N6945013R7999_AwardFeePlan.pdf

AWARD-FEE PLAN

FOR

BASE OPERATING SUPPORT SERVICES

U.S. NAVAL STATION GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA

(GTMO BOS)

N69450-13-R-7999

October 2013

APPROVED:

Fee Determining Official

Renee Comfort

Chief of Contracts NAVFAC Southeast

SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE - SEE FAR 2.101 & 3.104

Table of Contents

Section Title Page

1.0 Introduction 3

2.0 Organization 3

3.0 Responsibilities 3

4.0 Award-Fee Processes 4

5.0 Award-Fee Plan Change Procedure 5

6.0 Contract Termination 5

Attachments

Attachment Title Page

1 Evaluation Criteria and Weightings 7

2 Award Fee Rating Table 8

3 Award Fee Conversion Chart 11

4 Award Fee Process 12

AWARD-FEE PLAN

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This award-fee plan is the basis for the evaluation of the contractor's performance under Solicitation N69450-13-R-7999, Base Operating Support Services, U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba Contract, and for presenting an assessment of that performance to the Fee Determining Official (FDO). It describes specific criteria and procedures used to assess the contractor’s performance and to determine the amount of award fee earned. Actual award-fee determinations and the methodology for determining award fee are unilateral decisions made solely at the discretion of the Government.

The contract performance includes a one year base period and four one year option periods. The work to be acquired under this solicitation is for ongoing Base Operating Support (BOS), including Utilities Base Operating Support (UBOS) services, at U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (GTMO). This requirement includes all labor, supervision, management, and materials, except those specified to be Government furnished, for the following services: family housing, facility management, facility investment, other (swimming pools), custodial, pest control, integrated solid waste management, grounds maintenance and landscaping, base support vehicles and equipment, electrical, wastewater, water, and limited facilities support functions.

The award fee will be provided to the contractor through contract modifications and is in addition to the fixed-price provisions of the contract. The award fee earned and payable will be determined by the FDO based upon review of the contractor's performance against the criteria set forth in this plan. The FDO may unilaterally change this plan prior to the beginning of an evaluation period. The contractor will be notified of changes to the plan by the Contracting Officer, in writing, before the start of the affected evaluation period. Changes to this plan that are applicable to a current evaluation period will be incorporated by mutual consent of both parties.

2.0 ORGANIZATION

The award-fee organization consists of: the Fee Determining Official (FDO); an Award Fee Evaluation Board (AFEB) which consists of a chairperson, the Contracting Officer, other functional area participants, and other advisory members as required.

3.0 RESPONSIBILITIES

a. Fee Determining Official. The FDO approves the award-fee plan and any significant changes. The FDO reviews the recommendation(s) of the AFEB, considers all pertinent data, and determines the earned award-fee amount for each evaluation period.

b. Award-Fee Evaluation Board. The AFEB will convene as soon as possible after the end of a performance evaluation period but not more than 45 days after the end of the period.

AFEB members review the Contracting Officer’s Representative’s evaluation of the contractor's performance, consider all information from pertinent sources, prepare a report summarizing its findings, and arrive at an earned award-fee recommendation to be presented to the FDO. The AFEB may also recommend changes to this plan.

c. Contracting Officer . The Contracting Officer is the liaison between contractor and

Government personnel and coordinates the administrative actions during the award fee process.

d. Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR). The COR maintains written records of the contractor's performance in their assigned evaluation area(s) and prepares Monthly Performance Assessment Summaries (MPAS) so that a fair and accurate evaluation is obtained.

CORs will be fully trained and maintain detailed and proper documentation.

4.0 AWARD-FEE PROCESSES

a. Available Award-Fee Amount. The available award fee for each evaluation period is $500,000 ($1,000,000 annually). The award fee earned will be paid based on the contractor’s performance during each evaluation period.

b. Evaluation Period. During the first six months of performance, no award fee will be available. The first award fee evaluation period will occur one year (twelve months) after the effective date of the contract and bi-annually thereafter (at the end point of the base year and mid and end points of the option year periods of performance). The first award fee evaluation period will be for the second six months of the base year. The maximum award fee that will be made available is $500,000 for the base year and $1,000,000 annually thereafter. The award-fee process laid out herein will be carried out for the first six months of performance for informational purposes only.

c. Evaluation Criteria. If the Contracting Officer does not give specific notice in writing to the contractor of any change to the evaluation criteria prior to the start of a new evaluation period, then the same criteria listed for the preceding period will be used in the subsequent award-fee evaluation period. Any changes to evaluation criteria will be made by revising Annex 3 and notifying the contractor.

d. End-of-Period Evaluations. The Contracting Officer’s Representative submits their evaluation reports to the AFEB 21 calendar days after the end of the evaluation period. The AFEB prepares its evaluation report and recommendation of earned award fee. The AFEB Chair briefs the evaluation report and recommendation to the FDO. At this time, the AFEB may also recommend any significant changes to the award-fee plan for FDO approval. The FDO determines the overall grade and earned award-fee amount for the evaluation period within 60 calendar days after each evaluation period. The FDO letter informs the contractor of the earned award-fee amount. The Contracting Officer issues a contract modification within fifteen calendar days after the FDO’s decision is made authorizing payment of the earned-award-fee amount.

e. Contractor’s Self-Assessment. When the contractor chooses to submit a self-evaluation, it must be submitted to the Contracting Officer no later than five working days from the end of the evaluation period. This written assessment of the contractor’s performance throughout the evaluation period may also contain any information that may be reasonably expected to assist the AFEB in evaluating the contractor’s performance. It is highly recommended that the contractor follow the Award Fee Plan criteria in conducting and presenting their self-assessment, and include how they rate themselves on their performance for the period. The contractor may choose to present their self-assessment orally to the AFEB if desired. The request to do an oral presentation must accompany the written summary self-assessment. The report shall include a summary of all the evaluation criteria listed in Attachment 1. The contractor will not be reimbursed for any effort in preparation of a self-assessment.

g. Unearned Award Fee. All unearned award fee will be de-obligated from the contract by modification once the award fee evaluation period is 100% complete. Any unearned award fee will be forfeited and not available in subsequent evaluation periods.

5.0 AWARD-FEE PLAN CHANGE PROCEDURE

All significant changes are approved by the FDO; the AFEB Chairperson approves other changes. Examples of significant changes include changing evaluation criteria, adjusting weights to redirect contractor’s emphasis to areas needing improvement, and revising the distribution of the award-fee dollars. The contractor may recommend changes to the Contracting Officer no later than 30 days prior to the beginning of the new evaluation period. After approval, the Contracting Officer shall notify the contractor in writing of any change(s). Unilateral changes may be made to the award-fee plan if the contractor is provided written notification by the Contracting Officer before the start of the upcoming evaluation period. Changes effecting the current evaluation period must be by mutual agreement of both parties (contractor and Government).

6.0 CONTRACT TERMINATION

If the contract is terminated for the convenience of the Government after the start of an award-fee evaluation period, the award fee deemed earned for that period shall be determined by the FDO using the normal award-fee evaluation process. After termination for convenience, the remaining award-fee amounts allocated to all subsequent award-fee evaluation periods cannot be earned by the contractor and, therefore, shall not be paid.

Attachments

1. Evaluation Criteria and Weightings

2. Award Fee Rating Table

3. Award Fee Conversion Chart

4. Award Fee Process

ATTACHMENT 1

EVALUATION CRITERIA

Category of Performance Weightings Quality of Product or Services for 1602000 Electrical

1. Contractor’s minimization of unscheduled interruptions for electrical power demand is met at 99.9 percent of the time annually (49.9 percent per rating period).

2. Average Monthly Performance Assessment Summaries (MPAS) for the sub-annex are rated Satisfactory or higher.

30%

Quality of Product or Services for 1606000 Water

1. The finished water storage capacity is 85% to 100% at all time.

2. Average Monthly Performance Assessment Summaries (MPAS) for the sub-annex are rated Satisfactory or higher.

15%

Quality of Product or Services for 1604000 Wastewater

1. No violations of discharges.

2. Average Monthly Performance Assessment Summaries (MPAS) for the sub-annex are rated Satisfactory or higher.

10%

Quality of Product or Services for 1502000 Facility Investments

1. Average Monthly Performance Assessment Summaries (MPAS) for the sub-annex are rated Satisfactory or higher.

15%

Quality of Product or Services for 1401000 Family Housing

1. Average Monthly Performance Assessment Summaries (MPAS) for the sub-annex are rated Satisfactory or higher.

10%

Quality of Product or Services for 1700000 BSVE

1. 16 vehicles, annually (8 per rating period), do not exceed the allowable individual unit downtime.

