United States: Legal Insights: Building Better Mousetraps By Adding Value To Technical Proposals

"Build a better mousetrap and the world will beat a path to your door" is the old saying, but the federal government seldom beats a path to the door of a contractor. Nevertheless, companies can win contracts by adding value to their proposals with technical discriminators.

Assuming a contractor is responsible, contract awards by federal agencies are generally determined by three sets of factors: price, past performance, and technical approach. Where contracts are awarded based on the government's assessment of best value, distinctions among technical proposals are critical to determining the contract award. In best value acquisitions, technical discriminators, which serve to differentiate one proposal from another, are often what determine success or failure.

To increase the value of their technical proposals, contractors must make maximum use of technical discriminators. Yet, not all technical discriminators that could lend a competitive advantage to a proposal may be readily apparent. For that reason, it can be useful to look at best value assessments in other procurements. Many such evaluations are reviewed in bid protest decisions. These decisions frequently discuss the technical discriminators that agencies find significant.

A. Evaluation of Technical Proposals in Best Value Acquisitions

Contracts issued by the federal government are awarded through sealed bidding or negotiated acquisitions. FAR 15.000. Negotiated acquisitions can be conducted on a sole source or competitive basis. FAR 15.002. Technical proposals are of the most significance where a competitive negotiated acquisition is decided by which prospective contractor offers the best value to the agency. Contracts awarded through sealed bidding, sole sourcing, or a lowest price, technically acceptable basis are most likely to be determined on price, price-related, or other factors not involving a particular technical approach. See FAR 6.401(a), 15.002(a) and 15.101-2.

In best value procurements, the agency evaluates proposals by engaging in a tradeoff process. This procedure permits balancing among cost or price and non-cost factors and allows the government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal. The perceived benefits of the higher priced proposal have to merit the additional cost. FAR 15.101- 1(c). When tradeoffs are performed, the source selection authority must document an assessment of each offeror's ability to accomplish the technical requirements and prepare a summary, matrix, or quantitative ranking, along with an appropriate supporting narrative, of each technical proposal using the evaluation factors in the solicitation. FAR 15.305(a) (3).

All factors and significant subfactors that will affect contract award and their relative importance must be stated clearly in the solicitation. FAR 15.304(d). Although agencies are not permitted to use unstated evaluation factors in evaluating proposals, the government may take into account specific matters that are logically encompassed by, or related to, the stated evaluation criteria, even if they are not expressly identified as evaluation criteria in the solicitation. Red River Computer Company, Inc.1

B. Technical Discriminators That Add Value

Bid protest decisions of the Government Accountability Office and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims offer a window into the process by which federal agencies conduct best value procurements. Disappointed offerors in these acquisitions frequently contend that the agency did not properly engage in the tradeoff process. Such protests are denied where the agency can demonstrate that it reasonably applied the evaluation factors in the solicitation to decide which proposal offered the best value to the government. These best value assessments frequently address technical discriminators. By studying the best value determinations discussed in bid protests, contractors can better understand what types of technical discriminators make a difference to the agencies and why they are valued.

Bid protest decisions show that technical discriminators differentiating one technical proposal from another generally fall into five categories: (1) quality of product, (2) quality of service, (3) management of work, (4) qualifications of personnel, and (5) quality of written proposal. Each of these factors are used by contractors to gain an advantage in competitive procurements.

1. Quality of Product

In a procurement involving the government's purchase of a tangible product, the quality of that product is clearly the most important discriminator. Among the common differentiators of product quality that procuring agencies have found add value are the following.

(a) Use of Commercially Available Components

  • Continental RPVs2 : Where the Army requested proposals for the acquisition of an aerial remotely-piloted vehicle target system, the contracting officer determined that the winning offeror's proposed use of off-the-shelf components offered significant benefits to the government by avoiding the need for costly specialized equipment and increasing the reliability of the system. According to the agency, these parts were low technology and thus low risk.
  • Marion Composites3 : The Army issued a request for proposals for a quantity of rigid wall shelters. The contract was awarded to an offeror who proposed critical shelter components that were already tested and proven. As a result, the contractor's technical approach did not pose a risk of production delays and justified paying a price premium. 4
  • Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation4 : Where the Air Force issued a request for proposals for the development and delivery of a multi-intelligence core upgrade for its Distributive Common Ground System, the agency found the winning contractor's software maximized the use of commercial off- the-shelf technology to provide an open standards based architecture and a high level of flexibility. By accommodating modifications, growth, and system upgrades to a greater extent than a competing proposal, the awardee's approach ensured maximum combat capability.

(b) Superior Design

  • Precision Lift, Inc.5 : The awardee's design for aircraft maintenance platforms was found superior in featuring an advanced, interlocking alignment pin system that exceeded minimum performance standards and plank decking with 40% more cross sectional material which provided greater strength, support, and safety.
  • Continental RPVs6 : The winning design of an air frame for remotely-piloted vehicle targets provided the ability to change air frame components easily in response to any future growth requirements.
  • Chicago Dryer Company7 : The winning technical approach for laundry equipment exceeded specifications where the equipment could be linked to the agency's existing laundry software allowing the agency supervisor to closely monitor performance and productivity.

