I'm looking at a state IT Request for Proposal (RFP) for a new records management system, with a three-week response deadline. The requirements in Section L are so specific they read like they were written around one vendor's platform. It's a general services NAICS code, no set-aside. I've been trying to figure out how to even begin writing a proposal with our current system, which is good, but doesn't have these exact features. I don't want to spend a month on this if it's already a done deal. Is it fair to say in the thread that the RFP reads like one vendor wrote it? Does that kind of comment help anyone else on the thread, or is it just complaining? Has anyone seen a thread discussion lead to an amendment on an RFP like this?
The RFP reads like one vendor wrote it. Is it fair to say so in the thread, and does it help anyone?
Ask a question1 answer
It is fair to say that an RFP reads like it was written for a specific vendor, but it is unlikely to lead to an amendment or help other bidders. On federal procurements, a protest based on an impropriety apparent in a solicitation must be filed before bid opening or the time set for receipt of initial proposals to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) or before the closing date for proposals for an agency-level protest (4 CFR 21.2(a)(1); FAR 33.103(e)). State procurements follow state procurement codes and the specific rules of the state's purchasing portal. If you believe the solicitation is unduly restrictive or written to favor one vendor, you may consider filing a protest with the appropriate state authority. Without a protest, an agency may not be compelled to change the solicitation. You should review the state's vendor guide for how to submit questions or protests regarding a specific solicitation.