Share and Share Alike

ccompanied by both his assigned legal representative and contracting officer, Kennan should immediately report the note to Martin. Kennan should not conduct an investigation on his own. Anything he could come up with in two days would be suspect and a waste of his time. He should request an internal investigation to determine what, if any, action is warranted.

I do not believe Kennan has a significant legal or contractual problem. About the only thing he did wrong was to have the meeting without the contracting officer in the room. If the solicitation had not been on the street, the contracting officer's presence would not even have been required for this meeting. This may turn out to be a political issue, but as a contracting problem, it can be fixed without much risk to the agency.

Kennan did not go too far in helping a bidder. In fact, he followed current FAR guidance for exchanges with industry before receipt of proposals. "Exchanges of information among all interested parties, from the earliest identification of a requirement through receipt of proposals is encouraged," FAR 15.201 states. "The purpose of exchanging information is to improve the understanding of government requirements and industry capabilities."

One authorized technique to promote early exchanges of information is one-on-one meetings with potential offerors. However, any one-on-one meetings that substantially involve discussions of contract terms and conditions should include the contracting officer. It does not appear that contract terms and conditions were discussed.

Because the solicitation was on the street, the contracting officer should have been in the meeting. To control exchanges with potential offerors after the solicitation is issued, the FAR requires that the contracting officer be the focal point. Again, as stated in the FAR, "When specific information that is necessary for the preparation of proposals is disclosed to one or more potential offerors, that information shall be made available to the public as soon as practicable, but not later than then next general release of information, in order to avoid creating an unfair competitive advantage. However, information provided to a particular offeror in response to that offeror's request shall not be disclosed if doing so would reveal the potential offeror's confidential business strategy (FAR 15.203(f))." From the management case it is not clear that information necessary for the preparation of proposals was disclosed.

The contracting officer and legal representative assigned to the program should interview both Kennan and Foster to determine whether information required for proposal preparation was disclosed at the meeting. If the answer is no, additional contracting action is not required. If such information was disclosed, the contracting officer should determine if it was of such importance to require cancellation of the solicitation. Judging from the characterization of the meeting in the in the case study, I doubt that is the case. If any of the disclosed information is judged to be a clarification that all offerors should be made aware of, the contracting officer should provide that information, via an RFP amendment, and allow the bidders to revise their proposals. The results of the analysis should be provided to Martin to put out any political fires that may arise.

This case study shows the importance of using your acquisition team to keep you out of trouble. Before acquisition reform and an emphasis on open communication, Kennan could have been in a world of hurt. Under today's rules, he is encouraged to hold these meetings.

I am a strong supporter of one-on-one meetings with potential offerors. They are by far the most valuable way for the government to perform market research and get insight into government requirements and industry capabilities. The more you tell industry about your requirements, the more likely you are to get an acceptable solution.

Charles "Chip" Mather is co-founder and
senior vice president of Acquisition Solutions Inc., which helps government agencies improve their acquisition processes and results. During a 20-year Air Force career, Mather was responsible for more than 20 major source selections valued in excess of $10 billion and became known for his innovative acquisition streamlining techniques.