Attachment 2 - Sample Task 2_Regular.pdf

Attachment 2

Performance Work Statement

Sample Task Only – not funded or intended to be executed 1

1. Introduction. In order to fulfill its Biennial Review obligations, the Directorate of

Organizational and Management Planning (O&MP) in the Office of the Director of

Administration and Management (ODA&M) requires support from a firm in private industry that possesses expertise and experience with managing and directing large-scale organizational-customer response programs. The Director of Administration and Management (DA&M), Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), is the OSD Principal Staff Assistant (PSA) and advisor to the

Secretary and Deputy Secretary of Defense on administrative, organizational, and management matters, among other responsibilities. In this Defense-wide role, the DA&M has several functions and responsibilities that encompass and/or affect the Defense Agencies (DAs), DoD

Field Activities (FAs), their business lines, performance, and customer satisfaction. The work is high impact and highly visible to the Secretary of Defense, Deputy Secretary of Defense, and those who oversee DA and DoD FA activities in the Department of Defense. As a result of our current fiscal environment, DoD cannot continue business as usual. In this particular effort, we are seeking new technical approaches that will assist the Department’s senior leadership decision making. This sample task is meant to explore approaches and identify the offeror best positioned to create a new, more effective tool to make organizational and management decisions based on cost and performance (or burden and benefit). This new revolutionized Biennial Review, if successful, should provide tools that permit the assignment (or re-assignment) of responsibilities within DAs and DoD FAs by senior decision makers in a more competitive, business driven, and performance-based manner. While this is a sample task and not intended to be implemented, it will expose the offeror’s capability to assist the Secretary of Defense in reform, cost saving, and streamlining organizations. Matters of the utmost interest regarding product and service delivery include, but are not limited to: performance, need, marginal effectiveness, time and cost to deliver, and structure.

1.1. Periodic Review in Statute. The Biennial Review is based on Section 192(c) of Title

10, United States Code that states “periodically (and not less often than every two years), the

Secretary of Defense shall review the services and supplies provided by each DA and DoD FA.”

Paragraph (1) of the statute establishes two purposes for the periodic review. The first purpose is to ensure “there is a continuing need for each such Agency and Activity.” The second purpose is to ensure that “the provision of those services and supplies by each such Agency and Activity, rather than by the Military Departments, is a more effective, economical, or efficient manner of providing those services and supplies or of meeting the requirements for combat readiness of the armed forces.” Paragraph (2) of the statute states that this review “shall apply to the National

Security Agency (NSA) as determined appropriate by the Secretary, in consultation with the

Director of [National Intelligence].” It further states that the “Secretary shall establish procedures under which information required for review of the NSA shall be obtained.”

1.2. Evaluating Performance. The Secretary of Defense (SD), Deputy Secretary of Defense

(DSD), OSD PSAs, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff evaluate the performance of the DAs and DoD FAs, and other organizational entities of the Department of Defense on a continuous basis; and decisions are made throughout the year regarding the assignment of missions and functions relevant to Section 192(c). While the Biennial Review is one tool used to assess DA and DoD FA performance, it also records section 192(c) relevant decisions and provides information on the tools and processes. Therefore, Biennial Review provides information that, when combined with the other Departmental tools and processes, can be used

Sample Task Only – not funded or intended to be executed 2 by the senior leaders of the Department to make needed changes to the DoD Components in order to improve their efficiency, economy, and effectiveness, assess their continuing need, and evaluate their contribution of shared services (and other support) to improve combat readiness of the U.S. military, assist the Military Departments, and enable the broader mission of the

Department of Defense.

2. A Retooled Biennial Review: a DA&M retooling of the Biennial Review (which historically has been used to enhance Defense reform initiatives and to fulfill, and record, other activities in fulfillment of, section 192(c) of title 10 U.S. Code)

3. Biennial Review reports must include organizational analyses, alternative organizational alignments, and the basis for the recommended alternatives for senior DoD leader consideration.

Further, it must incorporate the Department’s focus on benefit-to-burden analysis in addition to analysis similar to past reviews. Historically, Biennial Reviews focused on an activity’s need to exist, its effectiveness and its efficiency in providing services and supplies compared to the ability of the Military Departments to provide those services. In addition to this focus, an offeror should also propose a means of evaluating the cost to provide a particular product or service, and the benefit that product or service delivers.

The DoD requires the capability to assess the performance of the functions of the DAs and DoD

FAs against the cost of maintaining those functions. It also needs the capability to compete and evaluate a provider’s products and services; and an ability to shift resources toward successful, high-performing and lower cost providers, and away from underperforming higher cost providers. At the same time, the Department must assess over collectivization (that like most monopolies, in the extreme, can increase cost and reduce effectiveness) and foster a well regulated competition between, and among, providers that breeds excellence, efficiency, and reduces costs to the taxpayer.

Key Dimensions: Therefore, there are four critical dimensions to ensure future Biennial Reviews produce the capabilities outlined above.

1. Identify the cost of providing each responsibility, function, service, or product. A comprehensive, auditable, and standardized catalogue of (in common terminology) discrete functions (and their associated resource allocation) for each DoD Component must be developed in a database of business lines and associated products and services.

This catalogue of authorized responsibilities and functions must be consumable by senior

Defense leaders. In brief, this accounting must exhaustively expose the cost for providing each product or service and include organizational customer information to support performance feedback.

2. Performance feedback. Quantitative and qualitative feedback from organizational customers must measure, baseline/benchmark, and evaluate activity based on assigned standards for authorized responsibilities/functions. Further, this process/system should systematically measure and analyze performance such that it provides accessible and comprehensive performance information to inform decision-making, promote efficiency, Sample Task Only – not funded or intended to be executed 3 and permit shifting resources to the highest priority, best performing, and most economical activities with complete stakeholder transparency.

3. Targeted products. Products will be timed to deliver tailored decision support analysis and briefs to inform annual front end assessments, summer issue cycle/POM build, and other planning, programming, budgeting, and execution milestones such as execution reviews. Such reports will facilitate senior leader prioritization of responsibilities and functions so that resources can be allocated to the highest priority, most important, and highest valued products and services. Additionally, the new Biennial Review will contain a process for publishing information through institutional channels to stakeholder recipients, distribute monthly/annual/biennial feedback on organizational customer satisfaction, and support information exchanges for consuming organizations that facilitate finding the best value.

4. Excellence and efficiency. Through transparency, foster competition that breeds excellence and enhances efficiency, influences source selection, while enabling agility to maximize the utilization of resources to meet authorized responsibilities/functions and align workforce performance plans with priorities.

4. Scope. While demonstrated expertise and experience in this area is of paramount importance, the successful company will also possess knowledge of the DAs and DoD FAs, and how the

Department of Defense oversees these organizations. Further, the successful company should possess the knowledge and ability to develop Section 192(c) relevant organizational reform options supported by both respondent inputs and organizational and management analysis. This

Task Order is composed of a base period of one year with four annual options to renew, and potentially covers a period up to five years in length.

4.1. Biennial Review Continuum. Similar to the DoD Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution System, the Biennial Review is a continuous process that is made up of several major, sometimes overlapping, phases: (1) preparation for the next Review; (2) conduct of the

Review, development of a formal report, publication of the associated report, and its distribution;

(3) close-out actions, identification of lessons learned, and preparation for the next Review.

They are all accomplished while maintaining and updating customer, business line, and associated product and service lists.

4.2. Objectives. The principal objectives are as follows:

(1) Assist the Government with recording and documenting the fulfillment of Section

192(c) requirements by the senior leadership of the Department of Defense in each

Biennial Review report.

(2) Inventory (a complete and comprehensive list of) services or products provided by each agency and field activity as well as a complete and comprehensive list of all users/customers of the services or products, be they organizational or retail, in and out of

DoD; include any fee charged and/or cost of each service or product provided by each supplier organization.

