AF Life Cycle Management Center Engineering, Professional, & Administrative Support Services (EPASS) Responses to Industry Questions Mr. Emilio V Varcarcel EPASS Program Manager Ms. Jamie Ford EPASS Chief of Contracts
(1 of 31) Q: Please explain the relationship between EPASS & OASIS EPASS is an AFLCMC Program Management Office (PMO) That is utilizing the GSA OASIS Small Business vehicle as its MAC/IDIQ To implement AFLCMC's strategic sourcing strategy for A&AS support 2
(2 of 31) Q: Does the AF know of any plans by GSA to establish an on-ramp for SBs to be added to OASIS? GSA has stated they are getting ready to on-ramp some companies into Pool 2 Q: What is the status of the RFI posted 7 Nov 14 for 8(a) contractors interested in Pool 6? EPASS has completed our RFI / Market Research (MR) on potential 8(a)'s interested in Pool 6 12 companies responded We are utilizing 8(a) set-asides but not exclusively in Pool 6 We've set aside two (2) task orders in Pool 1 One (1) in Pool 3 Three (3) in Pool 6 3
(3 of 31) Q: How many dollars were awarded in FY14? What amount is planned for FY15? FY14 -- $4M FY15 -- $397 awarded as of 28 Apr 15 -- Will award an estimated $1.6B this FY FY16 -- Estimate is $200M 4
(4 of 31) Q: How many projected awards do you anticipate for EPASS? EPASS will award TOs in two separate waves. First Wave: Consists of 34 known task orders that will be awarded by early 2016 to account some 2,200+ CMEs. Second Wave: Will subsume the workload currently captured by ETASS II and PASS II starting in late 2016 EPASS TOs will not begin until the natural conclusion of existing TOs The # of EPASS TOs for the second wave is unknown at this time; however, the projected CME s exceeds the first wave Q: When are RFPs projected to be released? The RFP release date for known EPASS TOs is posted on FBO regularly 5
(5 of 31) Q: We have the chart with the schedule of EPASS opportunities to be awarded using the OASIS SB contract vehicle. Can the Government be more specific as to which OASIS SB Pool will be used to solicit Proposals for these opportunities? The EPASS TO Phasing chart posted on FBO includes: 1) Projected GSA OASIS Pool and 2) Decision to pursue a specific socioeconomic set aside Some TOs may show a TBD in those two columns; because the CO is awaiting completion of MR to finalize those determinations 6
(6 of 31) Q: Does the Government plan to solicit any of the scheduled EPASS opportunities on OASIS SB Pool-4? For every EPASS TO the pool determination decision is made by the CO for each solicitation Based on the nature of the work to be performed To date none of the AFLCMC requirements have been identified to require Pool 4 support Q: If so, please indicate which opportunities will be solicited using the Pool-4 contract vehicle. None have been determined 7
(7 of 31) Q: How or by what method does the EPASS office make a determination that a requirement is Pool 3 or Pool 6? It seems contracts going in Pool 6 should be in other pools. For every EPASS TO, the pool determination & NAICS decision are made by the CO for each solicitation based on the MR 8
(8 of 31) Q: How does EPASS office support the transference and resetting of current 8a contracts into SB community? The AFLCMC strategic sourcing approach being implemented by the EPASS PMO calls for: Larger Directorate-wide task orders That implement Performance Based Services Acquisition (PBSA) practices In order to achieve increased flexibility and economies of scale savings AFLCMC's SB and 8(a) dollars will increase as a result of this SAF approved aggregation initiative 9
(9 of 31) Q: Will there be any WOSB competed actions? More SDVOSB? The Customer and EPASS PMO perform MR for every task order This MR informs the CO as they make the set-aside decision Task Order #29, AFLCMC Staff, will be set-aside for EDWOSB in Pool 1 10
(10 of 31) Q: Please discuss the process and timing for decisions regarding socioeconomic set-asides. EPASS strives to provide as much visibility into projected Pool and Socioeconomic determinations as early as possible Q: Is it possible to provide more transparency and lead time to allow both primes and subs the opportunities to adjust strategy to accommodate these decisions? The EPASS PMO will continue to publish updated TO Phasing plans on FBO for industry's awareness as closely to a CO Pool/socioeconomic determination as possible 11
