Addendum 52.212-2 - EC.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

377TH AIR BASE WING (AFGSC)

377 MSG/CONTRACTING DIVISION – KIRTLAND AFB, NEW MEXICO

RFO 52.212-2 Evaluation – Commercial Products and Commercial Services (Deviation Date) The following has been tailored to this procurement:

a. Basis for Award. The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer, conforming to the solicitation, will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. To be considered for award, an offer must first be rated “Technically Acceptable.” The Government will then make an award decision based on Past Performance and Price.

The price proposed must be found to be fair and reasonable in accordance with RFO 12.204(a).

b. Evaluation Process. The Government will evaluate each offeror’s technical approach to determine if it is Acceptable or Unacceptable. The proposal must meet the minimum requirements of the Performance Work Statement (PWS) to be rated "Acceptable" across all subfactors. Any proposal rated "Unacceptable" will be removed from further consideration. For all technically acceptable offerors, the Government will assess its confidence in the offeror's ability to perform the work, assigning a rating of Confident, Neutral, or No Confidence. The price for all technically acceptable offers will be evaluated for fairness and reasonableness in accordance with RFO 12.204(a). Among all technically acceptable offers, the Government will consider Past Performance and Price. The Government reserves the right to make an award to an offeror with a "Confident" past performance rating that is higher in price than one with a "Neutral" or "No Confidence" rating, if the perceived benefit of the better past performance is deemed to be worth the additional cost. Award will be made to the offeror that provides the best value to the Government.

c. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

a. (i) Factor 1: Technical (Go/No-Go) – The Government will evaluate the offeror's technical proposal on an Acceptable or Unacceptable basis. A proposal must receive an "Acceptable" rating for the overall factor to be eligible for further consideration. To be considered "Technically Acceptable," the offeror must demonstrate a clear understanding of the requirements in the Performance Work Statement (PWS), be rated "Acceptable" for all subfactors below, and meet the professional standards referenced in the PWS.

i. Subfactor 1: Staffing and Retention Plan – To be rated “Acceptable,” the offeror must provide a proposed plan that, at a minimum:

1. Outlines a scheduling model that mathematically demonstrates how the offeror will provide a minimum of three (3) certified lifeguards per session to ensure compliance with the DAFI 34-101 mandatory 10-minute break requirement, while guaranteeing that two (2) guards remain on active surveillance duty at all times.

2. Presents a realistic recruitment and retention strategy tailored to the local Kirtland AFB/Albuquerque market conditions, specifically addressing how they will recruitment and retention of certified lifeguards to ensure compliance with the DAFI 34-101.

The plan must also detail the process for providing backup or relief personnel to cover unplanned absences (e.g., sickness, no-shows) to prevent facility closures.

3. Details a viable vacancy mitigation plan utilizing a pool of pre-certified "on-call" or relief personnel, including a guaranteed response time to fill unplanned absences (sickness, no-shows) to ensure no facility sessions are delayed or canceled.

ii. Subfactor 2: Certification and Qualifications – To be rated “Acceptable,” the offeror must provide a clear plan that, at a minimum:

1. Outlines a reliable process for verifying that 100% of proposed personnel hold current, valid lifeguarding and CPR/AED certifications from a nationally recognized organization (American Red Cross, Starguard Elite, or Ellis & Associates) prior to performing work under this contract.

2. Identifies a robust tracking method to monitor certification expiration dates and prevent any lapses during contract performance.

3. Outlines a physical testing process to verify that all proposed lifeguards meet the specific swim proficiency requirements detailed in PWS paragraph 1.5.8 (300-yard continuous swim, 2-minute tread, and 10-lb brick retrieval from a depth of 7 feet in under 1 minute and 40 seconds).

iii. Subfactor 3: Management Plan & Quality Control – To be rated “Acceptable,” the offeror must provide a proposed plan that, at a minimum:

1. Defines the on-site role, responsibilities, and authority of the required Aquatics Manager to act on behalf of the contractor and resolve issues with the Government COR.

2. Details a secure, logical process for daily facility opening, closing, and key control/physical security in accordance with PWS paragraph 1.5.7.

3. Demonstrates a clear operational approach to executing daily facility upkeep tasks (pool vacuuming, skimmer/drain clearing, and equipment sanitizing) and daily water testing parameters (DAFMAN 48-143), including a rapid communication protocol to report water deficiencies to the COR while strictly adhering to the PWS prohibition on contractor chemical handling.

4. Includes an internal Quality Control Plan (QCP) outlining the contractor's surveillance schedule to identify and self-correct performance deficiencies.

iv. Any proposal rated "Unacceptable" for any subfactor will render the entire technical proposal "Unacceptable" and ineligible for award.

b. (ii) Factor 2: Past Performance – For all offerors rated "Technically Acceptable” the Government will conduct a past performance evaluation on recent (within three years) and relevant (similar work as the requirement) submissions. The evaluation will result in a single performance confidence rating of Confident, Neutral, or No Confidence. These ratings are defined as follows:

Adjectival Rating Description Confident Based on the offeror’s recent and relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral No recent and relevant performance record is available for the offeror. A Neutral rating is not favorable or unfavorable and will not be a basis for eliminating an offeror from competition.

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent and relevant performance record, the Government has significant doubt that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

c. (iii) Factor 3: Price – The offerors Total Evaluated Price (TEP), for award purposes, will be based upon the total price proposed for each Contract Line- Item Number (CLIN) as calculated in “Supplies or Services & Prices or Costs” of the solicitation (SF 1449) or excel that includes pricing for all CLINs included in the SF1449. The TEP will be evaluated against competitive quotations and other necessary means found in RFO 12.204(a). 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).

i. Price will be evaluated for fair and reasonableness in accordance RFO 12.204(a).

ii. The purchase order resulting from this solicitation will include RFO 52.217-9 “Option to Extend the Term of the Contract”.

iii. The purchase order resulting from this solicitation will include RFO 52.217-8 “Option to Extend Services”, a six- month extension. The six-month extension period under this clause will only be utilized if necessary. IAW 52.217-8, the extension pricing will be based on the pricing on contract if utilized. The six-month extension will not appear on the resulting contract as a separate CLIN and will only be add to the contract when required for the price proposed in Factor 3. The TEP will be used for evaluation purposes only. Evaluation of extension pricing shall not obligate the Government to exercise the extension.

d. A written notice of award or acceptance of a quote, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the quote, shall result in a binding contract upon signature of the apparent awardee. Before the quotation’s specified expiration time, the Government may accept a quote (or part of a quote), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

(End of provision)