Source Selection Statement.pdf

Source Selection Statement for the George C. Marshall Space Flight Center

NASA TECHNICAL STANDARDS SYSTEM (NTSS)

Request for Proposal (RFP) 80MSFC20R0007P00003

This document serves to provide rationale for the source selection decision associated with the NASA Technical Standards System (NTSS) acquisition.

I. PROCUREMENT DESCRIPTION

The scope of the agency-wide NTSS contract effort includes a contractor web-based architecture (the platform) that integrates through Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) with the NASA Technical Standards website to provide access to NASA technical standards as well as those of Technical Standards Developing Bodies across 15 NASA facilities including ancillary facilities.

The procurement was conducted as a full and open competition in accordance with FAR Part 12 Acquisition of Commercial Items, in conjunction with FAR Part 15 Contracting by Negotiation.

The RFP utilized North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 518210 – Data Processing, Hosting, and Related Services. The Government anticipates a single award firm fixed price contract, with a pay-per-document component, and a four-year period of performance consisting of a one-year base period with three one-year options. Additionally, the RFP included a separately-priced, firm-fixed-price phase-in purchase order not to exceed 45 days.

The NTSS RFP was released on March 27, 2020. Prior to the receipt of proposals, four amendments to the RFP were issued in order to respond to industry questions and comments and make minor changes to various parts of the solicitation.

On April 17, 2020, proposals were received from the following businesses:

1. IHS Markit

2. Techstreet/A Clarivate Analytics company

II. EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

The proposals were evaluated in accordance with the RFP, FAR Part 12.203 Procedures for solicitation, evaluation, and award, and FAR Part 15.101-2 Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable source selection procedures.

The RFP listed two evaluation factors, Technical Acceptability and Price. Past performance was not an evaluation factor; however, past performance was assessed as part of the responsibility determination.

Technical Acceptability: The Government performed a technical evaluation on both proposals in order to access their capability in performing the requirements of the PWS.

Price: The Government performed a price analysis of all proposals received in accordance with FAR 15.404-1, Proposal Analysis Techniques. The total evaluated price consisted of price for the base period and all option periods for each proposal. The separately-priced Phase-In Purchase Order was not included in the price evaluation.

Responsibility: A responsibility determination was performed in accordance with FAR 9.1 Responsible Prospective Contractors, which included an assessment of satisfactory past performance.

The RFP stated the following with respect to the evaluation:

The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be the most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

Technical Acceptability

Price

The evaluation of the proposals is summarized below in the order evaluated.

IHS

Review of the proposal submission revealed apparent exceptions to terms and conditions of the solicitation. Subsequent attempts at clarification confirmed the exceptions. Specifically, IHS took exception to paragraphs (n) Title, and (o) Warranty of FAR 52.212-4, Contract Terms and Conditions Commercial Items, as well as other terms and conditions. By so doing, IHS rejected the terms and conditions of the solicitation. Consequently, in accordance with paragraph (b)(11) of FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors Commercial Items (b)(11), IHS was excluded from further consideration. A letter was issued on June 15, 2020, notifying IHS in this respect and returning its proposal.

Techstreet/Clarivate

Techstreet/Clarivate proposal took no exception to the terms and conditions of the solicitation.

Techstreet/Clarivate proposal was found to be responsible, with satisfactory past performance based on assessment of the contract references provided, and review of the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting and Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information systems.

Under the Price factor, Techstreet/Clarivate proposal had a total evaluated price of $6.7M.

Under the Technical Acceptance factor, Techstreet/Clarivate was found technically acceptable.

III. SELECTION DECISION

With respect to the process, I concluded the evaluation plan was followed and the evaluation of the proposals was comprehensive, thorough, and well-documented.

In making the selection decision, I referred to the RFP language which explicitly stated:

The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

It was clear from the proposal that Techstreet/Clarivate made a reasonable attempt to respond to the requirements of the solicitation. I then exercised my independent judgement and concluded that the proposal most advantageous to the Government, for the NTSS acquisition, is the proposal provided by Techstreet/Clarivate. More detailed statement of the rationale for my decision follows.

The Techstreet/Clarivate proposal is the only proposal received that is responsive to the solicitation.

The Techstreet/Clarivate proposal was found to be technically acceptable.

The Techstreet/Clarivate proposed price of $6.7M is lower when compared to the GICE of $9M and to historical pricing under the current NTSS contract NNM16AA13C of $8.5M.

Accordingly, I direct contract award to Techstreet/Clarivate.

Hervie B. Williford Source Selection Authority

PROCUREMENT ROUTING SLIP

MSFC Form 4063 (April 2018) Previous Versions Obsolete

TITLE OF PROCUREMENT:

NASA Technical Standards System (NTSS)

TYPE OF ACTION AND IDENTIFICATION:

Source Selection Statement

VALUE OF

ACTION:$6.7M

POINT OF CONTACT:

Lizette Kummer 256-544-3457/lizette.m.kummer@nasa.gov

ORDER CODE OFFICE ACTION SIGNATURE COMMENTS

1 PS22 Lizette Kummer Release

2 PS22 Kathy Cooper/Ofc Chief Review

3 LS01 Jerry Seeman/Legal Review See attached

4 PS20 Bryan Williford Execution

REMARKS:

DISTRIBUTION (Check Appropriate Boxes) (Click for e-mail address):

STANDARD DISTRIBUTION (excludes incremental funding mods)

AS42 (Shipping) MSFC-Receiving-PS@mail.nasa.gov

AS50 (Security) MSFC-Security-PS@mail.nasa.gov

AS41 (Property) MSFC-Property-PS@mail.nasa.gov

AS21 (Facilities) MSFC-Facilities@mail.nasa.gov

QD10 (Quality) MSFC-Quality-PS@mail.nasa.gov

PS14 (FPDS) MSFC-FPDS-NG@mail.nasa.gov (Include input sheets)

CONTRACTING OFFICERʼS REPRESENTATIVE(S)

CONTRACTOR

CONTRACT ADMIN/AUDIT (DCMA/DCAA/ONR, et cetera)

NASA CENTER FOR AEROSPACE INFORMATION (CASI)

help@sti.nasa.gov

ZP30 (Applicable on R&D awards when New Technology or Patent Rights apply)

MSFC-NewTech-PS@mail.nasa.gov

PS COST/PRICE ANALYST (award fee payment mods only)

MSFC-Pricing@mail.nasa.gov

ADDITIONAL DISTRIBUTION RECIPIENTS:

LIZETTE KUMMER

Digitally signed by LIZETTE

KUMMER

Date: 2020.06.08 16:26:08 -05'00'

MARY COOPER Digitally signed by MARY COOPER Date: 2020.06.09 08:28:11 -05'00'

JERRY SEEMANN

Digitally signed by JERRY

SEEMANN

Date: 2020.06.12 15:49:23 -05'00'

2020-06-18T10:18:36-0500

HERVIE WILLIFORD