A Practical Guide to Entering Federal Government Contracting

Federal Government contracting continues to attract professionals seeking complex, meaningful work. Yet for many, the pathway into the APS environment can feel highly structured and difficult to navigate without the right guidance. From engaging with specialist agencies and responding to selection criteria, through to security clearances and panel evaluation processes, the expectations are very different from those of the private sector.

This guide breaks down the key considerations for anyone seriously looking to enter Federal Government contracting, offering practical insight into what matters most, where candidates often fall short, and how to position yourself for success in a competitive process.

If you receive a call from someone who claims to have a Federal Government contract opportunity, it pays to do your research.

Working with a reputable and respected Federal Government partner is important. I’d obviously recommend Calleo first (daylight second) and then there are quite a few others that have respected names in market.

Second to finding the right agency to partner with, is finding the relevant consultant within their team. Meeting with that person, understanding what government agencies they support and thirdly, taking on their feedback about how your profile looks and feels.

I’d encourage people to build relationships through two-way engagement, built and sustained over a long period of time. Relationships are a two-way street, takes two to tango and so on and so on.

Painful and at times repetitive, most government processes will require a selection criteria response. You will be guided on what form this should take by the consultant that is helping you.

More recently, AI slop is dominating our review process. It is often undeniable when AI is being used and will typically not be viewed favourably or support your application. AI is of course a useful tool and can help polish responses, but it doesn’t know specifics on the projects you’ve worked on so if you rely on it completely, your responses will lack depth.

Your responses to these criteria with detailed examples are key. Theoretical and hypothetical undertakings do not sufficiently address the criteria and what is being evaluated upon. What you have done, what you have delivered on specific to a work experience is critical and will elevate your response.

If you are making a serious attempt and pivot towards federal government contracting, then investing in an AGSVA Security Clearance would be worthwhile.

Whilst not always a “mandatory requirement” when roles go to market, having one will help you tick the mandatory requirement when they are. This will give you the ability to put your application forward for more positions.

Another key question would be, Baseline versus NV1. Generally speaking, technical positions (eg. Network Engineers, Dev-Ops Engineer) the investment in an NV1 is worthwhile more so than for a Project Manager. But I’d even suggest it for delivery people as well. If Defence is a long-term play, then having an NV1 will open the door for opportunities that exist within the restricted environment space.

The great leap into Federal Government is not always a clear or easy step. The industries or environments that you have experience in do not always lend themselves to working in an APS context.

I often see people with experience in similar or highly regulated complex environments as having the desirable experience that would mean they are better equipped to deliver within the Federal Government setting. This can be sometimes state government or banking or even those with a degree of complexity such as Australia Post or Telstra. Some of the larger agencies such as Services Australia and Health value this experience.

The federal government recruitment evaluation process is structured, rule‑bound, and designed to demonstrate fairness, and value for money.

Firstly, mandatory requirements need to be met, such as security, citizenship, panel approved agency. APS evaluation panels use weighted scoring to assess capability. This is not subjective and the panel must document every score. You will be measured and rated on technical skills, experience, understanding of delivering in the APS environment as well as culture fit.

Next will be value for money for the Commonwealth which is not just about rate, it can be about rate versus capability versus risk and supplier reputation for what they previously have delivered. Each reviewer/panel member will score, a consensus will be agreed upon with final scores and then if it is close between two, it will go to references.

If you’d like to find out more about the hiring process, or how your skills and experience could align with the expectations of the APS environment, get in touch at gavin.campbell@calleo.com.au