Federal acquisition policy has moved decisively toward buying results. Executive Order 14402, signed April 30, 2026, makes fixed-price contracts with performance-based considerations the default and preferred method of procurement. The FAR has long named performance-based acquisition the preferred method for acquiring services (FAR 37.102).
For a program office with a management or operations need, this raises a practical question: how do you describe the work so it can be priced as a fixed deliverable and accepted against clear standards? This guide sets out the structure.
What the FAR asks for
FAR 37.601(b) lists three elements of a performance-based contract for services:
- A performance work statement.
- Measurable performance standards, in terms of quality, timeliness, quantity, or similar, and the method of assessing performance against them.
- Performance incentives where appropriate.
The FAR also expects a quality assurance surveillance plan to be prepared alongside the work statement (FAR 46.401), so the method of checking performance is settled before award rather than after.
Building the scope
- Start from the outcome. Describe the change the program needs, such as reduced intake backlog or a governance process leadership can run, before describing any tasks.
- Define deliverables that can be accepted or rejected. Each deliverable should have a format, a due point, and acceptance criteria written in advance.
- Set measurable standards. Use quality, timeliness, and completeness measures that a reviewer can check without interpretation.
- Specify how performance will be assessed. Name the reviewer, the review window, and what happens when a deliverable does not meet the standard.
- Size the scope deliberately. Since October 1, 2025, the simplified acquisition threshold is $350,000 (Federal Register, August 27, 2025). A defined first phase often fits within it.
- Plan the handover. State what the government team must be able to run at the end, and include the documentation and training that make that possible.
An illustrative example
| Element | Illustrative content for a process improvement task |
|---|---|
| Outcome | Reduce the time from request intake to assignment for the program's support requests. |
| Deliverables | Current-state process map; findings brief with root causes; redesigned intake and routing procedure; 90-day implementation plan. |
| Standards | Each finding supported by traced examples; procedure tested with the team that will run it; plan assigns an owner to every action. |
| Assessment | Contracting officer's representative reviews each deliverable within an agreed window against the written acceptance criteria. |
| Handover | Procedure, templates, and a working session so the government team runs the process without contractor support. |
This example is illustrative. Actual scopes depend on the requirement, the contract vehicle, and the contracting officer's determinations.
A scope that cannot be accepted or rejected against written criteria is a time-and-materials engagement described in fixed-price language.
Before the scope goes to the contracting officer
- Does the first paragraph describe an outcome rather than a list of tasks?
- Can every deliverable be accepted or rejected against criteria written today?
- Are the standards measurable without a judgment call?
- Is the surveillance method named, with a reviewer and a timeline?
- Is it clear what the government team will run after the work ends?