SAM_FPDS_OMM_JOFOC.pdf

Justification and Approval

For Other than Full and Open Competition 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1) Only One Responsible Source and

No Other Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Requirements

1. Identification of the Agency and the Contracting Activity.

The requiring Agency is Integrated Award Environment (IAE), Office of Systems Management, FAS, GSA located at 1800 F Street NW, Washington D.C. 20405. The contracting activity for this action is Contracting Division, FAS – Region 05, General Services Administration located at 230 S Dearborn St. Suite 3500, Chicago, IL 60604.

2. Nature and /or Description of Action.

This approval is being requested for a new contract action titled SAM & FPDS Operations, Maintenance, and Migration (OMM) to Modernized SAM.gov. The contract type is combination Firm Fixed Price and Labor Hour/Time and Materials contract. The IGCE (Independent Government Cost Estimate) amount of the effort is $44,172,364. The period of performance is two years, comprised of a one-year base period and two (2) six-month option periods to allow for IAE program flexibility.

3. Description of Supplies or Services.

The purpose of this procurement is to obtain the necessary contractor support to perform operations and maintenance on the existing System for Award Management (SAM at www.sam.gov) and Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS at www.fpds.gov) while migrating the Entity Information (including the Entity Registration and Exclusion sub-domains) and Contract Data functionality to the modernized SAM.gov environment.

The overarching objectives of this requirement are as follows:

Business Objectives

● Operate and maintain the legacy SAM and FPDS applications independent of where the application is hosted (on-premise or in cloud)

● Integrate the pre-modernized Entity Registration, Exclusions, and Contract Data functionality from the legacy SAM and FPDS with the modernized SAM.gov (currently beta.SAM.gov) in Q1 FY20

● Retire the legacy SAM and FPDS applications in Q1 FY20

● Operate and maintain the Entity Registration, Exclusions, and Contract Data functionality in the modernized SAM.gov (Optional)

● Transition Out

Technical Objectives

● Meet GSA and IAE application security requirements

● Encrypt all data in transmission and at rest

● Meet Service Level Agreement (SLA) standards/metrics

4. Statutory Authority Cited.

http://www.sam.gov/ http://www.fpds.gov/

10 U.S.C.2304(c)(1) as implemented by FAR 6.302-1 -- Only One Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Requirements. FAR 6.302-1 (a)(2)(ii) states:

Supplies may be deemed to be available only from the original source in the case of a follow-on contract for the continued development or production of a major system or highly specialized equipment, including major components thereof, when it is likely that award to any other source would result in—

(A) Substantial duplication of cost to the Government that is not expected to be recovered through competition; or

(B) Unacceptable delays in fulfilling the agency’s requirements.

Further, FAR 6.302-1(b) states that this authority may be used:

(b)(1) When there is a reasonable basis to conclude that the agency’s minimum needs can only be satisfied by—

(i) Unique supplies or services available from only one source or only one supplier with unique capabilities.

This justification requires the approval of the Head of the Contracting Activity, as prescribed in FAR 6.304(a)(3), for a proposed contract action over $13.5 million but not exceeding $68 million.

5. Reason for Authority Cited – Contractor’s Unique Qualifications.

GSA intends to enter into negotiations for a sole source contract to IBM, Inc. IBM is the current contractor for the SAM Architecture and Operations Contract Services (AOCS) contract which provided program management, design and development of an IAE architecture, requirements definition for all IAE applications, systems engineering, security, and operational and maintenance support for the IAE system portfolio. The IAE portfolio currently consists of nine (9) applications that facilitate the pre and post award procurement processes across the entire federal civilian and Department of Defense acquisition communities.

IBM was awarded the SAM AOCS contract on February 15, 2010 after full and open competition of a Request for Proposals (RFP). IBM was the sole contractor in the competitive range due to the strength of their technical proposal. The other two (2) contractors were eliminated from the competitive range because their technical proposals lacked detail in numerous critical areas.

IBM has consistently delivered good performance since the onset of this contract. They have received a minimum of satisfactory ratings in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), which have improved over time. An excerpt of their recent Option Year 4 rating states:

“IBM’s performance is solid and continues to improve over the course of this contract. They have moved from the satisfactory/good level to the very good/excellent level in many areas. Their processes have matured. Their knowledge base continues to grow. IBM continues to partner with the government to overcome challenges and displays strong commitment to program success.”

During IBM’s eight (8) years of performance on the SAM-AOCS contract, they have gained substantial knowledge of IAE systems. They have repeatedly delivered good performance and have improved over time. IBM has gained the most technical knowledge of IAE systems among any source in the marketplace. Additionally, the SAM legacy systems are at the end of their product life and are scheduled to be retired and their functions transferred to the GSA Cloud business platform over the next one (1) to three (3) years. The timing will depend on funding, completion of new system modules and applications, and the number of hurdles encountered during transition to the new information technology platform. It is considered impractical and risky to have a new contractor step in at this phase of the work, which is in the final steps of of a ten-year project. For reasons of continuity during completion of the work, it would not be advantageous to the Government to solicit a new full and open RFP. (FAR 6.302-1(a)(2)(ii)(B)).

Even if a new contractor were awarded this work after solicitation of a competitive RFP (which is impractical because no other source could demonstrate a stronger technical proposal as IBM due to their past and current work), the additional time needed to onboard the contractor would be detrimental. IBM required two (2) years to learn the intricacies of the IAE systems and become proficient in them. This time was also needed to develop a strategy, in conjunction with IAE, for the best way to modernize the IAE portfolio of systems. IBM’s current contract is performance-based, which means they did not simply take direction from the Government, but worked with Government to formulate a modernization strategy. There would be no reason to estimate a new contractor would take less time to onboard. Such time would harm the Government’s mission and also represent duplication of costs (see FAR 6.302-1(a)(2)(ii)(A)).

Furthermore, IBM encountered Government caused delays during performance of the current contract. The Government changed strategy, directed IBM to implement two U.S. Digital Services recommendations to redesign SAM entity registration web services to near-real time and to implement a separate sensitive secure file transfer protocol (SFTP) server for SAM entity registration extracts; to implement risk mitigation for FPDS to migrate the rules engine from iLog to Drools; and to support five (5) additional fast path releases to mitigate fraudulent activity in SAM. In addition, Government delay in providing access to the cloud environment impacted the ability to begin migrating the applications from the current infrastructure stack to the cloud. As such, IBM was not able to complete the current SAM-AOCS contract requirements within the eight (8) year period of performance constraint. IBM is considered for this sole source contract so they can build upon their existing expertise and contract work to finish the task of modernizing FPDS and SAM, updating their security, and moving the systems to the cloud environment.

All Government agencies, as well as the general public, rely on the reporting and entity information services of SAM and FPDS. A delay in the progress and ultimate launch of beta.SAM.gov would have far reaching effects. Every agency must report federal awards in FPDS, while every vendor must have an active SAM.gov profile to receive federal awards.

Modernizing these systems provides a stable operating environment as well as reduced maintenance costs for the Government.

PLAIN LANGUAGE: The primary reason the Government feels IBM is the Only Responsible Source is because the multiple swimlanes of work that are all presently being performed by IBM, their current familiarity and expertise with the systems, and their strong performance over the life of the current contract. It’s not that IBM is the only contractor capable of performing the Statement of Work - it’s that whomever was the incumbent contractor at this point in time (which happens to be IBM) is the only contractor that could keep the project on schedule with such little work left to go until SAM and FPDS are moved into the modernized cloud environment. Onboarding a new contractor would assume incredible risk with no foreseeable reward for the project.

6. Efforts to Obtain Competition.

GSA issued an RFI and responses were evaluated to determine if any interested firms could step in and perform this contract without a learning curve that would cause significant delays to the project schedule. Although a number of firms were capable of performance, none had the capability to immediately support this effort in a highly effective manner as is presently done by IBM. Thus it was determined that none of the other firms were competitively viable.

Therefore, GSA has determined that IBM, Inc. is the only firm that has the required expertise and tools which are readily available to meet all of the government’s requirements in accordance with FAR 6.302-1.

7. Determination of Cost Fairness and Reasonableness.

A determination of cost fairness and reasonableness will be made by performing a price analysis of the contractor’s proposed pricing to the IGCE, available historical price information (i.e., the current SAM AOCS effort being performed by IBM), and market pricing tools such as Acquisition Gateway’s Contract-Awarded Labor Category (CALC) tool.

8. Market Research Conducted.

A market research survey was conducted to determine what firms in the marketplace had performed work similar to the SAM-AOCS effort. A self-certification document was posted to FBO.gov on Sept. 26, 2018 asking for contractors to respond if they successfully performed a project that met any or all of 8 special criteria that are applicable to the SAM-AOCS contract (see Exhibit B - RFI). We received 36 responses. Of those, 23 of the 36 responded that they had in fact successfully completed an IT project that met all eight of the criteria.

This market research confirmed part of what the GSA project team already knew - there are many vendors in the marketplace who are capable of performing the technical requirements of the contract. The basis of this Sole Source Justification remains, however, that it is in the best interest of the Government to continue the effort with IBM until the SAM and FPDS systems are migrated to the modernized, cloud environment. This plan presents the lowest project and schedule risk to the government.

9. Other Factors.

a. Procurement History.

(1) These services are currently provided under SAM-AOCS Contract GS15Q16IAC0002. GSA FEDSIM awarded the contract on February 15, 2010. The Period of Performance is February 15, 2010 to February 14, 2019. A 6 month contract extension was approved to extend the period of performance from August 14, 2018 to February 14, 2019. The original contract had an eight (8) year period of performance. After the base period, the FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services clause was exercised; therefore, the total period of performance for this contract after all options are exercised will be 9 years, February, 15 2010 - February 14, 2019. Contract administration was transferred to Region 5 Contracting Division in June 2015.

(2) Competitive status of the current contract: full and open competition with a sole source 6 month period of performance extension.

(3) Authority for less than full and open competition previously used: Urgent and compelling circumstances (for the 6 month extension)

(4) The acquisition plan for the existing contract states full and open competition was selected because it presented the best opportunity for GSA to leverage the commercial industry expertise, achieve the desired competition, and provide the ability to select a solution that represents the best value for the government.

Another consideration is that this approach provides the ability to make use of technology advancements that can be realized through industry expertise.

(5) If any prior award was accomplished by full and open competition, provide a detailed explanation of the changed circumstances.

IBM was awarded the existing contract based on the strength of their technical proposal. IBM has performed very well throughout the life of the contract while also gaining further knowledge of the IAE systems. Given IBM’s intimate knowledge of IAE systems, it would be harmful to the Government and taxpayers to onboard a new contractor and lose program continuity at the time of new system completion and launch. There is a limited amount of work remaining in the SAM.gov modernization effort, making this an impractical time to bring on a new contractor.

Furthermore, the impact to IAE’s program schedule and mission by onboarding a new contractor would be detrimental to IAE. IAE has developed a program roadmap, complete with major milestone dates, that tracks the progress of the overall effort. Onboarding a new contractor would undoubtedly delay the roadmap because of time needed to familiarize with the program and new systems and strategy development.

(6) Provide an explanation of any unusual patterns which may be revealed by the history, e.g., several consecutive, urgent buys:

None.

(7) If a justification was prepared to support the procurement made before this one, briefly describe the circumstances justifying the buy and whether there have been any significant changes.

None.

b. Acquisition Data Availability.

Technical data packages and documents suitable for full and open competition have been developed. However, it is the government’s position that only one contractor, IBM, is capable of providing this service based on their knowledge and expertise of the IAE systems.

10. Sources Expressing Interest in the Acquisition.

GSA received 36 responses to a Request for Information released to find information about firms that have completed large scale IT modernization projects with requirements similar to the SAM-AOCS effort.

11. Actions Taken to Remove or Overcome Barriers to Competition Before Any Subsequent Acquisition.

The effort required under this contract will finish with the completion of said contract. Therefore, it is not anticipated that there will be a subsequent acquisition for this effort.

Enterprise-wide planning is separately ongoing for operations and maintenance of beta.SAM.gov. The structure of the new beta.SAM.gov will allow for separate requirement pieces and greater competition for each piece. It is anticipated that multiple small business awards will be made to provide enhancements of beta.SAM.gov and maintain the new systems after they move from the beta mode to full production mode. This will transpire after the primary development work is completed and the new system is fully operational, which will take place during this follow-on contract.

A notice of the proposed contract action will be publicized to FBO.gov in accordance with FAR 5.2.

Technical Certification.

I justify that the supporting data under my cognizance which are included in the justification are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

NAME: _Meredith M. Whitehead DATE: ____________________________

TITLE: _Director, Business Operations, IAE SIGNATURE: _______________________

Contracting Officer Certification.

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

NAME: Brian Bogucki_______________ DATE: ____________________________

TITLE: Contracting Officer SIGNATURE: ______________________

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

NAME: Eben Greybourne_______________ DATE: ____________________________

TITLE: Supervisory Contracting Officer SIGNATURE: ______________________

Legal Sufficiency Review. I have reviewed the foregoing justification and approval and deem it legally sufficient.

Name:_Scott McCleary Date:____________________________

Title: Legal Counsel Signature:________________________

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

NAME: Micky Mayes DATE: ____________________________

TITLE: Director, Contracting Division SIGNATURE: ______________________

Special Competition Advocate Approval

I have reviewed this justification and approval for purchase of SAM & FPDS OMM and recommend approval of this procurement under 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1) Only One Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Requirements.

Approval is granted subject to the availability of funds, and provided that the services and property herein described have otherwise been authorized for acquisition.

Name: Anne Mesch ___________________ Date:____________________________

Title: Deputy Regional Commissioner Special Competition Advocate Signature:________________________

Head of Contracting Activity Approval

I have reviewed this justification and approval for purchase of SAM & OMM and recommend approval of this procurement under 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1) Only One Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Requirements.

Name: Kim Brown____________________ Date:____________________________

Title: Regional Commissioner, HCA Signature:________________________