Atch 2 ITO and BOA FA481420TF104.pdf

Simplified Acquisition Proposal Request (SAPR), Attachment 2

SAPR# (FA481420TF104)

Instructions to Offerors/Basis of Award

1. Instructions to Offerors (ITO):

A. This is a competitive simplified acquisition selection conducted in accordance with (IAW) Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 13. Contracts awarded under FAR 13 are not subject to FAR 15.3 procedures. Accordingly, award of a contract under this Simplified Acquisition Proposal Request (SAPR), should an award be made, shall follow the procedures outlined in FAR 13, as supplemented.

B. The proposal submitted in response to this SAPR must be in compliance with the terms and conditions stated in the SAPR, corresponding attachments, and the Performance Work Statement (PWS). All claimed capabilities to meet the requirements shall be realistic and are subject to verification by the Government. Non-conformance with these instructions may result in rejection of the proposal, an unfavorable proposal evaluation, or being deemed ineligible for award. The Contracting Officer (CO) will select the best submission which conforms to the SAPR requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by the submission instructions), and is judged, based on the evaluation factors and subfactors, to represent the best value to the Government. This may result in an award to a higher rated, higher priced Offeror, where the decision is consistent with the evaluated results, and the Contracting Officer reasonably determines that the higher priced offeror outweighs the price difference.

C. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to SAPR terms and conditions and must provide complete supporting rationale. The Government reserves the right to determine any such exceptions as unacceptable. Any exception determined unacceptable by the Government may result in the Offeror’s proposal being determined unacceptable and ineligible for award. This information shall be provided in the format and content of the table below within the Offerors proposal cover letter. If no exceptions are made, include a statement stating so within the proposal cover letter.

SAPR Exceptions

SAPR

Document

Page/ Paragraph

Requirement/ Portion Rationale

PWS, ITO,

Evaluation Factor, etc.

Applicable Page and Paragraph Numbers

Identify the requirement or portion to which exception is taken

Describe why the requirement can/will not be met

D. The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal shall not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements but, rather, shall provide convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet these requirements. Offerors 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 Offeror's proposal. Proposals shall remain valid for no less than 120 days from the date of submission.

E. Discrepancies. If an Offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the Offeror shall immediately notify the CO in writing with supporting rationale as well as the remedies the Offeror is asking the CO to consider as related to the omission or error.

F. Each Offeror shall submit proposals electronically via email in a format readable by Microsoft Word (MS) 2010, Adobe Acrobat X Pro, MS Excel 2010, and MS-Power Point 2010, as applicable. No hard copy proposal packages will be accepted.

The Offeror shall submit proposals for consideration no later than 21 Aug 2020 by 2:00 PM EST. Questions/Requests for Information (RFI’s) shall be submitted by email directly to yvette.prioleau.1@us.af.mil and ramon.jimenez.7@us.af.mil no later than 4 Aug 2020 by 10:00 AM EST. Questions and RFI’s submitted after 4 Aug 2020 10:00 AM EST may not be answered. Answers to submitted questions and RFI’s will be posted publicly not later than three business days after Questions/RFI due date. Only one (1) proposal shall be submitted, per company, in response to this requirement. Proposals received after the date/time specified will not be evaluated. Emails containing proposals shall have the following subject: “(Insert Company Name)_Response to FA481420TF104, and be emailed directly to:

yvette.prioleau.1@us.af.mil and ramon.jimenez.7@us.af.mil. No hard copy proposals will be accepted.

G. Proposals in response to this SAPR shall contain a Cover Page and two (2) separate volumes/attachments: (#1) Technical Approach and (#2) Price. Font shall be no less than Times New Roman 12 pt. Pages shall be numbered consecutively within each volume. The page limits prescribed are maximum page limits for each volume. Tables of contents, cross-reference matrix, tabs, and glossaries shall not be counted against prescribed page limits. Pages submitted in excess of these limits will not be read or considered in the Government’s evaluation of the proposal. All proposal information shall be submitted in either MS Word or PDF format except for pricing information (Volume II). Pricing information shall be submitted in MS Excel format (Pricing Worksheet, Attachment 3). Each volume shall be submitted as a separately-labeled electronic file (i.e. Volume I, Technical Approach). The cumulative total size of the cover letter and all volumes shall not exceed 18MB.

Offerors must ensure that pricing information is only included in Volume II. Do NOT include any Pricing information on the Cover Letter nor in Volume I. All unit and extended prices provided shall be rounded to the nearest dollar. Extended prices must be divisible by the number of units proposed. Submit your proposal electronically in accordance with the table below.

mailto:yvette.prioleau.1@us.af.mil mailto:ramon.jimenez.7@us.af.mil

VOLUME REFERENCE TITLE MAXIMUM NUMBER

OF PAGES

Cover Letter 2 Pages I Factor 1 Technical Approach See below Subfactor 1.1 Management Plan 5 Pages Subfactor 1.2 Technical Experience 3 Pages

II Factor 2 Price Proposal No Page Limit

(1) Cover Letter

Cover Letter shall include Offerors’ contract number, small business status/categories, company primary and alternate points of contact with email/phone and who is authorized to contractually obligate the company, CAGE Code, DUNS number, a statement that the company understands the requirements specified and will meet the performance standards and requirements therein, a statement that the company does or does not take exception to any of the requirements of this SAPR and/or specific information if proposing a teaming arrangement.

(2) Volume I: Technical Approach

Technical Approach should be specific and complete. Legibility, clarity, and coherence are very important. Your responses will be evaluated against Technical subfactors 1.1 through 1.2. Failure to address a subfactor will result in an “unacceptable” rating for that subfactor. Provide as specifically as possible the actual methodology you would use for accomplishing/satisfying the subfactors. Address your technical solution for meeting or exceeding the Government’s minimum performance or capability requirements of each technical subfactor. Should provided technical solutions not reflect an ability to meet minimum performance requirements, the applicable subfactor will be rated as “unacceptable”. Technical solutions that exceed minimum performance requirements may be rated higher (i.e. Outstanding). Offerors whom merely reiterate the PWS and/or reformulate the requirements specified in this SAPR will be viewed/evaluated as lacking the knowledge necessary to successfully perform and will be rated “unacceptable” for the applicable subfactor.

(3) Volume II: Price Proposal

As part of an offerors price proposal they are required to complete and return Attachment #3, Pricing Worksheet. Additionally, the offeror shall submit pricing information to support the completeness and reasonableness of their proposed prices provided as part of Attachment #3. The pricing information submitted should fully support the PWS requirements for each major functional element specified in the PWS. Information shall be segregated by the performance periods.

H. Point of contact (POC): Contract Specialist Ms. Yvette Prioleau, she can be reached at (813) 828-1872 or by email at yvette.prioleau.1@us.af.mil and the Contracting Officer Mr. Ramon Jimenez, he can be reached at (813) 828-4018 or by email at ramon.jimenez.7@us.af.mil.

2. Basis of Award:

A. Award will be made in accordance with the procedures specified in the SAPR, to the Offeror whose proposal results in the best value to the Government. A contract may be awarded to the offeror who is deemed responsible IAW FAR 9.1, as supplemented, whose proposal conforms to the SAPR’s requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by the SAPR instructions) and is judged, based on a comparative analysis to represent the best value to the Government.

B. Comparative Analysis. Following receipt of responses to this SAPR, the Government will perform a comparative analysis (review of each proposal against the factors and subfactors established in the SAPR) in order to select the offeror that is best suited to fulfill the requirements of the SAPR and represents the best value to the Government. All proposals will initially be evaluated and rated based on the Offeror’s responses to the factors/subfactors. The Government will then compare evaluated results and make an award decision that represents the best value to the Government.

C. Interchanges are fluid interaction(s) between the Contracting Officer (CO) and the Offerors that may address any aspect of the proposal and may or may not be documented in real time.

The Government intends to make award based on the initial proposal submissions without conducting interchanges. Therefore, each offer should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to hold interchanges using Interchange Notices (INs) if, during the evaluation, it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government. Offeror responses to INs will be considered in making the award selection decision. Interchanges may be conducted with one, some or all offerors as the Government is not required to conduct interchanges with any or all Offerors responding to this

SAPR.

Once the Government determines the Offeror that is best-suited to meet stated requirements, the Government reserves the right to communicate with only that Offeror to address any issues, if necessary, and finalize an order with that Offeror. If the parties cannot successfully resolve outstanding issues, as determined pertinent at the sole discretion of the Government, the Government may communicate with the next best-suited Offeror, based on the original analysis and address any necessary issues with that Offeror. If the government begins communications with the next best-suited Offeror, no further communications with the previous Offeror will be entertained until after order award. This process will continue until an agreement is successfully reached and an order is awarded.

D. Evaluation Factors. Within the Technical Approach, subfactors 1.1 through 1.2 are of equal importance. All evaluation factors and subfactors other than cost or price, when combined are more important than cost or price.

(1) Responses to this SAPR will be evaluated against the following factors and subfactors:

Factor 1 – Technical Approach

Subfactor 1.1: Management Plan Subfactor 1.2: Technical Experience

Factor 2 – Price

(2) Factor 1 – Technical Approach

Within the Technical Approach, all subfactors are of equal importance and each will receive their own rating. No overall technical approach rating will be assigned. The following adjectival ratings (Table 1) will be used to annotate the technical evaluations and will form the basis of the assignment of ratings for each subfactor (1.1 through 1.2).

(a) Sub-factor 1.1, Management Plan:

Offerors shall submit a Management Plan that clearly demonstrates offerors understanding of the management and staffing requirements of the PWS. The Management Plan will be rated “Acceptable" if it contains the following:

1. Identifies an accurate, complete and conforming workforce composition/matrix showing labor category, experience, contractor manning equivalents (CMEs), for each functional area to meet all PWS requirements for the base period and all option years.

Table 1-Technical Subfactor Ratings

Rating Description

Outstanding Offeror’s response exceeds the requirements of the SAPR.

Acceptable Offeror’s response meets the requirements of the SAPR.

Unacceptable Offeror’s response does not meet the requirements of the SAPR.

2. Includes an accurate, complete and conforming organizational chart that identifies on-site contract manager, alternate contract manager(s), and all other personnel offerors propose to manage and staff this requirement.

3. Offeror submits an accurate, complete and conforming staffing plan that details how the offeror intends to recruit, retain, and replace sufficient personnel who have the knowledge, experience, and skills to perform as required in the PWS.

(b) Sub-Factor 1.2, Technical Experience:

Offerors shall provide the technical methodology/approach to be used in performing the requirements of the PWS for the technical discriminators listed below. Include in your approach, three projects your company has completed within the last five years from the date of this FOPR that, in the aggregate, reflect your company’s ability to perform the discriminator items. Each customer reference shall include a contracting and technical point of contact along with email address, phone number, and title. The Government may supplement the experience information provided with information concerning your performance from any other reliable source including its own experience with your company.

The technical discriminators are as follows:

1. Demonstrates technical experience providing a similar mix of personnel with the education, skills/qualifications and experience necessary to perform tasks described in the PWS.

2. Demonstrates technical experience supporting various data and information systems required to be reviewed, maintained and managed as part of the overall SA/SC security cooperation mission.

3. Demonstrates technical experience directing and performing top-level system analysis, performing trade studies, performing technical optimizations, and developing high level designs.

(3) Factor 2 - Price Proposals will be evaluated for price completeness, reasonableness and balance and receive an “acceptable” or “unacceptable” rating as specified below in Table 2. The proposed price will be evaluated for the entire effort, inclusive of all options. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). Six-month extension of services is IAW FAR 52.217-8, "Option to Extend Services", and will only be utilized if necessary. The six-month extension of services is not to be considered part of any option period and will be a separate option exercised if it is utilized. Offerors will be required to submit pricing for a six-month extension of services.

(a) Completeness. The proposal will be reviewed to determine the extent to which all the price elements have been addressed. The Offeror’s proposed price and other information will be evaluated to ensure continuity and traceability of prices to the technical volume and between the initial proposal and any revisions thereto. The review will determine the adequacy of the Offeror’s proposal in addressing and fulfilling the SAPR requirements.

(b) 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. The Government will determine prices fair and reasonable through the use of one or more of the price analysis techniques at FAR 13.106-3(a).

(c) Unbalanced pricing. Offerors are cautioned against submitting an offer that contains unbalanced pricing. 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 shall analyze offers to determine whether they are unbalanced with respect to separately priced line items or sub-line items. An offer that is determined to be unbalanced may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

Table 2-Price Factor Ratings

Rating Description

Acceptable Offeror’s price proposal has been determined to be complete, reasonable and balanced.

Unacceptable Offeror’s price proposal has been determined to be incomplete, unreasonable and/or unbalanced.