JASMA

A government contract debriefing is the closest thing you’ll get to a professional critique of your proposal
from the people who graded it. In other words: it’s like getting your exam back with commentsexcept your
exam cost weeks of capture time, three color-team reviews, and enough caffeine to qualify as a controlled
substance.

Done right, a debriefing can help you raise your win rate, tighten compliance, sharpen pricing strategy, and
(when needed) make an informed decision about whether to pursue a bid protest. Done wrong, it becomes an awkward
meeting where everyone pretends they’re learning while secretly drafting an email titled “We totally got robbed.”

What a debriefing is (and what it definitely isn’t)

A debriefing is the agency’s explanationwithin the rulesof how it evaluated your proposal and why the award
decision came out the way it did. The goal is to provide meaningful feedback while protecting other offerors’
confidential and proprietary information.

It is not a courtroom. It is not a scoring-by-scoring comparison of your proposal
versus the winner’s. And it is not the time to attempt a dramatic monologue about how your team
has “supported the mission since 1997.” (Save that for the next proposal’s executive summary.)

Know the rules and the clock (before you do anything else)

Pre-award vs. post-award: don’t mix them up

In negotiated procurements (think FAR Part 15), there are two common debriefing moments:
pre-award (if you’re excluded from the competitive range or otherwise excluded before award) and
post-award (after the contract is awarded). The mechanics and timing differ, and that timing can
matterespecially if you might protest.

• Pre-award debriefing: typically requested within a short window after notice of exclusion.
  If you request it, the agency provides information about why you were excludedwithout revealing other offerors’
  data.
• Post-award debriefing: requested soon after award notice and focused on how your proposal was
  evaluated and the rationale for award.

What agencies usually must cover in a post-award debriefing

While formats vary (oral, written, virtual, in-person), post-award debriefings commonly address:
significant weaknesses/deficiencies (if applicable), your ratings, the awardee’s overall evaluated price/cost and
ratings (as permitted), the award decision rationale, and answers to reasonable questions about whether evaluation
procedures and applicable requirements were followed.

Translation: you should walk away knowing what mattered, how you were assessed against what mattered, and what
actually drove the selection.

Special note for DoD offerors: “enhanced debriefing” follow-up questions

For many Department of Defense procurements where a required post-award debriefing applies,
you may have a structured opportunity to submit additional written questions shortly after the debriefing.
The agency then responds in writing, and the debriefing is considered open until those responses are delivered.
This is not trivia: it can affect protest timing.

The practical takeaway: if you’re in a DoD environment, you need a plan for follow-up questions
before the debriefing even startsbecause the calendar will not stop to let you “circle back.”

Bid protest timing: why your debriefing notes may be time-sensitive

If you’re thinking about a GAO bid protest, deadlines are short and enforced strictly. In certain circumstances,
GAO regulations provide a debriefing-based timing rule that ties the protest filing deadline to the debriefing
date offered/held, rather than the moment you first “knew or should have known” the basis of protest.

This is not legal advice, but it is common-sense survival advice:
treat the debriefing window like a perishable item.
If you might protest, involve experienced counsel early so you don’t discover a deadline by missing it.

Before the debriefing: show up with a plan (not just feelings)

Step 1: Build a one-page “evaluation map”

Take the solicitation’s evaluation factors and build a simple map:
factor → subfactor → what you claimed → what evidence you provided → where it lived in the proposal.
This gives you two superpowers:

• Targeted questions (“Which aspect of our transition plan created risk?”)
• Fast triage after the meeting (“We over-claimed and under-proved in past performance.”)

Step 2: Decide your objective (learning, positioning, or protest evaluation)

Your debriefing “win condition” should be explicit. Pick one primary goal:

• Learning goal: Identify 3–5 specific changes that improve your next proposal.
• Positioning goal: Understand the agency’s true discriminators so you can target future bids.
• Protest evaluation goal: Clarify potential evaluation/procedural issues worth exploring.

You can do all three, but if you try to do all three at once without a structure, you’ll do none of them well.

Step 3: Assign roles (yes, really)

Debriefings go sideways when everyone tries to be the main character. Assign:

• Facilitator: keeps the tone professional and steers the agenda.
• Note-taker: captures exact wording (especially around weaknesses/risks).
• Technical lead: asks clarifying questions tied to requirements.
• Price lead: listens for cost/price realism, tradeoffs, and value narrative.
• Question wrangler: tracks unanswered items for follow-up questions.

Step 4: Draft your question bank the day before (not in the parking lot)

Write questions that are:
specific (about your proposal), tied to evaluation factors, and
answerable without revealing others’ secrets.
If your question requires the CO to disclose a competitor’s proprietary approach, it won’t land.

During the debriefing: ask questions that actually get useful answers

Start with the “big picture” narrative

Before you chase details, ask for the story:
“What were the key discriminators that drove the award decision?” Then listen for repeated themes like
risk, confidence, relevance, understanding of the requirement, or
management approach.

Then dig into weaknesses, deficiencies, and riskspolitely but precisely

Weakness language is where the learning lives. Try prompts like:

• “Which parts of our approach were assessed as significant weaknesses or deficiencies, and what specific
  proposal content led to that conclusion?”
• “Was the concern primarily technical feasibility, schedule realism,
  staffing, or integration?”
• “If we had added one additional piece of evidence, what would have most reduced perceived risk?”

Past performance: ask about relevance and confidence, not just ratings

Past performance isn’t just “good vs. bad.” It’s “relevant vs. not relevant” and “credible vs. not proven.”
Ask:

• “How did the evaluators define relevance for this procurement?”
• “Which of our references were considered most/least relevant, and why?”
• “Did the team have concerns about recency, similarity of scope, or performance quality?”

Technical evaluation: confirm interpretation of requirements

If you lost on technical, your job is to figure out whether you:
(1) misunderstood the requirement, (2) failed to prove you met it, or (3) met it but didn’t differentiate.
Questions that help:

• “Did our approach meet the requirement but lack differentiation, or was it evaluated as not fully meeting it?”
• “Where did the evaluators see ambiguity or missing detail?”
• “Were there compliance issues (missing forms, page limits, required attachments) that affected evaluation?”

Price and value: ask about tradeoffs and realism (where applicable)

Not all procurements include cost realism or price realism, but many involve a best-value tradeoff narrative.
Ask:

• “What value elements justified the award decision at the chosen evaluated price?”
• “Were any aspects of our pricing viewed as unrealistic, risky, or unsupported?”
• “Did the government view our staffing mix or labor categories as aligned to the PWS/SOW demands?”

Process and fairness: ask “did you follow the playbook?” (without accusing)

There’s a smart way to ask whether evaluation procedures and requirements were followed without sounding like
you’re trying to cross-examine the contracting officer:

• “Can you confirm the evaluation followed the solicitation’s stated factors and subfactors?”
• “Were clarifications or discussions conducted, and if so, how were they handled within the process?”
• “Were any material proposal revisions requested, and did that affect how proposals were evaluated?”

After the debriefing: turn feedback into wins (and protect your options)

Within 24 hours: run an internal “hotwash”

Gather your capture, proposal, technical, and pricing leads and sort what you learned into three buckets:

1. Compliance fixes: submission/checklist issues, missing proofs, unclear mapping to requirements.
2. Competitiveness upgrades: differentiators, stronger evidence, better risk reduction, clearer staffing logic.
3. Process concerns: items that may warrant deeper review with counsel (if you’re considering protest).

If you can submit follow-up questions, do it strategically

Follow-up questions are not “bonus trivia.” Use them to:
clarify ambiguity, confirm what exactly drove the weakness, and pin down whether an evaluator misread something.
Keep questions short, anchored to evaluation factors, and easy to answer without competitor disclosure.

Good follow-up question template:

Context (what you heard) + pinpoint (what you need clarified) + why
(risk/requirement alignment).

Update your capture and proposal system (so this loss pays rent)

Debriefings are only valuable if they change future behavior. Feed your debriefing notes into:

• Proposal templates: compliance matrix, proof points, staffing tables, risk mitigations.
• Past performance library: tag projects by relevance dimensions (scope, customer, complexity, size).
• Pricing playbook: labor mix logic, basis-of-estimate discipline, narrative that explains value.
• Color team checklists: add “prove it” questions, not just “say it better” comments.

If a protest is on the table, get organized fast

A debriefing can raise questions about evaluation consistency, unequal treatment, or adherence to stated criteria.
If you’re considering a GAO protest (or another forum), talk to qualified counsel early to evaluate facts and
timing. Even if you decide not to protest, you’ll at least make that decision with real informationrather than
with a group chat full of hot takes.

Common debriefing mistakes (a.k.a. how to waste free feedback)

• Missing the request window or submitting a vague request that delays scheduling.
• Arguing instead of learning (“But we’re amazing!” is not a question.)
• Asking competitor-comparison questions the agency can’t answer.
• Not tying questions to evaluation factors (you’ll get generic answers).
• Failing to document exact language used for weaknesses, risks, and rationale.
• Waiting too long to consider next steps if protest timing could matter.
• Treating the debriefing as a consolation prize instead of a strategy tool.

Debriefing playbook: sample questions that get real value

Technical / management

• “What were the top two discriminators between proposals?”
• “Which specific portions of our approach were evaluated as higher risk, and why?”
• “Did we meet requirements but fail to differentiate, or did evaluators view our approach as not fully responsive?”
• “Where did we lack detail or proof compared to what evaluators expected?”

Past performance

• “How did you define ‘relevant’ past performance for this procurement?”
• “Which references were most relevant and which were least, and what drove that assessment?”
• “Was confidence affected by recency, scope similarity, or performance issues?”

Price / value

• “What value justified the best-value decision at the selected evaluated price?”
• “Were any parts of our price or staffing viewed as unrealistic or risky?”
• “What pricing narrative elements would have better supported our proposed approach?”

Process

• “Can you confirm evaluation followed the stated factors and subfactors?”
• “Were there compliance issues that affected our evaluation (forms, page limits, required attachments)?”
• “Did evaluators identify any internal inconsistencies in our proposal?”

Conclusion: make the debriefing part of your win strategy

The best government contractors treat debriefings as a repeatable business process, not an emotional event.
They request debriefings promptly, arrive with targeted questions, document what matters, and convert feedback
into real improvements. They also understand timingespecially for DoD enhanced debriefings and potential GAO
protest considerationsso they can make smart, calm decisions instead of rushed ones.

Think of a debriefing like a gym mirror: it’s not always flattering, but it’s incredibly useful if you’re trying
to get stronger. Show up, pay attention, do the workand let every loss fund your next win.

Experiences from the field: what contractors learn the hard way (so you don’t have to)

Over time, contractors tend to collect “debriefing lessons” the way capture managers collect conference lanyards:
accidentally, repeatedly, and with mild resentment. Here are a few real-world patterns that show up again and
againshared in a general, anonymized wayalong with what successful teams do differently next time.

Experience #1: The hidden compliance tripwire

One team left a debriefing stunned because the feedback sounded almost… small. The evaluators liked the technical
approach, found the staffing reasonable, and agreed the past performance was relevant. Then came the kicker:
the proposal included a required attachment, but it was incomplete, and the agency treated it as a compliance
flaw that cascaded into risk. Nobody on the proposal team remembered the attachment being a big deal. It was
“just admin.” The debriefing made it clear: the agency didn’t see it as admin; it saw it as proof of readiness.
The fix wasn’t heroic writingit was a stronger compliance gate.

What top teams do: they build a submission checklist that’s treated like a launch checklist. Every required form,
attachment, and representation is verified by a named owner, with a final “compliance read” that is separate from
the narrative review. If the debriefing reveals a compliance issue, the corrective action is immediate and
proceduralbecause the fastest way to lose a great proposal is to fail a small requirement.

Experience #2: Past performance was good… but not the right kind of good

Another contractor heard the dreaded phrase: “Your past performance was strong, but less relevant.” That’s a
painful sentence because it sounds like a compliment wrapped around a rejection. The debriefing clarified that
the customer cared less about the contractor’s general capability and more about a specific operating context:
same mission environment, same security constraints, same pace of delivery. The contractor had done excellent work,
just not enough of it in the precise scenario the agency prioritized.

What top teams do: they tag projects in a past performance library by relevance dimensions (customer type, size,
complexity, environment, compliance demands). Then they tailor references to the procurement’s “relevance profile.”
If they don’t have enough directly relevant work, they use the debriefing as a capture signal: partner smarter,
hire SMEs with credible resumes, and position for a different slice of the market until the portfolio matches.

Experience #3: The tradeoff decision wasn’t “you were expensive”it was “you didn’t justify value”

Teams often assume they lost on price when they hear the awardee had a lower evaluated cost. But debriefings
frequently reveal something more nuanced: the evaluators weren’t punishing a higher price; they were struggling to
see why the higher price mattered. In one case, the proposal included premium tooling, more senior labor, and
additional quality controlsgood ideasbut the narrative didn’t connect those choices to measurable outcomes the
agency cared about (reduced downtime, faster response times, fewer defects, lower transition risk).

What top teams do: they treat the price narrative like a value argument, not a receipt. They explain why staffing
mix supports performance, how tools reduce risk, and what outcomes the government should expect. When the debriefing
reveals a “value explanation” gap, the corrective action is not always lowering price; sometimes it’s showing your
mathclearly and credibly.

Experience #4: The follow-up question that changed the next capture

In a DoD environment with enhanced debriefing procedures, one company submitted tight follow-up questions focused
on a single weakness: evaluators said the transition plan lacked detail for a particular system handoff.
The written response clarified the government’s expectation: they wanted evidence of prior transitions of that
specific system type and a day-by-day schedule for the first two weeks. That one answer reshaped the company’s
future transition template, informed staffing assumptions, and improved their next proposalon a different
procurementenough to flip the outcome.

The lesson: debriefings are not just about the bid you lost. They’re about the next five you haven’t written yet.
When you treat debriefing feedback as reusable intelligencecaptured cleanly, stored centrally, and fed back into
processyou stop “starting over” on every proposal. And that’s how debriefings quietly turn into revenue.