FAR 11.801—Preaward in-use evaluation.
Plain-English Summary
FAR 11.801 addresses preaward in-use evaluation of supplies, meaning the government may evaluate offered products under comparable real-world operating conditions before award instead of relying only on paper proposals or separate laboratory testing. The section covers when such evaluations may be used, the condition that no further test plan is needed, the requirement to tell offerors in the solicitation in advance, and how the results may be used in source selection. In practice, this gives contracting activities a way to see how a product performs in an environment similar to actual use, which can be especially important for equipment, systems, or supplies whose value depends on performance in context. It also ties directly to FAR 15.305, because the results can be used to rate proposals, determine technical acceptability, or otherwise evaluate offers. The purpose is to improve the quality of award decisions by allowing the government to assess real performance while preserving fairness through advance notice to all offerors.
Key Rules
Comparable in-use evaluation allowed
Supplies may be evaluated under comparable in-use conditions before award. This means the government can observe or test the item in an environment similar to how it will actually be used, rather than relying only on specifications or controlled test conditions.
No separate test plan required
A further test plan is not required for this type of evaluation, so long as the evaluation is conducted under comparable in-use conditions and the solicitation gives offerors proper notice. This makes the process more flexible than formal testing regimes.
Advance notice in solicitation
Offerors must be advised in the solicitation that in-use evaluation may occur. This notice is essential to fairness and transparency because it tells vendors that their supplies may be judged based on performance in a real or realistic operating setting.
Results may affect source selection
The results of the evaluation may be used to rate proposals, determine technical acceptability, or otherwise evaluate offers. FAR 11.801 expressly links these results to the broader proposal evaluation framework in FAR 15.305.
Evaluation must remain comparable
The in-use conditions should be comparable, not arbitrary or misleading. The government should ensure the evaluation setting is reasonably related to the intended use of the supplies so the results are meaningful and defensible.
Responsibilities
Contracting Officer
Include clear solicitation language advising offerors that supplies may be evaluated under comparable in-use conditions. Ensure the evaluation approach is fair, documented, and consistent with the stated source selection criteria and FAR 15.305.
Technical Evaluators / End Users
Conduct or observe the in-use evaluation in a way that reflects comparable operating conditions and apply the stated evaluation criteria consistently. Document performance observations and any basis for ratings or acceptability determinations.
Offerors / Contractors
Understand from the solicitation that products may be evaluated in use and ensure proposed supplies are ready to perform under the stated or reasonably comparable conditions. Provide accurate technical information and, where applicable, support demonstrations or evaluations with representative items.
Agency / Requiring Activity
Define the intended use environment and help ensure the evaluation conditions are relevant to the agency’s actual needs. Support the contracting officer in selecting evaluation methods that produce reliable, defensible results.
Practical Implications
This section lets agencies see how a product performs in realistic conditions before award, which can be more informative than catalog descriptions or lab results alone.
The biggest pitfall is failing to tell offerors in the solicitation; without advance notice, using in-use evaluation can create fairness and protest risk.
Another common issue is using conditions that are not truly comparable to actual use, which can make the evaluation unreliable or vulnerable to challenge.
Contracting officers should make sure the evaluation method is tied to the stated technical criteria and source selection plan, so the results can be used properly under FAR 15.305.
Contractors should read solicitations carefully for any in-use evaluation language and be prepared for their product to be judged on actual performance, not just claimed capabilities.
Official Regulatory Text
Supplies may be evaluated under comparable in-use conditions without a further test plan, provided offerors are so advised in the solicitation. The results of such tests or demonstrations may be used to rate the proposal, to determine technical acceptability, or otherwise to evaluate the proposal (see 15.305 ).