AMENDMENT_TWO_Solicitation_Number_1231ME18R0019_-_Attachment_C_BPP_Technical_Assistance_Support_Services_9-5-18.pdf

Attachment C - AMENDMENT TWO Competitive Award Proposal Requirements, Instructions, and Evaluation

BROADBAND PILOT TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SUPPORT SERVICES REQUIREMENT

5 SEPTEMBER 2018

AMENDMENT TWO: BROADBAND PILOT PROGRAM TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

SUPPORT SERVICES REQUIREMENT

Table of Contents

Procurement Action: Request for Proposal - 1231ME18R0019

FAR Part 12 Acquisition of Commercial Items, using

“FAR Part 15-Contracting by Negotiation” Process

Project Title: Broadband Pilot Program Technical Assistance Support Services

Set Aside: Total Small Business Set Aside

Customer: Rural Utilities Services (RUS)

Contract Type: Hybrid Fixed Price/Time and Materials (T&M)

Period of Performance:

Milestone Schedule:

Proposal Content – MAXIMUM OF 125 PAGES TOTAL FOR ALL VOLUMES (one-sided)

Proposal Instructions

9.1 Technical Proposal – Volume 1

9.1.1 Technical Approach

9.1.2 Relevant Experience

9.1.3 Management Approach

9.1.4 QASP in accordance with FAR 37.603 and 37.604

9.1.5 Performance Work Statement

9.2 Resume Proposal – Volume 2

9.3 Price/Cost Proposal/Cover Letter and Completed Proposal

Information (1449) – Volume 3

9.4 Other Proposal Documents – Volume 4

9.4.1 Past Performance

9.4.2 Subcontractors and Other Teaming Considerations

9.4.3 NAICS Code and Set-Aside Requirements

9.5 Proposal Format

Evaluation Factors

10.1 Technical Approach – Rated

10.2 Relevant Experience – Rated

10.3 Sub-Factor 2: PWS, Management Approach and QASP – Rated

10.3 Sub-Factor 3: Staffing and Key Personnel Resumes – Rated

10.4 Past Performance - Rated

Evaluation Ratings, Definitions and Risk Ratings

11.1 Technical Evaluation Ratings and Definitions

11.2 Technical Evaluation Narratives

Price/Cost Proposal Evaluation

Basis for Award Decision

Assumptions, Conditions, or Exceptions

Submission Instructions

Procurement Action: Request for Proposal - 1231ME18R0019

FAR Part 12 Acquisition of Commercial Items, using

“FAR Part 15-Contracting by Negotiation” Process

Project Title: Broadband Pilot Program Technical Assistance Support Services

Set Aside: Total Small Business Set Aside

Customer: Rural Utilities Services (RUS)

Contract Type: Hybrid Fixed Price/Time and Materials (T&M)

The USDA expects to award one (1) IDIQ contract with subsequent Task Orders under this competition but reserves the right to not award a Task Order if such action is determined to be in the Government’s best interest.

Period of Performance:

Two (2) year base and Two (2) one-year options

Milestone Schedule:

Solicitation release: 08/23/2018

Questions due: 09/07/2018. 09:00 AM ET

Proposals due: 09/23/2018, 12:00 PM ET

Proposal Content – MAXIMUM OF 125 PAGES TOTAL FOR ALL VOLUMES (one-sided)

Volumes 1, 2 and 4 shall be combined into ONE FILE but separated within the file according to the Volume headings as set forth below:

Volume 1 of the offeror’s proposal is the Technical Proposal. It includes the following sections:

• Statement on Preference of Contract

• Technical Approach

• Relevant Experience

• Management Approach including:

a. Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

b. Performance Work Statement (PWS) in response to the SOO

c. CLIN 001 Task Order PWS

Volume 2 of the offeror’s proposal is the Resume Proposal. It includes the following elements:

• Resumes

• Letters of Attestation/Commitment

• Resume Attachments (if applicable)

Volume 3 of the offeror’s proposal is the Price/Cost Proposal. It includes the following elements:

• Completed Cost/Pricing Worksheet (Attachment B)

• Subcontractor Cost Build Up (if applicable)

• Cover Letter

• Completed Proposal Information – SF1449

Volume 4 of the offeror’s proposal is Other Proposal Documents. It includes the following elements:

• Past Performance

• Completed Solicitation Past Performance Questionnaire

• Subcontractor Documentation (if applicable)

• Any other documents that are not included in the Technical, Resume, or Price Proposals as described above (if applicable)

Proposal Instructions

This contract action is being solicited under the authority of FAR Part 12 – Acquisition of Commercial Items, using the processes in the FAR Part 15 – Contracting by Negotiation. The offeror must provide the information required as specified below to evaluate its Technical Proposal.

