GSA’s Alliant 3 team is batting a solid .500 with the release of the draft RFP this week. They moved quickly on a project requiring a fast start. Unfortunately, the team has apparently made a decision to deny requests from individual companies to discuss ideas and concerns. As such, what should have been a positive development enabling the agency to move quickly on an important project now runs the risk of incurring delays later on. Reduced communication on similar IDIQ projects has usually resulted in less well-crafted responses and in increased protest activity. As it is now, prospective contractors will have until noon eastern time on January 6th to comment on the draft Alliant 3 RFP issued by GSA last week. The long review time suggests that there are several potential changes from the current Alliant 2 contracts that industry may want to review carefully. They may undoubtedly be questions on some areas but reducing communication opportunities may make it difficult for those to be answered in a timely manner. One of the changes is that offers will be assessed based on the top 60 Highest Technically Rated Qualifying Offers. Cost and pricing data will not be considered at the contract level. GSA had signaled this change in earlier communications indicating that pricing on large IDIQ’s will become a negotiation matter between contractors and ordering agencies. Alliant 3 is also an unrestricted vehicle, meaning that companies of any size can submit a proposal. Proposals from JV’s and contractor teams are also allowed, providing that the companies in those arrangements meet the requirements for eligibility set forth in the draft. The requirement in other recent IDIQ’s for all offerors to submit proof of past performance on the solutions to be proposed continues. Offerors can earn up to 17,500 points for previous performance, regardless of the total number of projects submitted for review. Contractors should take all of the time allotted to carefully review the content of the draft. GSA should reconsider its decision to restrict communications.
Government contractors always face a tricky issue of whether to exceed technical, professional, and other requirements included in a government solicitation or whether to just provide solutions that are closer to what the customers says they actually want. While the more robust proposal provides better security and a higher level of services, it also usually costs more. Customers looking for a value-based approach may not want to pay the additional amount, even though the solution will work better for them over time. This issue came up recently in a Bloomberg Government article where the author, a federal cyber adviser, advocated for enhanced cybersecurity offerings. Read more
Way too often contractors, even experienced ones, tend to look at the whole of the government market and try to develop one, standardized approach. This can be particularly true when a specific method has worked before. The government, however, is most definitely not one customer. Adapting business development and contracting approaches are essential to being successful in more than one place, even inside one agency. Proactive vs. reactive is one obvious example. Contractors are told by senior level government officials that they should Read more
When is your offer considered to be officially rejected? That can be a tricky question for contractors when agencies use “advisory down selects” in an acquisition. The approach, used most recently at DHS and NIH, starts with a multi-phased acquisition, usually beginning with a company’s technical proposal. If it is evaluated as lacking or insufficient the company receives an advisory notice to that effect. The notice, however, does not preclude the company from submitting an offer in phase two of the acquisition. While it cannot officially augment its original proposal to correct any deficiencies identified in the first phase, it can make a bid on Read more
GSA’s latest attempt to establish a small business IDIQ contract for IT solutions hit yet another roadblock last week with the filing of two more pre-award protests. At least two companies aren’t happy with the way GSA addresses small business joint ventures and other small business rules. The Court of Federal Claims will examine the matter, a process that could take many months and will almost surely be more than the timeline for a GAO protest. While protests can be a good thing in government acquisition by ensuring that agencies follow applicable rules, too many protests can sink a program. Companies of all sizes need to Read more