contact sid@sidjaffe.com or 703-855-3160

Archive for category: Federal Proposals

You are here: Home / Federal Proposals
✎

The Five C’s of Proposal Preparation (Fifth in a Series of Articles)

April 25, 2016/in /by

JP Richard, SJ&A

In the last issue, we discussed Competition, the fourth of the five C’s of proposal preparation. To refresh your memory, the other four were Compliance, Capabilities, ConOps and Compelling. Let’s move on to the last one: Compelling.

To compel, according to Webster, means to drive or to bring about by force. That’s not a bad description of what we are trying to do with our RFP responses. How can we make our proposal compelling? How can we “force” them to pick us?  The easy answer is that we must be compliant, demonstrate our capabilities, show how we can do the work best and stand out above the competition—essentially accomplish the four first C’s discussed in this series. Highlights for a compelling proposal include:

  1. Make a good first impression—come out swinging!  Many proposals begin with, “ABC Company is pleased to submit this proposal…” Know that your prospective client does not care about you or if you are pleased—they only care about their bottomline.  The first few paragraphs of every proposal section or chapter are crucial.  Ensure that you engage them by focusing on their wants and needs at the top, summarizing key points at the beginning. Ensure that every sentence has meaning for them; superfluous information about your company is neither wanted or helpful.
  2. Convince the reader—features tell/benefits sell!  Keep your proposals to the point, focused on the benefits of your product or service, not just the attributes or features. For example, just stating that you have an ISO certification is not convincing. Expound on what that means to a potential client—for example, that the client will receive service in a clear, consistent, and predictable manner with a rigorous documented quality control program.
  3. No boilerplate—ensure that the potential customer feels “special.”  Each project and potential customer is unique and the proposal should reflect that. While it is tempting to re-use text and graphics from a previous proposal, you must ensure that your language reflects the opportunity and requirements at hand. Stay focused on this customer and prepare a solution for them.  Evaluators can “smell” boiler-plated material and it is a turn-off.
  4. A bored evaluator is not an engaged evaluator—be creative!  The goal is to compel the evaluator to keep reading—do not risk disengagement. Grab and keep the attention of the reader through the use of present-tense verbs, graphics, headings, and even descriptive figure and table captions. Be concise; use clear, plainly stated language, not jargon.
  5. Regurgitate—yes, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery!  While most RFPs do not want you to merely repeat the Statement of Work in the proposal, you must assure them that you have heard and understand their requirements. This includes those items that you have learned from the customer during the Capture phase that are not specifically articulated in the RFP.  Know your customer, and speak their language.
  6. Write Well! You’d be surprised at how many proposals are dismissed immediately because there’s a typo in the first paragraph or it is sloppily prepared. Use a fresh pair of eyes to review the proposal or a professional editor prior to your Red Team review.
  7. The proof is in the details—be specific!  It’s not enough to tell the potential client that you can provide the service or product. If you are confident that your approach can increase their productivity by 35 percent, for example, then say so! Then, provide the “prove-it” points.  Back up your solution with credible facts and figures or a case studies—qualify and quantify your text wherever you can. Use examples of where you have provided the scope of work previously and the specific performance metrics that you achieved; a graphic illustrating it is best.  Empty phrases such as, “we have experience in providing XYZ” or “we understand the requirements and therefore should choose us” is not compelling without proof.

Let’s add another vital element— our attitude!

  1. Show Your Enthusiasm and Commitment!  To be truly compelling, your proposal must demonstrate that you really want the contract.  When a proposal team is motivated to secure a win, it is reflected in the document.  Your dedication to the project shows. Often, “it takes a village” to prepare a compelling proposal—technical experts, writers, editors, cost and contracting specialists, and graphic specialists. Providing a well-crafted document with a single voice requires a concerted effort by a group committed to the win. This commitment should start from the top corporate management who should pay attention to the proposal initiative and the team, demonstrating the importance of the win to the company. Only if the proposal team is convinced of its importance and a possibility of a win, can they convey a compelling message themselves.

If you would like to discuss ways in which we can support your proposal development needs, contact JP by e-mail at jp@sidjaffe.com or call him at 703-568-6417.

✎

The Five C’s of Proposal Preparation (Fourth in a Series of Articles)

January 8, 2016/in /by

by JP Richard, SJ&A

In the last issue, we talked about ConOps, the third of the five C’s of proposal preparation. To refresh your memory, the other four were: Compliance, Capabilities, Competition and Compelling. Let’s now move on to Competition.

It is critical for the proposal team to know who the competitors are for the contract. Are you competing against the incumbent contractor? Are there cost-cutting vendors trying to get the business? Are you the incumbent who might have gotten a bit complacent? If you don’t know who else wants the business, you risk losing it. Your response will be influenced by what you expect the competition to do, as well it should.

If you have been providing services or products to Federal agencies for some time, you probably know who also provides these services. If you are new to the Federal marketplace, you can check several contracts data bases, available at no cost, to see who has won certain types of contracts in your target agencies in the past. Federal contractors—particularly those concentrated in the Washington metropolitan area—are a small, tight-knit community who go to many of the same industry functions; there are few secrets. There is also a lot of migration from one firm to another in this industry, so you may have in your own organization people who have formerly worked for your competition. Make sure you track their experience and take advantage of this resident knowledge!

If there is a bidder’s conference prior to an RFP release, make sure you attend. An interested parties list, usually the attendees at the bidder’s conference, is typically made available by the issuing agency. It is not necessarily an accurate list of your potential competition, but it helps.

SJ&A suggests developing a Competitor Database: building, documenting, and maintaining your research intelligence about them.  At the start of every proposal, review your data carefully and identify what their strengths and weaknesses are.

One way to deal with our competition in a proposal is to decide what their strengths are and make sure you address them in your own proposal, subtly pointing out why your approach is better than the competition. As well, you can exploit their weaknesses, such as developing a Risk Mitigation Plan where you show a potential deficiency and how your firm can overcome it. You must do it subtly though: “bad-mouthing” the competition may alienate reviewers who might have a bias toward them. It’s just not good form.

We seem to have covered the bases in getting our proposal organized by covering the four first Cs, but we haven’t discussed Compelling yet. That is indeed a nebulous term but we will explore what it means in the next issue.

If you would like to discuss ways in which we can support your proposal development needs, contact JP by e-mail at jp@sidjaffe.com or call him at 703-568-6417.

✎

The Five C’s of Proposal Preparation (Third in a Series of Articles)

October 15, 2015/in /by

by JP Richard, SJ&A

In the last two issues, we discussed Compliance and Capabilities, the first two of the Five C’s of Proposal Preparation. To refresh your memory, the other three are ConOps, Competition and Compelling. Let’s now move on to ConOps.

The term ConOps is short for Concept of Operations—typically reflected in the Technical and Management Approach sections of a Government proposal. This is where you tell the evaluator how things will work on the project. Thus far, you have convinced reviewers that you can do the work because you have demonstrated it with your past performance examples and detailed capabilities. It’s not enough to tell them that you’ve done it before, you must show them, detailed in clear language, how you will do “it” for them this time.  It must resonate with what they have in mind and in their current environment.

If you can’t explain what you will do effectively, and what the process and end results are, you either don’t understand the problem or your message has not been thought out. They need a team that communicates effectively and brings a clearly defined process, tools, and organization. They want to know what makes your organization/approach work well and most important, how their goals will be accomplished. This includes the goals that were articulated in the RFP and those that are not reflected there but are in the minds of the customer. Do your research!  Show you understand them!  Be able to describe what the customer wants in the customer’s words. Be sure to use the Government’s terminology in your response. Organizations and companies often use different terms for similar operations.  Know theirs; use theirs.  Speak their language.

Your ConOps must be presented logically – in steps, phases, or a process with well-defined actions and deliverables. Clearly articulate what the outcome will be and how both you and the customer will measure success. Do not  provide a “boilerplate” response. Tailor every word to their organization. If it means that you need to change your organization or your approach to win, make that decision early.

A critical component of demonstrating that you have addressed their needs and their operations is by showing that  you have mitigated their operational risks. Consider including a Risk Mitigation Plan. This can be done with a simple table or matrix—one side detailing the technical or management risk or major operational issues that could surface during the course of the contract, the other side detailing your approach that mitigates it. Prove that you have their bases covered. This is not only an excellent opportunity to show your understanding of the client, but to neutralize your competitors through “ghosting.”  Identify risks that your competitors might bring (without naming the competitor) and show how your approach is better.  We will discuss Competition further, the fourth C, in the next newsletter.  A solid ConOps can clearly set you apart from the pack.

If you would like to discuss ways in which we can support your proposal development needs, contact JP by e-mail at jp@sidjaffe.com or call him at 703-568-6417.

✎

Ensuring the Competitive Edge for Small Business Set Asides

October 15, 2015/in /by

by Sheryl Birsky, SJ&A

A recent bid protest decision by the GAO held that an agency had improperly issued a solicitation as a small business set-aside because the agency’s market research did not reasonably consider whether the identified small businesses were capable of performing the contract requirements. The decision (Triad Isotopes, Inc., July 2015) can be found at http://www.gao.gov/assets/680/671626.pdf. It is not enough to determine that there were at least two small business concerns who could meet the RFQ requirements. Agency procurement officials must also make reasonable efforts to ascertain whether those small businesses are able to perform the work.

In the protest, Triad (a large business) contended that searching the VetBiz and DSBS databases for small companies under NAICS code 325412 could not support a set-aside for the Department of Veterans Affairs because NAICS code 325412 includes businesses manufacturing all types of pharmaceuticals, “including cold medicines and lip balms”  — not the specific type of pharmaceutical required in the RFQ. Triad argued that the VA’s market research was flawed and inadequate. GAO agreed.

The GAO wrote that under the FAR’s “rule of two,” a procurement with an anticipated dollar value of more than $150,000 must be set aside for small businesses when there is a reasonable expectation that offers will be received from at least two responsible small business concerns, and award will be made at a fair market price. The “reasonable expectation” determination, in turn, rests on market research.

Specifically, “the agency’s database searches were based solely on the RFQ’s NAICS code, which as mentioned above, covers a wide range of pharmaceutical manufacturing – from the manufacturing of lip balms, to the manufacturing of nuclear medicine (e.g., radioisotopes).”  There was “no indication in the market research report, or otherwise, that any of the identified companies are radiopharmaceutical providers or have the required nuclear pharmacy licenses to perform under the contract.”

In short, GAO sustained the protest, concluding that “it was not reasonable for the agency to base its assessment of the availability of small business concerns on search results that merely identified the existence of small businesses under the pertinent NAICS code.”

What does this mean for Small Businesses seeking set aside work? You can help the Government meet their set-aside goals by providing the right data for their research, including the following:

  1. Respond to Requests for Information (RFI) fully – address the specific requirements and do not just forward corporate boilerplate! Put time into tailoring them for the effort. These responses are dual-purposed for the Government: They may determine the procurement strategy for the Contracting Officer, as well as provide valuable technical information for the Government Program Manager. On both counts, this is an opportunity to sway decision making—make your RFI count!
  2. Ensure that the corporate information you provide in Government databases are accurate. Be as specific as you can wherever you can. There may not be an RFI – but only cursory research done by a Contracting Officer. As well, ensure that your website is detailed and updated.
  3. When making your marketing Call Plans and implementing your Opportunity Capture activities, be sure to include the Contracting Officer and relevant COTRs. Provide detailed specifics related to past performance, licenses, and certifications, as well as the corporate vehicles and NAICs codes that are applicable to your company.

For more information about Small Business Set Aside strategies, contact Sheryl Birsky at Sheryl@sidjaffe.com or phone 202-785-5811.

✎

The Five C’s of Proposal Preparation (Second in a Series of Articles)

September 10, 2015/in /by

by JP Richard, SJ&A

In the last issue, we talked about Compliance, the first of the Five C’s of Proposal Preparation. To refresh your memory, the other four were Capabilities, ConOps, Competition and Compelling. Let’s now move on to Capabilities.

It is critical to show the evaluators how compliant your response is by meeting all of their requirements, but they also want to know something about who is telling them that all of their problems will be solved if they turn the problem over to your organization. That means you have to tell them about your organization’s capabilities and convince them that you are the best qualified to handle the job.

Showing your capabilities means demonstrating a variety of skills:

  • how you will perform the required tasks
  • how you can manage a team of people
  • how you will communicate with the users
  • how you have set up a response structure to resolve problems that may arise.

Past performance is still their single best measure of future success: show them that you have done similar work at their agency or in a related organization. Make sure that the past performance examples that you provide are equivalent to the work being required in the current RFP, both in size and scope. Detail the work and don’t forget to tell them why that is relevant to the current RFP, whether they ask for the relevancy or not. Draw direct comparisons. Often, companies have their project descriptions “boiler-plated.” Be sure to tailor your contract performance data for each submission!

Most important, prove it! Quantify and qualify your success stories and project descriptions. Provide statistics, measures of improvement, speed of response, and the amount of dollars saved by your clients. Show how you have been innovative. Don’t just tell them that you provided first-rate support—spell out the benefits that other customers have gained. Even better, provide a graphic depicting this, ensuring that your message comes through.

This is an opportunity to emphasize your organization’s strengths and distinguish yourself from other bidders. The reviewers must be convinced that you bring unique capabilities to the table. In our next issue, we will see how to do that when we talk about ConOps.

If you would like to discuss ways in which we can support your proposal development needs, contact JP by e-mail at jp@sidjaffe.com or call him at 703-568-6417.

✎

The Five C’s of Proposal Preparation (First in a Series of Articles)

July 27, 2015/in /by

by JP Richard, SJ&A

To develop and present a winning proposal, you must be organized. The best way to organize is to establish a pattern of operations and follow it. Eventually, the pattern becomes a habit – a series of rote actions universally understood in your organization as the way to proceed.  Just think of how easy it would then become to prepare one winning proposal after another in this environment.

Organizing is best done on the basis of a set of principles. Let’s frame these principles as the Five C’s of Proposal Preparation. These are:  Compliance, Capabilities, Con Ops, Competition and Compelling. In the next few issues of this newsletter, we will explore what each of these C’s mean to you and to the reviewers of your proposal.

Let’s start with Compliance. Compliance must be addressed in three ways. First, your proposal must comply with Section L of the RFP, Proposal Requirements, which sets forth the specific content and format desired by the Government. This section identifies everything from the size and kind of typeface, to the items they are expecting to see addressed. There are no exceptions for non-compliance—any deviation may result in the exclusion of your proposal for consideration.

Next, we must comply with every want and need expressed in that RFP satisfactorily and in the process, convince the readers that our approach is the best solution. It’s not enough to say that we will do “it”, but we must show how and why our approach is the best, and, it must be presented in the order and format requested in the RFP.  Evaluators use a checklist to ensure compliance when reviewing proposals—therefore, your response must not only meet the needs, but respond to them where they expect to find them.  Do not make them struggle to evaluate your proposal.

That’s why organizing the proposal response to exactly mirror the outline of the RFP is so important. This ensures that your response hits every requirement, and that the reviewers are aware that you have hit all of the requirements because they found them in the right order. The best way to ensure that you have met the first “C,” is to prepare a “Shred” of the RFP – including an Outline and a Compliance Matrix, identifying what is required for every section.  Read every word of the RFP, including Appendices—often, there are requirements where you don’t expect to find them.

Compliance also means you give them what they want—even though you might think they need something altogether different. Respond to their requirements, not to your ideal concept of how it should be done. But that is the subject for another article; in our next issue we will talk about Capabilities.

If you would like to discuss ways in which we can support your proposal needs, contact JP by e-mail at jp@sidjaffe.com or call him at 703-568-6417.

✎

About to Embark on a New Proposal? A Few Reminders

March 24, 2015/in /by

by Sheryl Birsky

Compared to this time last year, there seems to be an abundance of RFP/Task Order releases from the Government.  In the heat of proposal preparation, there are often over-looked factors that can make a difference to the evaluation of your proposal. Here are a few reminders.

Write customer-focused, not company-centric proposals. Ensure that every paragraph of your response addresses their solution, their pain points.  Your company mission is irrelevant to them – it is about their mission! Do a word search and see how many times your firm’s name appears versus theirs.

Design for proposal evaluators who skim.  Make your proposal easy to read – short sentences with headers, bullets, and graphics.  Do not make evaluators have to work to get your message.  Use “’features/benefits” tables or text boxes to summarize your key points and “take aways.”  Write like a newspaper—headlines and most important points first, followed with additional information, and then full details last.

Choose language carefully.  Use the customer’s language and terms in your proposal – which may differ than your company’s or that of industry.  As well, avoid negative turns of phrase (e.g., 99% retention rate versus 1% attrition rate). Your language must be in agreement with the compliance language of the solicitation.

Support your claims! Evaluators question everything – ensure that all claims and offerings can be validated. Provide qualitative or quantitative proof and be careful when using such words as “guarantee” “promise,” or “ensure.”  When you make a statement, be prepared to follow up with a statement beginning “as evidenced by…”

Beware of boilerplate.  Take the time to tailor your text! Do not give short-shrift to resumes or past performance descriptions! And, make them “’skimmable” as well with summary boxes or short headers that highlight key attributes.

If you have questions or require proposal support, contact Sheryl Birsky at Sheryl@sidjaffe.com or phone (202)785-5811.

✎

Another Way to Ensure Proposal Compliance!

December 23, 2014/in /by

by Sheryl Birsky

Most proposal managers will develop a compliance checksheet at the start of a proposal to ensure that all RFP requirements are captured, including Sections C (Statement of Work), L (Proposal Preparation Instructions), and M (Evaluation Criteria). They may use a matrix format that lists the requirement and the corresponding section of the proposal; others may append their detailed proposal outline with pertinent RFP items. Here is another quick way to ensure compliance—particularly helpful for large, complex RFPs.

If you have the solicitation in Word format, use the Text to Table feature and turn the paragraphs into rows. Add a column to the left so that you have a place to indicate where in the proposal the item can be found. Next, do a search in the document for such key words as: Will, shall, Contractor, require, ensure, and must and highlight them in red. In this way, you can be sure that most (maybe not all) government requirements are identified.

Of course, doing a Word search, may or may not yield all of the requirements, but it is a good check. The only method to ensure that you have captured every requirement is to read the entire Solicitation word for word. SJ&A recommends doing all three types of compliance checks at different parts of the proposal preparation process: An annotated outline for use at proposal kick-off, a table/search like that discussed above to ensure compliance at first-draft review, and a completed compliance matrix for final red team review and inclusion in the proposal.

If you need proposal assistance, contact Sheryl at 202-785-5811 or e-mail her at Sheryl@sidjaffe.com.

✎

FOIA’s: Dispelling the Myths

October 13, 2014/in /by

by Sheryl Birsky

In assessing or preparing for an upcoming bid, Federal contractors often overlook the value of submitting a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for incumbent contractual information. FOIAs are the most underused tool in our market research arsenal.

Many contractors believe that it is pointless because the Government’s reply to the request is a heavy-handed redacted document with little data to glean. Others don’t bother because it requires a long lead time—sometimes months—to get a response and often too late to have any impact for a proposal at hand. With a little preparation, you might be surprised at the vital information that can be revealed.

For example, you may be able to determine the number of contract modifications and changes to the Statement of Work to get a more accurate understanding of the history, evolution, and preferences of the government project manager. You can often spot management issues, overspending and mis-direction of technical solutions and can address these issues head-on in your proposal.

Another place to obtain data points for your approach is the Table of Contents of the winning proposal; often, the Government overlooks redacting this. Tell-tale information can include a staffing profile and key technical and management elements. An entire story can be gleaned from the Table of Exhibits—particularly if the graphics have active captions.

FOIA requests should be an ongoing part of your long-term marketing and information-gathering strategy. Download SJ&A’s FOIA Tips and Helpful Links pdf for more information. To learn more about market research services for Federal contractors, including SJ&A’S Market Research Workshop, contact Sheryl at 202-785-5811 or e-mail her at Sheryl@sidjaffe.com.

✎

The Right (or Write) Pile

September 20, 2014/in /by

by Sheryl Birsky

When I was supporting a government Source Selection Board years ago, we were preparing for the review of a large influx of proposals. One hour after the government’s deadline for proposal receipt, I was sent in to the repository room and told to do a first culling. “Where do I begin?” The response was to read the Table of Contents and check for compliance:

  • Does the proposal follow the organization specified in Section L of the RFP?
  • Are all requested elements there?
  • Is the information in the requested format?

I scanned each Table of Contents and perused the content, and within a few hours had three stacks of proposals. One stack was to be reviewed by the Board; one stack was to have a notification of loss prepared with the proposal deficiency noted; and, one stack was labeled “Issues” which were proposals that were over the page count and had to have the surplus pages removed prior to Board review.

I was surprised to learn that the Board did not even look at the submitted proposals in the “no-go” stack.  All of the time and effort spent by the contractor were squandered—their proposal eliminated from just a cursory review.  Further, those that were over the page count were immediately labeled as being “an issue” and required extra effort on the government’s part—not a good first impression.

I also learned the value of a well prepared Table of Contents, particularly those that drill down to at least the third outline level.  Other positive attributes include those that reference the relevant RFP Section in the Section titles, and those that had a Table of Figures with descriptive titles that told a story. In fact, a reviewer could glean most of the salient points of the proposal just from reading the graphics titles!

Make sure that your proposal lands on the right pile. Prepare a thorough “shred” of the RFP as the first step in your proposal process and create a checklist or matrix outlining all requirements. Double-check it by doing a global search for the words “’shall” and “will” in the Solicitation. Compliance mapping and a well-crafted outline are vital to ensuring that your proposal even reaches the government evaluator.

An economical way to achieve this is by using SJ&A’s “Shred-to-Red©” Proposal Services. On a fixed-price basis, you receive support at just the beginning of the process—shredding the document, outlining the proposal, and ensuring an effective kickoff with templates and themes—and at the end of the process with a well-run Red Team review. In this way, your technical staff can focus on what they do best, while a fresh eye ensures that your proposal is compliant, well organized, and conveys an effective message. The cost of a Shred-to-Red© Service is generally $4,000—depending on the scope and complexity of the effort.

To learn more about Shred-to-Red© Services, contact Sheryl at 202-785-5811 or e-mail her at Sheryl@sidjaffe.com.

Recent Comments

    © Copyright - Sid Jaffe & Associates, 2019 - Enfold Theme by Kriesi