Source & Authority Information
- •FAR Subpart 15.2 - Solicitation and Receipt of Proposals(accessed 2026-01-15)
- •FAR Part 14 - Sealed Bidding(accessed 2026-01-15)
Request for Proposal (RFP) - Negotiated Procurements
Request for Quotation (RFQ) - Simplified Procurements
Invitation for Bid (IFB) - Sealed Bidding Procurements
Request for Information (RFI) - Market Research
Comparing Document Types and Selection Factors
- Request for Proposal (RFP): Negotiated procurement seeking comprehensive proposals evaluated across multiple weighted factors. Requires substantial response effort developing detailed technical approach, management approach, past performance documentation, and competitive pricing. Best value evaluation methodology allows tradeoffs between technical excellence and price, potentially awarding to other than lowest price. Used for complex requirements where solution approaches vary.
- Request for Quotation (RFQ): Simplified solicitation seeking price quotes for clearly defined requirements. Requires lower response effort focused primarily on pricing and delivery commitments. Price is typically the primary selection factor for quotes meeting stated specifications. Technical evaluation confirms specification compliance rather than assessing approach innovation. Used for commercial items, simplified acquisitions, and orders against existing vehicles.
- Invitation for Bid (IFB): Sealed bidding solicitation where lowest-priced responsive bid from responsible bidder wins contract award. Requires precise compliance with every specification without deviation. No technical evaluation beyond binary pass/fail compliance determination. Price is the exclusive selection factor among compliant bids. Used for clearly specified requirements where price is paramount.
- Request for Information (RFI): Market research document gathering industry information without contract award. No competitive evaluation or selection occurs. Information helps agencies understand market capabilities and plan procurements. Responses demonstrate interest and capability without binding commitments. Used before formal solicitations to inform acquisition strategies.
Strategic Response Approach by Document Type
- 1Correctly identify the procurement document type
Determine whether you are responding to an RFP, RFQ, IFB, or RFI before beginning any response development activities. Review the document title, stated procedures, and evaluation methodology carefully. Each document type requires fundamentally different response approaches and resource commitments. Misidentifying document types leads to inappropriate responses that may be non-compliant or waste resources on non-competitive information requests.
- 2Understand the specific evaluation methodology
Review exactly how responses will be evaluated to focus effort appropriately on factors that matter for selection decisions. RFPs require strong technical approaches meeting evaluation criteria. IFBs require precise specification compliance and competitive pricing. RFQs emphasize price competitiveness for compliant offerings. RFIs seek useful information without competitive evaluation. Align response strategy with evaluation approach.
- 3Allocate response resources proportionately
Match response effort and resource investment to document type and opportunity value. Major RFPs warrant substantial proposal development investment across technical, management, past performance, and pricing volumes. Simple RFQs require efficient pricing responses without elaborate technical documentation. IFBs require careful compliance verification and competitively optimized pricing. RFIs deserve strategic consideration of information disclosure value.
- 4Follow all instructions precisely
Each document type specifies particular response requirements that must be followed exactly for compliance. RFPs specify detailed volume structure, content requirements, page limitations, and formatting rules. IFBs require specific bid formats, certifications, and acknowledgments. RFQs indicate required quote elements and submission procedures. Follow every instruction exactly to avoid compliance rejection.
- 5Calibrate competitive positioning strategy
Adjust competitive strategy to document type characteristics. RFPs reward differentiated technical approaches and demonstrated capability that justify best value selection. IFBs reward exclusively lowest compliant pricing with no value for technical differentiation. RFQs fall between depending on specific evaluation details. RFIs should balance helpfulness for influencing requirements with protecting competitive advantages from disclosure.
Additional Federal Procurement Document Types
Common Mistakes in Document Type Response
- Developing elaborate technical proposals for RFQs where price is the primary selection factor, wasting resources on unnecessary proposal content that evaluators will not consider in selection decisions.
- Taking exceptions or proposing alternatives in IFB responses, resulting in non-responsive bid rejection regardless of price competitiveness or solution quality.
- Treating RFIs as binding solicitations by committing excessive resources or expecting contract award from information responses.
- Providing proprietary technical approaches in RFI responses that competitors can then adopt, losing competitive advantage before formal solicitation.
- Underfunding RFP response efforts and producing non-competitive proposals that fail to demonstrate technical capability or past performance.
- Missing the distinction between price-based and best value evaluations, resulting in inappropriate competitive positioning.
- Assuming IFB specifications have flexibility when sealed bidding requires exact compliance without deviation.
