Responsibility standards, SAM status, vehicle access, and accounting readiness
Terms for proving the legal entity that will submit can meet standards and stated submission gates.
1 / 3
Standards of responsibility (FAR 9.104-1)
FAR 9.104-1's general standards of responsibility cover adequate financial resources (or ability to obtain them); ability to comply with schedule considering all commitments; satisfactory performance, integrity, and ethics records; necessary organization, experience, accounting and operational controls, and technical skills (or ability to obtain them); necessary equipment and facilities (or ability to obtain them); and legal qualification and eligibility. Assign owners and remediation paths for each gap at the gate — especially financing, facilities, and schedule compression on aggressive starts. Large size and past awards do not make readiness automatic.
Watch for
Don't check only whether annual revenue exceeds contract value, treat technical acceptability as conclusive proof of responsibility, or defer every responsibility issue until after award when the already demands evidence of readiness.
2 / 3
Hard gates (SAM, vehicle, clearance)
Hard gates are non-negotiable submission requirements mapped to the actual offeror and the due date — active under FAR 4.1102 / 52.204-7 (and listed exceptions or Alternate I where they apply), vehicle or Schedule access, licenses, clearances, size status. Proceed only on written evidence or a -supported cure path. Keep a register beside the ; any red item without a timed cure is a candidate. Under basic 52.204-7, active SAM is required at submission and award unless a listed exception or the prescribed Alternate I applies. Affiliation does not transfer eligibility.
Watch for
Don't use an affiliate's SAM or contract as if it were yours, explain missing gates in an assumptions volume, treat planned approvals as present facts, or assume SAM is required only at award when the solicitation and basic require it at submission.
3 / 3
Accounting system adequacy and key personnel
For cost-reimbursement work, FAR 16.301-3 requires an adequate for determining costs applicable to the contract. Require current, entity- and system-specific evidence that costs can be identified and accumulated as required — not a six-year-old review of a different segment after ERP and rate changes. When demands named keys with commitment letters, require available, qualified people and compliant commitments before submission (see IT Objects). Treat accounting adequacy and key-person availability as bid gates when the solicitation makes them material; redesign or no-bid when they fail late.
Watch for
Don't treat compliant as a permanent brand that transfers across segments and systems. Submitting an unavailable key person and signing later is a protest risk, not a strategy. Renaming a deputy as without checking minimum qualifications or rewriting the solution leaves the proposal inconsistent.