(11a of 31) Q: Though the sequencing chart is notional, changing the Pool or setaside status adversely impacts months of work that the contractor community has already conducted. The sequencing chart plays a major role in teaming strategies and business arrangements where small businesses are investing large sums of money to prepare for RFP and proposal activity. To change after the fact impacts months of effort that has been focusing on specific RFP releases. The EPASS PMO is very aware of the usefulness of its TO Phasing chart that is posted on FBO, and how reliant industry is on the information contained on the chart in order to establish their teaming arrangements To that end, we make it a very concerted effort to ensure the data on the chart with regards to Pool and socioeconomic category selection (if applicable) is accurate and doesn't change once it is posted 12
(11b of 31) PREVIOUS QUESTION CONTINUED Q: What is driving the changes (in Pool or Socioeconomic category) and is there a better way to provide preliminary info to the contractor community? To date, we have only had to correct one socioeconomic designation after it had been posted 13
(12a of 31) Q: Please discuss the amount of subcontracting seen on successful proposals to date. Discuss amount of subcontracting to large business as compared to SB. The EPASS Strategy is intended to enhance opportunities for the small business community To date we have identified over $280M in contracts that were previously awarded to Large Businesses that are now being awarded to SBs We also built safeguards into our EPASS cross-teaming approach to prevent a single LB to sub under multiple SB Primes for a single solicitation That way each SB Prime gets the best offer from each LB And a single LB cannot prevent other SBs to compete fairly as subs under each solicitation 14
(12b of 31) PREVIOUS QUESTION CONTINUED Q: Please discuss the amount of subcontracting seen on successful proposals to date. Discuss amount of subcontracting to large business as compared to SB. Out of the 8 EPASS TOs that have been awarded, the number of LB Subs is 5 out of 23 total subcontracting arrangements. Only one LB has subcontract work under two separate TOs. SS Sensitive restrictions preclude additional detail on proposals 15
(13 of 31) Q: Please explain rules for EPASS cross-teaming A company can only be either a Prime or a Sub on one solicitation If a company (either as a prime or a sub) appears on two or more solicitations, those solicitations will be thrown out as defective Once a task order is awarded, the winning offeror is free to: Add or remove additional subs Without asking for permission from the PCO But must notify the PCO of making the change 16
(14 of 31) Q: How can a SB that is not on OASIS gain access to the PWS/SOW and Draft documentation that has been made available to OASIS contractors? Can more details, such as draft PWS, historic FTEs, and incumbents be made available on FBO or some other forum that potential subs can access? The EPASS program office only provides the RFP to the fair opportunity pool within the applicable GSA OASIS SB Pool Members of that pool are then able to share that information with industry partners as they would like 17
(15 of 31) Q: Can the AF provide more details on each of the opportunities in order to ensure that SBs not on OASIS can attain information on those opportunities? Could you post draft RFPs on FBO? The EPASS PMO will continue to provide RFPs only to the GSA OASIS fair opportunity pool 18
(16 of 31) Q: Are the Technical Interchange Meetings (TIMs) open to industry? TIMs are limited to the GSA OASIS SB Primes within the fair opportunity pool But may depend on the approach for the TIM (e.g. face-toface, DCO, Telecom, or just emailed paper briefing) And if there is enough space/online capacity for each respective TIM On occasion, the CO for the solicitation may allow primes to invite their subs to also attend the TIM 19
(17 of 31) Q: Why aren t Centers (Robins, Tinker, Hill) involved in the SS when they have a large share of manpower positions? All AFLCMC customers (regardless of where they are located) are directly involved in their respective EPASS TO source selections All technical evaluators come from customer organizations It is up to each customer to determine: The composition of their tech evaluation team To include which locations are represented in the evaluations Most include members from geographically separated units 20
(18 of 31) Q: Why a TA/LTEP approach? Several other organizations who are using OASIS as their contract vehicle are conducting best value, Price Performance tradeoffs. EPASS' Technical Acceptability/Lowest Total Evaluated Price (TA/LTEP) is considered a Best Value approach Even LPTA is on the best value continuum In terms of full-tradeoff, the EPASS PMO has encouraged AFLCMC organizations to consider identifying a tradeoff approach that can be quantified and justified (i.e. the cost to trade up above their stated minimum requirements is justified by the value the anticipated benefits) To date, no AFLCMC organization has proposed a tradeoff methodology 21
