REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION (RFI)

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION (RFI)"

Aleesha Allison
5 years ago
Views:

1 REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION (RFI) I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Definition and Purpose: o Per FAR (e): RFIs may be used when the Government does not presently intend to award a contract, but wants to obtain price, delivery, other market information, or capabilities for planning purposes. Responses to these notices are not offers and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract. There is no required format for RFIs. o Per FAR (b): The purpose of exchanging information as through RFIs is to improve the understanding of Government requirements and industry capabilities, thereby allowing potential offerors to judge whether or how they can satisfy the Government s requirements, and enhancing the Government s ability to obtain quality supplies and services, including construction, at reasonable prices, and increase efficiency in proposal preparation, proposal evaluation, negotiation, and contract award. Why is it Key? o A well planned process and effectively written RFI provides a mechanism for the government to solicit and receive valuable market research information from industry. The information received may help inform and improve decisionmaking related to requirements, acquisition strategies, or the quality of future requests for proposals, which can result in substantial savings of time and money for the government. o An RFI often serves as an alert to the private sector that the government has a need that may eventually be filled through an acquisition or procurement. It is an opportunity for industry, as a whole, to begin to understand the government s need. It also kicks off a company s strategy and internal efforts (and bid and proposal spending) associated with preparing to meet that need. o A poorly planned or written RFI is a wasted opportunity. It can lead to misunderstandings, unwarranted expectations, lost and unrecoverable time and money for both government and industry, as well as an overall degradation of trust between DHS and the private sector. Who are the Key Participants (and Why?) o DHS Program Manager and Contracting Officer & Specialists RFIs are typically drafted by the DHS Contracting Specialist and a good part of the RFI will consist of semi-standard language and instructions. However, it is vital that the Government also communicate the unique context of the effort(s) associated with an RFI and to be clear and precise in what type of information the Government wants to receive. The DHS Program Manager (PM), Contracting Officer (CO) and Contracting Specialist (CS) should have a strategy conversation about why DHS needs the requested information as well as what type of follow-up will occur before putting pencil to paper.

2 o DHS Program Subject Matter Experts The SMEs should support the PM, CO and CS by helping to provide context for the RFI and clarity and completeness around operational needs and technical requirements that can help drive industry towards proposed solutions. o DHS Component Acquisition Executive (CAE) and Head of Contracting Activity (HCA): For some sensitive and high-visibility efforts, it may be appropriate for higher-level executives to engage with the DHS PM and CO/CS in a conversation about the RFI strategy and follow-up. o Industry: Business Development (BD) Lead assigned to DHS account: At this stage of the process, the BD lead from Industry is the primary point person for the opportunity. Their role is to develop a solid understanding of the opportunity and the requirements/strategy so as to determine the corporate resources needed to develop winning solutions. Solutions/SME Engineers: Industry will engage Solutions/SME Engineers to support analyzing Government requirements/problems and bringing to bear solutions that will address those requirements/problems. Their role will be to develop broad solutions and then potentially engage with Government to further vet the solutions provided. The RFI response constitutes one of the earliest concrete steps in the capture process. Depending on a firm s level of contact with the PM and CO, the RFI may be the first detailed indication of what the Government intends to accomplish. II. TIPS AND CONSIDERATIONS FOR RFIs: Increase interest by sharing RFIs with industry interest groups o In many cases, Government should ensure that RFIs, when released formally, are made known to industry interest groups within the relevant sectors (e.g., avionics, biometrics, border enforcement). This will help enhance the industry interest group government relationship, due to the need to first identify those groups, as well as help produce a dialogue within industry on possible collaboration on responding to the RFI. It will also naturally gravitate businesses on the periphery into relevant industry groupings to help shape what may be the future market place for the government. Although the Government cannot release formal RFIs only to such industry interest groups, the Government can and should consider releasing draft RFIs to them for the aforementioned reasons. 2

3 The success and value of the RFI and of the responses largely depends on the clarity and completeness of the communications documents: the Government s RFI and the Contractor responses. o It takes time and costs money for Contractors to respond to RFIs. Contractors have budget allocations for such work, but those resources are quite often limited, especially in smaller companies. Many Government personnel involved in issuing RFIs and in reviewing and using the responses may not sufficiently understand or appreciate that fact. When an abundance of RFIs never result in RFPs, it results in a waning interest by the Contractor community and an increased likelihood that they will not respond to future RFIs. o Similarly, many Contractors involved in responding to RFIs may not sufficiently understand and appreciate that the Government team is often overwhelmed with responses that are non-responsive but they nevertheless have to give due diligence to each response. The Government should include an explanation of the role and purpose of the RFI in the context of a broader agency or program strategy, along with the types of decisions the Government will make with the RFI responses and the estimated timing of those decisions. o The more the private sector can know and understand about why the Government is asking for the information requested in the RFI, the more the individual Contractors will be able to decide whether they will respond to the RFI and the better the response they will provide. The Government knows why they are requesting such information and how the responses will help shape decisions (and when); sharing that rationale and context in the RFI should therefore not be difficult, but it is quite often not included. o The Government should also be mindful not to be unnecessarily prescriptive or specific in its RFIs. If an acquisition is in the earlier stages, the RFI should be describing higher-level key requirements and asking for information around potential types of solutions. If the acquisition is in a much later stage of production, for example, it would be appropriate to request more specifics. The Government should communicate an estimate of potential funding available, if possible, for the activity it is pursuing. o Contractors evaluate whether or not they want to respond based on the potential Return on Investment that they estimate. 3

4 The Government should consider conducting one of several types of Industry Days in conjunction with an RFI if the context and rationale for the information request is complex. o This will allow the Government to communicate its needs, strategy, rationale and expectations more effectively than could be done with only a written RFI document, and will likewise allow the Contractors attending the event to be in a more informed position to decide if they will respond, and if so, to provide more responsive information. (These topics are further addressed in the Industry Day section of the Binder.) o Individual Contractor responses to RFIs that are done in conjunction with Industry Day type events can be much more valuable if there are opportunities for one-on-one meetings between individual Contractors and DHS personnel. This does not necessarily require DHS to meet with all responding Contractors. The RFI can serve as a selection tool for determining who the government should schedule one-on-ones meetings. Responders should provide the type of information requested: nothing less and nothing more than is directly relevant to the request. o If a response includes less information than requested or provides information that is not directly relevant to the request, it leaves the Government reviewers with a sense of incompleteness about the responder (if part of the information requested was not provided). o If a response includes more information than requested, it may give the sense that the responder is overselling itself (by providing information above and beyond what was requested in terms of relevance). o If a specific type of information was requested by the Government and will not be provided by the responder, the responder should explicitly state that it is not providing that information and should explain its rationale. Perhaps there is a good justification which would benefit both the Government and the responder. o Responders should be thorough and precise in their answers. If the Government requests examples of where a specific type of product that meets their requirements might be in operational use, the response should describe the organization using that product, how long they have been using the product, how many units of the product they are using, and whether those are production units or development units and any other relevant information that would allow the Government to ascertain the maturity and pedigree of the product, along with references for the using organization. If the Government requests examples of operational use, and a responder has several in pre-production evaluation mode at a few organizations but none in 4

