1. Source Selection Authority
(SSA)
This is just-in-time training for you as the Source Selection Authority (SSA) on an Air Force source selection.
9/17/2018

2. OVERVIEW Source Selection Organization
AF Source Selection Key Participants
SSA’s Roles and Responsibilities
Acquisition Ethics
Conflict of Interest
Procurement Integrity Act
Source Selection Process
Overview
Areas that require a significant amount of your time and effort
Quick Look
Competitive Range
Sample Charts
Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD)
Watch Items
Other Training
9/17/2018

3. 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

4. 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

5. SSA Roles and Responsibilities
Source Selection Authority (SSA)
Responsible for proper and efficient conduct of source selection IAW mandatory procedures.
Appoint chairpersons for SSET and SSAC when used.
Establish team and ensure team membership remains consistent for duration of selection process.
Ensure all involved in source selection are knowledgeable of policy/procedures for properly and efficiently conducting source selection.
Ensure no senior leader is assigned to or performing multiple leadership roles in the source selection.
Ensure all are briefed and knowledgeable of law regarding unauthorized disclosure of source selection information.)
FAR (b) The source selection authority shall
(1) Establish an evaluation team, tailored for the particular acquisition, that includes appropriate contracting, legal, logistics, technical, and other expertise to ensure a comprehensive evaluation of offers;
(2) Approve the source selection strategy or acquisition plan, if applicable, before solicitation release;
(3) Ensure consistency among the solicitation requirements, notices to offerors, proposal preparation instructions, evaluation factors and subfactors, solicitation provisions, or contract clauses, and data requirements;
(4) Ensure that proposals are evaluated based solely on the factors and subfactors contained in the solicitation (10 U.S.C. 2305(b)(1) and 41 U.S.C. 253b(d)(3));
(5) Consider the recommendations of advisory boards or panels (if any); and
(6) Select the source or sources whose proposal is the best value to the Government ( U.S.C. 2305(b)(4)(B) and 41 U.S.C. 253b(d)(3)).
AFFARS MP5315.3, paragraph states that the SSA shall:
Be responsible for the proper and efficient conduct of the source selection IAW this procedure.
Appoint chairperson for the SSET and SSAC when used.
Establish a source selection team and ensure that the team membership remains consistent for the duration of the selection process.
Ensure all involved in the source selection are knowledgeable of policy and procedures for properly and efficiently conducting the source selection.
For ACAT or major services (Category 1 and 1A) acquisitions, ensure no senior leader is assigned to or performing multiple leadership roles in the source selection.
Ensure all involved in the source selection are briefed and knowledgeable of Subsection 27(a) of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 USC Sec. 423 and FAR 3.104) regarding unauthorized disclosure of source selection information.
9/17/2018

6. SSA Roles and Responsibilities
Source Selection Authority (SSA)
Ensure all persons receiving source selection information are instructed to comply with standards of conduct and sign the Source Selection Non-Disclosure Agreement.
Approve the Source Selection Plan (SSP) before release of RFP.
Determine if award without discussions is appropriate
Establish competitive range, approve entering discussions, and approve release of Evaluation Notices (ENs)
Select the source whose proposal offers best value
Document decision in Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD)
AFFARS MP5315.3, states that the SSA shall:
Ensure all persons receiving source selection information are instructed to comply with applicable standards of conduct (including procedures to prevent the improper disclosure of source selection information) and sign the Non-Disclosure Agreement.
Approve the Source Selection Plan before release of RFP and approve subsequent revisions to the plan. For changes to the source selection team membership, see paragraph
Review all necessary information prior to entering discussions to determine if award without discussions is appropriate.
Establish the competitive range, approve entering discussions, and approve release of evaluation notices (ENs). Other types of ENs (Clarification and Communications) can be released prior to defining a competitive range. The SSA may designate the CO as the approval authority for release of ENs in the Source Selection Plan.
Select the source or sources whose proposal offers the best value to the Government.
Base the decision on an integrated assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in the solicitation. While the SSA may use reports and analyses prepared by others, the decision shall represent the SSA’s independent judgment.
Document the supporting rationale in the Source Selection Decision Document.
9/17/2018

7. Acquisition Ethics
The following set of charts on Acquisition Ethics will be briefed to each member of the source selection team.
9/17/2018

8. Ethics
As Federal officials and personnel, we act for the benefit of the American public, not for private interests. The ethics rules are intended to ensure that we perform our mission with that public interest in mind. Our adherence to ethics principles, and the rules that implement them, is important because it upholds the public’s confidence in the integrity of our Government.
Slide and notes from OSD Ethics Training 2005
9/17/2018

9. Regulations on Ethics
There are numerous executive orders, laws, regulations, standards and guidelines on ethics
Sources especially important to acquisition professionals are the following:
Executive Order 12674, Principles of Ethical Conduct for Government officers and employees
Procurement Integrity Act
DoD Joint Ethics Regulations
FAR Part 3, DFARS Part 203, AFFARS Part Improper Business Practices & Personal Conflicts of Interest
Executive Order 12674, April 12, 1989 as amended.
Procurement Integrity Act was enacted in Congress revised the law in The revised version went into effect on 1 Jan The law is implemented in the FAR
DoD R, Joint Ethics Regulation provides specific guidance for DoD personnel.
9/17/2018

10. Fundamental Basis for Ethics
Federal employees hold their positions as a public trust
US citizens have a right to expect that all federal employees will place loyalty to the Constitution, laws and ethical principles above private gain
Federal employees shall fulfill that public trust by adhering to general principles of ethical conduct as well as specific ethical standards
Federal employees must avoid any action that would create the appearance of violating ethical standards and laws
By observing these laws and ethical standards, federal employees help to ensure that citizens have complete confidence in the integrity of Government operations and programs
9/17/2018

11. Employees’ Responsibilities under Executive Order 12674 (as amended)
Employees MUST …
Place loyalty to the Constitution, the laws, and ethical principles above private gain.
Act impartially to all groups, persons, and organizations.
Give an honest effort in the performance of your duties.
Protect and conserve Federal property.
Disclose fraud, waste, and abuse, and corruption to appropriate authorities.
Fulfill in good faith your obligations as citizens, and pay your Federal, State, and local taxes.
Comply with all laws providing equal opportunity to all persons, regardless of their race, color, religion
(Chart from OSD 2005 Ethics Training.)
Your responsibilities under the Executive Order on ethical principles for Government personnel, are summarized in this slide and the next one. DO
Place Loyalty to the Constitution, the Laws, and Ethical Principles above Private Gain.
Act Impartially to all Groups, Persons, and Organizations.
Give an Honest Effort in the Performance of your Duties.
Protect and Conserve Federal Property.
Disclose Fraud, Waste, Abuse, and Corruption
Fulfill Obligations as Citizens, and Pay your Taxes.
Comply with Equal Opportunity Laws
9/17/2018

12. Employees’ Responsibilities under Executive Order 12674 (as amended)
Employees MUST NOT …
Use nonpublic information to benefit yourself or anyone else.
Solicit or accept gifts from persons or parties that do business with or seek official action from DoD (unless permitted by an exception).
Make unauthorized commitments or promises that bind the government.
Use Federal property for unauthorized purposes.
Take jobs or hold financial interests that conflict with your government responsibilities.
Take actions that give the appearance that they are illegal or unethical.
(Chart from OSD 2005 Ethics Training. Red added for emphasis to source selection training.)
DO NOT
Use Nonpublic Information to Benefit Yourself or Associates
Solicit or Accept Gifts from Parties Doing Business With or Seeking Official Action from DoD
Make Unauthorized Commitments or Promises
Use Federal Property for Unauthorized Purposes
Take Jobs or Hold Financial Interests that Conflict with our Government Responsibilities.
Take Actions that even Appear to be Illegal or Unethical
9/17/2018

13. Ethics in Acquisition
Per OSD-AT&L Ethics Training, the core ethical principles for acquisition professionals are the following :
Shall not hold conflicting financial interests
Shall not use public office for private gain
Shall not engage in conflicting outside employment
Shall not give preferential treatment
Shall protect and conserve Federal property
9/17/2018

14. Conflict of Interest
Conflict of Interest -- Mandatory Disqualification
You may not participate personally & substantially (e.g., make a decision, give advice, make a recommendation) in any government matter that would affect the financial interests of:
You, your spouse, or your child
Your general partner
An organization in which you are serving as an officer, director, trustee, general partner or employee, OR
An organization with which you are negotiating for employment, or have an arrangement for future employment
DoD R
Section 2. Conflict of Interest—(18 U.S.C. 208)(reference (b))
9/17/2018

15. Conflict of Interest
Conflict of Interest -- Discretionary Disqualification
Your supervisor may disqualify you from participating in a government matter that affects the financial interests of:
A member of your household
A relative with whom you have a close personal relationship
An organization with which you are an “active participant” (such as committee chairperson)
A company with which you have an off-duty business relationship
An organization in which you served within the last year as an officer, director, trustee, consultant, contractor or employee
An organization in which your spouse is currently serving as an officer, director, trustee, consultant, contractor or employee
AFFARS MP5303, Improper Business Practices and Personal Conflicts of Interest, sets forth the procedure for disqualification of a person or the Contracting Officer’s Request for Exception to FAR for award of a contract to government employee.
9/17/2018

16. Conflict of Interest
Conflict of Interest -- Discretionary Disqualification
Balancing Test: In above situations, supervisor should allow employee to participate in the matter only if supervisor determines that government’s need to have that employee participate in the matter outweighs the appearance problems that would result
Supervisor who makes this judgment must be commissioned officer or civilian GS-12 or above (exception for General Officer commanders, this determination is made by Legal)
The contracting officer and supervisor must seek legal review and coordination on their decision to remove or let an employee participate in the source selection.
9/17/2018

17. Conflict of Interest Conflict of Interest – Stock
Federal employees may not work on any government matter (e.g. source selection) that affects the financial interests of a company, if they (their spouse or child) own stock in the company
Exception: if value of stock owned by you, your spouse or child in all the companies involved in the matter is $15,000 or less
The Source Selection Authority (SSA) must be advised on any Conflict of Interest Issues—Either disqualification or retention decisions
The SSA must be made aware of any conflict of interest issue no matter whether the Contracting Officer and legal recommend removing the person from the source selection OR retaining the person based on a determination that there is no conflict of interest.
9/17/2018

18. Procurement Integrity Act
Procurement Integrity Act (FAR 3-104)
Prohibition on disclosing procurement information – Ban applies to:
Current Federal employees
Former Federal employees
Individuals such as contractor employees who are currently advising the government regarding the procurement
Individuals such as contractor employees who have advised the government regarding the procurement but are no longer doing so
Prohibition on obtaining procurement information other than as provided by law
Ban applies to everyone including Federal and contractor personnel
FAR (a) This section implements section 27 of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (the Procurement Integrity Act).
FAR Statutory and related prohibitions, restrictions, and requirements.
(a) Prohibition on disclosing procurement information.
(b) Prohibition on obtaining procurement information. A person must not, other than as provided by law, knowingly obtain contractor bid or proposal information or source selection information before the award of a contract to which the information relates.
Procurement Integrity Law enacted congress in Revised in Law is implemented in FAR
9/17/2018

19. Procurement Integrity Act
Requires agency official (officer, employee, member of the uniformed services) to report employment contacts by or with a competing contractor
Promptly report the contact in writing to the employee’s supervisor and to the designated ethics official, AND
Either:
Reject the possibility of employment, OR
Disqualify himself or herself from further personal and substantial participation in the procurement until the agency has authorized the employee to resume participation in the procurement on the grounds that:
The company the employment contact was with is no longer a bidder or offeror in the procurement, OR
All discussions between the employee and the company regarding possible employment have terminated without an agreement for employment
FAR (c)(1) (c) Actions required when an agency official contacts or is contacted by an offeror regarding non-Federal employment.
(i) Promptly report the contact in writing to your supervisor and to the agency ethics official; and
(ii) Either reject the possibility of non-Federal employment or disqualify himself or herself from further personal and substantial participation in that Federal agency procurement until such time as the agency authorizes the official to resume participation in that procurement.
FAR (d) Prohibition on former official’s acceptance of compensation from a contractor. A former official of a Federal agency may not accept compensation from a contractor that has been awarded a competitive or sole source contract, as an employee, officer, director, or consultant of the contractor within a period of 1 year after such former official—
(i) Served, at the time of selection of the contractor or the award of a contract to that contractor, as the PCO, the SSA, a member of a source selection evaluation board, or the chief of a financial or technical evaluation team in a procurement in which that contractor was selected for award of a contract in excess of $10M;
(ii) Served as the program manager, deputy program managers, or ACO for a contract in excess of $10M awarded to that contractor; or
(iii) Personally made for the Federal agency a decision to—
(A) Award a contract, subcontract, modification of a contract or subcontract, or a task order of delivery order in excess of $10M;
(B) Established overhead or other rates for contract or contracts valued in excess of $10M;
(C) Approve issuance of a contract payment or payments in excess of $10M to that contractor; or
(D) Pay or settle a claim in excess of $10M with that contractor.
9/17/2018

20. Procurement Integrity Act
A one-year ban on accepting compensation from the contractor on acquisitions over $10M
Applies to people serving on a source selection such as the Contracting Officer (CO), Program Manager (PM), SSA, members of the Source Selection Evaluation Team (SSET), etc.
Can apply regardless of whether one retires, resigns or separates from government
Applies to accepting compensation as an employee, officer, director or consultant of the contractor
Ban does not apply to accepting compensation from any division or affiliate of a contractor that does not produce “the same or similar products or services” as the entity of the contractor that is responsible for the contract the employee was involved in (such as a commercial division of the contractor)
FAR (d) FAR (d) Prohibition on former official’s acceptance of compensation from a contractor. A former official of a Federal agency may not accept compensation from a contractor that has been awarded a competitive or sole source contract, as an employee, officer, director, or consultant of the contractor within a period of 1 year after such former official—
(i) Served, at the time of selection of the contractor or the award of a contract to that contractor, as the PCO, the SSA, a member of a source selection evaluation board, or the chief of a financial or technical evaluation team in a procurement in which that contractor was selected for award of a contract in excess of $10M;
(ii) Served as the program manager, deputy program managers, or ACO for a contract in excess of $10M awarded to that contractor; or
(iii) Personally made for the Federal agency a decision to—
(A) Award a contract, subcontract, modification of a contract or subcontract, or a task order of delivery order in excess of $10M;
(B) Established overhead or other rates for contract or contracts valued in excess of $10M;
(C) Approve issuance of a contract payment or payments in excess of $10M to that contractor; or
(D) Pay or settle a claim in excess of $10M with that contractor.
The 1-year prohibition begins on the date—
(i) Of contract award for positions described or date of contractor selection if the official was not serving in the position on the date of award;
(ii) The official last served in the of the positions described
(iii) The official made on of the decisions described
(3) A former official of a Federal agency is not prohibited from accepting compensation from any division or affiliate of a contractor that does not produce the same or similar products or services, as the entity of the contractor that is responsible for the contract.
9/17/2018

21. Procurement Integrity and Ethics Summary
All source selection participants and advisors must review, fully understand and adhere to these ethical standards and laws
Never risk compromising the integrity of a source selection
Refer all ethics questions and concerns to the contracting officer and legal
Ask yourself if a reasonable person who knew the relevant facts may think that the law or ethical standards had been violated
Avoid even the appearance that you are violating the law or any ethical principle
Remember -- any violations may subject you to administrative, civil or criminal penalties
Each person shall sign a Source Selection Information Briefing Certificate.
Contact the CO and Legal if you have questions
Specific guidance for DoD personnel may be found in DoD ‑R, Joint Ethics Regulation.
AFFARS requires any individual requiring access to source selection information as a result of participating on a source selection or in the performance of their duties shall sign a Source Selection Information Briefing Certificate (See MP5315.3, Attachment 1).
9/17/2018

22. Source Selection Process
9/17/2018

23. 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

24. Source Selection Authority
Areas that require a significant amount of your time and effort:
Acquisition Strategy Panel
Acquisition Plan
Source Selection Plan including Section L (Instructions to the Offerors) and Section M (Evaluation Criteria)
Authorize release of Request for Proposals (RFP)
Competitive Range Briefing
Competitive Range Decision and Evaluation Notices approved with approval to enter into discussions, OR
Award without discussions
Briefing to release Request for Final Proposal Revision (FPR)
Decision Briefing
Proposal Analysis Report (PAR) signed by SSAC Chairperson
Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD)
For acquisitions over $100M there are four briefings to the SSA. The SSAC will participate in the last three briefings.
Acquisition Strategy Panel (ASP)
Competitive Range Briefing or Initial Evaluation Briefing
Pre-FPR Briefing
Decision Briefing
Documents that require SSA signature:
Source Selection Plan
Approve release of the RFP
Establish the competitive range
Approve release of the evaluation notices (ENs) or you may choose to delegate release of the ENs to the contracting officer after review by the source selection evaluation team (SSET) chairperson.
Approve release of request for Final Proposal Revision (FPR)
Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD)
9/17/2018

25. Source Selection
Only people who have signed the Source Selection Non-Disclosure Agreement are authorized to handle source selection sensitive packages.
Schedule for briefings must be met by the SSET to protect schedule on calendars of SSA and SSAC chairperson.
SSA appoints SSAC Chairperson and SSAC members.
Decide how to handle requests for meetings from competing contractors between receipt of proposals and award of contract.
Who in your organization do you want designated to handle/review the source selection packages submitted for your signature?
The amount of time required for Initial Evaluation Briefing, Pre-FPR Briefing, and Decision Briefing depends on the number of proposals received and the complexity of the acquisition. The schedule for the briefings is critical if award of the contract is required by a certain time. SSA, SSAC chairperson and SSET chairperson must work to meet and protect the dates established for these briefings. It is very difficult to re-schedule the briefing due to the senior level of personnel involved. Notwithstanding scheduling problems, it is better to re-schedule than to present a briefing when the team is not prepared.
The SSET will make recommendations to you for the SSAC chairperson and members. You may agree or choose someone else. Recommend that the person selected for the SSAC chairperson has an acquisition background. Consider including SAF/SB, SAF/GCQ, and a representative of the user.
You must treat all competing offerors equitably. If you have a meeting with one, then you should also agree to meet with others if they request a meeting. Suggest you along with GCQ decide how to handle request for meetings during the time from receipt of proposals until award of contract. The SSET chairperson must provide the list of offerors (prime and subcontractor) to the SSA and SSAC after receipt of proposals so they will be knowledgeable of what offerors are involved in the source selection.
9/17/2018

26. Quick Look Who submitted offers? Are proposals complete?
Ensure page count limitations
Have any exceptions to RFP requirements been noted?
Obvious showstoppers
Do proposals need to be loaded into any evaluation tool?
“Quick Look” information will be provided to the SSA
The Contracting Office will take a quick look at all proposals, making sure each proposal is complete, removing excess pages, and making a complete list of offerors including subcontractors.
The SSET Chairperson will provide list of offerors including subcontractors, significant exceptions to the RFP, and cost/price total amount to the SSA. The SSA may request a Quick Look briefing.
9/17/2018

27. Competitive Range
Reduction of Number of Offerors with whom Discussions will be held
When is a Competitive Range established?
After the SSET has completed the evaluation of all proposals
Assessed relative qualities based solely on factors and subfactors in RFP
If discussions will be conducted
Criteria for inclusion/elimination proposals from competitive range
Include all of the most highly rated proposals
Number may be limited for purposes of efficiency
FAR (c)(1) Agencies shall evaluate all proposals in accordance with (a), and, if discussions are to be conducted, establish the competitive range. Based on the ratings of each proposal against all evaluation criteria, the contracting officer shall establish a competitive range comprised of all of the most highly rated proposals, unless the range is further reduced for purposes of efficiency pursuant to paragraph (c)(2) of this section.
AFFARS (c)(1) “The SSA shall establish the competitive range.”
In determining whether to leave a proposal in the competitive range or eliminate it, you should consider the chance of the proposal being made acceptable.
9/17/2018

28. Competitive Range Briefing
May Recommend Elimination of one or more offerors from the Competitive Range
Must Provide Detail Sufficient to Support CO Recommendation for SSA Approval
SSET Presentation of Initial Evaluation Results for all Factors
Brief all Strengths, Deficiencies, and Uncertainties
SSA Approval to Enter Discussions
Release ENs
Should be Available for Review and Approval by SSA
SSA Approval of Interim Ratings for Release to Offerors
SSA Approval for Award Without Discussions
If awarding without discussions, SSAC chair (SSET chair if no SSAC) will provide a source selection recommendation to the SSA
Also provide a minority opinion if there is significant disagreement among the SSAC members
SSA Approval of Interim Ratings for Release to Offerors if Entering Discussions
Even if no offerors are being eliminated the SSA will receive an “Competitive Range Briefing” that details the initial evaluation status of all offerors and clearly identifies all issues requiring issuance of ENs. The SSA must approve the release of ENs before discussions are opened.
Examples of those people who would attend the briefing are: SSA, SSAC, SSET (all members) and source selection advisors.
Charts—Recommend listing strengths, deficiency, uncertainties, weaknesses etc., in descending order of importance on charts for each subfactor.
SSA will decide at the conclusion of this briefing to:
a. Award without discussions, or
b. Conduct discussions with all offerors or make a competitive range determination eliminating one or more offerors before conducting discussions.
9/17/2018

29. Sample Charts Example charts are provided for the following:
Mission Capability
Technical Rating
Risk Rating
Past Performance
The following charts are provided as samples of charts you may be presented in the Competitive Range Briefing.
9/17/2018

30. Sample Chart Format (Mission Capability Technical/Risk )
TECHNICAL RATING
Source Selection Information - See FAR 3.104
Competitive Range Briefing - For Official Use Only
FACTOR:
SUBFACTOR:
R, Y, G, B
OFFEROR:
(Subfactor)
STRENGTHS:
DEFICIENCIES:
RISK RATING
UNCERTAINTIES:
L, M, H, U
This is a SAMPLE chart to show one way of portraying the Mission Capability Subfactor Technical rating and the Risk rating on the same chart.
Recommend you show a sample chart in the briefing and explain to the SSA/SSAC what they will see in the way of information on the following set of charts for each offeror for the Mission Capability subfactors.
WEAKNESSES\SIGNIFICANT WEAKNESSES:
(Subfactor)
Source Selection Information - See FAR 3.104
Competitive Range Briefing - For Official Use Only
On the following slides, for each FACTOR/SUBFACTOR, the STRENGTHS, DEFICIENCIES and UNCERTAINTIES reported support the TECHNICAL RATING, and the SIGNIFICANT WEAKNESSES AND WEAKNESSES reported support the RISK RATING
9/17/2018

31. Sample Source Selection Briefing Charts Mission Capability Technical/Risk
Factor Mission Capability
Subfactor Subfactor 1—(name of subfactor)
Strength
State the Strength
Requirement: State what the requirement is and where in the RFP it was required.
How does the strength exceed the requirement?
Explain benefit to the Government of this strength
State whether strength will be added to contract OR is inherent in the proposal L
H/M/L
Technical Rating
This is a SAMPLE chart showing the information required for a strength. The SSET must provide the following information in the briefing chart: what requirement does the proposal exceed and where is it in Sec L & M of the RFP; clearly show how the strength exceeds the requirement, explain the benefit of this strength to the Government, and state how it will be captured in the contract.
The color rating for the subfactor is based on the complete evaluation results—strengths, deficiencies, and uncertainties.
Note: Strength does not automatically result in Green Or
Blue for Subfactor Rating
9/17/2018

32. Sample Source Selection Briefing Charts Mission Capability Technical/Risk
Factor Mission Capability
Subfactor Subfactor 1–(name of subfactor)
Deficiency
State the Deficiency
What requirement in the RFP did the offeror fail to meet? Where was the requirement?
Reference EN number
H/M/L
Technical Rating
The SSET should state what requirement the proposal failed to meet and where that requirement is in Section L & M of the RFP. Recommend you include the EN numbers on the briefing charts.
NOTE that 1 deficiency drives a RED color for the MC subfactor even if there are strengths. A proposal with one subfactor rated RED is unawardable. If you enter into discussions, the offeror will be given an opportunity to provide a response to the EN which may correct their deficiency.
Note: Deficiency drives RED at the Subfactor level.
RED means the proposal is unawardable.
9/17/2018

33. Note: Uncertainties Normally Drive Yellow Subfactor Rating
Sample Source Selection Briefing Charts Mission Capability Technical/Risk Y
Factor Mission Capability
Subfactor Subfactor 1—(name of subfactor)
Uncertainty
State item on which you need more information
or where the information is unclear.
What did the RFP require?
What did the offeror provide?
Reference EN number
H/M/L
Technical Rating
Note: Uncertainties Normally Drive
Yellow Subfactor Rating
9/17/2018

34. Sample Source Selection Briefing Charts Mission Capability Technical/Risk
B/G/Y
Factor Mission Capability
Subfactor Subfactor 1—(name of subfactor)
Weakness or Significant Weakness
State the Weakness or Significant Weakness
Will the weakness have an impact on schedule, cost or performance?
Did the offeror propose risk mitigation?
Reference EN number
Deficiency
Which significant weaknesses or combination of weaknesses is very likely to cause unmitigated disruption of schedule, drastically increase cost or severely degraded performance?
H/M/L
Risk Rating
The Risk Rating chart shows the weakness or significant weakness in the proposal for that subfactor. You should also show the offeror’s proposed mitigation, if any, and state whether or not the government agreed with that mitigation.
9/17/2018

35. Sample Source Selection Briefing Charts Past Performance
This is a SAMPLE chart for showing the combined data collected on one offeror. It is a way to show the data to the SSA/SSAC that is easily readable. It addition to this chart, the PCAG should have charts explaining their process, what date was collected, narrative observations they wanted to brief to the SSA/SSAC and a performance confidence assessment assigned this offeror.
E=Exceptional
VG=Very Good
S=Satisfactory
M=Marginal
U=Unsatisfactory
VR=Very Relevant
R=Relevant
SR=Somewhat Relevant
NR=Not Relevant
9/17/2018

36. Sample Source Selection Factor Evaluation Matrix
MISSION CAPABILITY
Subfactor 1
Subfactor 2
Subfactor 3
Technical
Rating
Risk
PAST PERFORMANCE*
*Assessed at subfactor, rated at factor level
PRICE/COST
A sample source selection factor evaluation matrix is for use when cost/price risk is not an evaluation factor. It is provided to show the evaluation and the integrated assessment.
Integrated assessment of above factors and subfactors will be
made in order to determine “best value” to the government.
9/17/2018

37. Factor Evaluation Matrix Including Cost/Price Risk
MISSION CAPABILITY
Subfactor 1
Subfactor 2
Subfactor 3
Technical
Rating
Risk
PAST PERFORMANCE*
*Assessed at subfactor, rated at factor level
PRICE/COST
This sample source selection factor evaluation matrix is used for those source selections including a Cost/Price Risk Factor.
Integrated assessment of above factors and subfactors will be
made in order to determine “best value” to the government.
9/17/2018

38. 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

39. Proposal Analysis Report (PAR)
Part I – Introduction
Acquisition background including requirements description
List of offerors (to include Competitive Range if appropriate)
Evaluation Factors/Subfactors
Part II – Description of Proposals
Focus on unique characteristics of each Proposal
No judgments, comparisons, Ratings
Part III – Evaluation Results
Results of evaluation of each Proposal against evaluation Factors/Subfactors
Strengths, Weaknesses and Deficiencies
Part IV – Comparative Analysis of Offerors
Comparison of Proposals by Factors and Subfactors
Assessment of Cost or Price, Past Performance, and Cost/Price Risk (if used)
Adequate price competition determination
Source Selection Recommendation (if applicable, any minority opinion)
Part V--Contracting
AFFARS MP , paragraph requires Proposal Analysis Report (PAR) for all acquisitions over $100M or as required by the SSA. The PAR shall be signed by the SSAC chairperson and the SSET chairperson. Based on an IG finding, recommend the CO sign to document that the price is fair and reasonable. Paragraph 8.6 defines the PAR as a report that fully documents the results of the evaluation of each proposal and the comparative analysis of all proposals within the competitive range.
The PAR includes the assessment of Cost or Price, past performance, mission capability technical and risk, and Cost/Price Risk (if applicable). The PAR includes the source selection recommendation (and if applicable, any minority opinion).
3. AFFARS MP5315.3, IG paragraph 7.10 discusses the PAR including the organization and what should be included. See AFFARS Information Guidance IG , PAR Guide.
Note to instructor: Discuss when to start preparation of PAR, how long the process make take, and additional information their SSA may require.
9/17/2018

40. Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD)
Provides SSA’s Integrated Assessment and Best Value Decision
Must track to Requirements, Evaluation Factors, Decision Briefing and PAR
Compares Proposals by Factors/Subfactors
Must be a stand alone document
Redacted copy will be provided to debriefed offerors
AFFARS MP , paragraph 7.12, Source Selection Decision. “A Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD) shall be prepared for all Air Force source selections; shall reflect the SSA’s integrated, comparative assessment and decision; and shall include the rationale for any business judgments—tradeoffs made or relied on by the SSA—including benefits associated with additional costs. The SSDD shall be the single summary document supporting selection of the best value proposal consistent with the stated evaluation criteria; it shall clearly explain the decision and document the reasoning used by the SSA to reach the decision.”
Paragraph ,” The SSDD is fully releasable to the Government Accountability Office and others authorized to receive proprietary and source selection information. When releasing a copy of the SSDD to offerors or to anyone not authorized to receive proprietary and source selection information, redacted material should be limited to that which is proprietary and that which shall continue to be protected as source selection information. The need to redact such information is not a sufficient reason to refrain from preparing a properly written SSDD.”
AFFARS MP5315.3, IG paragraph 7.12 states that the SSDD must compare aspects of the most competitive offers against each other; e.g., “I have decided Contractor A’s approach to factor.XX was better than [Contractor B’s] [all other offerors’] because Contractor A proposed, discussed, resolved, identified, possesses or whatever.”
Note to Instructor: Discuss time to prepare SSDD including review and signature.
9/17/2018

41. Watch Items The following areas need special attention by the SSET
Documentation
Mission Capability Technical and Risk Rating 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 Government Accountability 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.
(NOTE: SSET chairperson must place significant emphasis on accurate documentation.)
9/17/2018

42. Other Training
Source Selection Advisory Council Chairperson Module—1 hour
Source Selection Evaluation Team Chairperson Module
SSET chairperson roles and responsibilities –1 hour
Source Selection Evaluation Team Training—2 days
For SSET chairperson, technical, performance confidence assessment group (PCAG), contracting, cost/price members and advisors
Includes pre-solicitation, issuance of the request for proposal, evaluation of proposals, process of discussions, briefings and documentation.
Acquisition specific team training will allow members to ask relevant questions to their source selection
Follow-on Specific Training Available as required
Evaluation of Mission Capability
Evaluation of Past Performance
Cost/Price Evaluation
SSAC chairperson module available if required.
The SSET chairperson module will be presented to the SSET chairperson prior to the SSET training. This will provide the SSET chairperson with current requirements of the source selection regulations and provide an opportunity for he/she to ask questions and understand the overall process before the detail training session with the complete team.
The SSET training will be required for all AF source selections over $100M. Members must be assigned to the source selection in advance of this training and all members must attend the training sessions.
Additional training will be available to the team based on their needs.
9/17/2018