OASIS Interact Community

We’ve been receiving feedback on the revised OASIS draft solicitations and we want to thank everyone for their diligence in helping us make the solicitations clearer, better, and stronger.  We feel, and we have heard your feedback, that releasing the draft solicitations and collaborating on ideas has been beneficial to everyone involved in the process.

Included in the revised draft solicitations, based on feedback received from both Industry and customers, we required that one of your Relevant Experience projects come from work done in each pool in which you are bidding.  This was done to ensure that Offerors actually performed on requirements where the predominance of work was appropriate for the Pools being applied for.  This approach meets that goal, but we’ve received feedback that there might be unintended consequences as a result of this approach.  Basically, that the approach forced Offerors to either submit the projects that create the highest possible overall score OR submit projects that result in a lower overall score in order to apply for more Pools.  The feedback suggested that this could result in the Government not getting the best contractors in all Pools.  We see merit in this point, and feel that we may have developed a solution that still meets the goal of ensuring that we get experienced contractors in each Pool while not forcing an Offeror to sacrifice their best projects for scoring purposes.

Fundamentally, we plan to “decouple” the Pool application projects from the Relevant Experience projects.  Similar to how we are treating Mission Space projects and MA/IDIQ projects, we intend to make the projects associated with Pool application separate from the Relevant Experience projects.  For the Pools based upon exceptions, (Pools 3, 5, and 6) we would require demonstration of work applicable to that specific pool.  For example, if applying for Pool 6, you would have to provide examples of work done for Aircraft R&D.  Of course, if your Relevant Experience projects already cover the Pools you wish to apply for, that’s fine.  The requirements in this new approach would look like this:

Pass/Fail:

Relevant Experience Projects (5 for both SB and OASIS)

• Meet the dollar values ($750K/year each on SB – Cumulative $25M/year on OASIS)
   
• Meet the core discipline integration requirements (3 disciplines on SB – 4 disciplines on OASIS)
   
• Completed within the past 5 years or ongoing
   
• Can be any type of project so long as the core disciplines are present (Federal, Commercial, State, etc)

Pool Application Projects (2 per Pool for SB – 3 per Pool for OASIS)

• Each project reported in FPDS under a NAICS code associated with the Pool being applied for
   
• Each project must have a Past Performance score of 3.5 or better
   
• Completed with the past 5 years or ongoing
   
• No dollar minimum
   
• No core discipline requirement

Scoring System – Unchanged.

Another change that we are considering doing (based upon customer input) is establishing subpools for Pool 5.  Because the exceptions are for distinct sets of work and focused in the type of work to be performed compared to most of the Pools, we are thinking of establishing Pool 5A for Aircraft Part R&D companies and Pool 5B for Space Systems R&D companies.  Each subpool would have 20 awards.

We feel this approach would tie the predominance of scoring to the scope of the OASIS contracts (core disciplines) through the Relevant Experience Projects and their associated Past Performance while simultaneously ensuring that Offerors have successfully performed within the Pools they are applying for without having to “game” the scoring system or make decisions (based on point value) of what Pools they wish to apply for.  As always, however, we want your feedback on this approach.  Do you think this is a better approach?  Let us know.

We are in the final stages of getting the draft solicitations ready for the review process that will turn them into final solicitations.  Accordingly, your input and feedback over the next week or two is very important to us.  Again, I want to sincerely thank you all for your input and ideas.  Please continue to monitor us here on Interact as we approach the final stretch.

Jim