Introduction
The Procurement Director of a federal agency sat across from me, visibly frustrated. “We just completed an 18-month procurement for video conferencing,” she said. “We followed all the rules. Conducted a thorough RFP. Evaluated proposals rigorously. Selected what we thought was the best vendor.”
“Six months after deployment, we discovered the selected platform can’t actually do what we need. The vendor promised FISMA compliance—turns out they meant ‘working toward’ compliance, not actually certified. They said they integrated with Active Directory—technically true, but requires expensive custom development they didn’t mention. They claimed 99.9% uptime—but that excludes ‘scheduled maintenance’ which happens to be during our business hours.”
“We’re now stuck with a three-year contract for a system that doesn’t meet our needs. Starting over would mean admitting failure and wasting taxpayer money. We’re living with a suboptimal solution because our procurement process, while following all the rules, didn’t ask the right questions.”
This scenario is heartbreakingly common in government video conferencing procurement.
The problem isn’t that agencies fail to follow procurement regulations—they’re meticulous about compliance. The problem is that procurement processes designed for purchasing tangible goods don’t naturally fit complex technology systems. Without domain-specific knowledge, agencies write RFPs that miss critical requirements, evaluate proposals that sound good but lack substance, and select vendors based on incomplete understanding.
The cost of procurement mistakes is enormous:
Wasted taxpayer money on systems that don’t work
Years locked into unsuitable contracts
Mission capabilities compromised
Staff productivity lost
Security vulnerabilities introduced
Public trust damaged
This guide provides government procurement professionals with comprehensive knowledge for acquiring video conferencing successfully. You’ll learn government contracting vehicles, how to develop effective RFPs, evaluation criteria that identify truly qualified vendors, security assessment requirements, and proven strategies that lead to successful acquisitions.
Whether you’re a contracting officer, program manager, CIO, or IT professional supporting procurement—this guide helps you acquire video conferencing that actually serves your agency’s needs.
Let’s start with understanding the government procurement landscape.
Government Procurement Process Overview
Government procurement follows structured processes ensuring fairness, competition, and compliance with regulations.
Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)
Foundation of Federal Procurement:
FAR establishes uniform policies and procedures for federal executive agencies.
Key Principles:
Full and Open Competition:
- Maximum competition ensures best value
- Sole-source contracts require justification
- Small business set-asides encouraged
Best Value:
- Not necessarily lowest price
- Consider quality, performance, delivery, service
- Life-cycle cost analysis
- Mission requirements met
Transparency:
- Public notification of opportunities
- Clear evaluation criteria
- Documented decision rationale
- Protest procedures
Fair Treatment:
- Equal opportunity for contractors
- Objective evaluation
- Ethical conduct
- Conflict of interest avoidance
Procurement Thresholds
Micro-Purchase ($10,000 or less):
- Simplified procedures
- Purchase card acceptable
- Minimal competition requirements
- Quick acquisition
Simplified Acquisition ($10,000-$250,000):
- Simplified procedures
- Quotes instead of formal proposals
- Reduced documentation
- Faster than full and open
Full and Open Competition (over $250,000):
- Formal solicitation process
- Competitive proposals or bids
- Extensive documentation
- Longer timeline (3-12 months typical)
Procurement Timeline
Typical timeline for video conferencing procurement (over $250,000):
| Phase | Duration | Activities |
|---|---|---|
| Requirements Definition | 1-2 months | Gather requirements, stakeholder input, market research |
| Acquisition Planning | 1-2 months | Strategy, funding, approval, acquisition plan |
| Solicitation Development | 1-2 months | Draft RFP, technical review, legal review, approval |
| Solicitation Period | 1-2 months | Publish RFP, questions and answers, proposal submission |
| Evaluation | 1-3 months | Technical evaluation, cost analysis, discussions |
| Award | 1-2 months | Selection, negotiations, contract award, protests |
| Total | 6-13 months | From start to contract award |
Add deployment time: 2-6 months
Total time from decision to operational: 8-19 months
State and Local Procurement
Variations from Federal:
States and localities follow own procurement codes but principles similar.
Common Differences:
- Lower thresholds for formal competition
- State-specific contract vehicles
- Local preference provisions
- Board approval requirements
- Public notice requirements
GSA Schedule 70 and MAS
GSA Schedules are pre-negotiated government-wide contracts simplifying federal procurement.
Multiple Award Schedule (MAS)
What It Is:
GSA Multiple Award Schedule consolidates 24 separate schedules (including former Schedule 70) into single program.
Benefits:
Pre-Negotiated Terms:
- Prices already negotiated by GSA
- Terms and conditions established
- Streamlined procurement
- Faster acquisition
Pre-Vetted Vendors:
- Vendors undergo GSA qualification
- Financial stability verified
- Past performance reviewed
- Responsibility determination made
Compliance Simplified:
- FAR compliance built-in
- Reduces agency documentation burden
- Standardized terms
- Lower protest risk
Using GSA MAS for Video Conferencing
Relevant Special Item Numbers (SINs):
54151S – Information Technology Professional Services
- Implementation services
- Integration services
- Training services
- Support services
54151 – Integrated Consulting Services
- Requirements analysis
- System design
- Program management
Software (various SINs):
- Video conferencing platform licensing
- Related software components
IT Equipment:
- Cameras, microphones, displays
- Conference room systems
- Network equipment
GSA Advantages and Limitations
Advantages:
Speed:
- No need for full RFP process
- Can use simplified procedures
- Faster than full and open competition
Reduced Risk:
- Pre-vetted vendors
- Established pricing
- Standard terms reduce negotiation
- Lower protest likelihood
Small Business:
- Many small business GSA contractors
- Easier to meet small business goals
- Access to innovative small vendors
Limitations:
Limited Negotiation:
- Prices somewhat flexible but constrained
- Terms and conditions mostly fixed
- Less customization than negotiated contracts
Not All Vendors:
- Some vendors not on GSA Schedule
- Newer/smaller vendors may not have GSA contract
- May miss innovative solutions
Still Requires Work:
- Must define requirements clearly
- Evaluate competing GSA vendors
- Not automatic decision
GSA eBuy
RFQ Tool for GSA Schedule:
eBuy allows posting requirements to GSA Schedule contractors.
Process:
- Post requirement on eBuy
- GSA contractors respond with quotes
- Evaluate quotes
- Select vendor and place order
- Faster than traditional RFP
Best for:
- Well-defined requirements
- Leveraging GSA Schedule
- Competitive quotes needed
- Simplified acquisition
Other Contract Vehicles
Beyond GSA, multiple contract vehicles support video conferencing acquisition.
SEWP (NASA)
NASA Solutions for Enterprise-Wide Procurement:
Government-wide acquisition contract (GWAC) for IT products and services.
Characteristics:
- NASA-managed
- Pre-competed contracts
- Multiple contract holders
- Technology products focus
Video Conferencing Use:
- Hardware (cameras, displays, servers)
- Software licensing
- Implementation services
- Maintenance and support
Benefits:
- Very low fees (0.35%)
- Fast ordering
- Flexible terms
- Strong technical support
NITAAC CIO-SP3/CIO-SP4
NIH Information Technology Acquisition and Assessment Center:
GWACs for IT services and solutions.
CIO-SP3 / CIO-SP4:
- Large, complex IT solutions
- Custom development
- Integration services
- Comprehensive IT services
Video Conferencing Application:
- Custom video conferencing solutions
- Enterprise integration
- Ongoing managed services
- Large-scale implementations
Department of Defense Contracts
DISA SETI / ITES
Strategic Enterprise Technology & Innovation (SETI):
- DoD IT services and solutions
- Replaces older ITES vehicles
- Multiple awardees
- Task order competition
Video Conferencing Use:
- DoD video conferencing requirements
- Classified system implementations
- Defense-specific requirements
- Multi-year enterprise contracts
State and Regional Contracts
State IT Contracts:
Many states have master contracts for IT products and services.
Examples:
- California CMAS (California Multiple Award Schedule)
- Texas DIR contracts
- NASPO ValuePoint (multi-state cooperative)
Benefits:
- State-specific terms
- Competitive pricing
- Simplified state procurement
- Cooperative purchasing
Cooperative Purchasing
Piggybacking on Other Agency Contracts:
Some contracts allow other agencies to use them.
