1. Source Selection Evaluation Team (SSET) Chairperson
This is just-in-time training for you as the Source Selection Evaluation Team Chairperson on an AF source selection.
9/17/2018

2. Source Selection Organization
SSA
SSAC
SSET Chair
Mission Capability
PCAG
Cost/Price
Contract
Advisors
Source Selection
Evaluation Team
This is a wiring diagram of the typical source selection organization. The source selection evaluation team usually consists of all the functions in the blue box. In some cases, some of the boxes may be combined.
AFFARS MP5315.3, Informational Guidance (IG) paragraph (1) states, “For PEO acquisitions or source selections greater than $100M, the team structure normally consists of the Source Selection Authority, Source Selection Advisory Council, the Source Selection Evaluation Team and any advisors.”
9/17/2018

3. AF Source Selection – Key Participants
Source Selection Authority (SSA)
Source Selection Advisory Council (SSAC) Chairperson
Source Selection Evaluation Team (SSET) Chairperson
Mission Capability Team Chief
Performance Confidence Assessment Group (PCAG) Chair
Cost/Price Team Chief
Contracting Officer (CO)
Note Restrictions:
Senior Leaders—AFFARS (b)
Non-Government Personnel—FAR 9.5, AFFARS (c)
AFFARS MP sets forth definitions for the source selection key participants.
a. Source Selection Authority (SSA) is the official designated to make the source selection decision.
b. Source Selection Advisory Council (SSAC) is a group of senior personnel who provide counsel during the source selection process
c. Source Selection Evaluation Team (SSET) is the group of personnel, representing the various functional disciplines relevant to the acquisition.
FAR states that the Contracting Office (CO) serves as the focal point for inquires from actual or prospective offerors after release of solicitation, controls exchanges with offerors after receipt of proposals, and awards the contract.
For Program Executive Officer (PEO) acquisitions or source selections over $100M, the team structure normally consist of SSA, SSAC, SSET, and any advisors. SSET typically consists of technical/service/programmatic evaluators, contracting officer/buyers, PCAG, cost or price analyst(s) and advisors. The SSET should include the minimum number of evaluators necessary and may be supplemented with advisors as required.
Senior leaders (05s/civilian equivalents) cannot perform multiple leadership roles in source selections for any ACAT or major service (Category 1 and 1A) acquisitions such as functioning as both advisor and evaluator.
Note limitation on use of non-government personnel in source selection.
AFAC added further discussions concerning use of Non-Government Personnel (NGP) as part of the Source Selection AFFARS (c)(2) AFFARS MP Para
NGP CANNOT have any financial interests nor be the SSA, Chairperson of the SSET/SSAC or an advisor to or a member of the PCAG
Additionally Atch 1 Source Selection Information Briefing and Debriefing Certificate was changed to Source Selection Non-Disclosure Agreement AFFARS MP Atch 1 Area for Non-government personnel was added to acknowledge non-disclosure and non-financial interest.
Non-Government Personnel — AFFARS (c) (See FAR 37.2 for required approvals.)
(a) FFRDC (Federally Funded Research and Development Center) employees may serve as a team member including membership in a SSAC or SSET; however, an FFRDC employee may not serve as a member of the PCAG, as chairperson of a SSAC or SSET, or as an SSA.
(b) Non-government advisors may be used as necessary to assist in the source selection evaluation. Although advisors may assist in the evaluation and provide input regarding strengths, notable aspects, deficiencies, and weaknesses in proposals, they shall not determine ratings or rankings of offerors’ proposals. Additionally they shall not be the SSA, Chairperson of the SSET/SSAC or a member of the PCAG. If contractor personnel are used as advisors the following applies: (1) Restricted to only necessary part of proposals; (2) CO shall obtain necessary approval (FAR 37.2); (3) solicitation shall list contractors in clause; (4) offeror must be given opportunity to object to the release of proposal information to non-government personnel, (5) appropriate OCI clauses in contract under which non-government contractor personnel are provided; and (6) requirement for CO to make determination is competing offeror objects. SAF/AQ Letter dated Jul 11, 2007 requires the CO obtain a copy of the agreement to protect information from unauthorized use or disclosure in accordance with FAR (b). Letter delegates approval required in FAR (d) and AFFARS (c) to HCA with further delegation authorized within AFMC and AFSPC to Center Commanders.
9/17/2018

4. SSET Chairperson Roles and Responsibilities
Subject to SSA approval, appoint SSET members including PCAG & chair
Establish PCAG for all source selections > $100M
Ensure personnel, resources, time assigned to the source selection reflect the complexity of the acquisition.
After SSP is approved, approve personnel changes and document in an addendum.
Ensure SSET members are knowledgeable of their responsibilities including details on how the evaluation is to be conducted BEFORE any proposal is reviewed.
SSET shall prepare and maintain SSP
Establish effective communications with requiring office
Ensure proposals are evaluated on only the criteria in the Request for Proposals (RFP) Section M
Review ENs and recommend SSA approve release
Ensure team membership remains same for all discussions with offerors
Prepare the PAR for acquisitions > $100M and sign
Prepare the SSDD for the SSA
Participate in debriefings to offerors
If no SSAC, shall provide a source selection recommendation to the SSA
AFFARS MP5315.3, paragraph SSET chairperson shall appoint members to the SSET, including a Performance Confidence Assessment Group and its chairperson as required, subject to approval of the SSA.
Establish a PCAG for all source selections > $100M. Informational Guidance —Use of PCAG for source selections <$100M is at the discretion of the SSA.
Ensure personnel, resources, and time assigned to the source selection reflect complexity of the program. After source selection plan approval, any personnel changes to the SSET may be approved by the SSET chairperson in an addendum to the SSP.
Ensure members of the SSET are knowledgeable of their responsibilities before any proposal is reviewed, including details on how the evaluation is to be conducted.
SSET shall prepare and maintain the SSP
Responsible for establishing effective liaison with the requiring office to ensure requirements are effectively addressed within the requirements documents and, if used, within threshold/objective language.
5.3. The SSET Chairperson shall ensure that proposals are evaluated based solely on the criteria contained in the solicitation (Section M or equivalent provision) and ensure the evaluation is properly documented IAW paragraph 7 of the MPs.
Review Evaluation Notices (ENs) and recommend SSA approve release through the CO
Ensure team membership remains consistent for all discussions with offerors.
Shall prepare the Proposal Analysis Report for acquisitions >$100M or as required by the SSA. SSAC Chairperson (if used) and the SSET chairperson shall sign.
Prepare the SSDD for SSA’s signature.
Participate in debriefings to offerors.
If an SSAC is not used, the SSET chairperson shall make an award recommendation, based on the SSET’s evaluation, at the decision briefing. Rationale for the recommendation shall be based upon the evaluation criteria (Sec M or equivalent provision) of the solicitation.
9/17/2018

5. CO Roles and Responsibilities
Contracting Officer (CO)
Ensure required approvals are obtained and contract clause requirements are met before non-government personnel are allowed to provide source selection support (CO must have copy of agreement in file as required by FAR )
Manage all business aspects of the acquisition
Ensure procedures exist to safeguard source selection information (FAR 3.104)
Approve access to or release of source selection information before and after contract award (FAR )
Maintain source selection evaluation records
Ensure that requests for delegations are completed and documented in file
Release RFP after approval of business clearance and SSA approved SSP
Single point of contact for inquires from actual or prospective offerors
Control exchanges with offerors after receipt of proposals
Approve release of ENs if designated this authority by the SSA in the Source Selection Plan
Assist SSET chairperson with preparation of the PAR and SSD
Obtain contract clearance before contract award
Ensure unsuccessful offerors are debriefed and debriefing is documented
AFFARS MP5315.3, Contracting Officer (CO) shall
Ensure that IAW AFFARS (c)1, required approvals are obtain and contract clause requirements are met before non-government personnel are allowed to provide source selection support. (CO must comply with FAR (b) “A contractor that gains access to proprietary information of other companies in performing advisory and assistance services for the Government must agree with the other companies to protect their information from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary and refrain from using the information for any purpose other than that for which it was furnished. The contracting officer shall obtain copies of these agreements and ensure that they are properly executed.”
Manage all business aspects of the acquisition. IG says that the SSA usually requests the CO manage the protection of source selection information.
Ensure that procedures exist to safeguard source selection information IAW FAR as supplemented.
Approve access to or release of source selection information before and after contract award IAW FAR
Maintain source selection evaluation records. When evaluation information developed by any member of the source selection team is presented in any form to the SSA, that evaluative material and any related supporting evaluative material becomes an official record that must be maintained and must not be altered. Updates, revisions, or changes to that evaluation information must be captured in subsequent documentation in a way that the original record remains distinct. Evaluative materials are considered working papers prior to their disclosure to the SSA. These working papers may be changed or modified by their author as necessary in order to support the evaluation process.
Ensure that any request for source selection delegations are properly accomplished and documented in the source selection file.
Release the solicitation only after approval of business clearance and the SSA has approved the Source Selection Plan.
After release of the solicitation, serve as the single point of contact for inquiries from actual or prospective offerors.
After receipt of proposals, control exchanges with offerors IAW FAR
If awarding without discussions, the CO shall obtain contract clearance prior to contract award. And per 5.6.6, obtain contract clearance approval in accordance with AFFARS
In conjunction with SSET chairperson, prepare PAR.
Assist in preparation of the SSDD.
6.6. Ensure unsuccessful offerors are debriefed IAW FAR and The CO shall document the debriefing(s) provided to offeror(s). The debriefing summary must also include a record of offeror questions and government responses.
9/17/2018

6. Source Selection Process Overview
ASP
Competitive Range Briefing
Pre-FPR
Decision
Decision
Request for FPR Ratings Released
Pre-
RFP
RFP
Release
Proposal
Receipt
Interim Ratings
and ENs released
EN Responses
FPR Receipt
Award
Debriefings
Oral Presentations
EXCHANGES
CO controls after release of RFP
Req Devel
Risk Assessment
Acq Strategy
DRFPs
Conferences
One-on-One Mtgs
Market Research
Acquisition
Plan
Cost/Price
Risk
exchanges
with offerors
Discussions
(only w/offerors in CR)
CO Responses to Questions
RFP Amendments
All proposals eval
Comp range deliberated
No revisions allowed
Communicate only with those uncertain if in/out of CR
Must discuss
significant weaknesses
deficiencies
other aspects to enhance award potential
Proposal revisions allowed
This is an overview chart for the complete Source Selection process.
Depending on the size and complexity of the acquisition, the acquisition team may be required to do an Acquisition Strategy Briefing.
Other briefings that may be required are Initial Evaluation Briefing, Pre-FPR or Clearance Briefing, and Decision Briefing. These briefings may be combined briefings to the SSA and SSAC.
Acquisitions over $100M will have the following briefings to the SSA and SSAC:
Initial Evaluation Briefing (The process ends here if awarding without discussions.)
Pre-FPR Briefing unless awarding without discussions
Decision Briefing unless awarding without discussions
AFFARS MP states that as a minimum, at the initiation of and again at the conclusion of discussions, the SSET through the CO shall indicate, to or discuss with, each offeror in the competitive range the following: Adverse past performance to which the offeror has not had an opportunity to respond, uncertainties, weaknesses, deficiencies, and strengths. This should be accomplished by providing the offeror its own mission capability, cost/price risk (if applicable) and past performance ratings. The final disclosure of ratings to the offeror prior to requesting final proposal revisions shall reflect the results of discussions with the offeror.
Offerors eliminated from the competitive range may choose to receive a de-briefing then or wait until after award—they can have only one de-briefing. After award of contract, the other offerors may receive a de-briefing.
PAR
SSDD
Communications
for greater understanding
leading to CRD
Debriefings of successful and unsuccessful offerors. Same rating charts as shown to SSA
9/17/2018

7. Source Selection Evaluation Team Chairperson
Areas that require a significant amount of your time and effort:
Risk Assessment
ASP preparation and briefing
Preparation of Section L (Instructions to the Offerors) and Section M (Evaluation Criteria)
Evaluation of the proposals
Documentation of the Evaluations
Consensus of the subfactor teams
Documentation of consensus of the subfactor team including any minority opinion remaining after consensus
Traceability of documentation from evaluation to briefings to PAR to SSDD
Preparation of the briefings
Preparation of the PAR
Drafting the SSDD
Risks identified in the risk assessment become a critical element of the source selection plan and the RFP. Explain the thread that starts with the requirement, ties to the risk assessment, then to the RFP, proposal, evaluation and contract execution.
You must schedule the ASP early. For SAF/AQ ASP, you must submit an Executive Summary 45 days in advance of the ASP. The ASP charts must be submitted 6 work days in advance of the ASP.
Request for Proposal (RFP) Section M—Evaluation Criteria is key to your source selection. It tells the offerors and Government what and how to evaluate the proposals. Section L—Instructions to the Offerors is also important because it tells the offerors what to put in their proposal. These two sections must be consistent.
The SSET evaluation of the proposals must be done in accordance with the RFP Section M. You will have a significant job making sure the evaluation is done consistently and documented correctly while maintaining schedule. The mission capability team chief should strive for consensus on each subfactor. If there is a disagreement that can not be resolved in consensus, you must make sure the documentation adequately describes the consensus and the minority opinion.
Preparing briefings, PAR, and SSDD are also your responsibility.
9/17/2018

8. Required Source Selection Documentation
Source Selection Plan and revisions
Draft Request for Proposal
Comments received and Government responses to comments
Request for Proposal, any amendments including Final Proposal Revision request
Proposals received including all revisions
Evaluation worksheets and summaries
Mission Capability Technical &Risk
Subfactor Worksheets
Subfactor Summaries
Past Performance
PCAG must document results of their assessment by listing all contracts that were relied upon, description of the relevancy of the contracts, with positive and negative aspects associated with performance under each
Cost/Price
Cost team must document their evaluation of each proposal
Reference AFFARS MP5315.3, paragraph 7, AF source selection documents:
7.1. SSP and any revisions
7.2. DRFP if issued along with comments received and government responses thereto
7.3. RFP and any amendments including the Request for Final Proposal Revision.
7.4. Proposals
7.5. Evaluation worksheets and summaries. After each member of the evaluation team has completed his or her review of a proposal, the evaluation must be documented and included in the source selection file.
AFFARS MP , IG paragraph 7.5 stated the use of electronic source selection tools is helpful, especially in larger efforts. If worksheets are used, they typically include:
Subfactor Worksheets and Subfactor Summaries (see AFFARS MP for complete language and samples).
Past performance evaluation—PCAG must document the results of their assessment by listing all contracts that were relied upon, with the positive and negative aspects associated with performance under each. A description of the relevancy of the contracts should also be included.
9/17/2018

9. Required Source Selection Documentation
Competitive Range Determination
Competitive Range Briefing Information/Charts supporting the CO’s recommendation
Include any documentation approving release of ENs or entering discussions
Evaluation Notices and responses
Clearance Documentation in addition to the
Determination to award without discussions or
Final proposal revision request approval
Briefing to SSA/SSAC prior to requesting FPR if required
by SSA
Decision Briefing
Proposal Analysis Report (PAR)
Simplified Source Selection Report <$10M
Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD)
Source Selection Debriefing Documentations
Reference AFFARS MP , paragraph 7, AF source selection documents:
Competitive Range Determination
When the SSA is other than the CO, this determination may be documented in a briefing. Briefing information/charts shall be in sufficient detail to support the CO recommendation and included in source selection file. Include any documentation with the Competitive Range Briefing regarding approval to release ENs, or enter into
discussions.
Evaluation Notices, responses, and Government evaluation
Clearance Documentation
Clearance documentation in addition to the determination to award without discussions or the final proposal revision request approval shall be included in the contract file.
Decision Briefing
Whenever the SSA is other than the CO, a source selection decision briefing is mandatory and shall be included in the source selection file.
Proposal Analysis Report (PAR)
Simplified Source Selection Report for source selections <$10M at discretion of SSA
Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD)
7.13 Source Selection Debriefing Documents
9/17/2018

