TO 1 Attachment 1 - Incentives_Matrix.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 27 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Integrated Logistics Management System (ILMS) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 19AQMM21R0135
About this file
This document outlines a draft request for proposal for an integrated logistics management system contract. Key details include that the Department of State intends to issue the RFP to support its enterprise supply chain management program through a suite of integrated technologies. The solicitation will result in a single award indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity contract for non-commercial items over a base period of one year and nine one-year options. The pre-solicitation event will be posted online on August 2nd and industry questions on the draft RFP are due by July 20th. The RFP is estimated for release in September 2021. The NAICS code is 541511 with a $30 million size standard. Offerors must have a TOP SECRET facility clearance. Feedback is also requested on the identified labor categories.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 35
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Task | Objective | Performance Measure | Requirement | Minimum Performance Level | Incentive | Performance Incentive Interval | Monitoring Source | Award Fee | Calculation |
| 1 | Timely responses to and support of ILMS program management requirements. | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | None | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose |
| 1 | Strategic communications services that effectively convey the ILMS program’s benefits and accomplishments, and engagement support services that build inclusivity with relevant stakeholders. | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | None | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose |
| 1 | Realistic and well-managed contractor performance management system (to accomplish all capability areas) aligned with ILMS’s operations, strategic goals and 10-year roadmap. | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | None | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose |
| 1 | Realistic and well-managed program management activities that help ILMS achieve its 10-year roadmap while maintaining acceptable cost and schedule variance for all tasks. | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose |
| 1 | On-going assessment of program performance with the objective of reducing costs and increasing benefits to DOS through analysis of alternatives and cost benefit analysis of new features, and the quantification of benefits for the ILMS Value Realization Plan | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose |
| 1 | Timely transition of program support, strategic communications, tier 3, and customer support desk activities from incumbent with minimal disruption to operations. | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | None | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose |
| 1 | Adherence to approved schedule and cost. | Schedule Variance | Schedule variance must be within acceptable range for overall program and the individual time and material tasks. | The cumulative schedule variance can be positive, but cannot be greater than -5% (absolute value). | The cumulative schedule variance can be positive, but cannot be greater than -3% (absolute value). | This Service Level Agreement will be measured and assessed every six (6) months. | The contractor shall collect and provide this information to the COR | The percentage is calculated by subtracting the budgeted cost of work scheduled from the budgeted cost of work performed and dividing that number by the budgeted cost of work scheduled. | |
| 1 | Adherence to approved schedule and cost. | Cost Variance | Cost variance must be within acceptable range for overall program and the individual time and material tasks. | The cumulative cost variance can be positive, but cannot be greater than -5% (absolute value) | The cumulative cost variance can be positive, but cannot be greater than -3% (absolute value) | This Service Level Agreement will be measured and assessed every six (6) months | The contractor shall collect and provide this information to the COR | The percentage is calculated by subtracting the actual cost of work performed from the budgeted cost of work performed and dividing that number by the budgeted cost of work performed. | |
| 2 | Enhance user experience through implementing break-fixes and process improvements. | Reduce Issue Backlog | Reduce system incident backlog. | 95% of data fixes and critical issues are resolved, on average, within eight (8) business days or less. | 100% of data fixes and critical issues are resolved, on average, within eight (8) business days or less. | This performance metric will be measured and assessed every month. | The monitoring source for this Service Level Agreement is a monthly review of the customer support desk incident report | The application support team will report the number of data fixes and critical issues resolved in 8 business days of less, along with the total number of data fixes and critical issues for the period. The number of data fixes and critical issues resolved in 8 business days or less is divided by the total number of Ariba data fixes and critical issues. | |
| 2 | Enhance user experience through implementing break-fixes and process improvements. | Non-Critical Issues Performance Metric - duplicative of row 23 | Offeror to propose performance metric pertaining to the reduction of system incident backlog related to non-critical issues. | Offeror to propose | None | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | |
| 2 | Implement quality, defect free break-fixes. | Agile Development Quality Metics | Offeror to propose multiple performance metrics pertaining to the quality of break-fix development. Proposed metrics must address agile productivity metrics. | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | |
| 2 | Maintain high quality customer support and reduce customer issues by supporting business process analysis and functional support to ILMS users. | Business Process Support Metrics | Offeror to propose business process support metrics. | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | |
| 3 | Maintain optimat system availability | Maintain Optimal System Availability | ILMS and S-ILMS System and Sub-Systems Availability. Enhance system infrastructure and system performance to support global users. | 95% of the modules in ILMS, Secure ILMS, myServices, and SAMS must be available at least 99.9% of the time. | 95% of the modules in ILMS, Secure ILMS, myServices, and SAMS must be available at least 99.9% of the time. | This performance metric will be measured and assessed every month. | The monitoring source for this performance metric is a monthly review of the O&M availability report. | The system availability percentage will be measured by taking the amount of time each module is available within the performance period and dividing it by the total amount of time during the same performance period. If a module does not meet the availability requirement it will not be included as met in the calculation of the performance standard. Planned and unplanned outages by DOS IRM will not be included in the denominator based on official DOS IRM notifications. Planned ILMS, Secure ILMS, myServices, and SAMS outages will not be included in the denominator based on the standard weekly maintenance time or announcements from the ILMS customer support desk. | |
| 3 | Maintain maximum system performance | Maintain Optimal System Performance | Provide a stable platform to house high-volume data and provide quality system performance and response time that enables users to effectively carry out DOS’s mission. | None | Performance 30 days post release is not less than the performance baseline in the 5 target performance areas. | This performance metric will be measured and assessed every month. | The performance under this performance metric will be monitored using the Oracle Enterprise Manager and Splunk software. | The variance from baseline will be calculated by taking the average baseline response time and subtracting the average actual transaction response time. Performance of 5 key target areas are measured for this performance metric. The contractor and DOS will agree upon the 5 key target areas and baseline parameters at the beginning of the contract period and they will remain in place for the duration of the contract period. | |
| 3 | Maintain continuity of operations as a result of a disaster or unforeseen event | Continutity of Operations | Contractor to propose continuity of operations metric. | Offeror to propose | None | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | |
| 3 | Maintain a strong security posture for ILMS, Secure ILMS, myServices, and SAMS. | Maintain a Stong Security Posture | Compliance with the Department’s security policies for all ILMS server environments. | The acceptable quality level is a monthly overall risk score equivalent to or better than the letter grade B. | The acceptable quality level is a monthly overall risk score equivalent to or better than the letter grade A. | This performance metric will be measured and assessed every month. | Task monitor review of IRMs risk score report. | The calculation for this Service Level Agreement is based on the monthly average risk score provided for A/LM/PMP/SYS in iPost, minus the score for items which cannot be remediated due to ILMS system requirements, such as, IRM inability to scan servers properly reported in iPost as “Unsuccessful Scans”, Windows Operating system required to schedule upgrade migrations reported in iPost as “Unapproved Operating System”, ILMS system functionality requiring waivers reported in iPost as “Security Compliance”, specific patches which prevent new versions from being installed, reported in iPost as “Vulnerability”. |
iPost Letter Grade Scale is as follows:
0 – 16: A+ 16 – 35: A 35 – 65: B 65 – 95: C 95 – 115: D 115 – 150: F >150: F-iPost Letter Grade Scale for S-ILMS is as follows:
0 – 800: A+ 801 – 1753: A 1754 – 3255: B 3256 – 3300: C 3256 – 3300: C 5758 – 7510: F >7511: F-
| 3 | Maintain a strong security posture for ILMS, Secure ILMS, myServices, and SAMS. | Remediate Plan of Action and Milestone (POA&M) Findings | Compliance with DOS’s security policies remediating security findings identified during assessment and scanning for all ILMS server environments. | |||||
| 95% of remediation documentation for POA&M findings will be approved by A/LM/PMP/SYS prior to the due date | 100% of remediation documentation for POA&M findings will be approved by A/LM/PMP/SYS prior to the due date | This performance metric will be measured and assessed every month. | A document will be established to track open POA&M findings, their due date, date of submission to A/LM/PMP/SYS, and date of approval by A/LM/PMP/SYS. The Xacta tool will also be used to track POA&M items. This document will be reviewed regularly. | Count of POA&M findings which are within contractor’s control to remediate and do not rely on external parties or unfunded efforts to complete, have a due date equal to or less than the date at the end of the reporting period, and A/LM/PMP/SYS approved remediation documentation by the specified deadline, divided by all POA&M findings which are within contractor’s control to remediate and do not rely on external parties or unfunded efforts to complete, and have a due date equal to or less than the date at the end of the reporting period. | ||||
| 4 | Provide high quality 24x7 worldwide customer support and reduce customer issues by supporting business process analysis and functional support to users. | Tier 1 Resolution Time | Tier 1 resolution time meets acceptable standards. | No less than 95% of contacts are resolved by Tier 1 support within 4 hours | The acceptable quality level is no less than 96% of contacts are resolved by Tier 1 support within 4 hours. | This performance measure will be measured and assessed every month. | The monitoring source for this performance metric is a monthly review of the customer support desk’s incident report. | The resolution percentage shall be calculated by taking the number of Tier 1 contacts resolved within 4 hours and dividing it by the total number of Tier 1 contacts resolved. |
| 4 | Provide high quality 24x7 worldwide customer support and reduce customer issues by supporting business process analysis and functional support to users. | Tier 2 Resolution Time | Tier 2 resolution time meets acceptable standards. | No less than 90% of Tier 2 contacts are resolved within 24 hours | The acceptable quality level is no less than 91% of contacts are resolved by Tier 2 support within 24 hours | This performance measure will be measured and assessed every month. | The monitoring source for this performance metric is a monthly review of the customer support desk’s incident report. | The resolution percentage shall be calculated by taking the number of Tier 2 contacts resolved within 24 hours and dividing it by the total number of Tier 2 contacts resolved. |
| 4 | Provide high quality 24x7 worldwide customer support and reduce customer issues by supporting business process analysis and functional support to users. | User Configuration Requests | User configuration request processing time meets acceptable standards. | No less than 97% of user configuration requests are processed within 48 hours | None | This performance measure will be measured and assessed every month. | The monitoring source for this performance indicator is a monthly review of the Support Desk SLA report | The configuration response time shall be calculated by taking the number of iForm user requests processed in 48 hours and dividing it by the number of iForm user requests processed. Excludes nights, weekends, holidays, and time waiting on customer input, supervisor approval, additional functional area owner approval and ISSO approval |
| 4 | Provide high quality 24x7 worldwide customer support and reduce customer issues by supporting business process analysis and functional support to users. | Vendor/Location Configuration Requests | Vendor/location configuration request processing time must meet acceptable standards. | No less than 99% of vendor/location configuration requests are processed within 24 hours | None | This performance measure will be measured and assessed every month. | The monitoring source for this performance indicator is a monthly review of the Support Desk SLA report | The configuration response time shall be calculated by taking the number of iForm vendor/location requests processed in 24 hours and dividing it by the number of iForm vendor/location requests processed. Excludes time waiting on customer input and nights/weekends/holidays |
| 4 | Provide high quality 24x7 worldwide customer support and reduce customer issues by supporting business process analysis and functional support to users. | Non-Critical Issues Backlog Reduction | Backlog issue processing time and volume must meet acceptable standards. | No less than 90% of forecasted monthly items. (i.e. No less than 191 SIRs and CRPSs) are closed per month | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | The monitoring source for this performance indicator is a monthly review of the Support Desk SLA report | The Application Support Team will report from Phire the number of SIRs and CRPSs completed per month. |
| 4 | Provide timely and accurate resolution of customer requests to ensure strong, on-going customer satisfaction. | Customer Satisfaction | Users are satisfaction with customer support desk issue resolution. | 85% of users are Satisfied or Very Satisfied with the resolution of their issue. | 95% of users are Satisfied or Very Satisfied with the resolution of their issue. |
tc={429B6A8B-5CA8-434B-AA77-219696E445C4}: [Threaded comment]
Your version of Excel allows you to read this threaded comment; however, any edits to it will get removed if the file is opened in a newer version of Excel. Learn more: https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=870924
Comment:
| This is currently 85%. Do we want to make that the minimum performance level? | This performance measure will be measured and assessed every six (6) months. | The monitoring source for this Service Level Agreement is the ILMS customer support desk surveys associated incident resolution. | The percentage will be calculated by dividing the sum of responses for Satisfied (4) and Very Satisfied (5) by the sum of total responses for the time period being surveyed. The percentages provided are a running total as the incentive fee is based on the score across six months as opposed to an average of the monthly scores. | |||
| 4 | Provide timely and accurate resolution of customer requests to ensure strong, on-going customer satisfaction. | Customer Issue Resolution Success | Users are satisfied with first customer support desk issue resolution. | No more than 7.5% of issues are reopened by users for non-resolution. | No more than 5% of issues are reopened by users for non-resolution. |
tc={207602EA-43EE-4E33-90AE-635F3E86426E}: [Threaded comment]
Your version of Excel allows you to read this threaded comment; however, any edits to it will get removed if the file is opened in a newer version of Excel. Learn more: https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=870924
Comment:
| The current metric is 7.5%. Do we want to make that our minimum performance level? | This performance measure will be measured and assessed every six (6) months. | The monitoring source for this Service Level Agreement is the ILMS customer support desk surveys associated incident resolution. | The percentage will be calculated by dividing the number of reopened surveys by the number of total surveys received during the reporting period. The percentages provided are a running total as the incentive fee is based on the score across six months as opposed to an average of the monthly scores. Valid exceptions include issues resolved but user reopened to report an unrelated issue. | ||||||
| 4 | Enhance self-service | Enahnce Self Service | Offeror to propose performance metric(s) measuring the success of self-service tools and integrated application user assistance designed to lower Tiers 1 and 2 customer support desk incidents. Each proposed metric must specify the requirement, standard, acceptable quality level, monitoring source, and calculation. | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose | Offeror to propose |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .