EASSS-4_Pre-Solicitation_Conference Final-20241205.pdf

Evaluations, Assessments, Studies, Services, and Support 4 (EASSS 4)

Request for Proposal (RFP) # 80LARC24R0011 Pre-Solicitation Conference

December 5, 2024

NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC)

Welcome & Introductions

Sheila Watford Contract Specialist

Office of Procurement (OP), NASA LaRC

Washito Sasamoto Technical Representative

Science Office for Mission Assessments (SOMA), NASA LaRC

David Rutkowski Cost/Price Analyst

Enterprise Pricing Office, NASA Headquarters (HQ)

Adam Roob Contracting Officer OP, NASA LaRC

Agenda

Time Topic 13:00 Welcome & Introductions 13:10 Technical Overview 14:15 Procurement Overview 14:35 Cost Overview 14:45 Question and Answer 15:15 Closing Remarks

Question Protocol

• We will take questions today via public Teams chats, private messages to the hosts, or verbally.

• We will also accept emailed questions to larc-easss4@mail.nasa.gov after the conference until 5:00 PM

ET.

• We will strive to provide preliminary responses to today’s questions before the conference concludes. However, official responses to all fully-applicable questions will be posted on SAM.gov.

• Feel free to ask questions during presentations.

– Please identify yourself and your company when asking a question.

mailto:larc-easss4@mail.nasa.gov

Pre-Solicitation Conference

• FAR 15.201 Exchange With Industry Before Receipt of Proposals

– Establishes procedures for information exchange

– Encourages exchange of information consistent with procurement integrity requirements (See FAR 3.104).

• Any discussions, comments, etc., made by

Government personnel during this Pre-Solicitation Conference are considered unofficial unless they are incorporated into the final Request for Proposal (RFP) or addressed by an official response to a question.

Technical Overview

EASSS-4 Work Content Overview

• The Science Office for Mission Assessments (SOMA) provides proposal/Concept Study Report (CSR) evaluations for NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) programs.

• SOMA also provides assessments and studies of programs and investigations for NASA Headquarters (HQ) SMD and other NASA organizations.

• Evaluation, assessment, and study tasks may be directly solicited by another NASA organization other than SOMA.

EASSS-4 SOW Mapping

• Proposal/CSR Evaluations (Statement of Work (SOW) Section 3)

• Assessments (SOW Sections 4 and 6)

• Studies (SOW Sections 5 and 6)

• Logistics, Facilities, and Information Support (Services and Support) (SOW Section 7)

EASSS-4 Proposal/CSR Evaluations

• Proposal/CSR Evaluations (SOW Section 3):

– Evaluate proposals/CSRs in response to Announcements of Opportunity

(AO), NASA Research Announcements (NRAs), Cooperative Agreement Notices (CANs), or other Broad Agency Announcements (BAAs).

• Prepare supplementary solicitation materials (e.g., technical information related to the solicitation, report formats, and logistics guidelines for proposers).

• Identify expertise needed and staff panels with non-conflicted panel members.

– Panels will be made up of Subject Matter Experts (SMEs), many of whom will be occasional or part-time consultants and some of whom may be non-U.S. persons.

– SMEs may be direct employees, subcontractors, or consultants.

– Note that individual Tasks often include provision of mentees.

• Provide independent cost estimates for the evaluation of each proposal/CSR as required by individual task orders.

– Provide validated and approved analysis tools and models (e.g., costing tools) required to support the evaluation.

– Document evaluation panel findings and prepare interim and final evaluation reports.

EASSS-4 Assessments

• Assessments of NASA programs and investigations (SOW Sections 4 and 6):

– Technical Assessments – assess the performance of technical systems, the impact of new technologies on technical systems, and develop functional math models

– Management Assessments – assess the effectiveness of management systems, processes, tools, and components of SMD programs

– Cost Assessments – estimate investigation development and life cycle costs, and assess cost risk

– Schedule Assessments – analyze past investigation development schedules, estimate investigation development schedules for new investigations, and assess schedule risk

– Other Potential Assessments –investigation risk, safety, environmental impact, mission trajectory, resource utilization, analyses of instruments, spacecraft and launch vehicle designs, systems engineering, safety and mission assurance, fabrication and assembly, and test and launch operations on programs or projects

– Quick Assessments (SOW Section 6) – will commence no later than 10 calendar days after the Contracting Officer provides a notice to proceed, will be completed within 90 days, and will not exceed a total cost of $100K

EASSS-4 Studies

• Studies of elements of NASA programs and investigations (SOW Sections 5 and 6):

– Scientific Studies – gather information supporting science investigations, systems analysis, conduct trade studies for handling and analyzing samples of extraterrestrial materials, and define payloads to meet scientific goals. Studies may also include investigating potential science objectives for small low-cost investigations and planetary protection.

– Technical Studies – analyze the feasibility of an instrument, a spacecraft, and/or a mission design; investigate mission options with regard to associated performance expectations; and analyze system designs

– Management Studies - gather information and analyze the structure, performance, and effectiveness of existing management systems in NASA programs, investigations, and in similar endeavors

– Schedule and Cost Studies – gather information on past schedule/cost performance of selected/down-selected NASA investigations, and analyze the results (e.g., regression of normalized data) for use on future investigation schedule/cost evaluations.

– Quick Studies (SOW Section 6) – will commence no later than 10 calendar days after the Contracting Officer provides a notice to proceed, will be completed within 90 days, and will not exceed a total cost of $100K

EASSS-4 Logistics, Facilities, and Information Support (Services and Support)

• Support for evaluations, assessments, studies, conferences, and workshops (SOW Section 7):

– Generate and distribute materials

– Develop and maintain contact lists, meeting attendance plans, attendance logs, etc.

– Provide regular conflict of interest and non-disclosure training

– Arrange meetings, telecons, web-based conferences, and site visit logistics

– Provide facilities, teleconferencing capability, internet access, and web-based conferencing tools at a level of protection sufficient to prevent unauthorized access to Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) material for up to 100 attendees

– Provide audio-visual equipment, copiers, and printers

– Provide information support necessary for a third-party NASA contractor to implement and populate information systems, such as databases, web pages, or analysis tools

Evaluations 73% Assessments, Studies, and Services

27%

EASSS-3 Value by Task Types as of 8/31/2024

Actual Value: $57M

Note: Service and Support activities embedded in most tasks

Evaluations 27%

Assessments, Studies, and

Services 73%

EASSS-3 Tasks by Types as of 8/31/2024

Total Tasks: 86

Note: Service and Support activities embedded in most tasks

SOMA (LaRC, firewalled)

36%

SMD (HQ)

28%

Other LaRC 9%

GSFC

15%MSFC

12%

EASSS-3 Tasks by Organization as of 8/31/2024

Total Tasks: 86

EASSS-3 Usage by Organizations

• Tasks awarded to support various NASA organizations

– SOMA (LaRC, firewalled)

• Proposal/CSR Evaluations, Assessments, Studies, and Services and Support

– SMD (HQ)

• Proposal/CSR Evaluations, Assessments, and Studies

– Other LaRC

• Assessments

– Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC)

• Assessments and Studies

– Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC)

• Assessments

• Almost all tasks support SMD

– One supports the Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate (ESDMD)

• Note H.9 LARC 52.227-96 ORGANIZATIONAL AND PERSONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST (JUN 2024) (MODIFIED SEP 2024)’s (b)(2): "Performance of a proposal/Concept Study Report (CSR) evaluation, assessment, or study the results of which could potentially impact the Contractor’s interests and those of its funders [additions to Draft RFP language in bold, deletions from Draft RFP language struck through, and emphasis added via italics]."

EASSS-3 Task POPs and Values

• Task Period of Performance and Values

– Evaluation tasks had periods of performance ranging from four

(4) to 26 months and actual values from $37K to $4.9M.

– Assessment tasks had periods of performance ranging from two

(2) to 58 months and actual values from $11K to $1.5M.

– Study tasks had periods of performance ranging from one (1) to

20 months and actual values from $15K to $1.1M.

– There has been one dedicated Service and Support task, with a period of performance of 54 months and an actual value of $117K.

EASSS-3 Tasks by Contract Year

• 1st year:

– 37 tasks initiated (7 Evaluations, 25 Assessments, 4 Studies, and 1 Service and Support)`

– 15 tasks still active

• 2nd year:

– 21 tasks initiated (9 Evaluations, 10 Assessments, and 2 Studies)

– 2 tasks still active

• 3rd year:

– 20 tasks initiated (6 Evaluations, 8 Assessments, and 6 Studies)

– 10 tasks still active

• 4th year as of 8/31/2024:

– 8 tasks initiated (2 Evaluations, 3 Assessments, and 3 Studies)

– 6 tasks still active

Proposal/CSR Evaluations

• Proposal/CSR Evaluation tasks support SMD Spaceflight Program acquisitions

– Under EASSS 3:

• Astrophysics Probe Explorer (APEX)

• Medium-Class Explorers (MIDEXs)

• Small Explorers (SMEXs)

• Explorers Missions of Opportunity (MOs)

• Geospace Dynamics Constellation (GDC)

• Dynamical Neutral Atmosphere-Ionosphere Coupling (DYNAMIC)

• Earth System Explorers (ESE)

• Earth Venture (EV) Mission and Instrument

• Vigil Focused Mission of Opportunity

• Senior Review

• Proposal/CSR Evaluation tasks support SMD Spaceflight Program acquisitions (continued)

– Expected for EASSS 4:

• New Frontiers

• Discovery

• SIMPLEx

• MIDEX

• SMEXs

• Explorers MO

• Earth Venture (EV) Xs

– See Planning List for SMD Solicitations on SOMA website at http://soma.larc.nasa.gov/. Note that SOMA does not currently participate in the evaluation of NASA Research Announcement (NRA) proposals submitted to Research Opportunites for Space and Earth Science (ROSES).

http://soma.larc.nasa.gov/

• AOs may be for full-mission, instrument, or Mission of Opportunity (MO) investigations.

• Evaluation Tasks may be Single-Step, Step 1, or Step 2.

The latter two combine for Two-Step opportunities.

– Single-Step or Step 1 of Two-Step opportunities are the solicitation, submission, evaluation, and selection of proposals prepared in response to an AO.

– For Step 2 of a Two-Step opportunity, NASA selects one or more Step-1 proposals for Phase-A concept studies that result in CSRs. As an outcome of Step 2, NASA down-selects one or more investigations to continue into the subsequent phases of development for flight and operations.

• Examples included as Historical Tasks:

– Science Office for Mission Assessments (SOMA) Planning Task

• Consolidated staff planning task that includes recruitment

– [Redacted] Proposal Technical, Management, and Cost Evaluation

• Single-Step Technical, Management, and Cost (TMC) Evaluation

– [Redacted] Proposals Technical, Management, and Cost (TMC) Evaluation

• Step-1 TMC Evaluation

– [Redacted] Proposal Technical, Management, and Cost Evaluation

• Step-1 TMC Evaluation with subpanels

– [Redacted] Concept Study Report (CSR) Evaluation

• Step-2 TMC and Science Evaluation

– [Redacted] and [Redacted] Proposal Science Panel Support

• Step-1 Science Evaluation Support

Typical Proposal Evaluation Process (Single- Step and Step-1)

Evaluation Task(s) Initiation

AO Release

(AOR)

Selection by

SMD AA @ HQ

Debriefings to Proposers

AOR + 3 weeks AOR + 3 months

Evaluation

Scientific Merit & Feasibility Evaluation Kick-Off and Evaluation

Plenary Meeting

Science Panel Meeting

Categorization Committee

@ HQ

Steering Committee

@ HQ

~ 1–2 weeks~ 2–4 months

Archive Materials in SOMA Vault

Key:

EASSS-4 activities Possible EASSS-4 activities

EASSS-4 OCI/PCI

TMC

Evaluation Kick-Off

Transition Briefing(s) to Program Office (Only for Single-Step)

Compliance Check of Proposals

Receipt of Proposals

Receipt of Notices of Intent

AOR + 1 month

Pre- Proposal Conference

Typical CSR Evaluation Process (Step 2)

Selection by

NASA HQ

Receipt of CSRs

Compliance Check of CSRs

Initial Evaluations

Initial Plenaries Site VisitsFinal

Plenaries

PIs Brief

NASA HQ

Down-Selection

@ NASA HQ

Down-Selection Announced by

NASA HQ

Debriefings to Proposers

~1–2 months~1–2 weeks1-day site visits, ~2 site visits per week

~1–2 weeks

Transition Briefing(s) to Program Office

~10–12 months after Selection

Kick-Off Briefings

Evaluation Task Initiated

Receipt of Draft Participants Lists

Steering Committee

@ HQ

Key:

EASSS-4 activities Possible EASSS-4 activity

EASSS-4 OCI/PCI

Archive Materials in SOMA Vault

Form A Re-Evaluation Check

• Tasks are initiated several months prior to receiving proposals to allow time to:

– Staff panels with evaluators having necessary skills and qualifications

– Document OCIs and PCIs and acceptable mitigations

– Train evaluators on evaluation standards and NASA’s online evaluation system

• The NASA Technical Point of Contact (TPOC) will conduct a kick-off briefing on the specific procedures, criteria, and standards

• Task orders for evaluations typically identify:

– Type and number of skills required

– Number of sub-panels to be staffed, if required

– Evaluation schedule and location(s)

– Products required

– Number of independent cost estimates (normally more than one)

– Transition Briefings for Single-Step and Step-2 Evaluations

Proposal/CSR Evaluation Tasks

• Proposal/CSR Evaluation tasks

– Evaluator skills are required for science, instruments, flight systems, mission design and operations, management and schedule, cost, and other areas identified in task orders

– Evaluating proposals in response to an AO

• Can range from 2 to 30 proposals, potentially requiring subpanels

• Primarily TMC

• Subpanels—when necessary—each evaluate no more than 10 proposals

– Evaluating Phase-A CSRs

• Can range from 2 to 5 CSRs

• One panel with redundant skills in most areas; includes TMC and Scientific

Feasibility, and possibly Scientific Merit

• For Two-Step opportunities, separate tasks are issued for each Step.

• Evaluation tasks are usually for full mission or instrument/MO, but can be combined (e.g., Explorers Step-2 Evaluations).

• Several evaluation tasks can run in parallel. For example, the following took place concurrently:

– Vigil Focused MO Single-Step

– Astrophysics Explorers MIDEX and MO Step-2

– ESE Step-1

– DYNAMIC Step-1

– APEX Step-1

• Location(s) of evaluation tasks

– Initial TMC Evaluations of proposals are conducted remotely using SOMA’s secure server, requiring access behind the NASA firewall and thus use of NASA-provided computers.

– Initial Science Evaluations are typically conducted using a system outside of the NASA firewall.

– Evaluation panel plenary meetings to finalize evaluations are conducted in different locations around the country.

– Additional travel may be required for evaluations of CSRs where initial plenaries and site visits are required.

Historical Tasks

• Historical task SOWs

– 10 selected representative tasks from the current contract

– Located as Attachment L-1 to the Draft RFP on SAM.gov

– Provide insight into the SOW content for evaluations, assessments, studies, services, and support

• Historical Evaluation Tasks

– Addressed on slide 22.

• Historical Assessment Tasks

– [Redacted] Review Board (SRB) Support

– [Redacted] Independent Review Board (IRB) Support

• Historical Study Tasks

– Cost Model Support for [Redacted]

– [Redacted] Support [for SMD Chief Technologist]

• Historical Service and Support Tasks

– The single dedicated Service and Support task will change significantly due to a shift to fully-electronic archiving, so no Historical Task has been issued.

• Service and Support activities are embedded in most tasks.

Historical Tasks

Examples of Instruments Evaluated

• Optical telescopes and detectors at all wavelengths including detection of polarization and spectroscopy (microwave, IR, Visible, UV, X-Ray, gamma-ray).

• Non-optical high energy x-ray, gamma-ray, cosmic ray, and ion detectors covering all energy ranges

• Radio wavelength instruments and detectors

– Radar

• Bi-static radar

• Doppler radar

• Ground penetrating radar

• Synthetic aperture radar

• Scatterometer

• ‘Radar on a chip’

– Radiometers

• LIDAR (earth science and planetary missions), including ‘lidar on a chip’

• In-Situ instruments:

– Mass spectrometers

• Linear ion trap spectrometer

• Multibounce time of flight (TOF) mass spectrometer

• Orbit trap mass spectrometer

• Quadrupole mass analyzer

• Magnetic sector mass analyzer

• Electrostatic sector mass analyzer

• Quadrupole ion trap mass analyzer

• Ion cyclotron resonance

– Coronagraph

– Ion Velocity Meter (IVM)

– Sweeping Impedance Probe

– Multi-angle imagers within imagers

– Hyper-spectral imagers

– Fourier Transform spectrometer

– Gas correlation spectrometer

– Dyson spectrometer

– X-ray fluorescence spectrometer

– Laser induced breakdown spectrometer

– Raman spectrometer

– Spectrographs used to measure chemical composition

– Gas chromatograph

– Fine resolution micro-imager

– Langmuir probe

– Particle detector

– Plasma analyzers

• Electrostatic analyzer (ESA)

• Energetic neutral analyzer (ENA)

• Magnetometers

• Fabry-Pérot interferometer

• Microwave sounders

• Cameras

• Polarimeters

• Heliospheric imager

• Magnetic field imager

• Seismometers (planetary surface)

• Oxygen generation (planetary surface)

Procurement Overview

Activities To Date

• Sources Sought Notice released to Industry on May 16, 2024

– Included a detailed description of need

– Requested capability statements

• Pre-Solicitation Notice and Draft RFP posted on November 8, 2024

• Pre-Solicitation Conference on December 5, 2024

Key Milestones: Notices and Conference Schedule

• All EASSS 4 documents are available at https://SAM.gov

• Check SAM periodically for updates

– Potential Offerors are responsible for monitoring this site for any updates to the draft solicitation

– Potential Offerors are responsible for downloading their own copy of the draft solicitation and any updates

Document Access and Updates

• This is a competitive follow-on acquisition of the Evaluations, Assessments, Studies, Services, and Support 3 (EASSS 3) contract

• The contract has historically been:

– Single Award

– Cost-Reimbursement

– Fixed Fee

– Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ)

– With performance-based task orders

• Current EASSS 3 Contract features:

– Small Business Set-Aside

– Contract Ceiling $111.75M; however, actual value as of 8/31/2024 was approximately $57M

– NASA-issued computers are provided to enable access to NASA IT resources, which is required for nearly all evaluation tasks

History/Follow-on Contract

Small Business Information

• Small Business Set-Aside

– North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) Code 541715, Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Nanotechnology and Biotechnology)

– Size Standard of 1,000 employees or less.

– Per FAR 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting (e)(1), Services, (except construction) – “It will not pay more than 50 percent of the amount paid by the Government for contract performance to subcontractors that are not similarly situated entities. Any work that a similarly situated entity further subcontracts will count toward the prime contractor's 50 percent subcontract amount that cannot be exceeded."

• Annual reporting requirement to demonstrate compliance (Exhibit B)

– Refer to Code of Federal Regulations 13 C.F.R. §125.6 – Prime contractor performance requirements, for more information.

– NASA LaRC Small Business Representative, Mr. Rob Betts, robert.betts@nasa.gov mailto:robert.betts@nasa.gov

Contract

• Contract Type

– Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF)

– Indefinite-Delivery/Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) contract

• Task orders will be issued as requirements arise in accordance with the Task Ordering Procedure clause

• Section B – Supplies and Services and Prices/Cost

– Minimum quantity of work to be issued $100K

– Maximum Contract Value (all Task Orders combined) - $99.75M

– Contract funding is provided with each task order

• Task orders may be incrementally funded pursuant to FAR 52.232-22, Limitation of Funds

Contract Type and Pricing/Cost Information

• Section F – Deliveries or Performance

– 5-year period of performance

– Delivery Requirements

• Contract deliverables contained in RFP Exhibit B

• Task order-specific deliverables identified in each task order

– Place of Performance

• Sites as specified by each task order

Performance Schedule and Place of Performance

• Section G – Contract Administration Data

– The Contractor shall submit all vouchers and invoices using the steps described at NSSC’s Vendor Payment information web site at: https://www.nssc.nasa.gov/vendorpayment (See G.4)

– Offerors may contact the NSSC Customer Contact Center at 1- 877-NSSC123 (1-877-677-2123) with any additional questions or comments

Vouchers and Invoices https://www.nssc.nasa.gov/vendorpayment

• Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI)

– Types of OCIs (NASA Guide on OCIs) https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/guides/OCI_Guid e.pdf

• Unequal access to information

– When a Contractor has access to non-public information which may provide the Contractor an unfair competitive advantage in a later competition for a Government contract

• Impaired objectivity

– When a Contractor’s judgment and objectivity in performing the contract requirements may be impaired because the substance of the Contractor’s performance has the potential to affect other interests of the Contractor

• Biased ground rules

– When a Contractor, as part of its performance of a Government contract, has in some sense set the ground rules for another Government contract

Types of Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/guides/OCI_Guide.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/guides/OCI_Guide.pdf

• Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) (Continued)

– In accordance with FAR 9.5, it was determined that the EASSS 4 scope poses a significant potential for two types of OCIs:

• A strong potential for an OCI due to Impaired Objectivity, as the contractor will be responsible for evaluating proposals/CSRs and assessments

– Note: use of firewalls within its own organization to mitigate “impaired objectivity” OCIs, except in extremely limited circumstances, prevents the Contractor from effectively managing its subcontractor(s), consultant(s), and individual tasks

• There is a strong potential for an OCI involving Unequal Access to Information, as the contractor is likely to have access to proprietary data from proposals submitted in response to NASA solicitations, as well sensitive Government information regarding requirements, which could provide a competitive advantage.

Types of OCI (continued)

• Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) (Continued)

– To avoid, neutralize, and/or mitigate OCIs and PCIs, the RFP includes:

• Clause H.2, Limitation of Future Contracting (NFS Clause

1852.209-71)

• Clause H.9, Organizational and Personal Conflicts of Interest

(LaRC Clause 52.227-96)

• Section I, FAR Clause 52.203-16, Preventing Personal Conflicts of Interest

• Section I, NFS Clause 1852.237-72, Access to Sensitive

Information

• Section I, NFS Clause 1852.237-73, Release of Sensitive

Information

OCI Clauses

• Section H – Special Contract Requirements

– Clause H.9, Organizational and Personal Conflicts of Interest

(LaRC Clause 52.227-96)

– Due to the nature of the EASSS 4 requirements, the Contractor may encounter OCIs that might bias the contractor's judgment, such as:

• Evaluation or assessment of the work product of the Contractor or of the

Contractor’s competitors

• Performance of a proposal evaluation, assessment, or study in which the results could potentially impact the Contractor’s interests and those of its funders

• Performance on any work arising from, or related to, any proposal evaluation, assessment, or study on which it performed these services, except as required in performance of this contract

• Access to proprietary information or data of other Contractors and/or Government sensitive, nonpublic information or data, which information or data may provide the Contractor with an unfair competitive advantage

Potential Bias and OCIs in Contractor Performance

• Clause H.9, Organizational and Personal Conflicts of Interest (LaRC Clause 52.227-96) (Continued)

– OCI Avoidance:

• Contractor shall be precluded from proposing on or working on certain types of contracts as set out in the tailored clause H.2

LIMITATION OF FUTURE CONTRACTING (NFS 1852.209-71) (DEC

1988).

• Contractor shall establish a procedure to examine any work it wishes to propose upon or to engage in to ensure that the work does not create an OCI with this contract.

– Personal Conflicts of Interest (PCIs):

• Given the nature of the services required by this contract, covered employees may encounter PCIs resulting from a financial interest, personal activity, or relationship that could impair the covered employees’ ability to act impartially and in the best interest of the government. For the purposes of PCI, the term “covered employee” is a contractor employee, subcontractor employee, or consultant.

OCI Avoidance and PCIs

• Clause H.9, Organizational Conflicts of Interest (LaRC Clause 52.227-96) (Continued)

– PCI Avoidance:

• Contractor shall establish a procedure to screen all covered employees to prevent PCI’s, including those PCIs that cannot be identified until after award

• Contractor shall screen covered employees at appropriate times to prevent and avoid PCIs and maintain effective oversight

• Contractor shall prevent PCIs by not assigning or allowing covered employees to perform on tasks where a potential PCI is identified unless approved by the Contracting Officer

• Contractor is under continuing obligation to disclose actual or potential PCIs

PCI Avoidance

• Section H – Special Contract Requirements (Continued)

– Requirement to continually screen for OCIs and PCIs for those conflicts that cannot be identified at award

– OCI and PCI training required for all personnel (including subcontractors and consultants)

– Additional OCI and PCI notification, reporting, and training requirements for each task order award

– OCI and PCI Avoidance Plan required with the proposal. The OCI and PCI Avoidance Plan becomes a compliance document at award.

OCI & PCI Screening, Training, and Compliance Requirements

• Section H – Special Contract Requirements (continued)

– H.2 Limitations of Future Contracting (NFS 1852.209-71)

(c) The restrictions upon future contracting are as follows:

(1) The Contractor shall not:

(i) participate in any capacity, in support of an offeror/potential proposer, in a solicitation for which it provides evaluative services under this contract, projected to include all Science Mission Directorate Announcements of Opportunity (AO); or

(ii) perform any work for the baseline or threshold investigation, as defined at selection/down-selection of the associated proposal/CSR, directly arising from, or directly related to, any proposal/CSR evaluation or assessment, which the Contractor performed under this contract. This restriction shall remain in effect for a reasonable time after the Contractor’s performance under this contract has ended, as agreed to by the Contracting Officer and the Contractor, sufficient to avoid unfair competitive advantage or potential bias. This time shall in no case be less than the duration of the contract plus one year, of any contract arising directly from a proposal/CSR evaluation, or an existing contract for a mission subject to an assessment on which the Contractor performed these services.

(2) To the extent that the work under this contract requires access to proprietary, sensitive, business confidential, or financial data of other companies, and as long as these data remain proprietary, sensitive, or confidential, the Contractor shall protect these data from unauthorized use and disclosure and agrees not to use the data for any other purpose including, but not limited to, competing for future work.

(d) The Contractor shall include this clause in all subcontracts regardless of tier.

Limitations on Future Contracting and Data Protection Requirements

1. As noted in Clause H.9, paragraph (g)(2) of the RFP, responses to EASSS 4 task order requests shall include plans for avoiding, neutralizing, or mitigating OCIs and PCIs as described in paragraphs (b), (c), (d), and (e) of the clause.

2. To ensure consistency across proposal/CSR evaluations, the prime contractor must remain non-conflicted and able to conduct all proposal/CSR evaluations.

Avoiding OCIs and PCIs (1 of 3)

3. A substantial part of the work under this contract involves “impaired objectivity” OCIs which cannot be effectively mitigated through the use of firewalls, except in extremely limited circumstances, as such firewalls typically hinder the prime Contractor’s ability to effectively manage its subcontractor(s), consultant(s), and individual tasks.

4. The prime Contractor must not expect that use of a firewall within its own organization to mitigate “impaired objectivity” OCIs will be acceptable to NASA. Such firewalls generally provide insufficient mitigation for an “impaired objectivity” type of OCI.

Avoiding OCIs and PCIs (2 of 3)

5. The RFP requires each Offeror to include a description of current and planned work (including subcontracts) and its assessment of the potential risk for OCIs and PCIs this work may engender in the performance of EASSS 4. See Provision L.18, Factor 1, Subfactor 2, paragraph 1(a). Offerors are highly encouraged to be conservative in their assessments.

6. See RFP Provision L.18, Factor 1, Subfactor 2, paragraph 1 and Exhibit B for a complete list of OCI and PCI Avoidance Plan contents.

Avoiding OCIs and PCIs (3 of 3)

• Section H – Special Contract Requirements (continued)

– Information Security

• Access to classified information is required under this contract

– The Contractor shall maintain a Facility Clearance rating at the Top Secret/Sensitive

Compartmentalized Information (TS/SCI) level with no safeguarding required.

– Offerors are required to provide its CAGE code or documentation demonstrating its eligibility requirements as soon as possible so that the Government can confirm that it possesses or meets the eligibility requirements for the facility clearance.

• The Contractor shall comply with NFS 1852.204-76 (DEVIATION 21-02B), Security Requirements for Unclassified Information Technology Resources, and Exhibit E, Security Requirements for Unclassified IT Resources

• The Contractor shall comply with all U.S. export control laws and regulations, including the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), 22 CFR parts 120-130, and the Export Administration Regulations (EAR), 15 CFR parts 730- 799, in the performance of this contract. In the absence of available license exemptions/exceptions, the Contractor shall be responsible for obtaining the appropriate licenses or other approvals, if required, for exports of hardware, technical data, and software, or for the provision of technical assistance.

Information Security Requirements view

• Section I – Special Contract Requirement

– Task Ordering Procedure

• Task orders issued for specific work within the SOW scope

• Each task order is separately funded by the requiring activity and may be incrementally funded

• The Contractor is required to submit task plans in response to Government requests

– Propose technical approach for completing the task

– Use the contract Schedule of Rates to price burdened labor of the prime and/or significant subcontractors

– Support pricing for all other proposed costs

– OCI and PCI plan, notification, reporting, and training in accordance with approved contract OCI and PCI Avoidance Plan

• Financial and technical performance reported monthly

Task Ordering Procedures view

• Section J – List of Attachments

– Exhibit I, Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, & Accessibility (DEIA) Plan

• The Contractor shall distribute the plan in accordance with Exhibit B.

• The plan shall be submitted within 30 days after contract award.

Task Ordering Procedures

Representations and Instructions

• Section K – Representations and Instructions

– Ensure an active record in the System for Award Management

(SAM) database (SAM.gov)

– Complete all representations and certifications

• Section L - Instructions and Notices to Offerors

– Offerors are highly encouraged to perform a thorough review of the instructions, conditions, and notices

– Offerors are responsible for reviewing the RFP and complying with all instructions, conditions, and notices

– Do not make assumptions based on past solicitations

– This presentation does not cover all proposal submission requirements

• Section L - Instructions and Notices to Offerors

– Four proposal volumes (Mission Suitability, Past Performance, Cost/Price, and Business)

– Significant Subcontractor is defined as any subcontractor proposed to perform a cumulative of 5% of the total contract price or greater across all contract performance areas. (Provision L.13)

– Require one (1) electronic copy via NASA’s Enterprise File Sharing and Sync Box (EFSS Box) (Provision L.17)

– Mission Suitability/Technical Proposal Volume I (Provision L.18)

• Page limitations apply separately to the Mission Suitability/Technical

Proposal volume and the OCI and PCI Avoidance Plan (Note:

Provision L.16 will be updated in the future to reflect this)

• Review submittal requirements for each subfactor

– Subfactor 1 - Staffing Approach

– Subfactor 2 - Management

Instructions and Notices

• Section L - Instructions and Notices to Offerors

– Past Performance Proposal Instructions (Volume II) (Provision

L.19)

• Provide list of contracts that the Offeror, as well as significant subcontractors, has held within the last five (5) years that are similar in content, size, and complexity

• Provide the information required in Provision L.19(b) for each reference submitted

• Provide written consent that allows NASA to discuss past performance of the significant subcontractor and joint venture partner with the offeror

• Independent Past Performance Information

– The Government may consider PPI from other sources, e.g., the

Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Interviews, Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs).

Past Performance Proposal Instructions (Volume II)

Cost Overview

• Section L - Instructions and Notices to Offerors

– Cost/Price Volume III (Provision L.20)

• Anticipate that Adequate Price Competition will exist

• Data Other than Cost or Pricing Data Required

– Offerors are encouraged to read section L.20 of the RFP to understand the required supporting documentation required for each element of cost.

• Per FAR 15.404-3, offerors shall provide sufficient information to support their determination of price/cost reasonableness of each subcontractor’s proposed costs.

– Cost/Price Forms (Attachment L-2, Excel Workbook) – General Instructions

• No PDF or Word files

• No external links

• Spreadsheets must be self-calculating

• No hidden cells

• No locked or password-protected files

Cost/Price Proposal Instructions

• Attachment L-2, Cost Forms (continued) –

– Cost Form 1-10, Limitations on Subcontracting Worksheet

(FAR 52.219-14)

• “[The Offeror] will not pay more than 50 percent of the amount paid by the

Government for contract performance to subcontractors that are not similarly situated entities.”

• Contract Performance – Labor and related burdens (No Fee) (13 C.F.R.

§125.6)

• Offeror’s cost of performance is total labor cost plus applicable G&A

• Subcontractor’s cost of performance is total labor cost plus applicable G&A

• Summarize total cost of performance and determine Offeror’s percent of contract performance

• Offerors will NOT be considered for award if 50% of contract performance is not met by the prime and similarly situated entities

Cost/Price Proposal Instructions (continued)

• Attachment L-2, Cost Forms (continued) –

– Cost Form 1-2 – Total Proposed Price

• Cost Form 1-2 is auto-calculated based on the offeror's proposed costs in cost forms 1-3 CPFF Labor Price and 1-5 Travel and ODCs.

– Cost Form 1-3 – CPFF Labor Price

• Cost Form 1-3 is auto-calculated based on the offerors proposed costs in Cost Form 1-4 CPFF Labor Rate Build-up.

• Offeror’s responsibility to verify the fully loaded labor rates in Cost

Form 1-3 match those in Cost Form 1-4.

• Government provided hours in Cost Form 1-3 shall be distributed by the Offeror for work to be performed by the Offeror’s employees, significant subcontractors, other subcontractors, and consultants. However, the total hours by labor category must equal the amounts included in Cost Form 1-3 (Offerors may add additional rows for the distribution of labor hours).

Attachment L - 2 , Cost Forms (continued)

• Attachment L-2, Cost Forms (continued)

– Cost Form 1-4 – CPFF Labor Rate Build-up

• The Offerors shall complete all sections of the CPFF labor rate build-up tab for years 1-5.

• The offerors shall propose their direct labor rate, all applicable indirect rates, fixed fee amount, and any Prime burdens on subcontractors (if applicable) for each year.

• The offeror may insert additional columns if needed. The offeror shall include all formulas intact.

– Cost Form 1-5 – Travel and Other Direct Costs

• Government plug amounts provided in Cost Form 1-5.

• Offerors shall propose any applicable burden (Ex. Material Handling, G&A, etc.) that would be applied to Travel and/or ODCs during contract execution.

• Travel and ODC burdens shall NOT include profit/fee as Travel and ODCs will be awarded on a no profit or fee basis.

Attachment L – 2, Cost Forms (continued)

• Attachment L-2, Cost Forms (continued)–

– Cost Form 1-6 – Summary of Indirect Rates

• Show how CFY rates are apportioned to CY rates

• Show all formulas for derivation of apportioned rates

– Cost Form 1-7 and 1-8 – Fringe, Overhead and G&A

• Offerors shall complete the indirect rate build-up exhibits in accordance with Section L of the solicitation.

• Additional tabs may be added for additional indirect rates (if applicable).

– Cost Form 1-9 Schedule of Subcontractors

• Offerors shall fill-in and identify ALL subcontractors. This includes but not limited to, subcontractor’s address, contract type, and basis of selection.

• Offerors shall provide their price and/or cost analysis of each subcontractor in accordance with Section L of the solicitation.

Attachment L - Cost Forms (continued)

• Section L - Instructions and Notices to Offerors

– Business Proposal Instructions (Volume IV) (Provision L.21)

• Signed contract offer:

– Signed original of the Standard Form (SF) 33 and all required fill-ins completed in Sections B to K

– Acknowledgement of all amendments to the solicitation by signing and dating page 1 of each SF 30

– A cover letter stating either acceptance of proposed terms and conditions and SOW or a cover letter listing exceptions to the terms, conditions or requirements

– Offerors are cautioned that exceptions or new terms, conditions, and clauses may result in a determination of proposal unacceptability (NFS 1815.305-70), may preclude award to an Offeror if award is made without discussions, or may otherwise affect an Offeror’s competitive standing.

• Offeror’s statement that its proposal shall remain firm for at least 240 calendar days after the date specified for receipt by the Government

Business Proposal Instructions (Volume IV)

• Section L - Instructions and Notices to Offerors

– Business Proposal Instructions (Volume IV) (Provision L.21) (continued)

• Instructions for Responsibility Considerations (Provision L.21d)) areas set forth in FAR 9.104-1 and 9.104-2 including the below:

– (1) Accounting and Operational Controls

• Offerors shall possess adequate accounting system for determining costs applicable to the contract prior to award of a cost-reimbursement contract

– (2) Exhibit G, Department of Defense (DD) Form 254, Contract Security Classification Specification

• Offerors shall possess or meet eligibility requirements for a Facility Clearance at the Top Secret / Sensitive Compartmented Information level in accordance with Exhibit G, DD Form 254, Contract Security Classification Specification.

• Offerors are required to provide its CAGE code or documentation demonstrating its eligibility requirements as soon as possible so that the Government can confirm that it possesses or meets the eligibility requirements for the facility clearance.

Business Proposal Instructions (Volume IV)(Continued)

• Section M – Evaluation Factors for Award

– Conducted in accordance with FAR 15.3, NFS 1815.3 Source

Selection Procedures, and the solicitation

– Evaluation Factors

• Factor 1 - Mission Suitability (numerically weighted and scored per RFP Section M)

• Factor 2 - Past Performance (confidence rating per RFP Section M)

• Factor 3 - Cost/Price

– Anticipate award on initial offers, but the Government reserves the right to hold discussions with offerors

Evaluation Factors

• Section M – Evaluation Factors for Award

– Best Value Selection: The Government will award a contract to the responsible Offeror whose proposal provides the best solution to the solicitation and the best value to the Government, all factors considered

– Mission Suitability, Past Performance, and Cost/Price will be of approximately equal importance

– Therefore, and in accordance with FAR 15.304(e), all evaluation factors other than Cost/Price, when combined, are significantly more important than Cost/Price

Evaluation Factors (continued)

• Section M – Evaluation Factors for Award

– Factor 1 – Mission Suitability

• Subfactors

1. Staffing Approach 400

2. Management 600

Total Points 1,000

Section M: Factor 1 – Mission Suitability

• Section M – Evaluation Factors for Award

– Factor 2 - Past Performance, will be assessed from:

• Information contained in the proposal for Prime and Significant Subcontractors

• Past Performance evaluation input provided through customer questionnaires and/or interviews

• Information NASA obtains from other sources

Procurement Overview Section M: Factor 2 - Past Performance

• Section M – Evaluation Factors for Award

– Factor 3 – Cost/Price

• Reasonableness

• Realism – Proposed costs

– are realistic for the work to be performed,

– reflect a clear understanding of the requirements,

– and are consistent with the unique methods of performance and materials described in the technical proposal.

• Lack of resource realism may adversely affect the Offeror's Mission

Suitability score and result in cost realism adjustments under the Cost/Price factor

• Offeror’s proposed prices for Exhibit C – Schedule of Rates

Procurement Overview Section M: Factor 3 – Cost/Price

• Questions or Comments Due: December 5, 2024

• RFP Release: January 6, 2025

• Proposals Due: February 14, 2025

• Award: July 21, 2025

• Effective Date of Award: October 1, 2025

• Dates are provided for planning purposes only and are subject to change.

Procurement Timeline (Tentative Dates)

Key Information and Communication Guidelines

• Check the SAM.gov web site periodically for pertinent information

• All communications and inquiries must be directed to larc-easss4@mail.nasa.gov.

Questions and Answers

Questions and Answers

Please identify yourself and your company when asking a question.

Closing Remarks

Thank you all for participating today and we are looking forward to your proposals.