X hits on this document

PDF document

Report No. D-2009-091 - page 20 / 32

80 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

20 / 32

An MNF-I official stated that the SOW from a separate contract for strategic communications management services2 was provided to JCC-I/A as the seed project for evaluating contractor proposals for this PSYOP/IO procurement. An MNF-I official stated that the strategic communications management services contract was exclusively for PA. Examples of tasks in the seed project include media monitoring, assessment, and reporting; media training for spokespersons and subject matter experts; and Web site development and management.

On July 28, 2008, the contracting officer reissued the solicitation to incorporate changes in response to technical and performance questions posed by offerors. The second version of the seed project expanded the SOW to include four additional tasks; however, none of these tasks were related to PSYOP.

On August 21, 2008, the contracting officer issued the third and final version of the solicitation. This version incorporated additional changes in response to offerors’ questions and changed the name of the services from “Psychological/Information Operations” to “media services.” This version also changed the name of the seed project from “Strategic Communication Management Services,” to “Media and Advertizing Management Services.”

Source Selection

JCC-I/A properly executed the source selection for solicitation W91GDW-08-R-0006. A JCC-I/A official assisted in the establishment of the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB), which consisted of personnel from MNF-I, MNC-I, the PSYOP Task Force, and JCC-I/A. According to a former MNC-I official, the SSEB included individuals with backgrounds in IO, PSYOP, contracting, or PA. The SSEB began its evaluations at JCC-I/A offices on August 26, 2008.

In accordance with FAR Subparts 15.304, “Evaluation Factors and Significant Subfactors,” and 15.305, “Proposal Evaluation,” the SSEB evaluated the proposals and assessed each proposal solely on the five evaluation factors (Technical Capability, Past Performance, Specialized Past Experience, Iraqi Socio-Economic Program Support, and Price) identified in the solicitation. In accordance with FAR 15.304, the solicitation stated that the evaluation factors of Past Performance, Specialized Past Experience, and Iraqi Socio-Economic Program Support, when combined, were equal and slightly more important than price. The contracting officer documented the strengths, deficiencies, significant weaknesses, and risks supporting the proposal evaluations in the Source Selection Decision Document included in the contract file documentation.

JCC-I/A received nine proposals in response to solicitation W91GDW-08-R-0006; however, one contractor submitted a late proposal and was removed from the competition. The SSEB conducted a comprehensive evaluation of the remaining eight proposals and determined that two proposals were technically unacceptable. Following

2 An existing contract for Strategic Communications Management Services was awarded by JCC-I/A to the Lincoln Group on September 23, 2006.

14

Document info
Document views80
Page views80
Page last viewedSun Dec 04 19:02:05 UTC 2016
Pages32
Paragraphs425
Words9245

Comments