FAR 9.103—Policy.
Plain-English Summary
FAR 9.103 states the core policy that the Government may buy only from responsible prospective contractors and may award only after the contracting officer makes an affirmative responsibility determination. It explains that responsibility is not presumed from a low price or a technically acceptable offer alone; the contractor must affirmatively demonstrate that it can perform, and if the record does not clearly show responsibility, the contracting officer must find the offeror nonresponsible. The section also ties responsibility determinations to special procedures for small businesses under the Certificate of Competency program in FAR subpart 19.6, and to SBA Section 8(a) procedures in FAR subpart 19.8 when applicable. Finally, it warns against false economy: the lowest evaluated price may not be the best value if it leads to default, delays, or extra administrative and contractual costs. In practice, this section is the policy foundation for preaward responsibility reviews, documentation of the contracting officer’s judgment, and coordination with SBA when small business concerns are involved.
Key Rules
Award only to responsible contractors
The Government must make purchases from, and award contracts to, responsible prospective contractors only. Responsibility is a threshold requirement before award, not a post-award performance issue.
Affirmative determination required
A contracting officer may not award unless they affirmatively determine the prospective contractor is responsible. If the available information does not clearly support responsibility, the contracting officer must find the contractor nonresponsible.
Small business procedures apply
When the prospective contractor is a small business concern, the contracting officer must follow FAR subpart 19.6 on Certificates of Competency and responsibility determinations. If the acquisition involves Section 8(a), the contracting officer must also follow FAR subpart 19.8.
Lowest price is not enough
The Government should seek low prices, but the lowest evaluated price alone does not justify award if responsibility is lacking. A low offer can be a false economy if it results in default, late delivery, or added administrative costs.
Responsibility includes subcontractors when needed
A prospective contractor must affirmatively demonstrate responsibility, and that showing may need to include the responsibility of proposed subcontractors. The contracting officer may consider whether the contractor’s proposed team can actually perform the work.
Responsibilities
Contracting Officer
Make an affirmative responsibility determination before award; document the basis for the decision; find the offeror nonresponsible when the record does not clearly show responsibility; apply the special procedures in FAR subpart 19.6 for small businesses and subpart 19.8 for 8(a) acquisitions when applicable; consider whether proposed subcontractors affect the contractor’s ability to perform.
Prospective Contractor
Affirmatively demonstrate responsibility by showing it has the capability, integrity, and resources needed to perform; provide information supporting responsibility when requested; address the responsibility of proposed subcontractors if their performance is material to contract performance.
Small Business Concern
If found nonresponsible, may be entitled to the Certificate of Competency process under FAR subpart 19.6, which gives SBA a role in reviewing responsibility for small business offerors.
SBA
When the small business responsibility procedures apply, review and act under the Certificate of Competency framework; when Section 8(a) applies, participate under the procedures in FAR subpart 19.8.
Agency
Support contracting officers with accurate preaward information, past performance data, financial or technical assessments, and any other evidence needed to make a sound responsibility determination.
Practical Implications
A low bid or low evaluated price does not guarantee award; the contractor still has to pass the responsibility review.
Contracting officers should not award when the record is thin or ambiguous—lack of clear evidence means nonresponsibility, not a guess in favor of award.
For small businesses, responsibility findings can trigger SBA involvement, so contracting officers must know when the Certificate of Competency process applies.
Responsibility reviews often hinge on practical performance risk: financial resources, technical capability, integrity, delivery history, and the ability of key subcontractors to perform.
Poor documentation is a common pitfall; if the responsibility determination is challenged, the file should show the facts and reasoning behind the decision.
Official Regulatory Text
(a) Purchases shall be made from, and contracts shall be awarded to, responsible prospective contractors only. (b) No purchase or award shall be made unless the contracting officer makes an affirmative determination of responsibility. In the absence of information clearly indicating that the prospective contractor is responsible, the contracting officer shall make a determination of nonresponsibility. If the prospective contractor is a small business concern, the contracting officer shall comply with subpart 19.6 , Certificates of Competency and Determinations of Responsibility. (If Section 8(a) of the Small Business Act ( 15 U.S.C. 637 ) applies, see subpart 19.8 .) (c) The award of a contract to a supplier based on lowest evaluated price alone can be false economy if there is subsequent default, late deliveries, or other unsatisfactory performance resulting in additional contractual or administrative costs. While it is important that Government purchases be made at the lowest price, this does not require an award to a supplier solely because that supplier submits the lowest offer. A prospective contractor must affirmatively demonstrate its responsibility, including, when necessary, the responsibility of its proposed subcontractors.