LSJ_OPP Support Services - SAM posting R.pdf

BP has a need for continuing services, the scope of which includes developing Strategic Plans. This was historically centered on the Joint Strategic Plan (JSP), which outlined the Department and U.S. Agency for International Development’s (USAID) approach to U.S. foreign policy and development assistance. Required every four years under the Government Performance and Results Act Modernization Act of 2010, the JSP aligns with top-level strategies such as the National Security Strategy and is submitted within a year of a new presidential term. The current JSP expires in 2026.

As of July 1, 2025, USAID ceased implementing foreign assistance under the Reevaluating and Realigning United States Foreign Aid Executive Order. Foreign assistance programs now fall under DOS, and the JSP is under review to ensure compliance with Administration policies. Moreover, BP, who is responsible for overseeing the Department’s strategic and performance planning activities, is working to draft the next iteration of the Strategic Plan and subsequent management thereof, with the help of Competitive Innovations, consistent with federal mandates and Administration policies.

An urgent and compelling need exists to procure strategic planning analysis, performance analysis, and evaluation support. The absence of immediate strategic planning and performance management capabilities would severely hinder DOS’s ability to operate efficiently; comply with federal regulations and mandates such as Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993 (P.L. 103-62), GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-352), Foundations for Evidence Based Policy Making (P.L. 115-435), and OMB Circular A-11; adapt to changes; and achieve mission objectives. Delays in addressing these needs would result in unacceptable risks to the Department’s operations, resource management, and ability to fulfill its mission. Immediate action is required to mitigate these risks and ensure continuity of operations.

If DOS does not have required strategic planning, performance management, and evaluation capabilities, several critical issues could arise, impacting its ability to achieve its mission effectively. Strategic planning and performance management are essential for aligning resources, policies, and programs with overarching goals, ensuring accountability, and adapting to changing priorities. Potential consequences include:

• Risk of noncompliance with federal regulations/mandates – without strategic planning and performance management, DOS risks failing to align its projects, programs, and investments with federal mandates, Department policies, and mission priorities. This misalignment jeopardizes the Department’s ability to meet statutory and regulatory requirements, potentially resulting in noncompliance, loss of funding, and diminished credibility.

• Inability to monitor progress and address critical gaps – strategic planning and performance management are essential for tracking progress toward goals, identifying gaps, and adapting to changing mission needs.

Without these capabilities, DOS would lack the tools to assess whether its programs and projects are on schedule, within budget, or achieving their intended outcomes. Delays in addressing these gaps would compromise the Department’s ability to respond effectively to emerging priorities and operational challenges.

• Reduced operational efficiency – strategic planning provides a framework for matching resource needs with realistic goals and projections. Without it, DOS would face challenges in resource allocation, leading to inefficiencies and potential waste. Proactive planning is essential for anticipating crises, improving operations, and maintaining continuous improvement mechanisms. Moreover, evaluations help identify which programs and initiatives are most effective, enabling the Department to allocate resources where they will have the greatest impact. Without evaluation support, resources may be wasted on ineffective programs, reducing overall efficiency.

• Inadequate performance metrics – strategic planning answers key questions about what should be accomplished, how progress is measured, and what resources are required. Without these metrics, DOS would lack the ability to evaluate its performance effectively, leading to poor decision-making and reduced accountability.

• Undermined strategic planning – evaluation findings are integral to strategic planning, as they provide the evidence needed to set realistic goals, prioritize initiatives, and measure progress. Without evaluation support, the Department’s strategic planning efforts would be less effective and less grounded in evidence.

The absence of strategic planning and performance management capabilities would severely hinder DOS’s ability to operate efficiently, comply with mandates, adapt to changes, and achieve its mission objectives.

These capabilities are foundational to effective governance, resource allocation, and accountability.

Evaluation support is a further critical component of DOS’s ability to assess the effectiveness, efficiency, and impact of its programs, policies, and operations. Without evaluation support, DOS would face significant challenges in ensuring accountability, improving performance, and making evidence-based decisions.

Evaluation is not just a technical process; it is a foundational element of effective governance and strategic management.

Following standard competitive procedures would result in unacceptable delays due to lengthy pre-award (solicitation, evaluation, and transition) timelines. Specific to pre-award, time is needed to perform robust market research to identify vendors who have the breadth of expertise to enact this Administration’s evolving priorities, while ensuring compliance with the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993 (P.L.

103-62), the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-352), the Foundations for Evidence Based Policy Making (P.L. 115-435), and OMB Circular A-11. Vendors must also possess deep knowledge of the current environment and infrastructures impacting Strategic Plan development and required actions thereafter such as the initial management, monitoring, and evaluation of post-Strategic Plan publication activities.

Moreover, specific to transition activities, great care and time is needed to transition all underlying data, analyses, reports, and other deliverables, as well as current strategic planning efforts and resultant files.

Contract History Call order 19AQMM21F7312 was issued on June 28, 2021 to Competitive Innovations, LLC against Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA) SAQMMA16A0269 (PASS-D). The POP for this award was one, 12-month base period and two, 12-month option periods. All option periods have been exercised, originally ending on June 27, 2024. The POP was extended to December 27, 2024 pursuant to FAR 52.217‐8, Option to Extend Services, and further extended for one year through December 27, 2025.

The acquisition process for a follow‐on OPP Support Services contract has been initiated, with an anticipated award date of July 7, 2026. The requested interim award consisting of a six-month base period and one, six-month option period will allow BP and AMD sufficient time to draft the recompete package, solicit, evaluate, award, and transition services, without encountering a lapse in service.

SECTION 5: DETERMINATION BY THE ORDERING ACTIVITY CONTRACTING OFFICER THAT THE

CONTRACT ACTION REPRESENTS THE BEST VALUE CONSISTENT WITH FAR 8.404(D)

The Contracting Officer has determined the anticipated contract action will represent the best value based on the Contracting Officer’s plan to follow the procedures in FAR 8.405. Although approval is requested to contract with one source, the Contracting Officer will not award the planned contract action unless the Contracting Officer evaluates and determines that the resultant price is reasonable.

GSA has deemed MAS contract priced hourly rates fair and reasonable. A review of technical content and pricing will be performed by the program office. The Contracting Officer will ensure that reasonable discounts from the GSA MAS contract are provided where applicable/appropriate. Based on these factors, the Contracting officer will have full information to determine price reasonableness for the proposed interim award.

SECTION 6. DESCRIPTION OF THE MARKET RESEARCH CONDUCTED AMONG SCHEDULE

HOLDERS AND THE RESULTS OR A STATEMENT OF THE REASON MARKET RESEARCH WAS

NOT CONDUCTED

For the requested interim award, market research was conducted by surveying General Services Administration (GSA) Multiple Award Schedule (MAS) offerings, including Special Item Number (SIN) 541611, as well as indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) OASIS+ SB, Management and Advisory domain. The requested interim award is intended only to provide time to complete the ongoing competitive acquisition process for the follow-on contract. This same market research applies to the currently in-process competitive follow-on procurement. 3,061 contractors hold schedules under GSA MAS SIN 541611 – 2,513 of those contractors are considered small businesses. Moreover, there are 829 small business contractors on OASIS+ SB, Management and Advisory domain.

SECTION 7. STATEMENT OF THE ACTIONS, IF ANY, THE AGENCY MAY TAKE TO REMOVE OR

OVERCOME ANY BARRIERS THAT LED TO THE RESTRICTED CONSIDERATION BEFORE ANY

SUBSEQUENT ACQUISITION FOR THE SUPPLIES OR SERVICES IS MADE

SECTIONS 8. CERTIFICATIONS

TECHNICAL AND REQUIREMENTS CERTIFICATION (FAR 6.303-2(b)) I certify that the facts and representations under my cognizance which are included in this Justification and its supporting acquisition planning documents, except as noted herein, are complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief.