2. NAVAIR-Industry Summit
Exploring Results
from
NAVAIR-Industry Summit

3. Our Panel – NAVAIR-Industry Summit
Alan Goldberg, APMP Fellow. Director – NAVAIR Source Selection Office, Patuxent River, MD
James Stanford, Deputy Director – NAVAIR Source Selection Office, Patuxent River, MD
Industry
Jay Herther, CPP APMP Fellow. VP of Bus Winning, BAE Systems Electronics Systems, Nashua, NH

4. Goal and Approach Goal: Approach: Desired Result
Explore the results from the NAVAIR-Industry Summit
Engage in an interactive dialogue that enhances an understanding of Industry and Government needs
Identify actions toward process improvement
Approach:
Panel members will present Summit results, facilitate discussions, answer questions
Audience will seek an understanding of summit results and Industry/Government needs, share insights, and suggest process improvements or actions
Desired Result
The audience and panel members take away insights that will be used to improve the process for our company/Agency as well as for acquisition professionals in general

5. Agenda Background Topics for Discussion Summary
Topic # 1: Restricted information exchange with industry
Topic # 2: Lack of status reporting during acquisition development & evaluation
Topic # 3: Protests and debriefs
Topic # 4: Implementation of Value Adjusted Total Evaluated Price (VATEP) Tradeoff
Summary

6. Background
NAVAIR conducted an Industry Day on the Competitive Source Selection process on 4 November 2015
Industry’s interest prompted initiation of the NAVAIR-Industry Summit, conducted on 29 Nov 2016
Summit focuses on one type of source selection—major design competitions—to minimize the variability that comes from all types of source selections
Formed a working group of major contractors and consulting firms familiar with major design competitions and NAVAIR to identify Summit discussion topics and establish Summit format
BAE Systems
Boeing
Lockheed Martin
Northrop Grumman
Goal: Promulgate process improvement actions that would promote better proposals, better best value selections, and reduced process time
Purpose: Explore critical areas of concern to gain common understanding of reasons causing process disconnects and determine actions that could improve the process
Raytheon
Rockwell Collins
Shipley
Lohfeld Consulting Group

7. NAVAIR-Industry collaboration
Earlier Procurement Studies (2004 – 2014), for example:
APMP Early Industry Involvement Survey Regarding NAVAIR Competitive Procurements
APMP Government/Industry Study Team
APMP Procurement Improvement Committee Survey
NAVAIR Industry Day (Nov 2015)
NAVAIR Industry
Working Group
(May 2016)
Summit Plan: Topics/Format/Panel members (July 2016)
NAVAIR/ Industry
Reviews of Draft Best Practices
(Aug-Sept 2016)
NAVAIR Industry Summit
(Nov 2016)
Final Best Practices Guidance per Summit
Publish NAVAIR/Industry Best Practices on Competitive Procurement/ Communications Guide (June 2017)
Integrate Best Practices into NAVAIR
Instruction C
as warranted
(October 2017)

8. Agenda Background Topics for Discussion Summary
Topic # 1: Restricted information exchange with industry
Topic # 2: Lack of status reporting during acquisition development & evaluation
Topic # 3: Protests and debriefs
Topic # 4: Implementation of Value Adjusted Total Evaluated Price (VATEP) Tradeoff
Summary

9. Restricted information exchange with industry
Government perspective: Need control to ensure fairness; using PCO to control communications to ensure consistent information is provided to industry
Control through PCO begins at Draft RFP (including L & M)
Industry perspective: NAVAIR is restricting communications too early in the process—essentially shutting down effective communications
Frequent examples even prior to Draft RFP (e.g., RFI)
Process is inconsistent
Industry recommendations:
Adhere to FAR ; allow unrestricted communications with technical personnel up to RFP release
Publish acquisition communication plan to industry
Host unrestricted 1:1 and “virtual” industry days
Audience Discussion

10. Agenda Background Topics for Discussion Summary
Topic # 1: Restricted information exchange with industry
Topic # 2: Lack of status reporting during acquisition development & evaluation
Topic # 3: Protests and debriefs
Topic # 4: Implementation of Value Adjusted Total Evaluated Price (VATEP) Tradeoff
Summary