Requirements:
- Contract must explicitly allow
- Appropriate scope
- Terms acceptable to using agency
- Due diligence required
Benefits:
- Leverage another agency’s procurement
- Faster than own competition
- Proven vendor/solution
- Cost savings (shared effort)
Risks:
- Requirements may not fully match
- Less control over terms
- Dependency on original contract
- May miss better solutions
RFP Development for Video Conferencing
Well-crafted RFPs are foundation of successful procurement.
Requirements Gathering
Stakeholder Engagement:
Involve all stakeholders in requirements definition.
Key Stakeholders:
- IT leadership (CIO, CISO)
- End users (various departments)
- Security team
- Compliance / legal
- Records management
- Budget / finance
- Procurement office
Requirements Categories:
Functional Requirements:
- What the system must do
- Features and capabilities
- User requirements
- Integration requirements
Non-Functional Requirements:
- Performance (capacity, speed, reliability)
- Security (encryption, access controls, audit)
- Compliance (FISMA, HIPAA, etc.)
- Usability
- Scalability
Operational Requirements:
- Deployment model (cloud, on-premise, hybrid)
- Maintenance and support
- Training
- Documentation
Business Requirements:
- Budget constraints
- Timeline
- Contract terms
- Small business goals
Statement of Work Development
SOW Structure:
1. Background and Objectives
- Agency mission and context
- Current state and challenges
- Project objectives
- Success criteria
2. Scope
- In-scope activities and deliverables
- Out-of-scope (explicitly)
- Assumptions
- Constraints
3. Technical Requirements
- Detailed system requirements
- Integration specifications
- Performance standards
- Security requirements
4. Deliverables
- System components
- Documentation
- Training
- Reports
5. Performance Standards
- Uptime requirements
- Response time
- Support responsiveness
- Service level agreements
6. Project Management
- Roles and responsibilities
- Communication requirements
- Change management
- Risk management
7. Acceptance Criteria
- Testing requirements
- Acceptance procedures
- Warranty
- Transition to operations
Instructions to Offerors
Clear Proposal Requirements:
Proposal Format:
- Page limits (prevents information overload)
- Organization (standardized for evaluation)
- Required sections
- Font and formatting (readability)
Content Requirements:
Technical Proposal:
- Technical approach and solution
- Implementation plan
- Project management approach
- Personnel qualifications
- Past performance
Management Proposal:
- Organization and staffing
- Key personnel
- Subcontractors
- Risk management
- Quality assurance
Cost Proposal:
- Pricing structure
- Cost breakdown
- Basis of estimate
- Assumptions
Submission Instructions:
- Deadline (date and time)
- Delivery method (email, portal, physical)
- Number of copies
- Questions and answers process
Evaluation Criteria and Scoring
Clear evaluation criteria ensure objective, defensible vendor selection.
Evaluation Factors
Typical Evaluation Structure:
Factor 1: Technical Approach (40-50% weight)
- Solution architecture and design
- Meeting stated requirements
- Innovation and best practices
- Implementation approach
- Risk mitigation
Factor 2: Management Approach (20-30% weight)
- Project management plan
- Organization and staffing
- Key personnel qualifications
- Quality assurance
- Schedule and milestones
Factor 3: Past Performance (15-25% weight)
- Relevant project experience
- Customer references
- Performance ratings
- Contract compliance history
- Problem resolution
Factor 4: Cost (20-30% weight)
- Total cost of ownership
- Pricing reasonableness
- Cost realism
- Payment terms
Small Business Participation (may add points):
- Small business prime or subcontracting
- May be separate factor or adder
Scoring Methodology
Adjectival Rating System:
Exceptional (5 points):
- Exceeds requirements significantly
- Major strengths, no weaknesses
- Outstanding solution
Good (4 points):
- Exceeds some requirements
- Strengths outweigh weaknesses
- High confidence of success
Acceptable (3 points):
- Meets all requirements
- Balanced strengths and weaknesses
- Reasonable confidence of success
Marginal (2 points):
- Meets most requirements
- Weaknesses outweigh strengths
- Significant risk
Unacceptable (1 point):
- Fails to meet critical requirements
- Major weaknesses
- Unacceptable risk
Numerical Score Calculation:
Factor Score × Factor Weight = Weighted Score
Sum all weighted scores = Total Score
Example:
- Technical (45 points): 4 × 45% = 1.80
- Management (25 points): 3 × 25% = 0.75
- Past Performance (20 points): 5 × 20% = 1.00
- Cost (10 points): 3 × 10% = 0.30
- Total Score: 3.85 out of 5.00
Best Value Determination
Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA):
When requirements are clearly defined and price is primary concern.
Process:
- Evaluate technical proposals pass/fail
- All acceptable proposals compete on price
- Lowest price acceptable proposal wins
Appropriate when:
- Requirements well-defined
- Commodity-like procurement
- Limited innovation expected
- Price most important
Best Value Tradeoff:
When technical factors important beyond minimum requirements.
Process:
- Evaluate all factors (technical, management, past performance, cost)
- Tradeoff analysis (technical superiority vs. cost)
- Award to offeror providing best value (may not be lowest price)
Appropriate when:
- Technical innovation valued
- Quality and capability important
- Complex requirements
- Total value matters more than price
Technical Evaluation
Technical evaluation requires subject matter expertise.
Technical Evaluation Team
Composition:
IT Technical Expert:
- Evaluates architecture, design, technology
- Assesses technical feasibility
- Reviews integration approach
Security Specialist:
- Evaluates security controls
- Reviews compliance approach
- Assesses risk
Functional Expert:
- Understands agency requirements
- Evaluates functional fit
- User perspective
Contracting Officer:
- Ensures compliance with RFP
- Manages evaluation process
- Maintains documentation
Subject Matter Expert (SME):
- Video conferencing expertise
- Industry best practices
- Emerging technologies
Technical Evaluation Criteria
System Architecture (20-25%):
Evaluate proposed architecture.
Assessment:
- Scalability to meet growth
- Reliability and redundancy
- Security architecture
- Integration capabilities
- Technology currency
Questions:
- Does architecture meet requirements?
- Is it properly designed for government use?
- Are there single points of failure?
- How does it integrate with existing systems?
Functional Requirements (25-30%):
Evaluate meeting stated requirements.
Assessment:
- Requirement-by-requirement review
- Compliance matrix verification
- Functional demonstrations
- Feature completeness
Scoring:
- Full compliance: all requirements met
- Substantial compliance: most requirements, minor gaps
- Partial compliance: significant gaps
- Non-compliance: major requirements missed
Implementation Approach (20-25%):
Evaluate proposed implementation plan.
Assessment:
- Implementation methodology
- Realistic timeline
- Resource allocation
- Risk management
- Testing and acceptance
Red Flags:
- Unrealistic timelines
- Insufficient resources
- No risk mitigation
- Vague testing plan
Security and Compliance (15-20%):
Evaluate security approach.
Assessment:
- Security controls implementation
- Compliance with standards (FISMA, NIST 800-53)
- Encryption and data protection
- Access controls
- Incident response
Evidence:
- Security documentation
- Certifications (FedRAMP, StateRAMP)
- Security assessment results
- Continuous monitoring plan
Support and Maintenance (10-15%):
Evaluate ongoing support.
Assessment:
- Support model (24/7, business hours)
- Response time commitments
- Escalation procedures
- Training and documentation
- Software updates and patches
Technical Demonstrations
Live Demos:
Request live demonstrations of proposed solution.
Demo Scenarios:
Basic Functionality:
- Schedule and join meeting
- Audio and video quality
- Screen sharing
- Recording
Integration:
- Active Directory authentication
- Calendar integration
- Document sharing
Administration:
- User management
- Reporting
- Security configuration
Advanced Features:
- Large meetings (100+ participants)
- Breakout rooms
- Webinar capability
Evaluation:
- Does it actually work as claimed?
- Is it usable?
- Performance acceptable?
- Any concerning limitations?
Security Assessment
Security evaluation is mandatory for government systems.
Security Evaluation Criteria
Encryption (Critical):
Data in Transit:
- TLS 1.2 or higher
- Strong cipher suites
- Certificate management
Data at Rest:
- Encrypted storage
- Key management
- Secure deletion
End-to-End Encryption:
- Available for sensitive meetings?
