A04_Sole_Source_Justification_(2).pdf

LIMITED SOURCES JUSTIFICATION

Upon the basis of the following justification, I, hereby approve the use of restricting consideration of the proposed contractual action pursuant to the authority of FAR 6.302

JUSTIFICATION

1. AGENCY AND CONTRACTING ACTIVITY:

Agency:

Department of Defense

Office Secretary of Defense – Office of Military Commission

4800 Mark Center Drive

Suite 11F09-02

Alexandria, VA 22311-2100

Contracting Activity:

Department of Defense

Washington Headquarters Services – Acquisition Directorate

1225 S. Clark Street

Arlington, VA 22202

2. NATURE/DESCRIPTION OF ACTION(S):

Approval of a sole source award to Local Projects, LLC. The total estimated value for the requirement is approximately $437,872. The period of performance (base period and two one-year option periods) is September 2015 – September 2018.

3. DESCRIPTION OF SUPPLIES/SERVICES:

OMC requires the services of software development company capable of providing database administrators to create an evidence presentation graphical user interface (GUI) on an external hard drive with USB connection from an existing GUI software program. The project will involve modifying, coding, formatting, and repurposing an existing GUI software program and manipulating a database of photos, videos, and other electronic data files for use in a courtroom environment.

4. AUTHORITY AND SUPPORTING RATIONALE:

FAR 6.302-1 provides an exception to other than full and open competition when only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy the agency requirements. FAR

6.302-1 (b)(1) specifically provides that this authority may be used when there is a reasonable basis to conclude that the agency’s minimum needs can only be satisfied by unique supplies or services available from only one source or only one supplier with unique capabilities.

The acquisition action requested by OMC Office of Chief Prosecutor (OCP) through OMC

Office of Convening Authority is for the services of a software developer who has intricate and detailed knowledge of both the victim data and the software platform on which said data resides.

The preferred vendor is directly responsible for all aspects of the data's current configuration, having developed it from inception and implementation, through daily use by thousands of people visiting the 9-11 Memorial Museum, to ongoing maintenance and modification as the needs arise. The software platform in question, which will be acquired by OCP through a no-cost license with the 9-11 Memorial Museum, will require significant and detailed manipulation.

Conceivably, OCP may require Local Projects to make changes during trial when time constraints require a complete and seamless understanding of both the data and the software;

simply put if changes are needed during trial, there will be no room for error, and this vendor with its expertise is the only identified vendor with the unique, requisite knowledge.

Furthermore, given the privacy-sensitive nature of the victim data and the proprietary nature of the software platform, the 9-11 Memorial Museum would like to limit access to the data and software platform. Local Projects already has such access. Given that this vendor is the only vendor to have worked on this data software combination, no additional market research is necessary.

Local Projects (LP) is the reliable source to complete the scope of work detailed by OCP. The requirements of this project far exceed programing expertise. Only LP understands the relationships between the items that will populate the database. Although the 9-11 Memorial

Museum will license its proprietary software platform and parts of its associated database to

OCP, significant and timely modifications to the platform and database will need to be completed to tailor its use to OCP specifications. LP designed the software platform and worked on the 9-11 Memorial Museum project for over 8 years. LP generated the master plan, partnered with the curators to design the exhibits, and then designed all the media that they eventually produced and launched. The platform designed by LP was not a modification to an “off-the-shelf” program; it was designed fro cradle to grave by LP.

LP wrote the platform with the specific intent of profiling victims' data in the most meaningful and representative way. This required a unique understanding of the visitors' motives and a custom approach to representing dynamic material about each victim as the archive grew and changed. The application and platform of delivery were, therefore, very customized to the specific experience of understanding the victims' profiles and histories, without it being a simple slideshow and without the information being static. The database and media contents are again tied to the front-end experience, and therefore were formatted and stored to optimize use by the application. This includes customizations to the different sizes, formats and metadata of the assets and victim profile data. The database employed utilized a structure that facilitated the different schemes the front-end application needed. The level of sophistication for presentation for such a wide variety of materials is singular.

LP alone has spent the aforementioned hours with the victim profile data. No one else has knowledge, access or awareness of this level of material, or the expertise to present them in as sensitive and successful fashion. LP has already customized the assets, profile information, and all metadata for delivery to search and other front-end experiences, even as the materials continue to grow dynamically with new donations. This has been done in concert with the 9-11

Memorial Museum and takes both victim and curatorial concerns into consideration. The current implementation is therefore very customized, and LP's prior history with this material makes it uniquely knowledgeable and capable of delving into what subsets of data may be relevant for

OCP engagement. Only LP possesses the unique qualifications to be able to build the platform and populate the layers of the database without members of the 9-11 trial team sitting with them at each step of the process, a cumbersome and labor-intensive situation that would inhibit the timely completion of other steps required to bring the underlying case to trial. Any other vendor, approaching this dataset for the first time, would be confronted with an insurmountable learning curve within the timeline of this project.

In addition to the foregoing, to effectively compete this requirement, the details of this project and its intended use would have to be revealed in any posted solicitation. OCP maintains that exposing such details would have the direct effect of revealing their trial/litigation strategy.

Trial/litigation strategy is one of the commonly recognized privileges attorneys enjoy and are required by ethical rules to maintain. OCP maintains that soliciting offers and posting the level of detail required to obtain sufficient proposals would breech this privilege and place the integrity of the proceedings against the 9-11 conspirators in jeopardy.

In sum, only LP possess the expertise, knowledge and perspective to satisfy OCP’s minimum needs. Further, in awarding the contract to LP, the government’s best interest would be served, in that the expected needs of OCP at trial and its trial/litigation strategy (or Attorney Work

Product) would not have to be widely revealed.

5. REPRESENTATION OF THE BEST VALUE:

The Contracting Officer will ensure that the final negotiated price under this task order is fair and reasonable in accordance with FAR 15.404-1 procedures in accordance with the DPAP

Deviation 214-O0011 dated March 13, 2014.

6. DESCRIPTION OF MARKET RESEARCH:

Market research consisted of a Small Business Administration Dynamic small business search and System of Award Management, using NAICS code 541511 CUSTOM COMPUTER

PROGRAMMING SERVICES. This market research revealed that Local Projects is the only available source to meet this requirement given that Local Projects, LLC developed the data management system required for manipulating a database of photos, videos, and other electronic data files for use in a courtroom environment.

7. ANY OTHER SUPPORTING FACTS:

N/A

8. ACTIONS TAKEN TO REMOVE BARRIERS TO COMPETITION:

To effectively compete this requirement, the aforementioned details would have to be revealed within the posted solicitation. By exposing such details would have the direct effect of revealing their trial/litigation strategy. Trial/litigation strategy is one of the commonly recognized privileges attorneys enjoy and are required by ethical rules to maintain. OMC maintains that soliciting offers and posting the level of detail required to obtain sufficient proposals would breech this privilege and place the integrity of the proceedings against the 9-11 conspirators in jeopardy.

9. TECHNICAL/REQUIREMENTS CERTIFICATION:

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

Signature:

Name and Title Organization Phone

10. CONTRACTING OFFICER CERTIFICATION:

I have reviewed this justification and find it to be accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Signature:

Name Organization Phone