212-1_212-2 ASCC 20-25.docx

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1

INSTRUCTIONS TO QUOTERS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2015)

A. Instructions to Quoters.

1. Quotes shall be submitted via email to Contract Specialist Bethany Flynn, bethany.l.flynn.civ@mail.mil and Contracting Officer Larry Brown, larry.l.brown9.civ@mail.mil prior to 31 August 2020 at 7:00 a.m. EDT. No other government employees shall be included on the quote email. To do so could endanger the impartiality of the evaluations process, and result in the quote being declared non-compliant.

(a) Contractors shall confirm receipt of all quote submittals. Upon receipt of electronic submissions, the Contract Specialist will acknowledge the quotes were received with a confirmation email; however, time is based on actual quote receipt not on confirmation email. It is the responsibility of the quoter to ensure electronic submissions were properly sent and a confirmation email is received.

2. Electronic submissions via email is the only acceptable form of quote submission.

Faxed submissions will not be accepted.

3. The sole point of contact responsible for supplying additional information and answering all inquiries is the Contract Specialist. Address all questions or concerns the quoter may have to the Contract Specialist Bethany Flynn and Contracting Officer Larry Brown at the emails listed above. All questions regarding this solicitation shall be submitted in writing via email no later than 10 August 2020, 7:00 a.m. EDT. Questions received after this time may not receive responses.

B. General Instructions

1. The selection of a source for award purposes will be conducted utilizing source selection procedures as delineated in FAR Part 12 (Acquisition of Commercial Items) and FAR Part 13 (Simplified Acquisition Procedures). Quotes will be evaluated using the criteria under FAR Clause 52.212-2 (Evaluation-Commercial Items) with Addendum (below).

2. The Quote. The submission of the documentation specified below will constitute the quoter’s acceptance of the terms and conditions of the RFQ, concurrence with the Performance Work Statement (PWS), and contract type. Non-concurrence with any portion of the terms and conditions, PWS, or contract type must be clearly stated in the submission package.

3. Instructions outlined in the Quote Preparation Instructions below prescribe the format for the quote and describe the approach for the development and presentation of quote data. These instructions are designed to ensure the submission of necessary information to provide for the understanding and comprehensive evaluation of quotes. It is the Government’s intention to award without discussions. Quoters are encouraged to present their best Technical, Past Performance, and prices in their initial quote submission.

4. If a quoter believes the requirements in these instructions contain an error, an ambiguity, omission, or are otherwise deemed unsound, the quoter shall immediately notify the Contract Specialist and Contracting Officer in writing with supporting rationale.

5. In accordance with FAR Subpart 4.8 (Government Contract Files), the Government will retain all unsuccessful quotes.

6. A vendor may submit multiple candidates/teams, but each must be submitted on separate quotes, complete with Volumes 1-3, even if information is identical. These shall be sent by separate emails.

C. Quote Preparation Instructions

Quoters are required to submit a completed solicitation (including acknowledgment of all Amendments). Failure to follow the Quote Preparation Instructions may cause your quote to be deemed non-compliant by the Government.

1. Quotes shall consist of three (3) separately tabbed volumes: (see content descriptions below).

Volume 1: General Volume 2 Tab 1: Technical.

Volume 2 Tab 2: Past Performance of the Vendor (not the candidate(s)).

Volume 3: Price. This volume shall be a separate file from Volume 1 & 2. Failure to adhere to this may result in the quote being deemed non-compliant at the discretion of the government. Volume 3 may be on the provided Excel spreadsheet (preferred) or a PDF.

Quoters shall submit their quote IAW the below.

D. Quote Submission Format and Content

Volume 1:

General

The General section shall include all other information to include acknowledgement(s) and signed Amendment(s), Representation & Certifications, Exceptions, and any other information not applicable to Volume 2 or 3.

Volume 2, Tab 1 Factor 1: Technical

(1) The Technical Volume shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims in the Quote. Legibility, clarity and coherence are very important. Quoters shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities and experience, and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the quotation.

(2) The Technical submission will be evaluated against the Technical Factors of this solicitation. The Government will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Technical submission. Contractors shall detail all of their experience and capabilities.

