Can The Govt Change Requirements and SOW after RFP Closed But before Contract Award

Have you considered FAR 15.206(c)?

Yes. that is helpful, but it is an OT award, not FAR.

By OT do you mean other transaction?

You won’t find much specific guidance to help you.  Here’s a DoD guide which provides an overall view of the process which may provide better insight.  Read the section on solicitation and evaluation.

https://www.acq.osd.mil/asda/dpc/cp/policy/docs/guidebook/TAB A1 - DoD OT Guide JUL 2023_final.pdf

Without knowing details of your particular acquisition, I say use common sense.  Remember, the OT process is about giving the government access to the best industry sources.  If your changed requirement can potentially be best satisfied by parties not currently under consideration, I would open it back up.

G-Man_KO said:

The Govt put out a RFWP, a down selct to several vendors was conducted.  But the Requirements/SOW changed.  So can the Govt work with the down selected Vendors and share with them the new SOW?

I think I would consider taking some action against the government if I were a contractor that was not down selected If there is a significant difference in the changed SOW.

Neil Roberts said:

I think I would consider taking some action against the government if I were a contractor that was not down selected If there is a significant difference in the changed SOW.

And what would be the basis of your protest? What rule would you say they broke?

Vern Edwards said:

And what would be the basis of your protest? What rule would you say they broke?

Not sure right now. Would review OT rules, common law, UCC and any "funny' things going on related to the timing of a change in the SOW (who knew what, when and why). After all, I spent time and money to propose and some sense of fairness may be applicable.

So, the Govt changed the requirements (SOW) and since it was late in the game and we had done an initial evaluation, we did a down select to 4 top-rated vendors and sent them the updated SOW with questions (would/could you deliver on the new requirement-type questions), then had one-on-ones with the 4 vendors and ultimately down-selected to one vendor based on the discussions.

The approach seems to me the best and fairest way to process this rather unique situation.  Thanks for everyone's comments & ideas.