FAR 12.203 gives you broad discretion and keeps things simple. No scoring sheets, no competitive ranges, no Part 15 formality. Just good business judgment, documented.
Quotations are not proposals. The evaluation rules are simpler than you think. Learn what FAR 12.203 actually says, then walk through an evaluation yourself.
A quotation is a response to a Request for Quotation (RFQ). It results in a purchase order, not a bilateral contract. This distinction matters because it determines which rules apply to your evaluation.
When you evaluate quotations under FAR Part 12, you are not in FAR Part 15 or Part 14 territory. FAR 12.203(c)(2) says it plainly: "The evaluation procedures are not subject to part 15 or 14." That means no evaluation plans, no scoring sheets, no competitive range, no formal discussions requirement. You have broad discretion in deciding how quotations will be evaluated.
That does not mean you can be arbitrary. It means the process is built around good business judgment, not bureaucratic procedure. You still need to be fair, you still need to evaluate against your stated criteria, and you still need to document your reasoning. But the FAR is intentionally giving you room to keep things efficient.
Before you can evaluate anything, you need to tell vendors how to respond. That is 52.212-1. This provision goes in every commercial solicitation and tells offerors exactly what their submission must include.
At a minimum, offerors must submit: the solicitation number, their name and contact information, their Unique Entity Identifier (UEI), information necessary to evaluate the factors in 52.212-2, responses to any representations and certifications not already in SAM, and a statement of agreement with the solicitation terms. That last one matters. If a vendor takes exception to your terms, you need to know before award.
Late submissions: Offers received after the deadline are late and will not be considered, unless the offer arrives before award and the Contracting Officer determines that accepting it would not unduly delay the acquisition. A late modification that makes a successful offer more favorable to the Government can be considered at any time. Know the difference.
Award without discussions: 52.212-1(d) states the Government intends to evaluate offers and award without discussions. That means the offeror's initial submission should be their best shot. However, the Government reserves the right to hold discussions if the Contracting Officer decides they are necessary. You are not locked in either way.
52.212-2 is the provision that goes in your solicitation telling offerors how you will evaluate their responses. Offerors need to know what matters and how much it matters.
The provision has a fill-in-the-blank structure. You insert your evaluation factors in relative order of importance. For proposals, you must also state the relationship between non-price factors and price using one of three options: non-price factors when combined are significantly more important than price, approximately equal to price, or significantly less important than price.
That relationship statement drives your entire evaluation. If you say technical factors are significantly more important than price, you are telling offerors (and any protest forum reviewing your decision) that you are willing to pay more for a technically superior solution. If you say price is significantly more important, you are telling them price will dominate your decision. Mean what you say.
Options: If your requirement includes option years or option quantities, 52.212-2(b) says the Government will evaluate offers by adding the total price for all options to the base price. Tell your offerors this upfront. And watch for unbalanced pricing: if a vendor bids $1 for the base year and $200,000 for Option Year 1, the Government may determine that offer is unacceptable.
FAR 12.203(a) keeps it straightforward. For most commercial acquisitions, your evaluation factors need not be more detailed than three things: technical capability, price, and past performance. That is the FAR telling you to keep it simple.
Technical (FAR 12.203(a)(1)): Evaluate based on how well the proposed products or services meet the Government's requirement. Predetermined subfactors are not required. You can consider things like delivery timeframe, warranty terms, training included, transition plan, or anything else relevant to whether the vendor can meet the need. These do not have to be broken out as formal subfactors. They are considerations under the technical umbrella.
Past Performance (FAR 12.203(a)(2)): Past performance should be an important evaluation factor. Consider information from a wide variety of sources, inside and outside the Government. This includes CPARS (Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System), but also commercial market experience. For emerging technology or newer vendors, consider their commercial track record. You can also consider an offeror's experience as a subcontractor.
Price (FAR 12.203(a)(3)): Evaluate prices inclusive of transportation charges from shipping point to delivery destination. Get prompt payment discounts when you can, but do not include them when evaluating prices.
FAR 12.203(c)(2) gives the contracting officer broad discretion in establishing how quotations will be evaluated. Read that again. Broad discretion. Here is what that means in practice:
Comparative evaluation: You can perform a comparative evaluation of quotations. This means you compare quotations against each other rather than scoring each one against a rubric. "Vendor A's approach is stronger than Vendor B's because they specifically addressed the maintenance schedule and provided named technicians with relevant certifications." That is a valid evaluation method.
No scoring required: You do not have to assign numerical scores. You do not have to build a scoring matrix. You can if you want to, but the FAR does not require it. What matters is that your evaluation is documented, rational, and consistent with your stated criteria.
No competitive range: You are not required to establish a competitive range before communicating with quoters or soliciting revised quotations. If you want to call a vendor and ask them to clarify something in their quote, you can. If you want to ask all vendors for revised pricing, you can. The formality of Part 15 discussions does not apply here.
Price evaluation for commercial quotations is a price analysis, not a cost analysis. You are not digging into the vendor's cost structure. You are determining whether the quoted price is fair and reasonable.
The standard techniques: compare to other quotations received, compare to prior prices for same or similar items, compare to published price lists or GSA schedules, compare to your IGCE. Use whichever techniques make sense for the buy. The Price Fair and Reasonable training (Topic 24) goes deeper on this.
One important detail from FAR 12.203(a)(3): evaluate prices inclusive of transportation charges from the shipping point to the delivery destination. A vendor who quotes $100 with free shipping is cheaper than a vendor who quotes $90 with $25 shipping, even if the unit price looks lower.
Your documentation does not need to be elaborate, but it needs to exist. A file with a purchase order and nothing else tells the next person (or the GAO, if there's a protest) nothing about how or why you made your decision.
Your evaluation documentation should show: what criteria you stated in the solicitation, how each quotation measured against those criteria, your price analysis, and your rationale for selecting the winner. For a comparative evaluation, that means explaining why one quotation was better than the others on the factors that mattered.
The 88th Civil Engineering Squadron needs quarterly preventive maintenance on 12 Carrier WeatherMaker 48TC rooftop units at Building 1240, Wright-Patterson AFB. Base year plus two option years. Estimated value: $142,000 total. You've completed your market research and your commercial item D&F. Now you need to issue an RFQ and evaluate the responses.
FAR 12.203 says technical, price, and past performance. But "technical" is a big umbrella. What specific considerations matter for this requirement? Select the factors you want to evaluate. (There is no single right answer here. The point is to think about what matters for this specific buy.)
Remember: predetermined subfactors are not required under FAR 12.203(a)(1). These are considerations under your technical evaluation, not formal subfactors that need individual scores.
Here is what you received. Now you need to evaluate each quotation against the factors you selected.
Below is how a comparative evaluation might look for each factor you chose. This is not the only right answer. It is one way to apply good business judgment to the quotations you received.
Based on your evaluation, you write a brief narrative documenting your decision. For a comparative evaluation, that looks something like this. Notice how the rationale changes based on the factors you selected:
That is a complete evaluation. No scoring matrix. No numerical ratings. A clear narrative that explains what you received, how you evaluated it, and why you made the decision you made. Anyone reading this file can follow your reasoning.
The primary authority for evaluating commercial quotations. Covers evaluation factors, basis for award, and the evaluation process. This is the section that gives you broad discretion and exempts you from Part 15 and Part 14 procedures.
Open FAR 12.203The provision that goes in your solicitation telling offerors how you will evaluate their quotations. This is where you state your factors and their relative importance. FAR 12.203(b) points you here.
Open FAR 52.212-2The complete regulation governing commercial acquisitions. After the RFO, this is the single authority for buying commercial products and services.
Open FAR Part 12How FAR Part 12 changed under the overhaul. Includes the restructured evaluation procedures and streamlined acquisition authorities.
Open RFO Deviation GuideMultimedia resource from the FAR Overhaul team explaining Part 12 in practice. Includes flowcharts, decision trees, and Q&A on commercial evaluation.
Open Part 12 AlbumWhen a vendor protests an award, the GAO reviews the agency's evaluation. Reading protest decisions teaches you what reviewers look for and how to document your evaluation so it holds up.
Browse Recent Decisions