MSD_DRAFT ORDERING GUIDE_12 DECEMBER 2024.pdf

ORDERING GUIDE

Multiple Award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity Contract for

Modern Software Delivery

Contract #: W9128Z-25-R-XXXX

Date: December 2024

Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground

DC3oE Advisory Group

6472 Integrity Court, Building 4401

Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005

MSD Ordering Guide

December 2024

Table of Contents

1. BACKGROUND

2. SCOPE

3. GOVERNMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

3.1 IDIQ Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO)

3.2 IDIQ Order Ombudsman

3.3 Ordering Contracting Officer (OCO)

3.4 Requiring Activity (RA)

3.5 Order Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR)

3.6 MSD MAIDIQ Contractors

4. CONTRACT DETAILS

5. MSD ORDER REQUIREMENTS

5.1 Order Minimum Requirements

5.2 Order Forms

6. CONTRACT TYPES

6.1 Cost-Reimbursement Orders

6.2 Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) Orders

6.3 Time-and-Materials and Labor-Hour Orders

7. CLIN STRUCTURE

7.1 Software Enablement Efforts (CLINs 0001 – 0004 and 0008 – 0011)

7.2 Travel (0005 & 0012)

7.3 Other Direct Costs (ODCs) (CLINs 0006 & 0013)

7.4 Expedited Delivery/Enhanced Performance (EDEP) (CLINs 0007 & 0014)

7.5 Award Term Incentives (CLIN TBD)

8. ORDERING PROCEDURES AND CONSIDERATIONS

8.1 Order Request for Proposal

8.1.1 SOW, PWS, or SOO

8.1.2 Market Research

8.1.3 Orders utilizing Commercial Procedures

8.1.4 Orders set aside for Small Business

8.1.5 Funding Document

8.1.6 Independent Government Estimate (IGE)

8.1.7 Security

8.1.8 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

8.1.9 Basis for Order Award

8.1.10 Other Considerations/Requirements

8.2 Order Request Preparation

8.3 Labor Categories

8.3.1 Stacked Labor Categories

8.4 Labor Category Pricing

8.5 Evaluation Procedures

8.5.1 Evaluation Approach

8.5.2 Mandatory Evaluation Factors

8.5.3 Order Pricing

8.5.4 Total Program Budget

8.5.5 Optional Evaluation Procedures

8.6 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

8.7 Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI)

8.8 Transition – In and Transition – Out

8.9 Cost and Software Data Reporting (CSDR)

9. CONTRACT REPORTS AND DELIVERABLES

9.1 Software Metrics

9.2 Deliverables / Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL)

10. DATA RIGHTS AND WARRANTIES

10.1 Data / Software Rights Assertions

10.2 Order Software Warranty Clause

11. ACCOUNTING SYSTEMS

12. COST ACCOUNTING STANDARDS

1. BACKGROUND

The MSD MAIDIQ is designed to provide the U.S. Army with the ability to rapidly design, develop, test, deploy, and maintain mission critical applications and systems. The vehicle aligns with Army Directive (AD) 2024-02 for Enabling Modern Software for Defense and Acquisition Practices and DoD Modern Software Strategy Memorandum, 2 February 2022. The MSD MAIDIQ enables the Government to build functionality, implement, and extend the capabilities of U.S. Army and to modernize the Army through rapid development and delivery of software capability. This vehicle will have in place mechanisms to sense, respond, and adjust deliveries to increase effectiveness and efficiency throughout the software lifecycle.

2. SCOPE

This MAIDIQ is designed to provide a vehicle to award task orders in an efficient manner to support software capability efforts that incorporate but are not limited to the following:

• Software development, security, and operations (DevSecOps, DSO)

• Software delivery using modern architectures, infrastructure, and platforms

• Support digital transformations that apply modern technologies

See the PWS for additional information on scope.

3. GOVERNMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

3.1 IDIQ Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO)

The MSD MAIDIQ PCO is the sole and exclusive Army official with actual authority to administer and/or modify the terms of IDIQ contract, monitor the Contractor's performance in the areas of contract compliance and contract administration, and assist the Contractor and OCO on matters related to the IDIQ Contract terms and conditions.

3.2 IDIQ Order Ombudsman

The Order ombudsmen for the Army Contracting Command - Aberdeen Proving Ground are Jason VanLuven jason.e.vanluven.civ@army.mil and Lane Gary lane.m.gary.civ@army.mil.

