Overview
This section prescribes the flexible procedures for soliciting competition, evaluating responses, and documenting awards under Simplified Acquisition Procedures (SAP). It grants contracting officers broad discretion to minimize administrative burdens while ensuring that the government receives a fair and reasonable price.
Key Rules
- Solicitation Flexibility: Contracting officers (COs) are encouraged to use "best value" and are not required to state the relative importance of evaluation factors or use formal evaluation plans.
- Single Source Authority: For purchases under the Simplified Acquisition Threshold (SAT), COs may solicit from a single source if they determine only one source is reasonably available (e.g., urgency or brand-name requirements).
- Oral Solicitations: COs should use oral solicitations to the maximum extent practicable for acquisitions under the SAT if it is more efficient than electronic methods and does not require public notice.
- Evaluation Discretion: The formal procedures of FAR Parts 14 and 15 are not mandatory; COs can perform comparative evaluations and are not required to establish competitive ranges or conduct formal scoring.
- Price Reasonableness: Before award, the CO must determine the price is fair and reasonable, preferably through competition, or via market research and comparison to past prices if only one quote is received.
- Documentation: Documentation should be kept to a "minimum extent" necessary, typically consisting of an abstract of quotes and a brief justification if a non-price-related factor determined the award.
Practical Implications
- Increased Speed: Agencies can move from requirement to award much faster than traditional negotiations because they can bypass formal debriefings, competitive range determinations, and complex scoring systems.
- Reduced Barrier to Entry: Because solicitations are simpler and often oral or electronic, small businesses can compete with less overhead compared to large-scale "Part 15" procurements.
- Streamlined Evaluations: COs can directly compare the qualities of one quote against another (comparative evaluation) rather than measuring each against a rigid, pre-established rubric.