Pre-Proposal Conference

NASA Langley Research Center

October 26, 2009

Introduction

Michael Stubbs

Office of Procurement

Agenda

Opening Remarks Michael Stubbs

Procurement Specifics Michael Stubbs

Technical Presentation Randy Cone

Tour of Clinic and Fitness Ctr. Stubbs/Cone

Reasons for Conducting Conference

• Provide an opportunity for potential Offerors to view the site and gather information

• Answer any questions submitted by industry • Increase chance to award contract without

discussions

Conference Guidelines

• General questions pertaining to LaRC will be addressed

• Questions pertaining to the RFP must be submitted in writing

• List of attendees, conference presentation, and response to questions received will be posted on the NAIS website

• Response to questions at this conference shall not be construed as a revision unless subsequently confirmed by a formal amendment to the RFP

Conference Guidelines Con’t.

• Photography is permitted• Everyone must stay together as a group during

tours• Any tour questions must be submitted in writing• Interaction with Clinic or Fitness Center staff is

prohibited

Procurement Specifics• Total Competitive 8(a) Set-Aside

• Hybrid contract consisting of Firm Fixed Price (FFP) sustaining efforts CLIN, a Cost Reimbursement No Fee (CRNF) CLIN and a Fee For Services CLIN.

• 5 Year base award

• CLEWS replaces the current sole-source Clinic Contract

Proposal Preparation Instructions

• Assure proposal contains all necessary information, required documentation, and is complete in all aspects. The evaluation is based upon actual material presented and not on the basis of what is implied. See FAR 52.215-1 Instructions to Offerors – Competitive Acquisition.

• Ensure that the cost proposal is consistent with the technical proposal in all respects since the cost proposal may be used as an aid to determine the Offeror’s understanding of the technical requirements. Discrepancies may be viewed as a lack of understanding.

• NASA may reject any proposal that fails to comply will all cost proposal instructions, including those for electronic submissions, as incomplete and technically unacceptable.

Method of Evaluation(Section M)

• Proposals received in response to this solicitation will be evaluated by a Source Selection Team (SST) in accordance with NFS 1815.3

• The Source Selection Authority (SSA), after consultation with the SST and other advisors, will select the Offeror that can perform the contract in a manner most advantageous to the Government, all factors considered.

Evaluation Factors

• Factor 1—Technical Suitability– Understanding the Requirement and Technical Approach– Management – Safety and Health

• Factor 2—Cost/Price

• Factor 3—Past Performance– Written Proposal and Questionnaires are requested to be

submitted approximately 10 calendar days prior to the final proposal due date

Relative Importance of Evaluation Factors(Section M, Paragraph M.4)

• NASA will award a contract to the offeror whose proposal represents the best value to the government based on the evaluation of Technical Suitability, Cost/Price and Past Performance factors identified. The technical and past performance factors are essentially equal in importance. The technical and past performance factors when combined are significantly more important than Cost/Price.

Relative Importance of Evaluation Factors (con’t)

(Section M, Paragraph M.4)

• The Technical Suitability subfactors are listed in their relative order of importance: Subfactor 1 UTRA, Subfactor 2 MGMT, and Subfactor 3 Safety and Health, where Subfactor 1 is slightly more important than Subfactor 2, which is significantly more important than Subfactor 3.

Schedule• Period of Performance: 3/1/10 - 2/28/15

Phase-In 2/15/10 - 3/1/10

• Procurement Schedule:– Pre-Proposal Conference 10/26/09– Past Performance Proposal Due 11/8/09– Proposal Due 11/18/09– Proposal Evaluation Period 11/19 – 2/10– Award 2/10– Begin Contract Performance 3/1/10

• NONE

Questions Received to Date

Technical Presentation

Randy Cone – Office of Human Capital Management

LaRC Institution

Founded in 1917• 1st civil aeronautical research laboratory

Infrastructure/Facilities• ~800 acres, ~200-300 Buildings• $2-4 B replacement value ($1B book)

Programs• ~$750 M total annual budget

Workforce• ~1,900 Civil Servants• ~1,800 Contractors

Excludes Corporate G&A

Technical SOW RequirementsOverall Objectives

• Provide Quality Health and Employee Wellness support to Langley Research Center Delivery of Required Services Innovative Fee for Service Program Qualified Health Care Professionals

• Provide a quality Employee Assistance Program to Langley Research Center Personnel

Qualified AEP Professionals

Technical SOW RequirementsCLIN 1

• Occupational Medical & Health Services Emergency Diagnosis & Treatment Health Maintenance Examinations Occupation Related Examinations Foreign Travel Administration of Medications

• Employee Assistance Program• Physical Fitness Program• Maintenance of Facilities & Equipment

Technical SOW RequirementsCLIN 2

•Optician Services•Ophthalmology Services•Radiology Services•Clinical Laboratory Services•Medicines & Medical Supplies•Medical Specialists & Experts•Emergency Services Outside Normal Work Hours

Technical SOW RequirementsCLIN 3

•Reimbursable ServicesOccupational Related ExaminationsDrug & Alcohol TestingNon-Emergency Type Medical Services & Programs

Work BeginningImmediately Upon Contract Effective Date

•Operation of Clinic

•Operation of Fitness Center

•Operation of Employee Assistance Program

Questions? And Tour