NOTE: Document rescinded -- posted for information purposes only
A GUIDE TO BEST PRACTICES FOR
PERFORMANCE-BASED SERVICE CONTRACTING
Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP)
Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
Executive Office of the President
TABLE OF CONTENT
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION
Chapter 2 BASIC DEVELOPMENTAL ELEMENTS
Chapter 3 JOB ANALYSIS
Performance Analysis and Standards
Chapter 4 PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT
Chapter 5 QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN
Quality Assurance Evaluator Requirements
Chapter 6 CONTRACT TYPE
Time and Material/Labor Hour Contracts
Previously Acquired Services
Partial Use of PBSC Methods
Chapter 7 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
Chapter 8 CONFLICT RESOLUTION
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Chapter 9 CONCLUSION
Appendix 1 - User Manuals
Appendix 2 - OFPP Policy Letter 91-2 [Rescinded March 30, 2000, List
of Rescinded Policy Letters]
Appendix 3 - Performance-Based Service Contracting (PBSC)
Solicitation/Task Order Review Checklist
Appendix 4 - Targets of Opportunity for Performance-Based Service
Appendix 5 - References
Appendix 6 - Government Agencies And Companies Offering Training In Performance-Based
Appendix 7 - Tree Diagram
Appendix 8 - Sample Performance Requirement Summary
Appendix 9 - Commerce Business Daily Sample Request for Comments
Appendix 10- Performance-Based Service Contracting Templates for Professional
and Technical Services [No Longer Applicable]
Appendix 11 - Surveillance Activity Checklist
Appendix 12 - Model Alternative Dispute Resolution Agreement
Performance-based service contracting (PBSC) emphasizes that all aspects of
an acquisition be structured around the purpose of the work to be performed as
opposed to the manner in which the work is to be performed or broad, imprecise
statements of work which preclude an objective assessment of contractor
performance. It is designed to ensure that contractors are given freedom to
determine how to meet the Government's performance objectives, that appropriate
performance quality levels are achieved, and that payment is made only for
services that meet these levels.
This document contains best practices that have proven useful for drafting
statements of work, solicitations, and quality assurance plans, and in awarding
and administering performance-based service contracts. Many of these practices
were identified through the government wide Office of Federal Procurement Policy
PBSC Pledge Program. This document is neither mandatory regulatory guidance, nor
is it intended to serve as a detailed "how to" manual. Such manuals exist
already, and citations to them are included at Appendix 1.
The purpose of this publication is to assist agencies in developing policies
and procedures for implementing PBSC. The practices contained herein were
derived from the experiences of contracting personnel in both government and
industry. This information was gathered from interviews, articles, and existing
We wish to thank the procurement and program officials from the Executive
Departments and agencies, and those representatives from the private sector, who
provided information on their experiences with PBSC. We especially appreciate
the participation of those agency officials who were willing to be innovative in
promoting and implementing this initiative and utilizing PBSC methods by joining
in the OFPP PBSC pledge program.
This is one in a series of publications on best practices developed by OFPP.
Copies of these documents may be obtained from the Executive Office of the
President's (EOP) Publications Office by calling 202-395-7332 or writing to the
Office of Publications, 725 17th Street, NW, Room 2200, New Executive Office
Building, Washington, DC 20503. Comments and suggestions should be addressed to
the attention of Stanley Kaufman, New Executive Office Building, Room 9001,
Washington, DC 20503.
Deidre A. Lee - Administrator
OFPP Policy Letter 91-2 established the policy of utilizing a
performance-based approach to service contracting. Appendix 2 contains a copy of
the Policy Letter. PBSC emphasizes objective, measurable performance
requirements and quality standards in developing statements of work, selecting
contractors, determining contract type and incentives, and performing contract
administration. Appendix 3 contains a checklist of key elements of PBSC
PBSC was pioneered within the Department of Defense with a great deal of
success. However, this proven methodology has yet to be fully implemented
governmentwide for a variety of reasons, including inexperience in writing
performance-based statements of work, cultural inertia, and concerns about more
open and interactive communication with industry throughout the acquisition
To promote implementation of this policy, OFPP initiated, in October 1994, a
governmentwide pledge pilot project to encourage the use of PBSC. Services
covered by the pledge ranged from janitorial and guard services to computer
maintenance, and aircraft and technical support. See Appendix 4 for a list of
services that provide targets of opportunity for PBSC.
The governmentwide pledge was further supported by four industry associations
representing over 1,000 companies. They pledged to utilize conflict resolution
mechanisms to avoid protests and disputes, identify services convertible to
performance-based contracting on a fixed-price basis, work with the government
to eliminate obstacles to implementing this initiative, and identify commercial
contracting practices adaptable for use by the government.
As a result of the pledge, 15 agencies converted 26 contracts with an
estimated value of $585 million to performance-based methods. The agencies
reported an average 15 percent reduction in contract price in nominal dollars,
and an 18 percent improvement in satisfaction with the contractors work.
Moreover, reduced prices and increased customer satisfaction occurred at all
price ranges, for both nontechnical and professional and technical services, and
whether the contract remained fixed-price or was converted from cost
reimbursement to fixed-price. Copies of the pilot project report, "A Report on
the Performance-Based Service Contracting Pilot Project," May 1996, may be
obtained from the EOP Publications Office or the Acquisition Reform Network
As evidenced by the results of the pledge, incentives for agencies to
implement PBSC are numerous. For program personnel, PBSC is a tool that offers
improved contractor performance. For budget offices, PBSC has already
demonstrated significant cost savings. For managers, PBSC improves mission
attainment and implements the principles of streamlining and innovation of the
National Performance Review (NPR), as well as the Government Performance and
Results Act. Further, personnel who participate on PBSC acquisitions will have
the opportunity to attain recognition for their successes. In addition,
contractors who do well on initial PBSC efforts will gain an advantage on future
solicitations where past performance is a significant evaluation factor.
Conversion to performance-based contracting for Navy aircraft
maintenance resulted in immediate savings of $25 million. Additional
savings are anticipated through the positive and negative incentives
contained in the contract. The proposal, evaluation and award process took
30 days less than was needed for the previous non-performance based
competition. Working with industry as a team, to meet Navy aircraft
maintenance requirements, resulted in dollars and time savings. So far,
performance is surpassing the contracts minimum required
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) saved enough
money from converting a janitorial services contract to PBSC to reinstate
several tasks previously cut due to a lack of sufficient
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) saved enough money from its
first PBSC Superfund task order to fully fund the next task
In converting from a traditional Statement of Work (SOW) to a PBSC
Performance Work Statement (PWS), some agencies have reported an increased
initial up-front investment. However, the resulting savings to the agency
through the use of PBSC will quickly offset the initial up-front costs. In
addition, the quality improvement expected from this type of contract and the
resulting expected reduction in overall contract administration costs will again
offset the initial up-front costs and should provide program offices with
additional resource availability.
PBSC will help to correct problems commonly associated with services
contracts and identified in numerous audits, including cost overruns, schedule
delays, failure to achieve specified results, and other performance problems.
This document is intended to facilitate implementation of PBSC.
Appendix 5 lists references used in compiling this document.
BASIC DEVELOPMENTAL ELEMENTS
The contract statement of work, which is referred to as the PWS, is the
foundation of performance-based services. The PBSC PWS describes the effort in
terms of measurable performance standards (outputs). These standards should
include such elements as "what, when, where, how many, and how well" the work is
to be performed. A Quality Assurance Plan (QAP), which directly corresponds to
the performance standards and measures contractor performance, is needed to
determine if contractor services meet contract PWS requirements. Positive and/or
negative performance incentives, based on QAP measurements, should be included.
