B08_Attachment 0009_W15P7T-23-R-0004 RFP Instructions 30 June 2023.pdf

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION PER FAR 2.101 and 3.104 W15P7T-23-R-0004

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP)

SYSTEMS ENGINEERING AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT (SEPM) SUPPORT

SERVICES – W15P7T-23-R-0004

30 June 2023

OFFERORS ARE INSTRUCTED TO SUBMIT PROPOSALS IN ACCORDANCE WITH

THE INSTRUCTIONS SET FORTH WITHIN THIS RFP ONLY.

The Army Contracting Command-Aberdeen Proving Ground (ACC-APG), on behalf of Program Executive Office Command Control Communications-Tactical (PEO C3T), anticipate awarding an Indefinite Delivery-Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract for engineering and acquisition support services to augment PEO C3T’s core Government personnel in support of PEO-wide program management, development, and fielding of Command, Control, and Communication systems.

The IDIQ will have an ordering period of five years. The Government reserves the right to cancel this requirement without incurring any proposal fees.

THIS RFP IS NOT AN AUTHORIZATION TO START WORK

A. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION (Section L)

1. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

a. If an Offeror chooses to submit a proposal, the proposal shall be submitted to Candace Hough, candace.o.hough.civ@army.mil and Kristopher Tress, kristopher.b.tress.civ@army.mil; no later than (NLT) 1200 Noon Eastern Time (ET) 31 July 2023. The size per e-mail shall not exceed 9 MB. If necessary, Offerors may submit multiple emails. If submitting multiple emails, please denote in the Subject line of the email “Email 1 of 2” or “Email 2 of 3”, etc. If a complete proposal is not submitted by this closing time, the Offeror’s proposal will not be considered for award. If the Offeror does not receive confirmation of receipt, it is the responsibility of the Offeror to contact the Contract Specialist identified above to confirm their proposal has been received. Confirmation of receipt does not equate to confirmation of contents of proposal and eligibility of award.

b. All questions shall be submitted via email to kristopher.b.tress.civ@army.mil, and candace.o.hough.civ@army.mil, no later than 4:00 PM ET on 14 July 2023 (14 days after RFP release). Offerors who submit questions in response to the RFP, are requested to use Attachment 0014 “RFP Question Template”, noting that each attachment in the RFP template has its own tab. The completed question template should be attached to the email as an Excel document.

mailto:kristopher.b.tress.civ@army.mil

c. Notice of Intent (NOI) that an Offeror intends to submit a proposal shall be submitted NLT 1200 Noon ET on 21 July 2023 via email to kristopher.b.tress.civ@army.mil and candace.o.hough.civ@army.mil, and The NOI shall include the company name, contact information, and CAGE code for the prime and all proposed subcontractors.

d. All communications shall be conducted in writing only and directly to the

Contract Specialists identified above. Offerors shall not contact any Government personnel other than the person identified above concerning this solicitation. Contacting any Government personnel other than the individuals identified above may result in an organizational conflict of interest (OCI) and may result in an Offeror being excluded from competition and award.

e. The Offeror shall identify and address in its proposal all actual or potential

OCI situations with itself, subcontractors, partners, or any other Offeror as it applies to this RFP, per FAR 9.5, or state that there are no known potential OCIs. If there are no known potential OCIs, the Offeror shall include a statement affirming that there are no known actual or potential OCIs within its xxxxTECHxxxx.docx. If any actual or potential OCIs are identified, then the Offeror shall submit a mitigation plan, xxxxOCIxxxx.docx. If the contracting officer determines that any actual or potential OCIs cannot be mitigated, then the Offeror shall not be eligible for award. There is no page limitation on the OCI mitigation plan submission. All Offerors and proposed subcontractors must affirm whether or not they are providing any scientific, engineering, and/or technical assistance (SETA), or similar type of support, to all PM shops reporting to PEO C3T, which include PM Tactical Network, PM Mission Command, PM Tactical Radios, Project Management Office Network Enablers, and the Joint Tactical Network Center.

f. Any Offeror with active exclusion records at the time of submission will not be evaluated and will not be considered for contract award. Offerors shall submit a current copy of their record (entity dashboard view) with their proposal, printed directly from the System for Award Management (SAM), dated on the same date as their proposal submission. See Attachment 0011 for sample.

g. Offerors shall not submit any assumptions, terms, conditions, caveats, or exceptions with proposals. All concerns shall be addressed and resolved by submitting questions by the date specified in this RFP. No assumptions, terms, conditions, caveats, or exceptions submitted with proposals in response to RFPs will be accepted or incorporated into the awarded contract.

h. Offerors may encrypt and/or password protect proprietary information as they see fit. However, if the Government is unable to access the documents, the proposal will not be considered for award. The e-mail proposal submittal shall consist of separate files as set forth and named below. Microsoft Office 2010 software or higher, and Adobe software if applicable, shall be used to create the required files. Proposals shall not contain any classified data or information.

i. Each volume shall be properly identified, numbered, and logically assembled.

Each volume shall also contain clearly identified sections and all pages shall be numbered and identified by the complete company name, date, and solicitation number in the header and/or footer.

j. Cost information shall not appear in the Technical proposal. Proposals that fail to separate cost information from the Technical proposal may not be considered for award. Subcontractor cost proposals shall be submitted electronically directly to kristopher.b.tress.civ@army.mil and candace.o.hough.civ@army.mil, prior to the proposal due date and time, if the subcontractor deems its proposal contains proprietary data. The size per e-mail shall not exceed 9MB, and its proposal shall include all necessary supporting documents and narrative.

k. Costs associated with the preparation and submission of any proposal in response to this solicitation (bid and proposal costs) are the responsibility of the Offeror. Offerors are advised that the Government will not reimburse any offeror for bid and proposal costs, as a contract line item, associated with responding to this solicitation.

l. The entire proposal shall remain valid for a minimum of one hundred and eighty (180) days from receipt by the Government and shall not contain classified data or information. Proposals offering a shorter period of time will not be considered for award. Note that the Offeror will be considered the legal entity and CAGE code identified in their proposal.

m. The electronic submittal shall consist of separate files as set forth and named in the table below. MS Office 2010 software or higher shall be used to create the required files. In order to reduce proposal size, proposals shall be limited to the number of pages as outlined below for each volume. All proposal information shall be confined to the appropriate file. Any proposal exceeding the page limit may not be evaluated. The Government will not evaluate any pages that exceed the page limitation(s) identified below. Title pages, Table of Contents, and Acronym Indices are excluded from the page limits set forth in the table below for all volumes. Pages containing text shall be type written using the standard letter size (8.5 x 11) in Microsoft Word. Text shall be single spaced and a minimum of twelve (12) point Times New Roman or Arial font and no less than one (1) inch margins/borders. Any table or graphic shall use a minimum of ten (10) point Times New Roman or Arial font. Drawings or other graphics shall be reduced only to the extent legibility is not lost.

n. Offeror shall submit a redacted version of the Technical Proposal as indicated in the table below. The redacted version shall remove the company name and any other identifiable information.

o. The following volumes of material shall be submitted:

Volume Document File Name* Notes N/A Executive Summary xxxxEXECSUMMARYx xxx.docx (or PDF) 2 page limit

I. Technical Technical Proposal consisting of Factor 1 – Demonstration of Knowledge of System of Systems Technical Challenges and Factor 2 – Technical Readiness xxxxTECHxxxx.docx (or

PDF)

Page limits for each Technical Factor and Subfactor are as follows:

- Factor 1 - Demonstration of Knowledge of System of Systems: 15 pages

- Factor 2, Subfactor 1 – Program Management Plan: 15 pages

- Factor 2, Subfactor 2 –

Staffing Approach: 15 pages not including 6 resumes (2 page resume and 1 page summary = 3 pages total * 6 resumes = 18 pages total for resumes)

- Factor 2, Subfactor 3 –

Management Transition- In: 15 pages

Total page limit : 78 – Applies to the body of the technical volume, but does not apply to Title Pages, Table of Contents, and Acronym Index. Pages that exceed the limit will not be evaluated.

I. Technical Redacted Technical Proposal consisting of Factor 1 – Demonstration of Knowledge of System of Systems Technical Challenges and Factor 2 – Technical Readiness xxxxTECHREDACTxxx x.docx (or PDF)

Please submit version of Technical Proposal that redacts the company name and any other identifiable information. Page limits for each Technical Factor and Subfactor are as follows:

- Factor 1 - Demonstration of Knowledge of System of Systems: 15 pages

- Factor 2, Subfactor 1 – Program Management Plan: 15 pages

- Factor 2, Subfactor 2 –

Staffing Approach: 15 pages not including 6 resumes (2 page resume and 1 page summary = 3 pages total * 6 resumes = 18 pages total for resumes)

- Factor 2, Subfactor 3 –

Management Transition- In: 15 pages

Total page limit : 78 – Applies to the body of the technical volume, but does not apply to Title Pages, Table of Contents, and Acronym Index. Pages that exceed the limit will not be evaluated.

II. Past Performance

Past Performance Proposal xxxxPASTPERFxxxx.docx or xxxx.PASTPERFxxxx.pdf

5 page limit per past performance example submitted, and 1 page Summary page for Volume II Past Performance (26 page limit total)

Page limits do not apply to the Table of Contents, List of Past Performance Questionnaires Distributed to Customers, Organization Change History, and Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms/Acronym Index included with this volume.

III. Cost Cost Narrative xxxxCOSTNARRxxxx.doc x (or PDF)

No page limit.

III. Cost Cost Proposal xxxxCOSTxxxx.xlsx No Page Limit

RFP Attachment 0005, completed by the Offeror and renamed as described, SHALL be submitted with all formulas visible in each cell with a value. Proposals submitted that do not adhere to the format or cell requirements may not be further considered for award.

III. Cost Sanitized Cost Proposal xxxxSANITIZEDxxxx.xlsx No Page Limit

DELETE all costs from the cost proposal. Leave in any LCATS and/or hours proposed.

Offeror shall remove any logo/company information.

Proposals submitted that do not adhere to the format or cell requirements may not be further considered for award.

IV.

Miscellaneous Submittals

System for Award Management (SAM) Report xxxxSAMxxxx.pdf 1 page limit. See Paragraph

(f) under Proposal Submission Requirements and Attachment 0011 for sample.

IV.

Miscellaneous Submittals

OCI

Declaration/Mitigatio n Plan xxxxOCIxxxx.docx (or

PDF)

No page limit. See paragraph (e) under Proposal Submission Requirements and OCI clause under Section H of the solicitation document.

IV.

Miscellaneous Submittals

8(a) Small Business Certification xxxxCERTxxxx.docx (or

PDF)

1 page limit. See Attachment 0013 for Template.

IV.

Miscellaneous Submittals

Property Management Plan

(PMP)

xxxxPMPxxxx.docx (or

PDF)

No page limit.

IV.

Miscellaneous Submittals

Representations and Certifications xxxxREPSCERTSxxxx.pdf No page limit.

*Offerors shall replace “xxxx” with the Offeror’s name and the date of the proposal. For example: OfferorACOST041523.xlsx

NOTE: Pages that exceed the required page limitations will not be evaluated.

Additional pages over the maximum allowed will be removed or not read and will not be evaluated by the Government.

2. PROPOSAL CONTENT

a. All information the Offeror intends to have considered, including the Offeror’s best cost, shall be submitted with the initial proposal. The Government proposal evaluation will be limited to the information provided by the Offeror and nothing will be assumed. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete, thorough, and accurate evaluation of the submitted proposal. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

b. Content Requirement. All information shall be confined to the appropriate file. The offeror shall confine submissions to essential matters, sufficient to define the proposal in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked. Please see the following information for what shall be included in each volume of the proposal:

(i) VOLUME I – Technical. The volume shall be organized into the following sections:

(1) Section 1 – Factor 1: Demonstration of knowledge of Systems of Systems Technical Challenges associated with performance:

Offerors shall describe their understanding and usage of systems of systems as it pertains to the Army’s Tactical Network. For your response, address any subsystems believed to be required to support interoperability for warfighting functions.

Background and basis for demonstration of knowledge:

In Capability Set 21, the Integrated Tactical Network (ITN) was expanded to increase Situational Awareness (SA) for Battalion and below, particularly for dismounted soldiers. One of the key attributes of this change was to introduce a lower data classification level, Secure But Unclassified (SBU), for lower echelon Army units. For addressing the different technical aspects of this use case, assume the unit type is an Infantry Brigade Combat Team (IBCT).

• Demonstrate your technical knowledge by elaborating on the design considerations (pros, cons, simplification, complexity, etc.) in employing the ITN for this increased SA.

• Explain the subsystems and what functions they perform for the SBU architecture to enable the Android Tactical Assault Kit (ATAK) capabilities for the dismounted soldier back to the Network Operation Center.

• Explain the data and network integration between the SBU and tactical SIPRNet that includes how the data traverses through dismounted, mounted and command posts systems.

• In addition to the technical design considerations, please provide information regarding the Army Programming, Planning, Budgeting and Execution (PPBE) cycle as well as the programmatic/acquisition considerations pertinent to building the Army’s Tactical Network. Provide knowledge and understanding of the Army budget execution and Acquisition process, to include use of Army financial and programmatic systems. Provide an understanding of program documentation development (milestone decisions, POM briefings, Procurement and Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (P&R) forms, Acquisition Requirements Packages, etc).

**Note: The aforementioned demonstration of knowledge represents a realistic requirement of Task Order 0001.**

(2) Section 2 – Factor 2: Technical Readiness

a. Subfactor 1. This subfactor evaluates the offeror’s Program

Management Plan. The Offeror will provide a strategic methodology for creating, implementing, and maintaining an environment where qualified personnel are in place to ensure continuity of service. At a minimum, the proposed methodology must address:

• Management and team members describing anticipated roles, responsibilities, and management approach to meeting the delivery of contract requirements.

• Cost control, addressing rate discipline and methods to ensure costs are competitive and reasonable.

• Subcontractor management – The degree to which the Offeror plans to use subcontractors, and the Offeror’s plan to manage subcontractors while providing seamless service to the PEO.

• Quality assurance and risk management in providing continuity of service and ensuring assigned personnel are properly managed. For instance, how does the Offeror ensure personnel are performing appropriately, in compliance with all government site requirements i.e.

badging requirements, and are working during the agreed upon work hours, etc.

b. Subfactor 2. This subfactor evaluates the offeror’s Staffing Approach.

The offeror will demonstrate a strategic methodology for recruiting, hiring, retaining, and replacing personnel with the skills, knowledge and security clearances to successfully meet the requirements of the

PWS:

• Recruiting/hiring/retention approach.

• Personnel replacement resources needed to ensure that hiring requirements are addressed promptly and effectively.

• Key personnel resumes with qualifications as follows:

Qualifications (18 page limit): The contractor shall provide one (1) resume (not to exceed two (2) pages each) and a qualifying narrative (not to exceed one (1) page each) for the following Key Personnel demonstrating that each meets or exceeds the requirements/criteria of the Task Order 0001 Performance Work Statement (PWS) paragraph

3.2 Key Personnel Requirements:

Labor category # of Resumes Required

T26C Systems Engineer Senior (2) T4C Data Engineer Senior (1) T16C Engineer INFOSEC Senior (2) B18D Program Manager (1)

c. Subfactor 3. This sub-factor evaluates the offeror’s Management

Transition In. The offer will provide information to substantiate the following:

• CAC requests process, contractor in-processing and PEO C3T check-in process, security clearance verification, timeline-in and transition-out plan.

• Specific policies, methods, and procedures to retain high-performing incumbent personnel, as well as efforts to ensure that there is no service or expertise gap during/after transition.

• Tracking and reporting to ensure that the transition is 100% complete within 45 days of contract award, to include personnel, GFE, and position-specific system access.

(ii) VOLUME II – Past Performance. Each offeror shall submit a past performance volume with its proposal, containing past performance information in accordance with the format contained in Attachment 0010, Past Performance Questionnaire. Offerors are cautioned that the Government will use data provided by each offeror in this volume and data obtained from other sources in the evaluation of past performance.

Content and Organization

The Past Performance Volume shall be organized according to the following general outline:

a. Part A: Table of Contents

b. Part B: Offeror’s Past and Present Performance Information Sheets (Summary Page included on first page of Past and Present Performance Information Sheets)

c. Part C: List of Past Performance Questionnaires distributed to customers

(POC’s name, title, email, and phone number)

d. Part D: Organizational Change History

e. Part E: Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

Past Performance Information Sheets

The offeror shall submit information in accordance with Attachment 0010, Past

Performance Questionnaire from Section J of this solicitation. The Offeror shall submit no more than five recent and relevant Government and/or commercial contracts for the Government to assess the Offeror’s probability of meeting solicitation and PWS requirements based on a demonstrated record of performance. Of these five recent and relevant Government and/or commercial contracts that the Offeror may submit, no more than two may be from the proposed significant subcontractors/significant teaming partners. The Government considers a significant subcontractor and/or significant teaming partner to be a company that provides twenty (20) percent or more of the support required, and/or a company that provides a critical portion of the effort required.

The offeror shall include rationale supporting their assertion that the past performance effort meets the definitions of recent and relevant. For a description of the characteristics or aspects the Government will consider in evaluating this information, see Section M: Past Performance Factor and the subparagraphs thereto.

a. If an offeror submits past performance information for an ID/IQ and/or BPA contract, then the offeror must identify a specific TO under that specific ID/IQ and/or BPA contract.

b. Recent past performance means experience within the last three (3) years from the release date of this solicitation.

c. Relevant past performance means providing evidence demonstrating experience as described in Sections M, as applicable.

d. Offerors are required to explain what aspects of the past performance submittals are deemed relevant to the technical evaluation criteria.

The information needed for the Summary Page is included in Section J, Attachment 0010, Past Performance Questionnaire. The offeror shall complete the Summary Page describing the work performed by the prime or the Subcontractor, as described in Section L, submitted in relation to the required experience reference(s) under the Technical/Management Volumes.

Past Performance Questionnaires

The offeror shall provide Attachment 0010, Past Performance Questionnaire found in Section J of this solicitation, to each of the Government customer Points of Contact (POC) identified for each of the past performance efforts submitted. Attachment 0010 provides a sample Questionnaire Cover Letter for use when providing the Past Performance Questionnaires to the Government POCs. Offerors should request the Government customer POCs complete and e-mail the questionnaires directly to the email addresses referenced in Section L and shall be received by the Government by the due date for proposals. Early submission of the Past Performance Questionnaires is encouraged. In order to expedite the assessment process, the offeror may complete Sections I and II of the Past Performance Questionnaire for the convenience of the Government customer POC. The offeror shall not, however, complete any other section of the Past Performance Questionnaire. Once the questionnaires are completed by the customer POCs, the information contained therein shall be considered sensitive and shall not be released to the offeror. The Government is requesting a list (including POC’s name, title, email and phone number) of Past Performance Questionnaires that the offeror distributed to their Government customers.

Organizational Structure Change History

Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of relevant past efforts or between conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this procurement. To facilitate this relevancy determination, Offerors may include in this proposal volume a "roadmap" describing all such changes in the organization of your company. A pamphlet or other commercial document describing such reorganizations may suffice. As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevance of any efforts you identify for past performance evaluation/confidence assessment. Since the Government intends to consider past performance information provided by other sources as well as that provided by the offerors, the "roadmap" should be both specifically applicable to the efforts and general enough to apply to efforts on which the Government receives information from other sources.

(iii) VOLUME III – Cost/Price

General Instructions

Cost/Reasonableness and Realism

Cost Factor Evaluation Approach: Each Offerors proposal will be evaluated in accordance with the criteria in FAR 15.404-1. Accordingly, the analytical techniques and procedures prescribed in FAR 15.404-1 for evaluating Offerors proposal may be used individually or in combination with others to ensure that the final cost is fair, reasonable, and realistic. The probable cost will be determined by adjusting (for purposes of evaluation only) each Offerors proposed cost and/or Fee, when appropriate, to reflect any additions or reductions in cost elements to realistic levels based on the results of the cost realism analysis.

(a) The total evaluated cost, to be used in the award determination (subject to cost realism adjustments), will be the total identified in the Offerors COST.xlsx file for the base and all option periods and an additional six months in accordance with FAR 52.217-8 “Option to Extend Services”.

(b) The Government may use external sources of information in performing its cost evaluation to include, but not limited to, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Department of Labor, Department of State, DCAA or DCMA. This DOES NOT excuse the Offeror from following the proposal submission instructions and from submitting supporting documentation for its rates proposed.

The Government reserves the right to make adjustments based on the

Government most probable cost.

This section is to assist you in submitting information other than cost or pricing data that is required to evaluate the reasonableness of your proposed cost. Compliance with these requirements is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of your proposal and removal of the proposal from further consideration. Offers should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate their reasonableness.

Cost/Information:

Each Offeror shall provide whatever information is necessary to help the

Government understand why the proposed costs are realistic in the xxxxCOSTNARRxxxx.docx (or .pdf). Additionally, each Offeror shall ensure any proposed cost-reimbursement subcontractors provide whatever information is necessary to help the Government understand why the proposed subcontractor costs are realistic in the subcontractor’s xxxxCOSTNARRxxxx.docx (or .pdf). Each Offeror's cost volume shall contain sufficient quantitative and narrative documentation to adequately support and explain the costs proposed, to include subcontractor proposed costs. If the Offeror’s proposal includes accounting approaches that deviate from standard industry accounting practices, the Offeror shall include documentation from the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) and/or the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) showing that the Offeror’s accounting system/cost accounting standards allow for the deviation and/or rate cap. DCMA/DCAA approved deviations will be incorporated into the resulting Contract. The Offeror and its subcontractor(s) shall disclose the location (Government site or the Contractor site per the PWS) of each proposed labor category’s performance in their respective cost proposal(s).

Subcontractor cost proposals shall be submitted electronically directly to the above Government POCs prior to the proposal due date and time, if the subcontractor deems its proposal contains proprietary data. If the subcontractor does not deem that its proposal contains proprietary information, then the subcontractor shall submit its cost proposal to the prime contractor for inclusion in its proposal. The subcontractor’s proposals shall include all necessary supporting documents and narrative.

All information relating to the proposed price, including all required supporting documentation must be included in the section of the proposal designated as the Cost/Price volume. Under no circumstances shall this information and documentation be included elsewhere in the proposal.

Each Offeror shall provide a complete cost proposal for Task Order 0001 utilizing the labor categories specified in Attachment 005, SEPM Cost/Price Sheet. The Government estimates that this task order will require the level of effort specified in the C3T SEPM Pricing Template.

The cost proposal shall include all proposed labor categories and hours for the prime and its subcontractor efforts regardless of the contractual relationship between the prime and subcontractor (i.e. FFP, T&M, CPFF, etc). The contractual relationship between the prime and each subcontractor shall be identified in the proposal. The Offeror shall use formulas that reference these tabs to build by cost element using the format specified in FAR Part 15, Table 15-2. Each tab shall provide visibility to the allocation base, applicable rate applied, and the amount per cost element. Offerors shall insure compliance with its customary accounting practices. Using formulas, the Offerors shall sum the cost elements from each tab to create annual program year Cost Element Summaries (i.e.. one (1) Base Year and two (2) Option Years) in FAR Part 15, Table 15-2 format. Finally, the Offerors shall sum all annual program year Cost Element Summaries using formulas to build a Total Program Cost Element Summary FAR Part 15, Table 15-2 format. The Total Program Cost Element Summary shall be the Offerors total proposed Cost plus Fixed Fee for evaluation purposes.

In accordance with FAR 15.404-3(b) the prime contractor or subcontractor shall: (1) Conduct appropriate cost or price analyses to establish the reasonableness of proposed subcontract prices; (2) Include the results of these analyses in the price proposal IAW FAR 15.404-3. If the prime or subcontractor relied upon its approved purchasing system to establish its subcontracts, they shall so state and provide documentation of their approved purchasing system (including date of approval) within its Cost Narrative.

Travel and Other Direct Costs (ODCs): Offerors shall propose the Government provided Travel and/or on ODCs estimates below. The estimates provide the total cost for Travel and/or on ODCs exclusive of Offerors associated indirect charges. Offeror shall propose any applicable indirect charges on Travel and/or on ODCs in accordance with its disclosed accounting practices. Travel and ODCs will be on a cost basis (no fee).

1. Offeror shall use the exact Government-provided estimates for Travel and

Material costs in its cost TEP (see table below). The Government estimates are the total cost for Travel and Material costs exclusive of an offeror’s associated indirect charges. Offeror shall propose any applicable indirect charges on the Travel and Material cost estimates IAW it’s disclosed accounting practices. The Offeror shall propose its total cost for Travel, consisting of the Government’s Travel estimate plus applicable indirect charges to Travel, on contract item line numbers (CLINs) (no fee) 0003, 0006, and 0009. The Offeror shall propose its total cost for Material, consisting of the Government’s Material estimate plus applicable indirect charges to Material, on contract item line numbers (CLINs) (no fee) 0002, 0005, and 0008.

Offeror shall use the exact Other Direct Costs (ODC’s) estimates below as part of their calculations for the proposed total cost for ODC contract item line numbers (CLINs) Cost (no Fee) 0002, 0005, and 0008. The Government estimates for ODC costs below are exclusive of an offeror’s associated indirect charges. The Government estimates for ODC include costs related to shipping to Continental United States (CONUS) and OCONUS locations, sponsorships, Visas, Defense Base Act (DBA) Insurance Coverage (Cost no fee), Cost-of-Living Adjustment (COLA) (Cost no fee), and life support.

Contract Period Travel Estimate Materials/ODC Estimate

Base Period $1,900,000.00 $400,000.00 Option Period 1 $2,050,000.00 $450,000.00 Option Period 2 $2,200,000.00 $500,000.00

Unsanitized cost/price proposals are required to be submitted using the Microsoft Excel-based SEPM Cost/Price sheet provided in the RFP Section J, Attachment 0005. Instructions to complete the individual templates are found in the RFP Section J Attachment 0005. Additionally, the Offeror shall provide sanitized versions of the cost/price proposal, including information related to hours, labor categories, and any additional ODC estimates proposed by the Offeror to aid in the Governments review.

For labor rate pricing, the offeror shall provide supporting cost information as described below within the pricing template guidelines or, where necessary, as an attachment to their cost/price proposal volume.

Labor and overhead rates should include sufficient detail to sustain a Defense Contract Audit Agency audit (e.g., Direct Labor Rates, Overhead, Fringe Benefits, G&A, Fee, etc.).

2. In support of the proposed direct labor rates, the Offeror and its subcontractor(s) shall provide documentation of the most recent direct labor rates, to include at least one (1) of the following (a, b, c, or d):

a. Forward Pricing Rate Agreements (FPRA) or Forward Pricing Rate Recommendations (FPRR) from DCAA or DCMA or DCAA/DCMA-approved Compensation Rate Tables mapped to the proposed labor categories

b. Letter(s) of Intent (LOIs), which include, at a minimum, the following:

i. Position;

ii. Direct hourly rate;

iii. Submitted on Offeror’s or subcontractor’s letterhead;

iv. Signed by the employer and prospective employee; and,

v. A statement that the LOI is for Solicitation No. W15P7T-23-R-0004.

c. Payroll records and/or paystubs dated within 90 days of the solicitation closing date showing rate of pay and referenced to the labor category in the proposal.

d. Salary survey data to include copies or screen shots of the actual salary survey data, which at a minimum, shall include the following:

i. Source of data;

ii. Job title and description;

iii. Geographic location; and,

iv. Range of salary amounts with reference to applicability of amounts.

NOTE1: Offeror and its subcontractor(s) shall provide a direct mapping of proposed direct labor categories and other supporting rate information to the corresponding FPRA, FPRR, or FPRP.

NOTE 2: If using salary survey data to support direct labor rates, the Offeror should not propose any direct labor rates below the 50th percentile for any labor. Proposed rates below those percentiles may be found unrealistic.

NOTE 3: If the rates proposed are not fully supported and/or the Government is unable to determine the realism of proposed labor rates, the Government may use salary survey data from Economic Research Institute or other sources to make necessary adjustments.

NOTE 4: If the proposed level of effort is determined to be unrealistic, the Government will be unable to establish a most probable cost, which is necessary to be eligible for award.

3. In support of the proposed indirect expense rates, the Offeror and its subcontractor(s) shall provide documentation of the most recent indirect expense rates, to include at least one (1) of the following (a, b, c, d, e, or f):

a. Most recent FPRA(s) with DCAA or DCMA

b. Most recent FPRR(s) from DCAA or DCMA

c. Most recent Forward Pricing Rate Proposal (FPRP)

d. Approved Provisional Rates

e. Other statement of current rates

NOTE for paragraphs c, d, and e: If an Offeror supports proposed indirect rates utilizing documentation options c. – e. above, the Offeror shall include forecasted pools and bases for the current year (by expense account). Additionally, the Offeror shall support these rates with three (3) years historical actual pools and bases information (by expense accounts) that validates the calculations. Below is a sample (formats and dates may vary):

e. If a Prime Offeror/subcontractor cannot include a. – c. above because it restructured or is a new entity, it shall provide proof of such, to include the date it restructured or the date the new entity was formed. The Offeror shall also include the pools and bases, as well as all historical data detailing pools and bases information (by expense account), which validates the calculation from the date of the restructuring.

NOTE 1: The rates reflected in the FPRA, FPRR, FPRP, Approved Provisional Rates Proposal, or other statement of current rates should directly match the rates proposed by the Offeror or subcontractor. If the rates do not match, the Offeror or subcontractor shall provide sufficient detail explaining how the proposed rates are realistic.

