crs_reports: R48980

Congressional Research Service reports with summaries, authors, and topic classifications.

This data as json

id title publish_date update_date status content_type authors topics summary pdf_url html_url
R48980 Noncompetitive Federal Contract Awards: Other than Full and Open Competition 2026-06-10T04:00:00Z 2026-06-12T17:38:06Z Active Reports Dominick A. Fiorentino, David H. Carpenter   In the context of federal procurement, Congress has long been interested in the view that increased competition among potential vendors could result in (1) lower prices, (2) higher quality goods and services, (3) increased innovation, and (4) greater public trust in government. The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984 (CICA), as amended, forms the current framework for competition in federal procurement. CICA requires that executive agencies “obtain full and open competition through the use of competitive procedures” for the procurement of all property and services unless expressly authorized by statute (10 U.S.C. §3201(a), 41 U.S.C. §3301(a)). Under CICA, “full and open competition” results when “all responsible sources are permitted to submit sealed bids or competitive proposals” (41 U.S.C. §107). Procurement contracts are subject to CICA’s full-and-open-competition requirement unless a separate statute expressly authorizes the use of different procedures or a statutory exception applies. Non-procurement contracts, such as those resulting from agencies’ use of other transaction authority (OTA), are not subject to CICA (see, e.g., 51 U.S.C. §20113). Contracts awarded using simplified acquisition procedures; contract modifications that are within the scope of the original contract award; and orders placed under requirements, definite quantity, indefinite quantity, task order, and delivery order contracts are also not subject to the full-and-open-competition requirement (FAR §6001). Some competitions in which only certain contractors can compete still meet CICA’s requirement for full and open competition because CICA provides for “full and open competition after exclusion of sources.” This occurs in two contexts: agencies’ “dual sourcing” initiatives and set-asides for small businesses (10 U.S.C. §3203(a)-(b), 41 U.S.C. §3303(a)-(b)). Although CICA establishes full and open competition as the default in federal procurement, it also provides seven exceptions that agencies may invoke. These exceptions generally cover situations where either competition is infeasible or the federal government prioritizes other objectives over full and open competition. These statutory exceptions are (1) only one responsible source; (2) unusual and compelling urgency; (3) industrial mobilization, engineering, developmental or research capability, or expert services; (4) international agreement; (5) authorized or required by statute; (6) national security; and (7) the public interest (10 U.S.C. §3204(a), 41 U.S.C. §3304(a)). Although agencies have discretion to use noncompetitive procedures in certain circumstances, CICA requires that agencies justify their actions in writing. Contracting officers are required to provide justifications of, and obtain approvals for, most noncompetitive procurements conducted in reliance on CICA exceptions (10 U.S.C. §3204(e), 41 U.S.C. §3304(e)). Vendors excluded from bidding on federal contracts because of an agency’s actions to limit competition may challenge via the bid-protest process the agency’s method of, or rationale for, making a noncompetitive contract award (28 U.S.C. §1491, 31 U.S.C. §§3551-3557). Article I of the Constitution provides Congress the authority to appropriate funds and conduct oversight over government contracting practices. Thus, Congress has often sought to encourage cost-effective and efficient contracting mechanisms to help the government acquire high-quality goods and services that serve taxpayers’ interests. As part of its oversight and legislative functions, Congress may consider (1) the scope of agency discretion in using CICA exceptions, (2) the frequency of agency use of bridge contracts, and (3) changes made by the second Trump Administration’s “Revolutionary FAR Overhaul” (https://www.acquisition.gov/far-overhaul/). https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/R/PDF/R48980/R48980.2.pdf https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/R/HTML/R48980.html

Links from other tables