Final Pre-Proposal Conference - 26APR2011 Rev 3.ppt
PPT presentation 3 MB Posted
- Attached to
- NAWCTSD Training Data Products Contract (TDPC) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- N61340-11-R-0010
About this file
Slide presentations from the TDPC pre-proposal conference on 26 April 2011 in Orlando FL.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 37
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
PAGE: *
Pre-Proposal Conference
Training Data Products Multiple Award Contract (TDPC)
Welcome Aboard/General Overview Ms. Aida Matta Training Data Products Contract
(TDPC)
Program Manager
Introductions
| Leadership in Attendance |
| Government TDPC Integrated Project Team (IPT) |
| CDR Francisco Silebi, Program Director |
| Ms. Aida Matta, Program Manager |
| Mr. Thomas Courtney, Contracting Officer |
| Ms. Lari Manning, Instructional Systems Specialist |
| Mr. Ralph Soberal, Contract Specialist |
| Ms. Argentina Thompson, Small Business |
| Geoffrey Chun, Legal Counsel |
Agenda
0800-0830 Welcome Aboard/General Overview – Aida Matta
0830-0900 Administrative/Terms and Conditions - Ralph Soberal
0900-0930 Source Selection Overview– Tom Courtney
0930-1000 Past Performance and Experience– Lari Manning
1000-1015 Break
1015-1045 Technical – Lari Manning
1045-1115 Price – Ralph Soberal
1115-1130 Open Discussion
1130 Adjourn
Please silence all cell phones, BlackBerry’s, etc.
No recording devices
Restroom locations
Today’s attendees’ list will be posted on the NAWCTSD and FedBizOpps websites
Welcome to the Naval Air Warfare Center Training Data Products Contract Pre-Proposal presentation
Mission NAWCTSD is the principal Navy center for research, development, test and evaluation, acquisition and product support of training systems;
We provide Interservice coordination and training systems support for the Army and Air Force, and we perform such other functions and tasks as directed by higher authority.
(OPNAVNOTE 5450 - 8 Sep 93)
Naval Aviation
Non-Aviation
Non Navy
NAVY
TDPC
TDPC Strategy Functional Area I Analysis, Design, and Evaluation Functional Area 2 Development, Production, and Implementation Functional Area 3 Sustainment Small Businesses Revenue standard - $27 Million.
LOT I - UNRESTRICTED
Functional Area I Analysis, Design, and Evaluation Functional Area 2 Development, Production, and Implementation Functional Area 3 Sustainment
LOT II - RESTRICTED
No size or revenue standard .
Scope of TDPC TDPC will procure both products and services Training products will be 80 - 90% of the contract The end-goal of the TDPC is to deliver current training systems including, but not limited to:
| Traditional |
| Stand-Alone, NIPRNet, SIPRNet, and Web-Based |
| Virtual World (self-paced or instructor facilitated) |
| PC Simulation |
| PDA, Wearable Computers, Notebooks, etc. |
| Blended Systems |
| New and emerging products adaptable for training |
Procurement Milestone Schedule
Sheet1
Milestone Completion Date
Release RFP 11-Apr-2011
Pre-Proposal Conference 26-Apr-2011
Solicitation Questions 6-May-2011
Proposals Due 26-May-2011
Oral Presentations Start 1-Jun-2011
Final Proposal Revision (FPR) Due 21-Nov-2011
Contract Award 23-Feb-2012
Sheet2
Sheet3
QUESTIONS?
Administrative/Terms and Conditions Mr. Ralph Soberal TDPC Contract Specialist
Communications Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
FAR 15.201, “Exchanges with industry before receipt of proposals”
Presolicitation Conferences constitute an Informal Exchange of Information Insight into Government plans No Guarantee as to Government’s final course of action To improve the understanding of Government requirements and industry capabilities, thereby allowing potential offerors to judge whether or how they can satisfy the Government’s requirements, and enhancing the Government’s ability to obtain quality services, at reasonable prices, and increase efficiency in proposal preparation, proposal evaluation, negotiation, and contract award.
Formal RFP is the only contract action to allow industry to formally respond with a proposal
Rules of Engagement All information released during this conference is to be considered for informational purposes only
Internal source selection plans and procedures will not be discussed
Unless an amendment is issued, no communication today between industry attendees and individual Government personnel either modifies or changes the solicitation
Guidelines & Information Please save your questions until the end of each section in the presentation. A “Question” slide will prompt you
The Government reserves the right to request any question be submitted in writing
Due to time constraints, not all questions may be answered today
Questions not answered today will be reviewed and may be answered and posted on the website or otherwise incorporated into the solicitation documents
All documents will be issued on the web at http://nawctsd.navair.navy.mil under Business Opportunities and https://www.fbo.gov under Federal Business Opportunities
Follow-on Communications
All follow-on communications shall be coordinated via the Contracting Officer, with the primary POC being the Contract Specialist below
Contracting Officer: Mr. Thomas Courtney (AIR 2.5.3.2.1)
- Telephone No: (407) 380-4108
- Email: thomas.courtney@navy.mil
Contract Specialist: Mr. Ralph Soberal (AIR 2.5.3.5.2)
- Telephone No: (407) 380-4077
- Email: rafael.soberal@navy.mil
Disclaimer Today’s remarks by Government officials involved in the TDPC Multiple Award Contract solicitation shall not be considered a guarantee of the Government’s course of action in proceeding with this or any other solicitation
The information shared today reflects current Government intentions and is subject to change based on a variety of circumstances, including internal and external comments and reviews
The formal Request for Proposals is the only document that shall be relied upon in determining the Government’s requirements
Page * Solicitation (Standard form 33) Return completed signed copy (Volume 4 - Other) Block 12 - Minimum 270 days In Accordance With (IAW) Section L, paragraph A3.5 Minimum Offer Acceptance Period Block 14 (Acknowledgement of Amendments; include signed copies of SF 30s) Block 15A – 18 (Offeror Information and Endorsement)
Page * Section B Highlights – Supplies or Services and Prices No pricing provided at the MAC Level CLIN structure will be reflective of MAC basic award
| 1st Digit (LOT) : 1 = LOT I; 2 = LOT II |
| 2nd Digit (Ordering Period): 0 = Base Ordering Period; 1, 2, or 3 for each successive option |
| 3rd Digit (Contract Type): 1 = Firm-fixed-price (FFP); 2 = Fixed-price-incentive (FPI); 3 = Cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF); 4 = Cost-plus-incentive-fee (CPIF) |
| 4th Digit (Functional Area): 1, 2, or 3 for the applicable Functional Area. |
Example: 2011 = Lot II; Base Ordering Period; FFP contract; for Functional Area 1. Will also result in 2111, 2211, and 2311 optional ordering periods.
MAC ceilings:
$780M – Combined Unrestricted (LOT I) and Restricted (LOT II) MACs $1K - Guaranteed minimum (Regardless of number of awards)
Page * Section C Highlights – Descriptions and Specifications
C2. DESCRIPTION OF LOT I AND LOT II
LOT I – Materialized Requirements of Greater Complexity LOT II – Materialized Requirements of Lesser Complexity Opportunity to participate in DO/TO procurements Determination of requirements to LOT I or LOT II at DO/TO level Small Business would be competitive in terms of Market Prices, Quality, and Delivery For cross Functional Area (FA) requirements must have ticket for all FAs Table indentifies qualified Functional Area(s) of award
Page * Section D – Packaging and Marking Section E – Inspection and Acceptance
Section D – Packaging and Marking
Basic MAC does not require delivery of any product or service; instructions for proposal packaging and marking provided in Section L Specific instructions for requirements will be provided at the DO/TO level
Section E – Inspection and Acceptance
Basic MAC does not require inspection and acceptance of any product or service; proposal acceptance is provided in Section L Specific instructions for inspection and acceptance will be provided at the DO/TO level
Page * Section F Highlights–Deliveries or Performance Period of Performance
MAC Commences on date of award and may be extended in accordance with option provision POP on DO/TO may extend beyond ordering period; in no case will DO/TO performance date exceed 11 years from date of MAC basic award
Ordering Periods
Base Ordering Period – 60 Months Options – 12 Months (3 Options)
Page * Section G Highlights–Contract Administration Data
NAVAIR Clause 5252.201-9502 - Provide in Volume 4 – Other
| Contractor Authorized Contract Coordinator |
| Technical Representative |
Page * Section H Highlights- Special Contract Requirements 5252.216-9508 Minimum Guarantee Small Businesses obtaining award in both LOTs any Functional Areas will only receive one Minimum Guarantee ($1,000)
H.3 Award of DO/TO on LOT II Set-Aside Basis Provide maximum practical opportunities to small businesses Small business goals published on NAWCTSD Business Opportunities Website Partial Set-Aside; Determined after market research Failure of small business to respond to market research inquiry may result in assignment to LOT I No set-aside within LOT I LOT II awardees will be required to satisfy at least 50% of the requirement IAW 52.219-14 Limitations on Subcontracting on a DO/TO basis
Page * Section H Highlights- Continued H.4 Prime Contractor Subcontracting Restriction of subcontracting applies to the requirement ticket holders only (LOT and FA) Not applicable to LOT I requirements for LOT II only ticket holders Not applicable to LOT II requirements for LOT I only ticket holders Commercial items or support may be purchased from another ticket holder Not applicable to DO/TO issued pursuant to “Exception to Fair Opportunities”
H.7 Security Requirements FAR 52.204-2 comply with DoD Manual 5220.22M Anticipated up to the Level of TOP SECRET DD254 issued at DO/TO level
Page * Section H Highlights- Continued H.8 (b) All DO/TO are subject to the basic terms and conditions with limited exceptions Clauses relevant to specific contract types not included in DO/TO FAR 52.222-46 Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees FAR 52.216-16 Progress Payments FAR 52.232-32 Performance Based Payments
H.10 Clause Modifications Reserve the right to add, delete, and/or modify clauses on individual DO/TO
Page * Section H Highlights- Continued H.11 Addition of Contractors During Life of ID/IQ Contract Maintain presence of both large and small businesses contractor base Periodically determine whether to add LOT I or LOT II, by Functional Area or any combination thereof Small businesses merging or being acquired (FAR 51.219-28 re-representation) Unable to re-represent as small business (FAR 52.219-28) TDPC prime contractor performance history Experienced levels of DO/TO competition Emergence of capable firms Any other consideration in Government’s best interest
Failure to re-represent will render awardee ineligible for additional LOT II awards (N/A to LOT I)
Page * Section H Highlights- Continued H.12 Small Business Subcontracting Plan Large Businesses Only Approved by PCO All elements of plan with the exception of goals and companies Not part of the tradeoff Communications regarding subcontracting plan not considered discussions 2 part frame work (complete 2nd part at DO/TO level) Do not confuse with small business participation (referred to as small business utilization strategy in Sections L & M) H.14 Maximum Profit /Fee Rate Table outlines maximum for DO/TO and Modification by Contract Type Maximum pass through on Subcontracts Travel on Cost Reimbursable basis is 0.0% Applicable to all DO/TO requirements (including competitive)
Page * Section I Highlights – Contract Clauses
FAR 52.203-2 Cert of Independent Price Determination FAR 52.204-7 Central Contractor Registration (must be registered to include NAICS Code 541330) FAR 52.219-4 Notice of Price Evaluation Preference for HubZone Small Business Concerns under LOT I (10% increase LOT I large businesses) FAR 52.219-14 Limitation on Subcontracting (LOT II 50% rule)
Section I Highlights – Continued
FAR 52.219-28 Post Award Small Business Program Rerepresentation Applies (long term contract over 5 years) 30 days from novation agreement 30 days after merger or acquisition 60-120 days prior to end of fifth year 60-120 days prior to exercise of options Fill in information for clauses incorporated by reference under Section I is included at the end of Section I under “Section I Clause Details”
Page * Section J – List of Documents, Exhibits and Other Attachments Section K – Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors
| Section J - Attachment(s) 3, 4, and 5 to be provided before oral presentation(s) |
| Section K – Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors to be provided in Volume 4 – Other section |
Page * Section L Highlights – Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Bidders
A1.0 General:
A1.1 Proposal Format
8.5 X 11; Arial 12 Pt Font; 1 inch margins
Each volume separate binder Page number by Functional Area (FA) FA 1, Page 1 – 1-1 Original and 4 copies paper 4 CD-ROMs (Separate Price Master and Back-up)
A1.3 Microsoft (MS) 2007 Applications MS Office and MS Visio
A1.4 Hyperlinks No hyperlinks Volumes 2, 3, and 4. Hyperlinks allowed in Volume 1 for ease of movement No marketing information
Page * Section L Highlights – Continued
A1.0 General (continued):
A1.5 Virus Free Electronic Submissions A1.6 Multimedia No sound graphics or video embedded A3.0 Proposal Submission:
Clearly mark packages with solicitation number and submit no later than date on block 9 of SF 33.
No Fax or electronic submission Mailed or hand carried Hand carried need visit request submitted no later then two business days prior Contact myself or alternate Mr. Thomas Courtney (must be hand delivered) Give yourself plenty of time for gate entry and processing
Page * Section L Highlights – Continued
A3.0 Proposal Submission (continued):
A3.1 Proposal packaging In cartons or equivalent in most efficient manner Packing slip Marked “For Official Use Only” “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104” A3.2 All proposals must be UNCLASSIFIED A3.3 Solicitation changes (see notification website) A3.4 Solicitation questions submitted via email utilizing Attachment (2). Last date for submission is May 6, 2011 Government reserves the right not to respond to late question submissions A3.5 Minimum offer acceptance period (input in Block 12 SF33 minimum 270 days) If longer specify in clause and include in Volume 4 – Other Pre-proposal conference slides and attendee list will be posted to solicitation notice following conference
Page * Section L Volume 4 Other B5.2.1 Terms and conditions, assumptions, Exceptions, Deviations, or Waivers Certification – to terms and conditions, exceptions, or deviations If proposed, may cause to be deficient Exception – will not comply with requirement Deviation – will not comply with requirement but proposes alternative to meet intent Waiver – request authorization to depart from specific requirement but would be considered suitable Provide detail description if proposed if none state so.
