1 / 41

Department of Defense Source Selection Procedures

Department of Defense Source Selection Procedures. National Contract Management Association (NCMA) Pikes Peak Chapter May 17, 2012 . Suzanne Snyder, CPCM,CFMC, CPPO, Fellow. Source Selection Policy Update.

justin
Download Presentation

Department of Defense Source Selection Procedures

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. Department of Defense Source Selection Procedures National Contract Management Association (NCMA) Pikes Peak Chapter May 17, 2012 Suzanne Snyder, CPCM,CFMC, CPPO, Fellow

  2. Source Selection Policy Update Contracting Officers shall follow the principles/procedures in OUSD(AT&L)/DPAP memo, 4 Mar 11, Department of Defense Source Selection Procedures, when conducting negotiated, competitive acquisitions utilizing FAR part 15 procedures (DFARS 215.300 / PGI)* *New procedures will be applicable over the Simplified Acquisition Threshold (currently set at $150,000)

  3. Background for DoD Policy Update • Procedures resulted from a Joint Analysis Team • Examined current source selection processes utilized within DoD • Identified key elements of a successful source selection • Develop procedures to provide uniform guidance • Develop procedures to simplify the source selection process

  4. Refresher…What is Source Selection? • Source Selection is a process that deals with the selection of a contractor through a competitive negotiation • The process begins with the establishment of an evaluation plan for a proposed acquisition and ends when the Source Selecting Authority (SSA) selects a contractor who will receive a contract award • Consists of a continuum of approaches and tradeoff options to obtain the best value - under DoD two distinctions: • Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) • Tradeoffs between non-cost factors and cost/price

  5. Source Selection Process Overview Competitive Range Briefing (Initial Evaluation Brief IEB) CPD#3 Peer Review Peer Review Peer Review (MIRT) ASP Pre-FPR CPD #4 Decision CPD #5 Request for FPR Ratings Released Pre- RFP CPD #1 RFP Release CPD #2 Interim Ratings and ENs released Proposal Receipt Award EN Responses FPR Receipt Debriefings Oral Presentations EXCHANGES CO controls after release of RFP • Req Devel • Risk Assessment • Acq Strategy • DRFPs • Conferences • One-on-One Mtgs • Market Research • Acquisition • Plan • Cost/Price • Risk • exchanges • with offerors • Business Clearance • Independent Review Discussions (only w/offerors in CR) • All proposals eval • Comp range deliberated • No revisions allowed • Communicate only with those uncertain if in/out of CR • CO Responses to Questions • RFP Amendments • Must discuss • significant weaknesses • deficiencies • other aspects to enhance award potential • Proposal revisions allowed • Contract Clearance • Independent Review • Independent Review PAR SSDD Communications for greater understanding leading to Competitive Range Determination Debriefings of successful and unsuccessful offerors. Same rating charts as shown to SSA

  6. Source Selection Policy Update These procedures ARE NOT required for: ---Competitions where the only evaluated factor is price ---Basic research and acquisitions where Broad Agency Announcements (BAA) are used in accordance with FAR Part 35 to solicit proposals and award contracts ---Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR), Small Business Technology Transfer Research (STTR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (SBTT) acquisitions solicited and awarded in accordance with 15 United States Code (U.S.C.), Section 638 ---Architect-engineer services solicited and awarded in accordance with FAR Part 36  --Acquisitions using simplified acquisition procedures in accordance with FAR Part 13 (including Part 12 acquisitions using Part 13 procedures) ---FAR Part 12 Streamlined Acquisitions  ---Orders under multiple award contracts – Fair Opportunity (FAR 16.505 (b)(1)) and ---Acquisitions using FAR subpart 8.4.

  7. SSA Advisors SSAC SSEB Chair Advisors Technical Capability Past Performance Team Cost/Price Contract Elements Source Selection Organization Source Selection Team Source Selection Authority (SSA) Advisors (Cost or Pricing, Legal, Small Business and other subject-matter experts. Contracting Officer (PCO,CO, KO) Source Selection Advisory Council (SSAC) Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) PCO/CO/KO

  8. The Players --Source Selection Team Composition • Source Selection Authority (SSA) • Shall be other than the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) for acquisitions estimated at $100M or more, regardless of procedure used • PCO is also referred to as CO or KO • Source Selection Advisory Council (SSAC) • Required for acquisitions estimated at $100M or more • Prepares written comparative analysis of proposals, provides source selection recommendation to SSA and oversight to the SSEB • Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) • SSEB may conduct comparative analysis/make source selection recommendation only if specifically requested by SSA or required by Source Selection Plan • Advisors, cost/pricing experts, legal counsel, small business specialists, other subject matter experts

  9. SSA Roles and Responsibilities • Individual designated to make the best-value decision • Responsible for proper and efficient conduct of source selection in accordance with laws & regulations • Appoint chairpersons for SSEB and SSAC when used • Establish team and ensure team membership remains consistent for duration of selection process • Ensure all involved in source selection are knowledgeable of the policies and procedures for properly and efficiently conducting source selection • Ensure no senior leader is assigned to or performing multiple leadership roles in the source selection • Ensure source selection pacing is driven by events and not by the schedule • DOD Procedures: • 1.4.1.1 For acquisitions with a total estimated value of $100M or more, the SSA shall be an individual other than the PCO. For all other acquisitions, the PCO may serve as the SSA in accordance with FAR 15.303 unless the Agency head or designee appoints another individual.

  10. SSA Roles and Responsibilities cont. • Source Selection Authority (SSA) • Ensure all are briefed and knowledgeable of law regarding unauthorized disclosure of source selection information • Ensure all persons receiving source selection information are instructed to comply with standards of conduct and sign the Source Selection Non-Disclosure Agreement • Approve the Source Selection Plan (SSP) before release of RFP • Make the determination to award w/o discussions, establish competitive range or enter into discussions, approve release of Evaluation ns • Select the source whose proposal offers best value IAW RFP evaluation criteria • Document decision in Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD)

  11. PCO-CO-KO Roles and Responsibilities • Contracting Officer (CO, KO or PCO) – primary business advisor & principal guidance source for the entire source selection (BIG JOB) • Manage all business aspects of the acquisition • Assist and advise the SSA on proper execution of each source selection event • Ensure required approvals are obtained and contract clause requirements are met before non-government personnel are allowed to provide source selection support (CO must have copy of agreement in file as required by FAR 9.505-4) • Ensure procedures exist to safeguard source selection information (FAR 3.104) • Approve access to or release of source selection information before and after contract award (FAR 3.104-4) • Maintain source selection evaluation records • Ensure that the SSP reflects the approved acquisition strategy and contains linkages between requirements documents, program risks, evaluation criteria, and proposed evaluation methodology that will facilitate a sound SS decision • Ensure that requests for delegations are completed and documented in file

  12. PCO-CO-KO Roles and Responsibilities • Contracting Officer (CO) • Release RFP after approval of business clearance and SSA approved SSP • Single Point of Contact (POC) for inquires from actual or prospective offerors • Ensure proposals are evaluated on only the criteria in the approved source selection plan and the Request for Proposals (RFP) Section M • All evaluation records and narratives shall be reviewed collaboratively by the CO and the SSEB Chairperson for completeness and compliance with mandatory procedure • Control exchanges with offerors after receipt of proposals • Approve release of ENs if designated this authority by the SSA in the Source Selection Plan • Assist SSEB chairperson with preparation of the PAR and SSD • Obtain contract clearance before contract award • Ensure unsuccessful offerors are debriefed and that the debriefing is documented

  13. SSAC ChairpersonRoles and Responsibilities • Source Selection Advisory Council (SSAC) Chairperson • Subject to SSA approval, appoint SSAC members and request additional assistance from other governmental sources such as Secretariat, HQ USAF, or from joint service members • Ensure all SSAC members are knowledgeable of their responsibilities • Review the SSP and any revision prior to SSA approval • Convene SSAC meetings as requested by SSA • SSAC shall review the evaluation and findings of the SSEB to ensure their accuracy, consistency, and supportability and shall provide advice, analysis, briefings, and consultation as requested by the SSA • Shall recommend a source for the SSA’s consideration • DOD Procedures: • 1.4.3.1.2.Organizations shall establish an SSAC for acquisitions with a total estimated value of $100M or more. An SSAC is optional for acquisitions with a total estimated value of less than $100M. • 1.4.3.1.3. The primary role of the SSAC is to provide a written comparative analysis and recommendation to the SSA. When an SSAC is established, it will provide oversight to the SSEB.

  14. SSEB Chairperson Roles and Responsibilities • SSEB Chairperson • Subject to SSA approval, appoint SSEB members including PCAG and chair • Ensure personnel, resources, time assigned to the source selection reflect the complexity of the acquisition • Ensure SSEB members are knowledgeable of their responsibilities including details on how the evaluation is to be conducted BEFORE any proposal is reviewed • SSEB shall prepare and maintain SSP • Ensure proposals are evaluated on only the criteria in the approved source selection plan and the Request for Proposals (RFP) Section M • All evaluation records and narratives shall be reviewed collaboratively by the CO and the SSEB Chairperson for completeness and compliance with mandatory procedure • Support SS activities such as debriefings & post award meetings

  15. SSEB Members Roles and Responsibilities • SSEB Members • Comprehensive review & evaluation of proposals only using the RFP requirements and established criteria • Write ENs for SSEB Chairman to recommend SSA approve release • Prepare the evaluation documentation • Participate in debriefings to offerors • If no SSAC, recommend a source to the SSA

  16. Non-Government Advisors May be authorized, but should be minimized as much as possible (1.4.5.2) -- Non-Government advisors, other than Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs), shall be supported by a written determination based on FAR 37.203 and 37.204. All non-Government advisors shall sign the non-disclosure agreement signed by all Government employees who are participating in the source selection (1.4.5.2.1) -- Submit documentation to the PCO -- PCO must ensure Government has received consent of the submitting contractor(s) to provide access to the contractor who is to assist in the source selection Non-Government advisors may assist in and provide input regarding the evaluation, but they may not determine ratings or rankings of offerors’proposals 1.4.5.2.2. -- Disclosure of past performance information to non-Government personnel is strictly prohibited (FAR 42.1503)

  17. CAUTION • There is no one “best approach” to source selection • The least complex option that meets the acquisition needs will be the best considering: • Degree of complexity of requirement • If the requirements are clearly defined (SOO vs PWS) • If the government desires different options and approaches • The risk of successful performance • The market conditions • Successful source selections start with engaged multi-functional teams from the point at which the need is identified

  18. Traditional Outcomes Requirements Docs Best Value Continuum Source Selection Criteria More SOO FULL TRADE-OFF Less CRITERIA PWS HYBRID e.g. PPT DETAILS Less More Detailed construction specs LPTA

  19. Greater Relative Importance of Cost or Price Lesser Lesser Importance of Non-Cost Factors Greater Cost or Price Non-Cost Factors The Best-Value Continuum – Source Selection Techniques FAR Part 15.101, FAR Subpart 15.3, as supplemented Trade-Off Source Selection Process described in DoD Source Selection Procedures Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) Source Selection Process described in DoD Source Selection Procedures, Appendix A Tradeoff Source Selection Process described in DoD Source Selection Procedures Oh! The possibilities! Mix-n-match tradeoffs: Technical Technical Risk Past Performance Cost or Price Non-Cost Factors Lowest Price Low Price

  20. Determining the Source Selection Technique • First, consider the rating methodology the team will use for the subfactors and factors w/o subfactors • Determine if the offerors’ response to the criteria (technical solution and/or risk) can be assessed by • Pass/fail –acceptable/unacceptable • Rating levels – acceptable – better - best • Method of assessment can vary for factors/subfactors (pass/fail for some, rating for others) • Selected approach must consider trade space • Do we have money to pay for better or best? • Is there a benefit to exceeding the requirements? • How critical is price? • Finally, review the best value continuum to determine which source selection technique (or hybrid) is most appropriate

  21. Appropriate when best value is expected from selection of technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price Not limited to low dollar actions! When bar to meet “pass” is high and budgets tight may not be anything to trade -- LPTA appropriate Tradeoffs are not permitted (no better or best) Past Performance (PP) may be used as an evaluation factor but rated only as acceptable or unacceptable Proposals are evaluated for technical acceptability but not ranked using non-cost/price factors Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) Process

  22. Trade-Off is used when it is in the best interest of the Government to consider award to other than the lowest priced offeror or other than the highest technically rated offeror This process permits: Tradeoffs among cost or price and non-cost factors Best combination of technically superior, low risk proposals that also have a history of favorable past performance Selection of approach where benefit of a higher priced proposal merits the additional cost Requires environment where trade space exists in cost or price and non-cost factors Trade-Off Process

  23. Pre-Solicitation Activities • Risk assessment--required as necessary to support acquisition planning process • Market research—Use of Industry Day(s) and draft Request for Proposals (RFP) are highly recommended for all acquisitions • Source Selection Plan (SSP) required for all best-value, negotiated, competitive acquisitions under FAR Part 15 • SSA approves SSP prior to issuance of final RFP • Evaluation factors/subfactors--expected to be discriminators • All source selections shall evaluate: • Cost or Price of supplies or services being acquired • Quality of Product or Service • Consideration of one or more non-cost evaluation factor(s) tailored to the source selection process employed

  24. Developing Evaluation Criteria – Factors & Subfactors • Iterative Process! • Incorporate knowledge gained from: • Market Research • Acquisition activities • Evaluation factors shall • Represent key areas of importance and emphasis • Support meaningful comparison and discrimination between and among competing proposals • We must evaluate: • Price/Cost • Quality of Product or Service • Technical (Examples - Technical excellence/management capability/past performance/Small Business) Focus on significant Discriminators and Maximize Streamlining by only Evaluating what Must be Evaluated

  25. Here’s Just a Few of the Options!*Variations refer to DoD Source Selection Appx

  26. COST/PRICE PAST PERFORMANCE P/F Variation 1a • Evaluate • Cost or price of all proposals, and • Past performance of all offerors on “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” basis (DoD Source Selection Procedures, Appendix A, Table A-2) • Award without discussions or enter into the discussion process (follow Sections 3.2 - 3.10 of DoD Source Selection Procedures, as supplemented, as applicable) “The SSA may choose, in rare circumstances, to award a contract on the basis of the initial proposals received without conducting discussions.”

  27. COST/PRICE PAST PERFORMANCE - Confidence Variation 1b • Evaluate cost or price of all proposals, and • Conduct a full Performance Confidence Assessment (Section 3.1.3. DoD Source Selection Procedures, as supplemented) on all offerors • Award without discussions or enter into the discussion process (follow Sections 3.2 - 3.10 of DoD Source Selection Procedures, as supplemented, as applicable)

  28. COST/PRICE PAST PERFORMANCE P/F TECHNICAL P/F Variation 2a • Evaluate: • All technical proposals using DoD Source Selection Procedures, Appendix A, Table A-1 rating descriptions of “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable”, • Cost or price of all proposals, and • Past performance of all offerors using Appendix A, Table A-2 rating descriptions of “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” • Award without discussions or enter into the discussion process (following Sections 3.2 - 3.10, as applicable)

  29. COST/PRICE PAST PERFORMANCE - Confidence TECHNICAL P/F Variation 2b • Evaluate all technical proposals using Appendix A, Table A-1 rating descriptions of “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable”, • Evaluate cost or price of all proposals, and • Conduct a full Performance Confidence Assessment (Section 3.1.3. DoD Source Selection Procedures, as supplemented) on all offerors • Award without discussions or enter into the discussion process (follow Sections 3.2 - 3.10 of DoD Source Selection Procedures, as supplemented, as applicable)

  30. COST/PRICE PAST PERFORMANCE P/F TECHNICAL P/F RISK Variation 3a • Evaluate: • All technical proposals using Appendix A, Table A-1 rating descriptions of “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” and separately assess Technical Risk as “Low”, “Moderate”, “High” rating using Table 3 descriptions • Cost or price of all proposals, and • Past performance of all offerors using Appendix A, Table A-2 rating descriptions of “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” • Award without discussions or enter into the discussion process (following Sections 3.2 - 3.10, as applicable)

  31. COST/PRICE PAST PERFORMANCE Confidence TECHNICAL P/F RISK Variation 3b • Evaluate all technical proposals using Appendix A, Table A-1 rating descriptions of “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” and assess “Low”, “Moderate”, “High” Technical Risk rating using Table 3 descriptions • Evaluate cost or price of all proposals, and • Conduct a full Performance Confidence Assessment (Section 3.1.3. DoD Source Selection Procedures, as supplemented) on all offerors • Award without discussions or enter into the discussion process (following Sections 3.2 - 3.10, as applicable)

  32. COST/PRICE PAST PERFORMANCE P/F TECHNICAL Adjectival RISK Variation 4a • Evaluate • All technical proposals using a combination of color/adjectival ratings described Table 1, or Tables 2 and 3, and Appendix A, Table A-1 rating descriptions of “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” and assess “Low”, “Moderate”, “High” Technical Risk rating using Table 3 descriptions at the subfactor level, • Cost or price of all proposals, and • Past performance of all offerors using Appendix A, Table A-2 rating descriptions of “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” • Award without discussions or enter into the discussion process (follow Sections 3.2 - 3.10 of DoD Source Selection Procedures, as supplemented, as applicable)

  33. COST/PRICE PAST PERFORMANCE Confidence TECHNICAL Adjectival RISK Variation 4b • Evaluate all technical proposals using a combination of color/adjectival ratings described Table 1, or Tables 2 and 3, and Appendix A, Table A-1 rating descriptions of “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” and assess “Low”, “Moderate”, “High” Technical Risk rating using Table 3 descriptions at the subfactor level, • Evaluate cost or price of all proposals, and • Conduct a full Performance Confidence Assessment (Section 3.1.3. DoD Source Selection Procedures, as supplemented) on all offerors • Award without discussions or enter into the discussion process (follow Sections 3.2 - 3.10 of DoD Source Selection Procedures, as supplemented, as applicable)

  34. Evaluation Process • Technical approach and related technical risk – one of two evaluation methodologies can be used • Combined (single) rating – risk evaluated as one aspect of technical evaluation, inherent in technical evaluation factor or subfactor ratings; or • Separate technical and risk ratings assigned at technical factor (or subfactor level if subfactors used) • Past Performance • Extent of participation of Small Business concerns • Separate evaluation factor, or a subfactor under technical factor • Pass/fail; or use same ratings scheme as for technical/risk • Considered within evaluation of one of the technical subfactors • No separate small business rating applied

  35. Technical Rating Evaluation (Methodology 1)

  36. Technical Rating Evaluation (Methodology 2)

  37. Technical Risk Rating (Methodology 2)

  38. Past Performance Evaluation

  39. Performance Confidence Assessments

  40. Evaluation and Decision Process • Discussions are highly recommended for source selections • Award without discussions shall occur in only limited circumstances • PCO establishes competitive range; SSA approves • When PCO is not SSA, SSA concurrence required prior to releasing the request for final proposal revisions • Definitions Chapter: “strength” -- an aspect of an offeror's proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance • Debriefings -- PCO encouraged to use Debriefing Guide provided at Appendix B

  41. Summary • Goal is to select the proposal that represents the best value • FAR 15 negotiated competitive actions • More formal process, try to make it simplified • Teams are essential • Evaluation criteria tailored to each acquisition • Must be followed through the evaluation process and award decision • Integrity and creditability of the process must be maintained

More Related