be america’s best…war-winning capabilities on time, on cost i n t e g r i t y - s e r v i c e -...

Be America’s Best…War-Winning Capabilities on Time, on Cost

I n t e g r i t y - S e r v i c e - E x c e l l e n c e

Headquarters U.S. Air Force

1

SOURCE SELECTION TRAINING (ACQUISITION PLANNING)

<acquisition title>

<Trainer’s name><Trainer’s

Organization>


Facilities Orientation

Ground Rules Start/Stop Times

Blackberry’s/PDA’s – turned off

Encourage Interaction

2

Introductions


Overview

Market Research Acquisition Planning 4 W’s

Requirements Documents

Risk Assessment

Acquisition Considerations

Contract Type Selection

Performance-Based Acquisition

Source Selection Planning SS Plan and Content

SS Evaluation Approaches Tradeoff

LPTA

Evaluation Criteria SS Technique Team Members R&R SS Tools Pre-Solicitation & RFP release Governance/Oversight and

Clearance MIRT and PEER Reviews Ethics Summary

3


Objectives

Ensure Market Research is conducted throughout acquisition process

Recognize importance of Acquisition Planning for a successful Source Selection

Understand Key Elements of Source Selection Process

Know consequences of behaviors and actions as they relate to Ethics and Procurement Integrity

4


Objectives (cont.)

Prepare team to successfully develop and support Acquisition Strategy/Plan and Source Selection Plan

Recognize how Contracting Process relates to Acquisition Strategy and Planning Process

5

Output: Evaluation criteria for inclusion in Source Selection Plan and RFP Section M (or equivalent commercial provision)Output: Evaluation criteria for inclusion in Source Selection

Plan and RFP Section M (or equivalent commercial provision)

Start

END

Source Selection Process Roadmap

I n t e g r i t y - S e r v i c e - E x c e l l e n c e

Source Selection ProcessPre-RFP Release


8

MARKET RESEARCH

Market Research Training Module

Useful Market Research Sources

GAO/COFC Protest Decisions: Lack of Competition and Market Research

https://cs.eis.af.mil/airforcecontracting/knowledge_center/Documents/AFFARS_Library/5310/market_research_briefing.ppt

https://cs.eis.af.mil/airforcecontracting/knowledge_center/Documents/AFFARS_Library/5310/useful_market_research_sources.docx

https://cs.eis.af.mil/airforcecontracting/BriefingsFact%20Sheets/GAO%20and%20CoFC%20Protest%20Decision%20Summaries/Lack%20of%20Competition%20and%20Market%20Research.pdf


9

Engaging with Industry… Article from “The Source”


Identify commercial sources for gov’t requirements Obtain business intelligence for informed decisions

impacting: Acquisition Strategy & Planning

Source Selection Planning


Reduce business risks Identify opportunities, industry trends, technological

developments

10

Why Conduct Market Research?

Improves Chances for SuccessImproves Chances for Success


Identifies:

Sellers & Buyers

Our leverage in the market

Industry trends

Technology changes/advancements

New commercial items

Business/financial arrangements

Factors influencing doing business with Government

11

Benefits of Market Research


Reveals key information about sources:

Capability

Technological improvements

Alliances and joint ventures (relationships and type of agreements with their suppliers)

Business/contract type preferences (cost type, fixed price, etc.)

Financial strength and growth potential

Contractor incentives

12

Benefits of Market Research (cont.)


Activities include:

Industry Days

Requests for Information

Survey of market-sector - Sources Sought Synopsis

Internet Search of commercial marketplace

Networking with trade associations in specific market sectors

One-on-one meetings with potential offerors

Draft Request For Proposals

13

Market Research Activities


Market Research Toolkit

Synopsis

Internet Search

Virtual Networks

Report Template

Market Research Report Database

Market Research Product/Service

Training and References

GSA Schedules, Yellow Pages, Catalogs, etc.

14


If you have not documented it - you have not done it!