11. Lack of status reporting during acquisition development & evaluation
Government perspective: Concern with misleading industry due to unknowns
Industry perspective: Industry would like to be informed of procurement progress so they can make informed decisions about resource application
Industry and government recommendations:
Provide acquisition timeline updates routinely via FBO or bidder updates
Provide timely answers to inquiries and then publish answers/updates to FBO or bidders
Audience Discussion

12. Agenda Background Topics for Discussion Summary
Topic # 1: Restricted information exchange with industry
Topic # 2: Lack of status reporting during acquisition development & evaluation
Topic # 3: Protests and debriefs
Topic # 4: Implementation of Value Adjusted Total Evaluated Price (VATEP) Tradeoff
Summary

13. Protests and debriefs
Providing effective debriefs and minimizing protests are in the interest of government and industry
Government perspective:
“Catch 22” exists in that poor debriefings result in protests; but info in debriefs is sometimes minimized due to fear of protests
Understanding the rationale for the decision may require info about the successful offeror’s proposal—info that can’t be provided without the successful offeror’s approval
Protest is a mechanism needed to correct mistakes, but is too often used due to poor communication or to motives other than ensuring selection was made properly
Industry perspective:
Bid protests reflect a lack of sufficient debrief detail to convey a precise rationale for the decision based on evaluation criteria
Protests are essential to discovering faulty or biased evaluations
Industry recommendations:
Provide government senior-level debriefs with industry senior-level executives for major acquisitions
Provide meaningful debriefs
Consider using Air Force’s Extended Debriefing approach
Audience Discussion

14. Agenda Background Topics for Discussion Summary
Topic # 1: Restricted information exchange with industry
Topic # 2: Lack of status reporting during acquisition development & evaluation
Topic # 3: Protests and debriefs
Topic # 4: Implementation of Value Adjusted Total Evaluated Price (VATEP) Tradeoff
Summary

15. Implementation of Value Adjusted Total Evaluated Price (VATEP) Tradeoff
One government perspective: Potential that implementing VATEP can stifle industry innovation and restrict government’s ability to make smart buying decisions
Industry perspective: VATEP allows government to pay a premium for something really wanted, provides direct feedback to prioritize resources—but difficult to quantify
Industry recommendations:
Implement VATEP only when it makes sense to implement it
Don’t force it on programs to meet a metric
Will take close government/industry dialog and iteration to effectively pre-determine evaluation credit and risk assessments
Provide AoA results to industry for early assessment
Audience Discussion

16. Agenda Background Topics for Discussion Summary
Topic # 1: Restricted information exchange with industry
Topic # 2: Lack of status reporting during acquisition development & evaluation
Topic # 3: Protests and debriefs
Topic # 4: Implementation of Value Adjusted Total Evaluated Price (VATEP) Tradeoff
Summary

17. Summary of Summit Actions
Address the RFI process in revision to NAVAIR Source Selection instruction.
Consider revising the NAVAIR Source Selection Instruction to lower the threshold at which Draft RFPs with Sections L&M and pre-solicitation conferences are required from the current $250M.
NAVAIR to organize meeting of PCOs to discuss the process and policy of when and how communication with industry occurs prior to final RFP release.
Review training and guidance with regard to the PCO’s judgment on how and when to ensure information is shared without stifling communication.
Take action to ensure consistency across NAVAIR’s contracts workforce.
Address the PCO’s responsibility to keep industry informed of the RFP release and evaluation schedule/status.
Discuss ways of ensure that PCOs are providing status on a more consistent basis.
Explore ways of providing draft Sections L&M or outlines earlier in the process
Update NAVAIR source selection instruction to emphasize that it is the PCO’s responsibility to keep industry informed of RFP release progress and evaluation status
Explore ways of maintaining an “open door” policy under PCO management from Sources Sought RFIs through issuance of Final RFP; such that industry can have direct communication with the subject matter experts and program managers about upcoming procurements.