B06_IDA_JA_Signed_Redacted.pdf

Page 1 of 7Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

WASHINGTON HEADQUARTERS SERVICES

1155 DEFENSE PENTAGON

WASHINGTON, DC 20301-1155

AACQUISITION

DIRECTORATE

WHS/AD Control Number: 2018-WHS-0031

JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL (J&A)

FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

1. Contracting Activity

This requirement is to support the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), the Joint Staff, Unified Combatant Commands, the Defense agencies, and other Department of Defense (DoD) components. Washington Headquarters Services, Acquisition Directorate (WHS/AD) is the contracting activity supporting this requirement.

2. Description of Action

Award of a contract on a sole source basis to the Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA), a Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC), for operation of the Systems and Analyses Center (SAC) FFRDC. The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), the Joint Staff/Combatant Commands, Defense Agencies, Joint Program Offices, and other users of the FFRDC have a continuing need for the IDA FFRDC study and analyses requirements.

Award of a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) type contract has been selected due to the uncertainties in performance (i.e., changes in the levels of effort and technical requirements), which do not permit cost to be estimated with sufficient accuracy over the five year period of performance. A CPFF type contract will provide the DoD flexibility to accommodate dynamic and urgent requirements for FFRDC support in highly diversified technical areas.

This action will be an indefinite quantity/indefinite delivery contract comprised of a single

(5) year base including a period of performance from FY 2019 through FY 2023, with an option to extend the ordering period by six months. The five year contract duration is required to satisfy the need for long-term support from the IDA SAC FFRDC. The goal of this contract structure is to provide a contract vehicle that permits objective and independent support, in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 35.017(a)(4) and to foster the required program continuity, stability, and long-term relationship.

3. Description of Supplies and Services

IDA is a nonprofit corporation, whose purpose is to promote national security and the public interest. To avoid institutional pressures and to maintain freedom from commercial or other potential conflicts of interest, IDA does not work directly for the Military Departments, nor with the private industry. Work under the IDA FFRDC is to assist the OSD, the Joint Staff, the Combatant Commands, and Defense Agencies in addressing national security issues, including systems and technologies at all stages of development, deployment, and use. This research will require a deep understanding of performance, mission capabilities and costs, the

Page 2 of 7Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

IDA FFRDC J&A

underlying technologies, the information environment, the supporting infrastructure, and related intelligence matters. It also will require a thorough knowledge of the national security policies, strategies, organizational structures and relationships, and force employment concepts that help determine which capabilities are needed and how they will be used. Research performed is intended to support the long-term strategic relationship between the FFRDC and its sponsors.

Services required will encompass performance of a wide range of research, analyses, analytic models, simulations, training and instructional materials, and other technical and analytical support useful for policy and program planning and management by task sponsors in accordance with the areas of core competency. Many tasks may be multifaceted in nature, drawing upon multiple core competencies. The specific work to be performed and deliverables to be provided will be described in the statement of work and schedule and deliverables section of each individual project description.

As part of its support of OSD, the IDA SAC FFRDC will continue to maintain research and analysis capabilities that are critical to independent assessments of operational effectiveness and suitability in support of Defense Operational Testing & Evaluation (DOT&E)'s oversight of the Department's operational and live fire test and evaluation programs and the infrastructure and resources needed for support. IDA scientific and technical expertise will support the USD Research and Engineering (R&E) requirements to explore new technologies and to meet the increasing emphasis on multi-component coordination, innovation, and gap analysis for the technology base. IDA expertise and experience will be used for research and analysis of the Defense acquisition process to increase the quality and affordability of Defense acquisition programs, as well as identification of the root causes of failed acquisition programs.

The projected cost ceiling for this contract is million including the potential for a six-month option to extend services per FAR 52.217-8 (the next paragraph and table will define Staff Years of Technical Effort (STE) and provide a breakout per FY). The contract type will be an Indefinite-Delivery-Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) and subsequent task orders will be issued on a cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) basis. Task orders will be funded as they are issued. The task orders also include the number of STE, which represents the direct professional and consultant labor used on the task. The individual research and analysis efforts will vary in performance period length from a few months to multiple years. Such multiple-year efforts are funded on a fiscal year basis with an accompanying updated Project Description (research definition, deliverables, schedule, funding plan, etc.) defining the need for the additional work. The proposed contract term is for a 5-year contract period commencing October 1, 2018 (FY2019) and ending September 30, 2023 (FY2023), with an option to extend the ordering period by six months. The ordering period for the current contract, HQ0034-14-D-0001, expires on September 30, 2018.

STE shall be used in sizing and managing DoD-funded FFRDC work. STE will provide a standard measure across all DoD FFRDCs for projecting DoD workload and funding requirements. Each (STE) is equivalent to 1,810 hours of paid effort for technical services.

STE work years include both FFRDC employee and subcontracted consultant technical

Page 3 of 7Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 effort." Estimates for the five years of STE with a six month option to extend services and contract funding are as follows:

Estimated Cost Per Year Over The Five-Year Contract Fiscal Year STE Estimated $ in Millions

FY 2019

FY 2020

FY 2021

FY 2022

FY 2023

FY 2024 6 month option Total

The number of DoD STE is set by Congress each year in the Defense Appropriations Act, including a sub-ceiling for study and analysis FFRDCs. Currently the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment (USD A&S), through the Director, Acquisition Resources and Analysis (ARA), sets the annual STE ceiling for each FFRDC.

