TEAMS3_DRFP.pdf

For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in

Acrobat X or Adobe Reader X, or later.

Get Adobe Reader Now!

http://www.adobe.com/go/reader

NNL17ZB1001R

EXHIBIT K

EXHIBIT K

AWARD FEE PLAN

Technology, Engineering, and Aerospace Mission Support 3

(TEAMS 3)

Contract Number: TBD

Contractor: TBD

Contractor Approval:

Date

Fee Determination Official Approval:

Date

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 Introduction

2.0 Organizational Structure and Responsibilities for Award Fee Administration

3.0 Evaluation Requirements and Criteria

4.0 Method for Determining Award Fee

5.0 Changing the Award Fee Plan

6.0 Attachments

Attachment A: Award Fee Organization

Attachment B: Evaluation Periods and Maximum Available Award Fee

Attachment C: Award Fee Grading Table

Attachment D: Actions and Schedules for Award Fee Determinations

Attachment E: Special Interest Items

1.0 Introduction

1.1 This Award Fee Plan (AFP) is the basis for evaluation of the Contractor’s performance on the Technology, Engineering, and Aerospace Mission Support 3 (TEAMS 3) contract. The purpose of this plan is to establish a general framework for evaluating the Contractor’s performance. Accordingly, all fee determinations shall be based on the guidelines found herein. The plan is unilaterally established by the Government and may be revised at any time to redirect emphasis in accordance with Section 5.0 of this plan.

1.2 The primary objective of the TEAMS 3 contract is to provide engineering services in support of research and technology development in order to meet evolving NASA mission objectives. The contract requirements consist of Core Mission Support (Core) and Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) requirements. The Core consists of discipline oriented work that includes core technical engineering services. Under the IDIQ requirements, task orders (TOs) will be issued to accommodate programmatic uncertainty and potential new work within the scope of the contract.

1.3 This contract contains NASA FAR Supplement (NFS) Clause 1852.216-76, Award Fee for Service Contracts, and the award fee determination each period is final.

1.4 The period of performance is specified in the Period of Performance contract clause. The period of performance for each CLIN/Option CLIN is specified in the Supplies and/or Services to be Provided contract clause.

1.5 The estimated cost and maximum available award fee for performing this contract is specified in the Supplies and/or Services to be Provided contract clause and the Estimated Cost and Award Fee contract clause. Additional information regarding the award fee schedule is specified in the Award Fee Availability Schedule contract clause. The maximum award fee percentage for the total contract value is TBD percent. The estimated cost and award fee are subject to equitable adjustments arising from changes or other contract modifications.

1.6 Provisional award fee payments will be made under this contract pending the determination of the amount of fee earned for an evaluation period. If applicable, a provisional award fee payment may be made to the Contractor not more often than on a monthly basis. The total amount of award fee available in an evaluation period that will be provisionally paid is the lesser of 80 percent of that evaluation period’s available award fee or the prior period’s evaluation.

1.7 The Fee Determination Official (FDO) will determine the award fee payable periodically in accordance with this plan. The determination of the award fee earned is a unilateral decision made solely at the discretion of the Government.

1.8 The unearned award fee in any given period shall not be carried forward or “rolled-over” into subsequent periods in accordance with FAR 16.401(e)(4).

1.9 The Government may unilaterally change this plan, as covered in Section 5.0 and not otherwise requiring mutual agreement under the contract, provided the Contractor receives notice of the changes 30 calendar days (referred to as “days” throughout the AFP) prior to the beginning of the evaluation period to which the changes apply. For Special Interest Items only, the Government may unilaterally change this plan, providing the Contractor receives notice of the changes 15 days prior to the beginning of the evaluation period to which the changes apply. Note: The Award Fee Pool will only be modified when the cumulative changes result in a cost impact exceeding 5% (increase/decrease) of the current estimated cost applicable. This adjustment will not apply to TOs. Each TO will carry a separate award fee.

2.0 Organizational Structure and Responsibilities for Award Fee Administration

Attachment A identifies the award fee evaluation organizational structure for the TEAMS 3 contract. Following are the responsibilities:

2.1 Fee Determination Official (FDO). The FDO may designate an Alternate FDO when appropriate. The primary FDO responsibilities are:

2.1.1 Establish the Award Fee Evaluation Board (AFEB) and appoint the voting members of the AFEB by memorandum.

2.1.2 Review recommendations of the AFEB, consider all other pertinent data, and Contractor self-assessment, if provided.

2.1.3 Determine the amount of award fee earned and payable for each evaluation period as addressed in Section 4.0 and ensure that the amount and percentage of award fee earned is commensurate with and accurately reflects the Contractor's performance. Any variance between the AFEB recommendation and FDO determination must be justified and documented in the official contract file.

2.1.4 Sign the Award Fee Determination Letter for the evaluation period, specifying the amount of award fee determined and the basis for that determination.

2.1.5 Approve the Award Fee Plan (AFP) and changes as addressed in Section 5.0.

2.1.6 Approve Special Interest Items (SIIs) and relative weights up to 10%.

2.2 Award Fee Evaluation Board (AFEB). The primary responsibilities of the AFEB are to:

2.2.1 Conduct on-going evaluations of Contractor performance based upon Discipline Lead (DL), Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR), and Contracting Officer (CO) evaluations and all other information from pertinent sources on the Contractor’s performance for the award fee period. Evaluate the Contractor's performance according to the standards and criteria stated in this AFP.

2.2.2 Determine the recommended rating and award-fee amount to be presented to the FDO for each award fee period.

2.2.3 Recommend changes to the AFP, as addressed in Section 5.0.

2.3 AFEB Chairperson. The AFEB Chairperson is responsible for the overall functioning of the AFEB. The primary responsibilities of the AFEB Chairperson are to:

2.3.1 Appoint non-voting members, if appropriate, to assist the AFEB in performing its functions.

2.3.2 Request and obtain performance information from other organizations or personnel involved in observing Contractor performance, as appropriate.

2.3.3 Meet with the Contractor during the evaluation period to provide preliminary performance feedback.

2.3.4 Conduct briefing to the FDO with regard to the recommendations of the AFEB on the Contractor’s overall performance and recommend the award fee rating and amount. If Contractor requests debrief, provide results of award fee evaluation.

2.3.5 Ensure the timeliness of award fee evaluations.

2.3.6 Recommend AFP changes to the FDO, as addressed in Section 5.0.

2.4 Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR). The primary responsibilities of the COR are to:

2.4.1 Provide Performance Monitors (PMs) with appropriate award fee performance instructions and guidance.

2.4.2 On an on-going basis monitor, evaluate, and assess Contractor performance. Obtain and analyze the DL Evaluation Reports for consistency and completeness.

2.4.3 Prepare the Contract Performance Summary Report for the AFEB.

2.4.4 Attend all AFEB meetings, record the findings of the AFEB, and assist the CO in preparing the Award Fee Determination Letter for the FDO’s review and signature.

2.4.5 Complete the technical portion of the annual Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS).

2.4.6 Recommend changes to the AFP, as addressed in Section 5.0.

2.5 Discipline Leads (DLs). The primary responsibilities of the DLs are to:

2.5.1 Ensure PMs submit consistent and complete semi-annual evaluation forms to the DLs. Use the PM evaluations and other information from pertinent sources on the Contractor’s performance to develop DL evaluations and submit the evaluations semi-annually to the COR, as described in Section 4.0 and Attachment D.

2.5.2 Notify the COR or CO in writing if, at any time, there are problems with the Contractor’s performance.

2.5.3 Recommend changes to the AFP, as addressed in Section 5.0.

2.6 Performance Monitors (PMs). Generally, the TDN/TO owner will be the PM for the TDN/TO. The primary responsibilities of PMs are to:

2.6.1 Monitor, evaluate, and assess Contractor performance on a continuous basis in assigned areas and in accordance with this plan.

2.6.2 Complete an evaluation form on a semi-annual basis and submit to the DL, as described in Section 4.0 and Attachment D.

2.6.3 Notify the COR or CO in writing if, at any time, there are problems with the Contractor’s performance.

2.6.4 Recommend changes to the AFP, as addressed in Section 5.0.

2.7 Contracting Officer/Contract Specialist (CO/CS). The primary responsibilities of the CO/CS are to:

2.7.1 Advise the AFEB on Cost-Plus-Award-Fee rating standards, policies, and procedures and ensure the consistent application of Agency policy in these matters.

2.7.2 Receive the DL Evaluation Reports submitted to the CO by the COR.

2.7.3 Monitor, evaluate, and assess Contractor performance.

2.7.4 With the assistance of the COR, prepare the Business Management and Cost Control reports.

2.7.5 Consider changes to this plan and recommend to the AFEB those determined appropriate for presentation to the FDO.

2.7.6 Attend all AFEB meetings and prepare with the COR’s assistance the Award Fee Determination Letter for the FDO’s review and signature.

2.7.7 Transmit the FDO Award Fee Determination Letter to the Contractor and prepare and distribute the contract modification awarding the fee.

2.7.8 Notify the Contractor in writing of any approved changes to the AFP.

2.7.9 Complete the Award Fee Evaluation System module in the NASA Acquisition Internet Service and the annual Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS).

2.8 AFEB Chairperson or Member Substitution(s). In the event the designated AFEB Chairperson is unable to chair the scheduled AFEB, either the Chairperson or FDO will appoint a designee to assume the AFEB Chair responsibilities. If a member of the AFEB is absent, a person with similar qualifications may be substituted with the approval of the AFEB Chairperson.

3.0 Evaluation Requirements and Criteria

3.1 Performance Areas and Evaluation Criteria

The performance factors to be evaluated are identified below. The Contractor’s performance will be assessed for each factor using the adjective ratings described in Attachment C. The evaluation criteria for each factor are specified in the indicated section below.

Factor

Weight

AFP Section

Technical Performance

(a) Quality of Work (More Important)

(b) Schedule (Important)

(c) Safety and Health & Security (Important)

50%

3.1.1

Business Management Performance

(a) Contract Management and Compliance (More Important)

(b) Reporting (Less Important)

15%

3.1.2

Cost Control

30%

3.1.3

Special Interest Item

5%

3.1.4

The percentage weights indicated above and the grading table in Attachment C are quantifying devices. Their sole purpose is to provide guidance in arriving at a general assessment of the amount of award fee earned. In no way do they imply an arithmetical precision to any judgmental determination of the Contractor's overall performance and amount of award fee earned.

The performance factors will be used in the evaluation of performance under the Core CLINs and individual TOs issued under the IDIQ CLIN. For each award fee period, these factors will be evaluated and receive a single rating for both the Core and individual TOs issued under the IDIQ CLIN. This award fee rating will be used to determine the fee earned for the Core and TOs issued under the IDIQ CLIN.

3.1.1 Technical Performance - Factor Weight 50%

Description of Factor: For each evaluation period, the Contractor's technical performance will be assessed to determine if the work that has been performed meets the Performance Work Statement (PWS) requirements, including a variety of sub-factors related to how the work was accomplished, as indicated below. Quality of Work and Schedule Performance will be assessed using the adjective ratings shown in Attachment C with inputs from the PMs and the DLs. Safety and Health and Security will be assessed on a pass/fail basis using inputs from the PMs and DLs as well as specific input from the Safety & Mission Assurance Office (SMAO) and Security.

3.1.1.1 Sub-factors for Evaluation:

(a) Quality of Work – The Government will assess the Contractor’s overall ability to provide effective and efficient performance-based services to meet technical requirements as described in the PWS, TDNs/TOs and the AWP. This includes:

· Subjective assessment of the quality of performance-based services provided including the accuracy and completeness of technical documentation, plans, and other required deliverables as outlined in the contract, including the PWS, TDNs/TOs and Exhibit B, Contract Documentation and Reporting Requirements; anticipation and resolution of problems; recovery from delays; reaction time; and Contractor’s level of cooperation and communication effectiveness in attempting to resolve technical problems, issues and changes while ensuring quality technical performance.

· Contractor’s ability to provide staffing at appropriate skill levels and expertise to provide effective and efficient performance-based services and ensure the highest standards of quality of work. This includes assessing the extent to which the Contractor has applied and retained competent and experienced personnel to assure successful and cost efficient performance and the extent to which the Contractor has provided proper training to maintain required skill sets.

· Contractor’s ability to identify risks; analyze their impact and prioritize them; develop and carry out plans for risk mitigation, acceptance, or other action; track risks and the implementation of mitigation plans; support informed, timely, and effective decisions to control risks and mitigation plans; and assure that risk information is communicated among all levels of a program/project.

(b) Schedule Performance - The Government will assess the Contractor’s performance in successfully completing work and meeting mission requirements in accordance with the milestones and delivery dates established in the contract and identified in TDNs/TOs. This includes early delivery, attaining or exceeding milestones or meeting rapid-response or urgent requirements which result in notable positive impact on mission requirements. The Government will also assess the Contractor’s ability to identify potential schedule problems early, project the impact of near term schedule adjustments on accomplishment of overall work and effectiveness of the Contractor’s schedule recovery plans.

(c) Safety and Health, and Security – The Government will assess the overall effectiveness of the Contractor’s safety and health, and security programs as follows:

· Safety and Health - The Government will assess the effectiveness of the Contractor’s safety and health program and ability to provide a safe work environment including actions taken to prevent accidents or safety violations; recognition of safety hazards/violations and remedial actions; conducting annual inspections of all facilities; maintaining accident/incident files; timely reporting of mishaps and required safety documentation; analysis of lost-time and other accidents, including reasons for the accidents and assessment to determine if accidents represent isolated instances or are symptomatic of a Contractor safety program deficiency; and providing safety training for all personnel.

If there is a major breach of safety directly related to the work on contract in an evaluation period, the Contractor shall be assessed as a fail and earn an overall fee rating of unsatisfactory. A major breach of safety is an act or omission of the Contractor that results in an accident, incident, or exposure resulting in a fatality or mission failure; or in damage to equipment or property equal to or greater than $1 million; or in any "willful" or "repeat" violation cited by the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) or by a state agency operating under an OSHA approved plan.

· Security - The Government will evaluate the effectiveness of the Contractor’s security program including: maintenance of Top Secret facility clearance capability; maintenance of sufficient number of appropriately cleared staff; and compliance with applicable security regulations. Consideration will be given to the Contractor’s compliance with regulations and procedures associated with export control, general release of information, IT security and associated training.

If there is a major breach of security that is directly related to work on this contract in an evaluation period, the Contractor shall be assessed as a fail and earn an overall fee rating of unsatisfactory. Security is the condition of safeguarding against espionage, sabotage, crime (including computer crime), or attack. A major breach of security may occur on or off Government installations. A major breach of security is an act or omission by the Contractor that results in compromise of classified information; illegal technology transfer; workplace violence resulting in criminal conviction; sabotage; compromise or denial of information technology services; equipment or property damage from vandalism greater than $250,000; or theft greater than $250,000.

Basis for Measuring Performance: Using the above sub-factors and a standard of reasonable performance for them, the PMs, DLs, and COR will evaluate the Contractor’s performance and assign ratings as specified in Attachment C, Award Fee Grading Table.

If an aspect of the effort is performed with significantly higher than required competence (exceptional), less than reasonable expected competence or is outside of the contractual requirements, the PM Evaluation Form or DL Evaluation Report will recognize the strength, weakness and/or area of concern and characterize it as having major or minor impacts on overall performance in related areas. These strengths, weaknesses and/or areas of concern will be used by the AFEB to weigh the inclusion of specific issues in the award fee letter.

3.1.2 Business Management Performance - Factor Weight 15%

Description of Factor: Business Management is the manner in which the Contractor plans, organizes, and controls work under the contract and implements contract provisions. It includes personnel, inter-organizational interfaces, work flow, property and materials controls, and contract management. For each evaluation period, business management performance is broadly assessed in meeting the business management requirements for the overall contract, as indicated below:

3.1.2.1 Sub-factors for Evaluation

(a) Contract Management and Compliance – The Government will assess the Contractor’s overall management and compliance with the terms and conditions of the contract, integration and coordination of all activities needed to execute the contract. This will include the Contractor’s implementation of the AWP, overall ability and effectiveness in responding to management issues, identification and correction of problems, accuracy and timeliness of all reporting requirements, timeliness and completeness of proposal submissions, the Contractor’s cooperation and effective working relationships with other contractors and Government personnel to ensure integrated efficiency, effective use of resources and response to emergencies and other unexpected situations, compliance with FAR 52.219-14 (Limitations in Subcontracting), ability to monitor and forecast subcontract business trends that may ultimately impact overall contract performance, and ability to manage (control, use, preserve, protect, repair, maintain and report) all Government property in their possession (Contractor- acquired, Government-furnished and Installation-accountable) in accordance with the property clauses in the contract. The Government will also consider:

· Responsiveness of Management – The Government will assess the extent to which appropriate staffing, strategies, policies, plans, procedures, and actions provide an effective context for the successful performance of the contract. This includes effective and timely management actions in relationships or interfaces with NASA organizations.

(b) Reporting – The Government will assess the extent to which the Contractor’s NASA Form (NF) 533 reports and invoices are accurate, timely and complete.

Basis for Measuring Performance: Using the above sub-factors and a standard of reasonable performance, the CO in coordination with the COR will prepare a report that addresses the above performance areas and assigns ratings as specified in Attachment C, Award Fee Grading Table.

If an aspect of the effort is performed with significantly higher than required competence (exceptional), less than reasonable expected competence or is outside of the contractual requirements, the CO in coordination with the COR will recognize the strength, weakness and/or area of concern and characterize it as having major or minor impacts on overall performance in related areas. These strengths, weaknesses and/or areas of concern will be used by the AFEB to weigh the inclusion of specific issues in the award fee letter.

3.1.3 Cost Control - Factor Weight 30%

Description of Factor: Cost Control is the manner in which the Contractor controls costs and manages financial resources. Cost control includes the measure of the Contractor's success in controlling actual costs against the negotiated estimated cost of the contract.

The cost control will be based on how the Contractor's (and subcontractors’) actual accrued costs contained in the monthly NF 533 reports, compare to the negotiated estimated cost of the contract for the base period of the contract, and for the remaining periods, to the AWP also. The Government will assess the Contractor’s effectiveness in forecasting, managing, and controlling contract costs. An assessment of actual technical work accomplished will be considered in the determination of the cost. The analysis of cost control will also give consideration to changed support requirements, changed statutory requirements, and/or changes beyond the Contractor’s control, which impact contract costs. The Government will assess the Contractor’s ability to provide clear and accurate financial reports and its ability to identify potential problems and implement corrective action which minimizes cost impact.

In accordance with NFS 1816.405-274 (e), the evaluation of cost control will utilize the following guidelines:

· If there is a cost overrun, considerations will be given to the reasons for the overrun and the Contractor’s efforts to control or mitigate it. Normally, the Contractor should be given an unsatisfactory rating for cost control when there is a significant cost overrun within its control. However, the Contractor may receive a Satisfactory or higher rating for cost control if the overrun is insignificant. Award fee ratings should decrease sharply as the size of the overrun increases. In any evaluation of Contractor overrun performance, the Government will consider the reasons for the overrun and assess the extent and effectiveness of the Contractor's efforts to control or mitigate the overrun.

· The Contractor should normally be rewarded for an under-run within its control, up to the maximum award fee rating allocated for cost control, provided the adjectival rating for other award fee evaluation factors is Very Good or higher; however, cost under-runs standing alone may not be an indicator of excellent cost control unless the actual effort during the evaluation period matches that originally proposed or planned. An under- run will be rewarded as if the Contractor has met the estimated cost of the contract when the average adjectival ratings for all other factors is less than Good but greater than Unsatisfactory.

· The Contractor should be rewarded for meeting the estimated cost of the contract, but not to the maximum rating allocated for cost control, to the degree that the Contractor has prudently managed costs while meeting contract requirements. No award will be given in this circumstance unless the average adjectival rating for all other award fee evaluation factors is Satisfactory or higher.

Basis for Measuring Performance: Using the above factor and a standard of reasonable performance, the CO in conjunction with the COR will prepare a report that addresses the above factor and assigns a rating as specified in Attachment C, Award Fee Grading Table.

If an aspect of the effort is performed with significantly higher than required competence (exceptional), less than reasonable expected competence or is outside of the contractual requirements, the CO in coordination with the COR will recognize the strength, weakness and/or area of concern and characterize it as having major or minor impacts on overall performance in related areas. These strengths, weaknesses and/or areas of concern will be used by the AFEB to weigh the inclusion of specific issues in the award fee letter.

3.1.4 Special Interest Item (SII) - Factor Weight 5%

Description of Factor: Up to 5 percent of the total award fee available each period may be designated for SIIs. If there is no SII for an award fee period, the remaining percentage will be redistributed equally to the Business Management Performance and Cost Control Factors. When identified, a SII is an area of performance that the Government deems critical and/or requires special attention. Not later than 45 days prior to the end of award fee period, performance evaluators may submit proposed SIIs to COR for the next award fee period.

Proposed SIIs will include recommended evaluation criteria, desired results, and proposed weight percentage. The COR will submit proposed SIIs to the AFEB Chairperson for approval. If approved, the SII will be furnished to the CO, who will notify the Contractor 15 days prior to the start of the affected award fee period. After the start of an award fee period, a SII can only be implemented by a bilateral agreement between the Contractor and Government. Attachment E contains SII(s) that apply to each award fee period.

4.0 Method for Determining Award Fee

A determination of the award fee earned for each evaluation period will be made by the FDO within 45 days after end of the applicable award fee period. All fee determinations shall reflect the Government’s assessment of the Contractor’s progress and ability to meet contract objectives. The evaluation process will encompass actual performance and the conditions under which it was achieved. For example, performance will be considered in light of the priorities and workload existing during the evaluation period, taking into consideration factors beyond the Contractor’s control, which either enhanced or detracted from performance. Although award fee contracts are subjective in nature, the Government generally attempts to utilize objective and quantifiable measures to the greatest extent possible as a guide in assessing the Contractor’s performance.

The method to be followed in monitoring, evaluating, and assessing Contractor performance during the period, as well as for determining the award fee earned or paid, is described below. Attachment D summarizes the principal actions and schedules involved.

4.1 The COR will ensure that each PM receives the following:

· A copy of this plan along with any changes made in accordance with Section 5.0.

· Appropriate orientation and guidance and specific instructions applicable to the PM’s assigned performance areas, if applicable.

4.2 PMs will evaluate and assess Contractor performance and discuss their observations with Contractor personnel as appropriate, noting observed accomplishments, deficiencies, or unusual circumstances. This affords the Contractor an opportunity to clarify possible misunderstandings regarding areas of unsatisfactory performance and to rectify or resolve deficiencies in a timely manner. The assessments will be conducted in an open, objective, and cooperative manner so that a fair and accurate evaluation is obtained. This will ensure that both the PM and the Contractor receive accurate and complete information from which to prepare assessments and to plan improvements in performance. Positive performance accomplishments will be emphasized just as readily as negative ones and extraordinary circumstances will be noted in reports.

4.3 PMs will conduct their contacts and visits with Contractor personnel within the context of official contractual relationships and avoid activities or associations that might cause, or give the appearance of, a conflict of interest on either part. PM contacts with Contractor personnel will not be used to instruct, direct, or supervise or control these personnel in the performance of the contract. The role of the PM is to monitor, assess, and evaluate, not to manage the Contractor's effort.

4.4 DLs will prepare consolidated DL Evaluation Reports which will consist of an assessment of the Contractor’s performance in support of the DL, including input obtained from the PM’s via Performance Evaluation Forms. The Performance Evaluation Forms will be attached to the DL Evaluation Reports. The DL Evaluation Reports will be submitted to the COR within 15 days after end of the evaluation period.

4.5 The Contractor will have the option of submitting a self-assessment to the COR and CO which will be due not later than (NLT) 7 days prior to end of award fee evaluation period. The COR will forward the Contractor self-assessment to the appropriate DLs and PMs. PMs will have the opportunity to reconcile differences between their evaluations and the Contractor self-assessment prior to sending their end-of-period evaluations to the DL.

4.6 Promptly after the end of each evaluation period, the AFEB will meet to consider all the performance information it has obtained. The Contractor will have an opportunity to provide a briefing of its performance during the past evaluation period. The Briefing shall not normally exceed 30 minutes. At this meeting, the AFEB will summarize its preliminary findings and recommendations for the FDO and calculate the overall weighted rating and recommended award fee amount.

4.7 The CO, in coordination with the COR, will prepare the award fee determination letter for the period, which will be reviewed by the AFEB Chairperson and then submitted to the FDO for use in determining the award fee earned. The letter will include an adjectival rating and a recommended performance score with supporting information.

4.8 The AFEB will brief 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 the FDO approval. The FDO considers the recommendations of the AFEB, information provided by the Contractor, if any, and any other pertinent information in determining the amount of the award fee to be paid for the period. The FDO's determination of the amount of award fee earned and the basis for this determination will be stated in the award fee determination letter.

4.9 The CO shall notify the Contractor in writing of the FDO's determination. The Contractor may request a debriefing from the AFEB Chairperson.

5.0 Changing the AFP

5.1 Right to Make Unilateral Changes. The Government may unilaterally change any matters covered in this plan (except for Special Interest Items which are 15 days) and not specifically identified as requiring mutual agreement under the contract, prior to the beginning of an evaluation period by providing timely notice to the Contractor in writing at least 30 days prior to the start of the relevant evaluation period.

5.2 Steps to Change the AFP. The following is a summary of the principal actions involved in changing the AFP for an evaluation period (actions may be modified to reflect different approval or notification levels).

Action

Schedule

AFEB members draft proposed revisions to AFP

Ongoing

AFP revisions submitted to CO for drafting

Ongoing

FDO reviews and concurs on revisions to AFP

NLT 30 days prior to the start of period

CO notifies the Contractor regarding revisions to the AFP

NLT 30 days prior to the start of period

5.3 Method for Changing Plan Coverage. The method to be followed for changing the AFP is described below:

5.3.1 Personnel involved in the administration of the fee provisions of the contract are encouraged to recommend plan changes with a view toward changing management emphasis, motivating higher performance levels, or improving the award fee determination process. Recommended changes should be sent to the CO and COR for AFEB consideration and drafting.

5.3.2 Both the Government and the Contractor should work to eliminate any unnecessary contractual, organizational, or conceptual barriers that constrain information sharing and impede a partnering relationship.

5.3.3 Prior to the end of each evaluation period, the AFEB will submit its recommended changes, if any, applicable to the next evaluation period for approval by the FDO with appropriate comments and justification.

5.4 No later than 30 days before the beginning of each evaluation period (15 days for SIIs), the CO will notify the Contractor in writing of any changes to be applied during the next period. If the Contractor is not provided with this notification, or if the notification is not provided within the agreed number of work days before the beginning of the next period, then the existing plan will continue in effect for the next evaluation period unless bi-lateral agreement is obtained.

6.0 Attachments

The applicable evaluation requirements are included as attachments to this AFP as follows:

Attachment A: Award Fee Organization

Attachment B: Evaluation Periods and Maximum Available Award Fee Attachment C: Award Fee Grading Table

Attachment D: Actions and Schedules for Award Fee Determinations Attachment E: Special Interest Items

ATTACHMENT A

Award Fee Organization

Award Fee Evaluation Board (AFEB) Chairperson:

Award Fee Evaluation Board Voting Members:

Non-Voting Members/Advisors:

ATTACHMENT B

Evaluation Periods and Maximum Available Award Fee

Award Fee Period/CLIN

Start Date

End Date

Available Award Fee (Core Mission Support)

Available Award Fee (Task Orders)

ATTACHMENT C

Award Fee Grading Table

Adjectival Rating

Range of Performance (numeric rating)

Description

Excellent

100-91

Contractor has exceeded almost all of the significant award-fee criteria and has met overall cost, schedule, and technical performance requirements of the contract in the aggregate as defined and measured against the criteria in the award-fee plan for the award-fee evaluation period.

Very Good

90-76

Contractor has exceeded many of the significant award-fee criteria and has met overall cost, schedule, and technical performance requirements of the contract in the aggregate as defined and measured against the criteria in the award-fee plan for the award-fee evaluation period.

Good

75-51

Contractor has exceeded some of the significant award-fee criteria and has met overall cost, schedule, and technical performance requirements of the contract in the aggregate as defined and measured against the criteria in the award-fee plan for the award-fee evaluation period.

Satisfactory

Contractor has met overall cost, schedule, and technical performance requirements of the contract in the aggregate as defined and measured against the criteria in the award- fee plan for the award-fee evaluation period.

Unsatisfactory

Less than 50

Contractor has failed to meet overall cost, schedule, and technical performance requirements of the contract in the aggregate as defined and measured against the criteria in the award-fee plan for the award-fee evaluation period. No award fee shall be paid for an unsatisfactory rating.

NOTES:

Any factor receiving a adjectival rating of “Unsatisfactory” (less than 50) will be assigned a numerical score of Zero (0) for purposes of calculating the award fee amount to be earned (includes cost control).

As a benchmark for evaluation, in order to earn a total overall rating of "Excellent," the Contractor would typically be under cost, on or ahead of schedule, and be rated "Excellent" for Technical Performance.

In documenting performance evaluators shall use the adjectival ratings as noted above and include supporting statements where applicable. The following definitions shall be used in determining a strength, weakness or area of concern:

Strength - Contractor performance exceeded the performance requirements as documented in the contract or TDN Statement of Work for the evaluation period. A strength should be well defined and supported by either an impact statement or an equivalent characterization of the specific performance with supporting comments such as the description of an associated innovation and/or process improvement.

Weakness - Contractor performance was less than expected based on the performance requirements as documented in the contract or TDN Statement of Work for the evaluation period. A weakness should be well defined and supported by an impact statement or an equivalent characterization of the specific performance with supporting comments. (Indicate impact to quality of work, schedule, cost etc.)

ATTACHMENT D

Actions and Schedules for Award Fee Determinations

The following is a summary of the principal actions involved in determining the award fee for the evaluation periods. The AFEB will establish lists of subsidiary actions and schedules as necessary to meet the schedule for principal actions.

Action

Schedule

AFEB Chairperson and Members appointed

Prior to first period and ongoing

PMs receive Award Fee guidance

Prior to first period and ongoing

PMs assess performance and discuss results with the Contractor

Ongoing

Special Interest Items (SIIs) to Contractor

Not Later Than (NLT) 15 days prior to start of the affected award fee period

PMs submit Performance Evaluation Forms to DLs

NLT 10 days after end of evaluation period

DLs submit IDLT Evaluation Reports to COR

NLT 15 days after end of evaluation period

AFEB meets to discuss performance reports and prepare preliminary findings and evaluation period recommendations

NLT 30 days after end of evaluation period

AFEB briefs findings and summary recommendations to FDO

NLT 40 days after end of evaluation period

FDO determines overall rating/earned award fee amount and signs Award Fee Determination Letter. CO forwards Letter and executed contract modification to Contractor

NLT 45 days after end of evaluation period

Award fee payment made to the Contractor via contract modification

NLT 60 days after end of evaluation period

ATTACHMENT E

Special Interest Items (SII)

SII Number

SII Title

Award Fee Period

SOLICITATION, OFFER AND AWARD

4. TYPE OF SOLICITATION2. CONTRACT NUMBER 3. SOLICITATION NUMBER

7. ISSUED BY CODE 8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If other than Item 7)

ORDER UNDER DPAS (15 CFR 700)

6. REQUISITION/PURCHASE NUMBER

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

NEGOTIATED (RFP)

SEALED BID (IFB)

5. DATE ISSUED

1. THIS CONTRACT IS A RATED RATING PAGE OF PAGES

1 95

C. E-MAIL ADDRESS

EXT.NUMBERAREA CODE

B. TELEPHONE (NO COLLECT CALLS)A. NAME

10. FOR

INFORMATION

CALL:

CAUTION: LATE Submissions, Modifications, and Withdrawals: See Section L, Provision No. 52.214-7 or 52.215-1. All offers are subject to all terms and conditions contained in this solicitation.

