(Editor’s Note. After spending so much time and money preparing a proposal then participating in a long selection process (e.g. presentations, discussions, BAFOs, etc.) it would be nice to find out why you did not win. Though unsuccessful offerors have long had the regulatory right to request and obtain a postaward debriefing, the experience was usually frustrating, where the explanations were not meaningful. There have been several changes to the regulations recently that are designed to significantly improve the debriefing process and we have found several instances of actual improvements in our experience with clients. We recently came across an article by Edward Williamson of the Office of the Chief Attorney in the Department of the Army in the May 1998 issue of Contract Management that presents many of the recent changes to debriefing rules.)

In the past, the purpose of debriefing was viewed simply as an opportunity to assist unsuccessful contractors to prepare better proposals. Congressional inquiries into procurement reform in recent years have referred to the number and duration of protests as a significant impediment to reform and the lack of meaningful debriefings were cited as reasons for many firms filing protests. Recent changes to the regulations were intended to improve debriefing in order to lessen protests. The relevant debriefing legislation was included in the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act, the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 and the Federal Acquisition Regulation Sections 15.505, 15.506 and 33.104(c).

{TAG_FORM_TITLE}