In This Week’s Newsletter:
- Opportunity Spotlight of the Week: DISA ISNEP
- Four To Follow: Four Interesting Pursuits
- Capture Corner: Designing Capture for Award Fee Recovery
- Pricing Insights: Why BLS.gov is a Great Resource
Opportunity Alert – DISA ISNEP
Contact Katie: katie.clatterbuck@hinzconsulting.com
Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA), Infrastructure Systems and Network Enhancement (ISNEP).
On July 14, 2026, DISA Acquisition released the Q4 FY2026 Opportunity Forecast, updating the procurement timeline to an anticipated release in Q1 FY27 and a planned award in Q4 FY27. This $400M IDIQ details work to include program and project management, seamless integration and transition management, advanced network implementation expertise, comprehensive logistics support and rapid response and flexibility to emergent operational needs. The competition type is currently unknown.
Four to Follow
- Department of the Army, Human Resources Solutions Generation VI, Recruiting, Management and Administrative Support (RMAS). The Army has need for a contractor to provide professional program support including business management, program analysis, IT support, policy analysis, and data analysis related to recruiting and retention. Specific support for this effort includes but is not limited to: contract support for data and records tracking, recruitment and retention programs, protocol activities including recognition ceremonies and public relations programs, technical writing and credentialing and qualification. This $1.52B Small Business Set-Aside Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) is set for release in August 2026 with an award timeframe for September 2027.
- Department of the Air Force, United States Space Force, Space Systems Command, Enterprise Payload Processing Management (EPPM). On July 15, 2026, the Contracting Office released a draft RFP and RFI for Enterprise Payload Processing Management, a new requirement that will centralize the Space Force’s scheduling and procurement of commercial payload-processing facilities used to prepare satellites for launch across National Security Space, civil, and commercial missions. EPPM moves this work away from the current ad hoc model, in which individual program offices and their space vehicle contractors buy processing services on their own, toward a single managed approach. Responses to the draft RFP and RFI are due August 6, 2026, and the Government projects releasing the final RFP in the first quarter of fiscal year 2027. The contract value and competition type are currently unknown.
- Department of State (DOS), Design Build Capital Projects Construction Manager Program IDIQ Contracts. DOS’s Bureau of Overseas Building Operations (OBO) has the need for a contractor to provide cost and schedule estimates during the design phase for capital projects and assume associated risks while collaborating with the owner. Contractors will also advise OBO’s Deputy Architect/Engineering team on constructability and will be responsible for the overall project coordination and control throughout the project lifecycle. This $7.5B Full and Open/Unrestricted IDIQ is scheduled for potential release in October 2026 with an award tentatively set for January 2027.
- Department of Navy, Naval Sea Systems Command, Test Operations Support Services (TOSS). The Navy has a continued need for technical services in support of the Expeditionary System Evaluation Division (ESED), Range System Engineering Department (RS40), providing operational test and evaluation support services. This $50M SDVOSB opportunity is set for release via SeaPort NxG in October 2026 with a potential award in May 2027.
Designing Capture for Award Fee Recovery
Contact Nick: nick.mccauley@hinzconsulting.com
Lots of capture teams treat award fee plans as a proposal compliance item and an execution problem. They read the plan carefully during proposal development, make sure the management approach and metrics language align, then hand it off to the program team to “manage for fee” after award.
That approach leaves significant money on the table.
In Cost-Plus-Award-Fee (CPAF) contracts, a meaningful portion of potential profit sits in the award fee pool. The teams that consistently earn high percentages are not the ones who simply execute well after award—they are the ones who treated the Award Fee Plan as a design constraint from the earliest stages of capture.
Here’s how to build award fee recovery into the capture process itself.
1. Treat the Award Fee Plan as Competitive Intelligence
As soon as a draft Award Fee Plan appears (or earlier if you can surface the customer’s thinking), dissect it the same way you would Section M.
- What are the weighted criteria (Management, Technical Performance, Cost Control, Schedule, etc.)?
- How frequent are the evaluation periods?
- Is there a base fee, or is it pure award fee?
- Are there automatic reductions or “kill criteria”?
