The protester then has an opportunity to file written comments on the report.
Utilizing Debriefings to Prevent Bid Protests
Officially, Post-Award debriefings are meant to provide transparency to the unsuccessful candidates. Although the prescribed requirements of the briefings are very rigid and formal, agencies should resist the temptation to meet the bare minimum required by the formalities. Agencies should pay special attention to Requirement 1, the "evaluation of the significant weak or deficient factors in the offeror's proposal" because the evaluation is open-ended, unlike Requirements 2-3, which contain definite numerical standards, and Requirement 4, which only requires a simple summary. Open-ended evaluations can vary greatly in quality and also increase the opportunities for the agency to make a mistake.
If it is a particularly confusing or shallow evaluation, an unsuccessful offeror might take issue with the soundness of the agency's decision and later move to Protest the Bid by claiming that the evaluation demonstrated unsound judgment or unfair treatment. Because Bid Protests to the Government Accountability Office receive an automatic stay of performance, even a weak protest could delay a project significantly.
Because of the disruptive potential of Bid Protests, Agencies should use debriefings as an opportunity to resolve any lingering grievances and remove any ammunition that the unsuccessful offeror may have for protesting the bid. Agencies can accomplish this by doing very thorough evaluations which anticipate and address likely grievances from unsuccessful offerors. Rumbaugh recommends that "the debriefings provide offerors with positive, constructive, and comprehensive feedback, demonstrating that the government is interested in their future success."
Offerors should "feel as if they've gotten the "complete story" about their evaluation."
Although bid protests are very annoying the average agency, they seem to have achieved their purpose by promoting agency hyper-compliance with source selection procedures, thereby reducing opportunities for corruption and misconduct among agencies. Because bid protests are costly to both the agency and the contract winners, the mere threat of protest provides incentives for agencies to "design and operate source-selection processes that are transparent in terms of promoting compliance with the law; fair in terms of access to contracting opportunities; and effective in terms of responsiveness to Congressional preferences."
Thus, as long as agencies remain diligent and focused in compliance, the legislative purpose of the bid protest system, and of the source selection system, will be fulfilled.
Federal Acquisition Regulation Source Selection Statute 15.3 https://www.acquisition.gov/far/html/Subpart%2015_3.html
Acquisition Community Connection https://acc.dau.mil/CommunityBrowser.aspx?id=18888
ACQ Center (2003) Source Selection: Common Myths and Misconceptions NIH AMC Symposium Nov. 9, 2004 oamp.od.nih.gov/.../AMCSymposium.
Maser, S.M., Subbotin, V., & Thompson, F. (2010) The GAO's Bid-Protest Mechanism: Effectiveness and Fairness in Defense Acquisition? Working Paper Atkins School of Management Willamette University. Available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1616424
GAO Office of General Counsel (1996) Bid Protests at GAO: A Descriptive Guide. Sixth Edition, 1996 GAO/OGC-96-24 http://www.gao.gov/special.pubs/og96024.htm#PAGE5
United States Government Accountability Office - Office of General Counsel (2009)Bid Protests at GAO:A Descriptive Guide Ninth Edition GAO-09-471SP http://www.gao.gov/decisions/bidpro/bid/d09471sp.pdf
Shrewsbury, J.M. (2010). U.S. Government Source Selection, "Best Value" Process. NCMA Aloha Chapter.
Best Value/Tradeoff Process http://nawctsd.navair.navy.mil/Resources/Library/Acqguide/evalcomp.htm#bv
Source Selection Guide
Paper: Each student is required to write a paper on a selected topic. Students should use the 5th Edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA) as a guide for citing references. Each paper must be between 5 and 10 pages in length (double spaced, 12 point print, with Times New Roman font). Standard margins should be used. Students will choose their own topics but may elicit suggestions from others. Topics should relate to a current Procurement Law issue or controversy. Please post your topic onto Discussions area. Your professor will approve your topics no later than 6pm on Saturday of Week 4.
Papers will be graded as follows: Spelling and grammatical errors will be noted, but grades will be based on each paper's content. Papers that argue the author's central premise in a clear and logical fashion will receive high marks. Papers that fail to take a position (or fail to effectively argue the author's central point) will not do well prepare a research paper on the importance of following the process of the Soource Selction to prevent Protest. This paper should explain the Source Selection process and speak on how when properly apply prevent protest and all for the source selection team to make the right decision on which bidder is the best value for the agency.
I need an outline of the paper on 24 SEP 2011 but the actual paer will be due at a later date. Please advise if this can be done.
Customer is requesting that (writergrrl101) completes this order.
(Rumbaugh, M.G., 2010, p. 5)
(Rumbaugh, M.G., 2010, p. 2)
(Shrewsbury, J.M., 2010, p. 7)
(Shrewsbury, J.M., 2010, p. 8)
(Shrewsbury, J.M., 2010, p. 6)
(Shrewsbury, J.M., 2010, p. 11)
(Shrewsbury, J.M., 2010, p. 12)
(Shrewsbury, J.M., 2010, p. 13)
(Shrewsbury, J.M., 2010, p. 15)
(Shrewsbury, J.M., 2010, p. 16)
(Rumbaugh, M.G., 2010, p. 425)
(Rumbaugh, M.G., 2010, p. 22)
(Rumbaugh, M.G., 2010, p. 22)
(Rumbaugh, M.G., 2010, p. 25)
(Rumbaugh, M.G., 2010, p. 25)
(Rumbaugh, M.G., 2010, p. 21)
(FAR Part 15)
Source Selection Guide 27 (?
Source Selection Guide 27; (?
Best Value Process, http://nawctsd.navair.navy.mil/Resources/Library/Acqguide/besvalu.htm