- Key management approach
- Performance impact
Assessment:
- Documentation review
- Technical validation
- Penetration testing results
Access Controls (Critical):
Authentication:
- Multi-factor authentication support
- PIV/CAC integration (federal)
- Single sign-on compatibility
- Password policies
Authorization:
- Role-based access control
- Least privilege principle
- Granular permissions
- Regular access reviews
Assessment:
- Technical specifications review
- Configuration options
- Integration testing
Audit Logging (Critical):
Required Events:
- All access attempts
- Administrative actions
- Configuration changes
- Data access
Log Protection:
- Tamper-evident or immutable
- Secure storage
- Retention periods
- SIEM integration
Assessment:
- Log sample review
- Completeness verification
- Protection validation
Compliance Assessment
FISMA Compliance:
Requirements:
- System security plan
- Risk assessment
- Security controls (NIST 800-53)
- Continuous monitoring
- Authority to Operate process
Vendor Evidence:
- Existing ATOs from other agencies
- FedRAMP authorization
- Security assessment reports
- POA&M (plan of action and milestones)
Agency Assessment:
- Review vendor documentation
- Conduct supplemental assessment if needed
- Determine residual risk
- ATO decision
Other Compliance:
HIPAA (if applicable):
- Business Associate Agreement
- PHI protection controls
- Breach notification procedures
CJIS (law enforcement):
- FBI CJIS Security Policy compliance
- Criminal justice information protection
ITAR (defense):
- Technical data protection
- Access limited to U.S. persons
Assessment:
- Vendor certifications
- Control validation
- Third-party assessments
Vendor Security Questionnaire
Standard Questions:
Organization Security:
- Security program maturity
- Security certifications (ISO 27001, SOC 2)
- Incident history
- Security staffing
Data Protection:
- Data classification
- Encryption methods
- Key management
- Data location and sovereignty
Access Management:
- Authentication methods
- Access control model
- Privileged access management
- Vendor personnel access
Network Security:
- Network architecture
- Boundary protection
- Intrusion detection/prevention
- DDoS mitigation
Incident Response:
- Incident response plan
- Notification procedures
- Forensics capability
- Disaster recovery
Compliance:
- Certifications and authorizations
- Audit results
- Continuous monitoring
- Third-party assessments
Vendor Due Diligence
Beyond technical and security evaluation, assess vendor viability.
Financial Stability
Why It Matters:
Video conferencing is long-term relationship (3-5 years typical). Vendor must remain viable.
Assessment:
Financial Statements:
- Revenue and profitability
- Cash flow
- Debt levels
- Financial trends
Red Flags:
- Declining revenue
- Negative cash flow
- High debt-to-equity ratio
- Recent layoffs
D&B Report:
- Dun & Bradstreet financial rating
- Payment history
- Legal filings
Past Performance
Reference Checks:
Contact existing customers.
Questions:
- What went well?
- What challenges did you face?
- How did vendor respond to problems?
- Would you choose them again?
- Any surprises (good or bad)?
Specific to Government:
- Government customer references
- Similar agency size and complexity
- Similar requirements
- Recent implementations (past 2 years)
Performance Database:
Check government past performance databases:
Federal:
- Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS)
- Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS)
Ratings:
- Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, Unsatisfactory
- Recent ratings more relevant
- Trends important
Corporate Stability
Acquisition Risk:
Video conferencing industry consolidating rapidly.
Questions:
- Is vendor acquisition target?
- Recent acquisitions by vendor?
- Product roadmap stability?
- Contract protections if acquired?
Product Lifecycle:
Assessment:
- Product maturity
- Development activity
- Update frequency
- End-of-life plans
Red Flags:
- Declining development
- Dated technology
- Migration pressure to new product
- Vague roadmap
Personnel and Resources
Implementation Team:
Key Personnel:
- Project manager qualifications
- Technical lead experience
- Resume review
- Availability commitment
Staff Augmentation:
- Core team vs. subcontractors
- Subcontractor qualifications
- Staff turnover plans
- Knowledge transfer
Support Resources:
Ongoing Support:
- Support team size and location
- Response time commitments
- Escalation procedures
- Account management
Contract Negotiation
Even with pre-negotiated vehicles, some negotiation possible.
Negotiable Terms
Pricing:
Potential Flexibility:
- Volume discounts
- Multi-year commitments
- Bundled services
- Upgrade paths
Approach:
- Understand vendor’s pricing model
- Compare to market rates
- Leverage competition
- Document negotiations
Service Level Agreements:
Key SLAs:
- Uptime commitment (99.9%? 99.99%?)
