Combo_W50S7Z23R0006 LA ANG New Orleans YRRP.pdf

Page 1 of 14 W50S7Z23R0006

This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in Subpart 12.6, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. This announcement constitutes the only notice. Attached are all the specifications and requirements. This requirement is a request for proposal (RFP). The solicitation documents and incorporated provisions and clauses are those in effect in the Federal Acquisition Circular FAC Number: 2023-01 Effective Date: 12/30/2022.

The award will be a Firm Fixed Priced Award in accordance with the following:

1. Set Aside: This acquisition is a 100% HUBZone set-aside.

2. The Product Service Code is V231, Transportation/Travel/Relocation- Travel /Lodging.

3. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code for this acquisition is 721110 with a size standard of $35,000,000.

A. DESCRIPTION OF ACQUISITION:

The LA ANG has a requirement to purchase the below listed services. A description of all the specifications and requirements of the equipment: AV, etc. are in the attached Performance Work Statement. This procurement will be awarded under Simplified Acquisition Procedures. Quotes must be received at the listed time and date.

All questions and requests for information (RFI) must be received not later than 3 March 2023 at 11:00 am EST.

B. SCHEDULE OF SUPPLIES/SERVICES:

All work is to be performed in accordance with (IAW) the attached Performance Work Statement.

C. QUOTE PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

To ensure timely and equitable evaluation of quotes, offerors must comply with instructions contained herein. Proposals must be complete, self-sufficient, and respond directly to the requirements of this RFP.

a. The offeror must submit a signed and dated quote on company letterhead with unit prices and extended prices in response to this solicitation. In doing so and without taking any exception to the requirements of this synopsis/solicitation, including specification, "Schedule of Supplies/Services" and terms and conditions, the offeror agrees to accede to all solicitation requirements. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale.

b. Offerors must provide a unit price and extended price for

CLIN 0001 Lodging CLIN 0002 Event

c. Interested parties capable of providing the requirement must submit a written quote to include discount terms, tax identification number, cage code, and UID.

d. To be eligible to receive an award resulting from this RFP, contractors must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) database, no exceptions. To register, please visit http://www.sam.gov or by calling 1-866-606-8220.

e. Quote Contents:

PART I – TECHNICAL AND PAST PERFORMANCE:

Page 2 of 14 W50S7Z23R0006

Provide quote that complies to all the requirements of the synopsis/solicitation and depicts past performance with similar requirements.

PART II – PRICE:

The price factor will be evaluated for reasonableness. The Government will evaluate the price of all quotes as follows:

Quotes will be determined fair and reasonable based on competitive quotes, comparison with similar services in a related industry, comparison to an independent Government estimate, or any other reasonable basis in accordance with FAR 13.106-2.

The Government intends to award a contract without discussions with respective offerors. Offerors shall submit sufficient information and, in the format, specified in Quote Preparation Instructions.

Offeror’s may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their quote to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond.

D. BASIS FOR AWARD

This is a 100% Competitive HUB Zone Set-Aside firm-fixed price contract. The small business contractor must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. Award will be made by best value trade-off (see addendum) that meets all required services technical capabilities/requirements and 52.212-2 evaluation criteria and 19.1307 Price evaluation preference for HUBZone small business concerns.

(a) The price evaluation preference for HUBZone small business concerns shall be used in acquisitions conducted using full and open competition. The preference shall not be used-

(1) Where price is not a selection factor so that a price evaluation preference would not be considered

(2) Where all fair and reasonable offers are accepted; or

(3) For the reserved portion of a solicitation for a multiple-award contract (see 19.503).

(b) The contracting officer shall give offers from HUBZone small business concerns a price evaluation preference by adding a factor of 10 percent to all offers, except-

(1) Offers from HUBZone small business concerns that have not waived the evaluation preference;

or

(2) Otherwise successful offers from small business concerns.

(c) The factor of 10 percent shall be applied on a line item basis or to any group of items on which award may be made. Other evaluation factors, such as transportation costs or rent-free use of Government property, shall be added to the offer to establish the base offer before adding the factor of 10 percent.

(d) When the two highest rated offerors are a HUBZone small business concern and a large business, and the evaluated offer of the HUBZone small business concern is equal to the evaluated offer of the large business after considering the price evaluation preference, the contracting officer shall award the contract to the HUBZone small business concern.

