FTSS III pre-solicitation conference brief_FINAL1.ppt

PAGE: *

Fielded Training Systems Support

(FTSS III)

Pre-Solicitation Conference 14 August 2009 Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Government Team at Conference

Today’s Agenda

Program Overview, Term & Conditions Mr. Tom Courtney, PCO

Break

Tomorrow’s Agenda

Tour group size goal 18-20 people, max 30 minutes per device, 30 minutes per device pubs set.

Reserve Training in progress – 1 device available after lunch.

Pubs will be made available.

WELCOME AND GROUND RULES

Primary Purpose - Assure clear understanding of the RFP.

All attendees must sign-in.

Please silence cell phones and pagers.

No recording.

This is an Informational Briefing only.

Submit questions in writing on question submittal forms provided at the sign-in table.

Presentation, official questions, answers, and a list of attendees will be posted on the NAVAIR Contracts website: http://nawctsd.navair.navy.mil

Questions And Answers Today, the Government will accept questions as the presentation progresses. Written questions may be submitted to designated Government personnel during any break. All questions may not be answered in open forum due to time constraints.

Questions not addressed in open forum will be reviewed and answers will be posted online.

After today, questions should be submitted to Kathleen Dougherty, Contract Specialist, at the following email address: kathleen.dougherty@navy.mil

It is requested that all questions be submitted to the Government by 19-August-2009. All questions and answers will be posted on the web at http://nawctsd.navair.navy.mil under Business Opportunities.

Correspondence Attendee list, questions/answers and slides will be posted to FedBizOpps and NAWCTSD website.

All comments and questions must go through NAWCTSD point of contact listed below:

Ms. Kathleen Dougherty, (407) 380-8189 kathleen.dougherty@navy.mil

Disclaimer Today’s remarks by Government officials involved in the FTSS III procurement should not be considered a guarantee of the Government’s course of action in proceeding with the project.

The information shared today reflects current Government intentions and is subject to change based on a variety of circumstances, including internal and external comments. The formal solicitation is the only document that should be relied upon in determining the Government’s requirements.

Program Overview, Terms and Conditions & Price Volume (5.0) Instructions

Mr. Tom Courtney, PCO

Customers CNAF East CNAF West

CNATT

CNRFC

NAVAIR

NTSC

CNATRA

BUMED

MARCORSYSCOM

SLC

FMS and Others NAWCTSD Vision: to be the supplier of choice for training and human performance solutions enhancing the capability of the Nation’s Warfighters.

Customers served by FTSS III include, but are not limited to, Navy & USMC Wings, Fleet and Fleet Replacement Squadrons; weapons training units, CNATRA HQ and Training Air Wings & squadrons; school houses (such as NATTC); NAVSEA Surface and Subsurface training commands; aviation survival training units; Navy and USMC Reserve Force Wings and squadrons; and Foreign Military Sales users. User organizations are in both overseas and CONUS locations.

NAVSEA

EWTG LANT & PAC

CSCS

CNE

MSC

RECURRING REQUIREMENTS

* Part of initial Source Selection ** Small Business Set-Aside Effort

MAC Contract Structure One RFP, Two MACs, Two Separate Proposals and Evaluations Estimated release early FY 2010 Small Businesses can submit a proposal for either or both MACs

Task Orders to be Awarded (instant Task Orders) are representative of future Task Orders Similar work effort For SBSA MAC, CIS capability assessed only in Experience Factor; COMS to be more prevalent in future task orders Similar Unit Prices Total prices of future Task Orders may be several times more than that of the instant Task Order, but mostly due to the number of trainers and/or number of sites

Each MACs will have multiple awardees and allow for any contract type

MAC Contract Structure MAC Ceilings:

$900M - Unrestricted MAC

$80M - SBSA MAC

$10K guaranteed minimum

Contract Ordering Period (Each MAC) 5 years base (plus three one-year options)

CLIN Structure

Estimated Award Date: May 2010

Section C Highlights – Descriptions and Specifications

C1. FTSS III SCOPE

The scope for the FTSS III Unrestricted MAC and the FTSS III Small Business Set-Aside MAC is contained in Attachment 1.

A separate SOW will be attached as part of individual Task Orders awarded as a result of these competitive MACs.

C2. INCORPORATION OF CONTRACTOR’S PROPOSAL

“incorporate any part…deemed beneficial to the task order performance” Incorporation into the task order, e.g. Statement of Work or within the Schedule, provided to the apparent successful offeror prior to award will not constitute discussions.

Government reserves the right to reconsider source selection decision if the apparent successful offeror does not agree to the incorporation as binding

Section G Highlights–Contract Administration

G.1 PREMIUM TIME – COMS

Conducted outside the work schedule defined in the Task Order SOW for tasks such as to provide additional training time, some Government directed modifications and inspections.

A Premium Time hour equates to an additional work-hour of effort and is a composite rate for each individual task order, which does not reflect the rate of any one labor category

G.2 ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTION – CIS

Time required by the Government to accomplish a CIS requirement, other than makeup training, outside the work schedule defined in the Task Order Reimbursement to the Contractor for Additional Instruction will be made at the hourly rate specified in the Task Order.

Premium Time and Additional Instruction rates are part of competitive, evaluated price.

G.4 TECHNICAL DATA VERIFICATION (TDV)

Priced per page Intermittent tasking; 6-months to complete.

Used infrequently

Section H Highlights- Special Contract Requirements H.2 Supporting Rationale For New Or Amended Collective Bargaining Agreements Information will be analyzed to help determine if wages, fringe benefits, or periodic increases provided for in the new or amended collective bargaining agreement vary substantially from those prevailing for similar services in the locality.

H.12 Addition Of Contractors During The Life Of The ID/IQ Contract On a periodic basis, the Government will make a determination whether it is necessary to add additional prime contractors.

The Government reserves the right to add additional prime contractors as deemed necessary in order to sustain the competitive environment for awarding task orders.

5252.211-9501 Excess Repair/Replacement Costs Limits cost risk to the first $25K of a single item

5252.217-9507 Over and Above Work Requests Common, in-scope Priced through negotiations to maximum extent

Other Considerations Performance Based Statement of Work Deductions may be taken where applicable

Service Contract Act Applicable

NAICS 541330 Engineering Services (aero exception) - $27M annual revenue

Use of Options – Contract options to extend the ordering period Task Order options to extend services

Incremental Funding

Offerors are advised that under the “Changes” clause, the Government may add training devices to existing COMS sites on a sole-source basis to previously awarded task orders throughout the contemplated 5-year task order period of performance.

Price Proposal (Vol. 5.0) Volume shall contain:

All price information requested Copy of Price Breakout Worksheet (PBW) with the Contract Line Item (CLIN) and Task Unit Prices

Protected Excel spreadsheets use formulas and functions to build to total evaluated price Spreadsheets shall not be protected by offerors

Provide sufficient information to support price Include explanation of all ground rules and assumptions that affect the price estimates.

Submit Forward Pricing Rate Agreements if applicable

For those prices provided in accordance with the Service Contract Act, offerors should not escalate non-exempt labor in the out-years.

Show traceability between PBW, proposed effort and proposed manning levels

Price Breakout Worksheet (PBW) Example

Offerors will provide data in Yellow blocks.

Each stepladder level will be averaged together for price evaluation purposes.

Stepladder pricing to be used for Manning/Staffing (Unrestricted MAC only) to develop the technical proposal are provided in Section L, Table 2.2.1a-1 of the RFP

Sheet1

0101 COMS Stair Step UNIT QUANTITY UNIT Supply Support UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE

1A Device 2F110 (OFT) S/N 0002 2 OHPD 2 MO $ 253 $ 1,256 $ 2,512

1B Device 2F110 (OFT) S/N 0002 4 OHPD 2 MO $ 350 $ 1,560 $ 3,120

1C Device 2F110 (OFT) S/N 0002 6 OHPD 2 MO $ 422 $ 1,680 $ 3,360

2A Device 15F8H (TT) S/N 0005 3 OHPD 2 MO $ 358 $ 1,355 $ 2,710

2B Device 15F8H (TT) S/N 0005 6 OHPD 2 MO $ 455 $ 1,590 $ 3,180

2C Device 15F8H (TT) S/N 0005 9 OHPD 2 MO $ 603 $ 1,700 $ 3,400

0102 CIS

3A Pilot 10 Hrs/Wk 2 MO N/A $ 2,200 $ 4,400

3B Pilot 20 Hrs/Wk 2 MO N/A $ 2,300 $ 4,600

3C Pilot 30 Hrs/Wk 2 MO N/A $ 2,500 $ 5,000

4A NFO 48 Hrs/Wk 2 MO N/A $ 2,100 $ 4,200

4B NFO 96 Hrs/Wk 2 MO N/A $ 2,400 $ 4,800

4C NFO 144 Hrs/Wk 2 MO N/A $ 2,600 $ 5,200

Price Evaluation Example

0101 COMS Stair Step Qty UNIT Supply Support UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE Average Task Total Price

1A Device 2F110 2 OHPD 2 MO $ 253 $ 1,256 $ 2,512

1B Device 2F110 4 OHPD 2 MO $ 350 $ 1,560 $ 3,120 $ 2,997

1C Device 2F110 6 OHPD 2 MO $ 422 $ 1,680 $ 3,360

2A Device 15F8H 3 OHPD 2 MO $ 358 $ 1,355 $ 2,710

2B Device 15F8H 6 OHPD 2 MO $ 455 $ 1,590 $ 3,180 $ 3,097

2C Device 15F8H 9 OHPD 2 MO $ 603 $ 1,700 $ 3,400

0102 CIS

3A Pilot 10 Hrs/Wk 2 MO N/A $ 2,200 $ 4,400

3B Pilot 20 Hrs/Wk 2 MO N/A $ 2,300 $ 4,600 $ 4,667

3C Pilot 30 Hrs/Wk 2 MO N/A $ 2,500 $ 5,000

4A NFO 48 Hrs/Wk 2 MO N/A $ 2,100 $ 4,200

4B NFO 96 Hrs/Wk 2 MO N/A $ 2,400 $ 4,800 $ 4,733

4C NFO 144 Hrs/Wk 2 MO N/A $ 2,600 $ 5,200

Sum of Averages $ 15,494

TYPICAL PRICE PROPOSAL SHORTFALLS

Arithmetic and/or spreadsheet formulas are incorrect

Not relating contractor labor categories to wage determination labor categories

Not explaining pricing approach

Excessive ground rules or assumptions that limit the offeror’s commitment

Not completing all RFP sections (e.g., Section G Contract Administration information, Section K Reps/Certs etc.)

TYPICAL PRICE PROPOSAL SHORTFALLS

Inconsistency between the technical proposal and the price proposal

Unbalanced pricing Between Tasks (Devices) Between Stepladders Supply Support amounts

Service Contract Act non-compliance

Escalating out-years not IAW SCA Price Adjustment clause

Indications of 52.219-14 Limitation on Subcontracting (SBSA only)

Technical Volume (2.0) Mr. John Brown, Technical Lead

Training Support Services Warfare Dominance FTSS III – Enabling Battlefield Dominance Through Superior Support

CIS

COMS

Device Relocations

TSM

Mod Spt

PIO

FTSS III Scope Contractor Operations and Maintenance Services (COMS), may include the following:

Training Device Operations Maintenance Supply Support Information Assurance (IA) Technical Data Verification (TDV) Access Control Janitorial Trainer Modification Support Trainer Space Prep

Contractor Instruction Services (CIS)

Other Potential Services Training Device Relocation (TDR) Training Systems Management (TSM) Training Device Modification (TDM) Spares and Product Support In-Service Engineering Office (ISEO) Support

Unrestricted MAC Task

E-2C COMS / CIS

Draft SOW, appendices and 1-year monthly reporting history posted to NAWCTSD web site

2 Sites – NS Norfolk, VA (COMS) E-2C and C-2A platforms NBVC Point Mugu, CA (COMS and CIS) E-2C and S-3B platforms

Secret clearances

Task Order Period of Performance

Performance Schedule:

* Mobilization not included in 60-month Period of Performance limit ** The last 2 months of the last lot exercised will be used for transition

E-2C COMS

Naval Station Norfolk anticipated requirements:

COMS, CMS (On-Call Support) and Time & Materials (T&M)

Eight Training Devices Device 15F8C, E-2C Weapon Systems Trainer (WST) Device 15F8H, E-2C WST Device 2F110, E-2C Operational Flight Trainer (OFT) Device 2F166, E-2C OFT Device 2F168, C-2A OFT Device PRISim, Professional Range Instruction Simulator Device 11H177, E-2C Simulated Maintenance Trainer (SMT) Device E-2C Distributed Readiness Trainer (EDRT)

New device planned for FY10/11, 2C85, Reconfigurable Flight Training Device (RFTD)

E-2D Model device introduction in FY11/12 – planned extensive CLS

Information Assurance

Janitorial Services

E-2C COMS

NS Norfolk, COMS/CMS Variable step-ladder support options, Mon-Fri (includes weekends and Holidays in formal RFP)

Device 2F110, E-2C OFT

8, 10, 12, 14, 16 OHPD

Device 15F8C, E-2C WST

8, 10, 12, 14, 16 OHPD

Device 2F166, E-2C OFT

8, 10, 12, 14, 16 OHPD

Device 2F168, C-2A OFT

8, 10, 12, 14, 16 OHPD

Device 15F8H, E-2C WST

8, 10, 12, 14, 16 OHPD

Device EDRT

4, 6, 8, 10, 12 OHPD

Device PRISim

8, 10 OHPD

Device 11H177, E-2C SMT Maintenance Support Hours (MSH) - On-Call support periods

8.5, 10, 12, 14, 16 MSH

E-2C COMS

NS Norfolk unique features to consider:

Co-located with E-2C Program In-Service Engineering Office (ISEO) COMS contractor may provide support to ISE tasks Support may be Premium Time ISEO will utilize devices during CTT and after CTT periods as necessary

NS Norfolk is the E-2C community school house for aircrew and maintenance training Norfolk will be E-2D school house as new platform stands up Training requirements have seen several moves in past years, more changes will be required to balance evolving user community demands CNATT expectation is for significant increase in utilization on 11H177

E-2C COMS

NS Norfolk unique features to consider, cont.

CIS performed under a separate contract CISLANT contract competition estimated for award in Jul 2011

Manned Access Control points staffed with organic Navy personnel Atypical of COMS COMS contractor has independent facility access COMS has specific support requirement for 15F8H and 15F16 spaces security, CAC access management, and overall security monitoring for all designated spaces SAU has independent facility access

Device PRISim requires weapons certifications and instruction support

E-2C COMS

NS Norfolk unique features to consider, cont.

Varying levels of Information Assurance (IA) support on different devices Required on 15F8H, 15F16 and 11H177 at CSD Anticipated on 2F110 after modification Other devices to be converted, schedule TBD

Devices located in five separate buildings and several separate spaces Contractor must consider distribution for manning purposes Manning driver related to operations support, maintenance activities, security implications, spares and test equipment distribution, communications, safety and other factors

Device 2F110 preparing to enter major modification Modification expected to be off-site a year or longer, anticipated to include removal from motion, new visual system, glass cockpit and other significant changes

E-2C COMS

NS Norfolk unique features to consider, cont.

Device EDRT requires periodic surge support Device supports Fleet Synthetic Training (FST) events, typically high visibility in command staff FST activity is increasing in frequency Began once/Qtr, now once/month, expected multiple times/month Each FST event may require surge and additional dedicated support, as well as extended operating hours

Some devices are used to support FMS and other customers outside Navy squadrons Active use of Premium Time

E-2C COMS / CIS

Naval Base Ventura County Point Mugu anticipated requirements:

COMS, CMS, CIS and T&M

Four Training Devices Device 2F110, E-2C OFT Device 15F8H, E-2C WST Device 15F16, E-2C EDRT Device 2B92B, S-3B OFT

New device planned for FY11, 2C85, RFTD

E-2C COMS / CIS

Naval Base Ventura County Point Mugu anticipated requirements:

Contractor Instruction Services for Pilot and Naval Flight Officer positions 2F110 = Pilot Instruction 15F8H = Naval Flight Officer Instruction

E-2D Model device introduction ~ FY13 – planned CLS

Information Assurance

Access Control (Contractor task, not organic Navy)

Janitorial Services

E-2C COMS / CIS

NBVC Point Mugu, COMS/CMS Variable step-ladder support options, Mon-Fri (includes weekends and Holidays in formal RFP)*

Device 2F110, E-2C OFT

2, 4, 6 OHPD

2, 4, 6 Instruction Hours Per Day (IHPD) **

Device 15F8H, E-2C WST

3, 6, 9 OHPD

12, 24, 36 IHPD **

Device EDRT CMS – On Call support

Device 2F92B, S-3B OFT CMS - On-Call support

* Days per Week schedule variable as determined by customer ** IHPD compressible within a week or other period as determined by customer

E-2C COMS / CIS

NBVC Point Mugu unique features to consider:

E-2C Program ISEO support provided by NS Norfolk Contractor may provide support to ISE tasks Support may be Premium Time ISEO may utilize devices during CTT and after CTT periods as necessary

Point Mugu has no school house functions – COMS & CIS functions support active Fleet squadrons Users may transfer select school house tasks to Point Mugu as necessary

Point Mugu provides surge training quarterly for 3-week periods Pre-planned requirement that the Contractor shall include in FFP proposal

E-2C COMS / CIS

NBVC Point Mugu unique features, cont.

Varying levels of Information Assurance (IA) support on different devices Required on 15F8H and 15F16 at CSD Anticipated on 2F110 after modification

E-2C Devices are located in one building S-3B device location selected, within 1 mile of E-2C facility

Device 2F110 to be modified after NS Norfolk 2F110 Modification expected to be off-site an extended period, anticipated to include removal from motion, new visual system, glass cockpit and other significant changes

E-2C COMS / CIS

NBVC Point Mugu unique features to consider, cont.

Device EDRT requires periodic surge support Device may support FST events FST activity may increase in frequency Less certain FST activity than at Norfolk FST events may require surge, dedicated support, and extended operating hours

Point Mugu has challenging environment and geographic affects on its workforce

E-2C COMS / CIS

NBVC Point Mugu unique features to consider:

Some devices are used to support FMS and other customers outside Navy squadrons Historical utilization is not a reliable factor Potential for highly variable Premium Time support

Point Mugu utilization will be driven by Fleet squadron OPTEMPO

Draft SOW and appendices posted to NAWCTSD web site

3 Sites:

NS Norfolk, VA MCAS Cherry Point, NC NAS Jacksonville, FL

6 Devices at each site

Janitorial Services

No security clearances required

No dedicated access control

No variable operating hour pricing requirement SBSA MAC Task Order

NASTP COMS

Naval Station Norfolk

6 Devices Device 9A9, High Altitude & Rapid Decompression Trainer Device 9E6, Ejection Seat Trainer Device 9F2C, Parachute In-Water Release Trainer* Device 9H1, Helicopter Rescue Hoist Trainer* Device 9D6B, Modular Egress Training Simulator* Device 9F9A, Parachute Over-Water Simulation Trainer*

Janitorial services

* Located at the swimming pool Anticipated NASTP COMS

Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point

Device 9A9, High Altitude & Rapid Decompression Trainer Device 9E6, Ejection Seat Trainer Device 9F2A, Parachute In-Water Release Trainer* Device 9H1, Helicopter Rescue Hoist Trainer* Device 9D6B, Modular Egress Training Simulator* Device 9F9A, Parachute Over-Water Simulation Trainer*

Janitorial services

* Located at the swimming pool

Naval Air Station Jacksonville

Device 9A9, High Altitude & Rapid Decompression Trainer Device 9E6, Ejection Seat Trainer Device 9F2C, Parachute In-Water Release Trainer* Device 9H1, Helicopter Rescue Hoist Trainer* Device 9D6B, Modular Egress Training Simulator* Device 9F9A, Parachute Over-Water Simulation Trainer*

Janitorial services

* Located at the swimming pool

NASTP COMS unique features Several training devices are located at swimming pool facilities and components are used in the water Associated safety risks with water Corrosion Chemical affects

All training devices relate to physical hazards of aviation and have significant safety process requirements High Altitude chamber creates hypoxia and uses medical grade oxygen Ejection seat trainer introduces G-loads Water-based trainers have drowning and strangulation hazards

NASTP COMS unique features Operation of all devices are under direction of medical service corps officers

No security clearance requirements

No Manned Access Control responsibilities

COMS is a fixed daily work week, with weekend support as required Typical site operation does not simultaneously require operation of more than one device (periodic exception at pool location)

Technical Proposal Section L Vol. 2.0

2.1.1 Management Approach

Management controls and processes Cost control and Labor Rate escalation Organizational chart that clearly reflects the proposed organization Identify subcontractors, and provide their roles, responsibilities, and products Show how the subcontractors fit into the Organizational structure and describe monitoring activities

Technical Proposal Section L Vol. 2.0

2.1.2 Personnel Resources

Stable workforce Ramp up from Task Order initiation to full performance Hiring approach Training approach, including on going training, new employee or cross-training

Technical Proposal Section L Vol. 2.0

2.1.3 Manning & Staffing

Methodology(ies) used to determine the manning level, skill mix, shift assignments and personnel distribution

2.1.4 Supply Support & Obsolescence Planning

Turn-around time on all repairs to repairable items Timely replacement of spares to ready-for-issue (RFI) status Minimize in-awaiting-parts time.

2.1.5 Small Business subcontracting plan and an SB participation strategy (Unrestricted MAC only) In addition to the strategy, Large Businesses must also provide their Small Business Subcontracting Master and Task Order plans.

Small businesses need only provide their small business participation strategy.

Award of Task Order or MAC cannot be made to Large Business offerors not providing the Small Business Subcontracting Plan

Technical Proposal Section L Vol. 2.0 Instant Task Orders

2.2.1 Manning & Staffing

Manning, staffing and skill mixes Sufficient resources Comprehensive rationale Weekend requirements and surges Complete requirements and manning chart(s) attachments Adapt OHPD support for increased or decreased stepladder requirements Cross reference the CBA labor category title to the WD labor category title and number.

Technical Proposal Section L Vol. 2.0 Instant Task Orders

2.2.2 Approach to COMS/CIS

2.2.2.1 COMS Approach:

Back-Up Support Plan Operations and Maintenance Support Plan Qualifications & Certifications

2.2.2.2 CIS:

Back-Up Support Plan Instruction services plan Qualifications & Certifications

Technical Proposal Section L Vol. 2.0 Instant Task Orders

2.2.2 Approach to COMS/CIS (con’t)

2.2.2.3 Mobilization and Transition Plans:

Schedule of all key dates/milestones, requirements and events Smooth transition to another offeror

Break 15 minutes

Source Selection Overview

Alan Goldberg Source Selection Office Director

AIR-4.10E

Source Selection Objectives Choose the contractor who provides the best value to the Government, all factors considered.

Obtain through use of a comprehensive evaluation process, a high quality, fair and consistent evaluation of proposals.

Generic Source Selection Process Req’ts Developed Plan the Approach Acquisition

Strategy/Plan

SSP

Market Research & Early Exchanges w/Industry

Draft RFPs

One-on-ones

Industry Days

Tech. Library

Receive Proposals Proposals Analysis Discussions w/ Offerors (ENs) Complete Discussions Evaluate Proposals Competitive Range (or SSA Selects Sources) Evaluate FPRs Request Final Proposal Revision (FPRs) Debrief Contract The Source Selection Process

SSA

SSA

SSA

SSA

SSEB Chair

DECISION

Formal

RFP

Technical Exp Past Perf Price

Sections L and M Understanding and following Sections L&M are the keys to developing a good proposal; a mutually beneficial goal for award

Proposal Instructions – Section L of the RFP:

Tells Offerors what to put in the proposal

Evaluation Criteria – Section M of the RFP:

Identifies what will be evaluated

Proposals should use the same paragraph format provided in Section L

Draft Section M Evaluation Factors - General Multiple offerors will be selected for each MAC on the basis of their proposal providing the “best value” to the Government, all factors considered.

Each MAC will be evaluated separately.

The most highly rated proposals will be selected for award for each MAC to support FTSS solicitation, allowing them to compete for future task orders Amongst these most highly rated proposals, one proposal will be awarded a Task Order under each MAC Instant Task Order awardees will be selected based on the most advantageous proposed approach to performing the Government’s requirements

Intend on awarding without discussions … Award based on initial proposals can happen if the Government receives an offer that conforms with the solicitation and provides the greatest overall benefit to the Government, all factors considered.

Don't assume you can improve your position during discussions, there may not be discussions.

However, …

...the Government Reserves the Right to Conduct Discussions

Evaluation Notices (ENs) As a minimum, notification of deficiencies and significant weaknesses Ask for additional information

Proposal change pages where needed Helps to easily identify changes Minimizes work for the Final Proposal Revision (FPR)

Draft Evaluation Criteria

EXPERIENCE

(Performance Risk)

TECHNICAL

(Rating & Proposal Risk)

Key:

> (more important) = (equal);

Task Order Price

PAST

PERFORMANCE

(Performance Risk) Price ($$$)

Section L Proposal Instructions Outline Volume I Executive Summary

Volume III Experience

Volume IV Past Performance

Volume V Price

Volume VI Terms and Conditions, Assumptions, Exceptions or Deviations

Draft Section M-Evaluation Factors -Technical - The Government will assess the offeror's Technical Proposal with respect to its compliance with the solicitation requirements and risk associated with the offeror's approach

Assessment of the offeror's proposed approach Management approach Personnel resources Manning/staffing methodology Supply support and obsolescence planning Small Business Subcontracting Plan and Participation Strategy

Draft Section M-Evaluation Factors -Technical - Assessment of the offeror's instant Task Order which is considered representative of future Task Orders Manning/staffing COMS approach CIS approach (Unrestricted MAC only) Mobilization and Transition Plan

Emphasis will be placed on the proposed manning/staffing for the instant Task Order

Technical Evaluation Flow Technical Factor; Volume 2.0

- 2.1 Approach to Accomplishing Current and Future Task Orders

* denotes emphasis Section L Paragraphs:

Technical - Cross Reference Matrix Road map to RFP and proposal

Shows relationship between the proposal instructions paragraphs and RFP requirements

Use as is or revise as needed to better relate your understanding of the program and guide the Government through your proposal

Cross Reference Matrix *COMS Appendices use Para 4.1 for Manning factors Section L – Proposal Instructions SOW E-2C

COMS

Addendum A SOW E-2C

CIS

Addendum B SOW NASTP Addendum

Document

2.1.3 Manning/staffing methodology 4.2; 4.8 4.3; 4.5 4.3; 4.4; 4.10; 4.1 1.1 – 2.2

Cross Reference Matrix (con’t) *COMS Appendices use Para 4.1 for Manning factors Section L – Proposal Instructions SOW E-2C

COMS

Addendum A SOW E-2C

CIS

Addendum B SOW NASTP Addendum

Document

2.2 Task Order (Unrestricted MAC or SBSA MAC ------ ------- ------ -------

Tech Evaluation Grading - Qualitative Compliance Rating

Proposal Risk

- RISK -

Likelihood of achieving cost, schedule, performance Assessment Of Proposals (Technical)

- COMPLIANCE -

Offeror’s approach to meeting requirements Significant Strengths, Significant Weaknesses, and Deficiencies Strengths, Weaknesses & Deficiencies can relate to Compliance, Risk or both Strengths, Weaknesses, and Deficiencies

We provide two rating, a compliance rating and a risk assessment for each criterion/element.

The compliance rating is a determination if the reqmts within the area of the evaluation will be met.

The risk assessment is the likelihood that the reqmts will be met within the period of contract performance.

Technical Strength Examples Strength Examples

Exceeds mandatory / minimum requirement with benefit to the Government (Compliance)

Approach contains a feature that enhances operational or other program/product capability with benefits to the Government (Compliance)

Reduces proposal risk by providing more than sufficient resources in order to respond to unknown conditions/situations (Risk)

Reduces proposal risk by providing resources/capabilities that are in-place and ready to be used (Risk)

Reduces proposal risk by providing plans that reduce/mitigates risks inherent in the proposed approach and program (Risk)

Reduces proposal risk by providing performance margin (Risk)

Technical Deficiency Examples Deficiency Examples (Affects Compliance and may also affect Risk, but in any case results in an unawardable proposal)

Proposal states exception or deviation Approach is assessed to be unable to meet a requirement Gross lack or critical lack of information Combination of weaknesses that raise the risk of performance to an unacceptable level

Technical Weakness Examples Weakness Examples

Marginal resources or capability to accomplish the effort (Risk)

Approaches that rely on resources or actions not within the Offeror’s full control (Risk)

Approaches that rely heavily on a single action or resource (aka single point failure) (Risk)

Untested/unproven approaches (Risk)

Lacks substantiation or full description of the approach (Risk)

Requirements can only be accomplished by impacting Government operations, capability or resources beyond that which is normal for this effort or system (Compliance)

Lacks information to assess requirements capability (Compliance)

Lacks information to assess risk (Risk)

Technical Proposal Ratings Definitions Compliance Ratings: The ratings reflect the Government's assessment of solicitation compliance and the expected results, based on the Offeror's proposed approach.

Outstanding Highly Sat.

Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory

Proposal Risk Definitions Proposal Risk: The proposal risk assignments reflect the Government’s assessment of potential impact on schedule, cost, and performance based on implementation of the Offeror’s proposed approach.

Low High Medium

Experience vs. Past Performance Experience – What you have done “I’ve repaired 100 leaky boats in the past month.”

Past Performance – How well you have done “Ninety leaked!”

Draft Section M-Evaluation Factors -Experience - Evaluate relevant experience of offeror and (if applicable) its principal and critical subcontractors’ and team members’ on the basis of its breadth, depth and similarity to the work required to meet the program objectives

Emphasis will be placed on the prime contractor

For both MACs, areas to be evaluated include the following:

Contractor Operation and Maintenance and Services (COMS) Contractor Instruction Services (CIS)

For Unrestricted MAC, areas to be evaluated also include the following:

Training Systems Management (TSM) Overseas/Foreign Military Sales (FMS) For the Unrestricted MAC, emphasis will be placed upon COMS and CIS experience

Experience Proposal Provide contracts that demonstrate experience relevant to the program and your proposed approach For each prime and subcontractor as it relates to their assigned responsibility Don’t give credit for experience in an area that the prime or subcontractor will not be performing as per the Technical Proposal Volume

Provide a comparative analysis between your experience and the effort required by the solicitation

Demonstrate that there are no gaps in experience with regard to SOW tasks Corporate experience is evaluated not personnel experience Where there is a gap, address a plan to compensate for the risk; personnel can be considered in risk mitigation plans

No credit given as no role in this effort

Gap Indicates Extensive Experience; depending on assessment of depth and breadth Proposal Experience Summary Table (for Prime and Each Principal Subcontractor, Critical Subcontractor and Team member):

Build a table to summarize information; color coding based on years of experience and recency of experience Provide supporting data that support the summary table, inclusive of information that demonstrates breadth and depth of experience Recency (yrs from proposal submittal) % of entire Task Order effort

N/A for MAC level % role of that effort for Task Order

N/A for MAC level Subcontractor: ABC

Limited Experience indicated; depending on assessment of depth and breadth Experience Assessment Approach

Task/Work 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4a 4.4b 4.4c 4.5a 4.5b

% of Role = 50% 15% 0% 25% 10%

Contracts

#1 X X X X X

#2 X X X X X

#3 X X

#4 X X X X

#n X X

Sheet2

Sheet3

Assessment Of Experience (Gap Analysis)

- PERFORMANCE RISK -Amount of doubt that the offeror will perform Significant Strengths and Significant Weaknesses *Performance Risk

* From NAVAIRINST 4200.39B Experience Evaluation Grading

- Qualitative - Strengths and Weaknesses

Past Performance and Experience

- Risk Definitions -

Low (L) Based on the offeror's experience or past performance, essentially no doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort Based on the offeror's experience or past performance, little doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Based on the offeror's experience or past performance, some doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

High (H) Based on the offeror's experience or past performance, substantial doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Based on the offeror's experience or past performance, extreme doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No past performance record identifiable. This applies only to Past Performance.

Very Low (VL)

Moderate (M)

Very High (VH)

Unknown (U)

Draft Section M-Evaluation Factors -Past Performance- Evaluate offeror’s, and (if applicable) its principal and critical subcontractors’ and team members’ demonstrated past performance in delivering quality products and services similar to those required by the solicitation in the following areas:

Meeting technical requirements Meeting schedule requirements Controlling contract cost, and Managing the contracted effort on similar programs

Emphasis will be placed on the prime contractor

Demonstrated systemic improvement Consideration for discounting problems may be given when those problems are addressed through demonstrated systemic improvement

Bulk of data obtained from CPARS & Questionnaires

Past Performance -Evaluation Concept- How did Offeror perform on current or past contracts?

Review Offerors Past Record, e.g., CPARS, Questionnaires Determine Relevancy / Recency Assess each Contract Referenced Assess each relevant contract found through an independent Government search Roll up each reference assessment into an overall Offeror Assessment Based on Offeror’s assessment (Look Back), how do we think they will perform on the program?

Final product is a determination of the Performance Risk for the FTSS III Contract

Look Back Look Forward

Past Performance Proposal Identify contracts containing efforts similar to the FTSS effort For Prime, Principal Subcontractors, Critical Subcontractors and Team members All contracts submitted for Experience should also be submitted for Past Performance or an explanation of why not Performance within 5 years of proposal due date Relate to same plant, division or cost center where you propose to accomplish work Provide agreements between you and your subs/team members to allow us to coordinate past performance issues Provide past performance information, at least 2-4 weeks prior to proposal due date Contract data (Section L, Part B, para 1.0 i, 4.2 and 4.3) on a CD-ROM and one paper copy Offeror Summary Table providing prime and subcontractor/team member roles and responsibilities (Section L, Part B, para 1.0 i)

Past Performance Proposal Relevancy of past contracts

Information that demonstrates the level of performance obtained Where available, provide quantifiable measures/trends to demonstrate past performance

Describe incentives in the past contract if they existed, and demonstrate to what level performance was obtained

Earned Value / Award Fee If you are aware that this data may contradict either a CPAR or questionnaire, please provide an explanation in this section

Systemic Improvement Information as it relates to preventing recurrence of past problems If you have had problems on referenced programs, detail how you overcame them on that contract and incorporated lessons learned on other contracts Demonstrate by showing performance improvements preferably through Government records

Provide current contact information (e.g. POC’s)

Past Performance Questionnaires

CPARs Update Questionnaires (Section L Past Performance Attachment #1(PPA-1)) Send to contacts for CPAR contracts where completion date is more than 6 months old

Past Performance Questionnaires (Section L Past Performance Attachment #2 (PPA-2)) Send to contacts within 2 weeks from receipt of the RFP where CPAR data is not available

Request responses back to FTSS POC within two weeks of receipt

Identify when and where the questionnaires were sent

DO NOT FOLLOW-UP on Questionnaires; The Government will perform all follow-up actions

Past Performance Information

Primary PPI Sources:

Offerors’ Proposals

PPIRS

Questionnaires Phone Interviews

DACO/DCMA

Other Past Performance Information

Past Performance Evaluation Grading - Qualitative Assessment Of Past Performance

* Performance Risk

- PERFORMANCE RISK -

Amount of doubt that the offeror will perform Significant Strengths and Significant Weaknesses

* From NAVAIRINST 4200.39B Strengths and Weaknesses

We provide two rating, a compliance rating and a risk assessment for each criterion/element.

The compliance rating is a determination if the reqmts within the area of the evaluation will be met.

The risk assessment is the likelihood that the reqmts will be met within the period of contract performance.

Draft Section M - Evaluation Factors -Price - Price proposal shall be evaluated to determine Completeness Consistent and reasonable with respect to the offeror’s technical approach Reflects a clear understanding of the solicitation requirements Contains no material imbalances

Unreasonable prices or inconsistencies between the Technical and Price proposals may be assessed as proposal risk under the Technical factor.

Positive or negative pricing observations identified as part of the evaluation may be considered in the best value trade-off analysis.

The evaluated prices for the Task Orders will be the prices included in the Government’s “best value” trade offs to select the awardees for the MACs as well as the Task Orders.

The total evaluated price will be the sum of the Base and Option Year CLINs for the instant Task Order based on the prices proposed in the Price Breakout Worksheet.

For tasks with multiple stepladder levels, an average unit price will be utilized to determine the total evaluated price.

Proposal Preparation

- Guidance - Demonstrate a thorough understanding of requirements and inherent risks Demonstrate sufficient resources to meet the requirements Provide clear and concise descriptions Drawings & diagrams complement narrative, but don't replace it Support your statements with facts, analysis and substantiating data to illustrate that you have a valid and practical solution for all requirements Be consistent from Volume to Volume

Be attentive to all parts of the RFP Requirements, SOWs Terms and Conditions Evaluation Criteria and Proposal Instructions

A Cross Reference Matrix can be a good proposal development tool

Make appropriate trade-offs to provide the very best value that you can offer Pointing out strengths and benefits Addressing risks with mitigating approaches Showing proper balance between cost and technical benefits while demonstrating realism Proposal Preparation

- Guidance -

Proposal Preparation Considerations

Structure your proposal in accordance with the Proposal Instructions

Can an evaluator quickly find what he/she needs?

Is it clear?

Is it well organized?

Drawings & diagrams complement narrative, but don't replace it

Substantiate, don't simply make claims Give us a reason to believe you; provide information to allow an independent assessment

Typical Proposal Shortfalls

Statements in the proposal are not well supported

Past Performance POCs are not current

Not signing RFP

Summary The Source Selection process will assure that your proposal will receive a fair and consistent evaluation and selection

L&M is intended to help you provide us with your best value solution and instruct you in preparing a proposal that will facilitate our evaluation

Keys to Developing a Good Proposal Understand the RFP requirements Understanding the Evaluation Criteria will help you know where to place emphasis in your proposal Follow the Proposal Instructions – Provide material where requested, i.e., keep Past Performance and Experience material out of Technical Volume

Ensure that your proposal Helps the evaluator evaluate - don’t make us have to guess or search for answers Follows the exact numerical outline provided by Section L Provides substantiation for what you propose – give us a reason to believe you

Bottom-Line Propose your best value solution, making the Technical and Price Trade-Offs that are in the best interest of the Government Propose a realistic proposal with a high performing team, providing an executable contract that is likely to perform as proposed Provide a proposal that helps the Government perform its independent analysis and provides high confidence in the proposed solution and contract performance plan

End of Presentation

Today’s Agenda

Tomorrow’s Agenda 0800 – 0815 Gather @ Bldg SP364;