ATTACHMENT 5 - ADDENDUM 52.212-1 and 52.212-2.pdf

ADDENDUM TO RFO 52.212-1: Instructions to Offerors

The following instructions are incorporated as an addendum to RFO 52.212-1.

Offerors must submit complete quotations in accordance with these instructions to be considered for award.

(l) Government’s Rights to Make Partial or No Award. The Government intends to award a single Firm-Fixed-Price contract for all Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs). However, the Government reserves the right to make no award at all. Offerors are instructed to provide pricing for all CLINs. Failure to price a CLIN may result in that line item (and the overall quote) being deemed ineligible for award.

1.0 Submission Requirements

Quotations must be submitted electronically via email to the Contracting Officer at biannica.glay@us.af.mil no later than the date and time specified in the solicitation. The email subject line must read: "Quote Submission: Aeromedical Case Management Support - [Insert Offeror Name]". The quotation must consist of two (2) distinct parts, submitted as separate PDF attachments:

• PART I: Administrative and Pricing Volume

• PART II: Technical Capability Volume (Note: A formal Past Performance Volume is not required. See Addendum to 52.212-2 for details).

2.0 Part I: Administrative and Pricing Volume

Offerors must submit the following administrative and pricing information:

• SF 1449: A completed and signed copy of the SF 1449, including an acknowledgment of all solicitation amendments, if applicable.

• Pricing Schedule & Supporting Pricing Information: The offeror must submit its pricing using the Government Provided Pricing Worksheet (Attachment 3). Submission of the completed Pricing Worksheet is mandatory and shall constitute the Offeror’s official price proposal.

The Pricing Worksheet must be completed in its entirety using the provided format.

Offerors shall not alter, delete, or overwrite protected formulas, worksheet structure, or embedded calculations. Only designated input cells may be modified.

The completed Pricing worksheet must include the Offeror’s proposed Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) monthly rates for the Base Period and all Option Periods, together with the required pricing information:

• Proposed FTEs by labor category

• Direct labor rates

• Fringe benefits

• Indirect rates (e.g., overhead and G&A)

• Proposed profit/fee

• Any material assumptions used in developing the proposed price

Offerors are solely responsible for reviewing and complying with all instructions contained within the Government provided Pricing Worksheet. In the event of a discrepancy between manually entered values and automatically calculated values within the Government-provided Pricing Worksheet, the automatically calculated values will govern for evaluation purposes unless otherwise corrected by the Offeror prior to the quotation closing date.

• Alternate CLIN Structure (Optional): While the Government prefers the established CLIN structure, offerors are encouraged to propose an alternative CLIN structure if it represents a better value or aligns with standard commercial practices.

• Representations and Certifications: By submission of a quotation, the offeror represents that its annual representations and certifications in SAM.gov are current and that its SAM registration will remain active through time of award.

ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLETENESS: The offeror is responsible for ensuring its quotation is complete, accurate, and includes all information required by this solicitation. The Government is not responsible for locating information left out of the quotation, interpreting ambiguous or inconsistent submissions, or assuming information that has not been provided. Similarly, the Government will evaluate only the information submitted with the quotation. Information incorporated by reference, available through external websites, or omitted from the quotation may not be considered. Failure to submit complete, coherent, and adequately supported information by the quotation due date my result in the quotation being determined unacceptable or otherwise ineligible for award.

3.0 Part II: Technical Capability Volume

To minimize the administrative burden, the Technical Capability Volume must not exceed 15 pages. The volume must clearly demonstrate how the offeror meets the minimum criteria outlined in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Narrative responses must be tailored to this requirement. Generic, repetitive, or templated content; unsupported assertions; paraphrasing of the PWS; or promotional language that does not clearly demonstrate the offeror’s actual technical approach may result in the proposal being determined unacceptable or non-compliant.

Offerors must provide specific, empirical, and actionable methodologies. To facilitate rapid evaluation, offerors must utilize tables and matrices where directed below.

Offerors must address the following:

• Prior Experience (Submit via Table): The offeror must identify at least one (1), but no more than three (3), recent (performed within the last 3 years) and relevant project where the offeror successfully provided high-volume medical administrative or healthcare data system support. This must be submitted in a table format containing:

• Contract Number,

• Client Agency/Company,

• Total Dollar Value,

• Number of FTEs managed,

• Specific IT Systems utilized,

• and a brief 3-to-4 sentence scope description explaining how the project is comparable to this requirement.

• System Experience & Domain Expertise: Demonstrate the offeror’s capability to perform within the DoD or Air Force medical information systems identified in the PWS (e.g., AIMWTS, ECT, PEPP). For each applicable system:

• Identify the contract/project where the system was utilized

• Describe the functions performed within the system

• Identify the labor category(ies) using the system.

If the offeror lacks direct experience with the listed systems, provide a crosswalk identifying equivalent commercial or government healthcare systems and explain how the demonstrated experience directly translates to the required capability.

General statements regarding familiarity with healthcare systems, without supporting examples, will not be evaluated as evidence of capability.

• Staffing Approach & Anticipated FTE Matrix (Submit via Table): Provide a staffing matrix including:

• Proposed Labor Categories

• Number of FTEs by Labor Category

• Proposed Coverage of Baseline Workload

• Surge Staffing Methodology (up to 15%)

Following the table, provide a narrative not to exceed three (3) page description:

• Recruiting Strategy for Tier 1 personnel

• Retention strategy

• Expected time-to-fill vacancies

• Use of local hiring, remote personnel (if authorized in PWS), or authorized telework (if authorized in PWS)

• Procedures to maintain uninterrupted staffing

• Phase-In Execution: Submit a phase-in plan not to exceed one (1) page demonstrating the offeror’s ability to achieve full operational capability within the required transition period.

At a minimum, address:

• Knowledge transfer

• Employee onboarding

• System access coordination

• Security processing

• Continuity of operations

• Risk identification and mitigation

CRITICAL INSTRUCTION TO OFFERORS: The quotation shall represent the offeror’s best and final submission. The Government intends to evaluate quotations and make award without exchanges or negotiations. Therefore, offerors are encouraged to submit their most favorable pricing in their initial submission.

The offeror is solely responsible for submitting a complete, accurate, and adequate detailed quotation. The Government is under no obligation to seek clarification of, interpret, or infer information that is omitted, ambiguous, inconsistent, or inadequately explained within the quotation.

Only information contained within the quotation submitted by the solicitation closing date with will be considered during evaluation. The Government will evaluate quotations solely on the information provided. Failure to provide the information requested by the solicitation may result in the quotation being determined unacceptable or ineligible of award.

(End of Addendum for RFO 52.212-1)

ADDENDUM TO RFO 52.212-2: Evaluation Factors for Award

The following instructions are incorporated as an addendum to RFO 52.212-2.

1.0 Basis for Award

The Government intends to award a Firm-Fixed-Price contract to the responsible offeror whose quotation conforms to the requirements of the solicitation and represents the best value to the Government. This acquisition is being conducted utilizing the streamlined commercial procedures authorized under RFO Part 12. The Government will not utilize formal RFO Part 15 source selection procedures, nor will quotations be numerically scored or comparatively ranked.

Evaluation Approach: The Government will first evaluate Technical Capability on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. Quotations determined “Unacceptable” will not be eligible for award. Among the quotations determined “Acceptable”, award will be made to the responsible offeror submitting the lowest total evaluated price determined fair and reasonable. For this acquisition, the Government anticipates that this approach will result in the best value.

2.0 Evaluation Factors

The Government will evaluate quotes based on two factors:

• Factor 1: Technical Capability (includes Prior Experience)

• Factor 2: Price

Factor 1: Technical Capability: Technical Capability will be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. The Government will determine whether the quotation demonstrates the minimum capability necessary to successfully perform the requirement in accordance with the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

The evaluation will consider the specificity, completeness, realism, and demonstrated applicability of the information submitted. Generic, repetitive, templated, promotional, or unsupported narrative; conclusory statements; or responses that merely restate or paraphrase the PWS without demonstrating the offeror’s specific capability will not be considered evidence of technical capability.

To be rated "Acceptable," the offeror's quote must adequately address the following minimum standards:

• STANDARD A - Prior Experience: The quotation demonstrates recent (within the past three years) and relevant experience through one (1) to three (3) projects comparable in scope, complexity, and magnitude to this requirement. The submitted table identifies the required information and demonstrates successful performance of high-volume medical administrative support, healthcare data processing, or similar services).

• STANDARD B - System Experience: The quotation demonstrates the capability to perform within the required DoD/Air Force medical information systems described in the PWS (e.g., AIMWTS, ECT, PEPP) by:

• Identifying specific prior contracts utilizing those systems and describing the functions performed; or

• Providing a detailed crosswalk demonstrating how experience with equivalent government or commercial healthcare systems directly translates to the required systems and functions.

• STANDARD C - Staffing & FTEs: The submitted Staffing Matrix proposes an appropriate labor mix and number of FTEs sufficient to perform the baseline workload and the anticipated surge requirements. The accompanying narrative provides a realistic and actionable strategy for recruiting, onboarding, retaining, and replacing qualified personnel (including obtaining required Tier 1 security clearance) while minimizing staffing interruptions.

• STANDARD D - Phase-In Plan: The offeror presents a realistic Phase-In plan that adequately addresses knowledge transfer, employee onboarding, system access coordination, security processing, continuity of operations, and risk mitigation, ensuring a seamless transition of services within the 30-day window without mission degradation.

Failure to adequately demonstrate compliance with any one of the minimum technical standards may result in the quotation being rated “Unacceptable” under Factor 1 and therefore ineligible for award.

Factor 2: Price: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Total Evaluated Price, which consists of the Base Period, all evaluated Option Periods, and the evaluated extension of services in accordance with RFO 52.217-8, as calculated in the Government-provided Pricing Worksheet (Attachment 3).

In evaluating price, the Government will consider adequate price competition and may utilize the supporting pricing information submitted by the Offeror (e.g., proposed staffing, labor categories, direct labor rates, fringe benefits, indirect rates, profit/fee, and other supporting assumptions) to determine whether the proposed Firm-Fixed-Price is fair, reasonable, balanced, and consistent with the Offeror’s proposed technical approach.

The Government reserves the right to evaluate consistency between the Pricing Worksheet and the Technical Capability Volume. Material discrepancies between the Offeror’s proposed staffing, labor mix, pricing assumptions, or tother supporting information may be considered in the evaluation.

The Government is not obligated to seek clarifications regarding inconsistencies, omissions, or mathematical assumptions contained within the Offeror’s Pricing Worksheet and may evaluate the quotation based solely upon the information submitted.

3.0 Responsibility Determination

Past Performance is not a separately evaluated factor under this solicitation. Prior to award, the Contracting Officer will determine whether the apparent successful offeror is responsible in accordance with the standards set forth in RFO Part 9.

In making this determination, the Contracting Officer may consider information available from the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS), the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), the System for Award Management (SAM), and any other information available to the Government relevant to the offeror’s responsibility, including financial resources, performance record, integrity, business ethics, and ability to successfully perform the contract requirements.

Only an offeror determined responsible will be eligible for award. If the apparent successful offeror is determined non-responsible, the Government may proceed to the next otherwise successful offeror.

(End of Addendum to RFO 52.212-2)