Secure Your EPASS Victory: Preparing a Quality Response

The Engineering Professional and Administrative Support Services (EPASS) program is designed to enhance acquisition, engineering, finance, security, and administrative support for the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC). This contract primarily aims to improve program management for activities related to aircraft. Offerors are required to submit self-scored work samples as part of the technical section of their proposals.

At-a-Glance

In October 2024, the Government released a request for information (RFI) seeking feedback on the draft performance work statement (PWS) and evaluation criteria. Tracking and solicitation details are outlined in Tables 1 and 2 below.

Table 1: Tracking Information

ItemIdentification Number
Solicitation NumberFA862225R2500
GovWin Opportunity ID Number248836
Sam.gov Notice IDFOPR77
NAICS Code541512
Contract VehicleOASIS
Competition TypeSmall Business Set-Aside

Table 2: Solicitation Information

DateDescription
October 21, 2024RFI Draft PWS Draft Level of Effort Matrix (LOE) Draft Evaluation Criteria RFI Yes/No Questions
May 2025Estimated Solicitation Date
August 2025Estimated Award Date

The draft PWS underscores the significance of cross-cutting, foreign military sales (FMS), surge support, and effective coordination for mission success. The primary work areas identified in the PWS include:  

  • Program Management and Support Services
  • Engineering and Technical Support
  • Logistics and Sustainment
  • Cybersecurity and Information Protection
  • Contracting and Financial Management

Awardees will perform the work at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH; Robins Air Force Base, GA; and Tinker Air Force Base, OK.

Draft Evaluation Criteria

The Air Force provided draft evaluation criteria with the RFI released in October 2024.

Basis for Task Order Award

The selection process follows a fair opportunity method per the General Services Administration (GSA) OASIS+ Small Business Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contract and FAR 16.505. Awards will be granted to the Highest Technically Rated Offeror (HTRO) with a Realistic and Reasonable Price (RRP).

Evaluation Methodology/Factors

  1. Factor 1 – Technical
    • Offerors provide a self-score under each evaluation criteria subfactor.
    • The Government will validate these self-scores.
    • A self-scoring matrix with weighted factors will be used for each work sample.
  2. Factor 2 – Cost/Price
    • Evaluation for realism, reasonableness, and unbalanced pricing.
    • Detailed cost analysis will be conducted using techniques in FAR 15.404-1.
  3. Self-Scoring and Validation
    • Offerors must substantiate their self-scores with evidence.
    • Validation focuses on the proposal with the highest self-score.
    • Unsubstantiated claims can result in a score adjustment or disqualification.
  4. Subfactors for Technical Evaluation
    • Non-Functional Aspects:
      • Positions on Largest Work Samples
      • Geographically Separated Work Locations
      • Transition of Incumbent and Non-Incumbent Positions
      • Tier-5/Top Secret-Eligible Positions
      • Financial Stability
    • Functional Aspects:
      • Systems Integration Engineering Support
      • Acquisition Logistics Management Support
      • Acquisition Program/Project Management Support
      • Financial Management Support
      • Security Assistant Support
      • Configuration/Data Management Support
      • Cybersecurity Support

In case of a tie, the Air Force will apply up to two tiebreakers to determine the awardee. The first tiebreaker will favor the offeror with the largest number of positions delivering digital engineering and transformation support. The second tiebreaker will consider the offeror with the most engineering positions providing systems integration engineering.

Tips for Offerors

Here are four hints for developing high-scoring proposals:

  1. The draft evaluation criteria have education and certification requirements for multiple labor categories—review them carefully to make sure they align with the positions presented in your work samples.
  2. Begin mapping the PWS requirements to the work samples and assessing the point value for each sample.
  3. Complete the self-scoring matrix accurately, providing clear evidence for each score. Ensure all supporting documentation is thorough and aligns with the evaluation criteria to facilitate Government validation.
  4. The tiebreakers emphasize the number of positions managed in similar efforts. Review your sample work examples carefully for the number of full-time equivalents (FTEs) in each labor category referenced in Section 1.2 of the draft evaluation criteria.

Conclusion

The EPASS program is essential for improving the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center’s support services. The evaluation criteria and self-scoring process highlight the need for clear and thorough proposals from offerors. Begin scoring your work samples early and consider using outside resources for a more objective view. Lohfeld Consulting has OASIS subject matter experts ready to support this task order. Contact us today for more information on our OASIS services.

Relevant Information

By Brenda Crist, Vice President at Lohfeld Consulting Group, MPA, CPP APMP Fellow

Lohfeld Consulting Group has proven results specializing in helping companies create winning captures and proposals. As the premier capture and proposal services consulting firm focused exclusively on government markets, we provide expert assistance to government contractors in Capture Planning and Strategy, Proposal Management and Writing, Capture and Proposal Process and Infrastructure, and Training. In the last 3 years, we’ve supported over 550 proposals winning more than $170B for our clients—including the Top 10 government contractors. Lohfeld Consulting Group is your “go-to” capture and proposal source! Start winning by contacting us at www.lohfeldconsulting.com and join us on LinkedInFacebook, and YouTube(TM).