ࡱ> ` Rbjbj M l l l l  T5T5T585T5 xh66"666k8"? A$hH MI8"k8MMl l 66w2BRBRBRMvl 6 6BRMBRBRw}lt h 66 TT5M~* H0x ҈NP҈T҈ PBE BRG/IYBBBPfBBBxMMMM d*T5 T5 l l l l l l   Source Selection Plan For the Acquisition of Multi-Channel Contact Center Services 1.0 INTRODUCTION This Source Selection Plan establishes procedures for the Source Selection Organization (SSO) to evaluate offers submitted in response to the Request for Quotation (RFQ) for the acquisition of Multi-Channel Contact Center Services to support (identify services required). 1.1 Background (The requesting agency will be required to provide background information in sufficient detail to ensure that: (i) the requirement is properly identified, (ii) a timeline for the requirement, from its identification to the present is provided, (iii) the urgency of the requirements delineated, and (iv) any other information, necessary for GSA to complete required justifications prior to soliciting quotations, is developed.) 1.2 Scope of the Requirement The Contractor shall provide automated and attended customer support services to respond to inquiries about Federal government programs, policies, information sources and agencies from the general public, Congressional offices, business and professional communities, academia, government offices, and electronic and print media. The Contractor shall furnish the necessary facilities, personnel, equipment, supplies, and services, as required, to meet the requirements of the Government. The Contractor shall perform all technical and management functions, as described in XYZ Agencys Statement of Work, to plan, design, implement, operate, and manage the contact center solutions. In addition, the Contractor shall provide any special project support needed to analyze, plan, design, implement, operate and manage special customer support services that may be needed to meet the evolving needs of the Government. The contractor-provided contact center(s) shall be located within the contiguous 48 states. The Contractor shall respond to inquiries and fulfillment requests originated from within the United States and from foreign countries. 1.3 Acquisition Strategy The current contract will be replaced by a task order that will be competed under the Multi-channel Contact Center Program multiple award indefinite-delivery indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts that were awarded in July 2004. A request for quotation for the ABC Contact Center task will be issued to all of the IDIQ contract holders. This includes: ICT Group Incorporated Pearson Government Solutions Teletech Government Solutions Lockheed Martin Aspen Systems Datatrac Information Services, Inc. The Government will evaluate all quotations submitted in response to the request for quotation. Task order award will be made to the responsive, responsible offeror who provides the greatest-value solution to the Government. In determining greatest-value, the technical factor is significantly more important than the price factor. 2.0 SOURCE SELECTION ORGANIZATION (SSO) The SSO consists of the Source Selection Authority (SSA), the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO), the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP), the Price Evaluation Panel (PEP), and appropriate advisors. The following diagram depicts the SSO for this procurement:  2.1 Roles and Responsibilities The following sections describe the components of the SSO and their responsibilities and provide the names of the individuals appointed to the SSO. 2.1.1 Source Selection Authority The SSA is responsible for proper and efficient conduct of the source selection process, in accordance with the procedures in this Plan, and for making the final source selection decision. The SSA must approve of the final source selection decision. The Technical and Price Evaluation Panels report directly to the SSA. The SSA shall: ensure that the entire source selection process is conducted properly, efficiently, and with integrity, review and approve the source selection plan ensuring that evaluation and selection criteria are consistent with the requirements of the solicitation, ensure all quotations and source selection sensitive documents are accounted for and safeguarded, provide the evaluation committees with appropriate resources, guidance and special instructions as may be necessary for the conduct of the evaluation and selection process, regulate the flow of information throughout the process, and make the final selection after an in-depth review and analysis of recommendations and other information made available by the evaluation committees. 2.1.2 Technical and Price Evaluation Panels The TEP and PEP are the vital components of the source selection process because they conduct independent evaluations of offeror quotations. The TEP will review the non-price portions of the quotations, while the PEP reviews the pricing portions of the quotations. The TEP and PEP shall conduct their evaluations based on the factors and sub-factors identified in this Source Selection Plan, and present written reports to the SSA summarizing the results of their evaluations. The two panels perform their evaluations separately. The Chairpersons of the TEP and PEP will be required to attend SSA meetings to present their committees evaluations and recommendations. The PEP may sit in on the TEP presentation, however, TEP members shall not be exposed to cost information until after the SSA has made and documented a selection. 2.1.3 TEP and PEP Chairpersons The TEP and PEP Chairpersons have overall responsibility for the evaluation of quotations and presentation of the results from their respective committee areas to the SSA. Specific responsibilities of the Chairpersons include: Lead the panel members in the initial evaluation of quotations to determine if any are unacceptable. For any quotation found unacceptable, ensure that the rationale for so judging it is sufficiently documented. Lead the panel members in reviewing proposed findings and reaching a consensus on the validity of findings based on the rationale. Lead the panel members in classifying findings as strengths or weaknesses, and determining whether those strengths and weaknesses are major or minor. Ensure that all such classifications are supported by comprehensive justification. Ensure that findings requiring editing are reviewed by the originators to verify that the original intent has been preserved (if that is the objective) and that errors have not been introduced. Lead the panel members in developing a collective judgment from the findings as to numeric scores where applicable. (TEP Chair only) Lead in the review and completion of cost realism and the total evaluated price of each quotation. (PEP Chair only) Attempt to resolve any reservations or concerns of individual committee members. If resolution cannot be obtained, ensure that any significant reservations, concerns, or disagreements are documented in the report and presentation to the SSA. Lead the Panel members in determining proposed requests for clarification and substantiation. Lead in developing and presenting initial and final written reports and oral presentations to the SSA. Provide other support to the SSA as required. 2.1.4 TEP Members In addition to supporting the TEP Chairperson in the duties identified above, the responsibilities of the TEP members are to: Evaluate the non-price aspects of each quotation and prepare required documentation in accordance with the Source Selection Plan, the solicitation, and the FAR. Maintain records of notes and other data pertaining to the evaluation. Participate in all TEP meetings and consensus-building discussions. Ensure that all strengths and weaknesses are defined as major or minor and included in the committee report to the SSA. Assist the Chairperson and SSA as requested. 2.1.5 PEP Members The responsibilities of the PEP members are to: Evaluate the pricing quotation and prepare required documentation in accordance with the source selection plan, the solicitation, and the FAR. Maintain records of notes and other data pertaining to the evaluation. Participate in all PEP meetings and consensus-building discussions. Assist the Chairperson and SSA as requested. 2.1.6 Advisors 2.1.6.1 General Counsel Mr. John Cornell, Senior Associate Counsel, from the GSAs Office of General Counsel will advise the SSO on legal matters pertaining to this procurement. 2.1.6.2 Support Contractor The Government may procure the services of a support contractor to support the quotation evaluation process. Accordingly, representatives of the support contractor may be assigned as non-voting members only. As such, they may assist with the evaluations as deemed appropriate by the PCO. Contractor personnel who assist in the evaluation process may attend meetings provided they have a conflict of interest clause in their contracts and have signed the appropriate Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality Certification forms. The responsibilities of SSO Advisors are to: Advise and support the SSO, as needed or requested, in their areas of expertise, Review questions and findings, and assist at briefings if requested by the PCO. 2.2 SSO Membership Source Selection Authority  (This individual can either be the contracting officer or a program official from the requesting agency) Procurement Contracting Officer Robert H. Corey Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP)  (GSA highly recommends that this panel is populated with a mix of GSA program experts and program officials from the requesting agency)  Price Evaluation Panel (PEP) (GSA will provide the lead on this panel. TEP members will not have access to pricing information prior to the final scoring of the technical quotations.)  3.0 STANDARDS OF CONDUCT This section describes the standards of conduct that are imposed on members of the SSO, the procedures to be employed for information control during the source selection process, and the facilities to be employed for the activities of the SSO. All participants in the SSO shall abide by the rules of ethics for the conduct of Government business defined in the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch. SSO members are required to sign the Procurement Integrity Certification for Procurement Officials (GSA Optional Form 333). SSO members shall follow the specific standards of conduct applicable to the acquisition process which are described in Sections 3.1 through 3.3 of this plan. 3.1 Procurement Integrity All members of the ABC Contact Center SSO shall comply with FAR Part 3, Improper Business Practices and Personal Conflicts of Interest. This shall include safeguarding the quotations and related source selection documents at all times. It is vital that the receipt, storage, and handling of quotations be treated with all safeguards necessary to prevent anyone who is not directly involved in the evaluation process from obtaining information about the offerors quotation. 3.2 Conflicts of Interest No one having a financial interest in any offeror, a parent company of an offeror, or a subsidiary of an offeror shall be a member of the SSO. This includes individuals who have a spouse, minor child, or other household member who is employed by an offeror, a parent company of an offeror, or a subsidiary of an offeror; individuals who own stock in an offering company, including a parent company or a subsidiary of an offeror (this does not include ownership of mutual funds, which may hold such stock); and individuals who anticipate that they may seek employment with any offeror, a parent company, or a subsidiary of an offeror. Any member of the SSO who has such a financial interest shall notify the PCO. To obtain access to Source Selection Sensitive material, Government participants in the ABC Contact Center source selection will be required to sign the Certification Concerning Conflict of Interest. Non-Government employees participating in the source selection will be required to sign the Certification and Agreement of Contractor Support Personnel of the Absence of Conflicts of Interest. 3.3 Information Control All participants in the ABC Contact Center source selection will be required to follow the guidelines described in the following subsections regarding the processing and dissemination of information related to the acquisition. In addition to receiving briefings on physical security and information security rules and procedures, each member of the SSO will be required to sign the Certification Regarding Nondisclosure of Acquisition Information. 3.3.1 Communications with Contractors and Others The PCO will be the sole point of contact between the SSO and potential offerors. All communications between SSO members and offerors shall be made by, or with the express authorization of, the PCO. All inquiries regarding the acquisition (including those originating from Government personnel who are not members of the SSO) shall be referred to the PCO. The PCO will coordinate responses to all inquiries with appropriate GSA officials prior to release. No member of the SSO shall discuss any elements of the source selection process (e. g., the identity of SSO members; the identity of companies that have submitted quotations; any content of quotations, evaluation procedures, or evaluation results) with anyone who is not a cleared member of the SSO and who does not require the information in performance of these duties. As discussed in Section 3.3.3, any unauthorized communication shall be brought immediately to the attention of the PCO. The following additional restrictions will apply to the exchange of information among components of the SSO during the evaluation of offers: Cost-related information, including any offeror's pricing data, will not be shared between the Price Evaluation Team and the Technical Evaluation Team, except with the authorization of the PCO. Information contained within an offeror's Technical and Management Quotation will not be shared between the Technical Evaluation Team and the Price Evaluation Team, except with the authorization of the PCO. 3.3.2 Release of Information The release of acquisition-related information to the public will be strictly regulated by the PCO, who is solely responsible for the release of such information. All participants in the ABC Contact Center acquisition are bound by the nondisclosure agreement established for the acquisition. In order to maintain the fairness and objectivity of the evaluation and discussion process, SSO members must be diligent in assuring that source selection sensitive information is not disclosed that would: Give an offeror a competitive advantage, Indicate a competitive position between two or more offerors, Disclose an offeror's technical or management approach, pricing methodology, or past performance record, or Jeopardize GSA's position in the conduct of discussions The General Counsel's representatives will work closely with SSO members and will participate in meetings with offerors when requested to do so by the PCO. 3.3.3 Reporting Irregularities In the event of any apparent or suspected violation of the statutes, directives, or ethical standards governing the conduct of the ABC Contact Center source selection, SSO members shall immediately report such activities or events to the PCO. The PCO will report such irregularities to the GSA Assistant Inspector General. The Office of the Inspector General will notify the responsible GSA officials of the irregularities, as appropriate and necessary. 3.4 Source Selection Facility All ABC Contact Center source selection activities will be conducted in secure office facilities in the GSA Headquarters building at 1800 F Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20405. 4.0 SOURCE SELECTION ACTIVITIES 4.1 Training of Source Selection Evaluation Board Members Prior to the beginning of the quotation evaluation, members of the SSO will receive direction to prepare them for their specific roles in the source selection process. The SSO will be familiarized with the provisions of the SSP. In addition, evaluation team members assigned to the evaluation teams will receive instructions on the procedures that they will use in carrying out their duties. Members of the evaluation teams will receive training designed to bring all participants to a common understanding of the ABC Contact Center request for quotation and the quotation evaluation process. Training will focus on the scope and direction of the ABC Contact Center program and the objectives to be accomplished. Specific topics to be covered include: Structure and composition of the SSO, the responsibilities of each component of the SSO, and the working relationships among the components of the SSO. Source Selection activities and schedule. Standards of conduct applicable to each member of the SSO. This will include: (i) a review of applicable policies, regulations and statutes, (ii) restrictions of conflicts of interest and (iii) requirements for safeguarding the integrity of the acquisition process, Security Regulations and operating procedures applicable to the day-to-day work of the SSO. This will include: (i) document control procedures for handling proprietary and source selection sensitive materials, (ii) procedures governing contacts between members of the SSO and with representatives of outside organizations. Description of the physical office space and facilities assigned for the use of the SSO, along with a presentation on the rules and procedures for their use. This will include the storage of source selection sensitive material. 4.2 Receipt of Quotations All quotations will be received by the PCO at the location and by date and time called for in the Request for Quotation. The PCO will create a list of quotations received and will inventory the contents of each quotation. Once inventoried, the PCO will distribute the appropriate volumes to the team chairpersons for evaluation. 4.3 Evaluation of Quotations The PCO will maintain a log all quotations received. The log will contain the name and address of the offeror and the date and time the quotation was received. Control numbers will be assigned to each quotation. The control numbers will be used to track and control the quotations distributed to the individuals assigned to the SSO. Quotations will first be audited by the PCO to determine that they are complete and responsive to the solicitation instructions and quotation requirements and then distribute the quotations to the TEP and PEP chairpersons for distribution and evaluation. Once the PCO has determined that quotations are acceptable for further evaluation, the individual panel members will conduct separate initial evaluations of each quotation according to the guidelines contained in this Source Selection Plan. Evaluation of an offerors technical quotation will be evaluated independently from the price quotation. 4.3.1 Weighting of Factors in a Greatest Value Procurement Weighting involves the assignment of relative importance among the factors by assigning points to each factor. A common example of this is to decide between an offeror who offers more performance but at a high price and an offeror who offers marginally acceptable performance but at a very attractive price. 4.3.2 Overall Weighting Schedule for the ABC Contact Center Procurement A numerical scoring system which scores price will not be used. Price must be considered in every source selection, but this requirement does not necessitate the numeric scoring of price. Award will be made to the responsive, responsible offeror who provides the greatest-value solution to the Government. In determining the greatest value, the overall technical score is significantly more important than price. 4.3.2.1 Technical Evaluation Weighting Schedule An offerors overall technical score is determined by using the following weighting schedule: (Examples Only) (Examples Only) Management Plan: 50 percent Technology Approach: 25 percent Facility & Technology Infrastructure: 20 percent Experience: 15 percent Past Performance: 10 percent Overall Technical Score: 100 percent 4.4 Technical Evaluation Criteria Technical quotations will be evaluated individually for compliance and conformance with the solicitation requirements and the evaluation factors. Technical sub-factors will be rated individually using a numerical rating scale. As part of this initial evaluation, each member of the TEP will conduct a thorough, independent review of each quotation received and subsequent oral presentation by each offeror. TEP members shall assign a point rating to each of the evaluated technical sub-factors and identify and note all deficiencies, major and minor strengths and weaknesses. It is important to note that within each factor, each sub-factor is of equal value. After each TEP member has conducted an independent review of each quotation, the members will then deliberate as a body of the whole to reach a consensus point rating for each of the evaluated sub-factors, and to identify all deficiencies, major and minor strengths, and major and minor weaknesses to be described in an evaluation report. The descriptions shall contain sufficient explanations to justify the characterizations to a person who has not read the quotation. Additionally, information in the report may be used to debrief unsuccessful offerors. If the members are unable to come to a consensus rating for a sub-factor, they will determine the final point rating by majority vote. If a majority vote on the point rating cannot be reached on a sub-factor, the final point rating will be determined by obtaining the average point scoring of that sub-factor. The numerical rating of each technical sub-factor will then be combined and averaged to derive an overall rating for the relevant technical factor. TEP members shall after or during consensus dialogs compare quotations to one another to ensure that point ratings accurately represent the relative ranking of quotations. The TEP will not have access to price information during this evaluation process. The Technical Evaluation Team will use the following numerical ratings to rate the sub-factor elements of each offerors quotation: Example: RatingGeneral Description5The sub-factor clearly meets and consistently exceeds the Governments stated requirements in all areas. The information provided suggests a very low risk of less than satisfactory performance on the part of the offeror. 4The sub-factor meets the Governments stated requirements in all areas, and in some areas the offeror exceeds the Governments stated requirements. The information provided suggests a low risk of less than satisfactory performance on the part of the offeror.3The sub-factor meets the Governments stated requirements in all areas. The information provided suggests a moderate risk of less than satisfactory performance on the part of the offeror.2The sub-factor meets the Governments stated requirements in all areas, but in some areas, it barely meets the Governments stated requirements. The information provided suggests a substantial risk of less than satisfactory performance on the part of the offeror.1The sub-factor fails to meet any of the Governments stated requirements. The information provided suggests a very substantial risk of less than satisfactory on part of the offeror If award is not made based on initial, written quotations, TEP members will review revised quotations after each round of discussions using this same process for each offeror that is still in the competitive range. 4.5 Technical Evaluation Factors The following technical quotations factors will then be evaluated in descending order of importance: Management Plan, Technical Approach, Facility and Technology Infrastructure, Experience, and Past Performance. 4.5.1 Management Plan: The Government will evaluate the offerors response based on the following information to be provided and documented in accordance with Section E.2.1.7 of Attachment E of the solicitation: Soundness of the program management plan Experience and qualifications of key personnel Soundness of the human resources management plan Soundness of the performance management/service level management plan Soundness of the quality assurance/quality improvement plan Soundness of the operations management plan 4.5.2 Technical Approach: The Government will evaluate the offerors response based on the following information to be provided and documented in accordance with Section E.2.1.6 of Attachment E of the solicitation: Understanding of services to be provided Soundness of strategy and approach for information and knowledge management Soundness of strategy and approach for deploying automated services Soundness of the phase-in plan Soundness of the security plan Soundness of the disaster recovery/contingency plan Emergency response capability Soundness of management reports solution Soundness of directory listing solution 4.5.3 Facility and Technology Infrastructure: The Government will evaluate the offerors response based on the following information to be provided and documented in accordance with Section E.2.1.5 of Attachment E of the solicitation. Adequacy of contact center facility Soundness of technology architecture Soundness of technology solutions Soundness of technology enhancement/improvement plan 4.5.4 Experience: The Government will evaluate the offerors response based on the following information to be provided and documented in accordance with Section E.2.1.3 of Attachment E of the solicitation: Relevancy of corporate experience and core competency Demonstration of experience in key disciplines Description of operational and management processes 4.5.5 Past Performance: The Government will evaluate the offerors response based on the following information to be provided and documented in accordance with Section E.2.1.4 of Attachment E of the solicitation. Relevancy and complexity of projects in relation to the requirements of the RFP Assessment of project performance and ability to meet objectives 4.6 Price Evaluation Criteria The PEP shall conduct a thorough, independent review of each price quotation not excluded as unacceptable by the PCO. The PEP will review each price quotation to ensure price realism. Price realism will be evaluated on a pass/fail basis. If a price quotation does not demonstrate price realism, it will be evaluated as unacceptable and the offeror will not be considered for the award of the ABC Contact Center task. The offeror's price quotation will be evaluated with respect to price realism and total price. 4.6.1 Evaluation of Price Realism Price realism will be evaluated to ensure that the proposed prices reflect a clear understanding of the work and skills required for contract performance. Price quotations determined to be unrealistic in terms of technical commitment or unrealistically low in cost or price will be deemed reflective of an inherent lack of technical competence or indicative of failure to comprehend the complexity and risk of the contract requirements and may be grounds for the rejection of the quotation. 4.6.2 Evaluation of Total Price The Government will first take the offerors Base Period unit price for each of the Volume Bands identified in Tables L.1 through L.5 of the Request for Quotation and multiply it by the appropriate estimated monthly workload volume provided in Tables F.2.1 through F.2.5 of the Request for Quotation. The extended amount for each of the bands will then be subtotaled. The Government will add the subtotal of the Volume Bands to the subtotal of the offerors Base Period CLINs, not associated with the Volume Band price, to arrive at the total price for the Base Period. This procedure will be repeated for each of the Option Periods. After the Government has established the total price for the Base Period and each of the Option Periods, it will add these prices together to arrive at the offerors total evaluated quotation price. 4.8 Price/Technical Tradeoff (Best Value) Analysis As a last step of the evaluation process, the Government will perform a price/technical tradeoff analysis to determine the best value solution. The analysis identifies and compares significant differences between quotations to address the question of whether superior value is worth the difference in price. The TEP and PEP will complete a summary report that will be briefed and submitted to the SSA. The SSA will perform a comparative, best value analysis of the findings of the Panels and make a formal award decision. The analysis will be based upon an integrated assessment of the offerors proposals, and will reflect each offerors strength, weaknesses, and risks in relation to the evaluation factors and price. The methodology to perform the trade off analysis begins with identification of critical differences between proposals. One way to test the differences is by: comparative differences between proposals, which are important in the light of the program being supported, and which can be expected to have an impact on agency operations. These differences become discriminators and can be either positive or negative. Once isolated, discriminators can be understood and analyzed, and their value can be weighted against price differences in the trade off. Documentation to support the award must show the relative differences among proposals and their strengths, weaknesses, and risks in terms of the evaluation factors. A comparative evaluation of these strengths, weaknesses, and risks, using the test above (comparative differences between proposals, which are important in the light of the program being supported, and which can be expected to have an impact on agency operations) yields a list of discriminators. Once discriminators are identified, some may be capable of being quantified; others may not. In cases where there is adequate data to quantify the impact in dollar terms, quantification can be performed. An impact analysis seeks to assess the value of differences between proposals by looking at what effect they will have on the agency. An analysis of the discriminators, quantified and non-quantified, must be prepared and included in the final report with the impact analysis. The Best Value is assessed by the comparison of the proposals discriminators and impacts by: comparing the lowest net price proposal with the next lowest proposal, and assessing whether the difference in value is worth the difference in price. 4.9 Oral Presentations After receipt of quotations, each offeror will be given an opportunity to provide an oral presentation to the technical evaluation team. The purpose of the oral presentation is to provide each offeror an opportunity to present to the Governments evaluation team key elements of their quotation and to describe any unique capabilities that might differentiate their quotation from other competing offers. Price information will not to be discussed during oral presentations. Offerors will be given a limited period of time in which to present their quotations. During the presentation, the governments attendees will not interrupt the offeror to ask questions (except to request the repetition of inaudible words or statements or request the explanation of terms unknown to them) or otherwise engage the offeror in any dialog. The Government will conduct a question and answer session following the oral presentation during which the offerors representative must answer questions posed by the government. Information presented during the oral presentation, and any subsequent written discussion items, may be used by the Government to augment the written quotation. 4.10 Award on Initial Quotations Upon completion of the oral presentations and the subsequent evaluation of each quotation, the evaluation team chairs will provide the results of the initial evaluation results to the SSA. The SSA may decide to award the task order based on the initial quotations received 4.11 Competitive Range If the task order is not awarded based on the initial offers, the PCO will prepare a written determination that establishes the competitive range. The PCO will issue written notification to all offerors determination to be outside the competitive range. Quotations outside the competitive range will be eliminated from further evaluation. Offerors whose quotations are outside the competitive range may request a debriefing from the PCO within three (3) business days of receipt of the notification. 4.12 Discussions This phase of the source selection process will gather additional information needed to supplement or validate the information furnished in the quotations. The information gathering may be in the form of written and/or further oral discussions with offerors. Any unresolved clarification requests and deficiency notices developed throughout the quotation evaluation will be use as the basis for developing discussion issues for each offeror. Offerors in the competitive range will participate in discussions with the PCO, who will be assisted, as necessary, by other members of the Source Selection Team. At the end of this phase, the PCO will request Final Quotation Revisions. 4.12.1 Development of Discussion Items Based on the clarification requests and deficiency notices evaluation teams will compile a set of technical/management and price/business discussion issues for each offeror in the competitive range pertaining to any unresolved questions that may have arisen during the evaluation. Each team will formulate their issues into discussion items and provide them to the PCO. Any issue pertaining to an offerors representations or any other issue of a contractual nature will be given to the PCO for formulation into discussion items. The PCO will then consolidate the discussion items into a package that will be used during the discussions with the offerors. 4.12.2 Conducting and Documenting Discussions The PCO will notify the offerors in writing of the meetings to be held for discussions. The notification sent to offerors will include the following: an agenda, date, time and place of the meeting, the name of any specific offeror employees requested to attend with a request for a list of attendees and job titles, a list of areas in the quotation for which additional information is required, and a list of specific weaknesses in the quotation that require resolution. In preparation for the meetings with the offerors, the PCO and the team chairs will meet to formulate the Governments strategy for carrying out the discussions. 4.12.3 Responsibilities of Government Participants During discussions with offerors, the PCO will be responsible for the Governments overall negotiating position and for dealing with price-related issues, as well as the technical and management issues with the support of the Technical Evaluation Team Chair and any designated team members and advisors that are requested to participate. The PCO will lead the discussion and discussion process and ensure compliance with applicable acquisition regulations and policies. Specifically, the following precautions must be taken: Neither the number nor identity of offerors within the competitive range will be divulged to any offeror, No participant in the discussions and discussions will reveal, either directly or indirectly, any aspect of one offerors quotation to another offeror, No participant in the discussions will offer suggestions to an offeror on how they might improve their quotation or their chances for being selected award. Working notes will be maintained during the discussions as they are held. The PCO will designate a Government participant to take working notes and prepare minutes that document the results. 4.12.4 Multiple Rounds of Discussions Multiple rounds of discussions may be necessary to complete the evaluation process. If this is so, each round will be conducted using the same protocol. At the end of each round of discussions the PCO will call for each offeror in the competitive range to submit a revised quotation that reflects the agreements reached during that round of discussions. Quotation revisions will be evaluated by the Technical and Price teams using the evaluation procedures outlined in this plan. The product of this process will be documentation of the results of the reevaluation. 4.12.5 Final Revised Quotations After all issues have been resolved with each offeror in the competitive range, the PCO will prepare and issue a written request to offerors in the competitive range to submit their final quotation revisions. The PCO will establish a firm deadline for the submission of the final quotation revisions. The results of the price evaluation for the final quotation revisions will be used to determine price reasonableness. Depending upon the results of the evaluation, either of the following two actions may be taken: If none of the final price quotation revisions are fair and reasonable the Government will either request offerors to reopen discussions and revise and resubmit their FPR, or terminate the acquisition process If one or more of the Final Quotation Revisions is fair and reasonable, the evaluation process will proceed using the direction provided in this plan. 4.13 Source Selection and Legal Review The TEP and PEP chairs will brief the SSA, which is also the PCO for this procurement, on the Final Quotation Revision evaluation and make their recommendation for award. The SSA will review the recommendation and make the final award determination in accordance with procedures outlined in Section 4.8 of this Plan. The General Counsel staff assigned to the SSO will perform required legal reviews of the task order. Once the legal reviews have been completed, the General Counsel staff will forward their findings and recommendations to the PCO. 4.13.1 Make Award The PCO will make award to the successful offeror, finalize and execute the resultant task order, and perform other activities necessary to complete the FAR requirements for the source selection process. 4.13.2 Issue Award Notice The PCO will issue a written post-award notice to all offerors that submitted a quotation indicating their rights to request a formal debriefing from the PCO. 4.13.3 Debrief Offerors In response to written requests from offerors, the PCO will arrange for and conduct formal debriefings. The PCO may request support for, and attendance at, the debriefings by the members of the SSO. Each debriefing will be documented by the PCO in a summary report that will become part of the contract file.     FirstContact Procurement Tool Kit For Informational Purposes Only PAGE  PAGE - 12 - FirstContact Procurement Tool Kit For Informational Purposes Only   4DI]_clp}' o  7 < Z [ 6 D I M ÷xphb6B*phhb6hb6B*phhb6 h2@h*jB*ph3fhQhQB*ph3fhQhfWhLhQB*ph3fhhh25CJaJhfW5CJaJh*j5CJaJ h2aJ$h45CJ$\aJ$hQ5CJ$\aJ$h25CJ$\aJ$h2,   7]^_`abcdef ^` ^`gd*j $@&a$gdp! ! ^`GQfghijkl} I f \s>?gi & F @&^`gdp! ^` >?BCghijmtx'-G^z(1gpżh+ h2] hfW]hRhjzTjhRUmHnHuh*jhh25CJaJhfW5CJaJh5CJaJhb6h9hb6B*phhb6hb6B*phhM,5B*phh2B*phhfWhh2hM,52iklmnopqrst'H{ & F gd & F gd+ & F @&^`gdp! ^`C- w!!"<####a$%I%%&3&E&u& & F  & F @&^`gdp! ^`W` )Zc8!d!t!u!!!!!!!###$$3&9&E&&&''''''(T(q(((((((|+++++++++,, ,!,A,B,I,L,S,T,n,t,v,ɼhrKh[vhmB*ph3fh[vh[vB*ph3fh "B*ph3f h2;h[vh "hhhhLhfW hfW]h)h!T6h!Th9h2 h2]@u&'L'''''(()*,+|+++++$If^`^`gdfW & F ^`@&^`gdp! & Fgdh & F+++, ,!,A,B,R,vskd$$Ifla0hX Z04 la$If^`gd[vR,S,T,u,v,w,,yydS: $If^`gd[v$If`gd[v$If^`gd[v$If^`skd$$Ifl^0hX Z04 lav,w,,,----- -!-"-#-----------D/////000000001G1k1t111Ǽḯᎉᄉynjjh9hM,5h2B*ph3fhb6hb6B*ph hfW\ h2\ h2] h5Fh2hl,h25CJaJhfW5CJaJhY)?5CJaJhY)?h "h2B*ph3fh "h[vB*ph3fh "h "B*ph3fh "h2hzX hb6B*ph3fh[vh[vB*ph3fh[v),----!-"-]KK6$If^`gdl,$If^`skd$$Ifl@0hX Z04 la$If^`gdL $If^`gd[v"------.0veeeWW ^`^`gd5Fskdy$$Ifl0hX Z04 la$If^`gdl,0022}57 7899:<X=>>?,@@#AaAABBB & F & F ^`@&^`gdp!122222556C6E6677 7 77787J7K788889`:v:;;;;]>f>>>????CBBBBBBECFCXCYCDDDDDDYEZE^EzE~EEEEGGGGG>H?HQHRHĸhfWhl,h25CJaJhl,hl,5CJaJhl,5CJaJh.1hM,5 h2]hb6B*ph3f h2\ hfW\h9h2GBDDYEZEzEEHAIkIwJKLLN#NsPQ R@SSET'U[UU & F@&^`gdp! ^`RHLLLLLLM2MSM\MMMN NN!NCNLNNNNN4O=OtO}OOP'P0PPPQQQQQQQQ@ShSiS{S|SSSSST1TDTETTTTT'U-U0UUV+V.V=VKV\V|VVVVVVVVVV h2>*h "h "h "B*ph3fhU h&shb6B*ph3fhM,5h7h9%h9hfWh2MUV6VVVVVVVWWY[]^_&_-_$$If^`a$gdl,^`gdl,@&^`gdp!  >^`>gdU   >`>gdU ^`VV WWWX`XGYYYYh[q[]]8^A^_____%_&_A_B_#`$`*a+aaabbccccc dddddd~eeggijkkl mXn\nnn ooqozooppp.p7pzpp>qGqhb6B*ph3fhM,5 h2\hl,h2CJhl,h2CJ\hxh2B*phhxB*phhl, h2>*h9h2hU G-_A_B_D_#`[F$If^`gdl,kdL$$Ifl0Hv 8 04 lap$$If^`a$gdl,#`$`&`*as^$If^`gdl,$$If^`a$gdl,skd$$IflV0Hv 804 la*a+a-aau`$If^`gdl,$$If^`a$gdl,qkd$$Ifl0Hv 804 laaaabu`$If^`gdl,$$If^`a$gdl,qkdJ$$Ifl0Hv 804 labbbcu`$If^`gdl,$$If^`a$gdl,qkd$$Ifl0Hv 804 lacccdd~eSf|fff}k]]TTT & F ^`@&^`gdp! `qkdx$$Ifl0Hv 804 la f"g^ggbhhhi:iYiiiiij k1kSkkYllll & F & F T$ @@@@@@ & F ^` & FlmnXnvnzpprrt)uuu$vYwx"{|~0 ^`gd?9 ^`gd?9^`gd?9@&^`gdp! & F ^`Gq}rrrrrrrrss!sstt0t4t8tdtvttttt(u)uuuuuuuuvvwYw~0OXirv{Ɇ%.Xa#,^rsz-h{bV h?9CJh?9h "h`h{_hx!hQFh;Ph:fAh#Yh..hU h9h2L0|vȇs-[!3Տ & F T$ @@@@@@^`@&^`gdp! ^` & F`gdXbq-4Տ܏t{Ӗږ "#U^bƛǛțGHNOah(Ikjh(IkUhY)?h7 h2\ h"\ h?9\hh2\ h\ h?9h?9h?9h:hh9h2hU BՏZtӖ#˙bǛH^`gd?9 & F  ^`@&^`gdp!Hağ%$a$gd:h]h&`#$gdrk$a$gdrk^`gd@&^`gdp!%DEFGPQRƽƽhY)?hshjzTh(Ikh&6h:hQCJh:h~CJh:hM,5CJhx0JmHnHu h20Jjh20JUh2hrkh2aJh:hrkCJ%EFGHIJKLMNOPQR^`gd$a$gd:< 009&P1h:pt4/ =!"#0$% n̒E"Gz?$PNG  IHDR( utEXtSoftwareMicrosoft Office5q`PLTEJ`9tRNS@f pHYs@@bCc[ cmPPJCmp0712HsIDATx^흁r ۾C_7I637" szd~?5 YMV4U~[di M9 tjHSuH6ZTmMV4U~[di M9 tjHSuH6ZTmMV4U~[diU*H5y989{e|׋DUs'ᕱd Nͽ&7 4qzQMT HL* I{>gwv%&*v ^Ase6oEnخKM {%(Uu'83AQ_*/mʵTRԢd(έHTS#kS "]`ؿjhGS-SAbJ\; ҵdCif}!Ͷi\r\eΣgA}zrMFJ:N ryuUL) nEw)$)VDʵ~Ou&\"K}R$LRX4 il!V HR>IUfnyNU&;;{IoH7d3@7}Y"Ht6b%l iu5G(tF.*$9pKhj@w~́sH|ouׁOS*=uI?ZNގ&) -kr/$C {;6HE{ICAȳcg{jq9ݷ܎g'Ɩ"4}O}S9jV*oȔ%>ìzHN̘IZ>}#/+K=}$,Q2У'z{m*SG/꾈Jz”R[ Lij\x0Л!QڥBi^ht{QIrBzw( IBLgBk2Hfg3KYRCT; SB&+߁fYU>ZH4ESRX9hlM&uʱu*g#x'~\7 2ٝ r:|g&x/\{ IWz֤*wʁ>'AdU&iK6=#k̾!3eix=ڭ*)v+ׄɹOoKKh՞fT5Iįl2\ָ"|V~2Ή.=4r1J{2O}H [gi>}R}!ivrYkdm l:M:$NSiɦT+@*s@4 Xms!dP=?ztC: 79 8 79 8 79 8 79 8 79 8 79 8 79 8 79 8 79 8 79 8 79 8 7ƹ_Q&?tR"ǡGD=$@X@B&}>)Uw2ɩp9 8 V8? 8 V8? 8 V8? 8 V8? 8 V8? 8 V8? 8 V8? 8 V8!5^R''؏lC q n=oSN%{b-ChͤZ]/b!Mp{DwGPek@m# 6IQIzUg&THfۂ.IFZHYŵ.5f.y}ILY!.́9%(c1$#zSn d{M2FyHRmVda'Q&H]Ҁq;ysMyX?2<*Q> Endnote ReferenceH*:Q@b: Body Text 3CJaJOr LC_indent~ & F<<>Th)Tf^`4/@4 Listh^h`VYV p! Document Map-D M CJOJQJ^J R  R 7]^_`abcdefghijkl}If\ s > ? g i k l m n o p q r s t ' H {C-w<aI3EuL !",#|#######$ $!$A$B$R$S$T$u$v$w$$%%%%!%"%%%%%%&((**}-/ /01124X5667,88#9a99:::<<Y=Z=z==@AAkAwBCDDF#FsHI J@KKEL'M[MMN6NVNNNNNOOQSUVW&W-WAWBWDW#X$X&X*Y+Y-YYYYZZZ[[[\\~]S^|^^^"_^__b```a:aYaaaaab c1cSccYddddefXfvfzhhjjl)mmm$nYop"stv0w|wwwwv||}}s-[!3ՇZtӎ#ˑbǓHaė%EFGHIJKLMNOPS000000000000007070707070707070707070707070700l0000I0I00 0 0 0 0 00000H 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H 00} 000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 000< 0< 0< 0< 0<00000 0  0  0 00#0#0#0# 0#0# 0# 0#0# 0#0# 0# 0#0#0# 0#0#0#0# 0# 0#0# 0#0# 0# 0#0#0#0#0#000(0(000/000000000 00 0000606 06 06 06 060600000<000 0= 0= 0= 0= 0=00D00F0F0F0F0F0F0F009M09M09M09M09M09M09M09M00N0N0N0N0N0N00N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N0N00\0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\0\ 0\ 0\ 0\0\ 0\ 0\000bf0bf0bf0bf0bf0bf0bf00m0m0m0m0m0m 0m 0m0m00w00|00}0000~008 08 08 08 0808000 0 0 0 000000ގ0ގ0ގ0ގ00m0m000000@0y00@0y00@0y00@0y00@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0y00Лy00 000000000Н P[m v,1RHVGq-RQUX\`bdmorfiu&+R,,"-0BU-_#`*aabcfl0ՏH%RRTVWYZ[]^_acefghijklnpqsQSPW[bi!!l,b$̒E"Gz?$>@(  `  0A?B S  ?i R@~^tA _Toc527961800 _Toc365254003 _Toc365874106 _Toc365874874 _Toc365887861 _Toc365944092 _Toc366580344 _Toc366674864 _Toc366819010 _Toc371471375 _Toc375475932 _Toc527961802 _Toc365254004 _Toc365254007 _Toc365874111 _Toc365874879 _Toc365887866 _Toc365944097 _Toc366580349 _Toc366674869 _Toc366819015 _Toc371471380 _Toc375475937 _Toc527961804 _Toc365254008 _Toc365874112 _Toc365874880 _Toc365887867 _Toc365944098 _Toc366580350 _Toc366674870 _Toc366819016 _Toc371471381 _Toc375475938 _Toc527961805 _Toc365254009 _Toc365874113 _Toc365874881 _Toc365887868 _Toc365944099 _Toc366580351 _Toc366674871 _Toc366819017 _Toc371471382 _Toc375475939 _Toc527961806 _Toc365254010 _Toc365874114 _Toc365874882 _Toc365887869 _Toc365944100 _Toc366580352 _Toc366674872 _Toc366819018 _Toc371471383 _Toc375475940 _Toc527961807 _Toc371471371 _Toc375475928 _Toc527961808 _Toc371471387 _Toc375475944 _Toc527961809 _Toc489327074 _Toc536102217= & & & & & & & & & & & {{#{#{#aaS  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;=><?@? G G G G G G G G G G G DDDDDDDDDDD#%%S4t6Y  4A L  tAd}> $F|9   <9 EH |   .. D! ! 8l8 k  \  \ r   l5 tG L<   ,   D+5Y 4Y  \3Y  1Y 1Y    K / | 48  d#F Ա# ; +Y 4    " 77EM  ----8/8/*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PostalCode:*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsStreet;*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsaddressh*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsCity0http://www.5iamas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsZ3*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceNamehttp://www.5iantlavalamp.com/Z1*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceTypehttp://www.5iantlavalamp.com/_/*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagscountry-regionhttp://www.5iantlavalamp.com/V4*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsplacehttp://www.5iantlavalamp.com/i*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsState0http://www.5iamas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags ,C43314/43314433143314331433143314331433143314331  W$WFGSW&W|wwFGS333IIbbcl 7<Z[6D  = > ? ? h i $$((--8/J/77F;X;<<???@Q@iK{KMMMMM NNNW%WhhllmmwwFGGHPSEL  = > ? ? $$((--8/J/77F;X;<<???@Q@iK{KW%Whh$DFGS RnB.* nm_)d4j e@2\zFnEARMy} Q&#J\ʺ`\@`|.D}bb_xnSiHn);t,v)+1u@ۄ D?3wL<† zlg@hhh^h`.@hh8^8`.@h^`)@p0^p`0()@@ 0^@ `0()@0^`0()@0^`0()@0^`0()@h ^`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo(o 88^8`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(   ^ `OJQJo(o   ^ `OJQJo( xx^x`OJQJo( HH^H`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo(@h ^`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo(o 88^8`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(   ^ `OJQJo(o   ^ `OJQJo( xx^x`OJQJo( HH^H`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo(@h ^`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo(o 88^8`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(   ^ `OJQJo(o   ^ `OJQJo( xx^x`OJQJo( HH^H`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo(@h ^`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo(o 88^8`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(   ^ `OJQJo(o   ^ `OJQJo( xx^x`OJQJo( HH^H`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo(@h ^`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo(o 88^8`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(   ^ `OJQJo(o   ^ `OJQJo( xx^x`OJQJo( HH^H`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo(@h ^`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo(o 88^8`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(   ^ `OJQJo(o   ^ `OJQJo( xx^x`OJQJo( HH^H`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo(@h ^`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo(o 88^8`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(   ^ `OJQJo(o   ^ `OJQJo( xx^x`OJQJo( HH^H`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo(@h ^`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo(o 88^8`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(   ^ `OJQJo(o   ^ `OJQJo( xx^x`OJQJo( HH^H`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo(@h ^`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo(o 88^8`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(   ^ `OJQJo(o   ^ `OJQJo( xx^x`OJQJo( HH^H`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo(@h ^`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo(o 88^8`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(   ^ `OJQJo(o   ^ `OJQJo( xx^x`OJQJo( HH^H`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo(@h ^`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo(o 88^8`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(   ^ `OJQJo(o   ^ `OJQJo( xx^x`OJQJo( HH^H`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo(@h ^`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo(o 88^8`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(   ^ `OJQJo(o   ^ `OJQJo( xx^x`OJQJo( HH^H`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo(@h ^`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo(o 88^8`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(   ^ `OJQJo(o   ^ `OJQJo( xx^x`OJQJo( HH^H`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo(@h ^`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo(o 88^8`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(   ^ `OJQJo(o   ^ `OJQJo( xx^x`OJQJo( HH^H`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo(@h ^`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo(o 88^8`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(   ^ `OJQJo(o   ^ `OJQJo( xx^x`OJQJo( HH^H`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo(@h ^`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo(o 88^8`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(   ^ `OJQJo(o   ^ `OJQJo( xx^x`OJQJo( HH^H`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo(@h ^`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo(o 88^8`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(   ^ `OJQJo(o   ^ `OJQJo( xx^x`OJQJo( HH^H`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo( zRn}bm_) e@D?3w} Q);txnSiFnE.* `#J\d4@`)+1uM                                                                                                                                        NM13&sU zX *9x! ".1t4M,5b6 -7aK=Y)?:fA5FrK;PWPjzT{bVfWxY{_*j(IkXbq[v)6|y|rkxp!7>cAp&6l,Rcnvmm"h#YR$:(4!T47..:L2:+{XQs?9`)RWQF~9%##$ $A$R$S$v$%%!%%%&W-WAWBWDW#X$X&X*Y+Y-YYYYZZZ[[S@%W%WDx%W%WRP@UnknownGz Times New Roman5Symbol3& z Arial5& zaTahoma?5 z Courier New;Wingdings"1h#P#jMM!0d4dII 2qHX?W2$NCC Task Order Source Selection Plan caroledobbsT             Oh+'0 (4 T ` l x(NCC Task Order Source Selection Plan  Normal.dot caroledobbs6Microsoft Office Word@NZ@ _@>xo@՜.+,0  hp|   MI %NCC Task Order Source Selection Plan Title  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|~Root Entry FPQVData }1Table&WordDocumentMSummaryInformation(DocumentSummaryInformation8CompObjq  FMicrosoft Office Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q