cde-llc

[cde-llc]

BBC: Language lessons told through Twitter

[cde-llc]

[cde-llc]

New Anonymizing Security Feature for Visitors

Understanding that most of our clients don't surf with the anonymizing benefits of a VPN, we have implemented a free script service that gives partial coverage to you - at least on our out-bound links. Using anonym.to here will at least anonymize your access to links on our site that you click on.

[cde-llc]

How to Explain: a Linguist's Approach

Systemic Functional Linguists have a bunch of templates nifty enough for any writer. Consider "The Explanation Text." It follows a format ripe for systemic analysis:

Statement of Problem

Explanation of Possible Causes

Suggested Alleviating Action(s)

Statement of Outlook

We can take this structure and use it for compelling proposal writing - especially in areas that are customer hot buttons to show that we really understand the problem and bring a relevant solution.

For example, an under-dog approach to ghosting a large cybersecurity incumbent:

  The best candidates for cybersecurity are not making their way into [govt office]. We have vetted and personally communicated with at least 650 cyber professionals in this close-knit community over the past three years and understand what it takes to recruit them and why a larger company may not be able to meet its staffing projections.

  First, cyber professionals are in a niche market and see themselves as saught after and deserving of all-star treatment. Their perception of working for a larger firm is that there is too much bureaucracy distracting them from their passion; their on-site job work for the customer gets side-tracked too often by corporate "responsibilities". Second, the benefits at a large firm are not tailored but generic and may not meet the needs or desires of a largely young and single talent pool. Third, with tightening margins under FFP type contracts awarded based on LPTA competitions, larger companies are moving to gut contractors' pay and perks rather than find business cost efficiencies. Cybersecurity professionals have taken note of lesser starting salaries with lip-service incentives that are tied to corporate performance instead of professional acheivement and successes with their customer.

  Through examining these insights, we have developed a comprehensive recruitment and retention package that starts with our shared customer focus, incorporates benefits and perks that serve our core talent of cybersecurity professionals, and resolves all "corporate" issues to a minimum amount of individual hassle. We provide all on-site employees direct access to overhead executive administrative staff to serve them. This shared resource is a mutual benefit for [the customer] as well as our on-site staff, providing immediate turnaround on administrative matters, avoiding wasted time and hassle. We also build in personal and corporate incentive plans into our Recognition and Retention program (See Section xx.xx.x).

  As described in our program management plan, our vision for [customer] support is to be fully staffed with top talent who are in turn supported by our corporate office with more than lip service but real results. We anticipate reaching the required staffing levels ahead of schedule, based on the overwhelmingly positive response to our Benefits, Recognition and Retention package. By implementing our approach, [Customer] will see service levels raise along with performance and morale within weeks of our thoughtful transition.

[cde-llc]

Profile: Li Deng, Microsoft Research

Dr. Deng is widely published for his work in acoustic phonetics, speech processing, translation, and machine learning. As a principle researcher at Microsoft Research, he uses deep neural networks for speech recognition and is among the leading innovators in his field. He is also a Fellow of The Acoustical Society of America, the IEEE, and the ISCA.

[cde-llc]

These days, you can crowdsource funding, strategy, design, code, and scientific breakthroughs. But can you crowdsource inspiration? This will be my focus when speaking with IT executives at Research Triangle Park on Thursday.

Paige Rasmussen, panelist at AITP's July event, "Bleeding Edge: Crowd Sourcing"

[cde-llc]

The Flesch-Kinkaid Score for Ease of Readability

It's pretty well known that proposals are expected to be readable at the fourth or fifth grade level, if only to make it easier for the evaluators to get through it all. I like to call it "Simple English." Here's an opensource, free tool that you can download to run your verbiage through and find out whether you're making your new customers' job easy enough.

[cde-llc]

According to the report published on http://www.acq.osd.mil, the DoD allowed over 99% of contractors' incurred bids and proposals costs. In 2010, allocable B&P costs to DoD contracts were up from the previous year, but the DoD's share down by about a million.

Need to learn more about allocability of your B&P funds? Give Paige a buzz: 202-538-0500.

[cde-llc]

ORCA, CCR, + six more transitioning to SAM at the end of the month, managed on an IBM contract!

[cde-llc]

GAO Findings: There's an App for That

Currently only available through the iTunes store and sized for the iPhone, rumor has it an Android app is on its way. Click here to download the GAO Findings App.

[cde-llc]

Proprietary vs Safeguarded Data

I often see of email correspondence come through that has a message at the bottom included in the signature, something along the lines of "This is/may be company proprietary, delete if it was not intended for you and let me know."

These messages are off-putting because they assume a lack of trust with the recipient. And establish that the sender has no clue what proprietary means and are lazy or too cautious. The trust factor is damaged on both sides.

What needs to happen is better employee training on what is considered proprietary so that they can distinguish that information from what is otherwise 'safeguarded'.

These are actually proprietary:

Non-public customer data

Project data created in support of contracts with customers

Contract correspondence, performance and deliverables information

Financial, technical, or business information not authorized for public release

Information that gives the company a competitive advantage

M&A information

Bids and proposals

Trade secrets

Authentication credentials (like IDs, passwords, and PKIs)

Company network diagrams and breach in network information

Vulnerability information and security plans

Source code

Project planning and execution documents

Patent-related information

These are simply "Safeguarded," and still treated with care:

Routine internal and external correspondence, including with customers

Targeted marketing materials

Exploratory marketing analysis

Analyses, reports, and presentations

Of course, what starts as safeguarded correspondence or documentation may become proprietary at the time when proprietary data is included.

Guard all your information and know what level of marking it needs to protect your company. Just because someone receives something proprietary does not mean it is automatically protected in the eyes of the law.

Know what is proprietary and what is not, have a Nondisclosure Agreement close at hand for new recipients, and mark information correctly when sharing.

[cde-llc]

How to maintain independent contractor status

It is a criminal misdemeanor for a government customer to treat a contractor as an employee. Same with clients of independent consultants.

As a good contractor, you should know how to help keep your customer out of jail.

The courts see "independence" by reviewing two sets of facts: how the contract was written and how the contract was administered. This means that although a contract can clearly establish independent contractor status, the actual relationships and activities during contract performance can be a different picture.

As a contractor, here are a few ways to make sure you are doing your part to maintain your independence:

Provide your deliverables (meetings, reports, etc.) on time. If you run afoul of contract terms and your customer allows it, you put yourself and your customer at risk.

Ensure the quality of the delvierables meets the standards set out in the contract. If it is not up to snuff, make sure you customer rejects or responds that they will take "partial acceptance." Contractors often try to 'exceed' standards. Be careful not to make so many  can be considered something an employee would do.

Do not allow your customer to prescribe the 'means, manner, or method' of your work. Your contract is to provide an end result, not to be the delegated worker-bee of your customer.

[cde-llc]

GAO: You Can't 'Calculate' Adjectival Ratings

Add up all your proposal's evaluated strengths and weaknesses and compare them to those of the winner's proposal, whether through addition: "Our 20 strengths and three weaknesses are superior to their 10 strengths and seven weaknesses," or percentage: "Our proposal contains only 15% weaknesses vs the 70% of the awardee's."

You might feel as though the agency selected a worse bid just based on that statistic alone, especially if it was in a best value competition. But GAO would disagree with your calculation.

GAO has noted repeatedly throughout protest responses that:

Adjectival ratings and point scores are mere tools in the evaluation and selection process and should not be mechanically derived or applied.

Besides the most recent try by GDIT shot down by GAO in this protest denial, to reference a few relevant findings:

Wackenhut Servs., Inc., B-400240, B-400240.2, Sept. 10, 2008, 2008 CPD ¶ 184 at 7;

Nippo Corp., B-402363.2, May 5, 2010, 2010 CPD ¶ 112 at 5;

Master Lock Co., LLC, B-309982.2, June 24, 2008, 2009 CPD ¶ 2 at 10;

Medical Dev. Int’l, B-281484.2, Mar. 29, 1999, 99-1 CPD ¶ 68 at 9

Feel like protesting? Contact us for an expert contractual review before you call a lawyer. 202-538-0500