The offeror’s Technical Proposal must not exceed a total of twenty (25) pages of the overall total of 125 pages. This page count includes full discussion of the offeror’s Technical Proposal as specified in Section 8 and graphics (if any). The page count does not include the title page, table of contents, cover page or acronym list (if provided).

Pages exceeding the 125-total proposal page count limit will not be evaluated.

The proposal must start with the Offeror’s Preference of Contract. This is the first Factor and is a Pass/Fail Factor.

• Factor 1: Compliance – Offeror’s Preference of Contract (Pass/Fail) Solicitation 1231ME18R0017 and Solicitation 1231ME18R0019 are being issued at the same time. The Government has determined it is a conflict of interest for the same contractor to work on both resulting contracts. Therefore, an offeror may submit proposals on both solicitations, but may only be awarded a contract from one.

The offeror must state which solicitation(s) they are proposing on. If proposals are submitted on both solicitations, the offeror must submit separate proposals for each solicitation and state their preferred solicitation in both proposal. This stated preference will be considered, in the event an offeror that proposed on both solicitations is determined to be the best value to the government for both.

Failure to state a preferred Solicitation or to state which solicitation(s) the offeror is proposing on will result in a Failure on this Factor and will eliminate the offeror from further consideration for award.

9.1 Technical Proposal – Volume 1

The technical proposal should include a Management Approach that includes all items necessary to execute this order, including, but not limited to: a master schedule of multiple tasks and Labor Mix required to address all aspects of this SOO, and a detailed work plan that addresses all requirements set forth in the requirements and other suggestions as it related directly to the requirements, tasks and deliverables. The technical proposal should discuss the role the bidder proposes for each subcontractor, if any, and experience and past performance that would qualify the proposed subcontractor. It should elaborate on the scope, magnitude, and complexity of prior and ongoing experience, related to their proposed role, over the past three years for each subcontractor proposed. Additionally, the technical proposal should identify procedures that shall be employed to ensure subcontractor time and efforts are appropriately applied to the project's objectives.

The technical proposal should contain a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) that the bidder will follow. The QASP will be used for managing contractor performance, ensuring that systematic quality assurance methods validate that contractor quality control efforts are timely, effective, and are delivering the results specified in the contract or task order.

The technical should also contain the Performance Work Statement (PWS) in accordance with below paragraph number 9.1.5. This PWS will be in response to the SOO requirements.

The first task order (CLIN 001) has the following requirements and the PWS shall be included in the Technical Proposal. Price will be included for CLIN001 and submitted as part of the Price/Cost Proposal – Volume 3

FIRST TASK ORDER Requirements – submitted separately, part of the Volume 1 (25 page limit):

ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

Project Planning Requirements

The Contractor shall develop and maintain a Project Management Approach for each of the tasks awarded Under this Task Order. The Project Management Approach shall include, without limitation, the following: specific milestones, critical path flow chart that clearly shows the start and end date of all activities, a narrative description of major tasks required by the solicitation, the responsible parties, and the individual steps required for compliance.

The contractor shall submit the Project Management Approach to the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) for review and approval.

9.1.1 Technical Approach

Provide information to demonstrate how the offeror will complete the requirements identified in the Statement of Objectives (SOO).

9.1.2 Relevant Experience

Provide relevant experience information to demonstrate the offeror’s successful use of the proposed Technical and Management Approaches on previous and/or current Government and/or commercial contracts of similar size, scope, and complexity as the requirements identified in the SOO performed as a prime contractor or subcontractor. For any experience submitted, include data by client, date completed, type of work, client contact, with telephone number and email, client address, contract number contract type, and total contract value. Bidders shall detail how the experience relates to the current project.

Attachment H Corporate Experience Example Matrix may be used (copy and paste) in the offeror’s proposal.

9.1.3 Management Approach

Demonstrate the offeror’s organizational and management approaches, including the prime offeror’s management tools and systems, resource and schedule management approach, staffing plan/approach, and, if applicable, approach to assigning work between the prime and any subcontractors, proposed for the requirements identified in the SOO.

9.1.4 QASP in accordance with FAR 37.603 and 37.604

Performance standards are established to measure the performance level required by the Government to meet the contract requirements. The standards shall be measurable and structured to permit an assessment of the contractor’s performance. The Government requires the Contractor to prepare the quality assurance surveillance plan and requires the offerors to submit a proposed quality assurance surveillance plan for the Government’s consideration in development of the Government’s plan and USDA shall evaluate the proposed standards to determine if they meet agency needs.

Requirements for quality assurance and quality assurance surveillance plans are in FAR 46.4.

9.1.5 Performance Work Statement

(1) Describe the work in terms of the required results rather than either “how” the work is to be accomplished or the number of hours to be provided.

(2) Enable assessment of work performance against measurable performance standards;

(3) Rely on the use of measurable performance standards and financial incentives in a competitive environment to encourage competitors to develop and institute innovative and cost-effective methods of performing the work.

(c) Offerors use the SOO to develop the PWS; however, the SOO does not become part of the contract. The PWS shall, at a minimum, include—

(1) Purpose;

(2) Scope or mission;

(3) Period and place of performance;

(4) Background;

(5) Performance objectives, i.e., required results; and

(6) Any operating constraints.

9.2 Resume Proposal – Volume 2

Submit resumes for any personnel you identify as Key Personnel. For all resumes submitted, include the information in the table below.

Resumes must demonstrate the proposed personnel’s experience relevant to the SOO requirements (as identified for each in the table) and qualifications relevant to the identified labor category and their description as it relates to the Statement of Objectives (SOO) and resulting Performance Work Statement (PWS). At a minimum, resumes must include the following:

• Education – colleges, schools, and certifications with relevant dates and fields of study

• Experience – describing the area(s) of work in which the person is qualified and how the work relates to the SOO requirements, start/end dates of the work, company name and position title

The offeror must submit a certified resume and a commitment letter for each proposed resource. The certified resume must include the proposed individual’s statement attesting to the veracity of the information provided in the resume, signature, and date. The certified resume must be submitted along with a commitment letter from the individual agreeing to perform the work (as required) for the duration of the effective period of performance, as established in the SOO.

The offeror must certify that all proposed resumes for Key Personnel meet the requirements as specified in the SOO:

Industry Role USDA Labor Category Number of Required Resumes

SOO/PWS Sections (Tasks)

9.3 Price/Cost Proposal/Cover Letter and Completed Proposal Information (1449) – Volume 3

The Price/Cost Proposal must be completed in the format provided in Solicitation Attachment B – Supplies or Services and Prices, using MS Excel only (Version 2016 compatible).

For this requirement, the offeror must submit pricing in accordance with the Pricing Table (Tabs 1 and 2) in the Attachment B. Tab 2 in Attachment B is the pricing for the first Task Order. The pricing for the First Task Order will be utilized for evaluating price.

FFP for the total award and the Task Order must be submitted at the same time and price will be evaluated based on their fixed price for the total effort and the First Task Order.

For the Labor Loading Matrix (roles, CLINS/labor categories and hours) specified in Solicitation Attachment B, the offeror must propose labor rates. The USDA will accept alternate categories and labor mixes. Labor rates are to remain consistent within each period of performance for each task and is consistent with those proposed in the basic contract. In this manner, there must be a single rate per resource for each period of performance, which may not be escalated for a change in the fiscal year during that period. One labor category with multiple resources may have different rates across the individual labor category. If the Offeror proposes a subcontractor(s), they are to be included in the Labor Loading Matrix as a prime/subcontractor mix.

The offeror must provide the labor rates proposed for each of the resources specified for this effort in Attachment B.

In addition to the evaluation factors listed, price/cost will also be considered in the ultimate award decision. In an effort to receive the highest quality solution at the lowest possible price/cost, the USDA requests all available discounts on all services and materials for this requirement. When discounts are offered, proposals must clearly identify the contract price/cost and the discount price/cost for each labor rate and item being discounted.

Discounts to the company’s established and published rates are hereby solicited for the base and therefore all task orders.

The Technical Proposal must not contain any pricing information or pricing related information of any kind.

In addition to the price/cost proposal, the Procurement Evaluation Team (PET) will be reviewing the Cover Letter and Completed Proposal Information (1449) in this Volume 3.

9.4 Other Proposal Documents – Volume 4

The offeror must provide all other documents that are not included in the Technical, Resume or Price Proposal Volumes (as described above) in a separate volume. These include, but are not limited to:

• Past Performance Questionnaires or CPARS evaluations or Open Ratings Report, IAW Section 9.4.1

• Subcontractor Documentation (if applicable), iaw Section 9.4.2

9.4.1 Past Performance

Bidders are required to describe their past performance history on contracts with similar size, scope, and complexity to the activities identified in the SOO. Bidders shall describe past performance that is similar and / or relevant to the current requirement. Bidders shall identify up to six (6) comparable efforts performed during the last three (3) years. Present this data by client, date completed, type of work, client contact, with telephone number and email, client address, contract number contract type, and total contract value. Bidders shall detail how the experience relates to the current project. Bidders shall also identify any performance problems with referenced contracts and the corrective action taken to resolve the problems.

• A Past Performance evaluation or CPARS report to demonstrate your past performance during the three (3) years prior to the proposal due date. For Past Performance evaluations:

o Each Past Performance evaluation must be (a) for work performed under one of the current and/or previous contracts cited in the Corporate Experience section, and (b) completed and signed by the evaluator in the format provided in Attachment E – Past Performance Questionnaire.

o At least one (1) Past Performance evaluation must be for the prime offeror (or CTA Lead, if applicable).

9.4.2 Subcontractors and Other Teaming Considerations

If the offeror proposes a subcontractor or subcontractors to perform part of the work, the offeror must comply with the requirements specified in the FAR. Additionally, the offeror must specify the prime/subcontractor ratio for the work in both the Technical and Price/Cost Proposals. Any information regarding the Technical Approach and Relevant Experience factors that are based on the subcontractor or subcontractors must be included in the corresponding sections of the Technical Proposal.

If a Contractor Teaming Arrangement (CTA) is proposed, the lead member of the CTA must be clearly identified and must possess the appropriate NAICS code, as well as eligibility for any set aside requirement identified for this procurement action.

9.4.3 NAICS Code and Set-Aside Requirements

For this Procurement Action, the offeror or lead CTA member must be eligible as Small Business for this NAICS under SAMS at the time of proposal submission.

9.5 Proposal Format

All proposal submissions must conform to the following specifications:

• Document format for Technical Proposals can be either PDF or MS Word 2016 compatible.

• Document format for Price/Cost Proposals must be MS Excel 2016 compatible.

• Word documents must be formatted in Times New Roman 12 point font with 1 inch margins.

• Table text must be no smaller than Times New Roman 10 point font.

Evaluation Factors

In addition to price, the Government will consider the following three (3) non-price evaluation factors.

The first Factor is Pass/Fail and offerors must pass Factor 1 to be further considered for award. Factors 2 and 3 are Technical Factors and are of equal weight. Technical Factors, when combined are significantly more important than price:

Factor 1: Compliance – Preference of Contract (Pass/Fail)

Factor 2: Technical Approach

Factor 3: Past Performance

The evaluation factors and sub-factors are identified below:

• Factor 1: Compliance – Offeror’s Preference of Contract (Pass/Fail) Did the offeror state which solicitation(s) they were proposing on? Did the offeror which solicitation is their preferred for award?

Failure to pass Factor 1 will eliminate the offeror from further consideration for award.

• Factor 2 – TECHNICAL APPROACH

Three technical approach sub-factors are stated below and considered equal in importance o Sub-factor 1 - Relevant Experience: Knowledge and understanding of government lending practices and programs designed to facilitate the deployment of broadband services to benefit rural communities.

o Sub-factor 2 – PWS that has a technical performance work statement that meets all of the requirements set forth in the SOO and incorporates best industry practices to meet all of the SOO in its entirety. PWS must include:

1. Management Approach that addresses all items necessary meet the requirements of the SOO and to execute upon the award,

2. QASP that monitors quality assurance throughout the life of the contract. The QASP must ensure that all requirements are met or exceeded and support aggressive deployment schedules.

o Sub-factor 3 - Staffing Plan: The availability of appropriate staff, to include subject matter experts, to meet the requirements and timelines as required by the SOO.

• Factor 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE

The past performance confidence assessment rating is based on the offeror’s overall record of recency, relevancy, and quality of performance.

10.1 Technical Approach – Rated

Technical Approach will be evaluated based on the extent to which it demonstrates a likelihood of successful performance of the requirements of SOO. The effectiveness and feasibility of the proposed Technical Approach and the offeror’s understanding of the work will be considered as part of assessing the likelihood of successful performance. The SOO’s Functional Areas are the discriminating indicators.

10.2 Relevant Experience – Rated

Corporate Experience will be evaluated based on the extent to which it demonstrates a likelihood of successful performance of the requirements identified in the SOO using the proposed Technical and Management Approaches as a prime contractor or a subcontractor on current and/or previous Government contracts of similar size, scope and complexity as the requirements identified in the SOO.

Relevant Corporate Experience of a subcontractor will be evaluated and are as important as the contributions of the Prime/Lead Contractor as it relates to the Corporate Experience factor. Discussion of Corporate Experience in the Technical Approach section of the proposal will be evaluated in Corporate Experience. The offeror that receives an “Unacceptable” rating for the Corporate Experience factor will be excluded from further consideration for award.

Proposed Contractor Teams (whether bound by CTAs or Subcontractor Team Agreements (STAs)) will be evaluated for the Technical Approach factor as detailed in Section 10.1, the Corporate Experience factor as detailed in Section 10.2.

10.3 Sub-Factor 2: PWS, Management Approach and QASP – Rated

The PWS will be evaluated to the degree that the technical performance work statement meets all of the requirements set forth in the SOO and incorporates best industry practices to meet all of the SOO in its entirety

The Management Approach will be evaluated based on the extent to which the prime offeror’s overall organizational and management approaches, including its management tools and systems, resource and schedule management approach, staffing plan/approach, and, if applicable, approach to assigning work between the prime and any subcontractors, demonstrate a likelihood of successful performance of the requirements identified in the SOO. Subcontractor contributions will be considered and are as important as the contributions of the Prime/Lead Contractor in the assessment of the Management Approach factor. The offeror that receives an “Unacceptable” rating for the Management Approach factor will be excluded from further consideration for award.

The QASP will be evaluated to the degree that it monitors quality assurance throughout the life of the contract, and ensures that all requirements are met or exceeded, and support aggressive deployment schedules

Note: Technical Approach should address HOW the offeror will perform the requirements, NOT what offeror’s experience is. Discussions of the offeror’s previous experience should be included in the Corporate Experience section. Similarly, Management Approach should address HOW the offeror is going to manage the work of this contract, NOT what the offeror’s experience has been in managing programs.

Discussions of the offeror’s previous experience in managing programs of similar size, scope and complexity should be included in the Corporate Experience section.

10.3 Sub-Factor 3: Staffing and Key Personnel Resumes – Rated

Each resume submitted will be evaluated based on the extent to which it demonstrates the individual’s likelihood of successful performance of the requirements in the SOO sections specified in the table and any additional requirements enumerated in SOO. Each resume will be rated separately and then an aggregate rating for the Resumes factor will be assigned. An “Unacceptable” rating for one submitted resume will not necessarily result in an “Unacceptable” aggregate rating.

The offeror that receives an aggregate rating of “Unacceptable” for the rated Resumes factor will be excluded from further consideration for award.

10.4 Past Performance - Rated

The evaluation of past performance is based on consideration of all relevant facts and circumstances.

The evaluation may consider information from any source(s) deemed necessary by the CO. Performance Evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements.

The past performance evaluation considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements. In accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2), the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor’s performance shall be considered. These are combined to establish one performance confidence assessment rating for each offeror.

In addition to information provided by offerors in response to this solicitation, past performance information may be obtained from any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; the Defense Contract Management Agency; and interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining Officials.

Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Method

Adjectival Rating Description Substantial Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available, or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor f f Limited Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Evaluation Ratings, Definitions and Risk Ratings

11.1 Technical Evaluation Ratings and Definitions

The following table shows the description, definition, and allocation of ratings for the rated proposal sections. Proposals will be assigned adjectival ratings based on the definitions described in this table.

Combined Technical/Risk Rating. The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. Unless a waiver is granted, combined technical/risk evaluations shall utilize the combined technical/risk ratings as set forth in the table below:

11.2 Technical Evaluation Narratives

Strength – An element or feature that demonstrates a high likelihood of successful performance of the requirements of the SOW or identifies innovations and leading practices or features that should significantly benefit the project and provide substantial value to the Government.

Weakness – An element or feature that detracts from the likelihood of successful performance of the requirements of the SOW.

Risk – Assessment of risk considers potential for disruption of schedule, increased costs, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. Factor ratings can be adjusted based on a risk consideration.

Price/Cost Proposal Evaluation

The pricing for the First Task Order will be analyzed for reasonableness. It will also be analyzed to determine whether it is realistic for the work to be performed under the first task order and how well it reflects a clear understanding of the SOO as it relates to the Government’s requirements.

The First Task Order pricing may be analyzed for balanced pricing among the contract line items (CLINs).

The offeror is also cautioned that proposal pricing that is considered unbalanced may be considered grounds for eliminating a proposal from the competition.

Color Rating

Adjectival Rating

Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is not awardable.

USDA reserves the right to request the offeror provide additional information that supports the proposed prices/costs. The offeror is cautioned that unrealistically low proposed prices/costs may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from the competition on the basis that the offeror does not fully understand the requirement.

Price analysis will be conducted on the proposed pricing for the First Task Order (Tab 2 - attachment B).

The CLIN total will be used as the proposed price for the purpose of evaluation. For evaluation purposes, Travel and ODC are to be set at a Not to Exceed amount with a full justification of pricing.

Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

Basis for Award Decision

The Government will award a single award contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer, conforming to the RFP solicitation requirements and represents the best value to the Government, as determined by the evaluation criteria described herein, in accordance with the FAR 15.101-1. Best value will be based on a detailed evaluation of all factors set forth and the most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors are set forth in Paragraph 10.

USDA intends to award a contract without discussions with offerors but reserves the right to conduct discussions and/or negotiations with any and/or all offerors, as determined by the Contracting Officer to be necessary.

A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer’s specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

Assumptions, Conditions, or Exceptions

The offeror must submit any assumptions, conditions or exceptions regarding any of the terms and conditions of this solicitation, including the SOO. If no assumptions, conditions, or exceptions are submitted at the time of the proposal, it will be understood that the offeror proposes no assumptions and agrees to comply with all terms and conditions set forth herein. The Government reserves the right to accept or reject any proposal that includes assumptions, conditions, or exceptions to any of the terms and conditions of the Solicitation.

Submission Instructions

Proposals must be submitted to heather.mackenzie@wdc.usda.gov and must be received on or before the proposal due date/time. Proposals received at any point after the due date and time will be considered late and will NOT receive any consideration.

The offeror should retain proof of receipt. The offeror will receive an Acknowledgement of Receipt within 24 hours of timely proposal submission.

Past Performance Questionnaires from third parties may be submitted to the Contracting Officer at scott.bertrand@wdc.usda.gov and the Contract Specialist at heather.mackenzie@wdc.usda.gov . This information must be received by the proposal due date and time. Instruct any third party submitting Past Performance Questionnaires to include the Solicitation Number in the subject line of any emails.

All proposal files must use the following naming convention: Solicitation Number + Offeror Name + - Document Name.filetype (for example: “18-000-CS ABC Inc - Technical Proposal.pdf” or “18-000-CS ABC Inc - Attachment B.xls”). Resume files must include the Role (abbreviated, as appropriate) and the proposed individual’s last name (for example: “18-000-CS ABC Inc - Proj Mgr Resume - Smith.pdf”).

Questions regarding this AMENDMENT TWO to the FBO solicitation, must be submitted via email. No phone calls will be accepted and no email correspondence should be sent to anyone other than the individuals listed above as this is SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE. All questions are due by 09/07/2018 (09:00 AM EST). No questions will be accepted after that date.

Under no circumstances are communications authorized on this matter directly with the technical/requiring/program office.

Additionally, the offeror must monitor the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) homepage for announcements on any amendments or activities related to this procurement. The offeror must acknowledge the reading of all amendments posted for this procurement in its cover letter.

The offeror may be removed from award consideration for missing required information and/or submissions as specified in Sections 9 and 10.

Attachments Attachment A - SOO Attachment B - Price/Cost Worksheet mailto:heather.mackenzie@wdc.usda.gov mailto:scott.bertrand@wdc.usda.gov mailto:heather.mackenzie@wdc.usda.gov