Determine your documentation methodology during the planning phase

Document contemporaneously – after the fact documentation is seldom accurate

GAO and COFC place great emphasis on documentation at all phases of acquisition including

15

Document Your Actions

GAO/COFC Decision Summaries Importance of Documentation in Source Selections

https://cs.eis.af.mil/airforcecontracting/BriefingsFact%20Sheets/GAO%20and%20CoFC%20Protest%20Decision%20Summaries/Importance%20of%20Documentation%20in%20Source%20Selections.pdf




16

ACQUISITION PLANNING


Acquisition Planning – 4 W’s

17

Who Acquisition team, led by program / requirements manager

What Acquisition of commercial items or non-developmental items Full and Open Competition Formalize Acquisition Strategy Panel (ASP)

Why Satisfy government needs in most effective, efficient, economical, and timely

manner

When As soon as requirement is identified


Contents of Acquisition Plans

18

(a) Acquisition Background and Objectives (b) Plan of Action (cont.)

(1) Statement of Need (2) Applicable conditions (3) Cost (4) Capability or Performance (5) Delivery or Performance-Period

Requirements (6) Trade-offs (7) Risks (8) Acquisition Streamlining

(b) Plan of Action

(1) Sources (2) Competition (3) Contract Type Selection (4) Source-Selection Procedures (5) Acquisition Considerations (6) Budgeting and Funding (7) Product or Service Descriptions

(8) Priorities, Allocations, and Allotments (9) Contractor Versus Government

Performance (10) Inherently Governmental Functions (11) Management Information Requirements (12) Make or Buy (13) Test and Evaluation (14) Logistics Considerations (15) Government-Furnished Property (16) Government-Furnished Information (17) Environmental and Energy

Conservation Objectives (18) Security Considerations (19) Contract Administration (20) Other Considerations (21) Milestones for the Acquisition Cycle (22) Identification of Participants in

Acquisition Plan Preparation


(a) Acquisition Background and Objectives (b) Plan of Action (cont.)

(1) Statement of Need (2) Applicable conditions (3) Cost (4) Capability or Performance (5) Delivery or Performance-Period

Requirements (6) Trade-offs (7) Risks (8) Acquisition Streamlining

(b) Plan of Action

(1) Sources (2) Competition (3) Contract Type Selection (4) Source-Selection Procedures (5) Acquisition Considerations (6) Budgeting and Funding (7) Product or Service Descriptions

(8) Priorities, Allocations, and Allotments (9) Contractor Versus Government

Performance (10) Inherently Governmental Functions (11) Management Information Requirements (12) Make or Buy (13) Test and Evaluation (14) Logistics Considerations (15) Government-Furnished Property (16) Government-Furnished Information (17) Environmental and Energy

Conservation Objectives (18) Security Considerations (19) Contract Administration (20) Other Considerations (21) Milestones for the Acquisition Cycle (22) Identification of Participants in

Acquisition Plan Preparation

Acquisition Planning Key Activities

19

Statement of Need - Requirements Documents

Tradeoffs

Risks


Source Selection ‘Procedures’ Planning


20

Requirements Documents


SpecificationsWork

Specification

(WS)

21

Requirements DocumentsDescribe

Agency Needs

Statement of

Objectives (SOO)

Statement of Work (SOW)

Purchase Descriptions

Performance Work Statement (PWS)

Capability

Development

Document (CDD)

Systems Requirements

Document (SRD)

Initial Capabilities Document (ICD)

Technical Requirements Document (TRD)

Capability Production

Document (CPD)


Descriptions, specifications, and criteria that define minimum needs of agency for supplies or services

Requirements may be expressed as:

Minimum value or level of performance (threshold performance requirement)

Desired goal (objective performance requirement)

22

Requirements Documents Typical Content


Based on Market Research, describe Government needs in terms of:

Functions to be performed

Performance level required

Essential physical characteristics

These documents are basis for:

Risk assessment

Development of evaluation criteria

Preparation of solicitation and proposal

Contract type selection, formation and execution

23

Requirements Documents Commonalities


Basis for Independent Government Estimate (IGE)