The PWS Performance Standards, QAP and Incentives are interdependent and must be
compatible in form, style, and substance, and should be cross-referenced. For a
procurement to be a true PBSC, it should contain a PWS, QAP, and appropriate
Application of only selected aspects of the total PBSC methodology is not
likely to be successful, and can even cause a reduction in the value of services
provided. Agencies have reported negative experiences due to the failure to
define work in completion terms, to develop or enforce measurable Government
quality assurance plans, and to place sufficient financial risk on the
One agency limited its implementation of PBSC to the fee portion of
several major contracts. It did not use negative incentives, and payment
of the cost portion of the contracts was not tied to performance
requirements and standards. A GAO report found that the agency paid much
higher fees, yet the contractors performance did not
Proactive management support and direction from the highest agency levels
disseminated throughout the agency, including field operations, also is
important to the success of PBSC. Cultural inertia and lack of experience, two
large detriments to use of PBSC, can be overcome by positive agency support for
A directive signed by the Deputy Director of the Defense Logistics
Agency (DLA) was sent to all personnel stressing PBSC and the importance
of program and procurement personnel working
The NASA Administrator emphasized the importance of PBSC in a
memorandum to all NASA field centers, and NASA's Procurement Executive
visited each field center to promote the use of PBSC. Now each field
center is stressing the use and importance of
The Deputy Administrator, General Services Administration (GSA),
affirmed the use of PBSC in a memorandum to Senior Management and asked
for their help in stressing the use of PBSC to statement of work preparers
and contracting personnel involved in service
The Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and
Acquisition emphasized to the Navy acquisition community the goals of PBSC
and indicated that PBSC should be adopted at all contracting
Signing the PBSC pledge led the Railroad Retirement Board to establish
a three-person agency executive committee that met with contracting and
technical personnel to develop and manage the implementation of PBSC. The
committee members included the directors of three agency bureaus: data
processing, supply and service, and disability/Medicare claims processing.
The three-person executive committee provided oversight to the technical
and procurement staff involved in the
Training for program and contracting personnel that includes how to write
both PWSs and QAPs, as well as other aspects of PBSC, is of equal importance to
the success of PBSC. Training can be accomplished by internal resources,
external sources, or modifying existing training to include PBSC.
The Department of Energy (DOE) modified its project management course
to include PBSC and contracted for a prototype training package
exclusively for program personnel to help define their duties and roles in
DOE also developed an electronic bulletin board to advertise their best
practices and lessons learned on PBSC and other procurement reform
DLA distributed diskette copies of the NAVFAC model PWSs and QAPs as
guides for its field activities and encouraged them to utilize NAVFAC
training courses to develop skills for writing their own PWSs and
To aid agencies in implementing PBSC, OFPP has solicited information on
training programs or courses covering the development of PWSs and QAPS. Appendix
6 contains a list of these sources. While inclusion on this list is not an
endorsement of any particular course or organization, we hope that the
information will be helpful to agencies interested in PBSC training and that
agencies will utilize these resources.
Agencies experienced in the use of PBSC have established a process that
provides a useful model to follow when implementing PBSC. In general, the steps
in this process are performing a job analysis, writing the PWS and QAP
concurrently, and performing diligent contractor surveillance after contract
award. This document addresses each of these important steps.
Job analysis involves determining what the agency's needs are, and what kinds
of services and outputs are to be provided by the contractor. This is of
particular importance because the services or outputs identified form the basis
for establishing performance requirements, developing performance standards and
indicators, writing the PWS, and producing the QAP. If the job analysis is done
properly, writing the PWS and QAP will be facilitated. In general, job analysis
includes: agency or activity organization, work to be performed by the
contractor, performance standards, directives, data gathering, and cost.
Organization analysis involves reviewing the agency's needs and identifying
the services and outputs required from the contractor. It should emphasize the
outputs the contractor will produce, but should not dictate how to produce these
DOEs analysis of its protective force program resulted in a
determination that it no longer needed armed and specially trained
security guards. The change from armed to unarmed protective forces
reduced contract payroll costs significantly. Further, contract labor
hours necessary to support an armed force were eliminated. These changes
resulted in an approximate annual savings of
Work analysis involves further analyzing the required outputs by breaking
down the work into its lowest task level and linking tasks in a logical flow of
activities. Agencies should start with the overall service or output required
from the contractor, then divide the job into all its parts and subparts, and
identify the relationships among all the parts.
One method to accomplish this analysis is a tree diagram. It is a chart that
divides a job into parts and subparts, each of which contributes to a final
result or output, and demonstrates its relationship to the others. Appendix 7
contains a sample tree diagram.
Identifying all outputs from tasks and subtasks required of the contractor is
important. Failure to do so will result in incomplete or ambiguous contractual
requirements that may be difficult to enforce or lead to contractor
misinterpretation and inadequate performance.
GSA reports that SOW and QAP preparation training provided by NAVFAC to
GSA's pledge participants provided an excellent foundation for using job
Ft. Bragg established a Process Action Team (PAT) to develop a standard
format for the PWS and QAP. This was copied on a disk in WordPerfect and
given to customers along with instructions on how to complete it. All the
specifications were numbered and samples for technical exhibits were
included. The instructions query the customers concerning their
requirements. The results are then integrated into final
Performance Analysis and Standards
Performance analysis assigns a performance requirement to each task, which
involves determining how a service can be measured and what performance
standards and quality levels apply. The performance standard establishes the
performance level required by the government. Correspondingly, the acceptable
quality level (AQL) establishes a maximum allowable error rate or variation from
For example, in a requirement for taxi services, the performance standard
might be "pickup within five minutes of an agreed upon time." The AQL then might
be five percent, i.e., the taxi could be more than five minutes late no more
than five percent of the time. Failure to perform within the AQL would result in
a contract price reduction.
Under the Navy aircraft maintenance contract, requirements are stated
in measurable terms such as: ground abort rate is less than five percent;
100 percent of flight schedules are met; and aircraft are 80 percent
Agencies should insure that each standard is necessary, is carefully chosen,
and not unduly burdensome. Failure to do so can result in unnecessarily
increased contract costs.
The Railroad Retirement Board converted a contract for data entry
services to include a performance-based statement of work. They
experienced approximately 30 percent cost savings. By going through the
process of developing a PBSC PWS, they identified and eliminated
unnecessary requirements.The estimated type and volume of source
documents to be converted decreased by 14 percent. Vendor pricing was
based on a more accurate and realistic profile of work to be
Care must be exercised in establishing the quality level at which performance
standards are set. The minimum acceptable performance standard should rarely be
100 percent, since the standard directly affects the cost of the service.
Conversely, if the quality level is too low, it may act as disincentive to good
Where appropriate, agencies may provide either a specific performance
standard or allow the contractor the option to propose different target levels
of standards of service along with the appropriate price adjustment. This allows
contractors an opportunity to propose what they consider to be the most
cost-effective performance standard level. In order to properly evaluate
alternative levels of standards proposed by the contractor, agencies need to do
market research into the feasibility of accepting these alternative levels,
i.e., discussing with commercial entities their contracting methods and
acceptable levels of standards for the same type of service.
In a GSA contract for custodial requirements, specification writers
only identified desired quality levels. Offerors' technical proposals only
identified the frequency and methods to be employed to meet the quality
standard. The result was maximum flexibility for the
Standards may be published or well recognized, industry-wide standards, or
may be developed by the agency. Agency standards should have industry input to
ensure they are realistic and effective. This may be done through public
meetings, public comment on proposed standards, or Requests for Information
(RFIs) per FAR 15.405.
If there are a number of tasks and deliverables, agencies should summarize
them in a performance requirements summary (PRS). A PRS usually lists tasks,
deliverables, standards, and quality levels. Appendix 8 contains sample PRS
All potentially relevant agency directives should be screened to determine
which should be utilized, either in whole or in part. Directives that are
unnecessary, or that apply only in part, should not be referenced or included in
their entirety. Negative effects from excessive or inappropriate application of
specifications include: confusion or errors in performing work; undermining the
government's ability to enforce required performance; unjustifiable increases in
the cost of performance; unwarranted dictation of how work is to be performed,
and discouraging or preventing contractor use of innovative or cost-effective
Wherever possible, agencies should excerpt required portions of directives
and include them in the PWS. If this is impractical, agencies should incorporate
the required portions by reference. Entire documents should not be incorporated
by reference when only a portion of the document applies.
Directives may also be an information source for developing task descriptions
and quality standards.
Agencies should provide the contractor an estimate of the workload to be
performed and the items and services that the government will furnish to the
contractor for the performance of the contract. In order to make the workload
estimate, a determination of the historical workload by the major performance
categories must be made. In addition, agencies must clearly identify the amount
and types of items and services that it will provide to the contractor, e.g.,
electrical, equipment, furniture.
The historical workload data gathered may be used in cost estimating and
analysis, and should be used as a baseline to estimate the future work
requirements to be covered in the contract. This is especially important so that
the offerors in addition to the incumbent can gain sufficient familiarity with
the work in order to compete effectively. Also, the estimate of the future work
requirements and government furnished items is critically important as the basis
for the offerors to provide realistic cost estimates.
In preparing a solicitation for telephone hotline services, EPA used
its extensive workload data as an attachment to the solicitation. The data
included an analysis of call volume since 1989. This enabled industry to
gain a better understanding of the requirement and the magnitude of the
workload. It also allowed EPA to shift the burden of having the capacity
to handle surges to the contractor under a fixed-price contract. Under the
previous cost type contract, EPA had been paying to keep extra operators
standing by even when they werent
Needed workload data is often available from existing management information
subsystems or other databases or records such as sampling or on-the-job
observation. If workload data is not available, various techniques can be used
to generate it. For example, agencies can provide their best estimate of the
data or if there is sufficient time before the award of the contract, the
program personnel can immediately begin collecting workload data for a
sufficient period of time to use for projections.
Some agencies have placed a performance requirement in the PWS for the
incumbent contractor to maintain accurate workload data. This information can be
used to help develop the baseline for future contract work estimates.
Agencies should place workload data and applicable documentation in a central
area, e.g., a reference room where all potential offerors will have access to it
and can readily use it in preparing their bids.
Estimated costs must be computed for each service or output based on
available data. These costs are used in preparing the government estimate,
evaluating proposals, and determining positive and negative performance
For commercial services, the marketplace should provide a sufficient baseline
for cost estimating. In the development of their independent government
estimates, agencies should include consideration of commercial costs of
performing work in the private sector.
Incentives should be used when they will induce better quality performance
and may be either positive, negative, or a combination of both. They should be
applied selectively to motivate contractor efforts that might not otherwise be
emphasized, and to discourage inefficiency. Incentives should apply to the most
important aspects of the work, rather than every individual task.
Where negative incentives are used, the deduction should represent as close
as possible the value of the service lost. This amount is usually computed by
determining the percentage of contract costs associated with each task. For
example, if a given task represents 10 percent of the contract costs, then 10
percent will be the potential maximum deduction in the event of task failure.
Similarly, if a task is not performed to the AQL stated in the quality standards
of the contract, deductions are computed based upon tables or formulas designed
to reflect the value of substandard output. For example, a task having an AQL of
five percent defects would have its unit price reduced incrementally for each
percent of defects exceeding the AQL.
The Navy aircraft maintenance contract contains both positive and
negative incentives. As a positive incentive, the material management
function was turned over to the contractor. Material is obtained on a cost
reimbursable basis, but the contractor earns a 15 percent positive
incentive for cost avoidance. This "bonus" is calculated by comparing
actual material costs with historical material costs adjusted by the
Consumer Price Index. As a negative incentive, the contract is priced at a
ready for training rate of 75 percent. To the extent this level of
performance is not attained, the contract price is reduced
proportionately. For example, an actual ready for training rate of 60
percent results in a 20 percent price
The definitions of standard performance, maximum positive and negative
performance incentives, and the units of measurement should be established in
the solicitation. They will vary from contract to contract and are subject to
discussion during a source selection. Care must be taken to ensure that the
incentive structure reflects both the value to the government of the various
performance levels, and a meaningful incentive to the contractor. Performance
incentives should be challenging yet reasonably attainable. The goal is to
reward contractors for outstanding work, but not penalize them for fully
satisfactorily but less than outstanding work.
The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) established a cash incentive for a
raw water treatment service contract by creating a fee pool to which both
TVA and the contractor contribute. The TVA business team evaluates the
contractor's performance semiannually, and if the contractor meets the
established performance evaluation criteria they are awarded their
contribution to the fee pool. If they exceed the established performance
evaluation criteria, they receive all or a portion of TVA's contribution
to the fee pool. However, before TVA awards any portion of its
contribution to the fee pool, the contractor must have demonstrated cost
savings to TVA in excess of the fee pool incentive payment (e.g., if the
contractor is awarded one percent, they must have saved TVA two percent or
Incentives are especially useful in efforts that are complex, have a
high-dollar value, or have a history of performance or cost overrun problems.
NASA's cost type Space Station contract provides that the contractor
will be docked 25 cents for every dollar of cost overrun, but will earn an
additional 25 cents for every dollar saved. In addition, all fee payments
are provisional and are subject to recoupment if station hardware fails to
Incentives should correlate with results. Agencies should avoid rewarding
contractors for simply meeting minimum standards of contract performance, and
create a proper balance between cost, performance, and schedule
incentives. The incentive amount should correspond to the difficulty of the task
required, but should not exceed the value of the benefits the government
receives. Agencies need to follow-up to ensure that desired results are
realized, i.e., that incentives actually encourage good performance and
discourage unsatisfactory performance. Verifying the effectiveness of the
incentives used is important.
NASA reduced program costs for the Space Shuttle by approximately $350
million since FY 90 by the use of special contractual incentives. These
incentives included special incentive fees, such as award fees for
exceptional cost performance, and value engineering provisions. The award
fee for exceptional cost performance is used to incentivize the contractor
to initiate innovations, cost management, and cost reduction measures that
reduce operation costs while maintaining excellent performance. The award
fee is earned incrementally during performance and is in addition to and
separate from any other fees available under the contract, and is
available only when the contractor earns a performance rating of excellent
for the award fee period. The amount of the fee earned is based upon a
formula established by the contract, and no fee can be earned during any
period when the actual contract costs exceed the should-cost
Past performance "report cards" per FAR 42.15 should reflect adherence to
performance requirements when a PWS has been used. Performance under PBSC
provides better data for evaluation of past performance under other
solicitations. A powerful incentive of excellence and customer satisfaction is
created when contractors know their performance will influence future award
PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENTS
The key elements of a PBSC PWS are: a statement of the required services in
terms of output; a measurable performance standard for the output; and an AQL or
allowable error rate. These will have been established during the job analysis
phase discussed in Chapter 3. The PWS describes the specific requirements the
contractor must meet in performance of the contract. It also specifies a
standard of performance for the required tasks and the quality level the
government expects the contractor to provide.
Agencies should identify only those outputs that are essential and should be
a part of the PRS. Agencies should express the outputs in clear, concise,
commonly used, easily understood, measurable terms. Agencies should not repeat
material in the PWS that is already included in other parts of the contract.
Agencies also should not include detailed procedures in the PWS that dictate
how work is to be accomplished. Instead, they should structure the PWS around
the purpose of the work to be performed, i.e., what is to be performed, rather
than how to perform it. For example, instead of requiring that the lawn be mowed
weekly, or that trees be pruned each Fall, state that the lawn must be
maintained between 2-3" or that tree limbs not touch utility wires or
A GSA vehicle maintenance specification for service calls was changed
from an hourly rate to a price-per-occurrence. This resulted in a
noticeable difference in the contract
The Air Force found that it saved 50 percent by specifying that floors
must be clean, free of scuff marks and dirt, and have a uniformly glossy
finish, rather than requiring that the contractor strip and rewax the
Under the Navy contract for aircraft maintenance, the contractor is
held to a standard of performance and is empowered to use best commercial
practices and management innovation in performance. The contract does not
specify how many plane captains, mechanics or parachute riggers are
required to be in a crew or on the
To the maximum extent practicable, the PWS should be a stand-alone document,
with minimal references to regulatory or other guidance. Only mandatory
requirements should be referenced.
Agencies should write the PWS using precise terms and clear, concise wording.
