Attachment ii. Instructions to Offerors and Evaluation Criteria.pdf

273FCC20R0007

Attachment ii.

Instructions to Offerors and Evaluation Criteria (Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 and FAR 52.212-2)

Instructions to Offerors

1 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

1.1 This is a Full and Open Best Value Tradeoffs competitive procurement

This competitive procurement shall result in the award of a contract with firm-fixed-price contract line items (CLINs) and firm-fixed-price/no-cost CLINs. No alternate proposals shall be accepted. No proposal costs shall be reimbursed. The Government reserves the right to award on initial proposals or proposals, without discussion, if considered to be in the best interest of the Government. All offerors should submit their best price and technical proposal in their initial submission. The electronic version of the RFP is the official version for this acquisition. No hard copy or facsimile copies of the Request for Proposal, or amendments, will be provided.

The Government intends to award a single contract. The period of performance will consist of a base period of five years which includes a 60-day transition-in period for the NANPA/PA services, followed by three (3) one (1) year option periods. The five-year base is structured as a single CLIN for the NANPA/PA services and for the RNDA services the five-year base period is structured as a one-year development CLIN and a four-year operations CLIN. The 60-day transition-in period for the NANPA/PA will be required to ensure an orderly transition from the existing Contractor with no degradation of service. The transition-in period will also provide the awardee adequate time to obtain the required contractor personnel security determinations, in advance of day one of the start of contract performance.

All proposals shall include the Offeror and any subcontractors Name(s), DUNS, CAGE Code, and a brief description of the services to be performed.

2. SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

1. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION - Send proposals via email to Contracting Officer at:

Kadian.Ferguson@fcc.gov. Include “RFP Number 273FCC20R0007, NANPA PA RNDA - Proposal” in the subject line of the e-mail. Acknowledge the solicitation by completing blocks 30a and 30c and signing block 30b of the SF1449. All proposals, questions, and correspondence shall be submitted no later than the proposal due date stated in block 8 of the SF1449.

2. QUESTIONS – Submit any questions or comments via email to Contracting Officer at:

Kadian.Ferguson@fcc.gov. Include “RFP Number 273FCC20R0007, NANPA PA RNDA - QUESTIONS” in the subject line of the e-mail. Please identify the page and section of the solicitation to which your question refers. Questions are to be submitted no later than 10:00 AM EST, July 8, 2020.

3. SOLICITATION/CONTRACT (SF1449) AND AMENDMENTS (SF30) - Complete blocks 12, 17a, 17b, 30a, 30b, and 30c of the Request for Proposal (RFP) SF 1449. In doing so, the Contractor accedes to the contract terms and conditions as written in the RFP. Submit page 1 of the SF1449 with the signature of a corporate officer authorized to negotiate for the company in Block 30a, 30b and 30c and acknowledgement of any and all amendments, (SF 30) with signature in Block 15B. The Government may reject any proposal which fails to do so.

4. FORMAT AND CONTENT –

mailto:Kadian.Ferguson@fcc.gov mailto:Kadian.Ferguson@fcc.gov

The contractor's proposal shall consist of the four volumes, each provided in a separate document. The submission shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled. Each volume shall be appropriately numbered and clearly identified with the date and RFP number. A Standard, 12-point font size applies to all volumes. Use Times New Roman 12-point font, single spaced type with one-inch margins. The technical proposal shall be submitted in MS Word or PDF format. The price proposal shall be submitted in MS Word or MS Excel format. Proposals shall be delivered directly to Kadian Ferguson by email at Kadian.Ferguson@fcc.gov. Electronic submission of Proposals is the ONLY method of acceptance.

3. PROPOSAL CONTENT

The Contractor’s submission shall include four separate parts: a Business Volume, Technical volume (or “Technical Proposal,” addressing technical, experience and other non-price information), Past Performance volume (demonstrating recent and relevant experience) (or “Past Performance Proposal”), and a Price volume (or “Price Proposal”). Contractors shall provide volumes in the format and order specified below. Proposals that lack sufficient information are non-compliant as to preclude further meaningful evaluation or that, on account of proposal construction, are grossly technically deficient may be determined unacceptable. With the concurrence of the Contracting Officer, such proposals need not be given further consideration. The Contracting Officer will promptly notify those Contractors whose proposals were found unacceptable on these grounds.

4. VOLUME I - BUSINESS [No page limit]

a. Cover Letter or First Page - Restrict the following information to the cover page or first page of the submitted proposal, the company logo can be included in the header of each page as necessary, if applicable:

• Company name

• Company logo or other identify graphic

• Company mailing address

• CAGE code and DUNS number

• Name and contact information for company official with authority to obligate the vendor.

• Solicitation Number

• Must state the validity of the proposal from the time of the due date, no less than 90 days.

b. Representations and Certifications, FAR 52.212-3 - Contractors shall submit one completed copy of all representations and certifications. If the Contractor has completed the Online Representations and Certifications at the System for Award Management (SAM) https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM , submit an electronic printout of the Representations and Certifications.

c. Neutrality Offers must submit a certificate signed by a Chief Executive Officer or President that explicitly certifies the offeror meets each requirement of the Commission’s neutrality requirements in Commission rule 52.12, 47 C.F.R. §52.12.

5. VOLUME II - TECHNICAL [60 pages limit]

The Technical Proposal is limited to a total of 60 single-sided pages. Pages shall be numbered consecutively throughout the Technical Proposal. Sections shall be numbered consecutively throughout the Technical Proposal, as listed below. Pages exceeding the limit will be removed and not forwarded for evaluation. Contractors are encouraged to use graphics to best demonstrate their capabilities and solutions. The Table of Contents, Table Summary, Compliance Matrix, Title page, Executive Summary, and resumes for Key Personnel and Required Personnel are NOT counted as part of the 60-page limit.

Technical Proposal Content and Formatting Instructions:

Table of Contents

Each Contractor shall provide a Table of Contents to identify the location of key subject areas of the proposal and the page number where the Section is located.

Table Summary

Each Contractor shall provide a Table Summary indicating pages/sections of the proposal addressing evaluative criteria.

Compliance Matrix

Each Contractor shall provide a compliance matrix to present how RFP requirements are addressed throughout the proposal. Each row in the matrix links each proposal section with one or more RFP requirements. This document shall demonstrate how and where the Contractor covers each requirement in its proposal.

Executive Summary

Each Contractor shall provide a summary of its Technical Proposal highlighting its understanding and approach to the technical requirements and the capability of its proposed team.

NOTE: The Technical Proposal must not contain any reference to cost/price.

Technical Proposal/Technical Solution - The technical solution shall include all information necessary to evaluate the proposal in accordance with the Evaluation Factors described below in the evaluation criteria. This includes the following:

Factor 1: Organization and Implementation Approach Factor 2: Staffing Plan Factor 3: Corporate Experience

Factor 1: Organization and Implementation Approach The Offeror shall provide a detailed discussion of its organization and implementation approach for accomplishing the requirements of the contract.

The Offeror’s approach shall:

- Be clear, logical, practical, efficient, and complete.

- Identify potential risks with the proposed approach as well as the means to mitigate them.

- Demonstrate a clear understanding of all RFP requirements and include evidence of specific methods and techniques for completing the services required under the PWS.

- Demonstrate how its proposed processes/tools are successful in gaining efficiencies and/or process improvements to include performance metrics/ measures.

- Demonstrate knowledge of generally accepted accounting standards and laws regarding fiduciary responsibility, privacy requirements, as well as other activities that directly affect the responsibility of the

NANPA/PA/RNDA.

- Demonstrate knowledge of all relevant FCC rules regarding cost allocation and recovery mechanisms, number administration, pooling administration, fund collection, and reporting requirements. The offeror should also be familiar with any Office of Management and Budget rules and regulations that may impact the collection process.

- Demonstrate knowledge of relevant legislation that bears on numbering administration and collecting funds and/or proprietary information from individual entities.

- Discuss the timeline for the creation of the RND before it becomes operational.

Factor 2: Staffing Plan

The Offeror’s staffing plan shall provide a description of the staffing solution provided to perform the duties, functions, and responsibilities required by the RFP and related documents. The staffing plan shall include personnel resumes. The staffing plan shall describe the Offeror’s processes and procedures for identifying, recruiting, hiring, screening, and retaining sufficient numbers of qualified personnel to meet the Government’s performance objectives. The plan shall describe the techniques used to ensure efficient and effective use of personnel, as well as any training and/or certification programs the Offeror uses to maintain proficiency and verify qualifications.

The plan shall describe the relationship between the various management levels and the proposed labor categories for each service area.

The Offeror shall demonstrate its ability to obtain qualified personnel to meet the requirements of the PWS and set forth how it will ensure that the FCC receives well-qualified staff that will continue to meet the needs of the FCC throughout the term of the contract. The Offeror’s approach shall discuss how the knowledge, skills, experience, training, and capabilities of personnel relate to the PWS requirements.

Additionally, the Offeror shall provide draft Transition-In and Transition-Out Plans that describes the processes and procedures used to transition into and out of this contract. The plan shall discuss the methodologies used for ensuring seamless Transition-In with the Government and Transition-Out between contracts and techniques used to ensure the cooperative transfer of service execution between vendors.

Note: Resumes are excluded from the page limit.

Factor 3: Corporate Experience

Describe any corporate experience that relates to the level and complexity of work detailed in the PWS.

This description may include an explanation as to how the Offeror’s experience on similar past projects will enhance its ability to successfully perform the NANPA/PA/RNDA services.

6. VOLUME III - PAST PERFORMANCE [20 pages limit]

Factor 4: Past Performance – Each Contractor shall demonstrate that it has performed well on recent contracts or task orders that are predictive of success on the current effort. Each Contractor shall identify three (3) contracts/task orders with the Federal Government (preferred), or with State, local, commercial, or non-profit customers that demonstrate recent and relevant positive past performance. The Contractor shall provide a list with three (3) recent and relevant references. Recent is defined as active or completed efforts performed within the past three (3) years from the closing date of this solicitation (this can include work that began prior to this three-year period, but was completed within the three-year period). Relevant is defined as similar in terms of size, scope, and complexity in comparison to the requirements in the PWS (including the TRDs). The recent and relevant past performance of subcontractors for this contract will be considered, however only one of the three past performance references can be for a subcontractor.

The Offeror shall include:

(1) The contract number; (2) A description of the work performed; (3) The name, current phone number, and current e-mail address of the individual who can speak to customer satisfaction, timeliness of the work and quality; (4) Role on the project (Prime/partner or subcontractor); (5) The total dollar value of the work; (6) Explanation of the relevance of the work to TRD task areas; and (7) Self-assessment as to how the experience gained will enhance Offeror's ability to deliver the services requested.

The Government reserves the right to contact each reference provided. Each offeror shall notify references of the possibility that FCC will call seeking past performance information on the identified projects or other recent, relevant projects on which the offeror has performed. The Government may also consider recent, relevant information obtained through other Government past performance sources, including PPIRS other agency surveys. Offerors without recent and relevant past performance (or that are unable to provide three references in this regard) shall so state. The Offeror shall provide a copy of the Past Performance Questionnaire to its references supplied in the past performance section of the proposal.

The offeror is responsible for ensuring the Past Performance Evaluation Survey is received prior to the closing date and time of the RFP.

Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment i) [No page limit]

The Offerors shall provide the Past Performance Questionnaires to the three references outlined by the Offeror in the Offeror’s Past Performance Reference Documents. The Offeror shall request that the reference complete and provide the Past Performance Questionnaire directly to the FCC Contracting Officer (by email to Kadian.Ferguson@fcc.gov) on or before the proposal due date.

7. VOLUME IV – PRICE [No page limit]

Price Proposal Content and Formatting Instructions

The offeror shall complete the Schedule of Supplies/Services page(s) of the Standard Form (SF) 1449 of the RFP with pricing for the base and each option period for each Contract Line Item (CLIN). Note that the price proposal does not have a page limit.

Section 1.0 Assumptions, Conditions, Explanations, and Deviations

In this Section, an offeror submitting a proposal must expressly state whether it makes or takes assumptions, conditions, or exceptions respecting the terms, conditions, and requirements of this RFP, including the PWS. The offeror shall explain any assumption, condition, or exception made or taken, including any assumptions (or explanations) related to the proposed price. If no assumption, condition, or exception is made or taken, the award placed with the offeror will incorporate the terms, conditions, and requirements as set forth in this RFP and the PWS, and the offeror agrees to be bound thereby. Offerors should note that deviations from the requirements of the RFP, including the PWS, will render the proposal unacceptable, unless: (1) the Government requests revised proposals under revised requirements or instructions that relax the involved term, condition, and requirement for all Contractors, or (2) the Government allows the offeror to revise its proposal to comply with the RFP as currently written. Such deviations may exist as proposal qualifications, restrictions, pricing assumptions, or any other declaration, assertion, or tender that contravenes or conflicts with the mandatory requirements of the RFP (including the PWS).

Section 2.0 Price Proposal Spreadsheet

In addition to providing pricing by CLIN, offerors should provide a spreadsheet which details by CLIN the proposed labor categories, hours rates, software costs, etc. Contractors shall provide a price proposal spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel. In order to determine the price reasonableness of the Contractor’s price, in accordance with FAR 15.404-2 (d), the Contractor shall provide the labor categories, level of effort in hours, and the Total Price for the Base and Option periods of the RFP. Labor categories and the requisite level of effort and labor mix and any explication of the basis of estimate used to develop the fixed price proposed must be provided in sufficient detail to assess price reasonableness and balanced pricing appropriate for the work.

