 |
|||||||
|
May - June 2010 Volume 6, Issue 3 |
Contact Us: |
||||||
|
Identifying and creating “themes” for a proposal is an essential step in the proposal development process. Themes allow the proposal writer to bring clarity to the overall proposal presentation and typically focus the evaluator’s primary concerns. Themes are essential to good proposal writing in that they answer the big question: Why should the client pick your company over your competitors? In developing these themes for a proposal, we typically focus on two types: proposal themes and win themes. Proposal themes provide the foundation for a proposal response. Proposal themes accentuate the benefits and features of your proposed solution while providing supportive details that reinforce the theme. Various sections of your proposal will have various themes tied to your overall solution and the RFP’s evaluation criteria. Think back to your high school and college literature classes – a theme helps to tell the story. Your themes in a proposal allow you to “tell the story” of your proposed solution. Win themes are the central one to three ideas that you are presenting in your proposal that highlights why your company and solution are of best value to your client. Win themes tend to focus on a customer’s “hot button” issues or concerns. In most cases, win themes deal with issues regarding cost effectiveness, innovation, proven solutions/results, and/or minimal risks. Good proposal planning requires that you put great thought into your proposal themes. The themes will allow you to tell the story of your proposed solution by emphasizing the most important details, answering the client’s most important questions, and highlighting your company’s significant value to the agency’s need.
If you have been reading a lot of federal procurement news lately, there is no doubt that you have seen numerous articles regarding the value of various multiple award contracts to the federal procurement process. These articles bring into question the whether the numerous contractor options, presented through the General Services Administration’s Multiple Award Schedules (GSA-MAS) program, the agency-level Multiple Award Contracts (MAC), and the Government Wide Acquisition Contracts (GWACS) are giving the Government maximum buying power. Each of these types of contracts has been established for various reasons, including an effort to increase competition, improve efficiency, leverage Government buying power, and to ensure the Government high-quality and best value solutions. There are, however, many concerns regarding whether or not these procurement vehicles are meeting their intended purposes. Concerns with the high number of MACs, GWACs, and GSA MASs as purchasing options, include:
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) published a report in April 2010, entitled, “Data and Oversight Problems Hamper Opportunities to Leverage Value of Interagency and Enterprisewide Contracts,” (GAO-10-367) that indicates the lack of mechanisms for collecting data on the various GSA MASs, GWACs, and MACs in use by the federal agencies, do not allow for the Government to fully understand if the vehicles are bringing about their intended purpose – to ensure the Government is successfully leveraging its buying power. GAO indicates that a lack of management and oversight has lead to the Government being unable to determine the effectiveness of the various vehicles. Currently, only GWACS require approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in order to be established. However, the GAO reports “recent legislation and OMB’s Office of Federal Procurement Policy initiatives are expected to strengthen management of MACs, but no such initiatives exist for enterprisewide contracts (GAO-10-367).” With respect to the GSA’s MAS program, the organization does have tools/methods in place to obtain best price such as the establishment of Most Favored Customer, the Price Reduction Clause and pre-award audits. Unfortunately the GAO report indicates problems exist with these methods: “GSA uses other pricing tools—e.g., pre-award contract audits by its Inspector General and Procurement Management Reviews—on a limited basis. For example, the Inspector General performs pre-award audits on a small sample of MAS contracts annually, but has identified contract cost avoidance of almost $4 billion in recent years. In 2008, GSA established a MAS advisory panel that recommended changes to the pricing controls noted above; concerns remain that such changes could adversely affect GSA’s ability to negotiate best prices (GAO-10-367).” Finally, the report indicates that a “lack of data, decentralized management, and limitations in assessment tools create challenges for GSA in managing the MAS program” (GAO-10-367). The question – how many contracts are too many? – will exist for a while and the continued media attention will guarantee that it will not go away. Look for the Government to continue its scrutiny of these procurement vehicles for some time |
1401 14th
Street, NW |
||||||
|
Newsflash |
|||||||
|
Two Highly Anticipated IT Contracts are Released in Draft RFP Two of 2010’s most highly anticipated Information Technology contracts have been released in Draft RFP form in the last two weeks. The Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) EAGLE II Draft RFP and the Department of Veterans Affairs’ (VA) Transformation Twenty One Total Technology Draft RFP were both released to the public on May 21, 2010. Both draft documents are posted on the Federal Business Opportunities website (www.fbo.gov). EAGLE II is a $22B, multi-faceted, indefinite delivery indefinite quantity (IDIQ), IT acquisition vehicle that will be used by DHS agencies over the next seven years and beyond. EAGLE II has both an unrestricted and small business set-aside track, and the agency plans to award a “manageable number” of contract awards (currently, EAGLE I has 25 unrestricted and 28 small business prime contractors, which the agency claims are “manageable.”) DHS indicates that a final RFP will be released in early fourth quarter 2010. Transformation 21 Total Technology is a $12B, IT and communications IDIQ acquisition vehicle that, when awarded, will be used by VA agencies. VA plans to award 15 prime contracts under this vehicle. The agency anticipates that a final RFP will be released on or about June 11, 2010. |
|||||||
|
Update |
|||||||
|
Washington Technology Announces its Annual Top 100 Federal Contractors Washington Technology has once again released its annual Top 100 Federal Contractors List. Companies topping the list this year are Lockheed Martin in the number one spot, followed by Northrop Grumman up from number three last year. Boeing and Raytheon land in third and fourth, respectively, and rounding out the top five is Science Applications International which is up from last year’s seventh position. There is much discussion about how the NAICS codes for the "small" businesses on the list were chosen. It seems that many should clearly should not be listed as a small business. A complete list of the 2010 Top 100 can be found by clicking here. |
|||||||
|
July 13, 2010
August 6, 2010
August 10, 2010
August 27, 2010
September 14, 2010
September 16,
2010 |
|||||||