(Date)(Hour) local timeuntildepository located in copies for furnishing the supplies or services in the Schedule will be received at the place specified in Item 8, or if hand carried, in the

SOLICITATION

9. Sealed offers in original and

PART IV - REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

OTHER STATEMENTS OF OFFERORS

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

INSTRS., CONDS., AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS AND

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

CONTRACT CLAUSES

PART III - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACH.

I

J

K

L

M SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA

DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

PACKAGING AND MARKING

DESCRIPTION/SPECS./WORK STATEMENT

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

PART II - CONTRACT CLAUSESPART I - THE SCHEDULE

H

G

F

E

D

C

B

A

SEC. DESCRIPTION PAGE(S) (X) DESCRIPTION SEC. (X)

11. TABLE OF CONTENTS

18. OFFER DATE17. SIGNATURE

SUCH ADDRESS IN SCHEDULE.

IS DIFFERENT FROM ABOVE - ENTER

15C. CHECK IF REMITTANCE ADDRESS

EXT.NUMBERAREA CODE

15B. TELEPHONE NUMBER

(Type or print)AND

ADDRESS

OF

OFFEROR

CODE FACILITY

16. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN OFFER15A. NAME

DATEAMENDMENT NO.DATEAMENDMENT NO.

and related documents numbered and dated):

amendments to the SOLICITATION for offerors

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of

14. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF AMENDMENTS

CALENDAR DAYS (%)30 CALENDAR DAYS (%)20 CALENDAR DAYS (%)10 CALENDAR DAYS (%)

(See Section I, Clause No. 52.232.8)

13. DISCOUNT FOR PROMPT PAYMENT

designated point(s), within the time specified in the schedule.

by the offeror) from the date for receipt of offers specified above, to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item, delivered at the

12. In compliance with the above, the undersigned agrees, if this offer is accepted within ______________ calendar days (60 calendar days unless a different period is inserted

NOTE: Item 12 does not apply if the solicitation includes the provisions at 52.214-16, Minimum Bid Acceptance Period.

OFFER (Must be fully completed by offeror)

IMPORTANT - Award will be made on this Form, or on Standard Form 26, or by other authorized official written notice.

28. AWARD DATE

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

27. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

25. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY

26. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

CODE 24. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 7)

ITEM

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

23. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN

41 U.S.C. 253 (c) ( 10 U.S.C. 2304 (c) (

22. AUTHORITY FOR USING OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION:

21. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION20. AMOUNT19. ACCEPTED AS TO ITEMS NUMBERED

AWARD (To be completed by government)

CODE

X

LARC

NASA/Langley Research Center 5 Langley Blvd., Bldg. 2101 M/S 12 Hampton VA 23681-2199

Sandra Chellis 757 sandra.chellis@nasa.gov

864-3640

PAGE(S)

Liliana J. Richwine

AUTHORIZED FOR LOCAL REPRODUCTION

Previous edition is unusable

STANDARD FORM 33 (Rev. 9-97)

Prescribed by GSA - FAR (48 CFR) 53.214(c)

1-2 3-5

8-9 11-21 22-42

43-57

59-66

67-88 89-95

See Provision L.15

ITEM NO. SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

NAME OF OFFEROR OR CONTRACTOR

2 95

CONTINUATION SHEET

REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED PAGE OF

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)

Phase-In

Base - Core Mission Support (PWS 4.1 - 4.12)

Base - Core Mission Support (PWS 4.13)

Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ)

Option Period - Core Mission Support (PWS 4.1 - 4.12)

006 Option Period - Core Mission Support (4.13)

OPTIONAL FORM 336 (4-86)

Sponsored by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.110

NSN 7540-01-152-8067

NNL17ZB1001R SECTION B

PART I – THE SCHEDULE

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS

B.1 NAMING/NUMBERING SCHEME FOR CLAUSES IN FULL TEXT AND FOR CLAUSES

INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (LaRC 52.201-90) (MARCH 2012)

There are various types of clauses contained in the contract. Most clauses will reference a numbered cite such as: Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR 52.#); NASA FAR Supplement (NFS 1852.#); or Langley Research Center (LaRC 52.#). There are also clauses that have no numbered cite designation. Those clauses were written by LaRC for this specific contract or were written as generic Agency clauses specific for this contract type.

(End of clause)

B.2 SUPPLIES AND/OR SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED

The Contractor shall provide all resources (except as may be expressly stated in the contract as furnished by the Government) necessary to deliver and/or perform the work set forth in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) entitled Technology, Engineering, and Aerospace Mission Support 3 (TEAMS 3) incorporated in Section J as Exhibit A. Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) 001 of this contract is for a 90 day Phase-In period. Work performed under CLINs 002, 003, 005 and 006 will be further defined by issuance of Technical Direction Notices (TDNs) (See G.8).

Task Orders may be issued under CLIN 004 for additional work within the general scope of the contract.

CLIN Description Type

001 Phase-In Firm Fixed Price (FFP)

002 Base – Core Mission Support (PWS 4.1 – 4.12) Cost-Plus-Award-Fee (CPAF)

003 Base – Core Mission Support (PWS 4.13) CPAF

004 Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Task Orders

CPAF/Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee

(CPFF)

005 Option – Core Mission Support (PWS 4.1 – 4.12) CPFF

006 Option – Core Mission Support (PWS 4.13) CPFF

(End of text)

B.3 FIRM FIXED PRICE (NFS 1852.216-78) (DEC 1988) (Applicable to CLIN 001)

The total firm fixed price of CLIN 001 is $To Be Determined (TBD).

(End of clause)

B.4 ESTIMATED COST AND AWARD FEE (NFS 1852.216-85) (SEP 1993) (Applicable to CLINs 002 and 003)

The estimated cost of this contract is $TBD. The maximum available award fee, excluding base fee, if any, is $TBD. The base fee is $0. Total estimated cost, base fee, and maximum award fee are $TBD.

CLIN

ESTIMATED

COST

MAX AVAIL AWARD

FEE (Base Fee is $0)

TOTAL ESTIMATED COST

AND MAX AWARD FEE

002 $TBD $TBD $TBD

003 $TBD $TBD $TBD

TOTAL $TBD $TBD $TBD

(End of clause)

B.5 ESTIMATED COST AND FIXED FEE (NFS 1852.216-74) (DEC 1991) (Applicable to CLINs 005 and 006)

The estimated cost of this option period is $TBD exclusive of the fixed fee of $TBD. The total estimated cost and fixed fee is $TBD.

CLIN

ESTIMATED

COST FIXED FEE

TOTAL ESTIMATED COST

AND FIXED FEE

005 $TBD $TBD $TBD

006 $TBD $TBD $TBD

TOTAL $TBD $TBD $TBD

B.6 MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM INDEFINITE DELIVERY, INDEFINITE QUANTITY (IDIQ)

CONTRACT VALUE (LaRC 52.216-90) (MARCH 2012) (Applicable to CLIN 004)

The Government will order through the issuance of task orders a minimum quantity of work of $0.00 under this contract. There will be no further obligation on the part of the Government to issue any task orders. The total maximum contract value of CLIN 004 (IDIQ) is $32,500,000.

(End of clause)

B.7 CONTRACT FUNDING (NFS 1852.232-81) (JUN 1990)

(1) CLINs 002, 003, 005, and 006 - Core Mission Support:

(a) For purposes of payment of cost, exclusive of fee, in accordance with the Limitation of Funds clause, the total amount allotted by the Government for CLINs 002 and 003 and Option CLINs 005 and 006, if exercised, is $TBD. This allotment covers the following estimated period of performance: From effective date of contract through TBD.

(b) An additional amount of $TBD is obligated under the CLINs for payment of fee.

(2) CLIN 004 – IDIQ:

(a) For purposes of payment of cost, exclusive of fee, in accordance with the Limitation of Funds clause, the total amount allotted by the Government for CLIN 004 is $TBD. This allotment is for the performance of work in accordance with the limitations and completion dates as set forth in the Task Orders authorized by the Contracting Officer and covers the following estimated period of performance: From effective date of Task Order Award through TBD.

(b) An additional amount of $TBD is obligated under each Task Order for payment of fee.

(3) See table below for funding summary:

Funding Summary

Funding for CLINs 002 & 003 Estimated

Cost

002 & 003

Award Fee for CLIN

(IDIQ)

Award Fee

Fixed Fee

005 & 006

005 & 006 Fixed Fee

Award

[END OF SECTION]

NNL17ZB1001R SECTION C

SECTION C - DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATIONS/PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

C.1 SPECIFICATION/PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

The Contractor shall provide all resources (except as may be expressly stated in the contract or task orders as furnished by the Government) necessary to perform the requirements delineated in Section J, Exhibit A, PWS, entitled “Technology, Engineering, and Aerospace Mission Support 3 (TEAMS 3).”

NNL17ZB1001R SECTION D

SECTION D - PACKAGING AND MARKING

D.1 CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Clause(s) below at the beginning of this Section are incorporated by reference, with the same force and effect as if they were given in full text. Clauses incorporated by reference which require a fill-in by the Government include the text of the affected paragraph(s) only. This does not limit the clause to the affected paragraph(s). The Contractor is responsible for understanding and complying with the entire clause. The full text of the clause is available at the addresses contained in clause 52.252-2, Clauses Incorporated by Reference, of this contract.

NFS CLAUSE

NUMBER

NFS CLAUSE TITLE

1852.211-70 PACKAGING, HANDLING, AND TRANSPORTATION (SEP 2005)

*Specific packaging, handling, and transportation instructions may be listed in Task Orders or Technical Direction Notices.

NNL17ZB1001R SECTION E

SECTION E - INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

E.1 CLAUSES INCOPORATED BY REFERENCE

FAR CLAUSE

FAR CLAUSE TITLE

52.246-5 INSPECTION OF SERVICES - COST-REIMBURSEMENT (APR

1984)

E.2 HIGHER-LEVEL CONTRACT QUALITY REQUIREMENT (FAR 52.246-11) (DEC 2014)

(a) The Contractor shall comply with the higher-level quality standard(s) listed below.

(1) ANSI/ISO/ASQC Q ISO 9001, Quality Management Systems Requirements and the required Capability Maturity Model Integration for Development (CMMI– DEV) Capability as indicated per TDN or Task Order.

(2) The Contractor shall comply with NASA Workmanship Standards for all Software Engineering, Development and Maintenance activities and comply with NPR 7150.2 NASA Software Engineering Requirements augmented by Langley Management System Center Procedures: Located at http://standards.nasa.gov/documents/nasa;

Title Number

Software Engineering…