Proposal_Recommendations_ _Comments_v2.pptx

Proposal Recommendations and Comments

Mike Verlinden Rules

UNCLASSIFIED

Proposal Suggestions Follow RFP SOW format and numbering structure Gov’t must first determine if the proposal is “complete” (Does it address all areas within the RFP?).

Proposing in this fashion:

Makes it obvious to the government that the proposal does address EVERY factor Helps the writers ensure they have addressed all areas Speeds up proposal writing and reviewing process allowing reviewers to concentrate on the approach

Be Concise!

Answer simple questions with simple answers GOOD - Question: How many employees are in your company? Answer: 342 BAD - Question: How many employees are in your company? Answer: A couple pages detailing company history, different working locations, and number of employees per location that the reviewer can extract and add together to obtain the answer to the question.

No points for using up all of the allotted pages Focus on RFP items and evaluation criteria While reading about corporate history and values is interesting, it is not an evaluation criterion. Those pages are better used highlighting relevant experience.

Proposal Suggestions Ensure continuity across all proposal volumes Avoid submitting an “inconsistent” proposal Did you propose to build a hardware/software solution in your technical volume? Are the hardware costs included in your cost volume?

Did you propose to build a team of “X number” of companies to solve a technical problem? Are each one of those companies included in your cost proposal?

Did you propose to work at a government location as well as contractor location? If you specified “on-site” and “off-site” labor rates in your cost proposal, is the breakout consistent with the technical volume?

Tailor your approach to this specific acquisition Be careful of “one size fits all” management approaches. How do you propose to apply it to this unique acquisition?

Beware of reutilizing content from other proposals.

Many times sticks out as an obvious standard pitch Very easy to accidently include details that only pertained to the original proposal thereby confusing the source selection team

General Comments on Approach No preference to location or presence in particular areas For general management purposes, a Rome, NY office or representative is not needed nor is one in any other particular city or state. Base support for technical performance is determined on an order by order basis.

Exclusive teaming agreements Generally not looked at as being in the best interest of this acquisition To promote agility, flexibility, and availability of niche talent on all orders, AFRL has taken the stance that we do not restrict teaming to the companies proposed Subs are encouraged to join multiple teams Primes are encouraged to subcontract to the most qualified subs during performance regardless of proposed team

General Comments on Approach Be realistic and cost effective in approach This is particularly applicable for portions of the management approach not directly related to a specific delivery order (i.e. paid out of company overhead) Did you propose frequent reoccurring advisory meetings by panels consisting of costly consultants? When multiplied out over the duration of the contract, is the cost realistic? What is the likelihood the approach will be sustained for the life of the contract?

Bringing relevant outside business to the table is a positive thing In many cases, AFRL partners with industry to transition technology to the warfighter.

Other gov’t efforts your company is executing likely have synergy with AFRL developments. Mentioning these efforts and relationships along with a proposed approach to leverage them for technology transition could be received as a well rounded approach.

Agile Cyber Technology II Question & Answer Session image3.png image1.png image2.png