AFLDP-IT_BPA_Attachment_2_Instruction.pdf

02 December 2024

MEMORANDUM FOR ALL GSA MAS Small Business Set-Aside Schedule Contractors

FROM: AFDW/PK

SUBJECT: Request for Quotation (RFQ), FA7014-25-Q-0001), Air Force Leadership Development Program—Information Technology (AFLDP-IT)

This is an RFQ for the subject requirement to be awarded in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 8.405 procedures, the terms and conditions of the GSA MAS Small Business Set-Aside, and the specific information, instructions and evaluation criteria are outlined in this RFQ and attachments. The Government intends to award a single Blanket Purchase Agreement with pricing for Firm Fixed Price (FFP) and Time and Materials (T&M) task order for the subject requirement. This Request for Quote (RFQ) is being issued as a Total Small Business Set-Aside using NAICS code 541519, Other Computer Related Services. This is a competitive source selection conducted in accordance with (IAW) Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 8.

1. RFQ Information:

A. Quotations are due by (Add Time and Time Zone here) on DAY MONTH YEAR. Submit quotations electronically via email to CS, kenya.turner@us.af.mil and CO, ashley.raymond.2@us.af.mil. All electronic quotation submissions shall reference the complete RFQ number in the subject line. LATE QUOTATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. After receipt of your quotation, the CS or CO will email a confirmation of receipt. If you do not receive a confirmation of receipt before the due date/time, the schedule contractor is encouraged to reach out to the CS and CO to ensure the quotation was received.

B. Questions & Answers: Schedule contractors are cautioned that all communications are to be channeled through the CO. Any questions and comments whether technical or contractual in nature, shall be submitted in writing via email using the provided MS Excel workbook titled “Questions Template – AFLDP-IT” (Attachment 8) to the CO, Ashley Raymond via email at ashley.raymond.2@us.af.mil and CS, Kenya Turner via email kenya.turner@us.af.mil. Questions and comments shall be submitted to the CO and CS by (Add Time and Time Zone here), DAY MONTH YEAR. No further questions will be addressed on this requirement after this date. All questions and comments will be consolidated, and responses will be forwarded to all Schedule contractors.

C. This RFQ is not authorization to begin performance and in no way obligates the Government for any costs incurred by the schedule contractor associated with developing a quotation. The Government reserves the right not to award an order in response to this RFQ. Prior to commencement of any activities associated with performance of this requirement, the Government will issue a written directive or contractual document signed by the CO with appropriate consideration established. The Government reserves the right to cancel this solicitation, with no obligation to the contractor by the Government.

D. The anticipated period of performance for this acquisition is as follows:

Period of Performance:

A. Phase-In: Award Date Plus 60 Days B. Base Period: Award Plus 12 Months C. Option Period 1: End of Base Plus 12 Months D. Option Period 2: End of Option Period 1 Plus 12 Months E. Option Period 3: End of Option Period 2 Plus 12 Months F. Option Period 4: End of Option Period 3 Plus 12 Months G. Optional Six-Month Extension of Services (EOS): End of Option Period 4 Plus 6

Months

E. A site visit/pre-quotation conference will not be held.

F. List of Attachments:

1. Performance Work Statement (PWS) (Dated 6 Nov 24)

2. Contract Data Requirements List (CDRLs)

3. Provisions and Clauses

4. Pricing Worksheet

5. Staffing Matrix

6. Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

7. Draft Contract Security Classification Specification (DD-254)

8. Questions Template—AFLDP-IT MS Excel Workbook

2. RFQ Instructions to Schedule Contractors (ITSC)

A. This is a competitive RFQ selection conducted in accordance with (IAW) Federal

Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 8.405-2. Orders placed under the contract instrument, General Services Administration (GSA) Multiple Award Schedule (MAS) are not source selections and are not subject to FAR 15.3 procedures. Accordingly, issuance of a task order award under this RFQ (should an award be made) shall follow the ordering procedures outlined in FAR 8.405, as supplemented.

B. A quotation submitted in response to this RFQ shall be in compliance with the terms and conditions of the General Services Administration (GSA) Multiple Award Schedule (MAS) contracts, requirements as stated in this RFQ and attachments, and the Performance Work Statement (PWS) (Attachment 1). All claimed capabilities to meet the requirements are subject to verification by the Government. Non-conformance with these instructions may result in rejection of the quotation or an unfavorable quotation evaluation or being deemed ineligible for award.

C. The quotation shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The quotation shall not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements but, rather, shall provide convincing rationale to address how the Schedule contractor intends to meet the requirements. Schedule contractor shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities or experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Schedule contractor's quotation.

D. Discrepancies. If a Schedule contractor believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the Schedule contractor shall immediately notify the Contracting Officer (CO) in writing with supporting rationale as well as the remedies the Schedule contractor is asking the CO to consider as related to the omission or error.

E. Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI). A Schedule contractor shall identify any conflict of interest or appearance issues which may be a potential OCI IAW FAR Subpart 9.5, as supplemented, and any basic contract clause(s) that govern the schedule. At the time of submitting a quotation, an Organizational Conflict of Interest Identification and Mitigation Plans or a statement that no OCI exists shall accompany your quotation. The Organizational Conflict of Interest Identification and Mitigation Plan or statement that no OCI exists shall be included within the Schedule contractor’ Technical Quotation, Volume I. The Government-accepted Organizational Conflict of Interest Identification and Mitigation Plan shall be incorporated by reference into the resultant Task Order.

Schedule contractor are responsible for immediately notifying the Contracting Officer should any potential conflict of interest arise at any time prior to and/or after task order award

F. Quotation Submission. Each Schedule contractor shall submit their quotation electronically to the email box of Contract Specialist, Kenya Turner at kenya.turner@us.af.mil) and Contracting Officer, Ashley Raymond at ashley.raymond.2@us.af.mil. The quotation shall be submitted no later than the required quotation due date. The Schedule contractor shall indicate the volume number and title on each document and use separate files to permit rapid location of information, as described in paragraph J below.

Failure to provide the items listed above and below may render your quotation incomplete. Incomplete quotations will not be evaluated.

The Schedule contractor shall submit their quotation for consideration no later than XX:XX XX (Add Time Zone, i.e., Central Time) DAY MONTH YEAR. Only one quotation shall be submitted, per company, in response to this RFQ. Quotations received after the date/time specified will not be evaluated.

J/ Schedule contractor submitting a quotation in response to this RFQ shall submit a cover letter, narrative summary, signed SF1449, exceptions to solicitation requirements, DD254, Gateway, CCMI Level 2 Certification, Past Performance, Technical Approach, Oral Presentation, and Pricelist. Font shall be no less than Times New Roman 10 pt. or no more than Times New Roman 12 pt. legible tables, charts, graphs and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems, and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. Pages shall be numbered consecutively within each volume. All quotation information shall be submitted in either Microsoft Word or PDF format, except for the Pricing Information (Volume III), and Staffing Matrix (Attachment 5)). RFQ Pricing worksheet, Attachment 4, and Staffing Matrix, attachment 5, shall be submitted in Microsoft Excel format. Each volume shall be submitted as a separately labeled electronic file.

Schedule contractor shall ensure that pricing information is only included in Volume III – Price Folder. Do NOT include any pricing information in Volume II – Technical Folder.

All unit and extended prices provided shall be rounded to the nearest dollar. Extended prices shall be divisible by the number of units proposed with no fractional cents. Submit your quotation electronically IAW the table below. All electronic quotation submissions shall reference the completed RFQ number in the subject line.

VOLUME TITLE

MAXIMUM

NUMBER

OF PAGES

I Administrative Folder Cover Letter N/A Narrative Summary 8 Contract Documentation: Signed SF1449 and completed fill-in clauses including Reps & Certs N/A

Exceptions to Solicitation Requirements N/A

DD254 N/A

II Technical Folder Subfolder 1 Gateway

CMMI Level 2 Certification N/A Past Performance 10

Subfolder 2 Technical Approach Oral Presentation 45 pages/slides II Price Folder

Price List N/A

Other than Certified Cost Pricing Data, if and when applicable

N/A

Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the Government’s evaluation of the quotation. If Interchange Notices (INs) are required, page limitations may be placed on responses to INs. The specified page limits to IN responses will be identified in the INs to the Schedule contractor. Each page shall be counted except the following: Cover Letter, Contract Documentation: Signed SF1449 and completed fill-in clauses including Reps & Certs, Exceptions to Solicitation Requirements, DD254, CMMI Level 2 Certification, Price List, and Other than Certified Cost Pricing Data, if and when applicable.

Volume I: Administrative Documents

This volume shall include the following:

• Cover Letter shall be submitted on company letterhead and shall include the following: shall identify all enclosures being transmitted, be signed by a company representative, and contain no other information. The cover letter shall be a separate document and will not be counted in the page limitations.

• Narrative Summary of the entire quote that is concise, to include addressing significant risks and highlighting any key or unique features, excluding price.

The narrative content shall relate to the technical evaluation factors/sub factors. Any summary material presented here shall not be considered as meeting the requirements for any portions of other volumes of the quote.

• Contract Documentation: The offeror’s quote shall include a signed copy of the SF1449 and include completed fill-in clauses. Signature by the Offeror on the SF 1449 constitutes an offer, which the Government may accept. In doing so, the Offeror accedes to the commercial contract terms and conditions as written in the RFQ.

• Exceptions to Solicitation Requirements: Offeror shall state all assumptions and proposed exceptions to solicitation requirements.

• DD254: All contractors are required to hold, at a minimum, a facility clearance level of SECRET. Offerors shall complete the DD-254 (block 6 and 8), see Attachment 7 for details. To be eligible for award, an offeror must have the required clearance at the time of quote submission. Sponsorship will not be granted.

*Quotations not valid through DAY MONTH YEAR will be deemed unacceptable.

(1) Volume II: Technical

The Technical Volume shall be specific and complete. Legibility, clarity, and coherence are very important. Your responses will be evaluated against the evaluation criteria in the Basis of Award below. Provide as specifically as possibly the actual methodology you would use for accomplishing/satisfying the evaluation criteria. Address your technical solution for meeting or exceeding the Government’s minimum performance or capability requirements of the evaluation criteria. All the requirements specified in the RFQ are mandatory. At a minimum, the Schedule contractor’s technical volume shall address each of the evaluation criteria, as they apply to the PWS, (Attachment 1). The technical volume should demonstrate the Schedule contractor’s ability to perform the technical requirements. By your submission, you are representing that your firm will perform all the requirements specified in the RFQ. Do not merely reiterate the objectives or reformulate the requirements specified in the solicitation. This volume shall include the completed:

• CMMI Level 2 certification that includes company name and appraisal ID.

• Past performance information on at least three (3) recent contracts/work efforts, but no more than five (5). To be recent, the contract (or subcontract) must have been performed or be ongoing within the past three (3) years from the date of issuance of this RFQ and executed for a minimum of a six (6) month period. Past Performance outside this given timeframe will not be evaluated. Offeror’s quote shall provide examples of past performance that demonstrate a likelihood of success in the contemplated effort.

• Oral Presentation shall present a clear approach that will be employed for accomplishing / satisfying all the requirements specified in the solicitation to include a discussion on how the offeror will assess the technical and contractual requirements of the PWS.

(2) Volume III: Price

The Schedule contractor shall submit pricing information to support the completeness and reasonableness of their proposed prices for all CLINS. The pricing information submitted should fully support the PWS requirements for each major functional element specified in the PWS. A price breakdown shall be provided by filling out Attachment 4, Pricing Worksheet.

3. Basis of award/Evaluation Criteria

A. Award will be made to the Schedule contractor whose quotation results in the best value to the Government in accordance with this RFQ and FAR 8.405 procedures. An order may be awarded to the schedule contractor who is deemed responsible IAW FAR 9.1, as supplemented, whose quotation conforms to the RFQ’s requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by the RFQ instructions) and is judged, based on the evaluation Factors, to represent the best value to the Government. This may result in an award to the best rated technical capability and past performance pricing that is consistent with the evaluation factors. Non-price factors are defined as technical and are rated significantly more important than price. Therefore, the Government will award a task order to the Schedule contractor considered to be the best value, price and other factors considered.

B. Evaluation Process:

1. First, the Government will assign a rating for each schedule contractors’ Factor 1 (Gateway) on a recent, not recent and relevant, not relevant compliant basis (as defined in Factor 1 Table 1 and Factor 1 Table 2 below). If a schedule contractor receives a not recent/not relevant rating for Factor 1, then the Government will not evaluate their Factor 2 (Technical) or Factor 3 (Price) and they will no longer be considered for award. Each schedule contractor that had a compliant rating for Factor 1 will then be evaluated for Factor 2 (Technical). The Government will assign a rating of outstanding (blue), good (purple), acceptable (green), marginal (yellow), or unacceptable (red) (as defined in Factor 2 table 3 below) and significant strength, strength, weakness, significant weakness, uncertainty, and deficiency (as defined in Factor 2, table 4 below) for the schedule contractor’s Factor 2. If a schedule contractor receives a not technically compliant rating for Factor 2 then they will no longer be considered for award and Factor 3 (Price) will not be evaluated. As stated above, the government will rate each Factor. The Government will evaluate the criterion within each factor to arrive at an overall Factor rating, however, each criterion will NOT be rated.

2. Interchanges are fluid interaction(s) between the CO and Schedule contractor that may address any aspect of the quotation and may or may not be documented in real time. The Government intends to make award based on the Schedule contractor’s initial quotation submissions without conducting interchanges. Therefore, each quotation should contain the Schedule contractor’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to hold interchanges using Interchange Notices (INs) if, during any portion of the evaluation, it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government. Interchanges may be conducted with one, some, or all schedule contractors that quoted in responded to this solicitation to address any issues, if necessary. The Government is not required to conduct interchanges with any or all schedule contractors responding to this RFQ. Schedule contractor responses to INs will be considered in making the selection decision.

C. Responses to this RFQ will be evaluated against the following Factors:

Factor 1 – Gateway

Factor 2 – Technical

Factor 3 - Price

Factor 1 – Gateway

Under this factor, the Government will evaluate the Schedule contractor’s minimum standard based on the following:

i. Verified CMMI Level 2 Certification

ii. Past Performance

Rating Definition

Recent Past performance is determined to be ongoing projects or projects completed within the last three (3) years from the date of issuance of this RFQ and for a minimum of six (6) months.

Not Recent Anything later than three (3) years from the date of issuance of this RFQ and/or less than six (6) months of performance.

Factor 1. Table 1.

Rating Definition

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Factor 1. Table 2.

Factor 2 – Technical Approach

Under this factor, the Government will evaluate the Schedule contractor’s technical approach based on the following:

i. Configuration and Software Engineering Approach

ii. Management Approach

iii. Experience and Qualifications

The Government intends to perform a combined technical/risk evaluation using the following adjectival ratings:

Color Adjectival Rating Definition

Blue

Outstanding

Quote demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple

Good

Quote indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength or significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Green

Acceptable

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

Yellow

Marginal

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

Red

Unacceptable

Quote does not meet requirements of the solicitation and, thus, contains one or more deficiencies and is not awardable, and/or risk of performance is unacceptably high.

Factor 2. Table 3.

Rating Description

Significant Strength

An aspect of an Offeror’s quote with appreciable merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the considerable advantage of the Government during contract performance.

Strength

An aspect of an offeror’s quote with merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the advantage of the Government during contract performance.

Weakness A flaw in the quote that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

Significant Weakness

A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. (See FAR 15.001).

Uncertainty Any aspect of the quote for which the intent of the offer is unclear (e.g., more than one way to interpret the offer or inconsistencies in the quote indicating that there may have been an error, omission, or mistake).

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 contract performance to an unacceptable level.

Factor 2. Table 4.

Factor 3 – Price

Price quotations should support the proposed Factors (pricelist and total evaluated price (TEP), and will be evaluated for fair and reasonableness, unbalanced pricing, completeness, and the PECP will be evaluated for realism. Schedule contractor whose price is determined to be incomplete, unreasonable, or unbalanced will not be considered for award.

1. The Initial TEP (I-TEP) will be the average of the fully burdened labor rates of the thirteen

(13) prepopulated common labor categories (see Atch 4 Pricelist tab 1) across all five (5) years. Evaluation of options and the extension of services (EOS) shall not obligate the Government to exercise such options. The six-month EOS is IAW FAR 52.217-8, “Option to Extend Services” and will be utilized if necessary. The six-month EOS is not to be considered part of option period X and will be a separate option exercised if utilized. After any interchanges, if necessary, the Government will evaluate the Final TEP (F-TEP). If interchanges do not occur, the I-TEP will become the F-TEP.

Labor Category

Program Management I

Analyst I

Information Security I

System Engineer I

Strategic Planner I

Senior Engineer I

Senior Technician I

Software Systems Engineer I

Test Engineer I

Test/QA I

Support Tech I

Under this factor, the Government will evaluate the Schedule contractor’s F-TEP based on the following:

i. Reasonableness. For a price to be reasonable, it must represent a price to the Government that a prudent person would pay in the conduct of competitive business. Normally, price reasonableness is established through price analysis techniques as described in FAR 15.404. In the event that price analysis techniques at FAR 15.404 are insufficient to establish a fair and reasonable price determination, other price analysis techniques may be used.

ii. Unbalanced Pricing. The Government will evaluate quotes to determine whether they are unbalanced with respect to price, variable quantity matrix factors, and separately priced line items. Unbalanced pricing may increase performance risk and could result in payment of unreasonably high prices.

Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one (1) or more contract line items is significantly over or understated. The Government may also consider an offer unbalanced if there is a significant difference between proposed labor rates in the same labor category between option periods or the proposed prices from year to year are above what would be considered a reasonable adjustment for escalation.

Unbalanced pricing will be determined not awardable.

iii. Completeness. The Schedule contractor’s price will be reviewed to determine the extent to which all the price elements of the offer have been addressed.

The Schedule contractor’s price quotation will be evaluated to ensure continuity and traceability of prices to the technical quotation and between the initial quotation and any revisions thereto. The review will determine the adequacy of the schedule contractor’s quotation in addressing and fulfilling the RFQ requirements. Incomplete packages will be determined not awardable.

iv. Realism. The proposed direct rates for the five-years will be evaluated for realism. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s and first-tier subcontractor(s)’ (if applicable) PECP for realism by assessing the compatibility of proposed price with quote scope and effort IAW FAR 52.222-46. For the PECP to be realistic, it must reflect what it would cost the Offeror to perform the effort, if performed with reasonable economy and efficiency in the relevant geographic area, based on recognized national and regional compensation surveys. It must also demonstrate the Offeror’s ability to successfully recruit and retain qualified professional employees in the geographical area where the work is being performed.