Attachment 3-Draft FOPR Instructions_Criteria.docx

Fair Opportunity Proposal Request (FOPR) Space Systems Command (SSC) Acquisition and Financial Support (SAFS)-2 Task Order for the SSC Contracting Directorate (SSC/PK) FOPR No. FA8802-24-Q-0001 Date 06/13/2024

1. General Instructions

1.1. This is a competitive fair opportunity selection conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 16.505(b)(1), as supplemented. This fair opportunity selection is not a source selection subject to FAR 15.3 procedures, as supplemented.

1.2. Points of contact (POCs). Procurement Contracting Officer (PCO) Nichole Hill nichole.hill.4@spaceforce.mil

Contract Specialist Abel Moreno abel.moreno.1@spaceforce.mil

1.3. Proposals submitted in response to this FOPR must comply with the terms and conditions of TBD and the requirements as stated in the FOPR, FOPR attachments, and the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Failure to comply may render a proposal ineligible for award. By submitting a proposal, an offeror represents that it understands the scope and workload associated with the government’s requirements and is capable of performing all requirements identified in the PWS. Proposals that do not address requirements within the PWS will be considered alternate proposals. Alternate proposals will not be evaluated by the government and will not be eligible for award.

1.4. If an offeror believes that the FOPR contains an error, omission, or is otherwise unsound, the offeror shall notify the POCs identified in paragraph 1.2 above within 5 business days of FOPR release, provide supporting rationale, and suggest potential remedies. The PCO will respond to all comments received and will amend the FOPR if necessary. The PCO will post responses to comments and amendments (if required) to TBD.

1.5. Ombudsman. In accordance with DAFFARS 5352.201-9101, Ombudsman, an ombudsman has been appointed to hear and facilitate the resolution of concerns from offerors, potential offerors, and others for this acquisition. If resolution cannot be made by the PCO, concerned parties may contact the SSC/PK Deputy Director at smc.pkc.workflow@us.af.mil or (310) 653-1785.

1.6. This FOPR does not authorize any offeror to perform the contemplated effort prior to notification of an award decision by the Fair Opportunity Decision Authority (FODA) and receipt of an executed task order from the PCO. Prior to award, the PCO reserves the right to withdraw and cancel solicitation or the contemplated task order. In such an event, offerors will be notified of the PCO’s decision. Such decision shall be final and shall not be subject to FAR 52.233-1, Disputes, or the Contracts Disputes Act.

1.7. Offerors must submit proposals no later than TBD. Only one proposal may be submitted per company. Timely receipt of proposals is the sole responsibility of offerors. Proposals received after the cutoff date and time will not be evaluated. Early submissions are encouraged and will be accepted as final submissions. Proposals shall be submitted electronically to the Procurement PCO and Contract Specialist listed in the FOPR. In compliance with FAR Subpart 4.803(a)(10), the Government will retain one copy of each proposal received in response to this request.

1.8. Proposals should be clear and concise and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation. Elaborate formats, bindings or color presentations are not desired or required. Provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet requirements and do not simply rephrase or restate the government’s requirements.

1.9. Proposals shall consist of three separate volumes: (1) Technical Factor, (2) Price/Cost Factor, and (3) Task Order and Associated Documentation. Each volume shall contain a detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. Each volume shall also contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used and an explanation for each. To the greatest extent possible, each volume shall be written on a standalone basis so that its contents may be evaluated with a minimum of cross referencing to other volumes of the proposal. All pricing information shall be addressed only in the Price/Cost Factor and Task Order and Associated Documentation Volumes. Do not include pricing information in the Technical Factor Volume.

1.10. Proposals shall be submitted in a format readable by Microsoft Office applications and Adobe PDF. Create a separate file for each proposal volume. Include the native version (e.g., *.docx) with full edit rights and an Adobe PDF version of all documents. Clearly mark each file and document to identify the proposal volume number, FOPR number, and offeror's name. Format documents to print on 8 1/2" x 11" paper except for fold-outs used for charts, tables, or diagrams, which may not exceed 11" x 17". Foldouts will count as two pages. Font style shall be Times New Roman. Font shall be no less than 12-point font except for tables and graphics. Tables and graphics shall not be less than 8-point font. Margins shall be set to “Normal” for MS Word and MS Excel. Each page shall include headers or footers that clearly indicate the proposal volume, the FOPR number, the offeror’s name, and the page number. All dollar amounts in the Price/Cost Factor Volume and Task Order and Associated Documentation Volumes shall be rounded to the nearest dollar.

2. Proposal Instructions for Volume I – Technical Factor

2.1. Page Count. Page count for Volume I, Technical shall not exceed the limitations set forth in the table below. The table of contents and glossary of abbreviations and acronyms do not count against the page limitations. Pages submitted in excess of this limit will not be read or considered in the government’s evaluation of the proposal.

2.2. Subfactor 1 – Management Approach

2.2.1. Describe the offeror’s approach to meeting or exceeding the Task Order Performance Requirements in Section 2 of the PWS and the staffing requirements in FOPR Attachment 1, Staffing Requirements. Identify the proposed team, including any subcontractors or teammates. Describe experience performing similar tasks on prior contracts or orders, including significant accomplishments and lessons learned.

2.2.2. Describe the offeror’s approach to managing the task order throughout the base and option periods to ensure that performance meets or exceeds the stated performance thresholds. Identify the task lead who will provide overall management, direction, administration, quality assurance, and leadership.

2.2.3. Describe the offeror’s approach to identifying qualified candidates to perform each area of the PWS and to hiring and retaining personnel to minimize turnover and vacancies. Describe experience hiring and retaining high-performing personnel on prior contracts. Ensure approach is consistent with the total compensation plan provided in accordance with paragraph 4.5 below.

2.2.4. Submit a Staffing Matrix using the template provided in FOPR Attachment 2, Staffing Matrix. See Attachment 2 for completion instructions. Do not add content to the Staffing Matrix beyond what is requested in Attachment 2. Ensure the Staffing Matrix is consistent with the Pricing Matrix described below for Volume II, Price/Cost Factor.

2.2.5. Provide resumes for all personnel identified by name in the Staffing Matrix. Resumes shall not exceed 2 pages per individual. Descriptions may include but are not limited to the individual’s positions/titles, duration of assignments, roles and responsibilities, impact to the organization/mission, key accomplishments, and education. Write in plain English, do not use acronyms or abbreviations. Ensure that information provided in the Staffing Matrix is traceable to descriptions in the resume.

2.2.6. Describe the offeror’s approach to task order transition, including but not limited to key milestones and success criteria; engagement with the PCO, PCO’s representative, and SSC/PK leadership; engagement with the incumbent contractor; key contractor personnel required to ensure a smooth transition without disruption of work; and contractor employee on-boarding process (e.g., common access cards, badging, training). Assume a transition period from 28 October 2024 through 30 November 2024. The incumbent task order ends 14 November 2024.

2.3. Subfactor 2 – Pricing Competency

2.3.1. SSC/PKF pricing work requires a fundamental understanding of the FAR and its supplements and logical implementation. Paragraphs 2.3.2 and 2.3.3 below provide scenarios of a possible sole source proposal and a possible competitive proposal. Note: The scenarios provided here are examples similar to the scenarios that will be provided in the final FOPR. These scenarios are provided for purposes of the draft FOPR and will be replaced in the final FOPR. Submit a training plan, in the format provided in paragraphs 2.3.4 and 2.3.5 below, to describe how the offeror would train its employees to perform the pricing work for each proposal scenario.

2.3.2. Sole Source Proposal Scenario. A $320M proposal with the following cost elements is received:

$8,398,367

Subcontracts

Total Subcontracts

$135,000,000

Materials

$32,000,000

Travel

$225,000

Other Direct Costs

$105,000

Subtotal

$191,380,636

Subtotal

$279,415,729

Firm Fixed Price

$319,951,965

2.3.3. Competitive Proposal Scenario. The following proposal was submitted by one Offeror:

Target Cost

$350,000,000

Target Price

$395,500,000

Target Cost

$145,000,000

CPIF

$155,875,000

Total Proposed Price

CLIN 0001 at Target Price

$395,500,000

CLIN 0002 at CPIF

$155,875,000

Total

$551,375,000

2.3.4. Sole Source Proposal Scenario Training Plan Format.

Labor Hours

Direct Rates

Indirect Rates

Materials

Travel

ODC

Management Reserve

Subcontracts

Inter/Intra Company Divisions

Profit

Contract Type Considerations

2.3.5 Competitive Proposal Scenario Training Plan Format.

Cost Realism

Most Probable Cost

Price Reasonableness

Unbalanced Pricing

Contract Type Considerations

2.4. Subfactor 3, SharePoint Management

Describe the offeror’s approach to meeting or exceeding the requirements in Section 2.4 of the PWS with emphasis on the Concept of Operations (CONOPS), Site Map, and Modernization Plan. Describe how the offeror will structure its team to accomplish these requirements; proposed milestones and schedules for development of the CONOPS, Site Plan, and Modernization Plan; information and support required from the government; and the team’s prior experience delivering similar services.

3. Proposal Instructions for Volume II – Price/Cost Factor.

3.1. There is no page count limitation for Volume II, Price/Cost Factor.

3.2. Submit a Pricing Matrix using the template provided in FOPR Attachment 3, Pricing Matrix. Ensure the Pricing Matrix is consistent with the proposed Staffing Matrix (Volume I) and Model Task Order (Volume III). Complete the yellow-highlighted cells as instructed below:

3.2.1. Worksheet entitled “Bidders to fill in.”

a. Input the Prime Contractor name in cell D4 and date of proposal submittal in cell D6.

b. Complete the remaining cells highlighted in yellow by inserting the number of FTEs (number of full-time equivalent personnel) and Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) dollars for the PK Labor, PKF Labor, PKV Labor, and PKX Labor.

c. In the Hours Per FTE section, input the hours per FTE per year by company name.

d. All dollar amounts should be rounded to the nearest dollar.

e. Note that the cells for the Other Direct Costs (ODC) Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) are pre-populated with government amounts (highlighted in green). Do not alter these amounts.

f. Do not enter values into non-yellow cells. Do not edit formulas. Do not re-format cells.

g. Price the Option to Extend Services in one-month increments (i.e., 1/12 of the annual price for that year).

3.2.2 Worksheet entitled “CLIN Table. Do not enter values into this worksheet. This worksheet automatically picks up values from the prior worksheet. Double check this worksheet to verify consistency with the prior worksheet and the Model Task Order. In the event of an inconsistency between this worksheet and the Model Task Order, the Government Total Evaluated Price (TEP) will be calculated using the values from the Model Task Order.

3.2.3. Adequate Price Competition. The government issued this solicitation with the anticipation of adequate price competition; therefore, any cost/price documentation requested shall not be certified cost or pricing data. However, in the event that adequate price competition does not exist after receipt of proposals, the government reserves the right to request additional cost or pricing data as necessary from the offeror and its subcontractors and may conduct negotiations with the offeror, pursuant to FAR 15.403-4, in order to ensure a reasonable and realistic price/cost. Furthermore, the offeror may be required to provide a Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data prior to award, pursuant to FAR 15.406-2. The offeror shall acknowledge the requirement to provide additional cost or pricing information and certify the data prior to award if requested by the government.

4. Proposal Instructions for Volume III – Task Order and Associated Documentation

4.1. Page Count. There is no page count limitation for Volume III, Task Order and Associated Documentation.

4.2. Cover letter. Provide a cover letter that includes:

a. Offeror’s contract number.

b. Small business status or categories.

c. Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code.

d. Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) code.

e. Name, title, telephone number, and email address of the company or division point(s) of contact authorized to engage in Interchanges with the government and who can obligate the company contractually.

f. 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 order.

g. Teaming or subcontract arrangements.

h. Clear statement that the proposal is valid for 180 calendar days.

4.3. Model Task Order. Complete the following fill-ins of the FOPR Attachment 4, Model Task Order… [To be provided with FOPR release.]

4.4. Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Mitigation Plan.

4.4.1. In accordance with FAR 9.504, the PCO has analyzed the planned task order and determined that:

a. Potential biased ground rules or impaired objectivity conflicts of interest exist if the Offeror, its subcontractors, or its teammates were to perform Pricing Support tasks in accordance with Section 2.3 of the PWS for proposals where the prime offeror, its subcontractors, or its teammates participated in developing a proposal. These types of conflicts may not be mitigated by firewalls alone and will require additional techniques to avoid, neutralize, or mitigate. The government will not require the offeror to provide Pricing Support on other Advisory and Assistance Services or Systems Engineering and Integration acquisitions.

b. Potential unequal access to information conflicts of interest exists if the offeror, its subcontractors, or its teammates were to gain access to information while performing any of the tasks in Section 2 of the PWS that would result in an unfair competitive advantage on future acquisitions.

4.4.2. Submit an OCI Mitigation Plan prepared in accordance with FOPR Attachment 5, OCI Mitigation Plan Checklist. At a minimum, the OCI Mitigation Plan shall address methods the offeror, its subcontractors, its teammates, and their employees will establish to avoid, neutralize, or mitigate organizational or personal conflicts of interest. In accordance with FAR 9.5, the offeror shall also analyze this planned acquisition for other actual or potential OCI situations associated with its performance under any contract it has been or may be awarded prior to the proposal due date of this FOPR, by any federal agency or other entity. The Mitigation Plan shall document any current or foreseen OCI concerns, describe proposed avoidance or mitigation techniques, and be consistent with FAR 9.5 (as supplemented) and the most recent decisions of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.

4.4.3. If award is made to the offeror, the resulting task order may include an OCI limitation applicable to subsequent government work, at a prime contract level, at any subcontract tier, or both. During evaluation of proposals, the government may, after interchanges with the offeror and consideration of ways to mitigate or avoid identified actual or potential conflicts of interest, insert a clause or term and condition in the resulting task order which disqualifies the offeror from further consideration for award of future contracts.

4.4.4. Resolution of OCI issues will be considered as part of the PCO’s responsibility determination. Unresolved actual or potential conflicts of interest will render a proposal unawardable.

4.5. Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees.

4.5.1. In accordance with FAR 52.222-46, Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees, submit a total compensation plan setting forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for professional employees who will work under this task order in accordance with the instructions below. For this acquisition, a meaningful number of professional employees is defined as one.

4.5.2. Provide the planned compensation for all professional employee labor categories proposed to perform this task order. Describe the job skills and qualifications requirements associated with each identified labor category. Identify the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) code for each labor category using the Bureau of Labor Statistics SOC system. Identify the labor categories by geographic location of contract performance. Provide the corresponding salary and quantified fringe benefits for each labor category. The fringe benefit data shall also include a description of the benefits offered, and to which professional employee category the fringe benefits would apply.

4.5.3. Discuss how the proposed total compensation plan package reflects a sound management approach, an understanding of the task order requirements, and will provide uninterrupted high-quality work. Also address how your proposed salary and fringe benefits will facilitate the recruitment and retention of employees.

4.5.4. Subcontractors and teammates may submit their total compensation plans directly to the points of contact identified in paragraph 1.2 above. The prime offeror shall submit a list of the subcontractors and teammates who will be submitting separate professional employee compensation plans to the government, including point of contact names, titles, email addresses, and phone numbers. Subcontract and teammate total compensation plans must be received no later than the proposal due date in paragraph 1.7 above. The total compensation plan submitted in the proposal will not become part of the awarded task order.

4.5.5. Evaluation of compensation for professional employees will be considered as part of the PCO’s responsibility determination. Professional compensation that is unrealistically low or not in reasonable relationship to the various job categories, since it may impair the Contractor’s ability to attract and retain competent professional service employees, may be viewed as evidence of failure to comprehend the complexity of the contract requirements.

5. Basis for Award.

5.1. Best Value Determination. Award will be made in accordance with the TBD procedures and the procedures specified in this FOPR. A single task order will be awarded to the offeror:

a. Who is deemed responsible in accordance with FAR 9.1, as supplemented, and as stated in the instructions in Section 4 above;

b. Whose proposal conforms to the FOPR’s requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and other information required by the FOPR instructions); and

c. Whose proposal (including any interchange notice responses) is judged to represent the best value to the government in accordance with the evaluation methodology outlined in paragraph 5.3 below.

5.2. Communicating with offerors.

5.2.1. Interchanges are fluid interactions between the PCO and the offeror that may address any aspect of the proposal. The government intends to award a task order without Interchanges. However, the government reserves the right to conduct Interchanges if deemed in the best interests of the government. Interchanges may be conducted with one, some, all, or none of the offerors in the form of Interchange Notices. Offerors are cautioned to respond to Interchange Notices in the format specified in the notice and in sufficient detail to address the subject matter of the notice. There is no “final proposal request” following Interchanges. Offeror responses to Interchange Notices will be considered in making the final selection decision.

5.2.2. Once the government determines the offeror that is the best value to meet stated requirements, the government reserves the right to communicate with only that offeror to address any contract document updates, if necessary, and finalize an order with that offeror. If the parties cannot successfully resolve the contracting documentation, as determined at the sole discretion of the government, the government may communicate with the next best-suited offeror, based on the evaluation as outlined below, and address any necessary document updates with that offeror. If the government begins communications with the next best-suited offeror, further communications with the previous offeror may or may not be entertained. This process will continue until an agreement is successfully reached and an order is awarded.

5.2.3. The government will offer a post-award debrief to offerors in accordance with FAR 15.506.

5.3. Evaluation Methodology.

5.3.1. In determining best value, the government will perform a comparative analysis (directly comparing Offeror proposals to one another) in order to select the proposal that presents the best overall value to fulfill the requirements of this FOPR. The comparative analysis will be based on the government’s assessment of the Advantages and Disadvantages of the Technical Volume proposal (see Section 5.4) and the Total Evaluated Price (see Section 5.5).

5.3.2. Importance of the evaluation factors in the best value assessment. Factor 1, Technical is substantially more important than Factor 2, Price/Cost. Within Factor 1, all Technical Subfactors are equally weighted. Factor 2, Price/Cost is substantially less important than Factor 1, Technical. While the Technical Factor is significantly more important than the Price/Cost Factor, the government may select for award other than the highest evaluated Technical Factor proposal if the government determines that the higher TEP does not represent the best value to the government.

5.3.3. While the government evaluation team will strive for maximum objectivity during evaluations, the selection process by its nature is subjective and, therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process. The selection official has the responsibility of making the final award determination.

5.4. Evaluation of Factor 1: Technical. The government will assess the Advantages and Disadvantages of the offeror’s Volume 1, Technical Factor in accordance with the definitions in the table below and the following subfactor criteria.

Definitions

5.4.1. Subfactor 1 – Management Approach. The government will evaluate the extent to which the offeror’s proposed management approach is likely to result in the offeror:

a. Meeting or exceeding stated performance thresholds throughout the base and option periods.

b. Identifying and retaining qualified personnel to minimize turnover and vacancies throughout the base and option periods.

c. Staffing the task order with qualified personnel that meet or exceed the staffing requirements in Section 2 of the PWS and FOPR Attachment 1, Staffing Requirements throughout the base and option periods.

d. Successfully transitioning from the incumbent contractor at the beginning of task order performance with minimum disruption of work within the SSC Contracting Directorate.

5.4.2. Subfactor 2 – Pricing Competency. The government will evaluate the extent to which the offeror’s training plans are complete and accurate. Completeness is attained if all Cost Element Categories and Elements of Evaluations as identified in the tables in paragraphs 2.3.4 and 2.3.5 are addressed. Accuracy evaluates the extent to which the content of the training plans is consistent with applicable statutes, regulations, and published policies and does not contain errors in logic.

5.4.3. Subfactor 3 – SharePoint Approach. The government will evaluate the extent to which the offeror’s proposed SharePoint Approach is likely to result in the offeror:

a. Delivering and executing an effective SharePoint CONOPS and modernizing the SSC/PK SharePoint sites.

b. Completing and maintaining a comprehensive SharePoint Site Map.

5.5. Factor 2: Price/Cost.

5.5.1. The offeror’s Volume 2, Price/Cost will be evaluated for Reasonableness and Unbalanced Pricing. The government will compute a TEP which will be used in making the best value determination.

5.5.2. Reasonableness. The offeror’s proposal will be assessed for reasonableness, where reasonableness is an assessment of whether the price is too high. The price is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that amount which would be paid by a prudent person in the conduct of competitive business. Reference FAR 31.201-3. In conducting the reasonableness analysis, the government will use one or more analysis techniques described in, but not limited to, FAR 15.404-1. A determination of unreasonableness will render a proposal unawardable.

5.5.3. Unbalanced Pricing. The offeror’s proposal will be assessed for the presence of unbalanced pricing. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable TEP, the price of one or more CLINs is significantly over or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. An offer may be rejected if the PCO determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the government.

5.5.4. Total Evaluated Price. For the purpose of evaluation for award, the TEP for each proposal will be calculated as follows: the sum of the amounts for all CLINs for the basic period and all option periods (including FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services). The evaluation of options shall not obligate the government to exercise such options.

5.5.5. Inconsistencies. The government will compare the information the offeror provided in the Model Task Order to the information the offeror provided in Volume II to ensure the information in the former is identical to that in the latter. If any inconsistencies exist between the Model Task Order and Volume II, the Model Task Order will take precedence and the value in the Model Task Order will be used in to calculate the TEP.

6. FOPR Attachments

Attachment 1, Staffing Requirements

Attachment 2, Staffing Matrix

Attachment 3, Pricing Matrix

Attachment 4, Model Task Order (with attachments)

Attachment 5, OCI Mitigation Plan Checklist