Attachment 1 - SAFPA - Instructions to Offerors.pdf

FA701425R0048 - SAF/PA - Social Media Monitoring and Management Tool

Addendum to FAR 52.212-1-- Instructions to Offerors (ITO) -- Commercial Items

1.0 CONTRACT

This is a competitive 100% Small Business award. This acquisition will result in a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) award with a 12-month base period), plus four, one-year options, and a six-month option to extend services in accordance with (IAW) FAR 52.217-8.

2.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

2.1 The offeror’s proposal must include all data and information requested by this Instruction to Offerors (ITO) and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. The offeror shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the Statement of Work Non-conformance with the instructions provided in this ITO may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation.

2.2 The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal should 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 and experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offeror's proposal. Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed artwork, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

2.3 System for Award Management (SAM). Offerors will not be eligible to receive a contract award from a Department of Defense (DOD) activity unless they are registered in SAM.

Offerors must be registered in the SAM Database prior to award of any contract. Firms must register on a one-time basis and annually confirm accuracy and completeness of registration information. Online registration and instructions can be accessed at https://www.sam.gov.

2.4 It is the Government’s intent to award without interchanges. Therefore, each initial offer should contain the offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct interchanges if later determined by the Contracting Officer to be necessary.

2.5 The Government will conduct price analysis in accordance with FAR 15.405 to evaluate proposed prices and may reject prices which do not reflect a clear understanding of the requirements or are not consistent with the offeror's technical/mission capability proposal.

2.6 By submission of its offer, the Offeror agrees to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being determined ineligible for award.

3.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

3.1 The Contracting Officer (CO), David N Warner, and the Contracting Specialist (CS), Alyse Whitfield are the sole points of contact for this acquisition. All questions or concerns shall be e-mailed to the CO and CS by 4:00pm Eastern Time on 25 July 2025. The CO and CS may be reached via e-mail at: david.warner.27@us.af.mil and alyse.whitfield@us.af.mil. Oral questions will not be accepted.

3.2 All proposals shall be received by the contracting team by 4:30 pm Eastern Time on

04 August 2025 via email. It is the responsibility of the offeror to verify receipt of proposals with the CO or CS. No hand deliveries will be accepted. The proposal submission requirements apply to all elements of the proposal. Late proposals will be processed in accordance with FAR Provision 52.212-1(f) Late Submissions, Modifications, Revisions and Withdrawals of Offers.

3.3 It is the responsibility and at the discretion of the offeror regarding format and clarity of subcontract information. However, separate submissions of subcontracting information that is proprietary and sensitive should, at the minimum, clearly indicate the corresponding offer. The proposal submission requirements apply to all elements of the proposal, including all separate submissions or Contractor Teaming Arrangements (CTA) that are part of the offer.

3.4 The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and its amendments have resulted in an increasing number of requests from outside the Government for copies of contract qualifications and proposals submitted to federal agencies. If an Offeror’s submissions contain information that he/she believes should be withheld from such requestors under FOIA on the grounds that they contain “trade secrets and commercial or financial information” [5 USC§552(b)(4)], the Offeror should mark its submissions in the following manner:

The following notice should be placed on the title page: “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 -- Some parts of this document, as identified on individual pages, are considered by the submitter to be privileged or confidential trade secrets or commercial or financial information not subject to mandatory disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. Material considered privileged or company confidential on such grounds is contained on page(s) .”

Each individual item considered privileged or confidential under FOIA should be marked with the following notice: “The data or information is considered confidential or privileged and is not subject to mandatory disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.”

3.5 After solicitation posting, subsequent interchanges between Government and responding offerors will be controlled by the CO and CS. E-mail will be used to transmit such information to offerors. The Government intends to send answers to questions with an amendment to the solicitation and distribute via email. Offerors shall submit all communications via email to the CO and CS at the email addresses identified above.

3.6 If this RFP is amended, all terms and conditions that are not amended remain unchanged.

Offerors shall acknowledge receipt of any amendment(s) to this RFP by the date and time specified in the amendment(s). Failure to acknowledge any amendment(s) could result in the offeror being excluded from award.

3.7 Oral Presentations will not be permitted.

3.8 The offeror agrees to hold the prices in its offer firm for 180 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of offers.

3.9 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. The Offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without interchanges. Accordingly, Offerors are advised to submit initial proposals that are well defined and clearly acceptable without additional information and additional or substitute pages.

4.0 PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

4.1 The purpose of these instructions is to prescribe the format of proposals and describe the approach for the development and presentation of proposal data. They are designed to ensure the essential information required for evaluation of proposals is submitted.

Offerors are cautioned to follow the detailed instructions fully and carefully, as the Government intends to make an award based on initial offers received without interchanges.

4.2 To assure timely and equitable evaluation of the proposal, the offeror must follow the instructions contained herein. The proposal must be complete, self-sufficient, and respond directly to the requirements of this solicitation. The response shall consist of two (2) separate volumes; Volume I – Technical Approach and Volume II –Price.

4.2.1 Proposal Organization: The offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the

Proposal Organization Table below. The titles and contents of the volumes shall be as defined in the table, all of which shall be within the required page limits and with the number of copies as specified. Each volume identified in the table below shall be individual documents.

The content of each proposal volume is described in the ITO paragraph as noted in the Table 1 below:

Proposal Organization Table

Volume Volume Title Page Limit

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

I

FACTOR I: TECHNICAL APPROACH

II FACTOR II: PRICE Unlimited

4.2.2 Electronic Copies: Do not compress any files. Electronic copies of the proposal shall be submitted in the following formats: Microsoft (MS) Word 2016 or higher, MS Excel 2016 or higher, MS Power Point 2016 or higher, or Searchable Portable Document Format (PDF), as applicable. Offerors must ensure that pricing information is only included in Volume III. Do NOT include any Pricing information in Volume I or Volume II. All unit and extended prices provided shall be rounded to the nearest whole dollar. Extended prices must be divisible by the number of units proposed. All burdened labor rates shall be rounded to the nearest penny.

4.2.3 Page Limitations: Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read nor considered in the evaluation of the proposal. Blank pages, title pages, cover pages, table of contents, tab indexing, glossaries, list of tables and figures, subcontractor consent letter(s), and resumes are not included in the page limitation. Legible tables, charts, graphs, and figures may be used to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc.

4.2.4 Page Size and Format: A page is defined as each face of a sheet of paper containing information. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two pages. Page size shall be 8½ x 11 inches. Pages shall be single-spaced and typed, except for displays and the reproduced sections of the solicitation document. The font shall be Times New Roman and no less than 12 point in size. Use at least 1-inch margins on the top and bottom. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume.

When text is included within displays, it may be no smaller than 10 point but must be clearly legible without magnification. The size of any displays shall not exceed the page size as defined above. Fold out pages are accepted for Volume III, FACTOR III:

PRICE. The page size and format restrictions shall also apply to responses to Proposal Revision Opportunity Notices (PRON), if applicable (see section 5.0 for definition of

PRON).

4.2.5 Title Page: Each volume must include a title page and will not count against page limitations IAW Table 1 above. The title pages must show:

(1) Solicitation Number

(2) Name, address, telephone numbers and e-mail address of the offeror (only one copy for all required volumes)

(3) Cage Code/ DUNS

4.2.6 Cross-Referencing: The proposal volumes shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated without cross referencing to another volume.

4.2.7 Indexing: Each volume shall contain a detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections and will not count against page limitations IAW Table 1 above.

4.2.8 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms: Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, with an explanation for each. As stated above in paragraph 4.2.2, glossaries do not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes.

5.0 PROPOSAL VOLUME INSTRUCTIONS

5.1 Volume I – Executive Summary and Technical Approach (Factor I)

5.1.1 Executive Summary: The executive summary of the entire proposal should be concise, to include addressing and highlighting any key or unique features, excluding price.

The salient features should tie in with evaluation factors/subfactors. Any summary material presented here shall not be considered as meeting the requirements for any portions of other volumes of the proposal; it will be considered for informational purposes only and will not be evaluated for award.

5.1.2 Factor I Technical Approach: The Offeror shall provide the following in a comprehensive format to enable the government to fully evaluate the information presented in the Offeror’s technical proposal. The technical proposal should be specific and complete. Legibility, clarity, and coherence are very important. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to provide a proposal that enables the Government to effectively evaluate the Offeror’s technical proposal. The Offeror has the burden to provide a proposal that demonstrates the Offeror has an accurate understanding of the technical requirement and that the Offeror has a viable technical approach and methodology to complete the requirement IAW with the Statement of Work (SOW). The proposal should not merely reiterate or rephrase the objectives or reformulate the Government’s requirements specified in the solicitation but shall provide convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet these requirements.

5.2 Volume II – Price (Factor II)

5.2.1 Offerors shall provide other than certified cost or pricing data required to evaluate whether prices proposed are complete, balanced, fair and reasonable. Price proposals should be sufficiently detailed to support the CO’s determination. The burden of proof for credibility of proposed prices rests with the offeror. Compliance with the instructions herein is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of the proposal.

5.2.2 The information submitted should fully support the SOW requirements for each major functional element specified in the PWS. Offerors shall use the attached pricing sheet (See attachment 3) to provide a breakdown which shows the skill mix, labor categories, labor rates and position descriptions. Information shall be segregated by the performance periods, individual performance locations, and the total price for each CLIN as specified in the solicitation. Information shall also show the consolidated total price for performance.

5.2.3 The price proposal must include prices for a 12-month base period (includes, plus four, one-year options, and a 6-month option to extend services in accordance with (IAW) FAR 52.217-8. If the extension of service clause (FAR 52.217-8) is exercised, it will be at the exact same rates and terms, other than length of performance, as the base or option period being extended. The six-month extension under FAR 52.217-8 will be evaluated, however it will not be included in the TEP. The anticipated Period of Performance is as follows:

Period of Performance STARTS ENDS Base Period 29 Sept 2025 28 Sept 2026 Option Year 1 29 Sept 2026 28 Sept 2027 Option Year 2 29 Sept 2027 28 Sept 2028 Option Year 3 29 Sept 2028 28 Sept 2029 Option Year 4 29 Sept 2029 28 Sept 2030 6 Month - Option to Extend Services 29 Sept 2030 28 Sept 2031

Addendum to FAR 52.212-2 -- Evaluation -- Commercial Items

1.0 BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD

1.1 This is a competitive 100% Small Business award Performance Price Tradeoff (PPT) source selection under FAR Subpart 19.505. Tradeoffs will be made only between Past Performance and Price among those offerors who have been determined to be technically acceptable. Past performance is significantly more important than price; however, price will contribute substantially to the selection decision. This may result in an award to a higher rated, higher priced offeror, where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors and the Government reasonably determines that a higher rated performance provides the best value. While the Government source selection evaluation team will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature, is subjective and, therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process. In order to be considered for award, the offeror must be determined responsible (as described in FAR 9.104), meet all solicitation requirements (including terms and conditions), be technically acceptable, be assessed a past performance rating of “Satisfactory” or “Substantial”, and have a price that is complete, balanced, fair and reasonable.

1.2 The evaluation will be based on two (2) factors: (Volume I) FACTOR I Technical Approach, (Volume II) FACTOR II – Price. The Government will not search for data to cure problems or address inconsistencies in an offeror’s proposal. Proposals will be evaluated using the following evaluation process steps:

1.2.1 Step 1 – Proposal Adequacy: The Government will review proposals for completeness (adhering to all information/instructions in the ITO). If an offeror fails to comply with instructions in the ITO, the offeror’s proposal may be deemed incomplete and will receive no further consideration and be eliminated from the competition. The Government will only evaluate proposals deemed complete.

1.2.2 Step 2 - Factor I: Technical Approach: The Government will evaluate all complete proposals on how the Offerors technical approach meets the requirements of the Statement of Work.

1.2.3 Step 3 - Factor III: Price. The proposed Price Volume will be evaluated for completeness, balance and reasonableness.

2.0 EVALUATION FACTORS

Factor I – Technical Approach: The Government will evaluate each offeror’s technical approach proposal to determine if the offeror provides a sound approach that meets the requirements of the SOW and demonstrates a thorough and comprehensive understanding of those requirements.

The Government will detail significant strengths, strengths, significant weaknesses, weaknesses, and/or deficiencies if they apply and assign the technical volume a technical/risk rating as defined below:

Color Adjectival Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

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

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

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.

Definitions

Significant Strength An aspect of an Offeror’s proposal 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 proposal with merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the advantage of the Government during contract performance.

Significant Weakness A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Weakness A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Deficiency A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

2.0.1 Factor II – Price: The Government will evaluate each offerors price proposal will be evaluated for completeness, balance, and reasonableness. Only proposals determined to be complete, balanced, fair and reasonable will be eligible for award.

Proposals shall support the proposed technical approach and will be evaluated based upon (i) Total Evaluated Price (TEP), (ii) completeness, (iii) reasonableness and (iv) unbalanced pricing. Offerors whose price is determined to be incomplete or unreasonable will not be considered for award.

2.0.2 Total Evaluated Price: The proposal will be evaluated based on the TEP, which includes the base period and all options, to include the sum of the Firm Fixed Price (FFP) CLINs. The price proposed for each CLIN includes the applicable unburdened labor hour rates, burden rate, profit (profit is not to be included in the burden rate), and any other rate applied to each respective CLIN total (i.e. Material Handling Fee). The six-month extension under FAR 52.217-8 will be evaluated, however it will not be included in the TEP.

Evaluation of option prices shall not obligate the Government to exercise such options.

2.0.3 Completeness: The proposal will be reviewed to determine the extent to which all the priced 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.

2.0.4 Reasonableness: The Government will evaluate the reasonableness of proposed price IAW FAR 15.405. For the price to be reasonable in its nature and amount, it should not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of a competitive business. An offer that is determined to be unreasonably high will not be considered for award. Please note the pricing sheet (attachment 3) will be incorporated into the resultant contract.

2.0.5 Unbalanced Pricing: The Government will analyze proposals to determine whether proposed prices are unbalanced. 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 TEP, the price of one (1) or more contract line items is significantly over or understated. The

Government will analyze proposals to determine whether they are unbalanced with respect to price, variable quantity matrix factors, and separately priced line items, and option prices. A proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

3.0 INTERCHANGES

3.1 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 order 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 Request for Proposal (RFP).

3.2 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.

5.0 PROPOSAL REVISION OPPORTUNITY NOTICES (PRON)

If required (based upon interchanges discussed above in section 3.0), the offerors will provide proposal change pages along with their Interchange Notice responses for any aspect of the proposal that will be incorporated into the awarded contract. After interchanges are completed, offerors will not be given any further opportunity to submit proposal revisions.

The CO reserves the right to request Proposal Revisions from all, some or none of the offerors.