Offerors shall identify NANPA/PA and RNDA transition-related costs separately, including price for transition from the incumbent (NANPA/PA) and price for transition to a successor (NANPA/PA and RNDA). Offerors shall identify RND Creation cost separately from RND Operations cost.

Evaluation Criteria

BASIS FOR AWARD

Award will be made on a best value tradeoff basis. Accordingly, the Government will award the contract to the responsible and technically acceptable Offeror whose proposal, conforming to the solicitation, represents the best value to the Government in accordance with the evaluation factors and subfactors stated in this solicitation. The proposal that offers the best value is the proposal that, in the Government's estimation, provides the greatest overall benefit to the Government in response to the requirement. In determining which proposal offers the best value, the Government may make tradeoffs between prices and non-price proposal attributes (including past performance).

In conducting any tradeoff to determine which proposal provides the greatest overall benefit to the Government, the Government will consider proposal and Offeror attributes, judging the strengths and weaknesses associated with each proposal under the evaluation factors and subfactors identified in the solicitation. Among other things, these strengths and weaknesses may include: past performance or other attributes of the Offeror’s proposal that makes more or less likely the risk of unsuccessful or inefficient performance of the contract, including increased cost, defective or degraded performance, extended or disrupted schedule, or the risk of required additional Government oversight; and meritorious aspects of the Offeror’s proposal that exceed the requirements or approach the requirements in a way beneficial to the Government (either as expressly included in the proposal or inherent to the Offeror’s process).

Best value will be determined by comparing the value of the differences in the proposal(s) and Offerors as judged by the non-price evaluation factors with differences in their price to the Government. In making this determination, the Government is more concerned with obtaining superior past performance and technical/management capabilities than with making a source selection at the lowest price. However, the Government reserves the right to place the order with an Offeror(s) whose proposal does not offer the most superior non-price attributes or whose proposal offers other than the lowest price, where doing so achieves the greatest overall benefit for the Government. As the evaluation of non-price factors among the proposals near equality, price will become more important to the Government.

The Government intends to award a contract to the Contractor based on initial proposals. Contractors shall provide their best, complete proposal upon initial submission. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions after constructing a competitive range consisting of the most highly rated proposals.

SOURCE SELECTION FACTORS

Neutrality Pass/Fail Offerors must demonstrate that they meet the Commission’s neutrality requirements in Commission rule 52.12, 47 C.F.R. §52.12. Offers must submit a certificate signed by a Chief Executive Officer or President that explicitly certifies the offeror meets each requirement. The successful offeror will be required to re-certify to its compliance at the time of award. Offerors shall be prepared to provide any other documentation verifying compliance as may be requested by the Commission.

If a proposal fails the Neutrality requirement, that proposal will be deemed technically unacceptable and not eligible for award. A proposal will only be further evaluated if it passes the Neutrality Test.

The evaluation factors and significant subfactors for this award are as follows:

Evaluation Factors Order of Importance

Factor 1 Organization and Implementation Approaches

Factor 1 is slightly more important than Factor 2.

Factor 2 Key Personnel and Staffing Plan Factor 2 is slightly more important than Factors 3 and 4.

Factor 3 Corporate Experience Factor Factors 3 and 4 are of equal importance.

Factor 4 Past Performance Factor Factors 3 and 4 are of equal importance.

Organization and implementation approaches, key personnel and staffing plan, corporate experience, and past performance, when combined, are significantly more important than price.

Adjectival Ratings

Proposals will be rated, for Factors 1: Organization and Implementation Approaches; Factor 2: Key Personnel and Staffing Plan; Factor 3: Corporate Experience, and Factor 4: Past Performance under an adjectival rating scheme. The Government will not “roll up” factor adjectival ratings into an overall non-price proposal adjectival rating.

Evaluation factors:

(1) Organization and Implementation Approaches

(a) The FCC will consider the extent to which the offeror’s implementation approach provides a realistic, thorough, and detailed schedule to develop the RNDA system and transition the existing NANPA and PA systems; and can be expected to result in on- time delivery, review, revision, and acceptance of all deliverables. The FCC will give equal weight to the implementation approach for the NANPA, PA, and RNDA. The FCC will consider the likelihood and extent to which the implementation approach will guard against disruptions to current and continuing NANPA and Pooling Administration operations.

(b) The FCC will evaluate the Offeror’s proposal for the combined NANPA, PA, and RNDA effort to determine:

1. the extent to which the proposed technical and management approach demonstrates a clear understanding of all requirements.

2. the quality of the specific methods and techniques proposed for completing each discrete task, the thoroughness of the Offeror’s approach to managing the program and specific tasks and approach to planned execution of the projects.

3. the extent to which its proposed models/processes/tools are likely to be successful in gaining efficiencies and/or process improvements (including) performance metrics/measures.

4. the Offeror’s insight into and ability to explain and anticipate: potential program challenge areas; major difficulties, problem areas, and risks; the application of creative and feasible solutions; future integration of new processes; and technology enhancements.

5. the degree to which the Offeror’s proposal demonstrates an understanding of program logistics and schedule and will consider previously unidentified program issues raised in the proposal (of which the Government should be aware) and their proposed mitigation or resolution.

(c) The FCC will assess the proposed management structure, processes and procedures for planning, resourcing, managing, and monitoring progress in meeting the FCC’s objectives for the NANPA, PA, and

RNDA.

(2) Staffing Plan

(a) The FCC will assess the proposed processes and procedures for identifying, recruiting, hiring, screening, and retaining sufficient numbers of qualified personnel to meet stated FCC objectives; the proposed techniques to be used to ensure efficient and effective use of personnel; proposed training and/or certification programs to maintain proficiency and verify qualifications; and the proposed relationship between the various management levels and the number of individuals required.

b) The FCC will consider the feasibility of the offeror’s proposed staffing plan and the extent to which the plan demonstrates the Offeror’s understanding of resource requirements to accomplish all activities.

(c) The FCC will consider the extent to which personnel resumes demonstrate education, experience, and qualifications suitable to successful development and management of the RNDA, NANPA, and PA systems and to performance of RNDA, NANPA, PA responsibilities. The FCC will consider the specific roles and job responsibilities reflected in the resume and how well those roles and responsibilities relate to the function proposed for the individual for contract performance and the amount of time the individual will devote to the contract. The FCC will consider the individual’s professional involvement in, and professionalism concerning, topics implicated by the contemplated contract.

(3) Corporate Experience

The FCC will consider the offeror’s corporate experience on past projects and evaluate the quality of prior technical and management approaches and staff contributions to projects that relate to the FCC’s objectives for the RNDA, NANPA and PA.

(4) Past Performance

The past performance assessment will assess the government’s confidence in the offeror’s ability to successfully accomplish the proposed effort based on the offeror’s demonstrated work record on recent and relevant efforts in terms of size, scope, and complexity in comparison to the requirements in the PWS, and how well the Offeror performed those relevant efforts. The recency and relevancy of the information, the source of the information, context of the data and general trends in the contractor’s performance will be considered. More recent and more relevant performance usually has a greater impact in the confidence assessment than less recent and less relevant performance. The Government will perform an independent determination of relevancy of the data provided or obtained. A relevancy determination will be made for each of the three (3) submitted contracts for the offeror. For the Offeror, no more than three (3) contracts should be submitted for consideration, any more will not be evaluated. If additional contracts are submitted, they will be evaluated in order of submission up to the required number. An offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom any or recent information on past performance is not available will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.

In conducting the past performance evaluation, the FCC may use information obtained from sources other than the Offeror’s references and information contained in their proposals, including, among other sources, current information from Government-wide past performance databases and industry reporting sources. The FCC may also consider past performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel, other corporate entities or subcontractors where such information is relevant to this acquisition, whether or not contained in the Offeror’s proposal. The FCC is not required to interview points of contact identified by Offerors.

(5) Price Analysis

The Government will evaluate the information submitted in each Offeror’s price proposal in accordance with FAR 15.404-1. Offerors are required to separately price the NANPA, PA, and the RNDA portions of the effort. Further, offerors should identify and distinguish between upfront and operational costs associated with the RNDA. The Government will review price proposals for completeness and arithmetic accuracy. Price will be evaluated but not rated. Failure to submit offers for all line items listed will be cause for rejection of the offer. The Government will determine whether the evaluated price is fair and reasonable. In reaching such determination, the Government may consider the reasonableness of proposed labor rates and unit prices, considering the estimated significance of the impact of such labor rates and prices on the overall price to be paid by the Government over the course of the contract

(b) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for the base period and all options, including the additional six-month option in FAR 52.217-8, to the total price for the basic requirement. The price of the 6-month option will be evaluated as 50% of the option period 3 annual price (the total of CLINs 3001 and 3002). The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced.