Contractor RFPs for Gov't Business

...Is there something wrong with this picture other than the risk being assumed by the contractor?

If the contractor explains the funding situation in it's requests for proposals and states that it will not be liable for any costs incurred prior to a funded order, what is the risk being assumed by the contractor - its solicitation costs?

Having come from the Gov't side of the house, the idea of a Gov't CO/KO issuing a RFP without funding is a bit questionable. I really didn't know what to think from the contractor's side, except the risk that the funding might not come through.

Yes, but please define the "risk" to the contractor under the above scenario? What is it at risk for? It would seem to me that a supplier or subcontractor could choose to participate or not under the conditions expressed in the contractor's RFP/RFQ, right?

Let's just say hypothetically that the agency we're contracted with has entered into a number of constructive changes and because of poor fiscal planning and not obligating the funds upfront, the contractor has taken it in the shorts on a few occasions.

Let's just say hypothetically that the agency we're contracted with has entered into a number of constructive changes and because of poor fiscal planning and not obligating the funds upfront, the contractor has taken it in the shorts on a few occasions.

Okay - if this is a directed change to my contract to seek proposals for upcoming funding, I believe that I would demand that it be in writing and that the Government fund my overhead and admin expenses for seeking proposals prior to funding being in place, if that is applicable to your situation. That way, if they cancel the projects, you can likely be at least reimbursed your admin or B&P costs.

Yes, I think that is the correct way to proceed under the circumstances. Good advice, Joel.