Non-DoD agencies are not limited by a ceiling, so their usage could also change widely year to year.

4. Statutory Authority Permitting Other Than Full and Open Competition

Statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition is 10 U.S.C. 2304 (c) (3)

(B) and FAR 6.302-3(a) (2) (ii), industrial mobilization; engineering, developmental, or research capability; or expert services. "Full and open competition need not be provided for when it is necessary to award the contract to a particular source in order to establish or maintain an essential engineering, research or developmental capability to be provided by an educational or other nonprofit institution or a federally funded research and development center."

5. Rationale Justifying Use of Cited Authority

IDA traces its roots to 1947, when Secretary of Defense Forrestal established the Weapons Systems Evaluation Group (WSEG) to provide technical analyses of weapons systems and programs. In the mid-l950s, the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff asked Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) to form a civilian not-for-profit institute to assist the WSEG in addressing the nation's most challenging security problems.

The institute operated initially under the auspices of a university consortium. IDA was established in 1956 at the request of the Secretary to take over the operations of an internal DoD analytic organization supporting the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs. In 1956, IDA incorporated in the State of Delaware as a not-for-profit corporation, governed by an independent, self-perpetuating board of trustees.

Page 4 of 7Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

Prior to establishing the IDA FFRDC, the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff evaluated the pros and cons of establishing an in-house capability. The requirement for technical analyses, evaluations and reports on weapons systems and matters of national security were critical and time urgent. The technical complexities of the analysis tasks included work that typically extended beyond the state-of-the-art. At that time, no single, well-defined industrial capability existed to meet those needs. Similarly, no in-house staff with the necessary capabilities existed. Civil service salaries were far below industry and there were no incentives to attract, recruit, and retain an in-house capability. Thus, the IDA FFRDC was established to provide the requisite capability. The rationale to establish the FFRDC was to do the technical work that in-house, civil service resources could not do and which private industry either could not or should not be relied upon to do. IDA has continued to develop and maintain the expertise and capabilities necessary to support the DoD leadership with emphasis on the following characteristics:

a. Unique expertise. Tasks that require outstanding competence in specific fields or interdisciplinary policy analyses, where such capabilities exist at the IDA SAC FFRDC.

b. Long-term analysis. Long-term analyses or close working relations with Government agencies, not available to other contractors.

c. Proprietary and restricted information. Privileged access to proprietary data, competition-sensitive data, no-contract documentation, or restricted data that only an FFRDC can obtain.

d. Objectivity. Advice on alternative programs and courses of action free from conflicts of interest caused by service, commercial, or other involvement that only a non-profit analytical organization can appropriately provide.

An award of the follow-on contract to IDA is required to support maintenance and growth of the core-competency areas listed below. The core competencies are focus areas which are determined by the Department. Without a contract vehicle in place, IDA will not have the means to maintain and invest in the expertise and tools needed to support these high priority areas for the Department.

1. Systems and Capabilities Evaluations. IDA’s evaluations of national security systems and capabilities will support decisions on acquisition and program planning, and involve assessments of military worth, performance, technological risks, costs, and joint and allied interoperability. Mission and functional area assessments, analyses of program portfolios, architecture studies, and concept analyses will be conducted as well, along with detailed evaluations of technology and integration issues related to sub-components of major systems and the information environment.

2. Technology Assessments. IDA will provide scientific, technical and analytical support related to identifying, evaluating, developing and using advanced technologies for national security systems and capabilities, as employed by the United States and by others. This work will involve assessments of technology feasibility, readiness, performance, producibility, demonstrations, and development risks. Areas in which IDA will maintain special expertise include materials; sensors, surveillance, and target acquisition; simulation, training, and human factors; aerospace and weapons

Page 5 of 7Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 technologies; chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear sciences and related national security technologies; manufacturing and test processes; and information and computing.

3. Force and Strategy Assessments. IDA will conduct assessments relating systems;

operational performance; command relationships; force structure; and national security plans, policies and strategies. Analyses will examine ongoing and past contingency operations, joint exercises, and peacetime operations to identify lessons learned and to determine the implications for national security planning.

4. Resource and Support Analyses. IDA will develop methods and models for estimating the resources to develop, procure, test, operate, and support defense forces, national security systems and capabilities, information environments, cyber defenses, and intelligence capacities. IDA will apply these techniques to evaluate the implications of policy, planning, programming, and acquisition decisions.

6. Description of Effort Made to Solicit Offers from as Many Offerors as Practicable

While no requirement exists to obtain competition for the reasons cited in FAR 6.302-3(a)

(2) (ii), FAR 35.017-4(a) nevertheless requires that in reviewing FFRDCs "the sponsor, prior to extending the contract or agreement with an FFRDC, shall conduct a Comprehensive Review of the use and need for the FFRDC." This review ensures there remains a requirement for the FFRDC and includes consideration of alternate sources to meet the sponsor's needs. The Comprehensive Review considered alternatives in industry, academia and other FFRDCs. Competition among the FFRDCs is not considered viable due to the highly specialized nature of the IDA SAC support. Other FFRDCs are neither in a position to absorb the volume of work, nor do they possess IDA’s highly specialized expertise. In most cases, IDA would not be able to perform the work done by other FFRDCs. The determination was made that no alternatives exist that meet DOD's needs for the IDA SAC FFRDC. In certain situations, soliciting alternative project plans from other FFRDCs is possible and is supported by the USD(A&S), however this is only applicable to some individual projects and not the SAC vehicle as a whole.

This requirement will not be synopsized in the FedBizOpps, pursuant to the exception authorized by 41 U.S.C. 1708(b) (2) (A). FAR 5.202(a) (10) exempts this type of procurement from the requirement for a FedBizOpps synopsis.

7. Determination of a Fair and Reasonable Cost

The Contracting Officer will determine that the anticipated cost to the Government of the services covered by this J&A will be fair and reasonable. Fair and reasonable costs will be determined by an in-depth analysis of historical hours and costs, a technical recommendation from the program office, and the utilization of field audit assistance from Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA). DCAA and DCMA’s input will be solicited to determine if IDA’s business systems have been audited and determined to be adequate. The resident Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO), DCAA auditors, and Government Contracting Officer Representative (COR) will also provide, on a full-time basis, the surveillance required to monitor a cost reimbursement contract after award. Final incurred costs will also be audited by the Government.

Page 6 of 7Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

8. Description of the Market Research Conducted and the Results

The application of FAR 6.302-3(a)(2)(ii) is contingent upon receiving a Sponsoring Agreement based upon a Comprehensive Review establishing a continuing need for the IDA SAC FFRDC and that no other entity can perform this function. In accordance with FAR 35.017-4(b), approval to continue or terminate sponsorship of the IDA SAC FFRDC rests with the head of sponsoring agency, the USD A&S. Sponsorship is based upon a Comprehensive Review of the use and need for the FFRDC. The Comprehensive Review includes consideration of alternative sources to meet the sponsor's needs pursuant to FAR 35.017-4(c)(2) and serves the function of Market Research. Market Research in a traditional sense of going out to survey the commercial industry is not appropriate, as the commercial industry cannot meet the critical parameter of being unbiased. FFRDCs must have access to sensitive data and must be free from conflict of interest to be able to present unbiased analysis, something that commercial vendors cannot do, because of competing priorities.

A Comprehensive Review was conducted by the OSD Studies and FFRDC Management Office and approved by the USD (AT&L) [currently USD (A&S)] on December 22, 2017.

Alternate sources to fulfill the research and analysis needs of OSD, Combatant Commands, Joint Staff, and Defense Agencies were considered as part of the Comprehensive Review conducted. FAR Section 35.017-4 (c)(2) requires an examination of alternative sources that could provide IDA FFRDC capabilities to DoD. The Comprehensive Review: (a) addressed the skills, competencies, and capabilities required for a "IDA FFRDC like" organization; (b) addressed the importance of the strategic relationship in identifying "core" work for a FFRDC; and (c) summarized the results of a survey from major users that assessed whether in-house Government personnel, for-profit or not-for-profit contractors, or university-affiliated organizations could provide the capabilities of the present IDA FFRDC as effectively. Responses from the task sponsors and major users stated that in-house personnel, for-profit and other not-for-profit entities in the private sector, as well as universities, could not meet their needs as effectively as the IDA FFRDC.

9. Other Facts Supporting the use of Other than Full and Open Competition

N/A

10. Interested Sources

To date, no other source has expressed an interest in writing to satisfy the requirements of this justification.

11. Actions to Remove Barriers to future Competition

For the reasons set forth in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5, WHS/AD has no plans at this time to compete future requirements for the types of services covered by this J&A. If another potential source emerges, WHS/AD will assess whether competition for future requirements is feasible.

Page 7 of 7Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

112172870

CERTIFICATION

I, hereby, certify that the supporting data under my cognizance included in this justification are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

_ 03/06/2018

Contracting Officer Representative/Program Office Date

_03/01/2018

Contracting Officer Date

CONCURRENCE

Base on the foregoing, I hereby concur with this justification and recommend for approval.

KAO.DAVID.HOBERT.1 Digitally signed by

KAO.DAVID.HOBERT.1112172870

_ D_ate_: 20_18_.04_.18_18_:17_:00_-0_4'0_0'

David H. Kao, Competition Advocate Date

David D. Sanders, Director Date Acquisition Directorate

APPROVAL

Based on the foregoing, this justification is, hereby, approved.

Barbara A. Westgate, Director Date Washington Headquarters Services

SANDERS.DAVID.

DELANO.10583915

Digitally signed by

SANDERS.DAVID.DELANO.1058

391596 Date: 2018.04.26 10:13:00 -04'00'

WESTGATE.BARB

ARA.A.1046649814

Digitally signed by

WESTGATE.BARBARA.A.10466

49814 Date: 2018.04.26 13:10:09 -04'00'