for use when the best value is expected to result from selection of the “technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price”. In the case of LPTA, cost tends to be the driver in the selection since technical superiority is not desired, only that the contractor meets a minimum acceptability threshold as set in the solicitation. The solicitation will also specify the award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors.
What does that mean? Ultimately, if you meet the technical thresholds set across the board and your price is the lowest, you win! It’s a way to verify that a company can meet minimum technical requirements though budget is the true driver for the acquisition.
So, let’s break that down a little more.
Technical Acceptability. The level of technical acceptability is determined by the Government and evaluation factors must describe technical acceptability in terms of objective measures and/or standards. When evaluating only “Pass/Fail”, “Go/No Go”, or “Green/Red” scores are used. To be among offerors considered for contract award, an offer must receive a “Pass”, “Go”, or “Green” in every factor and subfactor. Those offers move forward for the evaluation of price. It only takes one “Fail”, “No Go”, or “Red” rating and the offer is eliminated from further consideration. Because there is no subjectivity in this type of evaluation method, offers are not ranked in terms of technical superiority.
Conversely, when using the tradeoff method, factors are written such that subjective analysis and review results in various degrees of technical acceptability which are expressed as adjectival ratings, colors, or numeric scores within a range. A Competitive Range is established and only those offers with the most likelihood of award continue on into negotiations with the Government.
While there is no room for subjectivity in the LPTA technical review, trust me, evaluators will try to sneak it in. For example, they will use ratings like “Pass++”, “Go – “, and “Bright Green”. And you guessed it, that doesn’t fly. They get sent back to the evaluation room to do it all again and put offers clearly into one of the two categories for every factor.
In LPTA, those offers that meet the technical acceptability thresholds then moved on to the price evaluation.
Lowest Evaluated Price. Notice the word “evaluated”. This means that the agency may review the price along with any other price factors as stipulated in the solicitation for those offers that achieved a “Pass”, “Go”, or “Green” in all technical factors.
In some instances, the term “evaluated price” means the actual price offers. But in other instances, the Government may add other price factors into the mix (and as disclosed in the solicitation) to arrive at an evaluated price, or a price that may not reflect the actual price(s) proposed but is used to determine the awardee.
Evaluated prices are ranked in order from low to high. The technically acceptable offer with the lowest evaluated price is the apparent contract awardee.
When is LPTA Used?
It differs for Department of Defense (DoD) and non-DoD agencies. Section 880 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 states that, except for DoD, LPTA shall only be used when ALL the below are met—
(1) The minimum technical acceptability requirements can be comprehensively and clearly described.
(2) There is no realized, or only minimal, value from a proposal that exceeds the minimum technical or performance requirements.
(3) Technical proposals will require no, or only minimal, subjective judgment by the source selection authority as to the desirability of one offeror's proposal versus a competing proposal.
(4) There is a high degree of confidence that reviewing the technical proposals of all offerors would not result in the identification of characteristics that could provide value or benefit.
(5) The lowest price reflects the total cost, including operation and support, of the product(s) or service(s) being acquired.
(6) The Contracting Officer determines in writing the circumstances that justify the use of the LPTA process.
In the same law, except for DoD, Contracting Officers are directed that they shall AVOID, to the maximum extent practicable, the use of LPTA for procurements that are predominantly for the acquisition of—
- Information technology services,
- Cybersecurity services,
- Systems engineering and technical assistance services,
- Advanced electronic testing,
- Audit or audit readiness services,
- Health care services and records,
- Telecommunications devices and services,
- Knowledge-based professional services,
- Personal protective equipment, or
- Knowledge-based training or logistics services in contingency operations or other operations outside the United States, including in Afghanistan or Iraq.
The Defense FAR Supplement (DFARS) Subpart 215.101-2-70 states the same rules apply within DoD but adds* that the use of LPTA shall also only be when—
- No, or minimal, additional innovation or future technological advantage will be realized by using a different source selection process,
- Goods to be procured are predominantly expendable in nature, are nontechnical, or have a short life expectancy or short shelf life.
- The contract file includes a determination that the lowest price reflects full life-cycle costs of the product(s) or service(s) being acquired.
*(as amended by Section 822 of the NDAA for FY2018 (Pub. L. 115-91))
In addition, DoD outlines the following prohibitions:
- Contracting Officers shall not use the lowest price technically acceptable source selection process to procure items designated by the requiring activity as personal protective equipment or an aviation critical safety item, when the requiring activity advises that the level of quality or failure of the equipment or item could result in combat casualties.
- In accordance with section 832 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (see 10 U.S.C. 4232), contracting officers shall not use the lowest price technically acceptable source selection process to acquire engineering and manufacturing development for a major defense acquisition program for which budgetary authority is requested, beginning in fiscal year 2019 and beyond.
- Contracting Officers shall make award decisions based on best value factors and criteria, as determined by the resource sponsor (in accordance with agency procedures), for an auditing contract. The use of the lowest price technically acceptable source selection process is prohibited (10 U.S.C. 240f).
Is Past Performance Evaluated under LPTA?
Unless the Contracting Officer documents the file in accordance with FAR Subpart 15.304(c)(3)(iii) that past performance is not an appropriate evaluation factor for the acquisition, it will be evaluated. ed not be an evaluation factor in lowest price technically acceptable source selections.
If the Contracting Officer elects to consider past performance as an evaluation factor, it will be evaluated like any other solicitation in accordance with FAR Subpart 15.305 but there will be no comparative assessment made. The same ratings of "Acceptable", "Unacceptable" (or similar), and "Neutral" (for no record of past performance) will be used.
If the Contracting Officer determines that a small business’ past performance is not acceptable, the matter shall be referred to the Small Business Administration (SBA) for a Certificate of Competency (COC) determination, in accordance with the procedures at FAR Subpart 19.6.
How an LPTA Evaluation is Conducted.
As is standard for all source selection procedures, the technical and price evaluations are conducted separately by different teams called the Technical Evaluation Board (TEB) and the Price Evaluation Board (PEB), who combined are known as the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB). The TEB and the PEB do not show the findings of their team to the other and non-disclosure agreements are signed by all evaluators and non-voting board members (i.e., advisors).
After the Boards receive their training on how to conduct the evaluation, in accordance with the Source Selection Evaluation Plan (SSEP) (which is developed prior to the receipt of proposals), the TEB will receive copies of each offer and worksheets to document an independent review and assessment of each offer in terms of meeting the technical acceptability thresholds of each factor (and subfactor). TEB members will individually document their rationale and write down the pages of the offer and quote offer language to substantiate their position.
Once the individual reviews by TEB members are completed, the TEB will meet as a group and discuss their individual ratings and rationales until they come to a consensus evaluation rating and agree on the supporting documentation within the offer (or missing from the offer) for their findings. Typically, when using the LPTA method, once a “Fail”, “No Go”, or “Red” rating is received by an offer it is documented and the offer removed from further review and consideration for award without the remaining factors / subfactors being evaluated. Review of all factors continues for the remaining offers until all offers remaining are either eliminated from further consideration or they have received “Pass”, “Go”, or Green ratings on all factors.
The TEB completes consensus rating sheets. A final consensus TEB report of findings is prepared to summarize the process, individual and consensus ratings, and any key discussions and decisions made by the TEB, any dissenting opinions, and to summarize the outcome. The consensus evaluation report with all supporting documentation (to include individual and consensus worksheets and notes) is provided to the Contracting Officer for review and feedback.
The PEB will do its separate evaluation related to the price requirements of the solicitation similarly to the process used by the TEB (i.e., individual reviews, then by consensus, documented and a report written). Upon completion, a PEB consensus report is created and provided to the Contracting Officer, if the Contracting Officer did not take part in the price review directly.
The Contracting Officer then reviews both reports and the supporting documentation, discusses any discrepancies found, asks for more information or documentation where needed, and then writes the Source Selection Decision document outlining the process, each Boards’ findings, and the contract award decision. This decision document is then signed by the Source Selection Authority (SSA) which may be the Contracting Officer themselves but may be one level above the Contracting Officer when certain dollar thresholds are met.
Give Examples of LPTA Technical Evaluation Criteria.
“Vendor shall submit a copy of the certification documenting they are a current licensed KDHE UST contractor and tightness tester. Failure to submit this certification will cause the vendor to be rated technically.”
“Contractor shall name and provide for least one currently certified Diagnostic CT/Radiological Technologist available for the duration of the contract for the work hours shown. Include all required information as listed below with supporting credential documentation as listed in the Statement of Work. Failure to provide any document in the personnel package will result in this factor being rated as “Unacceptable.””
“The Altitude Simulation Unit to be provided must meet the following product specifications:
o Interior dimensions (minimum dimensions): 15” x 15” 15”
o Exterior dimension (maximum dimensions): 60” (W) x 30” (D) x 30” (H)
o Pressure range (minimum): 1,000’ – 8,000’
o Features a controller unit that will monitor pressure within the chamber, recognize when pressures have diverged from a given setting, and then re-pressurize as needed.
o Chamber fitted with glove access for use while pressurized.
o Whole system needs to include the pump, controller unit, and chamber.
Failure to provide a specification sheet for validation of these requirements will result in the elimination of your offer from further consideration.”
Can a Solicitation include both LPTA and Other Evaluation Criteria?
Yes, however, it is not a recommended practice. This occurs most often when a requirement must be verified through submission of a document such as a certain certification, insurance rating, or other industry standard.
Is the LPTA Evaluation Method Being Used Successfully by Government?
Well…that’s THE loaded question and where the LinkedIn post by Jackie Robinson-Burnette and my answer takes us. My opinion is--
- The Government uses LPTA.
- The Government currently awards contracts using LPTA methods.
- BUT (and it's a big one) the Government isn’t doing it correctly.
What the Government labels as LPTA criteria really isn’t measurable simply using “pass/fail” ratings. This is why TEBs tend to play around with ratings to find a way to describe for the Contracting Officer the degrees in which offers vary. This is, as Randy Lange wrote in his comment to the post, “…LPTA disguised as “best value”.” And it drives me crazy!
There are also several experiences on both sides of the fence -- industry and Government -- and takes on it. From the Government taking the easy way out, Contracting Officers not having the time to babysit Project Managers who cannot come up with objective measures, and industry bystanders who have been battle-worn by the process when it’s not deployed correctly.
Now what do you think? What is LPTA good for? Absolutely nothing? There are still very good and reasonable use cases for LPTA, when done right!
Regardless of where you stand on the LPTA debate, now you know what LPTA is supposed to be good for and how it is supposed to work. But until the Government can use it correctly, LPTA should be used for absolutely nothing.
(August 2024)
.webp)
View related posts
The FAR Overhaul: Long-Deferred Maintenance on the Government's Procurement Highway
If you’ve ever worked in federal procurement — as a contracting professional, program manager, small business, prime, sub, or advisor — you’ve probably had this moment:
You’re doing your best to follow the rules…and suddenly you hit a clause, a cross-reference, or a requirement that feels like it came out of nowhere.
That’s because the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) isn’t just a set of rules. It’s a highway system. A massive, heavily traveled road network that’s been patched, expanded, and rerouted for decades — and in many areas, it’s operating with years of deferred maintenance.
Let’s talk about what that really means using the highway analogy to explain why the Revolutionary FAR Overhaul isn't as "revolutionary" as some might think.
The FAR is like a Well-Traveled Federal Highway
The FAR is the main road that nearly every federal acquisition travels on. And like any highway system:
- Everyone uses it
- Everyone depends on it
- And over time, it’s been modified in ways that made sense in the moment… but created complexity later
If you look at any highway on Google Maps it shows a rather clean route. FAR, we were taught, was set up to be the same way: requirements, procedures, clauses, and guidance. But once you’re actually “driving” that road? Well, you realize the terrain is full of twists and turns. It's more complicated than you realized.
Hidden Guardrails: The Rules You Don’t See Until You Need Them
Some of the FAR’s most critical compliance safeguards are like guardrails buried under weeds or snow. They’re there for a reason: to prevent waste, protect fairness, ensure accountability. But they’re not always easy to spot. In practice, you often discover them when someone asks:
“Did you document that?”
“Where’s your justification?”
“Why didn’t you compete this?”
“Which clause applies here?”
That’s when you realize the guardrails were present the whole time — just not visible.
Guardrails are added all the time or in the process of being fixed (via rulemaking). But all that construction can clog up traffic and make the time for arrival (contract award) continually recalculate.
Hazards & Risks: Potholes, Speed Traps, and Fog
Now add in the hazards:
- Potholes = ambiguity and unclear language
- Fog = inconsistent interpretation across offices and agencies
- Construction zones = evolving policy updates, executive orders, and new mandates
- Speed traps = protests, audits, IG scrutiny, and compliance reviews
And these hazards hit different people differently. The same stretch of FAR may feel smooth to one team and treacherous to another. That’s not because the people are bad at driving — it’s because the road is uneven.
Side Roads & Gray Areas: The Detours Everyone Knows About
Then there are the side roads. Some are official alternate routes: simplified acquisition procedures, flexibilities, exceptions, and FAR “shortcuts” that exist for good reasons. Those are the routes people take because they’ve always taken them. Indicators might be hearing yourself or your peer say --
“We’ve always done it this way.”
“That’s how the last CO handled it.”
“This should be faster.”
“It’ll probably be fine.”
Side roads aren’t automatically wrong. But they come with risks, Eventually someone asks, “Why did you go that way instead of the main route?”
Others are the gray areas -- the gravel roads and roads only the locals (experienced COs/KOs) know. Those routes have to be navigated very carefully and even the best driver can have issues even if there is less traffic. Many times they beat those on the highway to their destination, but it's only because they know where all the seen and unseen hazards are from their years driving that route.
So What Is the FAR Overhaul, Really?
Here’s the key point:
✅ It is NOT building a new road.
✅ It is NOT bulldozing the FAR and replacing it.
✅ It IS road maintenance -- the kind that should've been done years ago.
And when you have decades of deferred maintenance, it takes a lot of work to make that road appear to be what it was all along.
But that's not "revolutionary". That's finally doing the work you've been putting off because you couldn't get to it.
The County (in this case, the FAR Council, being the governing body over the FAR and its contents) could always do a little better job at maintenance than they do. But their budget and resources are low and their workload demands are very high (just take a look at the FAR Open Case Report). Sometimes it takes a new Sheriff In town (a new Administration) driving down the highway see what those too close to it should have been aware of all along. Layers upon layers of deferred maintenance.
The FAR Overhaul is best understood as freshening up the same highway.
- Clearing overgrowth = outdated and redundant material and non-regulatory clutter.
- Improving signage = clarity and usability.
- Standardizing merges and exits = better consistency and flow.
- Removing obsolete detours = non-regulatory clutter, outdated terminology, and rules that no longer serve their purpose.
And a bonus is the updated maps available for your travels (FAR Companion and Practitioner Albums)
The destination isn’t changing. But the route is FAR more functional -- see how I did that. ;)
Why This Metaphor Matters
When people hear the word “overhaul,” they often assume “Everything is changing.” But what this effort really signals is “We are fixing the road we’ve been driving on for decades.” That’s important because procurement has become more complex, acquisition timelines are under pressure, and both agencies and industry need guidance that is easier to understand, apply, and defend.
If the FAR Overhaul is the same old FAR highway with better pavement, clearer signs, fewer surprises, and, hopefully, less time lost in detours, fewer compliance collisions, and a smoother drive for everyone. The biggest difference is that now all travelers know what the locals knew all along. How to get from point A to point B in less time using an updated road system and map.
Safe travels on the FAR Highway in 2026!
The FAR Is a Highway System… and the Revolutionary FAR Overhaul Is Long-Overdue Road Work
Contract Types and Contract Vehicles: The Difference Matters
Nuances matter in Federal Contracting. Those who haven't lived the Federal Contracting experience day in and day out may believe it's minor details that don't make a difference. They don't pick up on the nuances.
For those that have lived it from behind the walls of an agency know how those nuances can make a difference between how you are perceived building relationships with primes, potential team members and, most importantly, agency decision-makers.
One nuance -- Contract Types and Contract Vehicles.
Contract TYPES are defined by the pricing structure and risk ratio between the parties. They are:
✅️ Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) to include FFP with Economic Price Adjustment (FFP w/EPA), Prospective Price Determination, Fixed-Ceiling Priced Contracts with Retroactive Price Redetermination, and those with a Level-of-Effort term (FFP-LOE).
✅️ Cost Reimbursement (or "Cost-Plus" ("CP")) to include cost sharing, Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF), Award Fee (CPAF), and Incentive Fee (CPIF).
✅️ Time-and-Materials (T&M) with materials on a fixed-price or cost-reimbursement basis.
✅️ Labor-Hour (L-H).
Contract VEHICLES provide the performance and administrative structure for the Contract Type. Those are:
✅️ Definitive Contracts are for specific stand-alone project(s) that fall above the Simplified Acquisition Threshold (SAT).
✅️ Indefinite Delivery Vehicles (IDVs) include Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity contracts (IDIQs), Definitely Quantity, and Requirements vehicles. They include, but are NOT exclusively, governmentwide (GWACs), agency-specific, or GSA Multiple Award Schedules (MAS).
➡️➡️ Under the IDV umbrella falls task orders (services) & delivery orders (products) and specific instructions for who can order and how.
✅️ Agreements such as Basic Agreements, Basic Ordering Agreements (BOAs), and Blanket Purchase Agreements (BPAs).
➡️ ➡️ They are most often an umbrella for calls / orders (agencies call them both of these things even where FAR / RFO is specific, so it is easy to get confused), but don't have to be.
✅️ Purchase Orders (POs) (actions that fall under SAT).
✅️ Letter Contracts.
Yea, I know. FAR (even the RFO) lumps them all together as "Contract Types" in Part 16. But none stand alone. In my opinion, the FAR rewriters blew their chance to clarify this important piece of the procurement puzzle. For example:
▶️ IDIQs for services may include the ability to issue multiple types of task orders like fixed-priced, cost, T&M, and L-H under them, or only one type.
▶️ Definitive contract vehicles can be any contract type or combination thereof (hybrid) as indicated in the contract line items (CLINs) and for which terms and conditions are included.
Bottom line is -- There is not a complete understanding of a contract vehicle without defining its contract type(s).
If you see folks lumping TYPES and VEHICLES together in a discussion without explaining the difference, you know they aren't familiar with the nuances of this part of the FAR / RFO.
Follow those that are and have. Visit fedsubk.com and Expand your Federal Contracting knowledge today.
There are nuances in every FAR / RFO Part, including Part 16. We talk about why it is important to know and understand them in this marketplace.
FedSubK Feature: Be Seen! Why Your SBS Profile is So Important
UPDATED November 2025 to incorporate changes from the SBA Dynamic Small Business Search (DSBS) to the new SBA Small Business Search (SBS)
I’ve posted on LinkedIn a lot recently about ways to be seen as a little fish in the big pond that is the Federal marketplace. Every GovCon consultant has a take on the best entry points with agencies. My take is there is only one place small businesses MUST put their best foot forward to be quickly and easily seen by Federal buyers for potential opportunities and influence small business set-asides.
The Small Business Administration (SBA) Small Business Search (SBS) is THE PLACE you must be on your A-game.
The Small Business Search (SBS) is a database in which SBA houses information on the current pool of certificated small businesses. Presently, small businesses that do not have certifications or are self-certified, may also create a profile in this database. The SBS is used by contracting officers, small business specialists, large prime contractors, and other small businesses looking for teaming partners to find small businesses that can help meet Federal requirements and identify businesses that can help the Government (or a prime contractor) meet its small business goals. SBS is one of the first--and often only--sources used in market research by agencies to determine the numbers of small businesses able to provide products or services by North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code.
You can see why this might be an important place to pay attention to, eh?
Businesses have forgotten about the SBS in the last few years because SAM.gov no longer sends small business registrants directly to SBS at the end of their registration to complete the profile like it used to. I HUGE bummer. Businesses now must wait for their SAM.gov registration to be activated, then they can establish an SBA SBS account, claim their entity record, and fill in their company profile in the SBS system. Federal buyers are looking for detailed information from SBS to use as part of their market research efforts.
SBS isn’t only for market research.
Even more importantly, the SBS shows Federal buyers the status of any pending certification applications for the purpose of determining whether you are eligible to compete for a set-aside action. For example, an Economically Disadvantaged Woman Owned Small Business (EDWOSB) can still submit an offer for an WOSB set-aside even with a pending application for certification showing in the SBS. Contracting Officers often use SBS as a source to confirm the socioeconomic certification status and 8(a) program participation along with SAM.gov.
While MySBA Certifications automatically sends socioeconomic certification status to SAM.gov and updates the requisite reps and certs to reflect the correct socioeconomic status, recently it has taken weeks for that migration to occur. WOSBs and EDWOSBs have reported not seeing their correct socioeconomic status reflected in their SAM entity record.
Businesses should always check their SAM entity record to ensure that the proper status is shown within a reasonable time after receipt of an active certification status; usually within 14 business days. If the record is not accurately reflected, you can contact answerdesk@sba.gov or the SBA socioeconomic program under which your business was certified for assistance. If a Contracting Officer says that your SAM record does not reflect the status claimed, ask the Contracting Officer to check SBS for the more accurate information because of these delays.
So now let’s talk about BEING SEEN in SBS and walk through each part of the registration.
Understanding how to maximize the fields in SBS is how you can make the best possible first impression so that Federal buyers want to learn more about YOU!
The Key Words
Often businesses pluck these from thin air and over-generalized based on what they think the Government wants to see. Key words need to reflect and incorporate aspects of your primary NAICS, secondary NAICS, and what you can provide under those NAICS. If you use key words that don’t reflect your primary NAICS, you’ll leave the Government scratching their head about you. They won’t understand the message you’re sending about your company. Be consistent and specific with key words while tying into your NAICS codes in order to leave the best impression. You have 500 characters -- use them wisely.
The Website
Be sure that you include the URL for any website you have. Make it be more than a landing page. It needs to tell your story. It needs to include information about your company, what you sell, past customers, and products or solutions you provide. And most of all, it must be polished. Scrub your site hard for formatting, typos, grammatical errors, etc. Acquisition personnel using the SBS will often quickly click on the site to see just how polished it is. When it looks good, they get the impression you know your stuff and pay attention to details.
The Capabilities Narrative
This is the written equivalent of your elevator pitch. This section should include all the things you’d include in that two-minute speech. Hit hard on what your company specialized in and its core product or service areas. Show the business’s focus and avoid being all over the map by overpromising on the breadth of work the business performs.
Near the end of the capabilities narrative, list any socioeconomic certifications Why not lead with it? Because that certification is only part of your business, and it alone does not get you interest from the Contracting Officer. End with that information so the Contracting Officer can easily see it in a quick query and get your business into their market research counts.
Lastly, identify any government contract vehicle or GSA Schedule your company may hold. If you can catch their eye that you have an existing GSA Schedule or your business participates in the 8(a) program, you’ll get counted and likely get a look in terms of the Contracting Officer wanting to know more. If they need to meet a socioeconomic goal, they can see quickly. You’re helping the Contracting Officer do their job. They LOVE that! (And made another great first impression!)
SBS now also includes a field to add a link to your online capabilities statement. Use it!
“Extras” You Should Never Skip
Performance History
I cannot say this enough…if you history doing work for any Government or quasi-Government entity at any level -- Federal, State, or Local level -- list them! Don’t play the “they’ll see that when I propose” game. Showing performance history—even if it is minimal or commercial and not Government--helps. How? It proves the viability of the business and the size and types of projects you’ve completed. Those goes a long way to determining eligibility of the business based on performance on same / similar work of a same / similar dollar value (“Rule of Two” stuff – you can read more about that here).
Review Your Profile
Go out to the SBS site and use the filters for your NAICS, business name, geographic location, and business types. Make sure your show up and see how your profile measures up to your competitors. Look at their records and see what they included that you haven’t. Use the good ideas of others, but don’t plagiarize. Contracting Officers will see that and that won’t look good for either of you.
Keep Evolving
Your SBS isn’t something that you can just set and forget either. Make reviewing your profile in SBS something you do when you renew your SAM.gov registration every year. If something major changes in your business focus, NAICS, or socioeconomic status, make associated changes in SBS.
What GovCon doesn't always talk about -- The SBS Influence
When doing market research and trying to determine if an acquisition should be set-aside for small businesses, the Government is not only counting about the numbers of small businesses that claim they can do the work under a NAICS code in SBS. They are analyzing your SBS profile to see if your business could be one of the "... two or more responsible small business concerns that are competitive in terms of fair market prices, quality, and delivery" and they have “…a reasonable expectation of obtaining an offer…” from you. (There’s that pesky “Rule of Two” again.)
In other words, based on what they see, could you submit a proposal likely to win? And how does a Contracting Officer determine that? Simply put... the your answers to everything we just covered.
Completing your profile helps tip the market research scales toward a small businesses set-aside and possibly a specific socioeconomic set-aside. If you're all over the map in your SBS narrative, the Government will not consider you viable eligible contractor towards that “Rule of Two” and could possible choose to go another way with their acquisition strategy, away from a small business set-aside. Or worse, they set it aside but remember your name from the market research as one of the businesses that didn’t make their initial market analysis cut.
Influence where you can! SBS is the place where you have a lot of influence!
Have I convinced you to get out there and create or update your SBS profile yet?
While the system is no longer got the word "Dynamic" in the title, don't forget its meaning. Life is dynamic, business is dynamic, and your SBS profile should still be dynamic, too. Get it completed ASAP. You can’t afford not to.
Remember again, SBS IS WHERE FEDERAL BUYERS GO TO FIND SMALL BUSINESSES and where other small businesses go to find teaming partners and subcontractors.
Get out there, GET NOTICED, BE SEEN, and STAY DYNAMIC!
(former title: FedSubK Feature: Be A Dynamic Small Business!)
