TArticles tagged with: Maryann Lesnick

Best Practices for a Task Order Proposal Factory

A number of best practices will enable success in responding to rapid turnaround TO RFPs.

The trend in Federal procurement is to award more and more work through task orders on multiple award contract (MAC) vehicles. MAC contracts go by many names: Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) contracts (single award or multiple award) GSA Schedules (sometimes referred to as Multiple Award Schedules and Federal Supply Schedules) Blanket Purchase Agreements (BPAs) Government-wide Acquisition Contracts (GWAC) MAC contracts are generally awarded based on qualifications, experience, and merit. Bidders are evaluated for past performance, quality certifications (CMMI, ISO, etc.), corporate experience, security clearances, and internal systems such as cost accounting, estimating, and purchasing. Once the MAC awards are made, specific project work is issued and funded through individual task orders (TOs). Different contract vehicles use different terms for these requests: task order request (TOR), request for task order proposal (RTOP), request for task execution plan (RTEP), task order request for proposal (TO RFP), etc. When a TO RFP is issued, the … Continue reading Best Practices for a Task Order Proposal Factory

Continue reading...

L versus M – Where do I start?

Using section M as the basis of your proposal could result in a non-compliant bid

I’ve noticed a trend with some companies to use section M of the government solicitation document as the basis for their proposal structure. While I understand the desire to make it easy for the evaluators to score your proposal, this could result in a non-compliant bid. Organize your bid or proposal according to the customer’s instructions. A compliant proposal meets the customer’s requirements and submittal instructions. U.S. federal bid requests issued under the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15 must comply with detailed instructions on how the bid request and bid response are to be structured. Requirements for the structure of the proposal are provided in section L. Evaluation factors for the award are provided in section M. Evaluators often review proposals in two passes.  The first pass is a compliance review to section L.  This review may be performed by the CO and if the proposal is not rigorously compliant, … Continue reading L versus M – Where do I start?

Continue reading...

Improve Win Rates through Asset Integration and Content Management

APMP Bid & Proposal Con 2019 Presentation – Maryann Lesnick, Lohfeld Consulting Group

As BD professionals, we care about ALL information assets of our organizations. More than any other group, we appreciate the potential value, from competitive differentiation to reusable content to proof points to innovations, awards, and recognitions. The list goes on. All of this intelligence represents potential content for proposals. Thus, it is essential that we take an active role in the establishment and maintenance of a content library. This session will explore strategies to define the library; engage organizational components in sharing/contributing to the library; ensuring data is relevant and current; and using the content library to produce winning proposals. A well-managed content library will save significant time and effort crafting future responses. An added benefit is that it also brings your organization together in pursuit of a common goal: winning new business. Why this session is important: Asset integration and content management challenges and limitations may arise from start-up … Continue reading Improve Win Rates through Asset Integration and Content Management

Continue reading...

Improve your Writing Series – Avoid Nominalizations in your Proposals

Use active verbs for clarity and effectiveness

One of the best ways to improve your writing is to use active verbs instead of nominalizations. What is a nominalization, anyway? A nominalization is a verb converted into a noun. Nominalizations come in two forms: Those that have endings such as -ment, -tion, -sion, -ing, and -ance Those that link with verbs such as achieve, effect, give, have, make, reach, and take. For example, “The last step is the collection of data for the monthly report.” is longer and less clear than: “The Program Manager collects data for the monthly report.” Eliminating a nominalization often reveals passive voice and enables you to correct that as well. There is always a verb hidden inside a nominalization. Consider: Conclusion – conclude Demonstration – demonstrate Analysis – analyze Optimization – optimize Solution – solve Possession – possess Realization – realize Collection – collect Examples of verb linkage nominalizations and the hidden verb … Continue reading Improve your Writing Series – Avoid Nominalizations in your Proposals

Continue reading...