EXTRACTmRAYTHEON COMPANY

SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD

REPORT
Secure Border Initiative (SBInet)

Raytheon Company

Evaluation Boeing Raytheon

Factor
1 - Technical (b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

2 - Performance
Measures
3 - Management
Plan
4 - Performance
Risk
5 - Past
Performance
6 - Subcontract
Plan
7 - Proposed Task
Order
OVERALL NON-
COST RANKING
8 - Cost/Price

Strengths
niflcant I (b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)
Major
Minor I
Weaknesses
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)
MajorSignificant
Minor
Deficiencies

PROCUREMENT SENSITIVE SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION SEE FAR 3.104

!
 Evaluation Results

Factors Initial Evaluation Final Evaluation

1 - Technical (b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)
2 - Performance Measures, QASP
3 - Management Plan
4 - Performance Risk
5 - Past Performance
6 - Subcontract Plan
~.Task Order
8- Cost/Price ~~~.~..~_ptable

(b) (4) and (b) (5)

Significant
Major
Minor
Weaknesses
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)
Significant
Major
Minor
Deficiencies 0
* Factors 1-4 are considered equal and each is significantly more important than Factor 5 and
Factor 6. Factor 7 is less important than Factors 5 and 6. When combined, all non-cost factors
are significantly more important than Factor 8, Cost/Price.
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

PROCUREMENT SENSITIVE SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION SEE FAR 3.104

2
 (b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

TECHNICAL:
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

Final Factor Rating

Initial Factor Rating
STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES
Initial Final Initial Final
Significant (b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5) Significant (b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)
Major Major
Minor Minor
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

PROCUREMENT SENSITIVE SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION SEE FAR 3.104

3
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

PROCUREMENT SENSITIVE SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION SEE FAR 3.104

4
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

PROCUREMENT SENSITIVE SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION SEE FAR 3.104

(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

l
ty

and
.

PROCUREMENT SENSITIVE SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION SEE FAR 3.104

(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

PROCUREMENT SENSITIVE SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION SEE FAR 3.104

 (b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

PERFORMANCE MEASURES INCENTIVES/DISINCENTIVES, QASP:

(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)
Final Factor Ratin
Initial Factor Rating
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)
Initial Final
Significant (b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)
Major
Minor
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

PROCUREMENT SENSITIVE SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION SEE FAR 3.104

 (b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

MANAGEMENT PLAN:
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)
Final Factor Rating
Initial Factor Ratin
STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES
Initial Final Initial Final
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5) (b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)
Significant Significant
Major Major
Minor Minor
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

PROCUREMENT SENSITIVE SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION SEE FAR 3.104

9
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

PERFORMANCE RISK:
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

Final Factor Rating

Initial Factor Rating
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

PROCUREMENT SENSITIVE SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION SEE FAR 3.104

l0
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

PROCUREMENT SENSITIVE SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION SEE FAR 3.104

11
 PAST PERFORMANCE, CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:
Possible Confidence Rating: High, Significant, Satisfactory, Neutral,
Little, or None
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

Final Factor Rating

Initial Factor Rating
STRENGTHS
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)
Initial Final
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)
Significant Significant
Major Major
Minor Minor
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

Final Fac~
Initial Factor Rating
STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES
Initial Final Initial Final
Significant (b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)
Significant (b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)
Major Major
Minor Minor
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

PROCUREMENT SENSITIVE SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION SEE FAR 3.104

 Significant Strengths:
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

PROPOSED TASK ORDER:

(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)
Final Factor Rat=_~__g_
Initial Factor Rating
STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES
Initial Final Initial Final
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)
Significant Significant (b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)
Major Major
Minor Minor
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

ot

s.

(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

PROCUREMENT SENSITIVE SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION SEE FAR 3.104

(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

e
le

al

PROCUREMENT SENSITIVE SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION SEE FAR 3.104

14
(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

SUMMARY OF COST P(b)(3); (b)(4); (b)(5)

Overall Acceptability
Rough O
Cost Realism
Risk of Cost Growth
Program
Reasonableness
Realism
Cost Growth Risk
Tucso
Reasonableness
Realism
Risk of Cost Growth
Offeror’
Reasonableness
Realism
Risk of Cost Growth
Reasonableness and Realism (per FAR defi
proposed solution and not on a comparison o
determine which Offeror proposed the best solution.

PROCUREMENT SENSITIVE SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION SEE FAR 3.104