(3) The Technical submission should be prepared in a format consistent with the PWS and the evaluation criteria set forth in this solicitation. The Technical submission should be sufficiently specific, detailed, and complete to clearly and fully demonstrate understanding of the proposed work and the goals of the U.S. Army War College (USAWC) Carlisle Barracks, PA.

(4) Candidate resume(s) can be included as a part of Vol 2, Tab 1 or added as a separate attachment, but must be included.

Technical volume shall address all of the following factors and shall follow this general outline:

Factor 1: Technical: Relevance to the requirement IAW PWS 5 Subfactor 1:

a. Master's degree in a discipline related to military organizational issues. (e.g., Strategic Studies, Leadership, Military Arts and Science, management of large organizations, Military History). Desired: A Master's degree from an accredited graduate degree granting institution in a discipline related to military organizational issues. (e.g., Strategic Studies, Leadership, Military Arts and Science, management of large organizations, Military History). Highly desired: A PhD from an accredited graduate degree granting institution in military or organizational issues or a national security related discipline.

b. Completed advance Professional Military Education (e.g. Senior-Level Education or Intermediate-Level Education as defined by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction 1800.01F, Officer Professional Military Education Policy) or equivalent. Desired: Senior-Level College graduate (or equivalent). Highly desired: US Army War College or USMC War College graduate.

Subfactor 2: At least three (3) years of experience as a field grade officer, senior non-commissioned officer, or senior warrant officer (or equivalent). Desired: A minimum of three (3) years of experience as a field grade officer, senior non-commissioned officer, or senior warrant officer (or equivalent) serving in an Army Service Component Command. Highly desired: A minimum of three (3) years of experience as a field grade officer, senior non-commissioned officer, or senior warrant officer (or equivalent) serving in multiple Army Service Component Commands, Major Commands, and Joint Commands.

Subfactor 3: At least two (2) years of experience (or Joint Qualified) applying the principles of operational or strategic Landpower, in operations or planning, at one of the following levels (or equivalent):

Desired: A minimum of two (2) years of experience at a Service Command applying the principles of operational or strategic Landpower, in operations or planning. Highly desired: A minimum of two (2) years of experience at a Joint Command applying the principles of operational or strategic Landpower, in operations or planning.

Subfactor 4: At least two (2) years of experience as an instructor, facilitator, or observer/controller (or equivalent). Desired: A minimum of two (2) years of experience as a faculty instructor at either a Service College (US Army Command and General Staff College, Marine Corps Command and Staff) or an accredited degree granting institution, developing and teaching college level courses. Highly desired: A minimum of two (2) years of experience at either a Senior-Level College or an accredited graduate degree granting institution, developing and teaching courses.

Instructor, facilitator, or observer/controller (or equivalent) experience must have occurred within the last 5 years as reflected on a curriculum vitae, professional resume, and/or similar documents.

Subfactor 5: The contractor shall be a U.S. citizen and shall possess, at a minimum, a current SECRET clearance (at time of award). The contractor will also possess, at a minimum, a SECRET facility clearance (at time of award).

Volume 2 , Tab 2.

Factor 2: Past Performance:

Contractors shall submit recent and relevant information, e.g. contracts and/or subcontract work performed for the same or similar requirement. To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past three (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Contractors shall include the source of information, e.g. three points of contact, addresses and telephone numbers, type of contract, contract amount, period of performance, and comments on any performance problems encountered and the contractor’s corrective actions.

Contractors with no prior Government contracts or subcontracts may submit similar information for contract and/or other work performance with State and local Governments, private industries, educational institutions and/or past Government service if applicable. The submittal shall include rationale on how it was determined that the work performed previously was the same or similar in nature, size, and complexity to the work specified by this solicitation. A minimum of (3) three past performance references are requested. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy (including context of data), and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information).

Volume 3

Factor 3: Price Price shall be evaluated using price analysis techniques in accordance with FAR 13.106-3. Price will not be evaluated for quoters with a technically unacceptable rating. Unless indicated otherwise, all lines shall be quoted for, including all option years. Failure to do so will be cause for the quote to be declared non-compliant. Pricing shall be provided on the provided Excel spreadsheet (preferred) or on a PDF.

(End of addendum)

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2

EVALUATION – COMMERCIAL ITEMS (Oct 2014)

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

a. Basis for Purchase Order Award. The Government intends to award one Purchase Order(s) resulting from this solicitation to responsible quoters whose quote conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered, conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 13, Simplified Acquisition Procedures, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), and the Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFARS). Awards will be made to quoters deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), whose quote conforms to the solicitation requirements, and whose quote, judged by an overall assessment of the evaluation criteria and other considerations specified in this solicitation, representing trade-offs most advantageous to the Government.

b. The Government intends to award using a trade-off analysis as a result of this solicitation. The Government intends to evaluate quotes and award Purchase Order(s) without discussions with quoters. The Government may request additional oral or written information from one or more quoters, but not necessarily from all quoters. Therefore, the quoters initial quote should contain the quoters best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint.

c. Evaluation Criteria. This procurement is being conducted under FAR Part 13 Simplified Acquisition Procedures.

The Evaluation criteria consists of 3 factors (Technical, Past Performance, and Price). The quote submission will be evaluated under these three (3) evaluation factors. Technical and Past Performance Factors are approximately of equal importance. All Technical Subfactors are approximately of equal importance. All evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined, are more important than cost or price.

Factor 1: Technical: Relevance to the requirement IAW PWS 5 Subfactor 1:

a. Master's degree in a discipline related to military organizational issues. (e.g., Strategic Studies, Leadership, Military Arts and Science, management of large organizations, Military History). Desired: A Master's degree from an accredited graduate degree granting institution in a discipline related to military organizational issues. (e.g., Strategic Studies, Leadership, Military Arts and Science, management of large organizations, Military History). Highly desired: A PhD from an accredited graduate degree granting institution in military or organizational issues or a national security related discipline.

b. Completed advance Professional Military Education (e.g. Senior-Level Education or Intermediate-Level Education as defined by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction 1800.01F, Officer Professional Military Education Policy) or equivalent. Desired: Senior-Level College graduate (or equivalent). Highly desired: US Army War College or USMC War College graduate.

Subfactor 2: At least three (3) years of experience as a field grade officer, senior non-commissioned officer, or senior warrant officer (or equivalent). Desired: A minimum of three (3) years of experience as a field grade officer, senior non-commissioned officer, or senior warrant officer (or equivalent) serving in an Army Service Component Command. Highly desired: A minimum of three (3) years of experience as a field grade officer, senior non-commissioned officer, or senior warrant officer (or equivalent) serving in multiple Army Service Component Commands, Major Commands, and Joint Commands.

Subfactor 3: At least two (2) years of experience (or Joint Qualified) applying the principles of operational or strategic Landpower, in operations or planning, at one of the following levels (or equivalent):

Desired: A minimum of two (2) years of experience at a Service Command applying the principles of operational or strategic Landpower, in operations or planning. Highly desired: A minimum of two (2) years of experience at a Joint Command applying the principles of operational or strategic Landpower, in operations or planning.

Subfactor 4: At least two (2) years of experience as an instructor, facilitator, or observer/controller (or equivalent). Desired: A minimum of two (2) years of experience as a faculty instructor at either a Service College (US Army Command and General Staff College, Marine Corps Command and Staff) or an accredited degree granting institution, developing and teaching college level courses. Highly desired: A minimum of two (2) years of experience at either a Senior-Level College or an accredited graduate degree granting institution, developing and teaching courses.

Instructor, facilitator, or observer/controller (or equivalent) experience must have occurred within the last 5 years as reflected on a curriculum vitae, professional resume, and/or similar documents.

Subfactor 5: The contractor shall be a U.S. citizen and shall possess, at a minimum, a current SECRET clearance (at time of award). The contractor will also possess, at a minimum, a SECRET facility clearance (at time of award).

Each Quote/Technical submission will receive a Combined Technical/Risk Rating below. The Technical subfactor ratings will be used to determine an overall rating for the Technical factor.

Adjectival Rating

Description

Definitions:

Strength: An aspect of a quote that appreciably decreases the risk of unsuccessful award performance or that represents a significant benefit to the Government. Some examples of strengths include PhD, teaching citations, service awards and/or academic promotions. The included examples is not an exhaustive list and in no way limits the Governments rights to consider any and all Strengths it determines are of significant benefit or appreciably decrease risk.

Weakness: A flaw in the quote that increases the risk of unsuccessful award performance. A “significant weakness” in the quote is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful award performance.

Deficiency: A material failure of a quote to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a quote that increases the risk of unsuccessful award performance to an unacceptable level. Examples of deficiencies include a statement by the quoter that “I cannot or will not” meet a requirement, an approach that clearly does not meet a requirement, or omission of data required to assess compliance with the requirement.

Uncertainty: Any aspect of the quote for which the intent of the quoter is unclear because there may be more than one way to interpret the quote or because inconsistencies in the quote indicate that there may be an error, omission or mistake. There is a direct correlation between risk and uncertainty. Examples include a mistake in calculation or measurement and contradictory statements.

Reasonableness: A price is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of competitive business.

Completeness/Accuracy: The quote submission is in compliance with the instructions in the solicitation.

FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

The information listed here is that of the Quoter, not any candidate or subcontractor. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy (including context of data), and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information).

Recency. The first is to evaluate the recency of the quoter’s past performance. Recency is generally expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant, and is critical to establishing the relevancy of past performance information. Recency Assessment. An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past three (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated.

Relevancy. The second is to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the quoter is to the effort to be acquired through this solicitation. Common aspects of relevancy include, but are not limited to, the following: similarity of product/service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, use of key personnel, and extent of subcontracting/teaming. A relevancy determination of the quoter’s (including joint venture partner(s) and major and critical subcontractor(s)) past performance will be made. In determining relevancy for individual awards, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being submitted by the quoter, teaming partner, or subcontractor whose award is being reviewed and evaluated. The past performance information provided in the quote submittal and information obtained from any other sources available to the Government (e.g. PPIRS, FAPIIS, eSRS, DCMA) may be used to establish the degree of relevancy of past performance. Quoters without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and, as a result, will receive a "Neutral" rating for the Past Performance factor.

Quality of Products or Services. The third aspect of the past performance evaluation is to establish the overall quality of the offeror’s past performance. The past performance evaluation conducted in support of the solicitation does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the offeror’s past performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers to determine how well the offeror performed those past contracts.

The Past Performance evaluation will assess the quoter’s probability of meeting the solicitation’s requirements as indicated by that quoter’s record of past performance. Past Performance is assessed at the factor level after evaluating aspects of the quoter’s recent past performance and focusing on performance that is relevant to the item being procured under this solicitation.

Past contract performance should demonstrate the selected quoter’s ability to meet project goals as specified in the Performance Work Statement and the Instructions to Quoters. The quoter must demonstrate that he/she has performed work of a similar scope and magnitude of effort.

There are four levels of relevancy. The quoter will receive one of the four relevancy ratings identified below. With respect to relevancy, past performance of greater relevancy will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance.

Past Performance Relevancy Rating:

The Past Performance Factor will be assigned one of the Confidence Assessment ratings defined below. A quoter whose submittal demonstrates no past performance will be rated “Neutral.” An award will not be made to any quoter who receives a “Limited Confidence” or “No Confidence” past performance rating. All past performance information collected will be reviewed to determine the quality of the quoter’s past performance, general trends, and usefulness of the information to establish the performance confidence assessment rating below:

Performance Confidence Assessment Rating:

The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

FACTOR 3: PRICE

Price will not be scored or rated. Evaluation of price will be performed using one or more of the price analysis techniques in FAR 13.106-3. Through these techniques the Government will determine whether prices are reasonable, complete and balanced. In as much as the best value quote will be determined through tradeoff analysis, the Government is not bound to award to the lowest evaluated price. On the other hand, if the Government determines that a higher rated quote provides value-added features but at an unreasonable/unjustifiable amount, it is not bound to award to a higher technically rated quote.

The price must be appropriate for the benefit provided to the U.S. Army, the USAWC, and CSL. The goal of this solicitation is to obtain a firm-fixed price award. Quoters will submit the total price for completing required work inclusive of all costs associated with this requirement.

Price will be evaluated on a total price basis and will include base year and all options.

(End of addendum)