Attachment_0005-_Award_Term_Plan.docx

W58RGZ-17-R-0001

AWARD TERM PLAN

TECHNICAL SUPPORT OF THE AMRDEC PROTOTYPE INTEGRATION FACILITY

Attachment 0005 4 Nov 2016

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This Award Term Plan (hereinafter referred to as the “Plan” or ATP) serves as the charter which will be used to evaluate the contractor's performance of work required by this contract and to determine whether the performance award term options (hereinafter referred to as the “award term” or “term”) will be granted. The U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research, Development, and Engineering Center (AMRDEC) Prototype Integration Facility (PIF) requires top-level performance to meet program requirements. Hence, this plan is designed to provide an additional incentive to the contractor for outstanding quality performance that will benefit the PIF.

The intent of this plan is to establish criteria and procedures for the evaluation of the contractor's performance during evaluation periods as referenced in paragraph 6.3 and the contract and the furnishing of sufficient data to enable the Award Term Approving Official to determine whether the award term or profit/fee adjustment will be granted.

2.0 GENERAL

Through this plan, the PIF seeks to incentivize the contractor to perform at a level the PIF considers better than satisfactory. The factors for this determination are set forth in paragraph 6.1.

3.0 PURPOSE

This plan and the specific contract provisions shall serve as a guide to the PIF personnel directly involved in the evaluations of contractor performance.

4.0 OBJECTIVES

The objective of this performance award term feature is to incentivize contractor performance in the areas delineated in paragraph 6.1. Therefore, the contractor should emphasize these areas in its performance of this contract.

5.0 PERFORMANCE AWARD TERM REVIEW TEAM

5.1 Organization

The organization of the Team is described in the following paragraphs.

5.1.1 Award Term Approving Official. The Award Term Approving Official is the Chief, AMRDEC Contracts Division C, Army Contracting Command-Redstone (ACC-RSA).

5.1.2 Performance Award Term Review Team. The Award Term Approving Official will appoint a Team to assist in evaluating the contractor's performance. The AMRDEC Prototype Integration Facility Program Manager (PIF PM) will serve as Chairman. The team will include the contracting officer (or a designated representative), the attorney advisor and members from the requiring activity as designated by the Chairman. The team members will ensure a fair and accurate assessment, in accordance with this plan, of the contractor's performance for the period being evaluated. The Team Chairman may also use non-voting advisors as necessary.

5.2 Duties of the Team.

The duties of the Team are as follows:

5.2.1 Implement the plan and propose timely modifications to the Plan, if required, throughout the period of contract performance.

5.2.2 Evaluate contractor performance for each performance evaluation period.

5.2.3 Prepare and submit to the Award Term Approving Official a written evaluation of the contractor's performance for each evaluation period.

5.3 Responsibilities.

5.3.1 Award Term Approving Official. Approves the composition of the Performance Award Term Review Team, determines the contractor performance rating, and whether the award term period will be granted based on the factors of the plan. Advises the Contracting Officer in writing of term evaluation results and award term decision and documents the basis for the decision.

5.3.2 Team Chairman. Structures the Team membership to provide representation that reflects all appropriate aspects of contract performance and provides membership to adequately assess contractor performance for the period being evaluated. Conducts the evaluation in accordance with this plan. Schedules Team meetings and serves as a recorder at these meetings. Leads the team in developing a consensus evaluation and in resolving significant differences in ratings. Provides brief summary documentation for the Award Term Approving Official. May provide feedback to the Contracting Officer regarding recommended areas that could lead to improved contractor performance in subsequent periods.

5.3.3 Performance Award Term Review Team. Monitors and evaluates contractor performance for the period under consideration, utilizing the factors set forth in the plan. Makes written evaluations, completes the evaluation worksheets, and formulates award term recommendations. Briefs the Award Term Approving Official on evaluations, when requested, and provides supporting data/documentation to support the assessment of performance. Prepares the evaluation report and accompanying narrative justification. Identifies potential improvement areas and areas of emphasis for the next succeeding evaluation period to the Contracting Officer.

5.3.4 Contracting Officer. Notifies the contractor in writing of term evaluation results and award term decision. Serves as sole interface with the contractor for official recommendations regarding areas that could lead to improved performance. Prepares and distributes contract modifications awarding the term authorized by the Award Term Approving Official. Maintains term documentation as part of the official contract file. Retains historical files and other documentation relating to term matters for the contract.

6.0 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION AND FACTORS

The PIF shall evaluate the contractor's performance in achieving contract requirements for the term and profit/fee adjustment periods using the evaluation factors below. The Contracting Officer may notify the contractor of areas where emphasis should be placed for an upcoming period.

6.1 Evaluation Factors and Scoring

The contractor's performance will be evaluated on the basis of five metrics. These five metrics are associated with 1) order award process, 2) project cost, 3) project schedule, 4) project performance, and 5) subcontracting. Each metric has sub-metrics. The contractor must meet or exceed the sub-metric goal to receive a score of 1 for that sub-metric. The sub-metric score (ranging from 0 to 1) is then multiplied by the possible points for that sub-metric. The sub-metric points received are then summed and divided by the total possible number of points for that metric. The resultant percentage is multiplied by the weight for that metric to produce the metric total score. The five metric total scores are summed for the total overall score. The maximum score is 100. A minimum score of 80 must be achieved each reporting period. Table 6.1 provides an example score worksheet.

Table 6.1: Example Score Calculation

6.1.1 Metric 1 (M1) - Order Award Process: The contractor shall support consistent and predictable Order award process steps (total possible points: 6; weight: 28).

a. (M1.1) Order Execution Plan (OEP) Submission Time: OEP submission time includes two measures. (1) The contractor’s average OEP (i.e., proposal) submission time in calendar days should be less than or equal to the specified days in each category. (2) 80% of all OEPs for each category must be received less than or equal to the specified time period for that category. The measure starts at the time the contractor is requested to provide a proposal to a SOW and ends at the time when ACC-RSA receives the proposal. The categories and specified time periods are as follows:

1. Category A 10 days: labor/travel only orders (possible points: 1)

2. Category B 20 days: Orders below the threshold for Certified Cost or Pricing Data (per FAR 15.403-4) and have no subcontractors (possible points: 1)

3. Category C 40 days: All other orders (possible points: 1)

b. (M1.2) OEP First Time Acceptance Rate: The rate OEPs are accepted on their first submittal to ACC-RSA. The contracting officer will determine if the OEP is acceptable. First pass yield must be 95% or greater by category. (possible points: 1 per category, 3 total)

6.1.2 Metric 2 (M2) - Project Cost: The contractor shall complete orders at or under the negotiated cost with respect to contractor-induced cost overruns (total possible points: 2; weight: 22).

a. (M2.1) Actual Cost vs. Negotiated Cost: The actual cost of the project shall complete at or under the negotiated amount (including any Government-induced adjustments) 95% of the time. (possible points: 1)

b. (M2.2) Cost Overrun Limit: The contractor shall not induce a cost overrun exceeding 10% of the negotiated ceiling of any order. (possible points: 1)

6.1.3 Metric 3 (M3) - Project Schedule: The contractor shall complete orders on or before the scheduled completion date (total possible points: 2; weight: 28).

a. (M3.1) Actual Completion Date vs. Scheduled Completion Date: The actual completion of the project should occur on or before the scheduled completion date (including any Government-approved extensions that are not contractor induced) 95% of the time (i.e., the contractor shall have no more than 5% contractor-induced extension requests and a scheduled completion date that is missed or extended due to a contractor-induced extension will be tallied as a missed completion date). This shall be measured against the performance completion date or delivery date as specified in the order. (possible points: 1)

b. (M3.2) Actual Completion Date vs. Scheduled Completion Date for Order Deliverables or Key Milestones: The actual completion/delivery date of the project’s Contract Data Requirement List (CDRL) items or identified key milestones shall be on or before the scheduled completion date (including any approved, Government-induced extensions) 95% of the time (i.e., the contractor shall have no more than 5% contractor-induced extension requests and an approved scheduled date that is missed or extended due to a contractor-induced extension will be tallied as a missed completion date). (possible points: 1)

6.1.4 Metric 4 (M4) – Project Performance: The contractor shall complete orders in compliance with technical performance requirements (total possible points: 5; weight: 14).

a. (M4.1) Government Project Lead (GPL) Feedback: GPL feedback with respect to performance (not schedule or cost) must exceed a score of 90. This metric is intended to capture the contractor’s performance in regards to how they were tasked under the PIF contract. The PIF GPL for each task order will complete a Customer Satisfaction Survey. Scores will be normalized across all GPLs. Ratings for the pre-award and post-order award time periods will be assessed. The PIF GPL Satisfaction Goal is greater than 90%. (possible points: 1)

b. (M4.2) Product Quality for Order Deliverables: Hardware and CDRLs shall be accepted the first time received/inspected 95% of the time. (possible points: 2)

c. (M4.3) PIF Yield: PIF yield refers to the total number of accepted inspections divided by the total number of inspections. The contractor shall have a yield of greater than 92% for the aggregate of logistics products (e.g., hardware, maintenance work orders, drawings). (possible points: 1)

d. (M4.4) Corrective Action Reports (CAR): The contractor shall have no repeat CARs. (possible points: 1)

6.1.5 Metric 5 (M5) - Subcontracting: The contractor shall conduct effective subcontracting (total possible points: 2; weight: 8).

a. (M5.1) Limitations on Subcontracting: Limitations of subcontracting, compliance with FAR 52.219-14: The contractor shall meet the requirements on limitations of subcontracting by performing 50% or more of the cost of manufacturing the supplies, not including the cost of materials. (possible points: 1)

b. (M5.2) Competitive Subcontracts: Challenging goals will be negotiated to incentivize the contractor to compete subcontracts and material purchases. The minimum requirement will be established at 30% of total subcontract and material dollars, but may be improved based on the successful offeror’s proposal. (possible points: 1)

6.2. Scoring for Award Term Eligibility

During the quarterly assessment, each metric goal will be scored as described in section 6.1. Award term ratings will be assigned as follows:

To be eligible for the award term or profit/fee adjustment entitlement, the evaluation team’s consensus scoring as discussed in paragraph 7.2 shall result in a score of Excellent or higher.