(19 of 31) Q: With the history of predecessor contracts it would appear that the resulting staffing issues will not be improved in the TA/LTEP world. Why not change? The current TA-LTEP approach being used by the EPASS program office is providing the desired results in terms of quality of contractor employees being hired at the lowest "best value" cost to the government 22
(20a of 31) Q: What is the preferred method for substantiating rates? The Government will not provide further direction on how an Offeror should substantiate that their proposed rates to meet the burden of proof for demonstrating realism The Basis of Estimate (BOE) paragraph in the Instructions to Offerors is quite extensive The BOE should be considered in concert with all Solicitation documents when substantiating that an offerors' proposed direct and indirect rates are realistic for their proposed technical solution 23
(20b of 31) PREVIOUS QUESTION CONTINUED Q: What is the preferred method for substantiating rates? Although not all-inclusive, the failure to adequately support direct rates for labor category, skill level, experience, education, security requirements, location, comparative labor mapping, and other PWS requirements are elements that have resulted in MPC adjustments for Offerors in past solicitations Additionally, although not all-inclusive, the failure to adequately support indirect rates entirely, or without explanation for decreases in established run rates, are elements that have resulted in MPC adjustment for Offerors in past solicitations 24
(21 of 31) Q: If you provide CME numbers and do not want a variance then why not define a standard for hours in a man-year? That ensures an apples-to-apples comparison from a pricing perspective. The number of hours in a man-year is a company-specific accounting practice that is a part of their DCMA approved cost accounting system The EPASS PMO does not generally dictate the number of hours in a man-year because it is up to each company to determine how to propose against each solicitation based on their respective company's staffing plan and its associated costs per their company's cost accounting policies 25
(22 of 31) Q: A couple of RFPs indicated an award value range is this going to be the way for future efforts? No A couple is inaccurate only one RFP did The EPASS program office is not planning to make an "award value range" a standard approach for future solicitations 26
(23 of 31) Q: Understanding that the OASIS contract vehicle is GSA sponsored, but that the EPASS office is USAF based, do you foresee, future OASIS TOs for the DoD abiding by DFARS 252.204-7012? DFARS 252.204-7012, Safeguarding of Unclassified Controlled Technical Information, is included in EPASS Task Order RFPs 27
(24 of 31) Q: Is the EPASS program assessed as successful so far? Any changes being considered? The EPASS PMO has met or exceeded all expectations, both in terms of responsiveness to our customers By awarding our EPASS TOs with adequate time for the winning offeror to staff properly prior to performance award As well as the quality of the employees being hired by our EPASS awardees One of the measures we use to track the quality of our TO awards is the number of incumbents being retained when a new TO is awarded To date we are seeing on average better than 94% retention of qualified incumbents We will continue to monitor retention and turnover 28
(25 of 31) Q: Does the use of OASIS lead to a reduction in the number of contracts in AFMC? The use of GSA OASIS SB does not have any impact on the number of contracts the EPASS program office will be awarding GSA OASIS SB is just the contract vehicle we have elected to use for our EPASS contracts However, implementation of strategic sourcing concepts via the EPASS strategy does result in fewer contracts being awarded to obtain the same number of A&AS requirements 29
(26 of 31) Q: We keep hearing OASIS is reducing costs. What metric is being used to validate this? By using the GSA OASIS SB vehicle, the AF is seeing real cost savings Since the Contract Access Fee (CAF) the AF has to pay to use their vehicle is only 0.1% Versus the 3%-10% fees being paid by AFLCMC organizations to use other contract vehicles There are inherent savings and efficiencies with the strategic sourcing initiative implemented by AFLCMC that stood up the EPASS PMO 30
(27 of 31) Q: It seems that OASIS was designed to make small business metrics look good at the same time drastically reducing the number of small businesses eligible to compete on future contracts. In fact numerous minority and SDVOSB defense contractors will go out of business. Is that the intent? Why was an impact study not performed? GSA developed their GSA OASIS SB vehicle in compliance with the White House's Office of Management and Budget direction to implement strategic sourcing for services 31
(28 of 31) Q: What is the EPASS PO gameplan when the TO procurement schedule runs out this year? Are there other requirements in work that will precipitate an FY16 schedule? There are some additional EPASS TOs that will be awarded in 2016 as part of the First Wave of EPASS TOs They will be captured on the EPASS TO Phasing plan that is posted to FBO once we have a more concrete requirement While 2016 will see a reduction in the number of awards, the team will be busy working toward standardizing the EPASS process of contract administration The Second Wave of EPASS TOs will capture the requirements currently being sourced via PASS II and ETASS II once the base PoP of those contracts ends 32
(29 of 31) Q: What is the USAF Strategy for On-ramping true small/8a business? Many of the current 8as in the OASIS pools have graduated or will soon graduate due to either Cost or Time, therefor locking out young 8a companies and putting SBA DoD's ability to meet SB 8a goals in jeopardy On-ramping of 8(a)s into the GSA OASIS SB Pools is a GSA prerogative GSA will consider the status of their 8(a) contract holders at the 5 year point They have the ability to on-ramp a socio-economic group within each pool as the need arises EPASS is on-track to realize an increase in our 8(a) spend 33
(30a of 31) Q: What is the USAF strategy to craft acquisition strategies that foster teaming with the next generation of 8as to support the OASIS pools. Many of the EPASS awards have been dominated by a single small business supported by incumbent business. This leaves little opportunity for teaming and if teaming does occur work allocation is not substantial enough to build qualifications to compete on future efforts. The assertion made in this question, that a single small business, supported by incumbents, has dominated the EPASS awards is NOT FACTUAL; EPASS has witnessed diverse teaming arrangements amongst offerors & awardees The EPASS A&AS scope is a only a component of the overall USAF services footprint Our strategic sourcing strategy of fewer-larger TOs is consistent with the OMB's direction to implement strategic sourcing for services and follows BBP tenets 34
(30b of 31) PREVIOUS QUESTION CONTINUED Q: What is the USAF strategy to craft acquisition strategies that foster teaming with the next generation of 8as to support the OASIS pools. Many of the EPASS awards have been dominated by a single small business supported by incumbent business. This leaves little opportunity for teaming and if teaming does occur work allocation is not substantial enough to build qualifications to compete on future efforts. To put the EPASS scope in perspective, the last information provided to our office by the GSA OASIS program office, out of the first $670M awarded to GSA OASIS SB primes, only $243M had been awarded as EPASS tasks orders There is significantly more work being awarded to other AF and DoD organizations than what has been awarded by the EPASS program office 35
(31 of 31) Q: How are 8a small business expected to obtain the necessary prime past performance with the USAF to enable on-boarding to an OASIS pool? While OASIS does not require USAF prime past experience, USAF solicitations do require significant USAF past performance. As a result a vendor may make it onto OASIS, but will still not be competitive for USAF acquisitions. USAF solicitations do not require USAF past performance; If a company qualifies under the NAICS, the contractor has the requisite performance to do the A&AS tasks at hand Requirements called out on EPASS solicitations are determined by the customer organization and are not established by the EPASS PMO 36
EPASS FBO Website http://1.usa.gov/1e1hcr7 GSA OASIS SB Website http://1.usa.gov/1e1hoxt EPASS Resources Any SBs or socio-economic company can look at the RFP to see if they would qualify for on-ramping opportunities GSA OASIS Contracts Website http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/189867 Lists Prime Contractors, Ts and Cs, etc. Email for GSA OASIS SB Contracts Office oasissb@gsa.gov 37