Attachment 3 - Instructions to offerors.pdf

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTION TO OFFERORS—COMMERCIAL ITEMS The following paragraphs of this provision are tailored as follows:

Submission of Offers:

Contractors are responsible for submitting a proposal in response to the solicitation. All pages requiring fill-in information must be returned with the offeror’s proposal and must be received by the date/time provided, unless otherwise changed via amendment. Amendments must be acknowledged in writing or the proposal may be considered non-responsive. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to check SAM.gov for amendments issued against this solicitation and respond accordingly.

Proposal Preparation Instructions:

Offerors shall submit proposals via email to the contract specialist, Karly Zamiar at karly.zamiar@us.af.mil no later than the date/time specified. Hard copies of the proposal will not be accepted. Questions shall be submitted via email within 5 business days of solicitation issuance.

The proposal shall be complete, clear, concise and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation.

Responses to this solicitation shall strictly adhere to the requirements set forth. Submissions that do not adhere to format and content requirements may be considered non-responsive. The Government reserves the right to eliminate any such proposals from consideration for award. The proposal shall not contain any extraneous information such as advertisements or marketing information.

Provide one complete proposal via email, submitted in the following five (5) sections:

Section I – Administrative Information

Section II – Technical Capability

Section III – Past Performance References

Section IV- Price List

Section V- Mission Essential Plan

Section I - Administrative Information:

Offerors shall submit a document to include the Offeror's name, address, telephone number, CAGE code and UEID numbers, points of contact (POCs) authorized to negotiate with the Government on the Offeror's behalf, and a statement confirming the Offeror is willing to hold its prices firm for at least 120 days from the date specified for receipt of offers.

Offerors shall be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) with the appropriate NAICS

Code and shall not have any Active Exclusions listed within SAM. If the Offeror is currently registered in

SAM with completed representations and certifications, include an affirmation statement that these representations and certificates are current, complete, and accurate as of the date proposals are due.

Section II – Technical Capability:

Offeror’s shall submit detailed documentation exemplifying technical capability to meet the requirements of the PWS. See evaluation criteria in 52.212-2 below. Please include all information that will allow the evaluators to determine all criteria is met on Factor 2 below.

Section III – Past Performance References:

Past Performance information will be obtained by the Government using independent Government sources, to include: SAM.gov, Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System

(CPARS), Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs), and the Contracting Officer's knowledge of each

Offeror’s past performance. Additionally, Offerors shall submit up to three (3) references by completing

Attachment 4 – Past Performance References for contracts that you consider relevant in demonstrating your ability to perform the requirements in this solicitation. See evaluation criteria in 52.212-2 below.

mailto:karly.zamiar@us.af.mil

Section IV – Price Sheet:

The Offeror shall complete Attachment 2 – Price Sheet to include the rate for each item listed for the Base and each Option Year. See evaluation criteria in 52.212-2 below. All Option Year rates must be completed, including the test price in Column B and Column L.

Section V - Mission Essential Plan

The contractor will submit a Mission Essential Contractor Service Plan that adequately details a realistic approach as to how the contractor will continue to perform the essential contractor services listed in the

Performance Work Statement (Attachment 1). Proposed Mission Essential Contractor Service Plans must specifically address each part of the DFARS 232.237-7024 (b)(2)(i through v). The Mission Essential

Contractor Service Plan must be submitted with your offer and received by the TOPR closing date and time.

See evaluation criteria in 52.212-2 below.

(End of Provision)

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-2 EVALUATION – COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS & SERVICES The

Government will review proposals received to determine if they are responsive to the solicitation requirements. A responsive proposal is one that meets all of the terms, conditions and specifications in the solicitation. The Offeror must provide all documents listed and comply with all proposal instructions in order for their proposal to be considered “responsive” to this solicitation. Only responsive proposals will be evaluated for award.

Award will be made to the Offeror providing a proposal that is deemed the best value to the

Government. The Government will use tradeoff procedures, with Past Performance being significantly more important than Price. This may result in an award to a higher-rated, higher-priced offer if the

Government determines that the past performance of the higher-priced offer outweighs the price difference.

The selection process is subjective by nature and professional judgment is implicit throughout the tradeoff process.

The Government intends to award without discussions (except communications conducted for the purpose of minor clarification). Therefore, the proposal should contain the Offeror's best terms and conditions. If the

Government decides to hold discussions, Offerors will be notified as soon as possible.

Evaluation Criteria:

An assessment will be made to determine the best-value to the Government using the following factors to evaluate each proposal:

Factor 1 – Price

Factor 2 – Technical Capability

Factor 3 – Past Performance

Factor 4 - Mission Essential Plan

This is a Tradeoff Source Selection procedure IAW 15.101-1. The Government will begin its evaluation with the lowest priced proposal and proceed upward until a combination of acceptable past performance, acceptable technical capability, and acceptable mission essential plan is reached. That proposal represents the best value to the Government, and award shall be made to that Offeror without further consideration of any other offers.

Factor 1 – Price:

Proposals will be evaluated to determine price reasonableness, balance, and completeness inclusive of all options. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). A price is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of competitive business. The Government may use various price analysis techniques and procedures to ensure a fair and reasonable price. Some of those techniques are, but not limited to, comparison of proposed prices received in response to the solicitation, comparison of proposed prices with historical paid prices, and/or comparison of proposed prices with the Independent Government Estimate.

Price must be determined fair and reasonable.

Factor 2 – Technical Capability:

An offeror’s capability will be evaluated to determine if it is acceptable or unacceptable IAW the evaluation criteria stated below. Offerors must include all information that will allow the evaluators to determine each criteria rating. If an offeror’s capability is determined to be unacceptable, the offeror will no longer be considered for award and the source selection team will start evaluating the next offeror.

Factor Criteria Acceptable Unacceptable

1 Vendor must possess up to date CAP and CLIA Licensure IAW PWS para 1.2

2 Vendor must provide a Web-based result reporting that will allow DGMC Laboratory computers to receive results using a standard Web browser. Said website shall provide timely access to high-resolution microscopic images, ability to check status of test requested, and indefinite access to historic results.

Website must have a password-based system which can be access by the Pathologist from any location at any time IAW PWS Para 2.8

3 Vendor must provide Virtual Analysis Capability, allowing for slide images of IHC's, Flow Cytometry and FISH tests to be seen on-line that are able to be screened for diagnosis IAW PWS Para 2.9

4 Reports should be easily accessibly electronically from

Web-based reporting system and be downloadable as a

PDF or any format wherein the report can be transferred to the Laboratory Information System (LIS) via a ''cut and paste'' function IAW PWS Para 2.10

5 Vendor must provide access to extensive and experienced Medical Advisory Staff available for consultations. Must provide list of Pathologists on staff as related to the types of testing DGMC is requesting IAW Para 2.12

6 Vendor must provide 24/7 access to Client Services to support changes to testing, add-on testing or rush cases to support emergency surgeries IAW PWS Para 2.14

7 Vendor must support add-on ordering capability. □ □

8 Vendor must provide an Immunohistochemistry (IHC) technical program and Special Stains testing IAW PWS

Para 3. l

9 Vendor must meet turn-around times for requested testing as referenced under each test IAW PWS Para 3.l-3.7

10 Vendor must provide Cytogenetic testing IAW PWS

Para 3.3, Fluorescence in situ Hybridization (FISH), testing IAW PWS Para 3.4, Liqu.id-based testing IAW

PWS Para 3.7, Flow Cytometry testing IAW PWS

Para 3.2, Cancer Site Specific NGS Panel, Lung

Cancer Panel testing based on specimen sent and Next Generation Sequencing/Solid Tumor Profiling

11 Vendor must provide designated couriers to meet transportation needs IAW PWS Para 2.1 & 2.2

12 Vendor must provide Specimen Testing Services for all tests within current Test Menu IAW PWS Para 3.8 as well as provide Testing Services for a timeframe

IAW PWS Para 2.1

13 Vendor must provide any materials needed for testing, i.e. collection kits, etc.

Factor 3 - Past Performance:

The Government will use Performance Price Tradeoff procedures and past performance data independently obtained from other Government sources, to include: Sam.gov, CPARS, PPQs, and the Contracting Officer's knowledge of each offeror's past performance. Up to 3 Past Performance References provided by the Offeror may also be considered.

The most current and relevant past performance (3 years or newer) information will be evaluated and shall be ranked according to the scale below:

Adjectival Rating Description

Acceptable Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Unacceptable Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Relevancy Definitions

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

2. Somewhat Relevant - Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities as this solicitation requires.

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

Offerors must earn a past performance rating of Acceptable past performance in their ability to fulfill the requirements of this specific task order to be further considered. Proposals from offerors who receive less than an Acceptable rating in their ability to fulfill the requirements of this specific task order will not be further considered and the source selection team will start evaluating the next offeror.

Factor 4 – Mission Essential Plan:

If an offeror has an acceptable price, technical capability, and past performance their mission essential plan will be evaluated. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s mission essential plan to continue to perform the essential contract services listed in the Attachment 1 – Performance Work Statement using the adjectival rating scheme defined in the table below. An offeror’s proposed plan will be evaluated to determine if it is acceptable or unacceptable IAW the evaluation criteria stated in this solicitation. If an offeror’s plan is not submitted or is determined to be unacceptable, the offeror will no longer be considered for award and the source selection team will start evaluating the next offeror.

Mission Essential Plan - Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method

Adjectival Rating Description

Acceptable The Mission Essential plan is sufficient to ensure continued performance of the essential contract services during periods of crisis.

Unacceptable The Mission Essential plan is not sufficient to ensure continued performance of the essential contract services during periods of crisis.

(End of Provision)