Convay Blog

Government Video Conferencing Procurement Guide: Complete Acquisition Strategy

Introduction

The Procurement Director of a federal agency sat across from me, visibly frustrated. “We just completed an 18-month procurement for video conferencing,” she said. “We followed all the rules. Conducted a thorough RFP. Evaluated proposals rigorously. Selected what we thought was the best vendor.”

“Six months after deployment, we discovered the selected platform can’t actually do what we need. The vendor promised FISMA compliance—turns out they meant ‘working toward’ compliance, not actually certified. They said they integrated with Active Directory—technically true, but requires expensive custom development they didn’t mention. They claimed 99.9% uptime—but that excludes ‘scheduled maintenance’ which happens to be during our business hours.”

“We’re now stuck with a three-year contract for a system that doesn’t meet our needs. Starting over would mean admitting failure and wasting taxpayer money. We’re living with a suboptimal solution because our procurement process, while following all the rules, didn’t ask the right questions.”

This scenario is heartbreakingly common in government video conferencing procurement.

The problem isn’t that agencies fail to follow procurement regulations—they’re meticulous about compliance. The problem is that procurement processes designed for purchasing tangible goods don’t naturally fit complex technology systems. Without domain-specific knowledge, agencies write RFPs that miss critical requirements, evaluate proposals that sound good but lack substance, and select vendors based on incomplete understanding.

The cost of procurement mistakes is enormous:

Wasted taxpayer money on systems that don’t work
Years locked into unsuitable contracts
Mission capabilities compromised
Staff productivity lost
Security vulnerabilities introduced
Public trust damaged

This guide provides government procurement professionals with comprehensive knowledge for acquiring video conferencing successfully. You’ll learn government contracting vehicles, how to develop effective RFPs, evaluation criteria that identify truly qualified vendors, security assessment requirements, and proven strategies that lead to successful acquisitions.

Whether you’re a contracting officer, program manager, CIO, or IT professional supporting procurement—this guide helps you acquire video conferencing that actually serves your agency’s needs.

Let’s start with understanding the government procurement landscape.

Government Procurement Process Overview

Government procurement follows structured processes ensuring fairness, competition, and compliance with regulations.

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)

Foundation of Federal Procurement:

FAR establishes uniform policies and procedures for federal executive agencies.

Key Principles:

Full and Open Competition:

Best Value:

Transparency:

Fair Treatment:

Procurement Thresholds

Micro-Purchase ($10,000 or less):

Simplified Acquisition ($10,000-$250,000):

Full and Open Competition (over $250,000):

Procurement Timeline

Typical timeline for video conferencing procurement (over $250,000):

PhaseDurationActivities
Requirements Definition1-2 monthsGather requirements, stakeholder input, market research
Acquisition Planning1-2 monthsStrategy, funding, approval, acquisition plan
Solicitation Development1-2 monthsDraft RFP, technical review, legal review, approval
Solicitation Period1-2 monthsPublish RFP, questions and answers, proposal submission
Evaluation1-3 monthsTechnical evaluation, cost analysis, discussions
Award1-2 monthsSelection, negotiations, contract award, protests
Total6-13 monthsFrom start to contract award

Add deployment time: 2-6 months

Total time from decision to operational: 8-19 months

State and Local Procurement

Variations from Federal:

States and localities follow own procurement codes but principles similar.

Common Differences:

GSA Schedule 70 and MAS

GSA Schedules are pre-negotiated government-wide contracts simplifying federal procurement.

Multiple Award Schedule (MAS)

What It Is:

GSA Multiple Award Schedule consolidates 24 separate schedules (including former Schedule 70) into single program.

Benefits:

Pre-Negotiated Terms:

Pre-Vetted Vendors:

Compliance Simplified:

Using GSA MAS for Video Conferencing

Relevant Special Item Numbers (SINs):

54151S – Information Technology Professional Services

54151 – Integrated Consulting Services

Software (various SINs):

IT Equipment:

GSA Advantages and Limitations

Advantages:

Speed:

Reduced Risk:

Small Business:

Limitations:

Limited Negotiation:

Not All Vendors:

Still Requires Work:

GSA eBuy

RFQ Tool for GSA Schedule:

eBuy allows posting requirements to GSA Schedule contractors.

Process:

  1. Post requirement on eBuy
  2. GSA contractors respond with quotes
  3. Evaluate quotes
  4. Select vendor and place order
  5. Faster than traditional RFP

Best for:

Other Contract Vehicles

Beyond GSA, multiple contract vehicles support video conferencing acquisition.

SEWP (NASA)

NASA Solutions for Enterprise-Wide Procurement:

Government-wide acquisition contract (GWAC) for IT products and services.

Characteristics:

Video Conferencing Use:

Benefits:

NITAAC CIO-SP3/CIO-SP4

NIH Information Technology Acquisition and Assessment Center:

GWACs for IT services and solutions.

CIO-SP3 / CIO-SP4:

Video Conferencing Application:

Department of Defense Contracts

DISA SETI / ITES

Strategic Enterprise Technology & Innovation (SETI):

Video Conferencing Use:

State and Regional Contracts

State IT Contracts:

Many states have master contracts for IT products and services.

Examples:

Benefits:

Cooperative Purchasing

Piggybacking on Other Agency Contracts:

Some contracts allow other agencies to use them.

Requirements:

Benefits:

Risks:

RFP Development for Video Conferencing

Well-crafted RFPs are foundation of successful procurement.

Requirements Gathering

Stakeholder Engagement:

Involve all stakeholders in requirements definition.

Key Stakeholders:

Requirements Categories:

Functional Requirements:

Non-Functional Requirements:

Operational Requirements:

Business Requirements:

Statement of Work Development

SOW Structure:

1. Background and Objectives

2. Scope

3. Technical Requirements

4. Deliverables

5. Performance Standards

6. Project Management

7. Acceptance Criteria

Instructions to Offerors

Clear Proposal Requirements:

Proposal Format:

Content Requirements:

Technical Proposal:

Management Proposal:

Cost Proposal:

Submission Instructions:

Evaluation Criteria and Scoring

Clear evaluation criteria ensure objective, defensible vendor selection.

Evaluation Factors

Typical Evaluation Structure:

Factor 1: Technical Approach (40-50% weight)

Factor 2: Management Approach (20-30% weight)

Factor 3: Past Performance (15-25% weight)

Factor 4: Cost (20-30% weight)

Small Business Participation (may add points):

Scoring Methodology

Adjectival Rating System:

Exceptional (5 points):

Good (4 points):

Acceptable (3 points):

Marginal (2 points):

Unacceptable (1 point):

Numerical Score Calculation:

Factor Score × Factor Weight = Weighted Score
Sum all weighted scores = Total Score

Example:

Best Value Determination

Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA):

When requirements are clearly defined and price is primary concern.

Process:

Appropriate when:

Best Value Tradeoff:

When technical factors important beyond minimum requirements.

Process:

Appropriate when:

Technical Evaluation

Technical evaluation requires subject matter expertise.

Technical Evaluation Team

Composition:

IT Technical Expert:

Security Specialist:

Functional Expert:

Contracting Officer:

Subject Matter Expert (SME):

Technical Evaluation Criteria

System Architecture (20-25%):

Evaluate proposed architecture.

Assessment:

Questions:

Functional Requirements (25-30%):

Evaluate meeting stated requirements.

Assessment:

Scoring:

Implementation Approach (20-25%):

Evaluate proposed implementation plan.

Assessment:

Red Flags:

Security and Compliance (15-20%):

Evaluate security approach.

Assessment:

Evidence:

Support and Maintenance (10-15%):

Evaluate ongoing support.

Assessment:

Technical Demonstrations

Live Demos:

Request live demonstrations of proposed solution.

Demo Scenarios:

Basic Functionality:

Integration:

Administration:

Advanced Features:

Evaluation:

Security Assessment

Security evaluation is mandatory for government systems.

Security Evaluation Criteria

Encryption (Critical):

Data in Transit:

Data at Rest:

End-to-End Encryption:

Assessment:

Access Controls (Critical):

Authentication:

Authorization:

Assessment:

Audit Logging (Critical):

Required Events:

Log Protection:

Assessment:

Compliance Assessment

FISMA Compliance:

Requirements:

Vendor Evidence:

Agency Assessment:

Other Compliance:

HIPAA (if applicable):

CJIS (law enforcement):

ITAR (defense):

Assessment:

Vendor Security Questionnaire

Standard Questions:

Organization Security:

Data Protection:

Access Management:

Network Security:

Incident Response:

Compliance:

Vendor Due Diligence

Beyond technical and security evaluation, assess vendor viability.

Financial Stability

Why It Matters:

Video conferencing is long-term relationship (3-5 years typical). Vendor must remain viable.

Assessment:

Financial Statements:

Red Flags:

D&B Report:

Past Performance

Reference Checks:

Contact existing customers.

Questions:

Specific to Government:

Performance Database:

Check government past performance databases:

Federal:

Ratings:

Corporate Stability

Acquisition Risk:

Video conferencing industry consolidating rapidly.

Questions:

Product Lifecycle:

Assessment:

Red Flags:

Personnel and Resources

Implementation Team:

Key Personnel:

Staff Augmentation:

Support Resources:

Ongoing Support:

Contract Negotiation

Even with pre-negotiated vehicles, some negotiation possible.

Negotiable Terms

Pricing:

Potential Flexibility:

Approach:

Service Level Agreements:

Key SLAs:

Negotiation:

Payment Terms:

Structures:

Negotiation:

Contract Protections

Intellectual Property:

Data Ownership:

Developed Materials:

Exit Rights:

Termination for Convenience:

Data Portability:

Transition Assistance:

Performance Guarantees:

Warranties:

Indemnification:

Liability:

Sample RFP Language

Pre-written RFP sections accelerate development.

Technical Requirements Section

Example: Authentication Requirements

“The proposed video conferencing solution shall support the following authentication methods:

3.1.1 Multi-Factor Authentication The system shall require multi-factor authentication for all users, utilizing at minimum two of the following factors:

3.1.2 PIV/CAC Integration The system shall accept Personal Identity Verification (PIV) and Common Access Card (CAC) credentials for authentication, in accordance with FIPS 201 and NIST SP 800-73.

3.1.3 Active Directory Integration The system shall integrate with Microsoft Active Directory or LDAP-compliant directory services for:

3.1.4 Single Sign-On The system shall support Single Sign-On (SSO) via SAML 2.0 or OpenID Connect protocols, enabling users to authenticate once and access the video conferencing system without additional credentials.”

Security Requirements Section

Example: Encryption Requirements

“4.2 Encryption Requirements

4.2.1 Data in Transit All data transmitted between components shall be encrypted using TLS 1.2 or higher, with support for TLS 1.3 preferred. Weak cipher suites (NULL, EXPORT, DES, RC4, MD5, SHA1) shall be disabled.

4.2.2 Data at Rest All stored data (recordings, chat logs, shared files, configuration data) shall be encrypted at rest using FIPS 140-2 validated cryptographic modules, with minimum AES-256 encryption.

4.2.3 Key Management The Contractor shall provide key management capabilities enabling the Agency to:

The Agency shall maintain exclusive control over encryption keys; Contractor personnel shall not have access to Agency encryption keys.”

Performance Requirements Section

Example: Availability and Performance

“5.1 System Availability

5.1.1 Uptime Commitment The system shall maintain 99.9% availability during business hours (Monday-Friday, 6 AM-8 PM Eastern Time, excluding federal holidays), measured monthly. Availability is defined as system accessible and functional for normal operations.

5.1.2 Scheduled Maintenance Scheduled maintenance shall occur outside business hours unless otherwise coordinated. The Contractor shall provide minimum 7 days advance notice of scheduled maintenance.

5.1.3 Performance Standards The system shall support:

5.1.4 Service Level Agreement The Contractor shall provide Service Level Agreement specifying:

Deliverables Section

Example: Documentation Deliverables

“6.3 Documentation Deliverables

The Contractor shall provide the following documentation within 30 days of system deployment:

6.3.1 System Architecture Documentation

6.3.2 Administrator Guide

6.3.3 User Guide

6.3.4 Security Documentation

All documentation shall be provided in editable format (Microsoft Word or equivalent) and PDF, and may be updated by the Agency without restriction.”

Common Procurement Mistakes

Learn from others’ mistakes to avoid repeating them.

Mistake 1: Vague Requirements

Problem:

RFP says “System shall provide high-quality video” without defining “high-quality.”

Result:

Vendors interpret differently. Selected vendor’s “high-quality” is 720p, but agency expected 1080p.

Solution:

Specific, measurable requirements: “System shall support 1080p HD video resolution at minimum 30 frames per second.”

Mistake 2: Ignoring Total Cost of Ownership

Problem:

Evaluation focused on initial licensing cost, ignored ongoing costs.

Result:

“Cheapest” vendor actually most expensive over contract life due to high support fees, expensive add-ons, annual price increases.

Solution:

Total Cost of Ownership analysis:

Mistake 3: Over-Reliance on Self-Assessment

Problem:

RFP includes requirements matrix. Vendors self-assess compliance. Agency accepts at face value.

Result:

Selected vendor claimed “full compliance” but many features require additional modules (extra cost) or custom development (not mentioned).

Solution:

Verify vendor claims:

Mistake 4: Price as Primary Factor

Problem:

LPTA procurement: any technically acceptable proposal competes on price alone. Lowest price selected.

Result:

Technically “acceptable” but barely. Vendor provides minimum, no innovation, poor quality, minimal support.

Solution:

Best value tradeoff when appropriate:

Mistake 5: Inadequate Security Evaluation

Problem:

Security evaluation limited to questionnaire. No validation.

Result:

Vendor claimed “FISMA compliant” but provided no evidence. Agency discovered post-award that vendor has no government ATOs, no FedRAMP, minimal security.

Solution:

Rigorous security assessment:

Mistake 6: Ignoring References

Problem:

Reference checks perfunctory. Called references, asked general “how’d it go?” questions.

Result:

Missed that vendor’s implementations consistently run over schedule and budget, and support is poor.

Solution:

Thorough reference checks:

Mistake 7: Unrealistic Timeline

Problem:

RFP requires implementation in 60 days. Vendors commit to meet RFP.

Result:

Implementation rushed, poor quality, inadequate testing, problems in production.

Solution:

Realistic timelines:

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Should we use GSA Schedule or conduct full and open competition?

A: Depends on requirements and urgency. GSA Schedule faster (3-6 months vs. 6-12 months) and lower risk, but may limit competition. Full and open competition more flexibility and potentially better value but longer timeline. For most agencies, GSA Schedule or other contract vehicle appropriate.

Q: How do we evaluate cloud vs. on-premise without biasing the competition?

A: Write requirements focused on outcomes (security, performance, availability) rather than deployment model. Let vendors propose best solution. Evaluate on merit against requirements. Both models can meet most requirements if properly implemented.

Q: What if lowest price proposal is technically superior?

A: Ideal outcome! Award to that vendor. Best value means best combination of technical merit and cost—when lowest price is also best technical, decision is easy.

Q: Can we require specific product or vendor?

A: Generally no (restricts competition). Exception: sole source justified (only one vendor can meet requirements, urgent need, etc.). Requires written justification and approval. Brand name or equal acceptable (specifies product but allows equivalent).

Q: How do we handle vendor protests?

A: Follow agency procedures. Typical process: vendor files protest, agency responds, GAO or agency decides. Maintain thorough documentation of evaluation to support decision. Well-documented, objective evaluation rarely overturned.

Q: Should technical evaluation team see cost proposals?

A: No, evaluate technical proposals blind to cost (prevents bias). Cost analysis separate. Combined in final best value determination.

Q: What if no proposals are acceptable?

A: Cancel solicitation, revise requirements, re-compete. Don’t award to unacceptable proposal. Better to start over than lock into unsuitable solution.

Q: How do we write evaluation criteria for best value?

A: Establish factors and weights reflecting priorities. Typical: Technical 40-50%, Management 20-25%, Past Performance 15-20%, Cost 20-30%. Document in RFP so vendors know how they’ll be evaluated.

How Convay Supports Government Procurement

Throughout this guide, I’ve provided platform-agnostic procurement guidance. Now let me explain how Convay specifically supports government acquisition.

Simplified Acquisition

Multiple Contract Vehicles

Convay is available through multiple acquisition vehicles:

GSA Multiple Award Schedule
NASA SEWP
State and regional contracts
Cooperative purchasing
Direct procurement support

Procurement-Ready Documentation

Comprehensive RFP Response Support

Convay provides documentation supporting evaluation:

Technical specifications
Security documentation
Compliance certifications (FedRAMP, StateRAMP)
Implementation methodology
Past performance references
Pricing transparency

Proven Government Experience

Extensive Government Customer Base

Convay’s government experience includes:

Federal agencies (civilian and defense)
State and local governments
Educational institutions
Verifiable references
Documented past performance

Transparent Pricing

Predictable, Fair Pricing

Convay pricing structure supports government procurement:

No per-user licensing (predictable costs)
Transparent pricing (no hidden fees)
Volume discounts
Multi-year options
Small business friendly

Conclusion: Procurement Done Right

The federal agency Procurement Director from our opening story learned from their failed acquisition. For their next video conferencing procurement, they:

Invested time in detailed requirements
Consulted technical experts
Wrote specific, measurable requirements
Conducted thorough vendor evaluations
Validated vendor claims
Checked references rigorously
Evaluated total cost of ownership
Selected based on best value, not just price

“The second procurement took longer but resulted in solution that actually works,” she told me. “The key was asking the right questions and not accepting vendors’ claims at face value. Proper procurement takes effort, but it’s worth it to get a system that serves the agency’s mission.”

Successful government video conferencing procurement requires:

Clear, specific, measurable requirements
Appropriate contract vehicle selection
Comprehensive evaluation criteria
Rigorous technical and security assessment
Thorough vendor due diligence
Focus on best value, not just lowest price
Realistic timelines and expectations

Don’t rush procurement or cut corners. Invest the time to get it right—the cost of getting it wrong is far higher than the cost of thorough evaluation.

And when you’re ready to acquire video conferencing built specifically for government—choose Convay.

Ready to start your procurement?

[Download RFP Template for Video Conferencing] | [Request Procurement Consultation] | [View Contract Vehicles] | [Schedule Vendor Demo]

Convay: Built to Serve Government

Multiple contract vehicles. Procurement-ready documentation. Proven government experience. Transparent pricing.

Developed by Synesis IT PLC | CMMI Level 3 | ISO 27001 & ISO 9001 Certified

Trusted by agencies seeking procurement success, not just compliance.

Tagged

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *