To amend title 41, United States Code, and title 10, United States Code, to provide best value through the multiple award schedule program, and for other purposes.
Analysis under review: This bill has generated analysis that may be too generic or incomplete. Clause-level evidence remains available below.
Summary
What This Bill Does
Amends federal procurement law to give GSA Administrator discretion to award contracts based on "best value" rather than strictly "lowest overall cost" when it serves federal interests.
Who Benefits and How
Federal agencies benefit from flexibility to consider quality, capability, and other factors beyond price. Higher-quality contractors benefit from ability to compete on value rather than price alone.
Who Bears the Burden and How
Low-cost contractors who competed primarily on price may lose competitive advantage. The change could potentially increase some procurement costs if agencies choose higher-priced but higher-value options.
Key Provisions
- Amends title 41 and title 10 procurement statutes
- Gives GSA Administrator discretion to determine when best value procurement is appropriate
- Maintains lowest cost as default but allows best value alternative
Evidence Chain:
This summary is generated from the full bill text using AI analysis. Expand "Detailed Analysis" below for identified beneficiaries/burden bearers.
At a Glance
What This Bill Does
Allows GSA to use best value instead of lowest cost for federal procurement through multiple award schedules
Who Benefits
- Federal agencies
- Higher-quality contractors
- GSA
Who Bears Costs
- Low-cost focused contractors
- Federal taxpayers (potential cost increases)
Key Policy Areas
Federal Procurement, Government Contracting
Primary Purpose
Allows GSA to use best value instead of lowest cost for federal procurement through multiple award schedules
Policy Domains
Legislative Strategy
"Increase procurement flexibility to improve quality of government acquisitions"
Sponsors
Legislative Progress
Passed HouseReported by Mr. Peters, without amendment
Passed House (inferred from eh version)
Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland …
Mr. Donalds (for himself, Mr. Nehls, Mr. Higgins of Louisiana, …
Impact analysis is available but no clear stakeholder effects identified. View clause-level analysis →
Bill Structure & Actor Mappings
Who is "The Secretary" in each section?
- "the_administrator"
- → Administrator of General Services
Key Definitions
Terms defined in this bill
As described under section 15.101 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation
We use a combination of our own taxonomy and classification in addition to large language models to assess meaning and potential beneficiaries. High confidence means strong textual evidence. Always verify with the original bill text.
Learn more about our methodology