DF ESS Consolidation_022124_Redacted.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

*Multiple delivery orders with differing PoPs, inclusive range shown **Projected to fund final option which extends to 15 Sep 2024

B. Consolidated Advisory and Assistance Support Services

It is anticipated this consolidated effort will be competed full and open in OASIS Pool 1.

The task order will consist of firm-fixed-price and Time and Material contract line items in accordance with (IAW) commercial terms and conditions. The A&AS consolidation acquisition contains 78 task areas. The contractor shall provide A&AS services to augment Department of the Air Force (DAF) and Secretary of the Air Force (SAF) staffs in support of their mission requirements. The general task areas are as follows:

Military Construction (MILCON), Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization (FSRM), congressional affairs, strategic communications, operational energy, environmental management, installation energy, installation planning and strategy, emergency management, explosive ordnance disposal, fire and emergency services, engineer readiness, housing management, real property, utilities, cyber security, budget analysis, administrative assistance, climate resilience and strategy, and program management.

II. Findings

A. Market Research.

The Government conducted thorough market research in accordance with FAR 10.001 and

10.002 for this acquisition. Specifically, the Government researched potential impact that consolidating development and operations requirements into one contract would have on industry and the Government’s requirement. Below are the results of the market research:

1) The Government participated in Industry Week from 8-11 May 2023. One on One sessions were conducted 15-24 May 2023 with five interested offerors.

After discussions with the five interested offerors they were determined incapable of supporting the entire requirement.

2) In addition, the Government released four Requests for Information (RFI). The first RFI was posted to GSA OASIS LB Pool 1 from 28 June 2023 to 12 July 2023 and received five responses. The second RFI was posted to GSA OASIS LB Pool 1, 19 December 2023 to 3 January 2024 and received two responses.

The third RFI was released on GSA OASIS SB Pool 1 from 5 February 2024 – 14 February 2024 and received six responses. The fourth RFI was released on SAM.gov from 5 February 2024 – 14 February 2024 and received nine responses.

3) The RFIs provided an opportunity for interested parties to respond to the Government’s requirement. A total of 23 responses were received from the four RFI’s and Industry Week (five large businesses, and 18 small businesses), of which two large business were determined capable of performing all the required tasks as the prime contractor. Several additional OASIS LB pool 1 contractors are suspected to have capability to meet the full requirement but did not respond to the RFIs.

4) Market research findings shows DoD contract history of the same NAICS and similar magnitude have been awarded to large businesses. There has not been any history of Small Business performance for the contracts listed in table 1. In the last five years, 11 of 11 contracts of the same NAICS and valued between $100M and $500M were awarded to large business. Six of 11 were awarded on an enterprise solution, two on competitive definitive contracts, and three sole sourced.

5) Market research findings based on Procurement IQ market intelligence suggests individual venders occupy low market share which should drive high competition and engagement in price-based competition. Market intelligence additionally suggests the large requirement provides the government negotiation leverage, five-year duration could result in discount for long revenue stream, and consolidation in related services would likely result in discount from economy of scale.

B. Identification of Alternative Contracting Approaches Involving a Lesser Degree of Consolidation.

Alternative approaches could range from no consolidation (continue four separate contract efforts) to consolidating some or all existing requirements. Any approach that involves less consolidation would reduce predicted cost savings from economy of scale and result in increased burden on the government from increased management of contract acquisition and execution. Additionally, the government would likely continue to pay higher fees for contract access compared to a consolidated approach. Per Table 2 below, the Government has a cost avoidance fee of and a cost savings of because of this effort being consolidated.

C. Impact of Acquisition Strategy on Small Business Concerns.

The contracts proposed for consolidation are not and have not historically been awarded to small business. There are negligible impacts to small business resulting from consolidation.

D. Steps are taken to include small business concerns in the acquisition strategy.

The Industry Week, one-on-one interviews, and multiple RFI’s resulted in small business interest to subcontract. Size and scope of the four individual requirements are sufficiently large enough that small business could not reasonably meet all requirements. Contractors will be required to submit subcontracting plans and are expected to include small business participation through subcontracting.

III. Basis of Consolidation

The determination to consolidate the four contracts is a result of market research conducted by AF/A4C, SAF/IE, and AFDW/PK during acquisition planning.

Consolidation is expected to produce cost savings through economy of scale and price-based competition for a large dollar, five-year requirement. Contract requirements between AF/A4C and SAF/IE are synergistic as the requirements engineer centric, planning and policy tasks. Additionally, consolidation reduces government burden in contract administration, acquisition, and maintenance through actions required on one contract vice four contracts while maximizing cost savings.

The Government expects to achieve the following benefits from combining the four requirements to meet AF/A4C and SAF/IE missions: Reduction in acquisition cycle times; reduce government management; and maximize cost savings.

1) Reduction in Acquisition Cycle Times: Pursuing one acquisition every five years compared to four reduces workload on AFDW/PK, SAF/IE and AF/A4C. Additionally, maintenance through the life of the contract is streamlined by adjustment or modification of just the one contract. This is of particular importance as the DAF shifts to align with initiatives associated with Great Power Competition.

2) Reduced Government Management: The consolidated order will significantly reduce the government administrative burden for duplicative acquisition processing, requirement definition, market research, requirement package, proposal management, source selection, award, and performance management.

3) Maximize Cost Savings: The consolidated order will provide cost savings through competition, economy of scale and the elimination of pass thru and service fees. The exact cost savings is difficult to estimate due to the variety of personnel involved, the complexity of the acquisition and the technical industry involved. The current government estimate indicates cost savings from consolidation in fees is . This is only an estimation of cost savings calculated by the elimination of contract fees between the present contracts (See Table 2). Additionally, cost savings from economy of scale and competition, and consolidation of contractor program management of four contracts into one, project savings across five years (See Table 2). Current estimates project costs savings from consolidation.