JA_17797_TFAS_SPA_M67854-12-F-4905_P00011_Redacted.pdf

UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS

MARINE CORPS SYSTEMS COMMAND

2200 LESTER STREET

QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-6050

Code: CT-2.4 J&A Number: 17797

LIMITED SOURCES JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL

Secure Personnel Accountability Training Environment

1. Contracting Activity

Marine Corps Systems Command

PMM-110

Information Systems and Infrastructure Total Force Information Technology Systems2200 Lester Street Quantico, VA 22134-6050

2. Nature and/or Description of the Action Being Approved

This acquisition is conducted under the authority of the Multiple Award Schedule Program under Title III of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949. This justification is to seek approval of the use of limited sources under FAR Part 8.405-6. If approved, this J&A is effective and a contract award is authorized through 30 September 2014. The proposed action is to award a sole source task order to:

Contractor/Service Provider: InfoReliance (IR) Corporation Address: 1000 Corporate Drive, Suite 307, Stafford VA 22554

3. Description of Supplies/Services

The proposed contract action is to procure non-personal services for Post Deployment Systems Support (PDSS) of the Secure Personnel Accountability (SPA) module. Specifically, the addition of Engineering Change Proposals (ECPs) to correct a training deficiency is required.

This capability will not change the operational characteristics of the system, and no other interfacing systems are affected. These web-based training capabilities are necessary to meet user community requirements. Execution of the ECPs involves evaluation, development of implementation plans, development of software changes, and fielding of the completed solution.

These ECPs will provide improved capabilities for training the SPA user community before they are deployed. The current training approach is Train-the-Trainer (T3), utilizing a computer-based training system. This approach is no longer viable because the business process has changed. Trainer billets have been eliminated due to budget cuts and force reductions in MARCENT end strength. This has created a capability gap in meeting the SPA training requirements for the end user. The new capabilities will effectively meet the SPA training requirement by allowing the end user to access training via the web. By reducing personnel needed to meet this requirement, MARCENT staffing will have the ability to continue to meet the training demands of the SPA end users, enabling SPA to meet mission requirements.

The estimated dollar value for this procurement is $200K over a six-month period of performance. The procurement is fully funded with FY14 OMMC appropriated funds.

4. Identification of the Justification Rationale

In accordance with FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(C), this order must be issued on a limited sources basis in the interest of economy and efficiency as a logical follow-on to a competitively awarded order issued on M67854-12-F-4905. The original GSA order was competed under M67854-12-Q- 4905 (RFQ ID: RFQ637623) amongst all 3236 vendors under GSA Information Technology (IT) Schedule 70.

The current PDSS Contractor is tasked to provide maintenance and updates to the training system and to provide support for training to deploying units. Because of this ongoing work, the current Contractor is uniquely positioned to provide the follow-on task. The new work is similar to and builds upon the work required under the current effort.

The Contractor’s programmatic and technical knowledge, to include intimacy of software code, breadth of maintenance requirements, and duration and length of experience with SPA relative to alternative sources in the marketplace, make competition for the new ECPs impractical.

Market research provides that the program could spend nearly $66,000.00 more on a new Contractor. This additional cost is a third of the programmed budget, and will not be recoverable through competition. Additionally, the management of a new Contractor and the increased effort required of Government personnel to ensure a new Contractor is fully knowledgeable on all of the programmatic, procedural and technical requirements of the program would be considered a duplication of effort.

Use of alternative sources would require a Full and Open competition. According to MCSC contract award procedures, it would take nine months after receipt of a full contract package to award. Taking into consideration the cumulative timeline of a Full and Open competition, ramp up of a new Contractor, and the six-month period of performance, delivery time would increase from an estimated six months to a minimum of 17 months. It is estimated that for another Contractor to ramp up programmatic, procedural and technical understanding of the baseline system would add, at a minimum, 60 days to task completion. This places the user community at risk of not having the ability to meet mission requirements.

5. Determination of Best Value

The Contracting Officer shall ensure that the pricing is determined fair and reasonable. In order to make this determination, the Contracting Officer will perform a market analysis of commercially available labor categories and rates using the procedures outlined in FAR 15.404-

1. In addition, the Contracting Officer will request/negotiate for price reductions above and beyond the pricing submitted.

6. Description of Market Research Conducted

The original GSA order was competed under M67854-12-Q-4905 (RFQ ID: RFQ637623) amongst all 3236 vendors under GSA Information Technology (IT) Schedule 70. Market research for a logical follow-on was based on comparison of the Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) from the current SPA contractor (IR) along with cost data gathered from four other vendors who also provide analogous and similar contracting efforts on GSA IT Schedule 70 vendors. Selected and reviewed were competitors Kadix, SAIC, CSC, and Metrostar.

LABOR CATEGORY

Estimated

Hours KADIX SAIC CSC METROSTAR Project Lead/Program Manager $171.80 $179.08 $169.14 $118.31 Sr. Developer/Sr. SW Systems Engineer $152.05 $156.89 $132.22 $127.78 Business Analyst $130.58 $125.72 $110.08 $125.47 Sr.Developer/Web Architect $161.55 $159.33 $107.67 $104.45 Developer/Subject Matter Expert $140.02 $116.37 $113.03 $104.45 Test $152.05 $156.89 $132.22 $127.78

As the IR ROM provided was approximately market research clearly provides that the incumbent rates on the current contract remains the best value for this effort, when combined with any anticipated duplication of costs ($66,000) as a result of any competition. According to the market research, the next lowest contractor would have been METROSTAR, who when combining the cost of the training along with the cost or competition, would have totaled

, or rather, above the Current contractor (IR).

7. Other Facts Supporting the Justification

N/A

8. Actions to Remove Barriers to Future Competition

The Government expects to obtain a technical data package or improved performance specification that will support competition for future maintenance and sustainment of this item.

CERTIFICATION AND APPROVAL

TECHNICAL AND REQUIREMENTS CERTIFICATION:

I certify the facts and representation under my cognizance, which are included in this Justification and its supporting acquisition planning documents, except as noted herein, are complete and accurate.

TECHNICAL COGNIZANCE:

Danny T. Franco, Project Manager, SPA Phone: 703-784-4730 Date:

REQUIREMENTS COGNIZANCE:

Daniel P. Corbin, Program Manager, ISI Phone: 703-784-0844 Date:

REVIEW FOR LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:

I have determined this Justification is legally sufficient.

Brendan Klapak, TFITS Counsel Phone: 703-432-3893 Date:

CONTRACTING OFFICER CERTIFICATION:

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

Edward H. McGrail III, TFITS Contracting Officer Phone: 703-784-6583 Date: