JA_-SWD_RBC_PCO_Support_20Apr16.pdf

Control No. SWF16-10

For Official Use Only

JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL

FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

1. Contracting Activity:

Department of Army US Army Corps of Engineers Fort Worth District, Contracting Division Fort Worth, Texas 76102

2. Description of Action: The approval is being requested by the Southwestern

Division (SWD) office to have the Contracting Office procure a bridge contract to eliminate further interruption of services that were previously provided under contract W9126G-14-C-0014:

A SWD contract wherein the option period of performance was completed on 27

March 2016 and the second option period was not exercised in a timely manner.

Interruption of these services will have severe consequences to the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Southwestern Division (SWD) region. Workload and Workforce analysis for balancing our workforce, Corps of Engineers Civil Works (CECW) program, Corps of Engineers International and Interagency Services (IIS) program, Corps of Engineers Military Missions (CEMM) program and work the SWD region does for other District’s will be severely impacted. The bridge contract will bridge the services of the contractor for a 6 month period from date of award (6 April 2016). This action will enable the contractor to provide continuity of services to ensure the Corps meets it mission and reporting requirements. It will also provide the USACE ample time to conduct market research to determine if another contractor is available to provide these services with minimal transition impact.

3. Description of Supplies/Services: The requested services will include the following:

a. Write reports using data contained within the USACE Enterprise Data Warehouse (EDW) using the EDW’s front end software: webIntellignce to write reports. While the EDW was intended to be easy to use and reports were supposed to be easy to develop the fact is; reports are extremely difficult to write. Very few people can write error free reports because the EDW is comprised of Universes that support many proponents of Corporate tools (e.g. P2, OFA, CEFMS, RMS, etc) without any data standards. The various Universes contain data objects with the same data but with different titles. To make things worse, the various objects, with the same name, are built with different business rules (e.g. the data is updated at different times). If a report writer isn’t aware of the business rules then their reports could give inaccurate data (the data could be in error by two up to 12 times the actual value). This complexity is significant and it does require that people use the data frequently so they can be familiar with the universes and can write good reports. It takes somewhere between 18 and 24 months to learn the USACE data structures, business rules, Universes and business processes. Some believe it takes more than 24 months.

b. Maintain reports in the EWD. Every time the EDW needs to be updated (which is typically weekly) each report must be checked to make sure the EDW is still recognizing all of the parameters and functionality of our reports.

c. Support PMs and all levels of management with reports showing project performance and to ensure data quality is at acceptable levels. The detailed knowledge of on-going projects and schedules is not transferable. The learning curve for this type of work is very time consuming. The current contractor is capable of updating schedules on SWD projects with minimal input from the PMs. This is a significant time and cost savings because PMs do not have to explain all the history of the work so the schedulers know how to update the schedules correctly

d. Runs data quality reports to identify projects that have not followed the monthly battle rhythm correctly (i.e. not brought in actual costs from CEFMS to P2, have not update project status, reset data date, etc.)

e. Furnishes and analyzes Workload and Revenue reports to ensure SWD is operating with in its Operating Budget. i.e. are overhead rates too high or too low.

f. Furnishes CEMM and IIS programs reports on their small reimbursable projects

(SRM)

g. Maintain and furnish customer required reports to Army and Navy

h. Maintain the Hydropower Reporting System (HPRS) so the daily hydropower reports can be sent to Southwest Power Authority (SWPA). ACE-IT system updates and interruptions have significantly impacted the functionality of the HPRS. If reports are not submitted on time then the reports must be manually generated and submitted which takes significant man hours by the Hydropower Operators to perform. Which adversely impacts the mission because the time spent on manually generating daily reports (several hours) is time diverted from their normal daily maintenance responsibilities which will have a snowball effect on schedules and costs.

i. Daily data quality reviews - Contractor conducts daily data quality checks by running reports to identify missing key reporting elements. P2 is a complex system that uses the data for a variety of reporting requirements. Each reporting system requires their own set of codes for capturing data. If an activity is not coded correctly, it may have significant impacts on how the projects is captured for upward reporting. Constant diligence is required to assure all key reporting elements are assigned and maintained.

The total estimated value for this acquisition is $475,000 and will be awarded using a purchase order on 6 April 2016. This contract action will include the service described above to ensure accurate reports are provided and updates occur error free with current data. A detailed performance work statement is enclosed.

4. Authority Cited: The following authority is cited; 10 U.S.C. § 2304(c)(2) as implemented in FAR 6.302-2.

5. Reason for Authority Cited: FAR 6.302-2(b)(2) is cited because further delay of this work will have critical impact the many projects under the SWD. This contractor is the only responsible source capable [at this time] of performing the service described above.

The contractor is also the only responsible source who can work with the EDW, P2, OFA, CEFMS, RMS, Hydropower systems and with various Project Delivery Teams (PDTs) to provide the report writing and project maintenance services of the PCO.

The contractor has been providing the services described above for several years and is familiar with the specific tools, business rules and processes used by the USACE. The contractor understands and knows the underlying EDW Universe data structures, P2 data structures, RMS data structures, and the many other interfaces with other AIS tools. The contractor has in-depth experience working with USACE PDTs (vertical and horizontal) and has developed and provided training on how to use P2’s Primavera, P2’ PM+ (interfaces and Project Maintenance), EDW reports, PMBP BPs, OFA and other functions to create reports, manage data and status projects. The contractor has developed exceptionally complicated scripts, data queries, customized reports and data quality scripts to help maintain projects and sustain SWD projects.

Without the continued contractor support of the above services, end-of-month processing (between 29 Mar and 6 April) will not be completed timely; labor codes will not be extended if required and/or budgets will not be redistributed (i.e., there will be no money to pay people); automated processes will not be started (move data date, bring in actual costs to P2 and run reports for PMs and Budget analysts to advise them of budget status and if there are data quality issues). Failing to accomplish these tasks may result in the interruption of work on our regions’ critical Dam Safety and levee repair projects. These projects are critical to public safety and protection from loss of property and life. Districts may be forced to shut down projects in P2 and initiate emergency procedures.

Emergency procedures will add significant costs to projects because of the amount of work required to manually create work items, labor PRCs and to generate labor codes (currently these are all automated steps from P2 when exercised by the PM or PCO offices). If the additional work cannot be completed timely, then project delays may be experienced. Once the emergency procedures are stopped, then there will be new required effort to align the emergency labor codes back to the projects. This is tedious and requires significant amounts of time and money.

Other impacts include: Resource providers would not know if they are meeting critical mission requirements, what their priority work is, or if they are on schedule and budget.

In-house labor forces for large and complex projects would be significantly overburdened in their review of existing data in the P2 system; there would be significantly reduced capacity for quality assurance to ensure project schedules follow the Critical Path method, and that projects comply with corporate and regional standards; Project Managers would not be provided with adequate information to add missing data or correct invalid data; In-house labor forces would be significantly overburdened in their ability to interface projects with CEFMS, interface projects with CEFMS using the P6 Web Maintenance portlet and to perform data quality tasks by monitoring project interface reports and correcting project errors; In-house labor forces would be significantly overburdened in their ability to establish new projects in the P2 system. Ensure new projects follow the Critical Path method, and that projects comply with corporate and regional standards.

6. Efforts to Obtain Competition: The expired contract was originally awarded as a Sole-Source 8(a). Since the award of that contract the Contractor has graduated from the 8(a) program. Any future contract for these type services must first be offered to the 8(a) program unless released by SBA.

7. Actions to Increase Competition: As discussed in sections 3 and 5 above, this is a limited sources acquisition because there is a paucity of vendors (see section 8 below) or Subject Matter Experts (SME) who are familiar with the type of work described in the Performance Work Statement but only one contractor who can perform the work in the USACE environment during the period of this bridge contract.

8. Market Research: Market research indicates there are a number of 8(a) firms in the market (158 for the Dallas SBA Servicing Region (0600)). However, a sources sought will be necessary to determine the more specific capabilities as the requirements for specific SMEs is needed. Additionally, as this will be a bridge contract to eliminate further interruption of services, the market research will be utilized to find an appropriate contractor for the future re-procurement of these services.

9. Interested Sources: Interested sources is not applicable at this time.

10. Other Facts: The previous contract for this work was awarded under the 8(a) program, citing FAR 5.202(4), (W9126G-14-C-0014), with a base period of 12 months and two 12 month option periods. No previous Justification and Approval was required.

At this time it would be cost prohibitive to acquire these services elsewhere; 1) the time and cost associate with learning the USACE data structures and the required filters and scripts to produce reports are time prohibitive. And would require more time than this contract’s period of service supports. 2) It would be very costly to find another contractor who would understand the SQL scripts (there are 1,000’s of them), USACE data structures, required reports and their respective formats (140+ reports). 3) It has been the USACE experience that it takes a minimum of 18 months and likely more than 24 months to bring a new person up to a level of proficiency required to perform the work described in the PWS and 4) the time to obtain security clearances and gain access to our systems and complete the required training is a minimum of 3 months, which is more than half way into the period of performance. The Government would receive no benefit from the new vendor until that time. Therefore, it would be of no benefit to contract with another firm to perform the work required by the USACE. Considering the services described in the PWS are required immediately pursuing another vendor is not viable at this time and are not the best value for the Government.

11. Technical Certification: “I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance, which are included in the justification, are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.”

Name: Mark D. Gmitro Title: Program Manager Date: 1 April 2016 Signature:

12. Requirements Certification: “I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance, which are included in the justification, are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.”

Name: Mark D. Gmitro Title: Program Manager Date: 1 April 2016 Signature:

13. Fair and Reasonable Cost Determination: “I hereby determine that the anticipated cost for this contract action will be fair and reasonable. Cost and price analysis techniques will be used as the basis for this determination. The estimated cost does not meet the threshold for certified cost or pricing data.”

Name: Robin G. Prince Title: Contracting Officer Date: __________________ Signature:

14. Contracting Officer Certification: “I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Name: Robin G. Prince Title: Contracting Officer Date: __________________ Signature:

m2ct9rgp Typewritten Text 20 Apr 2016 m2ct9rgp Typewritten Text 20 Apr 216

APPROVAL

Based on the foregoing justification, I hereby approve the procurement to obtain the Services of Regional Business Center Program Support for USACE Southwestern Division (SWD), under PWS dated 28 March 2016 on an other than full and open competition basis pursuant to the authority of 10 U.S. Code 2304 - Contracts: competition requirements, subject to availability of funds, and provided that the services and property herein described have otherwise been authorized for acquisition.

Date: __________________ Signature:

m2ct9rgp Typewritten Text 29 Apr 2016