APG_S3CoE_IndustryPerspectivesPanelKeySummary2Aug18.pdf

APG S3CoE

2 Aug 18~Page 1 of 3

Army Contracting Command-Aberdeen Proving Ground (ACC-APG)

Source Selection Support Center of Excellence (S3CoE)

APG S3CoE Q~4 Symposium Series: Industry Perspectives Panel Symposium Key Summary

25 July 2018, 9:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m.

Mallette Hall Auditorium, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD

BACKGROUND

The APG S3CoE conducts a quarterly symposium series with Industry. The purpose of the symposiums are to provide our Industry partners with ACC APG perspectives on various topics to allow greater transparency and assist Industry with providing competitive proposals. The FY 18 topics covered for Q~1 was Source Selection Government and Industry Trends, Q~2 Cost Realism

Evaluation Information Q~3 Past Performance Evaluation Information and Q~4 APG invited

Industry (via FedBizOpps-FBO) to brief Team ACC APG on Industry’s perspectives related to the defense acquisition source selection process with requested recommendations to maximize competitive proposal submissions. The symposium series is open to Industry and Government defense acquisition professionals.

OVERVIEW

The Industry Perspectives Panel Symposium was held on 25 July 2018 at APG, MD. The purpose of the symposium was to afford our Industry partners an opportunity to candidly discuss their perspectives on the defense acquisition source selection process with contracting, requirements owners and Industry.

There were a total of 131 registrants (64 Government and 67 Industry); approximately 90 personnel attended. The Industry panel was represented by both small (SB) and large businesses

(LB): 90 Degrees of Design (SB), Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation (LB), Booz Allen

Hamilton (LB), Boeing (LB) and moderated by the APG Chapter President of the National

Defense Industrial Association (NDIA).

The ACC APG S3CoE welcomed the audience and stated that the key summary information would be distributed to Government and Industry partners not in attendance via Government internal communication channels and posted to FBO by 2 August 2018. The APG S3CoE then introduced the NDIA moderator. The moderator also provided opening remarks, introduced and moderated the Industry panel. The Industry panel discussed their perceptions, proposal and teaming partner considerations and provided recommendations for increasing Industry

2 Aug 18~Page 2 of 3 participation and enhanced Industry/Government collaboration; as annotated in the below listed summary of key information.

INDUSTRY PERCEPTIONS

The panel commented on their perceptions related to the market research phase by stating it is not always clear what the Government is requesting from Industry. The panel stated when requests for information (RFIs) notices are issued with short suspense dates; Industry may perceive the

Government already having preferred solutions for the issued RFIs. The panel also commented on how the Government states they want technical innovation and expertise and that Industry is willing to provide it, however. Does the Government acknowledge and reward innovation? Is the

Government willing to pay for technical differentiation? Additionally during the market research phase it was noted that Industry may be reluctant to provide potential cost information, due to their perception that the Government will expect the costs submitted with information known at that time. There are times when information and costs have evolved; which may be different than the

RFI cost information submitted.

The panel perceptions related to the solicitation phase were in reference to how information may at times be inconsistent, disorganized by having some requirements being buried in unexpected sections of solicitations. Industry would like for the Government to answer solicitation questions and not simply refer them to FBO announcements. The panel recommended an executive summary or a bottom line up front (BLUF) section in solicitations; which would include the requirements owners (customers) and the competition pool. Industry would like to know if they are competing solely with Industry or also competing with Government agencies. The panel acknowledged that Industry has to also follow solicitation instructions more closely.

The panel commented that Industry talks to Industry; Government talks to Government but

Industry and Government may not be talking enough. The panel stated they perceive, that the

Government perceives Industry as not being prepared to meet aggressive schedules and is not empowered to negotiate without escalating to their senior leadership. Industry commented they are prepared to support Government requirements and are empowered; some matters may require senior leadership awareness.

PROPOSAL BID VS. NO BID DECISION PROCESS

The panel stated some of the evaluated risk areas when deciding to submit proposals are incumbents and how their potential solutions will challenge the core capabilities, personnel expertise, security requirements, locations, schedules, costs, clauses and contract types. The panel also stated how they evaluate if their proposal solutions are in line with solicitation evaluation discriminators. The stability of funding, projected funding and profit margins, due to efficiencies are also taken into consideration when evaluating risks. If the draft solicitation is drastically different from the official solicitation or there are too many solicitation bid and proposal cost changes; that may influence the proposal submission decision. The panel stated if small businesses do not receive information early enough to assess, if they and or teaming partners can

2 Aug 18~Page 3 of 3 do the work; they may not be able to submit proposals. The panel mentioned that small businesses may not have the same resources as large businesses. An audience Industry partner stated there have been times when key personnel talent have become Government personnel by the end of the contract. It was noted that companies may not want to lose their competitive talent to Government agencies so they have to consider those risks when deciding to submit proposals.

TEAMING PARTNER CONSIDERATIONS

The panel commented how they look for strategic partner solutions that take into consideration cybersecurity, laws, import, export, foreign entities and non-disclosure agreements. The panel also noted there has to be a balance as to not degrade prime core capability work by subcontracting;

large businesses like teaming with small businesses for complimentary skill set solutions, their innovation and ability to recruit quickly. The panel suggested that small businesses state their capabilities to large businesses, to participate in mentor protégé programs; prior to signing teaming agreements. If small businesses propose work for large business proposal submissions and do not get the actual contract work, there may be ethical integrity lapses which is why it is important to have teaming agreements.

RECOMMENDATIONS AND KEY TAKEAWAYS

The panel passionately commented on how critical it is for Requirements Owners (ROs) to engage with Industry early, by providing Government requirement documents in a repository and have

Program Manager (PM) Liaison Offices to arrange Industry meetings, because Government PMs cannot meet with all of Industry. The repository document access and arranged Industry meetings prevent Industry from having to spend time searching for information; Industry can spend time discussing strategic solutions with PMs.

The panel also encourages ACC APG to keep providing division updates and multiple award (MA) indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) task orders (TO) information updates via FBO. The

IDIQ TO updates afford companies opportunities to strategically engage with the prime contractors.

Industry and Government would benefit by encouraging our up and coming professionals to engage in dialogue and reduce slow responses due to apprehension of having conversations. There are times in a post award environment, where a telephone call conversation to ask and answer questions would be efficient.

CLOSING REMARKS

The Industry moderator and panel thanked Team ACC APG for the opportunity to share their perspectives and recommendations for increasing Industry participation and Government collaboration. The APG S3CoE and audience thanked the moderator and panel and concluded the symposium.