Complexity Level 2

Complexity Level 2 represents the middle tier of procurement difficulty in federal government contracting, where you're dealing with requirements that can't be evaluated on price alone. Unlike straightforward commodity purchases, these contracts require subjective assessment of proposals—think performance criteria, technical capabilities, or service quality that need expert judgment.

How It Works

The concept traces back to the 2005 version of the Supply Manual's Chapter 6 on developing procurement strategy, though you won't find "Complexity Level 2" explicitly defined in current policy documents. In practice, these procurements sit between basic Complexity Level 1 buys (where you know exactly what you want and can compare quotes directly) and highly specialized contracts requiring extensive technical evaluation.

Level 2 kicks in when government organizations specify performance requirements rather than just describing a product. You're evaluating how well a supplier can meet outcomes, not just whether they can deliver widgets at the lowest price. The Department of Justice's General Conditions for Higher Complexity goods contracts illustrate this distinction—these agreements involve detailed specifications and allow contractors to subcontract up to 40% of the contract price, recognizing that meeting complex requirements often requires specialized partnerships.

The 2009-2010 Procurement Ombudsman review highlighted how complexity impacts both suppliers and procurement officers. Their Chapter 5 analysis put it plainly: "There are many different procurement tools available for acquiring the same goods or services... This variety increases the complexity of acquiring a service." When PSPC developed assessment guidance for bid solicitation (sub-section 4.35.2), they emphasized that evaluation criteria must be clearly defined so suppliers understand exactly how their proposals will be judged—a direct response to the subjective nature of these evaluations.

Key Considerations

• Evaluation criteria need explicit definition upfront. Vague statements like "demonstrated capability" won't cut it—you need measurable indicators or specific evaluation matrices that assessors can apply consistently.

• The shift from objective to subjective assessment changes your approval requirements and documentation standards. You'll need more detailed justification for supplier selection than simple price comparisons provide.

• Complexity affects which procurement instruments you can use. Supply arrangements and standing offers work differently at this level because you're pre-qualifying based on capabilities, not just product catalogs.

• Budget thresholds interact with complexity levels—what requires ministerial approval at Level 1 might need Treasury Board involvement at Level 2, even at lower dollar values.

Related Terms

Complexity Level 1, Evaluation Criteria, Standing Offer

Sources

• Supply Manual - VERSION 05-02 (2005), Chapter 6: Developing the Procurement Strategy

• General Conditions - Higher Complexity - Goods - Part I, Department of Justice Canada

• Chapter 5: Methods of Supply Standing Offers and Supply Arrangements, Office of the Procurement Ombudsman

Understanding where your procurement falls on the complexity spectrum shapes everything from your solicitation approach to how you structure evaluations. Get the complexity assessment right, and you'll avoid both over-engineering simple buys and under-resourcing complex ones.