10. Records Retention AFFARS MP5315.3, para 4.2.2.3
Maintain source selection evaluation records
Once presented to SSA in any form, that evaluative material and any related supporting evaluative material becomes an official record that must be maintained and must not be altered.
Can update, revise, or change that evaluation information in subsequent documentation, but the original record must remain distinct
Prior to presentation to the SSA, evaluative materials are “working papers” and may be changed/modified by their author as necessary
Records Retention. Everyone is responsible to ensure that appropriate documentation of the evaluation is maintained.
AFFARS MP5315.3, paragraph reads as follows: “Maintain source selection evaluation records. When evaluation information developed by any member of the source selection team is presented in any form to the SSA, that evaluative material and any related supporting evaluative material becomes an official record that must be maintained and must not be altered. Updates, revisions, or changes to that evaluation information must be captured in subsequent documentation in a way that the original record remains distinct. Evaluative materials are considered working papers prior to their disclosure to the SSA. These working papers may be changed or modified by their author as necessary in order to support the evaluation process.”
9/17/2018

11. Watch Items The following areas need special attention Documentation
Mission Capability/Proposal Risk Subfactor Summary
Each evaluator does his/her individual analysis sheet
Then together the team develops a consensus and the subfactor leader documents that in the subfactor summary making sure he/she covers any minority opinion remaining after consensus.
Recent GAO protest decisions have been impacted by this documentation
Definitions
Must make sure strengths meet all three parts of the definition
Mission Capability Team Chief must be able to explain why it is a strength and how it is advantageous to the Government.
Two recent protests involving Air Force Source Selection were sustained. The reasons for the General Accounting Office (GAO) taking the position they did was:
Under the solicitation requiring that offerors substantiate proposed initiatives to reduce staffing, the agency applied a more exacting standard in evaluating adequacy of substantiation for protestor’s proposed initiatives than it did in evaluating the awardee’s substantiation. Be careful that each offeror is evaluated fairly and to essentially the same standard. We cannot inadvertently or otherwise apply different evaluation standards.
Be careful that we do not inadvertently engage in discussions through the issuance of clarifications. The agency’s communications with awardees following submission of initial proposals during which awardees made multiple changes to the evaluated rates constituted discussions according to the GAO and required the agency to establish a competitive range and conduct discussions with all competitive range offerors. In this case award was made without discussions but the agency had issued clarification requests concerning proposed costs. These clarification requests made previously unacceptable proposals acceptable for award and therefore constituted a material change to their proposal. GAO reiterated that communications “constitute discussions unless the mistake is minor and both the existence of the mistake and what was actually intended are clearly apparent from the face of the proposal.” In this case they also reiterated the need to conduct a cost realism assessment when the majority of the contract effort will be performed on a cost-reimbursement basis.
9/17/2018

12. Watch Items Past Performance
Collection of Data and Evaluation of Past Performance is time consuming
Number of Proposals Received Increases the PCAG work
SSET Chairperson must stay engaged with the PCAG chairperson
Make sure the PCAG realizes the significance of the tasks
Importance of PCAG staying on a schedule
Oversight of evaluation of the past performance data
Understand their planned past performance part of the briefing to SSA/SSAC
SSET Chairperson must work on maintaining team morale
DO NOT fall into the trap some SSET Chairs have—they focused on the Mission Capability/Proposal Risk and Cost/Price but thought the PCAG could take care of the Past Performance. It caused them a lot of problems and busted source selection schedule.
The number of proposals significantly increases the amount of work the PCAG has to do. Example: Three proposals with one subcontractor each would be much easier to gather data on than 25 proposals with five or more subcontractors on each team.
When determining the number of people for the PCAG, think about the anticipated number of proposals. Do you think the offerors will use several subcontractors for your acquisition?
The source selection process requires long days/weeks to accomplish the evaluation, briefings, and documentation. As the SSET chairperson you should work on maintaining morale within the team and ensure that the members all work together as a team.
9/17/2018

13. Available Tools Template/Guides SS Training
ASP Executive Summary Template
SAF/AQ ASP Template
AF Past Performance Evaluation Guide
AF PAR Guide
Source Selection Decision Document Guide
SS Training
SS Team Training
RFP Preparation of Sections M and L
Evaluation of Proposals
Mission Capability
Past Performance
Cost/Price
Samples of Initial Evaluation Briefing
ASP Executive Summary Template and ASP Template Charts are available at:
Use web site to find the following:
Mandatory Procedures MP5315.3, Source Selection including Information Guidance
Information Guidance, IG (a)(2), Past Performance Evaluation Guide
Informational Guidance, IG , PAR
Source Selection Decision Document
The person presenting this training should provide a sample of an Initial Evaluation Briefing including a way to brief past performance.
9/17/2018