6.3 Performance Evaluation Periods

Due to the magnitude of requirements, metrics, as identified in paragraph 6.1 of this plan, will be reviewed quarterly (every three months). At the conclusion of the appropriate evaluation period, an average quarterly score will be generated and will form the award term evaluation used to determine whether the award term or profit/fee adjustment will be granted.

As shown below in Figure 6.3, two award-term periods of two years each will be used to incentivize excellence in performance beyond the 5-year base contract time period. The ATP metrics (discussed in Paragraph 6.1 and measured quarterly), will be evaluated at the end of year (EOY) one as a pilot of the first award term decision to be made at the EOY2. At the EOY2, the ATP metrics monitored within the first two years will be used to make a determination regarding execution of the first Award Term period after completion of the fifth year of the PIF-3 base contract. An evaluation of the ATP metrics will be conducted at end of year three (EOY3) and at the end of year 4 (EOY4). These evaluations will be used to make a determination regarding execution of the second Award Term period after completion of the seventh year (EOY7) of the contract (base plus first 2-year award option). If awarded, this extends the contract to its maximum period of performance.

Figure 6.3: Award Term and Contract Profit/Fee Adjustment Approach

After EOY4 evaluation is complete, the contract enters what has been termed a dead zone, where the 2-year period of performance extension is no longer an available attainment. Thus, the ATP metric evaluations at EOY5-8 will be used to determine whether or not the contractor receives a temporary profit/fee adjustment over the following 12-month period. This adjustment will apply to all task orders awarded during that year.

Through the award-term process, the contractor’s performance will be evaluated by a Performance Award Term Review Team. The team will evaluate the contractor’s performance in achieving contract requirements during the contract in the metric areas. The award term period and profit/fee adjustment periods will be executed only after the Government evaluates the contractor’s overall performance at a level greater than satisfactory (i.e. excellent or outstanding) in accordance with the ATP criteria. The award term and profit/fee adjustment decisions will require approval of the Award Term Approving Official.

7.0 PROCEDURES

7.1 Quarterly Contractor Self-Assessment, Management Review Meeting, and Government Feedback

7.1.1 Quarterly Contractor Self-Assessment

The purpose of the quarterly self-assessment is to provide the contractor an opportunity to formally present an appraisal of its quarterly performance to date against the evaluation criteria during the evaluation period, as well as providing an opportunity to receive Government feedback on their performance. The information and insight provided by the contractor input can benefit the quarterly reviews and ultimately the final Award Term process at award term period end by offering new information or perspectives relative to performance. The parties are encouraged, however, to maintain continual feedback throughout contract performance and not wait until the quarterly self-assessment to provide feedback.

The Government will provide a written summary of the Internal Customer Satisfaction metric within five working days after the end of each calendar quarter.

The Contractor shall provide award term metric results for the calendar quarter being reviewed, within ten working days after the end of each quarter. The Contractor may include a written self-assessment of each order performance and overall quarterly performance to the Contracting Office. The written self-assessment may not exceed 2 pages per order and 2 pages for overall quarterly performance. The self-assessment shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following:

7.1.2 Quarterly Management Review Meeting

The purpose of the quarterly management review meeting is to provide the contractor and the Government management teams an opportunity to collect, analyze, and formally present a summary of their PIF AS 9100 metrics. Both the contractor and the Government management teams shall compile the data in a summary PowerPoint format and brief their findings to a Government and Contractor management team within 30 working days after the end of each quarterly review period. The information and insight provided by both management teams can benefit the quarterly reviews and will ultimately impact the final Award Term process at award term end.

7.2 Step-by-Step Procedures for Award Term Evaluation Periods

7.2.1 Quarterly Reviews

7.2.2 Award Term Evaluations

8.0 AWARD-TERM PLAN CHANGE PROCEDURE

The assessment elements and ratings in this plan may be changed to correspond to any DoD directed changes in performance information. The Contracting Officer may also unilaterally change the specific areas of emphasis within the assessment elements to focus performance objectives. Any unilateral changes will be made before the start of the award term period being evaluated. Bilateral changes may be made at any time to improve the process/contents of the Award-Term Plan.

image1.emf image2.png