FAR 36.602-3—Evaluation board functions.
Plain-English Summary
FAR 36.602-3 explains what an architectural-engineering (A-E) evaluation board must do once a project has been publicly announced and firms have responded. It covers four core topics: reviewing current data files and public notice responses, evaluating firms using the qualification criteria in FAR 36.602-1, holding discussions with at least three of the most highly qualified firms about concepts and alternative methods of performing the work, and preparing a selection report for the agency head or other designated selection authority. The section exists to support the Brooks Act-style qualifications-based selection process, where firms are chosen based on demonstrated competence and professional qualifications rather than price. In practice, this means the board must build a documented, defensible record showing how it identified the most qualified firms and why it recommended them in order of preference. The selection authority relies on that report to make the final shortlist decision, so the board’s analysis and documentation are central to a compliant A-E procurement.
Key Rules
Review eligible firm data
The board must review current data files on firms eligible for the project and the responses received to the public notice. This ensures the board considers both standing qualifications information and project-specific expressions of interest.
Apply stated evaluation criteria
Firms must be evaluated under the criteria in FAR 36.602-1. The board cannot use ad hoc factors or price-based comparisons at this stage; it must follow the published qualification criteria.
Discuss with top firms
The board must hold discussions with at least three of the most highly qualified firms. These discussions focus on concepts and the relative utility of alternative methods for furnishing the required services, helping the board better understand each firm’s approach and capabilities.
Recommend at least three firms
The board must prepare a selection report recommending, in order of preference, at least three firms considered most highly qualified. The report must give the selection authority a clear ranked recommendation, not just a general summary.
Document the basis for selection
The report must describe the discussions and the evaluation conducted so the selection authority can review the considerations behind the recommendations. Adequate documentation is required to support transparency, accountability, and later review.
Responsibilities
Evaluation Board
Review current firm data files and public notice responses, evaluate firms using the required criteria, conduct discussions with at least three of the most highly qualified firms, and prepare a ranked selection report with supporting documentation.
Head of the Contracting Activity
Provide general direction to the evaluation board and oversee the process at the activity level.
Agency Head or Other Designated Selection Authority
Review the board’s selection report and use it to make the selection decision from among the recommended firms.
Eligible Firms
Respond to the public notice and provide current qualifications information so the board can consider them for the project.
Practical Implications
This section is the backbone of qualifications-based selection for A-E services, so the board’s documentation must be strong enough to explain why the recommended firms are the most highly qualified.
A common pitfall is treating the process like a price competition; the board should focus on qualifications, concepts, and suitability, not cost comparisons at this stage.
Another risk is failing to hold discussions with at least three firms when that many are available and highly qualified; the minimum discussion requirement is explicit.
The selection report should be detailed enough to show how the board reached its ranking, because thin or conclusory reports can undermine the selection authority’s confidence and create protest risk.
Contracting officers and board members should ensure the public notice response file and current data files are complete and up to date before evaluations begin, since incomplete records can skew the shortlist.
Official Regulatory Text
Under the general direction of the head of the contracting activity, an evaluation board shall perform the following functions: (a) Review the current data files on eligible firms and responses to a public notice concerning the particular project (see 36.603 ). (b) Evaluate the firms in accordance with the criteria in 36.602-1 . (c) Hold discussions with at least three of the most highly qualified firms regarding concepts and the relative utility of alternative methods of furnishing the required services. (d) Prepare a selection report for the agency head or other designated selection authority recommending, in order of preference, at least three firms that are considered to be the most highly qualified to perform the required services. The report shall include a description of the discussions and evaluation conducted by the board to allow the selection authority to review the considerations upon which the recommendations are based.