A38_JEFO_HSICC_Bridge_Complete_File_Redacted_1.pdf

United States Department of the Interior

INTERIOR BUSINESS CENTER

Washington, DC 20240

JUSTIFICATION FOR AN EXCEPTION TO FAIR OPPORTUNITY

AUTHORITY: FAR 16.507-6(b)

Head Start Information and Communication Center Bridge

1. Identification of the agency and the contracting activity, and specific identification of the document as a “Justification for an Exception to Fair Opportunity.”

This document is a Justification for an Exception to Fair Opportunity for the Department of the Interior (DOI), Interior Business Center (IBC), Acquisition Services Directorate (AQD), Division I, Branch 3 in support of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Office of Head Start (OHS).

2. Nature and/or description of the action being approved.

Request is for an exception to fair opportunity for a follow-on requirement to receive short-term continued support while a long-term, competitive action is being completed.

The anticipated procurement will be a firm-fixed price (FFP) task order issued against the incumbent’s (Hendall, Inc.) One Acquisition Solution for Integrated Services Plus (OASIS+) contract. The OASIS+ contract vehicle was issued by the General Services Administration (GSA).

3. A description of the supplies or services required to meet the agency’s needs (including the estimated value).

This will be a Firm Fixed Price task order to provide continued support in modernizing and operating the communications infrastructure of OHS, improving accessibility and usability of its digital resources, and increasing audience engagement through an integrated, user-centered strategy that leverages innovative tools and technologies.

The total estimated value of this action is . The period of performance is a two-month base period and four one-month option periods with an option to extend up to six months under FAR 52.217-8.

4. Identification of the exception to fair opportunity (see 16.505(b)(2)) and the supporting rationale, including a demonstration that the proposed contractor’s unique qualifications or the nature of the acquisition requires use of the exception cited. If the contracting officer uses the logical follow-on exception, the rationale shall describe why the relationship between the initial order and the follow-on is logical (e.g., in terms of scope, period of performance, or value).

Head Start Information and Communication Center Bridge

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(B) – Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level of quality required because the supplies or services ordered are unique or highly specialized.

Currently, AQD is in the middle of conducting a competitive follow on to replace incumbent contract 75P00120C00049 that was awarded by HHS’s Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration (ASA), Program Support Center (PSC) . This incumbent contract was awarded to Hendall, Inc. and has a current expiration date of January 19, 2026. By executing this bridge contract, it will allow the Government to complete the competition and allow for a 30 day transition in support from Hendall to the new contractor.

The reason Hendall, Inc. is being selected for this sole source is because Hendall is currently the incumbent contractor and has been providing satisfactory support since July of 2020. Attempting to issue this procurement to a vendor to other than Hendall will result in a possible decline in support as the Government is not aware of any contractor outside of Hendall that can provide the required support on day one of the bridge as Hendall has the staff and expertise already in place. Market research conducted for the competition has shown that contractors exist that can provide the support, but all contractors outside Hendall will require a transition period in order to get up to speed to provide the required support, which is anticipated to be at least a month. Given that the purpose of this bridge contract is to ensure no gap in service and that the bridge task order holder is capable, awarding this task order to Hendall has the highest chance of achieving these objectives. If a gap in service were to occur, OHS’s ability to carry out critical public outreach regarding its various programs will be hindered, thus increasing the risk of programmatic failure. Therefore, Hendall is the only vendor that is capable of providing the services required at the level of quality required in the timeframe that is available (at least a month) and the period that the support is required.

5. A determination by the contracting officer that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable.

The contracting officer determines that the anticipated price under this bridge task order will be fair and reasonable based on comparison with the Government created Independent Government Estimate, which is based on the cost history for this service.

Furthermore, the prices will be determined fair and reasonable as the pricing quoted by Hendall will be verified to be in line with Hendall’s OASIS+ pricing, which has already been determined to be fair and reasonable.

6. Any other facts supporting the justification.

In accordance with FAR 16.505(b)(2)(ii)(D), within 14 days after placing the order with Hendall, a redacted version of this justification will be posted on SAM.gov for a minimum of 30 days.

7. A statement of the actions, if any, the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers that led to the exception to fair opportunity before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services is made.

A competition for this work is in process and the support provided under this bridge will ensure there is no gap in service while the competition is completed and follow on award is made, estimated around February/March of 2026.

7. The contacting officer�s certification that the justification is accurate and complete to the best of the contracting officer�s knowledge and belief.

I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

8. Evidence that any supporting data that is the responsibility of technical or requirements personnel (e.g., verifying the Government�s minimum needs or requirements or other rationale for an exception to fair opportunity) and which form a basis for the justification have been certified as complete and accurate by the technical or requirements personnel.

I certify that the technical data which forms a basis for this justification is complete and accurate and meets the Government�s minimum needs.

9. A written determination by the approving official that one of the circumstances in FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(A) through (E) applies to the order.

FAR 16.505 (b)(2)(i)(B)

10. Reviews and Approvals

Concur

Concur

Approve