- Response time for support
- Resolution time for issues
- Remedies for non-performance
Negotiation:
- Define specific, measurable commitments
- Penalties or credits for failures
- Reporting and verification
- Exclusions and limitations
Payment Terms:
Structures:
- Progress payments (milestone-based)
- Fixed monthly fees
- Usage-based pricing
- Hybrid approaches
Negotiation:
- Align payment with value delivery
- Protect agency (holdbacks, escrow)
- Cash flow management
- Incentives for early delivery
Contract Protections
Intellectual Property:
Data Ownership:
- Agency owns all data
- Right to export data
- No vendor IP claims on agency data
Developed Materials:
- Agency owns custom development
- Documentation ownership
- Training materials
Exit Rights:
Termination for Convenience:
- Agency right to terminate
- Reasonable notice period
- Transition assistance
Data Portability:
- Export all data in standard formats
- Complete data extraction
- Reasonable timeframe
- No additional fees
Transition Assistance:
- Defined transition period
- Knowledge transfer
- Documentation
- Reasonable fees
Performance Guarantees:
Warranties:
- System performance as specified
- Warranty period
- Remedies for defects
Indemnification:
- Vendor indemnifies for IP infringement
- Third-party claims
- Data breach (vendor fault)
Liability:
- Limitations reasonable but not excessive
- Different limits for different harms
- Excluded harms (no limitation)
Sample RFP Language
Pre-written RFP sections accelerate development.
Technical Requirements Section
Example: Authentication Requirements
“The proposed video conferencing solution shall support the following authentication methods:
3.1.1 Multi-Factor Authentication The system shall require multi-factor authentication for all users, utilizing at minimum two of the following factors:
- Something the user knows (password, PIN)
- Something the user has (smart card, token, mobile device)
- Something the user is (biometric)
3.1.2 PIV/CAC Integration The system shall accept Personal Identity Verification (PIV) and Common Access Card (CAC) credentials for authentication, in accordance with FIPS 201 and NIST SP 800-73.
3.1.3 Active Directory Integration The system shall integrate with Microsoft Active Directory or LDAP-compliant directory services for:
- User authentication
- Automated user provisioning and de-provisioning
- Group-based authorization
- Password policy enforcement
3.1.4 Single Sign-On The system shall support Single Sign-On (SSO) via SAML 2.0 or OpenID Connect protocols, enabling users to authenticate once and access the video conferencing system without additional credentials.”
Security Requirements Section
Example: Encryption Requirements
“4.2 Encryption Requirements
4.2.1 Data in Transit All data transmitted between components shall be encrypted using TLS 1.2 or higher, with support for TLS 1.3 preferred. Weak cipher suites (NULL, EXPORT, DES, RC4, MD5, SHA1) shall be disabled.
4.2.2 Data at Rest All stored data (recordings, chat logs, shared files, configuration data) shall be encrypted at rest using FIPS 140-2 validated cryptographic modules, with minimum AES-256 encryption.
4.2.3 Key Management The Contractor shall provide key management capabilities enabling the Agency to:
- Generate encryption keys within Agency authority
- Store keys separately from encrypted data
- Rotate keys on defined schedule
- Revoke compromised keys
- Document key lifecycle management procedures
The Agency shall maintain exclusive control over encryption keys; Contractor personnel shall not have access to Agency encryption keys.”
Performance Requirements Section
Example: Availability and Performance
“5.1 System Availability
5.1.1 Uptime Commitment The system shall maintain 99.9% availability during business hours (Monday-Friday, 6 AM-8 PM Eastern Time, excluding federal holidays), measured monthly. Availability is defined as system accessible and functional for normal operations.
5.1.2 Scheduled Maintenance Scheduled maintenance shall occur outside business hours unless otherwise coordinated. The Contractor shall provide minimum 7 days advance notice of scheduled maintenance.