B5.2.2 Adequacy of Accounting System Provide a statement defining the most recent of determination Identify the verifying Government agency If not, may be ineligible to receive cost reimbursement type DO/TO and progress payment arrangements under fixed-price contracts until obtained
Page * Section L Volume 4 Other (Continued) Other Data Signed SF33 basic and each amendment Signed representations, certifications, and acknowledgements or ORCA reference Completed Clause from Section L, A3.5 Minimum Offer Acceptance Period, if SF33 block 12 is longer than 270 days Information to populate Section G 5252.201-9502 (Contractor POC) Small Business only - Selection of Lot I and/or Lot II Large Business only - Small Business Master Sub Subcontracting Plan
Source Selection Overview Mr. Thomas Courtney TDPC Contracting Officer
Source Selection Objectives Choose the contractors who provide 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
| SOW |
| P-Spec |
Draft RFPs
One-on-ones
Industry Days
Tech. Library
Receive Proposals Compare Proposals Discussions w/ Offerors (ENs) Complete Discussions (PCO) Evaluate Proposals Set Competitive Range
(PCO)
(or SSA Selects Source) Evaluate FPRs Request Final Proposal Revision (FPRs) Debrief Contract
SSAC
The Source Selection Process
SSA
SSAC
SSA
SSAC
SSA
SSA
SSAC
DECISION
Formal
RFP
Technical Exp Past Perf Price
Page * 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
Page * Proposals
| (a) There are 3 distinct Functional Areas within the TDPC statement of work for which an offeror may propose: |
| (1) Analysis, Design and Evaluation |
| (2) Development, Production and Implementation |
| (3) Sustainment |
| An offeror may propose to one or more Functional Areas. For each Functional Area to which an offeror is interested in proposing, the offeror is required to submit a distinct proposal addressing all 4 evaluation factors for that Functional Area. |
| No alternate proposals allowed |
Page * Structure of this Evaluation Independent source selections x 6 Lot 1 x 3 Functional Areas Lot 2 x 3 Functional Areas
Independent best value / trade off decisions
Anticipate multiple awards per “pool” #s To allow robust competition at the order level
Page * Intent on Discussions… The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions; however, award may be based upon initial offers.
Don't assume you can improve your position during discussions, there may not be discussions.
Page * If Discussions…
Competitive Range Set (most highly rated; can limit based on efficiency) Evaluation Notices (ENs) sent (to offerors in the CR) As a minimum, notification of deficiencies and significant weaknesses Ask for additional information FPRs
Note WRT Technical: If discussions are held, a second Oral Presentation will not be conducted; instead, offerors will be given an opportunity to present (in writing) their mitigation for any weaknesses or deficiencies assigned based upon the oral presentation. However, this mitigation information may not be weighted as much as the information originally provided during the Oral Presentation.
If a competitive range is established, the Government may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.
Page *
EXPERIENCE
(Performance Risk)
TECHNICAL
(Rating & Proposal Risk)
The Government shall place significantly greater emphasis on the offeror’s Technical Capability over its Small Business Utilization Strategy.
Evaluation Criteria
PAST
PERFORMANCE
(Performance Risk) Price ($$$) And, “All evaluation Factors other than Price, when combined, are significantly more important than Price.”
Page * Proposal Volumes
| No page limits, however… |
| Subcontracting Plan (Annex A) – Lot 1, and only large businesses |
In presenting material in the proposal, the offeror is advised that quality of information is more important than quantity. Clarity, brevity, and logical organization should be emphasized during proposal preparation and presentation.
Volume
Volume Title
CD ROM*
Written Copies Required
Technical
1 Master/1 Backup
1 Original/4 Copies
Experience
1 Master/1 Backup
1 Original/4 Copies
Past Performance
1 Master/1 Backup
1 Original/4 Copies
Price/Other
1 Master/1 Backup
1 Original/2 Copies
Volume 4 Annex A
Master Subcontracting Plan
1 Master/1 Backup
1 Original/2 Copies
Page *
B1.2 SMALL BUSINESS UTILIZATION STRATEGY (LOT I OFFERORS ONLY)
| For each Functional Area proposed, the LOT I offerors shall describe their Small Business Utilization Strategy for implementation of the following elements for the individual DO/TO: |
| (1) The process that will be used to determine the complexity and variety of the work small firms are to perform; and |
| (2) The process that will be used to ensure maximum practicable utilization of small firms for each DO/TO. |
Who submits this? Answer: Lot 1 only, and from both large and small businesses
Note: Identification of specific small business utilization and goals will be proposed & evaluated at the DO/TO level as requirements materialize.
Page * Summary The Source Selection process will assure that your proposal will receive a fair and consistent evaluation and consideration for award
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
Ensure that your proposal Helps the evaluator evaluate - don’t make us have to guess or search for answers Provides substantiation for what you propose – give us a reason to believe you
TDPC Past Performance, Experience & Technical Proposal Requirements Lari Manning Instructional Systems Specialist
TDPC – SCOPE OF WORK
Functional Area 1 Scope of Work NOTE: This is not a complete list of processes.
Analysis, Design and Evaluation
| Analysis |
| Front End Analysis |
| Mission / Job / Task Analysis |
| Cognitive Task Analysis |
| Top Down Functional Analysis |
| Use Case Scenarios |
| Gap Analysis |
| Root Cause Analysis |
| Analysis of Alternatives |
| Problem Analysis |
| Baseline Comparison System |
| Technology Assessments |
| Design |
| TSRA |
| Training Task Analysis |
| Learning Analysis |
| Learning Objectives Design |
| Curriculum Outline Design |
| Scenario Design |
| Media Selection |
| Cost and Trade-off Analysis |
| Training Systems Functional Description |
| Evaluation |
| Evaluation Plans |
| Formative/Summative |
| Operational |
| Training Effectiveness Evaluation |
Functional Area 2 Scope of Work NOTE: This is not a complete list of processes.
Development, Production and Implementation
| Production/Work Plan |
| Implementation Plan |
| Test Plan |
| Prototypes |
| Scripts/Storyboards |
| Group and Self-Paced Training |
| Learner Assessments |
| Job Aids |
| Electronic Performance Support Systems |
| Hardware Delivery Systems |
| Electronic Classrooms |
| Learning Resource Centers |
| PDAs |
| Other |
Functional Area 3 Scope of Work
| Identify, analyze, design, cost, develop, produce and implement training system modifications, upgrades or enhancements due to: |
| Engineering Change Proposals (ECP) |
| Training Change Requests (TCR) |
| Rapid Engineering Maintenance Engineering Change (RAMEC) |
| Modernization Program |
| Service Life Extension Program (SLEP) |
| New & Emerging Technology |
| Software Upgrades |
| Policy, Guidance, Standard Operating Procedures, or Doctrine/ Tactics |
| Training Location, Manpower, Personnel, Facilities, Equipment or Resource Changes |
Sustainment NOTE: This is not a complete list of processes.
SOW Changes - Systems Engineering Technical Review Process (SETR)
| SETR - required by NAVAIR Instruction 4355.19D |
| TSD currently mapping processes to employ SETR reviews for all products, including ISD |
| SETR is currently not an evaluation factor |
| Will be applied at the Delivery/Task Order Level |
TDPC DEFINITIONS -WORK COMPLEXITY
What is “Work Complexity”?
| Standardized process to define program risks during acquisition planning |
| Used in concert with Marketing Research (FAR Part 10) output data |
| Helps establish the work as being in scope of either Restricted or Unrestricted MAC |
| Standardized job aid providing cues to IPT for Functional Area cost, schedule and performance risks |
| Supports the team in defining potential impact of technical requirements, manpower, personnel, data, resource, budget, schedule and other risks on the program |
Work Complexity Guidelines Functional Area 1: Analysis, Design and Evaluation Complex
| Analyses for weapon system acquisition (pre-MS A to MS C) |
| Human engineering analyses |
| Efforts where Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) do not exist |
| Large scale - manpower intensive with short schedules |
| More than one job or training site |
| One job with multiple positions, multiple jobs with one position each, or multiple jobs with multiple positions |
| Jobs and positions having multiple qualifications, certifications, or licenses (QCL) |
| Multiple missions and/or courses of instruction |
| Medium to high technical, cost and schedule risks |
Non-Complex
| Jobs that currently exist and are defined in the field |
| One job, with one position |
| One job, having one training site |
| One level of QCL |
| Single mission or single course of instruction |
| Readily available SMEs in the field |
| Small manpower requirements, with long lead times |
| Low technical, cost and schedule risk |
Work Complexity Guidelines Functional Area 2: Development, Production and Implementation Complex
| Weapon system acquisition (pre-MS A to MS C) |
| Development more than 80 hours of content |
| Development more than 40 hours of content having medium to high technical, cost, or schedule risk |
| Proprietary or specialized software requiring special training |
| Limited availability of personnel |
| Large scale, manpower intensive tasks having short schedules |
| Data immature and not available |
| Production of high levels of learning for knowledge (problem solving), skill (readiness, mechanism, adaptation and origination), and attitudes (receiving, responding, valuing, competence and innovation) |
| Medium to high degree of physical and functional fidelity |
| Simulation and simulation gaming as a strategy |
| New development of IETMs, technical publications, and integrated training and technical documentation/publications (performance support systems) |
Non-Complex
| New development for already implemented training systems (DODI 5000.02 model post-MS C, Operation and Support Acquisition Phase) |
| Development of less than 80 hours of content having low schedule risk |
| Use of two-dimensional and three-dimensional (2D and 3D) animations and graphics only. Has no simulation or simulation gaming requirements |
| Simulation with low degree of physical and functional fidelity |
| Requires production of only lower levels of learning to include knowledge (fact, rule and discrimination) and skill (perception, gross motor skills, and continuous movement) |
| Commercial Item software and hardware |
| Data available and mature |
| Manpower requirements small with long lead times |
| Low technical, cost and schedule risks |
| Development of stand-alone job aid, checklist or decision aid |
Work Complexity Guidelines Functional Area 3: Sustainment Complex
| Unknown, ill defined, or ever changing requirements |
| Unknown changes greater than known changes |
| Medium to high performance/technical risk |
| Medium to high cost risk |
| Medium to high schedule risk |
| Tasks requiring an Earned Value Management System |
| Technical data is immature and not readily available |
| SMEs may not be readily available |
| Rapid tactics changes |
| Requires large amounts of technical data |
| Sustaining training at multiple sites |
| Sustaining multiple courses of instruction across a training continuum |
| Upgrading hardware and software delivery systems to meet new policy, guidance or standards |
| Support deployable training systems or training conducted at forward deployed/ embarked locations |
| Update of existing IETMs, technical publications and performance support systems to meet Engineering Change Proposals (ECPs), technical directives, policy or standard operating procedure changes |
Non-Complex
| Documented list of required changes (known requirements) |
| Production requirements fixed based on known list of changes |
| Workforce fixed based on known list of changes |
| Low performance/technical risks due to Government defined changes |
| Low cost and schedule risks due to Government defined changes |
| Technical data readily available |
| SMEs readily available |
| Requires defined changes to training at one site |
| Required defined changes for one course of instruction or part of one course |
What IS Relevant?
| Previous federal, state or local Government contracts and private/commercial contracts similar to this solicitation and no older than five years from the TDPC proposal due date |
| Information older than 5 years will not be considered relevant |
| Contracts beginning before the five year period but ending during the five year period will be considered in whole. |
| Recent contracts will be considered more relevant than older contracts. |
| Should be related to similar programs in the same division, or price centers in which the offeror proposes to perform this effort |
| Past performance and Experience must be gained through contracted work vice the experience of its personnel |
| Past Performance and Experience submittals should be the same contracts |
What IS Relevant?
| Work may be from a previous contract as a prime, subcontractor or joint venture |
| The offeror shall not describe project work performed by other team members, subcontractors, or by individual employee’s experience from previous employment |
| Work must be performed by the company proposing on the TDPC |
What IS Relevant?
| A logical connection with the matter under consideration to include: |
| ISD Phases |
| Work processes and sub-processes within a Phase |
| Training products being delivered |
| Work assigned between prime and subcontractors |
| Relevant projects must require the delivery of products specifically geared to training |
| Training is defined as the events and activities designed to facilitate the learning and development of new and existing skills for the purpose of improving job performance |
What is NOT Relevant?
| Does not include: |
| Development of training devices or simulators |
| Teaching or Facilitating |
| Contractor Support Services (CSS) |
| Schoolhouse management, administration or staff work |
| Education |
| Work augmenting a team |
| Body shops |
| Summary of employees’ career experiences while working outside the company |
What IS Relevant in Functional Area 1?
Relevant
| Identify the need or gap and the subsequent processes to design a training intervention or performance support system |
| Design of training alternatives and training delivery methods, media, strategies, fidelity levels, and interactivity requirements to fill a performance gap, solve a performance deficiency or provide the training /support required to ensure employees can perform work in the intended environment, to the required proficiency |
| Evaluation of training |
Not Relevant
| Pass through of work that does not require the offeror to perform Functional Area 1 processes and sub-processes including Program Management, Front End Analysis, Training Systems Requirements Analysis, Evaluation, Configuration Management and Quality Control of the intermediate products |
| Development, Production, and Implementation of Direct and Indirect training solutions |
What IS Relevant in Functional Area 2?
Relevant
| Development, Production and Implementation of new training solutions |
| Management of multiple production teams working concurrently to produce, deliver and install a fully operational training system that will deliver, track, report, schedule, and manage learning as well as the training system |
| Production of training solutions requiring integration with a Learning, Training or Content Management System |
Not Relevant
| Pass through of work that did not require the offeror to perform Program Management, production of group and self-paced training solutions, and development, installation and test of the integrated training system |
| Purchase of training system HW and SW |
| Previous contracts supporting realignment of an organization, modification of organization mission/vision/goal statements, or the modification of operating procedures, policy or doctrine |
Relevant A previous contract that required the full ISD model to be applied to identify, design, develop, implement and evaluate change or an approach that required only production and implementation of customer identified changes are both considered relevant work
Not Relevant Pass through of work that does not require the offeror to perform Functional Area 3 processes and sub-processes including Program Management, analysis, design, production, integration and evaluation of an existing training system is not relevant
All work must be for the sole purpose of maintaining currency of the total training system through the application of the ISD model
What IS Relevant in Functional Area 3?
TDPC – EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENTS
Experience Section L Requirements
| For each Functional Area proposing to, provide information on Attachment 6 – Experience Input Form |
| Submit only contracts meeting definition of relevancy for each Functional Area |
| Identify project experience as Prime, Subcontractor or Joint Venture Member |
| Do not claim work performed by other team members |
| Do not claim work performed by employees while employed by other companies or organizations |
| Government will contact other team members and government representatives to verify work assignments |
| Contracts crossing Functional Areas should complete separate Experience Input Form for each Functional Area being proposed to |
Experience Section M
| Government will evaluate relevant experience on basis of breadth, depth and similarity of work required on TDPC |
| A balance between types, numbers of processes demonstrated along with complexity of contract will form the basis for overall performance risk rating |
| Complexity determination will apply definitions of complexity found in SOW |
| Lack of relevant experience may be considered a weakness and may not result in an adverse rating |
Experience Section M
| A small business may elect to compete for both the Restricted and the Unrestricted MACs |
| Due to the definitions of complexity, a low risk performance rating on LOT II (Set-Aside) contract does not necessarily mean offeror will have the same rating for LOT I (Non Set-Aside) |
Experience Section M
| Functional Area 1 |
| Greater emphasis will be placed on Analysis and Design, than on Evaluation |
| Functional Area 2 |
| Greater Emphasis will be placed on Development and Production, than on Implementation |
| Functional Area 3 |
| Greater emphasis will be placed on Analysis, Design, Development, Production and Evaluation, than on Implementation |
TDPC – PAST PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS
Past Performance Section L
| Submit the following for each Functional Area being proposed to: |
| Attachment 7 Past Performance contract List |
| List Past performance contracts along with summary information to include contact information for any past Performance and CPARs update Questionnaires sent out |
| Provide information on show cause notices, cure notices, or termination for default on any contract that has occurred in the last 5 years |
| If none, state there are none |
Past Performance Section L For each Functional Area proposing to, provide evidence of your organization’s ability to perform relevant work List a minimum of 5 of the most relevant contracts performed within 5 years of the proposal submission
| List from most relevant to least relevant |
| JV should submit 5. If 5 are not available from the JV, each JV member can individually submit up to 5, in addition to JV submittal |
Past Performance Section L
| Attachment (8) Past Performance Individual Contract Information |
| Provide past performance information by individual contract to include areas to include: |
| Contract data |
| Relevancy description and rationale |
| Past performance |
| Systemic Improvements |
| Attachment (9) CPARS Update Questionnaire |
| Submit to customers for past performance information for contracts with CPARS 6 months old; completion dates more than 6 months before the due ate for this Past Performance Volume |
Past Performance Section L
| Attachment (10) Past Performance Questionnaire |
| Submit Attachment 10 to customers for contracts that have no CPARS information |
| Submit to PCO, Administering Contracting Officer, Program Manager and Technical Lead for completion and return to government |
Past Performance Section L
| Government may also use information from other sources other than those identified by the offeror |
| Past performance Information Reporting Systems and Past Performance Questionnaires will be primary means to evaluate performance risk |
| The government will not search for mitigations to problems found in offeror’s submitted information |
| The burden is on the offeror to be thorough and complete |
Break
TDPC – TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS
The government intends on identifying the offerors most susceptible of performing Human Performance, Instructional Systems Development and Systems Engineering processes to analyze, design, develop, produce, install, test, implement and, evaluate direct and indirect training solutions
Section L Technical Capability
Section L Technical Capability
| The offeror will deliver their repeatable processes for each Functional Area being proposed to as required by Section L |
| Visio Flow Diagrams are to be a common representation of the offeror’s processes |
| Instructions for symbols are in Section L B1.1.1(c) |
| If ISO 9000 certified your existing process flow and symbology will be accepted |
| Provide an explanation of your symbology if different than Section L B1.1.1(c) |
Section L Technical
| Demonstrate your ability to solve typical training and performance problems using your repeatable processes |
| The scenarios [Attachments (3), (4) and (5)] will be provided the day of each offeror’s oral presentation |
| Five paper copies of each Functional Area scenario will be given to your team in an envelope |
| You will have 30 minutes to organize and 1 hour to present |
| At the end of each Functional Area oral, the government may ask probing questions, not to exceed 30 minutes |
| All questions will be during the probing period |
| Your proposed Visio flow diagrams will be loaded on the computer and will be ready for projection |
Section L Technical
| The oral presentations will allow the offeror to demonstrate that it can apply its processes and sub-processes to allow it to manage technical, cost and schedule risks, while solving job performance and or training problems |
| Price cost or fee information shall not be discussed in the oral presentation |
Section L Technical
| All oral presentations and the probing period will be captured on digital media |
| If proposing to more than one Functional Area, there will be a 15 minute break before receipt of the next Functional Area scenario (envelope) |
| The process repeats itself until all Functional Areas being propose d to are completed |
| All Functional Areas for an offeror, will be completed in the same day |
Section M Technical
| LOT I technical evaluation of: |
| Technical capability |
| Small business utilization strategy |
| LOT II technical evaluation of: |
| Technical capability |
| Evaluation will be on Visio Flow Diagrams and Oral Presentation |
| Ability to implement repeatable processes within A functional Area |
| Proposed approach for the scenario |
Section M Technical Will evaluate the offeror’s ability to solve human performance and training requirements for the following Level 1 processes:
Functional Area 1
| Analysis |
| Design |
| Evaluation |
| Management |
| Administration |
| Support |
| Quality Improvement |
| Delivery |
Functional Area 2
| Development |
| Production |
| Implementation |
| Management |
| Administration |
| Support |
| Quality Improvement |
| Delivery |
Functional Area 3
| Analysis |
| Design |
| Development |
| Production |
| Implementation |
| Management |
| Administration |
| Support |
| Quality Improvement |
| Delivery |
NOTE: Each Level 1 process should be mapped to the lowest level to best describe the offeror’s work activities.
Section M Technical
| The degree to which the offeror met the requirements effectively and efficiently will be determined through an analysis of the offeror’s selection of the: |
| Processes and Sub-processes |
| Labor categories |
| Input/output products for the scenario requirements |
| There will be one scenario per Functional Area |
Sample Scenario Functional Area 3: Mr. Wilson, the Operations Officer, from the XYZ Organization, provides initial and certification training to certify over 75 Instructors a year. The XYZ Organization has defined a new requirement to transition their entire Instructor-Under-Training syllabus to a technology-based-solution to reduce travel and manpower costs. Mr. Wilson wants to compete a contract to immediately change the media from traditional, instructor led, to a virtual world environment. The winning offeror will upgrade the delivery method and media only. All lectures, demonstrations, practice and assessment will take place in a virtual world, with geographical dispersed student instructors. Existing Instructor and Trainee Guides as well as assessment content will be reused. Only the media/delivery method will be modified.
TDPC Price Requirements Mr. Ralph Soberal TDPC Contract Specialist
Page * Price Section L Requirements Two Sections Pricing Other Content Pricing section shall contain:
All price information requested (Labor category cross-walk, rate, and build-up) Paper copy does not need labor descriptions (electronic as is)
Provide all rates, basis, and formulas used to build labor rates 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 Provide rationale for labor rates Provide DCMA POC
Page * Sheets are protected offerors will provide data in yellow blocks.
Offeror’s Labor Category is the category description the offeror uses
Explain differences (wrap text, ensure printed copy is legible)
Labor Category Cross-Walk
Page *
| List Labor Category from Cross-Walk |
| Show your work (formulas, descriptions, and basis) |
Labor Rate Build-up
Page *
| List Burdened Labor Rates from labor rate build-up |
| Show your work (formulas, descriptions, and basis) |
| Adjust Escalation if desired |
Burdened Labor Rates
Check Totals
Other Price Proposal Information – DCMA POC
Check Totals
Page * Price Section M Requirements Price Factor
Each Functional Area Complete Reasonable Complete Provide information in Section L, Volume 4 Reasonable Likelihood of competitive price in the future Total evaluated price when compared amongst all offerors Verifiable and supportable (rates and factors) No profit rates Not cost or Pricing data No profit rates Not considered certified current cost or pricing data Government may use DCMA or DCAA information HubZone preference (10%)
Page *
TYPICAL PRICE PROPOSAL SHORTFALLS
Arithmetic and/or spreadsheet formulas are incorrect
Not relating contractor labor categories to cross-walk
Not providing adequate labor rate support information
Not completing all RFP sections (e.g., Section G Contract Administration information, Section K Reps/Certs etc.)
OPEN DISCUSSION
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .