Un.ted States Administration And EPA 202-B-93-002
Environmental Protection Resources Management November 1993
Agency (3802F)
EPA The Cookbook
How To Get Contracts
Awarded In EPA
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Special thanks to Dave Stutz, Head, Superfund/RCRA
Headquarters Operations Branch, Placement Section and the OAM QAT
consisting of Sheila Kelly, Tom Caffrey, Nancy Toy, Ron Bell,
Joan Fields, and Dan Humphries who prepared the office of Solid
Waste Project Officer Planning Guide for New Acquisitions. This
document was the basis for this Guidance Manual with much of the
material the same or slightly modified.
This Cookbook was developed by the QAT for Streamlining the
US EPA Procurement Process. This QAT was established by the RMC.
Special recognition is given to Ron Stanley of OPPE who chaired
the QAT and directed the development of this Cookbook in its
early stages and to Tom Murray, who assumed the chair in the
later stages of the development of the cookbook and directed its
completion. The following members of the QAT also contributed
significantly, their time and talents to this effort.
Mark Anderson, OIG
Karen Chambers, RMC
John Comstock, OSWER
Dennis Cunningham, OIA
Tom Doherty, OGC
Debbie Ebele, Region III
Vicki Bailey Ellis, OARM
Ed Murphy, OAM
fill Robbins, OAM
Kathy Seikel, OPPTS
Marilyn Smith Church, OPPE
Jordan Strauss, OAM
Steve Wilson, OW
Also, we would like to recognize the following individuals
who helped build the foundation for this effort, especially,
Candace Castillo, ORD; Laszlo Bockh, OAR; Chen Wen, RMC; and Ed
Kramer, OW. The QAT would also like to recognize all of the
dedicated POs, COs in headquarters, RTF, and Cincinnati, and
program and contract managers who contributed their insights and
comments to the development of the document.
A special thanks to Robert Gray for his contribution to
Chapter III and to Roy Rathbun for his contribution to Chapter IV
and to Annette Duncan for her long hours of word processing in
preparing the final report.
-------
ACRONYMS
The following list is an alphabetical list of all acronyms
used throughout this Cookbook. Its purpose is to serve as a
quick reference for those unfamiliar with acronyms commonly used
with the EPA acquisition/procurement process.
AAS - Advisory and Assistance Services
ADP - Automatic: Data.Processing
APR - Agency Procurement Request
BAFO - Best and Final Offer
CBD - Commerce .Business Daily
CBI - Confidential Business Information
CERCLA - Comprehensive--Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act
CMM - Contracts Management Manual-
Co - Contracting Officer
COI - Conflict of Interest
CS - Contract Specialist
DOPO - Delivery Order Project Officer
D&F - Determination and Findings
EPAAR - Environmental Protection Agency Acquisition
Regulation
FAR - Federal Acquisition Regulation
FIFRA - Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
FIRMR - Federal Information Resources Management Regulation
FMFIA - Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act
FOIA - Freedom of Information Act
G&A - General and Administrative
GAO - General Accounting Office .
GPP - Government Furnished Property
ii
-------
IGCE - Independent Government Cost Estimate
JOFOC - Justification for Other than Full and Open
Competition
LOE - Level of Effort
OAM - Office of Acquisition Management
OARM - Office of Administration and Resources 'Management
ODC - Other Direct Cost
OIG - Office of the Inspector General
OIRM - Office of Information Resources Management
OMB - Office of Management and Budget
OSDBU - Office of Small .and Disadvantage* -Business
Utilization
OTA - Office of Technology Assessment
PEB - Peformance Evaluation Board
PO - Project Officer
POP - Period of Performance
PRR - Procurement Request Rationale
QA - Quality Assurance
QAO - Quality Assurance Officer
QAT - Quality Action Team
R&D - Research and Development
RCRA - Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RFP - Request for Proposal
RMC - Resources Management Committee
RTP - Research Triangle Park
SB/LSA - Small Business/Labor Surplus Area
SBA - Small Business Administration
SO - Source Selection Official
iii
-------
SOW - Statement of Work/Scope of Work
SRO - Senior Resource Official
TEC - Technical Evaluation Criteria
TEP - Technical Evaluation Panel
TEPR - Technical Evaluation Panel Report
TSCA •- Toxic Substances Control Act
WAN - Work Assignment Manager
WCAB - Washington Cost Advisory Branch
WP - Work Plan
iv
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ER Z INTRODUCTION
SECTION I-A HOW TO USE THIS COOKBOOK
SECTION I-B WHAT TO DO — A FLOWCHART FOR THE ACQUISITION
PROCESS
SECTION I-C WHO TO CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS NOT ANSWERED IN THIS
COOKBOOK
CHAPTER XI PRE-ACQUIBITION PLANNING
SECTION II-A PRE-ACQUISITION ACTIVITIES
SECTION II-B HOW TO SAFEGUARD AGAINST CONTRACT VULNERABILITIES
SECTION II-C QUALITY CONTRACTING TEAMS
SECTION II-D ANNUAL ACQUISITION PLANS
SECTION II-E INDIVIDUAL ACQUISITION PLANS AND CONTRACT
MANAGEMENT PLANS
III PROCUREMENT REQUEST RATIONALE
SECTION III-A GENERAL INFORMATION
SECTION III-B CHECKLIST ITEM #2 - EXPLANATION OF ALL COMPONENTS
SECTION III-C ITEMS 1 AND 3 THROUGH 32 OF THE CHECKLIST
SECTION III-D ADDITIONAL ITEMS THAT MAY BE REQUIRED FOR YOUR
PROCUREMENT PACKAGE BUT ARE NOT LISTED IN THE
CHECKLIST
CHAPTER IV STATEMENT OP WORK
SECTION IV-A WHAT IS A STATEMENT OF WORK
SECTION IV-B ELEMENTS OF A STATEMENT OF WORK
SECTION IV-C BACKGROUND STATEMENT AND PURPOSE
SECTION IV-D CONTRACTOR TASKS
SECTION IV-E SPECIALIZED REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
SECTION IV-F DELIVERABLES/PRODUCTS
ACTION IV-G INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
v
-------
SECTION IV-H SCHEDULES
SECTION IV-I GOVERNMENT FURNISHED DOCUMENTATION
SECTION IV-J SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
CHAPTER V TECHNICAL EVALUATION AND TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT
SECTION V-A TECHNICAL EVALUATION PROCESS
SECTION V-B TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA
SECTION V-C PRICE OR ESTIMATED COST FACTORS
SECTION V-D EVALUATING PROPOSALS
SECTOPM V-E TECHNICAL EVALUATION PANEL REPORT
SECTION V-F CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
APPENDIX V-l DOS AND DON'TS (OR EVERYTHING YOU NEEDED TO KNOW
ABOUT TEP REPORTS, BUT WERE AFRAID TO ASK.)
APPENDIX V-2 TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA
APPENDIX V-3 SAMPLES INDIVIDUAL AND CONSENSUS SCORE SHEETS
APPENDIX V-4 INDIVIDUAL SCORE SHEETS - GOOD AND BAD EXAMPLES
APPENDIX V-5 SCORING PLAN
APPENDIX V-6 TEP REPORT FORMAT
APPENDIX V-7 INDIVIDUAL AND CONSENSUS SCORE SHEET MATRICES
APPENDIX V-8 CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT
CHAPTER VI OUIDE FOR PREPARING INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST
ESTIMATES
SECTION VI-A PURPOSE OF THE GUIDE
SECTION VI-B BACKGROUND
SECTION VI-C DEFINITION, TYPES AND USES OF INDEPENDENT
GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATES
SECTION VI-D PREPARING THE INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST
ESTIMATES
vi
-------
CHAPTER Z
INTRODUCTION
-------
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
SECTION I-A HOW TO DBS THIS COOKBOOK
SECTION I-B WHAT TO DO — A FLOW CHART FOR THE ACQUISITION
PROCESS
SECTION I-C WHO TO CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS NOT ANSWERED IN THE
COOKBOOK
1-1
-------
SECTION I-A HOW TO USE THIS COOKBOOK
This Cookbook is designed to be a user-friendly guide for
POs to use in preparing all the paperwork that the 0AM will
require in order to award a mission-support, LOE contract.
Guidance more specific to other types of contracts will be
available later. This Cookbook does not cover special ADP needs,
small purchases, or procedures under the Brooks Act for
architect-engineer contracts, although some of this information
will be useful for those other needs. Before beginning work on
procurements, you should consult the CO designated for your
office or your program liaison to determine which procedures and
information are different and which are the same.
This Cookbook assumes you have at least a basic under-
standing of the nature of Government work and that you have been
trained in the ethics of contracting. It does not assume that
you have a detailed knowledge of contracting procedures. The
Cookbook hopes to provide you with that knowledge. It will be
kept up-to-date, and should be kept in a notebook as procedural
updates/changes are provided by OAM. All of your efforts that
are consistent with this Cookbook will be useable in obtaining a
contract.
This Cookbook is available in hard copy format. In general,
the forms included in the hard copy can be used for submitting to
OAM the required materials. If you would like a hard copy,
please contact the OAM Document Distribution Unit, 3rd floor,
Fairchild, telephone: (202) 260-8573.
If you have comments on the substance, content, format or
suggestions to make this cookbook easier to use, please send them
to: Karen Chambers, Policy, Training and Oversight Division,
OAM, Mailcode 3802F, Telephone: (202) 260-9795.
1-2
-------
SECTION I-B WHAT TO DO — A FLOW CHART FOR THE ACQUISITION
PROCESS
A major task for a PO is to monitor progress toward the
award of the contract. The following page (Figure I-D) gives you
an overview of the process to help you understand the entire
process. The PO and the CO should work as a team to make
progress towards the award of the contract. As a team, they
should understand the process and monitor progress toward
achieving the award, including the milestones and the "norms" for
meeting those milestones, which are shown on Table 1-1. During
the pre-award phase, a major PO responsibility is to provide a
quality purchase request package with all attachments and backup
information required to the CO. This will allow the CO to award
a contract that meets the program needs in the timeframe
required.
As a rule of thumb, once you have an award date in mind, you
should back calculate a start date (date of acceptable submission
to OAM) one (1) year earlier. Then subtract at least two (2) to
six (6) months for your Office's preparation and approval
process. Next, use the norms on the following page for comparing
the progress of the acquisition through OAM.
If you do not have an award date in mind, simply calculate
an expected date from the norms given on the following page.
It is our hope and expectation that if we can work well as a
team, we can reduce this lead time.
1-3
-------
TABLE 1-1. Baseline Data (Largely From 1991 Procurements as
Determined in a November 1992, Survey) and the QAT's Suggested
Goals for Improving the Process (all data in elapsed days).
Baseline State Desired State; Goals
Milestone Best Aver. Worst 1993-94 1995-1996
OAH Acceptance 1 65 184 38* 15
Acq. Plan Prep. 1 40 89 17 8
Acq. Plan Approv. 13 54 158 16 14
RFP Prep. 1 65 189 39 15
RFP Approved 5 30 78 21 16
RFP Issued 2 11 31 9 5
Proposals Rec. 31 41 59 40 40
TEPR Requested 1381 1
TEPR Completed 7 67 221 46 24
Comp. Range Prep. 2 14 47 7* 5
Comp. Range Appr. 3 16 221 14 7
Audits Received 15 59 119 47* 41
Pre-Neg Memo Prep. 1 22 62 8 5
Pre-Neg Appr. 1282 1
Negotiation Done 2 7 16 6 3
BAFOs Requested 1121* 1
BAFOs Received 2 6 13 5* 3
rTEPR Requested 11 31* l
rTEPR Completed 1 11 41 7* 3
Post-Neg Memo 2 13 35 9* 6
Source Sel. Prep. 1 19 149 2 1
Source Sel. Appr. 1 11 93 5 3
Contract Prep. 1 2 12 1 l
File Review 1 12 93 2 1
Contract Signed 1 10 19 3 2
AVG. ELAPSED TIME 125 347 543 337 240
* Steps marked for elimination or reduction in frequency of
use (see recommendation 3(a)).
** QAT for streamlining the procurement process.
1-4
-------
COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT PROCESS
Strategic
Decisions
Long-Range
Planning
Annual
Acquisition Plan
CO Named
PO Named
Other QCT Quality
Contracting Team
Members Appointed
QCT Consult
about Tactics
PO Writes
Rationale
CS Writes
Acquisition Plan
CO Sends Notice
loCBO
CBD
Publishes
t
CS Writes RFP
-^»
Murder Board Held.
Resolves All Issues
*
CSLogs
Proposals
-•>•
CO /CS Meet
With TEP
-^•
~^'
PO/ CO Makes
Changes
TEP Members
Evaluate
Technical Proposals
1
-^>
-^
CO Sends RFP
to Requestors
TEP Reaches
Consensus
-•«*•
-^-
CO Answers
Questions
TEP Chair Writes
Scores & Justifies
(TEPR)
Companies Outside
Competitive Range
Informed
CO /CS Evaluate
Cost Proposals
(BEPR)
— •>•
CO /CS Review
TEPR
*
Interrogatories
Developed
»
Competitive Range
Determined
*
Auditor Reviews
Cost Proposals
— •>•
~^-
CS/CO Writes
Prenegotiation Memo For
Each Company In Range
Responses Scored
By TEP
1
Discussions Held
BAFO's Requested
BAFO's
Submitted
-•*-
Post-Negotiation
tfemo Written. Source
Selection Made
-•*•
CS/CO Writes
Contract
Final File
Review
PostAward
Conference With
Successful Offerer
CO Awards
Contract
CO and TEP Chair
Debrief Unsuccessful
Offerers. (Their Request)
PO - PROJECT OFFICER
CO - CONTRACTING OFFICER
CS - CONTRACT SPECIALIST
CBD - COMMERCE BUSINESS DAILY
1-5
TEP - TECHNICAL EVALUATION PANEL
BAFO - BEST AND FINAL OFFERS
RFP - REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
-------
SECTION I-C WHO TO CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS NOT ANSWERED
ZN THIS COOKBOOK
OFFICE OF ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT
Betty L. Bailey
Director
Jeanette Brown
Deputy Director
Competition Advocate
Jordan A. Strauss
POLICY, TRAINING, AND OVERSIGHT DIVISION
Rosemarie Nance (202-260-5024)
Acting Director
Procurement Policy Branch
Interprets (FAR, EPAAR)
Acquisition Directives
Edward Murphy (202-260-6034)
Chief
ty Assurance Branch
FMFIA
COI
Audit
Thomas O'Connell (202-260-8268)
Chief
Information Management Staff
John Oliver (202-260-8288)
Chief
Training and Certification Branch
Gina Nightengale
Chief (202-260-6033)
HEADQUARTERS PROCUREMENT OPERATIONS DIVISION
John Gherardini (202-260-6035)
Director
1-6
-------
and Contracts Management Branch
Tim Farris (202-260-6566)
Acting Chief
Contracts Support Section
Forms
Distributes
FOZA
Jim Thompson (202-260-2332)
Head
Specialized Procurement Management Section
Small Purchase Orders
Bankcard
Glen Sites (202-260-2355)
Head
ADP Procurement Branch
Hiram Wilcox (202-260-6692)
Chief
ADP Placement Section
Stuart Toleman (202-260-7996)
Head
ADP Hardware Management Section
Alan Trail (202-260-3190)
Head
ADP Service Management Section
Sheila Ames (202-260-4412)
Head
EkdinftnistrativB Procurement Branch
Tom McEntegart (202-260-1433)
Chief
j^tjhflinistrative Placement Section
Phil Osborne (202-260-6454)
Head
1-7
-------
Administrative Management: Section
Joan Roberts (202-260-3211)
Head
COST ADVISORY AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS DIVISION
Donald Hambric (202-260-3163)
Director
8DFBRFDND/RCRA PROCUREMENT OPERATIONS DIVISION
Diane Balderson (202-260-9458)
Director
SuparfMHifl /RCRA Procrrfl'n y*Hag
-------
Regional Contract Management Branch
Karen Higginbotham (202-260-2308)
Chief
Eastern Section
Bruce Bakaysa (202-260-2308)
Head
Western Section
Barbara Bosco (202-260-3185)
Head
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT DIVISION — RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK
Mike Bower (919-541-3045)
Director
Don Button (919-451-3046)
Deputy Director
Jerry Dodson (919-541-2249)
Small Business Specialist
Contract Support and Policy Branch
Sandra Davis (919-541-3024)
Chief
Small Purchase Branch
Robert Traylor (919-541-3416)
Chief
Contract Placement Branch
Holly Powell (919-541-4369)
Chief
Contract Management Branch
Thomas Sharpc (919-541-3572)
Chief
CLP Acquisition and Management Branch
Janet Simmons (919-541-4081)
Chief
1-9
-------
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT DIVISION — CINCINNATI
Hark Kellerman (513-366-2026)
Director
Robert Edgeton (513-366-2101)
Deputy Director
Construction and Small Purchase Branch (C8PB)
Christina Colon (513-366-2043)
Chief
Acquisition Management Branch
Becky O'Kelly (513-366-2104)
Chief
Cost Advisory Branch
Warren Reynolds (513-366-2045)
Chief
Contract Management Branch
Michael Berich (513-366-2028)
Chief
Contract Support Branch
Marsha Wood (513-366-2020)
EXTERNAL SUPPORT
Leaal Counsel/Advisor
HQ-Richard Feldman (202-260-2794)
CIN-Thomas Darner (513-366-7917)
RTF-Thomas Doherty (919-541-0818)
Office of Small and Disadvantacred Business Utilization
Margie Wilson (703-305-7305)
Office of Information Resources Management
Stephen Hufford (202-260-7732)
Patents
Thomas Gorman (OGC) (202-260-1339)
1-10
-------
CHAPTER XI
PRE-ACQUISITION PLANNING
-------
SECTION II-A
SECTION II-B
SECTION II-C
SECTION II-D
SECTION II-E
CHAPTER II
PRE-ACQOI8ITION PLANNING
PRE-ACQUIBITION ACTIVITIES
o Overview
o Who's Responsible for What?
o General Timing and Content
HOW TO SAFEGUARD AGAINST CONTRACT
VULNERABILITIES
o Overview
o AA8 and Other Sensitive Areas
o Contracting Areas Requiring Special
Control Measures
o coi concerns
o inherently Governmental Functions
QUALITY CONTRACTING TEAMS
ANNUAL ACQUISITION PLANS
o Overview
o Purpose
o Responsibility and Timing
o Content
INDIVIDUAL ACQUISITION PLANS AND CONTRACT
MANAGEMENT PLANS
o Overview
o Responsibility
o Timing and Content
Il-l
-------
SECTION II-A PRE-ACQUI8ITION ACTIVITIES
overview
Advance planning is an essential part of conducting the
government's work. As a PO, you will be responsible for
either preparing, or assisting in the preparation of three
planning documents:
(1) an annual acquisition plan which outlines proposed
acquisitions for the next two fiscal years;
(2) an individual acquisition plan which sets milestones
and addresses financial, technical, legal, and
management issues to be considered in the contracting
process for your specific contract; and
3) an individual contract management plan which
supplements individual acquisition plans by discussing
how a specific contract, once awarded, will be managed.
This chapter tells you how to prepare each of these.
Who's Responsible for What?
Although you nay think that you have a formidable task
in front of you, there is plenty of support to help you
prepare your acquisition package.
On the contracting side, in addition to the CO who will
be guiding you through the solicitation preparation process,
the OAM has just established a liaison office whose main
responsibility will be to help you assemble a good
contracting package. This customer assistance office will
answer any questions you might have regarding the
preparation of your procurement planning document, SOW, and
TEC and will provide you with samples and guidance as
needed. Furthermore, this office will work with you to
discuss milestones and track your requirement through
contract award.
On the program side, there are also several people who
are there to advise and support you. As an example, Budget
Officers are responsible for extramural budget requests and
should keep you informed about changes in extramural
budgets. In addition, most offices have a senior contracts
person, who, along with the Budget Officer is responsible
for various aspects of pre-acquisition planning. If your
office does not have a Senior Contracts Coordinator, the SRO
(usually a Deputy Assistant Administrator or Assistant
Regional Administrator) will be responsible for designating
the individual responsible for the functions given below.
II-2
-------
General Timing and Content
The acquisition package is a comprehensive set of
documentation that provides complete background information
on a requirement, sufficient for the CO to develop and
process a solicitation for the requirement.
The elements of the acquisition package are:
o Procurement Request Package
The PR package is comprised of the PRR Checklist (32
point document) with its attachments, the Certification
to accompany PRR, and the Office Director Certification
of Procurement Request. Further discussion of the PRR
is contained in Section III.
o Acquisition Plan
The acquisition plan outlines various aspects of the
requirement (based on the PR package), describes the
procurement process to be followed, details budget and
funding considerations, and sets the procurement
schedule. One of the most important purposes of the
acquisition plan is to establish milestones for all
steps in the solicitation and source selection phases
of the procurement process. A general rule of thumb is
to initiate acquisitions approximately 18 months before
award to allow time for processing.
o CBD synopsis
A procurement abstract is developed as an attachment to
the PRR (32 point document) describing the type of work
required, identifying the office to be supported, and
listing the desired qualifications of a contractor.
The procurement abstract is used by the CO to prepare a
CBD synopsis to announce the procurement in the CBD.
II-3
-------
SECTION II-B HOW TO SAFEGUARD AGAINST CONTRACT
VULNERABILITIES
or
Before I Get Started.
what Do T Need to Know to Keen Ma Out of Trouble
Overview
Believe it or not, if your contract is criticized
because of inadequate contract management, you alone will
not be held accountable. The Agency has recently
established SROs, who, in addition to their other duties and
responsibilities as Deputy Assistant Administrators and
Assistant Regional Administrators, are accountable for
ethical, effective resource management in his/her Program or
Region. In other words, if the GAO or the OIG finds
evidence that your Office still views the Agency's
environmental protection mission as more important than
providing sound contract management, your SRO will find
his/her self under Congressional scrutiny for his/her
inability to manage his/her contracts properly.
One way to protect both yourself and your SRO is to
identify potential vulnerabilities before the contract is
awarded and develop specific contract management controls to
address those special sensitivities, either as an attachment
to the 32 point document or as a part of your contract
management plan.
Included in this section are areas that require
safeguards. Also included are samples of contract language
or management controls. Use them as examples, drawing on
those that are relevant to your acquisition; however, please
ensure that they are adapted to the unique needs of your
contract.
AAB and other Sensitive Areas
In order to procure AAS or support in areas which the
Agency considers sensitive, you must first prepare a
certification for your Assistant Administrator's signature.
This document is ultimately approved by the Assistant
Administrator for the OARM.
AAS is defined as those services acquired from non-
governmental sources by contract or by personnel appointment
to support or improve agency policy development, decision-
making, management, and administration, or to support or
improve the operation of management systems as described in
OMB Circular A-120. FAR subpart 37.2 provides further
information on the types of activities that are considered
AAS.
II-4
-------
Sensitive contracting areas as defined in EPA Order 1900-2
consist of the following:
o Budget preparation support
o Support services such as analyses, feasibility studies,
etc. to be used by EPA in developing policy
o Reorganization and planning support
o Regulation development support
o Any support in the in-house evaluation of another
contractor's performance
o Involvement in strategic acquisition planning
o Support on improving contract management
o Providing specialized expertise in the contractor
selection process
o Providing specialized expertise in the development of
SOW, Work Assignments, and other contract-ordered tasks
o Any support involving EPA policy or regulatory
interpretat ion
o Independently providing technical guidance concerning
EPA policies or regulations on EPA's behalf to outside
parties
The next page contains a sample AAS memorandum.
II-5
-------
Figure II-l
ATTACHMENT
Memorandum
Subject: Approval for Advisory and Assistance Services
From: ____^
Assistant Administrator
Through: Betty L. Bailey, Director
Office of Acquisition Management
To:
Assistant Administrator
Office of Administration and Resources
Management
I am requesting your approval to acquire advisory and
assistance services as defined in Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) Circular A-120. The proposed acquisition is
necessary to support the program in the
following area:
o (Identify contract-specific support areas)
In accordance with OMB Circular A-120, I certify that the
services to be performed will not: 1) unnecessarily duplicate
any previously performed work or services; 2) be used in
performing work of a policy/decision-making or managerial
nature; 3) be used to bypass personnel ceilings, pay
limitations, or competitive employment procedures; 4) be
contracted for on a preferential basis to former Government
employees; 5) be used specifically to aid in influencing or
enacting legislation; or 6) be used to obtain professional or
technical advice which is readily available within the Agency
or another Federal agency. Accordingly, it is determined that
the requested services are appropriate and meet the
requirements of OMB Circular A-120, the Federal Acquisition
Regulations (FAR) Subpart 37.2, and applicable EPA guidance
Concur
Betty L. Bailey, Director
Office of Acquisition Management
Approved
Jonathan Cannon, Assistant Administrator
for Administration and Resources Management
II-6
-------
Contracting Areaa Requiring Special Control Measures
The following is a list of contracting areas requiring
special control measures based on the EPA Order "Contracting
At EPA". A special discussion must accompany any
procurement request involving these activities.
o Situations where contractors share office space with
EPA employees
Control measures must be established to prevent the
performance of personal services to ensure that
contractors do not have inappropriate access to
privileged or sensitive information.
EXAMPLE
To ensure that contractor employees do not have
inappropriate access to privileged or sensitive
information, we have established file cabinets in a
portion of the office not accessible to contractor
employees. Our employees have heard that any privileged
or sensitive information must be stored in these file.
cabinets when not being used by the EPA employees.
Additionally, EPA supervisors have been asked to monitor
that this procedure is followed.
To prevent the performance of personal services by
contractor employees, all EPA employees co-located with
contractor employees have been informed they may not make
any direct work assignments to the contractor.
Supervisors have been cautioned not to treat contractor
employees as their own staff. All assignments to these
contractor employees will be made through the PP.
o Support in preparing responses to Freedom of
Information Act requests
Control measures must be established to ensure that
contractors are in compliance with all regulations
involving FOIA, the Privacy Act, and CBI.
o Any situation where a contractor has access to
confidential business information,and/or any other
sensitive information.
Control measure must be established to ensure that
contractors do not have inappropriate access to privileged
and sensitive information, to ensure that security systems
are in place preventing the release of sensitive information
to non-designated contractor employees, etc.
II-7
-------
EXAMPLE
To ensure that non-designated contractor employees do not
have inappropriate access to privileged or sensitive
information, areas of the on-site trailers will have file
cabinets equipped with locks designated for storage of
sensitive information. Contractor and EPA employees will
be notified that any privileged or sensitive information
must be stored in these file cabinets when not being used
by the appropriate employees. Specific contractor
employees will be designated to have access to the
information in these cabinets. These employees will sign
special confidentiality agreements to ensure that
sensitive information will not be inappropriately used or
released to unauthorized individuals.
Contractor and EPA employees will monitor the use of
sensitive information through log-in sheets which will
record the date, time and name of the individual removing
the material for use, and the date and time of return of
the material. The trailer and file cabinets will be
locked after business hours and only authorized personnel
will have keys to access these files. On-site access.
will be restricted to authorized personnel only.
Supervisors will be asked to monitor that this procedure
is followed.
Any situation where it can be assumed that the
contractor is EPA, without specifically identifying
itself as a contractor.
Control measures must be established to ensure that
contractor employees are clearly identified. In
addition, it is also your responsibility to remind your
contractor that he/she is to always preface any
comments made with the statement that the individual is
an employee of a contractor. He/she should also
identify himself as such whenever he/she attends any
meetings with EPA staff.
EXAMPLE
So that contractors will not be assumed to be EPA
employees, all contractor personnel will be required
to wear badges identifying themselves as contractor
employees. Signs will be posted at the site to
ensure that the public realizes that contractors are
on-site along with EPA employees.
-------
coi Issues
OAM has developed a COI Rule which defines COI provides
a discussion for contractors and COs to help clarify the
Agency's position on COI issues and procedures. Organiza-
tional COI exists when the nature of the work to be
performed under a contract and a prospective contractor's
organization, financial, or other interests are such that
award of the contract may result in an unfair competitive
advantage, or impair the contractor's objectivity in
performing the contract work. The OMB is currently
reviewing the rule's compliance with the Paperwork Reduction
Act. EPA will finalize its Rule once it receives OMB
approval.
The rule, once approved, will amend coverage on COI for
all contracts and provide for stronger reporting and
certification requirements. It will also add special COI
clauses and emphasize the identification of conflicts, both
during and after performance, to protect the Agency's cost
and recovery actions. Although the rule was written
primarily for the Superfund program, the processes for non-
Super fund programs are the same and the clauses can be
adapted for non-Superfund programs where COI is the issue.
In any case, the acquisition package must contain detailed
technical information on the activities involved in
potential organizational COI, so that the CO can incorporate
special provisions into the procurement to mitigate or avoid
conflict of interest.
Inherently Governmental Functions
As a PO, you are prohibited from issuing work assign-
ments or delivery orders for work that is inherently
governmental. What is "inherently governmental"?
Inherently governmental means any activity which is so
intimately related to the public interest as to mandate
performance by Government officials and employees.
Examples include:
o The actual preparation of Congressional testimony
o The interviewing or hiring of individuals for
employment at EPA
o Developing and/or writing of Position Descriptions and
Performance Standards
o The actual determination of Agency policy
o Participating as a voting member on a PEB; partici-
pating in and/or attending Award -Fee meetings
II-9
-------
o The actual preparation of Award Fee Plans
o Preparing Award Fee letters, even under typing services
contracts
o The preparation of documents on EPA letterhead other
than routine administrative correspondence
o Reviewing vouchers and invoices for the purposes of
determining whether costs, hours, and work performed
are reasonable
o The preparation of sows. Work Assignments, Technical
Direction Documents, Delivery Orders, or any other work
issuance document under a contract that the contractor
is performing or may perform.
o On behalf of EPA, actually preparing responses to audit
reports from the OIG, GAO or other auditing entities
o On behalf of EPA, preparing responses to Congressional
correspondence
o The actual preparation of responses to FOIA Requests,
other than routine, non-judgmental correspondence
o Any contract which authorizes a contractor to represent
itself as EPA to outside parties
o Conducting administrative hearings
o Reviewing findings concerning the eligibility of EPA
employees for security clearances
o The actual preparation of an office's official budget
request
By now you are probably saying "Whew, this is a lot of
work! How can I effectively do all of this by myself?"
Well, good news. The Agency has recently implemented a
concept known as quality contracting teams. In order to
promote teamwork and coordination, a team consisting of
contracting personnel, legal counsel, and others will work
with you from the inception of the procurement through
contract closeout in an advisory and oversight role. For
more information, see Section II-C.
