Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

June 3, 2010.  Lead: Delene Sedillo (BD)  Co-Lead: Mary Kincaid (BB)  Andrea Browne (BV)  Craig Burridge (BB)  Monica Ceruti (AL)  Laurie Declaire.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "June 3, 2010.  Lead: Delene Sedillo (BD)  Co-Lead: Mary Kincaid (BB)  Andrea Browne (BV)  Craig Burridge (BB)  Monica Ceruti (AL)  Laurie Declaire."— Presentation transcript:

1 June 3, 2010

2  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)

3 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 4 JSC Best Value Continuum FAR Part 8 and 12 FAR Part 15 Full Trade-Off PPT Performance/ Price Trade-Off LPTA Low-Price/ Tech Acceptable Simplified & Sealed Bid FAR Part 13 & 14 Low Price Non-Cost Cost PricePerf Trade-off Tech Acceptable GreaterImportance of PriceLesser LesserTechnical ComplexityGreater *Option to evaluate past perf but no comparative assessment or ranking. FAR 15.101-2(b) Limited Tradeoff (LTO) ( old midrange v/c) SEB Process

5  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

6 6 PPT/LTO Evaluation Process Evaluation Factor EvaluatIonEvaluatIon EvaluatIonEvaluatIon Ratings: Technical Past Perf. VCs (LTO) Cost Initial Evaluation Debrief Offeror Proposals Award w/o Discussion Award w/o Discussion Initial Evaluation Discussions Competitive Range Determination Competitive Range Determination Discussions Final Proposal Final Proposal ESs Final Evaluation Revise Ratings Award Final Evaluation Briefing Best Value Decision Evaluation Statements (ESs)

7 SEB PROCESS USING MSSLPT - 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 8 PPT/LTO Pros and Cons Pros  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

9  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


11 DescriptionCriteria 1 Technically Acceptable?Criteria 2 Technically Acceptable?Criteria 3 Technically Acceptable? 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 1Rainproof vinyl YesSnap in liner, 25° cold rating YesExterior not addressed, interior machine washable Potentially acceptable Offeror 2Cotton duck with waterproofing treatment YesZip in liner, 20° cold rating YesMachine WashableYes Offeror 3Rainproof vinyl YesSnap in liner, Tundra cold rating Potentially acceptable Dry clean exterior, interior machine washable No

Download ppt "June 3, 2010.  Lead: Delene Sedillo (BD)  Co-Lead: Mary Kincaid (BB)  Andrea Browne (BV)  Craig Burridge (BB)  Monica Ceruti (AL)  Laurie Declaire."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google