NPA Recommendation Process

Intro Video (play BEFORE presentation starts)
• 2014 DFW High School Football Pump Up 1
• http://youtu.be/SzZjvTK9l_0
1
NPA Recommendation Process
Friday Night in Texas – It’s Game Day!
Down & Dirty Fundamental Preparation
• All of us are coaches
– Lead
– Inspire
– Develop
• Do you know:
– Latest strategy?
– Most current stats?
– Rules and regulations?
– Your latest scouting report and win themes?
3
Football, Life, & Business – Similarities?
• TX High School Football Unplugged
• Start on click, not automatic start!
• http://youtu.be/hPu9b2fLXUc
4
Have You Made Impactful Decisions?
Football
Business
Coaching Style
Leadership Style
Offense
Business Development
Defense
Contract Management
& Performance
League
Lines of Business
Rules and Regulations
Rules and Regulations
Practice & Off Season
Continuous Development & Training
Performance Statistics
Quality Control
Game Day
Execution
Pre / Post Game Routines
Operation Processes & Systems
5
Where Are You Playing Ball?
6
Where Are You Playing Ball?
SourceAmerica Lines of Business
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Custodial
Grounds Maintenance
Food Service
Commissary Shelf Stocking
Laundry Services
Secure Document Destruction
Hospitality Services
Contact Center Services/IT Services
Records and Document Management
Supply Chain Management
Healthcare Environmental Services
Contract Management Services
Fleet Management
Products
Total Facilities Management (TFM)
7
Current Statistics
8
Current Stats (as of March 27, 2014)
SourceAmerica
Published Postings
Version 1
Version 2
Version 3
Total
Total
54
13
3
70
• 70 Postings have been Published
• 47 Opportunities Represented
9
Current Stats (as of March 27, 2014)
By Posting
Type
ON
DS-ON
DS-A
RFI
Total
Products
Services
Total
Total
25
13
7
9
54
19
35
54
Ave. # Days
Published
15.52
7.30
6.42
15.55
n/a
10
Current Stats (as of March 27, 2014)
By Sub-Posting Type
AbilityOne
AbilityOne TFM
AbilityOne M&D (products)
AbilityOne Additional Producer
AbilityOne Project Transfers
Federal Supply Schedule
Non-AbilityOne
Total
Total
33
2
2
2
6
1
8
54
11
Current Stats (as of March 27, 2014)
By Business Unit
Total
East Region
7
National Operations
4
National Business Development
4
North Central Region
5
North West Region
2
Products
13
Pacific West Region
2
South Region
12
South Central Region
3
Total Facility Management
2
Total
54
12
Current Stats – Highlights & Facts
• Between 1/27/2014 – 3/27/2014
– Regarding the 54 Published Postings
• 312.01 Estimated Disabled Work Years
• $24,603,980 Estimated Annual Contract Value
• 4 Cancellations
1 – Impact
3 – No Capacity or Capability
2 – No NPA Responses
4 – No Capacity or Capability
13
Rules & Regulations
14
The Rules Have Evolved
The Old Days
• Limited
Understanding of
NPA Capability
• No Formal
Process for
Outreach
B-1
July 2009
• NPAs Provide
Input
• Defined
Processes
• More
Transparency
• Limited Visibility
• More Competition
• SourceAmerica
More
Regionalized
• “Where’s My
Contract?”
• National in Scope
Changes in
Environment
• GAO Report
• Protests
• Yakima Case
NPA Rec. Process
Jan 2014
• Policy Based On
Regulations
• Procedure is
Public
• Budget Cuts
• SourceAmerica
Certification
• Decrease in
Opportunities =
Increase in
Competition
• NPA and SA
Instructor-led
Training
• Back to Govt.
Regulations
• Dedicated
Resources
15
The Rule Book - Policy
Policy Highlights
• SourceAmerica public document
– http://extranet.sourceamerica.org/Resources/Pages/NPARec.aspx
• Applies to the development of AbilityOne opportunities for
which SourceAmerica has NPA Recommendation
responsibilities
• Identifies the authority of the Commission and the
responsibilities that are designated to the CNA
• Outlines the suitability criteria areas
16
The Rule Book - Suitability
Determination
of Suitability
CFR
Policy
Section
Procedure
Section
CNA
Assesses
Employment
Potential
51-2.4(a)(1)
Section 4.0
7.2.C.1
Yes
Nonprofit Agency
Qualifications
51-2.4(a)(2)
Section 4.0
7.2.C.2
Yes
Capability
51-2.4(a)(3)
Section 4.0
7.2.C.2
Yes
Level of Impact
51-2.4(a)(4)
Section 4.0
N/A
No
(Commission)
17
The Rule Book - Procedure
Procedure Highlights
• SourceAmerica public document
– http://extranet.sourceamerica.org/Resources/Pages/NPARec.aspx
• Recommendation: NOT Selection, Distribution, Award
• Defined Posting Types, Criteria, Evaluation, and Processes
Criteria Type
Required?
Procedure
Section
Who Assesses
Minimum Eligibility
Criteria
Yes, 6 Required
7.2.C.1
Finance & Regional
Operations
Opportunity Specific
Criteria
Yes, 3 Required
7.2.C.2
Evaluation Team
Discretionary
Criteria
No
7.2.C.3
Executive Director
18
The Rule Book - Procedure
Quick
Facts
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Posting or
Publication?
Posting
Same types of
postings, new
names?
Yes
Where do
NPAs find
Postings?
Customer
Portal
Four Distinct Types of AbilityOne
Postings
• Request for Information
– (RFI), Procedure Section 6.0
• Opportunity Notice
– (ON), Procedure Section 7.0
• Designated Source Opportunity Notice
– (DS-ON), Procedure Section 8.0
• Designated Source Announcement
– (DS-A), Procedure Section 8.0
All posting types are outlined and defined
in the Procedure!
19
The Rule Book - Procedure
Criteria Linkage to NPA Responses
• Written responses from the NPA are directly related to
criteria listed in the posting.
• Criteria are directly linked to “Response Questions” (text box)
and/or “Response Statements” (attachment) listed in the
posting. Example, below:
Opportunity Specific
Criteria
Capability: Capability or “capability factors” are evaluation factors that bear on
the NPA’s relative ability to perform the requested scope of work. Such factors
include, but are not limited to: experience, past performance, qualifications of
proposed key personnel, facilities, and understanding of work.
Response Question
(text box)
(Capability- Past Performance) Describe your organization’s experience in
mentoring smaller and/or new AbilityOne NPAs. Include a brief description of
the mentorship relationship and outcomes(s). (////)
Response Statement
(attachment)
(Capability – Experience) Attach your NPA’s proposed technical solution to meet
the specifications, SOW, or opportunity description and requirements. Note:
Refer to the attached SOW/PSW/technical data for project specific details. (/////)
20
The Rule Book - Procedure
Quick
Facts
Q
A
Minimum
Eligibility
Consistent?
Yes
Q
A
Team or
Individual
Evaluations?
• Only Evaluate What is on Paper (Technical
and Past Performance)
• Discretionary Criteria for Executive Director’s
use only
• No weights are applied during evaluations
• Following Posting Instructions are critical to
your success!
Both
Defined Evaluation Matrices
Q
A
Descriptive or
Numeric?
Descriptive
Technical Matrix (/////)
Past Performance Matrix (////)
21
The Rule Book – Procedure, Section 7.4
• Technical Matrix (/////)
Rating
Description
Outstanding
The NPA’s response meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of
the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weakness. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.
Good
The NPA’s response meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the
requirements. The response contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful
performance is low.
Acceptable
The NPA’s response meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the
requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on performance.
Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.
Marginal
The NPA’s response does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate
approach and understanding of the requirements. The response has one or more weaknesses which are
not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.
Unacceptable
The NPA’s response does not meet the requirements and contains one or more significant weaknesses.
Risk of unsuccessful performance is very high.
Not Provided
The NPA marked the response with an N/A or failed to provide the requested response/attachment.
22
The Rule Book – Procedure, Section 7.4
• Past Performance Matrix (////)
Rating
Description
Very Relevant
Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort
and complexities this opportunity requires.
Relevant
Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and
complexities this opportunity requires.
Not Relevant
Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort
and complexities this opportunity requires.
Not Provided
The NPA marked the response with an N/A or failed to provide the requested
response/attachment.
23
The Rule Book - Procedure
24
The Rule Book - Procedure
NPA Debriefs (Procedure Sections 7.6 and 8.5)
• Only NPAs who responded as the lead organization and representing
themselves as the prime contractor for the specific ON may request and
participate in a formal debriefing (ON or DS-ON). SourceAmerica does
NOT offer debriefs to proposed subcontractors.
• The request must be made in writing to the respective Executive Director
within five (5) business days of electronic time stamp documented in
the non-recommendation notification email sent from the SourceAmerica
Executive Director.
• SourceAmerica follows specific templates and processes for debriefs that
standardize the format and the information shared with the NPA.
25
The Rule Book - Procedure
Appeal Highlights (Procedure- Sections 9 and 10)
• An NPA cannot appeal just because they don’t like the
recommendation decision
• An appeal is eligible in situations where the NPA believes
that its response was not evaluated:
1) In accordance with the stated criteria listed in the posting; and
2) In a consistent manner with the process as outlined in the Procedure.
• Specific formatting and instructions that must be adhered to.
• All Level 1 appeals are handled by the VP of Regional Ops.
• All Level 2 appeals are handled by the COO.
26
Where Is Your Motivational Sanctuary?
27
The Heart of Winning
• Vince Lombardi winning is a habit
motivational video
• Start on click, not automatic start!
• http://youtu.be/tUFR_W1lRVE
• <iframe width="560" height="315"
src="//www.youtube.com/embed/tUFR_W1lR
VE" frameborder="0"
allowfullscreen></iframe>
28
A Winning Strategy – 2 Questions
1. Do you plan for winning “solutions” OR
“content” OR both?
2. Do you worry about the “right” things when
putting a proposal together?
29
A Winning Solution OR Content
How many times has a proposal been
thrown into chaos because during a
late-stage review someone decided the
solution was wrong?
When this happens, it’s a double-hit — in
addition to the time you spent on the original
solution, you also lose the time it took to write
about it. That is why it’s critically important to
validate the solution before you start writing.
30
A Winning Solution OR Content
• Conceptualizing and validating your approach is basically an engineering
problem.
• Define the solution. What are you going to do in order to achieve the
goals? What is your approach?
• Specify the solution. You need to document it so that others can
collaborate in the writing process. You can use bullets or storyboards.
• If you use storyboards, then take care not to entangle solution planning
with content planning.
• Validate the solution. Are you prepared to commit to this approach? Have
all stakeholders provided input? Will it achieve the goals? Is it realistic,
feasible, and efficient? Is it compliant? Is it within budget? Does it offer
competitive advantages, strengths, and sold rationale?
• Your validation plan for the proposal should address validating the
solution separately from validating the content. Write the solution into
your proposal.
31
Proposal Development Worries
The WRONG things to worry about…
1. “Can we do the work?” vs. “Can we win?”
– Identified your organization can do the work.
– Freed of the need to worry about whether or not you can
win, most organizations focus on whether they can
complete the proposal in time and please their leadership.
– This usually means that they worry more about passing
their draft reviews/submission than they do about winning.
32
Proposal Development Worries
The WRONG things to worry about…
2. Spelling and Grammar
–
–
–
–
Editing is important. Worry about winning first.
Editing may (or may not) be a factor in whether you win. But
it is only one factor, and not the one with the biggest impact.
This does not mean that you should submit a proposal full of
typos. It means that the risk of not winning because you
have one here or there is lower than the risk of not winning
because you failed to articulate why the customer should
select you.
When you must set priorities, base them on their impact on
your proposal’s evaluation score. Worry about things in the
right order.
33
Proposal Development Worries
The WRONG things to worry about…
3. Style
– Style is even lower on the hierarchy of needs than
spelling/grammar.
– Most proposals run out of time long before style can be addressed.
Some people try to overcome that by passing out a style manual or
editorial guide to the subject matter experts on the proposal.
– You are better off asking them to focus on content and ignore style.
– Then bring editors in after the assignments are complete to
incorporate style/branding. It’s more efficient that way.
– It’s important, but a lower priority. Putting your lower priority up front
to distract people with questionable writing skills to begin with is not
the answer.
34
Proposal Development Worries
The RIGHT things to worry about…
1. Why will the customer select you?
– In every section of the proposal, you should base your
response on answering this question.
– If you don’t know the answer, how can you possibly articulate
it for the customer? While you’re at it, you might want to
consider why the customer might select a competitor instead
of you… and what you are going to do about it.
– You should worry about this until you are confident in your
competitive advantage. And then continue to worry about it.
35
Proposal Development Worries
The RIGHT things to worry about…
2. Have you got the scope right?
– What are the limits on the project?
– How much?
– How long?
– Can you identify, hire, and train individuals with significant
disabilities?
– What should be included or excluded?
– Is your solution thorough and complete?
– Did you plan and tailor quality?
– Do you have the capacity?
36
Proposal Development Worries
The RIGHT things to worry about…
3. Can your proposal team deliver a
winning response?
– Separate from the issue of resource availability is resource capability.
Can they deliver a winning response?
– Do they have the writing skills and knowledge needed?
– Your odds of getting what you need go up in direct proportion to the
amount of planning detail you provide to them before they start
writing.
– After they start writing, you should watch closely for weakness
(schedule or content) so that you can prepare contingency plans.
37
Proposal Development Worries
The RIGHT things to worry about…
4. Do you have focused internal reviews?
– The more guidance you provide your reviewers, the more
reliable the results.
– However, because reviewers tend to be senior managers,
you’re often trying to direct people who have more authority
than you have. Overcome this with a vetted defined Proposal
Development Process.
– The recommended validation process is based on defining
specific criteria (e.g., targeted reviews) to help ensure that you
get what you need from the reviewers.
– There is more riding on whether you get the review of the
plans right than there is in later reviews. That’s something
worth worrying about.
38
What Is Your Drive to Win?
• Can Anyone Help Me?
• Start on click, not automatic start!
• http://youtu.be/Ruqg_4p6Cb8
39
Thank You
40

Download Report