Establish connection from Requirement Document to IGE, Schedule, Prices/Costs, Evaluation Criteria, Proposal Preparation Instructions

24

Requirements Documents “Connecting the Links”

Requirements Document

Independent Government Estimate

Schedule of Prices or Costs

Proposal Preparation Instructions

Evaluation Criteria


25

Risk Assessment

Risk Assessment Briefing

https://cs.eis.af.mil/airforcecontracting/aqcinternal/fieldsupportteam/source_selection_train_the_trainers/attachments_for_reference-resource_materials/Risk_Management_Presentation.pptx


Identifies:

High-risk areas for both Government and contractors

Impact and probability

Discriminators for Source Selections

Incentive areas

Foundation for evaluation criteria

26

Purpose of Risk Assessment

Risk Management Process


Link risks to requirements clearly

If high risk, ensure: RFP requires offerors to address risk and provide mitigation

strategies in proposal Evaluation criteria includes evaluation of risks and

mitigation strategies Oversight of mitigation strategies in post award/incentives

Obtain Industry input on Risk Assessment

28

Conducting Risk Assessment


29




30

Spectrum - Contract Type and Risk

Cost Risk

Requirements Definition

Acquisition Phase

Contract Type

CR CPFFCPIF or

FPIF

CPIF, FPIF, or

FFP

FFP, FPIF, or FPEPA

FFP, FPIF, or FPEPA

HIGHLOW

WELLDEFINED

POORLYDEFINED

RESEARCH SUSTAINMENT


Consider what Market Research indicates

Understand your potential offerors

Technical capability

Financial responsibility

Adequacy of accounting/business systems

Extent and nature of anticipated subcontracting

Discuss your Program

Type, complexity, urgency

Acquisition history – competitive/sole source

Period of performance/length of production run

31

Selecting the “Right” Contract Type


Consider political and fiscal environment in which you operate

May effect current program requirements, acquisition plan/strategy and overall business deal

Be aware of key stakeholders and possible impact(s)

SECDEF, AT&L, DPAP, AQ, PEO, CC, PM, etc.

Be cognizant of leadership’s current guidance & preferences

Policy & info memos/guidance issued by Agency or DoD

32

Selecting “Right” Contract Type (cont.)


33

Performance-Based Acquisitions

Acquisition Considerations (cont.)


Performance-Based Acquisitions

34

Use performance-based strategies & contractual language to: Maximize competition, innovation, & interoperability

Enable flexibility

Reduce cost

Improve life-cycle support

Task contractor in clear and concise language

DoD Directive 5000.01, para E.1.1.16


DoD Directive 5000.01, para E.1.1.16


Resource: Performance Based Payments – Guide Book and Analysis Tool

http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/cpic/cp/Performance_based_payments.html


All service acquisitions > Simplified Acquisition Threshold (few exceptions) should be performance-based Include identifiable and measurable cost, schedule, and

performance outcomes

Consider customer requirements (ensure consistency)

Ensure adequate planning and management to achieve desired outcome

Performance Work Statement (PWS)

Conveys “what” we want -- not “how” to do it!

Cite required directives and standards by specific process/procedure ( paragraph or chapter vs. wholesale inclusion of AFI)

35

Performance-Based Services Acquisition


36

Source Selection Planning


Required for all best-value, negotiated competitive acquisitions under FAR Part 15 (exceeding SAT - $150K)

Name all individuals involved in source selection, and clearly define their roles in SSP

Ensure SSP is approved by SSA prior to solicitation release

Cover all required areas/topics

37

Source Selection Plan (SSP)


As a minimum include:

Background and Objectives

Acquisition Strategy

Source Selection Team (names and roles)

Communications

Evaluation Factors and Subfactors

Documentation

Schedule of Events

Non-governmental personnel (by name)

Source Selection materials management

38

Source Selection Plan Contents


Tradeoff

and

Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA)

GAO & COFC Summaries on Best Value Tradeoff Decision

39

SS Evaluation Approaches

https://cs.eis.af.mil/airforcecontracting/BriefingsFact%20Sheets/GAO%20and%20CoFC%20Protest%20Decision%20Summaries/Best%20Value%20Tradeoff%20Decision.pdf


Tradeoff is normally used for more complex acquisitions

Evaluation process requires more in-depth review of proposals than LPTA

Level of detail depends on: Complexity of acquisition Degree of competition Contract type

40

Tradeoff


Used when in best interest of Gov’t to Award to:

Other than lowest-priced proposal

Other than highest technically rated proposal

Process is more flexible - permits:

Tradeoffs among cost/price and non-cost factors

Best combination of technically superior, low risk proposals that also have a history of favorable past performance

Best value decision is based on comparative assessment of proposals

41

Tradeoff (cont.)


What are expected consequences of tradeoffs among following elements?

Cost/Price

Capability

Performance and Schedule

Does your Requirements Document reflect user’s expectations?

42

Tradeoff Considerations


LPTA process is used when: “Best Value” is expected from lowest-priced, technically

acceptable proposal

Procuring commercial, non-complex supplies or services

Requirements are firm, clear and definitive

No benefit is expected from proposals exceeding minimum technical or performance requirements

Excellent Article on LPTA

43

Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA)

LPTA Article


When using LPTA:

Evaluate proposals against minimum technical requirements (Acceptable/Unacceptable)

Past Performance may be an evaluation factor (Acceptable/Unacceptable)

Tradeoffs are not permitted

Proposals cannot be ranked on non-cost/price factors

Exchanges may occur

Comparative Analysis is not required

44

LPTA (cont.)


Technical Critical to define what constitutes “Acceptable”

Clearly state minimum requirements

Past Performance May be waived by PCO If evaluated, ‘Unknown’ rating is considered acceptable

“Acceptable” rating required in all non-price factors/subfactors

45

LPTA (cont.)


Methodical process incorporates knowledge from: Market Research

Acquisition planning activities

Evaluation factors: Must be critical areas of importance and emphasis

Identify “key discriminators”

Provide meaningful comparison and discrimination between competing proposals

Factors must address: Price/Cost

Quality of Product or Service

Non-cost factors

46

Evaluation Criteria Factors & Subfactors


BRAINSTORM ideas to develop your evaluation criteria

Assumptions: Knowledge of market and requirements

Potential offerors

Discuss: KEY discriminators

Your confidence in offerors’ ability to meet requirement

Uniqueness or clarity of specifications

Identify high or moderate risks

Small Business Participation

47

Developing Evaluation Criteria Factors & Subfactors


Determine factor rating methodology and relative importance based on brainstorming

Factor: Cost/Price

Factor: Past Performance (unless PCO waives) Acceptable/Unacceptable Performance Confidence Assessment

Factor: Technical Subfactors Acceptable/Unacceptable (no “tradeoff”) Combined technical/risk or separate ratings (range of

colors/adjectival ratings) Combination (can vary by subfactor)

48

Determining Source Selection Approach/Technique

Ratings


49

Source Selection Team

Source Selection Team – Example


51

SSA Roles and Responsibilities

RESPONSIBLE FOR PROPER AND EFFICIENT CONDUCT OF SOURCE SELECTION PROCESS

PCO Roles and Responsibilities

52

- Establishes plan/procedures to protect Source Selection information, and manages SS documents

- Releases the RFP

- Single point of control for all Source Selection information

- Obtains all required approvals for Non-government advisors

- Ensures SSEB evaluation is consistent with RFP

- Controls exchanges with offerors

- Establishes competitive range after SSA approval

- Awards Contract

- Submits SS participants worksheet to SAF/AQC

PRIMARY BUSINESS ADVISOR AND PRINCIPAL GUIDANCE SOURCE FOR ENTIRE SOURCE SELECTION


53

SSAC Roles and Responsibilities

PROVIDES FUNCTIONAL EXPERTISE AND SUPPORT TO SSA

- Oversees SSEB

- Reviews SSEB evaluation results to ensure consistency with RFP

- Provides written comparative analysis & recommendation to SSA

SSEB Chairperson Roles and Responsibilities

54

MANAGES EVALUATION TEAM

- Appoints SSEB members

- Establishes functional evaluation teams

- Ensures SSEB members know HOW to evaluate proposals BEFORE they review

- Staffs Source Selection Team with proper skill and experience

- Schedules adequate time to successfully complete Source Selection

- Ensures adequate resources are available

- Provides consolidated results

- Documents SSEB evaluation results (PAR, briefing slides, etc)

- Does not perform comparative analysis of proposals or make Source Selection recommendation unless requested by SSA

- Supports post Source Selection activities


55

SSEB Evaluators - Roles and Responsibilities

NORMALLY ORGANIZED INTO FUNCTIONAL AREAS

- Source Selection responsibilities take priority over other work i.e. primary duty responsibility

- Conduct comprehensive review and evaluation of proposals against solicitation evaluation criteria

- Document contemporaneously evaluation results

- Support post-award activities

Advisors Roles and Responsibilities

56

TWO DISTINCT TYPES OF ADVISORS: GOVERNMENT AND NON-GOVERNMENT

Government advisors:- Assist SSA if no SSAC used

- Assist the SSEB as subject matter experts

Non-Government advisors:- Used on a limited basis – only advisory

- Must be approved in writing (except FFRDC, FAR 37.203/37.204)

- Sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA), COI statement, AND provide documentation regarding stocks owned

- May not rate or rank any offeror’s proposal

- May not see or evaluate past performance information

https://cs.eis.af.mil/airforcecontracting/knowledge_center/Documents/AFFARS_Library/5315/templates/source_selection_non-disclosure_agreement.pdf


57

Source Selection Tools


Mandatory Use for Competitive Acquisitions Value $50M or greater Hi-Vis Programs

Consolidation of individual contractsRe-competition as a result of sustained protest (corrective

action)Political sensitivityPEO or CC deems high-risk program regardless of $ value or

ACAT level

EZ Source Deployment - two spirals over 18 months (Jun 2013 - Oct 2014)

Spiral I locations meeting mandatory criteria use EZ Source if solicitation is issued on/after location’s effective date

Spiral II - all remaining locations

Policy Memo 13-C-02

58

EZ Source Tool

https://cs.eis.af.mil/airforcecontracting/knowledge_center/Documents/Contracting_Memos/Policy/13-C-02.pdf


EZ Source tool (AFMC) POC: Kerry Estes, DSN 785-5471, [email protected]

EZ Source Templates

Electronic Source Selection (ESS) tool (SMC) POC: Mr. Ted Nguyen, DSN 633-5072, [email protected]

Decision Point See www.acqcenter.com for more information

Fed Select See www.caci.com

POC: Steve Ford, (703) 486-3266 ext 1031, [email protected]

59

Source Selection Tools POCs

mailto:[email protected]

https://cs.eis.af.mil/airforcecontracting/records_contract/EZ/EZ_Docs/Forms/AllItems.aspx?RootFolder=/airforcecontracting/records_contract/EZ/EZ_Docs/Templates&FolderCTID=0x012000275BAF38D663AC48BC3196DB89C381F9&View=%7B2BAD56B2-C1CB-42B2-A916-117AD9A44651%7D


http://www.acqcenter.com/

http://www.caci.com/



60

Pre-Solicitation and

RFP Release Activities


Start

END

Source Selection Process Roadmap


Section L - Proposal Instructions to Offerors

Section M - Evaluation Factors and Criteria

Must be developed by entire team! All stakeholders must be involved

L & M are tailored to each source selection Consider program risks Leverage L & M templates and language when appropriate

Link L & M and requirements Cross Reference Matrix helps

Developing Sections L & M


Cross Reference MatrixSample 1


64

Cross Reference MatrixSample 2

Cross Reference PWS Para RFP Section L&M CLIN CDRL Proposal (Vol & Para)

Transition Phase-in SF1 0001 A00F

Element 1a – GFE Usage Plan 1.2.2 L: 4.1aM: 2.2.1a

0001 N/A

Element 1b – Repair Process Demonstrations

1.2.1 L: 4.1bM: 2.2.1b

0001 N/A

Element 1c – Hire/Retain Qualified Personnel

1.2.3 L: 4.1cM: 2.2.1c

0001 N/A

Element 1d – Facilities Plan 1.2.4 L: 4.1dM: 2.2.1d

0001 N/A

Element 1e – Data Reporting 1.11 L: 4.1eM: 2.2.1e

0003 A00A-A0AD

Supply Chain / Material Management

SF2Imbedded in overhaul /

repair pricesA00C-A00E,

A00G-H, A00N

Element 2a – Parts Forecasting and documentation of approved sources

1.9, 1.5.4 L: 4.2aM: 2.2.2a

Imbedded in overhaul / repair prices

N/A

Element 2b – Material Storage, Packaging / Transportation

1.3, 1.8, and 1.9 L: 4.2bM: 2.2.2b


A00D, A00E, A00G, A00H

Program Management

SF3Imbedded in overhaul /

repair pricesA00C, A00E,

A00R

Element 3a – Schedule / Produce Requirements, Surge Responsiveness, and O&A

1.4.1.a, 1.15, and 1.16

L: 4.3aM: 2.2.3a

Imbedded in overhaul / repair prices, 0005

A00C, A00E

Element 3b – Transition Phase-Out 1.17 L: 4.3bM: 2.2.3b

0002 N/A

Element 3c – Small Business Requirements

PWS: N/AClause H002

L: 4.3cM: 2.2.3c


A00R


65

Draft Request For Proposal (DRFP)

Highly recommended for ALL acquisitions

Must be consistent with acquisition strategy and SSP Specific content determined by PCO – consider:

Detailed description of Government’s requirements, e.g. Requirements Document, PWS, SOO, etc.

Price/Cost ScheduleEvaluation Criteria, Proposal Contents e.g. Sections L&M

Benefits - Input from Industry on: Realism and clarity of government requirements Contract type contemplated Schedule realism

Note: Maintain record of comments and adjudication


SSEB and SSAC (if used) review requirements as a standard for evaluation

SOO or SOW must clearly describe work objectives or work to be performed

Is SOO/SOW performance-based?

Specification must clearly delineate key technical characteristics of product or service

Schedule B CLIN structure must be complete and clear

Requirements must be achievable and not overly restrictive

Review Acquisition Strategy, unique special clauses and critical technical requirements

Gov’t estimate must be consistent with requirements and available funding

66

Review Draft RFP Requirements


Government’s formal tool to: Communicate technical and contractual rqm’ts to industry

Solicit proposals from industry to satisfy its requirements

Must be consistent w/ requirement docs, AP and SSP Final solicitation cannot be released until:

AP or LCMP is approved

SSP is approved

Business Clearance has been obtained

Notification required concurrent w/ issuance of RFP

67

Request for Proposal

RFP becomes the Binding ContractRFP becomes the Binding Contract


68

Clearanceand

Governance Oversight


Clearance

Objectives: Implement approved acquisition strategies

Ensure fair and reasonable business arrangements

Follow laws, regulations, and policies

Perform independent review and assessment of action

Clearance Approval Authority:ACAT I: > $500M DAS(C) & ADAS(C) for Business Clearance Only

> $50M Senior Center Contracting Official (SCCO)

$25M-$50M One Level Below SCCO

$5M-<$25M Two Levels Below SCCO

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------OPERATIONAL: > $2M SCCO

$1M - $2M Squadron Commander

$500K - $1M At Least One Level Above PCO

69


Contract

Award w/o discussor FPR & SSA Decision

Competitive ContractClearance

70

Business & Contract Clearance

Business

Issue Solicitation Competitive BusinessClearance


Multi-Functional Independent Review Team (MIRT)

Required for competitive actions >$50M Provides independent assessment to CAA on acquisition,

source selection or procurement

Five Critical Decision Points (CDP) Pre-Business Clearance CDPs (simultaneously w/Clearance)

CDP #1 – ASP/Acq Plan

CDP #2 – Sections L&M of RFP

Pre-Contract Clearance CDPs (simultaneously w/Clearance)

CDP #3 – Competitive Range Briefing or Award w/o Discussions

CDP #4 – Final Proposal Revision Request

CDP #5 – Source Selection Decision Briefing

71


OSD Peer Reviews

OSD Peer Reviews (DFARS 201.170) Competitive solicitations > $1B (including options)

Sole Source and IT solicitations > $500M Comprised of senior contracting officials and attorneys from DoD,

(civilian or military) external to the department, agency, or component

Pre-award Peer Reviews - conducted in 3 phases: Prior to issuance of solicitation Prior to request for final proposal revisions (if applicable) Prior to contract award

Post-award Peer Reviews may be conducted for all contracts for services valued > $1B (including options)

7272


Inconsistent language in acquisition documents between Sections L&M and requirements

Develop matrix showing crosswalk between performance specification, SOW and Sections L&M of RFP

Evaluation criteria in RFP did not address key areas of importance and emphasis

Focus must be on “key discriminators” Define “discriminators” as evaluation factors/subfactors

Assess feedback during pre-solicitation exchanges

Keep factors/subfactors to a minimum (3-5) to simplify RFP If too many, then importance of each is diluted

Consider using an "acceptable/not acceptable" approach to some evaluation criteria

73

Common Findings in MIRTs and Peer Reviews


Common Findings in MIRTs and Peer Reviews (cont.)

ENs not written in a clear, concise and consistent way Be clear, complete, and direct when you write your EN Ensure SSEB Chair, PCO and Legal review all ENs

LPTA approach did not make clear in Sections L&M what constituted “technical acceptability”

Describe technical factors/subfactors in RFP in enough depth to communicate what will be evaluated on A/U basis and

Satisfy Government minimum requirements when assessing offeror’s proposal

Pressure on SS teams to meet unrealistic schedules “Need dates” drive teams to meet deadlines w/o regard to team

experience, complexity of acquisition, or limited resources SSA should validate “need dates” and advise SST on ways to ease

schedule risks

74

Uniform Contract Format

Representations, Certifications, and other Statements of Offerors orRespondents

Evaluation Factors for Award

Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents

Commercial Contract Format

76

Use the following format to the maximum extent possible:

(a) Standard Form (SF) 1449; (b) Continuation of any block from SF 1449, such as--

(1) Block 10 if a price evaluation adjustment for small disadvantaged business concerns is applicable (the contracting officer shall indicate the percentage(s) and applicable line item(s)), or if set aside for emerging small businesses;

(2) Block 18B for remittance address; (3) Block 19 for contract line item numbers; (4) Block 20 for schedule of supplies/services; or (5) Block 25 for accounting data;

(c) Contract clauses– (1) 52.212-4, Contract Terms and Conditions-- Commercial Items, by reference (see SF

1449 block 27a); (2) Any addendum to 52.212-4; and (3) 52.212-5, Contract Terms and Conditions Required to Implement Statutes and Executive orders;

(d) Any contract documents, exhibits or attachments; and (e) Solicitation provisions-

(1) 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors--Commercial Items, by reference (see SF 1449, Block 27a); (2) Any addendum to 52.212-1; (3) 52.212-2, Evaluation--Commercial Items, or other description of evaluation factors for award, if used; and (4) 52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications--Commercial Items.


DoD Source Selection Procedures Effective 1 Jul 2011 and mandatory for all competitive

acquisitions utilizing FAR Part 15 procedures

Source Selection Trainer’s Reference/Resource Material Assists trainers in presenting SS Phase I & II training modules

Types of Contracts - FAR Part 16.103 & 104, DFARS 216.1

Contracting by Negotiation - FAR Part 15, DFARS 215

Acquisition of Commercial Items - FAR Part 12.303

Describing Agency Needs (Rqmts) - FAR Part 11.101, DFARS 211.1

Market Research - FAR Part 10, DFARS 210

Acquisition Planning - FAR Part 7.1, DFARSS 207.1

Conflicts of Interest - FAR Part 3.104, DFARSS 203.104

77

References

https://cs.eis.af.mil/airforcecontracting/knowledge_center/Documents/AFFARS_Library/5315/dpap-memo-4mar11.pdf

https://cs.eis.af.mil/airforcecontracting/aqcinternal/fieldsupportteam/source_selection_train_the_trainers/SS_Trainers_Reference-Resource_Material.docx


Summary

78

Each Acquisition or Source Selection is unique

Source Selection process is both objective and subjective

Professional judgment, and critical thinking is required at every step

Goal: Ensure quality, timely products and services are delivered to the war-fighter and the nation. Obtain best value for the taxpayer

Goal: Ensure quality, timely products and services are delivered to the war-fighter and the nation. Obtain best value for the taxpayer


For acquisitions $10M and above: Attendees names will be provided to designated Source

Selection TrainersCertificates (Phase I or Phase II) will be provided to attendees by

SS Trainers

Continuous Learning (CL) points 6 CL points for each full day of instruction; 3 CL points for any half day of instruction, and 1 CL point for 2 hours or less of instruction

79

Feedback and Certificate

Your Feedback is Very Important . . . Please Take The Time To Complete The Survey

Your Feedback is Very Important . . . Please Take The Time To Complete The Survey


80

ETHICS AND PROCUREMENT INTEGRITY

SS Ethics Training

GAO/COFC Summaries-Organizational Conflicts of Interest


Summary of Changesfor

Phase I Acquisition Planning

81


82

LINKED CHARTS

Technical Rating Evaluation (Methodology 1)

83

Table 1. Combined Technical/Risk RatingsColor Rating DescriptionBlue Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach

and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Purple Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is unawardable.

Technical Rating Evaluation (Methodology 2)

84

Table 2. Technical Ratings

Color Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal contains multiple strengths and no deficiencies.

Purple Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains at least one strength and no deficiencies.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal has no strengths or deficiencies.

Yellow Marginal Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies and is unawardable.

Technical Risk Rating (Methodology 2)

85

Table 3. Technical Risk Ratings

Rating Description

Low Has little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Moderate Can potentially cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome difficulties.

High Is likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Is unlikely to overcome any difficulties, even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.

Technical Ratings

86

Table A-1. Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Past Performance Evaluation

87

Table 4. Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Rating Definition

Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

May use, as a minimum, “Relevant” & “Not Relevant” ratings for source selections requiring less discrimination in past performance evaluation.


88

Table 5. Performance Confidence Assessments

Rating Description

Substantial Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Limited Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Unknown Confidence (Neutral)

No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.


89

Table A-2. Past Performance Evaluation Ratings

Rating Description

Acceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown. (See note below.)

Unacceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort

Note: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past

performance rating can be reasonably assigned , the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the

offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable”.


90

Trade-Off Source Selection

Processdescribed in DoD Source

Selection Procedures

Low PriceLow Price

Non-Cost Non-Cost FactorsFactors

The Best-Value Continuum Source Selection Techniques

Greater Relative Importance of Cost or Price Lesser

Lesser Importance of Non-Cost Factors Greater

FAR Part 15.101, FAR Subpart 15.3, as supplemented

Tradeoff Source Selection Processdescribed in DoD Source Selection Procedures

Oh! The possibilities!

Mix-n-match tradeoffs:

Lowest Price Technically Acceptable

(LPTA) Source Selection Processdescribed in DoD Source Selection Procedures,

Appendix A

Cost or PriceCost or Price Non–Cost FactorsNon–Cost Factors

TechnicalTechnical RiskPast PerformanceCost or Price

be america’s best…war-winning capabilities on time, on cost i n t e g r i t y - s e r v i c e -...

Documents

market research activities

benefits of market research

conduct market research

cost acquisition planning

informationsurvey of

cost activities

c e e x c e

phases of acquisition