2. Average Monthly Performance Assessment Summaries (MPAS) for the sub-annex are rated Satisfactory or higher.

5%

Safety Program

1. Contractor DART Rate is less than 2.0.

2. Contractor Reports all safety incidents in a proper and timely manner and takes appropriate corrective actions.

3. Contractor staffs qualified Safety personnel at all times.

5%

Business Management/Relations:

1. Interaction between the contractor and the government is satisfactory or higher. This includes contractor’s history of reasonable and cooperative behavior (to include timely identification to the Contracting Officer of issues in controversy).

2. Customer Satisfaction is rated Satisfactory or higher for all customers.

3. The Contractor’s Quality Control Plan (QCP) minimizes the number of reworks, customer complaints, and equipment and system failures.

4. Contractor provides timely, complete, fair, and reasonable proposals for contract modifications and IDIQ task orders. The contractor’s accounting, billing, and estimating systems are adequate.

10%

ATTACHMENT 2

AWARD FEE RATING TABLE

Adjective Rating/ Percentage of Award Fee Earned

Description

Outstanding 91% - 100%

– Contractor has met the minimum basic (minimum essential) requirements of the contract, and has met at least 91% of the award fee criteria established in the award plan.

– Contractor’s minimization of unscheduled interruptions for electrical demand is between 0 and 30 minutes of downtime.

– Contractor’s finished water storage capacity is greater than 97% and less than or equal to 100% at all times.

– Contractor has no violations of discharges.

– Under 1700000 BSVE, 0 to 1 vehicles exceed the allowable individual unit downtime. The number of vehicles that exceeds the allowable individual unit downtime applies to the total vehicles across all alpha codes. For example, if only one vehicle exceeds the individual unit downtime for the performance period, the contractor will receive an outstanding rating for the BSVE Category of Performance.

– Contractor DART Rate is 0.0 or less than or equal to 0.5.

– Contractor staffs qualified Safety personnel at all times.

– Contractor always reports all safety incidents immediately and quickly and in a proper manner and is proactive in taking appropriate corrective action.

– Cooperation and teamwork demonstrated by the Contractor (including timely identification to the Contracting Officer of issues in controversy) substantially exceed normal expectations.

– Contractor’s number of validated customer complaints is 0 to 1.

– Contractor always provides exceptional proposals (in regards to timeliness, completion, and fair and reasonableness) for contract modifications and IDIQ task orders. The contractor’s accounting, billing, and estimating systems are exceptional.

– Contractor’s Customer Satisfaction received an Exceptional rating or equivalent.

– Contractor’s MPAS for the sub-annex received an Exceptional rating or equivalent.

Fee Earned

Description

Excellent 76% - 90%

– Contractor has met the minimum basic (minimum essential) requirements of the contract, and has met at least 76% of the award fee criteria established in the award plan.

– Contractor’s minimization of unscheduled interruptions for electrical demand is greater than 30 minutes and less than or equal to 1.5 hours of downtime.

– Contractor’s finished water storage capacity is greater than 93% and less than or equal to 97% at all times.

– Contractor has no violations of discharges.

– Under 1700000 BSVE, greater than 1 to less than or equal to 3 vehicles exceed the allowable individual unit downtime. The number of vehicles that exceeds the allowable individual unit downtime applies to the total vehicles across all alpha codes. For example, if two vehicles exceed the individual unit downtime for the performance period, the contractor will receive an excellent rating for the BSVE Category of Performance.

– Contractor DART Rate is greater than 0.5 to less than or equal to 1.0.

– Contractor staffs qualified Safety personnel at all times.

– Contractor always reports all safety incidents in a timely and proper manner and is minimally proactive in taking appropriate corrective action.