(c) Superior Testing Process

  • Marion Composites8 : In a procurement of rigid wall shelters, the winning proposal included a thorough discussion of the validation testing process, including detailed first article testing milestone charts and road testing requirements.
  • Continental RPVs9 : In an acquisition of remotely-piloted vehicle targets, the awardee verified the key performance parameters for its air frame design and power plant through test flights and substantiated the performance characteristics of its design with detailed performance data.

(d) Superior Terms

  • Precision Lift, Inc.10 : The winning technical proposal was deemed to offer an advantage where the product came with a five year warranty compared to a three year warranty offered by the competing proposal.

(e) Reduced Energy Consumption

  • Carothers Construction, Inc.11 : A proposal for the design/ build of an elementary school was found to be of greater value where the building design provided for a reduction in energy consumption of 10% more than the competing design and where the winning offeror proposed building canopy-style structures over the parking areas to support additional solar panels.

2. Quality of Services

When the government is purchasing services, the quality of those services is also a most important technical discriminator. Agencies have determined the following differences in the quality of services proposed by offerors to confer a competitive advantage:

(a) Enhanced Efficiency

  • Raytheon Company12 : In its proposal to provide engineering support and vulnerability assessments to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, the awardee identified inefficiencies in the existing characterization process and offered suggested changes to the workflow and team structure to address those inefficiencies.
  • Hagler Bailly Consulting, Inc.13 : The winning offeror proposed a more effective and innovative approach than the competing offeror for eliminating duplication of work and for incorporating previously completed assessments.
  • Millennium Corporation, Inc.14 : In response to a solicitation by the Department of Veterans Affairs seeking support services for the agency's acquisition and contract administration office, the awardee proposed to implement a comprehensive enterprise resource planning system to support acquisition management reporting. The proposed system promised to unify an aggregate of various elements of the agency's existing acquisition management systems.

(b) Offer to Provide Additional Services

  • Hagler Bailly Consulting, Inc.15 : Where the USAID issued a solicitation for a contract to provide technical assistance on an energy management project to the Government of the Philippines, the contracting officer was impressed by the awardee's plan to establish a fund to finance future energy projects and a public/private sector group to research and track consumer end-use and load issues.
  • American Correctional Healthcare, Inc.16 : In response to a solicitation from the Federal Bureau of Prisons for comprehensive medical services at a federal penitentiary, the winning offeror's proposal included behavioral health services at all of the hospitals in its proposal and also offered greater administrative support at these facilities compared to the competing proposal. 17
  • Computer Systems Development Corporation17 : The Department of Defense issued a solicitation to provide support services for automated information systems. One of the discriminators that favored the winning proposal was offering to provide 24 hour staff coverage in support of the information system facilities which exceeded the agency's requirement for hours of operation.
  • Doss Aviation, Inc.18 : In response to a solicitation for helicopter flight training services, the awardee's proposal was found to be technically superior because, among other reasons, it provided for two more instructor pilots than considered necessary by the independent government estimate.

(c) Tailoring of Services to Agency Needs

  • Hagler Bailly Consulting, Inc.19 : In response to a solicitation to provide technical assistance on an energy management project to the Government of the Philippines, the awardee's proposal was specifically tailored to the Philippines. The competing proposal was generic, utilizing an approach which could be applicable to any developing country.


1. Red River Computer Company, Inc., B-414183.4 et al. (June 2, 2017), 2017 CPD ¶ 157.

2. Continental RPVs, B-292768.6 (April 5, 2004), 2014 CPD ¶ 103.

3. Marion Composites, B-274621 (December 20, 1996), 96-2 CPD ¶ 236.

4. Northrop Grumman Systems, Corporation, B-293036.5 et al. (June 4, 2004), 2004 CPD ¶ 124.

5. Precision Lift, Inc., B-310540.4 (June 26, 2008), 2008 CPD ¶ 166.

6. B-292768.6 (see note 2).

7. Chicago Dryer Company, B-293940 (June 30, 2004), 2004 CPD ¶ 137.

8. B-274621 (see note 3).

9. B-292768.6 (see note 2).

10. B-310540.4 (see note 5).

11. Carothers Construction, Inc., B-405241.4 (July 26, 2012), 2012 CPD ¶ 225.

12. Raytheon Company, B-413981 (January 17, 2017), 2017 CPD ¶ 40.

13. Hagler Bailly Consulting, Inc., B-265708 (December 19, 1995), 95-2 CPD ¶ 276.

14. Millennium Corporation, Inc., B-412866 et al. (June 14, 2016), 2016 CPD ¶ 168.

15. B-265708 (see note 13).

16. American Correctional Healthcare, Inc., B-415123.3 et al. (January 2, 2018), 2018 CPD ¶ 85.

17. Computer Systems Developmental Corporation, B-275356 (February 11, 1997), 97-1 CPD ¶ 91.

18. Doss Aviation, Inc., B-275419 et al. (February 20, 1997), 97-1 CPD ¶ 117.

19. B-265708 (see note 13).

Originally published in Fall 2018 PACA Pulse

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions