6.1 Acquisition Planning (FAR Part 7)

6.1 Acquisition Planning (FAR Part 7)

Quick Answer: FAR Part 7 requires agencies to plan acquisitions so needs are met effectively, economically, and on time. Written plans (scaled to complexity) capture requirements, costs, milestones, risks, competition strategy, and contract-type considerations. On CON 3990V, watch for late plans, missing elements, and plans that ignore market research or default to sole source without analysis.

Pre-Award on CON 3990V begins with Plan Solicitation (FAI competency 2.1.1, about 12 questions across planning topics). Acquisition planning is not paperwork for its own sake—it is the Government’s discipline for deciding what to buy, how to buy it, when key events must occur, and who is accountable before a solicitation hits the street. If planning is weak, competition documents, evaluation schemes, and award rationales collapse under protest or audit pressure.

Purpose of acquisition planning

FAR Part 7 frames acquisition planning as the process by which the efforts of all personnel responsible for an acquisition are coordinated and integrated through a comprehensive plan for fulfilling the agency need in a timely manner and at a reasonable cost. In plain language:

Acquisition planning is team sport. The Contracting Officer is often the business integrator, but program managers, technical experts, cost estimators, and small business specialists own pieces of the plan. CON 3990V Guiding Principles already stressed team dynamics—Part 7 is where those roles show up in a formal product.

When formal / written plans are required (conceptual)

You do not need to memorize every agency dollar threshold for “written acquisition plan required” on a closed-book exam if you have not verified the current figure. What you must know conceptually:

1. Planning is always required as a process—even when a full formal written plan document is not mandated for a small, low-risk action.
2. Written plans (or agency-prescribed equivalents) are expected for more complex, higher-dollar, higher-risk acquisitions where coordination risk is real.
3. Agencies implement Part 7 with local procedures that define formats, approval levels, and when a streamlined plan or checklist is enough.
4. DoD components often layer DFARS/PGI or local guidance on plan content and review—awareness level only for CON 3990V; the FAR baseline still controls the purpose.

Exam trap: “No written plan was required, so no planning occurred.” False. The absence of a thick binder does not excuse skipping market research, competition analysis, milestone thinking, or risk discussion appropriate to the buy.

Exam trap: “We always use the same template plan and change only the title.” Template reuse without rethinking requirements, risks, and competition strategy is not compliant planning.

Contents of acquisition plans (high-yield themes)

FAR Part 7 expects plans to address the substance needed to execute the acquisition. Exact paragraph lists evolve, but CON 3990V-level themes are stable:

You will connect several of these elements later (Part 10 market research, Part 6 competition, Part 16 contract types, Part 19 small business). For Part 7, the exam cares that the plan integrates them—not that each is a separate silo.

Requirements definition linked to strategy

A recurring CON 3990V scenario: the requiring activity hands over a brand-name-only or overly restrictive specification late, and leadership wants award next month. Sound Part 7 thinking:

• Challenge whether the requirement is written to promote competition and best value.
• Prefer performance-based descriptions when they meet the need and expand the competitive field.
• Use market research (Part 10) to test commerciality and available sources before locking a sole-source narrative.
• Document tradeoffs if mission truly requires restrictive features.

Planning that starts after the specification is frozen around one vendor is planning theater—not acquisition planning.

Cost estimates and contract-type logic

Plan-level cost estimates drive:

• Procedure choice (e.g., simplified vs more formal methods as thresholds and conditions allow—details in later chapters)
• Competition strategy realism
• Contract type selection: if the requirement is well-defined and cost risk is low, fixed-price types often fit; if uncertainties dominate development or performance, cost-reimbursement or hybrid approaches may be more appropriate (Part 16 depth later)

On the exam, if a plan picks a cost-reimbursement type for a stable commercial catalog buy with adequate price competition available, something is wrong with the plan’s risk analysis—not with Part 16 alone.

Milestones and approval

Milestones exist so the team can reverse-plan:

1. Customer need / required delivery date
2. Award date required to support delivery
3. Evaluation period
4. Solicitation release and publicizing windows
5. Package completion (SOW/PWS, CDRLs, evaluation factors, clauses)
6. Acquisition plan / strategy approvals
7. Market research completion

Approvals are agency-specific, but the principle is constant: plans are reviewed at a level commensurate with risk and dollar value. Skipping required review because “we are late” is not a valid exam answer. Compress the schedule honestly, escalate, or re-scope—do not paper over missing approvals.

Early planning vs crisis planning

Scenario A — Missing plan elements. A program office submits a “plan” that lists only the requirement title and a desired award date. No cost estimate, no risk section, no competition strategy, no contract-type discussion. Correct CO response: return for completion; facilitate a planning meeting with the acquisition team; do not release a solicitation based on a hollow plan.

Scenario B — Competition strategy blank. Everything is filled except competition: the requiring activity already “knows” the incumbent is the only capable firm. Correct CO response: insist on market research documentation before accepting an other-than-full-and-open path; if a JOFOC is truly warranted, it must follow Part 6—not preference.

Scenario C — Milestones ignore publicizing. The plan’s award date cannot accommodate required synopsis/solicitation response times under Part 5. Correct CO response: rebaseline milestones or identify a lawful exception; do not silently violate publicizing rules to keep a political date.

Linking Part 7 to the rest of Pre-Award

Think of Part 7 as the spine:

• Part 10 feeds the plan with commerciality and source intelligence.
• Part 6 converts competition strategy into lawful procedures or justifications.
• Part 5 schedules publicizing consistent with milestones.
• Part 8 / 19 shape required sources and small business strategy.
• Parts 12 / 13 / 15 determine solicitation methods once commerciality, thresholds, and complexity are known.
• Part 16 documents type selection grounded in risk.

If any of those later steps contradict the plan, update the plan—do not leave a stale strategy in the file.

CON 3990V closed-book cues for Part 7

When a stem mentions “acquisition plan,” “acquisition strategy,” “milestones,” or “coordinating the team before solicitation,” tag Part 7. Ask:

1. Was planning timely?
2. Are required content themes present for the complexity of the buy?
3. Does the plan promote competition and reflect market research?
4. Is contract type justified by risk, not habit?
5. Are approvals and milestones realistic?

---

Bottom line: FAR Part 7 acquisition planning integrates the team around requirements, cost, schedule, risk, competition, and contract-type logic before solicitation. Written plans scale with complexity; the process never scales to zero. On CON 3990V, incomplete, late, or vendor-predetermined “plans” are wrong—demand integrated, early, defensible planning that links requirement definition to strategy.