Page 3 of 14 W50S7Z23R0006

The Payments of this contract will be thru the wide area workflow program. All payments are net 30 days.

All Offerors must accept this as payment. The wide area workflow website is https://wawf.eb.mi

CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS:

The following provisions and clauses apply to this acquisition and can be viewed through Internet access at the Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Site, http://www.farsite.hill.af.mil in accordance with 52.252-1 and 52.252-2.

This contract incorporates one or more clauses by reference, with the same force and effect as if they were given in full text. Upon request, the Contracting Officer will make their full text available, IAW FAR 52.107 or view in the sites mentioned in provision 52.252-1 and Clause 52.252-2.

FAR 52.212-1, Instruction to Offerors-Commercial - The provision at FAR 52.212-1, Instruction to Offerors - Commercial, applies to this acquisition, with addenda. Reference attached Addendum to FAR 52.212-1.

FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation-Commercial Items - As prescribed in 12.301(c), the Contracting Officer may insert a provision substantially as follows:

(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

(i) technical capability of the item offered to meet the Government requirement; (ii) past performance (iii) price

Technical and past performance, when combined, are more significant than price.

(b) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(c) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer’s specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

FAR 19.1307 Price evaluation preference for HUBZone small business concerns.

FAR 52.212-3 with Alternate I, Offeror Representations and Certifications-Commercial Items - Offerors shall include a completed copy of the provision at FAR 52.212-3 with Alternate I, Offeror Representations and Certifications-Commercial Items with its offer. Reference FAR 52.212-3 (b) for those representations and certifications completed electronically.

FAR 52.212-4, Contract Terms and Conditions-Commercial Items - The clause at FAR 52.212-4, Contract Terms and Conditions-Commercial Items, applies to this acquisition, without addenda.

FAR 52.212-5, Contract Terms and Conditions Required to Implement Statutes or Executive Order- Commercial Items - The clause at FAR 52.212-5, Contract Terms and Conditions Required to Implement Statutes or Executive Order-Commercial Items applies to this acquisition.

Page 4 of 14 W50S7Z23R0006

The contractor shall comply with the following additional FAR clauses:

FAR 52.219-28, Post-Award Small Business Program Representation; FAR 52.222-19, Child Labor-Cooperation with Authorities and Remedies; FAR 52.222-21, Prohibition of Segregated Facilities;

FAR 52.222-26, Equal Opportunity;

FAR 52.222-36, Equal Opportunity for Workers with Disabilities; FAR 52.222-50, Combatting Trafficking in Persons;

FAR 52.223-15, Energy Efficiency in Energy-Consuming Products;

FAR 52.223-18, Encouraging Contractor Policy to Ban Text Messaging While Driving on Base; FAR 52.225-13, Restrictions on Certain Foreign Purchases;

FAR 52.232-33, Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer-System for Award Management The following provisions and/or clauses apply:

FAR 52.204-7, System for Award Management;

FAR 52.204-10, Reporting Executive Compensation and First-Tier Subcontract Awards; FAR 52.204-13, System for Award Management Maintenance;

FAR 52.204-16, Commercial and Government Entity Code Reporting; FAR 52.204-18, Commercial and Government Entity Code Reporting;

FAR 52.204-19, Incorporation by Reference of Representations and Certifications;

FAR 52.209-6, Protecting the Governments Interest When Subcontracting with Contractors Debarred, Suspended, or Proposed for Debarment;

FAR 52.222-3, Convict Labor;

FAR 52.223-5, Pollution Prevention and Right Know Information; FAR 52.232-39, Unenforceability of Unauthorized Obligations;

FAR 52.232-40, Providing Accelerated Payments to Small Business Subcontractors; FAR 52.233-1, Disputes;

FAR 52.237-1, Site Visit;

FAR 52.237-2, Protection of Government Buildings, Equipment, and Vegetation; FAR 52.243-1, Changes - Fixed-Price;

FAR 52.249-2 Termination for Convenience of the Government (Fixed Price) FAR 52.249-4 Termination for Convenience of the Government (Services) (Short Form) FAR 52.249-8 Default (Fixed-Price Supply and Service) FAR 52.252-1, Solicitation Provisions Incorporated by Reference; FAR 52.252-2, Clauses Incorporated By Reference;

FAR 52.252-3, Alterations in Solicitation;