Sample Task Only – not funded or intended to be executed 4

(3) Carry out all aspects associated with the organizational performance evaluation process for the Biennial Review, including evaluation designing, planning, implementing, collecting, analyzing, summarizing, and reporting on the results, as well as conducting trend analysis by business line, when practicable. Provide assistance in working with the

DAs and DoD FAs to validate and maintain their business lines (with products and services) and proposed customer respondent lists/addresses, and take all appropriate steps to improve evaluation response rates; begin production of the next version of an on-line evaluation tool to collect respondent data on a dynamic and near real-time fashion and routinely and periodically publish results, summaries, and conclusions for all supplier agencies on the web that all users can access. All suppliers, customers, and oversight authorities should have access to the near real-time on-line data. Assist each agency in developing a brief random sample quality evaluation tool after fulfillment of a customer’s request to measure satisfaction levels and provide findings for inclusion into the Biennial

Review report. Produce a high to low satisfaction ranking of all Agency results for management review. (similar to the General Accountability Office High Risk List).

(4) Provide analytical and administrative assistance and support for the senior management assessment, which will include, while refreshing customer and business line databases and preparing for the follow-on Biennial Review, a weighted annual performance factor for each agency director based on evaluation results.

(5) Reassess the results and lessons learned from previous Biennial Reviews and provide recommendations to the Government for continuous-process- improvement purposes.

(6) Assist the Government in producing Biennial Review reports, and assist the

Government in developing and delivering briefings on the Biennial Review process and results.

(7) Assist with any associated planning to integrate reviews into other DoD performance assessment activities and processes.

(8) Support the Government on other actions and projects associated with the Biennial

Review, as needed, and within the scope of the Task Order, to include organizational analysis and developing alternatives for senior DoD leader consideration based on organizational customer inputs or results from senior management assessments.

5. Government Responsibilities: The success of the Biennial Review Program rests in large measure on a close partnership and working relationship between the Government and the vendor. Accordingly, tasks fall into three categories: those in which the Government will have lead; those in which the contractor will have lead; and those with shared responsibilities.

However, close coordination is essential between and among efforts. The following lists the major areas where the Government has the lead:

5.1. The Government will always draft the main body of the final Biennial Review reports, whether the focus is a senior management assessment or an organizational customer evaluations, Sample Task Only – not funded or intended to be executed 5 seeking editorial support, review, and comment from the contractor. The contractor will provide the executive summaries of each DA and DoD FA, which will be included in the main body of the report and, if requested, provide Section 192(c) related options for reform based on the contractor’s organizational analysis for O&MP to incorporate into Biennial Review results and offer to senior DoD leaders.

5.2. Although the contractor will assist with the preparation and presentation of briefings, the Government will give the briefings and respond to policy and programmatic questions.

5.3. The Government will always take the lead in coordinating with other Government offices internal or external to the Department of Defense, although the contractor might be asked to provide follow-up materials to those offices, and to assist, as necessary. For example:

5.3.1. Liaison with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI): With

O&MP support, OUSD(I) coordinates/consults with the appropriate element within ODNI regarding Biennial Review participation of NSA, NGA, and NRO. All three will participate regarding their DoD organizational customers and their DoD business lines.

5.3.2. Track communication flow between O&MP, PSAs, and DAs and DoD FAs.

6. Contractor Responsibilities. The contractor shall provide services principally under Special

Item Number 874-3: Survey Services, as listed in the General Services Administration Mission

Oriented Business Integrated Services (MOBIS) contracting arrangement.

6.1. Create and Update a Plan of Action and Milestones (POA&M) Timeline. Soon after task order award, the contractor shall meet with the Government to develop a Plan of Action and

Milestones, which shall cover, at a minimum, two full Biennial Review cycles, and shall update this POA&M, whenever necessary.

6.1.1. Meet with O&MP Staff and other experts previously associated with the Biennial

Review to assist with formulating the POA&M.

6.1.2. Receive the following items from O&MP Staff:

6.1.2.1. Copies of previous Biennial Review reports for reference.

6.1.2.2. Electronic and paper copies of the evaluation instrument(s) developed and designed by the previous support contractor. There will be some adjustments to the evaluation instrument(s), using the previous instrument as a baseline.

6.1.2.3. Changes to the evaluation instrument(s), as necessary.

6.1.2.4. Available electronic copies of any software applications developed by previous support contractor.

Sample Task Only – not funded or intended to be executed 6

6.1.2.5. Electronic copies of customer, business line, and product and service databases developed by previous support contractor.