3.3 Ordering Contracting Officer (OCO)

For purposes of this contract, authorized users are identified as OCOs. Only an authorized user, who is a delegated OCO, may solicit, award, and administer a Order under the MSD MAIDIQ. In order to qualify as an authorized user, a duly warranted

Contracting Officer of the Department of the Army, as defined in FAR Subpart 2.101, in good standing, must have a received a Delegation of Procurement Authority (DPA) from the MSD MAIDIQ PCO.

The OCO for each Order is the sole and exclusive Government official with actual authority to solicit, award, administer, and/or modify a Order under the MSD MAIDIQ.

3.4 Requiring Activity (RA)

RA is defined as any organizational element within the Army that has a requirement under the MSD MAIDIQ contracts. The RA is responsible for defining and documenting the need in a written form and funding to support the effort. The RA provides the Order documents to the OCO office, which uses it as the basis for soliciting Orders under the MSD MAIDIQ contracts. The RA is responsible for ensuring that the PWS/SOW/SOO accurately reflects the Army's needs and for working with the contracting office to resolve any issues or questions that arise during the procurement process. The RA also plays a role in monitoring contract performance and ensuring that the deliverable meets the Army's requirements.

3.5 Order Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR)

The OCO for each order will designate a Contracting Officer Representative (COR) and/or Technical Monitor (TM) to perform specific administrative or technical functions.

The specific rights and responsibilities of the COR and/or TM for each order shall be described in writing, which upon request, shall be provided to the Contractor. A COR/TM has no actual, apparent, or implied authority to bind the Government.

In addition to Mandatory COR training, OCOs must confirm that nominated CORs have also completed MSD specific training (described in the MSD Ordering Guide) before appointing an Order COR under this IDIQ.

3.6 MSD MAIDIQ Contractors

The principal role of the contractors is to deliver related products and perform services that meet requirements and/or achieve objectives/outcomes described in Orders issued under the MSD MAIDIQ Contracts.

4. CONTRACT DETAILS

MSD MAIDIQ

Contract Maximum Value $50B (Total value shared among all MAIDIQ contract holders)

Ordering Period 5-Year Base Period 5-Year Option Period

Contract Types Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Labor Hour (LH) Time & Materials (T&M) Cost-Plus Fixed-Fee (CPFF) Cost-Reimbursable (CR)

NAICS Code 541512 – Computer Systems Design (Primary) Other applicable NAICS Codes may be selected at the Order level for work within scope of the PWS.

5. MSD ORDER REQUIREMENTS

5.1 Order Minimum Requirements

All Orders awarded under this IDIQ will conform with the below:

1. Solicited and awarded by an OCO with a Delegation of Procurement Authority (See Section G.1.4.)

2. Ensure a nominated Order COR that has completed Mandatory Training requirements as well as MSD Specific COR training (See Section G.1.4.1).

3. Be within the scope of the Performance Work Statement and all other terms and conditions of the IDIQ contract.

4. Orders will adhere to Agile Development Procedures

• Must identify an Agile methodology with ceremonies and cadence determined. For example: PM will utilize SAFe with 3-month Planning Intervals (PI) with all the ceremonies during the PI detailed.

• Must have a Government product owner or equivalent and draft user agreement.

• Must have a feature roadmap.

• Must have a draft “Path to Production” or using evaluation of the vendor’s path to production as a source selection factor or scoped discovery phase that will yield the artifact. See “Provided Path to production” sample.

5. High Level Architecture, or plan to obtained government owned architecture in discovery phase.

6. Solicited and awarded under the proper NAICS Code for the requirement (See Section H.3.)

7. Identify if the requirement is set aside for small business concerns under the selected NAICS.

8. Identify the proper Product Service Code (See Section H.4.).

9. The OCO must tailor all optional clauses, provisions, and other applicable terms and conditions specific to the order solicitation and award (See Section I).

10. Comply with the ordering procedures in FAR Subpart 16.505, DFARs 216.505, and other applicable agency specific regulatory supplements.

