Attachment B - Instructions Conditions and Notices to Offerors.pdf

Attachment B

Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Offerors

Note: The Government reserves the right to reject any quote that does not comply with these instructions.

A. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1. Quote Volumes

To facilitate the evaluations, three (3) separate volumes:

Volume I Technical Quote Volume II Past Performance Quote Volume III Price Quote

Each volume shall be submitted separately and clearly labeled. Each of these parts shall be separate and complete in itself so that the evaluation of one may be accomplished independently of the evaluation of the other. Offerors must comply with the detailed instructions for the format and content of the quote; quotes that do not comply with the detailed instructions for the format and content of the quote will be considered non-responsive and will render the offeror ineligible for award.

Questions may be submitted requesting clarification for this requirement via email. Any clarifying information issued by the Government will be provided to all prospective offerors. All questions must be submitted no later than August 11, 2023, at 16:00 (ET) via email to Ms. Shawn R. Horton at SHorton@hrsa.gov with a courtesy copy to Ms.

Helen Wesley at HWesley@hrsa.gov. Questions received after the due date and time will not be considered. No Exceptions.

Quotes shall be prepared in accordance with Section entitled Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors, see attached. It is also brought to your attention that the Contracting Officer is the only individual who can legally commit the Government to expenditure of public funds in connection with this proposed acquisition.

Quotes must include a contact name, phone number and email address as well as your company name and complete address, including street, city, county, state, zip code, Tax Identification Number (TIN), and Unique Entity ID (UEI). The TIN must match the name of the offeror to whom the payments will be made. Please note that FAR 52.204-7 System for Award Management (Oct 2018) applies to this acquisition.

Quotes must be submitted no later than August 25, 2023, at 16:00 (ET) via email to Ms.

Shawn R. Horton at SHorton@hrsa.gov with a courtesy copy to Ms. Helen Wesley at HWesley@hrsa.gov.

This RFQ does not commit the Government to pay any costs for the preparation and submission of a quote nor does it commit the Government to make an award. By mailto:SHorton@hrsa.gov mailto:SHorton@hrsa.gov submission of a quote, the offeror acknowledges the requirement that a prospective awardee shall be registered in the SAM database prior to award, during performance, and through final payment of any contract, resulting from this solicitation. If not registered in the SAM database within the time prescribed by the Contracting Officer, the Contracting Officer may proceed to award to the next otherwise successful registered offeror. The System for Award Management (SAM) requires any prospective awardee to have a Unique Identifier (UEI) Number and be registered in the SAM database prior to award, during performance, and through final payment of any award resulting from this solicitation.

If you are not registered in the SAM, you may obtain information on registration and annual confirmation requirements via the internet at beta.sam.gov or by calling 1-866- 606-8220.

If you do not have a UEI number, please contact Dun and Bradstreet by calling Dun and Bradstreet at 1-866-705-5711 or via the Internet at http://www.dnb.com.

2. Page Format

Each volume shall be single spaced and shall be printable on 8.5 x 11-inch paper containing text no smaller than 11 points for text and 9 points for graphics (including call out boxes and tables). Each page shall be numbered, and each volume shall be tabbed to correspond to the table of contents. Offerors may include 11 x 17-inch foldouts only to display graphics, flow charts, organizational charts, or drawings. The technical quote volume shall not exceed 50 pages. The past performance quote shall not exceed 25 pages.

The price quote shall not exceed 25 pages. Any pages that exceed the page limitations shall be removed and will not be evaluated. Pricing tables shall also be provided in an unlocked, editable, and active formula excel spreadsheet.

3. Submission, Modification, Revision, and Withdrawal of Proposals

• Proposals and revisions of proposals shall be emailed to the listed Contract Specialist under the appropriate solicitation number. Offerors shall notify the Contracting Officer of any revisions to proposals before the closing date to Ms. Shawn Horton at SHorton@hrsa.gov.

• Offerors shall submit proposals in response to this solicitation in English and in U.S.

dollars.

• Proposals may be withdrawn at any time before award. Withdrawals are effective upon receipt of written notice by the Contracting Officer.

B. Proposal Details

1. Technical Proposal (Volume I).

To facilitate the technical proposal evaluation, the offeror shall submit as part of the

Request for Quote (RFQ), a separate enclosure entitled, “Technical Proposal.” The Technical Proposal must not contain references to price; however, resource information such as data concerning labor hours and categories, materials, subcontracts, etc., must be contained in the Technical Proposal so that your understanding of the statement of objectives may be evaluated. It must disclose your approach in sufficient detail to provide a clear and concise presentation that includes the requirements of the proposal instructions. The Technical Proposal must include a statement indicating whether any exceptions are taken to the terms and conditions of the RFQ as part of the transmittal letter. Any exceptions must include identification of the specific paragraphs and rationale for each exception. Exceptions shall also be noted in the proposal at the location of the exception.

a. Technical Factors.

The Offeror shall provide in their own words, a summary narrative demonstrating an understanding of the project and problem being addressed in this solicitation, as set forth in the Statement of Work.

The offeror’s technical proposal shall describe the following:

1) Understanding of the Scope of Work

The Offeror shall provide a statement of the problem, scope, and purpose of the project in the Offeror’s own words to demonstrate complete understanding of the intent and the requirements.

2) Technical Approach

The Offeror’s shall provide a technical approach to meet each of the requirements specified in the Statement of Work. The following items shall be covered:

o Description of the technical approach for completing each task and subtask in the SOW. The vendor should include information about how it will ensure that all content provided is accurate and up to date.

o Vetting strategy for non-government websites that uses standard quality guidelines.

o Comprehensive work plan that will demonstrate the offeror’s ability to complete all tasks within the period of performance.

o A discussion of anticipated challenges and potential problem areas with methods and approaches for resolution.

3) Personnel

The Offeror shall specify the professional staff who will perform the contract activities, including their education, experience and specific technical accomplishments essential to the performance of the project. The offeror shall provide résumés for all professional personnel proposed for this project.

A description of the staff proposed for carrying out the project must be provided and include:

o Experience/knowledge about newborn screening processes, newborn screening stakeholders, needs of families around newborn screening and follow-up and diagnosis of individuals with heritable conditions through newborn screening.

o The identification of other key personnel involved in the management of the project and their reporting relationships.

o The identification of any subcontracts and/or contract staff and a description of their qualifications, roles and reporting relationships; please include evidence of commitment to participate.

o The identification of any experts and/or consultants being used and a description of their qualifications, specific roles and reporting relationships;

please include evidence of commitment to participate.

4) Organization Capability and Experience

The Offeror shall describe the capability and experience of the offeror relative to the requirements of this project. This will include a description of prior and/or current projects that are similar and that demonstrate experience with newborn screening, content development for newborn screening, and management.

The discussion will detail:

o History of the organization and organization structure.

o The number of years the organization and key personnel have been working on issues and projects related to newborn screening; and o Information about the organization’s demonstrated experience with newborn screening-related issues.

2. Past Performance Proposal (Volume II).

Offeror’s shall submit a total of three (3) past performance references for the technical quote where the Offeror was the prime contractor or subcontractor for relevant work completed within the past three (3) years as required by this solicitation. “Relevant” is defined as similar in size, scope, and complexity to this procurement. Out of the three (3) past performance required, one (1) may be from a proposed subcontractor.

If the Offeror has not held any relevant Federal contracts, then the Offeror may submit references from state/local, private sector clients, or Federal clients using the Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment C). Offeror’s shall forward a copy the Past Performance Questionnaire to their clients to complete. The completed questionnaire shall be submitted by the client in PDF format by August 25, 2023, at 16:00 ET via email to SHorton@hrsa.gov with a courtesy copy to HWesley@hrsa.gov. If not received by the deadline, the questionnaire may or may not be considered as a reference.

The Government reserves the right to obtain information for use in the evaluation of past performance from all sources including sources outside the government.

Acceptable methods for providing a total of three (3) past performance references are:

a. Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment D).

b. Contractor Performance Assessment System (CPARS) reports/ratings.

c. Combination of questionnaires and CPARS reports/ratings.

3. Price Proposal (Volume III).

a. Each offeror’s proposed price will be analyzed to determine fairness and reasonableness.

b. The Offeror's price proposal shall consist of the following:

Standard Form 1449, Request for Quotations:

The offeror must complete the following Blocks:

BLOCK 12: Complete if offering discount terms.

BLOCK 17a: State the Name, Address, and Telephone No. of your organization.

BLOCK 17b: Complete if remittance address is different from that addressed in Block 17a.

BLOCK 20: HRSA IDIQ number; Contact name, phone number, and email address;

and UEI BLOCK 30a: If Block 28 is checked, provide the signature of the person with authority to bind your company.

BLOCK 30b: If Block 28 is checked, provide the name and title of the signer.

BLOCK 30c: If Block 28 is checked, provide the date signed.

Fill out any provisions that require Offeror input.

c. Labor Categories and Rates:

o Identify the labor category (ies) to be utilized for this effort (per task area), a description of the skills and experience per category, and the hourly rate(s) proposed, and any discounts.

o Consultant or Subcontractor rate information shall also be included, if allowable.

o Offerors should provide labor categories and labor rates for all Task Areas.

o Labor categories and hourly rates must be in accordance with the offeror’s

HRSA IDIQ and/or GSA schedule.

d. Payment Schedule. The offeror shall propose unit pricing and total pricing within the payment schedule outline in the Statement of Work based on percentages allotted per payment item. Unit prices must be rounded to the penny and multiplied correctly to get the extended price.

e. FAR 52.217-8 Option to Extend Services. The offeror shall provide separate pricing information for the possibility of FAR 52.217-8 Option to Extend Services being exercised. This pricing information should have the details as previously listed with the added detail of monthly pricing increments, maximum of six (6) months.

f. FAR 52.217-5 Evaluation of Options (Jul 1990) – Except when it is determined in accordance with FAR 17.206(b) not to be in the Government’s best interests, the Government will evaluate the total price for the basic requirement together with any option(s) exercised at the time of award.

g. Any exceptions to terms and conditions or ground rules and assumptions.

C. Evaluation Criteria

The Government will select the responsible HRSA Evaluation Studies offeror whose proposal, in conforming to this RFP, provides the best value to the Government.

Best Value Determination:

The Trade Off evaluation process will be utilized. Technical Factor is more important than the Past Performance Factor. When combined, the non-price factors (Technical and Past Performance) are significantly more important than Price. In the event that the evaluation reveals that two (2) or more proposals are approximately equal in non-price factors, then price will become significantly more important.

Determining the best value of the proposal includes the following three factors:

o Factor 1: Technical Factor o Factor 2: Past Performance Factor o Factor 3: Price Factor

1. TECHNICAL QUOTE (VOLUME I):

Technical will be evaluated on an adjectival basis. When using this methodology, evaluators will assign an adjective descriptor – Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal or Unacceptable – to each Technical Evaluation Criterion in the Technical Proposal.

Support Description

Significant Strength

An aspect of an offeror's proposal that has appreciable merit or appreciably exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be appreciably advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Strength An aspect of an offeror's proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

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

Significant Weakness

A flaw that appreciably 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.

RATING STANDARDS FOR THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Adjectival Rating Description Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths, which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses, which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is not awardable.

Factor 1 - Technical will be rated based on the following:

A. Understanding the Scope of Work B. Technical Approach C. Personnel D. Organization Capability and Experience

A. Understanding the Scope of Work The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s quote for:

• Evidence of thorough understanding of the problem, scope, and purpose of the NBSIC to demonstrate complete understanding of the intent and the requirements.

• Demonstrates knowledge of the following:

o newborn screening processes and stakeholders.

o newborn screening materials, resources and research.

o newborn screening requirements in states across the nation.

• Evidence of thorough understanding and knowledge of NBS as related to the solicitation.

B. Technical Approach

The Government will evaluate the quote for:

• Evidence of thorough understanding of the contents of each task and subtask to be performed to achieve the SOW objectives including the evidence of the contents of how the vendor will ensure that all content provided is accurate and up-to-date.

• Ability to identify the vetting strategy for non-government websites that uses standard quality guidelines.

• Ability to identify the comprehensive work plan that demonstrate the offeror’s ability to complete all tasks within the period of performance.

• Ability to identify discussion of the anticipated challenges and potential problem areas with methods and the approaches for resolution.

C. Personnel

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s detailed description of the professional staff who will perform the contract activities, including their education, experience/knowledge about newborn screening processes, newborn screening stakeholders, needs of families, and specific technical accomplishments essential to the performance.

D. Organization Capability and Experience

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s relevant organizational capability:

• Demonstrates similar experience in work related to newborn screening, content development for newborn screening, and management from prior and/or current projects.

• Demonstrates a minimum of five years the organization and key personnel have been working on issues and projects related to newborn screening.

• Demonstrates details of the organization and its organizational structure; and

• Demonstrated the organization’s experience with newborn screening-related issues.

2. PAST PERFORMANCE QUOTE - (VOLUME II):

The Offeror’s past performance will be evaluated in accordance with the following

Past Performance Relevancy Rating Standards and Performance Confidence Assessments Standards.

The Government will conduct a past performance evaluation of the Offeror’s past performance as well as that of its subcontractors (if applicable). Past performance consists of past performance relevancy and performance confidence; thus, the Offeror will be assigned two (2) ratings for past performance: First, the Government will evaluate the Offeror’s past performance references to determine how relevant a recent effort is to the current requirement for source selection. Common aspects of relevance include similarity of service/support, complexity, magnitude of effort, dollar value, and contract type. Second, the Government will evaluate the Offeror’ s past performance to determine the quality of work performed and assess the level of expectation that the Offeror can successfully perform the required effort.

In the case of an Offeror without a record of past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably. Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have a neutral past performance.

Past Performance Relevancy Rating Standards

Rating Definition

Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

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

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

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

Performance Confidence Assessment Standards

Rating Description

Exceptional Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has very high expectations that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Very Good Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has very good expectations that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

3. PRICE QUOTE (VOLUME III):

The Price Proposal will be evaluated based on the offeror’s:

a. Proposed labor rates for each labor category required for each task for an 18-month base period, optional tasks, and for one (1) six-month extension period in accordance with FAR 52.217-8 Option to Extend Services.

b. The overall total price proposal.

c. The Government reserves the right to reject any proposal that includes any assumptions that adversely impact(s) the Government’s requirements or fails to comply with any of the requirements outlined herein.

d. The appropriateness of terms and conditions, and ground rules and assumptions.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has reasonable expectations that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Marginal Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has minimal expectations that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Unsatisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Unknown Confidence (Neutral) No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.