FAR 52.214-22—Evaluation of Bids for Multiple Awards.
Plain-English Summary
FAR 52.214-22 is a solicitation provision used in sealed bidding when the Government may make multiple awards under one solicitation. It tells bidders that award decisions will not be based only on price and responsiveness, but also on the advantages and disadvantages to the Government of splitting the requirement among more than one contractor. The provision establishes a specific evaluation method: the Government assumes an administrative cost of $500 for each contract awarded and uses that assumed cost when comparing whether one award or multiple awards will produce the lowest aggregate cost. In practice, this means bidders must understand that a low bid on a single item or subset may not win if the Government’s added administrative cost for another contract outweighs the price savings. The section matters because it gives advance notice of how the Government will evaluate bids, promotes fair competition, and helps the contracting officer justify whether one award or several awards is most economical for the Government.
Key Rules
Multiple-award evaluation required
The solicitation must evaluate bids not only on price and other standard factors, but also on the benefits and drawbacks of making more than one award. This means the Government may choose a combination of bids that results in multiple contracts if that approach is more advantageous overall.
Assumed administrative cost
For evaluation purposes, the Government must assume an administrative cost of $500 for each contract awarded under the solicitation. This assumed cost is added into the comparison of single-award versus multiple-award outcomes, even if the actual administrative cost differs.
Lowest aggregate cost standard
Awards must be made to the items or combinations of items that produce the lowest aggregate cost to the Government, including the assumed administrative costs. The evaluation is therefore a total-cost comparison, not simply a lowest-unit-price comparison.
Applies to award combinations
The provision contemplates award of individual items or combinations of items, so the contracting officer must compare different possible award groupings. The winning bid structure may be one contract, several contracts, or a mix of item awards depending on which combination yields the best evaluated result.
Evaluation factor must be disclosed
Because this is a solicitation provision, bidders are put on notice before bidding that multiple-award considerations and the $500 assumed cost will be part of the evaluation. This helps ensure transparency and prevents post-bid changes to the basis of award.
Responsibilities
Contracting Officer
Include the provision when multiple awards may be made under a sealed bid solicitation, evaluate bids using the stated $500 assumed administrative cost, compare single-award and multiple-award combinations, and make award decisions based on the lowest aggregate evaluated cost to the Government.
Bidders/Contractors
Prepare bids with the understanding that the Government may split awards and will evaluate the total cost impact of multiple contracts, not just the bid price for individual items. Bidders should structure pricing strategically, knowing that a lower price on one item may not overcome the added assumed administrative cost of another award.
Agency/Requirement Owner
Determine whether the acquisition should allow for multiple awards and support the contracting officer’s evaluation approach by identifying the items or combinations of items that may be awarded separately. The agency must also be prepared to administer multiple contracts if that becomes the best evaluated outcome.
Practical Implications
Bidders cannot assume the lowest bid on each item will automatically win; the Government may prefer a bundled award if it avoids the added $500 per-contract evaluation cost.
The provision can make multiple awards less attractive unless the price savings from splitting the work exceed the assumed administrative cost.
Contracting officers need to test different award combinations carefully, especially when items can be awarded separately or together, to avoid an incorrect best-value calculation under sealed bidding rules.
A common pitfall is forgetting to include the assumed administrative cost in every relevant award scenario, which can change the apparent winner.
Contractors should watch the solicitation structure closely: if multiple awards are possible, pricing strategy may need to account for how the Government will compare combinations rather than individual line items alone.
Official Regulatory Text
As prescribed in 14.201-6 (q) , insert the following provision: Evaluation of Bids for Multiple Awards (Mar 1990) In addition to other factors, bids will be evaluated on the basis of advantages and disadvantages to the Government that might result from making more than one award (multiple awards). It is assumed, for the purpose of evaluating bids, that $500 would be the administrative cost to the Government for issuing and administering each contract awarded under this solicitation, and individual awards will be for the items or combinations of items that result in the lowest aggregate cost to the Government, including the assumed administrative costs. (End of provision)