11. Inclusion of a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) with mandatory dashboard metrics.

12. Inclusion of a CDRL for metrics delivery in the government approved format

Orders are strongly recommended to have the following items before ordering or as evaluation criteria:

1. Proposed Technical Stack

2. Wire Frame Diagrams or high-quality mockups for User Interface (UI) elements

Process/Workflow Diagrams

3. User Journey Maps

4. Prioritized User Story Backlog with stories required for MVP identified

5. Detailed Technical Architecture including primary interfaces defined

5.2 Order Forms

An appropriate order form (Defense Department (DD) Form 1155, Order for Supplies or Services, or Standard Form (SF) 1449, Solicitation/Contract/Order for Commercial Items) shall be issued for each delivery order.

6. CONTRACT TYPES

The MSD MAIDIQ contracts allow for orders to be issued on a Cost-Plus-Fixed Fee (CPFF), Labor Hour (LH)/ Time and materials (T&M) Firm Fixed Price (FFP), and/or Cost reimbursable basis. Orders may also combine more than one pricing arrangement [e.g., CPFF and FFP.], although separate contract line-item numbers (CLINs) are required for each pricing arrangement.

The MSD MAIDIQ supports both commercial and non-commercial requirements. Orders for Commercial requirements must utilize LH, T&M, or FFP contract types.

For Cost-Reimbursement and Non-Commercial LH/T&M type Orders, the accounting system requirements in Section at H.5 will apply.

6.1 Cost-Reimbursement Orders

Cost-Reimbursement orders are defined under FAR Subpart 16.3, Cost-Reimbursement Contracts. Travel and ODCs shall utilize Cost type CLINs (no fixed fee).

The Contractor shall have and maintain an adequate accounting system that will permit timely development of all necessary cost data in the form required by the proposed contract type to propose on Cost-Reimbursement and/or CPFF type Orders (Reference Section J, Attachment 0007 and Section L.3.2.1.4). The Contractor may be required to submit a cost proposal with supporting information for each cost element including, but not limited to direct labor, fringe benefits, overhead, general and administrative expenses, material handling costs, facilities capital cost of money, and other direct costs, consistent with their cost accounting system, provisional billing rates, and forward pricing rate agreements.

6.2 Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) Orders

FFP orders are defined under FAR Subpart 16.2, Fixed-Price Contracts, and other applicable agency-specific regulatory supplements. Expedited Delivery/Enhanced Performance CLIN (Section H.15) shall be issued as FFP CLINs.

6.3 Time-and-Materials and Labor-Hour Orders

T&M and LH orders are defined under FAR 16.601 and 16.602, respectively.

7. CLIN STRUCTURE

The MSD MAIDIQ contract CLIN structure may be found in Section B of the awarded contract. Below are requirements related to specific CLINs.

7.1 Software Enablement Efforts (CLINs 0001 – 0004 and 0008 – 0011) Software Enablement Efforts may be executed as CPFF, T&M/LH, and/or FFP, as a result of the Market Research Findings.

Regardless of contract type, Software Enablement Efforts should be structured as Outcome-Based versus Capacity Based whenever practicable. Expectations for the effort should be stated in terms of the final or completed product, or outcome, using terms such as epic/feature, release/increment, or a minimum viable product/outcome.

The intent of Software Enablement efforts under this IDIQ is to contract for an outcome, but also allow flexibility to align with the dynamic nature of modern software development. This is accomplished by establishing a clear product vision and objectives rather than excessively prescriptive requirements. This could be portrayed in a roadmap depicting capabilities and features aligned with the product vision, to be gradually completed over time. These capabilities should be defined at a level high enough to encourage innovation and collaboration within the teams. This high-level definition enables continuous refinement and reprioritization throughout the development lifecycle post-award. The Government must allow the contractor the space to provide value through use of current industry techniques and approaches, though governed by the high-level definition. The Government also must describe and contractually account for clearly defined deliverable or series of deliverables through Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) and/or Contract Data Requirements List (CDRLs).

7.2 Travel (0005 & 0012)

Travel may be required in the execution of an order under the MSD MAIDIQ. All travel shall be in accordance with FAR subpart 31.205-46. Reimbursement shall not exceed the maximum per diem rates set forth in the Federal Travel Regulation, Joint Travel Regulation, or Standardized Regulations unless a special or unusual situation applies.

Travel up to $25,000.00 requires Contracting Officer Representative approval. Travel that exceeds $25,000.00 requires Ordering Contracting Officer approval. No Fee or Profit shall be applied to travel.

