FileMaker_Pro_-_Over_SAT_JOFOC-Signed_1.pdf

Last updated 6/2/2016

ATTACHMENT 1

JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Over SAT (FAR 6.303-2)

PR Number: 0040583154

1. Identification of the Agency and the Contracting Activity: WCO/HAFC

2. Nature and/or Description of the Action Being Approved: FileMaker Developer Services for

Harpers Ferry Center

3. A Description of the Supplies or Services Required to Meet the Agency’s Needs, Including the Estimated Value: $163,215.00

The purpose of this contract is to provide the NPS/ Facility, Service and Property (FSP) with a newly developed database and to provide Publications (PUBS), Media Development (MD), and

Museum Conservation Services (MCS) with ongoing FileMaker database updates and new development, in accordance with the following Scope of Work. A new dashboard shall also be created to pull information from all the other databases for reporting purposes.

4. An Identification of the Statutory Authority Permitting Other Than Full and Open

Competition:

FAR 6.302-2(a)(2); Unusual and Compelling Urgency; When the agency’s need for the supplies or services is of such an unusual and compelling urgency that the Government would be seriously injured unless the agency is permitted to limit the number of sources from which it solicits bids or proposals, full and open competition need not be provided for.

5. A Demonstration That the Proposed Contractor’s Unique Qualifications or the Nature of the Acquisition Requires Use of the Authority Cited:

This is a learned profession. The Harpers Ferry Center currently has 6 existing databases and needs a 7th database developed. These databases greatly enhance/improve productivity and workflow of the Publications, Media Development, Conservation and Facilities, Services, and

Property. In every instance, the new contractor took five to six months to fully understand the intricacies of what the Harpers Ferry Center does in terms of the workflow between offices, and the overall FileMaker development needs. Not only is this a substantial risk of contractual obligation to spend so much unnecessary time training the new contractor, but there are excessive and unnecessary costs associated with re-teaching the new contractor, while also pulling Harpers Ferry Center personnel from their daily tasks. Over the three previous procurements, 15-18 months of duplicated efforts has resulted in money spent for what should have been a full understanding of the requirements in the scope of work. The contractor must understand this workflow to understand what is being required so that they can maintain the most adequate continuity during the lifecycle of the contract, with minimal need for training. While the contractors can execute the work prescribed in the contract, maximum efficiency is not reached until halfway through their term. This translates to over one full year of duplicate work to date, contradicting what should be contractual obligations that should be a “best value” to the

Government. Future procurements with another vendor will again, add significant duplication of costs and efforts, as well as the potential to miss or delay timely completion of contract deliverables.

6. A Description of Efforts Made to Ensure That Offers Are Solicited From as Many Potential

Sources as is Practicable, Including Whether a Notice Was or Will Be Publicized as

Required by FAR Subpart 5.2 and, If Not, Which Exception Under FAR 5.202 Applies:

In 2021, the RFP for a new contract only generated three bids. One was deemed unacceptable, because the offeror did not show a clear understanding of the scope of work. The pricing was comparable, so the best technical offeror, Prometheus Systems Consulting, LLC (also known as

360works), won the award. For the new proposed work, we will continue to add on to the newly developed CLIO database created under this year’s contract, in addition to continued work on

HFC’s existing databases; databases that Prometheus already has a great familiarity with. When the time permits, the NPS will develop a fully defined requirement to allow for Full and Open

Competition.

7. A Determination By the contracting officer That the Anticipated Cost to the Government

Will Be Fair and Reasonable:

There are other authorized FileMaker Pro developers in the market, as well as previously awarded contracts for this requirement in recent fiscal years. Cost comparisons can be performed by using that historical data.

8. A Description of the Market Research Conducted (see FAR Part 10) and the Results or a

Statement of the Reason Market Research Was Not Conducted:

Market research was conducted for authorized FileMaker Pro Developers. A list of 9 potential

FileMaker contractors were found through a search of GSA Contractors. Only one of these vendors were Platinum Partners. Next, a search was done of all of FileMaker Certified Platinum

Partners. There were 34 across the USA. A search was then done on SBA to determine capability and small business certification of these 34 vendors. Of the 34, five are currently registered with

SBA and meet the small business certification of NAICS 541511. None of the five registered with

SBA met any of the other Socioeconomic Status’ for further set-aside.

9. Any Other Facts Supporting the Use of Other Than Full and Open Competition (see FAR

6.302-2 (9) (i) – (iii) for some examples):

n/a

10. A Listing of the Sources, If Any, That Expressed in Writing, an Interest in the Acquisition:

n/a

11. A Statement of the Actions, If Any, the Agency May Take to Remove or Overcome Any

Barriers to Competition Before Any Subsequent Acquisition for the Supplies or Services

Required:

The agency will monitor the current market to better understand any licensing or bolstering of the

Certified Platinum Partners community. Further market research or requests for information can give the Government a better overview of potential firms that can be awarded follow-on requirements with minimal impact to the requesting agency’s operations, in terms of duplication of costs and/or efforts.

Certification:

I certify that any supporting data that is the responsibility of technical or requirements personnel (i.e. verifying the Government’s minimum needs or schedule requirements or other rationale for other than full and open competition) and which form a basis for the justification have been certified as complete and accurate:

(Signature)________________________________________ (Date) _______________________

(Type or Print Name): __________________________________________________

(Title): Program Office Representative

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

(Signature) _______________________________________ (Date) _______________________

(Title:) Contracting Officer

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

(Signature) _______________________________________ (Date) _______________________

(Title:) Section Chief

Reviewed/Concur/Approved by: (if applicable)

(Signature) _______________________________________ (Date) _______________________

(Type or Print Name): _________________________________________________

(Title:) Chief of the Contracting Office