Outline the steps in the acquisition process for a negotiated best value source

Question

Outline the steps in the acquisition process for a negotiated best value source selection. Address the impact of best value on each step from the determination of need through the final acquisition plan. For each step, write a paragraph or several to: (1) define the step; (2) explain it's purpose; (3) explain the impact of best value on that step; and (4) state the product or outcome of that step. Take into consideration the best value procurement approaches that the contracting activity may use in preparing to meet a customers' need. Use the following structure for this essay: Introduction - Discussion of Steps - Summary.

Explanation / Answer

15.001 Definitions.

As used in this part—

“Deficiency” is a material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

“Proposal modification” is a change made to a proposal before the solicitation closing date and time, or made in response to an amendment, or made to correct a mistake at any time before award.

“Proposal revision” is a change to a proposal made after the solicitation closing date, at the request of or as allowed by a contracting officer, as the result of negotiations.

“Weakness” means a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. A “significant weakness” in the proposal is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

15.002 Types of negotiated acquisition.

(a) Sole source acquisitions. When contracting in a sole source environment, the request for proposals (RFP) should be tailored to remove unnecessary information and requirements; e.g., evaluation criteria and voluminous proposal preparation instructions.

(b) Competitive acquisitions. When contracting in a competitive environment, the procedures of this part are intended to minimize the complexity of the solicitation, the evaluation, and the source selection decision, while maintaining a process designed to foster an impartial and comprehensive evaluation of offerors’ proposals, leading to selection of the proposal representing the best value to the Government.

15.100 Scope of subpart.

This subpart describes some of the acquisition processes and techniques that may be used to design competitive acquisition strategies suitable for the specific circumstances of the acquisition.

15.101 Best value continuum.

An agency can obtain best value in negotiated acquisitions by using any one or a combination of source selection approaches. In different types of acquisitions, the relative importance of cost or price may vary. For example, in acquisitions where the requirement is clearly definable and the risk of unsuccessful contract performance is minimal, cost or price may play a dominant role in source selection. The less definitive the requirement, the more development work required, or the greater the performance risk, the more technical or past performance considerations may play a dominant role in source selection.

15.101-1 Tradeoff process.

(a) A tradeoff process is appropriate when it may be in the best interest of the Government to consider award to other than the lowest priced offeror or other than the highest technically rated offeror.

(b) When using a tradeoff process, the following apply:

(1) All evaluation factors and significant subfactors that will affect contract award and their relative importance shall be clearly stated in the solicitation; and

(2) The solicitation shall state whether all evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined, are significantly more important than, approximately equal to, or significantly less important than cost or price.

(c) This process permits tradeoffs among cost or price and non-cost factors and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal. The perceived benefits of the higher priced proposal shall merit the additional cost, and the rationale for tradeoffs must be documented in the file in accordance with 15.406.

15.101-2 Lowest price technically acceptable source selection process.

(a) The lowest price technically acceptable source selection process is appropriate when best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price.

(b) When using the lowest price technically acceptable process, the following apply:

(1) The evaluation factors and significant subfactors that establish the requirements of acceptability shall be set forth in the solicitation. Solicitations shall specify that award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors. If the contracting officer documents the file pursuant to 15.304(c)(3)(iii), past performance need 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 shall be evaluated in accordance with15.305. However, the comparative assessment in 15.305(a)(2)(i) does not apply. If the contracting officer determines that a small business’ past performance is not acceptable, the matter shall be referred to the Small Business Administration for a Certificate of Competency determination, in accordance with the procedures contained in Subpart 19.6 and 15 U.S.C. 637(b)(7)).

(2) Tradeoffs are not permitted.

(3) Proposals are evaluated for acceptability but not ranked using the non-cost/price factors.

(4) Exchanges may occur.

Background

Source selection is not an isolated aspect of the acquisition life cycle; instead, it is a key phase of the life cycle shown below in Figure 1. In order for source selection to be successful, the precursor phases of the life cycle (need identification, market research, requirements definition, strong acquisition planning, solicitation development, and proposal solicitation) must be completed effectively.

The source selection approach should be captured in a source selection plan. The plan should include the proposal evaluation criteria. Selecting appropriate evaluation factors is one of the most important steps in the entire source selection process. The source selection plan explains how proposals are to be solicited and evaluated to make selection decisions. It defines the roles of the source selection team members. A realistic schedule also should be included in the plan.

The article Picking the Right Contractor describes best practices and lessons learned in the pre-proposal and selection process, including ways to involve Industry to improve the likelihood of a better source selection outcome. The article, RFP Preparation and Source Selection will walk you through the RFP process, typical MITRE systems engineering roles, and the important points of the selection process. Both articles contain best practices and lessons learned for the preparation and evaluation processes.

Best Practices and Lessons Learned

Advocate the right definition of success: Some organizations define "acquisition success" as the awarding of the contract. Once the contract is awarded (without a protest), victory is declared. Although contract award is one of several important milestones, this limited view of acquisition tends to overlook the need to adequately consider what it will take to successfully execute the acquisition effort in a way that achieves the desired outcomes. It leads to a "ready, fire, aim" approach to acquisition planning. Advocate for a broader view of acquisition success, one that balances the desire to award a contract quickly with adequate planning, program management, and systems engineering across the entire system or capability life cycle.

The importance of planning: The importance of conducting adequate acquisition planning before release of the RFP cannot be overstated. This includes encouraging clients to take the time to conduct market research and have dialog with industry so the government becomes a smart buyer that recognizes what is available in the market place, including the risks and opportunities associated with being able acquire solutions that meet their needs. This insight allows the government to develop a more effective source selection strategy, which includes choosing more meaningful evaluation factors (or criteria) that focus on key discriminators, linked to outcome metrics. Concentrating on a few key differentiating factors can also translate into a need for less proposal information instead of asking for "everything," which tends to occur when not certain what is important. Adequate acquisition planning helps ensure that the source selection process will go smoothly, increases the probability of selecting the best solution, and reduces the risk of protest.

Maintain the right focus: Focusing on mission/business outcomes instead of detailed technical specifications broadens the trade-space of potential innovative solutions that industry (potential contractors) may offer. It can increase industry's ability to use commercial items and/or non-developmental items to fulfill government needs.

Follow your process: The evaluation documentation must provide a strong rationale for the selection decision. During the proposal evaluation phase, a critical lesson is to ensure that the evaluation team does not deviate from the stated RFP evaluation factors. General Accounting Office decisions clearly indicate that use of factors other than those published in the RFP almost guarantees that a bid protest will be sustained. At a minimum, the source selection documentation must identify weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies as defined by FAR 15.001 Definitions [1]. Good documentation also identifies strengths and risks.

The importance of industry exchanges: Increased communication with industry through presolicitation notices, information exchanges, and draft RFPs makes the acquisition process more transparent and may lower the likelihood of a protest. These techniques can be an effective way to increase competition, especially when there is a strong incumbent. Exchanges with industry are especially important when the procurement requirements are complex.

Handling sensitive proposal information—a critical requirement: To maintain the integrity of procurement, sensitive source selection information must be handled with discretion to avoid compromise. All government team participants share the critical responsibility to ensure that source selection and proprietary information is not disclosed. There is no room for error. Any lapses by MITRE individuals not only could compromise the integrity of a federal procurement but also could damage MITRE's relationship with the government.

Clarity of evaluation factors: It is not unusual for the government to ask MITRE systems engineers to help draft proposal evaluation factors (Section M) for a solicitation. The focus should be on the key discriminators that will help distinguish one proposal from another. Cost must always be one of the factors, along with such factors as mission capability, similar experience, past performance, and key personnel. Many solicitations are often vague about the relative weights among such evaluation factors as cost. These ambiguities often lead to successful protests. It is important to do everything possible to ensure that the relative weights of the factors are as clear as possible in the minds of the potential offerors and the government evaluation team.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse O
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.