BAA MSN DWH Metal Castings BAA 0001-21.pdf

DLA Emergent Metal Casting Requirements Broad Agency Announcement

Source Selection Information—See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 1

DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY

Research & Development Enterprise Service Activity (J68) Emergent Metal Casting Requirements

Broad Agency Announcement

BAA 0001-21

Source Selection Information—See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 2

Document Type: BAA Solicitation Number: BAA0001-21

Posted Date: 7/1/2021

Questions in Response to BAA Posting Due Date: 7/7/2021

Proposal Due Date: September 29, 2021

Classification Code: A -- Research & Development Set Asides: N/A

NAICS Code: 541715 -- Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Nanotechnology and Biotechnology)

PART: U.S. GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENTS

SUBPART: SERVICES

OFFICE ADDRESS: 700 Robbins Ave Philadelphia, Pa 19111

CLASS CODE: A--Research and Development

SUBJECT: Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Emergent Metal Casting Requirements

SOL: BAA-0001-21

POINT OF CONTACT (POC): Eugene Marrone; alternate RANDD.DCSO@dla.mil

CONTACT INFORMATION: Phone: 267-858-0990; Email Eugene.Marrone@dla.mil

I. INTRODUCTION

This notice constitutes a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) for the acquisition of research and development in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 35.016, Broad Agency Announcement, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. No other solicitation will be issued. Only the information provided in this notice is available. Requests for other forms of solicitations shall be disregarded.

This BAA will remain open for five years. The resultant BAA shall have a ceiling of $90 Million, no funds will be issued against the BAA, all funding will be established against individual task orders.

This BAA addresses DLA’s expected need for scientific study and experimentation directed toward advancing the state-of-the-art or increasing knowledge or understanding in Areas of Interest related to Metal Casting. Interested parties may submit an initial synopsis, referred to as a "White Paper," describing a specific project related to an Area of Interest listed in Attachment B to this BAA. If a White Paper is of sufficient interest, DLA may request technical and cost proposals for the effort described by the White Paper.

The process for obtaining a possible award under this BAA consists of three steps:

STEP I: Submission of White Paper

STEP II: Submission of a technical proposal only if requested by the DLA Contracting Officer

STEP III: Submission of a cost proposal either concurrent with or after submission of a technical proposal only if requested by the DLA Contracting Officer

Source Selection Information—See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 3

II. GENERAL INFORMATION

A. Eligibility To be eligible for award, respondents must meet certain minimum standards pertaining to financial resources, adequacy of accounting systems, ability to comply with performance schedules, prior record of past performance, integrity, organization structure, experience, operational controls, technical skills facilities and equipment. For additional information and guidance concerning qualifications and standards for responsibility of prospective contractors, please refer to Part 9 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR).

B. BAA Response Submission Respondents interested in possible awards under this BAA must first submit a White Paper, in the format specified herein, by e-mail to the e-mail address shown, or via DoD SAFE if larger than 15 megabytes, as provided in Attachment A. The purpose of the White Paper is to discourage Respondents from incurring substantial technical proposal preparation costs on proposed research that is not of interest to DLA.

Respondents are required to submit White Papers as a way to determine DLA’s interest prior to investing in technical proposal development. There is no limit on the number of white papers or projects that each respondent may submit.

In accordance with FAR 3.104-4, your company is required to mark all material that may be Source Selection Information as described at paragraph (10) of the “Source Selection Information” definition in FAR2.101, to include the cover page and each page that may contain source selection information with the legend “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104”. Although the information in paragraphs (1) through (9) of the definition in 2.101 is considered to be Source Selection Information whether or not marked, all reasonable efforts must be made to mark such material with the same legend. If you are unsure if particular information is Source Selection Information as defined in FAR 2.101, consult your Agency Officials.

Note: Source Selection markings are required for all documents submitted in response to this BAA, which includes White Papers and Technical/Price Proposals (when applicable).

C. Contract Type The Government intends to award one or more Independent Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) cost sharing contracts (FAR 16.303) as a result of this BAA. The period of performance of the IDIQ contract(s) resulting from this BAA is up to 5 years inclusive of a three-year base period and one two-year option period.

Offerors are required to submit White Papers for review, both White Papers and Technical Proposals must generally be for cost-sharing contracts. However, DLA will consider White Papers and Technical Proposals based on cost (FAR 16.302), cost-plus-fixed-fee completion (FAR 16.306), or fixed-price (FAR Subpart 16.2) contracts, or on transactions other than contracts, grants, or cooperative agreements (“Other Transactions”), but reserves the right to award contract types other than cost-sharing, or Other Transactions, only when DLA in its sole discretion deems such award to be in the best interests of the Government. Submittals based on contract types other than cost-type or fixed-price, or on Other Transactions, will be rejected and discarded and will not be reviewed or evaluated.

Source Selection Information—See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 4

D. White Papers

As stated above, proposers are required to submit a White Paper in advance of a technical proposal. The White Paper provides a synopsis of a proposed project by briefly answering the following questions:

1. What is the proposed work attempting to accomplish or do?

2. How is it done today, and what are the limitations and challenges?

3. Who will care and what will the impact be if the work is successful?

4. How much will it cost, and how long will it take?

A template containing content descriptions and instructions is provided as Attachment C to this BAA. Use of this template is mandatory for all submissions to this BAA. Document files must be in .pdf, .ppt, .pptx, .odx, .doc, .docx, .xls, or .xlsx formats. All submissions must be written in English and all pages shall be formatted for printing on 8½ by 11-inch paper with 1-inch margins and font size not smaller than 12-point (8 or 10-point font may be used for figures, tables, and charts).

White Papers will not be evaluated but will be reviewed to determine whether the proposed solution is technically feasible and viable (i.e., compatible with DoD constraints, technical environments and other organizational requirements), and whether the White Paper presents a research project whose results end users are likely to adopt and that is of sufficient interest to DLA to warrant consideration of a technical proposal.

DLA reserves the right to request technical proposals from any, all, some, or none of the Respondents submitting White Papers. A request for technical proposals is not a guarantee that a proposal based on a White Paper will ultimately be selected for award negotiation. White papers for non-innovative, marginal improvements are inappropriate under this BAA and will not result in a technical proposal request.

E. Notifications

White Papers DLA will notify Respondents submitting a White Paper in response to this BAA by email message acknowledging receipt and a subsequent email message after review of the White Paper either (1) providing instructions for the submission of a technical proposal or (2) advising that DLA does not wish to receive a technical proposal and providing feedback to the Respondent regarding the rationale for this decision. No other notifications will be provided. DLA will attempt to reply to White Papers within thirty calendar days after receipt.

These official notifications will be emailed to the Respondent’s Administrative POC identified in the White Paper.

Technical Proposals As stated above, Respondents invited to submit technical proposals will receive an email providing instructions for the submission of a full technical proposal. A proposal request may include projects from one or more White Papers. Email notification will also be sent if the technical proposal is not acceptable. Any technical proposal submitted other than in response to a request from DLA based on review of a White Paper will be discarded without review.

Source Selection Information—See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 5

Cost/Price Proposals Respondents selected to submit cost/price proposals will be notified by email. DLA may request the cost/price proposal be submitted with the technical proposal or at any time after technical proposal submission. Email notification will also be sent if the cost/price proposal is not acceptable. Any cost/price proposal submitted other than in response to a request from DLA will be discarded without review.

DLA reserves the right to request cost/price proposals from any, all, some, or none of the Respondents submitting technical proposals. Any such request for cost/price proposals does not guarantee award. The request for cost/price proposal will provide delivery (e-mail or via DoD SAFE) instructions.

F. Debriefs

No debrief after review of White Papers will be provided as no award can result from a White Paper.

G. Additional Information Requests

DLA may contact Respondents to provide additional information required for White Paper review, technical proposal evaluation, and cost realism analysis. Respondents may be removed from the proposal evaluation process if the Respondent and the contracting officer fail to negotiate mutually agreeable terms within a reasonable period of time.

H. Subcontracting Plans

The Defense Logistics Agency is strongly committed to providing meaningful prime and subcontracting opportunities for small businesses, small disadvantaged businesses (SDBs), woman-owned small businesses (WOSBs), historically underutilized business zone (HUB Zone) small businesses, veteran- owned small business (VOSBs), service disabled veteran-owned small businesses (SDVOSBs), historically black colleges and universities, and minority institutions, and other concerns subject to socioeconomic considerations through its awards.

Businesses unfamiliar with doing business with the government and that require assistance may contact the state-specific Department of Defense (DoD) Procurement Technical Assistance Center (PTAC).

DoD PTACs serve as a resource for businesses pursuing and performing under contracts with DoD, other federal agencies, state and local governments and with government prime contractors. Assistance provided by the PTACs is usually free of charge. PTAC support includes registration in systems such as SAM, identification of contract opportunities, understanding requirements and preparing and submitting proposals.

The PTACs have a presence in each state, Puerto Rico and Guam. To locate a local PTAC visit:

http://www.dla.mil/HQ/SmallBusiness/PTAC.aspx or http://www.aptac-us.org/new/.

Note: Small business are exempt from submitting a subcontracting plan.

Subcontracting Plan

For proposed contract awards exceeding $750,000 large businesses and non-profits (including educational institutions) shall provide a Subcontracting Plan (“Plan”) that contains all elements required by FAR 19.704, FAR 52.219-9, and as supplemented by DFARS 252-219-7003. The Plan must be submitted as an

Source Selection Information—See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 6 attachment to the “Proposal Adequacy Checklist” attached to a requested cost proposal. If a company has a Master or Individual Subcontracting Plan, as described in FAR 19.701 or a Comprehensive Subcontracting Plan, as described in DFARS 219.702, a copy of that Plan shall also be submitted as an attachment to the “Proposal Adequacy Checklist”.

Plans will be reviewed for adequacy, ensuring that the required information, goals, and assurances are included. FAR 19.702 requires an apparent successful offeror to submit an acceptable Plan. If an apparent successful offeror fails to negotiate a Plan acceptable to the contracting officer within the time limit prescribed by the contracting officer, the offeror will be ineligible for award.

Offerors shall propose a plan that ensures small businesses (inclusive of SDBs, WOSBs, HUBZone, VOSBs and SDVOSBs) will have the maximum practicable opportunity to participate in contract performance consistent with efficient performance.

As a baseline, Offerors shall, to the best extent possible, propose realistic goals to ensure small business participation in accordance with the current or most recent fiscal year subcontracting goals found on the DoD Office of Small Business Program website at: https://business.defense.gov/. If proposed goals are below the statutory requirements, then the offeror shall include in the Plan a viable written explanation as to why small businesses are unable to be utilized and what attempts were taken to ensure that small business were given the opportunity to participate in the effort to the maximum extent practicable.

Subcontracting Resources Subcontracting to a prime contractor can be a good way to participate in the contracting process. The following is a list of potential resources that may assist in locating potential subcontracting partners, opportunities, and resources:

Companies Participating in DoD Subcontracting Program Report DAU Small Business Community of Practice (SB COP) DefenseLink ≥ $7.0 M Award Notices DoD OSBP Prime Contractors and Subcontractors with Subcontracting Plans Dynamic Small Business Search Electronic Subcontracting Reporting System (eSRS) DLA SBIR/STTR Search – Website or Brochure DoD Procurement Technical Assistance Centers (PTAC) U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) Subcontracting Opportunities Directory U.S. SBA Subnet

In accordance with FAR 5.206 Notices of Subcontracting Opportunities, the following entities may transmit a notice to the Governmentwide Point of Entry (GPE) at https://www.SAM.gov to seek competition for subcontracts, to increase participation by qualified HUBZone small business, small, small disadvantaged, women-owned small business, veteran-owned small business and service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns, and to meet established subcontracting plan goals:

A contractor awarded a contract exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold that is likely to result in the award of any subcontracts.

A subcontractor or supplier, at any tier, under a contract exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, that has a subcontracting opportunity exceeding $15,000.

Source Selection Information—See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 7

The notices must describe-

1. The business opportunity;

2. Any prequalification requirements; and

3. Where to obtain technical data needed to respond to the requirement

In addition, another example of a place in which prime contractors may post solicitations or sources sought notices for small business is the U.S. SBA SUBNET: https://eweb.sba.gov/gls/dsp_sbabanner.cfm. The SUBNET database provides a listing of subcontracting solicitations and opportunities posted by large prime contractors and other non-federal organizations.

III. AREAS OF INTEREST

The Areas of Interest for this BAA are listed in Attachment B.

IV. Technical Proposal Contents Offerors will propose one or more R&D projects, as requested by the contracting officer after review of White Papers, that include:

(a) The improved Castings capability to be established, expressed in terms of outcomes that are important to the DLA supply chain;

(b) Technical Plan as described below;

(c) Detailed technical approach, rationale, and strategy for accomplishing technical goals in support of innovative claims and deliverables;

(d) Deliverables associated with the proposed research, including those listed below and a clear description of the results, products, and transferable technology to be developed.

(e) Schedule and milestones for each task in the proposed efforts.

Proposals shall include all proprietary claims to results, prototypes, or systems supporting or necessary for the use of the research, results, or prototypes. If there are no proprietary claims, then the proposal must include a statement to that effect.

Proposals shall include a technical plan for each proposed project, using active voice to describe the tasks to be performed, in sufficient detail to establish the methodology and feasibility of accomplishing the technical approach. The technical plan must, at a minimum, include the following:

1. Project: The improved castings technologies to be established, expressed in terms of outcomes that are important to the Warfighter, DLA, or another DoD Component.

2. Background: Include any information that is necessary to understand the history and need for the research

3. Objective: Description of the goal or anticipated achievement

4. Technical Approach: Detailed description of the technical approach, rationale, metrics, potential application to more than one weapon system, benefits, leveraged or shared resources

5. Task(s): Detailed description of task(s) to be performed

6. Impediments or Risk: Description of any impediments or risks to implementing the technical approach and how they will be overcome, including constraints (e.g., cost, schedule, etc.) and assumptions and planned responses for each

7. Proprietary Data: A description of all proprietary claims to results, prototypes, or systems supporting or necessary for the use of the research, results, or prototypes (if none, this must be stated). Proposals shall indicate by specific marking on each page if data described therein is proprietary.

Source Selection Information—See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 8

8. Key Personnel: A list of key personnel along with the approximate percentage of effort to be expended by each person to perform the task(s)

9. Specific metrics for measuring progress and success

10. A brief description of the facilities and equipment that would be used for the project(s)

11. Performance Schedule: Detailed realistic schedule and milestones with confirmation of realism to include a Program Evaluation Review Technique (PERT) chart, Gantt chart or other appropriate format that displays all major tasks, their schedule and dependency relations.

12. Résumés: Description of the specific experience and qualifications to perform the task(s) of all key personnel.

13. Past Performance, Capabilities, and Related Experience - Each proposal shall address the offeror’s prior experience, capabilities, and past performance by including the following:

a. Information pertaining to prior significant and related research or work experience or expertise in any of the listed areas of interest, and the offeror’s track record in casting technologies related areas. This should include an explanation of how this experience or expertise will be beneficial to this program.

b. Five (5) accounts/contracts/projects within the last (3) three years for which the offeror has provided services and/or supplies of a nature relevant to casting technologies. In addition, any and all contracts terminated in whole or in part during the previous five (5) years, including those currently in the process of termination are considered relevant and the offeror shall provide past performance information for those contracts in addition to the five requested. The offeror shall indicate the termination type and reasons.

c. At least two (2) points of contact with contact information for each account/contract/project; a description of the service or supply which was provided; and a brief performance history on each of those accounts/contracts/projects; Role as prime or subcontractor; if from a past Government contract, the contracting activity name, address, and the Contracting Officers name, telephone number, and email address; Contract type; awarded cost; price; original delivery schedule; final or projected final delivery schedule

d. Where related research was performed in a contractor teaming arrangement (CTA), provide points of contact for teaming members or partners to include company name, individuals and phone numbers.

e. A bibliography of relevant technical papers and research, published and unpublished, which documents the technical ideas upon which the proposed project is based.

If no past performance specifically related to castings is available, respondents shall describe their past performance history on projects with comparable major customers and shall include supplemental information similar to that requested in 13 (a) through 13(e) above.

Proposals shall include a detailed description of how the contract will be managed (inclusive of cost management techniques) and show how the proposed organizational structure will ensure performance stability, reliable customer service, industry relevance, and commitment to DLA and project progression for the duration of the performance period.

The contractor shall perform functions on approved projects including, but not limited to: appropriate resource application, awarding necessary subcontracts, and ensuring technical excellence, cost control, and schedule adherence. Quarterly Interim Progress Reviews (IPRs) and a final review shall be provided for each Project at times and locations as required by the Government. The contractor shall notify the ICT PM of problems and issues as they arise.

Source Selection Information—See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 9

Deliverables for individual Projects will include:

1. Study Plans that update and add detail to the effort described in the technical proposal

2. Monthly technical progress and financial reports

3. Interim progress briefings or reports as required, to include an annual technical review usually held in conjunction with the Joint Defense Manufacturing Technology Panel (JDMTP) Metals Subpanel review of ManTech projects.

4. Minutes of meetings as required

5. Presentation materials as required

6. Final summary briefing or report

7. Any software, algorithms and associated documentation that may have been developed during the project

V. Proposal Evaluation Factors

Technical Evaluation Factors

DLA will evaluate technical proposals in accordance with this section through a peer or scientific review process.

Technical proposals will be evaluated for an overall technical capability that has scientific and technical merit, is viable and desirable, and describes a project that provides a solution in an Area of Interest listed in Attachment B. DLA will not evaluate technical proposals against each other since they are not submitted in accordance with a common work statement.

Technical proposals for non-innovative, marginal improvements are inappropriate under this BAA and will receive no further consideration.

Technical evaluation factors are as follows, listed in descending order of importance:

1. Overall Scientific and Technical Merit (Feasibility) - Respondents must explain the proposed research project and methodology in sufficient detail to establish that the proposed technical approach is innovative, implementable, and comprehensive and that the proposed technical team has the expertise and experience to accomplish the proposed tasks. Task descriptions and associated technical elements must be complete and in a logical sequence with all proposed deliverables clearly defined and directed toward a final outcome that achieves the proposed goal(s). The proposal must identify major technical risks and present clearly defined and feasible mitigation efforts.

2. Viability - This criterion measures whether DoD could easily adopt the proposed solution. The proposed effort is viable and likely to transition into an operational capability. The offeror demonstrates an understanding of working with DLA and DoD and of relevant DLA and DoD policy. Information technology included in the proposed effort addresses cybersecurity requirements and shows awareness of specific requirements in the Federal Government, DoD, and DLA.

3. Desirability - Adoption of the proposed solution offers clear benefits to DLA and has characteristics such as low barriers to transition, simplicity, ease of use, physical dimensions, etc. that make it likely to be adopted.

Source Selection Information—See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 10

4. Past Performance, Capabilities, and Related Experience - Proposals will be evaluated based on the degree to which they provide information pertaining to prior significant and related work experience or expertise in the technical areas of interest, and how that expertise will be beneficial to this program.

Price Evaluation Factor:

1. Cost Realism - The cost/price proposal shall provide sufficient information to evaluate the reasonableness and realism of proposed costs including:

a. Direct Labor – Individual labor categories or assigned persons with associated labor hours and unburdened direct labor rates

b. Indirect Costs – Fringe benefit, Overhead, G&A, Cost of Money, etc. (must show base amount and rate)

c. Proposed Contractor Acquired Equipment – Capital equipment purchases are not allowable project costs. Acquisition of materials and devices must be justified and approved in advance.

d. Travel – Number of trips, destinations, durations, etc.

e. Subcontracts – A cost proposal is required to be submitted by any proposed subcontractor

f. Materials – Specifically itemized with estimated (or actual) costs.

g. Lease Items - Fair market value of lease items and the method used for making such evaluations

h. Cost Share – The contractor is required to share in the cost of the project(s).

i. Cost Management Techniques

In addition to the evaluation criteria above, funds availability will be a consideration in the selection of proposals for award.

Adjectival Technical Ratings

Proposals will be assigned a rating based on the adjectival ratings defined below.

Factor 1 – Overall Scientific and Technical Merit (Feasibility)

Highly Acceptable (HA): Response demonstrates very good scientific and technical merit and soundness of the technical concept to advance the state-of-the-art or increase knowledge or understanding in an Area of Interest related to Metal Casting. Probability of success is high as the vendor’s response contains some strengths. Any weaknesses identified in the offeror’s response are not substantial enough to adversely impact the respondent’s strengths and may be correctable through negotiations or clarifications. No deficiencies are identified in the response.

Acceptable (A): Response demonstrates generally satisfactory scientific and technical merit and soundness of the technical concept to advance the state-of-the-art or increase knowledge or understanding in an Area of Interest related to Metal Casting. Probability of success is reasonable as the offeror’s response includes strengths and weaknesses. Any weaknesses identified in the offeror’s response are not substantial enough to adversely impact respondent’s strengths and may be corrected through negotiations or clarifications. No deficiencies are identified in the response.

Marginally Acceptable (MA): Response demonstrates marginal scientific and technical merit and soundness of the technical concept to advance the state-of-the-art or increase knowledge or

Source Selection Information—See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 11 understanding in an Area of Interest related to Metal Casting. Response may demonstrate some strengths, but probability of success is questionable as the offeror’s response contains weaknesses that are determined as having an adverse impact to successfully achieving program outcomes.

Not Acceptable (NA): Response demonstrates generally unsatisfactory scientific and technical merit and soundness of the technical concept to advance the state-of-the-art or increase knowledge or understanding in an Area of Interest related to Metal Casting. Response may contain some strengths, but probability of success is low as the offeror’s response contains significant weaknesses or deficiencies that are unlikely to be corrected through negotiations or clarifications.

Factor 2 – Viability

Highly Acceptable (HA): The proposed effort is viable and very likely to transition into an operational capability. The offeror demonstrates a very good understanding of working with DLA and DoD and of relevant DLA and DoD policy. Response contains some strengths. No significant weaknesses and no deficiencies identified in the response.

Acceptable (A): The proposed effort is viable and somewhat likely to transition into an operational capability. The offeror demonstrates a reasonable understanding of working with DLA and DoD and of relevant DLA and DoD policy. Response may contain strengths. Weaknesses of the offeror’s response, where and if applicable, are not substantial enough to conversely impact respondent’s strengths.

Weaknesses identified may be corrected through negotiations or clarifications. No deficiencies are identified in the response.

Marginally Acceptable (MA): Viability of the proposed effort is questionable and it is marginally likely to transition into an operational capability. The offeror demonstrates a marginal understanding of working with DLA and DoD and of relevant DLA and DoD policy.

Response may contain strengths, but questionable probability of successfully accomplishing the BAA requirement as the response contains significant weaknesses.

Not Acceptable (NA): Viability of the proposed effort is questionable and it is not likely to transition into an operational capability. The offeror demonstrates little or no understanding of working with DLA and DoD and of relevant DLA and DoD policy. Response may contain some strengths, but identified significant weaknesses and/or deficiencies are determined as having a critical impact on successfully fulfilling the Government’s requirement.

Factor 3 – Desirability

Highly Acceptable (HA): The proposed solution offers clear benefits to DLA and has very good characteristics such as low barriers to transition, simplicity, ease of use, physical dimensions, etc. that make it likely to be adopted by DLA and industry. Response contains some strengths. No significant weaknesses and no deficiencies identified in the response.

Acceptable (A): The proposed solution offers some evidence of benefits to DLA and has characteristics such as low barriers to transition, simplicity, ease of use, physical dimensions, etc. that make it

Source Selection Information—See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 12 somewhat likely to be adopted by DLA and industry. Response may contain strengths. Weaknesses of the offeror’s response, where and if applicable, are not substantial enough to conversely impact respondent’s strengths. Weaknesses identified may be corrected through negotiations or clarifications.

No deficiencies are identified in the response.

Marginally Acceptable (MA): The proposed solution offers marginal evidence of benefits to DLA and has few characteristics such as low barriers to transition, simplicity, ease of use, physical dimensions, etc. that make it likely to be adopted by DLA and industry. Response may contain strengths, but questionable probability of successfully accomplishing the BAA requirement as the response contains significant weaknesses.

Not Acceptable (NA): The proposed solution offers little or no evidence of benefits to DLA and has few or no characteristics such as low barriers to transition, simplicity, ease of use, physical dimensions, etc. that make it somewhat likely to be adopted by DLA and industry. Response may contain some strengths, but identification of significant weaknesses and/or deficiencies are determined as having a critical impact on successfully fulfilling the Government’s requirement.

Factor 4 – Past Performance, Capabilities, and Related Experience

Highly Acceptable (HA): Response demonstrates generally very good experience which is highly relevant to an area of research interest in the BAA. Response demonstrates very good past performance as it relates to implementing or sustaining systems or processes that are similar to those proposed. Response generally demonstrates very good overall past performance as it relates to meeting technical, schedule, cost and/or other objectives/requirements. Response demonstrates a very good probability of successfully accomplishing the DLA requirement based on experience and past performance.

Acceptable (A): Response demonstrates generally satisfactory experience which is relevant to an area of research interest in the BAA. Response demonstrates satisfactory past performance in implementing or sustaining systems or processes which are similar to those being proposed. Response generally demonstrates satisfactory overall past performance as it relates to meeting technical, schedule, cost and/or other objectives/requirements. Reasonable probability of successfully accomplishing the DLA requirement based on experience and past performance.

Marginally Acceptable (MA): Response demonstrates generally poor overall experience which is marginally relevant to an area of research interest in the BAA. Response demonstrates poor past performance in implementing or sustaining systems or processes similar to those proposed. Response generally demonstrates fair overall past performance as it relates to meeting technical, schedule, cost and/or other objectives/requirements. Questionable probability of successfully accomplishing the DLA requirement based on experience and past performance.

Not Acceptable (NA): Response demonstrates generally unsatisfactory overall experience which is not relevant in managing and performing tasks pertinent to an area of research interest in the BAA, and unsatisfactory experience in implementing or sustaining systems or processes to those being proposed.

Generally, demonstrates unsatisfactory overall past performance. Low or no probability of successfully accomplishing the DLA requirement based on past performance.

Source Selection Information—See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 13

Neutral: The respondent has no relevant record of past performance. Respondent will not be rated favorably or unfavorably.

Overall Consensus Ratings

Highly Acceptable (HA): Response contains strengths that demonstrate the ability of the offeror to meet or exceed applicable program objectives and/or performance parameters as provided for in the BAA. Weaknesses of the offeror’s response, as identified, are not substantial enough to adversely impact the respondent’s strengths. No deficiencies are identified in the response.

Acceptable (A): Response addresses the minimal level of information requested in the BAA.

Respondent's response may contain strengths and weaknesses. Weaknesses in the offeror’s response, where and if applicable, are not substantial enough to adversely impact respondent’s strengths.

Weaknesses identified may be corrected through negotiations or clarifications.

Marginally Acceptable (MA): Response addresses the minimal level of information requested in the BAA. The offeror’s response demonstrates limited understanding of the BAA and ability to meet applicable program objectives and/or performance parameters. Response has identified weaknesses determined as having an adverse impact to successfully achieving program outcomes.

Not Acceptable (NA): Response does not address the minimal level of information requested in the BAA. The offeror’s response did not demonstrate an understanding of the BAA and ability to meet applicable program objectives and/or performance parameters. It is unlikely that significant weaknesses and/or deficiencies can be corrected through negotiations or clarifications.

Price Evaluation Factor:

Factor 1: Cost Realism A cost realism analysis shall be performed in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(d) Cost realism analysis.

Realism will be based on an evaluation of the respondent’s cost proposal to determine whether the estimated cost elements are realistic for the work to be performed; reflect a clear understanding of the requirements and are consistent with the respondent’s technical proposal. In addition, funds availability will be a basis for selection.

VI. DECISION

A. Basis for Contract Award

DLA may select technical proposals that are most promising for further consideration and may request additional information from the Respondent. In accordance with FAR 35.016(e), DLA will select proposals for award based on technical evaluation, importance to agency programs, and funds availability. Cost realism and reasonableness will be considered to the extent appropriate. DLA anticipates making, but is not obligated to make, multiple awards under this BAA. DLA reserves the right to select for award all, some, or none of the proposals. Proposals for non-innovative concepts, marginal improvements, or commercial items or services are inappropriate under this BAA and will receive no award consideration. DLA plans to award, but is not obligated to award, Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts to one or more responsible Respondents whose technical proposals

Source Selection Information—See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 14 conform to the BAA, reflect a clear understanding of the specified BAA Area of Interest, are in the best interest of DLA, and offer a benefit to DLA, and whose cost/price proposals conform to the BAA, offer fair and reasonable pricing and realistic estimated cost that satisfy the cost realism analysis and are consistent with the Respondent’s technical proposal.

B. Basis for Award without Discussion DLA shall evaluate technical proposals and conduct cost realism analysis on cost proposals and make award without discussions. Proposals should contain the Respondent’s best terms. However, DLA reserves the right to conduct discussions and request revisions to proposals if it is determined to be necessary.

C. Basis for No Award DLA reserves the right not to make an award as a result of this BAA if such award is determined to be contrary to the best interest of DLA.

VII. PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

Proposal prices and all other terms and conditions must remain valid for 180 days from the submission date of the technical proposal. Information in the technical proposal that is deemed by the Respondent to be proprietary must be clearly marked as proprietary information.

In accordance with FAR 3.104-4, your company is required to mark all material that may be Source Selection Information as described at paragraph (10) of the “Source Selection Information” definition in FAR2.101, to include the cover page and each page that may contain source selection information with the legend “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104”. Although the information in paragraphs (1) through (9) of the definition in 2.101 is considered to be Source Selection Information whether or not marked, all reasonable efforts must be made to mark such material with the same legend. If you are unsure if particular information is Source Selection Information as defined in FAR 2.101, consult your Agency Officials.

To ensure all technical proposals receive proper consideration, DLA requires all Respondents to follow the same format. Technical proposals that do not conform to the format will not be evaluated and will not be eligible for award. Technical proposals must meet the following format requirements:

1. Document files must be in .pdf, .ppt, .pptx, .odx, .doc, .docx, .xls, or .xlsx formats;

2. No more than thirty-five (35) single-sided pages including, body, appendices, and attachments;

3. Formatted for printing on 8-1/2 by 11-inch paper with 1-inch margins and font size not smaller than 12-point (8 or 10-point font may be used for figures, tables, and charts).; and

4. A header on each page to identify page content and page number;

Any project Gantt charts may be submitted on larger pages (e.g., legal size), as required to be readable. There is no penalty for submitting a technical proposal of less than 35 pages as long as the technical proposal covers all

DO NOT submit a technical proposal unless it is requested by DLA after review of a submitted White Paper.

Any technical proposal submitted without such a request will be discarded without review.

Source Selection Information—See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 15 the required material. Résumés and certifications for technical data and computer software will not be counted as part of the 35-page limit. Technical proposals must be clear and concise, and must include sufficient detail to substantiate the validity of the research. Technical proposals must address the evaluation factors provided in Section V, Technical Proposal Evaluation, of this BAA. No cost or pricing information may be contained in the technical proposal.

Respondents must assume that DLA has no prior knowledge of Respondent’s facilities and experience, and DLA will base its evaluation exclusively on the merits and content of the information presented in the technical proposal, except that DLA reserves the right to evaluate relevant past performance that is not included in the technical proposal.

Technical proposals shall consist of six parts:

Part 1 —Cover Page Part 2 — Executive Summary Part 3 — Overall Scientific and Technical Merit (Feasibility) Part 4 — Viability Part 5 — Desirability Part 6 — Past Performance, Capabilities, and Related Experience

Part I – Cover Page

(1) BAA number; (2) Proposal Title; (3) Technical Point of Contact, including name, telephone number, , email address, and mailing address; (4) Administrative/Contracting Point of Contact, including name, telephone number, , email address, and mailing address; and (5) Contractor's business type selected among the following categories: Large Business, Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB), Other Small Business, HBCU, MI, Other Educational, or Other Nonprofit

Part 2: Executive Summary

An Executive Summary of the Respondent's entire technical proposal in one page or less is required. This summary shall be used to gain an understanding of the overall proposal contents. It should identify and highlight significant features, summarize innovative claims and unique contribution(s) of the proposal, and include the salient points of the proposed project, and the expected outcome improvement associated with the project.

Part 3: Overall Scientific and Technical Merit (Feasibility)

Respondents must explain the proposed research project and methodology in sufficient detail to establish that the proposed technical approach is innovative, feasible, and complete and that the proposed technical team has the expertise and experience to accomplish the proposed tasks. Task descriptions and associated technical elements must be complete and in a logical sequence with all proposed deliverables clearly defined and directed toward a final outcome that achieves the proposed goal(s). The proposal must identify major technical risks and present clearly defined and feasible mitigation efforts.

Part 4: Viability

Respondents must show that proposed effort is viable and likely to transition into an operational capability.

The offeror demonstrates an understanding of working with DLA and DoD and of relevant DLA and DoD policy. Information technology included in the proposed effort addresses cybersecurity requirements and

Source Selection Information—See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 16 shows awareness of specific requirements (e.g., FedRAMP) for IT in the Federal Government, DoD, and

DLA.

Part 5: Desirability

Proposals must show that the adoption of the proposed solution offers clear benefits to DLA and has characteristics such as low barriers to transition, simplicity, ease of use, physical dimensions, etc. that make it likely to be adopted.

Part 6: Past Performance, Capabilities, and Related Experience

Each proposal shall address the offeror’s prior experience, capabilities, and past performance as described in Paragraph IV.4. above.

VIII. COST/PRICE PROPOSAL

No page limits apply to a cost proposal. The cost proposal shall include total project cost by month. The offeror will also give a detailed breakdown of the total project costs. If subcontracts are contemplated, the offeror must estimate the total amount of effort to be subcontracted and specify the “burden” or “pass through rate” that will be applied to those subcontracts. Offerors are required to submit certification of current cost or pricing data in accordance with FAR 15.406-2. The total cost of each major cost element and the make-up of those costs shall be presented in the offeror's proposal. A statement related to the latest DCAA audit and whether the offeror’s accounting system has been approved by the DCAA shall be included in the cost proposal. State if there are currently negotiated DCAA rates and factors being used in the proposal. A Proposal Adequacy Checklist is included as Attachment D to this BAA and shall be included with each proposal submission.

Detailed breakdown of costs by cost category by offeror's calendar/fiscal year:

Direct Labor - Individual labor categories or personnel with associated labor hours and unburdened direct labor rates

Indirect Costs - Fringe benefits, Overhead, G&A, Cost of Money, etc. (must show base amount and rate)

Proposed Contractor Acquired Equipment – Capital equipment purchases are not allowable project costs. Acquisition of materials and devices must be justified and approved in advance

Travel - Number of trips, destinations, durations, etc.

Subcontracts - A cost proposal is required to be submitted by any proposed subcontractor and “burden”

DO NOT submit a cost proposal unless it is requested by DLA.

Any cost proposal submitted without being requested by DLA will be discarded without review.

Source Selection Information—See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 17 or “pass through rate” shall be clearly stated.

Materials - Specifically itemized with estimated (or actual) costs. Be sure to include (3) or more quotes and a determination of how prices were determined fair and reasonable.

Lease Items - Fair market value of lease items and the method used for making such evaluations

Sufficient information shall be provided in supporting documents to evaluate the reasonableness and realism.

The cost-sharing proposal must reflect an understanding of the research, perception of risks, and ability to organize and perform the task(s) stated in the technical proposal. Respondents shall submit at a minimum the information listed below:

A. Cover Page B. Table of Contents C. Section 1: Cost Summary D. Section 2: Accounting System E. Section 3: Cost Sharing and In-Kind Contributions F. Section 4: Approved Rates or Agreements G. Section 5: Cost or Pricing Data H. Section 6: Work Breakdown Structure I. Section 7: Major Cost Elements J. Section 8: Project Tasks K. Section 9: Option Tasks L. Section 10: Other Direct Cost M. Section 11: Subcontracts N. Section 12: Proposal Adequacy Checklist

Cover Page

A cover page containing the following information is required for Volume II:

A. BAA Number B. Area(s) of Research Interest C. Research Title D. Business Type E. Performance Period F. Contract Type: Cost-Sharing Contract - No Fee G. Brief Research Description H. Total Cost per Month I. Total Government Share J. Total Contractor Share K. Total Cost

Table of Contents

Section 1: Cost Summary

Respondents shall provide a cost summary that includes cost elements, listed by year of performance, including any options, in the format below. The work effort presented in the cost summary must represent the work

Source Selection Information—See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 18 effort presented in the respondent’s technical proposal. The cost summary at a minimum shall include direct labor, indirect costs, travel, material, equipment, other direct costs, subcontract costs, contractor’s share amount, and Government’s share amount.

Description Year X Year X Year X Year X Year X TOTAL

Direct Labor – $ $ $ $ $ $

Indirect Costs $ $ $ $ $ $

Travel $ $ $ $ $ $

Material $ $ $ $ $ $

Equipment $ $ $ $ $ $

Other Direct Costs $ $ $ $ $ $

Subcontract Costs $ $ $ $ $ $

Grand Total (all costs) $ $ $ $ $ $

Contractor’s Share Amount

Government’s Share Amount

Section 2: Accounting System

A cost sharing contract is a type of cost-reimbursement contract. FAR 16.301-3 states that a cost-reimbursement contract may be used only when the contractor's accounting system is adequate for determining costs applicable to the contract. To be eligible for award of a cost-reimbursement contract, respondents must

(1) meet certain minimum standards pertaining to financial resources; (2) have an accounting system approved for performing a cost-reimbursement type contract; (3) have the ability to comply with performance schedules and (4) have a prior record of past performance, integrity, organization structure, experience, operational controls, technical skills, facilities, and equipment. Respondent shall provide the following accounting system information:

A. A copy of accounting system approval from Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) or the Department of Human and Health Services (HHS).

B. A description of the accounting system proposed for this acquisition.

Cost Sharing and In-Kind Contributions

A cost sharing contract is a contract in which the contractor receives no fee and is reimbursed only for an agreed-upon portion of its allowable costs (FAR 16.303). Sufficient information must be provided in supporting documents to evaluate the reasonableness and realism of the proposed costs. This section shall include:

A. The sources of cash and amounts;

B. The specific in-kind contributions, their value in monetary terms, and the methodology used to derive their values; and C.