Article
First glance: Breakdown of the Alliant 3 draft solicitation
Jan. 16, 2024 · Authored by Leo Alvarez, Dylan Schreiner, Molly Menoni
The highly anticipated and closely watched second draft of the Alliant 3 solicitation is finally here! After nearly a year since the release of the amended version of the first draft request for proposal (RFP), on Dec. 8, 2023, the General Services Administration (GSA) released the second draft RFP for the “Best-In-Class” (BIC) Governmentwide Acquisition Contract (GWAC).
As a continuation of flagship vehicles Alliant and Alliant 2, Alliant 3 will provide government agencies with integrated information technology (IT) solution services for evolving needs. The focus of the contract vehicle is to solicit existing and future leading-edge technologies.
There are several changes when compared to the first draft RFP — some of which address technical proposal structure, self-scoring and teaming.
Key takeaways
Contemplated number of awards
According to the second draft RFP, GSA still intends to make at least 60 awards while also considering the possibility of tied scores. In the event of a tie at the 60th award, all offerors with equal scores will receive an award. Additionally, if a tied score occurs before the 60th award, the two offerors will also receive awards.
Master Contract labor categories
The Alliant 3 Master Contract will provide for three (3) standard IT Service Labor Categories (LCATs) to enhance the consistency of labor and service cost/price offers and reporting. The three (3) LCATs are:
- Standard IT Service LCATs
- Non-Standard IT Service LCATs
- Ancillary Service LCATs
Maximum rates at the senior skill level for the 31 “Standard IT Services LCATs” will only apply to Time & Material (T&M) and Labor Hour (LH) contract type Task Orders and to any T&M and LH contract type Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINS) in Task Orders with multiple contract types. Maximum Rates will not apply to any other contract types, including Cost-Reimbursement and Fixed-price Task Orders or Cost-Reimbursement and Fixed-price CLINS. Non-Standard and Ancillary LCAT pricing will be determined at the Task Order level.
Meaningful relationship commitment letters (MRCLs)
In the second draft RFP, the utilization of resources from a parent company, affiliate, division, and/or subsidiary will only allow offerors to take credit for scoring elements involving contractor business systems. Previously, GSA allowed offerors with an MRCL to take credit for relevant project experience, certifications and systems. This also departs from GSA’s historic treatment of offers under other major acquisition programs like the OASIS+ contract vehicle.
- Removed scoring section for “NAICS Relevant Experience Project - Fair Opportunity Task Order Award Against a MA/IDIQ Contract” (was 3,000 points, now N/A)
Note: GSA did not remove and renumber Section L.5.2.3.6, but instead left it as a “Reserved” placeholder so a new scoring area could be added to the final solicitation.
- Increased points for DCMA/DCAA certified Adequate Accounting System (was 5,500 points, now 6,000 points)
- Added in scoring alternative for a CFA/CPA certified Adequate Cost Accounting System (was previously not allowed, now 3,000 points)
- Added in scoring alternative for a CFA/CPA certified Approved Purchasing System (was previously not allowed, now 750 points)
- Added in scoring alternative for a CFA/CPA certified Acceptable Estimating System (was previously not allowed, now 200 points)
- Increased points for Scope 1 and Scope 2 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Disclosure (was 1,500 points, now 1,750 points)
- Increased points for Scope 3 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Disclosure (was 1,500 points, now 1,750 points)
Below is a summary breakdown of the maximum points by Scoring Volume for the Alliant 3 Draft RFP 2:
| Alliant 3 Draft RFP 2 Self Scoring Worksheet | |||
| Section | Element | Max Point Value | Percent |
| L.5.2 | VOLUME 2 – RELEVANT EXPERIENCE | 50% | |
| L.5.2.2 | NAICS Relevant Experience Projects / Primary Relevant Experience Projects at $7.5 Million Minimum Value | 17,500 | |
| L.5.2.3.3 | NAICS Relevant Experience Project Size & Complexity | 10,500 | |
| L.5.2.3.4 | NAICS Relevant Experience Project - Multiple Agency Awards | 3,500 | |
| L.5.2.3.5 | NAICS Relevant Experience Project - Cost-Reimbursement | 4,000 | |
| L.5.2.3.7 | NAICS Relevant Experience Project in a Foreign Location | 1,500 | |
| L.5.2.4 | Emerging Technology (ET) Relevant Experience | 6,600 | |
| L.5.2.4.3 | Breadth of Emerging Technology Relevant Experience | 1,500 | |
| L.5.2.4.4 | Engaging Small Business w/ Emerging Technology Experience | 1,000 | |
| L.5.3 | VOLUME 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE | 19% | |
| L.5.3 | Past Performance for Relevant Experience Projects | 17,500 | |
| L.5.4 | VOLUME 4 – SYSTEMS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND CLEARANCES | 19% | |
| L.5.4.1 - L.5.4.5 | Systems | 8,100 | |
| L.5.4.6 - L.5.4.9 | Industry Certifications | 6,000 | |
| L.5.4.10 | Government Facility Clearances | 3,500 | |
| L.5.6 | VOLUME 6 – ORGANIZATIONAL RISK ASSESSMENT | 8% | |
| L.5.6.1 | Organizational Risk Assessment | 7,500 | |
| L.5.7 | VOLUME 7 – SUSTAINABILITY RELATED DISCLOSURES | 4% | |
| L.5.7.1 | Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG Disclosure Completed | 1,750 | |
| L.5.7.2 | Scope 3 GHD Disclosure Completed | 1,750 | |
| MAXIMUM POINTS | 92,2000 | ||
Contractor business systems
Each of the key contractor business systems included in the Alliant 3 second draft RFP has varying degrees of detail, trigger words with specific meaning and acceptable forms of documentation to meet the solicitation scoring criteria. Be sure to read these sections in detail and do not paint with a broad brush for all contractor business systems. Please note, Baker Tilly will be supporting Alliant 3 offerors seeking third-party CPA review of contractor business systems.
- Adequate Cost Accounting System: Documentation from DCAA, DCMA, CFA or a third-party CPA that the offerors’ accounting system has been audited and determined adequate is acceptable for verification.
- Approved Purchasing System: Documentation from DCMA, CFA or a third-party CPA is acceptable for verification. Must provide either the CPSR Report (if available) or the official letterhead from DCMA, CFA or CPA verifying the approval of the purchasing system in accordance with the CPSR Guidebook.
- Acceptable Estimating System: Documentation from DCAA, DCMA, CFA or a third-party CPA that the offerors’ estimating system has been audited and determined acceptable is acceptable for verification.
- Earned Value Management System (EVMS): Contractor must provide documentation to verify that their EVMS is compliant with Electronic Industries Alliance (EIA) Standard-748.
Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) requirements
The Alliant 3 second draft RFP requires offerors to complete a C-SCRM Responsibility Assessment (Attachment J.P-11) with their proposal submission. If an offeror is awarded a contract, then within 60 days of contract award the contractor must complete and submit a C-SCRM Plan in accordance with the C-SCRM Plan Template (Attachment J.P-13). Interestingly, Alliant 3 has four (4) C-SCRM Maturity Levels—the first time we’ve observed such a structure articulated in such a fashion on any major GWAC/MAC program.
GSA deems an “acceptable” C-SCRM Plan as having a minimum of the 40 pre-identified NIST Controls (i.e., the Baseline level). While not required to exceed the 40 pre-identified Baseline NIST Controls, contract awardees are “encouraged” to adopt as many NIST Controls as possible to achieve a higher maturity rating level. Contractors should consider adopting as many NIST controls as possible to avoid limiting their ability to bid on Task Orders. Ordering Contracting Officers have the option to select a minimum C-SCRM Posture/Tier level when developing their Task Order requirements.
| Tier | Maturity | NIST 800-161, Rev. 1 controls (See Attachment J.p-14) | Total controls |
| 1 | Baseline | 40 pre-identified NIST Controls | 40 |
| 2 | Basic | Baseline plus 57 adopted NIST Controls | 97 |
| 3 | Intermediate | Basic plus 41 adopted NIST Controls | 135 |
| 4 | Advanced | Intermediate plus 23 and above NIST Controls | 161 |
Offerors should keep in mind that the NIST standard referenced is NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-161—NIST’s flagship supply chain risk framework. While there is some overlap between control families in NIST SP 800-161 and NIST SP 800-171 (the foundation for the Department of Defense’s (DoD’s) Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification), offerors should evaluate how efforts toward CMMC could provide coverage for a NIST SP 800-161 Internal Controls gap assessment. The frameworks are different and require focused attention, especially if GSA is encouraging adherence as part of being an approved Alliant 3 vendor.
General volume items
While there were no omissions within general volume items from the first draft RFP to the second draft RFP, there were three additions:
Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) Compliance Form
- C-SCRM Compliance Form attesting to their adherence of federal law and regulation governing cybersecurity supply chain risk management
Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Form
- OCI Form prescribes responsibilities, general rules and procedures for identifying, evaluating and resolving organizational conflicts of interest
Price Proposal
- To establish maximum ceiling rates at the Master Contract Level for the time-and-material (T&M) and labor hour (LH) contract types.
GSA noted that the Price Proposal requirements are still being developed and are anticipated to change in the final RFP to include the evaluation of fully burdened rates for each of the 31 labor categories listed in Attachment J-3 at the senior skill level for T&M and LH contract types. The government anticipates making a fair and reasonable price determination based on Total Evaluated Price and does not anticipate requiring certified cost and pricing data at the Master Contract level.
Proposal submission portal
Similar to the recent OASIS+ GWAC solicitation, GSA will utilize Symphony as the official electronic proposal submission portal. Upon release of the final solicitation, offerors are instructed to submit all questions via Symphony. Offerors should register and gain familiarity with the portal before the final solicitation is released.