7.3 Other Direct Costs (ODCs) (CLINs 0006 & 0013)

ODCs may be required in the execution of an order under the MSD MAIDIQ to cover costs such as licenses or other necessary items in support of the development. All ODCS under this CLIN require COR pre-approval. No Fee or Profit shall be applied to ODCs.

7.4 Expedited Delivery/Enhanced Performance (EDEP) (CLINs 0007 & 0014) The use of an Expedited Delivery/Enhanced Performance CLIN may be utilized for an individual Cost Reimbursement or T&M/LH order. This FFP CLIN is associated with and individual Program Increment (PI) and is payable to the contractor after the completion of a PI. The contractor shall meet or exceed the “Very Good” performance standard(s) for all performance metrics selected for the associated PI. The Government reserves the right to unilaterally cancel the FFP CLIN and de-obligate all funding under this CLIN, if the contractor does not meet all performance metrics. The Contractor shall not be entitled to payment if the metrics do not meet the minimum threshold of “Very Good”.

Cancellation of this CLIN will not negatively impact the contractor’s CPARs rating.

7.5 Award Term Incentives (CLIN TBD)

The Government may utilize Award Term Incentives for use at the Order Level, which allow for a process to reward contractors with an additional period(s) of performance.

The performance criteria will be established at the Order Level when utilized, and subjective with the final decision coming from the Term Determining Official (TDO).

Although Award Term is similar to an option, there is a significant difference. The contractor legally earns the right to an extension instead of relying on the Government’s unilateral right to exercise an option. Because the term is awarded based on performance, the contract is not subject to analysis at each renewal point. The Government must terminate for convenience if there is no longer a need or additional funding is not available.

8. ORDERING PROCEDURES AND CONSIDERATIONS

8.1 Order Request for Proposal

The RA prepares the Order Request for Proposal (RFP) package and submits it to the OCO. At a minimum, the package should contain the following:

8.1.1 SOW, PWS, or SOO

Each Order RFP will provide the software development objectives through the utilization of a PWS, SOW or SOO and/or a product feature/roadmap. However, performance-based orders shall be used to the maximum extent possible for services as required by FAR 37.102. The PWS/SOW/SOO identifies the technical, functional, and performance characteristics of the Government’s requirements.

8.1.2 Market Research

Market Research will be conducted for each Fair Opportunity action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold IAW FAR 10.001(a)(2)(v). The results derived from market research will inform the Order strategy as well as provide information as to if commercial procedures should be utilized to meet the requirement and to inform if an order will be restricted for small business concerns.

8.1.3 Orders utilizing Commercial Procedures

Based on the results of market research the OCO will determine if commercial products or services can meet the requirement and appropriate for a specific order , as identified in FAR 10.002 (d)(1).

If an order is released utilizing commercial procedures, and requires T&M/LH, ensure FAR 52.216-31 T&M/LH Proposal Requirements—Commercial Item Acquisition is included. As the title of the provision implies, FAR 52.216-31 is used for commercial item acquisitions when T&M/LH contract types are utilized. In this scenario, an offeror must specify separate fixed hourly rates in its offer that include wages, overhead, general and administrative expenses, and profit for each category of labor to be performed by the offeror subcontractors, and or divisions, subsidiaries, or affiliates of the offeror under a common control.

Offeror proposals will need to demonstrate how their proposal meets the definition of a commercial product, service, or COTs item IAW FAR 2.001.

8.1.4 Orders set aside for Small Business

Based on the results of market research i the OCO will determine whether or not to set-aside an Order to small business concerns identified in FAR 19.000(a)(3) in accordance with FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(F).

The Order RFP shall indicate if the Order is restricted to small businesses.

If an Order is restricted to small businesses, and only one proposal or no proposal is received, the RFP may be released again to all contract holders with no restrictions for up to an additional thirty (30) days.

Any proposals submitted under an Order RFP restricted to small business shall include the following representation:

The Contractor represents that it [ ] is, [ ] is not a small business concern under NAICS Code TBD assigned to contract number TBD.

8.1.5 Funding Document

Orders are funded by the OCO’s RA. Individual OCOs should provide specific instructions as to the format and content.

8.1.6 Independent Government Estimate (IGE)

The estimate will assist the OCO in determining the reasonableness of the contractors’ cost/price and technical proposals. The estimate is for Government use only and should not be made available to the MSD MAIDIQ contractors.

8.1.7 Security

Orders shall indicate any security clearances required and the level of classified access necessary. A DD Form 254, DoD Contract Security Classification Specification, shall be prepared when required.

8.1.8 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

The QASP will describe the systematic methods the Government will use to evaluate Contractor performance of the requirements as laid out in the PWS/SOW/SOO. (See also Section 11 below.)

8.1.9 Basis for Order Award

The OCO, in conjunction with the RA, develops the evaluation criteria that form the basis for Order award. Regardless of the criteria, the basis for order award to include relative importance, when applicable, will be provided to the MSD MAIDIQ contractor(s).

8.1.10 Other Considerations/Requirements

The RA will include other Order RFP package requirements required for their respective Orders such as, Service Contract Reporting Requirements (Manpower Reporting), Contract Data Requirements List, etc.

8.2 Order Request Preparation

The OCO must provide each awardee a fair opportunity to be considered for each order exceeding the micro-purchase threshold issued under the MSD MAIDIQ contracts except when an exception to fair opportunity applies. (See FAR 16.505(b)(1) and (b)(2)).

The Order RFP should include the contract type, proposal receipt date and time, estimated start date, period of performance, and any other related information not contained elsewhere; the appropriate work statement; instructions for submission of the proposal and selection criteria/basis for award, any special requirements (i.e., security clearances, travel, special knowledge); and other information deemed appropriate for the respective order. The scope and complexity of the Order should be considered when determining a proposal due date.

8.3 Labor Categories

To enhance the consistency of labor and service cost/price offers and reporting, LCATs and associated rate ranges will be released with each Order RFP when a Cost Reimbursement or T&M/LH effort is contemplated.

For each Order RFP for a Cost Reimbursement or T&M/LH effort, a rate range table will be provided with a list of LCATs. The ordering process will provide for a list of Standard LCATS. Standard LCATs includes the defined LCATs provided in the rate range table.

These defined Standard LCATs may be further stratified to include skill levels. The Contractor should utilize the Standard LCATs to the maximum extent possible.

Offerors may propose a non-standard LCAT in response to a Order RFP for proposal and should provide notice of this intent a minimum of 5 business days before Order receipt of proposals are due. This notification should include a justification into the rationale for the use of a non-standard LCAT along with the supporting information to justify the proposed rate.

8.3.1 Stacked Labor Categories

Stacked LCATs are reserved for those technical experts that drive their skills cross-discipline and build across the technical stacks to become highly efficient and technically dependable. To qualify for the stacked LCATs, Contractor personnel must possess demonstrated experience in more than one technical career field discipline.

This experience may qualify for Stack Points as described in the Stacked LCAT Form (IDIQ Attachment 0005). The Contractor shall include a completed Stacked LCAT Form (Attachment 0005) and resume for every individual proposed in a Stacked LCAT in an Order Proposal. The Government will not accept personnel proposed in Stacked LCATs without the required supporting documentation. The Government reserves the right to remove any Order Proposal submitted without the applicable Stacked LCAT supporting documentation from further consideration for that Order award.

8.4 Labor Category Pricing

Labor Category Rate Range

Each Cost Type, T&M and LH Order RFP will include the current MSD MAIDIQ Labor Category Rate Range. Offerors who propose labor category pricing within the MSD

MAIDIQ Labor Category Rate Range in most cases will be found to be Reasonable and Realistic for purposes of pricing the Order proposal. Offerors may propose rates outside of the range with substantiation.

The MSD MAIDIQ Labor Category Rate Range will be updated frequently utilizing feedback from the MSD Board of Directors as well as based on actual performance data or other third party data.

A Labor Category Rate range will not be provided for FFP orders.

CPFF Contract Types For CPFF Orders and/or CLINs, the cost of the labor rates proposed for Orders and invoiced will be compared to the rates proposed at an Order RFP.

With each Order RFP, the Government will provide an Attachment containing Direct Labor Rate Ranges. Offerors that propose direct labor rates below the “low” end of the range must submit rationale and/or documentation to support the proposed rates with their basis of estimate. Failure to substantiate a direct labor rate below the low end of the range shall result in a determination that the rate(s) are not realistic, and the offeror will not be eligible for award.

Offerors that propose direct labor rates higher than the “high” end of the direct labor rate of the range must submit rationale and/or documentation to support the proposed rates within their basis of estimate. Failure to substantiate a direct labor rate(s) above the high end of the range(s) shall result in a determination that the rate(s) are not fair and reasonable, and the Offeror would not be eligible for award.

T&M and LH Contract Types

With each Order RFP for Time and Material and/or Labor Hour Contract type Order or CLINs, the Government will provide an Attachment containing Time and Material and/or Labor Hour Rate Ranges. Offerors that propose fully burdened labor rates below the “low” end of the range must submit rationale and/or documentation to support the proposed rates with their basis of estimate. Failure to substantiate a fully burdened labor rate below the low end of the range shall result in a determination that the rate(s) are not fair and reasonable, and the offeror would not be eligible for award.

Offerors that propose fully burdened labor rates higher than the “high” end of the range must submit rationale and/or documentation to support the proposed rates within their basis of estimate. Failure to substantiate fully burden labor rate(s) above the high end of the range(s) shall result in a determination that the rate(s) are not fair and reasonable, and the Offeror would not be eligible for award.

8.5 Evaluation Procedures

8.5.1 Evaluation Approach

The MSD MAIDIQ is set up to enable streamlined acquisition and utilize the full flexibilities pursuant to FAR 16.505. While OCOs may tailor an approach to meet their unique program’s mission set, the Highest Technically Rated Offerors with a Fair and Reasonable Price (HTRO-RP) evaluation methodology should be used to the maximum extent practicable for Order awards.

The Government will review the proposals to determine the Highest Technically Rated Offerors based on the non-price factors as identified in the Order RFP. The non-price factors play a dominant role in the basis for award; however, an Offeror whose Cost/Price volume is determined not to be fair and reasonable will not be awarded an Order.

8.5.2 Mandatory Evaluation Factors

Cost/Price Factor

Cost/Price will be evaluated in all Order RFPs. To the maximum extent practicable, cost/price should be evaluated on a Reasonable Price basis, utilizing verification of rates proposed with the current MSD MAIDIQ Labor Category Rate Range document.

Technical Factor

Technical will be evaluated in all Order RFPs. The MSD MAIDIQ contract holders were all determined technically capable of performing the MSD MAIDIQ PWS and the base contract source selection included comprehensive technical factors in its award decision. OCOs should take this into consideration when developing the technical factor(s) for the Order RFPs. The technical factor should be specific to the Order requirements. The below approaches should be considered prior to requiring written proposals.

• Technical Challenge of an actual Task. For example, an evaluation of a “Sprint Zero” or Backlog Decomposition of a given Roadmap for a MSD requirement.

This would include the IDIQ contract holder to provide the “definition of done” for the requirement.

• Tech Challenge of notional task. A Tech Challenge to assess the offerors ability to respond to a task similar to the work required by an Order.

• Oral Demonstration to allow for an Offeror’s approach to meet the Order requirements.

• Digital submission of a proposed product vision.

Small Business Participation

Small Business Participation will be evaluated in all Order RFPs.

8.5.3 Order Pricing

The OCO will negotiate cost or pricing with the Contractor and make the determination for cost or price reasonableness for each Order type. Adequate price competition at the Order level in response to an individual requirement, establishes the most accurate, fair, and reasonable pricing for that requirement.

When adequate price competition exists (see FAR 15.403-1(b)(1)), generally no additional information is necessary to determine the reasonableness of cost or price. If adequate price competition does not exist and no other exceptions apply (see FAR 15.403-1(b)), the OCO will request a Certificate of Current Cost and Pricing Data in accordance with FAR 15.403-4.

If a contractor has an approved purchasing system, the contractor shall nevertheless obtain the contracting officer’s consent before placing any subcontract that represents greater than 20% of value of the applicable Order Award. If a contractor does not have an approved purchasing system, the contractor shall request and receive OCO consent to subcontract in accordance with FAR 44.201-1(b) Consent to Subcontracts, and FAR 52.244-2, Subcontracts for all Subcontracts applicable to an Order.

The OCO will determine and identify the applicable contract type for all CLINs within each Order. The available contract types listed below represent the types of CLINs which may be utilized individually or as a hybrid approach.

8.5.4 Total Program Budget

If a total program budget is provided in an Order competition, offerors are cautioned that exceeding the total program budget shall make their proposal ineligible for award.

8.5.5 Optional Evaluation Procedures

Past Performance

OCOs have the ability to utilize the past performance on previous TOs under the MSD MAIDIQ, as assessed by the monthly score card reporting. OCOs should contact the MSD MAIDIQ PCO for access to the current Metric Report.

8.6 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

The QASP provides a means for evaluating whether the Contractor is meeting the performance and delivery standards and acceptable quality levels (AQL), as identified in the base MAIDIQ and Order work statement(s) and identification of surveillance methods used to document the performance. Each Order will use the Base MSD MAIDIQ QASP and refine it to meet specific requirements for the individual Order.

8.7 Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI)

When OCI’s are disclosed or discovered during Order RFPs or during the performance of Orders, the OCO will investigate the potential OCI in accordance with FAR 9.5. The OCI, potential or otherwise, shall be resolved or mitigated prior to award of the Order.

An actual or potential OCI finding may prevent a Contractor from being involved in the development of the DoD system or from continuing to perform under the Order.

Additionally, OCOs should consult legal counsel when any OCI is disclosed or discovered.

8.8 Transition – In and Transition – Out

Transition In and/or Transition-Out plans are encouraged to maintain knowledge transfers or ensure a smooth transition based on the ending term of the contract or to transition to onboarding awardees to a new contract. The contractor shall follow any transition plan submitted as part of their proposal and keep the Government fully informed of status throughout the transition period(s). Throughout the Transition-in/Transition-out periods, it is essential that attention be given to minimize interruptions or delays to work in progress and maximize required knowledge transfer that would impact the mission. The contractor must plan for the transfer of work control, delineating the method for processing and assigning tasks during the Transition-in/ Transition-out periods. Below are considerations when including transition periods.

Transition-in Period

The Transition-in should begin upon contract award and will be defined by the mission partner by days/months in duration. The Transition-in should be defined in the Order PWS/SOW/SOO and may consist of but is not limited to the following: a start of work meeting for the contractor's management and working leader personnel to ensure that the contractor is completely familiar with the working environment and equipment used in connection with this contract; perform administrative duties to include personnel actions; transferring security clearances; writing and submitting plans; and purchasing contractor-furnished equipment; communication and understanding of applicable governing directives and technical requirements; joint inventory of GFP; and procedures for day-to-day operations and facility tours, if applicable.

Transition-out Period

Transition-out should begin during the end of a contract performance/delivery and will be defined by the mission partner by days/months in duration. The Transition should begin immediately prior to the end of the contract, however, may vary in duration based on complexity, knowledge transfer and scope. The contractor shall permit the designated contractor employees of the succeeding contractor or the Government customer to observe all required functions, procedures, and operations under the ending contract. The contractor shall complete ongoing work and otherwise prepare for an orderly transition to their successor or accepting Government customer. The contractor shall assemble all relevant and required aspects to performance and/or deliveries in an orderly and logical manner and deliver them through the COR or TCOR to the successor/Government customer (such as architectures, roadmaps, drawings, charts, diagrams, notes on work performed, as well as any information applicable intellectual materials or properties). The contractor shall not defer any requirements for the purpose of avoiding responsibility or transferring such responsibility to the succeeding contractor or Government customer. The contractor shall fully cooperate with his successor and/or the Government so as not to interfere with their work or duties.

8.9 Cost and Software Data Reporting (CSDR).

The contractor may be required to comply with CSDR requirements IAW Section 3227 of Title 10, U.S. Code, as determined at the Order RFP level and based on CSDR published thresholds and applicable programs.

9. CONTRACT REPORTS AND DELIVERABLES.

All required contractor reports and deliverables shall be defined at the Order level.

These reports shall include up to date and current information for the prime and all subcontractors. Deliverables will define the standard and Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) and are considered a complete, concise, and usable product provided to the Government in the format and timeframe requested.

9.1 Software Metrics

Software Metrics are the measurements of software characteristics to provide insights into the development effort to guide technical and programmatic decision-making, continuous improvement efforts, and remediation of blockers. Mission Partners and Government Software teams will regularly review metrics as part of their retrospectives and leverage metrics for continuous improvement, as well as to measure order performance/delivery. The individual order QASP will define the metrics required by each Contractor awardee, which may include but not limited to ASA(ALT) Software Metrics, as found in the ASA(ALT) DASA (DES) Digital Acquisition Playbooks for Transformation (ADAPT).

Metrics collected under each individual Order(s) shall be submitted by the contractor as a deliverable. The Government will aggregate a compilation of each individual MSD Contract Holder’s order level metrics to monitor a contractor’s overarching performance via a Software Metric dashboard.

The contractor shall adhere to all report submission requirements and notify the COR upon successful completion of each report, as detailed in the specific sections listed below.

9.2 Deliverables / Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL)

The CDRL is the standard format for identifying potential data requirements and deliverable data requirements in the contract. The OCO shall include a DD Form 1423, or a series of DD Forms 1423 containing data requirements and delivery information for each Order. DFARS Subpart 215.470 requires the use of the CDRL when the contract will require the delivery of data.

10. DATA RIGHTS AND WARRANTIES

10.1 Data / Software Rights Assertions

Pursuant to the requirements set forth in DFARS 252.227-7017, Contractors are required to specifically identify Data/Software Rights Assertions related to technical data and software deliverables for all Order requirements. These assertions shall comply with the following requirements:

1) The Contractor shall not assert license restrictions on items, component, or processes themselves. The asserted license restrictions shall pertain to software or technical data that relates to items, components, or processes.

2) The Contractor's Assertions shall not include technical data or software that will not be furnished to the Government under this Contract.

3) The Contractor shall provide a concise (but specific) description of the technical data and software deliverables that will be furnished to the Government with restrictions, rather than generically asserting license restrictions in "technical data" or "technology".

4) The Contractor is responsible for ensuring that Data and Software Rights Assertions from its subcontractors comply with the aforementioned content and formatting requirements (in accordance with DFARS 252.227-7017).

10.2 Order Software Warranty Clause

Orders may utilize a software warranty clause when appropriate. An example of one such clause is included below:

“The contractor shall ensure that the delivered code/software meets the required definition of done and is free of production faults for a period of 90 calendar days beginning on the day of deployment or fielding of the product. Any faults found during this period will be corrected by the contractor at no cost to the Agency.”

11. ACCOUNTING SYSTEMS

An acceptable accounting system provides for the proper segregation, identification, accumulation, and allocation of direct and indirect costs for Government procurements.

In accordance with FAR 16.301-3(a)(3), only those Contractors that maintain an adequate accounting system shall be eligible for Cost Reimbursement (all types) or Non-Commercial Labor-Hour type Order solicitations and awards.

Adequacy, acceptability, and/or approval of a contractor’s accounting system are determined by the Contractor’s cognizant DCMA CO, CFA CO, or cognizant DCAA office and are validated by the MSD MAIDIQ PCO.

Acceptable documentation may include current and valid determination letters from the Contractor’s cognizant DCMA or CFA CO, DCAA audit reports, or Pre-Award Surveys of Prospective Contractor Accounting System (SF1408) completed by Government Officials.

12. COST ACCOUNTING STANDARDS

Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) are a set of 19 standards and rules promulgated by the Government for use in determining costs on procurements and for Contractors to disclose in writing and follow consistently their cost accounting practices.

The Contractor may hold contracts, orders, or subcontracts that are subject to full CAS coverage, which requires all 19 standards; modified CAS coverage, which requires Standards 401, 402, 405, and 406; or are exempt from CAS coverage under 48 CFR 9903.201-1 and 48 CFR 9903.201-2.

For CAS-covered Orders awarded under the MSD MAIDIQ the Contractor shall comply with all applicable CAS as determined by their cognizant DCMA CO, CFA CO, or DCAA office, disclose actual cost accounting practices, and follow disclosed and established cost accounting practices consistently, for the entire duration of the Order.

The Cognizant Federal Agency Official (CFAO) is responsible for issuing determinations of adequacy and compliance of the Contractor’s CAS Disclosure Statement.

Contractors may provide the MSD MAIDIQ PCO with documentation from their CFAO to verify their CAS Disclosure Statement has been determined adequate. The Contractor shall notify the MSD MAIDIQ PCO of any updates or changes to the status of its CAS Disclosure Statement.

The Contractor shall also notify the designated OCOs for any affected Orders, in writing, of any changes to the status of their CAS Disclosure Statement or cost accounting practices.