All proposals have one thing in common. Unless they meet their submission deadlines, the customer does not evaluate them, and the company loses the bid. Therefore, verifying the proposal is on schedule is one of the most important duties of the proposal manager. However, most proposal managers don’t manage just one proposal. Most proposal managers handle several proposals simultaneously, and proposal directors manage the entire portfolio of proposals. The customer compounds the complexity of managing multiple bids by not always communicating the request for proposal (RFP) or post-RFP amendments’ release dates in advance. Trying to manage multiple schedules with conflicting requirements is stressful. Therefore, we sought out the advice of experts to complement the scheduling best practices found in the Association of Proposal Management Professionals (APMP) Body of Knowledge (BOK). These additional sources include the Schedule Assessment Guide from the Government Accountability Office (GAO). This report is available from the … Continue reading Advanced scheduling
UPDATED December 19, 2022 GSA released its draft for the Alliant 3 procurement on October 19, 2022 and is accepting bidder comments until January 6, 2023. You can submit your comments to A3DraftRFP@GSA.Gov using the comment template released with the draft RFP. I’ve been through the Alliant 3 draft, and I think GSA came up short in three areas. First, it failed to state the number of points needed to win a seat on its new contract. Second, it capped the number of winners at 60, and third, it failed to take advantage of all the lessons learned when it crafted the OASIS+ Draft Request for Proposal. 1. Unpublished award score GSA is not disclosing the number of points needed to win the new Alliant 3 contract and instead is saying it will award to the 60 highest-scoring bidders. If GSA proceeds with an unpublished award score, it invites protests … Continue reading Did GSA get it wrong on Alliant 3?
There is a dichotomy between the way industry and government Source Selection Evaluation Boards (SSEBs) run proposal reviews. In industry, reviewers read the entire proposal and make in-line recommendations concerning how to improve each section. Industry evaluators also verify that suitable win themes are present. How the government reviews proposals In contrast, the government grades the proposal using a score sheet based on the evaluation criteria listed in the request for proposal (RFP). In most cases, you can find the evaluation criteria in the RFP’s Section M. The RFP also explains the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) criteria the government uses to evaluate the proposal. For example, if the government uses FAR Part 15, it is rating your proposal on a best-value scale using a numeric, adjectival, or confidence rating. As part of the rating scheme, they evaluate your proposal according to strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, deficiencies, and risks. Government evaluators … Continue reading Run your next proposal review like the government
Given the recurring problems with large multiple-award contract vehicles, the government needs to reevaluate how it bundles the purchasing of IT products and services. What started out to be Best in Class acquisitions may be turning out to be more like worst-in-class procurements. There is no denying that when the government says it is going to bundle up a major portion of the IT market and compete it through acquisition vehicles, companies will fight to the death to be one of the awardees. Bidders know all too well that if they are not a winner on these major acquisition vehicles, they will have to sit on the sidelines for the next five or more years watching their competitors participate in an exclusive club of companies who have been granted access to this market. What started out to be a strategy to streamline IT acquisitions has turned out to be anything … Continue reading Best-in-class, or worst-in-class?