Are You Ready for the GSA ETSNext Travel Service Bid?
|Agency||General Services Administration (GSA), Federal Acquisition Service (FAS)|
|DRFP Name||E-Gov Travel Service, Next Generation (ETSNext) Travel and Expense (T&E) Technology Managed Services|
|Period of Performance||Per the DRFP, the base period is 3 years, and option periods 1-4 are 3 years beginning after the end of each option period|
|Competition Type||Full and open|
|Incumbents||Note: All task orders for the current ETS2 contract end in June 2027|
· Contractor: SAP Concur (formerly Concur Technologies,
Inc.), a subsidiary of SAP SE; Contract ID: GS33FY0026
· Contractor: CW Government Travel; Contract ID:
The combined value of Concur Technologies, Inc. and CW Government Travel is $2,801,333,438. The spending on SAP SE’s contract is roughly double that of CW Government Travel.
|Number of Winners||1|
|Award Date||Spring/Summer 2024|
ETSNext aims to implement a single-enterprise solution for managing travel and expense (T&E) management and reporting for 124 civilian agencies. ETSNext replaces ETS2, which provides a T&E system that enables agencies to place task orders. On ETS2, agencies are responsible for task order administration and all system configurations. In comparison, GSA will manage the T&E services ETSNext provides.
The scope of ETSNext requirements covers the following:
- Increasing customer satisfaction across all agencies and user types
- Reducing the time it takes for users to carry out their required T&E mission support activities
- Reducing duplicative customizations and maintenance for a better experience and better value across the government
- Strengthening information security infrastructure and processes
- Responding to changes in commercial travel and expense services and additional services
- June 23, 2023: Draft RFP release
- July 11, 2023: Industry Day
- July 20, 2023: Questions due
- October 2023: Final RFP release
Note: On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 11:00 am, GSA is presenting its industry day for ETSNext. If you haven’t signed up already, here’s the registration link.
Cost to Bid
The cost to bid on this multi-phase proposal is high. Phase 1 requires offerors to complete five volumes (none with current page limits) before advancing to Phase 2.
- Volume 1: Administration Information and Subcontracting Plan
- Volume 2: Self-Assessment
- Volume 3: Security
- Volume 4: Demo/Evaluation Testing with Oral Presentations (Note: Offeror’s key personnel must demonstrate their proposed solution and submit the briefing deck 2 full business days before the scheduled demo/evaluation testing)
- Volume 5: Price
If GSA selects an offeror to move to Phase 2, they must submit three more volumes and add information to Volume 5. The government has not specified page limits for these volumes.
- Volume 6: Technical and Management Approach
- Volume 7: Security
- Volume 8: Past Performance
Evaluation Criteria Summary
The government is rating offerors using a confidence standard of high, medium, and low for Phase 1 and Phase 2 subfactors. Highly rated offerors must have several strengths that benefit the government with no or minor weaknesses for each subfactor. Once the government evaluates offerors, it will produce a tabular comparison, as documented in the DRFP Scenario 1 below.
Scenario 1 – Clear technical distinction
|Offeror||Phase 1 |
|Phase 1 |
|Phase 2 |
The government evaluates non-price factors as slightly more important than price. A solution evaluated more highly in the non-price factors could be selected for award over one lower in total evaluated price. However, if non-price factors are equal, price becomes more important. The government has wide latitude in determining which solution represents the best value. The government intends to make an award without discussions; therefore, an offeror’s initial proposal must present its best effort.
Challenges to Bidding
The main challenge is for key personnel to conduct an oral presentation and demonstrate their proposed solution in Phase 1. The demo also involves having the government test the solution over 10 days. Offerors can have two representatives (Product Leads) observe the evaluation testing. If the government conducts onsite testing, the offeror’s representatives may participate in person. Offerors with favorable ratings will advance to Phase 2, which involves providing supporting plans and processes for implementing the solution as well as past performance information.
By Brenda Crist, Vice President at Lohfeld Consulting Group, MPA, CPP APMP Fellow
Lohfeld Consulting Group has proven results specializing in helping companies create winning captures and proposals. As the premier capture and proposal services consulting firm focused exclusively on government markets, we provide expert assistance to government contractors in Capture Planning and Strategy, Proposal Management and Writing, Capture and Proposal Process and Infrastructure, and Training. In the last 3 years, we’ve supported over 550 proposals winning more than $170B for our clients—including the Top 10 government contractors. Lohfeld Consulting Group is your “go-to” capture and proposal source! Start winning by contacting us at www.lohfeldconsulting.com and join us on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter.
Paperback or Kindle
by Bob Lohfeld
contributors Edited by Beth Wingate
Did you know that contracting officers spend up to 20% of their time mitigating disputes between teaming partners? In an informal poll we conducted on LinkedIn last month, 40% of respondents classified their teaming partners as “frenemies” on their last bid.
- Advice (421)
- AI (2)
- APMP (17)
- Business Development (187)
- Capture Management (186)
- Favorite Books (5)
- Go-to-Market (27)
- Graphics (5)
- Lohfeld Books (3)
- Past Performance (57)
- Post-submission Phase (15)
- Pre-RFP Preparation (200)
- Proposal Management (257)
- Proposal Production (57)
- Proposal Reviews (25)
- Proposal Writing (70)
- Pursuit Phase (85)
- Research Report (2)
- Resources (58)
- Tools & Tips (235)
- Training (10)
- Uncategorized (214)