• LinkedIn
  • Google +
  • Twitter
  • Facebook

+1-202-770-2939

Bid Protest Weekly
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Topics
  • About Us
  • Contact Us

The difference between price reasonableness and price realism – Published November 2, 2012

  • Home
  • Washington Business Journal Battle Lines
  • The difference between price reasonableness and price realism – Published November 2, 2012

The difference between price reasonableness and price realism

Washington Business Journal by Lee Dougherty, Attorney, General Counsel PC

Date: Friday, November 2, 2012, 12:40pm EDT – Last Modified: Friday, November 30, 2012, 1:56pm EST

When looking at a fixed-price contract proposal there can’t be a price realism analysis unless the government asked for it in the original solicitation. If a contractor is later denied a fixed-price contract based on the fact that their proposed price was too low, they should look closely at the solicitation. Chances are the agency officials responsible for the evaluation do not understand the difference between price realism and price reasonableness.

Protesting contractors: Emergint Technologies, Louisville, Ky.

Contracting agency: Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

Issue: Price realism evaluation in a fixed-price offer

Decision: Sustained

Postmortem:

In last week’s Battle Lines I wrote about the GAO’s most recent decision regarding an agency’s determination of reasonableness in evaluating a proposed price. This week the GAO sustained a protest filed in response to an award of a task order to Silver Spring-based DB Consulting Inc. for information services support for CDC’s National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion in Atlanta, based on allegations that the CDC had unreasonably evaluated Emergint’s proposal and had conducted a price realism evaluation which was not part of the evaluation criteria.

The CDC issued a request for task order proposals (RFTOP) that informed potential offerors that it intended to award a fixed-price time-and-materials task order. According to the RFTOP technical factors were more important than price and award would be made to the offeror whose proposal was considered most advantageous to the government. According to the RFTOP the proposed price could be evaluated, “to determine the reasonableness of the offeror’s price proposal.” Three offers were received by the CDC and an evaluation panel assigned each of the three an overall score. In its consensus report the evaluation panel was critical of Emergint’s price because it was lower than the government estimate and the panel believed that Emergint “may have difficulty retaining incumbents or being able to successfully recruit highly qualified staff.”

Although it seems simple, many acquisition professionals do not understand the difference between price reasonableness and price realism . A price reasonableness analysis, which the RFTOP informed offerors could be performed in this case, is conducted to determine whether a proposed price is too high. The purpose of a price realism analysis is the opposite and its purpose is to determine “whether the low price reflects a lack of understanding of contract requirements or risk inherent in its approach.” Because of its lack of understanding of what constitutes a price realism analysis, the CDC argued unsuccessfully that it had not conducted one because it had not adjusted the offeror’s price. In a fixed price contract the risk of performance falls to the offeror and “below cost prices are not inherently improper.” An agency can conduct a price realism evaluation, but only if it provides reasonable notice in the solicitation that the analysis will be part of the evaluation criteria. In this case the CDC failed to make price realism part of the evaluation criteria and therefore was not permitted to look beyond the fixed price offer. As a result of this and other argued protest grounds the GAO sustained the protest in favor of Emergint.

The difference between when a price realism analysis can be performed can be confusing. When looking at a fixed-price proposal there cannot be a price realism analysis unless the government included it in the evaluation criteria published in the solicitation. If a contractor is denied a fixed-price contract based on the fact that their proposed price was too low, they should look closely at the solicitation to determine whether there was notice that a price realism evaluation would be performed. Chances are the agency officials responsible for the evaluation do not understand the difference between price realism and price reasonableness.

Search Bid Protest Weekly

Download our Bid Protest Primer FREE eBook!

Categories

  • 8(a) Sole Source Awards
  • Acknowledging Amendments
  • Adverse Agency Action
  • Adverse Impact Analysis
  • Agency Tender
  • Alternate or Previously-Approved Product
  • Ambiguity in Solicitation
  • Attorney's Fees
  • Bad Faith in Evaluation
  • Below-Cost Offer
  • Best Value
  • Beyond the Scope
  • Bias
  • Bid and Proposal Costs
  • Bid Bond
  • Bid Compliance
  • Bid Protest Decisions
  • Bid Protest Jurisdiction
  • Bid Protests
  • Bidding Best Practices
  • Blanket Purchase Agreement
  • Blanket Purchase Order
  • Blog Articles
  • Bona Fide Needs Rule
  • Brand Name or Equal
  • Broad Agency Announcement
  • Brooks Act
  • Bundling or Consolidation
  • Buy American Act
  • Cancellation of a Solicitation
  • Capability of Contractor
  • CCR Registration
  • Certificate of Competency (COC)
  • Certification Requirements
  • Changes Clause
  • Clarifications
  • Clear and Convincing Evidence
  • Clearly Meritorious Protest
  • Clerical Error
  • Commercial Item Acquisition
  • Competitive Range
  • Compliance
  • Construction Design-Build
  • Construction Services
  • Contract Administration
  • Contract Modifications
  • Contracting Preference
  • Contractor Responsibility
  • Corporate Capability
  • Corrective Action
  • Cost Accounting System
  • Cost Evaluation
  • Cost Realism
  • Cost Reimbursement Contract
  • Cost-Technical Trade-Off
  • Customary Commercial Practice
  • CVE
  • DCAA Audit
  • Debriefing
  • Default Termination
  • Deficient Price Proposal
  • Delivery Order jurisdiction
  • Delivery Schedule
  • Designated Employee Agent
  • Disclosure of Price
  • Disclosure of Source Selection-Sensitive Information
  • Discussions
  • Disqualification
  • Documentation of Evaluation
  • Domestic Production Requirement
  • Education Center Articles
  • Electronic Filing
  • Evaluation Criteria
  • Evaluations
  • Events
  • Executive Order Compliance
  • Experience of Contractor
  • Experience Requirement
  • Fair Market Price
  • FedBizOpps
  • Federal Prison Industries (FPI)
  • Final Evaluation
  • Final Proposal Revisions
  • Financial Responsibility
  • Fixed Price Contract
  • Former Government Employees
  • FSS Contract
  • Government Contracts
  • Government Office Closings
  • Government Surplus Material
  • GSA Lease
  • HUBZone
  • ID/IQ
  • In-Sourcing
  • Incentive Fee
  • Inclement Weather Delay
  • Incomplete Proposal
  • Incorporation by Reference
  • Incumbent Capture
  • Incumbent Status
  • Independent Government Estimate (IGE)
  • Individual Environmental Report
  • Industrial Mobilization
  • Innovations
  • Interested Party
  • Invitation for Bid
  • Invited Contractor
  • Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act
  • Joint Venture
  • Key Personnel
  • Labor Hours
  • Labor Rate Pricing
  • Late Proposals
  • Level of Effort
  • Licensing Requirements
  • Limitation on Subcontracting
  • Liquidated Damages
  • Lost Proposal
  • Lowest Price Technically Acceptable
  • Mail-Box Rule
  • Management Planning
  • Market Research
  • MAS Contracts
  • Material Solicitation Amendment
  • Material Solicitation Terms
  • Meaningful Discussions
  • Micro-Purchase Threshold
  • Minimum Requirements
  • Misleading Discussions
  • Mistake
  • Mitigation Strategy
  • Multiple Awards
  • NAICS Code
  • National Security
  • Negotiation
  • News
  • Non-Procurement Instruments
  • Novations
  • Offeror Representations
  • OMB Circular A-76
  • Option Exercise
  • Oral Presentations
  • Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI)
  • Page Limitations
  • Past Performance
  • Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS)
  • Performance Based Standards
  • Permits and Responsibilities
  • Personal Conflicts of Interest
  • Post-Award Changes to the Contract
  • Post-Protest Re-Evaluations
  • Practicable Alternative
  • Pre-Qualification of Offerors
  • Preaward/Postaward Requirements
  • Prejudice
  • Price Calculation Error
  • Price Calculation Error
  • Price Evaluation
  • Price of FSS Task Order Quote
  • Price Realism
  • Price Reasonableness
  • Price Reduction
  • Procurement Announcement
  • Procurement Integrity
  • Product Testing
  • Proposal Acceptance Period
  • Proposal Detail
  • Proposal Evaluation
  • Proposal Extension
  • Proposals
  • Protest Jurisdiction
  • Protest Terms of Solicitation
  • Protester Comments
  • Public-Private Competition
  • Randolph-Sheppard Act (RSA)
  • Rate Tenders
  • Re-Certification of Size Status
  • Reconsideration
  • Reimbursement of Protest Costs
  • Rejection of Proposal
  • Relaxation or Waiver of Requirement
  • Relevancy of Past Performance
  • Reliance on the Proposal
  • Requirements Contract
  • Responsibility
  • Responsiveness
  • Restricted Competition
  • Resumes
  • Revision of Proposal
  • Revision of Proposals
  • Risk
  • Rule of Two
  • SBA Status protest
  • SDVOSB Set-Asides
  • Significant Issue Exception
  • Simplified Acquisition Procedures
  • Site Visit
  • Size Determination
  • Size Protest
  • Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program
  • Small Business Set-Asides
  • Small Business Subcontracting Goals
  • Sole-Source Award
  • Solicitation Amendment
  • Solicitation Requirements
  • Source Approval
  • Source Selection Authority
  • Source Selection Decision
  • Source Selection Plan
  • Sources Sought Notice
  • Staffing Plan
  • State and Local Requirements
  • Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA)
  • Subcontract Protest
  • Subcontractor Experience
  • Suspension and Debarment
  • Taking Exception to RFP Requirements
  • Task Orders
  • Teaming Agreement
  • Technical Acceptability
  • Technical Evaluation
  • Termination of Award
  • Terms of the Solicitation
  • Timeliness of Protest
  • Timely Filing
  • Timely Performance
  • Timely Proposal Submission
  • Trade Agreement Act
  • Unbalanced Pricing
  • Uncategorized
  • Unduly Restrictive Terms
  • Unequal Access to Information
  • Unequal Treatment of Offerors
  • Uniform Time Act of 1996
  • Unstated Evaluation Criteria
  • Unusual and Compelling Urgency
  • Use of Appropriated Funds
  • Veterans First
  • VIP Database
  • VOSB Set Asides
  • Wage Determination

Get Help


Visit Our
blog

Read more

Talk to an
attorney who
specializes
in bid protests:

+1-202-770-2939
Email

Keep up to date
on bid protest
decisions and
policies:

Lists*

© 2018 Bid Protest Weekly

  • LinkedIn
  • Google +
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Topics
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Topics
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • LinkedIn
  • Google +
  • Twitter
  • Facebook

+1-202-770-2939