"In different types of acquisitions, the relative importance of cost or price may vary.  For example, in acquisitions where the requirement is clearly definable and the risk of unsuccessful contract performance is minimal, cost or price may play a dominant role in source selection.  The less definitive the requirement, the more development work required, or the greater the performance risk, the more technical or past performance considerations may play a dominant role in source selection.  A tradeoff process is appropriate when it may be in the best interest of the Government to consider award to other than the lowest priced offeror This process permits tradeoffs among cost or price and non-cost factors and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal." (Emphasis indicated in italics)

Per the latest A-76 Circular, the Government's technical proposal now competes directly with the commercially offered proposals.  In short, the Government proposal must show the Government MEO can successfully perform with less risk to the mission than the commercial competition. This means a Commercial Activity study could now result in a decision to retain the studied function(s) in-house, even if the Government does not propose the lowest price, if the Government's technical proposal clearly indicates a significant reduced risk of unsuccessful performance as compared to the other commercial proposals.  The importance of the Government's technical proposal is substantially increased under the new circular.

If the technical proposal submittal requirements are properly designed to best assure only fully qualified offerors ultimately participate in the A-76 competition, many commercial offerors may not be able to effectively respond to those submittal requirements.  Stated simply, the greatest chance for a function to stay in-house is for no offeror to pass the technical evaluation.  That would result in an A-76 decision to continue the function in-house, pending a review by the contracting officer as to the reason no commercial offers were either presented or considered acceptable.  Such an in-house decision is not subject to an A-76 study administrative appeal from the rejected commercial offerors.  Technical proposal submittal requirements should be specifically tailored to the PWS requirements, and solicit performance related information that only a offeror fully versed on all of the PWS requirements could provide.

Additionally, we should not provide "how to" instructions in the PWS.  Rather than tell the competition how to do the work, they (the competition) should state how they intend to do the work in their technical proposal.  If they can not adequately provide an acceptable approach, they should not be rated by the Technical Evaluation Team as "acceptable".  Therefore, do not include in the PWS any requirement, reference, instruction, personnel qualification, etc. a firm, thoroughly knowledgeable of your operation, should already know. Make such information technical proposal submittal requirements; make the offerors state in their technical proposals which requirements, what portions of instructions are operable to your specific situation, what types of employees are required, etc.  As previously stated, develop specifically worded questions for the technical proposal submittal requirements to assure only highly qualified firms can "survive" the proposal evaluations.  Note that I am not suggesting "killer questions" (i.e. "have you stopped beating your wife?" type.).  All I'm suggesting is to develop questions dealing with issues an offeror would have to have dealt with to properly prepare a technical and price proposal.

The final step is to include technical proposal evaluation criteria in the Source Selection Plan (SSP) the Technical Evaluation Team can use to properly evaluate all proposals, including the MEO proposal.  Without specific evaluation criteria, approved in the SSP, it becomes difficult to "fail" an otherwise marginal offeror, especially one who has successfully performed similar contracts, or to document the "best value" of choosing a higher priced offer above a "lower priced, technically qualified" offeror.  Also assure the SSP includes criteria for evaluating the "risk to the Government" ( see FAR 15.404-1(e)) in accepting the offered price and technical proposals, rather than the "standard" lowest priced, technically qualified offeror.  Since those of your managers that are very knowledgeable as to what is required to successfully operate your studied function will not be able to be on the Technical Evaluation Team, at least "script" the evaluation process.  That evaluation criteria may preclude evaluators lacking first hand knowledge of the A-76 studied function(s) from selecting a potentially less than fully qualified offeror.  Given that such evaluation criteria is included in the approved SSP, all the Government has to do to withstand a procurement protest from an unsuccessful offeror is to show the evaluation teams followed the approved SSP, show that the proposal was compared to the SSP evaluation criteria, and show that the resulting rating was based on that criteria.

An example of a staffing related technical proposal submittal requirement and the associated proposal evaluation criteria follows.

Staffing Proposal Requirement: Given the requirements and projected workloads identified in Section C, Description/Specifications, and the applicable attachments, describe your proposed staffing in full time equivalents (FTEs) for requirements identified in the following sections:

• Technical Library
• Mail Center Services
• Command Planning Services
• Administrative Services Support
• Corporate Information Support
• Minor and Plant Property Records Management
• Procurement Support

Provide position descriptions for each specialty.  Identify the proposed employee skill levels, your criteria for selection for employment, and explain the rationale used to establish the number and types of employees.  Identify, by specification clause number, the specific contract services each employee position description will provide.  Demonstrate how the proposed staffing can accomplish the work within the specified or proposed (as applicable) time frames.  Show how you will be able to accomplish this work and not adversely impact other work.  Given the requirements of this contract, identify the anticipated source of your employees for this service and demonstrate that these qualified and fully capable people can be in your employ immediately upon the start of this contract.  Offerors should be aware that not all of the incumbent Federal employees may be available for contract employment due to placement in other federal positions or relocation.

Technical Evaluation Worksheet

Offeror

Offeror: _________________________________     #9; Evaluator/Date: ___________________________

Factor: Staffing

___________  The proposal provides a list of highly qualified staffing position descriptions and employee qualifications, sufficient to respond to all contract requirements and their workloads, and has provided the supporting staffing rationale. Proposal reference__________

  __________ The Offeror has thoroughly demonstrated a capability to accomplish the contract requirements within the specified or proposed (as applicable) time frames. The separate work forces proposed for the functional areas indicate a capability to accomplish each function's work without adversely impacting the work of the other functions. Proposal reference ___________

 ___________ The proposal provides a stable source of qualified and fully capable contract employees for each contract function, and has provided creditable proof that these types of people can be in the Offeror's employment immediately upon the start of this contract. Proposal reference ___________

____________ The proposal provides a list of qualified staffing and employee skill levels sufficient to respond to the projected workload and the rationale to support this staffing. Specific qualifications for most of the positions have been provided. Proposal reference__________

____________ The Offeror has thoroughly demonstrated a capability to accomplish the contract requirements within the specified or proposed (as applicable) time frames. Although no separate work forces for the functional areas have been proposed, it appears the Offeror should have the capability to accomplish each function's work without adversely impacting the of the other functions. Proposal reference__________

____________ The proposal provides a creditable source of qualified and fully capable contract employees for most of the contract functions, but appears to be relying on recruiting former Government employees for some of the more complex tasks or responsibilities. The Offeror has provided limited proof that these types of people can be in the Offeror's employment immediately upon the start of this contract. Proposal reference__________

____________ The proposal provides little rationale on how the proposed staffing was developed. Staffing appears marginal, but may be adequate if proper management approaches are used. Little to no position descriptions or qualifications have been provided. Proposal reference__________

____________ The Offeror has indicated a capability to accomplish the contract requirements within the specified or proposed (as applicable) time frames. No separate work forces for the functional areas have been proposed, and it appears the Offeror will depend on cross assignments to accomplish all of the work, relying on effective scheduling to accomplish each function's work without adversely impacting the work of the other functions. Proposal reference__________

____________ Although the proposal heavily depends on recruiting former Government employees, some non-Governmental employment sources are provided. The Offeror has provided little to no proof that these types of people can be in the Offeror's employment immediately upon the start of this contract. Proposal reference__________

____________ The proposed staffing for the contract workload is not adequate, nor has the Offeror provided any rationale for the number of people shown. Proposal reference__________

____________ The offered staffing indicates the Offeror has significantly underestimated the contract work effort. The Offeror will depend on extensive cross assignments to accomplish each function's work. No management approaches are provided to demonstrate there will be no adverse impact on the work of the individual functions. Proposal reference__________

____________ The proposal heavily depends on recruiting former Government employees. Few non-Governmental employment sources are provided. The Offeror has provided no creditable proof that these types of people can be in the Offeror's employment immediately upon the start of this contract. Proposal reference__________