Sole Source JustificationQivliq IDIQ Final.pdf

Form # USPTO-OP-026.v3.0 (01/2020) 1 Sole Source Justification

SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION (SSJ)

( 35 U.S.C. 2(b)(4), PTAG 6.1.1, PM 2016-02)

SECTION I. COMPLETED BY THE PROGRAM OFFICE

Program Office: Database Services Branch

Program Office

POC:

Patricia Hackman

Title of Procurement:

Database Services Support – 30-month extension and ceiling increase (USPTO Contract #DOC50PAPT1400025)

Estimated Value (including options)

$77,000,000.00 (Total value after $24,000,000.00 increase)

Contracting Officer:

Stephan Batt

Contracting Officer Phone:

(571) 272-2190 Acquisition Package Number:

ACQ-20-1140

1. Program Office Anticipated Type of SSJ (select from the drop-down box) o Sole Source (Procurement of supplies or services that is entered into or proposed to be entered into by an agency after soliciting and negotiating with only 1 source. Issued under FAR subparts 16.505.

2. Description of the Action

On October 1, 2014, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Labor Hour contract #DOC50PAPT1400025 to Qivliq Commercial Group, LLC as an 8(a) direct award. The purpose of the contract is to provide Database Support Services with a period of performance of 10/1/2014 – 09/30/2019. A six-month extension was previously completed to extend the period of performance (PoP) to 03/31/2020.

The purpose of this Sole Source Justification is to increase the overall aggregate ceiling from $53,000,000.00 by $24,000,000.00 to $77,000,000.00 (an approximate 45% increase), and to extend services to allow the PoP to continue through 09/30/2022. The proposed ceiling increase will enable the USPTO to extend current task orders and issue additional task orders under this IDIQ prior to its expiration. The proposed 30-month extension will include two (2) one-year option periods, followed by a 6-month option period.

Form # USPTO-OP-026.v3.0 (01/2020) 2

3. Description of the Supplies/Services The USPTO has a requirement for continued contractor services to provide database support to all USPTO business units and enterprise services. The scope of the work includes engineering and operations services as well as senior level project support for all USPTO database systems. In order to continue to meet the agency statutory requirements and maintain continuity of operations, the USPTO must extend the requirements currently provided by USPTO’s Database Services Branch.

The objective of this contract is to provide contractor support services to assist USPTO/OCIO staff with the continued mission to fully support all the USPTO Business Units across the organization/enterprise with database support, fully encompassing all requirements that may include but are not limited to: operations, engineering, creation, management, modernization, troubleshooting, migration, documentation and retirement.

4. Unique Vendor Qualifications or Nature of the Acquisition

The ongoing contractor support of USPTO’s database systems consists of a well-developed team that has the specialized skills and detailed knowledge of USPTO’s unique combination of in-house developed and Commercial off the Shelf (COTS) software to support on-going engineering and operations support, current next generation projects, and the critical stabilization of legacy systems. All of these tasks involve complex interactions between the engineering and operations support contractors and the senior level Qivliq contractors and subject matter experts who support USPTO projects. The current contractor team has years of knowledge and experience that allow it to successfully adapt to USPTO’s changing technology requirements, execute the management and upgrades of legacy systems, and support the innovation and implementation of new database technologies.

The incumbent contractor provides database support, which impacts nearly every application in use at USPTO. Successful support is largely dependent upon the collective efforts of a technically diverse staff able to respond quickly to incidents and support requests ranging from production outages to changing development requirements on a 24/7 basis. There is a continued need for specialized areas of expertise, especially in rapidly changing or evolving technologies.

The contractor possess highly specialized IT expertise that is integral to each project’s success.

The annual services requirements under the current contract have increased dramatically over the past few years as the contract absorbed database support that was previously done under other vehicles, and as the number and complexity of USPTO projects increases.

As part of a “New Ways of Working” initiative, USPTO is currently transitioning from project-based procurements to product-based procurements. This is a significant change across the organization, requiring full engagement from all stakeholders in order to prevent breaks in service and support of critical Legacy and Next Generation systems. The requested ceiling increase and extension is needed to allow OCIO and OP adequate time to determine next steps regarding the follow-on contract. Qivilq provides critical support across all systems, and a transition to a new vendor at this juncture would introduce unacceptable risk to the agency’s on-going projects

Form # USPTO-OP-026.v3.0 (01/2020) 3

If this contract is not extended, there will be no Operations and Engineering support for Database Operations at USPTO. This would also result in the loss of 24/7 support for critical production systems. This would increase the risk of more frequent and longer lasting production database outages. Additionally, system backups would be more likely to complete unsuccessfully, and pre-emptive monitoring would be mostly eliminated. With the transition to product-based procurements, there is uncertainty around this contract due to the current support being required across all products.

If this contract were to end or be transitioned prematurely, there would be a high risk of project support loss for databases, likely resulting in unacceptable delays for nearly all IT projects. The delays and system failures would cause a significant financial impact to USPTO. The requested ceiling increase and extension is needed to allow OCIO and OP adequate time to determine the appropriate risk mitigation regarding the follow-on contract.

5. Other Facts Supporting the Justification

None

6. Listing of sources that expressed interest in writing

None.

SECTION II. COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE PROGRAM OFFICE AND OP

7. Adjudicated Type of SSJ (select from the drop-down box)

[ o Sole Source (Procurement of supplies or services that is entered into or proposed to be entered into by an agency after soliciting and negotiating with only 1 source. Issued under FAR subparts 16.505.]

8. Statutory Authority

This action is being executed for Sole Source used in accordance with the authority of 35 U.S.C.

2(b)(4)

9. Efforts to solicit as many potential sources as possible

As USPTO finalizes its requirements for the next iteration of the contract, the agency will conduct market research to determine whether another 8(a) direct award is appropriate for the requirement.

Regardless of the selected acquisition strategy, the agency will make an effort to consider as many companies as possible, while meeting socio-economic requirements prior to solicitation.

Form # USPTO-OP-026.v3.0 (01/2020) 4

10. Market Research

Once USPTO completes its requirements definition for the next iteration of this contract, the agency will conduct market research to identify whether additional 8(a) contractors can meet the agency’s requirements.

11. Actions to remove or overcome barriers to competition

All new task orders issued during the current contract’s extension period will be awarded directly to Qivliq Commercial Group, LLC. Once USPTO completes its requirements definition for the next iteration of this contract, market research will be conducted with the goals of maximizing competition while meeting socio-economic requirements.

SECTION III. COMPLETED BY OP

12. Determination by the Contracting Officer that estimated cost will be fair and reasonable

The Contracting Officer will finalize a price reasonableness determination, appropriate to the contract type, prior to contract award. Detailed documentation and justification of price reasonableness will be provided in the Acquisition Form Documentation (AFD) to be prepared upon completion of negotiations.

Form # USPTO-OP-026.v3.0 (01/2020) 5

SECTION IV. REVIEW AND APPROVAL

1. Technical Certification

By signature below, the Technical Representative certifies that the supporting data necessary to form the basis for this justification is accurate and complete to the best of their knowledge and belief. Furthermore, the Technical Representative certifies that the justification has been adjudicated by the Program Office and OP.

Patricia Hackman Technical Representative

Technical Representative Signature Date

2. Contracting Officer’s Certification

By signature below, the Contracting Officer certifies that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of their knowledge and belief.

Stephan Batt Contracting Officer

Contracting Officer Signature Date

3. Bureau Procurement Official (BPO)/ Director of OP (or Designee) (required for actions valued at or >$700K)

By signature below, the ordering activity BPO/Director of OP certifies that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of their knowledge and belief.

Loren Dean BPO/Director of OP (or Designee)

BPO/Director of OP (or Designee) Signature Date

Form # USPTO-OP-026.v3.0 (01/2020) 6

4. Competition Advocate Certification:

Approval (required for actions valued from $700K to $13.5M) Concurrence (required for actions valued above $13.5M)

By signature below, the Competition Advocate certifies that they have reviewed this justification and has determined that sufficient facts exist to support the justification.

Sean Mildrew Competition Advocate Name (Deputy Chief Financial Officer)

Competition Advocate Signature Date

5. Head of the Contracting Activity (HCA) (or Designee) Certification (required for actions valued greater than $13.5M)

By signature below, the HCA certifies that they have reviewed this justification and has determined that sufficient facts exist to support the justification.

Jay Hoffman HCA (or Designee) Name

HCA (or Designee) Signature Date