ARMY AL&T
given about the evaluation process relative to the steps and how final ratings are determined by the source selection board.
Roofing work progresses on the new child development center at Fort Bliss, TX, Dec. 9, 2010. USACE has expanded construction at the installation for the past five years as units of the 1st Armored Division relocate there from Germany. (Photo courtesy of USACE.)
selected to proceed to the next phase in the competitive process can request a debriefing to learn where their proposals could have used improvement, then quickly turn their attention to another business opportunity.
Generally, for a stand-alone Request for Proposal (RFP), the best three to four proposals will make the cut for Phase 2 evaluation. For a MATOC, eight to 10 proposals will make the cut for Phase 2, from which three to seven contract awards will be made.
In Phase 2 of the selection process, experts evaluate the design technical capability, remaining performance capability, and price. This evaluation takes a deeper look at what’s offered against the expressed needs of the government and the price. The Phase 2 evaluation determines the best-value offeror(s), depending on whether the acquisition involves a stand-alone contract or MATOC.
Pioneers in Savannah While the two-phase selection process is not new under Federal Acquisition Regulation Part 36, the Savannah District, GA, pioneered this approach for USACE, releasing a design-build construction solicitation employing its first two-phase selection in FY00, for a $70 million aviation brigade barracks complex at Fort Stewart, GA.
In the first two-phase solicitation, the contract for which took approximately 10 months to award with three offerors, Phase 2 contained 11 primary factors and 14 subfactors, compared with the current process involving up to five factors and no subfactors.
“Increasing transparency has been our primary goal, and a key lesson we have learned is that giving more information to industry about how we will evaluate offers is a good thing,” said Rita Miles, Chief of the Execution Branch (Contracting) at Savannah District. RFPs issued at Savannah District now include very specific information regarding the government’s source selection plan, such as the adjectival rating descriptors, their definitions, and relative importance. More detail is also
Proven Benefits Savannah District receives relatively few protests under the two- phase selection process. Offerors sometimes protest to obtain information; however, as a result of the openness of this process, generally they already have useful information on the results of their evaluation. They receive feedback about how they can improve future submissions and walk away confident that they are being treated fairly.
Current processes will be continually refined and streamlined to meet the challenge, as existing stand-alone “C” contracts, SATOCs, and MATOCs expire and are replaced, and a greater number of proposals from industry are received for evaluation.
The two-phase best-value selection process has proven itself a vital tool in fulfilling the historically unparalleled USACE construction mission. It takes an average of eight months from release of solicitation to award base contracts and an average of 75 days from release of RFP letter to award task orders. Time frames will always be affected by the complexity of the projects.
Having standardized facility types is essential to meeting the construction demand. Child development centers (CDCs) are a top priority for the Army, USACE, and the U.S. Army Engineering and Support Center, Huntsville. Recently, the first CDC completed under the CoS, a large facility for children 6-10 years old, opened at Fort Lewis, WA. The centers provide much-needed, affordable day care for Soldiers’ children. In all, more than 20 CDCs are in various stages of construction at such installations as Fort Bliss, TX; Fort Hood, TX; Fort Lewis; and Fort Stewart. The majority of projects were awarded under the southern region 8(a) MATOC.
Funding of the CoS program has been unique. In addition to the yearly MILCON appropriation from Congress, a number of CoS projects have also been funded with American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds, the most recent being a small CDC at Fort Polk, LA, for which a contract was awarded in September 2010.
Virginia E. Mitchell was formerly the Principal Adviser for Policy and Compliance, Business Operations Division at the U.S. Army Engineering and Support Center, Huntsville. She currently is a Procurement Analyst in the Contracting Operations Division, U.S. Army Contracting Command Headquarters, Redstone Arsenal, AL. She holds a B.S. in social science from Bowling Green State University and is pursuing an M.A. in acquisition and contract management from the Florida Institute of Technology. Mitchell is Level III certified in contracting and is a member of the U.S. Army Acquisition Corps, Defense Acquisition University Alumni Association, and National Contract Management Association.
APRIL –JUNE 2011 79
C O N T R A C T I N G C OMMU N I T Y H I G H L I G H T S
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88