FAR 52.252-5, Authorized Deviations in Provisions; FAR 52.252-6, Authorized Deviations In Clauses;

DFARS 252.203-7000, Requirements Relating to Compensation of Former DoD Officials, DFARS 252.203-7002, Requirement to Inform Employees of Whistleblower Rights; DFARS 252.203-7005, Representation Relating to Compensation of Former DOD Officials; DFARS 252.204-7003, Control of Government Work Product;

DFARS 252.204-7004 (Alternate A), System for Award Management;

DFARS 252.204-7008, Compliance with Safeguarding Covered Defense Information Controls; DFARS 252.204-7011, Alternative Line-Item Structure;

DFARS 252.204-7012, Safeguarding of Unclassified Controlled Technical Information; DFARS 252.204-7015, Disclosure of Information to Litigation Support Contractors;

DFARS 252.211-7003, Item Unique Identification and Valuation; DFARS 252.211-7008, Use of Government-Assigned Serial Numbers;

DFARS 252.223-7006, Prohibition on Storage and Disposal of Toxic and Hazardous Materials; DFARS 252.223-7008, Prohibition of Hexavalent Chromium;

DFARS 252.225-7036, Buy American--Free Trade Agreements--Balance of Payments; DFARS 252.225-7048, Export-Controlled Items;

Page 5 of 14 W50S7Z23R0006

DFARS 252.232-7003, Electronic Submission of Payment Requests;

DFARS 252.232-7006, Wide Area Workflow Payment Instructions;

DFARS 252.232-7010, Levies on Contract Payments;

DFARS 252.243-7001, Pricing of Contract Modifications; DFARS 252.244-7000, Subcontracts for Commercial Items; DFARS 252.247-7023, Transportation of Supplies by Sea

The full text versions of referenced clauses and provisions is accessible through https://www.acquisition.gov/far/.

1. Addendum

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

1. SCOPE

1.1. You are invited to submit a proposal in response to our Request for Proposal (RFP) As a result of this solicitation, the Government intends to award a single Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract.

2. PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT PERFORMANCE

2.1. Performance Work Statement (PWS) for this solicitation is incorporated as an attachment.

3. FORMAL COMMUNICATION, OFFEROR EXPLANATIONS AND AMENDMENTS PRIOR TO

DATE SET FOR RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS

3.1. Submit all questions in the format shown below by email to the contracting office at the addresses shown below. Do NOT contact A-E or Engineering personnel directly. Doing so will only delay your answer. All questions must come through the Contracting Office.

Subject Line: Reference posted Solicitation number Email: posted email address

PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRY FORMAT

Date of Inquiry: _______________ From: ______________________________ Company Name: ________________________________ Address: _____________________________________________________________________________ Phone Number: _____________________________ Fax Number: ______________________________ Email address: ________________________________________________________________________ Inquiry: (Please clearly state your question)

3.2. Any explanation desired by offeror regarding the meaning or interpretation of the solicitation, or proposals, drawings, specifications, etc. must be requested in writing and with sufficient time allowed for a reply to reach offeror before the submission of their offer.

3.3. Any changes to the solicitation and PWS will be issued in the form of an amendment. However, any answers that clarify or provide an interpretation will NOT be posted via amendment but rather as a response to the RFI.

3.3.1. Receipt by the offeror must be acknowledged in the space provided on the SF 1442 or by returning a signed copy of the amendment by the time set for receipt of proposals. Explanations or instructions given in a form other than an amendment to the solicitation shall not be binding.

3.4. The right is reserved, as the interest of the Government may require, to revise or amend, the specifications or drawings or both prior to and/or after the date set for receipt of proposals as necessary. Such amendments, if any, Page 6 of 14 W50S7Z23R0006 will be announced by an amendment or amendments to this Request for Proposal. All information relating to this RFP, including pertinent changes/amendments and information prior to the date set for receipt of proposals will be provided via e-mail.

4. WAGE DETERMINATION – not applicable

5. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

5.1. Offeror shall provide all price/cost information necessary to provide a meaningful basis for Government's analysis and evaluation of price/cost for the project. Provide an introductory page to include CAGE Code, DUNS Number, Tax Identification Number (TIN), points of contact, authorized negotiators, contact phone, facsimile numbers, and email addresses.

5.2. Offer and Proposal All line items (CLINs) must be priced.

5.3. Representations and Certifications - insert the required certifications and representations and return only those shown in section 00600. Return with your proposal. All other required representations and certifications are to be completed on line in the System for Award Management (SAM) at https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/.

6. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTIFIED COST OR PRICING DATA – not applicable

7. CERTIFICATION OF COST OR PRICING DATA - not applicable

8. PROPOSAL EXPENSES AND PRE-CONTRACT COSTS

This RFP does not commit the Government to pay costs incurred in preparation and submission of initial and subsequent proposals or for other costs incurred prior to award of a formal contract.

9. REMOVAL OF SECTIONS AT TIME OF AWARD

Sections for solicitation and all exhibits will be physically removed as a result of an award, but will be deemed to be incorporated by reference in that award.

10. DISPOSITION OF UNSUCCESSFUL PROPOSALS

In compliance with FAR Subpart 4.8, the Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals. The Government will destroy extra copies of unsuccessful proposals. No destruction certificate will be provided.

11. EXCEPTIONS

If the offeror takes exception to any of the requirements specified in this solicitation, the offeror shall clearly identify each such exception and include a complete explanation of why the exception was taken and what benefit accrues to the Government. All exceptions to the solicitation requirements (Sections 00010 through 00800) and supporting rationale shall be included in an addendum to the proposal and clearly labeled "Exceptions". An addendum is only required if the offeror takes exception to any requirement in the solicitation. (The Addendum does not have a page limitation, but shall only include information relevant to exceptions taken to the solicitation requirements.) The Government will assume an offeror takes no exceptions to any solicitation requirement if the offeror does not submit an Addendum identifying exceptions. Offeror is advised that solicitation requirements are not necessarily negotiable and such exceptions may render an offeror's proposal unacceptable and ineligible for award.

Page 7 of 14 W50S7Z23R0006

12. CLAUSES

12.1. Clauses and provisions from the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and supplements thereto are incorporated in this document by reference and in full text. Those incorporated by reference have the same force and effect as if they were given in full text.

12.2. Clauses and provisions in this document may not appear in consecutive order.

EVALUATION ADDENDUM

1.1. This solicitation is for a Firm Fixed Price Contract. The Government intends to award a single contract to a qualified Small Business Offeror deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), whose proposal conforms to all the RFP’s requirements and is judged to represent the Best Value to the Government in accordance with the evaluation scheme set out in this solicitation. The award will be made based on the best overall (i.e. best value) proposal that is determined to be the most be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the three (3) evaluation factors: Technical, Past Performance and Price. To arrive at a Best Value decision, the Source Selection Authority will integrate the evaluation of Past/Present Performance, Technical and Price as set out in the solicitation. In terms of the relative importance of the factors, the Technical factor is approximately equal to the Present/ Past Performance and when combined, the non-cost factors are approximately more significant than the Price Factor. The firm that represents the best value to the Government will be selected for award in accordance with FAR 15.1 Source Selection Processes and Techniques.

1.2. To arrive at a Best Value decision this acquisition will utilize the FAR Part 15.101-1 tradeoff process unless the lowest priced offeror (with a price deemed reasonable and realistic) is also deemed to be the highest rated in terms of non-price evaluation criteria. If the lowest priced offeror is also the highest rated in terms of non-Price Factors, no tradeoff is necessary. Further, there is no tradeoff necessary between any offer that is lower priced and higher rated in terms of non-Price Factors with respect to any other offers that are higher priced and lower rated for the non-Price Factors. While the Government and the Source Selection Authority will strive for maximum objectivity, the evaluation process, by its nature, is subjective and therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire evaluation process.

1.3. The source selection process will be conducted in accordance with FAR Subpart 15.3, Source Selection procedures. Offers will be evaluated using the criteria listed in “Evaluation Factors for Award.” Noncompliance with the RFP requirements may raise serious questions regarding an offeror’s technical ability, past performance and/or pricing and may be grounds to eliminate the proposal from consideration for contract award. Failure to include all information requested may adversely affect the evaluation. A proposal that merely reiterates or promises to accomplish the requirements of the RFP will be considered unacceptable. A proposal that is orderly and sufficiently documented will be easy for the Government to understand and will enable the Government to perform a thorough and fair evaluation.

1.4. The Contracting Officer will begin the evaluation process by conducting a proposal compliance review for all timely-received proposals for determination of basic proposal adequacy prior to providing the proposals to the evaluators. Failure to provide a complete proposal may result in the proposal being removed from further consideration for award. Failure to address any factor Technical, Past Performance and Price or any technical subfactor shall be grounds for elimination from evaluation and consideration for award.

1.5. Offerors must ensure that no pricing information is displayed in Volume 2, Technical and Past Performance Proposal.

1.6. Although the assessment of Past Performance as a specific evaluation factor is separate and distinct from the Determination of Responsibility required by FAR Part 9, Past Performance information obtained herein will be used during the Government’s responsibility determination. The Government also reserves the right to obtain additional information solely for the purpose of making a responsibility determination from all offerors after

Page 8 of 14 W50S7Z23R0006 receipt of proposals. Requests for responsibility information do not constitute discussions.

1.7 The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer, in his/her sole discretion, later determines them to be necessary or appropriate.

Further, the Government reserves the right to create or not to create a competitive range.

1.8. ENFORCEABILITY OF PROPOSAL: The proposal must set forth full, accurate and complete information as required by this solicitation. By submission of the offer, the Offeror agrees that all items proposed (if applicable e.g., key personnel, subcontractors, etc.) will be utilized for the duration of the contract and any substitutions shall require prior Contracting Officer's approval.

2. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

2.1. The evaluation factors are (1) Technical, (2) Past/Present Performance and (3) Price. To arrive at a Best Value decision, the Source Selection Authority will integrate the evaluation of Past/Present Performance, Technical and Price as set out in the solicitation. In terms of the relative importance of the factors, the Technical factor is approximately equal to the Present/ Past Performance and when combined, the non-cost factors are approximately equal to the Price Factor. The firm that represents the best value to the Government will be selected for award in accordance with FAR 15.1 Source Selection Processes and Techniques.

2.1.1. Factor 1: The Technical factor is further divided into the following subfactors:

1. Experience and Capability

2. Schedule

3. Quality Control

The subfactors 1-3 will be rated in descending order of importance with Subfactor 1, Experience and Capability, being the most important.

Evaluation of the offeror’s proposal shall address each subfactor as it applies to the Plans and Specifications. A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation is set forth in the “Evaluation Approach”, Paragraph C of this section. During evaluations of each proposal, the Government will assign each subfactor an adjectival rating and write a narrative evaluation reflecting the identified findings; however, the overall evaluation will be at the factor level. An offer which fails to provide information in any of the specified areas may be deemed incomplete, and eliminated from the competition and ineligible for further consideration.

2.1.2. Factor 2. Past Performance: Each offeror’s past performance will be reviewed to determine relevancy and confidence assessment.

2.1.3. Factor 3. Cost/Price. The resulting award will be a firm fixed price contract type. Price Reasonableness will be utilized in the evaluation of the Firm-Fixed price effort.

2.1.4. 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 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

Page 9 of 14 W50S7Z23R0006 determine the extent to which the offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed task and technical requirements within the required schedule.

2.2. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL: TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTOR RATINGS:

2.2.1. The technical rating reflects the degree to which the proposed approach meets or does not meet the minimum performance or capability requirements through an assessment of the strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, and risks of a proposal. This is a combined rating that includes risk associated with the technical approach in a single rating. Ratings will be assigned at the subfactor level as well as an overall factor level rating. Based on evaluation results, the Government will assign a technical rating for each of the three (3) subfactors as well as the overall technical proposal. The subfactors will be rated in descending order of importance with Subfactor 1, Experience and Capability being the most important. An offer which fails to provide information in any of the specified areas may be deemed incomplete, and eliminated from the competition and ineligible for further consideration for award.

Color Rating

Adjectival Rating

Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple Good Proposal demonstrates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength or significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and demonstrates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation and, thus, contains one or more deficiencies and is unawardable, and/or risk of performance is unacceptably high.

2.2.3. Subfactor 1: Experience and Capability. The elements in subfactor 1 are of equal importance.

2.2.3.1. Using the information in Technical Proposal, and the projects/contracts discussed and listed in the Exhibit A’s the Government will evaluate the extent of related experience, and determine to what degree the offeror has the experience and capability to manage a complex multi-disciplined services project comparable to the work requirements of this solicitation. Accordingly, higher ratings can be achieved by offerors whose projects more closely resemble the scope, size, and complexity of this solicitation’s requirements.

2.2.3.2. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s understanding of the contract requirements, and determine to what degree their technical and administrative capabilities, proposed organization and management plan are adequate to meet contract requirements. To be considered adequate the Experience and Capability proposal will address the full spectrum of activities involved in the management of a resulting contract in a manner that gives the Government confidence that the offeror understands all of the requirements. An adequate proposal will include the information necessary to give the Government confidence of the offeror’s ability to successfully perform complete project management of the scope requirements.

2.2.3.3. Proposal must demonstrate adequate quality control processes to give the government confidence of the offeror’s ability to successfully manage the material submittal process, and ensure subcontractor compliance with contract documents.

2.2.3.4. Proposal must demonstrate, as a minimum, that the offeror has capability to fulfill the

Page 10 of 14 W50S7Z23R0006 requirement

2.2.4. Subfactor 2: Schedule.

2.2.5. Subfactor 3: Quality Control. The proposal narrative demonstrates that the quality control staff, with lines of authority, is adequate to meet the contract’s requirements. The proposed Quality Control answers should provide a detailed explanation of how quality issues are dealt with on various types of services projects and as a minimum, meetings, inspections, submittal reviews, correction of non-compliant work and how you intend to ensure non-reoccurrence and reporting of quality problems to Government officials. (Note: A Quality Control Plan is not required with this proposal).

2.3. PAST/PRESENT PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

2.3.1. 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 Plans and Specifications. The Past/Present Performance evaluation will consist of a “relevancy” rating and a “confidence” rating. Although there are subfactors listed below, the “confidence” ratings will be at the factor level only. Stated differently, the subfactors will be considered, but they will not receive individual confidence ratings. The Past/Present Performance evaluation will consider such things as an offeror's business practices, customer relationship, ability to successfully perform as proposed, and other considerations as described in Past/Present Performance Sub-factors, elements and other considerations. Past/Present Performance includes current/on-going (present) performance complete to 70% percent. Projects currently in progress for the National Guard will also be considered regardless of percentage complete. In assessing performance confidence, the evaluator may: (1) evaluate present and past performance information through the use of questionnaires completed by the offeror's references; (2) use data independently obtained from other Government or commercial sources; from any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; (3) interview Program/Project Managers, Contracting Officers or rely upon personal business experience with the offeror; (4) use the information provided in the Offeror’s Past Performance Relevancy Questionnaire; and (5) consider any information the offeror submits which explains any problems encountered on the identified contract and the offeror's corrective actions. The Government reserves the rights to obtain and evaluate past performance information from any source it deems appropriate.

2.3.2. The evaluation may take into account Past/Present Performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to this acquisition. The evaluation will also consider information provided relative to corrective actions taken to resolve problems on past or existing, contracts.

2.3.3. An offeror with no relevant Past/Present Performance may receive a rating based on the evaluation of its predecessor companies, key personnel, and/or subcontractors provided the offeror clearly states in the proposal that the information provided about predecessor companies, key personnel, and/or subcontractors is for the purposes of enhancing the offerors past performance proposal. These ratings may not have the same weight as the ratings of the proposing company. The weight that will be afforded for this type of past performance is within the sole discretion of the Government. If such information is not applicable (i.e., the offeror does not have a predecessor company, key personnel or subcontractors with relevant experience), the offeror shall be evaluated as “Unknown Confidence” (Neutral).

3.2.4. In accordance with FAR 15.306(a)(2), if award will be made without conducting discussions, offerors may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of their proposals, e.g., the relevance of an offeror's past/present performance information and adverse past/present performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond or to resolve minor clerical errors.

3.3 Current, Trends and Relevancy: Evaluators will consider the performance information for currency, Page 11 of 14 W50S7Z23R0006 relevancy as well as trends in the performance as explained further below.

3.3.1. “Current” means performance occurring within the last five (5) years for the period beginning five years prior to the solicitation release date. Within this period, performance occurring later in the period may have greater significance than work occurring earlier in the period.

3.3.2. “Trends” in performance will be considered and may include the following but may not limited to: more current performance having greater weight than older performance; patterns or trends in performance issues as relating to, but not limited to, types of projects, work, personnel and similar elements; and whether performance shows a pattern of improvement or decline over time.

3.3.3. The Government may also consider similarity of the client type (e.g. federal government) and/or the projects sustainability requirements. The Government will consider United States Green Building Council (USGBC) LEED® certification achievements. The location at which work was performed to the location(s) at which work will be performed will also be considered. Relevancy will affect an offeror’s overall Past Performance rating.

3.3.3.1. In assessing “relevancy” of an offeror’s previous contracts the Government may evaluate an offeror’s past performance for similarity of the services methods, size, project scope, cost magnitude and complexity of work performed to those required for the proposed effort. The Government may also consider similarity of the client type (e.g. federal government) and/or the projects sustainability requirements. ANG projects will consider United States Green Building Council (USGBC) LEED®. The location at which work was performed may also be considered.

Relevancy weight will affect offeror’s overall Past Performance Confidence rating. The more relevant the project is weighted the greater confidence there will be in the past performance assessment as a predictor of future performance.

3.3.4. The following apply to weighting relevancy considering all the elements listed above;

3.3.4.1. VERY RELEVANT - Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

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

3.3.4.3. SOMEWHAT RELEVANT- Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

3.3.4.4. NOT RELEVANT - Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

3.3.4.5. Offerors who otherwise have satisfactory performance on previous services projects may be rated Neutral if those projects are not considered relevant to the proposed acquisition and relevancy cannot be obtained through the evaluation of key personnel and/or subcontractors. Projects that are not current will not be considered in the evaluation.

3.4. Past Performance Sub-factors. There are six (6) sub-factors. The six (6) sub-factors are of equal importance. An overall evaluation for Past Performance will be at the factor level.

1. Quality Control

2. Timely Performance

3. Management Effectiveness

4. Compliance with Safety Standards

5. Compliance with Federal laws and regulations

Page 12 of 14 W50S7Z23R0006

6. Compliance with utilization of small business concerns requirements (applicable to all offerors);

including small business concerns. Reference FAR 19.702.

3.5. The elements that may be considered under each subfactor are described below:

3.5.1. Quality Control (QC): Evaluators may consider such things as: Quality of Workmanship; Adequacy of the Contractor QC; Identification/correction of deficient work in a timely manner; Suggested solutions and displayed initiative to implement solutions; Adequacy of Materials; Use of specified materials; Adequacy of Submittals and Adequacy of "As-Builts”.

3.5.2. Timely Performance: Evaluators may consider such things as: Met established progress schedule;

Timely submission of updated and revised progress schedules; Resolved delays in an expeditious manner;

Identification/correction of deficient work in a timely manner; Provided submittals in a timely manner;

Completed all contract work prior to requesting final inspection; Timely completion of punch-list items; Left no major discrepancies; Timely submission of close out documents, i.e., “as builts”, “red lines”; Contractor provided timely and satisfactory response to warranty issues after project completion.

3.5.3. Compliance with Safety Standards: Evaluators may consider such things as: Adequacy of implementation of safety plan; Acceptable safety history; and the Experience Modification Rate (EMR) provided on Exhibit A, Part 2, paragraph 2E. An EMR over 1.0 may receive less favorable consideration.

3.5.4. Management Effectiveness: Evaluators may consider such things as:

3.5.4.1. General Business Practices, including, but not limited to: Contractor provided experienced managers, and supervisors with the ability needed to meet contract requirements; Hired experienced subcontractors; Paid subcontractors/suppliers in a timely manner; The contractor cooperated to resolve problems, attending meetings (as applicable) and maintained communication to assure satisfactory resolution; Overall customer satisfaction and willingness to foster a spirit of partnership with owner. This is a critical element in this subfactor.

3.5.4.2. Pricing, including, but not limited to: The contractor submitted proposals that accurately represented the work required; The contractor's supporting price/cost information for modifications were accurate, complete and reasonable (not over inflated or under estimated); Provided well-substantiated pricing data for change orders;

3.5.4.3. Site Management/Superintendent, including, but not limited to: Site manager ensured compliance to contract requirements & safety regulations; Site manager acted promptly to resolve problems and ensure work quality; Site manager had sufficient authority to make decisions or take actions during project performance; Site manager consistently present on site when work was performed.

3.5.4.4. Sustainability requirement compliance including but not limited to: Extent to which the contract’s sustainability requirements were met. Achievement of USGBC recognition at certified or silver level on completed projects is considered a benefit to the Government and may receive additional consideration.

Achievement above the silver level may receive additional consideration.

3.5.5. Compliance with Federal laws and regulations: Evaluators may consider such things as:

Compliance with labor laws and regulations with specific attention to Services Wage Rate Requirements including, but not limited to: Submitted payrolls in a timely manner; Payrolls were complete and correct;

Compliance with Drug Free Work Place requirements; Compliance with Execute Order 16393—Planning for Federal Sustainability in the Next Decade.

3.5.6. Compliance with utilization of small business concerns requirements (applicable to all offerors);

including small business concerns. Evaluators will consider if the firm was in compliance with FAR 52.219-8 Utilization of Small Business Concerns.

3.6. Other Past Performance Considerations: Evaluators may also consider the following issues when

Page 13 of 14 W50S7Z23R0006 evaluating an offeror's Past Performance. These issues may help provide additional guidance in deciding a descriptive performance confidence assessment (e.g., "Substantial Confidence" or "Satisfactory Confidence") for a specific offeror if there is a question as to which adjective is most appropriate.

3.7. The following ratings and related definitions will be used to define the performance confidence assessment.

Based on the evaluation results, the evaluators will assign the Past Performance factor one of the ratings as defined below.

3.7.1. SUBSTANTIAL CONFIDENCE: Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

3.7.2. SATISFACTORY CONFIDENCE: Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

3.7.3 NEUTRAL: No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

3.7.4. LIMITED CONFIDENCE: Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

3.7.5. NO CONFIDENCE: Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

4. PRICE EVALUATION

4.1. This contract is a firm fixed price contract. Price is not rated. The purpose of the price/cost evaluation is to determine whether an offeror's proposed prices/costs for the project are determined to be fair and reasonable in comparison to the competition, the current market conditions and/or recent prices for the same or similar requirements. Reasonableness of an offeror's proposal is evaluated through cost or price analysis techniques as described in FAR Subpart 15.305(a)(1) and (4).

4.2. The RFP requires firm-fixed prices for the individual contract line items. A price reasonableness approach will be utilized by the Government to determine that the proposed prices offered are fair and reasonable and that a “buy-in” or unbalanced pricing between CLINS or Options is not occurring.

4.3 The Government will examine price proposals for artificially low unit prices. Offers found to be unreasonably high, unrealistically low (an indication of a “buy-in”), or unbalanced, may be considered unacceptable and may be rejected on that basis.

4.4. The Government reserves the right to obtain additional information concerning the price (cost) as necessary to obtain a better understanding of the price proposed. No proposal revisions will be allowed under these conditions. Request for such information is for clarification purposes only. This does not constitute and shall not be construed as discussions. If a minor clerical error has occurred, in which case the offeror may be given an opportunity to correct the minor error within the constraints of the "clarifications" process or the Contracting Officer in his/her sole discretion later determines discussions to be necessary or appropriate.

4.5. In the event the Government does not award a contract pursuant to this solicitation within 90 calendar days after receipt of proposals and award will be made without discussions, the following will apply:

4.5.1 The Government reserves the right to allow offerors to make an adjustment in their price proposals to accommodate cost changes caused by fluctuating services material market conditions. The Contracting Officer will notify Offerors, normally by electronic mail (email) of a common closing date for receipt of the adjusted price proposals. No additional proposal revisions will be allowed under these conditions. This does not constitute

Page 14 of 14 W50S7Z23R0006 and shall not be construed as discussions. If a minor clerical error has occurred, in which case the offeror may be given an opportunity to correct the minor error within the constraints of the "clarifications" process or the Contracting Officer in his/her sole discretion later determines discussions to be necessary or appropriate.

4.6. In the event the current prevailing Wage Determination is changed by the Department of Labor after the closing date of this solicitation, the updated Wage Determination will be incorporated by amendment and issued to all offerors that have not been eliminated from the competition. If applicable, these offerors/contractors will be given a reasonable opportunity to provide revised proposals solely to amend proposals due to Wage Determination changes. This does not constitute and shall not be construed as discussions if award without discussions is contemplated.

5. AWARD and DEBRIEFINGS

5.1. Award: A written award or acceptance of offer mailed, or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer shall be deemed to result in a binding contract without further action by either party.

5.2. Debriefings

5.2.1. Offerors excluded from the competitive range or otherwise excluded from the competition before award may submit a written request for a debriefing to the Contracting Officer in accordance with FAR 15.505.

5.2.2. After award, unsuccessful offerors may submit a written request for a debriefing to the Contracting Officer in accordance with FAR 15.506.