5 operational use, the responder should include those examples but clearly state up front that they have none in operational use. o If part of the information requested in the RFI is unclear, the prospective responders should contact the Government POC for clarification. Responders should not try to interpret what the Government asked for if the request is not clear enough; this will potentially save responders time and effort (which equals money) in preparing information that will not be used by the Government (because it is not what they asked for). Contact the Government and ask for clarification; in turn, the Government needs to timely provide such clarification when requested (to support the RFI response deadline). It is reasonable for a contractor to request a meeting with the Government team to better understand the RFI and provide a better response; it is likewise reasonable for the Government to accept and even encourage such meetings, as warranted, but all parties need to keep in mind the resource constraints for the Government team. Industry may choose not to respond to an RFI due to fears of proprietary information being shared with competitors, despite the fact that they are interested in responding to the eventual RFP. o There are established ways in which the Government can protect proprietary/sensitive corporate information. Contractors that are especially concerned about this situation should approach the DHS POCs in the RFI about their legitimate concern for resolution to help them decide if they should provide a response. o The Government can also consider hosting one-on-one meetings with interested companies so they can share their thinking without worry that the information will be disclosed. o Industry must keep in mind that the Government will make some decisions based, in part, on the information they actually receive from the RFI. If they make a decision based on incomplete and inaccurate information, their decision may not be well informed. Once those decisions are made and paths are set, if a contractor then submits information that it had been holding back because of its proprietary or sensitive nature (and wanting to gain some competitive advantage), the Government will react with mistrust. What Type of Follow-up Should Occur? o Once the Government has reviewed the information provided in the responses by individual Contractors, it is vital to keep the private sector informed about its status, such as how the information is being used to make decisions. This goes back to what was stated earlier about the need and importance for the Government to explain in the RFI why it is requesting the information, how it will be used in a 5

6 the context of broader strategies and plans, and when and how DHS decisions will be made (that would lead, in parallel, to business decisions by the private sector). By informing the private sector at appropriate times after the RFI responses are received, the Contractors can be in a better position to make more informed internal decisions about their investments and business strategies and can put themselves in a better position to be of service in addressing DHS needs, resulting in a win-win for both parties. o The Government should provide responses to RFI submissions that do not address their request or the intent and purpose of the RFI (e.g. Company provides marketing materials instead of comments). Contractors must be held accountable to the same extent as government for wasting time and money. If Government provides written response to a company that they did not provide adequate or substantial information or that they did not follow the desired format or content requirements, then Industry Executives will engage with their teams to ensure that does not happen since it reflects poorly on the contractor. o DHS personnel understandably should view the RFI and response process through several perspectives. They should view the RFI and response process as one of the first steps in establishing a long-term relationship of mutual and partnered success with a Contractor that will eventually fill the Government s needs through a contract. The Government personnel will build trust if they keep the private sector as informed as possible throughout the process. The private sector often interprets no information from the Government (after RFI responses are received) as a loss of interest, priority or funding on the part of DHS, which in turn leads Contractors to turn their attention and resources elsewhere for business. Many times the Government waits too long before updating the private sector and it ends up costing DHS additional ramp-up time. Short/interim updates from the Government stating that the RFI responses are still under review and that no decisions have been made yet are orders of magnitude more desirable and useful to the private sector than silence from the Government. It will take some effort from the Government to provide such an interim response, but that small effort yields high returns from the private sector in terms of maintaining their interest in the effort for which the RFI was released and in being better prepared to eventually meet DHS s needs in that effort. o If DHS makes a decision to not pursue (or to postpone) the effort that led to the release of the RFI, then DHS should inform the private sector of that decision as quickly as possible so that Contractors can make appropriate internal business decisions. 6

7 o DHS should provide written updates to all of the Contractors that provided responses, but should also provide the same updates to all of the private sector via the same method that was used to release the RFI. Some Contractors may not have been in a position to respond to the RFI but may be interested in following the status of the DHS effort and possibly contributing value to it at a later time. o It is reasonable for Contractors that responded to the RFI to request a meeting with the DHS Program Office in order to provide further depth on the RFI response, but in general, such Contractors should give the Government adequate time to process and absorb all of the information in the written responses. It is also reasonable for the Government to accept such requests for meetings, at the appropriate time, and, in fact, should consider requesting such meetings with the RFI responders that appear most interested or have provided the most thorough and valuable response. The RFI can serve as a tool for determining who the government should schedule one-on-ones meetings. 7

Framework for Government - Industry Engagement Through the Planning and Execution of the Acquisition Process

Framework for Government - Industry Engagement Through the Planning and Execution of the Acquisition Process WHY IS COMMUNICATION AND AN ONGOING DIALOGUE NEEDED? Early, frequent, and constructive communication