Agencies should not use broad or vague statements or overly technical language.
Agencies should use the active voice, task oriented statements (verb-noun
sentence structure), and the emphatic form of the verb to establish a binding
imperative. For example, say "The contractor shall (or must) provide "X", rather
than "X" will be provided."
To prevent misunderstandings, agencies should avoid abbreviations and
acronyms as much as possible. Agencies should define any abbreviations and
acronyms that are used the first time they appear in a document, and/or include
them in a glossary or appendix.
Agencies should avoid using ambiguous words and phrases. For example, say
"keep driveways clear of snow so that depth does not exceed two inches" or
"maintain grass between two and three inches high" rather than "clear snow as
required" or "mow grass as necessary."
The PWS should contain consistent terminology. Use the same words throughout
the PWS when addressing the same thing. This is particularly important when
referring to technical requirements.
Agencies should use an interdisciplinary team approach in developing the PWS,
and include, at a minimum, the contracting officer and a technical
representative. The program manager, or a designee of the acquisition executive,
or the Agency head should establish the team. Additional team members may
include an attorney, a writing advisor, and a representative from the
customer/user staff. Whenever possible, at least one team member should be
experienced in PBSC contracting techniques. Once established, the team should
designate a team leader to serve as a facilitator.
This team approach will result in a better final product, and limit the
potential for disagreements among agency officials prior to award and during
contract performance. It also serves to involve program personnel early in the
acquisition process. This is important because implementation of the PBSC
program resides predominantly with the program office. Program personnel are
primary points-of-contact for PBSC projects. Contracting officers should
actively promote the benefits of PBSC to the program offices. To this end,
continued collaboration throughout the acquisition process is important.
This approach worked well for GSA where SOW preparers and contracting
personnel worked as a team from the beginning. Together, they received PWS
training and developed a strategy for implementing PBSC in the pledge.
They plan to use this approach in addressing future
EPA assembled a team to develop methods to contract for Superfund
remedial projects using PBSC. The team consisted of a contracting
specialist, the Remedial Section chief, and the project officer. The first
project awarded using the techniques developed by the team resulted in a
contract award nearly $1 million less than the government estimate for the
Whenever possible, agencies should utilize Solicitations for Information
Purposes (see FAR 15.405), including draft statements of work and requests for
comments, to refine the PWS. Review by and input from potential sources provides
an effective way to screen the PWS for accuracy, comprehensiveness, and clarity.
It also serves as an excellent tool to identify aspects of the PWS that would
unnecessarily restrict competition or raise costs or discourage contractor
innovation. Early involvement of industry is important. Potential sources should
be asked whether certain quality requirements are significant cost drivers so
the government can consider whether they are worth the extra cost. Appendix 9
contains a sample Request for Comment.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) had clear success
issuing a draft solicitation for computer maintenance. They received
useful comments from industry which led them to re-evaluate some aspects
of their technical approach and recognize areas in need of clarification.
HHS experienced fewer problems with the solicitation as a
The Navy issued a draft RFP which solicited industry inputs or
alternatives to military specifications and standards. In response to
industry's submissions, many military specifications and standards were
deleted from the work statement. Some were deleted with no replacement,
while others were replaced with commercial
To the extent possible, agencies should disseminate draft RFPs and
solicitations electronically. This saves time and money and may result in
greater competition. Many agencies place acquisition information on the INTERNET
and have established a link to their agency home pages on the ARNET. This
information may be accessed at:
The Department of Transportation posted the National Highway and Safety
Transportation Administration's property and inventory control system RFP
on the Internet. This was done in the interest of expediency, to save
printing costs, and to test electronic data
NASAs Acquisition Internet Service (NAIS) includes all synopses and
competitive solicitations over $25,000. The address for this site is
http://procurement.nasa.gov/. NAIS also allows interested businesses to
designate procurement categories for which they would like to receive
automatic E-mail notification.
To the extent available, agencies should utilize existing model PWSs,
particularly those tested in application. Agencies often do not have to start
from scratch to develop a PWS. Appendix 10 contains a list of generic PBSC
documents developed by working groups consisting of agency technical and
professional personnel to assist agencies in converting selected professional
and technical services to PBSC methods. Copies of these documents are available
from the EOP Publications Office and the ARNET.
QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN AND SURVEILLANCE
The QAP defines what the government must do to ensure that the contractor has
performed in accordance with the PWS performance standards. This can range from
a one-time inspection of a product or service to periodic in-process inspections
of on-going product or service delivery. It is needed to ensure the government
receives the quality of services called for under the contract, and pays only
for the acceptable level of services received. Since the QAP is intended to
measure performance against standards in the PWS, these interdependent documents
must be coordinated. Accordingly, writing the two documents simultaneously is
both effective and efficient.
A good QAP should include a surveillance schedule and clearly state the
surveillance method(s) to be used. The QAP development establishes how resources
will be used to ensure that the government receives what it is paying for.
Development of the QAP also allows the agency to clearly define the amount of
contract administration resources needed.
The detail in the QAP regarding a particular task should be consonant with
the importance of the task. The QAP should focus on the quality, quantity, and
timeliness etc. of the performance outputs to be delivered by the contractor,
and not on the steps required or procedures used to provide the product or
The PWS and QAP may be combined into one document. This makes it easier for
both the contractor and inspector to understand and administer the contract
See Chapter 4 for best practices that are equally applicable to the
Selecting the most appropriate surveillance method for the effort involved is
important. Agencies should take into consideration task criticality, task lot
size, surveillance period, performance requirements and standards, availability
of quality assurance evaluators (QAEs), surveillance value in relation to task
cost/criticality, and available resources. Careful selection of appropriate
surveillance methods enables the government to determine the amount of resources
and associated costs needed to perform the surveillance task.
Acceptable surveillance methods include:
- 100 Percent Inspection: This is usually only the most appropriate
method for infrequent tasks or tasks with stringent performance requirements,
e.g., where safety or health is a concern. With this method, performance is
inspected/evaluated at each occurrence. One hundred percent inspection is too
expensive to be used in most cases.
- Random Sampling: This is usually the most appropriate method for
recurring tasks. With random sampling, services are sampled to determine if
the level of performance is acceptable. Random sampling works best when the
number of instances of the services being performed is very large and a
statistically valid sample can be obtained. Computer programs may be available
to assist in establishing sampling procedures.
- Periodic Inspection: This method, sometimes called "planned
sampling," consists of the evaluation of tasks selected on other than a 100
percent or random basis. It may be appropriate for tasks that occur
infrequently, and where 100 percent inspection is neither required nor
practicable. A predetermined plan for inspecting part of the work is
established using subjective judgment and analysis of agency resources to
decide what work to inspect and how frequently to inspect it.
- Customer Input: Although usually not a primary method, this is a
valuable supplement to more systematic methods. For example, in a case where
random sampling indicates unsatisfactory service, customer complaints can be
used as substantiating evidence. In certain situations where customers can be
relied upon to complain consistently when the quality of performance is poor,
e.g., dining facilities, building services, customer surveys and customer
complaints may be a primary surveillance method, and customer satisfaction an
appropriate performance standard. In all cases, complaints should be
documented, preferably on a standard form.
Agencies should discuss the surveillance methods to be used with the
contractor to confirm that they are fully understood. Whatever form of
surveillance used, agencies should take care to ensure that no undue
interference with contractor operations occurs. Agencies also should avoid
relying on cumbersome and intrusive process-oriented inspection and oversight
programs to assess contractor performance.
The Department of Commerce included the contractor on a grounds
maintenance contract as a partner in implementing the contract monitoring
and reporting requirements. This resulted in a continuing dialogue between
the two parties about contract performance focused on
Surveillance must be performed as stated in the QAP for the covered contract.
It includes scheduling, observing, documenting, accepting service, and
determining payment due.
QAEs must be fully qualified to meet the major responsibilities of the
position: maintaining complete and accurate documentation, a good relationship
with the contractor, and thorough knowledge of the contract requirements.
Experience and training are essential for effective surveillance.
The QAE should be identified with a letter of assignment that includes a copy
of the contract and surveillance plan. It should include cautions against making
legal interpretations, imposing tasks not in the contract, supervising
contractor employees, or waiving contract requirements. A copy of the letter
should be provided to the Administrative Contracting Officer.
Ideally, the QAE should be dedicated full time to quality assurance
activities. If this is not possible, the QAE aspect of the individual's job
should be a critical element in their performance appraisal.
Contractors should be briefed on surveillance requirements and
responsibilities at a post-award conference. Surveillance should be
comprehensive, systematic, and well documented. Reviewing and discussing the
contractor's plan for maintaining an acceptable quality level under the contract
is important. In many cases, contractors are required to submit a Quality
Control Plan to the government prior to the post-award conference.
One way to document surveillance is through use of a surveillance checklist.
See Appendix 11 for a sample. Techniques include inspections, correspondence
reviews, customer surveys, and audits.
When performance is deficient, the contracting officer should notify the
contractor promptly and implement the agencys system to track corrective
The extent of surveillance is determined by the surveillance schedule
established in the QAP. It should be systematic and sufficient to fairly
evaluate the contractor's total performance throughout the performance
Where surveillance results show good performance consistently, the amount of
surveillance should be adjusted accordingly. This saves the government money,
reduces oversight burdens on the contractor, and recognizes the contractor's
achievement of performance.
Agencies should select contract types that are most likely to motivate
contractors to perform optimally. PBSC encourages and enables the increased use
of fixed-price contracts and incentives to encourage optimal performance.
Fixed-price contracts are appropriate for services that can be objectively
defined in the solicitation and for which risk of performance is manageable. For
such acquisitions, performance-based statements of work, measurable performance
standards and surveillance plans are ideally suited. The contractor is motivated
to find improved methods of performance in order to increase its profits.
Cost-reimbursement contracts are appropriate for services that can only be
defined in general terms or for which the risk of performance is not reasonably
manageable. To the maximum extent practicable, PBSC methods should be used for
these contracts. Where possible, they should include specific incentive
provisions in addition to the award fee to insure that contractors are rewarded
for good performance, as well as quality assurance deduction schedules to assure
Time and Material/Labor Hour Contracts
When the use of time and material/labor hour contracts is appropriate,
agencies should employ PBSC methods to the maximum extent feasible.
Previously Acquired Services
When acquiring services that previously have been acquired by contract,
agencies should rely on experience, knowledge, and historical data gained from
the prior contract to incorporate PBSC methods. Where appropriate, conversion
from cost-reimbursement to fixed-price arrangements should be accomplished.
The OFPP report on the results of the PBSC pilot project demonstrated that
converting cost-reimbursement non-PBSC contracts to fixed price PBSC contracts
resulted in significantly reduced contract prices. On average, prices for these
contracts fell by 21 percent in nominal dollars.
The Department of Treasury awarded a recurring base operating support
services contract using PBSC. They converted from a cost-reimbursement to
a fixed-price contract, and on a $6 million requirement achieved savings
of over 20 percent, including the effects of inflation. Treasury also
believes the government will realize further future savings, since a
cost-type contract would have required at least five audits at a cost of
approximately $5,000 per audit. In addition, a considerable amount of
staff time will be saved due to decreased contract
DOE estimates it annually will save approximately $400,000 from a $2.3M
requirement due to the change from its sole source cost-plus-fixed-fee
contract to a competitive firm fixed-price contract for a site protective
Partial Use of PBSC Methods
In situations where the entire contract is not conducive to PBSC, many tasks
nevertheless may be defined in performance-based terms. In these situations PBSC
methods should be used to the maximum extent possible.
A cost-reimbursement level-of-effort term contract could be converted to a
fixed-price completion contract defining as much of the requirement in
performance-based terms as possible. A labor-hour arrangement could be used for
the remainder of the requirement that could not be sufficiently defined or to
accommodate unpredictable spikes in workload.
EPAs contract for telephone hotline services was awarded on a
fixed-price basis. The contractor used past history compiled by EPA to
determine the amount of work it could expect. To provide additional
flexibility for an emergency or crisis, quantity options (fixed price per
hour) were included.
Agencies also should consider breaking up large umbrella contracts
experiencing cost overruns or performance problems. This will often enable the
use of PBSC for large portions of the umbrella contract. The amount of money
saved, the improved performance, and the reduced contract administration effort
often can outweigh the added cost of awarding and administering multiple
Agencies should award more performance-based task orders competitively when
they use task order contracts. They should define their requirements in such a
manner that performance-based task orders can be fixed-price.
Good contract administration is essential to the success of PBSC, and
requires the cooperation of both program and procurement offices. Cooperation is
needed to identify any organizational barriers to fostering teamwork. Such
cooperation should be instilled and reinforced at the executive levels of
management in the agency.
The Customs Service has bi-weekly meetings between technical and
procurement personnel to discuss procurement issues, including
PBSC offers opportunities, in line with NPR principles, for streamlining and
innovation in the contract administration/audit process. A primary benefit of
the PBSC method is that it enables agencies to shift their emphasis from
processes to outputs.
DOE has revamped its audit and appraisal process to bring it in line
with PBSC. The focus has shifted from process to
PBSC streamlining extends to the entire acquisition process. It includes
requirements definition, proposal preparation, and contract administration.
The Air Force used PBSC for a product design procurement. On a billion
dollar procurement the streamlined process reduced procurement
administrative lead time by 66 percent, cut program staff by 75 percent,
and drove costs down by nearly 40 percent. The RFP was just 100
pages long, compared to an earlier RFP for a similar requirement that was
1,000 pages long. The program team was pared from the typical 80-100
people to a cross-functional team of 20 people. Draft requirements were
shared with industry, and when the RFP was issued, contractors were given
just one month to respond, which was sufficient due to their prior input.
Simple performance requirements, competition, and collaboration were used
to create relationships and incentives that produced extraordinary
For other best practices applicable to PBSC, see "Best Practices for
Contract Administration," October 1994.
Traditionally, contracting parties have relied on claims and litigation to
resolve disputes. However, this is often costly and time-consuming. In the
interest of economy and efficiency, expeditious and less confrontational
resolution procedures are increasingly being utilized. Communication and
openness throughout the procurement process greatly reduce conflicts. The OFPP
Pledge Program recognized the value of such procedures by including an agency
commitment to institute an informal, timely conflict resolution mechanism for
resolving pre- and post award issues.
Partnering is a technique for preventing disputes from occurring. Under this
concept, the agency and contractor, perhaps along with a facilitator, meet after
contract award to discuss their mutual expectations. The parties mutually
develop performance goals, identify potential sources of conflict, and establish
cooperative ways to resolve any problems that may arise during contract
Creating a partnership agreement signed by all parties - contracting officer,
QAE/COTR, program office, and contractor - creates a "buy in" to the overall
goal of satisfactory performance on time, within budget, and without claims.
Within the Department of Defense (DOD), the Army Corps of Engineers has
implemented a partnering program with its contractors and has achieved
improved cost, schedule, and performance goals. DOD believes the use of
partnering in its contracts improves relationships and communication
between government and industry.
Partnering can transform an adversarial relationship/attitude into a
professional relationship built on trust and cooperation between the parties.
Contracting parties that have participated in partnering have experienced the
following results: more timely performance, better cost control, significant
reductions in paperwork, and fewer disputes.
Some agencies have established an ombudsman to help resolve concerns or
disputes that arise during the acquisition process. Typically, an ombudsman
investigates selected complaints and issues nonbinding reports, with
recommendations addressing problems or future improvements deemed to be
The Army Materiel Command (AMC) has had an agency ombudsman for several
years. The ombudsman helps firms to resolve problems they encounter on
existing AMC contracts. The ombudsman investigates reported complaints or
requests for assistance from business/industry, and ensures that proper
action is taken. Working directly for the commander, the ombudsman is able
to cut through organizational "red tape" and improve the command
problem-solving process. The success of the ombudsman program at
Headquarters AMC prompted the establishment of ombudsman programs in all
of the subordinate AMC buying commands. The AMC-wide ombudsman program is
a positive force in the timely resolution of problems presented by
contractors. It contributes to an increased level of sensitivity in the
command for handling contractor problems, and results in the solution of
most problems presented without the need for expensive and time-consuming
NASA also established an ombudsman program to improve communication
between the agency and interested parties. The NASA ombudsman hears and
works to resolve concerns from actual and potential offerors, as well as
contractors, during the pre- and post award acquisition
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
ADR means any procedure or combination of procedures used voluntarily to
resolve controversies without resorting to litigation. Examples of ADR include
conciliation, facilitation, mediation, and mini-trials.
ADR can provide an effective and less expensive method for resolving contract
disputes. Agencies should include an agreement to utilize ADR in their
The Navy has used ADR techniques since 1982, and it has been able to
resolve issues and controversies in almost 99 percent of the cases in
which ADR was used. Recently, the Navy used ADR to resolve a $1.1 million
dispute. The hearing on this matter was completed within six hours, and a
decision was rendered the next day.
There is no single correct method for conducting ADR. Each situation is
different and the ADR technique and procedures must be tailored to a particular
situation and the needs of the parties.
The Army has established an acquisition reform working group that meets
periodically with industry to discuss upcoming procurements and the use of
The DLA has established agency-wide guidelines which include
consultation with ADR specialists to determine which of the numerous ADR
techniques would be appropriate for resolving each dispute
Several agencies, including the Navy, the Air Force, Army Corps of Engineers,
and GSA, have drafted model ADR agreements. These documents can provide useful
guidance to agencies in implementing the use of ADR techniques. A model
agreement is provided at Appendix 12.
The best practices included in this document are a first step at providing
practical guidance for implementing a performance-based approach to service
contracting. The use of these methods should lead to more cost-effective
acquisitions, better value, and greater competition. They should have the net
effect of shifting some of the manageable performance risk from the government
to the contractors. Contractors will be given more latitude for determining
methods of performance, with more responsibility for performance quality. The
government should experience fewer cost overruns, schedule delays, and
By using PBSC methods, agencies have an opportunity to further the goals of
streamlining and reinvention. The PBSC process requires agencies to re-evaluate
their workload to determine what really needs to be done and how best to do it.
Once a requirement has been subjected to this process, future performance-based
contracting will be easier, and agency needs will be better defined and
manageable. This creates a "win/win" situation for both agencies and
- USAF Manual 64-108, 11/4/94, "Service Contracts"
Contact: Major Brian Bellacicco
SAF/ACQO, USAF, Pentagon 1060
Washington, DC 20330
- NAVFAC M0327 "Facilities Support Contract Quality Management Manual"
Contact: Willard M. Thigpen
Naval Facilities Engineering Command
P.O. Box 190010
N. Charleston, NC 29419-9010
- OFPP Pamphlet #4, 10/80 -- "A Guide for Writing and Administering
Performance Statements of Work for Service Contracts"
(OMB Publications: 202-395-7332)
Performance-Based Service Contracting (PBSC)
Solicitation/Contract/Task Order Review Checklist
The following checklist is provided as a guide that may be used to aid in
developing a performance-based solicitation, contract or task order, and to
assist in determining whether an existing solicitation, contract or task order
may be appropriately classified as performance-based. This checklist is not
intended to usurp contracting officer discretion or authority regarding how
to structure an acquisition. However, the more an acquisition departs from
adherence to the checklist, the less likely the agency will achieve the benefits
of improved contractor performance and lower price that PBSC can provide.
This checklist contains minimum required elements that must be present for
an acquisition to be considered performance-based. To be effective, these elements
must be communicated to potential offerors in time to be considered when developing
their proposals. It also contains additional PBSC components important to ensuring
the Government obtains the benefits of PBSC and "other considerations" that
are not performance-based contracting methods per se but that nevertheless
so directly affect the success of PBSC that they are included.
This document is but one tool to assist in developing and assessing PBSC,
and it is purposefully not detailed or explanatory. For more fundamental discussions
of PBSC, see: Federal Acquisition Circular 97-1; Federal Acquisition Regulation
Subpart 37.6; and OFPP’s Policy Letter 91-2, "Service Contracting" and "A
Guide to Best Practices for Performance-Based Service Contracting." The
latter two publications are available from the Executive Office of the President’s
Office of Publications, 202-395-7332 and the Acquisition Reform Network, www.arnet.gov.
Minimum Mandatory PBSC Requirements
- Performance requirements that define the work in measurable, mission-related
- Performance standards (i.e., quality, quantity, timeliness) tied to the
- A Government quality assurance (QA) plan that describes how the contractor’s
performance will be measured against the performance standards.
- If the acquisition is either critical to agency mission accomplishment
or requires relatively large expenditures of funds, positive and negative
incentives tied to the Government QA plan measurements.
Additional PBSC Components
- An historic workload analysis is performed, or the workload is estimated
if historic data is unavailable, to aid in determining the performance requirements
and standards, Government QA plan, and incentives.
- The solicitation and contract/task order convey a logical, easily understood
flow among performance requirements, performance standards, Government QA,
and performance incentives.
- Process-oriented requirements (e.g., job descriptions, education requirements,
level-of-effort) and reports are eliminated to the maximum feasible extent.
- Government QA performance evaluators assigned to assess contractor performance
are trained in PBSC.
- Commercial and/or industry-wide performance standards, where available,
are relied upon.
- The marketplace and other stakeholders are provided the opportunity to
comment on draft performance requirements and standards, the Government QA
plan, and performance incentives.
- If the size of the requirement justifies the resource expenditures, potential
offerors are given the opportunity to learn more about the "as is"
operation to facilitate their ability to develop intelligent proposals.
- The contract/task order is fixed price.
- The contract/task order is completion type (vs. term type or level-of-effort).
- Multi-year contracting authority is used where available.
- Experience and lessons learned from predecessor acquisitions are used to
convert recurring requirements to PBSC.
- Past performance evaluations are based on the results of contract QA measurements
and incentives, and QA plans are consistent with past performance factors.
- For recurring requirements that have been converted to PBSC, the effects
of conversion are measured (e.g., price, performance).
- The contract/task order is awarded competitively.
- Best value evaluation/selection methods are used to award the contract/task
- Informal conflict resolution methods are utilized (e.g., alternative dispute
resolution, ombudsman, formal partnering agreements).
- An umbrella-type contract that has demonstrated significant performance
problems, cost overruns, or has included an amount of work that is too great
or diverse to be effectively managed by either the Government or the contractor,
is broken up into multiple contracts.
TARGETS OF OPPORTUNITY FOR PERFORMANCE-BASED SERVICE CONTRACTING (PBSC)
The categories of services on this list are PBSC targets of opportunity with
high payoff potential in terms of savings and improved mission support. The
list is intended as a guide, and not to be all-inclusive or restrictive. Services
not on the list also may be well-suited to PBSC, especially if they are recurring.
This list will be updated periodically to incorporate agencies’ experiences.
The following services have been acquired successfully, frequently and historically
by agencies using PBSC methods. Fixed price contracts should be the rule when
contracting for these services.
- Nontechnical ("blue collar") support, e.g., security, laundry,
grounds maintenance, facility maintenance, equipment repair.
- Operation and maintenance of facilities.
- Administrative and clerical support, e.g., data entry, court reporting,
typing, editing, distribution.
- Computer maintenance.
- Aircraft maintenance and test range support.
- Transportation, travel and relocation services.
- Medical services.
The following services have been acquired successfully, but relatively recently,
using PBSC methods and PBSC templates have been developed for these services
by government-wide working groups. Thus, fewer examples exist. Fixed price
contracts should be the rule when contracting for these services.
- Telephone call center operations.
- Software maintenance and support.
The following services offer significant opportunities for using PBSC methods,
but to date, experience is limited to pilot projects and/or PBSC templates.
- Environmental remediation.
- Software development.
- Management support.
- Studies and analyses.
- "The Positive Results of OFPP’s PBSC Pilot Project", Stanley
Kaufman Contract Management, March 1996.
- "Performance-Based Contracting for Services: A Case Study", John
Richardson Contract Management, July 1995.
- "Alternative Dispute Resolution: A Proposed Agreement", Ralph
C. Nash The Nash & Cibinic Report, Vol. 9, No. 4, April
- "Alternative Dispute Resolution: A Streamlined Approach to Resolving
Differences", Frank Carr, James T. DeLanoy, Joseph M. McDade, Jr., T.I.P.,
Vol. 6, No. 2, February 1995.
- "Performance-Based Contracting Incentives: Myths, Best Practices,
and Innovations", Gregory A. Garrett Contract Management, February
- "Reinventing the Government Contract for Services", Robert J.
Wehrle-Einhorn National Contract Management Journal, Vol. 25, Issue
- "Federal Policy on Performance-Based Contracting for Services",
Stanley Kaufman Contract Management, July 1993.
- U.S. General Accounting Office, "Partnerships: Customer-Supplier Relationships
Can Be Improved Through Partnering," GAO/NSIAD-94-173, July 1994.
- See also: OFPP Policy Letter 91-2 at Appendix 2
- User Manuals at Attachment 3
GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND COMPANIES OFFERING TRAINING IN PERFORMANCE-BASED
- ASR MANAGEMENT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES
POC - Philip Rosenberg
315 Oser Avenue
Hauppauge, NY 11788
Phone Number: 516-231-1086
- BUSINESS MANAGEMENT RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, INC
POC - Jim Harper
3949 Pender Drive Suite 300
Fairfax, VA 22030-6033
Phone Number: 703-691-0868
- CALDWELL CONSULTING ASSOCIATES
P. O. Box 10141
Richmond, VA 23240-0141
Phone Number: 804-740-2469
- Carte, Inc.
POC - Frances Richmann
Falls Church, VA 22041
Phone Number: 703-256-0509
- COAST GUARD, UNITED STATES
POC - Commander Steve Jacob
2100 Second Street, SW
Washington, DC 20593-0001
Phone Number: 202-267-1195
- FARRIS ASSOCIATES
POC - Dr. M.T. Farris
P.O. Box 3020
Daphne, AL 36526
Phone Number: 334-621-1828
- FEDERAL PUBLICATIONS, INC.
Mr. Michael Canavan
Federal Publications, Inc.
1120 20th Street, NW - Suite 500
Washington, DC 20036
Phone Number: 202-337-7000
- GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION FEDERAL ACQUISITION INSTITUTE
POC - John Blumenstein
Office of Acquisition Policy
Washington, DC 20405
Phone Number: 202-501-0964
- GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION INTERAGENCY TRAINING CENTER
POC - Veronica Brown
1213 Jefferson Davis Highway
Crystal Gateway #4, Suite 900
Arlington, VA 22202
Phone Number: 703-603-3216
- GIANCOLA AND ASSOCIATES
POC - Jeffrey Giancola
8713 Irvington Avenue
Bethesda, MD 20817
Phone Number: 301-530-8228
- GRANT THORNTON
POC - Thomas Dobrydney
1850 M Street, NW Suite 300
Washington, DC 20036-5804
Phone Number: 202-296-7800
- HUMANITAS INC
POC - Norman A. Linn
16398 Old Frederick Road
Mt. Airy, MD 21771
Phone Number: 301-854-6025
- JEFFERSON SOLUTIONS, L.L.C.
Mr. Allan V. Burman
President, Jefferson Solutions, L.L.C.
1341 G Street, NW, Suite 1100
Washington, DC 20005-3105
Phone Number: 202-626-8565
- KALMAN AND COMPANY INC
POC - Barbara Kalman
11 Koger Center, Suite 239
Norfolk, VA 23502
Phone Number: 804-461-4292
- MANAGEMENT AND INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES ASSOCIATES
POC - Charles Brewer
Post Office Box 84
Signal Mountain, TN 37377-0084
Phone Number: 615-490-0928
- MSC ASSOCIATES, INC
POC - James E. Hutcheson
2837 Thaxton Lane
Oakton, VA 22124
Phone Number: 703-242-7928
- NAVAL CENTER FOR ACQUISITION TRAINING
Mr. Jeffrey Brunner
Naval Center for Acquisition Training
1968 Gilbert Street - Suite 660
Norfolk, VA 23511-3384
Phone Number: 804-445-4996 ext. 222
- NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND
POC - Angela Naill
200 Stovall Street
Alexandria, Virginia 22332
Phone Number: 703-325-9052
- PRC INC
POC - David Kirkpatrick
1500 PRC Drive
McLean, VA 22102
Phone Number: 703-556-3144
- RED HAWK LABORATORY
POC - Matthew Bucholz
1800 Diagonal Road, Suite 600
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone Number: 703-684-4468
- SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
POC - Bruce Shelton
7880 Backlick Road, Suite 5
Springfield, VA 22150
Phone Number: 703-866-4700
- WARDEN ASSOCIATES
POC - JoAnn Warden
6727 Clelia Court
Springfield, VA 22152
Phone Number: 703-644-5912
- Mr. William S. Coleman, Jr.
6917 Andre Drive
Indianapolis, IN 46272
Phone Number: 317-876-1622
PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT SUMMARY VEHICLE OPERATIONS
Degree of Deviation from Requirement (AQL)
from Contract Price for Exceeding the AQL
||Customer must be picked up within 4 minutes
of the agreed upon time.
||Bus must not arrive at the stop later
than scheduled time or depart earlier than schedule time plus 5 minutes.
|Operate Unscheduled Bus
||Bus must arrive not later than 4 minutes
from agreed upon time between customer and dispatcher.
SAMPLE REQUEST FOR COMMENT
R -- PRIVATE [CORRECTIONAL]/DETENTION SERVICES
POC: Timothy L. Parry, Contracting Officer, 202-307-0817.
The following is a Request for Comment (RFC). This synopsis is for information
and planning purposes only and does not constitute a Request for Proposal.
The President’s fiscal year 1996 budget proposes an increase in the use
of privatized corrections in the Federal Bureau of Prisons (FBOP). Specifically,
the plan is to contract with private corrections concerns to operate the majority
of all future Federal pretrial detention, minimum and low security [CORRECTIONAL]
facilities. The [CORRECTIONAL] facilities will be Government Owned/Contractor
Operated and the estimated population capacity of individual prisons is anticipated
to be between 800 and 1,600 inmates. The purpose of the RFC is to afford industry
an opportunity to comment on any perceived issues with regard to the privatization
initiative and to allow the Government to receive the benefit of industry comments.
The Government’s purpose in providing an opportunity for industry comment
is to identify potential problem areas, and provide alternative recommendations
in order to enhance the success of the initiative. The Government believes
industry feedback is important, and is receptive to any and all ideas from
industry which would result in limiting unnecessarily constraining requirements,
realizing cost savings, or highlighting potential technical or contractual
problem areas associated with the initiative. Any comments provided should
not be viewed as a vehicle for presenting a specific approach or product intended
to be proposed but as an opportunity to improve an eventual solicitation package.
Comments are solicited regarding the following:
- The FBOP is considering negotiated firm-fixed unit-price (based upon inmate
man-days) Indefinite-Quantity "Performance-Based" contracts with
an award or incentive fee and an objective, measurable quality assurance
surveillance plan (the FBOP intends to follow Office of Federal Procurement
Policy letter 91-2, Service Contracting),
- Selection will be made on a best-value basis and significant emphasis will
be afforded to past performance in providing [CORRECTIONAL] services as an
evaluation criterion in determining award,
- The FBOP will require the eventual awardees to provide comprehensive [CORRECTIONAL]
services including the ability to respond appropriately to emergency situations
arising from within or outside the [CORRECTIONAL] facility,
- The FBOP will require the eventual awardees to provide comprehensive maintenance
and repair of the Government Owned facility and to provide the necessary
insurance/general liability coverage deemed necessary or appropriate,
- The FBOP may require the contractors to identify key facility management
staff (i.e., Wardens and other key personnel responsible for day-to-day prison
management) with initial submission of proposals,
- The FBOP will require the eventual awardees to provide comprehensive educational,
life skills, substance abuse, recreational and similar [CORRECTIONAL] programs
appropriate for an adult inmate population,
- Comment regarding the provision of comprehensive medical and psychiatric
care to the referenced inmate population,
- Comment regarding the awardees providing a health care delivery system
which meets the current Joint Commission on Accreditation of Health Care
Organizations standard for ambulatory care facilities and the accreditation
of that system subsequent to award,
- Comment regarding the appropriate length of the start-up period between
contract award and performance,
- At various times, for various reasons, a number of prisoners may be moved
between FBOP contractor managed facilities and FBOP operated facilities.
Therefore, the use of established FBOP classification, discipline, and inmate
record keeping procedures will be necessary,
- Comments, whether supportive or critical, are earnestly solicited regarding
every aspect of the proposed initiative. Replies are not mandatory. Replies
will be separated from, and have no bearing on, subsequent evaluation of
proposals submitted in response to any resulting formal Requests for Proposals.
The use of comments received from industry to complete final statements of
work and resulting solicitation documents will be at the discretion of the
FBOP. Any subsequent solicitations will be synopsized prior to its release.
Eligibility in participating in a future acquisition does not depend upon
a response to this notice. The Government will not critique a potential offeror’s
comments and the RFC should not be used by offerors to market their products/services.
The Government does not intend to pay for the information solicited and will
not recognize any costs associated with submission of the RFC. Proprietary
information is not being solicited. Information considered proprietary, if
any, should be identified as such. Responses to this synopsis must be submitted
in writing to the Contracting Officer at the above address no later than
May 7, 1995. (0097)
U.S. Department of Justice
Federal Bureau of Prisons
Procurement and Property Branch
400 First Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20534
Attention: Community Corrections Center Contracting
(*phone numbers and addresses have been updated in the event the reader would
like to contact the writer.)
(To be performed (Daily) (Monthly) (Weekly), etc)
VEHICLE AUTHORIZATION UTILIZATION BOARD (VAUB)
Method of Surveillance
contractor is required to hold a Vehicle Authorization Utilization
Board (VAUB) quarterly.
contractor should have in his possession a copy of the VAUB minutes.
There is no specific format for these minutes, but they should conform
to the standard form in AFR 10-1. Minutes should adequately describe
and document actions taken by VAUB.
contract is required to develop a vehicle priority list for VAUB
approved priority list. It should have the board president’s
signature and date.
MODEL ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION AGREEMENT
This alternative dispute resolution (ADR) agreement is entered into by (Name
of organization) and (Name of organization) to establish a procedure
to resolve a dispute that has arisen during the performance of contract (Contract
number and date).
- The parties agree to present their positions on this dispute to a mediation
panel consisting of a neutral advisor, (Name), and two principals
with full authority to settle the dispute, (Name), representing (Name
of organization), and (Name), representing (Name of organization).
Following the presentations, the panel will enter into negotiations to
arrive at a fair settlement of the dispute. During this ADR proceeding,
the principals will have full authority to alter the procedure or to schedule
additional meetings as they find necessary to reach a settlement of the
- This ADR proceeding will be held from (Date) through (Date) at (Location) [(or)
at a location to be determined by mutual agreement of the parties].
- Prior to the ADR proceeding, the parties will cooperate with each other
in exchanging all documents that are relevant to the dispute and in permitting
reasonable review of each other’s contract files. They will also
permit interviews of two key personnel for a period of no longer than four
hours each. On (Date), each party will send the following documents
to the neutral advisor and the two principals:
- A position paper summarizing the arguments of the party. This paper
shall not exceed (Number) pages, excluding charts and tables.
- All documents that are relevant to the dispute. The parties will cooperate
in selecting documents to avoid duplication between the submissions of
- A list of the issues to be determined by the panel. The parties will
make every effort to submit a joint list of issues in the order that
is most logical for presentation to the panel.
- A list of witnesses and participants in the ADR proceeding.
- The ADR proceeding will be conducted using the following procedures:
- Each party will make an opening statement of no longer than (1 to
2) hour(s). The first statement will be made by the proponent of
the major elements of the dispute.
- Each issue will be discussed using a round table discussion technique.
Each party will make its key employees and consultants available to participate
in this discussion. In the discussion, the proponent of the issue will
make a brief presentation of its position on the issue. The other party
will then make a brief presentation of its defense. The neutral advisor
will then moderate a discussion -- calling on participants from each
side as they request to address the issues in question. There will be
no side discussions and no participant will speak until called on by
the neutral advisor. The goal of this discussion is to fully develop
all information relevant to the determination of the facts of the dispute
and the precise position of each party. All participants will refrain
from statements that are unduly argumentative or contentious.
- The proceedings will not be recorded and witnesses will not be sworn.
However, all participants will be expected to be forthright in their
statements and to be fully open and honest in their dealings with each
- Attorneys may participate in the discussion and may call on other personnel
when necessary to ensure that they contribute their knowledge to the
discussion. Attorneys will not cross-examine witnesses of the other party.
- Following the round table discussions, each party may summarize its
position in a statement no longer than ½ hour. The parties may,
by mutual agreement, waive these statements.
- Following the proceedings described in Paragraph 4, the principals and
the neutral advisor will meet to negotiate a settlement that is fair to
both parties. The principals may conduct these discussions with or without
the neutral advisor. The principals may also request the neutral advisor
to present his views on any issues or to propose resolution of one or more
of the issues in dispute. Either principal may request a private, confidential
meeting with the neutral advisor to discuss possible settlement positions,
and the neutral advisor will not reveal any confidential information to
the other party, unless authorized to do so. Either principal may adjourn
the meeting at any time to caucus with his team, but all parties will endeavor
to keep the negotiations active until a settlement has been reached. If
settlement is not reached within the time allotted for this proceeding,
the principals may request that the neutral advisor formulate a proposed
settlement that is fair to each party. The principals may also continue
negotiations for any period that is deemed to be desirable.
- If settlement is reached, either party may call for the neutral advisor
to prepare a report documenting the settlement and stating his conclusions
as to its merits. Any such report will be delivered to each party promptly
after it is requested. This report may be used by either party to justify
the settlement within its own organization.
- This entire process is a settlement negotiation and all offers, promises,
conduct, or statements made in this ADR proceeding are confidential and
shall be inadmissible in any subsequent litigation (including proceedings
before a board of contract appeals) of the disputes covered by this agreement.
All written materials created specifically for this proceeding are also
confidential and inadmissible in subsequent litigation. However, if settlement
is reached, any such statements and written material may be used to justify
and document the contract modification embodying the settlement.
- The neutral advisor will treat the subject matter of this proceeding as
confidential and refrain from disclosing any of the information exchanged
to third parties. The neutral advisor is disqualified as a witness, consultant,
or expert for either party in any matter relating to the disputes covered
by this agreement.
- The fees of the neutral advisor and the cost of the meeting room will
be shared equally by the parties. Each party will bear all other costs
of this proceeding.
- Either party may terminate this proceeding at any time for any reason.
|(Principal’s signature) (Date)
||(Principal’s signature) (Date)
|(Name of organization)
||(Name of organization)
|(Neutral advisor’s signature) (Date)
Binding or nonbinding arbitration can be added to this agreement if the
parties want the neutral advisor to write a decision in the event that
they fail to negotiate a settlement. If this is desired, the following
paragraph can be added to the agreement (with appropriate alteration depending
on whether the arbitration decision is to be binding or nonbinding).
- If settlement is not reached, upon the agreement of the principals that
settlement is not possible, the neutral advisor will render a decision
within 14 days. This decision shall be binding on both parties to this
dispute unless either principal rejects the decision with (Number) days.
Either party may reject the decision of the neutral advisor without stating
any reason for such rejection.
Reprinted from the Nash & Cibinic Report, April 1995 by permission
of Ralph C. Nash.
Return to Top