6.2. The senior management assessment and organizational customer evaluation instrument(s), if retained, should reinforce customer evaluations and use measures appropriate for the leadership perspective. In this specific case, the contractor will advise and assist the

Government Program Director in accomplishing all aspects of each Biennial Review phases.

During each phase, the contractor will be assessing its impact on the upcoming phase, prepare and maintain relevant material for the upcoming phase, and refresh customer business line databases as necessary.

6.3. Contractor Technical Approach. The offeror will identify all major phases and contractor responsibilities associated with the new Biennial Review process including, but not limited to: planning; kick-off; database revision; execution; results analysis; report composition;

publication; and after-action review. Notional major phases may be as follows:

6.3.1. Consistent with the overall Biennial Review POA&M, and in coordination with

O&MP, the contractor shall develop a plan for their proposed approach. The POA&M shall:

6.3.1.1. Incorporate guidance from the Government.

6.3.1.2. Be in electronic format.

6.3.1.3. Be sufficiently detailed to track task accomplishment on a weekly and monthly basis.

6.3.1.4. Cover all phases of the organizational customer evaluation effort.

6.3.1.3. Incorporate feedback and lessons learned from previous Biennial Reviews and identify key issues and themes for inclusion in the Biennial Review process. Identify areas for improvement, assess the quality of prior reports as a baseline, and identify patterns across specific products and services that are related to customer-choice issues.

6.3.1.4. Incorporate OSD PSA, Military Department Secretary, CJCS, and DA and

DoD FA Director feedback regarding the usefulness of the previous Biennial Review tools, feedback from previous Biennial Review reports, and internal O&MP assessments of the

Biennial Review program. Where feasible, make adjustments to the Biennial Review Program and reports that address any concerns or criticisms.

6.3.1.5. Use previous Biennial Review organizational customer evaluations and milestone schedules as a guide, incorporating guidance as provided by the Government. The plan must address, at a minimum, the following items: improvements needed in methodology;

areas where additional customer-satisfaction models may apply; methods that produce improved high-level-summary reporting; any specific-improvement efforts recently conducted by each DA and DoD FA; and an application of the findings of recent initiatives.

Sample Task Only – not funded or intended to be executed 7

6.3.1.6. Include the contractor assisting O&MP in updating the OMB Paperwork

Reduction Act Waiver: The Contractor will coordinate a revised Biennial Review waiver to the

Paperwork Reduction Act for O&MP and assist in the liaison with OMB. The waiver is necessary because a number of DAs and DoD FAs have customers in the private sector and other

Federal agencies. The Act requires an OMB waiver/approval to contact members of the public, including commercial enterprises.

6.3.2. Kick-off briefings and awareness efforts. The contractor shall:

6.3.2.1. Assist with the preparation and presentation of individual and/or group kick-off briefings to the Directors of the DAs and DoD FAs, or senior officials designated as their representatives.

6.3.2.2.. Assist with the preparation and presentation of individual and/or group kick-off briefings to relevant OSD PSAs and/or their representatives who have oversight authority over any Defense Agencies or DoD Field Activities.

6.3.2.3. Assist with the preparation and execution of a Defense community awareness campaign designed to educate and prepare the appropriate audiences on their potential participation in the Biennial Review. This public affairs type campaign will focus on DA and

DoD FA participants as well as potential evaluation respondents.

6.3.3. Revision of customer lists, business lines, and evaluation instrument. The contractor shall:

6.3.3.1. Work with the DAs and DoD FAs to review and update their major business lines of operation and the associated product and service offerings. Where applicable, previous Biennial Reviews may be used as a baseline.

6.3.3.2. Provide general advice and support to the DA and DoD FA POCs in updating their customer lists of individuals designated to complete evaluations of business line(s). Support will consist of developing the customer list format, and maintaining copies of customer lists.

6.3.3.3. Modify, as necessary and based upon lessons learned, the design of the standard evaluation instrument using the tools from previous reviews or private sector experience as a guide. The evaluation tool must be fully compatible with the Internet so that identified organizational customers can complete their evaluation from an interactive and secure web site on the NIPRNET and/or on the SIPRNET. Note: Over-the-counter software or contractor-unique software can be used as long as it is compatible with DoD information technology systems and conforms to DoD information technology and Internet policies, procedures, security, and information assurance.

