Sec_J_Attch_7_Guidance_SSC_Award-Fee_Plan__5_Mar_14.docx

AWARD-FEE PLAN

FOR

GUIDANCE SUBSYSTEM

SUPPORT CONTRACT

4 February 2014

Approved:

DARYL J. HAUCK, Brig Gen, USAF

AFLCMC/SS

Fee Determining Official

Table of Contents

Section

Page

INTRODUCTION

ORGANIZATION

RESPONSIBILITIES

AWARD-FEE PROCESSES

AWARD-FEE PLAN CHANGE PROCEDURE

PERFORMANCE DEFICIENCIES IN PREVIOUS AWARD-FEE PERIODS

CONTRACT TERMINATION

Annex

AWARD-FEE ORGANIZATION

AWARD-FEE ALLOCATION BY EVALUATION PERIODS

AWARD-FEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION AREA WEIGHTS AND RATINGS RELATIONSHIP

AWARD-FEE EVALUATION CRITERIA

SAMPLE AWARD-FEE PERFORMANCE POINTS COMPUTATION

I

I

1. INTRODUCTION

This award-fee plan is the basis for the evaluation of the contractor's performance on the Guidance Subsystem Support Contract (Guidance SSC) and for presenting an assessment of that performance to the Fee Determining Official (FDO). It describes specific criteria and procedures used to assess the contractor’s performance and to determine the amount of award-fee earned. As described below, the contractor may provide a self-assessment of contractor performance. Actual award-fee determinations and the methodology for determining award-fee are unilateral decisions made solely at the discretion of the Government; however, the determination is subject to the “Disputes Clause” of the contract.

The award-fee earned will be provided to the contractor through contract modifications. The award-fee earned and payable will be determined by the FDO based upon review of the contractor's performance against the criteria set forth in this plan. The FDO may unilaterally change this plan prior to the beginning of a new evaluation period. The contractor will be notified of changes to the plan by the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO), in writing, before the start of the affected evaluation period. Changes to this plan that are applicable to a current evaluation period will be incorporated by mutual consent of both parties.

2. ORGANIZATION

The award-fee organization consists of: the Fee Determining Official (FDO), an Award-Fee Review Board (AFRB) (which consists of a chairperson and members, the contracting officer, and a recorder), other functional area participants, advisor members, and the performance monitors. The FDO, AFRB members, and performance monitors are listed in Annex 1.

3. RESPONSIBILITIES

4. AWARD-FEE PROCESSES

5. AWARD-FEE PLAN CHANGE PROCEDURE

All significant changes are approved by the FDO. The PCO, in coordination with the AFRB Chairperson, approves other changes. Examples of significant changes include: changing evaluation criteria; adjusting weights (detailed in Annex 3) to redirect contractor’s emphasis to areas needing improvement; and revising the distribution of the award-fee dollars. The contractor may recommend changes to the PCO no later than 30 days prior to the beginning of the new evaluation period. The PCO shall notify the contractor in writing of any approved change(s) no later than 10 business days before the start of the upcoming evaluation period. Unilateral changes may be made to the award-fee plan if the contractor is provided written notification by the contracting officer no later than 10 business days before the start of the upcoming evaluation period. Changes affecting the current evaluation period must be by mutual agreement of both parties.

6. PERFORMANCE DEFICIENCIES IN PREVIOUS AWARD-FEE PERIODS

If, during the current award-fee period, performance or cost deficiencies from a prior award-fee period are discovered that show degradation which should have been detected in a prior award-fee period, the Government reserves the right to unilaterally decrease the size of the award-fee pool for the current award-fee period by an amount determined appropriate by the FDO.

7. CONTRACT TERMINATION

a. Termination for Convenience: In the event that the contract is terminated for the convenience of the Government, the amount of award-fee to which the contractor is entitled shall be determined as follows:

(3) The remaining award-fee dollars for all periods subsequent to the period in which the termination becomes effective will not be considered earned or earnable; therefore, will not be paid.

b. Termination for Default: If the Government terminates this contract for default (i.e., contractor's performance is less than satisfactory), the contractor shall not earn any fee for the period in which the default occurred. Consequently, no additional award-fee shall be paid during the termination settlement of the contract. Award-Fee earned or earnable by the contractor for award-fee evaluation periods completed prior to the effective date of the termination will not be affected by the termination.

5 ANNEXES

1. Award-Fee Organization

2. Award-Fee Allocation by Evaluation Periods

3. Award-Fee Performance Evaluation Area Weights and Ratings Relationship

4. Award-Fee Evaluation Criteria

5. Sample Award-Fee Performance Points Computation

ANNEX 1

Award-Fee Organization

Members

Fee Determining Official:

AF Program Executive Office/Strategic Systems

AFPEO/SS

Award-Fee Review Board Chairperson:

System Program Manager (SPM) or Deputy

AFNWC/NI

Award-Fee Review Board Members:

Flight Systems Division Chief or Deputy Flight Systems Chief Engineer Program Control Chief or Deputy Contracting Division Chief or Deputy Guidance Branch Chief Guidance Engineering Branch Chief Contracting Officer (Non-Voting Member) Recorder (Program Manager) (Non-Voting Member)

AFNWC/NIB

AFNWC/NIE

AFNWC/NIL

AFNWC/PZB

AFNWC/NIBA

AFNWC/NIBD

AFNWC/PZBF

AFNWC/NIBA

Advisors

Performance Monitors

Vandenberg Engineer IWRP Program Manager IWRP Engineer

AFNWC/NIBD

AFNWC/NIBA

AFNWC/NIBD

ANNEX 2

Award-Fee Allocation by Evaluation Periods

The award-fee earned by the contractor will be determined at the completion of evaluation periods IAW Section II Services Summary of the PWS and shall begin on contract start date. The dollars shown corresponding to each period is the maximum available award-fee amount that can be earned during that particular period.

Total

* Will be filled out after negotiations and included in the final award-fee plan.

ANNEX 3

Award-Fee Performance Evaluation Area Weights and Ratings Relationship

During the first award-fee period, the Government will evaluate contractor performance using the criteria identified in Annex 4, Award-Fee Evaluation Criteria. Performance Evaluation Areas and their respective weights are listed in the table below.

During the remaining award-fee periods, the Government will evaluate contractor performance using the criteria identified in Annex 4, Award-Fee Evaluation Criteria against task areas identified in the Guidance Subsystem PWS. Performance Evaluation Areas and their respective weights are listed in the table below.

The following table depicts the relationship between the overall performance ratings, the point spread of the ratings, and the percentage of the award-fee payable.

During the evaluation, the AFRB will award points for the contractor’s performance as measured against the criteria established in this plan. The points awarded in each evaluation area will be multiplied by the respective area weight. The weighted area points will then be summed to provide the total points earned. This number of total points earned will equal the percentage of the award-fee to be paid.

ANNEX 4

Award-Fee Evaluation Criteria

The Government will evaluate contractor performance using the criteria identified in the following four Performance Evaluation Area (PEA) tables.

Table 1 - PEA 1 - PERFORMANCE

(91% – 100%) An award in this range indicates:

VERY GOOD

(76% – 90%) An award in this range indicates:

GOOD

(51% – 75%) An award in this range indicates:

SATISFACTORY

(No Greater Than 50%) An award in this range indicates

UNSATISFACTORY

(0%) An award in this range indicates:

1.1 Respons-iveness

1.1 Respons-iveness Cont.

Contractor provides all deliverables significantly ahead of Estimated Closure Date (ECD).

Maintains accurate status of tasks, recommends reprioritization, minimizes transitions between tasks, and recommends a more efficient use of resources.

Proactively reports potential schedule impacts to Guidance Subsystem Sustainment and develops feasible/successful mitigation plan.

Accommodates all requests for changes involving high priority tasks in a timely manner.

Accommodates most requests for changes on medium and low priority tasks.

Contractor provides all deliverables slightly ahead of Estimated Closure Date (ECD).

Maintains accurate status of tasks, recommends reprioritization, and minimizes transitions between tasks.

Regularly reports potential schedule impacts to Guidance Subsystem Sustainment and develops feasible/effective mitigation plan.

Accommodates most requests for changes on high priority tasks in a timely manner.

Accommodates some requests for changes on medium and low priority tasks.

Contractor provides most deliverables ahead of Estimated Closure Date (ECD).

Maintains accurate status of tasks and recommends reprioritization.

Reports potential schedule impacts to Guidance Subsystem Sustainment and develops mitigation plan on request.

Accommodates some requests for changes on high priority tasks in a timely manner.

Accommodates a few requests for changes on medium and low priority tasks.

Coordinates required changes (e.g., current status, ECD, prioritization) of Task Log items with the Government.

Contractor provides all deliverables by Estimated Closure Date (ECD).

Maintains accurate status of tasks.

Accommodates some requests for changes on high priority tasks.

Fails to meet the criteria for SATISFACTORY performance.

1.2 Deliver-able Quality Contractor execution of Task exceeds all technical requirements to resolve the issue without rework for work accomplished in the current or previous award-fee periods.

*Minimal rework (<5%) of total task output required to satisfy technical task requirements.

Contractor execution of Task meets all technical requirements to resolve the issue for work accomplished in the current or previous award-fee periods.

*Some rework (<10%) of total task output required to satisfy technical task requirements.

Fails to meet the criteria for SATISFACTORY performance.

1.3 Innovation Contractor develops innovative solutions and new systems to improve management oversight, timeliness, and quality of the Guidance SSC technical and business processes.

Implements process improvement change demonstrated in one or more areas of responsiveness, quality, cost effectiveness, or any other scope.

Contractor develops innovative solutions and new systems to improve management oversight, timeliness, and quality of the Guidance SSC technical and business processes.

Provides mature process improvement plans to implement process improvements demonstrable in one or more areas of responsiveness, quality, cost effectiveness, or any other scope.

Contractor proposes innovative solutions and new systems to improve management oversight, timeliness, and quality of the Guidance SSC technical and business processes.

Provides draft process improvement plans for process improvements demonstrable in one or more areas of responsiveness, quality, cost effectiveness, or any other scope.

Table 2 PEA 2 – COST

(91%- 100%) An award in this range indicates:

VERY GOOD

(76% – 90%) An award in this range indicates:

GOOD

(51% – 76%) An award in this range indicates:

SATISFACTORY

(No Greater Than 50%) An award in this range indicates:

UNSATISFACTORY

(0%) An award in this range indicates:

Fails to maintain current budget.

*Percentages of rework may be based on proportion of deliverable requiring corrections or proportion of schedule necessary to accomplish corrections.

**The Task Log will be the unit of measurement the Government utilizes to analyze cost efficiencies implemented by the Guidance SSC contractor. The Government recognizes that tasks can reach a level of criticality where a few tasks have the potential to out-prioritize and consume the entire budget. Consideration will be given to the Guidance SSC contractor in scenarios where cost efficiencies cannot be gained due to the level of complexity and urgency.

Table 3 PEA 3 – TRANSITION

(91% – 100%) An award in this range indicates:

VERY GOOD

(76% – 90%) An award in this range indicates:

GOOD

(51% – 75%) An award in this range indicates:

SATISFACTORY

(No Greater Than 50%) An award in this range indicates:

UNSATISFACTORY

(0%) An award in this range indicates:

3.1

Transition

3.1 Transition Cont.

Proactively, effectively, and continuously meets with Government and ISC and PBC contractors immediately after Post Award Conference to assist in preparing the draft transition plan to ensure submission prior to 20 calendar days following Post Award Conference.

Complete the final transition plan and ensure submission prior to the first 55 calendar days after the Post Award Conference.

Accomplishes successful transition of all General Sustainment and CLS CLIN requirements and is effectively performing the requirements of the Guidance SSC PWS earlier than 6 months after contract award.

Proactively, effectively, and continuously meets with Government and ISC and PBC contractors immediately after Post Award Conference to assist in preparing the draft transition plan to ensure submission prior to 20 calendar days following Post Award Conference.

Complete the final transition plan and ensure submission prior to the first 55 calendar days after the Post Award Conference.

Accomplishes successful transition of all General Sustainment and CLS CLIN requirements and is effectively performing the requirements of the Guidance SSC PWS earlier than 6 months after contract award.

Effectively and continuously meets with Government and ISC and PBC contractors immediately after Post Award Conference to assist in preparing the draft transition plan to ensure submission no later than 30 calendar days following Post Award Conference.

Complete the final transition plan and ensure submission no later than 60 calendar days after the Post Award Conference.

Accomplishes successful transition of all General Sustainment and CLS CLIN requirements and is effectively performing the requirements of the Guidance SSC PWS no later than 6 months after contract award.

Continuously meets with Government and ISC and PBC contractors immediately after Post Award Conference to assist in preparing the draft transition plan to ensure submission no later than 30 calendar days following Post Award Conference.

Complete the final transition plan and ensure submission no later than 60 calendar days after the Post Award Conference.

Accomplishes successful transition of all General Sustainment and CLS CLIN requirements and is effectively performing the requirements of the Guidance SSC PWS no later than 6 months after contract award.

Fails to meet the criteria for SATISFACTORY performance

ANNEX 5

Sample Award-Fee Performance Points Computation