OASIS+ Qualifying Projects: What Counts and How to Prove Relevance

Qualifying projects are where OASIS+ submissions are won or lost. They carry most of the credits on every domain scorecard, and they're also where most of the documentation work happens.

This guide covers what counts as a qualifying project (QP), the minimums every project must meet, how relevance is proven, and the special rules for subcontracts, teaming partners and joint ventures.

What counts as a qualifying project

A QP is a past or current services award you use to earn credits in a specific domain. You can submit up to five per domain, and each can be:

• A single contract
• A task order, BPA, BOA or other transaction agreement (OTA)
• One collection of task orders per domain

The work must be services, under FAR Part 37 for federal projects. Prime contracts, subcontracts and commercial contracts can all qualify, provided they meet the domain's requirements.

A project can't be used if it has a negative past performance record, meaning an average below 3.0 on a 5-point scale.

The minimums every project must meet

Average annual value

Each domain sets a minimum average annual value (AAV) for QPs, and it differs by pool. For example, GSA's own example for Technical and Engineering is $500,000 for small business pools, and consultants tracking the scorecards report $1 million for Unrestricted. Across domains, small business minimums range from about $250,000 to $1 million, and Unrestricted minimums run higher.

For projects longer than 12 months, GSA calculates AAV as total value divided by the days of performance, multiplied by 366. A long contract can have a surprisingly low AAV, so run the math before you commit to a project.

Protégés get relief: a protégé's own QPs need to meet only half the minimum AAV.

Recency and other requirements

Each solicitation also sets recency requirements and other conditions in Section L. These have changed between phases, so always confirm them against the current solicitation rather than an older guide. We've seen projects that looked perfect fail on a single requirement, which is why we screen every project against every minimum before building a package around it.

Proving relevance

Every QP has to be shown relevant to the domain. There are two paths.

Automatic relevance

If the project's PSC code or project-specific NAICS code appears on the solicitation's list of auto-relevant codes (attachment J.P-4), the project is automatically considered relevant.

This is the easiest path, but it's also where we catch the most mistakes. Codes that look like an obvious fit are sometimes not on the list. In one Facilities submission, two of the five projects had a code everyone assumed was auto-relevant but wasn't. Fortunately each had a second code that did qualify. Check every code against the actual list.

Only federal prime projects can use automatic relevance. Non-federal projects, including federal subcontracts, can't.

Standard relevance

If a project isn't automatically relevant, you prove relevance through the contract documents themselves: marking the specific passages, such as a distinct CLIN or section of the statement of work, that show the scope, nature, complexity and purpose of the work match the domain.

In practice, this means annotating the documents against the domain's functional areas (attachment J.P-5), using the solicitation's exact terminology. It's detailed work, and it's where many packages quietly lose credits.

The Project Verification Form (J.P-3)

When contract documents alone can't demonstrate relevance, GSA's Project Verification Form (J.P-3) lets the customer verify the project. It requires direct contact information for the contracting officer and the government employee verifying the work, and recent amendments added explicit scale checkboxes that the customer validates.

Getting a J.P-3 signed takes time, since it depends on someone outside your company. When we can build a strong score without one, we do. In one submission, swapping a single project eliminated the package's only J.P-3, which removed the biggest schedule risk in the effort.

Subcontracts, teaming partners and joint ventures

Your own subcontracts

A subcontract can be a QP, but it always needs standard relevance verification, and only your subcontract's scope counts, not the prime contract's full scope. When we annotate a subcontract QP, we tag only the work the subcontractor actually performed. Past performance for non-federal and subcontract projects may need a rating form (J.P-6) signed by a corporate officer of the customer with responsibility for the project.

A proposed subcontractor's project

In the Unrestricted solicitation we worked, QP experience could come from the offeror or a proposed subcontractor. Rules can differ by pool, so confirm this in your pool's Section L. It can fill a gap: in one Unrestricted submission, a proposed subcontractor's large federal prime contract became the offeror's fifth QP. That relationship needs to be documented properly, including a commitment letter from the subcontractor, and the project still has to meet every requirement on its own.

Joint ventures and mentor-protégé

A joint venture's own QPs must show a contract number issued to the JV entity. Mentor-protégé joint ventures must include at least one relevant QP per domain from the protégé or the joint venture itself, a requirement clarified in a 2026 amendment.

How we help

Choosing the right five projects and documenting them so GSA can verify every credit is the core of an OASIS+ submission. We inventory a client's full project history, find the combination with the strongest defensible score, and prepare each qualifying project package for review.

See How OASIS+ Scoring Works for how QPs fit into the full scorecard.