Final_RFP_A3_AT_Plan.docx

Award-Term Plan for the NBACC FFRDC Management and Operations Project

Award-Term Plan for the NBACC FFRDC Management and Operations Project Attachment 3 to Solicitation HSHQDC-15-R-00050

Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION:

This Award-Term Plan is the basis for the Government’s evaluation of the NBACC FFRDC Contractor’s performance and for presenting an overall assessment of that performance to the Term Determining Official (TDO). The evaluation for award-term points (also sometimes identified as performance points in this plan) will begin at the start of the contract. An adjustment to the Award-Term will not result in a contract ordering period of less than one-year or greater than ten-years from the award of the contract. This plan describes the specific evaluation criteria and the procedures to be used by the Government’s Award-Term Organization (ATO) to assess the Contractor’s performance and to determine the amount of award-term points earned are described herein. Actual award term determinations and the methodology for determining the award-term are unilateral decisions that are made solely at the discretion of the Government.

The contract term extensions that are earned by the NBACC FFRDC Contractor will be provided to the Contractor via unilateral contract modifications based upon the number of performance points that the Contractor earned, as determined by the TDO. The award-term earned will be determined by the TDO based upon his/her review of the Contractor’s performance against the performance evaluation criteria that are set forth in this plan. The TDO may unilaterally change this plan prior to the beginning of an evaluation period. The Contractor will be notified of changes to this plan by the Contracting Officer in writing before the start of the affected evaluation period. Changes to this plan that are applicable to a current evaluation period will be incorporated by mutual consent of both parties.

a. Background

The National Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasures Center (NBACC) Federally-Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC) will be managed by a Contractor for the Department of Homeland Security, Science and Technology (DHS/S&T) Directorate. The NBACC FFRDC will characterize existing biological threats and anticipate future threats; to anticipate, prevent, respond to, and recover from an attack through the establishment of an integrated science-based program and infrastructure; conduct and facilitate the technical forensic analysis of evidentiary samples from investigations of bio-crime and terror and support an integrated research program to fill operational bioforensic capability gaps and to manage, operate, sustain, and enhance the NBACC as a safe, secure facility. The programs that are conducted at the NBACC provide knowledge of infectious properties of biological agents (select agents), effectiveness of countermeasures (i.e., detectors, drugs, vaccines, and decontamination procedures), and forensics analyses to support policy makers and first responders’ development of policies, programs, and technologies.

The NBACC Strategic and Annual Plans are synchronized with and aligned to the DHS/S&T Priorities and Milestones which DHS/S&T has identified as essential to the NBACC’s success. The Strategic Plan is reviewed yearly in order to assess the need for revision and updates are provided to DHS/S&T. The Annual Plan is updated yearly to reflect the revised DHS/S&T Priorities and Milestones in order to ensure the continued alignment of the FFRDC Mission. The NBACC Strategic Plan builds upon previous NBACC Strategic Plans and uses an expanded process that looks out ten years rather than five years. The NBACC Management Approach continues to use a closed-loop “plan-execute-improve” process that was previously developed and implemented for the FFRDC. The Annual Plan provides insight into specific projects and activities that were accomplished or initiated by NBACC with current year funding. Progress of these projects and activities is reported in the monthly and quarterly requirements by NBACC.

b. Scope

The scope of this Award-Term Plan assesses the activities that the NBACC Contractor employs to plan, manage, and to operate the NBACC FFRDC. It also measures the effectiveness, quality, and timeliness of the NBACC Contractor in meeting program objectives and goals.

c. Purpose

The purpose of this Award-Term Plan is to define the process by which DHS/S&T will evaluate the NBACC FFRDC Contractor’s performance, determines the number of performance points earned for the applicable Award-Term evaluation period, and approves those Award-Term performance extensions that were earned by the NBACC FFRDC Contractor under the prime contract for the management and operation of the NBACC.

d. Objective

The objective of the Award-Term Plan is to provide a timely, fair, and balanced framework to measure the NBACC FFRDC Contractor’s effectiveness in meeting the Performance Metrics that are identified in the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) and in this plan. It provides the NBACC Contractor with an opportunity to earn performance points in order to obtain Award-Term contract extensions that are commensurate with the achievement of different levels of performance as defined in Section 7 of this plan.

2. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS:

· Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Contract TBD and its referenced and attached documents; and

· Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) (current fiscal year version)

3. DEFINITIONS:

4. ORGANIZATION:

The award-term organization consists of the following parties:

· Term Determining Official;

· Executive Agent;

· Performance Evaluation Board (another name for an Award-Term Review Board which consists of a chairperson, a recorder, the Contracting Officer, other functional area participants, and advisor members; and other senior management representative(s) who represent outreach activities); and

· Contracting Officer

The specific names for each of the above identified roles in the award-term organization are provided as Attachment 1 to this plan. (See Attachment 1)

A discussion of the responsibilities of each of the above identified participants will be provided in Section 5 of this plan entitled “Responsibilities.”

5. RESPONSIBILITIES:

a. Term Determining Official

Term Determining Official (TDO)—the TDO, as identified in Attachment 1 to this plan, will be the DHS Deputy Undersecretary for Science and Technology Directorate. A designee may be utilized temporarily if the assigned TDO chooses to delegate the responsibility to a designee. The TDO is responsible for the supervision of this performance evaluation activity. The primary TDO responsibilities are as follows:

· Participate in the preliminary debriefing to the Contractor;

· Reviews, approves, and provides comments on the Draft Final Performance Report (DFPR) and makes a determination on whether or not to exercise the Award-Term incentive period and make recommendations to the Contracting Officer;

· Monitor and adjust certain matters in this plan. The TDO may unilaterally change certain matters in this plan as covered in Section 8 and not otherwise require mutual agreement under the contract as described in Section 8 provided that the NBACC FFRDC Contractor receives written notice of the changes prior to the beginning of the evaluation period to which those changes apply;

· The TDO reserves the right to make adjustments to the evaluation weighting as defined in Section 7 of this plan in order to address anomalies and other considerations of the evaluation process. Changes to Sections 6(b) and 7(b), both entitled “Evaluation Weights,” that will result in an increase or decrease in a factor’s weighting by more than 3 percentage points from that initially approved for the current fiscal year must be made bilaterally;

· Approve recommended changes to the evaluation requirements of this plan; and

· The TDO may, at his/her discretion, appoint advisory members and senior management representatives to represent outreach activities to the PEB. Advisory members and senior management representatives may be used to address specific areas of expertise such as:

· Management Systems and Facilities;

· Science;

· Safety and Regulatory Compliance;

· Financial Management; and

· Forensics Operation

b. Executive Agent

Executive Agent (EA)--the Executive Agent (EA), as identified in Attachment 1 to this plan, will be the Director of the Office of National Laboratories for DHS Science and Technology Directorate. A designee may be utilized temporarily if the assigned EA chooses to delegate the responsibility to a designee. A designee may also be used as a permanent replacement. In either case, it is imperative that the NBACC FFRDC Contractor be notified if the assigned EA chooses to delegate responsibility to a designee. In addition to those tasks that are specifically defined in the Sponsoring Agreement, the EA will also perform the following Performance Evaluation Process tasks as follows:

· Reviews and Approves the Preliminary Findings Briefing (PFB) document that is developed by the PEB Chairperson;

· Leads the Preliminary Findings Debriefing with the NBACC FFRDC Contractor;

· Reviews and Approves the Preliminary Report that is developed by the PEB Chairperson;

· Reviews and Approves the Draft Final Performance Report (DFPR) and presents said report to the TDO (includes scores, award-term recommendation, observations, strengths and an improvement path based upon demonstration of adherence to the contract and the provision of deliverables;

· Prepares the Final Performance Report (FPR) and the NBACC FFRDC Contractor debriefing based upon the comments he/she received from the TDO;

· At the discretion of the TDO, the EA will conduct an informational briefing of the annual assessment findings and a final score to the DHS Undersecretary for Science and Technology;

· The EA will chair a meeting with the NBACC FFRDC Contractor in order to conduct a debriefing of the Final Performance Report (FPR). The FPR is a comprehensive evaluation report that includes the Contractor’s evaluation scores (earned Award-Term Points). These discussions will also include the announcement of the determination to exercise the Award-Term incentive period or not do so, provide observations, strengths, and the path for improvement for each performance measure.

c. Performance Evaluation Board (PEB)

Performance Evaluation Board (PEB)—as identified in Attachment 1 to this plan, the PEB is made up of the following membership:

· Chairperson—DHS/S&T Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR)

· Members—the members of the PEB consist of the following personnel:

· Science (Personnel from DHS/S&T Chemical and Biological Defense Division (CBD) and other Government Task Leads)

· The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)’s Liaison for Bioforensics; and

· Representatives from other customers as assigned by the PEB Chairperson

The primary responsibilities of the PEB include the following activities:

· Maintain written records of the Contractor’s performance in their assigned evaluation area(s) so that a fair and accurate evaluation is obtained;

· Gather evaluation input from sponsors concerning the performance of the NBACC FFRDC Contractor within their assigned area(s) of responsibility and consider the Contractor’s written self-assessment and the demonstration of adherence to contract terms and provision of deliverables by the NBACC FFRDC Contractor;

· Review and assess the data and other supporting documentation that is provided by the NBACC FFRDC Contractor;

· Jointly review/discuss the written records of Contractor performance. The PEB will also perform the following activities:

· Consider all information from pertinent sources;

· Prepare interim performance reports; and

· Arrive at an earned award-term score and a recommendation whether to exercise the award-term incentive period or not; and

· Provide the EA with the earned award-term score and a recommendation whether to exercise the award-term incentive period or not.

· Recommend changes to this plan to the TDO.

d. PEB Chairperson:

The PEB Chairperson is the DHS/S&T Contracting Officer’s Representative (DHS/S&T COR), or his/her designee. The primary responsibilities of the PEB Chairperson are as follows:

· Coordinates the activities of the PEB members;

· Selects PEB members who are knowledgeable in performance evaluations and are prepared to perform assigned tasks in a timely manner;

· Synthesizes the results provided by PEB members and develops the Preliminary Findings Debriefing;

· Participates in the NBACC FFRDC Contractor’s debriefing of preliminary findings (no scores) and notifies the NBACC FFRDC Contractor of their option to submit a reclama; and

· Leads the PEB in assessing the reclama by the NBACC Contractor and developing the Preliminary Performance Report

e. Contracting Officer

The Contracting Officer (CO) reviews the recommendations from the TDO for the award-term earned for the period being evaluated and will determine whether or not the TDO recommendations for the exercise of the respective award-term incentive period are within the scope of this plan. Upon determining that the TDO’s recommendations are in accordance with the provisions of this plan, the CO will then prepare and execute a unilateral contract modification to execute the earned award-term incentive period.

6. AWARD-TERM PROCESSES:

a. Evaluation Period

As identified in Attachment 2 to this plan (See Attachment 2), the evaluation period for the award-term for the base period of this contract will be a full calendar year using the actual date of contract award as the starting point. For the four option periods, the Government will start the evaluation of the Contractor’s performance at the actual date of each option’s exercise. As identified in this plan, the Government will also be conducting interim evaluations (semi-annual reviews). The interim evaluations will take place every six months or halfway through the full calendar year. The Government will conduct the end-of-period evaluation (annual evaluations) at the end of the calendar year.

b. Available Award Term Points

The earned award-term points will be based upon the Contractor’s performance during each evaluation period. The available points for each evaluation period are shown in Attachment 2 to this plan. An accumulation of positive 61 points or above is required for a one-year term extension.

c. Evaluation Weights

The evaluation weights are defined in both the Performance Metrics Section of the QASP and in this plan. For the NBACC FFRDC project, the evaluation weights will be as follows:

*--Number is rounded (actual value is 33.3333333333333. The sum of the three weight percentage values equal 100%. To calculate the total performance points score in order to determine the award-term, the Government (the PEB) would evaluate the Contractor’s performance in every sub-factor within the individual evaluation factor and would then develop an average factor score (ranging from 0 to 100). Next, the PEB would sum up the three average performance scores and would divide that sum by the number of factors (three) to obtain the total performance score. NOTE: If the average score for an individual evaluation factor is less than 61 points, then the average overall factor score would be 0.

**--This is the maximum number of points per individual evaluation factor.

These weights are qualifying devices. Their purpose is to provide overall guidance in arriving at a general indication of whether or not to exercise the Award-Term incentive period. The TDO reserves the right to make adjustments to the evaluation weighting as defined in Section 5(a) of this document.

d. Evaluation Criteria

The evaluation criteria that the Government will use in its overall evaluation of the Contractor’s performance are provided in Attachment 3 to this plan. (See Attachment 3) If the Contracting Officer does not give specific written notice to the Contractor of any change to the evaluation criteria prior to the start of a new evaluation period, then the same evaluation criteria that are listed for the preceding period will be used in the subsequent award-term evaluation period. Any changes to the evaluation criteria will be made by revising Attachment 3 and notifying the NBACC FFRDC Contractor.

e. Evaluation Grading

The evaluation criteria that the Government will use in the evaluation of the Contractor’s performance are provided in Attachment 3 to this plan. (See Attachment 3) A discussion of how the Government will grade the Contractor’s performance is also provided in Attachment 4 to this plan. (See Attachment 4) The process of how the Government will evaluate performance is provided in Attachment 6 (for the interim (semi-annual) evaluation) or Attachment 7 (for the end-of-period (annual) evaluation). (See Attachments 6 or 7 respectively)

f. Contractor Self-Assessment

In this evaluation process, at both the interim (semi-annual) evaluation and the end-of-period (annual) evaluation, the NBACC FFRDC Contractor will be afforded an opportunity to submit information (evidence) on its behalf, including a written self-assessment of its performance. These self-assessments will be limited to fifty written pages in length and may be accompanied by an oral presentation regarding contract performance to the PEB. The evidence and other supporting documentation is not counted towards the fifty page limit. It must be made available for review by the Contractor’s Area Coordinators not later than submission of the self-assessment to DHS/S&T.

DHS/S&T acknowledges the depth and breadth required in developing the written self-assessment and has afforded the NBACC Contractor 20 working days after the end of the appraisal period to submit their written self-assessment for each semi-annual period. The scoring and earned award-term will be administered annually as part of the year-end assessment process.

g. Interim (Semi-Annual) Evaluation Process

IMPORTANT NOTE: An interim determination for the NBACC FFRDC Contractor must be made by the Government within 60 calendar days after the receipt by the Contracting Officer of the NBACC Contractor’s written self-assessment report or for a longer period if the NBACC Contractor and the Contracting Officer agree. The method that the Government will follow in the monitoring and assessing of the Contractor’s performance during the interim evaluation is described below:

The PEB Chairperson will notify each PEB member 60 calendar days before the midpoint of the evaluation period. The PEB members will complete their individual evaluation reports by 60 calendar days after their notification by the PEB Chairperson. The PEB will then convene and jointly determine the interim evaluation results and prepares a Preliminary Findings Briefing (PFB). Once agreed upon by the PEB membership, the PEB Chairperson will forward the PFB to the Executive Agent (EA) for his/her review and approval by the EA.

The PFB will include, but is not limited to, an executive summary, a Contractor self-assessment (without scores) of the first-half deliverables by program, documented progress toward full-year deliverables, risk register, and the look-ahead. NOTE: The end-of-period evaluation (annual review) will include all the semi-annual review topics but will also include the Contractor’s recommended scores.

The PEB Chairperson may request additional performance information from other Governmental personnel and/or units that are involved in observing the Contractor’s performance, as appropriate.

After review, the EA will provide the PEB Chairperson with his/her written concurrence on the PFB documentation or not. If the PFB is not acceptable, the EA will send the document back to the PEB Chairperson for necessary corrections until the document is determined acceptable. Once the document is determined acceptable by the EA, he/she will provide his/her written concurrence to the PEB Chairperson. Upon receipt of the written concurrence, the Government, led by the EA, will hold a Preliminary Findings Debriefing with the NBACC FFRDC Contractor in order to discuss the preliminary evaluation results. At this meeting, DHS will provide the Contractor with feedback on first-half deliverables and associated work efforts and will provide the Contractor with an opportunity to provide a reclama and to make revisions to those deliverables that need improvement before they are accepted as final.

As discussed in Attachment 5 to this plan (See Attachment 5), the PEB will, upon receipt of all information, including the Contractor’s written self-assessment, will conduct a secondary review in which it will review all of the new information in order to see if the new materials/information caused the PEB to make any changes to its initial evaluation of the Contractor’s performance. At the completion of this review, the PEB will then generate a Preliminary Report (PR) for review and approval by the EA. The PR document will capture the content of the original evaluations found in the PFB documentation as well as any revisions to its evaluation of the Contractor performance. The PEB will, in the PR document, identify those areas where the revisions to scoring occurred and will provide the reasoning for the changes from the initial ratings identified in the PFB. If there were no changes in its evaluation, after further review of the additional information, of the Contractor’s performance, then the PEB will state so in the PR document.

