“I don’t want to do that because it will just upset them and they’ll make sure I don’t win.” This is a common concern I hear from clients when I help them review solicitations (invitations to bid (ITB), requests for proposals (RFP), or invitations to negotiate (ITN)) and draft their offers. But, this fear of “rocking the boat” is usually unfounded. This is why I frequently advise clients who hire me to help draft proposals to stick up for themselves by submitting “strategic” questions or filing “spec challenges,” which are bid protests challenging the terms of an solicitation.
When the government drafts a solicitation there may be provisions that are unclear, that make it a lot more difficult for a contractor to win, or that prevent a contractor from competing. In such situations, I frequently advise that the first step is to try to resolve the matter through the “question and answer” process. Most solicitations allow potential bidders to submit questions to the agency about the solicitation. In turn, the agency will usually publish an amendment to the solicitation with a schedule of all questions submitted and its answers to those questions. While every agency has its own rules, in most cases Q&As attached to a solicitation amendment amend the solicitation.
A well-drafted question will identify the provision being addressed, explain why it is problematic, and specifically explain the corrective action the bidder would like the agency to take with respect to it (e.g., to amend it, clarify it, delete it, etc.). Strategically using the Q&A process can cause the agency to commit itself to a position that is beneficial to the bidder, or force the agency to make clear what its position is. Unfortunately, many bidders think that if they try to “pin down” the agency during the Q&A stage, the agency will retaliate by scoring it poorly during evaluations. But, in my experience, most agencies consider strategic Q&As to be “business as usual” and don’t think twice about who asked what questions during scoring.
If the Q&A process doesn’t get the client the answer it was hoping for and the solicitation flaw really hurts it, the next step I often advise is to file a spec challenge. Clients are often uneasy at the thought of suing someone they’re about to submit a bid to – again, out of fear that even if they win the protest the agency will retaliate during scoring.
But, the reality is that spec challenges are the easiest type of protest to win. If a protester filing a spec challenge is asking for something reasonable that can’t really disadvantage the agency, the agency will often give it to them instead of spending time, money, or manpower fighting the protest. Moreover, in my experience if a bidder pursues a non-frivolous spec challenge in a respectful manner the agency will treat it as “business as usual,” and won’t think twice about it during scoring.
The takeaway is contractors should stick up for themselves when preparing bids. It’s usually cheaper and more effective than waiting until you lose.
- Partner
Joseph M. Goldstein is the Managing Partner of the Fort Lauderdale office of Shutts & Bowen LLP, where he is a member of the Business Litigation Practice Group. Joseph also practices out of the Tallahassee office.
A ...
Search Blog
Follow Us
Recent Posts
- Florida’s New Statutory Home Warranty: What Home Builders Need to Know
- Orange County Proposes Temporary Suspension Ordinance on New Development Applications
- SECURE 2.0 and Protecting Your Designated Beneficiaries
- Florida Appellate Court Provides Further Guidance Regarding New Summary Judgment Rule
- SEC Adopts New Cybersecurity Rules
- From 😊 to 💼: Can Emojis Create a Legally Binding Contract?
- HB-3: An Overview of ESG Factors Relating to Public Funds Investment and Financial Industry Impacts
- The Live Local Act Part 2 - Affordable Housing Incentives
- Florida's Live Local Act
- Taking an Appeal to Florida’s New Sixth District Court of Appeal? Three Local Rules You Need to Know
Popular Categories
- Business of Real Estate
- Real Estate Law
- Construction
- Construction Litigation
- Development/Land Use
- Landlord-Tenant
- Trusts and Estates
- Appeals
- Contracts
- Litigation
- Litigation (Appellate)
- Business
- Foreclosures
- Florida Government Contracts
- Property Tax
- Estate planning
- Supreme Court
- Conveyances
- Appellate Blog
- Cyber fraud
- Technology
- Lease
- Wealth planning
- Government
- Florida Bid Protests
- Government Contracts
- Business
- Insurance
- Proposal Writing
- Public Bidding
- Public Contracts
- GAO
- Restrictive Covenants
- Grant Writing
- Bid Protest
- Title
- Cybersecurity
- Data Security
- Promissory Notes
- Construction
- Regulatory Compliance
- Liens and encumbrances
- Creditor's Rights
- Government Contracting
- Florida Public Contracts
- Small Business
- Bidding
- Compliance
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- Federal Government Contracting
- Florida Administrative Law
- Public procurement
- Ad Valorem Assessments
- Attorneys' Fees
- Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure
- Florida Procurement
- Bankruptcy
- Eviction
- Mortgages
- Record on Appeal
- Rehearing
- Loan guaranties
- Attorneys' Fees
- Employment and Labor
- Litigation (Labor & Employment)
- Consumer Protection
- Regulation
- Maritime
- Briefing
- Request for Proposal
- Commercial Brokerage
- Bid Writing
- Florida Bidding Strategies
- Renewal
- Florida Public Procurement
- Attorneys' Fees
- Florida County Lands
- Florida Economic Incentive Packages
- Jury Instructions
- Stay
- Certiorari
- email hacking
- Assignment of Contract
- Assignment of Proceeds
- State Government Contracts
- Lis Pendens
- Appellate Jurisdiction - Deadlines
- Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure
- Finality
- Preservation
- Technology
- Evidence
- Expert
- Federal Supply Schedule
- Florida Public Records Law
- Government Vendor
- Mootness
- Public Private Partnership
- Socio-Economic Programs
- Sunshine Law
- Veteran Owned Business
- Homestead
- Partnerships and LLCs
- Standing
Editors
- Of Counsel
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Of Counsel
- Senior Associate
- Associate
- Partner
- Partner
Archives
- June 2024
- May 2024
- November 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- October 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- November 2018
- October 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016