– Cooperation and teamwork demonstrated by the Contractor (including timely identification to the Contracting Officer of issues in controversy) exceed normal expectations.

– Contractor’s number of validated customer complaints is greater than 1 to less than or equal to 3.

– Contractor always provides very good proposals (in regards to timeliness, completion, and fair and reasonableness) for contract modifications and IDIQ task orders. The contractor’s accounting, billing, and estimating systems are very good.

– Contractor’s Customer Satisfaction received an Very Good rating or equivalent.

– Contractor’s MPAS for the sub-annex received a Very Good rating or equivalent.

Good 51% - 75%

– Contractor has met the minimum basic (minimum essential) requirements of the contract, and has met at least 51% of the award fee criteria established in the award plan.

– Contractor’s minimization of unscheduled interruptions for electrical demand is greater than 1.5 and less than 4.5 hours of downtime.

– Contractor’s finished water storage capacity is greater than 85% and less than or equal to 93% at all times.

– Contractor has no violations of discharges.

– Under 1700000 BSVE, greater than 3 to less than 8 vehicles exceed the allowable individual unit downtime. The number of vehicles that exceeds the allowable individual unit downtime applies to the total vehicles across all alpha codes. For example, if four vehicles exceed the individual unit downtime for the performance period, the contractor will receive an excellent rating for the BSVE Category of Performance.

– Contractor DART Rate is greater than 1.0 to less than or equal to 2.0.

– Contractor staffs qualified Safety personnel at all times.

– Contractor reports all safety incidents, most of which are reported in a timely and proper manner, and takes appropriate corrective action.

– Contractor and employees usually demonstrate cooperation and teamwork (including timely identification to the Contracting Officer of issues in controversy) in accomplishment of the contract.

– Contractor’s number of validated customer complaints is greater than 3 to less than or equal to 8.

– Contractor provides satisfactory proposals (in regards to timeliness, completion, and fair and reasonableness) for contract modifications and IDIQ task orders. The contractor’s accounting, billing, and estimating systems are satisfactory.

– Contractor’s Customer Satisfaction received a Good rating or equivalent.

– Contractor’s MPAS for the sub-annex received a Good rating or equivalent.

Fee Earned

Description

Satisfactory 0%*

– Contractor has met the basic (minimum essential) requirements of the contract.

– Contractor’s minimization of unscheduled interruptions for electrical demand is 4.5 hours of downtime.

– Contractor’s finished water storage capacity is 85% at all times.

– Contractor has one or more violations of discharges.

– Under 1700000 BSVE, 8 vehicles exceed the allowable individual unit downtime. The number of vehicles that exceeds the allowable individual unit downtime applies to the total vehicles across all alpha codes. For example, if eight vehicles exceed the individual unit downtime for the performance period, the contractor will receive an excellent rating for the BSVE Category of Performance.

– Contractor DART Rate is 2.0.

– Contractor does not staff qualified Safety personnel at all times.

– Contractor reports some safety incidents in a timely and proper manner, and takes appropriate corrective action with little Government direction.

– Contractor and employees occasionally demonstrate cooperation and teamwork (including timely identification to the Contracting Officer of issues in controversy) in accomplishment of the contract.

– Contractor’s number of validated customer complaints is 8.

– Contractor provides marginal proposals (in regards to timeliness, completion, and fair and reasonableness) for contract modifications and IDIQ task orders. The contractor’s accounting, billing, and estimating systems are marginal.

– Contractor’s Customer Satisfaction received a Satisfactory or Marginal rating or equivalent.

– Contractor’s MPAS for the sub-annex received a Satisfactory or Marginal rating or equivalent.

Unsatisfactory 0%*

– Contractor has failed to meet the minimum basic (minimum essential) requirements of the contract.

– Contractor’s minimization of unscheduled interruptions for electrical demand is greater than 4.5 hours of downtime.

– Contractor’s finished water storage capacity is less than 85% at all times.

– Contractor has one or more violations of discharges.

– Under 1700000 BSVE, greater than 8 vehicles exceed the allowable individual unit downtime.

The number of vehicles that exceeds the allowable individual unit downtime applies to the total vehicles across all alpha codes. For example, if ten vehicles exceed the individual unit downtime for the performance period, the contractor will receive an excellent rating for the BSVE Category of Performance.

– Contractor DART Rate is greater than 2.0.

– Contractor does not staff qualified Safety personnel at all times.

– Contractor reports few safety incidents, reports are late and in an improper manner, and requires

Government direction in taking corrective action.

– Contractor and employees do not demonstrate cooperation and teamwork (including timely identification to the Contracting Officer of issues in controversy) in accomplishment of the contract.

– Contractor’s number of validated customer complaints is greater than 8.

– Contractor provides unsatisfactory proposals (in regards to timeliness, completion, and fair and reasonableness) for contract modifications and IDIQ task orders. The contractor’s accounting, billing, and estimating systems are unsatisfactory.

– Contractor’s Customer Satisfaction received an Unsatisfactory rating or equivalent.

– Contractor’s MPAS for the sub-annex received an Unsatisfactory rating or equivalent.

*For elements receiving evaluation points (overall weighted result) of 50 or less, no fee will be earned. Any unearned fee will be forfeited and not available in subsequent evaluation periods.

ATTACHMENT 3

AWARD FEE CONVERSION CHART

ADJECTIVE RATING

EVALUATION POINTS

(OVERALL WEIGHTED

RESULT)

PERCENTAGE OF

AWARD FEE EARNED

EXCELLENT 91-100 91 to 100 % VERY GOOD 76-90 76 to 90% GOOD 51-75 51 to 75%

SATISFACTORY 1-50 0%

UNSATISFACTORY 0 0%

Award Fee Calculation Methodology:

1. A rating is assigned (0-100) for each Category of Performance (CP).

2. Multiply weighting percentage to each CP to arrive at weighted result.

3. Add weighted results together to arrive at overall weighted result.

Example:

AFEB Ratings: Quality of Product or Services for 1602000 Electrical - 80 Quality of Product or Services for 1606000 Water - 95 Quality of Product or Services for 1604000 Wastewater - 83 Quality of Product or Services for 1502000 Facility Investments - 95 Quality of Product or Services for 1401000 Family Housing - 95 Quality of Product or Services for 1700000 BSVE - 70 Safety Program - 70 Business Management/Relations – 91

Weighted Result: (80*30%) + (95*15%) + (83*10%) + (95*15%) + (95*10%) + (70*5%) + (70*5%) + (91*10%) = 74.4

Overall Weighted Result: 74.4; round down to 74.

Adjective Rating (Award Fee Conversion Chart): GOOD Potential Percentage of Award Fee Earned (as determined by the FDO): 51% to 75%

FDO Decision:

The earned award-fee amount indicated by the use of a conversion table or graph is a guide to the FDO.

Use of the Award Fee Conversion Chart does not remove the element of judgment from the award-fee process.

ATTACHMENT 4

AWARD FEE PROCESS

CONTRACTOR SUBMITS SELF ASSESSMENT NO LATER THAN FIVE WORKING DAYS FROM

THE END OF THE EVALUATION PERIOD, IF APPLICABLE

COR SUBMITS EVALUATION REPORT/MPAS TO AFEB WITHIN 21 CALENDAR DAYS AFTER

THE END OF THE EVALUATION PERIOD

CONTRACTOR PRESENTS THEIR SELF-ASSESSMENT ORALLY TO THE AFEB, IF APPLICABLE

AFEB PREPARES EVALUATION REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF EARNED AWARD FEE

AFEB CHAIR BRIEFS THE EVALUATION REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO FDO

AFEB RECOMMENDS ANY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO AWARD-FEE PLAN FOR FDO

APPROVAL, IF APPLICABLE

FDO DETERMINES OVERALL GRADE AND EARNED AWARD-FEE AMOUNT WITHIN 60

CALENDAR DAYS AFTER THE EVALUATION PERIOD

FDO LETTER INFORMS THE CONTRACTOR OF THE EARNED AWARD-FEE AMOUNT

CONTRACTING OFFICER ISSUES CONTRACT MODIFICATION WITHIN FIFTEEN CALENDAR

DAYS OF FDO'S DECISION