After obtaining concurrence from all the members of the PEB, the PEB Chairperson will then forward the PR onward to the EA for his/her review and approval. If the PR document is not acceptable, the EA will send the document back to the PEB Chairperson for necessary correction until the document is determined acceptable. Once the PR is determined acceptable, the EA will provide written approval to the PEB Chairperson and the Government will provide the Contractor with the finalized written PR document and will formally meet with the NBACC Contractor in order to discuss the interim (semi-annual) ratings and associated conclusions in the PR.

As discussed in subsection (f) of this section, DHS/S&T acknowledges the depth and breadth of the effort taken by the NBACC Contractor of developing the written self-assessment and has afforded the NBACC FFRDC Contractor 20 working days after the end of the appraisal period to submit their self-assessment for the semi-annual period. IMPORTANT NOTE: as noted elsewhere in this document, the Government will not be paying any award-fee or exercising award-term for the interim (semi-annual) evaluation period. The scoring and earned award-fee and award-term will be provided annually as part of the year-end assessment process.

h. End-of-Period (Annual) Evaluations

IMPORTANT NOTE: An annual determination for the NBACC FFRDC Contractor must be made by the Government within 60 calendar days after receipt by the Contracting Officer of the NBACC Contractor’s written self-assessment report or for a longer period if the NBACC Contractor and the Contracting Officer agree. The method that the Government will follow in monitoring and assessing the Contractor’s performance during the end-of-period evaluation is described below:

The PEB Chairperson will notify each PEB member 60 calendar days before the end of the evaluation period. PEB members will complete their individual evaluations by 60 calendar days after receiving notification from the PEB Chairperson. The PEB will jointly prepare its Preliminary Findings Briefing (PFB) and the Draft Final Performance Report (DFPR). The DFPR is a draft evaluation report that contains the initial evaluations of the Contractor’s performance and the recommendation to the TDO of whether or not to award the applicable Award-Term incentive period. At this time, the PEB may also recommend any significant changes to the award-term plan for TDO approval.

The Draft Final Performance Report (DFPR) will include, but is not limited to, an executive summary, a Contractor written self-assessment (with recommended scores) of the full-year deliverables by program, progress made during the year, the risk register, and look ahead. NOTE: the end-of-period (annual) evaluation will include all the semi-annual review topics and will include the Contractor’s recommended scores.

The PEB Chairperson may request additional performance information from other Governmental personnel and/or units that are involved in observing the Contractor’s performance, as appropriate.

Once finalized and agreed upon by the membership of the PEB, the PEB Chairperson will forward the DFPR and PFB to the Executive Agent (EA) for his/her review and concurrence.

After review, the EA will determine if the DFPR and PFB are acceptable or not. If either document is unacceptable, the EA will forward that document back to the PEB Chairperson for necessary correct until the document is acceptable. Once the documentation is acceptable, the EA will provide the PEB Chairperson with his written concurrence on the DFPR and PFB documentation. Upon receipt of the EA’s written concurrence, the Government, led by the EA, will hold a Preliminary Findings Debriefing with the NBACC FFRDC Contractor in order to discuss the preliminary evaluation results. At this meeting, DHS will provide the Contractor with feedback on deliverables and will provide the Contractor with an opportunity to reclama and make revisions to these deliverables before they are accepted as final.

As discussed in sub-item (f) of this section of the plan, the NBACC FFRDC Contractor will be afforded an opportunity to submit a reclama and other information (evidence) on its behalf, including a self-assessment of its performance at the annual evaluation period. The written self-assessment will be limited to fifty written pages in length and may be accompanied by an oral presentation regarding contract performance to the PEB. The supporting evidence and other associated supporting documentation will not be counted towards the 50 page limit. However, the supporting evidence and other supporting documentation must be made available for review by the Contractor’s Area Coordinators not later than the submission of the self-assessment to DHS/S&T.

DHS/S&T acknowledges the depth and breadth of developing the self-assessment and has afforded the NBACC FFRDC Contractor 20 working days after the end of the appraisal period to submit their written self-assessment for the annual period. As noted earlier in this section, the scoring and decision to extend the term of the contract will occur annually as part of the year-end assessment process.

As discussed in Attachment 6 to this plan, the PEB will, upon receipt of all information including the Contractor’s written self-assessment, will conduct a secondary review in which it will review all of the new information in order to see if it would cause the PEB to change any of its initial evaluation ratings of the Contractor’s performance. At the completion of this review, the PEB will then generate an updated Draft Final Performance Report (DFPR) for review and approval by the EA. The updated DFPR document will capture all the content of the original evaluations found in the original DFPR documentation as well as any revisions to its evaluation of the Contractor performance. The PEB will, in the updated DFPR document, identify those areas where the revisions to the scoring occurred and will provide the reasoning for any changes from the initial ratings that are identified in the initial DFPR. If there were no changes in its evaluation, after further review of the additional information, of the Contractor’s performance, the PEB will state so in the updated DFPR document. The PEB Chairperson will forward the updated DFPR to the EA for his/her review and approval.

The EA will review the updated DFPR and will either approve the document or not. If the EA does not approve the document, he/she will send it back to the PEB Chairperson for the necessary corrections until the document is determined acceptable. If the DFPR is acceptable, the EA will inform the PEB Chairperson that the document is acceptable and will forward the document onto the Term Determining Official (TDO) for his/review and approval.

The TDO will review the DFPR and will determine if the documentation is acceptable or not. If the document is not acceptable, the TDO will send the document back to the EA for the necessary corrections until the document is determined acceptable. If the DFPR is determined acceptable, the TDO will approve the DFPR and will provide his written approval and the applicable comments to the EA. Upon receipt of the TDO-approved DFPR, the EA will then prepare the Final Performance Report (FPR). Once the FPR is completed and determined to be acceptable, the EA will set up and chair a formal meeting with the NBACC Contractor in order to discuss the final ratings/conclusions found in the FPR. In addition, the EA will provide the Contracting Officer with a signed copy of the FPR for the file and for action purposes.

The Contracting Officer will then review the final FPR in order to determine if the final FPR is in compliance with this plan. Once he/she has determined that the final FPR is in compliance with the plan, then the Contracting Officer will issue a unilateral contract modification that executes the applicable Award-Term incentive period.

7. EVALUATION FACTORS:

a. Evaluation Period

As identified in Attachment 2 to this plan (See Attachment 2), the evaluation period for the award-term for the contract’s base period is a full calendar year using the actual date of the contract award as the starting point. For the four option periods, the Government will start the evaluation period of the Contractor’s performance at the actual date of each option’s exercise. As identified in this plan, the Government will also be conducting interim (semi-annual) evaluations. The interim evaluations will take place every six-months, or halfway through the full calendar year. The Government will conduct the end-of-period (annual) evaluations at the end of the calendar year.

b. Evaluation Weights

The evaluation weights are defined in Section 6(c) of this Award-Term Plan.

c. Evaluation Criteria

The evaluation criteria that the Government will use in the overall evaluation of the Contractor’s performance are provided in Section 6(d) of this Award-Term Plan.

d. Evaluation Grading

The evaluation criteria that the Government will use in its evaluation of the Contractor’s performance are provided in Attachment 3 to this plan. (See Attachment 3) A discussion of the adjectival ratings, range of performance points, and how the Government will grade the Contractor’s performance is also provided in Attachment 4 to this plan. (See Attachment 4) The process of how the Government will evaluate performance is provided in Attachment 6 (for the interim (semi-annual) evaluation) or Attachment 7 (for the end-of-period (annual) evaluation). (See Attachments 6 or 7 respectively)

IMPORTANT NOTE: Those factors receiving a grade of “Unsatisfactory” (less than 61) will be assigned zero performance points for the purposes of calculating the award-term. The NBACC Contractor will not receive an award-term when the total performance point score is “Unsatisfactory” (less than 61). In order to earn a total overall rating of “Excellent,” the Contractor must be under cost, on or ahead of schedule, and be rated “Excellent” for Technical Performance. Key Government personnel will evaluate and assess the Contractor’s performance for the six-month period beginning at Contract Award and will continue semi-annually thereafter

e. Guidance on Assessing Performance and Level of Compliance

In assessing the NBACC FFRDC Contractor’s performance and to gauge the level of compliance, those personnel assigned either to the Performance Evaluation Board or as the Term Determining Official shall utilize the following information sources:

· Government contract surveillance records;

· Contractor’s self-assessment;

· The Performance Metrics;

· Contractor’s reclama and other submitted documentation; and

· Attachment 7 of this Award-Term Plan

Also, the Government evaluators may find that additional guidance can be found within the Quality Project Performance Plan (QPPP) Parameters Definitions for Bioforensics Methods and Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs)

8. AWARD-TERM PLAN CHANGE PROCEDURES:

a. Right to Make Unilateral Changes

Except for the matters described below, this plan may be revised unilaterally by the Government prior to the beginning of the interim or annual ratingperiods in order to redirect emphasis. Such unilateral changes are to be made by the TDO prior to the beginning of an evaluation period by timely written notice to the NBACC FFRDC Contractor. For redirection made during the evaluation period, these changes will be made bilaterally and the Government will provide the notification of such changes to the NBACC FFRDC Contractor as soon as practical, depending upon the urgency of the redirection, with an objective 30 calendar days prior to the effective date on which the change applies. Unilateral changes will be made effective as of the date on which the change applies pursuant to the written notice, and a unilateral contract modification will be issued in order to incorporate the change as soon as practicable thereafter.

The TDO may unilaterally change this plan prior to the beginning of an evaluation period. In addition, the Contractor may recommend changes to the plan no later than 30 days prior to the beginning of the new evaluation period. The Contractor will be notified of changes to the plan by the Contracting Officer, in writing, before the start of the affected evaluation period. Changes to this plan that are applicable to a current evaluation period will be incorporated by the mutual consent of the parties.

b. Steps to Change Plan Coverage

The following is a summary of the principal actions involving changing plan coverage:

The PEB will establish lists of any subsidiary actions and schedules as necessary to meet the above schedules.

c. Method for Changing Plan Coverage

The method to be followed for changing plan coverage is described below:

· Personnel involved in the administration of the award-term provisions of the contract are encouraged to recommend plan changes with a view toward changing management emphasis, motivating higher Contractor performance levels or improving the award-term determination process. The recommended changes should be sent directly to the PEB Chairperson.

· Prior to the end of the interim evaluation period, the PEB will submit its recommended changes, if any, applicable to the next annual evaluation period for approval by the TDO with appropriate comments and justification. The TDO may refer the proposed changes to the PEB for additional evaluation, consideration, and further recommendations.

· Prior to the end of the annual evaluation period, the PEB will submit its recommended changes, if any, applicable to the next interim evaluation period for approval by the TDO with appropriate comments and justification. The TDO may refer the proposed changes to the PEB for additional evaluation, consideration, and further recommendations.

· At or before the beginning of each evaluation period, the Contracting Officer will notify the NBACC FFRDC Contractor in writing of the changes to be applied during the next period, and will request the NBACC Contractor’s concurrence with such changes. These changes must be made bilaterally. If the NBACC Contractor is not provided with this notification, or if the notification is not provided at or before the beginning of the next period, then the existing plan will continue in effect for the next evaluation period. If the NBACC FFRDC Contractor does not concur with the proposed change which is required to be bilateral, then the proposed change will not take effect.

9. METHOD FOR CREATING SPECIAL AREAS OF EMPHASIS:

As world events change, those events may directly affect the Department of Homeland Security’s Fiscal Year Priorities and Milestones. In these circumstances, DHS/S&T may elect to redirect the NBACC FFRDC Contractor to different priorities and tasks during the evaluation period. When this occurs, the TDO, in concert with the PEB Chairperson, will identify these Special Areas of Emphasis. The PEB Chairperson will work with the NBACC FFRDC Contractor to develop agreed upon acceptance criteria and project outcomes along with a redistribution of the performance metrics and weighting factors. The Contracting Officer will coordinate contract changes, as appropriate.

10. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CALENDAR AND PERFORMANCE EVALUATION FLOW CHART:

Since the Performance Evaluation Schedule is somewhat fluid and functions as a guide of the timing of events throughout the year, a current Program Year Performance Evaluation Calendar will be provided as a separate attachment (Attachment 8 to this plan) and will be updated on an annual basis (See Attachment 8)

The Performance Evaluation Flow Chart, which represents the key activities for the performance evaluation process is separated out by the specific process and the specific evaluation period. The Performance Evaluation Flow Chart for the interim evaluation period (semi-annual period) is provided as Attachment 5 (See Attachment 5). For the end-of-period evaluation period (annual evaluation), the Performance Evaluation Flow Chart for this process is provided as Attachment 6 (See Attachment 6)

11. ATTACHMENTS TO THE AWARD-TERM PLAN:

Attachment 1—Award-Term Organization Attachment 2—Award-Term Allocation by Evaluation Periods Attachment 3—Evaluation Criteria Attachment 4—Evaluation Grading Scales (Adjectival and Numerical) Attachment 5—Performance Evaluation Process (Semi-Annual Evaluation) Attachment 6—Performance Evaluation Process (Annual Evaluation) Attachment 7—Guidance on Assessing Performance and Level of Compliance Attachment 8—Performance Evaluation Calendar

Attachment 1—the Award-Term Organization

The membership for the Award-Term Organization (ATO) for the NBACC FFRDC Contract will be as follows:

FBI Liaison for Bioforensics

Other NBACC Customers as assigned

By the PEB Chairperson

Key Terms:

· CBD—Chemical and Biological Defense Division

· DHS—Department of Homeland Security

· FBI—Federal Bureau of Investigation

· FFRDC—Federally Funded Research and Development Center

· HSARPA—Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency

· TDO—Term Determining Official

Attachment 2—Award-Term Allocation by Evaluation Period

The award-term earned by the Contractor will be determined at the completion of the evaluation periods shown below. The percentages and dollars shown corresponding to each period is the maximum available award-term amount that can be earned during the particular period.

Evaluation

Available

Key Terms:

· DOA—Date of Contract Award

· DOE—Date of Option Exercise

Key Assumptions:

*--the contract will have up to five one-year award-term incentive periods. Each year of the contract will have a corresponding award-term incentive period that may or may not be exercised depending on the Government’s evaluation of the Contractor’s performance.

*--the 100 points is the total maximum score that the NBACC FFRDC Contractor can achieve under a particular award-term evaluation period. As identified in Attachment 3, there are three main factors that the Government will use to evaluate the Contractor’s performance for this project:

· Technical Performance (33.33% weight)

· Business Management Performance (33.33% weight)

· Cost Control (33.33% weight)

To develop the 100 point score, the Government would evaluate all the subfactors under each of the three main factors and develop a numerical score for each of the three main evaluation factors. Those overall numerical scores for each evaluation factor would then be summed up and divided by the total number of evaluation factors (three) in order to develop an overall performance score. The illustration below shows how an overall performance score would be derived for the NBACC FFRDC Project:

Technical Performance: 80 points Business Management Performance: 72 points Cost Control: 85 points

Government Calculation(s):

80 + 72 + 85 = 237 points 237/3=79 points.

In this scenario, the Contractor’s overall performance score is 79 points and an award-term would be recommended. If the Contractor achieved 100 points on all three elements, then his performance score would be 100 (300/3 = 100) NOTE: If the Contractor, in an evaluation factor category, makes less than 61 points, then he/she will receive a factor score of 0. An illustration of this is provided below:

Technical Performance: 70 points Business Management Performance: 85 points Cost Control 60 points

Government Calculation(s):

70+85+0 =155 155/3=51.6667

In this scenario, the Contractor’s overall performance score is 51.6667 and an award-term would not be recommended.

Attachment 3—Evaluation Criteria

The performance factors to be evaluated are identified below. The evaluation criteria for each factor are specified in the indicated section of this attachment.

*--the actual weight value is 33.3333333333333%. However, the Government has elected to round. The three values still make 100% total value.

1. Technical Performance:

Factor Weight: 33.33% (Rounded) Description of Factor: For each semi-annual evaluation period, the Contractor’s technical performance will be assessed by the Government to determine if the work that has been performed meets the technical requirements of the Statement of Work (SOW) including a variety of subfactors related to how the work was accomplished, as indicated below.

Subfactors Considered for Evaluation:

Technical Requirements—the Contractor will be evaluated on their performance in providing effective and efficient services to meet the technical requirements and schedules as described in the contract’s Statement of Work.