6.3.3.4. Include, as directed, other appropriate DoD organizational entities in the

Biennial Review even though they might not be formally designated as a Defense Agency or

Sample Task Only – not funded or intended to be executed 8

DoD Field Activity. Further guidance on this will be provided by the Government after issuing the Task Order.

6.3.4. Organizational customer evaluation tool implementation. The contractor shall:

6.3.4.1. Inventory business lines, products, and services in all DAs and DoD FAs.

6.3.4.2. Inventory all organizational customers for each business line.

6.3.4.3. Inventory all costs associated with each business line.

6.3.4.4. Solicit input from (i.e., electronic, web based to the maximum extent possible) all organizational customers of each business line to determine DA and DoD FA performance when delivering products and services as well as customer satisfaction of the quality and timeliness of each service or product.

6.3.5. Results analysis.

6.3.5.1. The contractor will analyze the results of each business line evaluation;

provide individual reports for each DA and DoD FA (similar to those distributed for previous

Biennial Review organizational customer evaluation(s)); provide executive summaries of each

DA and DoD FA, which will be included in the main body of the report; and develop a simple extractable report for each business line that can be reviewed by each respondent. Pursuant to

Open Government direction, post results electronically accessible to Heads of DoD Components and all customers.

6.3.5.2. For business line results, the report format and graphical depiction of the results is critical to the successful interpretation by the DAs and DoD FAs. Therefore, the contractor shall explore, develop, and present to the Government team report redesign options to include enhanced graphics supporting more "actionable" analysis and state of the art graphics.

6.3.6. Report composition and publication. As discussed below, the contractor shall assist the Government in drafting the final report.

6.3.7. After-action review. Throughout the process, and including all phases, the contractor shall record observations and lessons for review, and incorporation, into future

Biennial Reviews.

6.4. Develop, Thoroughly Test, Activate, and Maintain an Interactive and Secure Web Site.

An interactive web site needs to be designed, approved by O&MP, and implemented using an approach consistent with the proposed technical approach and POAM.

6.4.1. The site needs to: provide access to recent Biennial Review reports; provide the means for the DAs and DoD FAs to submit their responses, customer lists, and their business line updates, including the associated product and services; provide the ability for the representatives of the Military Departments to review and provide comments on the customer lists of the DAs

Sample Task Only – not funded or intended to be executed 9 and DoD FAs; be compatible and mutually supporting with the O&MP website; and facilitate evaluation completion. For those organizations with sensitive information, there needs to be classified network (i.e., SIPRNET, JWICS) options for all these activities. This work begins with Task Order award and extends through the life of the Task Order. (Note: Three web sites may be needed—one on the NIPRNET/world-wide web, one on the SIPRNET, and one on

JWICS.)

6.4.2. Classified work, as necessary, up through SECRET, is required for this Task

Order, although it may involve use of IT systems that require a higher (TOP SECRET) clearance for access. Classified work might include a portion of the Biennial Review that addresses the

DAs and DoD FAs that are Defense Intelligence Components.

6.5. Provide Support to O&MP for Biennial Review senior management assessments. The

Government Program Manager shall determine what contractor support is needed in anticipation of the 2013-2014 report and provide amplifying direction at the start of the Task Order.

6.5.1. If a senior management approach is selected, the contractor will assist with coordination with the Military Department and Joint Staff offices participating, collaborate on the analysis of the senior management assessment responses, provide recommendations on how to frame the Biennial Review senior management assessment report, and assist with publication, distribution, and placement of the report on a government web site.

6.5.2. While assisting the Government Program Manager with the senior management assessment, the contractor will develop and populate a system for tracking DA and DoD FA organizational customer lists and maintain associated material, for reference, from the previous

Biennial Reviews and material collected during the senior management assessment.

6.5.3. During the Biennial Review, the contractor may engage the Military Department and Joint Staff offices participating, drawing on the most recent organizational customer evaluation results to assist in identifying pertinent issues that may be of concern and applicable to the senior management assessment.

6.5.4. In a timely manner, initiate planning for the subsequent organizational customer evaluation(s), to include information technology preparations, customer list refreshment, OMB survey permissions, maintaining liaison with the DA and DoD FA points of contact, and other organizational customer evaluation tool preparations.

6.6. Provide Support to O&MP-tailored Biennial Reviews that do not follow the standard organizational customer evaluation tool or senior management assessment approaches.

6.7. Final Reports. Assist with collecting input, assisting the Government with performing organizational analysis, and writing, editing, and printing a final report for each Biennial

Review, which shall be delivered in accordance with guidance provided by the Government immediately following collection of final responses from the DAs, DoD FAs, Military

Departments, and Joint Staff, as appropriate.

Sample Task Only – not funded or intended to be executed 10

6.7.1. Distribution and Promulgation. In providing copies of the final report, including paper copies and an electronic copy on CD, and being prepared to assist in posting appropriate portions of the report on the NIPRNET and/or SIPRNET, where access would be limited to those with Common Access Cards (CAC), and would be designated as For Official Use Only purposes, or classified, as necessary. Handling of all information and material, whether unclassified, For

Official Use Only, or classified, shall be in accordance with U.S. Government and DoD policy and procedures.

6.8. Security Clearance of Contractor Personnel. Biennial Review material will be at the

Unclassified, Unclassified/For Official Use Only, and Secret levels. Therefore, all contractor personnel handling Biennial Review material will have and maintain current and active Secret clearances.

7. Travel. The Government will reimburse the contractor for travel expenses associated with this Task Order that is required outside the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area. The contractor will not be paid per diem in excess of the CONUS per diem rate available to Government employees for a particular location. Travel requirements shall be identified in advance and will be subject to the approval of the Government. Travel outside of the National Capital Region for this Task Order is highly unlikely.

8. Deliverables.

8.1. Status Reports. A written progress and status report shall be provided to the

Government, when necessary or when requested, but no less than monthly. Once a month, the status report shall include a summary of cost-management information.

8.2. General Biennial Review Analysis. Throughout the life of the Task Order, the contractor shall provide on-going analytical support across the full spectrum of the Biennial

Review program.

8.3. Survey Process and On-Going Survey Analysis. When directed, the contractor shall conduct a evaluation of the organizational customers of the DAs and DoD FAs, and shall maximize the use of the Internet and web sites (NIPRNET, SIPRNET, JWICS) for evaluation tool completion, ensuring conformance to DoD standards and requirements regarding access control of For Official Use Only information and classified information up to Secret. The contractor shall provide on-going analytical support regarding the feedback process, including analyzing trends visible from previous Biennial Review evaluation results.

8.4. Continuous Process Improvement Recommendations. When directed by the

Government, but no earlier than 6 months after each Biennial Review Report is published, assist

O&MP in assessing OSD PSA use of the Report and soliciting their recommendations for improving the process for the next Biennial Review.

8.5. Briefings. The Biennial Review process can include a significant number of briefings, and the contractor needs to be prepared to assist with the preparation and delivery of them, although the Government shall always be the lead briefer/presenter.

Sample Task Only – not funded or intended to be executed 11

8.5.1. Lessons-Learned Briefing. An assessment/report shall be prepared using Power

Point that discusses the lessons learned during each Biennial Review cycle for possible consideration during the next Biennial Review. Its focus shall be on matters internal to ODA&M on how to continuously improve the Biennial Review and the Biennial Review process.

8.5.2. Other Briefings. Briefings, at the discretion of the Government, may be required in special cases. These briefings may include preparation briefings or results briefings to the participating organizations and DoD Component leaders—to include the Defense Agencies and the DoD Field Activities and OSD Principal Staff Assistants (PSAs).

8.6. Organizational Management Analysis Support. Draft organizational reform options, based on Section 192(c) knowledge regarding DAs and DoD FAs, current Biennial Review material, and organizational management analysis.

8.7. Interactive Web Site. Maintaining the Biennial Review on the NIPRNET and

SIPRNET/JWICS is crucial to the success of the Biennial Review. Innovative solutions and web methods will be very important throughout the life of this task order.

8.8. Other Deliverables. Given the dynamic nature of this program, the Program Manager of the support contract and the Government shall work closely together to identify other deliverables within the scope of this task order as far in advance as possible.

9. Facilities. The contractor shall provide its own facilities and supplies in execution of this

Statement of Work/Task Order. If requested, the Government may provide temporary office space on an as-needed basis within the Pentagon. The contractor needs to have a facilities clearance for classified work, up through Secret. Because the evaluation process, its results, and the final report contain sensitive information, the contractor needs to have information technology systems that are compatible with DoD systems, and that conform with DoD information assurance policies and procedures for handling DoD information that is

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY.

10. Period of Performance. The period of performance is one base year plus two annual options to renew, along with the potential for two award-term options, FY 2016 through FY 2017.

COTR: Christopher Appleby

Directorate for Organizational & Management Planning (O&MP)

Office of the Director of Administration and Management (ODA&M)

Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD)

1950 Defense Pentagon

Washington, DC 20301-1950

Phone: 703-697-1142

E-mail: chris.appleby@osd.mil

11. Quality Assurance. A Performance Requirements Summary (and other performance related documents) will be added to Section E of the award via modification within 90 days after award.

mailto:chris.appleby@osd.mil

APPENDIX A

Sample Task Only – not funded or intended to be executed 12

1. Biennial Review. Historically, the DA&M has conducted a periodic review of the DAs and

DoD FAs on behalf of the Secretary of Defense since 1987. This periodic review, which has been referred to as the Secretary of Defense Biennial Review of DAs and DoD FAs (short title:

Biennial Review), has been most recently based primarily on two alternating periods of evaluation. In one period, the work measured and assessed levels of satisfaction expressed in a survey of organizational customers of each DA and DoD FA. In the alternate period, the

Biennial Review surveyed key senior officials in the Department for their assessments of each

DA and DoD FA. The two periods overlapped in that each survey assessed satisfaction from two perspectives – top-down “institutional”, across, and outside the Department organizational customer. Similarly, the two perspectives provide unique, separate insights. In this new fiscal environment where resources are increasingly scarce, the Biennial Review work will need to increase its return on investment to assist senior leaders in resource allocation decisions.

Accordingly, any investment in a review should produce high-value definitive recommendations based on organizational performance and business lines/products delivered in light of the resources invested in each organization.

Historical Biennial Review Construct. As a point of reference, the first five Biennial Reviews, from 1987 to 1995, were carried out using an OSD Study Team approach. The next four

Biennial Reviews used a standardized survey to assess the levels of satisfaction held by the organizational (“wholesale”) customers as they evaluated the products and services provided by the particular DA or DoD FA. This period ended in 2004.

Starting with the 2005-2006 report, a new schedule of Biennial Reviews began

(encompassing a period of four years) utilizing alternating senior management surveys and customer surveys to make their assessments. Simply put, the new process surveyed organizational customers of the DAs and DoD FAs in the first two years of a planned 4 year cycle and, in the second two years of the plan, surveyed senior leader’s views in the form of a management assessment. In this way, organizational customers and senior leaders would each be surveyed every four years, reinforcing the Biennial Review’s work as described in paragraph 1.2., above.

Accordingly, the 2007 and 2008 Biennial Review conducted the organizational customer survey and reported the findings.

While the 2009-2010 Biennial Review was planned to use the senior management assessment survey approach, the Secretary of Defense Efficiency Initiatives reset the process schedule.

Because the Initiatives largely fulfilled the Secretary’s Section 192(c) responsibilities, a summary of those actions were reported in a tailored 2009-2010 Biennial Review report. The preparation for the 2012 Biennial Review is now underway, with an expected release date of

December 2012. The report shall include a summary and analysis of Secretary of Defense decisions that demonstrate fulfillment of the requirements of Section 192(c) since the 2011-2012

1.1. Biennial Review with organizational customer survey. When an organizational customer survey was the focus of the Biennial Review, a structured approach to describing DA and DoD FA business lines and associated products and services, along with a detailed customer

Sample Task Only – not funded or intended to be executed 13 list, provided the framework for the satisfaction questionnaire. In the past, a secure, anonymous, transparent, and interactive electronic survey was used to streamline the following: processing of survey-respondent lists, identifying business lines, verifying submissions, the administering of surveys, and reporting of results back to senior leaders of all DoD Components, including each

DA and DoD FA Director. In the most recent Biennial Reviews, there were more than 12,000 respondents to evaluation requests.

