Determining Fair and Reasonable Government Contract Pricing

Written by: Micheal Weaver

Establishing price reasonableness for a competitive bid is a double-headed objective for contracting officers (COs) and contracting firms alike. Though simple in principle, achieving fair and reasonable pricing is anything but simple in terms of execution. It requires mastery of a trifecta: market conditions, cost analysis techniques and regulatory guidelines. 

This article explores the fundamental methods for determining fair and reasonable pricing in government contracts. You'll gain insights into the various factors COs and contractors consider, including preferred techniques for price analysis and the importance of competitive research in the process. 

This article also explores the distinctions between price reasonableness and price realism and how cost realism analyses play a role in certain contract types. 

Price reasonableness is the assessment that a contractor's proposed price for goods or services is justified, given current market conditions and other relevant factors.

The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) requires contracting officers to determine that prices are "fair and reasonable" before awarding a contract. This ensures the government does not overpay for goods and services and maintains a respectful environment for contractors to bid in and be profitable. 

The concept of a fair and reasonable price is often described as “the price that a prudent businessperson would pay for an item or service under commercial market conditions,” given a reasonable knowledge of the competitive landscape.

How to Improve Your Proposals

Learn why detailed proposal sections are crucial to winning government contracts and how to ensure your contract bids stand out from the crowd.

Get the Guide

COs employ pricing reviews through a convergence of two lenses: a comprehensive view of the competitive landscape and an outlook that protects the government's interests. 

Methods include:

Adequate Price Competition

When multiple responsible offerors submit independent bids in response to a solicitation, the resulting competitive environment often leads to fair pricing. Price competition is said to exist if there are two or more offers and the price difference is within a reasonable range (usually up to 15%).

For example, if a government agency solicits bids for a new IT system and receives three offers from qualified vendors, the contracting officer can use this as a strong basis for determining price reasonableness. The quote span of the bids helps ensure that prices align with market expectations.

Cost and Price Analysis

FAR Part 15 outlines two primary methods for evaluating bids: cost analysis and price analysis. These techniques help COs develop a negotiation position that allows both parties to reach an agreement on a fair and reasonable price.

• Price analysis involves examining and evaluating a proposed price without assessing its individual cost elements and proposed profit. This method is often used when certified cost or pricing data are not required. Contracting officers may use various price analysis techniques, such as comparing proposed prices with those of similar items or using parametric estimating methods—a statistical method that relies on historical data and mathematical relationships.
• Cost analysis, on the other hand, involves reviewing and evaluating separate cost elements and profit in an offeror's proposal. COs typically use this method when certified cost or pricing data are required or when price analysis alone is insufficient to determine reasonableness.

When conducting cost analysis, COs typically ask three key questions:

1. Are the proposed costs realistic for the work to be performed?
2. Do the costs reflect a clear understanding of the RFP’s Statement of Work (SOW)?
3. Is the proposed solution consistent with the technical proposal?

Modern pricing software solutions like Deltek ProPricer can be helpful in this process. Its “Data View” feature allows COs to analyze pricing at a high level or drill down into specific cost elements, providing a comprehensive view of the pricing structure. 

Historical Market Pricing

By examining past contract awards for similar goods or services, COs can establish a baseline for current pricing expectations. The method considers factors such as inflation, changes in market conditions and technological advancements that may have occurred since the previous awards.

For instance, if a government agency procures office furniture, the contracting officer might review prices paid for similar items in recent years, adjusting for significant changes in materials costs or manufacturing processes. It creates valuable context for evaluating current proposed prices.

Market research is often considered the cornerstone of this process. Comprehensive market research provides COs with a solid understanding of the relevant industry's current market conditions, pricing trends and competitive dynamics.

However, it's important to note that though it’s a popular method, market research should not be considered a rigid benchmark. Just because specific prices have been accepted in previous contracts doesn't mean they are not negotiable or that they represent the best value for the government. Most commercial prices and terms can be subject to negotiation, and contracting officers should approach each procurement with a fresh perspective.

Effective market research involves:

1. Analyzing prices for similar goods or services across contracts and vendors.
2. Considering regional variations in pricing.
3. Evaluating the impact of economic factors such as recession.
4. Assessing technological advancements that might affect pricing.
5. Examining industry trends.

While price reasonableness and price realism are both essential concepts in government contracting, they serve different purposes. 

As discussed earlier, price reasonableness is a requirement for all procurements and is primarily concerned with protecting the government from overpaying.

Price realism, conversely, concerns whether a proposed price is too low. COs are known to perform this analysis in fixed-price contracts where there is a worry that an offeror's price is so low that it may jeopardize contract performance. Price realism analysis aims to assess whether the offeror understands the contract requirements and has proposed a price that allows for successful contract execution.

For example, if a contractor proposes a price significantly lower than other offerors or the government estimate, a price realism analysis might be conducted to ensure that the contractor hasn't misunderstood the scope of work or underestimated the resources required to complete the project.

Cost realism analysis is a specific type of evaluation applied to cost-reimbursement contracts and, in some cases, to competitive fixed-price contracts. Its purpose is to determine the probable cost of performance for each offeror.

In conducting a cost realism analysis, COs and their teams evaluate whether:

1. The specific cost elements are realistic for the proposed approach
2. The costs reflect a clear understanding of the contract requirements
3. The cost data aligns with the methods of performance and materials outlined in the technical proposal

If a contractor proposes a significantly lower labor rate than is typical for the required skill set, the CO might question whether the contractor can attract qualified people at that rate. Similarly, if material costs are substantially below market rates, concerns about the quality of the proposed materials might arise.

The results of a cost realism analysis are used to adjust each offeror's proposed cost to a more realistic level. These adjusted costs are then used to determine the best value for the government. In this way, the government's final selection is based on a realistic assessment of the likely cost of quality performance.

Determining price reasonableness is often a subjective process. It requires COs to consider a multitude of factors beyond just the proposed price and its underlying costs. 

Variables include: 

1. Company Attributes: The offeror's size, experience, and past performance can impact pricing. For example, a larger company might benefit from economies of scale, while a smaller company might have lower overhead costs.
2. Technology: Advancements in technology can significantly affect pricing, either by reducing production costs or by ramping up efficiencies.
3. Political Factors: Changes in regulations, trade policies or government priorities caused by party domination can influence pricing in specific sectors.
4. Natural Disasters or Global Events: Unexpected disruptions like global pandemics can affect supply chains and impact pricing.
5. Schedule Requirements: Tight deadlines might justify higher prices due to the need for expedited work or overtime labor.
6. Legal and Compliance Factors: The cost of meeting specific requirements can impact pricing.
7. Terms and Conditions: Specific contract terms, such as payment schedules or warranty requirements, can affect pricing.
8. Accounting and Estimating Systems: The sophistication of a contractor's accounting and estimating systems can influence the reliability and compliance of their cost and pricing data.  

Given the complexity of these variables, it's not uncommon for different COs to reach different conclusions about price reasonableness for similar procurements. That's why a clear rationale and thorough documentation are promising standards to uphold when implementing a fair and reasonable procurement.

Buyers Guide to Pricing Software

Learn how to select the right pricing software to streamline your proposal process, ensure compliance and increase your chances of winning government contracts.

Get the Guide