FAR Companion Part 39

Part 39 - Acquisition of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) FC39.001 FC 39.001 Applicability.

FAR part 39 emphasizes strategies that promote faster acquisition and secure deployment for information and communication technology (ITC) including information technology (IT), operational technology, emerging technology, and information systems. The definition for information and communication technology is in FAR part 2. However, the following context may be helpful in navigating the diverse ICT marketplace: ● Operational technology includes programmable systems or devices that interact with the physical environment or manage devices that interact with the physical environment. These systems or devices detect or cause a direct change through the monitoring and/or control of devices, processes, and events. ● Emerging technology includes any evolving or innovative capability (whether hardware, software, or service) that introduces new methods, tools, or efficiencies in support of mission needs. This includes technologies undergoing rapid advancement or change, and those with the potential to significantly improve operations, service delivery, and security (such as the Internet of Things, or IoT). ● Information systems can combine information technology, operational technology, and emerging technology. ○ Information systems can be deployed on premises or in the cloud. ○ Cloud deployments can be performed either as infrastructure, platform, or software as a service.

FC39.001(a)(2) FC 39.001(a)(2) Strategic planning for ICT acquisitions.

Successful ICT acquisitions begin with thoughtful planning that extends beyond immediate technical requirements to consider long-term strategic objectives, organizational, and operational factors consistent with OMB Circular A-130, “Managing Information as a Strategic Resource.” These planning approaches establish the foundation for technology solutions that Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Companion remain viable and valuable throughout their lifecycle while meeting Federal information governance requirements. OMB Circular A-130 establishes general policy for information governance, acquisitions, records management, open data, workforce, security, and privacy and represents a shift from viewing security and privacy requirements as compliance exercises to understanding security and privacy as crucial elements of a comprehensive, strategic, and continuous risk-based program at Federal agencies. ICT acquisition planning must align with this strategic framework by treating information as a valuable strategic resource requiring comprehensive lifecycle management. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Companion ● Align acquisitions to the agency’s technology roadmap: Align the procurement to the agency’s strategic technology roadmap that extends beyond immediate needs. This approach permits the agency to plan systemically for technology evolution, integration requirements, and capability maturation over time. This planning helps prevent isolated, incompatible systems and reduces total ownership costs by facilitating smoother technology transitions throughout the lifecycle. Where practical and appropriate, technology roadmaps may rely on integration with shared services that scale cost savings and value across larger Federal technology infrastructure and platforms. To ensure alignment with your agency’s technology roadmap, the acquisition planner should coordinate with your agency’s Chief Information Officer’s Office (or similar). The agency CIO plays a central role in ensuring ICT acquisitions align with enterprise architecture, information governance policies, and strategic technology planning as mandated by A-130's framework for managing information as a strategic resource. ● Integrate Federal information governance requirements: ICT acquisitions must incorporate the comprehensive information governance framework established by OMB Circular A-130. This includes ensuring acquisitions support the agency's information lifecycle management, from creation and collection through processing, dissemination, and disposal. Acquisition planning should address how proposed systems will contribute to the agency's strategic information management objectives, enable appropriate information sharing, and support data-driven decision making while maintaining security and privacy protections throughout the information lifecycle. ● Implement continuous risk-based security and privacy management: OMB Circular A-130 emphasizes the role of both privacy and security in the Federal information life cycle through a continuous, risk-based approach rather than periodic compliance exercises. ICT acquisition planning must incorporate security and privacy considerations from the earliest planning stages, ensuring that systems are designed with appropriate safeguards and can adapt to evolving threats and requirements. This includes conducting Privacy Impact Assessments (PIAs) when acquiring systems that handle personally identifiable information and implementing the Risk Management Framework throughout the system development lifecycle. ● Consider non-functional requirements: Balance functional capabilities with critical non-functional requirements: security, scalability, interoperability, maintainability, accessibility, and performance metrics. These requirements often determine whether a system will not only meet user needs, but also integrate with enterprise architecture and remain viable throughout its lifecycle. Clearly articulating non-functional requirements in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Companion solicitations helps vendors propose appropriate solutions and prevents expensive modifications later. Being familiar with key statutory requirements related to the acquisition of ICT is critical to a compliant acquisition. In addition to FAR part 39, it is important to be familiar with prohibitions as they pertain to the acquisition of ICT detailed in FAR part 40. Further applicable guidance, such as that related to the Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) or Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, can be found on CIO.gov, Section508.gov, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology Information Technology page (e.g., Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) requirements). Information pertaining to statutorily required purchasing programs relevant to ICT can be found on the statutory purchasing programs page.

FC39.001(a)(2) Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Companion FC 39.001(a)(2) Streamlined timeline techniques.

Accelerating the acquisition timeline ensures that implemented solutions remain technologically relevant and meet current mission needs. These techniques maintain procurement integrity while eliminating unnecessary delays that can undermine program success. ● Streamlined source selection. Design evaluation processes that enable award decisions within 180 days or less from solicitation release. Techniques include limiting proposal page counts; focusing on differentiating evaluation factors; using oral presentations, demonstrations, or other real-time assessments to replace written portions of the proposal; and implementing concurrent rather than sequential evaluation phases. Establish dedicated review teams with scheduled evaluation sessions rather than rely on part-time evaluators. These approaches maintain thoroughness while eliminating unnecessary delays that can render solutions outdated before implementation begins. ● Consensus-only documentation. Implement a streamlined consensus approach that eliminates individual evaluator write-ups in favor of direct team consensus documentation. This technique reduces administrative burden and timeline by having evaluators first discuss their assessments collaboratively, then document only the team's consensus findings. Instead of detailed narratives for each proposal, focus on capturing discriminating factors between proposals and clear reasons for ratings (or rankings). This approach can cut weeks from the evaluation timeline while improving evaluation quality through collaborative assessment that uses the entire team's expertise. ● Agile acquisition techniques. Apply agile principles to the acquisition process itself, not just the development methodology. Break the procurement into smaller, more manageable chunks with shorter timelines. Consider techniques like rolling admissions for vendor qualification, regular on-/off-ramping for multiple-award vehicles, and streamlined ordering procedures for prequalified providers. Capture lessons learned and continually refine acquisition approaches based on results. This creates a more responsive procurement system that can adapt to changing technology and mission needs.

FC39.101 FC 39.101 Management of ICT contract risk.

Information and communication technology acquisitions present unique challenges that can significantly impact mission success and taxpayer value. Unlike traditional procurements, ICT projects involve rapidly evolving technologies, complex integrations, and cascading Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Companion dependencies that can create costly problems if not properly managed. Effective risk management enables agencies to identify potential issues early and respond proactively, protecting against cost overruns, schedule delays, technical obsolescence, and solutions that fail to meet user needs. Modern ICT acquisitions face new risks beyond traditional concerns. Schedule risks may include Artificial Intelligence (AI) integration delays and supply chain disruptions. Cost risks often stem from evolving cybersecurity requirements and frequent technology updates. Technical risks have grown with AI implementations where agencies may lack expertise to evaluate performance or detect bias. Contract decisions typically involve balancing AI security, federal design requirements, and third-party vendor risks, while AI systems can face data Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Companion poisoning attacks. These challenges tend to multiply when agencies manage multiple high-risk projects with limited oversight resources. Effective acquisition risk management often combines proven contracting techniques with modern planning approaches. Acquisition planning should consider the government’s “realistic” plan B in the event a contractor fails to perform. Modular contracting can help manage such risk. Modular contracts can also break complex IT projects into smaller, manageable increments that deliver value while reducing overall risk exposure. Agencies may benefit from thorough acquisition planning that coordinates program, financial, and contracting perspectives early in the process. Many find success incorporating specific contract language for AI governance, cybersecurity attestations, and vendor risk assessments. Prototyping line items or contract structures can allow testing of technical approaches before committing to full-scale implementation. Outcome-focused contracting that emphasizes collaboration between government and contractor teams helps ensure both parties work together toward mission success rather than simply meeting contract specifications.

FC39.102 FC 39.102 Modular contracting.

Breaking down initiatives into manageable components reduces risk while increasing flexibility, competition, and opportunities for innovation. These strategies enable incremental capability delivery while maintaining system coherence and preventing vendor lock-in. Modular contracting is especially critical for piloting, learning from, and iterating with emerging technologies. ● Managing complex requirements. Prioritize logical separation of concerns, well- defined interfaces, and appropriate data exchange standards. This approach reduces risk by allowing incremental delivery and creating more opportunities for small, emerging technology business participation. ● Implementing modular contracting. Structure acquisitions into separate, interoperable modules rather than monolithic systems. This approach, consistent with FAR 39.102, enables incremental development and deployment of functionality, reduces risk exposure, and increases opportunities for innovation. Establish a family of contracts with complementary scopes that can be awarded to different contractors while maintaining integration. This strategy prevents vendor lock-in while providing flexibility to adopt new technologies or approaches for individual modules.

FC39.103 Outcome-based contracting. Outcome-oriented strategies align contractor success with agency mission achievement. They Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Companion encourage partnership between the government and the contractor focused on timely and quality mission delivery. ● Outcome-based contracting. Focus on what you need to achieve rather than dictating how vendors should deliver results. This approach gives commercial providers the flexibility to apply their expertise, innovation, and best practices to meet your mission needs. Instead of specifying exact methodologies, technologies, or labor categories required, define clear performance standards, metrics, and desired outcomes. This approach encourages vendors to propose creative solutions and allows them to use their commercial capabilities more effectively. The result is often better value and solutions that benefit from ongoing commercial innovation and improvement. ● Partnerships in the process. Focus on developing mutual trust and a shared sense of ownership for successful delivery between government and industry. Build relationships so both parties can align their financial and non-financial incentives to deliver better outcomes for the public. Building these transparent relationships helps offerors trust the government acted fairly if they didn’t win the award and encourages them to compete again next time. ● Performance metrics alignment. Develop meaningful performance metrics that directly connect to mission outcomes rather than technical specifications. Effective metrics focus on user experience, business process improvement, and mission capability enhancement rather than system characteristics alone. Structure contracts to include incentives tied directly to these outcome-based metrics, rewarding contractors for exceeding targets and addressing performance shortfalls when metrics aren't met. Recognize the role of the government team to support the outcomes and partner to achieve the mission. This approach keeps both government and contractor teams focused on delivering real mission value. FC39.70 FC 39.70 Innovative solicitation approaches.

Modernizing solicitation practices make it easier for government and industry partners to communicate more clearly and understand each other more deeply. Innovative solicitation approaches like challenge-based acquisitions, simplified pitches, and rapid feedback loops help attract tech startups and new market entrants. These methods reduce barriers, spark fresh ideas, and make it easier for emerging companies to bring cutting-edge solutions into the government space. ● Pre-proposal discovery sessions. Schedule one-on-one discovery sessions after solicitation release, but before proposal submission, to clarify requirements and answer vendor-specific questions. Conduct these sessions after an appropriate down-select process to minimize burden and focus time efficiently. These sessions allow vendors to explore their unique solution approaches while learning about agency needs. To Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Companion maintain fairness, establish clear ground rules prohibiting discussions of pricing, ensure consistent time allocations for all offerors, and document session protocols in the solicitation. These interactions result in complete proposals that better address agency Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Companion requirements and result in fewer assumptions and exceptions in proposals. ● Oral presentations. Add oral presentations to the evaluation process to assess vendor understanding, team capabilities, and solution approaches more effectively than written proposals alone. Structure these as scenario-based problem-solving exercises where the vendor might best show their approach to realistic challenges. This technique provides valuable insights into how teams think and work together while reducing proposal preparation burden and potential AI bias. ● Technical demonstrations and challenges. Request working prototypes or technical demonstrations that show vendors' actual capabilities rather than promised functionality. Establish technical challenges that all offerors address under consistent conditions, allowing side-by-side comparison of approaches and capabilities. This method reduces reliance on written claims and provides evidence of technical competence and innovation potential. However, in structuring technical demonstrations and challenges, it is important to understand the level of effort they require for industry partners, especially small businesses. Therefore, ensure the approach is appropriately structured based on the complexity, value and importance of the requirement. Regardless, ensure the evaluation criteria clearly communicate how demonstrations will influence award decisions.

FC39.70 FC 39.70 Evaluation and negotiation innovations.

Modern evaluation approaches recognize that success depends on people, capabilities, and contractual commitments more than written proposals or corporate history. These techniques help agencies identify partners with the right capabilities and motivations for project success. Examples of these or similar techniques are described in the Periodic Table of Acquisition Innovations (PTAI). ● Phased down-select processes. Consider multi-phase evaluation processes that progressively narrow the competitive field through increasingly detailed assessments. Initial phases might evaluate high-level solution approaches and team qualifications, while later phases examine technical details, pricing, and implementation plans from down-selected offerors. This approach reduces the proposal preparation burden for industry while allowing agencies to focus evaluation resources on the most promising solutions. It particularly benefits IT acquisitions where in-depth technical evaluation (for instance, of coding challenges or demonstrations) may be more resource intensive. ● Evaluate team capabilities. Assess the specific capabilities the team brings to the contract. Request demos of team problem-solving abilities through technical challenges, interviews, or scenario-based exercises. This approach recognizes that in rapidly evolving technology areas, the specific knowledge and adaptability of the team members matter. Consider how you structure the contract and incentives that maintain strong teams under contract performance. ● Look beyond contract dollars equating to experience. When evaluating a contractor’s experience, don’t simply use the size of past contracts or the length of a contract as measures for how a contractor may perform on your requirement without Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Companion understanding what you might lose out on. ● Negotiate performance commitments into the offer. During negotiations, transform vendor claims into contractual commitments with associated metrics and acceptance Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Companion criteria—turn criteria, turning them from promises into part of the contractually binding offer you accept. In today's AI-enhanced proposal environment, written claims are increasingly polished but may not reflect actual capabilities. In negotiations, test the depth of vendor understanding and willingness to stand behind their assertions. Consider implementing proof periods with defined acceptance criteria before full deployment under contract. This approach protects the government from exaggerated capabilities while giving vendors appropriate flexibility in implementation approaches.