Map these against competitors’ known strengths and weaknesses. This belongs in your competitive analysis, not just a compliance appendix.
2. Shape the Criteria While They Are Still Movable
During the draft RFP phase, customers are often still refining how they will measure success. Use white papers, one-on-ones, and industry day questions to influence the language around:
- What “excellent” actually looks like for each criterion
- How cost control will be measured
- Whether process discipline, risk management, or workforce stability will be scored under Management
The goal is not to soften the criteria—it is to ensure the final plan rewards the outcomes and behaviors you are uniquely positioned to deliver.
3. Design the Solution and Team Around the Fee Drivers
Once you understand what will actually move the needle on fee, force alignment in the solution and teaming strategy.
- If Cost Control carries heavy weight, build early visibility tools, earned value discipline, and subcontractor management processes that give the government confidence.
- If Technical Performance or Quality is heavily weighted, structure key personnel, technical approach, and risk mitigation so they clearly map to those factors.
- Avoid teaming structures that create management overhead or accountability gaps the customer is likely to penalize.
Capture should force these trade-offs early, before the proposal team inherits them under deadline pressure.
4. Build the Internal Operating Model During Capture
High award fee is rarely won by heroics after award. It is won by having the right governance, data, and culture already in place.
During capture, begin defining:
- How you will collect and present the data the Fee Determining Official will actually care about
- Who owns the narrative for each evaluation period
- How program management, contracts, and finance will stay aligned on fee strategy
These decisions should appear in the capture plan and flow into the proposal’s management approach and transition plan.
5. Keep the Capture Mindset Alive After Award
The strongest award fee performers treat each evaluation period as a mini-capture campaign. They continuously shape the customer’s perception of performance, surface risks early, and manage the narrative the same way a capture team manages win themes.
If your capture process ends at contract award, you are leaving fee on the table.
Bottom line: In CPAF work, a large part of your profit is discretionary. The teams that consistently recover high award fee percentages designed for it during capture, not the ones who tried to manage their way into it after the fact.
Why BLS.gov is a Great Resource
Contact Dr. Tom: thomas.hudgins@hinzconsulting.com
When drafting government contract proposals, pricing professionals don’t just pull labor rates or escalation percentages out of thin air. They rely heavily on data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS.gov) to ground their financial models in reality.
For a pricing proposal to be successful, it must be defensible. Pricers use BLS data for three primary reasons:
1. Establishing Objective Labor Baselines
When pricing a service or solution contract, a pricer must map corporate job titles to standardized federal labor categories. The BLS Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) program provides annual wage estimates for over 800 occupations across specific geographic locations. This allows pricers to look up the exact median, 75th, or 90th percentile hourly wages for a “Software Engineer” or “Program Manager” in a specific metropolitan area. It provides a neutral, verified baseline for direct labor costs that both the contractor and government evaluators accept as accurate.
2. Justifying Multi-Year Escalation Rates
Federal contracts often span five to ten years. To account for inflation and rising labor costs over time, pricers must apply an annual escalation rate to their future pricing periods. Instead of guessing a percentage, pricers use the BLS Employment Cost Index (ECI) or Consumer Price Index (CPI). The ECI is considered the gold standard because it tracks the actual changes in employer-paid wages and benefits quarter-over-quarter. Citing historical ECI data provides an unassailable justification for why a company is proposing a specific annual escalation (e.g., 4%).
3. Ensuring Smooth Audits and Evaluations
Under FAR Part 15, Government Contracting Officers (COs) are legally required to determine if a contractor’s proposed price is fair, reasonable, and realistic. If a pricer bases their pricing methodology on internal company assumptions, it invites intense government scrutiny and endless rounds of clarifications.
However, GSA and DoD procurement tools (like GSA’s CALC+ tool) actually pull directly from BLS wage datasets to build their own internal models. When a contractor builds their proposal using the exact same BLS data that the government uses to evaluate it, it dramatically reduces friction, speeds up the audit process, and signals to the evaluator that the bid is financially mature and compliant.
- July 30th: 2026 Air and Space Summit in McLean, VA
- August 27th: 2026 Navy Summit 27th in Falls Church, VA
- September 24th: 2026 Intel Summit in Falls Church, VA