DRAFT EPASS EB FOPR 79 ITO.pdf

EPASS FOPR #79

ATTACHMENT XX

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS (ITO)

ENGINEERING, PROFESSIONAL, AND ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES

(EPASS)

FAIR OPPORTUNITY PROPOSAL REQUEST (FOPR) #79

1 General Guidance The ITO provides general guidance for preparing proposals as well as specific instructions on the format and content of the proposal. The Offeror's proposal shall include all data and information requested by the ITO and shall be submitted in accordance with (IAW) these instructions. If the Technical Volume and Cost Volume provide contradictory information for the same subject, the proposal may be ineligible for award.

IMPORTANT: If a proposal fails to conform to the instructions provided in this ITO, it may be deemed non-responsive and ineligible for award.

All proposal information is subject to verification by the Government. Falsification of any proposal submission, documents, or statements may subject the Offeror to civil or criminal prosecution under Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code and/or disqualification from this Fair Opportunity Competition (FOC).

1.1 Small Business Requirements

This is a restricted task order Fair Opportunity Proposal Request (FOPR). Only contract holders qualified as small businesses may submit a proposal in response to the FOPR. The contracting officer is requesting recertification of the Offerors size status at the time of submittal of the task order proposal. Offerors are instructed to complete fill-in FAR clause 52.219-1 (as provided in Attachment 15), Small Business Program Representations (Feb 2024) to recertify its respective size status in relation to NAICS XXXXXX.

IAW 13 CFR 121.404(g), Offerors are reminded if a merger, sale, or acquisition occurs after offer, but prior to award, the Offeror shall recertify its size for the NAICS code(s) in the FOPR to the contracting officer prior to award.

Prior to award, if the contracting officer questions whether the apparent awardee qualifies as a small business due to a merger, sale, acquisition, or novation, the Government may request a size determination from the Small Business Administration (SBA) to ensure the awardee is considered a small business concern within the solicitation's NAICS at time of award. If the SBA size determination concludes that the Offeror, after the merger, sale, acquisition, or novation, does not qualify as a small business concern under NAICS XXXXXX, the Offeror will be ineligible for award.

The small business goals of the Air Force are a priority. The regulation at 13 CFR 121.404(g) prohibits the Air Force from receiving small business credit if a company no longer qualifies as a small business concern due to merger, sale, acquisition, or novation. To meet small business goals, the Air Force may not exercise options to a company that is no longer considered a small business concern under the task order NAICS code.

ATTACHMENT XX

1.2 Compliance with Requirements

Offerors shall comply with the requirements as stated in the FOPR.

The Level of Effort (LOE) Matrix (FOPR Attachment 02) is used as a Basis of Estimate (BOE) by the Government. The LOE Matrix is considered the Government’s expressed requirement per FAR 15.403-1(c)(1)(i) and all Offerors are required to bid labor rates for all position combinations (labor category, skill level, location, and clearance) at the exact hours contained within the LOE Matrix, as well as for position combinations appearing in the UPT which do not contain hours in the LOE Matrix. Failure to provide labor rates at the exact hours by designated position combination as identified in the LOE Matrix will result in the rejection of the Offeror's proposal.

The Offeror shall select a maximum of five work samples (contracts/task orders) to submit as substantiating evidence for the Offeror Self-Scoring Matrix (FOPR Attachment 11). The scoring of each qualification criterion shall come from the five work samples submitted, and only those five, unless otherwise noted in the Evaluation Criteria (FOPR Attachment 05) subfactor.

Qualifications for work samples are explained in the Evaluation Criteria. If the Offeror is a Joint- Venture, a copy of the Joint-Venture agreement shall be provided with the proposal. If the Offeror is a Mentor-Protégé Joint-Venture, a copy of the SBA approved Mentor-Protégé Agreement shall be provided with the proposal. See the Evaluation Criteria (FOPR Attachment 05) for additional instructions for Joint-Ventures. When referring to work samples, the terms “contract” and “task order” are interchangeable with “contract” often used as the all-encompassing term.

A Work Sample Cover Sheet (FOPR Attachment 12a) shall be completed for each work sample submitted. Each work sample shall provide at least two Government Points of Contact (POCs).

The Offeror shall ensure that all provided Government POCs are available to confirm evidence for a given work sample as of the proposal submission date. The Government will make a reasonable effort to contact the Government POCs provided if necessary. The Government reserves the right to contact the Government POCs provided in the Work Sample Cover Sheet, the Prime Contractor, any Subcontractors, or any other Government resources determined to be necessary, for any or all evaluation criteria subfactors during validation of self-scores. The Government is not obligated to contact Government POCs if evaluation can be completed based on the Offeror’s proposal alone. If the Government cannot validate the Offeror’s self-score on an evaluation criteria subfactor based on the substantiating data provided, the Government reserves the right to downward adjust the score, potentially all the way down to zero points awarded.

All work samples shall be redacted of any Personally Identifiable Information (PII) to the maximum extent practicable while still enabling adequate substantiation for Government validation. PII is defined as any information that can be used on its own or with other information to identify, contact, or locate a single person, or to identify an individual in context, and can include names, social security numbers or any other information that would identify an individual.

However, names in and of themselves are not considered PII.

IMPORTANT: Unsubstantiated and/or misleading claims, for even a single category, could result in the Government determining that the Offeror’s proposed self-score is disingenuous and/or artificially inflated, ultimately resulting in the proposal being deemed unawardable. The next highest rated self-score would then be evaluated.

ATTACHMENT XX

1.3 Clarity of Proposal

The proposal shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and validation of stated claims. The burden of proof to substantiate the Offeror’s self-score rests with the Offeror. The proposal shall include bodies of evidence supporting each self-score. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of its facilities, capabilities, and experience and will base the evaluation solely on the information presented in the Offeror's proposal.

The Offeror shall provide cross references with their proposal that will clearly demonstrate the connection between the submitted documents and the evaluation criteria called out in the “References” column of the Offeror Self Scoring Matrix work sample tabs. It is the responsibility of, and incumbent upon, the Offeror to accurately reference the specific location (e.g. page number and/or paragraph number) of substantiating data in each work sample within the Offeror Self-Scoring Matrix “References” column of each work sample tab to enable Government validation of the Offeror’s self-score. Failure to accurately reference the specific location may result in the Government’s inability to validate the proposed self-score, resulting in a downward adjustment. In addition, the Offeror shall:

• Demonstrate traceability between the evaluation criteria subfactor and evidence being proposed so that the Government can make a clear connection;

• Provide documented evidence that clearly supports the evaluation criteria subfactor. If the Government cannot conclusively align the evidence to support the requirement, it may result in decremented points, and;

• Ensure the proposed evidence guides the Government to a validated conclusion. If the evidence is unclear and the Government cannot make the connection, points will be decremented.

1.4 What Not to Submit

Offerors shall not submit elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed artwork, or other embellishments. The Government will NOT accept discretely generated documentation for the sole purpose of point validation. Discretely generated documentation is defined as documentation that is newly generated expressly for the purpose of responding to this solicitation and was in no way a product of the work sample.

Evidence proposed shall be submitted in the original format as it was originally delivered;

however, Offerors may highlight sections of the evidence document without inserting text notes.

Highlighting shall not adversely impact the legibility of the document. Offerors should explain how the work sample artifacts substantiate the self-score in the cover sheet for each evaluation criterion subfactor/work sample package (see Sections 12.2 and 12.3).

Names that have been manually inserted into substantiating artifacts and were not part of the original document will not be used to validate performance.

The Government has determined that Contractor Self-Assessments and employee resumes cannot be verified, are inconclusive as validated performance, and will not be evaluated as substantiating evidence submitted in response to EPASS FOPRs.

ATTACHMENT XX

1.5 Statement of Proposal Validity

The Offeror shall clearly state in its contract documentation volume that the proposal is valid for 270 calendar days from date of proposal submission.

1.6 Retention of Unsuccessful Proposals

IAW FAR subpart 4.8 (Government Contract Files), the Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals.

1.7 Interchanges

The Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without further contact. The Government intends to make a selection without interchanges.

However, if during the evaluation period, it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to conduct interchanges with an Offeror, the Contracting Officer (CO) will notify the Offeror. Should interchanges be conducted, Offeror responses to Interchange Notices (IN) will be considered in making the task order selection decision. The Government may conduct interchanges either orally or in writing, and may issue questions to some, none, or all Offerors.

IMPORTANT: The Government reserves the right to contact the Prime Offeror or any Team Members/Subcontractors/Interdivisional Transfers (IDTs) to substantiate, understand, or clarify any of the evidence provided.

1.8 Team Composition and Adjustment

1.9 Prime Offerors are ultimately responsible for the composition of their team. Notice of Payment Instructions

In the event, other payment instructions are not allowed, the Government will use DFARS PGI 204.7108(b)(2) cost voucher and line-item specific proration for payment. This will require the creation of CLINs at the project level and substantially increase the amount of CLINs on the contract. This will require a Level of Effort (LOE) Matrix organized by project rather than by division. In the event this were to occur, the Government will provide updated documentation and requirements to offerors.

2 Point of Contact The CO is the primary Government POC for this acquisition. Offerors shall address questions or concerns to the CO, and courtesy copy the designated Contract Specialist identified in the FOPR cover letter. The Offeror shall not contact any other Government personnel or offices regarding this acquisition until after task order award.

3 Debriefings The CO will notify Offerors of the fair opportunity decision IAW FAR 16.505(b)(6). Upon such notification, unsuccessful Offerors may request and receive a debriefing. Unsuccessful Offerors desiring a debriefing shall make their request IAW the requirements of FAR 15.506, as applicable.

4 Discrepancies If an Offeror believes that these instructions contain errors or omissions, or are otherwise unsound, the Offeror should immediately notify the CO in writing with supporting rationale and any remedy the Offeror may ask the CO to consider.

ATTACHMENT XX

5 Electronic Communications Submission of questions to the FOPR between the Government and Offerors will be controlled by the CO. TBD will be used to transmit such information between Offerors and the CO.

However, if technical/system issues are encountered, the CO may elect to use DoD SAFE or electronic mail (email) as an alternative. If determined by the CO, email may be used only if the email can be sent and received encrypted and includes the caption “Source Selection Information

– See FAR 2.101 & 3.104” in the subject line of the email. In order to facilitate the sending and receiving of encrypted email, Offerors shall use Microsoft Outlook configured to support encryption or a different email product that is Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME) compatible and configured to support encryption. If the Offeror intends to submit FOC information via encrypted email, the Offeror will need to contact the CO indicated in the FOPR cover letter prior to that first submittal in order to exchange certificates used for encryption. To ensure the process is working correctly, the Offeror may send a test encrypted message first (without including any FOC information).

6 Proposal Organization Proposals shall be delivered to the Government no later than the date and time specified in the FOPR cover letter. Proposals shall be organized as follows:

• Volume I – Table of Contents o Volume I(a) – Executive Summary (this will not be evaluated) o Volume I(b) – Contract Documentation

• Volume II – Factor I: Task Order Technical Proposal Substantiating Data

• Volume III – Factor 2: Task Order Cost/Price Proposal

There are no page limits for any volume except Volume 1(a), Executive Summary, which shall be limited to two pages. Offerors shall deliver their proposal entirely in electronic form via TBD.

If an offeror encounters challenges with this tool, they may contact the CO and submit their proposal electronically via DoD SAFE as an alternative.

Each volume shall contain a detailed table of contents delineating the subsections within that volume. Offerors are encouraged to use separate files to permit rapid location of all portions, including any subfactors, exhibits, annexes, and attachments.

All cost and pricing information shall be addressed only in Volume III - Task Order Cost/Price Proposal.

Font shall be Times New Roman, no less than 12-point. Character spacing shall be Microsoft Word default settings as “normal,” and margins shall be no less than one inch on all sides. The font size requirement is not mandatory for substantiating documents that fall out of this range.

The font for all tables, charts, graphs, and foldouts shall be Times New Roman, no less than 10-point font, with character spacing as Microsoft Word default settings of “normal”.

The 12-point font and 1-inch margin requirement does not apply to copies of the Offeror Self Scoring Matrix, Work Sample Cover Sheet, Uniform Pricing Template (UPT) (FOPR Attachment 06), or any substantiation documentation (e.g., Contract Data Requirement List (CDRL) items, ATTACHMENT XX

Performance Work Statements (PWSs), invoices, and/or screenshots). However, the Offeror shall ensure that all submittals are legible.

Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume. The page formatting prescribed here shall also apply to responses to INs, if any.

7 Cost or Pricing Information All cost and pricing information shall be addressed only in the Task Order Cost/Price Volume.

The Government may request additional cost and/or pricing information to substantiate or understand the Offeror’s proposal.

8 Cross-Referencing To the greatest extent possible, each volume shall be written as a standalone document so that it may be evaluated with minimal cross-references to other volumes of the proposal. Failure to include proposal information in the correct designated volume may result in the Government not considering the information in the evaluation..

The Offeror shall identify the substantiating artifacts in the “References” columns in each work sample tab of the Offeror Self Scoring Matrix, indicating the proposal reference information as it relates to the substantiating information references.

9 Electronic File Format The Offeror shall submit Volume I in Microsoft Word and/or searchable Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF), and Volumes II and III in Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel, and/or searchable Adobe PDF. Note: The UPT file and Offeror Self-Scoring Matrix shall be provided in Microsoft Excel, unlocked, and with working formulas.

IMPORTANT: Be sure to apply all appropriate markings including those prescribed IAW FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on Disclosure and Use of Data, and FAR 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Contractor Bid or Proposal Information and Fair Opportunity Selection Information.

10 Distribution Proposal submissions shall be addressed to the CO and Contract Specialist and submitted through TBD by the date and time specified in the FOPR cover letter.

ATTN: AFLCMC/AZS

PCO: <INSERT CO’s NAME> <INSERT CO’s E-MAIL ADDRESS>

Contracting Specialist: <INSERT SPECIALIST’S NAME>

<INSERT SPECIALIST’S E-MAIL ADDRESS>

Any necessary Team Member/Subcontractor/IDT BOEs may be submitted separately from the Prime Offeror proposal directly to the CO via encrypted email with a courtesy copy to the Contract Specialist, to the email addresses below. See Paragraph 13.2.2.1 for additional information.

ATTACHMENT XX

<INSERT CO’s E-MAIL ADDRESS>

<INSERT SPECIALIST’S E-MAIL ADDRESS>

11 Volume I - Table of Contents Volume I shall include a Master Table of Contents for the entire proposal.

11.1 Volume I(a) - Executive Cover Letter/Executive Summary

An Executive Summary shall be included and shall not exceed two pages in length. The Executive Summary shall include the Offeror’s self-score point total. The Executive Summary will not be evaluated.

11.2 Volume I(b) – Contract Documentation

The Contractor shall include all required contract documentation that does not belong in the Task Order Technical Proposal Volume or the Task Order Cost/Price Volume in Volume I(b). In addition, the Contract Documentation section shall include the following:

• Authorized Offeror Personnel

• Government Offices

• Provisions and Clauses Fill-ins

• Cross Teaming Limitations and Identification of Subcontractors

11.2.1 Authorized Offeror Personnel

The Offeror shall provide the name, title, email address, and telephone number of the company/division POC regarding decisions made with respect to its proposal and who can obligate the company contractually. In addition, the Offeror shall identify those individuals authorized to communicate with the Government.

11.2.2 Government Offices

The Offeror shall provide the mailing address, email address, and facility codes for the cognizant Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) and Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) offices.

11.2.3 Provisions and Clauses Fill-ins

The Offeror shall incorporate applicable provision and clause fill-ins.

11.2.4 Cross Teaming Limitations and Identification of Subcontractors To be considered a Team Member, direct labor rates and hours shall be proposed by the Team Member. A contractor qualifying via the GSA OASIS IDIQ Clause H.6.12 Meaningful Relationship Commitment Letters (MRCL) will not be considered a team member for the purposes of this solicitation unless it proposes direct labor rates and hours.

If a company is identified as a Prime Offeror or Team Member/Subcontractor on any proposal, then that company cannot participate as a Prime Offeror or Team Member/Subcontractor on any other Offeror's proposal for this specific FOC.

ATTACHMENT XX

After proposal submission, the teaming arrangement limitation does not apply to subsequent efforts regarding this task order or any future FOCs.

The Offeror shall provide a list of all proposed Team Members/Subcontractors that will perform work on this task order and the mailing address, email address, and facility codes for the cognizant DCAA and DCMA for each Team Member/Subcontractor.

IAW the GSA OASIS+ SB IDIQ contract, performance of services awarded under OASIS+ SB, FAR 52.219-14 Limitations on Subcontracting will be monitored and strictly enforced by the OASIS SB CO. In performance of all task orders combined (not each task order unless required by the Ordering CO for their individual task order) the contractor will not pay more than 50 percent of the amount paid by the Government for contract performance to subcontractors that are not similarly situated entities. Any work that a similarly situated entity further subcontracts will count toward the 50 percent subcontract amount that cannot be exceeded.

12 Volume II – Factor 1: Task Order Technical Proposal Substantiating Data In Volume II, the Offeror shall provide specific evidence to substantiate its self-score. The Task Order Technical Proposal Substantiating Data Volume should be specific and complete.

Legibility, clarity, brevity, and coherence are important. The Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated using the Offeror Self-Scoring Matrix. Using the instructions below, the Offeror shall provide, as specifically as possible, the actual evidence used to substantiate the Offeror’s self-score. All the requirements specified in the solicitation are mandatory. By submitting a proposal, the Offeror represents that it will perform all the requirements specified in the solicitation. The Offeror shall not include any dollar amounts within the Technical Proposal.

IMPORTANT: The Offeror shall consider the entire Description, Restrictions, Maximum Count, Relevancy, and Burden of Proof for each subfactor in the Evaluation Criteria document (FOPR Attachment 05) Section 3.1 when self-scoring. The Offeror Self-Scoring Matrix includes only a summary of the complete criteria.

12.1 Offeror Self-Scoring Matrix

The Offeror shall provide an Offeror Self-Scoring Matrix for their proposal utilizing up to five work samples. The Offeror shall substantiate their self-score for each evaluation criterion so that the Government can validate the highest technically rated self-score.

