Attachment 7 - Key Example Project Submission Scenarios.pdf

Key Example Project Submission Scenarios

Section 3. A. contains the requirement for the contractor to submit six (6) Key Example Projects.

The definition of the term ‘project’ is defined within section 3. A. 1) and 3. A. 3). To provide further clarification to the contractor community on the submission of ‘projects’ in satisfaction of each of the six (6) Key Example Projects, the following Clarification Points and Scenarios are provided.

Clarification Points:

1. A task order may have multiple CLINS and tasks.

2. The definition of a ‘project’ within the Synopsis is not synonymous with the definition of a CLIN.

3. The definition of a ‘project’ within the Synopsis is not necessarily synonymous with the definition of a task within that task order scope of work. A ‘project’ as defined by the Synopsis as comprising a single, independently beneficial, standalone deliverable at a single location.

4. The pertinent definition of a ‘project’ is stated in sections 3. A. 1) and 3. A. 3) of the Synopsis.

Please note: the scenarios provided below are theoretical exercises only and any ‘project’ specifics discussed are inserted to aid understanding and are not meant to be limiting.

Scenario One: The contractor was awarded a task order containing a series of tasks to produce three similar final deliverables at three different installations: a BUILDER assessment at Fort Leonard Wood, a BUILDER assessment at Schofield Barracks and a BUILDER assessment at Fort Drum. The completion of all subtasks in support of the end result of completing an installation specific BUILDER assessment is defined as a final deliverable. Each of these BUILDER assessments is defined by the parameters within the Synopsis as a ‘project’. Of the six Key Example Projects the contractor is requested to provide, each of the three completed BUILDER assessments defined above could comprise one of the Key Example Project. Even though each of the BUILDER assessments at three different installation locations was awarded under a single task order, the contractor cannot submit all three BUILDER assessments as a single Key Example Project.

Scenario Two: The contractor was awarded a task order containing a series of tasks to produce three interrelated final deliverables at one location: a Requirements Analysis (RA), a Planning Charrette (PC) and an Economic Analysis (EA) at Fort Carson. The Government understands that these documents may be in support of a single Military Construction (MILCON) project on a given installation and are therefore interrelated. For purposes of presenting projects as a Key Example Project, each of these requirements (RA, EA, PC) is defined by the parameters within the Synopsis as a project. Of the six Key Example Projects the contractor is required to provide, each of the final deliverables could comprise one Key Example Project. Even though each of the requirements was awarded under a single task order, the contractor cannot submit all three requirements as a single Key Example Project.

Scenario Three: The contractor was awarded a task order containing a series of tasks to produce a single final deliverable which supports more than one location: development of a business case analysis comparing a stationing action at Fort Hunter Liggett versus Fort Devens. The final deliverable is not severable by location as both locations must be analyzed to provide a single, independently beneficial, standalone deliverable. In this case, the final deliverable is defined as comprised by both locations. Of the six Key Projects the contractor is required to provide, the business case analysis could comprise one Key Example Project.