Procurements based on federal supply schedule (FSS) contracts can be tricky -- for the Government agencies conducting them as well as the contractors hoping to win a contract. The ease with which such contracting efforts can go sideways is particularly evident in the recent decision in AllWorld Language Consultants, Inc., B-411481.3 (January 6, 2016). The decision makes clear a fundamental rule…
If you want to win contract awards, your proposal needs to clearly and persuasively explain why you are the right choice. The words you choose matter, as does the way you arrange them. Indeed, as the recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) decision in Federal Acquisition Services Alliant Joint Venture, B-411842.2 (November 9, 2015) starkly demonstrates, sloppy syntax, grammar, and…
Agency comments during discussions often articulate a weakness or deficiency. Sometimes, however, the Government is also simply asking questions – identifying specific issues that should be addressed – and affording an offeror the opportunity to explain its proposal. When that happens, contractors need to be ready to capitalize on that opportunity to explain, but not always necessarily to change,…
A recent article addressed the dangers of “aspirational analysis”, the dynamic in which offerors interpret a solicitation as saying what they want it to say rather than recognizing what it actually requires. A slightly different version of the problem is highlighted by the decision in Aerostar Perma-Fix TRU Services, LLC, B-411733; B-411733.4 (October 8, 2015), where the protester…
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) recently was called upon, for the first time, to consider circumstances where an agency knowingly failed to investigate and resolve whether an agency employee who actively engaged in procurement-related activities should have been recused from those activities due to an apparent conflict of interest arising from the employee’s prior employment by the…
A recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) decision emphasizes a point that we have often urged – namely, that if you are unclear what an agency requires as set out in its solicitation (1) you need to seek clarification from the agency, and (2) if the agency refuses or fails to provide adequate clarification, you need to protest before the next solicitation closing date. The problem with…
Depending on your perspective, a contract modification that adds work to the existing contract may be either absolutely and “obviously” appropriate (if you’re the contractor) or an improper method of avoiding the fair and open competition required by the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA) (if you’d like an opportunity to compete for the new work). Choosing between these two extremes can be…
Companies assessing and working to respond to solicitations need to be careful not to fall prey to “aspirational analysis” – finding what they want to find in the stated requirements instead of understanding and accepting what those requirements actually say. Of course, contractors sometimes decide to ignore the solicitation terms and pursue the contract anyway, either confident that they have a…
Two recent decisions by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) highlight the importance of making clear, in your proposal, that your proposed staff and key personnel are locked-in and will be available and ready to go at the start of the proposed effort. This is particularly so where the solicitation requires express availability commitment letters. In each of these cases the offeror…
It has long been the rule that all items quoted and ordered in a Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) task order competition under FAR Part 8.4 must be on the vendor’s schedule contract at the time the order is awarded. However, a recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) decision clarifies that the critical moment is literally the task order award date, and not the offer or any other…
Disappointed offerors sometimes struggle to find viable protest grounds, but savvy firms know the importance of looking beyond the factual circumstances at the time of award. Depending on the stated evaluation criteria, learning the competition’s plans for the future may hold the key to a successful protest. The value of such an approach was recently demonstrated in the Government Accountability…
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) recently reiterated, in the corrective action context, that an agency cannot ignore changed circumstances, and that an award cannot stand where, as a result of interim developments, the awardee no longer intends to perform in a manner consistent with its proposal. FCi Federal, Inc., B-408558.7, B-408558.8, August 5, 2015.
