Request for Proposal
Annual Financial Statement Audit
FYs 20XX, 20XX, etc.
Name of your Agency
For x (x) Reporting Entity(ies)
SELECTION CRITERIA/METHOD OF AWARD
The offeror will be selected based on a best value decision.
This means that the offeror’s past performance and relevant experience, technical approach, and staff qualifications
are most significant than cost. The following provides
information on the factors and how they are weighted:
Selection Criteria/Method of Award
Factor One (xx%)
PAST PERFORMANCE AND RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
Limit to xx (xx) pages in total
Offerors will be evaluated based on their past performance
and experience performing Federal Government financial
statement audits for the past x(x) years. The offeror
should provide the name(s) of the audited entity and the
FY(s) audited and explain any complicated or unique
accounting and auditing issues associated with these audits.
Along with discussing the specific issues associated with
these audits, the offerors must also explain their audit
experience in the following areas which are considered
essential to this task order (in order of importance):
? This section should contain the areas pertinent to
your agency and should be listed in the order of
importance to your agency. Examples follow.
? Consolidated financial statements of an Executive
Department or Federal agency with a
decentralized/centralized bureau/component structure,
or, financial statements of a large, complex Federal
? Test of Information Systems (IT) Control Environment
(including reviews of general and application controls
and penetration testing).
? Federal Grant Accounting.
? Actuarial Accounting.
? Revolving Funds or Working Capital Funds.
? Performance and Accountability Reports (or
? Agreed-Upon Procedures for xxx.
? Audits of Independent Service Organizations as
required by SAS No. 70.
Offerors will provide information on their past performance
or efforts on contracts they have performed on the last xx
years that is similar to this effort.
Failure to address all of these areas will result in a
reduction of your Technical Proposal’s score.
For each of the FY 20XX audits discussed in the offeror’s
proposals, the name address, telephone number, and fax
number of COTRS must also be provided. The COTRS may be
contacted by the Technical Evaluation Panel and asked the
How would you evaluate the contractor’s overall
performance for audits performed for FY 20XX,
including quality of service, quality of staff, and
timeliness of performance?
Factor Two (xx%)
SPECIFIC TECHNICAL APPROACH
Limit to xx (xx) pages in total
Under this factor, offerors will be evaluated based on:
1. Their overall and specific technical approach,
along with their understanding of the specific
issues and risks relating to each of the separate
tasks. Offerors are not expected and should not
completely reiterate or delineate the joint
GAO/PCIE FAM. Rather, offerors are expected to
present their overall understanding of the FAM,
demonstrate their understanding of the specific
issues and risks associated with each task, and
present their audit approach and methodology for
the material account balances for the reporting
entity. In addition, the offerors must discuss
how their technical approach will be tailored to
meet the accelerated due dates.
Offerors should also demonstrate their
understanding of current accounting and auditing
issues (i.e., pending changes to FASAB accounting
and GAO auditing standards, and OMB guidance)
that may affect the audit of the reporting entity.
2. Their proposed estimates of time (by labor
category and labor hours) to complete the four
phases of the audit (planning, internal control,
testing, and reporting). (Note: the labor hours
must be the same as provided in the separate cost
Note: If your SOW has separate tasks, please add the
Offerors must separately address each task (Task X through
Task X) of this task order.
Factor Three xx (xx%)
QUALIFICATIONS OF STAFF
Limit to xx (xx) pages in total of which no more than x (x)
may be used for an overall narrative discussion
Offerors will be evaluated on their ability to immediately provide staff that are experienced, qualified, and trained and who have the appropriate levels of security clearances (if necessary). Consideration should be given to providing staff that has demonstrated experience in performing complex audits and in the areas considered essential for this task order (see Factor One (1)).
(Choose from one or both of the following per your agency requirements.)
(Top Secret Option)
All personnel assigned to the audit of the Consolidated Department of XXX reporting entity must have a top-secret clearance or an interim top-secret clearance by the time they start work on the audit. And, at a minimum, key personnel (partner, senior manager, manager, and senior) must have a top-secret clearance or an interim top-secret clearance at the time of the proposal.
All personnel assigned to the audit of the Consolidated Department of XXX reporting entity must have a NACI (National Agency Check and Inquires), a NACI in process, or a current clearance issued by a Federal government agency at the time they start work on the audit. And, at a minimum, key personnel (partner, senior manager, manager, and senior) must have a NACI at the time of proposal.
For the reporting entity to be audited under this task order, please provide a schedule of all staff that would in fact be assigned to the audit that includes the information listed below:
2. Labor Category.
3. Whether the person is a key personnel on this task.
4. Professional Certifications (CPA, CGFM, CISA, etc.)
and advanced degrees.
5. Total years of Federal government financial statement
6. Total years employed by the offeror.
7. Current security clearance level, date of clearance,
and agency granting clearance.
8. Years and brief description of Federal government
financial statement audit experience in the last three
(3) years in the areas considered essential to this
task order (see Factor One (1)).
Individual resumes will not be accepted in lieu of this
schedule. However, for each individual proposed, a one (1)
page summary of additional relevant experience may be
submitted for consideration.
Factor Four (0%)
INDEPEDENCE AND QUALITY CONTROL
The contractor must provide information regarding its
independence with respect to the reporting entity/reporting
entities and its quality control procedures. Each of the
following items must be addressed, including negative
? A statement that the firm is independent with respect
to the reporting entity/each of the reporting entities. ? All work, including non-audit services, with the
reporting entity/each of the reporting entities in the
past two (2) years (including the type of services
provided, the period covered, and the results). In
addition, the contractor shall briefly describe all
services for which the contractor is planning to
perform or has proposed to perform for the reporting
entity/these reporting entities.
? Any lawsuits with the reporting entity/these reporting
? Any relationships with the reporting entity/these
reporting entities that could impair independence. ? Explanation of the firm’s current internal quality
control system, including such items as workpaper
review procedures, staff independence requirements,
and continuing professional education requirements. ? A copy of the contractor’s most recent peer review
report, related letter of comments, and the
contractor’s response to those comments. If the peer
review report is more than one (1) year old, the
contractor must also discuss the results of the
contractor’s most recent internal inspection program
or equivalent. This discussion shall include the date
of the report, the period of the report, and the
Factor Five (0%)
The factors for past performance and relevant experience,
technical approach, and staff qualifications are
significantly more important than cost/price. While
cost/price is a substantial factor and will be considered
in the evaluation and selection for award, cost/price is
less important than the other factors. Cost/price will not
be point scored or otherwise rated. Cost/price will be
considered and evaluated in determining the overall best
value and interest to the Government.
The Offeror's Technical and Cost Proposal must demonstrate a clear understanding of the nature and scope of the work required. Failure to provide a realistic, reasonable and complete Technical and Cost Proposal may reflect a lack of understanding of the Statement of Work requirements and may result in a determination that the Offeror is technically unacceptable. Generally speaking, "generic" information may score lower than information "well tailored" to the selection factors.