Instructions_Evaluation Amendment 2.pdf

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

PROGRAM AREA: USAGM/ SEC

PROJECT NAME: Comprehensive Worldwide Security Services Agency POINTS OF CONTACT: J.R Hill, Contracting Officer chill@usagm.gov and Krista Jones, Contract Specialist KJones@usagm.gov.

PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL INFORMATION: Submit proposals to USAGMRFQCON@usagm.gov QUESTIONS DUE DATE: March 27, 2024, at 05:00 pm – Eastern Standard Time (EST) PROPOSAL DUE DATE: April8,2024, at 1:00 pm – EST

Proposals shall be delivered via email to the following email address: to USAGMRFQCON@usagm.gov. The email’s subject line shall be structured as follows:

[Solicitation Title] – [Company Name]. For example, RFQ Comprehensive Worldwide Security Services – AAA Company Request For Quotation

Solicitation Reference Number: B006-24-P-00002

Set Aside: N/A

NAICS Code 561210

PSC Code: R799

A.1 DESCRIPTION

The purpose of this solicitation is for The United State Agency for Global Media (USAGM) to procure services in relation to USAGM Comprehensive Worldwide Security Services. The successful Offeror will provide USAGM’s Office of Security with dedicated physical security expertise and personnel necessary to identify, document, design, plan, upgrade, and maintain the currency and operational readiness of the security infrastructure deployed by the USAGM at its facilities. USAGM will award a BPA on a Best Value basis that is determined to be the most advantageous to the Government.

All interested companies shall provide a quotation for the following:

Description of services

See Attachment B- Pricing Schedule

Cover Letter

The Offeror shall submit, with its proposal a cover letter (i.e., letter of transmittal) prepared on the company’s letterhead stationery. The first or title page shall be in accordance with FAR 52.215-1.

Specifically, the first page of the proposal shall show:

i. The solicitation number;

ii. The name, address, and telephone and email of the Offeror

iii. A statement specifying the extent of agreement with all terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation and agreement to furnish all Statement of Work items at the prices listed in the Offeror’s price proposal;

Proposals signed by an agent shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent’s authority, unless that evidence has been previously furnished to the issuing office.

v. UEI number

vi. GWAC number (if applicable)

iv. A statement that the Offeror’s proposal is valid for a period of 30 calendar days from the submission date of the proposal. Please note that any information included in the Offeror’s cover letter will not be evaluated in relation to solicitation.

When submitting a proposal on electronic media, the Offeror must ensure that the submission is readable, in the format specified in the solicitation, and has been verified as free of computer viruses. Prior to any evaluation, the Government will check all files for viruses and ensure that all information is readable. In the event that any files are defective (unreadable), the Government shall only evaluate the readable electronic files. Further, if defective (unreadable) media renders a deficiency in the Offeror's proposal, the Government shall consider the proposal incomplete and non-responsive and remove the proposal from further consideration.

Each Volume (such as, Past Performance or Price) of the proposal should be submitted as a separate document. Files with computations should be submitted as excel files and can be separate attachments.

USAGM will not require evaluators to search other proposal sections for information, nor will USAGM require its evaluators to search other volumes within a proposal. If information is not placed in the appropriate Volume, , that Volume may be deemed “Unacceptable”, and an Offeror’s proposal may be removed from the competition. Therefore, the Offeror shall ensure that each proposal Volume is complete in itself, well-written, and submitted in accordance with the instructions discussed herein. Each proposal Volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis.

USAGM personnel must be able to evaluate each proposal Volume independent of the other volumes. If a proposal is found to be unacceptable under any solicitation evaluation factor, the proposal is not eligible for award.

Written Volumes of the Offeror’s proposal shall be formatted as follows:

a. Page Size: 8 ½ x 11” with at least 1” margins on all sides

b. Font Size: 12 point or larger (font size for graphics and tables may be smaller but not less than 10 point)

c. Page Numbering: Pages consecutively numbered within each section

d. Page Count: Title pages, cover page, tables of contents, and section dividers not included in count; appendices, graphs and charts are included in the page count, unless otherwise specified.

e. Format: Two-column format is allowable

The Offeror shall submit three (3) proposal Volumes: Volume I- Management Approach and Experience and Technical Approach; Volume II Past Performance; and Volume III – Price.

Offeror shall provide 2 copies of each Volume, One redacted copy and one full text copy. No company logos or names shall be visible in the redacted copy.

Proposal Volumes Format Page Limitation

Volume I - Management Approach and Experience

Written 10 Pages

Volume I – Technical Approach

Written 10 pages

Volume II Past Performance Written 2 pages in addition to 2 pages per submission

Volume III - Price Written No Limitation

NOTE: The Volume 1 must not exceed 20 pages double-sided sheets of paper inclusive of text and graphics. Resumes do not count against page limit. Text must be in a font equivalent to Times New Roman, Font 11, or larger.

NOTE: One double-sided sheet of paper is equivalent to 2 single-sided sheets of paper of printed material.

NOTE: No Assumptions, Conditions, Exceptions are permitted. Any proposal containing Assumptions, Conditions, or Exceptions will be rejected and ineligible for award.

The technical proposal (Volume 1) shall not contain any pricing information.

EVALUATION FACTORS

The United States Agency for Global Media (USAGM) will award a Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA) resulting from this solicitation to the responsible Offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be the “best value” to the Government.

USAGM will use the following evaluation factors to evaluate proposals:

• Factor 1: Management Approach and Experience

• Factor 2: Technical Approach

• Factor 3: Past Performance

• Factor 4: Price

Factor 1: Management Approach & Experience

The Management Approach Factor will be evaluated based on the Offeror’s demonstrated approach to quality control, monthly reporting requirements, accounting procedures, management of teaming arrangement, project management inclusive of updates to the project management plans and schedules for the effort outlined in the SOW, coordination and engagement of contract staff, management of deliverable schedules, workforce retention, quality of workforce, and resumes of key personnel.

The Management Approach shall also be evaluated by USAGM for the following:

• The Offeror’s approach to project planning, methodology including coordination and communication related to deliverables.

• Offerors shall have experience in supply, logistic, installation, life-cycle maintenance, of ePACS and demonstrate knowledge of OSPB and ISC approved physical security requirements. Experience in assessments/surveys to report project upgrades, repairs, timelines, and costs.

• Offerors shall provide USAGM with evidence/proof of an existing Quality Management System implemented.

• The quality of the resume(s) for the proposed personnel identified as key personnel, and the extent to which they meet or exceed the minimum qualifications for Labor Categories.

• The resume at a minimum shall include the company name, duties performed by the individual, dates of employment, qualifications, experience, skills, availability, and credentials (education and certifications) for the proposed key personnel that demonstrates meeting the requirements detailed in the

RFQ.

• The Program Manager must have relevant project management experience and certification (PMP) with least 3 years PM experience supporting Federal contracts.

• The status of the proposed personnel, whether they are a company employee or a resource being recruited. If the latter, a letter of commitment from the potential candidate shall be submitted with proposal.

• Offerors are required to provide USAGM with a dedicated team of resources for full time on-site Physical Security Specialist and part time Security Engineer, Security Technician, and Program Management support when requested.

• Demonstrate experience in the installation and maintenance of OSPB and ISC requirements and support of the Physical Security equipment for troubleshooting and repairs.

Factor 2: Technical Approach

The USAGM will evaluate the Offeror’s demonstrated knowledge, understanding, and capabilities of meeting the requirements as described in the Statement of Work (SOW) The Government will also evaluate the Offeror’s methodologies and tools for accomplishing the tasks enumerated in the SOW.

The Offeror’s demonstrated Technical Approach shall also be evaluated by the Government for the following;

• Offeror’s proposed method, techniques, and tools for meeting all the requirements for each objective, outcome, task, and subtask (where applicable) of the SOW to include project planning skills with the development milestones and key deliverables.

• Offeror’s demonstrated approach to identify risks and anticipated difficulties and problem areas, along with mitigation strategy (ies) for resolution.

• The Offeror’s technical knowledge in all functional and specialty areas outlined in the SOW to facilitate the successful performance under the resulting BPA.

Evaluation Criteria/Methodology:

The ratings described in the table located in Definition Section 1 below will be utilized in evaluating Technical Factors 1&2.

Factor 3. Past Performance

The Past Performance Factor will be evaluated based on recent (within the past three (3) years of the date of this solicitation) contracts for quality of services, timeliness of performance, business relations, cost control, and managing programs that are relevant (similar in size, scope, and complexity) to the requirements of this SOW.

The USAGM reserves the right to contact references to evaluate the Offeror’s past performance. The USAGM is not limited to the references provided by the Offeror. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to make certain that the information provided for reference checks is complete, accurate and current as of the month of issuance of this solicitation. The USAGM will make two attempts to contact any given reference. USAGM does not guarantee, however, that all contacts references provided will be contacted and/or used in this evaluation.

Offerors lacking relevant past performance history will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably, but will receive a neutral rating. However, the proposal of an Offeror with no relevant past performance history, may not represent the most advantageous proposal to the USAGM. The Past Performance assessment will be used as a means to determine the Offeror’s risk of non- performance, defective performance, and/or late performance.

Offeror must demonstrate the following regarding past project execution;

• Identification of need

• Procurement of equipment and supplies

• Logistics/global deployment of material and personnel

• Global installation

• Global maintenance

The USAGM will evaluate three (3) recent and relevant contracts provided by the Offeror. Subcontractor past performance will not be evaluated. The Government reserves the right to obtain information from other sources (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System, Past Performance Information Retrieval System) to assess Offeror’s performance risk. The Government may consider positive and negative information not mentioned by the Offeror and found during the course of assessing relevant Past Performance.

The summaries of three relevant projects performed in the last three (3) years (from the date the solicitation is issued) shall include:

1) Project name, contract and/or task order number;

2) Contract dollar value;

3) Period of performance;

4) Customer point of contact (including name, work number, cell number, and email address);

5) Detailed description of work performed;

6) Roles and responsibilities;

7) Results achieved; and

8) A narrative that addresses how the work performed is similar in scope and complexity. Customers may be Federal, State, or Local Government, corporations, universities, associations and/or other commercial customers

The ratings described in the Table located in Definition Section 2 below will be utilized in evaluating Past Performance.

Factor 4: Price

The Price Proposal contains all pricing information required by the solicitation. The Offeror must submit a price (equal to the quantity of hours listed in the SOW titled “Estimated Level of Effort” multiplied by the Offeror’s proposed hourly rate) for all labor categories. Offerors must provide a grand total price for the base year and the option years. In this Hybrid: Firm-Fixed- Price and Time and Materials BPA, the price for all personnel and each CLIN in each year is the ceiling price for the year, as the term is defined in FAR Part 16 for labor hour contract.

The government will provide an excel sheet for prices only as a separate attachment. See Attachment B.

Price will be evaluated but will not receive an adjectival rating. The Government will evaluate the total price proposed for each performance period to determine price reasonableness as it relates to the technical requirements and to assist in the best value determination. The Price Proposal will be evaluated for accuracy, completeness and reasonableness. The Government reserves the right to reject an offer that contains unbalanced pricing pursuant to FAR 15.404-1 (g) (3).

The USAGM will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed labor categories and rates. The USAGM will evaluate the fairness and reasonableness of the labor rates as compared to the Independent government estimate .

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s total price provided in its Price Proposal Volume. The Offeror shall utilize Attachment B- Pricing Schedule provided.

The Government will evaluate the completeness and fair and reasonableness of the fixed price and hourly rates, including any discounts offered. The Government reserves the right to reject any Proposal that includes any assumption that adversely impacts the Government’s requirements.

EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

There are four evaluation factors: two technical, one past performance, and one price.

The USAGM will evaluate the two technical evaluation factors using four rating definitions:

Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, or Unacceptable. If a technical factor is rated Unacceptable, it will result in an overall rating of Unacceptable.

DETERMINATION OF BEST VALUE:

USAGM will award a contract to the Offeror that is rated, by an integrated assessment of all the evaluation factors, to be the “best value” to the Government.

The USAGM will use the following evaluation factors to evaluate offers. They are listed in descending order of importance:

1. Technical Approach

2. Management Approach and Experience

3. Past Performance

4. Price

Factors 1 and 2 are more important than Factor 3. However, Factor 3 is more important that Factor 4.

When all the non-price factors (1 – 3) are combined, they are significantly more important than price (Factor 4).

The USAGM reserves the right to make one award or no award, depending upon the quality of the proposals submitted and the availability of funds.

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with Offerors.

Therefore, the Offeror’s initial proposal should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint.

USAGM will not, in any case, make award to an Offeror it considers to have substandard capabilities or unreasonable prices.

If the Offeror’s proposal is determined Unacceptable in either of the technical evaluation factors, the proposal may not be considered for award.

Evaluation Factors Rating System for Managerial & Experience and Technical Approach

Rating Definition Outstanding/O Exceeds specified performance or capability in a way beneficial to the agency and has high probability of satisfying the requirement without any weaknesses.

Good/G Proposed approach indicates an understanding of the requirements and objectives and displays technical competence. The proposal meets or exceeds all of the requirements and sets forth plans and approaches that show a good probability of obtaining effective performance without any significant weaknesses.

Acceptable/A Meets evaluation standards; has good probability of satisfying the requirement; any weaknesses can be readily corrected.

Unacceptable/U Fails to meet minimum requirement; deficiency requires a major revision to the Proposal to make it correct

Past Performance Ratings Rating Description

Outstanding/O Based on the Offeror's record of past performance, no issues, concerns, or risks associated with receiving quality products, timely services, and full contract performance. Past performance information indicates that the Offeror is capable of significantly exceeding the requirements of the RFP.

Good/G The Offeror's record of past performance indicates there is very little risk associated with receiving quality products, timely services, and full contract performance. Past performance information indicates that the Offeror is capable of exceeding the requirements of the RFP.

Acceptable/A The Offeror's record of past performance indicates that there is some potential risk associated with receiving quality products, timely services, and full contract performance. Past performance information indicates the Offeror is capable of meeting the requirements of the

RFP.

Unsatisfactory/U The Offeror's record of past performance indicates there is significant risk associated with receiving quality products, timely services, and full contract performance. Past performance information indicates the Offeror will have significant problems meeting the requirements of the

RFP

Neutral/N No past performance information is available for evaluation. Offeror has asserted that is has no directly related or relevant past performance experience. Proposal receives no merit or demerit for this factor.

If the Offeror’s proposal is determined unacceptable in either of the technical evaluation factors, the proposal may not be considered for award.

The USAGM reserves the right to make one award or no award, depending upon the quality of the proposals submitted and the availability of funds.

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a BPA without discussions with Offerors.

Therefore, the Offeror’s initial proposal should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint.

Definitions

Weakness A Weakness is defined as a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Significant

Weakness

A Significant Weakness is defined as a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Strength A Strength is defined as an aspect of an offeror’s proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that is advantageous to the Government during contract performance. Deficiency Deficiency is 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. See FAR 15.001.

Rating Rating is the adjective descriptor assigned by the evaluators to the technical evaluation factors. It represents their conclusions as to the quality of the proposal, supported by narrative write-ups identifying the associated findings (strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, risks, and uncertainties).

USAGM will not, in any case, make award to an Offeror it considers to have substandard capabilities or unreasonable prices.