JSC Streamlined Procurement Team

June 3, 2010

Lead: Delene Sedillo (BD) Co-Lead: Mary Kincaid (BB) Andrea Browne (BV) Craig Burridge (BB) Monica Ceruti (AL) Laurie Declaire (BT) Diana Denardo (BJ) Rod Etchberger (BB) Lauren Johnson (BG) Julie Karr (BH) Advisors:

Roberta Beckman (BD) Joe Campbell (BB) Robert Tepfer (AL)

Team Members

Streamlined Process Applicability Any competitive negotiated acquisition for which it is

unnecessary to distinguish all levels of technical merit among the proposals to make an award decision

Firm fixed price and cost-type contracts Not appropriate for sole source buys, sealed bidding, and

technically complex acquisitions The designated approving official will approve the

recommended source selection strategy (PPT, LTO, or FTO) at the procurement strategy meeting

4

JSC Best Value Continuum

FAR Part 8 and 12

FAR Part 15

Full Trade-Off

PPTPerformance/

Price Trade-Off

LPTALow-Price/

Tech Acceptable

Simplified & Sealed Bid

FAR Part 13 & 14

Low Price

Non-CostCost

Price Perf

Trade-off

Tech Acceptable

Greater Importance of Price LesserLesser Technical Complexity Greater

*Option to evaluate pastperf but no comparative assessment or ranking. FAR 15.101-2(b)

Limited Tradeoff (LTO)(old midrange v/c)

SEB Process

Price/Past Performance Trade-Off (PPT)◦ May or may not request technical proposal◦ If requested, technical proposal is rated as

acceptable, unacceptable, or potentially acceptable

◦ Trade-off performed on all proposals that passed Limited Trade-Off

◦ Same as PPT, but adds value characteristics to the trade-off

◦ VCs are above the minimum requirement and act as a clear and concise discriminators Ratings of Significant Value Added, Value Added, or

No Value Added

PPT and LTO Models

6

PPT/LTO Evaluation Process

Evaluation Factor

EvaluatIon

Ratings:TechnicalPast Perf.VCs (LTO)Cost

Initial Evaluation

Debrief

OfferorProposals

Award w/oDiscussion

Initial Evaluation

Discussions

CompetitiveRange

DeterminationDiscussions

FinalProposal

ESs

Final Evaluation

Revise Ratings

Award

Final Evaluation

Briefing

Best Value Decision

Evaluation Statements (ESs)

Comparison of SEB and SLPT

SEB PROCESS USING MS SLPT - BOTH PPT & LTO

Factor – Mission Suitability◦ Subfactor: Management S&W◦ Subfactor: Technical S&W◦ Subfactor: Small Business

S&W◦ Subfactor: Safety & Health

S&W

Factor – Past Performance Factor – Price/Cost

Riddle: Yes

Factor – Technical Acceptability◦ Pass/Fail

Factor – Value Characteristics (LTO only)◦ V/C #1 Significant Value◦ V/C #2 Value◦ V/C #3 No Value

Factor – Past Performance Factor – Price/Cost

Riddle: Yes

8

PPT/LTO Pros and ConsPros

Uses smaller teams & less resources

Reduction in schedule◦ SSA under $50M may be

delegated to the Procurement Office Mgr

◦ Allows for simpler technically acceptability criteria

Recognizes good performers by eliminating marginal and unsatisfactory performers

Potentially greater opportunity to award without discussions

For LTO: Adds Value Characteristics (VCs)

Cons Technical superiority not

basis for award Initial learning curve

must be factored into the new process

Streamlined Acquisition Process Flow Chart Streamlined Acquisition Guide with Process

Documentation Virtual Procurement Website

◦ Templates◦ Samples

Training Material◦ Road Show for Stakeholders◦ Acquisition Team Training (Procurement Forum

pitch) Feedback Process

Products

Back-up

Description

Criteria 1Technically Acceptable

?Criteria 2

Technically

Acceptable?

Criteria 3Technicall

y Acceptabl

e?

All Weather Raincoat

Coat must be rainproof

Coat must have removable liner; with liner coat provides protection against cold to 30°

Coat must be machine washable

Offeror 1 Rainproof vinyl

Yes Snap in liner, 25° cold rating

Yes Exterior not addressed, interior machine washable

Potentially acceptable

Offeror 2 Cotton duck with waterproofing treatment

Yes Zip in liner, 20° cold rating

Yes Machine Washable

Yes

Offeror 3 Rainproof vinyl

Yes Snap in liner, Tundra cold rating

Potentially acceptable

Dry clean exterior, interior machine washable

No

Technical Acceptability - Supply