1 / 22

Purpose of Briefing

Purpose of Briefing. Provide information on the CA process as it is being implemented Army wide. Army CA Program Goal. Obtain the most cost effective commercial services through fair and open competition, consistent with the Army’s national defense requirements. Regulatory Guidelines.

Faraday
Download Presentation

Purpose of Briefing

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Purpose of Briefing Provide information on the CA process as it is being implemented Army wide.

  2. Army CA Program Goal Obtain the most cost effective commercial services through fair and open competition, consistent with the Army’s national defense requirements.

  3. Regulatory Guidelines • OMB Circular A-76: March 1996 w/revisions • AR 5-20: October 1997 w/revisions

  4. Exemptions • Public Law exempts Security Guards and Fire Fighters from CA studies. • MWR Board of Directors has exempted the following functions from CA study: • Family Support Services • Relocation/Transition Services • Financial Assistance Planning • Army Emergency Relief Services • Family Support Center • Community Life Services • Family Member Employment Assistance • Federal Aviation Administration exempted ATC. • ASA for Manpower and Reserve Affairs has temporarily exempted CPAC until Jan 2003.

  5. CURRENT A-76 STUDIES INARMY LIBRARIES

  6. FORT BELVOIR, VA • Part of BASOPS study • Drug & Alcohol & Library are only DPCA activities included. • PWS turned over to DOC week of 25 May • Ft. Meyer will provide a librarian to serve on Source Selection Board

  7. FORT MYER, VA • Part of BASOPS study • Drug & Alcohol, Recreation, & Library are only DPCA activities included in the study • PWS complete; working on MEO and management study

  8. FORT POLK, LA • WHOLE BASE STUDY • Drug & Alcohol, Education, & Library are only DPCA activities included • Solicitation to go on the street 1 August • Extended from 1 May while management study is revised

  9. HQ AMC LIBRARY • Bids due 4 June • SSEB begins 9 June • Librarian not serving on SSEB

  10. SELFRIDGE AIR NATIONAL GUARD • Transitioning to MEO, instead of going through competitive process

  11. THE FORT BRAGG STORY

  12. Commander’s Authority(U.S. Code: Title 10, Sec 2468) • Authority of base commanders over contracting for Commercial Activities (annual duties): • Prepare an inventory for that FY of commercial activities carried out by government personnel on the installation. • Decide which commercial activity to review under the procedures and requirements of OMB A-76 (or any successor administrative regulation or policy). • Conduct a solicitation for contracts selected for conversion to contractor performance under OMB A-76.

  13. Concerns • Costs to conduct studies. • Transition costs to contract or MEO performance. • Downstream cost escalation for base operation services under contract performance. • Prolonged anguish of civilian workforce. • Placement of impacted civilian workforce (in-house or contract). • Ability to sustain mission capability.

  14. Source Selection Authority Overview and Update

  15. THE FORMALSOURCE SELECTION ORGANIZATION SOURCE SELECTION AUTHORITY SOURCE SELECTION ADVISORY COUNCIL (SSAC) SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB) COST/PRICE TEAM MANAGEMENT/ TECHNICAL TEAM SUB-CONTRACTING TEAM PAST PERFORMANCE TEAM

  16. SOURCE SELECTION ROADMAP RFP 8 3 Plan the Approach Begin Evaluate Evaluation Factors PWS & Criteria INITIAL ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSALS Proposals Initial Decision & Announcement Oral Presentations IN-HOUSE WIN IMPLEMENT MEO SOURCE SELECTION Process Competitive Range Determination Cost Comparison INDUSTRY WIN AWARD CONTRACT Gov’t Proposal Revision (TPP) Possible Pre-Award Debriefs = CG/SSA Involvement Evaluate Revised Proposals Best Value Decision Possible Pre-Award Debriefs EVALUATE GOV’T PROPOSAL (TPP) Offeror Proposal Revision Cost Technical Discussions

  17. Evaluation Factors for theTechnical Proposal Plan (TPP)The Government’s In-house Proposal • Management/Technical Approach • Past Performance (NOT evaluated) • Subcontracting (NOT evaluated) • Cost/Price (A-76 Cost Comparison only)

  18. TRANSITION TO THE MEO WWW.BRAGG.ARMY.MIL/SPO/CA

More Related