Loren Data's SAM Daily™

FBO DAILY ISSUE OF MAY 21, 2010 FBO #3100
SOLICITATION NOTICE

D -- E-Governemnt and Enterprise Architecture Program

Notice Date

5/19/2010
 

Notice Type

Justification and Approval (J&A)
 

NAICS

541519 — Other Computer Related Services
 

Contracting Office

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, WO-AQM IT Support, 333 Broadway Blvd, SE, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87102
 

ZIP Code

87102
 

Solicitation Number

AG-7604-C-07-0025(Mod-03)
 

Archive Date

6/10/2010
 

Point of Contact

James R. Jefferis, Phone: 5058423389
 

E-Mail Address

jjefferis@fs.fed.us
(jjefferis@fs.fed.us)
 

Small Business Set-Aside

N/A
 

Award Number

AG-7604-C-07-0025
 

Award Date

5/11/2010
 

Description

THIS NOTICE CORRECTS/REPLACES NOTICE ISSUED 17 MAY 2010 Justification for Other than Full and Open Competition MODIFICATION TO FOREST SERVICE CONTRACT AG-7604-C-07-0025 E-GOVERNMENT/ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE MANAGEMENT AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT Washington Office AQM IT Branch 1. Nature/Description of Action. The FS Electronic Government program was chartered by the FS Executive Leadership Team (ELT) in 2001 in response to a Presidential mandate (commonly referred to as The President’s Management Agenda). The Electronic Government Act of 2002 elevated the mandate to law, re-emphasizing the federal government’s commitment to delivering services to citizens electronically. The Forest Service’s investment in electronic government has correspondingly grown over the years and is now in the range of $30-$40 million a year. In addition to the electronic government mandates, federal agencies have been required to develop and maintain Enterprise Architecture (EA) programs since the enactment of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996. Emphasis on this program, particularly from OMB, has increased steadily to the point where demonstrating EA compliance and proficiency is becoming an IT budget determinant for federal agencies. The FS led efforts for the Electronic Government and Enterprise Architecture programs are dependent on specialized expertise in a great many technical and business analysis domains. Personnel having these skills are not yet found to any significant degree in the federal work force. As a consequence, agencies are critically dependent on acquiring this expertise through contracting. The Electronic Government - Enterprise Architecture Technical and Management Services Contract (e-Gov Contract) is the vehicle by which the Forest Service implements projects that are transforming the way the FS does business in the Electronic Age. This justification seeks approval for the following modifications to Forest Service contract AG-7604-C-07-0025 issued to Innovative Solutions Group, Inc. (ISG). a.Increasing the contract ceiling from $60M to $75M for work within scope The incumbent contractor, Innovative Solutions Group (ISG), is a certified Vietnam Era Veteran Owned Small Business (VOSB). The company recently applied for Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) certification. Their current contract performance is excellent. 2.Description of Supplies/Services. This contract provides the Forest Service with a vehicle for fast and effective access to State-of-the-Art business analysis, technical analysis, software development, and enterprise architecture services to support the Forest Service electronic Government (e-Government) and Enterprise Architecture (EA) initiatives. The contract requires the contractor to supply all personnel and resources necessary to provide the Forest Service with management and technical support services for both the e-Government and EA programs. The contractor has performed the following work through task orders issued under aforementioned contract. a.Recreation One Stop (R1S), Recreation Information Data Base (RIDB). b.Field Data Automation/Mobile Computing c.Weather Information Management System (WIMS) Support Fire and Aviation Management (F&AM) d.Enterprise Content Management & Office of Regulatory and Management Services (ORMS) Modernization e.Electronic Research f.Web Information Delivery (FS web internet and intranet web portals) g.National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Portal Support h.e-Commerce/e-Collections Support for Symbols.gov i.Enterprise Architecture Office Support j.USDA/FS Enterprise Architecture Repository Support k.Electronic Forms (including Government Paperwork Elimination Act [GPEA] compliance) l.Information Resource (IR) Governance (Capital Planning & Investment Control (CPIC), Earned Value Management (EVM), & EA) m.Streamlining Permitting n.Business Requirements Management and Information Management o.Electronic Management of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Projects (eMNEPA) p.FS Compliance with USDA eAuthentication q.Virtual Incident Procurement (VIPR) Support r.FS Applications Architecture s.FS Data Center Operations t.Operate Program Management Office. This contract has also served as a vehicle for the FS to rapidly engage the services of specific Subject Matter Experts (SME) as well as to quickly start and complete small highly visible projects such as Customer Feedback, People & Places, Information Security and the FS Strategic IR Framework that would have required significantly longer timeframes for implementation if they were contracted out individually. This contract was solicited on September 07, 2005, as a competitively-awarded 8(a) set-aside Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract with provisions for firm, fixed-price or time and material task order pricing. The contract was for a base period of two (2) years and three (3) one-year options with a ceiling of $12 million per year over the period of performance of the contract. The contract was awarded on May 1, 2006 with an initial ceiling of $24 million. In February 2008 USDA issued a Delegation of Procurement Authority (DPA-08-004) for this contract that allowed the FS to raise the ceiling to the amount contemplated in the solicitation of $60 million. The current contract period of performance is through May 1, 2010. Although, one 1-year option period remains (May 1, 2010 through April 30, 2011), it is considered to be in the best interest of the government not to exercise the option, but to extend the contract for six months (May 1, 2010 through November 30, 2010) to allow time for a new competitive contract. The problem is that no ceiling remains to allow the issuance of additional new task orders or modifications to existing task orders. The contractor has up to one year after contract expiration to deliver on any work not completed prior to this expiration. To date the FS has obligated approximately $60 million to the contract over a 4-year period. It is estimated that an additional $15 million (beyond the current $60 million ceiling) is required to meet the proposed additional six month period of performance. This would yield a total ceiling price of $75 Million. The estimates for upcoming tasks in the following table reflect the program’s best estimate of what will be required to perform work during the increased period of performance: Fiscal YearActual Funds Obligated 2006$13.2M 200711.3M 200814.2M 200916.5M 2010$4.8M Total$60.0M Fiscal YearEstimated Funds 2010 $15.0M Total Estimated $15.0M Total Obligated $60.0M Projected Total Ceiling $75.0M 3. Statutory Authority for Raising the Contract Ceiling and extending the period of performance. The statutory authority for the action proposed in this justification includes the following: 41 USC 253(c)(1) and FAR Subpart 6.302-1 Only one responsible source, including FAR Subpart 6.302-1(a)(2)(ii) Follow-on contracts and FAR Subpart 6.302-1(b)(1) Unique capabilities: The services required by the FS are available, for the extension period discussed (i.e., prior to when a recompeted contract could be awarded), from only one responsible source and no other type of services will satisfy FS requirements. 4. Demonstration of Contractor's Unique Qualifications and nature of the acquisition that requires use of the cited authority. ISG’s unique qualifications applicable to statutory authority 41 USC 253(c)(1) and FAR Subpart 6.302-1 “Only one responsible source” are as follows: a.FAR Subpart 6.302-1(a)(2)(ii) Follow-on Contract. The funding for the subject contract represents a sizeable investment in the present contractor team for the FS e-Government and EA programs. Significant work remains to be completed. Awarding one or more short term new contracts to continue ongoing work while efforts unfold to award a new competitive contract represents a substantial risk to the FS in terms of: a) duplicate effort to get a new contractor up to speed on applications currently under development, b) getting current work completed in the time required, and c) loss of subject matter expertise for existing tasks and agency-specific knowledge. There is not a reasonable expectation that these kinds of losses could be recovered by the FS through competition of the work that would be accomplished by contract modification to the subject contract. Existing task orders under current contract have resulted in reaching the contract ceiling. Funding for the current task orders is expected to be expended by the end of March 2010. If the ceiling is not raised the contractor support for a significant number of mission critical projects will have to stop until such time as a replacement contract is put in place or contractor services for individual projects are obtained through alternative contract vehicles such as negotiating sole source contracts with certified 8(a) minority owned small businesses. It is quite possible that the replacement contract effort for the entire requirement could take up to one year to complete and would thus leave a significant gap in FS EA e-Gov contractor support. Negotiating alternative sole source contract vehicles for individual projects could take three months or more to complete, especially if six or more contracts are to be issued to meet the full range of services required. Competitive, individual, short term, replacement contracts would take even longer because of the time necessary to conduct a competition for each portion of the e-Gov contract currently in place. Any of these alternatives add significant workload to an already understaffed agency staff. In addition, a gap in the contracting support for many critical projects would occur and result in the FS losing a sizeable amount of intellectual capital, workforce momentum, and key contractor personnel. Additional detail concerning these losses is provided in part c. below. b.FAR Subpart 6.302-1(b)(1) Unique Capabilities. ISG created a consortium of small companies with unique experience and expertise relative to the FS’s e-Government and EA programs. ISG has also brought additional small businesses on board as the need has arisen. ISG has subcontracted to a total of thirty-four (34) other small businesses. The list of the thirty-four (34) small businesses and consulting firms that ISG has subcontracted to over the last three years is contained in attachment A. Since contract inception, almost four years ago, ISG developed unique FS e-Gov knowledge and expertise as the incumbent contractor. It is estimated that it would take 12 months or more for another contractor to gain the overall knowledge and expertise that ISG currently has on this FS e-Gov contract. Because of this unique partnership it could take up to six separate contracts with various companies to meet the single contract under ISG currently. c.Rationale for Contract Ceiling Increase 1.The Enterprise Architecture and Electronic Government work has matured, in the last 3-3/4 years, from experimental innovation to a proven methodology to dramatically improve the effectiveness and efficiency of agency business processes. The success stories from these efforts are starting to get wide spread exposure and discussion, in part because Communication of proven Business Solution development successes is a step in the methodology. The result of this spread of the success stories is a steady increase in requests for Business Analysis and Enterprise Architecture contractor support from efforts all around the agency; efforts that are striving to drive out costs, increase outputs, and improve outcomes achieved by, unit and staff business processes. This amount of very legitimate business need for using the EA eGov contract was not foreseen when the contract was initially put together. 2.The initial contract anticipated a small amount of use by other USDA agencies partnering with the FS. This past fiscal year (2009) that anticipation underwent an almost $3 million dollar expansion, in part, as USDA OCIO adopted key aspects of the FS EA approach and thus found the FS EA contractors as the obvious source for their support needs. The major factor in USDA use of the contract resulted from the FS success with the USDA mandated Web Portal implementation which caught the attention of the NRCS Office of Communications. NRCS leadership subsequently approved a $6 million, 3-year effort to "clone" the FS Web Portal framework and "reuse" a great many of the Portal components developed and perfected in the FS efforts. The obvious contractor support option for the NRCS effort was the FS Portal contractor team. Word of the FS success and the NRCS collaboration with FS on the Web Portal implementation is fast getting around to other agencies in the Department and can be expected to generate additional demand for use of the FS contract. These kinds of developments were not at all foreseen in the establishment of the initial contract ceiling and are now expected to account for up to $4 to $5 million a year. The amount of annual increase is being limited to the $8 million/yr because that is the most the current FS EA eGov staff (permanent federal employees) can adequately manage. Both sources of change described above have potential to grow fast enough that the $8 million/yr will leave unmet demand. The hard constraint for meeting that demand will be lack of federal staff. These supply vs. demand factors will be addressed as the FS CIO plans the follow-on contracting strategy and vehicle. 5. Efforts made to ensure that offers are solicited from as many potential sources as is practicable. Not applicable. 6. The contracting officer has determined that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable. This is based on the competitive and historical pricing data obtained. 7. The market research conducted and results. Adequate competition was received initially. Despite the recent economic down-turn there is no indication that resolicitation would result in lower prices to the Government for these services. Market research was based on initial offers received and then informally validated based on experience of the current acquisition team with pricing for similar professional services. 8. Other facts supporting the use of other than full and open competition. The estimated cost to the Government might sustain if the contract must be recompeted in lieu of increasing the existing contract ceiling is $50 million of loss to applications under development but not yet completed. This estimate was developed by the e-Gov Program managers and based on experience with the tasks that are underway for the program. The estimate of the loss due to degraded fire support should the Weather Information Management System (WIMS) alone lose contractor support could resulting in potential loss of life and near certain loss of property is at least $100 million. This estimate is quite conservative as: a) loss of life is not something to be measured in dollars, and b) in the wildland urban interface, credible estimation techniques value a single acre lost to wildfire in the neighborhood of $1 million dollars. 9. Listing of the sources that expressed, in writing, an interest in the acquisition. Not applicable. 10. Actions the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers to competition before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services required. Efforts to recompete the contract were initiated in late spring 2009 but existing workload for the CIO has caused these efforts to proceed slower than expected. This requirement will be competed in the future as it was in the past. A recompetition will be conducted with a competitive award in time to allow for sufficient transition of ongoing work to a new contractor.
 

Web Link

FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/USDA/FS/WOAQMITS/AG-7604-C-07-0025(Mod-03)/listing.html)
 

Place of Performance

Address: 1601 N. Kent St., Suite 1013, Arlington, Virginia, 22209, United States

Zip Code: 22209
 

Record

SN02154417-W 20100521/100519235153-bfb2f8a53510c93a46eafc426b75a0bf (fbodaily.com)
 

Source

FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)

---

| FSG Index  |  This Issue's Index  |  Today's FBO Daily Index Page |