What are the differences between an RFP, RFQ, and IFB in federal procurement?

The differences between an RFP, RFQ, and IFB lie in the type of contract, the evaluation method, and the level of detail required in the response. These distinctions are outlined in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), specifically Part 15 for negotiated procurements (RFPs) and Part 14 for sealed bidding (IFBs), with Part 13 covering simplified acquisition procedures (often RFQs).

A contracting officer uses an RFP for negotiated procurements, where they expect to evaluate proposals based on factors beyond just price, such as technical approach, past performance, and management. Your response to an RFP is a detailed proposal, addressing all evaluation criteria in Section M and instructions in Section L.

An IFB is used for sealed bidding, typically when the requirement is clearly defined and price is the primary award factor. Your response is a bid, usually just a price, submitted by a specific date and time for public bid opening.

An RFQ is generally used for simpler acquisitions, often below the simplified acquisition threshold. The government evaluates quotations based on price and other factors relevant to the requirement. Your response is a quotation, which is less formal than a proposal or a bid and may not require extensive documentation.