NOTE 2: All documents provided to support the proposed rates shall be explained within the xxxxCOSTNARRxxxx.docx (or .pdf).

The explanation shall include a mapping of the supporting documentation to the proposed rate(s) and how the proposed rate(s) was developed.

Rate Ceilings: The proposed fixed fee proposed, and accepted by the Government for Task Order 0001, shall be made part of the basic IDIQ contract. The proposed fixed fee shall represent the maximum value allowed for each subsequent Task Order, for the life of this IDIQ contract.

If Only One Offer Received: If only one offer is received in response to this RFP, the Government may request additional information to include certified cost or pricing data and a Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data.

Current 2018 2019 2020 2021

POOL $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

BASE $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

RATE 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

POOL $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

BASE $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

RATE 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

POOL $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

BASE $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

RATE 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

POOL $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

BASE $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

RATE 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Historical

Indirect 1

Indirect 2

Indirect 3

Indirect 4

Subcontracting Percentage: In accordance with FAR clause 52.215-22 if the offeror intends to subcontract more than 70 percent of the total cost of work to be performed under the task order, the offeror shall identify in its cost proposal the amount of the offerors indirect costs and profit/fee applicable to the work to be performed by the subcontractor(s).

If a subcontractor relationship exists, subcontract costs must also be delineated in accordance with the requirements above. If needed, the subcontract may submit its unsanitized cost breakout directly to the Contract Specialist/Contracting Officer. The subcontractor shall also provide contact information for its cognizant DCAA office.

Cost or Pricing Information Requirements: In accordance with FAR 15.403-1(b) and 15.403-3(a), information other than cost or pricing data may be required to support price reasonableness. Information shall be provided in accordance with FAR 15.403-5. If, after receipt of proposals, the Contracting Officer determines that there is insufficient information available to determine price reasonableness and none of the exceptions in FAR 15.403-1 apply, the Offeror may be required to submit certified cost or pricing data.

Following contract award, cost/price information related to proposals for task orders, modifications, etc. submitted by both the prime contractor and subcontract concerns will be subject to regulation, as set forth in FAR 15.403.

Labor Rate Targets: The Government will establish separate schedule of rates for CPFF rates. The CPFF Schedule of Rates will serve as target rates for determining reasonableness and setting fixed fee values for CPFF labor rates proposed during the task order proposal process after award of the IDIQ contract. For evaluation purposes, Offerors will be provided 1920 hours for each respective labor category at each respective location, to include education, technical experience, and security clearance.

The contractor shall be responsible for all costs related to making the property available for use, such as payment of all transportation, installation, or rehabilitation costs. This also includes costs associated with contract closeout of Government property (through disposition).

(iv) VOLUME IV – MISCELLANEOUS SUBMITTALS

(1) System for Award Management (SAM) Report: Offerors shall submit a SAM report showing Active Exclusions for the prime contractor dated on the same date as proposal submission. See Attachment 0011, SAM Report Sample.

(2) OCI Declaration / Mitigation Plan: Please see Proposal Submission

Instructions paragraph (e) for information on requirement of OCI Declaration / Mitigation Plan.

(3) 8(a) Small Business Certification: Offerors shall fill out Attachment 0013 to fulfill 8(a) Small Business Certification requirement.

(4) Property Management Plan (PMP): A description of the Offeror’s Property Management Plan and any customary commercial practices, voluntary consensus standards, or industry-leading practices and standards to be used by the Offeror in managing Government Property shall be submitted with all offers. It is recommended that Offeror’s incorporate specific Performance Work Statement/Statement of Work requirements into their GP Property Management Plan. For example, GP deliverables (e.g. CDRL) would be included in Reports.

The PMP is not part of the evaluation but will be reviewed for adequacy, that it meets the requirements of FAR 52.245-1, and is appropriately tailored to the complexity, sensitivity, and value of the property proposed to be provided and/or acquired.

(5) Certifications and Representations – Each offeror shall complete (fill-in and signatures) the solicitation sections indicated below using the W15P7T-23-R-0004 solicitation document (without modification to the file) provided with the RFP. An authorized official of the firm shall sign the SF 33 and all certifications requiring original signature. An Acrobat PDF file shall be created to capture the signatures for submission.

Section A – Standard Form 33 (SF 33), Solicitation, Offer and Award Section G – Contract Administration Data Section K – Representations, Certification and Other Statements of Offerors

B. BASIS FOR AWARD (Section M)

The award will be made based on the best overall (i.e., best value) proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the five evaluation factors: Technical Factor 1 – Demonstration of Knowledge of System of Systems Technical Challenges, Technical Factor 2 – Technical Readiness, Past Performance, Cost/Price, and Miscellaneous Submittals.

Technical Factors 1 and 2 are equally important. When combined, the two technical factors are significantly more important than Cost/Price and Past Performance combined. Past Performance is significantly more important than Cost/Price.

To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for the two Technical factors (to include all subfactors) and the Miscellaneous Submittals factor. Additionally, a rating of no less than “Neutral Confidence” must be achieved for the Past Performance factor.

Offerors are cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest cost offered. NOTE: ALL NON-PRICED FACTORS COMBINED ARE SIGNIFICANTLY

MORE IMPORTANT THAN COST/PRICE.

C. FACTORS AND SUBFACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The following evaluation factors and subfactors will be used to evaluate each proposal:

Award will be made to the offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors and subfactors described below. The Government reserves the right to make award based upon the Cost/Price factor in the event that the two Technical factors, Past Performance, and Miscellaneous Submittals evaluation results of all the offerors’ proposals are substantially the same.

VOLUME I: Technical has the following factors:

Factor 1: Technical – Demonstration of knowledge of systems of systems technical challenges associated with performance.

Factor 2: The Technical Readiness factor is further divided into the following subfactors:

a. Subfactor 1 Program Management Plan

b. Subfactor 2 Staffing Approach

c. Subfactor 3 Management Transition In

All three subfactors under Factor 2 are weighed equally.

An Offeror’s proposal shall address each Technical factor and subfactor as it applies to the Performance Work Statement (PWS). A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation is set forth in the “Evaluation Approach”, subsection D of this section. During evaluation of each proposal, the Government will assign each Technical factor and subfactor an adjectival rating and write a narrative evaluation reflecting the identified findings.

Volume II: Past Performance: Each offeror’s past performance will be reviewed to determine relevancy and overall confidence assessment.

Volume III: Cost/Price: The resulting award will be a hybrid contract consisting of Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) for services and Cost-No Fee for material, other direct costs

(ODCs), and travel. Cost realism will be utilized in the evaluation of Cost Reimbursable efforts.

Volume IV. Miscellaneous Submittals: Each offeror’s proposal will be reviewed to ensure each required document listed under Section L, Volume IV per the instructions contained in this RFP is submitted.

D. EVALUATION APPROACH

1. The overarching evaluation approach for all factors and subfactors is as follows:

a. Adequacy of Response. The proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the offeror’s methods and approach have adequately and completely considered, defined, and satisfied the requirements specified in the RFP. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement has been addressed in the proposal in accordance with the proposal submission section of the

RFP.

b. Feasibility of Approach. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable.

The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven devices and techniques. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the offeror is expected to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule.

Technical Volume I: Factors 1 and 2

2. The Technical – Demonstration of knowledge factor evaluates the offeror’s proposed ability to tackle Systems of Systems Technical Challenges associated with performance of Task Order 0001 for the base period and all option years. Marginal levels of the overall demonstration of knowledge could indicate a lack of understanding concerning the mission requirements and may result in the entire proposal receiving an unfavorable rating and/or being eliminated from the competitive range. The evaluation will focus on the offerors’:

• Knowledge of Systems of Systems Technical Challenges associated with performance.

• Understanding and usage of systems mentioned in the demonstration of knowledge.

• Understanding of subsystems required to support interoperability for warfighting functions.

• Understanding of processes believed to be integral in supporting configuration changes to enable command, control, and communications (C3) functionality between IBCT and the additional battalion equipped with their organic system.

• Understanding of Army PPBE cycle and knowledge of the Army budget execution, acquisition process, and program documentation development.

3. The Technical - Readiness factor is divided into the following subfactors:

Subfactor 1: This subfactor evaluates the offeror’s proposed Program Management Plan for the basic contract period and all option years. A rating of Marginal for the overall Program Management Plan subfactor could indicate a lack of understanding concerning mission requirements and may result in the entire proposal receiving an unfavorable rating and/or being eliminated from the competitive range.

The evaluation will focus on the offeror’s:

• Management and team members

• Cost control and subcontractor management

• Quality assurance and risk management

Subfactor 2: This subfactor evaluates the offeror’s Staffing Approach. Major emphasis will be placed on the following:

• Recruiting/hiring/retention approach and methods

• Personnel replacement resources

• Key personnel resumes

Subfactor 3: This subfactor evaluates the offeror’s Management Transition In plan.

The evaluation will focus on the offerors’:

• Transition in plan

• Specific policies, methods, and procedures to retain high-performing incumbent personnel

• Tracking and reporting of GFE and personnel-specific system access

In accordance with the Army Source Selection Supplement (AS3), Section 3.1, the Army methodology for evaluating Technical Approach and Related Risk is the

Combined Technical/Risk Rating, (see Table 1 below). This methodology considers risk, in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. Technical Factors 1 and 2 will each be assigned their own individual ratings. Each subfactor under Technical Factor 2 will also be assigned their own individual ratings.

4. Volume II - Past Performance Factor. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s record of past and current performance to ascertain the probability of successfully performing the required efforts of the PWS.

a. The past performance factor considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract requirements. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation:

recency, relevancy (including context of data), and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information).

b. The Government will focus its inquiries on the offeror’s (and major subcontractor’s) record of performance as it relates to all solicitation requirements, including cost, schedule, performance, and management of subcontractors. For the purposes of this SSP/Requirement, major subcontractors are defined as members of an offeror’s overall team who are expected to perform 20% percent or more of the proposed effort. A significant achievement, problem, or lack of relevant data in any

TABLE 1 – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Color Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough…