Significant Weakness is defined as a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. The term “risk” is defined as the potential for unsuccessful contract performance. The consideration of “risk” assesses the degree to which an Offeror’s proposed approach to achieving the technical factor may involve risk of disruption to schedule, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. The term “deficiency” is defined as a material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.
Significant Weakness means a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.
Significant Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.
Examples of Significant Weakness in a sentence
Significant Weakness - A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful award performance.
Significant Weakness in the proposal is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.
Significant Weakness: A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.
A Minor Weakness has a slight negative influence on the Proposer’s ability to meet the Project Goals while a Significant Weakness has a considerable negative influence on the Proposer’s ability to meet the Project Goals.
Significant Weakness is a flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.
More Definitions of Significant Weakness
Significant Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. Strength: an aspect of an Offeror’s proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance. Past Performance: Relates to how well an Offeror has performed; e.g., the quality of work accomplished, schedule compliance, cost control, and customer satisfaction. Relevancy: As it pertains to past performance information, is a measure of the extent of similarity between the service/support effort, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and subcontract/teaming or other comparable attributes of past performant examples and the source solicitation requirement; and a measure of the likelihood that the past performance is an indicator of future performance. Offeror: Except where the context in which the term is used clearly indicates otherwise, “Offeror” refers to the contractor submitting the proposal, and to joint venture members, teaming/partnering entities, and major subcontractors (defined as subcontractors performing 10% or more of the work).
Significant Weakness. A flaw in the response or proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. Denoted with an (S).
Significant Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. Deficiency – A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. Relevancy- as it pertains to past performance information, is a measure of the extent of similarity between the service/support effort, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and subcontract/teaming or other comparable attributes of past performance examples and the source solicitation requirements; and a measure of the likelihood that the past performance is an indicator of future performance. Confidence- a determination of how well the contractor performed on previous contracts. The past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the offeror performed those past contracts. The more relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance. Low Risk – Has little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties. Moderate Risk- Can potentially cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome difficulties. High Risk-Is likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Is unlikely to overcome any difficulties, even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring. Table 1: Combined Technical/Risk Ratings for Phases I (CLIN 0001 Engineering and design) and II (CLIN 0002 LRIP) Rating Description Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low. Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low. Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will...
Significant Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. Deficiency: material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. Sub-factor ratings are not rolled-up into an overall color rating for the mission capability factor. Each sub-factor will individually contribute to the overall assessment of the Offeror’s understanding of the complexity and scope of the program and the feasibility of the Offeror’s approach to satisfy the government’s objective.
Significant Weakness. A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. (FAR 15.001) Strengths: An aspect of an Offeror’s proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.
Significant Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. Deficiency – A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. Relevancy - As it pertains to past performance information, is a measure of the extent of similarity between the service/support effort, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and subcontract/teaming or other comparable attributes of past performance examples and the source solicitation requirements; and a measure of the likelihood that the past performance is an indicator of future performance. Confidence - A determination of how well the contractor performed on previous contracts. The past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the Offeror performed those past contracts. The more relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance.
Significant Weakness in the proposal is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. The definitions for Strength and Significant Strength are not in the FAR, however, the following definitions will be used: Strength: An aspect of the proposal that increases the probability of successful contract performance.