1.2.1. The principal data-gathering methodologies were oriented to capture organizational-performance measurements. The organizational customer lists of each DA and

DoD FA were updated and validated. Key senior representatives of each organizational customer were asked to complete a standard survey that addressed both statutory issues as well as other performance-measurement questions.

1.2.2. After the results for each business line were received, analyzed, and summarized, the respective results were provided to the owners of the work – the Directors of each DA and

DoD FA. Each Director is then permitted to provide written comment addressing the results and other related matters. At the same time this process is taking place, the vendor compares and contrasts results of previous Biennial Reviews to identify trends. After reviewing their respective survey results, each Director responded to a standard set of questions similar to those they answered, in the subsequent period of review. These questions cover Section 192(c) relevant matters, DA and DoD FA internal uses of the Biennial Review, as well as Biennial

Review improvement issues. The written responses to those questions were included in the final

1.2. Biennial Review with senior leader assessment. When a senior management assessment was the focus of the Biennial Review, it consisted of two simultaneous tracks. In the first, the

Directors of the DAs and DoD FAs were asked a series of questions regarding how they used previous Biennial Review results, how they adjusted their management to align with their customers goals, and how they modified their business lines. In the second track, the Secretaries of the Military Departments and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff were questioned regarding their satisfaction with the DAs and DoD FAs. The report also included: a summary and analysis of deliberations and decisions that demonstrated fulfillment of the requirements of

Section 192(c) since the previous Biennial Review, as well as a list of the business lines and associated products and services for each DA and DoD FA.

1.2.1. As an illustration of the required input for the 2005-2006 Biennial Review, the

Directors of the DAs and DoD FAs were asked questions similar to those that follow:

How have the previous Biennial Review results been addressed in 2005 and 2006, and have the plans described in your organization’s response to the 2003-2004 survey results been realized? If yes, how and to what extent? If not, why not?

What initiatives have been implemented to improve support to your organizational customers in 2005 and 2006?

Sample Task Only – not funded or intended to be executed 14

How have your efforts aligned with other major initiatives in the Department, such as the

2006 QDR and Department organizational priorities focusing on results-oriented performance?

How have you aligned your organization’s strategic planning and transformation efforts to the requirements of your organizational customers?

What improvements would you recommend regarding OSD oversight of your organization, and why?

What changes have occurred to your business lines and associated products and services in

2005 and 2006, and why?

1. 2.2. Similarly, the Secretaries of the Military Departments were asked a series of questions to provide their views on whether any DoD-wide functions currently performed by the

Defense Agencies or DoD Field Activities could be more economically or efficiently performed by their Military Department, and, if yes, how. These responses were included in the report.

The responses to the following questions were signed out by the Secretary or Under Secretary of each Military Department and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

What areas of concern do you have regarding the performance of any of the Defense

Agencies or DoD Field Activities, particularly with a view towards the support they provide to their organizational customers? How should these areas be improved in your view?

What Defense Agencies or DoD Field Activities are particularly responsive and/or important in supporting the requirements of your Military Department?

What issues, if any, are there between support functions provided by your Military

Department versus the Defense Agencies and DoD Field Activities? (Issues could include the following: coordination, funding, roles and responsibilities, duplication of effort, and/or implementation/execution.)

What DA and DoD FA mission areas/functions have been most improved by DoD-wide efforts in 2005 and 2006, such as the 2006 QDR and Departmental organizational priorities focusing on results-oriented performance?

[Secretaries of the Military Departments] What DoD-wide functions currently performed by the Defense Agencies and DoD Field Activities could be more economically or efficiently performed by your Military Department or another organization or vice versa, and why? [Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff] Are there any DoD-wide functions currently not assigned to a Defense Agency or DoD Field Activity that should be so assigned?

Historically, the Military Departments have also used this opportunity to provide additional comment on their satisfaction with the Defense Agencies or DoD Field Activities. The Military

Sample Task Only – not funded or intended to be executed 15

Departments will also be invited to participate in the development of customer lists to be used in the subsequent Biennial Review with an organizational customer survey.