12.2 Work Sample Substantiating Documentation

Work samples should be arranged such that each segment is readily identifiable allowing for ease of searching. The overall work sample artifacts should be contained in one electronic file with an easily distinguishable name (e.g., for a PDF file the Offeror may use “Work Sample 1 (WS-1) Overall.pdf”). The contents of this file should be as follows:

Work Sample Layout (example):

• FOPR XX

• Work Sample One (WS-1) (separate pages or sections)

- Work Sample Cover Sheet (Attachment XX)

- Federal Procurement Data Systems (FPDS) report

- Contract Front Page

ATTACHMENT XX

- Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPAR), Prime Past Performance Rating Form (PPPRF), or Subcontractor Past Performance Rating Form (SPPRF) associated with work sample contract

- PWS awarded with work sample contract

- LOE Matrix associated with work sample contract (if applicable)

• WS-1 Subfactors – Identify each subfactor associated with the work sample (example format below) o Technical/General

- 1.2.1 “Highest validated combined percentage for Exceptional and Very Good CPAR ratings.”

- 1.2.2 “Greatest number of validated work samples with Armament Weapon System Support”

- 1.2.3 “Greatest number of validated personnel providing engineering support across all work samples.”

12.3 Subfactor-Specific Artifacts from Each Work Sample

The artifacts being used to substantiate the self-score from each work sample should be arranged so that each artifact is readily identifiable allowing for ease of searching. The overall work sample artifacts should be contained in one electronic file with an easily distinguishable name (e.g. for a PDF file the Offeror may use “Subfactor 3.1.1 WS-1 Artifacts.pdf”). The contents of this file should be as follows:

• Introductory document for each Evaluation Criteria subfactor for which points are being claimed using the work sample, which contains the following basic information:

o First Page (include FOPR number): EPASS FOPR 79 Work Sample Number: One Company Name: XYZ Corporation Role and Category based on the type of work sample: Prime * Category 1 Work Sample Name: (i.e. contract name associated with work sample) Small

Aerial Vehicles Work Sample Contract Number: FA8622-26-F-1234 Identify Evaluation Criteria Subfactor: e.g., Subfactor 3.1.3 Time Period if applicable: When the Evaluation Criteria specifies an occurrence within a specific time period e.g., if “within 30 calendar days”, identify the 30 calendar days being used.

Substantiation Process: Explain the focus of the work sample contract and how it is relevant in support of the evaluation criteria subfactor requirements. Within the subfactor, identify each piece of evidence being submitted for validation, explain what each evidence document is and how each is being used to validate the proposed self-score.

Contractor format is acceptable (See example below).

• Identify Each Evidence Artifact Supporting this Work Sample:

o Provide a brief explanation of what each evidence artifact is substantiating

WS-1

Reference 1 – ABC Corp, AFLCMC/XYZ, PWS, FA8622-18-F-1234, 29/09/20

DESROCHERS, ZACHARY J GS-12 USAF AFMC AFLCMC/AZS

Update with FOPR 79 examples

ATTACHMENT XX

This PWS is to identify positions supporting Acquisition Program Management Support, evidenced by the alignment of the PWS paragraphs supported.

Reference 2 – MSR Reference 3 – Business System Personnel Roster, etc

13 Volume III – Factor 2: Task Order Cost/Price Proposal

13.1 General Instructions

These instructions are to assist the Offeror in preparing and submitting Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data required IAW FAR 15.403-3. The Government needs this information in order to properly evaluate the reasonableness, realism, and balance of the Offeror’s proposed price. Compliance with these instructions is mandatory and failure to do so could result in the rejection of the proposal. Offers should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate their reasonableness, realism, and balance. The burden of proof for credibility rests with the Offeror.

Information beyond that required by these instructions shall not be submitted unless the Offeror considers it essential to support their proposed cost and price.

13.1.1 Preliminary Determination of Adequate Price Competition IAW FAR 15.403-1(c)(1), the CO has made a preliminary determination of adequate price competition for this acquisition. Upon examination of the initial offers, the CO will review this determination. If adequate price competition exists, no additional data will be requested and certification under FAR 15.406-2 will not be required. However, if at any time during this competition the CO determines adequate price competition no longer exists, Offerors may be required to submit Certified Cost or Pricing Data IAW FAR subpart 15.4.

13.1.2 Ground Rules and Assumptions

The Offeror shall include a general discussion of the ground rules and assumptions (e.g. contract type; contract items; delivery schedule; or Government-Furnished Equipment (GFE), Property (GFP), Information (GFI), or Material (GFM)) used to develop the proposed prices. All assumptions, scope limitations and/or qualifications of the cost and price proposal shall be addressed and explained. The Offeror shall list each exception to the instructions provided in the solicitation and each qualification of the Task Order Cost/Price Proposal Volume, if any. The Offeror shall provide complete rationale for any exceptions. Other ground rules and assumptions of the prospective contract should be provided in the appropriate sections of the proposal accordingly.

13.1.3 Estimating Techniques and Methods

When responding to the Task Order Cost/Price Proposal Volume requirements in the solicitation, the Offeror and Subcontractors/IDTs may use any generally accepted estimating technique, including contemporary estimating methods (such as Cost-to-Cost and Cost-to-Non-Cost Cost Estimating Relationships, commercially available parametric cost models, in-house developed parametric cost models) to develop their estimates.

13.1.4 Rounding

All dollar amounts shall be rounded to the nearest dollar (e.g. $1,234), except that all labor rates shall be rounded to the nearest penny (e.g. $12.34). Percentages shall be rounded to the nearest

Example

ATTACHMENT XX

hundredth of a percent (e.g. 12.34%). Offerors shall use the “Round” function in Microsoft Excel to eliminate rounding errors from their proposal.

13.2 Cost and Price Instructions

The Task Order Cost/Price Proposal Volume shall be prefaced by a table of contents and shall specify, by page number, where each cost format and piece of narrative data is located. The Task Order Cost/Price Proposal Volume shall provide comprehensive narrative support for the cost and price proposal(s). In addition, the Offeror shall provide a Contract Line-Item Number (CLIN) summary. The Cost and Price Volume shall consist of the following sections:

SECTION 1: Introduction SECTION 2: Team Members/Subcontracts/IDT Summary SECTION 3: BOEs and Other Information SECTION 4: UPT Instructions

13.2.1 SECTION 1: Introduction

The Offeror shall prepare a proposal summary that includes an introduction, overview, index, summary description of their accounting systems, and, if applicable, changes to approved/ disclosed accounting systems.

13.2.1.1 Accounting System Summary

The Offeror shall provide a current (within 12 months from the date of proposal submittal) audit report, finding, or letter from the Offeror’s cognizant DCMA Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO) or DCAA office stating that the Offeror’s accounting system has been audited and determined to be both compliant with the FAR and is adequate for cost type contracts. A cost type contract may only be awarded if the limitations in FAR 16.301-3 are met. This reference establishes limitations that the Contractor’s accounting system shall be adequate for determining costs applicable to the contract. Therefore, no award can be made to an Offeror whose accounting system has not been determined to be adequate for cost type contracts. This impacts all Team Members/Subcontractors/IDTs if the Prime Offeror anticipates awarding cost type subcontracts to them. If no cost type subcontracts are to be awarded, the Offeror shall so state. If cost type subcontracts for Team Members/Subcontractors/IDTs are to be awarded, the Offeror shall provide the necessary information from them.

If it has been over 12 months since the accounting system was reviewed, the Offeror shall provide a statement that the accounting system has not changed since being reviewed along with the most recent audit report, finding, or letter from the ACO or DCAA. If the accounting system has changed, a certification shall be provided indicating that the changes have not impacted the approval or adequacy of the accounting system. The certification, if needed, shall be signed by someone with the legal authority to bind the company.

13.2.1.2 Adequate Disclosure Statements

IAW FAR part 30 and FAR Appendix 9903.201-1(b)(3), Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) do not apply to small business concerns. As this acquisition is a small business set-aside, this contract is CAS-exempt, and an adequate disclosure statement is not required.

ATTACHMENT XX

13.2.2 SECTION 2: Team Members/Subcontracts/IDT Summary

13.2.2.1 Team Member/Subcontractor/IDT Analysis

The Offeror shall provide a cost and price evaluation for all Team Members/Subcontractor/IDT.

The evaluation shall explain how the Team Members/Subcontractor/IDT effort relates to the overall effort and corroborate the justification that leads to the Prime Offeror’s conclusion that the Team Member’s/Subcontractor’s/IDT’s price is reasonable. Any cost or price adjustments to the Team Members/Subcontractor/IDT’s proposed prices that are included in the Offeror’s proposal submission, including discounting, or expected decreases to be achieved in negotiations, shall be fully identified, and explained. If any position combinations have proposed blended/composite labor rates, it shall also be clear what percentage of the work for the individual labor category will be performed by the Prime and each Team Member/Subcontractor/IDT.

Any Team Member/Subcontractor/IDT performing 10.00% or more of the total effort (as determined by percentage of cost, excluding travel, Other Direct Costs (ODCs), and studies, reports, and analyses) shall be considered a “Major Subcontractor” and a Team Member/ Subcontractor/IDT performing less than 10.00% of the total effort shall be considered a “Minor Subcontractor”. Detailed cost and pricing data is required for the Prime Offeror and all Team Members/Subcontractors (Major and Minor)/IDT and should demonstrate the individual cost components (direct and indirect rates) of the fully burdened labor rates.

Since some of the required data may be considered proprietary, any necessary Team Member/Subcontractor/IDT BOEs may be submitted under separate cover directly to the CO via email or DoD SAFE to the email addresses identified in Section 10.0. Emails shall be sent and received encrypted and include the caption “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 & 3.104” in the subject line of the email. In order to facilitate the sending and receiving of encrypted email, Team Member/Subcontractor/IDT shall use Microsoft Outlook email configured to support encryption or a different email product that is Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME) compatible and configured to support encryption. If the Team Member/Subcontractor/IDT intends to submit proprietary information via encrypted email, the Team Member/Subcontractor/IDT will need to contact the CO indicated in the FOPR cover letter prior to that first submittal in order to exchange certificates used for encryption. To ensure the process is working correctly, the Team Member/Subcontractor/ IDT may send a test encrypted message first (without including any proprietary information). Any data submitted separately by a Team Member/Subcontractor/IDT shall be received by the CO by the due date and time specified in the FOPR Cover Letter. The Government will not consider any BOE data that is provided directly to the CO by a Team Member/Subcontractor/IDT if it is submitted late. If encrypted email is unavailable, the Team Member/Subcontractor/IDT can submit electronically via DoD SAFE.

13.2.3 SECTION 3: BOEs and Other Information

This section shall include other information that will further support the Offeror’s Task Order Cost/Price Proposal Volume. The Offeror shall include other information including, but not limited to, GFE/GFP/GFI/GFM and/or Government-owned facilities, by Contractor fiscal year over the period of performance.

ATTACHMENT XX

13.2.3.1 Direct and Indirect Rates

The Government requires Offerors to objectively substantiate the realism and reasonableness of all proposed rates. The Government may determine that proposed rates are unrealistic or unreasonable, despite the inclusion of substantiating documentation, if the Offeror will not likely be able to hire and retain qualified personnel at the rate proposed or if the proposed price is deemed so high that it reflects a lack of sound business judgment.

This also applies to Team Members/Subcontractors/IDTs IAW Paragraph 13.2.2.1.

13.2.3.1.1 Labor Rates

The Government assumes Offerors will be unlikely to hire and retain personnel below the 85th percentile on this task order. Offerors may deviate from this assumption if it is necessary to support particular mission requirements but shall explicitly identify and explain in the BOE their reasons for selecting the percentile proposed.

Labor rate assertions submitted without evidence will be accorded little or no weight in the Government’s analysis. A description of an Offeror’s estimating technique is not in-and-of-itself sufficient to substantiate the realism or reasonableness of labor rates without additional substantiating data. Likewise, conclusory, unsupported statements of incumbent salaries without substantiating proof will be accorded little or no weight in the Government’s realism assessment.

Offerors are encouraged to use market survey and/or public index data from available sources to justify submitted rates. However, Offerors utilizing such data shall submit the following additional information:

a) A clear mapping between the proposed position combination wage rates and the wage rates listed in the database(s). The actual salary survey data shall be included in the cost proposal depicting the entire salary range for each Labor Category selected.

b) A clear mapping between labor category titles proposed to the labor category titles in the market survey. Offerors shall include a narrative explaining how the salary survey labor category selected reasonably maps to the labor category proposed.

13.2.3.1.2 Indirect Rates

The Offeror shall identify the base to which each indirect rate (overhead, fringe, General and Administrative (G&A), subcontract handling, etc.) is applied.

If an Offeror has a Forward Pricing Rate Agreement (FPRA) with the cognizant ACO, the Offeror shall provide the FPRA with the negotiated direct and indirect rates.

If an Offeror does not have an FPRA, the Offeror shall provide the most current approved Provisional Billing Rates (PBRs) for any indirect rates.

If the Offeror does not have an FPRA or PBRs, the Offeror shall submit current billing rates and explain how the proposed rates were derived. The Offeror shall submit their most current indirect rate invoices or information that contains actual indirect rates from the past six months prior to the release of this FOPR.

ATTACHMENT XX

The Government will not accept subjective forecasting of indirect rates.

Assertions submitted without evidence will be accorded little or no weight in the Government’s analysis.

Offerors are cautioned that the Government may reject proposals that fail to follow the above instructions.

This also applies to Team Members/Subcontractors/IDTs IAW Paragraph 13.2.2.1.

13.2.3.2 Government Furnished Equipment

No GFE/GFP/GFI/GFM other than what is identified in the PWS (FOPR Attachment 01) will be allowable.

13.2.3.3 Fixed Fee

The Offeror shall provide one fixed fee rate for the effort for both Prime and Subcontractor labor.

The proposed fee rate shall not exceed 5.00%. Fee rates in excess of the Not-to-Exceed amount will not be considered fair and reasonable and the Offeror will not be eligible for award regardless of technical score. A fee rate of 5.00% could still make an Offer unreasonable, as it could make the overall price unreasonable.

13.2.3.4 Escalation Rates

The escalation rates determined by the CO, and contained within the UPT, shall be proposed for all position combinations by option year, and is applicable to all Team Members/Subcontractors/IDTs. The source for these escalation rates is the most current version of Global Insights Report, Index CEU605400008 as of the final FOPR release.

13.2.4 SECTION 4: UPT Instructions

Offerors shall submit a UPT using the electronic Microsoft Excel format (.xlsx) provided by the Government that contains simple embedded formulas that provide insight into the build-up of the Offeror’s cost proposal. Offerors may make minor adjustments to the UPT, if needed, to provide additional information for clarification. Factors that affect labor rates shall be included in the BOE for that labor category to fully explain the labor rate populated in the UPT. The Offeror shall not encrypt, lock, or protect the UPT in the proposal submission. Below is a description of each section of the UPT Excel file.

13.2.4.1 Instructions Worksheet

This worksheet provides detailed instructions for how to fill out the UPT. Failure to follow the instructions may result in an Offeror being deemed ineligible for award.

13.2.4.2 Total Summary Worksheet

This worksheet provides a total cost and price summary by CLIN for the Base Year and each Option Year. The Total Estimated Cost and Fixed Fee cells for the Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee Level of Effort (CPFF LOE) CLINs are linked directly to the respective priced Division/FMS Branch LOE Worksheet. The Contract Access Fee (CAF) CLINs are formulated to be 0.1% of their respective Division’s/Branch’s Labor and Travel CLINs for the Base Year and Option Years 1-4 and shall not be adjusted. The Cost-Reimbursable CLINs include Government-established values for

ATTACHMENT XX

Travel and ODCs and shall not be adjusted. The Data CLINs are not separately priced. The Offeror’s proposed total value is the summation of the Total Price for the Base Period and Option Years 1-4. Offerors shall not make any adjustment to the Total Summary worksheet.

13.2.4.3 LCATs (ALL) Eglin AFB Worksheet

Other than the single cell in the Instructions worksheet where the Offeror shall record its name, this is the only worksheet which requires Offeror input. This worksheet identifies all potential position combinations (labor category, skill level, and clearance) for Eglin AFB and is the basis of calculation for all other locations and option years. The number of hours by unique position for the Base Year and Option Years 1-4 can be found in the LOE Matrix (FOPR Attachment 02) and the respective priced Division’s/Branch’s LOE worksheet. The Offeror shall propose a direct labor rate for each unique position combination regardless of hours.

For each position combination, identify a direct rate rounded to two decimals (e.g., $12.34). All position combinations shall utilize the same indirect rates (e.g., Fringe, Overhead, and G&A) for the duration of the contract and shall be rounded to two decimals (e.g., 12.34%). Fee as a percentage shall not exceed 5.00% and shall not change for the duration of the contract.

Once the Offeror has entered this information IAW the instructions above and as contained within the UPT, all other relevant cells will populate with the appropriate data and calculations as driven by the data inputs of the cells colored light blue.

13.2.4.4 B-Table Worksheet

This worksheet establishes the B-Table pricing for potential future unilateral additions or deletions of work covered by the respective unique position combinations represented herein.

This worksheet identifies the Fully Burdened Labor Rates (Less Fee) and Fixed Fee Per Hour that will be on contract for each unique position combination for the Base Year and Option Years 1-

4. The inclusion of a B-Table necessitates a single labor rate for each unique position combination. That single labor rate applies to all Prime Offeror and Team Member positions.

There shall only be one labor rate and hourly fixed fee per unique position combination per year.

A summary of the buildup and justification for any proposed composite/blended rate shall be provided in the UPT. The full buildup and justification for any proposed composite/blended rates, to include any supporting rationale, shall be included in Volume III in the form of a BOE.

13.2.4.5 CY24 OPM Locality Rates Worksheet

This UPT worksheet is used to determine rates for locations other than Eglin AFB and does not require input from the Prime Offeror. Rates for locations other than Eglin AFB use the calculation below based on OPM localities.

(Eglin AFB rate / Rest of US OPM locality) * new OPM locality rate

Example using $100 Eglin AFB rate to calculate a position at Robins AFB and Langley AFB:

Robins AFB: ($100 / (1+16.82%)) * (1+16.82%) = $100 (both reside in the Rest of US OPM locality)

ATTACHMENT XX

Langley AFB: ($100 / (1+16.82)) * (1+18.46%) = $101.40 (Langley AFB resides in VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK, VA-NC OPM locality).