5.1.3 Performance Standards The system shall support:
- Video quality: 1080p HD resolution minimum
- Audio quality: 48 kHz sampling rate, <150ms end-to-end latency
- Concurrent users: 500 simultaneous meeting participants minimum
- Large meetings: Single meeting with 200+ participants
- Meeting join time: <10 seconds from click to audio/video active
5.1.4 Service Level Agreement The Contractor shall provide Service Level Agreement specifying:
- Uptime commitment and measurement methodology
- Response time for support requests (priority-based)
- Resolution time for critical issues
- Reporting requirements
- Remedies for non-performance (service credits or other)”
Deliverables Section
Example: Documentation Deliverables
“6.3 Documentation Deliverables
The Contractor shall provide the following documentation within 30 days of system deployment:
6.3.1 System Architecture Documentation
- Network diagrams showing all components and connections
- Data flow diagrams
- Integration points with Agency systems
- Security architecture
6.3.2 Administrator Guide
- Installation and configuration procedures
- User management procedures
- Security configuration
- Monitoring and maintenance
- Troubleshooting guide
- Backup and recovery procedures
6.3.3 User Guide
- How to join meetings
- How to schedule meetings
- Using meeting features (screen share, recording, etc.)
- Best practices and etiquette
- Troubleshooting common issues
6.3.4 Security Documentation
- System Security Plan (following NIST SP 800-18)
- Security control implementation details
- Security assessment results
- Risk assessment
- Continuous monitoring procedures
All documentation shall be provided in editable format (Microsoft Word or equivalent) and PDF, and may be updated by the Agency without restriction.”
Common Procurement Mistakes
Learn from others’ mistakes to avoid repeating them.
Mistake 1: Vague Requirements
Problem:
RFP says “System shall provide high-quality video” without defining “high-quality.”
Result:
Vendors interpret differently. Selected vendor’s “high-quality” is 720p, but agency expected 1080p.
Solution:
Specific, measurable requirements: “System shall support 1080p HD video resolution at minimum 30 frames per second.”
Mistake 2: Ignoring Total Cost of Ownership
Problem:
Evaluation focused on initial licensing cost, ignored ongoing costs.
Result:
“Cheapest” vendor actually most expensive over contract life due to high support fees, expensive add-ons, annual price increases.
Solution:
Total Cost of Ownership analysis:
- Initial costs (licensing, implementation)
- Annual costs (subscription, support, maintenance)
- Hidden costs (training, integration, staff time)
- 3-5 year total
Mistake 3: Over-Reliance on Self-Assessment
Problem:
RFP includes requirements matrix. Vendors self-assess compliance. Agency accepts at face value.
Result:
Selected vendor claimed “full compliance” but many features require additional modules (extra cost) or custom development (not mentioned).
Solution:
Verify vendor claims:
- Request detailed explanations for “compliant” claims
- Technical demonstrations of critical features
- Reference checks asking about specific capabilities
- Proof of compliance (documentation, certifications)
Mistake 4: Price as Primary Factor
Problem:
LPTA procurement: any technically acceptable proposal competes on price alone. Lowest price selected.
Result:
Technically “acceptable” but barely. Vendor provides minimum, no innovation, poor quality, minimal support.
Solution:
Best value tradeoff when appropriate:
- Technical quality matters
- Weight factors appropriately (technical 40-50%, not 20%)
- Value technical excellence
- Accept paying more for better solution
Mistake 5: Inadequate Security Evaluation
Problem:
Security evaluation limited to questionnaire. No validation.
Result:
Vendor claimed “FISMA compliant” but provided no evidence. Agency discovered post-award that vendor has no government ATOs, no FedRAMP, minimal security.
Solution:
Rigorous security assessment:
- Require evidence (ATOs, FedRAMP authorization, security assessments)
- Independent validation
- Technical security review
- Penetration testing results
- Don’t accept claims without proof
Mistake 6: Ignoring References
Problem:
Reference checks perfunctory. Called references, asked general “how’d it go?” questions.
Result:
Missed that vendor’s implementations consistently run over schedule and budget, and support is poor.
Solution:
Thorough reference checks:
- Specific questions about performance
- Probe for problems and resolutions
- Ask what they’d do differently
- Talk to references not provided by vendor (find them independently)
Mistake 7: Unrealistic Timeline
Problem:
RFP requires implementation in 60 days. Vendors commit to meet RFP.
Result:
Implementation rushed, poor quality, inadequate testing, problems in production.
Solution:
Realistic timelines:
- Consult with industry on reasonable timelines
- Build in contingency
- Prioritize quality over speed
- Phased implementation if urgency exists
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Should we use GSA Schedule or conduct full and open competition?
A: Depends on requirements and urgency. GSA Schedule faster (3-6 months vs. 6-12 months) and lower risk, but may limit competition. Full and open competition more flexibility and potentially better value but longer timeline. For most agencies, GSA Schedule or other contract vehicle appropriate.
Q: How do we evaluate cloud vs. on-premise without biasing the competition?
A: Write requirements focused on outcomes (security, performance, availability) rather than deployment model. Let vendors propose best solution. Evaluate on merit against requirements. Both models can meet most requirements if properly implemented.
Q: What if lowest price proposal is technically superior?
A: Ideal outcome! Award to that vendor. Best value means best combination of technical merit and cost—when lowest price is also best technical, decision is easy.
Q: Can we require specific product or vendor?
A: Generally no (restricts competition). Exception: sole source justified (only one vendor can meet requirements, urgent need, etc.). Requires written justification and approval. Brand name or equal acceptable (specifies product but allows equivalent).
Q: How do we handle vendor protests?
A: Follow agency procedures. Typical process: vendor files protest, agency responds, GAO or agency decides. Maintain thorough documentation of evaluation to support decision. Well-documented, objective evaluation rarely overturned.
Q: Should technical evaluation team see cost proposals?
A: No, evaluate technical proposals blind to cost (prevents bias). Cost analysis separate. Combined in final best value determination.
Q: What if no proposals are acceptable?
A: Cancel solicitation, revise requirements, re-compete. Don’t award to unacceptable proposal. Better to start over than lock into unsuitable solution.
Q: How do we write evaluation criteria for best value?
A: Establish factors and weights reflecting priorities. Typical: Technical 40-50%, Management 20-25%, Past Performance 15-20%, Cost 20-30%. Document in RFP so vendors know how they’ll be evaluated.
How Convay Supports Government Procurement
Throughout this guide, I’ve provided platform-agnostic procurement guidance. Now let me explain how Convay specifically supports government acquisition.
Simplified Acquisition
Multiple Contract Vehicles
Convay is available through multiple acquisition vehicles:
GSA Multiple Award Schedule
NASA SEWP
State and regional contracts
Cooperative purchasing
Direct procurement support
Procurement-Ready Documentation
Comprehensive RFP Response Support
Convay provides documentation supporting evaluation:
Technical specifications
Security documentation
Compliance certifications (FedRAMP, StateRAMP)
Implementation methodology
Past performance references
Pricing transparency
Proven Government Experience
Extensive Government Customer Base
Convay’s government experience includes:
Federal agencies (civilian and defense)
State and local governments
Educational institutions
Verifiable references
Documented past performance
Transparent Pricing
Predictable, Fair Pricing
Convay pricing structure supports government procurement:
No per-user licensing (predictable costs)
Transparent pricing (no hidden fees)
Volume discounts
Multi-year options
Small business friendly
Conclusion: Procurement Done Right
The federal agency Procurement Director from our opening story learned from their failed acquisition. For their next video conferencing procurement, they:
Invested time in detailed requirements
Consulted technical experts
Wrote specific, measurable requirements
Conducted thorough vendor evaluations
Validated vendor claims
Checked references rigorously
Evaluated total cost of ownership
Selected based on best value, not just price
“The second procurement took longer but resulted in solution that actually works,” she told me. “The key was asking the right questions and not accepting vendors’ claims at face value. Proper procurement takes effort, but it’s worth it to get a system that serves the agency’s mission.”
Successful government video conferencing procurement requires:
Clear, specific, measurable requirements
Appropriate contract vehicle selection
Comprehensive evaluation criteria
Rigorous technical and security assessment
Thorough vendor due diligence
Focus on best value, not just lowest price
Realistic timelines and expectations
Don’t rush procurement or cut corners. Invest the time to get it right—the cost of getting it wrong is far higher than the cost of thorough evaluation.
And when you’re ready to acquire video conferencing built specifically for government—choose Convay.
Ready to start your procurement?
[Download RFP Template for Video Conferencing] | [Request Procurement Consultation] | [View Contract Vehicles] | [Schedule Vendor Demo]
Convay: Built to Serve Government
Multiple contract vehicles. Procurement-ready documentation. Proven government experience. Transparent pricing.
Developed by Synesis IT PLC | CMMI Level 3 | ISO 27001 & ISO 9001 Certified
Trusted by agencies seeking procurement success, not just compliance.
