CSA_Webinar_Slides_8-20-13.pdf

Pre-Proposal Conference Clear Signal for Action (CSA) Training Development & Support

RFP No. DTRT57-13-R-20019

The National Transportation Systems Center

Advancing transportation innovation for the public good

U.S. Department of Transportation Research and Innovative Technology Administration John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center

August 20, 2013

CSA Agenda

Overview

Presenters

1. Welcome and Introductions

2. Ground Rules

Robert Robinson, Contracting Officer Roland Regan, Contract Specialist

3. Volpe Center Overview Mary Stearns, Rvt-81, Division Chief

4. Section C / Statement of Work and Potential Initiatives

Mary Stearns, RVT-81, Division Chief Joyce Ranney, RVT-81, Program Manager Michael Zuschlag, RVT-81, Principal Investigator Nicole Johnson, RVT-81, Project Coordinator

5. Background Roland Regan, Contract Specialist

6. Highlights of the Request for Proposal

7. Cost and Business Proposal

Roland Regan, Contract Specialist

8. Reminders and RVP-31 Changes as of 7/9/13 Robert Robinson, Contracting Officer

CSA Webinar Ground Rules

Any statements, remarks or explanations made during this pre-proposal conference shall not qualify the terms of the solicitation.

Terms and conditions of the solicitation remain unchanged unless an amendment is issued that incorporates any possible changes discussed or alluded to during today’s pre-proposal conference.

In accordance with the RFP no verbal questions will be answered relative to the solicitation. Section L.2.G, entitled “Inquires”, states all questions must be submitted, in writing, to Roland Regan by 4:00 PM on August 27, 2013 and will be answered through an Amendment to the solicitation.

CSA Webinar Ground Rules (Continued)

No video or voice recording of this conference is permitted.

Please ensure silence or turn off all cell phones and PDAs.

Any statements, remarks or explanations made during this pre-proposal conference shall not qualify the terms of the RFP, unless an amendment is issued.

A copy of today’s presentation will be provided via e-mail by the end of this week.

Volpe Center Overview and CSA Program Background

Mary Stearns, Division Chief

Human Factors Research and System Applications

Background Volpe established in 1970 Part of U.S. Department of

Transportation (DOT) Research and Innovative Technology Administration

(RITA)

Named after former DOT Secretary and MA Governor John A. Volpe

Volpe supports DOT goals Safety State of good repair Economic competitiveness Livable communities Environmental sustainability

About Volpe

Who we are

Our Purpose: Advancing transportation innovation for the public good

Our Mission: Improve the nation’s transportation system by serving as a center of excellence for informed decision making, anticipating emerging transportation issues, and advancing technical, operational, and institutional innovations

Our Values:

Public service Innovative solutions Professional excellence Collaboration and partnering

Our most important asset:

dedicated transportation professionals Over 550 federal employees representing a full spectrum of disciplines from engineering to physical and social sciences

More than 260 advanced degrees

Over 400 on-site contractors

Internship and student co-op programs: more than 40 years cultivating the next generation of transportation professionals

What makes us unique

Multimodal, world-class resource

Decades of experience and expertise in every mode of transportation

Institutional knowledge of the global transportation system and its stakeholder perspectives

Experience in responding to large-scale global and national transportation challenges

Cross-disciplinary expertise

Knowledge in the full spectrum of technologies and disciplines relevant to transportation system improvements

Experience in assembling interdisciplinary teams to address technology and public policy innovations

What makes us unique Entrepreneurial, objective, efficient

Fee-for-service; no direct appropriations Flexibility and responsiveness of a consultant A trusted, objective advisor focused on safety and the public good

Federal advantage

Guided by a deep understanding of federal responsibilities, objectives, and practices

Accessibility of a federal in-house resource that can partner on strategy, tactics, policy, and acquisitions

Driven by public interest—not profit

Our sponsor base is broad and diverse

U.S. DOT

Federal Aviation Administration

Federal Highway Administration

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

Federal Railroad Administration

Federal Transit Administration

Maritime Administration

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Office of the Inspector General

Office of the Secretary of Transportation

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Research and Innovative Technology Administration

Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation

State and Local

Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning

Massachusetts Port Authority

Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments

Minnesota Department of Transportation

New York State Thruway Authority

Orange County Transportation Authority

State of Arizona

University of Florida

Washington Metro Area Transit Authority

Other Federal

Central Intelligence Agency

Department of Agriculture

Department of Commerce

Department of Defense

Department of Energy

Department of Homeland Security

Department of the Interior

Department of State

Environmental Protection Agency

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

U.S. Access Board

U.S. Postal Service

International

International Civil Aviation Organization

United Kingdom Ministry of Defence

Others

Boeing Commercial Airlines

MITRE Corporation

Continuous improvement through biennial customer satisfaction interviews

Annual obligations ~$250M

A multidisciplinary set of skills and expertise

Volpe Center organization

Technical Centers

Management

Systems Stephen Popkin

Transportation Policy and Planning

Rachel Winkeller

Environmental and Energy

Systems Gregg Fleming

Transportation Logistics and Security

Michael Dinning

Air Traffic Systems and Operations Steven Lang

Infrastructure Systems and Engineering Robert Dorer

Human Factors Research and

System Applications

Steven Popkin, Act.

Advanced Transportation Technologies

Gary Ritter

Chief Financial Officer William Henrikson

Chief Counsel Monica Conyngham

EEO Officer vacant

Director and Associate Administrator

Robert C. Johns

Human Resources

Susan Connors

Acquisitions Mary Doherty

Information Technology

Eric Frykenberg

Facilities Management David Duncan

Communication and Knowledge Management

Marc Mandler

Director Emeritus Richard John

Organizational Culture and Development

Helen Blackman

Strategic Initiatives for Research and Innovation

Ellen Bell

Deputy Associate Administrator for Research and Innovation

Anne Aylward

Deputy Associate Administrator for Operations David Ishihara

Human Factors Research and System Applications

Focus Provide internationally recognized human factors research and development capabilities supporting all modes of transportation

Pioneer new insights about the relationships between humans and policies, processes, automation, and technologies

Example projects Confidential Close Call Reporting System – FRA Improving safety culture in rail – FRA Human system interaction and cockpit displays – FAA

Requirements Overview & Objectives

Michael Zuschlag

Engineering Psychologist Human Factors Research and System Applications

What is Clear Signal for Action?

Safer Culture

Peer-to-peer Feedback

Safer Practices

Continuous Improvement

Safer Workplace

Anonymous Data

Safety Leadership

Products to be Delivered www.glearsign www.clearsignalforaction.gov

Clear Signal for Action Download Download Contact

Training Materials Software CSASupport@FRA.gov

Training Materials

Planning and Sustaining

Operations (PPF, CI, SLD)

Software Usage

Software

Observation Data

Data Analysis & Corrective Actions

Training Records

Observer & Process Performance

Train FRA to Support CSA Sites

FRA CSA Support Team Training site personnel Ad hoc consultation

FRA Knowledge Management Software maintenance and updating Technical support

Website www.glearsign www.clearsignalforaction.gov

Meets government requirements

Realities of Government and the Rail Industry:

Tell us about your abilities with…

Self-directing Materials and Support

ANNOUNCING

CSA Training for 2021 June 7-11

Pueblo Colorado By

The FRA CSA Support Team

Register:

Accommodations:

Limited Site Manpower

50 to 2000 Employees

Strict Schedules

Limited Professional Support at Site

Administration

Transportation

Maintenance of Way

Car & Diesel Maintenance

Station Services

IT Services

Training Department

Director of

Contracted Services

Administration

Transportation of Way

Car & Diesel

Station Services

Contractor A Contractor B

Emphasis on Attention

Employees Working Alone

(notional)

Self-observation Cross-crewmember Observation

Third-party Observation

Mutual Distrust

Management Labor Oversight, but not

Interference Constructive Role for Leadership

Worker-controlled Data & Analysis Physical Isolation

Usability

Statement of Work:

Getting us there

Waterfall Model Task # Task Description

1 Needs Assessment 2 Materials Definition 3 Production of 3 Modules 4 Full Production 5 Demonstration Pilot-Site Participation 6 Materials Revision 7 Website Development 8 Training for CSA Support Team 9 Turnover

10 Support on New Site

Task 1: Needs Assessment

Intercity Implemen-tation Framework

Technology Transfer

Plan

FRA

Training Visits to Railroads

Stakeholder Review Panel FRA IT

FRA

Tasks 3-6: Iterative Design

Task 3:

3 Modules

Task 4:

All Modules

Task 5:

Demo

Pilot

Task 6:

Revision

Build Test

Task 9: Turnover

Boundary Licensed Maximum Observees Intended Industry Segment

A 2,500 Pilot Demonstration B 19,000 Small Passenger C 5,000 Shortline Freight D 73,000 Class I Freight All 99,500 All Heavy Rail

License Boundaries

Proposal Requirements:

Technical Proposal

Technical Proposal Requirements

Written Portion Volume II – Staffing and Past Performance Offerors must include the required information as specified in Section L.5. as cited on pages 94-101.

Page limits are specified in L.5.B.

Technical Proposal Sections in L.5.D Section IV Past Performance Subfactor 1: Past Performance (w/in past 3 years)

Subfactor 2: Professional Work Product Samples

Volume II – Part A: Staffing

No more than 9 resumes shall be submitted

Must be verifiable; relevant dates, names and addresses of educational institutions and employers provided

Demonstrate qualifications of proposed personnel

Experience, education, certifications, and training relevant to SOW requirements

Resumes must be representative of, and consistent with, the Offeror’s proposed labor cost presented in the Cost and Business Proposal

Labor Category # of Resumes

Program Manager 1

Midlevel CSA Expert 1

Midlevel Safety Leadership Expert

Senior Training Development Expert

Junior Level Training Expert 1

Midlevel Software Development Expert Midlevel Information Security Analyst Midlevel Webmaster Midlevel Systems Usability Analyst

Total Required Resumes 9

Note: Substitutions made for degrees or years of experience require approval by the Contracting Officer or designee

Volume II – Part A: Staffing (cont’d)

In addition to resumes, Offerors must submit

Staffing Plan and Approach

Staffing Matrix

Organizational Chart

If proposing contingent candidates include commitment letters.

Volume II – Part B: Past Performance

Only relevant past performance history will be considered. The Government will determine relevance of past performance information based on the similarity of the nature of the previous work to the current requirement (i.e., Section C), the dollar value of the previous efforts (i.e., equal to or greater than $1,000,000), and the currency of the prior work (i.e., within the past three years)

Refer to pages 99-101 for Past Performance Proposal Instructions

Volume II – Part B: Past Performance (cont’d)

Offerors must send Client Authorization Letters (Exhibit F) for Non-Federal references listed in the five most relevant sources.

Offerors are responsible for making sure that past performance evaluations from Federal and non-Federal sources are received by the proposal due date and time (3:00 PM, EDT, September 26, 2013).

If the Offeror does not include past performance history or does not affirmatively state that no past performance history exists or can be obtained, the Offeror’s proposal will be rated Unacceptable.

Proposal Requirements:

Cost and Business Proposal

Volume I - Cost and Business Proposal

The cost and business proposal must consist of a signed Standard Form 33 and the solicitation documents as found in Exhibit C on page 80.

The total Level of Effort (LOE) is represented in Exhibit A on page 73 and allocates estimated hours per year for the entire requirement.

Labor Category qualifications and rates must be consistent with qualifications and rates of resumed staff.

Include information on Uncompensated Overtime (IAW FAR 52.237-10).

Include Compensation Plan for Professional Employees (IAW

FAR 52.222-46)

Volume I - Cost and Business Proposal (cont’d)

Cost and pricing information must be contained only in Volume I; under no circumstances should financial information be included elsewhere in the proposal.

Proposals must contain sufficient information for the Government to complete its evaluation.

Supporting documentation must be clear, complete, and convincing (i.e., must clearly show the build-up of O/H, G&A, Burden, fringe benefits, etc.) for both Prime and all sub-contractors.

Proposals need to be stand-alone proposals and not reference previously submitted proposals or other provided documentation

Volume I - Cost and Business Proposal (cont’d)

Licensing:

Offeror’s proposal shall include an Offeror provided license for Government’s use of Offeror’s and non-Offeror’s (if any) software incorporated into the CSA Materials (materials refers to both CSA training materials and all software applications, as defined in Section C 2.0 of the SOW) for an indefinite period for use by the Government. Offeror’s license shall incorporate as a minimum the following rights to the Government as cited on page 93.

Offeror shall grant the Government unlimited rights to customize, edit, revise, distribute, display, use, perform, copy, reproduce, modify, adapt, manage, maintain, edit, re-author, combine with other materials (including other software), prepare derivative works, and any other use in perpetuity of all CSA Material.

Offeror shall mark and identify in accordance with Section I.4 citing FAR 52.227-17 “Rights in Data-Special Works” all Offeror’s and non-Offeror’s software and proprietary data incorporated into the CSA Materials.

Offeror shall state, in writing, that Offeror’s and non-Offeror’s software shall be in compliance upon delivery with Section 508 and FAR 39.2.

Offeror shall provide a plan to enforce the license through technical means (e.g., web-page logins, registration, activation, digital rights management) to record the number of trainee users.

Cost and Business Proposal – Subcontracting

Offerors must comply with the consent requirements of FAR 52.244-2 and FAR 52.244-4 as cited on page 91.

If proposed subcontractors have an acceptable, Government approved accounting system, their proposal must be submitted as a CPFF type.

A Subcontracting Plan is required IAW page 92.

Subcontracting Goals identified in the RFP are based on departmental (DOT) goals as cited on page 92.

Proposed subcontracting plans require approval by SBA and DOT before proposals can be considered acceptable.

Evaluation Factors for Award

Robert Robinson, Contracting Officer

Basis for Award

Award will be made to responsive and responsible Offerors whose offers will provide the “best value” to the Government based on the Cost/Business Proposal and Technical Proposals.

It is the Offeror’s responsibility to ensure that its proposal is sufficiently complete and comprehensive so that the Government can accomplish its evaluation without further dialogue.

Government intends to make a single award.

While it is the Government's intent to make award based upon initial offers, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions. In that case, the CO will proceed to establish a competitive range and conduct negotiations with the firms in that range.

Order of Importance

Technical Understanding and Capabilities is rated higher than Staffing. Staffing is more important than Past Performance, and Past Performance is more important than Management Approach

Each Technical Proposal will be assessed based on the evaluation criteria in Section M.

However, Offerors are cautioned not to minimize the importance of the Cost and Business Proposal (Volume I); when Technical Proposals are evaluated as essentially equal, evaluated cost may become the determining factor.

Technical Proposal Evaluation

Section M.2 Technical Understanding and Capabilities is rated higher than Staffing. Technical Understanding and Capabilities and Staffing together are substantially more important than Past Performance and Management Approach.

Staffing is more important than Past Performance and Past Performance is more important than Management Approach.

Cost and Business Proposal Evaluation Section M.3 - Cost and Business Evaluation Criteria

Competitiveness of the proposed fixed fee and profit

Acceptability of the Professional Employees Compensation Plan

Acceptability of the Cost Control Plan

Uncompensated Overtime, if any proposed, will be evaluated IAW FAR 52.237-10

Acceptability of the Small Business Subcontracting Plan (if applicable)

Potential Cost Risk

Licensing adaptation IAW with Section L.4.E.

Price Reasonableness

Important Dates and Reminders

Proposals are due no later than 3:00 p.m. EDT, Thursday September 26, 2013 as cited on page 1.

Contract Award is projected to be made by December 19, 2013

Terms and conditions of the RFP remain unchanged unless an amendment is issued.

The RFP is the controlling document for this solicitation and all contractor proposals must follow the conditions cited therein.

Closing Remarks

Offerors are encouraged to ask questions on the solicitation.

Questions must be submitted in writing via e-mail to Roland.Regan@dot.gov. Questions must be submitted NLT 4:00 PM EDT on August 27, 2013 as cited on page 68.

Responses to question will be provided as an amendment to the solicitation.

Thank you for your attendance at today’s conference.

mailto:Robert.Robinson@dot.gov