2026 ED FSS SSJ > SAT RFO Form v1.1

U.S. Department of Education

Sensitive in accordance with 32 CFR Part 2002

CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION

WHEN FILLED IN

FEDERAL SUPPLY SCHEDULE (FSS) SOLE-SOURCE JUSTIFICATION

(SSJ) REVOLUTIONARY FAR OVERHAUL (RFO)

ORDERS PLACED OR BLANKET PURCHASE AGREEMENTS (BPAS) EXCEEDING

THE SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION THRESHOLD (SAT)

CONTRACT INFORMATION

PROCUREMENT TITLE:

ACTION ID NUMBER: ESTIMATED VALUE:

PRINCIPAL OPERATING COMPONENT (POC):

1. IDENTIFICATION OF CONTRACTING ACTIVITY.

2. NATURE AND/OR DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTION INCLUDING A DESCRIPTION

OF THE SUPPLIES/SERVICES REQUIRED TO MEET THE AGENY’S NEEDS.

3. THE AUTHORITY AND SUPPORTING RATIONALE.

The statutory exception supporting the placement of an order or an establishment of a FSS BPA that exceeds the SAT on a sole-source basis as implemented by GSAM/R 538.7104-3(b) is:

Provide the rationale behind the selection of the above statutory exception.

Customer Satisfaction Survey Services

3509 & 5456 $6,000,000.00

FSA has a need for measuring the performance of different student aid post-transaction processes, products, and services including the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA), Title IV service providers, e-mail campaigns, contact centers, and potentially additional lines of business by way of customer satisfaction surveys using the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) methodology. This will allow FSA to measure customer experience efficiently and effectively across the agency.

The main requirement to perform this requirement efficiently and effectively is the use of the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI). CFI Group USA, LLC has an exclusive arrangement as a founding partner of the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) and is the only company in the United States licensed to apply customized ACSI methodology across both the private and public (government) sectors.

They hold the exclusive license to use the patented, cause-and-effect ACSI methodology for customized, proprietary client research and organizational benchmarking.

ACSI is a cross-industry benchmark used to uniformly assess customer satisfaction across many federal government agencies and many private industry sectors. FSA has used the ACSI survey methodology for more than a decade for its surveys, and historical data would be difficult to compare if FSA switched to a different survey collection and analysis methodology. Moreover, FSA relies on the ACSI cause and effect methodology related to how customer driver impacts could drive customer satisfaction score changes and outcomes. The ACSI scores have been used to create performance metrics on other contracts. CFI Group has a very intimate knowledge on how the multitude of FSA programs and services work over the last decade and how the federal student aid have evolved time. Therefore, using another

Federal Student Aid (FSA)

Federal Student Aid (FSA) Contracts Operations Division (COD)

538.7104-3(b)(ii) – Only one source is capable.

Sensitive in accordance with 32 CFR Part 2002

CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION

WHEN FILLED IN

4. DETERMINATION BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER THAT THE ORDER

REPRESENTS A FAIR AND REASONABLE PRICE.

5. DESCRIPTION OF MARKET RESEARCH CONDUCTED AND RESULTS.

6. ANY OTHER FACTS SUPPORTING THE JUSTIFICATION.

7. STATEMENT OF ACTIONS, IF ANY, THE AGENCY MAY TAKE TO REMOVE OR

OVERCOME ANY BARRIERS THAT LED TO THE RESTRICTED CONSIDERATION

BEFORE ANY SUBESQUENT ACQUISITIONS.

A quote from the contractor has not been requested, and therefore a determination of fair and reasonable price cannot be made prior to the execution of this J&A. Since the requirement will be awarded using CFI Group USA's GSA schedule contract, FSA is not required to make a fair and reasonable price determination as FSS contract pricing has already been determined fair and reasonable.

However, quoted prices for the establishment of the BPA will be compared to the IGCE, and informal market research will be conducted to ensure FSA is receiving advantageous pricing prior to award. Discounts will be requested when soliciting a quote for the BPA.

Market research to determine whether other schedule holders can provide the types of required customer satisfaction survey services was not conducted because CFI Group LLC is the only contractor that can provide surveys and data analysis using the ACSI methodology. CFI Group USA LLC is a founding partner of the ACSI Index and the only company licensed within the US to apply customized ACSI methods in the government sector.

N/A

Given the issues noted above with switching to a different survey methodology, there are no reasonable steps FSA can take to increase competition. If and when FSA’s survey requirements substantially change, every effort will be made to use a non-proprietary (open source) survey methodology.

In accordance with GSAM 538.7104-3(b)(3)(ii), this justification will be posted following award. Any responses to the justification will be annotated and considered for use in future procurements similar to this one.

Sensitive in accordance with 32 CFR Part 2002

CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION

WHEN FILLED IN

REVIEWS & APPROVALS

TECHNICAL/REQUIREMENTS PERSONNEL

I certify the facts and representations under my cognizance, which are included in this justification and form a basis for it, are complete and accurate.

CONTRACTING OFFICER (CO)

I certify this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

PROCURING ACTIVITY COMPETITION ADVOCATE (PACA) > $900,000

I have reviewed and approve this justification.

Sensitive in accordance with 32 CFR Part 2002

CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION

WHEN FILLED IN

INSTRUCTIONS TO COMPLETE

This form is to be completed by POC Program Offices to prepare a SSJ for an order or BPA above SAT using FSS procedures under the deviations at RFO 8.401(b), ordering instructions at the General Services Administration Manual/Regulation (GSAM/R) 538.7104-3(b), and the FAR Companion (FC) 8.401(b), 538.7104- 3(b)(2). The completed justification must be signed by all applicable offices and officials.

BRAND-NAME – For FSS Orders, in accordance with (IAW) Subpart 538.7104-4:

(a) General. An item peculiar to one manufacturer can be a particular brand name, product, or a feature of a product, peculiar to one manufacturer. A brand name item, whether available on one or more schedule contracts, is an item peculiar to one manufacturer.

(b) Requirement. Items peculiar to one manufacturer must not be acquired unless—

(1) The particular brand name, product, or feature is essential to the ordering activity’s requirements, and market research indicates other companies’ similar products, or products lacking the particular feature, do not meet, or cannot be modified to meet, the need; and

(2) The file is documented accordingly—

(i) If the order is to be placed (or FSS BPA established) competitively, the file must be documented concerning the basis for restricting consideration to an item peculiar to one manufacturer, or

(ii) If the order is to be placed (or FSS BPA established) on a sole source basis, a justification must be executed IAW 538.7104-3.

CONTRACT INFORMATION

a. PROCUREMENT TITLE: <Insert title of the acquisition>

b. ACTION ID NUMBER: <Insert the Action ID from the Procurement Planning tool>

c. ESTIMATED VALUE: <Insert the estimated value>

d. POC: <Select the POC requesting the products/services>

1. IDENTIFICATION OF CONTRACTING ACTIVITY. <Select the contracting activity associated with this procurement>

2. NATURE AND/OR DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTION INCLUDING A DESCRIPTION OF THE

SUPPLIES/SERVICES REQUIRED TO MEET THE AGENY’S NEEDS. <Describe the type of action being issued; describe the supplies or services required to meet the agency’s needs, including the delivery schedule and/or period of performance (including all option periods), to give any reviewing or approving officials a better understanding of the scope, magnitude, and complexity of the requirement.>

3. THE AUTHORITY AND SUPPORTING RATIONALE. The statutory exception supporting the placement of an order or an establishment of a FSS BPA that exceeds the SAT on a sole-source basis as implemented by GSAM/R 538.7104-3(b) is <select exception from drop-down>:

538.7104-3(b)(i): The need is of such unusual urgency that following the procedures would result in unacceptable delays in fulfilling that need;

538.7104-3(b)(ii): Only one source is capable of providing the products, services, or solution required at the level of quality required because the products, services, or solutions are unique or highly specialized;

538.7104-3(b)(iii): The order should be issued on a sole source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency because it is a logical follow-on to an FSS order already issued on a competitive basis;

538.7104-3(b)(iv): It is necessary to place the order with a particular FSS contractor to satisfy a minimum guarantee established in the FSS BPA; or

538.7104-3(b)(v): A law expressly authorizes or requires that the purchase be made from a specified source.

Sensitive in accordance with 32 CFR Part 2002

CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION

WHEN FILLED IN

If applicable, explain the FSS contractor’s unique qualifications, nature of the acquisition that requires use of the same contractor as part of a logical follow-on, or reasons for urgency and how using the procedures would result in unacceptable delays. This is the most important part of the justification because it demonstrates the prospective contractor has unique qualifications and/or specialized capabilities or expertise not prevalent elsewhere on the schedules. You must explain what unique qualifications and special capabilities the contractor possesses.

In instances where an urgent and compelling need exists, discuss the nature of the urgency. Discuss how any follow-on work will be competed (mandatory). Also provide supporting rationale and a concise description of the extent, nature, and impact of the unacceptable delay.

4. DETERMINATION BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER. <Insert an explanation supporting why the proposed order or BPA represents a reasonable total price and will be the best value for the government consistent with GSAM/R 538.7102-2(d)(2) and 538.7104-2(a)(3).>

5. DESCRIPTION OF MARKET RESEARCH CONDUCTED AND RESULTS. <Insert a description of the market research; i.e., the collection and analysis of product/service information on the technical capabilities and prices/costs from appropriate FSS contracts. If market research was not conducted, the reasons why should be stated. A statement must also be made that the supplies and services are available under FSS. If market research was not conducted, state why.>

6. ANY OTHER FACTS SUPPORTING THE JUSTIFICATION. <Insert, as needed. When urgency is cited, provide data, estimated cost, or other rationale as to the extent and nature of the harm to the government that following schedule procedures would cause. When a logical follow-on is cited, include an estimate of the duplicative cost and methodology used to formulate the estimated cost.>

7. STATEMENT OF ACTIONS AGENCY MAY TAKE TO REMOVE OR OVERCOME ANY BARRIERS

THAT LED TO THE RESTRICTED CONSIDERATION BEFORE ANY SUBESQUENT ACQUISITIONS.

<Insert a description, including challenges to restrictive data markings, data rights, etc. If planning a competition, include the estimated date when the competitive procurement will occur. If this is a follow-on order, state the measures initiated to eliminate or reduce competitive barriers.>

REVIEWS & APPROVALS: This justification must be signed by all parties as appropriate to the acquisition according to the below table. Approval levels are Agency determined.

VALUE APPROVAL AUTHORITY

$900,000 or below CO

> $900,000 Procuring Activity Competition Advocate