11-10
-------
SECTION II-C QUALITY CONTRACTING TEAMS
We all know that in the past, at times there has been a
lack of coordination between the OARM, program offices and
the Office of General Counsel on important contracting
matters. As a means to promote teamwork and accomplish life
cycle management of contracts from award to closeout, the
Agency has recently implemented a "contracting team"
approach.
What is a contracting team?
A contracting team is a group of individuals, convened upon
the conceptualization of the contract, who are responsible
for contract management oversight through contract close
out. This way, all team members should be fully
knowledgeable of the history and terms of the contract, and
EPA's rights and obligations.
Who makes up the contracting team?
Members include the Procuring CO, the Administrative CO, PO,
Program Office Manager or Supervisor, Legal Counsel, Cost
Analyst, Financial Management Division representative (on an
as needed basis to discuss fiscal questions and
appropriations issues), and Property Administrator (where
necessary and feasible).
What exactly does a team do?
o Review and provide recommendations on individual
acquisition plans (pre-award) and contract management
plans (post award) for every major acquisition.
o Validate compliance with the plans at team meetings;
monitor work towards completion, cost control, and
effective contract management; and identify corrective
actions to be completed.
o Develop goals for ensuring the successful acquisition
and management of their contract.
This seems like it will be resource intensive. Will a team
be set up for every acquisition?
No, quality contracting teams are mandatory for all
acquisitions with a maximum potential value greater than
$100,000,000. Teams are discretionary for acquisitions with
a maximum potential value between $5,000,000 - $100,000,000.
For discretionary cases, OAM will make a determination as to
whether a quality contracting team is feasible after
reviewing factors such as conflict of interest, potential
vulnerabilities, CBI access, the importance of the contract
11-11
-------
to EPA'8 mission, and resource availability. This
information is contained in Chapter 15 of the CMM. You can
also call Paul Schaffer at 260-9032.
11-12
-------
SECTION II-D ANNUAL ACQUISITION PLAN
Each program office is required to submit an Annual
Acquisition Plan that lists all of the new contract actions
expected to be valued at more than $25,000 for the next two
upcoming fiscal years. This section tells you the content
and specific purposes of the Annual Acquisition Plan.
The plan provides information for three purposes: (a)
to advertise next year's awards to potential proposers to
increase competition and ensure fairness; (2) to assist CAM
in workload planning; and (3) to assist the OSDBU in their
preparation of an annual report to SBA which forecasts
expected contract opportunities for small and disadvantaged
business concerns.
Responsibility t
In April of each year, OAM will issue a call letter.
The memorandum will also identify those contracts scheduled
to expire within the next two fiscal years (FYs) .
By June 30 of each year, your SRO will forward the
required information listed below.
OAM will then meet with program representatives to
discuss program priorities, contracting workload, ways to
increase competition, minimum leadtimes, coordination
efforts to maximize responsiveness, and anticipated
problems .
OAM will then publish the annual acquisition plan
summaries in the CBD in the first quarter of the next FY.
FY#1 of your two year plan usually will not be too
detailed. Basically, you should just be reaffirming
milestones, scope of competition, and budget for actions
already in-house. However, please ensure that you add new
requirements that have recently become necessary. For FY/2
of the plan, include acquisitions to be initiated during the
upcoming year which are planned for award in the subsequent
year. A form is provided on the following page.
Content of Plan
At a minimum, the plan shall include the following
information:
o Name of your Contracting Office (Headquarters,
Cincinnati, RTP, Region _ )
11-13
-------
o Preparer's name and telephone number
o Allowance holder and organization
o Short unique description that distinguishes your
procurement from similar work of the same nature.
(Please avoid the use of acronyms)
o Estimated total dollar value (regardless of funding
source and including all options) of each planned
acquisition and whether funds are available
o Whether the proposed acquisitions will be set-aside for
small business or 8(a) concerns
For each action in the Workload Planning year (2nd year)
o Estimated date PRR will be sent to 0AM
o Date you need or expect the award to be made (should be
at least eighteen months from OAM's receipt of PRR)
o Type of contract desired (Cost Plus Fixed Fee, Cost
Plus Award Fee, Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite
Quantity) Note: The CO will make the final
determination as to the appropriate contract type)
For the plan as a whole, attach a discussion oft
o Items that need special attention (quick response
services, deviations from normal procedures, innovative
contracts, strategic changes)
o Resources available and EPA personnel responsible for
managing the contracts (POs, WANs, DOPOs, TEP members,
etc.)
o Potential vulnerabilities in managing the contract, and
how they will be handled. (See Section II-E and EPA
Order 1900-2)
Remember, this is just a plan, so during preparation,
build in enough flexibility in case your contract has to be
restructured to:
o adjust to changing priorities
o increase competition
o link budget and contracts planning
o ensure a smooth transition between existing contracts
and recompetes
11-14
-------
balance small business set-asides, 8(a) procurements,
and full and open competitions
provide for advertising expectations about upcoming
contracts (to .the public and to ..potential contractors)
11-15
-------
Figure II-2
CONTRACTING OFFICE,
PREPARED BY:
FY ACQUISITION PLAN
Name
ALLOWANCE HOLDER
APPROVED BY
Telephone No.
ORGANIZATION
Senior Resource Official
PLANNED ACTIONS:***
Date
1. Title and brief description of procurement or modification
Required
award date
Estimated
dollar
value*
Are funds
currently
available?
Set-aside for small
(SB) or 8 (a) firms?**
SB 8 (a)
2. Title and brief description of procurement or modification
Required
award date
Estimated
dollar
value*
Are funds
currently
available?
Set-aside for small
(SB) or 8 (a) firms?**
SB 8 (a)
3. Title and brief description of procurement or modification
Required
award date
Estimated
dollar
value*
Are funds
currently
available?
Set-aside for small
(SB) or 8 (a) firms?**
SB 8 (a)
4. Title and brief description of procurement or modification
Required
award date
Estimated
dollar
value*
Are funds
currently
available?
Set-aside for small
(SB) or 8 (a) firms?**
SB 8 (a)
"
11-16
-------
* includes all options
** insert "SB" for small business or "8(a) for 8 (a) firms
*** if a follow on procurement, circle the number of the
action
11-17
-------
SECTION II-E INDIVIDUAL ACQUISITION PLANS AND CONTRACT
MANAGEMENT PLANS
Any acquisition expected to be greater than $5,000,000
($25,000,000 for Superfund or ADP procurements) is required
to have an Individual Acquisition Plan (prepared by the CO)
and a Contract Management Plan (prepared by the program
office's PO.
Responsibilities
To develop the Individual Acquisition Plan, the CO will
obtain information from you (as well as from legal counsel,
cost/price analysts and others) to use in designing a
strategy for obtaining the award. This information
includes:
o A statement as to why the services are needed
o A summary of the technical and contractual history of
the acquisition
o Delivery or performance period requirements
o Technical, costs and schedule risks
o Possible sources
o Budgetary and funding estimates
o Property to be furnished by the Government
o Milestone for receipt of the statement of work and
purchase request
Some of this information will be found in the Annual
Acquisition Plan. Other parts may be found in the Pro-
curement Planning rationale and will need your confirmation
for final inclusion. However, after receipt of your input,
the CO is ultimately responsible for final preparation.
You, however, are responsible for preparation of the
Contract Management Plan. This following section tells you
how to perform that responsibility.
and Content
The objective of the Contract Management Plan is to
11-18
-------
identify how a specific contract will .be managed from the
point of award through its completion. If required, your
contract management plan should be included as an attachment
to the PRR (see Chapter III).
Items that should be covered includes
o Identification of the personnel responsible for
managing the contract from the point of award through
its completion.
o Internal office procedures, such as document flow, and
sequence of signatures
o Key vulnerabilities (i.e., COI, access to CBI)
o Methods of tracking important resources, such as
deliverables, property and funds
o Lessons learned from the previous contract (i.e
improvements to the SOW, method of contract management,
quality control procedures, or incorporation of audit
recommendations)
o Security
Further information on Annual Acquisition Plans,
Individual Acquisition Plans, and Contract Management Plans
is contained in Chapter 1 of the CMM. Now, Section III will
tell you where this information fits into the Procurement
Planning Request.
11-19
-------
CHAPTER XIX
THE PROCUREMENT REQUEST RATIONALE
-------
CHAPTER III
THE PROCUREMENT REQUEST RATIONALE
SECTION III-A GENERAL INFORMATION
SECTION III-B CHECKLIST ITEM #2 - Explanation Of All
Components
o EPA Form 1900-8 "Procurement Request/Order'1
o Procurement Abstract
o sow
o Concise Technical Proposal Instructions
o Competitive TEC
o JOFOC
o DSP to provide Full & Open Competition After
Exclusion of Sources
o AA8 Certification
o Justification of Need (GFP)
o QA Review Form
o Recommended Sources List
o Reports Description
o GFP Description
o Controls for Sensitive Contracting
o Hov Procurement Fits Into Contracting
Strategy
SECTION Ill-c Items l and 3 through 32 Of the Checklist
o OMB Strictures on AAS Contractors
o Sensitive contracting supporting Rationale
o Legal Analysis Procurement Question
o Unsolicited Proposal Question
o Proposed PO
III-l
-------
o Sources Recommended Question
o New contract or Modification Questions
o Set-aside Question
o OMB Circular A-76 Question
o Priority Processing Question
o Multiple Appropriation Funding Question
o Prohibited Contracting Activities Question
o FIRMR-oontrolled Requirements Question
o RCRA Procurement Guidelines Question
SECTION XXX-D ADDITIONAL ITEMS THAT MAY BE REQUIRED FOR
YOUR PROCUREMENT PACKAGE BUT ARE NOT INCLUDED
IN THE CHECKLIST
III-2
-------
SECTION III-A GENERAL INFORMATION
Assembling a procurement request package may appear to
be a daunting task for the uninitiated (and even for those
who have done it before). The authors of this Cookbook
understand this feeling of being overwhelmed by the
procurement process (we've each faced it ourselves).
One reason program offices have felt so uncertain about
what it takes to get a procurement "through the system" is
EPA has never developed a blueprint for assembling an
acceptable procurement package request. This chapter of the
Cookbook represents our best effort to provide such a
blueprint. We have developed this chapter of the Cookbook
in as "user-friendly" a style as we could to walk you
through each of the steps you must follow to assemble a
package that will be acceptable to your CO.
The centerpiece of all procurement request packages is
the 32-Point PRR Checklist ("the Checklist"). The
checklist must be completed for all procurement actions for
new contract awards over $25,000. This chapter of the
Cookbook contains:
(1) a copy of the checklist, which you may photocopy (or
obtain from Chapter 2 of the CMM),
(2) all the information you will need to complete the
Checklist, including explanatory notes on each of the
32 "points", and
(3) forms and explanations for other material not
specifically referenced in the Checklist that may also
be needed for OAM to process your procurement.
To make it easier to understand the type of documents
that are needed, think of the contents of the procurement
request package as separated into two categories, standard
and conditional documentation. Standard documentation must
be prepared for all procurements (with certain exceptions
resulting from dollar thresholds). On the other hand,
preparation of optional documentation is dependent more on
the specific requirements of the procurement. For example,
if the procurement involves GFP or AAS, additional paperwork
is required.
The first thing you will need to do is copy the 32-
point checklist, read through it, and decide what paperwork
applies to your contract. Next, refer to Section I-C of
this Cookbook and contact your contracts servicing center in
Headquarters, RTF, Cincinnati, or the Regional office to ask
that a CS be assigned to the procurement. Establishing
contact early on with the procurement office may eliminate
III-3
-------
procurement "ping pong" (rejection and re-submission of
inadequate procurement requests) by enabling you to work
with the experts right from the start. Finally, if your
office has an in-house procurement expert working for the
SRO, use that person as an information resource.
Documents required for ALL procurement request packages are
as follows:
32-point PRR Checklist
Planning Purchase Request (EPA 1900-8)
SOW
- QA Review Form
IGCE
PO Certification Form (EPA 1900-65)
Procurement Integrity Certifications
Procurement Abstract
Recommended Sources List
Additional documents that MAY be needed for processing the
procurement are listed below and described in full detail in
this chapter:
Labor Definition Requirement
Nominations for TEP Selection
TEC
- GFP Description
JOFOC - only applies to non-competitive procurements
D&F to provide full and open competition after
exclusion of sources [see FAR 6.2]
AAS Justification
Justification of Need (for GFP, including contractor-
acquired property, if known in advance)
Nominations for PEB (Award Fee)
Award Fee Plan (Only for Award Fee Contract)
III-4
-------
Discussion of Controls for Sensitive Contracting
Justification for Contract Period of Performance
Exceeding 36 Months
Justification for Contract Option Quantities Exceeding
50% of the Base Quantity
Identification of potential COI and proposed
mitigation/elimination
III-5
-------
SECTION III-B CHECKLIST ITEM #2 - EXPLANATION OF ALL
COMPONENTS
Item #2 of the Checklist contains several distinct
elements, some of which are mandatory for every procurement
and others of which are required only for certain types of
procurements, i.e., competitive procurements, sole source
procurements, etc. These elements are enumerated below.
Next to the title of each element is a reference,
indicated in brackets([...]), where applicable. Immediately
to the right of the reference document title (or to the
right of the element name (when no reference exists), is a
"C for conditional or "M" for mandatory.
Finally, each element contains an explanation of when
it is required and how it must be completed by the program
office. A full list of all procurement package mandatory
and optional items is also included on page 2 of this
chapter. After the "M" or "On designation, we have
referenced the Attachment # where an example of the item may
be found as an appendix to this chapter.
EPA Form 1900-8 "Procurement Request/Order" (M) (Attachment
11
This document provides funding for the procurement. When
initiating a procurement, a "dummy" form is used for
planning purposes and does not commit funds. However, this
"planning purchase request" must provide the estimated
dollar value of the procurement, the Allowance Holder Code,
and the date funds are expected to be available. The
request must be signed by the same officials required to
authorize funding documents. Please refer to the PO
Handbook for the appropriate signatory authorities. Before
a contract award is signed, the PO must provide OAM with a
funded Procurement Request.
Procurement Abstract (C) (Attachment 2)
The procurement abstract is the basis for the procurement
synopsis published in the CBD. It should include:
a brief statement of the type of work required
- desired qualifications of a contractor so that the
contracting community has enough information to decide
if they are qualified to pursue the RFP.
statement of whether the procurement is to be openly
competed or set-aside for small businesses or "8(a)"
firms,
III-6
-------
information on the magnitude of the requirement, i.e.,
for LOE contracts! the maximum period of performance
and maximum potential LOE.
sow (VI)
The SOW provides the basis for the performance of all work
required by the contract. For further information, please
refer to Chapter IV of this Cookbook.
Concise Technical Proposal Instructions fCl (Attafihjgent 3i
Standard EPA solicitation instructions provide general
direction to offerers on the preparation of technical
proposals. The project office may add additional specific
instructions if it so chooses.
Estimated Labor Requirements and Classifications!
Standard experience and educational qualifications have
been developed for professional/technical labor
classifications and these appear as boiler plate language in
solicitation and contract documents prepared by the OAM.
For example, professional levels (PLs) 1 through 4 are
designated. If the standard qualifications do not meet the
requirements of the project office, separate qualification
statements should be developed and furnished with the
Procurement Request.
For LOE contracts, the Project Office should include
information concerning the required skill mix (percent PL4,
PL3, etc.), and "plug costs", if any, for ODCs and travel.
"Plug costs" may be based on historical experience gained
form predecessor contracts adjusted for known requirement of
the instant procurement or another "bottom up" analysis of
estimated costs. This section should also .include any
special requirements for the format in which you want
technical proposals to be prepared, including desired page
limitations on technical proposals.
Competitive TEC fOi
The requirements for TEC are covered in detail in
Chapter V of this Cookbook.
JOFO fOi (Attachment 41
The FAR requires that procurements be awarded using
full and open competition. However, there are times when
full competition is not possible. The FAR Part 6.302 lists
the seven (7) circumstances which permit other than full and
open competition according to the law.
III-7
-------
They are:
o Only one responsible source and no other supplies or
services will satisfy agency requirements.
o Unusual and compelling urgency.
o Industrial mobilization; or engineering, development or
research capability.
o International agreement.
o Authorized or required by statute.
o National security.
o Public interest.
A justification must fall within one of these areas
before a requirement will receive consideration for
restricted competition or single source procurement.
Requests which result from the lack of planning for future
contracts DO NOT fall within one of these areas. It is
important that the project office be aware of the time it
takes to place a contract and to plan accordingly.
The form in the CMM, page 2-F4-1 is to be completed by
the Project Office. The PO Handbook contains a detailed
section on the preparation of the JOFOC [paragraph M-3.106-
8(f), pages 3-27 - 3-31.1]. Because non-competitive
procurement procedures are discouraged, the Project Office
is advised to contact the procurement office as soon as a
non-competitive procurement is contemplated to discuss the
rationale for the action and to receive direction and
guidance on the need and development of the JOFOC. This
will speed up the acquisition process and help eliminate
wasted effort.
D&F to provide full and open competition after exclusion of
sources rReference: FAR 6.2] (C) (Attachment 5)
If the Government determines that one or more potential
offerers should be precluded from competing on a procurement
action in order to establish or maintain an alternative
source of support, and that by limiting the competition in
this way reduced overall costs for the acquisition will
result, this justification shall be provided. This
determination is not related to set-asides for small or
disadvantaged businesses or labor surplus area concerns.
AAS Justification (C)
This memorandum must be prepared -for any procurement
III-8
-------
for which the SOW includes AAS. Procurement Policy Notice
#92-01, dated November 8, 1991, contains instructions for
preparing AAS memoranda. A sample memorandum is provided in
CMM, Chapter 2, page 2-B-l. The memorandum must be signed
by the Assistant Administrator for the Project Office. It
should be directed to the CO for procurements of less than
$5 million; for procurements of more than $5 million, the AA
for OARM is the approval official.
Justification of Need fGFPl fCl
All personal property, whether furnished by EPA or
acquired by the Contractor, must be justified. [Minimum
contents of the justification are set forth in the PO's
Handbook, Chapter 3, Sections M-3.106-16(h)]. You must
complete a "Justification of Need" if you intend to transfer
equipment purchased under an expiring contract or if you
wish to purchase new equipment under the new contract.
OA Review Form rReferenee: EPAAR 1546.2011 (Ml
This form documents the need to assure that
environmentally related measurements are scientifically
valid. The PO indicates on the form whether environmental -
measurements will or will not be required. The form must be
fully completed if the procurement is in excess of $25,000
and the accounting data object class is:
25.32 R&D contracts
25.35 Program contracts
25.47 Occupational Health Monitoring
25.49 Other work related to Occupational Health and
Safety
26.01 Laboratory Supplies
31.01 Scientific & Technical Equipment
Your QAO must be designated as a member of the TEP if
the estimated value of the procurement is over $500,000. In
such cases, some percentage of the TEC should relate to
quality assurance. If you do not know who your QAO is,
contact your contract liaison. The form found in attachment
6 is also located in the CMM, Chapter 2 pages 2-F3-1&2].
Recommended Sources List (Optional)
The recommended sources list is a list containing the
names of contractors that the Project Office wants included
in the solicitation mailing list. This list should include
III-9
-------
all possible known sources. Providing this list is strictly
optional for the Project Office since most members of the
vendor community scan CBD announcements regularly and send
written requests for all solicitations to which they may be
interested in responding.
Reports Description (C)
Standard contractor reporting requirements are included
in EPAAR 1552.210 and will automatically be included in your
solicitation unless you request otherwise. If the EPAAR
requirements do not provide adequate information to monitor
financial and technical progress of the contract, you may
develop additional requirements as necessary.
GFP Description [Reference; EPA Property Manual. PO
Handbook. Chanter 3. Section M-3.106-16. CMM. Chanter 51 fCl
The Project Office shall furnish this attachment if the
Government intends to provide property to the contractor.
The attachment must give a complete description of the
property, its estimated value, its condition and an
indication whether it will be used up by the contractor
during performance of the contract. Consult the above
references for complete information in this area.
Controls for Sensitive Contracting (C\ tAttachment 7)
Provide a complete description of the sensitive
activities and your internal controls (based on the
information given in the Checklist explanation). This
discussion should be incorporated into the AAS services
memorandum for AAS contracts. For non-AAS contracts
involving sensitive activities, a separate document is
required.
111-10
-------
SECTION III-C ITEMS 1 and 3 - 32 OP THE CHECKLIST
Congratulations! Once you have completed Item 2 of the
Checklist, you have most of the hard work in assembling the
procurement package behind youl The rest of the Checklist
items are truly just that — items to check, fill out, or
otherwise, indicate your understanding of basic procurement
regulations or other issues of particular concern in EPA
contracting.
************************************************************
Item 1: The title of this procurement
is .
The Title of the procurement is needed to identify
the procurement action. It should be as
descriptive as possible.
k***********************i
Item 3: This procurement ( ) involves or ( ) does not
involve AAS or sensitive contracting areas. (If
such services are involved, attach a copy of the
justification required by Chapter 2 of the CMM,
the original should be forwarded in accordance
with Chapter 2. See Figure 2-2 for the required
approvals). For both AAS and sensitive
contracting areas, attach a discussion of how the
procurement fits into your overall contracting
strategy.
[Reference: CMM Chapter 2, pages 2-4 and 2-A-l through 2-A-
9]
AAS include:
individual experts and consultants
studies, analyses and evaluations
- management and professional support services
engineering and technical services
NOTE: The vast majority of EPA contracts involve AAS. If
you believe your procurement does not fall into this
category, contact your CS for a determination of whether or
not this requirement applies.
Per OMB Circular A-120, paragraph 7, the AAS approval
must address the reasons for use and make the certifications
summarized as follows. The AAS shall not be:
III-ll
-------
used for policy, decision-making, or managerial work
which is the direct responsibility of Agency officials,
used to bypass personnel ceilings, etc.
awarded preferentially to former Government employees,
used to aid in influencing or enacting legislation,
procured through grants or cooperative agreements, and
used to obtain professional or technical advice which
is readily available within the Government.
For Sensitive Contracting areas, i.e., budget
preparation support, regulatory development support, policy
support, evaluation of another EPA contractor, etc., prepare
the certification per CMM Chapter 2 (page 2-C-l). A
document that provides a comprehensive listing of sensitive
contracting areas is EPA Order 1900.2, dated 10/22/90.
Item 4: This procurement ( ) involves or ( ) does not
involve legal analysis. I have ( ) or have not _
( ) discussed this procurement with the Office of
General Counsel which ( ) concurs or ( ) does
not concur with proceeding with this procurement.
This refers to legal services for analyzing and
interpreting the law, not to be confused with litigation and
regulatory support services. If the procurement is for
legal services. Office of General Counsel must agree with
using extramural resources for this purpose.
Item 5: I ( ) anticipate or have knowledge of ( ) I do
not anticipate or have any knowledge of
organizational conflict of interest issues related
to this procurement. (If yes, describe conflict
in an attachment.)
[Reference: FAR 9.5, OAM Procurement Policy Notice 91-06,
dated 23 Jul 91] Will ANY offerer, if awarded this
contract, find itself in a COI situation? [If YES, see
ATTACHMENT #27]
Item 6: Listed below are special EPA employee(s) who are
or will be participating in EPA's processing or
managing of this procurement, together with a list
of their non-Government employers. Check here if
none ( ).
111-12
-------
EPA Special Employees Non-Government Employer
[Reference: EPAAR 1503.600-71] A special EPA employee is an
EPA officer or employee who is retained, designated,
appointed or employed for not more than 130 days during any
period of 365 consecutive days. EPA has developed a policy
regarding the placement of contracts with such employees
within 365 days of the termination of their employment to
preclude COI. The Project Office must identify these
employees to insure that this policy is observed. (NOTE:
Regular EPA employees are not mentioned in the checklist but
are mentioned in the EPAAR reference.)
Item 7: This procurement ( ) is or ( ) is not based on
an Unsolicited Proposal.
[Reference: CMM Chapter 3] Special procurement rules apply
for awarding a contract based on an unsolicited proposal.
All unsolicited proposals are to be forwarded to the Office.
of Grants and Debarment of OARM for processing. A copy of
the technical proposal will be returned to the appropriate
technical office for technical evaluation.
Item 8: Designated as "reserved" on the form. Does not
need to be completed.
*********************
Item 9: The name of the proposed PO is
He/she ( ) has or ( ) has not been certified as
an EPA PO.
The project office may propose a PO for this
procurement only if he/she has met all PO requirements. EPA
Form 1900-65, requesting approval of the proposed PO, must
be completed and signed by the project office Division
Director.
Item 10: I ( ) recommend or ( ) do not recommend
prospective sources for this procurement. (If
sources are recommended, list in an attachment.)
111-13
-------
The project office should list the names and addresses
of any vendors to which they would like copies of the
solicitation sent. Developing such a list is strictly
optional since the vendor community is accustomed to
scanning the CBD for announcements of interest and will
notify OAN in writing of any RFPs for which they wish to be
added to the mailing list.
Item 11: This procurement anticipates ( ) a new contract
award or ( ) an additional work modification to
existing contract no. . It also
anticipates that it will be processed as a ( )
competitive procurement or ( ) other than full
and open competition. (Note: If other than full
and open competition is recommended, attach
appropriate justification as described in Part
1506 of the EPAAR. Also see sample format (Figure
2-4). Attach the PO's Certification that the data
provided in the justification is accurate and
complete.)
[Reference: FAR 6.3; see EPAAR 1506 for JOFOC execution]
[Also attach PO certification, CMM Figure 2-F4.]
Procurements can be placed non-competitively only if one of
the following conditions exists.
1. Only one responsible source
2. Unusual and compelling urgency
3. Need for industrial mobilization
4. International agreement
5. Authorized or required by statute
6. National security
7. Public interest
NOTE: EPAAR specifically mentions the use of #1 & #5 in EPA
considerations. [See ATTACHMENT #6]
Item 12: This proposed procurement is appropriate for ( )
total small business set-aside or ( ) total small
business/labor surplus area (SB/LSA) set-aside; or
( ) partial SB/LSA set-aside; ( ) partial SB
set-aside; ( ) 8(a) set-aside; ( ) LSA
111-14
-------
set-aside; or ( ) none of the above (check only
one). Consult the OSDBU for advice.
EPA is required to make every effort to achieve our
socio-economic goals. These include contracting out to
small and small disadvantaged business whenever possible.
All procurement requests must be processed through the OSDBU
or a local representative of that office. OSDBU's review
responsibilities are set forth in EPAAR 1519.201-2(c) (3).
As indicated in the checklist, the project office is to
consult with the OSDBU and Prepare EPA Form 1900-37 "Record
of Procurement Request Review." See ATTACHMENT #26
(NOTE: For information on set-asides see: Small Business
Definition - FAR 19.001; Set-asides explained - FAR 19.501 &
19.502; for Labor Surplus Areas Definition - FAR 20.101.)
Item 13: (a) The estimated POP is months after
the effective date of the contract ( )
inclusive or ( ) exclusive of submission of
any final report which may be required.
(b) The schedule of deliverable items (excluding-
reports) is as follows. Check here if no
deliverable items are required ( ).
Delivery
Item No. Description Quantity Date
Contract POP question. [Ref.: EPAAR 1517.202] If the total
proposed period of contract performance is more than 36
months, a justification is required. [see ATTACHMENT
Regarding submission of final reports, under cost
reimbursement contracts all costs chargeable to the contract
must be incurred during the contract period of performance
(POP) . Therefore, the POP must include the submission of
any final reports. Under delivery order contracts, products
may be delivered to the agency up to 90 days following the
end of the POP. Therefore, the POP of delivery order
contracts need not be inclusive of final reports.
************************************************************
Item 14: This procurement anticipates that the following
options will be needed. Check here if no options
are anticipated ( ) .
111-15
-------
Description of Term of Option (Description may be
indicated in a separate attachment)
[Reference: EPAAR 1517.202]
If option quantities exceed the basic quantity for any
contract period by more than 50%, a justification is
required. The use of this justification is intended to
encourage program offices to identify the range of support
needed with as much precision as possible.
Item 15: The following reports are required (describe in an
attachment). Check here if no reports are
required ( ). For each separate report required,
describe the following:
o Type of report (e.g., draft, final, interim,
special, etc.)
o Descriptive title (e.g., monthly progress
report)
o Minimum content requirements
o Number of copies required
o Distribution (with complete addresses of all
recipients)
o Delivery schedule
o Number of days the Government will have to
review, comment, approve/disapprove and
return (as appropriate)
•
Where specific report formats containing the
information above are used repetitively, "standard" formats
are established or may be established with the servicing CO.
Maximum use of such standard formats is encouraged.
Examples include monthly progress reports, financial
progress reports and final reports.
Item 16: Peer review of Contractor-generated documents ( )
will be or ( ) will not be required.
[Reference: EPA Order 2200.4A "EPA Publications
Review Procedure"]. This question refers to
scientific review of documents/deliverables.
************************************************************
111-16
-------
Item 17: Government property, data, or services ( ) will
be furnished or ( ) will not be furnished under
this procurement. (If furnished, describe in an
attachment including quantity and date available).
GFP, Data, Services question. Will the Government
provide anything which the contractor will need in
order to fulfill its contractual obligations?
This includes data or other written material. All
Government furnished items must be clearly
defined. If GFP is provided, such action must be
justified.
Item 18: Budget. (An attachment may be used.)
o The total estimated budget for the basic
effort and all options is $ .
o The estimated funding for the current FY is
$ •
o The estimated total cost of ODCs is
$ . (If possible, indicate
estimate of significant sub-items such as
travel, computer time, consultants, equipment
and material.
o For LOE actions and other actions where
hours, rather than an end product, are to be
purchased, indicate for the basic and all
option periods the number of hours required,
by category, with definitions for each
category.
Item 19: This procurement ( ) is or ( ) .is not subject to
the requirements of OMB Circular A-76. (If A-76
applies, required documentation must be provided
with the PR.)
It is not the Government's intent to be in competition
with private business. Therefore, if a commercial or
industrial item or activity can be obtained from the private
sector for less than it would cost the Government to make
the item or perform the same activity, it should be obtained
from the private source. However, if the Government has the
capability to perform the requirement, and can do it for
less than any private source, the item shall be made or
activity shall be performed nin-house." If the Government
has not developed the capability or capacity to make the
111-17
-------
item, or perform the activity, the procurement is not
subject to the requirements of OMB Circular A-76.
Inherently Governmental functions are outside the scope of
this Circular. [See PO Handbook, page 2-5 & 2-6.]
**********************************************************i
Item 20: This procurement ( ) requires or ( ) does not
require priority processing (a brief priority
justification may be attached).
(To be completed by procurement office:)
( ) Approved ( ) Disapproved
Date Chief, Contracting Office
The procurement office establishes a procurement
milestone schedule for each procurement based on workload
and does its best to meet the requirements of each project
office. If the Project Office requests priority processing,
a special effort will be made on the part of the procurement
office to closely coordinate all aspects of the procurement.
with the Project Office and expedite individual elements of
the procurement process. If priority processing is
requested, state the date by which the procurement is needed
and explain why the procurement was submitted for processing
at an earlier date.
Item 21: This procurement ( ) will or ( ) will not
involve the testing of human subjects in
accordance with EPA Order 1000.17.
The answer to this question should be self-
explanatory.
Item 22: This procurement ( ) does or ( ) does not
include acquisition of membership in an
association is included, attach a certification
indicating that the primary purpose of membership
is to obtain direct benefits for EPA, which is
necessary to accomplishment its functions or
activities.)
The answer to this question should be self-
explanatory.
************************************************************
111-18
-------
Item 23: This procurement ( ) is or ( ) is not for
leasing of motor vehicles. (If affirmative, attach
certification per FAR 8-1102.)
The answer to this question should be self-
explanatory.
Item 24: This procurement ( ) is or ( ) is not to be
funded from more than one appropriation.
Typically, EPA contracts are funded from a single
appropriation. However, if you intend to fund your
procurement with more than one appropriation (for example, a
mixture of AC&C, R&D and Superfund monies), then you must
demonstrate that the funds allocation mix is proportional to
the relative benefit expected to accrue to the program(s)
supported by each funding source. The proposed funding mix
must be approved by the Director of the Financial Management
Division in OARM. Chapter 9 of the CMM provides a more
detailed explanation of this requirement.
Item 25: This procurement ( ) will or ( ) will not
involve statistical surveys, data collection,
using questionnaires, or statistical analysis of
survey data. (If affirmative, procurement office
will include instruction in solicitation for
offerers to obtain the EPA Survey Management
Handbook).
[Reference: Paperwork Reduction Act; EPA Survey
Management Handbook] If, in the
performance of this contract, the
Contractor is required to solicit the
same or similar information from ten or
more public respondents (anyone other
than a Federal agency or its employees),
the Contractor shall not proceed until
prior approval is obtained from the OMB
as required by the Paperwork Reduction
Act. Such approval is identified by an
OMB Approval Number which EPA shall
furnish to the Contractor. The approval
of a work assignment or delivery order
by the CO does not constitute approval
for the Contractor to solicit
information, unless the information
request includes fewer than ten (10)
public respondents or the work
assignment/delivery order approval
specifically references the OMB Approval
Number.
111-19
-------
The Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation,
(Phil Roth - 260-2683), publishes the EPA Survey
Management Handbook which tells what to look for
in creating a statistical survey.
************************************************************
Item 26: To the best of my knowledge, the work specified in
this procurement action does not unnecessarily
duplicate any other work previously performed, or
being performed, under my authority.
This question was developed by OAN in response to an
016 concern over duplication of work because portions of
many SOWS are similar, if not identical to each other, and
there is a danger that different offices within the agency
may not be sufficiently aware of other agency activities to
avoid duplication of contractor effort. This certification,
made by the PO, supports the CO in assuring that the
Government is not paying to have the same work done twice.
Item 27: To the best of my knowledge, the work specified in
this procurement action does not involve any
"prohibited contracting activities" listed in
Chapter 2 of the CMM.
[Reference: CMM Chapter 2, pages 2-F-l through 2-F-5]
Prohibited activities include the following which MUST
NOT be included in the sow. These are inherently
Governmental functions.
o Preparation of Congressional testimony
o Interviewing & hiring EPA employees
o Writing position descriptions and performance standards
o Determining Agency policy
o PEB voting member or Award Fee board participant
o Preparing Award Fee letters (even as typing service)
o Preparation of Award Fee Plans
o Preparation of documents on EPA letterhead
o Reviewing vouchers or invoices for cost reasonableness
o Preparing SOWs or other work issuance documents for a
contract the preparer is performing
111-20
-------
o Preparing audit report responses
o Preparing responses to Congressional correspondence
o Preparing FOZA responses
o Contractor represents itself as EPA
o Conduct administrative hearings
o Performing EPA employee security clearance reviews
o Preparing official budget requests
************************************************************
Item 28: This procurement [ ] will/ [ ] will not involve
any of the areas requiring special contract
controls listed in Chapter 2 of the CMM. (If the
procurement involves such areas, a special
discussion must be attached detailing proposed
control procedures to be enforced.)
[Reference: CMM Chapter 2, page 2-D-l for list]
Situations requiring special controls. They
include:
o Contractor in EPA office space
o Contractor provides FOIA response support
o Contractor works with CBI
o Contractor appears to be EPA.
If one of these situations exists, controls are
required. They are to be set forth in an
attachment to the procurement package. Management
controls that involve the contractor's management
or staff should be detailed in the contract SOW as
well. [See ATTACHMENT #30]
Item 29: This procurement ( ) does or ( ) does not,
involve requirements governed under the FIRMR
(Note: If the procurement involves the FIRMR, a
requirements analysis and draft APR should be
attached.)
If the procurement contains any ADP or Telecommunica-
tions work a justification must accompany the procurement
request. A procurement can contain up to $2.5 million worth
of ADP or Telecommunications work without being processed as
a FIRMR-controlled procurement. If the procurement contains
111-21
-------
over $2.5 million of ADP or Telecommunications work, the
provisions of the FIRMR will govern the procurement. In
such cases, the procurement for this equipment and these
services will be placed through the ADP Placement Section in
OAM Headquarters procurement operation and the project
office must attach; (1) a Requirements Analysis, and (2) a
Draft APR. Further information on this subject may be found
in the June 16, 1993, memorandum from OIRM entitled,
"Acquisition of Federal Information Processing Resources" or
by calling Irv Weiss, OIRM on 260-9388.
Item 30: (a) The SOW/Specifications involve the use of
items subject to RCRA Procurement Guidelines
(see CMM Chapter 13).
YES NO
(b) If YES, the items are:
(c) The specifications for the item(s) complies
with the applicable RCRA Procurement
Guidelines.
YES NO
(d) If NO, the PO must check the appropriate box
and provide an explanation why items
containing recovered materials were not used.
the price is unreasonable;
applying minimum-content standards
results in inadequate competition;
Obtaining the designated items results
in unusual and unreasonable delays; or
recovered items do not meet all
reasonable performance specifications.
EXPLANATION (this may be provided in a separate
attachment)
EPA's procurement program for maximizing Government use
of Recovered Materials is set forth in Section 6002 of RCRA.
The Agency has issued procurement guidelines under RCRA 6002
for a number of designated items containing recovered
111-22
-------
materials including paper, building insulation, re-tread
tires, and refined oil. A recovered materials clause and
contractor certification should be included in contracts
involving the use of recovered materials. The Project
Office must provide a written justification if it requires
the use of an item which is NOT produced from recovered
materials, even though the item appears in the OSW
"Recovered Materials" guidelines.
***********************************************************
Item 31: The desired award date for this procurement is
This date is used by the procurement office when
establishing procurement milestones. It is also
helpful to provide the CO with the name of the
current contractor, contract number, and
expiration date.
Item 32: This procurement ( ) does or ( ) does not
include a requirement for use of Government-
provided in-bound and direct dial out-bound long
distance services. (If affirmative, the SOW shall
require the mandatory use of the FTS-2000
network.)
If the Contractor is required to use Government-
provided long distance phone service, this requirement
must be stated in the SOW along with a requirement that
the Contractor use the FTS-2000 network. The project
office must obtain approval of OARM'S National Data
Processing Division.
Signature Date
Title
Phpne Number
111-23
-------
SECTION III-D ADDITIONAL ITEMS THAT MAY BE REQUIRED FOR
YOUR PROCUREMENT PACKAGE BUT ARE NOT LISTED
IN TEE CHECKLIST
(1) PO Designation, EPA Form 1900-65, (Designation and
Appointment of PO/WAM/Delivery Order Officer) (Required
for all procurements) [Reference: Checklist #9]
The Project Office, Division Director or equivalent
level, shall designate a PO for each procurement action.
The PO shall not act in that position until proper
certification has been obtained, and thereafter shall
perform the responsibilities of the position within the
limits of the certification, unless a waiver is obtained.
The PO certification process is in Chapter 7 of the
CMM. To become certified, the designated individual must
complete two courses — the Basic PO training course and
Contracts Administration course. Additionally the
individual must complete a refresher course every three (3)
years. Certification is requested through EPA form 1900-65
(6-85) DESIGNATION AND APPOINTMENT OF PROJECT OFFICER/WORK
ASSIGNMENT MANAGER/DELIVERY ORDER OFFICER and is approved by
the CO.
(2) Justification for Period of Performance Greater Than 36
Months. [Reference: Checklist #13]
If the Project Office anticipates a contract period of
performance exceeding 36 months, a written justification
must be forwarded with the acquisition request package.
EPAAR 1517.202(b) The FAR allows for contracts with periods
of performance up to five years in length; however, it has
been EPA's practice historically to complete contracts every
three years as a means of promoting competition.
(3) Justification for Optional Quantities Greater Than 50%
of The Base Quantities [Reference: Checklist #14]
Under level of effort contracts, the CO must justify
the rationale for any increased quantity options that exceed
50% of the base LOE. This applies to each year of
performance. The justification must be supplied by the
Project Office. OARM discourages the use of increased
quantity options equal to more than 50% of the base LOE.
Project Offices should define the magnitude of their
requirements with as much precision as possible since the
vendor community uses this information to make bidding and
staffing decisions.
************************************************************
111-24
-------
(4) IGCE (Required for All Procurements In Excess of
$25,000) [Reference: Checklist # 18]
This is a detailed estimate of overall contract costs.
Proposals for cost reimbursement contracts are evaluated
based on the reasonableness of proposed costs rather than on
low price. Therefore, the IGCE is essential for the
Government to determine if proposed costs are reasonable
(and realistic).
The IGCE must be developed without any contractor
assistance. The IGCE should include not only the "bottom
line" estimate but also the rationale as to how the estimate
was developed, whether it was based on historical costs to
date or current cost of similar efforts of the same size and
scope, etc. The IGCE for LOE contracts should be based, for
the most part, on labor hours required for the base and
optional periods, broken down by category (P4, P3, P2, PI,
etc.); travel costs; and ODCs such as equipment rental,
consultants, and computer time. It is important to provide
estimates of the ODCs and travel costs as part of the IGCE
since these figures are usually provided to offerers in the
solicitation as "plug costs."
(5) TEP Appointments (required for all competitive
procurements) [Reference: [EPAAR 1515.61]
The SSO appoints the TEP members based on recommenda-
tions from the Project Office. The recommendations should
include the name and relevant experience of each individual.
The TEP must be composed of at least three (3) members for
procurements over $500,000. For procurements requiring the
submission of a quality assurance plan, the QAO must serve
on the technical evaluation panel by evaluating and point-
scoring QA plans submitted by all offerers. (The QAO need
not participate in other aspects of the technical
evaluation).
There is no upper limit on the number of panel members;
however, with a higher number of members, the logistics of
finding a meeting location and convenient time become more
difficult and the consensus discussions become more
involved. We recommend that no more than five (5) TEP
members be appointed.
The PO is required to serve as chairperson of the TEP.
For procurements with a potential value of $500,000 or less,
the PO may be the only member of the TEP. All TEP members
should have relevant knowledge and/or expertise of the types
of services or assistance required by the solicitation.
111-25
-------
This is crucial to the integrity of the evaluation process,
and to ensure competent and equal treatment of each
offerer's proposal. The RFP may not be released until the
TEP selection document has been signed by the SSO.
It should be noted that TEP members are involved in the
competitive procurement process from start to finish. TEP
members play an IMPORTANT and NECESSARY role in the
procurement process and need to devote a lot of time to the
process in order for it to be successful. Panel members and
their managers need to be aware of this commitment prior to
agreeing to serve on a panel.
(6) Award Fee PEB Appointments [Reference: Checklist #
N/A] [FAR 16.404, EPAAR 1516.404]
This document is required only when an award fee
contract type is selected by the CO. Per EPAAR 1516.404-
276, the members of the PEB are selected through mutual
agreement between the Contracts Office and the Project
Office. The chairperson of the PEB must be a Division
Director or equivalent in the Project Office. The
chairperson and CO recommend other members of the PEB,
including the Evaluation Coordinator, Executive Secretary,
and Performance Monitors. Members are recommended by
memorandum to the responsible Division Director, OAM, who
makes the formal appointment of the PEB through memorandum.
This formal appointment must be made before the solicitation
can be issued.
(7) Award Fee Plan [Reference: EPAAR 1516.404.277]
This document is required only when an award fee
contract type is selected by the CO. The *!Award Fee" is
money which is used by the Government to reward a contractor
for better than average performance. The award fee plan
describes the process of monitoring, assessing and
evaluating the contractor's performance to determine the
amount of award fee earned. This plan is developed by the
program office. Per EPAAR 1516.404.277, the Award Fee Plan
should include the following elements:
o The base fee amount (This is a fixed fee which the
contractor will receive).
o The total award fee pool (Money available for payment
of award fee).
o Performance areas to be evaluated.
o Criteria to be used in the evaluations.
111-26
-------
o Relative weights to be assigned to performance areas
and to the evaluation criteria.
o Frequency and timing of award fee determinations.
o The proportion of the total award fee pool to be
available for each evaluation period.
o The procedure to be followed (the timing involved) in
evaluating performance and determining the award fee.
The Award Fee Performance Evaluation Criteria are
included in the solicitation. Once the contract is awarded,
the PEB will compare the contractor's performance with the
evaluation criteria to determine a performance rating and
thus the amount of award fee which will be paid.
(8) Procurement Integrity Certifications [Required for all
procurements] [Reference: Checklist # N/A]
[FAR 52-203-8]
Procurement Integrity Certifications must be signed
Agency officials who participate significantly in 1)
drafting SOWs, 2) reviewing and approving specifications, 3)
developing the procurement package, 4) preparing and issuing
the solicitation, 5) evaluating bids or proposals, 6)
selecting an offerer for award, 7) participating in
negotiations, 8) reviewing and approving contract award, or
9) otherwise contributing to the fulfillment of an Agency
need or requirement through the procurement process.
(9) Multiple Appropriations Use Rationale [Reference:
Checklist # 24] [CMH, Chapter 9, paragraph 9.6 e.(l).]
•
This document must be developed for any contract that
is expected to be funded from more than one appropriation,
as required by a May 14, 1985, memorandum entitled
"Contracts Funded from Multiple Accounts—Procedures for
Identifying Contract Costs," from the Comptroller and the
Director, Office of Administration.
The rationale document should state the estimated
allocation of the appropriations to be used (as a percent of
the total funding of the contract). This allocation formula
should coincide with the benefits expected to accrue to
program areas funded by the respective appropriations as a
result of services performed under the contract. The
memorandum requires approval by the Director, Financial
Management Division, OARM.
************************************************************
111-27
-------
(10) EPA Form 1900-37 "Record of Procurement Request
Review.11
[Required for all procurements] [Reference: Checklist # 12]
This form, accompanied by a copy of the SOW and a PO
recommendation regarding the extent of competition desired
(i.e. open, complete or partial set-aside for small business
or other minority, 8(a), etc.), shall be forwarded to the
OSDBU (or the local OSDBU representative) for review and
recommendation.
(11) COZ Documentation [Reference: Checklist / 5]
Over the past several years, organizational COI has
been the object of mounting concern in the procurement
community. It has been the subject of hearings held before
the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs and an issue of
concern in reports issued by The OTA and 6AO. In acknow-
ledgement of this concern, the Agency has placed increased
emphasis on COI issues.
If the Government were to award a contract to an
offerer whose potential for a COI is clearly recognizable
when comparing its business activities with its Government
contract obligations, the Agency's credibility with the
public could be severely damaged. Such a loss of public
confidence in the integrity of the Agency's programs could
adversely affect EPA's ability to execute environmental
initiatives.
The Agency cannot risk relying upon contractors for
management support who, by the very nature of their other
work, either directly or through another firm, will place
themselves in actual or potential COI situations. Con-
sequently, the Agency has developed policies and procedures
to avoid, mitigate or neutralize actual or potential COI.
Included in these policies are provisions which allow
the CO to prohibit any firm from receiving an award for a
management support or AAS contract if it is determined that
actual or potential COI, or the appearance of such, could
occur if the firm were to perform the management support or
AAS.
COI determinations are made on a case-by-case basis by
comparing the statement of work with the representations
made by each offeror regarding their business activities and
affiliations. COI policies and provisions also provide for
the establishment of safeguards for avoiding and for
identifying, mitigating and neutralizing conflicts of
interest during contract performance. •
111-28
-------
If it is determined that firms performing certain types
of work would be put in a conflict of interest situation by
their very acceptance of this contract, the PO shall
document and give examples of all areas in the SOW where a
potential for COI exists. If the CO agrees with the PO's
documentation the CO will seek approval to exclude firms
which perform the identified type of work from receiving an
award under this procurement action. (Exempting Response
Action Contractors from performing EPA management support
type contracts is an example of this situation.)
(12) Certification of EPA Benefit, regarding Association
Membership [Reference: Checklist # 22]
This certification must indicate and demonstrate that
the primary purpose of membership is to obtain direct
benefits for EPA and is necessary to the accomplishment of
its functions or activities.
(13) Motor Vehicle Leasing Certification
[Reference: Checklist # 23] [FAR 8.1102]
This certification shall address the requirement of FAR
8.1102, which generally indicate that leased vehicles:
must meet prescribed fuel economy standards,
must be essential to the agency's mission as certified
by the head of the agency,
must meet any agency requirements or approvals, and
must not be available from General Services
Administration.
(14) Explanation of Special Controls [Reference: Checklist
# 28]
Certain activities when performed under EPA contracts
may place the Agency in a vulnerable or sensitive position
if adequate controls are not implemented. This document
must list the sensitive areas which apply to this
procurement and provide a detailed explanation of the
controls which are to be in place through out contract
performance to insure that the Agency's interests in these
areas are adequately protected.
************************************************************
(15) Determination of Substantial ADP Requirements
[Reference Check List #29]
111-29
-------
This form is to be filled out by the Senior Information
Management Official of the cognizant Assistant or Regional
Administrator's office. This determination will indicate if
the Statement of Work will require the Contractor to
furnish/perform more than 2.5 million dollars worth of ADP
equipment or services. The form is then sent to the
Director, Office of Information Resource Management for
approval. An approval from GSA is required for the purchase
of ADP in excess of the 2.5 million dollar threshold.
(16) Justification for Exemption to RCRA Procurement
Guidelines [Reference: Checklist #30]
Provide a justification to indicate why items, which
are to be delivered under this contract, are exempt from the
RCRA Procurement Guidelines in that they should not be
produced from recovered materials.
111-30
-------
CHAPTER XV:
THE STATEMENT OF WORK
-------
CHAPTER TV I
THE STATEMENT OF WORK
SECTION IV-A WHAT IS A STATEMENT OF WORK
SECTION XV-B ELEMENTS OF A STATEMENT OF WORK
SECTION IV-C BACKGROUND STATEMENT AND PURPOSE
SECTION TV-D CONTRACTOR TASKS
SECTION ZV-E SPECIALIZED REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
SECTION rV-P DELIVERABLE8/PRODUCT8
SECTION IV-Q INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
SECTION IV-H SCHEDULES
SECTION IV-I OuVBJkNMBHT FURNISHED DOCUMENTATION
SECTION IV-J SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
IV-1
-------
SECTION IV-A WHAT IS A SOW?
The SOW the portion of the contract which specifies
precisely what services or goods the Government requires
from the contractor. The SOW describes the contractor's
performance obligations. For services, the SOW must
describe the work to be performed, the results which the
contractor must achieve, the deliverables which the
contractor must produce and the schedule which the
contractor must meet.
Since the EPA primarily issues service contracts, this
chapter emphasizes the acquisition of services rather than
goods. Because of the emphasis on service contracts, this
chapter will often refer to work assignments and will
frequently use terminology related to LOE contracts for
services. However, the principles of sound SOW construction
(e.g., use of details, avoiding ambiguous terminology, etc.)
remain essentially the same regardless of whether the
contract is for goods or services and regardless of whether
it is fixed-price or cost-reimbursable.
IV-2
-------
SECTION IV-B ELEMENTS OF A STATEMENT OF WORK
Most SOWs will contain most or all of the following
elements:
o Background Statement and Purpose
o Contractor Tasks
o Specialized Reporting Requirements
o Deliverables/Products
o Inspection & Acceptance Criteria
(measures of performance and completion)
o Special Considerations
o Schedule
o GFP
o Government Furnished Documentation
The next sections of this chapter discuss each of these
elements. The sections describe what the elements are and
how to write the text for each, and give examples from
actual statements of work.
IV-3
-------
SECTION IV-C BACKGROUND STATEMENT and OBJECTIVE
The background statement serves as a brief introduction
to the services to be performed under the contract. It
helps orient the contractor by providing a history of what
has (or hasn't) been accomplished to date.
The purpose briefly states the objective(s) of the
current contract. It provides the "big picture" of what the
Government expects the contractor to provide.
In writing a background and purpose statement, remember
the following:
o Keep it brief, preferably no more than one or two
paragraphs.
o Limit the statement to the information you think
that the contractor will need to know in order to
understand the tasks which follow.
o Do not include instructions, specifications,
delivery schedules or the like. Save the details of
the current requirements until later in the SOW.
o Ensure that the purpose of the services/work
required is clear.
o Do not include language used to sell management on
the requirements, i.e., a background statement which
concludes with a statement such as "Therefore, we
need a qualified contractor to accomplish this
work."
IV-4
-------
Sample Background and Purpose Statement
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this requirement is to provide a hotline that
quickly responds to questions related to the Resource Conserva-
tion and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), Underground
Storage Tanks (UST), the Superfund Amendments Reauthorization Act
(SARA), and the Chemical Emergency Preparedness (CEPP) Community-
Right-to-Know/Title III program. The hotline will be the
mechanism for EPA's response to inquiries from the public and
regulated community; the referral point for document
availability; the dissemination of changing information; and the
primary means for answering factual questions on EPA regulations
and policies.
Hotline personnel shall interact with EPA technical
personnel and the public as well as serve Federal, State and
local governments. Hotline staff shall be required to coordinate
with EPA technical, legal and policy staff to research answers to
questions received, and to provide timely, accurate, factual,
complete and courteous responses to callers. The hotline will
maintain reference files and training programs in support of the
aforementioned programs. During the course of one year, the
Hotline will answer approximately 175,000 questions. The present
Hotline has 36 telephone lines and is operated by 35 telephone
operators/information specialists.
IV-5
-------
SECTION IV-D CONTRACTOR TASKS
Tasks specify the Government's needs and state what the
contractor must do in order to live up to their part of the
contract. Each task gives the contractor a detailed
description of certain work which must be performed or, in
the case of level of effort contracts, comprehensive
descriptions of work which might be required and then
further specified in work assignments.
Task descriptions are the heart of the contract and
should be constructed with great care. Remember, the
contractor is required to do only as much as you tell them
to do through the statement of work. A SOW prepared in
explicit terms will provide you with better proposals, make
technical evaluation easier and allow for easier contractor
management and evaluation after award.
Getting Started
There's one certainty in writing any SOW: If you don't
know what you want, you can (and will) end up with a product
which satisfies no one. So, deciding exactly what you need
is the best place to begin. If you're attempting to define-
requirements, try the following:
o Work backwards. Decide what you hope to get out
of the contract then describe what the contractor
will need to do to reach that goal.
o Collect and review background documentation and
guidance materials related to the requirement (e.g.,
Agency policy, scientific reports, position papers,
etc.). These documents could provide useful ideas,
goals, or limits.
o Review previous contracts for similar or identical
requirements. Use these contracts as a starting
point for determining how and if your requirement
differs from what has preceded it. However, don't
assume that the previous SOW is a good example to
follow.
o Use the experts. Seek out POs, WANs, and COs from
past efforts to determine what worked and what
didn't on similar past requirements. Especially ask
about what could have been done to make past SOWs
stronger.
IV-6
-------
Critique current contracts, work assignments or
delivery orders. Examine what current contractors
are providing and what services the SOW required.
If the SOW did not describe an essential service or
product, then you should consider addressing this
service or product in the new SOW.
Is the Government receiving more than it needs to
meet its requirements? If so, the current SOW may
be vague. In service contracts, details will
provide the contractor with focus and direction and
will help to preclude misdirected or inefficient
performance. In contracts for goods, well-written,
detailed specifications will ensure that the
government receives items which meet minimum needs.
Ask potential contract users to provide, in writing,
descriptions of what work the contractor needs to
accomplish. Be sure to ask for specific
descriptions; don't accept generalities, such as
"perform analyses." Instead, ask potential users to
specify what kinds of analyses they need the
contractor to perform.
Involve the CO in SOW development as early as
possible. The CO can determine which services
the contractor may legally perform. (Contractors
may not perform inherently governmental functions,
such as writing position descriptions for Government
vacancies, and may be restricted in performing other
work, such as AAS).
Put yourself in the contractor's place. Based on
the SOW, would you be able to supply the services or
provide the goods which the Government requires?
Would you be able to establish a proposed estimated
cost and fee or price?
Once you have a list of the requirements, conduct a
peer-review, especially with front-line users.
Conduct a similar review when you have completed a
draft of the SOW.
IV-7
-------
Writing the Task Descriptions
Once you have a detailed list of the services you want
the contractor to provide, you'll need to describe them in a
clear and logical way.
Organisation
o Prepare an outline.
o Begin by sectioning your work requirements into
separate, manageable units, or tasks. (For
example, a Superfund contractor might be asked to
perform Potentially Responsible Party searches and
to provide expert witnesses in enforcement cases.
These efforts would be described under separate
tasks).
o Under a large task, use subtasks as needed to
further define the individual steps or efforts which
the overall task.
o If the SOW is for work which must be completed in a
certain sequence, place the tasks in the appropriate
sequential order, first to last.
o Number and provide a descriptive, "stand-alone"
title for each task. Also identify subtasks by
numbers or letters. (Be consistent. If you
identify the first task with a Roman numeral,
identify all other tasks by Roman numerals. In any
event, every paragraph should be identifiable.
IV-8
-------
Descriptions
Once you have decided what tasks you want the
contractor to perform, you will need to provide a detailed
description of each one. These descriptions should clearly
state what the contractor must do and also describe the
expected results of the work.
Clarity and details are the keys to writing a good task
description. Avoid vague, ambiguous and needlessly complex
language. When disputes arise regarding ambiguities, the
contract is usually interpreted against the contract's
author, i.e., against the EPA. If your task descriptions
allow for numerous interpretations, the CO will probably end
up on the losing side in any dispute.
Use the following approaches to help strengthen your
task descriptions:
o All work where compliance or performance is
binding upon the contractor must be expressed in
mandatory language and must be distinguishable from
background or general information, which should be
kept in the "Background" element of the SOW. So, if
the contractor must do something, write "The
contractor shall. . . .*' (For example: The
contractor shall conduct a cost analysis. . .).
o Use "will" to express a declaration or purpose on
behalf of the Government. (For example: "The EPA
will provide the contractor with. . ."). Remember,
the contractor shall; the government vill.
o "May," "should," and "might" are not mandatory
words. It is best to avoid them. (Use of
"permissive" or "choice" words is appropriate if
you intend to give the contractor flexibility).
o Define and be consistent with terminology. Make sure
that you use words and phrases (especially technical
ones) in the same way throughout the SOW.
o Pronouns can be ambiguous. It is better to repeat a
noun and avoid any misinterpretation.
o Avoid "any," "either" and "and/or." These words imply
that the contractor has a choice. Use of "permissive"
or "choice" words is appropriate if you intend to give
the contractor flexibility.
IV-9
-------
o Avoid words and phrases which are subject to multiple
meanings and broad interpretations. Among the most
commonly used vague words are "augment," "workmanlike,"
"substantial," and "functional." Attachment A to this
chapter contains a list of other vague words which you
should avoid placing in a task description.
o Use active voice, not passive. Passive voice promotes
ambiguity and leads to needlessly complex sentences.
o Try to use short, descriptive sentences to ensure
clarity.
o Avoid using bureaucratic, scientific or complex terms
except as necessary. When you must use these terms,
define them within the SOW.
o Whenever possible, use simple words and terms in order to
avoid ambiguity. Attachment B to this chapter lists
complex words and phrases along with corresponding
simpler words and phrases.
o Stress that any papers, recommendations, etc. which the
contractor submits are drafts, not final copies. If
you are procuring advisory and assistance services (AAS),
then discuss the process which EPA will use to review the
contractor's work.
o Avoid the appearance of personal services in the way
in which the SOW is written by including as much detail
of performance requirements as possible. Doing so will
underscore that tasks are sufficiently well defined to
allow the contractor to perform independently.
o Avoid words such as "support" or "assist", which might
imply joint efforts between the government and its
contractor unless the contract's assistance or support
roles are subsequently described in a manner which makes
it clear that the contractor will perform independently.
o Clearly delineate contractor performance requirements.
o Avoid open-ended SOWs which contain on-going tasks
without defining completion.
o Avoid abbreviations unless they are of common usage or
are defined at first usage.
o Specify or emphasize performance requirements, "what is
needed", versus design approach, "how to".
IV-10
-------
Sample Task Description
Taak 3t Create and Implement • Standardised System for
Producing and Tracking International Travel cables
Baaed on contractor recommendations from Task 1, the DOPO will
aelect for implementation the recommendation which bast meets the
needa of OZA. The acceptable atrategy should include the actual
ayaten, a User's Guide, and training for the Deer's. The User's
Guide shall include a data element dictionary. The User's Guide
shall be submitted in draft form and final form to the DOPO for
approval. The contractor shall alao produce system
documentation. The system shall have the capability to accept
data and produce the international cable in hard copy. The
procedure for producing an acceptable cable should provide for a
draft copy of the cable which ahall be reviewed by the EPA desk
officer and the relevant Department of State contact. Approval
of the draft may involve faxing and use of the telephone for
verification and advance notification purposes. Verifications
with EPA staff may be done verbally but in no case shall the
contractor take direction from an EPA employee. An acceptable
cable is one that is substantively correct as verified by the
Desk Officer'and Department of State contact, and is
electronically readable by the machines used to process the final
version. The system shall be designed to operate within the
current OZA LAN and computer system. The system shall include
the capability to track all cables by country, region, and
mission or project. The system shall be able to produce a daily,
weekly and monthly report on all cables sent, segregable by
country, region, and miasion or project. The above minimum needs
may be expanded based on the contractor's recommendationa. The
expanaion of the minimum needs shall be accomplished by an
amendment to the delivery order. The contractor shall install
the system and demonstrate the ability to produce an acceptable
cable. The DOPO shall make final acceptance and approval of the
system. The contractor shall provide training to EPA staff
regarding the purpoaea, uses, capabilities and operating
procedures of the system. The contractor shall also provide
technical and management briefings on system functional
capabilities and design as required.
Deliverablass - System Documentation
.- Draft and Final User's Guide
- Standardized System for Producing and Tracking
International Travel Cables
• User Training
. - Technical and Management Briefing Capability
IV-ll
-------
SECTION IV-E SPECIALIZED REPORTINO REQUIREMENTS
Most contracts will include language requiring the
contractor to submit standardized reports such as the Monthly
Progress Report and Financial status Report, if you need to
receive information in addition to what the standardized reports
provide, then include a specialized reporting requirement as part
of the SOW or for inclusion in the contract Reports of Work.
This requirement will tell the contractor the information they
must submit, how often they must submit it and its format. When
you develop reporting requirement, remember the following:
o Reports cost money. Ask only for the information you
need.
o Provide details about each piece of information you need.
If you're asking for figures as part of your report, then
specify the formula or basis the contractor must use to
arrive at these figures. Don't assume that the
contractor will use the same approach you would.
o Specify the report structure. Do you want figures?,
charts?, graphs? If possible, provide a template or
sample for the report.
o Specify the media which you want the contractor to use.
Do you want the report on paper only? On paper and on a
disk? If on a disk, must the Contractor use a certain
software package (and version)? [NOTE: Stating
"EPA compatible" is not sufficient. Rather, specify
Lotus 1-2-3, version 2.3; WordPerfect, version 5.1, etc.]
o Specify how often the contractor must submit the report
and, if necessary, provide dates. For instance:
"The contractor shall submit the report by no later than
the 15th of each month." If completion of the report is
contingent upon EPA comments, then include language such
as "within 10 working days of receipt of EPA comments."
o How many copies of the report must the contractor
provide? Who receives copies of the report?
o Include the amount of time which EPA has for review
and approval and the amount of time which the contractor
has to correct and resubmit reports.
IV-12
-------
Sample Specialized Reporting Requirement
10* RUKJUJUU UQ1
The contractor shall submit standard delivery order reports due
by the tenth day off the following month. The monthly reports
will include graphic representation off percent off money spent to
•oney available with an indication off when 75% off contract ffunds
have been used. The monthly reports shall include an aggregate
listing off all cables completed for the previous month. The
listing shall have information relative to the cable assistance
request including the time and date the request was submitted to
the contractor, the time and date the drafft cable vas submitted
to State Department, the time and date the final cable vas
submitted to State Department, the time and date of confirmation
of the cable, the time and date off completion off the request.
This information shall be identifiable by country, mission, and
funding type. The monthly reporting requirements may be modified
by amendment to the Delivery Order.
IV-13
-------
SECTION IV-F DELIVERABLE8/PRODUCTB
The term "deliverable" refers to a tangible product
resulting from the contractor's work. Deliverables, which are
sometimes referred to as "products," can take almost any form.
Examples include training manuals, custom software, data entry
output, results of an air monitoring survey, reports, etc.
If the tasks which your contractor must perform will result
in deliverables, then you need to describe in detail the
deliverables you expect to receive. Mote that while deliverables
are more often addressed in detail at the work assignment/
delivery order level, they should be addressed in as much detail
as possible at the contract level. Be sure to include the
following information in your text:
o Name of Deliverable.
o Description (Describe the tangible product which the
contractor must deliver. Describe the scope of the
data to be addressed, the agenda or topics to be
included in workshops or guidebooks, the number of
days for training courses, etc.)
o Delivery Instructions (Identify the government official
to whom deliverables must be delivered. Also, specify a
location where delivery must take place).
o Number of copies (Specify the delivery media and the
number of hard copies, disks, etc. which the contractor
must deliver).
IV-14
-------
Sample Deliverable Description
SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT
The Contractor shall design and develop the following system
software module and system software capabilities.
other Permit Related Forms
The Contractor shall design and develop a module that will
utilize standard NHDES forms and letters to correspond to
permittee's and other Government agencies. This component of the
module will include the following capabilities:
1) a program on the EPA mainframe to extract data needed for
the form or letter from AFS; 2) a program on the NHDES LAN to
merge extracted data with standard form or letter text; a program
on the NHDES LAN to print the form or letter; and software to
allow AFS transactions with the date of document preparation to
be uploaded to EPA's mainframe.
Deliverablesi
1. Mainframe Extract Utility
2. NHDES LAN Extract Utility
3. Merge Utility
4. Permit Form Print Utility
Primary chapters in the documentation should include:
a. A background section, with a concise statement of the
problem. It should also restate the problem and its solution to
the Agency(s) organization order, missions and functions.
b. Prepare documentation such as executive summaries,
detailed data dictionaries, training material, and other
documentation.
Distribution Report
Addressee No. of Copies
Draft Final
Contracting Officer — 1
Project Officer 1 1
Work Assignment Manager 2 2
IV-15
-------
SECTION IV-G INSPECTION * ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
Inspection and acceptance criteria tell a contractor what
standards the Government will use to judge the goods and services
produced under the contract. The SOW must include the specific
criteria by which the Government will judge each deliverable and
deem it worthy of acceptance. In writing these criteria, do the
following:
o Be specific. The contractor has a right to know exactly
what you are looking for in an end product. For
instance, if a report must be typed double-spaced with a
one-inch margin on every side, then identify these
formatting criteria as conditions of acceptance.
Include the names of references with which any reports or
guidebooks must comply. Include any quality assurance
requirements or references. Include other measures of
quality or acceptability.
o Identify the number of workdays the Government needs,
upon receipt of a deliverable, to perform an inspection.
o Identify the number of workdays which the contractor will
have to correct deficiencies following inspection.
IV-16
-------
Sample Inspection and Acceptance Criteria
t. ACCEPTANCE PROCEDURE* FOR DELIVERABI
The contractor shall provide 3 printad and bound copiaa of each
dalivarabla for distribution within EPA and ona unbound copy
•uitabla for furthar duplication.
TaaJc l - Tha draft work plan shall ba dalivarad within 5 days of
racaipt of dalivary ordar. Tha final work plan shall ba
dalivarad within 5 days of DOPO accaptanca of tha draft plan.
Tha nature and contant of tha work plan will ba judgad by tha
dalivary ordar projact officar (DOPO) as to whathar tha task
components have baan mat.
Task 2 - Tha intarviaw outlina shall ba approvad by tha DOPO
prior to conduct of tha intarviaws to datanina ralavanca to tha
requirement. Tha contractor shall hava pariodic meetings with
tha DOPO to insura that tha background raviaw and naads statamant
work is procaading in a mannar which will laad to an aceaptabla
product.
Task 3 - Tha contractor shall provida all dalivarablas in a draft
form to tha DOPO for comments, corractions ana approval prior to
submitting final dalivarablas.
Taak 4 - Zn addition to accaptanca procaduras outlinad abova, tha
DOPO shall Beet with tha contractor on a monthly basis to discuss
and document parformanca adaptability. Unacceptable work
performance Bay rasult in modification to or cancellation of tha
dalivary ordar.
Task 5 - Log shaats shall ba dalivarad at tha and of •vary waak.
Tha DOPO shall Baat with tha contractor on a monthly basis to
discuss and document parformanca acceptability. Unacceptable
work performance may rasult .in modification to or cancellation of
tha dalivary ordar.
All items generated (electronic media included) as a rasult of
tha dalivary ordar shall become exclusive property of the EPA.
All items- purchased in support of this delivery order, including
manuals, handbooks, etc. shall become the exclusive property of
the EPA.
IV-17
-------
SECTION IV-H SCHEDULES
Include a schedule in your SOW if you are procuring services
which must be performed in a sequential order and within a
certain timeframe, or if you are buying goods which must be
delivered by certain dates. This schedule should show mandatory
dates for completion/delivery of essential services or goods.
In constructing your schedule, keep the following in mind:
o Always identify any legislative mandates or other
bases for critical schedules.
o Be realistic. Contractors will use the schedule to
help in pricing their proposals/bids. An unnecessarily
tight schedule will escalate costs.
o Don't list delivery/completion dates for intermediate
steps. Provide dates for essential elements/goods only.
o List all delivery/completion dates in chronological
order.
o The delivery date need not always be a specific date, .
e.g., June 30, 1994. Instead, you may define the due
date by number of days, weeks or months, such as "The
contractor shall submit the final report within 30
calendar days of receiving EPA comments on the draft
report."
o List the schedules (time frames) for government reviews,
approvals, furnishing of data or property, or other
input. If you include a "Schedule" section in your SOW,
it should simply list due dates. This section should not
impose new requirements or ask for additional/different
deliverables than those set forth in the rest of the SOW.
IV-18
-------
Sample Schedule
9. SCHEDULE OF **BU *» DILXVZXtABL
Taste Palivarabla Waatee aftar Award Goalee
1 - Draft Projact Plan 10 days 3
- Final Projact Plan 5 days 3
2 - Xntarviav Outlinas 10 days 3
- Naads Statement 3 vaaks 3
3 - Systaa Documentation 6 vaaks 3
- Draft and Final Uaar's Guide 6 vaaks 3
- Standardized Systaa for
Producing and Tracking
International Travel Cables 6 vaaks 3
- Usar Training ' 6 vaaks 3
• Technical and Management
Briefing Capability . 6 vaaks 3
4 - Required Systaa Output 7 vasks/ongoing
5 * Weekly activity log sheet Ongoing
IV-19
-------
SECTION IV-I GOVERMMBHT-FURNI8HBD DOCUMENTATION
If government guidelines, policies, standards or statistics
are necessary for the contractor to perform work successfully,
then the SOW should reference these materials. The SOW should
also address how and when the government will provide these
documents to the contractor and the format (hard copy,
electronic) in which the government will furnish the information,
The SOW should also state if the contractor is responsible for
returning the documents and any other special instructions for
the use of these documents.
IV-20
-------
SECTION IV-J SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
The SOW should describe any special considerations which the
contractor must make in performance of the SOW. Examples of such
considerations include:
o Requiring expert witnesses.
o Obtaining security clearances for contractor employees.
o Access to government installations.
o How contractor personnel must identify themselves when
working on EPA projects.
o Special regulations which the contractor must adhere to
in performing the SOW.
o Disciplines needed to perform a task (e.g. — bilingual
personnel, personnel with specific computer experience,
etc.).
o Handling of CBI. Especially note that the contractor
should not be permitted to:
1. Interpret FOIA request letters;
2. Determine if records are releasable under FOIA;
3. Sign any correspondence dealing with FOIA or other
CBI issues.
IV-21
-------
"ample of a Special Consideration
13. SPECIAL AREAS OF
For voucher ing purposes, it is very important that charges be
allocated as follows:
All work associated vith Eastern Europe, egolnfliaa SEED related
projects (the Regional Environmental Center in Budapest, and -the
Kralcov air and water projects) shall be charged to the following
Foreign Assistance Appropriation (FAA) account: 2X6Q13A06<,
'• "" ^"f
All other work, including SEED related projects (the Regional
Environmental Center in Budapest, and the Krakow air and water
projects) shall be charged to the following account: 2B3H13AOOO
IV-22
-------
AKKBX A
VAGUE/AMBIGUOUS WORDS PHRASES TO AVOID
but not limited to
augment
workmanlike
functional
to the satisfaction of the Contracting Officer (CO)
as determined by the CO
in accordance with the instructions of the CO
as directed by the CO
in the judgment of the CO
in the opinion of the CO
unless otherwise directed by the CO
reasonable requests
when and where directed by the CO
in strict accordance with
in accordance with best commercial practice
in accordance with best modern standard practice
including but not limited to
to be determined at a later date
in accordance with the best engineering practice
workmanship shall be of the highest quality/grade
accurate workmanship
securely mounted
properly connected
properly assembled
good working order
good/quality materials
in accordance with applicable published specifications
products of a recognizable reputable manufacturer
tests will be made unless waived
carefully performed
of an approved type
of a standard type
any phrase referring to "the Government inspector"
in a timely manner
promptly
state-of-the-art
viable
practical
IV-23
-------
MIMEX B
GENERALLY UNDERSTOOD MEANINGS OF SOW TERMS
Analyze — solve by analysis
Annotate —- provide with comments
Ascertain — find out with certainty
Attend — to be present at
Compare — find out likenesses or differences
Consider — think about; decide
Construct ~ put together; build
Control — direct; regulate
Create — cause to be; make
Define — make clear; establish limits
Design ~ perform an original act
Determine — resolve; settle; decide
Develop — bring into being
Differentiate — make a distinction between
Erect — put together; set upright
Establish — bring into being; set up
Evaluate — find or fix the value of
Examine — look at closely; test the quality of
Extract — remove
Fabricate — build; manufacture; design
Form — set up; bring into being
Formulate — to put together; express
Generate — produce
Inquire — ask
Inspect — examine carefully
Install — place; put into position; load (for software)
Institute — begin; bring into being; set
Integrate — merge; combine parts
Interpret — explain the meaning of; provide oral translation
Investigate — research; examine
Judge — form an opinion of
Manufacture — fabricate from raw material
Observe ~ inspect; watch
Organize — arrange in a logical or coherent way
Originate — cause; initiate
Perform — do; carry out
Produce — make; give rise to
Recommend — advise; direct a course of action
Record ~ set down in writing or on tape
Reproduce — make a duplicate of
Resolve — clear up; bring to closure; find an answer to
Review -- examine
Scan ~ examine briefly; transfer from hard copy to electronic
format using an optical character reader (OCR)
Search ~ provide a detailed review; look for
Track — observe; plot the path of
IV-24
-------
CHAPTER V
TECHNICAL EVALUATION
AND
TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT
-------
CHAPTER V
TECHNICAL EVALUATION
AND
EVALUATION PROCESS
Section V-A Technical Evaluation Process
o Background
o Purpose
o Basic Requirements
section V-B Technical Evaluation Criteria
o Typical Technical Evaluation Factors
o Technical Approach
o Corporate Experience
o Management Plan
o Personnel
o Past Performance
Section V-C Price or Estimated Cost Factors
section V-D Evaluating Proposals
o Ground Rules
Section V-B Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) Report
o Individual Panel Member's Report
o Consensus Report
o Matrices of Individual Scores and Consensus Scores
for Each Offerer
o Consensus Members Score Sheets and TEP Consensus
score Matrix
o Interrogatories
o Panel Comments
v-i
-------
o Each member must sign and return the certifications
Section V-F Conflicts of Interest
Appendix V-l Dos and Don'ts (or everything you needed to knov
about TEP reports, but were afraid to ask.)
Appendix V-2 Technical Evaluation criteria
Appendix V-3 Samples Individual and Consensus Score Sheets
Appendix V-4 Individual Score Sheets - Bad and Good Examples
Appendix v-5 Scoring Plan
Appendix V-6 TEP Report Format
Appendix V-7 individual and Consensus Score Sheet Matrices
Appendix V-8 COI statement
V-2
-------
Section V-A TECHNICAL EVALUATION PRO8CE88
BACKGROUND
The technical evaluation process is the most important pre-
avard function served by the Project Office. The evaluation
process demands objectivity, expertise, rational judgement, and
integrity. If any of these needs are lacking, the results could
be protests, delay of award, or in extreme circumstances, court
appearances.
Implementing the technical evaluation process for Project
Offices is the TEP. The TEP is chaired by the PO and should
ideally consist of three (3) to five (5) representatives,
including one person from outside of the program office
sponsoring the procurement. Also, if environmental measurements
are included in the SOW, a QAO should be a member. Experience
has shown that the larger the panel, the more difficult it is to
reach consensus. Further, it is difficult to simply convene a
large panel, due to members' schedule conflicts.
The panel should expect to expend about two weeks of effort
to evaluate the proposals. This will vary, however, depending on
the number of proposals received and the complexity of the
requirement. The members recommended for the panel should be
submitted by memorandum at the time the Procurement Request
package is received in OAM. OAM will contact the TEP chairperson
in advance of the proposals being received and confirm a block of
time that the panels' services will be needed. It is important
that the Project Office set aside the time for this process to
minimize delays. Management should be advised that certain
individuals will be needed on a full-time basis for the period of
time necessary to evaluate the proposals. It is also suggested
that the evaluations be conducted away from normal working
conditions so that everyday distractions do not delay the
evaluation process.
POTPO8E
The basic function of the technical evaluation process is to
determine in the most objective and fair method possible, which
of the technical proposals received in response to a solicitation
best meets the requirements of the solicitation and is most
advantageous to the Government.
BASIC REQUIREMENTS
The technical evaluation process is built around the
technical evaluation criteria. Evaluation criteria should be
tailored to the specific procurement rather than to a standard
format. For most competitively negotiated procurements, however,
sound planning requires several issues to be addressed during
solicitation preparation in order to avoid problems during
v-3
-------
negotiations. These are:
» The evaluation criteria must be established before issuance
of the solicitation and must be adhered to during the evaluation
process. Changes to the evaluation procedures after receipt of
proposals can be construed as favoring one.offerer over another,
threaten the integrity of the procurement, and can lead to
protests and delays in contract award.
» Evaluation criteria are standards against which each
proposal will be measured. Panel members must understand that
competing proposals are not rated against each other, but against
the Government standard — the evaluation criteria.
+ All evaluation criteria used must be stated in the
solicitation. Also, the relative importance of each evaluation
factor must be indicated. The best way to do this is by
specifying the numeric weight associated with each factor. The
weighting of the criteria should reflect, as accurately as
possible, the relative importance of the evaluation criterion.
For example, if the requirement calls for heavy emphasis on
certain technical expertise, then a "Key Personnel" criterion may
be the most critical factor for successful completion of the
effort and should therefore be the most heavily weighted.
> Evaluation criteria must not unduly favor the incumbent
contractor.
The key to a successful technical evaluation process, then, is
sound technical evaluation criteria and a fair, objective and
rational process that compare offerers against a known standard.
V-4
-------
SECTION V-B TEC
TEC (see Appendix 2) are a means for providing uniform
guidance to the evaluators on how to rats./score an offerer's
proposal with respect to a given factor. They focus the
evaluation on each individual factor and assist in achieving
consistent and impartial evaluations.
The selection of technical evaluation factors must be
directly related to the specific procurement described by the
SOW, which describes the work/tasks the contractor is required to
perform. The factors selected should be those that allow the
evaluator to determine, based upon the proposal submitted, how
well the offerer understands the Government's requirements and
establish a degree of confidence that the offerer ca'n
successfully meet the Government's requirements.
The number of TEC developed should be the minimum needed to
enable the TEP to properly discriminate between the relative
merit of proposals. Use of a large number of criteria can
mathematically dilute the evaluations during scoring to the point
where any proposal can achieve a reasonably high score, but
actually be poor in one or more extremely important factors. Do
not use factors that overlap or duplicate each other. If one
factor is dependent upon another, then use one or the other, but
not both. Also, a large number of criteria will make the
evaluation process extremely difficult, especially where numerous
proposals have been received. Keep in mind that, as part of the
evaluation process, a detailed write-up (narrative) for each
criterion must be provided as part of the TEPR that will be
submitted to the CO.
TYPICAL TEC FACTORS
Typical TEC may include:
1. Technical Approach
This factor refers to the merit of the offerer's proposed
method for accomplishing the technical objectives/requirements of
the contract and the appropriateness of the plan for successful
completion of the work. The techniques, processes, and tests
that the offeror plans to use should be examined. This may
include how the offeror will use its resources for the work. The
offerer's grasp of the difficulties and problems involved in
performing a particular job reflect on its understanding and
ability to perform that job well.
To demonstrate the offerer's understanding of the technical
scope of the issues and tasks to be undertaken in the proposed
contract, the Technical Approach criterion may be divided into
two subparts. The first part may ask the offeror to describe its
technical approach for fulfilling the overall requirements
V-5
-------
specified in the SOW. In the second part, the offerer would be
•eguired to participate in a simulation exercise such as a
Hypothetical work assignment to further demonstrate its
abilities. The offeror would be furnished a sample work
assignment and would be requested to describe its philosophy and
proposed (specific) technical approach for accomplishing it. The
scenario covered by the sample work assignment should be
representative of the type of work the offeror would be asked to
provide during contract performance. The use of a sample work
assignment or delivery order is usually a good idea since it
gives an indication of how the offeror would perform under the
actual contract.
2. corporate Experience
This factor refers to the firm's technical experience and
abilities that are relevant to the requirements of the RFP. It
measures the extent of the offerer's past and current experience
in performing similar work. However, be careful not to attach
too great an importance (weight) to this criterion since this can
result in a small group of offerers with very similar scores and
can favor the incumbent contractor (a practice that must be
avoided). Awarding consistently high ratings to the more
experienced offerers can stifle future competition by
consistently eliminating the less experienced offerers.
Generally, no more than 15% of the total points available should
be assigned to the corporate experience criterion.
j. Management Plan
This factor refers to the merit of the offerer's plan for
managing and administering the contract. It is worthwhile to
evaluate the degree to which the offerer's management plan has
established well-defined lines of authority, responsibility and
communication. Other areas that may be evaluated include how
swiftly the organization can respond to technical changes and
increased workloads and can mobilize to resolve problems; how
well the offerer's management techniques can be expected to
identify performance problems at an early stage and cost overruns
and to help work around subcontractor delays and similar
problems.
4. Personnel
This factor refers to the availability, competency,
pertinent education, and related experience of a firm's technical
personnel. The experience and ability of key technical and
support personnel are important factors in successful performance
of a contract. The proposal should clearly relate the offerer's
personnel qualifications and availability to the requirements of
the Statement of Work. The offeror should be required to
designate and discuss specific personnel for all, or at a
inimum, the most important technical disciplines. The number of
V-6
-------
people and their labor category (P4 (highest), P3, P2, etc.)
should be stated,. It is also a good idea to require offerers to
discuss how personnel of different^professions will be organized
as a team to perform certain tasks .--
5. Past Performance
This factor refers to the offerer's record of conforming to
specifications and to standards of good workmanship; the
offerer's record of containing and forecasting costs on any
previously performed cost reimbursable contracts; the offerer's
adherence to contract schedules, including the administrative
aspects of performance'; the offerer's history for reasonable and
coopersative behavior and commitment to customer satisfaction;
and generally, the offerer's business-like concern for the
interests of the customer. This factor should be used to assess
the relative capabilities of competing offerers and to help
assure greatest value source selections. However, this factor
should be written as to allow newly established firms to compete
for contracts even though they lack a history of past
performance. The TEP may contact offerer-provided references to
ascertain information for evaluating this factor.
V-7
-------
ACTION V-C PRICE OR ESTIMATED COST FACTORS
In a technical competition, price or estimated cost is not
as important a consideration as the offerer's technical ability
to perform the work. However, it still is an important factor
that must be taken into consideration in the source selection
process.
In awarding cost-reimbursement contracts, proposed costs are
only estimates and not absolute figures; therefore, they may or
may not be the determining factor in source selection.
Generally, as technical proposals become more equal in merit,
cost or price becomes more important.
The language to describe price or estimated cost factors as
an evaluation factor is very rarely drafted by the program
office. Program office input may be required in instances where
price or estimated cost will be a numerically-weighted evaluation
factor but, for all intents and purposes, the program office is
not required to develop documentation to describe the evaluation
scheme with respect to price or estimated cost.
V-8
-------
SECTION V-D EVALUATING PROPOSALS
After the specified time for opening proposals, the CS will
open all proposals received "on time" and create an abstract of
proposals. This is a logging-in function to be contained in the
contract file. The cost proposals will be extracted and the
technical proposals will then be distributed to the panel members
for evaluation. The technical evaluation process begins when the
V-7
CO/CS formally delivers the proposals to the TEP and briefs the
TEP on the proper procedures for handling and evaluating the
proposals.
Score sheets are also required for the evaluation process.
Score sheets are forms used during the evaluation process for
recording the evaluator's scores and narratives applicable for
the proposals received in response to the solicitation. Score
sheets shall contain the same evaluation criteria and sub-
criteria as stated in the RFP (see Appendix 3). While the
evaluation scoresheets can be prepared by the PO prior to the
beginning of the evaluations, in many cases, the CO has a set of
standard forms that can be used. If the PO does prepare her own
score sheets, the best course of action is to include a copy with
the Procurement Request (PR) package so that the CO or CS may .
review them before hand.
Ground Rules;
- All persons associated with a technical evaluation must
treat Offerers' identities and proposal contents with total
confidentiality to avoid compromising evaluation results or
leading to unfair advantage.
- TEP members shall not discuss any aspects of the
proceedings with anyone outside the TEP. If there is any question
in your mind regarding who has a "need to know" contact the CO.
This does not preclude discussions with TEP member's management
relative to status and timing. However, discussions relative to
particular offerers or aspects of their proposals are prohibited.
- Refer to the CO any attempted communications by offerers.
- If any additional information is needed, the TEP shall
request it through the CO in the form of interrogatories/
discussions. Interrogatories/discussions are any oral or written
communication between the government and an offerer.
Interrogatories/discussions involve information essential for
determining whether a proposal is acceptable. Interrogatories
also provide the offerer a?j opportunity to revise or modify its
proposal.
Each member of the TEP shall independently evaluate and
score each proposal. After the individual evaluations, the group
V-9
-------
will convene to develop a panel consensus score for each
proposal. The TEP Chairperson moderates this discussion and is
responsible for developing the consensus narrative. Averaging of
scores is NOT permitted (see GOOD and BAD score sheet narrative
examples in Appendix 4).
For the consensus summary, a detailed, written narrative
must be provided for each individual scoring element fully
supporting the consensus rating assigned. It is imperative that
the narrative correlate precisely with the score given. A
separate discussion must be written for each proposal that
summarizes the relative strengths and weaknesses of the offerer
in each of the major criteria. Upon completion of the consensus
summary, a TEPR will be submitted to the CO. Each individual on
the panel must sign the report to attest to its validity.
Scoring standards establish the rating scale that will be
used to evaluate proposals. Each score on the scale must be
defined. EPA furnishes a standard scoring plan that must be used
to evaluate technical proposals. The scoring plan is based on a
0 (poorest) to 5 (best) point scale (see Appendix 5).
V-10
-------
SECTION V-E TEPR
The following are guidelines on how to prepare the TEPR. It
is very important that you follow the format provided in Appendix
V-6 for the final report and follow the directions listed below.
Your report must include, at least, the following elements:
A. Individual Panel Member Reports.
This information should be held in a backup file by the PO
and made available upon the request of the CO. This information
is comprised of the individual score sheets with detailed notes
from each TEP member covering each criterion for each offerer.
The notes must discuss the relative strengths and weaknesses
associated with each proposal. When evaluating the strengths and
weaknesses, evaluators should reference proposal page numbers
wherever possible.
The narrative descriptions must fully support all scores.
For example, for a score of 1, you must clearly describe all of
the problems with the offerer's proposal. On the other hand, a
perfect score of 5 also must have a detailed narrative supporting
that score. You must state WHY and HOW the offeror deserves the
score given. A perfect score of 5 , however, does not preclude
the government from requesting interrogatories or discussions/
Each member must read each proposal in its entirety and must
independently evaluate and score each proposal. Please note that
each member must sign his/her individual score sheets.
If the CO has not requested the information previously, the
PO must submit this backup file to the CO for inclusion in the
official contract file prior to contract award.
B. Consensus Report
After the individual scores are completed, the panel members
should fully discuss their findings and provide a detailed
consensus report. This report will be prepared by the TEP
Chairperson and while the contracting officer may require
additional information, at a minimum, the following information
should be included:
C. Matrices of Individual Scores and Consensus Scores for Each
Offeror
This part of the report must include the individual panel
member scores for each evaluation criterion. One table must be
prepared for each proposal evaluated. Each table must show the
numerical (1 to 5) scores each evaluator awarded and the TEP
consensus score and points (score x .2 x point weighting) (see
Appendix 7).
V-ll
-------
D. Consensus Members Score Sheets and TEP Consensus Score
Matrix
This part of the report shall include the consensus score
sheets with detailed notes from the consensus discussion of the
TEP covering each criterion for each offerer. The notes must
discuss the relative strengths, weaknesses, and risks associated
with each offer, etc. In evaluating the strengths and
weaknesses, and in developing narratives and interrogatories,
refer to proposal page numbers whenever possible. Detailed
narrative descriptions must fully support the scores given.
The TEP Chairperson is responsible for compiling the
consensus scores and narrative and for facilitating the consensus
process. It is recommended that the panel members share the
responsibility of recording the consensus notes and narrative
during the process in order to assist the Chairperson. Please
note that each member must sign the consensus signature summary
page attached to the back of the consensus report.
A matrix depicting the TEP consensus scores for each
criterion should be included in the summary. A complete listing
of consensus scores must be shown for each offeror.
Both the individual scores with narrative and the consensus
scores with narrative become part of the official contract file.
E. Interrogatories
The purpose of interrogatories is to better understand an
offerer's proposal and to satisfy the legal requirement to have
meaningful discussions with all firms in the competitive range.
When offerers' proposals contain deficiencies, ambiguities,
and/or suspected mistakes, you must formulate questions or
interrogatories for offerers. The term deficiencies is a general
term of art referring to any part of a proposal that fails to
satisfy the government's requirement. Interrogatories are also
required for ambiguities and suspected mistakes.
Although, there is a difference between deficiencies and
weaknesses resulting from the offerers lack of diligence,
competence or inventiveness in preparing the proposal,
interrogatories should be used to point out weaknesses and
deficiencies identified by the TEP in offerers' proposals.
Interrogatories should also be used to clarify information
contained in the proposal and/or request information that should
have been provided but was omitted.
The goal is to avoid technical leveling through
interrogatories. Technical leveling is helping an offerer to
bring its proposal up to the level of other proposals through
V-12
-------
successive rounds of interrogatories, which may include technical
transfusion. Technical transfusion occurs vhen the Government
discloses information from one offerer's proposal that results in
improvements a competitor's proposal.
Thus, during the evaluation process, members of the panel
should write down questions for each offerer, if applicable.
Questions should be stated in such a manner to avoid technical
leveling or leading the offerer in a specific direction. The
chairperson will consolidate and record interrogatories for the
consensus report based on the full panels discussion.
F. Panel Comments
The panel can include any other pertinent information or
comments in this section. If for example an offerer's proposal
was severely deficient, or if there is a conflict on interest, it
should be noted here.
G. Certifications
Each member must sign and return the following certifications:
o Certification for Conflict of Interest
o Certificate for Unauthorized Disclosure of
Procurement Information
o Procurement Integrity Certification
V-13
-------
SECTION V-F COX
A signed Statement of COI (See Appendix 8) for each member
of the panel should accompany the consensus report. This
certifies that no apparent COI exists in evaluating the
proposals. An example of a COI might be if one of the panel
members has a spouse working for one of the offerers. An
apparent conflict must be brought to the attention of the CO
immediately so that the CO can determine whether or not the
person can remain on the panel. The statement also contains a
separate area to identify any potential or actual COI which may
result in contracting with any of the offerers.
V-14
-------
Appendix V-l
DOS and DON'Ts
Al-l
-------
TIPS - SUGGESTIONS - DOS AND DON'Ts
(OR EVERYTHING YOU NEEDED TO KNOW ABOUT TEP REPORTS
BUT WERE AFRAID TO ASK)
o Always keep in mind the end result: Complete, detailed
consensus report. In order to achieve this, your individual
evaluation must be complete.
o Your evaluation must be supported by a strong detailed narrative
which is consistent with scores. Do not use phrases such as "looks
good to me" or "strong write-up in this area."
o Support the statements you make in your narratives by providing
examples right out of the proposals. Ask yourself WHY and/or HOW
an offerer fulfilled or met the evaluation criteria elements.
EXAMPLE:
Statement: The offerer demonstrated excellent experience in
managing large dollar, highly complex, multi-tasked
contracts.
WHY/HOW: The offerer cited over 200 prior contracts that they
have successfully managed. These contracts include
the $60 M EPA Technical Enforcement Support contract,
DOE's $2.5 billion Strategic Petroleum Reserve
Project and $900 M Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial
Action Program. The offerer has over 40 years of
experience with Federal contracts from many different
agencies spanning many program areas including
Superfund and RCRA Enforcement.
o Write up your narratives FIRST then assign that criterion a
numerical score. You will find it easier to score once you have
read over what you have written.
o Do NOT reiterate the TEC elements. EXAMPLE: under CORPORATE
EXPERIENCE you would NOT say "The offerer has demonstrated relevant
enforcement related experience." Once again, HOW did they
demonstrate that experience?
o Do not downgrade a proposal because it did not address something
we never asked for in our request for proposals (RFP).
o In evaluating strengths and weaknesses, and in developing
narratives and interrogatories, reference proposal pages whenever
possible.
o Do not infer prior knowledge of a company into the evaluation,
i.e., "I know they can do it, but they didn't say so". Be like a
judge; look only at the written evidence.
Al-2
-------
o Avoid "reading into" or "reading out of" any portion of the
offer a meaning other than the exact language appearing in the
offer. If a clarification is needed, prepare an interrogatory
addressing it.
o Avoid the tendency to interpret the meaning of the offerer's
proposal when the writing is ambiguous. Clarify ambiguities with
an interrogatory.
o Recognize that the assignment of a score to an element is
subjective and based upon your best reasoned judgement.
o Recognize that offerers often use "catch phrases, buzz words,"
and semi-legalistic phraseology which may indicate a less-than-
thorough understanding of the solicitation.
o Recognize the substantive quality of the proposal and do not
be influenced by form, format or method of presentation. Look
for content.
o Recognize flattery on the part of the offerer.
o It is recommended that the Chairperson direct the panel members
to read the proposals in different order, i.e., panel member 1.
would start with proposal from XYZ and panel member 2 would start
with proposal from ABC and panel member 3 would start with
proposal from UBSTER, etc.
o Avoid forming "first impressions" of an offer that might tend
to influence the score assigned.
o Do NOT compare proposals to one another. Each proposal stands
on its own merit, and is evaluated strictly against the RFP
technical evaluation criteria.
o Advise the Contracting Officer if any proposals are totally
unacceptable and would require a major rewrite.
INTERROGATORIES
o Your interrogatories should be in the form of questions, not
suggestions. Don't slip into the mode of telling an offerer how
you would like to see the proposal.
o Do NOT ask an offeror to address something that we never asked
for in the RFP.
o Recognize ambiguities, inconsistencies, errors, omissions,
irregularities, and deficiencies that can affect the scoring.
These should be recorded on the individual/consensus evaluation
sheets under weaknesses. These will result in interrogatories.
Al-3
-------
o Questions should be stated in such a manner as to avoid
technical leveling (i.e., helping an offerer to bring its
proposal up to the level of other proposals through successive
rounds of discussion, such as by pointing out weaknesses
resulting from the offerer's lack of diligence, competence, or
inventiveness in preparing the proposal).
o Questions should be stated in such a manner as to avoid
technical transfusion (i.e., Government disclosure of technical
information pertaining to a proposal that results in improvement
of a competing proposal).
CONSENSUS
o Individual scores should NOT be totaled and averaged to reach
a consensus score.
o The consensus process is NOT a democracy where the majority
rules. No member can be "out-voted". Consensus means the
"collective opinion" of all members of the panel. Remember, by ,
signing the consensus report, you agree with the final report.
o During the consensus process, it is recommended that panel
members take turns recording the consensus narratives, scores and
discussion to help assist the chairperson. The chairperson is
responsible for consolidating all comments into the final report
but that person is also needed to facilitate the process itself.
It is also recommended that after consensus is reached on a
particular criterion, that the recorder repeat the narrative
recorded to make sure he/she has captured accurately, the
narrative and interrogatories discussed and agreed to by the
panel members.
The TEPR must support all ratings (scores) given with
factual statement and not simply conclusionary statements. For
scores of "4" and "5", the superior features (strengths) must be
cited. The benchmark (minimum requirement) must be cited in the
TEPR. A rating of "3" would indicate that a proposal met the
minimum requirements. Narratives with factual rather than
conclusionary statements must accompany scores "3.5" or "4.5" and
clearly indicate what the distinction is that merits a half
score.
The TEPR must identify any weakness, deficiencies, concerns,
uncertainties, or suspected mistakes. It should indicate whether
the weakness/deficiencies are significant or minor, and whether
risks to contract performance are anticipated if uncorrected or
unchanged.
For scores of 0 or 1, be emphatic. Provide representatives,
if not exhaustive examples of the deficiencies that result in the
score. Give references to pages or sections of the offer where
Al-4
-------
possible. Even where there are scored 0 or 1, it is possible
that as a result the offerer may be put in the competitive range.
As a result, keep in mind how or whether it would be possible to
phrase interrogatories to identify the weakness.
A score of 2 SUGGESTS that an interrogatory is to be
prepared, if the offerer is otherwise in the competitive range.
Do not use a score of 2 to soften the impact if in fact the item
is unacceptable and should be scored 0 or 1. Where a 2 is used,
try to phrase the comments to fit the form of the interrogatory.
For scores of 3 to 5, it is appropriate and even NECESSARY
to frame interrogatories if there ar deficiencies in the offer
that could be corrected. Any deficiencies that are not raised in
the TEPR and interrogatories cannot be used later to justify
selection.
It is suggested that technical panels use a "bottom" up
approach to the report in the areas that are scored 3 to 5.
First, indicate that the element is considered adequate or
good or superior. If the score is at the 3 level, indicate
specific examples of what made the element acceptable. Here, and
throughout the evaluation, remember to use page references
wherever possible.
Second, if the score is over 3, the.n ADD examples of the
superior features. If there are no deficiencies, but the
superior features are not so great as to merit a 5, simply
indicate what was adequate and superior, and that there were no
deficiencies. Remember that the TEPR will be very carefully
reviews for a score of 4 that 'the offerer's approach was
supervisor in all areas except for discussion of ozone analysis
will be read to suggest that there is a weakness in ozone
analysis that should be disclosed to the offerer.
Third, however, if there are weaknesses that you feel could
be addressed and improved, then go on to indicate those areas as
weaknesses, again phrasing the comment so as to fit the
interrogatory.
Al-5
-------
Appendix V-2
Sample Technical Evaluation Criteria
A2-1
-------
TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA
POINTS
1. CORPORATE EXPERIENCE
a* Enforcement Experience (10)
The offerer will be evaluated on the extent of
their demonstrated relevant enforcement-related
experience. The offerer should describe experience
concentrating on the specific elements outlined in
the SOW. Offerers will be evaluated according to
their capability and experience as indicated by
their completed and current projects related to
enforcement guidance development, program
implementation and evaluation; and according to
their capability and experience in conducting
enforcement programs of similar type, scope, and
complexity as outlined in the SOW.
b. Management Experience (5)
The offerer will be evaluated on the extent of their -
management experience anticipating or resolving
potential problems during contract performance and
in managing large dollar, highly complex, multi-tasked,
multi-disciplinary contracts.
2. Personnel 35
a. Experience. Qualifications and Availability of Key
Personnel (20)
The Key Personnel will be evaluated on the extent to
which they are senior people with appropriate
experience and education; knowledgeable about
environmental enforcement programs; capable of providing
expert testimony, project management and review, and have
substantive knowledge within their issue area; and
are available to work on this contract.
b. Experience. Qualifications and Availability of
Project Group (15)
The Project Group's ability to successfully manage and
complete work assignments for enforcement programs will
be evaluated based on their demonstrated experience,
academic qualifications, training, availability/
percentage of time dedicated to this contract,
A2-2
-------
accomplishments, and knowledge of enforcement issues
under environmental statutes, including consideration of
the group's composition, position within the overall
organization, and experience to resolve expected
problems.
3. Technical Approach 20
The offerer will be evaluated on the extent to which
they demonstrate a thorough understanding of environmental
enforcement programs and the requirements of these programs;
and an understanding of and the ability to perform the tasks
listed in the SOW for each of the following areas:
(1) State Enforcement Programs (3)
(2) Federal Facility Response Actions (3)
(3) RCRA/CERCLA Relationship and Other Cross
Program Issues (4)
(4) CERCLA and RCRA General Enforcement Support (4)
(5) Cost Recovery (3)
(6) Program Management and Support (3)
4. Sample Work Plan 10
The offerer will be evaluated on their response to the
Sample Work Assignment attached to the RFP as Attachment B.
The Sample Work Plan will be evaluated according to the
following criteria:
a. Soundness of Technical Approach and Understanding
of Problems Associated with the Task (4)
b. Adequacy of Project Staffing and Management Plan (3)
c. Degree to which proposed schedule is realistic and
comprehensive within a multi-task and short lead-time
tasking environment (3)
5. Management Plan 20
The offerer will be evaluated on the extent to which
their proposed organizational mechanisms can successfully
fulfill the requirements of the contract.
a. Organization and Resources (4)
The offerer's effectiveness to successfully manage
this effort will be evaluated in terms of the
clarity of lines of authority and communication
between staff and management; the adequacy and
appropriateness of corporate management's plans for
identifying and addressing any problems that might
A2-3
-------
arise; the degree to which the roles and responsibilities
of staff and management are defined; and
the level of integration of staff, subcontractors
and field offices.
b. Cost Forecasting and Tracking (4)
Ability to. t show how costs in the monthly report will
reflect up-to-date information will be evaluated
including consideration of monthly billing cycles,
accuracy of cost projections and ad-hoc reporting
capability.
c. Management Control (4)
The quality and effectiveness of the offerer's
management information system to maintain management
control of the contract including tracking the
progress of work assignments, providing tools for
effective management, such as a deliverables tickler
system, performing overall cost analysis of types of
assignments, etc., will be evaluated. Further, the
ability to ensure security and integrity of enforce- -
ment related records, how work assignments will be
reviewed and distributed in a timely manner, and how
conflict of interest checks will be made, shall also
be evaluated.
d. Equipment and Additional Personnel (3)
(1) Equipment (l)
The demonstrated availability, or ability to obtain
relevant equipment, vehicles, and supplies sufficient
for the scope of work will be evaluated. This will
include acquisition, disposition, and maintenance
procedures.
(2) Personnel (2)
The ability to recruit- and maintain staffing levels,
including acquisition of non-team subcontractors,
required under the contract will be evaluated.
e. Responsiveness (3)
The ability of the offerer to provide quick turnaround
response to EPA's needs will be evaluated.
Consideration will be given to the location of your
project team and all offices to be used for this
contract.
A2-4
-------
f. Quality Assurance Plan (2)
Demonstration of how quality assurance/quality control
procedures will yield products of high quality will be
evaluated including the frequency and types of audits
and internal control checks.
A2-5
-------
Appendix V-3
Example Individual and Consensus Score Sheets
A3-1
-------
INDIVIDUAL SCORE SHEET FORMAT
TEP NAME: OFFEROR:
ATTACHMENT A - TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA RFP
1. CORPORATE EXPERIENCE TOTAL 20 POINTS
a. Enforcement Experience 10 Points
The offerer will be evaluated on the extant of their
demonstrated relevant enforcement-related experience. The
offerer should describe experience concentrating on the specific
elements outlined in the SOW. Offerers will be evaluated
according to their capability and experience, as indicated by
their completed and current projects related to enforcement
guidance development, program implementation and evaluation; and
according to their capability and experience in conducting
enforcement programs of a similar type, scope, and complexity as
outlined in the SOW.
STRENGTHS: Page No.
WEAKNESSES:
INTERROGATORIES:
Score: Weight: 10 Total:
A3-2
-------
INDIVIDUAL SCORE SHEET FORMAT
TEP NAME: OFFEROR:
ATTACHMENT A - TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA RFP
1. CORPORATE EXPERIENCE TOTAL 20 POINTS
b. Management Experience 10 Points
The offerer will be evaluated on the extent of their
management experience anticipating or resolving potential
problems during contract performance and in managing large
dollar, highly complex, multi-tasked, multi-disciplinary
contracts.
STRENGTHS: Page No.
WEAKNESSES:
INTERROGATORIES:
Score: Weight: 10 Total:
A3-3
-------
CONSENSUS SCORE SHEETS
TEP NAME: OFFEROR:
ATTACHMENT 1 - TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA RFP
1. CORPORATE EXPERIENCE TOTAL 20 POINTS
a. Enforcement Experience 10 Points
The offerer will be evaluated on the extent of their
demonstrated relevant enforcement-related experience. The
offerer should describe experience concentrating on the specific
elements outlined in the SOW. Offerers will be evaluated
according to their capability and experience, as indicated by
their completed and current projects related to enforcement
guidance development, program implementation and evaluation; and
according to their capability and experience in conducting
enforcement programs of a similar type, scope, and complexity as
outlined in the SOW.
STRENGTHS: Page No.
WEAKNESSES:
INTERROGATORIES:
Score: Weight: 10 Total:
A3-4
-------
CONSENSUS SCORE SHEETS
TEP NAME: OFFEROR:
ATTACHMENT 1 - TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA RFP
1. CORPORATE EXPERIENCE TOTAL 20 POINTS
b« Management Experience 10 Points
The offerer will be evaluated on the extent of their
management experience anticipating or resolving potential
problems during contract performance and in managing large
dollar, highly complex, multi-tasked, multi-disciplinary
contracts.
STRENGTHS: Page No.
WEAKNESSES:
INTERROGATORIES:
Score: Weight: 10 Total:
A3-5
-------
Appendix V-4
Individual Score Sheets
Bad and Good Examples
A4-1
-------
GOOD GOOD GOOD INDIVIDUAL SCORE SHEETS GOOD GOOD GOOD
TEP NAME: Jane Doe OFFEROR: UBSTER. INC.
ATTACHMENT C - TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA RFP WOOOOOQ-E1
1. CORPORATE EXPERIENCE TOTAL 20 POINTS
a. Enforcement Experience 10 Points
The offerer will be evaluated on the extent of their demon-
strated relevant enforcement-related experience. The offerer
should describe experience concentrating on the specific elements
outlined in the SOW. Offerers will be evaluated according to
their capability and experience, as indicated by their completed
and current projects related to enforcement guidance development,
program implementation and evaluation; and according to their
capability and experience in conducting enforcement programs of a
similar type, scope, and complexity as outlined in the SOW.
[QTHSs Page Ho.
UBSTER, Inc. has extensive experience in supporting almost all
areas of EPA activity. They demonstrated excellent experience in
areas of developing enforcement documents and cost recovery
actions, citing several very good examples (Pgs. 7-10). They
show strong experience in policy and information areas, and
regulatory document development. They provided many examples of
documents they assisted in developing which were clear, concise
and well-written (Pgs. 20-45). They also show strong experience
in the areas of training and database development. UBSTER listed
over 100 different examples of training courses they developed
and presented for EPA and other agencies (Pgs. 51-55). They
demonstrated their experience in RAC Indemnification issues, as
well as experience in most levels of specific environmental
enforcement issues. Their exhibits (Exhibit B/Pages 35-65)
indicate over 200 projects and activities of large dollar value
that demonstrate considerable expertise and experience in all of
the specific elements outlined in the SOW.
WEAKNESSESi UBSTER did not address, or indicate, any experience
in the areas of administrative orders/consent decrees and
administrative, civil and criminal actions. In addition, it was
difficult to evaluate their experience in the areas of work plan,
RI/FS and RODS since they were not mentioned in their proposal.
INTERROGATORIES: 1. Please clarify your experience in the areas
of administrative orders/consent decrees and administrative,
civil and criminal actions.
2. Please clarify your experience in the areas of work plan
RI/FS and ROD development.
Score: A Weight: 10 Total: _g
A4-2
-------
GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD
INDIVIDUAL SCORE SHEETS
TEP NAME: Jane Doe OFFEROR: UBSTER- INC.
ATTACHMENT C - TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA RFP WOQOOOO-E1
1. CORPORATE EXPERIENCE TOTAL 20 POINTS
b. Management Experience 10 Points
The offerer will be evaluated on the extent of their
management experience anticipating or resolving potential
problems during contract performance and in managing large
dollar, highly complex/ multi-tasked, multi-disciplinary
contracts.
STRENGTHS: Page No.
UBSTER illustrated in their proposal an excellent contingency
plan to address problems as they arise (Page 26) and they have
several checkpoints built into their plan to prevent problems.
UBSTER demonstrated they could respond to EPA problems, i.e. a.
staff member worked around the clock for two months to provide
analytical and reporting support for a Congressional hearing on
the adequacy of the RCRA groundwater monitoring program at land
disposal facilities. UBSTER clearly demonstrated experience in
resolving management problems on short notice and for those
requiring critical actions (Page 44). UBSTER recognized and
emphasized the importance of extensive communications with EPA
personnel at all levels and outlined a complete, effective
communications network in their proposal (Page 56).
UBSTER demonstrated superior experience by indicating prior
contracts where they have successfully managed large, multi-
disciplinary contracts. These contracts include the $60 M EPA
Technical Enforcement Support contract, DOE's $2.5 billion
Strategic Petroleum Reserve Project and $900 M Uranium Mill
Tailings Remedial Action Program (Page 19). In addition, UBSTER,
Inc. has supported OSW, OERR and OWPE since the passage of RCRA
in 1976 and CERCLA in 1980. They have been involved with all of
these programs on activities including regulatory development and
program enforcement (Pgs. 20-25). They are currently managing 35
large dollar EPA contracts in the areas of Superfund and RCRA.
(Exhibit A/Pg. 106). They have over 40 years of experience with
Federal contracts for various other agencies.
WEAKNESSES: None were identified.
INTERROGATORIES: None were identified.
Score: 5. Weight: 10 Total: 10
A4-3
-------
BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD
INDIVIDUAL SCORE SHEETS
TEP NAME: Jane Doe OFFEROR: UBSTER. INC.
ATTACHMENT D - TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA RFP WOOOOOO-E1
1. CORPORATE EXPERIENCE TOTAL 20 POINTS
a. Enforcement Experience 10 Points
The offerer will be evaluated on the extent of their
demonstrated relevant enforcement-related experience. The
offerer should describe experience concentrating on the specific
elements outlined in the SOW. Offerers will be evaluated
according to their capability and experience, as indicated by
their completed and current projects related to enforcement
guidance development, program implementation and evaluation; and
according to their capability and experience in conducting
enforcement programs of a similar type, scope, and complexity as
outlined in the SOW.
STRENGTHSx Page Ho.
UBSTER, Inc. has demonstrated good experience. Their proposal
was well written. They appeared to understand most of the
Statement of Work. They were strong in some areas and weak in
others.
WEAKNESSESS
UBSTER, Inc. did not show any experience in seven out of the 11
areas outlined in the SOW.
INTERROGATORIES:
1. Please clarify your experience in the areas outlined in the
Statement of Work.
Score: 4.5 Weight: 10 Total:
A4-4
-------
BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD
INDIVIDUAL 8CORB SHEETS
TEP NAME: Jane Doe OFFEROR: UBSTER. INC.
ATTACHMENT D - TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA RFP WOOOOOO-E1
1. CORPORATE EXPERIENCE TOTAL 20 POINTS
b. Management Experience 10 Points
The offerer will be evaluated on the extent of their
management experience anticipating or resolving potential
problems during contract performance and in managing large
dollar, highly complex, multi-tasked, multi-disciplinary
contracts.
STRENGTHSz Page No.
UBSTER, Inc. has lots of real good experience. Their write-up in
this area was strong. They included many exhibits and graphs
illustrating their experience. UBSTER, Inc. has managed a lot of
contracts for the private sector. They indicated in their
proposal that they can resolve problems. They know how to get
the job done.
WEAKNESSESS
UBSTER, Inc. has no EPA contracts.
INTERROGATORIES:
1. Do you have any EPA contracts?
Score: 3. Weight: 10 Total: 10
A4-5
-------
Appendix V-5
Scoring Plan
A5-1
-------
SCORING PLAN
The evaluation of technical proposals shall be accomplished
using the Scoring Plan specified below. The values used in
technical evaluation shall be limited to those established in the
Scoring Plan.
Value Descriptive Statement
0 The element is not addressed, or is
totally deficient and without merit.
1 The element is addressed but contains
deficiencies that can be corrected only by
major or significant changes to relevant
portions of the proposal.
2 Clarification is required. Final scoring
of the element will be made following
limited discussions or full negotiations
if discussions or negotiations are held
with the offerer.
3 The proposal element is adequate. Overall
meets specifications. However, comments
should be made on any perceived weaknesses
or on areas in which an offeror could
improve.
3.5* Intermediate merit.
4 The proposal is good with some superior
features.
4.5* Intermediate merit.
5 The proposal is superior is most features.
* The values 3.5 and 4.5 are to be used to indicate intermediate
merit. If used, the chairperson of the Technical Evaluation
Panel shall' provide a narrative to explain the distinction
between 3 and 4 or values 4 and 5.
The numeric values (1-5) should be converted into
percentages (see value key on appendix A7-2 and A7-3) of the
total available points for that value. For instance, if a score
of 4 (80%) is assigned to a sub-criteria that accounts for 10% of
the total technical evaluation criteria weight, the following
calculation produces the total score for that sub-criteria.
Thus, the value score percentage of 80% (4) is multiplied by the
sub-criteria weight of 10 to produce a sub-criteria total of 8.
A5-2
-------
Appendix V-6
TEP Report Format
A6-1
-------
FORMAT OF THE TEP REPORT
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECTt Technical Evaluation Panel Report on Proposals
submitted under RFP
FROM: i , Chairperson
Technical Evaluation Panel
Office of
TO: , Contracting Officer
Office-Mail Code
A. Introduction
In this section, describe when the panel met; that the
(Contracting Officer's name) from OAM briefed
the panel on , 199_; how long you met; who the panel
members are; refer to an attachment containing all the disclosure
statements; etc. Also state that no panel members had a conflict
of interest in this section.
B. Background (Make the following Statement)
The proposals received were evaluated in accordance with
the evaluation criteria contained in the subject RFP and pursuant
to EPAAR 1515.6.
c. Individual Technical Evaluations
Indicate that attached to this report as Attachment A
are the individual score sheets of each TEP member for each
proposal.
D. Consensus Technical Evaluations
Refer to Attachment B (Consensus Score Sheets) and what
it represents. The consensus should include a detailed narrative
on all of the technical evaluation criteria elements.
E. Overview
The following is a summary of the results of the TEP
evaluation:
Insert Attachment C - Consensus Matrix
F. Certifications
Attachment D - Certificate for Conflict of Interest
Attachment E - Certification for the Unauthorized
Disclosure of Procurement Information
A6-2
-------
Attachment F - Procurement Integrity Certification.
O. Attachments
List your Attachments
H. CONSENSUS signature Page
Add the signature sheet, with original signatures, for
each consensus report (see below).
CONSENSUS REPORT SIGNATURE PAGE
Date , Chairperson
Date
Date
Date
A6-3
-------
Appendix V-7
Sample Individual and Consensus Score Sheet Matrices
A7-1
-------
TEP NAME:
INDIVIDUAL SCORE SHEET MATRIX
OFFEROR:
ATTACHMENT
CRITERIA
NO.
l.a.
l.b.
2. a.
2.b.
3.1.
3.2.
3.3.
3.4.
3.5.
3.6.
4. a.
4.b.
4.C.
5. a.
5.b.
5.C.
S.d.l
5.d.2
5.e.
5.f.
Total
Value Key:
A - TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA RFP
(VALUE)
SCORE X
3
5
4
4.5
2
3
3.5
3
1
3
4
5
5
3.5
5
3
3
4
4.5
4
5.0 = 100%
4.5 = 90%
4.0 = 80%
(60%)
(100%)
(80%)
(90%)
(40%)
(60%)
(70%)
(60%)
(20%)
(60%)
(80%)
(100%)
(100%)
(70%)
(100%)
(60%)
(60%)
(80%)
(90%)
(80%)
3.5 = 70%
3.0 = 60%
2.0 = 40%
A7-2
WEIGHT =
10
&o
?9
10
03
03
04
04
03
o?
Q4
03
03
P4
04
04
01
02
03
02
100
1.0 = 20%
TOTAL
6.0
10.0
16.0
9.0
1.2
1.8
2,9
2.4
0.6
1.8
3.2
3.0
3.0
2.8
4.0
2.4
0.6
1T6.
2.7
1.6
76.5
-------
TEP NAME:
CONSENSUS SCORE SHEET MATRIX
OFFEROR:
ATTACHMENT
CRITERIA
NO.
l.a.
l.b.
2. a.
2.b.
3.1.
3.2.
3.3.
3.4.
3.5.
3.6.
4. a.
4.b.
4.c.
5. a.
5.b.
S.c.
S.d.l
5.d.2
5.e.
5.f.
Total
Value Key:
1 - TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA RFP
(VALUE)
SCORE *
3
5
4
4.5
2
3.
3.5
3
1
3
4
5
5
3.5
5
3
3
4
4.5
4
5.0 - 100%
4.5 - 90%
4.0 = 80%
(60%)
(100%)
(80%)
(90%)
(40%)
(60%)
(70%)
(60%)
(20%)
(60%)
(80%)
(100%)
(100%)
(70%)
(100%)
(60%)
(60%)
(80%)
(90%)
(80%)
3.5 = 70%
3.0 - 60%
2.0 = 40%
A7-3
WEIGHT
10
10
20
10
03
03
94
P4
o?
03
04
o?
0?
04
04
04
PI
92
03
02
100
1.0 = 20%
TOTAL
6.0
19-P
16.0
9.0
1.2
1.8
2.8
2.4
0.6
1.8
3.2
3.0
3.0
2.8
4.0
•
2.4
0.6
1.6
2t7
1-6
76.5
-------
Appendix v-8
Conflict of Interest Statement
A8-1
-------
SUBJECT: Statement of conflict of Interest; Solicitation No.
10000-E1
FROM: Technical Evaluation Panel Members
TO: Contracting Officer
To the best of my knowledge, neither I nor any member of my
family have direct financial or employment interest in any of the
firms submitting proposals for consideration and evaluation,
which conflicts substantially or appears to conflict
substantially with my duties as a member of the TEP.
In the event that I later become aware of such a COI, I agree to
disqualify myself and report this to the Chairperson of my panel
and to abide by any instructions which he/she may give in this
matter.
SIGNATURE DATE
Do you believe that there is any potential or actual COI which.
may result in contracting with any of the offerers?
YES NO
If yes, explain:
A8-2
-------
CHAPTER VI
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATES
-------
-------
-------
I6CE EXAMPLES AND FORMS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pace
Sample I6CE - Cost Reimbursable Contract 3
Sample IGCE - Fixed Rate/Indefinite Quantity Contract 18
IGCE Forms - Cost Reimbursable Contract 32
IGCE Forms - Fixed Rate/Indefinite Quantity Contract 42
-------
Z6CE EXAMPLES AMD FORMS
This section of the IGCE Guide consists of examples of IGCEs
utilizing information from the guide. It also includes blank
forms which can be copied and used in preparing your ZGCE. The
forms can be used for new procurements or work assignments (WAs)
and delivery orders (DOs) on existing contracts. For WAs and DOs
substitute task for year. A limited number of forms on 3.5 disks
are available. Please contact Cost Advisory and Financial
Division if your office would like a copy of the disk.
-------
SAMPLE IGCE
COST REIMBURSABI
CONTRACT
-------
Level i
Level 2
Level3
Garage
1.0
Floor/
Foundation
1.1
Footers
1.1.1
Block
Concrete
Roor 1.1.3
Framing
1.2
Studs
Sheathing
Siding
1.2.3
Roof
1.3
_ Roofing
1.3.1
Shingles
1.3.2
Gutters
•raa
Interior
1.4
Insulation
1.4.1
[Electrical
1.4.2
Painting
1.5
Interior
1.5.1
Exterior
Drywall
1.4.3
Trim&
Molding
1.4.4
1.5.2
Grading &
Rnishing
1.6
Raking &
Cleaning
1.6.1
Landscaping
1.6.2
Seeding
1.6.3
Sample Work Breakdown Structure for a Garage
-------
GARAGE
DIRECT LABOR ESTIMATE
BRICK CONCRETE
I SUBTASKS
FLOOR/FOUNDATION
.1.1 FOOTERS
.1.2 BLOCK
.1.3 CONCRETE FLOOR
FRAHIN6
12
12
.2.1 STUDS 24
.2.2 SHEATHIN6
.2.3 SIDIN6
UOF
.3.1 ROOFIN6
.3.2 SHINGLES
.3.3 6UTHERS
.NTERIOR
4.1 INSULATION 6
4.2 ELECTRICAN
4.3 DRYNALL
4.4 TRIM
•AINTINS
.1 INTERIOR
.2 EXTERIOR
RADIN6 i FINISHING
6.1 RAKE 1 CLEAN 16
6.2 LANDSCAPING 7
6.3 SEEDING 1
50
16
16
16
16
6
16
8
T LABOR HOURS 78
RATES 115
DIRECT LABOR 11,170
10
12
16 134 10 12
130 S25 130 $20
«480 13,350 1300 »240
DRYHALL
INSTALLERS
32
32
$20
$640
PAGE 2 OF 2
PAINTERS TOTAL
18
10
24
74
16
16
16
6
6
16
32
8
5 5
B 8
16
7
1
13 295
120
1260 «6.440
-------
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Acquisition Management
Cost Advisory and Financial Analysis Division
401 M St. SW
Washington, DC 20460
-------
GUIDE FOR PREPARING INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT
COST ESTIMATES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. PURPOSE OF GUIDE - 4 -
H. BACKGROUND - 4 -
m. DEFINITION AND USES OF IGCEs - 4 -
1. Definition - 4 -
2. Types of Cost Estimates - 5 -
3. Uses of IGCEs - 6 -
4. Who is responsible for preparing IGCEs? : 7 -
IV. PREPARING THE IGCE - 7 -
1. Statement of Work - 7 -
2. Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) - 8 -
3. Databases - 8 -
4. Identifying Costs - 9 -
5. Steps for Estimating Direct Labor - 10 -
6. Fringe Benefits - 13 -
7. Overhead - 13 -
8. Travel - 14 -
9. Other Direct Costs (ODCs) - 14 -
10. General and Administrative (G&A) - 15 -
11. Profit or Fee - 15 -
A. Appendix A - Sample Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)
-2-
-------
I. PURPOSE OF GUIDE
This guide has been prepared to provide
general guidance to EPA personnel in their prepa-
ration of independent government cost estimates
(IGCEs). IGCEs are prepared in support of procure-
ment requests leading to new contracts, to support
modifications and change orders, and to support the
issuance of new work assignments and delivery
orders under existing EPA contracts. This basic
guidance can be used for new and existing contracts.
On existing contracts we should have better defined
needs for work assignments (WA) and delivery
orders (DO) which should result in more detailed cost
estimates.
This guide does not provide program specific
guidance. It does provide a thorough overview for
preparing an ICCE. It is expected that each EPA
program office will supplement this guide with
information relative to the specific program's require-
ments. The development and maintenance of good
databases are essential to effective cost estimating.
Some programs have developed databases and com-
puter software that facilitates the preparation of the
IGCE. All program offices are encouraged to take
similar actions.
H. BACKGROUND
Independent Government Cost Estimates
have always been an integral part of effective acquisi-
tion programs both in Government and private indus-
try. The Administrator's Standing Committee on
Contracts 1992, disclosed that this agency provides
little guidance on cost estimating and has not
allocated adequate program resources to support
development of IGCEs. The General Accounting
Office (GAO) has long been concerned with EPA's
failure to develop independent cost estimates. The
EPA OIG has identified improper contractor assis-
tance with cost estimation on ADP contracts. The
Administrator's Task Force on Implementation of the
Superfund Alternative Remedial Contracting Strategy
(ARCS), issued its report (the Dunne Report) in
October 1991, and commented on the lack of
independent cost estimates in the Superfund program.
As a result of the Dunne Report, Superfund began
developing guidance and databases specifically for the
Superfund remedial programs.
For purchases of ADP equipment, related
services and related equipment, the Federal Infor-
mation Resources Management Regulations (FIRMR)
require agencies to establish and document require-
ments for Federal Information Processing (FIP)
resources by conducting a requirements analysis
commensurate with the size and complexity of the
need. This analysis and an alternatives analysis are
required to accompany the Agency Procurement
Request to obtain a Delegation of Procurement
Authority (DPA) (when a DPA is required). "The
analysis of alternatives requires Agencies to compare
the costs of each feasible alternative unless the
anticipated cost of the acquisition is less than $50,000
(41 CFR 201-20.2). Required guidance for cost
calculations can be found in OMB Circular N. A-94,
'Discount Rates to be Used in Evaluating Time-
Distributed Costs and Benefits' for calculating
alternative costs." "Further information on whether
the FIRMR applies to your solicitation is in the
FIRMR (41 CFR 201-20.305) and associated FIRMR
Bulletins (Bulletin A-l), published by GSA and
available in the Headquarters Library. Further
guidance on when your solicitation may require a
Delegation from GSA may be found in the FIRMR
(41 CFR 201-20.305)."
The Administrator's Standing Committee
report says the development of in-house cost esti-
mation skills is an Agency contracts management
priority. This guide is the first step in complying
with the Standing Committee recommendation on
IGCEs and making IGCEs a normal part of the EPA
acquisition process.
The current policy requires IGCEs be
submitted with contract actions greater than $25,000.
Contract actions include new contract awards, modifi-
cations to increase the scope of work of the contract.
work assignments and delivery orders.
1.
DEFINITION AND USES OF
IGCEs
Definition
A cost estimate is generally defined as a
projection or forecast of the economic or financial
value of goods and/or services to be delivered in the
future. An Independent Government Cost Estimate
-3-
-------
is a detailed estimate of the cost to the Government
for services and/or supplies to be acquired, generally
from contractors. The estimate must be the Govern-
ment's own in-house estimate and must not be based
upon information obtained from contractors/ offerers
from which proposals, will be solicited. An IGCE is
the Government's estimate of what a responsible
contractor should propose based on the statement of
work. The IGCE should not be divulged to any
potential contractor.
There are various steps required in the
development of an IGCE. All are necessary for a
good cost estimate. The time expended »"d the depth
of information needed for each step will depend on
the phase and complexity of the work being
yfftimntftd, The various steps are g"niTu"ti7a^ in the
following paragraphs:
A. Know the requirement, project or service
being procured. In Government contracts,
the Statement of Work (SOW) is the source
document which defines the requirement,
project or service. Any work not included
in the SOW should not be included in the
cost estimate.
B. Establish ground rules and assumptions.
Examples of things to look for here include
the following:
• Determine what the schedules and
milestones are for completing the
cost estimate and for completion of
the entire project.
• Determine if this is a brand new
endeavor, continuation or follow-on
procurement.
• Determine if management has the
need for any built in reserves and
what impact budgets may have on
your estimating.
• Document all ground rules and as-
sumptions.
C. Determine if any historical databases are
available and what other sources of data are
available for the cost estimator to use. This
could include experience on like or similar
effort, any type of professional materials,
surveys and personal expertise1 of the cost
estimator and co-workers. Document all
. sources of information.
D. Determine what method of estimating will be
used. The two methods to be discussed in
this guide are the "Top-down and the Bot-
toms-up* methods. You may use a
combinations of these methods. Document
the estimating method chosen and why it
was selected.
E. Using the chosen method of estimating, pre-
pare your estimate for quantities for labor,
materials, travel and other elements of cost.
Document the quantities used and how they
were determined.
F. Review and organize your information and
estimate unit costs for each category of cost
and rtoitiputc your ff^imfltB Document the
source and dates of your costs.
G. Review the resulting cost estimate for credi-
bility, reasonableness, accuracy, and com-
pleteness. Make sure all steps in the IGCE
preparation have been well documented.
H. Have higher level management review and
approve your estimate.
I. Use the estimate to prepare the procurement
package.
2. Types of Cost Estimates
Every cost estimate will be based on
forecasts and cannot be predicted with absolute
certainty. EPA's goal for cost estimates is to achieve
predictions that are as accurate as possible using the
information available and the best estimating tech-
nique for a given situation. Generally speaking, there
are two major types of cost estimates, parametric (top
down) and engineering (bottoms-up).
Parametric or TOP Down. This is called the ballpark
approach and is based upon pricing major measurable
units such as manhours, cubic yards, number of
moves, number of laboratory tests or number of
computers, major computer systems requirements,
-4-
-------
etc. to determine an approximate estimate of the
costs. This approach requires the use of a database
with like elements of work. It requires collecting and
organizing historical data and relating it to the work
output being estimated. When making any estimates
based on historical data, adjustments have to be made
to the database information for the specific work
required and for cost increases/decreases due to
differing requirements and economic conditions.
The top down method would be used in the
early planning stages of a project when the precise
quantities or needs are not yet known or when
requirements are not fully known or detailed
specifications are not available. This is the method
which would probably be used when preparing an
IGCE for a new contract as opposed to a work
assignment or a delivery order on an existing
contract. The estimate would result in an "order-of-
magnitude" projection of costs, and would have to be
refined as the work product becomes more defined.
The top down approach may not detail all peripheral
costs, such as site preparation access, regulatory per-
mitting costs, specific licenses requirements, main-
frame time-share costs or software, but some
estimates of the cost of these items should be
included.
Engineering or Bottoms-up. This is called the
detailed estimate and represents the opposite end of
the cost estimating spectrum. It presumes that the
total effort can be separated into a work breakdown
structure (WBS), and pricing can be applied to each
element such as labor, overhead, travel, equipment,
other direct costs and G&A. The database for a
bottom-up estimate has to be very detailed and
represents the accumulated experiences of many
previous and similar projects. Adjustments still have
to be made and you should never depend entirely
upon any historical database. If a program is just
starting to prepare IGCEs, formal supporting databas-
es may not exist. However, there may be sufficient
in-house experience and prior contracts for similar
work which will provide information to assist you in
using this method.
This type of estimate is prepared following
completion of a detailed design specification of a
proposed construction project, detailed requirements
for software development, and whenever the needs
are well defined. Each program should have as a top
priority, preparing well defined needs for your SOW
prior to even considering a Purchase Request (PR)
package. In this scenario, fairly complete knowledge
of the work to be done is "gymy*. and exact work
steps or tasks and subtasks have been developed.
Typically, SOWs address "what is required", not
"how to do it." Therefore, offerers may propose
different methods of "how to do it" than anticipated
by the cost estimator. The Agency wants the bottom-
up type of detailed IGCE for all work assignments
and delivery orders.^ V^e.^^. V\ i $ Vox* i' Cu \
3.
Uses of IGCEs
EPA uses IGCE's for several purposes.
Among them are the following:
A. For evaluation of proposals for new con-
tracts. Once an IGCE has been completed,
all offers received can be compared to the
IGCE. Differences and similarities can be
compared and various conclusions can be
drawn. The Project Officer (PO),
Contracting Officer (CO), cost estimator and
cost analyst participate in this comparison
analysis, depending on the situation. Exam-
ples of what this comparison might disclose
include the following:
(1) The proposals overstate work re-
quired.
(2) The proposals understate the work
required.
(3) The SOW does not sufficiently
explain the requirements.
(4) The SOW is good, the IGCE is
good, the technical proposals are
good, but the proposal prices are
either too high or too low.
(5) The proposals may include ideas
and/or new technologies not
considered by the Government.
B. For budget purposes prior to awarding con-
tracts, issuing pQf "Ml WAs. A good
IGCE can be used to prepare the budget,
prioritize areas of concern and monitor the
work in process. You must always keep in
mind that the IGCE is an estimate and may
-5-
-------
C.
E.
differ from the final cost. In an ideal situa-
tion these differences will be insignificant.
However, there may be significant differ-
ences. You should analyze closely the
differences to understand why they occurred
and learn from them for the future. It is a
good idea to document significant differenc-
es for future references.
or eva
l""ting proposals for work assign-
ments and delivery orders. This is similar
to evaluating proposals for new contracts.
One difference is the lack of competition
since the contract has already been awarded.
The lack of competition increases the impor-
tance of a complete and accurate IGCE.
The quantities and levels of expertise and the
associated amounts for other direct costs
used in the IGCE are extremely important in
this situation since rates for labor and
indirect cost ««id associated amounts for
other direct costs will have been negotiated
for the contract as a whole.
To document negotiation objectives. This is
a continuation of the process of comparing
the IGCE to the proposals. The differences
and similarities should be highlighted and
the CO and PO should work together to
determine what the Government's nego-
tiation objectives should be and what issues
will be discussed during negotiations.
Desired outcomes should be documented as
part of the CO's prenegotiation plan.
To document award decisions. Any contract
award should be based on a fair and reason-
able price for the required work. The IGCE
will assist the CO and POs in their deter-
mination that the Government will pay a fair
and reasonable price and will get an accept-
able service or product. Any significant
difference between the IGCE negotiation
objective and the final cost/price negotiated,
should be addreseed and documented for the
contract file.
4. Who is responsible for preparing IGCEs?
It is the responsibility of the Program Office
(RPM/WAM,PO/DOPOor other technical personnel)
to develop the Independent Government Cost
Estimate. These persons are responsible for
determining the resources necessary to perform the
work described in the statement of work. If your
office or region has an in-house cost estimator, it is
recommended that the IGCE be jointly prepared by
the technical personnel and the cost estimator. The
accuracy and completeness of the IGCE are the
responsibility of the Program Office, not the
Contracting Officer. However, the Contracting
Officer should be available to address specific
contractual issues. Teamwork between the
contracting office and the program is vital for a good
IGCE.
IV. PREPARING THE IGCE
1.
Statement of Work.
The basic requirement for a sound and
defensible IGCE is a good SOW. The SOW is the
starting point for the cost estimator in the preparation
of the IGCE. The SOW is the source document that
defines the Government's requirements for a
product, project or service. It should provide
information on the requirements, descriptions of the
efforts required, and the timing and locations of
efforts. The Cost Estimator cannot prepare an
accurate and defensible IGCE without a clear,
complete and concise SOW and detailed specifi-
cations. The SOW is the basis for both the IGCE
and the contractor's proposals. A good SOW should
provide the necessary foundation for the EPA to
obtain the goods and services it contracts for at a fair
and reasonable cost and to get the best product,
project or service on time and within the budget.
Planning the SOW. EPA personnel must
allow a reasonable amount of time to develop and
prepare the SOW so that it includes detailed
descriptions of the *«*""-ji requirements for a
material, product, or service and includes the criteria
for determining whether the requirements are met.
A rushed project will usually result in a poor SOW
with incomplete requirements and may lead to failure
of the entire project. To start the SOW process, an
outline of the major tasks to be performed should be
developed. This will reduce the likelihood of major
omissions and redundant steps.
-6-
-------
Developing the SOW. After the SOW out-
'ine has been completed, the details can be added
ith the assurance that all facets of the work are
included and that a clear, concise and complete SOW
will emerge.
Utilizing the SOW. In addition to the obvi-
ous use of the specification in the resulting contrac-
tual instrument, it is also used to develop the
performance schedule, evaluation criteria for
negotiated contracts, provide a basis of measurement
for analyzing contractor performance, identification
of deliverables, and to develop the work breakdown
structure (WBS).
Included as Appendix A, is a sample WBS
for building a Garage and using the WBS for esti-
mating direct labor hours and dollars.
2.
Work Breakdown Structure fWBS)
A well written SOW should permit the user
to develop a work breakdown structure for the
requirement. Sometimes the WBS is actually
prepared before the SOW. The important point is to
prepare a WBS.
A WBS is prepared by dividing a
requirement, project or service into its major tasks
and dividing its major tasks into subtasks and
dividing the subtasks into sub-subtasks, etc. This
division into small subtasks makes it easier to identify
•he work required, to determine required staffing
ids, to schedule the work and to estimate the initial
/st for the desired output. It permits the cost
estimator to assign quantities such as manhours,
disciplines, labor category levels, number of trips,
duration of trips, and equipment, etc.
A WBS provides overall visibility to the
work to be performed and provides some assurance
that all required tasks and subusks are considered.
It is a valuable tool for identifying activities, deliv-
erables and milestones and provides a baseline to
track actual vs. estimated costs to help determine
potential cost overruns and undemms. It can be used
to identify potential duplications and redundant tasks.
This is an important tool not only for
estimating initial costs, but for scheduling the work,
managing the resources and costs, and tracking the
deliverables and expended effort throughout the
period of performance. Good planning should allow
sufficient time and effort to be devoted to preparing
a WBS to produce a useful product. We recommend
the WBS be prepared using some type of automated
spreadsheet so changes can be made easily.
3.
Databases.
A database is a collection of information.
The simplest form of a database is a list. The more
complex databases are computerized and contain
many different types of information which can be
sorted to provide printouts in different formats to fit
the needs of the user. Each program should be
developing databases appropriate to their needs.
In almost every situation, having a database
of like and/or similar projects will facilitate the
preparation of an IGCE. The cost estimator is
strongly cautioned to not rely completely on historical
data. Historical data may, in some instances, reflect
quantities and prices that are unreasonable and
unacceptable under current conditions or include
inefficiencies for past works. They are a good
starting point, but adjustments have to be made based
on current needs. Historical databases usually will
consist of two primary categories: (1) the quantity of
items to be acquired such as hours (level of efforts)
pieces of equipment, number of service calls of a
particular type, number of types and duration of
trips, number and type of lab analyses, number of
PCs ordered, (2) the specific costs or dollar amounts
incurred for these items.
The database of quantities should reflect pro-
jects which are similar in scope - in terms both of
type of work and size - to the project for which the
estimate is being prepared. If no formal database
exists, the IGCE preparer should review invoices and
monthly progress reports containing the actual costs
incurred for WAs or DOs which were issued for like
purposes. The information may or may not be broken
down into tasks and subtask level of detail to permit
a meaningful analysis.
The database of costs will consist of the
specific cost or pricing information such as direct
costs (hourly labor rates, travel costs, equipment
costs, etc.), indirect costs, fixed rates or prices and
unit prices. If there is no formal database, review of
prior invoices and progress reports and personal
experience will all be helpful. If the IGCE is being
prepared for a WA or DO on an existing contract,
-7-
-------
the contract will contain much of the cost data needed
to prepare the IGCE.
If relevant databases are unavailable, the
IGCE preparer may consult with other programs or
agencies where similar work may be performed to
obtain assistance. Examples of other agencies which
might have useful information are the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers for Superfund Clean-up or GSA
for ADP requirements. The Work Assignment
Managers (WAMs) and Delivery Order Project
Officers (DOPOs) can consult with senior or more
experienced project officers. Each major program
office should take steps to develop and maintain data-
bases tor all work commonly performed by contrac-
tors. It is extremely important to keep a database
updated once it is in place. Some EPA programs
may have to update their reporting requirements in
their contracts to facilitate the establishment of a
useful database for use in preparing IGCEs, staying
within budgets and better overall management of their
contracts and budgets.
guide. Direct costs are costs that can be directly
ciated with a particular project or contract. If a
4.
Identifying Costs
As stated in Part HI of this guide, an IGCE
is essentially a forecast of what the estimator believes
it will cost the Government for services and/or
supplies to be acquired, generally from contractors.
This estimated cost includes any profit or fee that the
contractor will earn.
In mis section we address a broad spectrum
of costs. When you prepare your IGCE you have to
exercise your professional judgement as to the detail
you include on each cost element.
Contractors incur costs in two broad catego-
ries, direct costs and indirect costs. A distinction is
made between the two categories because they are
given different accounting treatments. For a Gov-
ernment contract this distinction insures that a
contractor recovers the costs of performing work and
that only those costs for which a benefit is received
by the Government are charged to the Government.
It is important to have a general
understanding of the difference between direct and
indirect costs because it is necessary to make a
distinction between direct and indirect costs when
preparing an IGCE. FAR 31.202 and 31.203 define
these terms. These terms are simplified for this
cost is incurred specifically for a contract and would
not otherwise be incurred, it is a direct cost. Exam-
ples of direct costs include direct labor, materials,
travel, equipment, subcontracts, consultants,
computer usage time, courier service and long
distance phone calls to name just a tew. An estima-
tor preparing an IGCE has more control over direct
costs than indirect costs. Indirect costs are not
directly associated with a specific project or contract
but are necessary for the work to be done. Examples
of possible indirect costs are as follows:
Utilities
Management salaries
Maintenance cost
Recruitment costs
Office supplies
Legal fees
Depreciation
Accounting fees
Kent
Telephone
Fringe benefits
There is no specific rule or cost principle
which defines whether a particular cost will be direct
or indirect. A particular element of cost may be
treated as direct or indirect depending upon the
circumstances as long as the contractor treats the cost
consistently. Clerical labor is an element of cost that
can be charged direct or indirect depending on the
specific contractor's practices. Generally, contractors
will charge clerical labor which can be identified with
specific contracts as direct labor and all other clerical
labor as indirect labor. This is acceptable as long as
the accounting is consistent. It is important that the
estimator understands the way a contractor charges an
element of cost. Whether it is direct or indirect
depends on his accounting system and his consistent
treatment of like costs. A contractor cannot be
directed or required to charge a cost in a way that
differs from his usual accounting practice unless
his procedure is in violation of accepted Govern-
ment cost principles. For example, if it is a
contractor's accounting practice to direct charge the
president's time when he meets on problems dealing
with a specific contract, EPA cannot direct or require
him to charge his time to an indirect account when he
holds meetings for your specific contract. At EPA it
is not the responsibility of the estimator to review and
analyze the contents of the indirect pools and bases.
These details are left to the experts in the Cost Policy
and Rate Negotiation Branch (CPRNB) of EPA's
Cost Advisory and Financial Analysis Division
located in the Office of Acquisition Management.
-8-
-------
CPRNB is a central office which is
responsible for approving indirect billing rates and
^negotiating final indirect rates for contractors. Any
confirmation of an indirect rate or any question
dealing with indirect rates should be addressed to this
Branch. Remember, the estimator only needs to
know the rates and the bases to which they are ap-
plied. Any detailed assessment of details is the re-
sponsibility of agency experts in the accounting and
cost advisory areas.
Contractors may have one indirect rate or
dozens of indirect rates. It depends on their ac-
counting systems. Generally speaking, most
contractors will have a minimum of two indirect rates
i.e., an overhead rate and a General & Admin-
istrative (G&A) rate. Overhead expenses are
common expenses for everyday management of a
project or contract such as rent, utilities, clerical
labor, etc. The base for the overhead expense pool
may be direct labor hours, machine hours, direct
material costs or direct labor dollars. The most
common base is direct labor dollars. On an existing
contract, it is necessary for the cost estimator to
know and use the contractor's basis for allocating
indirect costs to ensure accurate amounts for indirect
costs. On a new procurement, it is necessary for the
-ost estimator to select a basis of allocation for
idirect rates and document his selection.
G&A expenses are generally expenses for
the overall management of a company. Examples of
expenses found in G&A pools are salaries for upper
management, accounting and legal expenses, rent and
utilities for corporate offices, etc. The base for
allocating G&A expenses is generally total cost, but
other allocation bases may be used. For example, a
contractor may use a base that excludes subcontracts.
There is no rule for an acceptable or
unacceptable number for an indirect rate. No one
can make an informed opinion about a company's
proposed costs from just knowing their indirect
rate(s). A complete understanding of the pools, bases
and the accounting system is required. Any question
regarding the indirect rates should be addressed to the
CPRNB.
When preparing the IGCE, the estimator
should generally assume that all work will be
performed by the prime contractor. In other words
do not price team subcontract costs out separately.
Pricing in this way simplifies the process and the cost
impact is small.
However, there may be instances on existing
contracts where the estimator and/or PO are aware
that the required work falls within the expertise of
one or more of the subcontractors. In these instances
the cost estimate should be based on the subcontract-
ors' rates and any oversight costs required by the
prime contractor.
When preparing the IGCE, document why
costs have been included and any assumptions made
that impact the costs. Once a project has been
completed you can go back and determine where the
differences are and where your assumptions differ
from actual occurrences. Also, when using your
IGCE during negotiations, having your assumptions
all laid out will make it much easier for you to
discuss areas of differences with the contractor.
Each and every assumption and/or decision used in
choosing cost factors, quantities, schedules and any
other IGCE item should be documented not only for
use during and after negotiations but for any possible
future reviews by management or other interested
parties.
It is strongly recommended that an automat-
ed cost template or spreadsheet be set up for each
contract, WA or DO. This will prevent simple math
errors and allow for changes with a minimum of
effort. Remember to update your documentation
whenever you change your template.
5.
Steos for Estimating Direct Labor.
Because such a large percentage of EPA's
contracts are labor intensive, a good Government
estimate for direct labor is fundamental to a clear,
concise and complete IGCE. Preparing a good
estimate for direct labor is both the most difficult
and the most important part of the IGCE. Recom-
mended steps for estimating direct labor are as
follows:
A. In order to prepare a good estimate of direct
labor, the estimator must have a good under-
standing of the work required. This should
be clearly delineated in the SOW so that the
contractor and the EPA estimator have the
same understanding of the work effort re-
quired.
-9-
-------
B.
As stated above, preparing a good estimate
for direct labor is both the most important
and the most difficult part of the IGCE. As
such, the estimator should make use of all
the Government expertise available. Proba-
bly the most effective method of tapping the
available Government expertise is to use the
so called roundtable method. This involves
bringing together Government representa-
tives having the specific knowledge and
experience of the subject requirement. Each
invited expert should be given a copy of the
SOW in advance and given sufficient time
to study the SOW and independently
estimate the number of hours required for
their area of expertise. At the roundtable
discussions, differences will be highlighted,
and strong and weak areas of the SOW will
be disclosed. If the requirement has a good
SOW, the experts will have little difficulty
understanding it. However, an unclear and
disorganized SOW will result in the experts
having difficulty understanding it and the
estimates may be meaningless. The round-
table discussions should be completely open
and allow the invited experts to discuss all
aspects of the requirement. These discus-
sions will probably result in adjustments to
the individual estimates. It is the respon-
sibility of the estimator to determine the
final estimate of hours based on the input
from the experts. The SOW may be revised
at this point to clarify areas of concern dis-
closed by the roundiable discussions. Using
the information and knowledge gained from
the roundtable discussion, the estimator is
ready to continue with his estimate of direct
labor. At the WA or DO level, discussions
with your supervisor and some of your peers
may give you sufficient input to determine if
you have a strong SOW or if you have a lot
of experience, your personal experiences and
professional judgement may be adequate.
A work breakdown structure (WBS) of the
project will enhance everyone's understand-
ing of the requirement, facilitate the round-
table discussions and result in a more mean-
ingful IGCE. If a WBS has not been pre-
pared, you should prepare one. This in-
cludes breaking the statement of work into
as many tasks and subtasks as can be identi-
fied or as considered necessary.
C. Identify the hours, Professional (P) & Tech-
nical (T) levels and disciplines and/or labor
categories and associated descriptions re-
quired for each task. A helpful hint to keep
in mind is "if the work was performed 'in-
house* what resources would be needed."
The write-up must include all assumptions
and the basis for selections. Decisions will
probably be derived from one or a combina-
tion of the following:
(1) Current database for similar work
being performed on this contract or
a similar contract with adjustments
for any differences.
(2) Roundtable discussions with
Government experts, supervisors
and peers.
(3) Personal experiences and
professional judgement.
(4) Available Government models for
the type of work required.
(5) Historical data on prior similar con-
tracts. (Caution: You should
never rely completely on historical
data; there will generally be some
adjustments required.)
D. If this is a delivery order on a contract al-
ready in place, compare the estimated P &
T levels and disciplines with the contract to
insure that the contract contains these levels
and disciplines.
If this is a new contract to be placed, work
with the CO to insure that the appropriate P
&. T levels and disciplines are included in
the solicitation.
E. Price the hours, P & T levels and disciplines
identified in C above.
If the estimate is for a new procurement, use
historical databases on previous work with
adjustments for escalation and differences in
- 10-
-------
the complexity of work. You may also
contact one of the Cost Advisory offices in
the Office of Acquisition Management (Hea-
dquarters. Cincinnati, and RTF) (o see what
information they may have on rates being
currently proposed on similar procurement.
Sometime*, you may have a situation when
you know the maximum dollar amount avail-
able to you and you have to basically esti-
mate how many hours you can potentially
buy. Whatever situation you find yourself
in — always document your decision in
writing.
If you have a delivery order under an exist-
ing fixed rate type contract, use the
negotiated rates f.om th» rontract for each
applicable category. These are usually
loaded rates (i.e., they include the direct
labor, overhead. G&A and profit). The
only additional items to be priced would be
any travel and/or ODCs and applicable G&A
and profit on these additional direct costs.
If the estimate is for a DO or WA under an
existing cost type contract, generally there
have been average rates negotiated for each
P and T level which may be used for
pncing. However, there may be situations
where the level of expertise or personnel
required is of a significantly higher or lower
level than the average rate. In these situa-
tions the accuracy of the estimate can be in-
creased by getting the contractor's average
rates for more specific categones instead of
the P & T categones. If you provide more
specific categones or disciplines to the CO.
he/she can request current information from
the contractor or they can request the Cost
Analyst to get this information from the con-
tractor.
It the uork crosses a contractor's fiscal
\ear. it Mill be necosary to either use
escalation factors or review the contract files
to determine if different rate> have been
negotiated for subsequent years In some
cases you nu\ want to use weighted average
rates which cover more than one year. The
contract or contractor's beM &. final (BAFO)
proposal should provide rates for each
contract sear.
The next page contains -n example of how
a final direct labor hour estimate may look:
-------
COST TEMPLATE FOR DIRECT LABOR
YEAR 1
YEAR 2
YEAR 3
uoo* CMIGO»
•mxifci u4M4afn
Mtanoiocsi
CNUiai
UMO4UIIII41 MOMI*
*>tIIM04*wtTir
nxocar
CMuar
cnouim >«ooM»4>m»
XSliM MWITI n
COMPUTK MOO«*i«i|ri
!4M«MlfNf4l H43MUII
cauniif • MDaiiM4«if *
IVlrlMSAMAlTfT
148 ticmcum
M4*r*i44i
u>a ncMtOMi
TOI41 »T
CUMCAl
rot 4i moon
TUVIl
M
M
P4
M
•4
•3
t
*a
n
n
n
PI
pi
ia
n
TI
MMa
1100
100
no
MO
MO
MOO
MOO
MOO
itoo
MO
itoo
MOO
MO
MOO
MO
IOOO
moo
IMO
1000
Mil
Ml
•41
MO
•40
•31
no
aa
in
•>>
•••
•»
•11
•11
• 14
• 11
• 11
•ii
444OIMI
• MMO
• moo
• »ooo
• MOM
• 11 MO
• riMO
III* MO
• UMO
• 41 MO
• ii in
1X1 000
• MMO
• MM
• MOM
• 1MO
• 1*000
•M« 4OO
113400
•OOMO
xMxa
IMO
MO
IM
»00
MO
I4M
33M
1100
tooo
MO
MO
IMO
MO
MM
4M
MM
ItlOO
IMO
MMO
Mil
n»n
mn
•4100
•41 M
•Mn
•31 M
04 «
•Mil
•It 40
• 1**1
•13 10
111 11
in n
• 11 10
mn
HIM
•1301
4MOMH
•iggtM
• mio
• 1400
lit 000
• 10 in
• n«o
• 111311
• 4i in
• 1»400
• nn
• 104OO
• 10 in
• im
in 400
• 1300
• njot
•Ml tM
1 11 110
n >4 no
fOUIB
1100
4OO
IM
400
•oo
1400
MM
IMO
MO
MO
MO
ooa
MO
MM
MO
MM
IMM
IMO
IFMO
Mil
•M 04
I4««l
144 10
•44 10
•MM
0301
•M3B
01 tl
am
•ion
•1410
• K14
• 1014
• 11 44
• 1014
•ii n
• 1433
4MOi*r
• ii '»
• 11041
• »*n
• I*«4fl
• 11 «3B
• 1«1M
1101 -40
iinn
• !<»•
• 1104
• ii *n
• 11 OB4
• IJao
• 30 110
1 4 111
• HIM
•4l( 1H
• n fn
•M43M
MM
4MO
IMO
14M
14M
I4OO
IMO
MM
4MO
33M
1100
IMO
4MO
1000
MM
ISM
4000
11 000
»«4
-------
Cost Policy and Rate Negotiation Branch at head-
•uarters for the latest information on indirect rates
a specific contractors.
If an IGCE is being prepared for a new
contract, the project officer may contact the
contracting officer for advice on how to estimate the
indirect costs.
For new procurement, the estimator may
want to use an average loaded rate for projected P&T
levels which would include labor, indirect (overhead
and G&A) and profit. This information could be re-
trieved from the historical database for similar work
with adjustments for escalation and any other differ-
ences. If you are pricing an individual work assign-
ment and/or delivery order, you will want to be more
specific and price categories of cost separately.
9.
Other Direct Costs fODCsl.
8.
Travel.
Determine if performance of the SOW will
require any travel by the contractor. If yes, the IGCE
should be specific as to :
• The purpose of the travel and the contrac-
tor's role
• number of trips
• numbers of persons per trip
• the beginning and ending destinations for
each trip and the length of time for each
trip
• expected necessity of car rental vs. public
transportation
* estimated per diems
• estimated airfares and/or train fares
• estimated amounts for taxis and other mis-
cellaneous expenses
The narrative should include the purpose of
each trip and any assumptions you have made regard-
ing travel required to perform the SOW. This will
be used to compare your estimate with the contractors
estimate.
Determine what ODCs will be required for
contract performance. Examples of ODCs include
the following:
Telephone Supplies Reports
Postage Reproduction Computer
Equipment Messenger Service
The narrative should include all assumptions you used
in pricing these items. Some points to consider for
each of the above are as follows:
Telephone - Based on historical data or
personal experience, estimate the number of
long distance calls per week and the average
amount per call. i.e. 2 calls per week at $5
per call and 52 weeks per year
2 X $5X52 = $520 for telephone calls/year
Postage - Consider what types of items are
mailed. Some contracts have a lot of
samples that are mailed or shipped.
e.g. 25 samples per month at $45/sample
25X$45 = $1,125/month shipping charges
Equipment - For any special equipment
needs consider specific items. Does the
Government already own such items that can
be used for the contract or project? Would
it be more economical to rent or lease rather
than buy? Include specific quantities and
cost for each equipment item. It is EPA's
policy that generally, contractors should
provide all resources necessary to perform
agency contracts. This includes equipment.
However, in some situations it may be
necessary to provide Government furnished
equipment or to permit the contractor to
acquire specialized equipment at
Government expense. This is a CO decision
and must be based on a written justification
of need provided by the PO with
concurrence at the Program Office Division
Director or equivalent level. The
requirements and regulations pertaining to
Government furnished property are found in
Chapter 5 of the Contracts Management
Manual (CMM) and Part 45 of the Federal
Acquisition Regulation (FAR).
-13-
-------
Reports - Review what reports are being re-
ceived on the current contract or similar
contracts. How many are being received?
What is being done with them? Can any be
cut out or the number reduced? Are
additional reports required? Could some
reports be combined? Keep in mind that
any changes to reports on a current contract
would require CO approval and modification
of the contract. Once the number of reports
and the estimated number of pages needed
per report, has been determined, the cost
estimator can estimate, based on historical
data how much it costs per page and
compute the total estimate,
i.e. if the historical base shows a cost of
$3.50/page and the average report is 50
pages and 3 different reports are required
per month.
$3.50 X 50 X 3 - $525/monthfor reports
Reproduction - This is usually estimated on
ff per page basis. The rates generally range
from $.05 to $.15 per page. You could use
an average of$. 10 and an estimate of pages
needed based on prior history.
$.10X10.000 pages
raxing.
$100 month for xe-
Note: EPAAR 1552.208.70 Reproduction
or copying is permitted up to 5,000 copies
of one page not to exceed 25,000 copies in
the aggregate of multiple pages per job or
individual requirement.
Messenger Service - This is an area where
cost savings can be realized if monitored
closely. Many times contractors use a
messenger service at $15 or $20 per trip
when an item could be mailed for $3 or $4.
If time is not of the essence, items should be
mailed inctoaH of using a messenger.
Calling several messenger services in the
area and asking for quotes for deliveries in
given areas will give a good estimate for the
unit cost. Then project the number of
deliveries per month.
e.g. 4 deliveries per month at $15 per deliv-
ery equates to - $15 X 4 = $60/month
10.
Computer Related Costs - This is one of the
more difficult area to estimate, because the
category covers so many facets. It can
include the purchase of personal computers,
different computer usage rates for main
frame and personal computers and other
computer related costs. Are there special
computer software packages that are
required for your contract or project? If so,
this cost could be included in this category.
This is an area where assistance from an
experienced professional is extremely
helpful. You may wish to consult with
representatives from the Office of
Information Resources Management at
Headquarters.
Miscellaneous ODCs - If this category is
included you should have specific things in
mind to include. Contractors include such
things as temporary office help, special
licenses and some surprises in this category.
There should never be excessive amounts in
this category.
General and Administrative (G&A).
Once the pricing has been completed for
direct labor, overhead, travel and ODCs, the applica-
ble G&A rate should be applied. Check Section C in
the contract for the appropriate bases and rates. If
the contract has been in effect for any length of time
the rates may have changed. Therefore, any amend-
ments to the rates should be reviewed. The EPA
Cost Policy and Rate Negotiation Branch at head-
quarters can provide the latest information on indirect
rates for specific contractors.
11.
Profit or Fee.
Since an IGCE is an estimate of the total
cost to the Government, it should include profit or
fee. Profit is associated with fixed price contracts
and fee is associated with cost reimbursable type con-
tracts. If the IGCE is for a contract already in place,
the estimator should review the contract for any
special fee provisions and apply the negotiated fee
percentage to the total ftstimatftd costs.
The estimate of the profit/fee for a new
procurement is an area where the CO can be
particularly helpful. He/she can either give you a
- 14-
-------
"normal* fee percentage to use or work with you in
preparing an estimate based on EPA's Weighted
uidelines for profit/fee. When estimating fee on an
award fee contract, take the conservative approach
and include the maximum fee available.
The time and effort expended and the details
included in the IGCE will vary with the size and
complexity of the project. Generally, the more
details you include in your IGCE, the more useful it
will be. Each program is different. Some items
discussed in detail in this Guide may not pertain to all
programs. For example, some EPA contracts contain
only small dollar amounts for ODCs and other EPA
contracts contain high dollar amounts of ODCs. This
guidance will have to be adapted for the specific
needs of each program. Remember, each program
should know more about its contract needs than
anyone else and is the most qualified to estimate the
cost of the work required.
We have prepared under separate cover a
package of example IGCEs. The examples show all
the information typed, but this is not necessary.
Your IGCE may be handwritten.
-15-
-------
APPENDIX A
SAMPLE WORK
BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE
(WBS)
-------
NDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE
SOLICITATION RPF #009876 - A1
'REPARER J. DOE
)ATE XX/XX/9X
TYPE OF ACTION
NEW CONTRACT X
WORK ASSIGNMENT'
DELIVERY ORDER
OTHER
SUMMARY COST ESTIMATE
COST REIMBURSABLE CONTRACTS
CATEGORY
1. Direct labor (WS-1)
2. Fringe Benefits (WS-2)
3. Total Direct Labor & Fringe Benefits (lines 1 & 2)
t. Overhead (WS-2)
.'..'^^^•^^^^^^^^^tt-^^^^^?^^^^
i. Total Travel (WS-3)
;. Total Other Direct Costs (WS-4)
..*... ',- - -?
. Sub-Total (lines 3,4, 5 & 6)
. G&A (WS-2)
Y.xl^ ;<:r<.llU* XSN „ ^ ,„ x\"-s ^N^'^^'**
. Total Costs (lines 7 & 8)
v* y, x«^v ^"'i?J~ s "\^^"->\:';"^'^,,--< "-'*' -
0. Profit/Fee (WS-5)
1 . Total Cost and Profit (lines 9 & 1 0)
YEAR1
$631,150
$220.903
$852.053
$596,437
$33,630
$253,256
$1,735,376
$260.306
^t*Sf
-------
INDEPEN(A...r GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE
TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION/CONTRACT RFP * 009876-A1
PREPARER J. DOE
DATE XX/XX/9X
NEW CONTRACT_X_
WORK ASSIGNMENTS
DELIVERY ORDER
OTHER
DIRECT LABOR ESTIMATE WORKSHEET
COST REIMBURSABLE CONTRACTS
Labor Category
PROJECT MANAGER .
HYDROLOGIST ''.:
CHEMIST '
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER
SYSTEMS ANALYST
BIOLOGIST
CHEMIST
COMPUTER PROGRAMMER
SYSTEMS ANALYST
COMPUTER PROGRAMMER
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER
COMPUTER PROGRAMMER
SYSTEMS ANALYST
LAB TECHNICAN
DRAFTSMAN
LAB TECHNICAN
TOTAL LOE HOURS
CLERICAL
P/T Level
P4
P4
P4
P4
P4
P3
P3
P3
P3
P2
P2
P1
PI
73
73
12
TOTAL LABOR HOURS L^L^H
LABOR CATEGORIES:
YEAR 1
Hours
1,800
500
200
500
500
2.400
3,600
2,000
1,500
900
1,500
2.000
500
2.000
600
2.000
22,500
2.250
24.750
Rate
$55
$45
$40
$40
$35
$30
$33
$29
$28
$19
$22
$15
$15
$14
$15
$12
^*n
Amount
189,000
$22,500
$8.000
$20,000
$17,500
$72.000
$118,800
$58,000
$42,000
$17.100
$33,000
$30,000
$7,500
$28.000
$9.000
$24.000
$806.400
$24.750
$631.150
YEAR 2
Hours
1.800
600
200
500
500
2,400
3.300
1,500
1,000
500
800
1,300
300
2.000
400
2.000
19.100
1.910
21.010
Rate
$57.20
$46.80
$41.60
$41.60
$36.40
$31.20
$34.32
$30.16
$29.12
$19.76
$22.88
$15.60
$15.60
$14.56
$15.60
$12.48
$1144
Amount
$102.960
$28.080
$8,320
$20,800
$18.200
$74,880
$113.256
$45,240
$29.120
$9.880
$18.304
$20.280
$4.680
$29.120
$6.240
$24.960
$554.320
$21.850
$576.170
YEAR 3
Hours
1,200
400
200
400
400
2,400
3,000
1.000
800
300
500
900
200
2.000
300
2.000
16.000
2.000
18.000
Rate
$59.49
$48.67
$43.26
$43.26
$37.86
$32.45
$35.69
$31.37
$30.28
$20.55
$23.80
$16.22
$16.22
$15.14
$16.22
$12.98
$11.90
Amount
$71,386
$19,469
$8,653
$17.306
$15.142
$77,875
$107,078
$31.366
$24.228
$6,165
$11,898
$14.602
$3.245
$30.285
$4,867
$25.958
$469.523
$23.795
$493.318
TOTAL
Hours
4,800
1,500
600
1,400
1,400
7,200
9,900
4,500
3,300
1,700
2,800
4.200
1,000
6.000
1,300
6.000
57,600
6,160
63.760
Amount
$273,346
$70,049
$24,973
$58,106
$50.842
$224,755
$339,134
$134,606
$95,348
$33.145
$63,202
$64,882
$15,425
$87.405
$20,107
$74,918
$1,630,243
$70,396
$1.700.638
NOTES, ASSUMPTIONS AND COMPUTATIONS
The work to be performed under this contract is similar to work performed under contract 68-01 -0000. We have added more hours for computer programmers
anda systems analyst category to this contract because of the increased need to develop in-house software to analyze the extensive and specialized
data expected to be collected under this contract We also added a P4 Hydrologist based on specific problems encountered on a task in Region III that
is excpected to continue under this contract Selection of all the other labor categories aie based on prior experience on contract 68 -0 1 -0000.
This contact will provide support to Regions 1. II. IS, IV and V. We had various telephone conferences with each Region (POs, section chiefs, ant
M UiaiHrll frUlttl&J
to get their views on the need for other labor categories n If their needs were being met with the current categories. Based on these discussions, we added
houis fora P3 computer programmer and the systems analyst category at the P4. P3 and PI levels. We also talked with technical personnel in the
Applications Software Branch at OIRM for input on the skill level and educational requirements for the systems analyst hours.
* Notes oertainina to the various telephone conversations are contained in the orooiam's back-up file for this IGCE.
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOUCITAT1ON RFP # 009876-A1 NEW CONTRACT X_
PREi ER J. DOE WORK ASSIGNMENT J
DAT _ (X/XX/9X DELIVERY ORDER
OTHER
DIRECT LABOR ESTIMATE WORKSHEET
COST REIMBURSABLE CONTRACTS
LABOR HOURS:
For the labor hours, we reviewed the current usage by Region and also had each Region submit their
expected needs for the next 3 years under this contract. The Regions were able to break the effort down
into tasks and in some cases to subtasks. This allowed us to determine (we think more accurately)
the specific labor categories, skill levels and hours required to perform the work. We analyzed this data
and used it as the basis for the hours for this contract. In the current contract, Projet Manager is 1,800 hrs. p f
This should provide sufficient coverage to manage the effort, so no change was made, exceptto reduce
!t in year three due to total hours being reduced. This reduction for year three was agreed to be all Regions.
The hours for the P4 Hydrologist are based on the expected needs for the Region III problem plus some
extra hours in case this specific problem occurs in any other Region. We expect a heavy workload in
programming and systems analysis during the first year and decreasing workloads in this area in years two
3nd three. This is reflected in the number of hours we have included for computer programmers and system
analysts for the entire three year period. We have a total of 7,400 hours in this area for year one and this
decreases to 3,600 in year three. All other categories reflect for the most part what is being used on the
current contract and the projected needs for each Region.
*AII correspondence from the Regions and notes pertaining to any telephone conversation are contained
n the programs back-up tile for this IGCE.
ATES:
~he current contract is a cost reimbursable contract and the labor is shown as a lump sum with no breakdown
>f cost per category on the invoices. We wentbackto the Contracting Officer and got a copy of the
lest and Final for the current contract to get an idea of what the rates by category should be
•nd added 5% escalation to the current rates. For computer programmers and the system analysts.
/e asked our C. O. to find out what EPA is paying for these labor categories on the agency's ADP contracts.
Ve got input from the Corps of Engineers on what they are currently being charged for a highly experienced
ydrologists. We then called the Cost Advisory Branch at headquarters and compared our projected rates
'ith rates currently being sumitted for review. We also received their input on the escalation for years two
nd three. They advised, based on current economic conditions, an escalation factor of between 3%
nd 5% be used for pricing the outyears. We used an average of 4% for years two and three. We included
irect clerical hours in our cost estimate. Clerical hours are generally not part of the LOE hours in EPA
ontracts. Contractors are told in the RFP to add their best estimate for clerical hours if it is their accounting
olicy to direct charge clerical hours which can be specifically identified to a contract It is our experience that
iost contractors direct charge clerical hours if they can specifically identity them to a contract. Based on
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION _ RFP # 009876 - A1 _ NEW CONTRACT X
PREPARER _J. DOE _ WORK ASSIGNMENT _
DATE _XX/XX/9X _ DELIVERY ORDER _
OTHER _
INDIRECT COST RATES WORKSHEET
Estimating rates tor computing indirect costs is different because the rates depend on how a contractor
accounts tor his costs and on what basis the indirect costs are allocated. For estimating purposes,
we assumed the following:
_ 1. A Fringe benefit rate of 3596 with total labor as the base. The current contract has a fringe
benefit rate of 29%. However several other in-house contracts have fringe benefit rates ranging
ngi
Bra
_ from 31% to 3896. We spoke with a representative of the Cost Policy and Rate Negotiation Branch
_ and found social security expenses are increasing beginning January of next year. We made
_ a roundtable judgement decision to use 35% for an estimated fringe benefit rate. _
2. The Overhead rate for the current contract has fluctuated over the throe year period
_ of performance from 60% to 8O%. Other contracts within our program office have overhead rates
_ ranging from 50% to 120%. We made a roundtable judgemental decision to use the average rate
_ from the current contract. The basis of allocation is total direct labor and fringe benefits. _
3. G&A on the current contract has been in the 13% to 15% range for 3 years. Other
_ contracts in our program office have G&A rates ranging from 5% to 45%. We made a _
judgemental decision to use for estimating purposes the 15% from the current contract for the
_ current year with an allocation base of total cost exclusive of G&A expenses. _
'hese are our best estimates and material differences in rates could be proposed by contractors based on their
Accounting systems. _
'»••/• Estimating purposes, use the following: Application Base for this contract
~ _ Fringe Benefits _ 35% Direct Labor _
__ Overhead _ 70% Direct labor and fringe _
| _ G&A _ 75% Total estimated costs exclusive of G&A expenses _
_ (General and Administrative) _
SAMPLE WORKSHEET cm-.
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE
TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION
PREPARER _J. DOE
DATF XX/XX/9X
RFP # 009876 - A1
NEW CONTRACT _X
WORK ASSIGNMENT"
DELIVERY ORDERS J
OTHER
WORKSHEET FOR TRAVEL COSTS
TRAVEL
Airfare
Per Diem
Car Rental
Mileage
Ground Transportation
Other (explain)
TOTAL TRAVEL
YEAR1
$13,050
$16,080
$4,500
$33,630
YEAR 2
$13,572
$16,723
$4,680
$34,975
YEARS
$14, 1 15
$17,392
$4.867
$36,374
TOTAL
$40,737
$50, 195
$14.047
$104.979
NOTES, ASSUMPTIONSAND COMPUTATIONS
Base*
witt
Sta,
prior experience on similar requirements, the roundtable discussions of Dec. 2.1992,
anch chiefs and on the specific travel requirements for travel on page 5 of the
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION RFP #009876-A1 NEW CONTRACT _X__
PREPARER __J. DOE WORK ASSIGNMENT _
DATE XX/XX/9X DELIVERY ORDERS
OTHER
IGCE CONTINUATION WORKSHEET-TRAVEL
5. For estimating purposes we are including $150 per traveler per trip for ground
transportation, mileage of personal vehicle to airport and parking at airport.
Hotels are available close to EPA Headquarters so that taxi fares, if used, will
minimal and Metro can be used.
-15 trips x 2 persons/trip x $150 = $4.500
6. For estimating purposes, we have added escalation of 4% per year for years 2 and 3 based on discussions
with the Washington Cost Advisory Branch.
Contiunation page (WS - 3)
SAMPLE WORKSHEET
-------
NDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE
TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION RFP # 009876 - A1
'REPARER J. DOE
)ATE XX/XX/9X
NEW CONTRACT _X
WORK ASSIGNMENT"
DELIVERY ORDER \
OTHER
OTHER DIRECT COST ESTIMATE
DTHER DIRECT COSTS
COURIER/MESSENGER
COMPUTER RELATED COSTS
MATERIAL/SUPPLIES
JOSTAGE/FEDERAL EXPRESS
REPORTS
REPRODUCTION
'ELEPHONE
OTAL ODCs
YEAR1
$936
$174,600
$41,000
$5,460
$18,360
$1,200
$11,700
$253,256
YEAR 2
$973
$124,459
$42,640
$5,678
$19,094
$1,248
$12, 168
$206,261
YEARS
$1,012
$108,484
$44,346
$5.906
$19,858
$1,298
$12,655
$193.558
TOTAL
$2,922
$407,543
$127,986
$17,044
$57,313
$3,746
$36,523
$653,076
NOTES, ASSUMPTIONS AND COMPUTATIONS
OURIER/MESSENGER
ill to three local couriers disclosed the following:
Quoted prices for courier service between EPA office and contractor's local office;
Courier Co. A - $15
Courier Co. B - $18
Courier Co. C - $20
Average
-$17.67 (rounded to $18)
i prior contracts the contractor has used courier service for almost every item whether it
'S a priority or not Most of the time the items could be sent by regular mail or carried by
rsonnd from the contractor coming in for meetings with the project officer or the
'ntracting Officer. Our data base shows on prior contracts courier deliveries averaging
ee times a week. We encourage the contractor to use the regular mail to the extent
ssible. There should be no need for courier service more than once a week.
herefore, for each year of the contract, our estimate for courier service is computed
follows:
52 weeks x 1 delivery/week x $18/delivery
$936
Year two with escalation of 496
Year three with escalation of 4%
$973
e ?
'nal pages if necessary)
CAMPLE WORKSHEET
WS-4
10
-------
NDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE
TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION RFP # 009876 - A1
=REPARER __J. DOE
3ATE XX/XX/9X
NEW CONTRACT _X
WORK ASSIGNMENT"
DELIVERY ORDERS J
OTHER
IGCE CONTINUATION WORKSHEET- OTHER Dt RE CT COSTS
COMPUTER RELATED COSTS
The estimated computer related cost is based on historical usage and on current projected
icreasos for programming and systems analysis tor year one plus adjustments for escalation
djus
the
•/ 4% per year. An analysis of historical data (three years of data on the current contract)
-closed an average usage of one hour of computer time tor every five hours of direct
or incurred. This does not mean there is a direct relationship between direct labor
umd and computer usage. However, for estimating purposes, it provides a standard
asurement for projecting hours of usage. Most of the computer related costs have been
-i are expected to continue to be lor personal computer (PC) and mainframe usage, usually
irged at an hourly rate. On the current contract, the usage has been evenly & equitably distributed
.ween personal computer (PCs) and mainframe usage. There will also be specific software
|g§
EP
pgrams required in order to be compatible with the EPA program software. For estimating
-poses, we are dividing the hours equally between personal computer (PC) and mainframe
ige. For estimating purposes we are using one hour of computer usage for every
• hours ofLOEplus an additional 1,000 hours for year one for the increased programming
d systems analysis projected tor year one. We have estimated the purchase of ten
ftware programs for year one and included $500 each year for years two and three
software updates.
hourly rates are based on the current contract with a 4%
-elation factor each year including year one because by the time this contract is awarded,
•- current rates will be over a year old. We estimated an average of $300/software
igram based on current market rates for year one. Our computations are as follows;
mputer Hates
id escalation of 4%
Year One Rates
1d escalation of 4%
Year Two Rates
id escalation of 4%
Year Two Rates
PC
$10.00/hr.
xl.04
SI 0.40
X1.04
310.82
Xl.04 a
$11.25
MAINFRAME
$50.00/hr.
xl.04
$52.00
x 1.04
$54.08
xl.04
$56.24
•
SAMPLE WORKSHEET
Continuation page
(WS-4)
11
-------
NDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION RFP # 009876 - A1 NEW CONTRACT _X_
'REPARER __J. DOE WORK ASSIGNMENT
)ATE XX/XX/9X DELIVERY ORDERS _
OTHER
IGCE CONTINUATION WORKSHEET- OTHER DIRECT COSTS
COMPUTER RELATED COSTS - continued
'ear One
22,SOO/LOE/5= 4.500 Based on historical data
7.000 Hours based on additional needs
5.500 Total hours
2,750personal computer (PC) hours
2,750 mainframe hours
2,750 hrs. x$10.4O/hr. for PC usage = $28,600
2.790 hrs. x$S2.(Xyhr. for mainframe usage = $143,000
oftware purchases
10 programs @$300/program = $3,000
Total Year One Estimate $174.600
3ar Two
19,100/LOE/5= 3,820 Based on historical data
1.910 personal computer (PC) hours
1,910 mainframe hours
',9: x$10.82/hr. lor PC usage = $20,666
. x$54.08/hr. for mainframe usage = $103,293
jftware updates $500
Total Year Two Estimate $124.459
?ar Three
16,000/LOE/5= 3,200 Based on historical data
1.600 personal computer (PC) hours
1,600 mainframe hours
,970 hrs. x$10.82/hr. for PC usage = $18,000
.910hrs. x $54.08/hr. for mainframe usage = $89,984
ftware updates 5500
Total Year Three Estimates $1081484
>TAL COMPUTER RELATED COSTS
Year One $174.600
Year Two $124.459
Year Three $108.484
TOTAL $407.543
Continuation page (WS-4)
SAMPLE WORKSHEET
12
-------
NDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION RFP * 009876 - A1 NEW CONTRACT _X
'REPARER _J. DOE WORK ASSIGNMENT "
)ATE _XX/XX/9\' DELIVERY ORDERS "
OTHER ~
IGGE CONTINUATION WORKSHEET- OTHER DIRECT COSTS
-------
NDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
JOLICITATION RFP # 009876 - A1 NEW CONTRACT _X
'REPARER _J. DOE WORK ASSIGNMENT
•ATE XX/XX/9X DELIVERY ORDERS J
OTHER
IGCE CONTINUATION WORKSHEET- OTHER DIRECT COSTS
DEPORTS
Monthly reports and annual reports are requirements on this contract. Our past experiences has
idicated an estimate of so much per page provides the best indication of cost. This per page unit
ost includes spdal binding and covers, work processing cost and copying the reports.
'he total number of reports requred by the Statement of Work per month is eight including all copies.
t the end of each year an additional six reports, including copies are required. Reports on similar
ontracts averaged 40 pages per report at $3.50 per page. These reports have been sufficient to meet
ur needs. On this contract we anticipate an increase in the number of pages due to additional areas
•hich have to be addressed as required by the SOW. We estimate an increase of five pages per report
'lese reports are extremely important and we want to be sure there are sufficient dollars in the contact
' cover the cost. Therefore, we have increased our estimated cost per page to $4 to account for
creases due to inflation and for any unexpected reports we may require.
Year One Estimated Costs:
8 reports/month x 45 pages x 12 = 4,320 pages
g additional reports x 45 pages = 270 pages
Total pages 4.590 xS4.00 = $18.360
Year Two estimated costs: escalation @4% $19.094
Year Three estimated costs: escalation @4% $19.858
^PRODUCTION
v IGCE estimating purposes we have used $. 10 per page and have estimated 1,000 pages
•r month. This is based on the current prices we are paying and prices on the open market.
v computed amount is as follows: 1,000 pages x$.1Q = $100/month
>ar 1: 12 months x $100 = S1.20O
•ar 2: escalation @ 4% $1.248
•ar 3: escalation @ 4% $1.298
TOTAL $3.746
Continuation page (WS-4)
SAMPLE WORKSHEET
14
-------
NDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
:OUCITATION RFP # 009876 - A1 NEW CONTRACT _X
REPARER _J. DOE WORK ASSIGNMENT*
ATE _XX7XX/9X DELIVERY ORDERS J
OTHER
IGCE CONTINUATION WORKSHEET- OTHER DIRECT COSTS
•or IGCE estimating purposes we are basing our estimate on the number of long distance phone calls
squired to perform the contract at an acceptable level. Based on experience we have found
->•-> more verbal communications there are between the program and the contractor, the less mistakes
. have. On the current contract we are averaging two long distance call a day with an average duration
20 minutes each. With the increased requirements on this procurement we expect phone calls to
Crease to three calls a day of 30 minutes duration. We have experienced an average of $.50
amount for this element of cost, we will review it and make a determination of its necessity to
s contract.
Continuation page (WS-4)
SAMPLE WORKSHEET
15
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOUCfTATION RFP #009876 - A1 NEW CONTRACT _X_
PREPARER J. DOE WORK ASSIGNMENT*
DATE XX/XX/9X DELIVERY ORDER \
OTHER
PROFIT/FEE WORKSHEET
We requested assistance from the Contracting Officer for estimating profit/fee. She recommended using
the EPA weighted guidelines method tor determining our estimated fee. We met with the Contracting Officer
and provided input on the importance and necessity of each element of cost and she prepared a weighted
guideline analysis for the fee. The weighted guidelines method disclosed a tee of 8.8%. We think
that is a fair and acceptable fee percentage. We have included the computations and assumptions
with the Independent Government Cost Estimate.
Since this is a LOE contract, direct labor is the most important factor for desired performance.
The weighted guidelines allows from 8% to 15% to be applied to direct labor. We assigned 15% to
°4 labor because the expertise and level of competence required at this level is the highest for all the
'abor. 14% was assigned to the P3 labor. The required expertise is not as high as PA but the effort to be
expended by the P3 labor represents 43% of the total effort. The effort for P2, PI, technical and clerical
effort is of lesser importance and the expertise required is at a lower level than the P4 and P3.
We assigned a 10% factor to P2 and P1 labor and an 8% factor to the technical and clerical labor.
After applying the percentages to the appropriate labor dollars, we computed the weighted percentages
if 12.96% for direct labor. For fee estimating purposes, we included the fringe benefit dollars with direct
abor dollars.
'RAVEL AND ODC: We combined travel and other direct costs (ODCs) for fee computation purposes.
'he' "Qd guidelines allows a fee range for travel and ODCs of 196 to 396. Since G&A is also
pph ravel and ODCs. we felt 1 % was a reasonable fee factor.
^DIRECT COST RATES -OVERHEAD AND G&A: The weighted guidelines allow a range of 6% to 8%
ir overhead and 5% to 8% for G&A. There is nothing out of the ordinary for indirects on this
rocurement. We used the average percentage of 7.5% for overhead and 6.5% for G&A.
(WS-5)
SAMPLE WORKSHEET
16
-------
PROFIT/FEE OBJECTIVES
'•CONTRACTOR 2. RF* QR CON* I1ACT NO.
IGCE 009876-A1
CONTRACTOR INPUT TO TOTAL PERFORMANCE
COST CATEGORY
RIALS
•MENT
PEERING
*CTURING
wTANTS
1 DIRECT COSTS &
PURCHASES
SUBCONTRACTS
•
DIRECT LABOR
OVERHEAD
DIRECT LABOR
OVERHEAD
Travel
IAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE
TOTAL
GOVERNMENT'S COST
OBJECTIVE
«
$2,295,861
$1,607,103
$758,055
$699,153
• 5,360,172
WEIGHT RANGE
fb>
'% to 4%
1%to5%
t%to2%
8% to 18%
6% to 9%
S%to9%
4% to 7%
2«teS«
1«.W
S«teB»
ASSIGNED ! :clGH TED PRO FIT/FEE
WEIGHT Hmt M fell
id : (dt
i
* s
%
«
12,96 *
7,5 »
«
i
«
1 «
11
11
«
6,5 «
^':&'£38R^[
$297,543
$120,533
$7,580
$45,445
• 471,101
OTHER FACTORS
FACTOR
IISK
RMANCE
TED FACTORS
TAL
•OTAL PROFIT/FEE
MEASUREMENT BASE
TOTAL COST
OBJECTIVE
3.A.U)
WEIGHT RANGE
nt
WEIGHTED PROFIT/' ••
S
S
• 471.101
S
' 471,101
IKS
No cost risk for contractors-cost reimbursable contract
No information on prior performance
$ 471,101 = 8.75% rounded to 8.8%
$ 5,360,172
-------
SAMPLE IGCE
FIXED RATE INDEFINIT
QUANTITY CONTRACT
18
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE
SOLICITATION RFJP. # WO01234-D1
PREPARER __J. SMITH
OATE XX/XX/9X
TYPE OF ACTIONN
NEW CONTRACT __X_
WORK ASSIGNMENT'
DEUVERY ORDER
OTHER
SUMMARY COST ESTIMATE
FIXED RATE/INDEFINITE QUANTITY CONTRACTS
CATEGORY
1. Direct labor (WS - 1,2 & 5
MWJW^*
fwSWvv'
tt» x j
?. Total Travel (WS-3
°; Total Other Direct Costs (WS-4)
4. G&A on travel and ODCs (if applicable) (WS - 2)
5. Total Costs (lines 1.2.3& 4)
SAMPLE WORKSHEET
19
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE
TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION
PREPARER
DATE XX/XX/9X
_RFP * W001234- D1
J. SMITH
NEW CONTRACT _X
WORK ASSIGNMENT'
DELIVERY ORDER _
OTHER
DIRECT LABOR ESTIMATE WORKSHEET
SCHEDULE OF LOADED RXED RATES
Labor Category
P-4
Program Manager
Site Manager/Leva III
Sr. Computer Socialist
Sr. LANS Specialist
Sr. Systems Analyst
TOTAL
P-3
Asst. Program Manager
Site Manager/Level II
Minicomputer specialist
Microcomputer specialist
Programmer/Analyst
TOTAL
P-2
Site Manager/Level 1
Technical Writer
Sr. Data Control Clerk
TOTAL
T-1
Data Input Technician •
Jr. Equipment Technlclat
Jr. Computer Operator
TOTAL
TOTAL LOE
•
Clerical
TOTAL DIRECT LABOR
Unloaded
Hourly Rate
955.00
$45.00
$31.00
$33.00
$37.00
$35.00
$29.00
$28.00
$28.00
$25.00
$25.00
$23.00
$18.00
$8.00
$9.50
$730
$11.00
Fringe @
30.00%
5/6.50
$13.50
$930
$930
$11.10
$10.50
$8.70
$8.40
$8.40
$7.50
$7J50
$630
$5.40
$2.40
$2.85
$225
$330
Overhead @
100.00%
$71.50
$5850
$4030
$42.90
$48.10
$45.50
$37.70
$36.40
$36.40
$32.50
$32.50
$29.90
$23.40
$10.40
$12.35
$9.75
$1430
Subtotal
$143.00
$117.00
$80.60
$85.80
$96.20
$91.00
$75.40
$72.80
$72.80
$65.00
$65.00
$59.80
$46.80
$20.80
$24.70
$19.50
$28.60
G&A @
10.00%
$14.30
$11.70
$806
$8.58
$962
$9.10
$7.54
$728
$728
$6J50
$6.50
$598
$4.68
$208
$247
$135
$286
Total
Coats
$157.30
$128.70
$88.66
$94.38
$105.82
$100.10
$82.94
$80.08
$80.08
$71.50
$71.50
$65.78
$51.48
$22.88
$27.17
$21.45
$31.46
Profit @
10.00%
$15.73
$12.87
$8j87
$9.44
$10.58
$10.01
$829
$8.01
$8.01
$7.15
$7.15
16.58
$5.15
$229
$2.72
$2.15
$3.15
Loaded
Hourly Rate
$173.03
$141.57
$97.53
$103.82
$1 16.40
$110,11
$91.23
$88.09
$88.09
$78.65
$78.65
$72.36
$56.63
$25.17
$29.89
$23.60
$34.61
Estimated
Hours/year
1,200
1.000
90C
90C
80C
4,800
1.000
1,000
2.500
1.000
1.700
7.200
800
2,500
1,200
4,500
2,200
1,500
1,000
4.700
21200
2.000
23200
CONTI
Yearl
$207,636
$141,570
$87.773
$93.436
$93.122
$623.537
$110.110
$91.234
$220,220
$88.088
$133,705
$643.357
$62,920
$180.895
$67.954
$311.769
$55,370
$44,831
$23.595
$123.795
$1.702.458
$69.212
$1.771.670
ACT COS
Year 2
$215,941
$147,233
$91.284
$97.174
$96.846
$648,479
$114.514
$94.883
$229.029
$91.612
$139,053
$669.091
$65.437
$188,131
$70.672
$324.239
$57.584
$46.624
$24,539
$128,747
$1.770.556
$71,980
$1,842,537
S
YearS
$224.579
$153.122
$94,936
$101.061
$100,720
$674.418
$119,095
$98.679
$238.190
$95.276
$144.615
$695,855
$68.054
$195,656
$73,499
$337.209
$59,888
$48.489
$25.520
$133,897
$1041.378
$74,860
$1,916.238
TOTAL
$648,157
$441,925
$273,993
$291,670
$290.688
$1346.434
$343.719
$284.796
$687,439
$274,976
$417,374
$2.008,303
$196,411
$564,682
$212,124
$973*17
$172,842
$139,943
$73.654
$386,439
$5314,393
$216,052
$5,530,445
NOTES, ASSUMPTIONS AND COMPUTATIONS
LABOR CATEGORIES:
The work to be performed under this contract is almost Identical to the work performed under contract 68-01 -2222. We have added the categories and noun tor a Pa Sr. LANS
Specialist and a P2 Technical Writer. All other categories are the same as the categories under contract 68-01 -2222. The Sr. LANS Specialist was added to provide support for the
various LANS systems used and needed by the program. The P2 Technical Writer was added to assist the program in writing clearer specif cations on specilc delivery orders.
CM
(Use additional pages if necessary)
VS-1
SAMPLE WORKSHEET
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION RFP * WO01234-D1 NEW CONTRACT _X_
REPARER J. SMITH " WORK ASSIGNMENT"
•OATE XX/XX/9X ~- DEUVERY ORDER
CATEGORY_FIXED LOADED HOURLY RATES OTHER
DIRECT LABOR ESTIMATE WORKSHEET
\ LABOR HOURS:
\ For the labor hours, we reviewed the current usage on contract 68-01-2222 and determined the current hours
! #ere sufficient for the program needs. At this point In time, there is no projected increase in our workload except
f'jr the work to be performed by the Sr. LANS Specialist and the Technical Writer. We provided a questionnaire
the Branch Chief and project officers which utilize this contract and received their input on the number
lours needed for the Sr. LANS Specilaist and the Technical Writer and their Input on current usage on the
ler labor categories. They identified the work these categories will perform into specific subtasks
-eded for the next three years under this contract. We reviewed their estimates, including their assumptions
•id used their recommended hours for each category.
e added clerical labor to our estimate. The RFP did not include a specific cartegory of hours for clerical.
• tie contractor's were instructed to add loaded clerical hours to the RFP hours if it is their accounting
•jlicy to direct charge clerical labor when it can be specifically identified to a contract. Based on prior
oerience on contract 68—01—2222, we included 2000 hours for direct clerical labor in our estimate.
' II correspondence from the Branch Chief and project officers and notes pertaining to any telephone
The current contract is a fixed rate/indefinite quantity contract and the labor is shown as a fixed rate for
labor category for each year. This fixed rate includes labor, indirects and profit and is called a loaded rate.
~»order to compute our estimate for loaded rates, we utilized published average survey rates for the computer
•idustry for the Washington area (most work will be performed there) for the labor categories in this
procurement. We added percentages for fringe benefits, overhead, G&A and fee.
-•Je worked with the Contracting Officer and the Cost Policy and Rate Negotiation Branch to get
'me ranges for the indirect rates. We realize each comapny is different and their rates depend on their
:ecific accounting system. The indirect rates used for estimating purposes are average rates from the
-.nges provided. We included a 10% fee factor for each category for estimating purposes. We used this
r-rcentage to ensure we did not under estimate costs. After we completed our computations, we compared our
to the rates in the current contract. We found some rates were higher and some lower,
ut overall were reasonable. We then added escalation of 3% tor year one, 4 % for years two and three. Our
stimated escalation factors were included after discussions with the Washington Cost Advisory Branch.
All workoaoers showing the various computations and comparisons we performed and all notes pertaining
all telephone conversations with the Contracting Officer. Cost Policy and Rate Negotiation and
Vashinaton Cost Advisory Branches are contained in the program's back—uo file for this IGCE.
(WS - 1) Continuation Page
SAMPLE WORKSHEET
21
-------
INDEPENDENT'GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICFTATION RFP #W001234-D1 NEW CONTRACT _X
PREPARER J. SMITH WORK ASSIGNMENT"
DATE _XX/XX/9X DELIVERY ORDER _
CAT M*Y FIXED LOADED HOURLY RATES OTHER
INDIRECT COST RATES WORKSHEET
' We talked with the Contracting Officer and the Rate Negotiation Branch at headquarters and got some current
rates for companies likely to bid on this contract (i.e. capable of performing the work). We performed a
straight average of the rates provided. Once we have computed loaded rates tor each labor category, we will
compare them to the current contract rates and make any adjustments we feel are necessary.
Fringe Overhead G&A
Company A 28% 770% 9%
CompanyB 35% 93% 14%
Company C 29% 707% 8%
Company D 25% 703% 8%
Company E 33% 91% 77%
AVERAGE 3O% 1OO% 1O%
SAMPLE WORKSHEET .
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE
TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION_RFP* W001234-D1
PREPARER J. SMITH
DATE XX/XX/9X
NEW CONTRACT __X
WORK ASSIGNMENT'
DEUVERY ORDERS J
OTHER
WORKSHEET FOR TRAVEL COSTS
TRAVEL
YEAR1
YEAR 2
YEAR 3
TOTAL
Airfare
$3,870
94.025
94,186
912,081
Per Diem
$3,312
$3,444
$3,582
$10.339
Car Rental
$1.800
$1,872
$1,947
$5,619
Mileage
$1.820
$1,893
$1,969
$5.681
Ground Transportation
$540
$562
$584
$1.686
Other (explain)
TOTAL TRAVEL
$11.342
$11,796
$12,268
$35,405
NOTES. ASSUMPTIONS AND COMPUTATIONS
Most of the work on this contra.-;? will be performed in the Washington area. Therefore, most of the
ravel costs will be for local travai. On the current contract, there has been the need to travel
'o the Program office in RTF approximately once a month fora two day visit. On this contract
vith the addition of the technical writer to assist the program with some of the written technical
descriptions, there will be a need tor the technical writer to meet with program officials. Based on
discussions with the Branch and Section Chiefs who will use this contract, we are projecting six,
•wo day trips per year for the technical writer. For local travel, we assumed a maximum of
25 miles one way distance from the EPA Headquarters offices, two trips per week tor meetings, or to
deliver emergency reports and used the current mileage rate Government workers are reimbursed
vhen using privately owned cars. For years two and three, we have escalated year one total travel
jy4% for each year. The escalation factor is based on discussions with Washington
lost Advisory Branch.
Computations are as follows;
oca/ travel
'wo trips per week — .50 miles maximum roundtrip
'arking @$S.OO/trip
'wo trips/week x 52 weeks = 104 trips x $5/trip parking = $520 for parking
lileage ©$.25/mile
wo trips/week x 52 weeks x 50 miles/trip = 5,200 miles/year = $1,300/yearfor mileage
Mileage =
$1,300
Parking •
5520
Total Local travel $1.820
Jse additional pages if necessary)
SAMPLE WORKSHEET
WS-3
23
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE
TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION RFP #W001234-D1
PRFPARER __J. SMITH
DAT- XX/XX/9X
NEW CONTRACT _X
WORK ASSIGNMENT
DELIVERY ORDERS J
OTHER
IGCE CONTINUATION WORKSHEET-TRAVEL
RTP Trips
18 trips total - two days each trip
Airfair $215 - 18 trips x $215 =
$3.870
Perdiem $92/day - 18 trips x two days x $92/day =
$3,312
3ar Rental $50/day - 18 trips x two days x $50/day =
$1,800
3arking & mileage $15/day - 18 trips x two days x $15/day =
$540
Total RTP Travel
$9.522
rotal Year One Travel - Local
$1,820
"otal Year One Travel - RTP
$9. 522
Total Year 1
$11.342
idd escalation of 4% for Year 2
$11.796
idd escalation of 4% for Year 3
$12.268
SAMPLE WORKSHEET
Contiunation page (WS-3
24
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE
TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION RFP *W001234-D1
3REPARER J. SMITH
DATE _XX/XX/9X
NEW CONTRACT _X
WORK ASSIGNMENT"
DELIVERY ORDER \
OTHER
OTHER DIRECT COST ESTIMATE
OTHER DIRECT COSTS
YEAR1
YEAR 2
YEAR 3
TOTAL
COURIER/MESSENGER
$2,080
$2,163
$2,250
$6,493
COMPUTER RELATED COSTS
$41.650
$38,036
$39,479
$119,165
MATERIAL/SUPPLIES
$600
$624
$649
$1.873
^OSTAGE/FEDERAL EXPRESS
$900
$936
$973
$2,809
REPORTS
$32.500
$33,800
$35,152
$101.452
REPRODUCTION
$1.200
$1,248
$1,298
$3,746
-ELEPHONE
$13,000
$13,520]
$14,061
$40,581
-QTAL ODCs
$91.930
$90.327
$93.862
$276.119
NOTES. ASSUMPTIONS AND COMPUTATIONS
OURIER/MESSENGER
•om our historical data, we determined we were paying an average of $18 per trip for courier
irvice and there was an average of three trips per weak. We reviewed what was being delivered by
tuner and determined some items being delivered were routine reports or follow-ups of meetings
at could be delivered by regular mail or delivered by people coming tor regularly scheduled
eatings. Two trips per week are more than sufficient to serve the needs of the program.
'e checked the Washington Post tor courier advertising and found rates of$15/trip to $30/trip.
'e called three courier services and got the following quotes: *
Company A: $15/trip - 5 mile radus; $30/trip - 5 miles and beyond
Company B: $20/tnp in metro area
Company C: $21/trip in metro area
ised on the above information, we are using $20/trip for estimating purposes and
% escalation for years two and three.
imputations
2 trips/week x 52 weeks x $20/tnp
$2.080 Year One
4% escalation
S2.163 Year Two
4% escalation
$2.250 Year Three
Total for 3 years
$6.493
* additional pages if necessary)
WS-4
SAMPLE WORKSHEET
25
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION _ RFP # W001234-D1 _ NEW CONTRACT X
PREPARER __J. SMITH _ WORK ASSIGNMENT
DATF _XX/XX/9X _ DELIVERY ORDERS
OTHER _
IGCE CONTINUATION WORKSHEET- OTHER DIRECT COSTS
COMPUTER RELATED COSTS
This contract requires extensive use of computers. EPA provides some PCs as government
furnished property and some of the work is performed using various LANS and the mainframe.
Our projected cost for computer related costs are for costs the contractor will incur for
contractor owned equipment. Our review of the workload on the current contract disclosed
80% of the computer related hours were for personal computer (PC) usage and the remainder for
mainframe usage and additional software to provide compatibility with EPA programs. The
program office branch chief projected a 10% increase in computer usage time on this contract due to the
addition of more LANS at EPA and usage by the technical writer. The program is currently reviewing
the need to provide more government PCs to this contract. However, a decision on this
will not be made for at least a year. For estimating purposes we have utilized the current
usage hours plus 10% for PCs and mainframe.
PCs
urrent average usage hours = 1 ,200 per month
°rojected in -house increase of 10% 120
rotal projected PC usage _ 1,320 hours
Ma' TIB
~>ui verage usage hours =
7rojtf*.*d in -house increase of 10%
"otal current mainframe usage
300 per month
30
330 hours
'he PC usage rate under the current contract is$1 1/hr. and the mainframe rate is $55/hr.
Ve looked at two other contracts in our program that have PC and Mainframe usage and did a straight
verage of the rates for each.
PC Mainframe
urrent contract $11 /hour $55/hour
ontract B _ $15/hour _ $60/hour
ontract C _ $10/hour _ $55/hour
verage _ 36/3 = $12/hr. _ 17O/3 = $57/hr.
ecause the average rates are higher than the current contract rates, we decided to use
•em for estimating purposes and to add escalation of 4% for years two and three.
Continuation page (WS-4)
SAMPLE WORKSHEET
26
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION RFP # W001234-D1 NEW CONTRACT _X__
PREPARER _J. SMITH WORK ASSIGNMENT __
DATE _XX/XX/9X . DELIVERY ORDERS
OTHER
IGCE CONTINUATION WORKSHEET- OTHER DIRECT COSTS
COMPUTER RELATED COSTS - continued
For software, the program needs the flexibility to work with new software programs that come
on the market They are aware of some new programming in process that could enhance their work.
cover current needs and possible new software needs we are estimating 20 software programs at an
cost of $350 for year one. For years two and three, we are estimating $2,000 peryearfor
.'^dating software.
•"ear One Estimate
PCs: $12/hourx 1,320 hours = $15,840
Mainframe: $S7/hourx 330 hours = $18,810
subtotal $34,650
Software: 20 programs x $350 each = $7.000
Total Year One $41.650
Two and Three Estimate
PC year one rate x 1.04 = year two rate x 1.04 = year three rate
$12 X 1.04 = $12.48 x 1.04 = $12.98
Mainframe year one rate x 1.04 = year two rate x 1.04 = year three rate
$57 X 1.04 = $59.28x1.04 = $61.65
'ear Two Estimate
PCs; $12.48/hourx 1,320 hours = $16,474
Mainframe: $59.28/hourx 330 hours = $19.562
subtotal $36,036
Software updates $2.000
Total Year Two $38.036
'ear Three Estimate
PCs: $12.98/hourx 1,320 hours = $17,134
Mainframe: $61.65/hourx 330 hours =
subtotal
Software updates
Total Year Three
GRAND TOTAL
$20.345
$37,478
$2.000
$39.478
$119.164
Continuation page (WS-4)
SAMPLE WORKSHEET
27
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION RFP # W001234-D1 NEW CONTRACT _X_
PREPARER _J. SMITH WORK ASSIGNMENT _
^ XX/XX/9X DELIVERY ORDERS
OTHER
IGCE CONTINUATION WORKSHEET - OTHER DIRECT COSTS
MA TERIAL/SUPPLIES
This category of cost is for graphic supplies, some office supplies and specific publications
required for this contract. This has been a minimal cost in the past and there is no forseeable reason
for it to increase a great deal in the future. For the past 3 years on the current contract it has averaged
approximately $50/month. We are using this average for year one with escalation of 4% for years 2 and 3.
Year One: $600 ($50x12)
escalation 1.04
Year Two $624
escalation 1.04
Year Three $649
TOTAL $1.873
°OSTAGE/OVERNIGHT DELIVERY
°ostage on the current contract is currently running approximately $20/month and overnight delivery
$50/month. With the decrease in courier service recommended, the mailing cost should increase
iye' ~t $5/month. Overnight delivery is expected to remain at the same level. We have included
?sc iof4% for years two and three.
'ear One:
*ostage: $25/monthx 12 = $300
Overnight delivery: $50/month x 12 = $600
Total $900
'ear Two: with 4% escalation $936 '
'ear Three: with 4% escalation $973
TOTAL $2.809 '
Continuation page (WS-4)
SAMPLE WORKSHEET
28
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION RFP # W001234-D1 NEW CONTRACT _X_
°REPARER _J. SMITH WORK ASSIGNMENT _
DATE _XX/XX/9X DELIVERY ORDERS
OTHER
IGCE CONTINUATION WORKSHEET-OTHER DIRECT COSTS
REPORTS
Monthly reports and annual reports are requirements for this contract. Our past experience has
indicated an estimate of so much per page provides the best indication of cost This per page
unit cost includes special bindings and covers, word processing costs and copying the reports.
The total number of reports required by the Statement of Work per month Is ten including all copies
At the end of each year an additional ten reports, including copies are required. Reports on similar
contracts averaged 50 pages per report at $4.50 per page. These reports have been sufficient
to meet our needs. On this contract we anticipate an increase in the number of pages due to
additional areas which have to be addressed as required by the SOW. These reports are extremely
important and we want to be sure there are sufficient dollars in the contract to cover the cost.
Therefore, we have increased our estimated cost per page to $5 to account for increases due to
inflation and for any unexcpected reports we may require.
Year 1 Estimated Costs:
10 reports/month x 50 pages x 12= 6,000 pages
10 additional reports x SO pages = 500 pages
Total pages 6,500 pages x $5.00 $32,5°°
Year 2 Estimated Costs: with escalation @ 4% $33
Year 3 Estimated Costs: with escalation @4% $35..
REPRODUCTION
For IGCE estimating purposes we have used $.10 per page and have estimated 1,000 pages
per month. This is based ont he current prices we are paying and prices on the open market.
Our computed amount is as follows: 1.000 pages x $. 10 = $100 month
y'ear 1: 12 months x$100 $ 1,200
"ear 2: with escalation @ 4% $1,248
tear 3: with escalation @ 4% $1,298
TOTAL $3.746
Continuation page (WS-4)
SAMPLE WORKSHEET
29
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION RFP # W001234-D1 NEW CONTRACT__X__
PREPARER _J. SMITH WORK ASSIGNMENT _
DATF XX/XX/9X DELIVERY ORDERS
OTHER
IGCE CONTINUATION WORKSHEET- OTHER DIRECT COSTS
TELEPHONE
For IGCE estimating purposes we are basing our estimate on the number of long distance phone calls
required to perform the contract at an acceptable level. Based on experience we have found
the more verbal communications there are between the program and the contractor, the less mistakes
we have. On the current contract we are averaging ten long distance call a day with an average duration
of 10 minutes each. We have experienced an average of $.50 per minute on the current contract.
The phone company indicated they did not expect to increase the rate for at least a year.
Therefore, our computed amount for telephone are as follows:
(52x5 - 260) 260 days/yr. x 10 calls/day x 10 minutes/call = 26.000 minutes/year
Yean: 26,000 minutes x $.50 = $13.000
Year 2: with escalation @ 4% $13.520
Year 3: with escalation @ 4% $14,061
TOTAL $40.581
WSCg< LANEOUS
We lot included any amount for miscellaneous. We believe we have covered the necessary costs.
rhei. ; no specific items that we can think of that would be included here. If a contractor proposes
in amount for this element of cost, we will review it and make a determination of its necessity to
•7/5 contract
Continuation page (WS-4)
SAMPLE WORKSHEET
30
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION RFP #W001234-D1 NEW CONTRACT _X_
PREPARER J. SMITH WORK ASSIGNMENT*
DATE _XX/XX/9X DELIVERY ORDER _
OTHER
PROFIT WORKSHEET
We talked to the contracting officer regarding profit. She recommended we take the conservative approach and
use a 10% profit factor to provide better assurance that we dont under estimate our costs. We have taken the
contracting officer's recommedation and used a 10% profit factor for all categories.
The RFP is allowing for G&A on travel and other direct costs, but states there will be no profit paid on travel
and other direct costs tor this procurement. Therefore, we did not include any amounts for profit on the travel and
other direct costs.
SAMPLE WORKSHEET
31
-------
IGCE FORMS
COST REBMBURSABL
CONTRACT
32
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE
SOLICITATION/CONTRACT
PREPARER
DATE ~~
TYPE OF ACTION
NEW CONTRACT
WORK ASSIGNMENT
DELIVERY ORDER
OTHER ~~
SUMMARY COST ESTIMATE
COST REIMBURSABLE CONTRACTS
CATEGORY
YEAR 3 I TOTAL
1. Direct labor (WS-11
2. Fringe Benefits (WS-2]
3. Total Direct Labor & Fringe Benefits (lines 1 & 2
4. Overhead (WS-2
5. Total Travel (WS-3
3. Total Other Direct Costs (WS-4)
'. Sub-Total (lines 3,4,5 & 6)
*. G&A (WS-2)
. Total Costs (lines 7 & 8)
* * - s *v''VV4~
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE
TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION/CONTRACT
PHEPARER
DATE
NEW CONTRACT
WORK ASSIGNMENTS
DELIVERY ORDER
OTHER
DIRECT LABOR ESTIMATE WORKSHEET
COST REIMBURSABLE CONTRACTS
Labor Category
P/T Level
YEAR 1
Hours
Rate
YEARS
Hours
Rate
TOTAL
NOTES, ASSUMPTIONS AND COMPUTATIONS
(Use additio gas If necessary)
iVS-1
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
-'OLICITATION/CONTRACT NEW CONTRACT
' SPARER WORK ASSIGNMENT
~.'ATE DELIVERY ORDER _
OTHER
DIRECT LABOR ESTIMATE WORKSHEET
(WS — 1) Continuation Page
35
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION/CONTRACT NEW CONTRACT
PREPARER WORK ASSIGNMENT
DATE DEUVERY ORDER
OTHER
INDIRECT COST RATES WORKSHEET
(WS-2)
36
-------
^DEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE
TYPE OF ACTION
O'JCITATION/CONTRACT
SPARER
ATE
NEW CONTRACT
WORK ASSIGNMENT
DEUVERY ORDERS _
OTHER
WORKSHEET FOR TRAVEL COSTS
TRAVEL
Airfare
Per Diem
Car Rental
Mileage
Ground Transportation
Other (explain)
-
TOTAL TRAVEL
YEAR1
$
$
YEAR 2
$
$
YEAR 3
$
$
TOTAL
$
$
NOTES. ASSUMPTIONS AND COMPUTATIONS
additional pages if necessary)
WS-3
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION/CONTRACT NEW CONTRACT
PREPARER WORK ASSIGNMENT
DELIVERY ORDERS _
OTHER
IGCE CONTINUATION WORKSHEET
Contiunation page
38
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST. ESTIMATE
TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION/CONTRACT
^SPARER
jATE
NEW CONTRACT
WORK ASSIGNMENT
DELIVERY ORDER
OTHER
OTHER DIRECT COST ESTIMATE
OTHER DIRECT COSTS
COURIER/MESSENGER
COMPUTER
MATERIAL/SUPPLIES
POSTAGE/FEDERAL EXPRESS
REPORTS
REPRODUCTION
TELEPHONE
MISCELLANEOUS
TOTAL ODCs
YEAR1
$
$
YEAR2
$
$
YEARS
$
$
TOTAL
$
•
$
NOTES, ASSUMPTIONSAND COMPUTATIONS
WS-4
ise additional pages if necessary)
39
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION/CONTRACT NEW CONTRACT
PREPARER WORK ASSIGNMENT
DA' DELIVERY ORDERS J
OTHER
IGCE CONTINUATION WORKSHEET
Contiunation page
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION/CONTRACT NEW CONTRACT
PREPARER WORK ASSIGNMENT
DATE DELIVERY ORDER
OTHER
PROFIT/FEE WORKSHEET
(WS-5)
41
-------
IGCE FORMS
FIXED RATE INDEFINIT
QUANTITY CONTRACT
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE
TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION/CONTRACT
'REPARER
)ATE
NEW CONTRACT
WORK ASSIGNMENT
DEUVERY ORDER
OTHER
SUMMARY COST ESTIMATE
FIXED RATE/INDEFINITE QUANTITY CONTRACTS
CATEGORY
1 .Direct labor (WS - 1.2 & 5)
YEAR1
YEAR 2
YEAR 3
2. Total Travel (WS-3
3. Total Other Direct Costs (WS-4)
' Q&A on travel and ODCs (if applicable) (WS - 2)
43
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE
TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION
PREPARER
DATE
NEW CONTRACT
WORK ASSIGNMENT
DELIVERY ORDER _
OTHER
DIRECT LABOR ESTIMATE WORKSHEET
SCHEDULE OF LOADED FIXED RATES
Labor Category
P-4
TOTAL
P-3
TOTAL
P-2
TOTAL
P-1
TOTAL
T-4
TOTAL
T-3
TOTAL
T-2
TOTAL
TOTAL LOE
Clerical
TOTAL DIRECT LABOR
Unloaded
Hourly Rate
Fringe @
Overhead @
Subtotal
G&A@
Total
Costs
Profit @
Loaded
Houriy Rate
Estimated
[Hours/year
CO*
Yearl
TRACT COSTS
Year 2
Year3
TOTAL
NOTES, ASSUMPTIONS AND COMPUTATIONS
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION/CONTRACT NEW CONTRACT
PREPARER WORK ASSIGNMENT
DATE DELIVERY ORDER _
OTHER
DIRECT LABOR ESTIMATE WORKSHEET
(WS - 1) Continuation Page
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION/CONTRACT NEW CONTRACT
PREPARER WORK ASSIGNMENT
DATE DEUVERY ORDER
OTHER
INDIRECT COST RATES WORKSHEET
(WS-2)
46
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE
TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATIO N/CO NTRACT
PREPARER \
DATE
NEW CONTRACT
WORK ASSIGNMENT
DELIVERY ORDERS _
OTHER
WORKSHEET FOR TRAVEL COSTS
TRAVEL
Airfare
Per Diem
Car Rental
Mileage
Ground Transportation
Other (explain)
TOTAL TRAVEL
YEAR1
$
$
YEAR 2
$
$
YEAR 3
$
$
TOTAL
$
$
NOTES, ASSUMPTIONS AND COMPUTATIONS
se additional pages if necessary)
WS-3
47
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION/CONTRACT NEW CONTRACT
PREPARER WORK ASSIGNMENT
DELIVERY ORDERS
OTHER
1GCE CONTINUATION WORKSHEET
CojitiunstioiL pstg&
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE
TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION/CONTRACT
PREPARER
DATE - '
NEW CONTRACT
WORK ASSIGNMENT
DELIVERY ORDER
OTHER
OTHER DIRECT COST ESTIMATE
OTHER DIRECT COSTS
COURIER/MESSENGER
COMPUTER
MATERIAL/SUPPLIES
POSTAGE/FEDERAL EXPRESS
REPORTS
REPRODUCTION
TELEPHONE
MISCELLANEOUS
TOTAL ODCs
YEAR1
$
$
YEAR2
$
$
YEAR 3
$
$
TOTAL
$
$
NOTES, ASSUMPTIONSAND COMPUTATIONS
WS-4
Ise additional pages if necessary)
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION/CONTRACT NEW CONTRACT
PREPARER WORK ASSIGNMENT
- DELIVERY ORDERS _
OTHER
IGCE CONTINUATION WORKSHEET
n
50
-------
INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE TYPE OF ACTION
SOLICITATION/CONTRACT NEW CONTRACT
PREPARER M WORK ASSIGNMENT
DATE DELIVERY ORDER
OTHER
PROFIT WORKSHEET
(WS-5)
51
------- |