Draft L and M.docx

SECTION L

L-900. INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS (Proposal Requirements)

I. Proposal Format

A. General: The following instructions cover the preparation and submittal of the offeror’s proposal for this solicitation. Offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are cautioned that any noncompliance with the terms and conditions of the RFP may cause their proposal to be determined not eligible for award. If a joint venture arrangement exists for this acquisition, the offeror shall provide a copy of the joint venture agreement that is signed and dated by all joint venture members as part of the proposal submission. Offerors shall submit only one proposal for the Operations Capability Support as the Government will review only one proposal per offeror. Proposals must be received by HQ SpOC/SAM-D Attention: Joseph Willard (joseph.willard@spaceforce.mil) and Shawn McGee (shawn.mcgee.1@spaceforce.mil) no later than the date and time specified in Block 8 on the face page of the RFP. However, offerors are requested to submit Volume III, Past Performance Information, so that it is received seven (7) calendar days prior to the required due date for proposals. Failure to submit Volume III by the earlier date will not result in offeror disqualification.

B. Communications: Exchanges of source selection information between Government and offerors will be controlled by the Contracting Officer. Email may be used to transmit such information only if the email can be sent encrypted, and must include “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104” in the subject line of the email. Otherwise, source selection information will be transmitted via DoD SAFE. In order to facilitate the sending and receiving of encrypted emails, offerors must use MS Outlook email configured to support encryption or a different email product that is S/MIME compatible and configured to support encryption. If you intend to submit your source selection information via encrypted email, you will need to contact the Contracting Officer indicated on the face page of the solicitation prior to that first submittal in order to exchange certificates used for encryption. To ensure the process is working correctly, send a test encrypted message first (without including any source selection information). Otherwise, source selection information will be transmitted via direct mailing or DoD SAFE https://safe.apps.mil/. When submitting source selection information via email, file suppression utilities, to include but not limited to zip files, will not be accepted.

II. Volume Organization

A. General: Proposals shall be submitted to the Government in five (5) separate volumes as set forth below:

*Below is a page limitation for each subfactor that contributes to Volume II, Technical (Factor 1):

Volume II, Technical (Factor 1)

In addition to the page limitations set forth above, proposal volumes shall comply with the following format:

1. Each volume shall be marked with the solicitation number and the offeror’s name and address, and the number of the Volume, i.e. I, II, III, etc. Proposals shall be in the English language and all monies shall be proposed in United States dollars.

2. Print shall be no smaller than a font size of 12. Paper size shall be 8 1/2” X 11,” excluding any drawings, diagrams, and/or supporting illustrations, spreadsheets, etc. Charts, graphs, drawings, diagrams, supporting illustrations, or spreadsheets shall not be greater than 11” x 17.” Each volume within the proposal shall be separately identified. Margins shall be no smaller than 1 inch and each page within a volume shall be numbered consecutively. Elaborate formats, bindings, color presentations are not desired or required.

3. The page limitation for Volume II, Written Technical Proposal is 85 pages. The page limitation for Volume III, Past Performance is 35 pages. There is no page limitation for Volume I - Contracting Volume, Volume IV Small Business Commitment, and Volume V Cost Proposal. The page limitations include any cover page, charts, graphs, drawings, diagrams, supporting illustrations, spreadsheets, etc., but excludes any table of contents or list of acronyms (if utilized). Offerors are cautioned that any pages that exceed the page limitations shall not be read but shall be removed and either retained in the contract file without being considered in the evaluation, or, sent back to the offeror.

4. Page limitations may be placed on responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs), if issued. The specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the ENs to offerors or on the EN form itself.

5. Each page containing proprietary information should be so marked.

6. Each page should contain the following legend at the bottom of each sheet:

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION--SEE FAR 2.101 and 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

B. Volume I, Contracting Volume

1. General: Volume I, Contracting Volume requirements shall consist of the completed and signed RFP, to include any amendments issued, with a cover letter delineating any exceptions taken to the RFP terms and conditions with accompanying rationale, a completed Subcontracting Plan, and documentation for the additional basic contract requirements addressed below. However, offerors are cautioned that any noncompliance with the terms and conditions of the RFP may cause their proposal to be determined not eligible for award. Offerors shall ensure that all clauses and provisions that require “fill in” information are appropriately completed, including the proposed prices associated with the contract line items in the Schedule of the RFP.

2. Subcontracting Plan (Applicable to Other Than Small Businesses ONLY): The offeror shall provide a Small Business Subcontracting Plan IAW FAR Subpart 52.219-9 Alternate II, FAR Subpart 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns, DFARS 252.219-7003, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (DoD Contracts), DFARS 252.219-7004, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Test Program), and AFFARS 5319.704, Subcontracting Plan Requirements. The Small Business Subcontracting Plan will be assessed to ensure it meets the FAR, DFARS, and AFFARS requirements prior to award of a contract.

Note: Describe how specific subcontracting percentage goals and targets will be met for the contract expressed in dollars and in percentages of the total contract dollars and total subcontracting dollars to each socio-economic small business category listed above. The subcontracting goals may be met by any combination of subcontracts or vendor purchases and should make use of small businesses to the maximum extent practicable.

For proposal purposes, an anticipated obligated value is provided for completing the Small Business Subcontracting Plan. Offerors shall use an anticipated obligated value of $200,000,000.00.

3. Additional Basic Contract Requirements: In order to be eligible for a basic contract award, the Offeror must provide documented proof of an adequate accounting system determination that is supported by the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) [Reference FAR l6.30l-3]. An adequate accounting system is not an evaluation criterion. It is a regulatory requirement with a pass/fail determination. A contract may only be awarded to the Offerors who are determined to have an adequate accounting system. If an offeror does not have this documentation included in the contracting volume, they will be ineligible for a basic contract. All offerors shall include the following documentation. In the event an offeror does not have the documentation below, they shall address each one separately to include the current status of each of the items:

l) Determinations on the offeror's Estimating and Purchasing Systems supported by DCAA/DCMA.

2) Indirect Rate documentation such as Provisional Billing Rate Agreements, Forward Pricing Rate Agreements (FPRA), Forward Pricing Rate Proposal (FPRP), and Forward Pricing Rate Recommendations (FPRR).

C. Volume II, Technical (Factor 1)

1. General: The written technical proposal shall be clear, concise, and include all the information required by this provision in sufficient detail for effective evaluation. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet these requirements. Offerors shall assume the Government has no prior knowledge of their capabilities, work processes, facilities, and experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offeror’s technical proposal.

2. Cross Reference Matrix: As part of offerors’ proposals, a separate cross-reference matrix shall be completed and submitted with the Technical Volume. All referenced paragraphs include all subsequent subparagraphs (for example, 1.3.3 includes 1.3.3.1, 1.3.3.1.2, 1.3.3.1.3, etc.). Offerors shall fill in the columns related to their proposal. This is only a tool to assist in the proposal preparation process. Offerors are ultimately responsible for ensuring that their proposal fully addresses all areas and that all requested information is completed in accordance with Sections L and M of this solicitation. Offerors shall complete the last column of this matrix with paragraph number references from the Technical Volume. Offerors may provide additional references to the other columns as deemed necessary. See below Table example format:

CROSS REFERENCE MATRIX EXAMPLE

Subfactor One – Strategic Approach Aspect 1: Staffing Management Approach

Subfactor One – Strategic Approach Aspect 2: Quality Control Approach

Subfactor Two – Technical Approach Aspect 1: C2 Operations Support

Subfactor Two – Technical Approach Aspect 2: DCO-S Support

Subfactor Two – Technical Approach Aspect 3: Enterprise SATCOM Support

Subfactor Two – Technical Approach Aspect 4: Facility Support

Subfactor Two – Technical Approach Aspect 5: Space Cadre Talent Management Support

Subfactor Three – Task Order Staffing/Transition Approach Aspect 1: Staffing Approach

Subfactor Three – Task Order Staffing/Transition Approach Aspect 2: Transition Approach

Acronym List. An acronym list shall be provided as an attachment within the Technical Volume.

3. Format and Specific Content: The following information shall be provided in the written technical proposal and will be evaluated to assess the proposed technical approach and associated technical risk in accordance with Section M-900, Evaluation Basis for Award. The written technical proposal shall address each of the following subfactors to describe the offeror’s proposed approach to performing the requirements set forth in the basic IDIQ PWS and Task Order 1 PWS as annotated. For each subfactor, the offeror shall identify risks, if any, associated with the proposed approach and actions the offeror will take to mitigate the identified risks. If no risks/mitigations are identified in the offeror’s proposal, it indicates the offeror does not consider there to be any risk associated with their proposed approach.

3.1. Subfactor One: Strategic Approach (IDIQ PWS) - Offeror shall submit a Strategic Approach to meeting the IDIQ PWS (Attachment L1) inclusive of a proposed Staffing Approach and Quality Control Approach.

3.1.1. Aspect 1: Staffing Approach: Submit a Staffing Approach that describes the Offeror's:

· Ability to provide an overarching Program Management capability through oversight of key personnel in performance of the IDIQ contract.

· general recruiting and training strategy, standard operating procedures, capacity, and past recruiting efforts that are required to meet the requirements of the IDIQ PWS;

· process for networking or obtaining outside resources to augment the pool of qualified personnel; and

· process for maintaining a workforce and quickly filling unexpected vacancies, i.e., retention incentives, recruitment bonuses, etc.

3.1.2. Aspect 2: Quality Control (QC) Approach: Submit a QC Approach that explains the approach an offeror will take to:

· ensure quality, schedule, cost, and performance for both cost reimbursable and Firm Fixed Price task orders;

· provide sufficient oversight to effectively manage and integrate team partners, and the flow-down process of its QC Approach to ensure consistency among the team;

· effectively identify and resolve problems arising between team partners; and

· notify the Government of issues affecting contract performance, contract impact, proposed mitigation, and provide for contractor self-oversight.

3.2. Subfactor Two: Technical Approach (Space and Cyber Operations Task Order (TO) PWS) - Offeror shall submit a Technical Approach to meeting the TO PWS (Attachment L2) requirements inclusive of all the requirements identified in the TO PWS with emphasis in four key areas identified below.

3.2.1. Aspect 1: Command & Control (C2) Operations Support

· Describe an approach specific to TO PWS paragraph 1.3.1:

· to support Functional Area Managers and the Weapon System Lead for USSF Command and Control (C2) operations units, USSPACECOM’s National Space Defense Center C2, and all required capabilities as they pertain to the Generation, Presentation, and Sustainment of USSF and USSPACECOM NSDC C2 Operational forces;

· demonstrating an understanding of the development of USSF C2 operations concepts for CFSCC, NSDC, subordinate units, and International Partners; and

· demonstrating an understanding of C2 operations policies and procedures as related to all non-USSF Air Operations Centers, the use of classified systems to include Special Access Program systems.

3.2.2. Aspect 2: Defense Cyber Operations-Space (DCO-S) Support

· Describe an approach specific to TO PWS paragraph 1.3.2:

· providing mission and planning analysis for DCO / Offensive Cyber Operations / Cyber C2 / Cyber Situational Awareness / DoD Information Operations concepts and programs and supporting the strategic technical planning and analysis for current and future proactive defensive cyber operations capabilities;

· to identify recommendations supporting the writing of the Concept of Operations to support DCO-S operational capabilities, and an approach to the rapid development, acquisition, and fielding of capabilities to meet urgent operational needs; and

· to make recommendations for Special Technical Operations planning/processes in execution of mission capabilities supporting multiple COCOMs; and

· demonstrating a comprehensive understanding of DoD JCIDS processes in conjunction with DCO/OCO/Cyber C2/Cyber SA/DoDIN operational utility consistent with Government architectures and guidance.

3.2.3. Aspect 3: Enterprise Satellite Communications (SATCOM)

· Describe an approach specific to TO PWS 1.3.3:

· to provide the required technical assistance and subject matter expertise (SME) support for the Military Satellite Communications and Commercial Satellite Communications mission areas under Protected, Wideband, Narrowband, and Commercial systems as described in the PWS;

· to meet the development of Mission Area Initial Capabilities Documents, Initial Capabilities Documents, Capability Development Documents, Capability Production Documents, senior leadership intent, Service & Joint requirements council memos, studies, and other efforts in support of the emerging SATCOM programs JCIDS or acquisition processes;

· specifying the delivery of operational management, planning, technical assistance to support the restoral recommendations for ensuring standardized, high quality, integrated and uninterrupted SATCOM resources are provided for USSPACECOM and Combatant Commands; and

· to provide 24x7 support to the SATCOM Integrated Operations Division.

3.2.4. Aspect 4: Facility Support

· Detail the approach specific to TO PWS paragraph 1.3.13, to provide meeting facilities capable of accommodating up to 150 personnel to support technical exchange meetings, conferences, working groups, and other collaboration and mission related activities at the Unclassified, Secret, Top Secret, and Top Secret/SCI, and Special Access Required (SAR) levels within a 5 mile radius of Peterson AFB

3.2.5. Aspect 5: Space Cadre Talent Management Support

· Detail an approach specific to TO PWS 1.3.9:

· To providing support for the Space Cadre Talent Management Office (SCTMO) in modifying, maintaining and executing queries against the Space Talent Analysis & Requirements System (STARS) for tracking Total Force (Active Duty, Air Force Reserve, Air National Guard) space cadre military and civilian personnel and billets using Microsoft SQL Server 2016 Enterprise Edition.

· In Providing the development and maintenance of training system requirements for space systems including system training plan development, and initial operational assessment. This will include review of requirements and planning documents associated with acquisition and maintenance of training systems supporting space operations

3.3. Subfactor Three: Task Order Staffing/Transition Approach (TO PWS) - Offeror shall submit a Task Order Staffing/Transition Approach to meet the requirements in the TO PWS (Attachment L2).

3.3.1 Aspect 1: Staffing Approach

· Provide a staffing approach with:

· proposed workforce composition showing labor category, Full Time Equivalents (FTEs), associated number of hours, direct TO PWS requirement supported, security clearance, education/certifications, experience, and if applicable, cross utilization for the base period and all option years (in the format as provided in Attachment L7, Staffing Approach Table);

· an organizational chart which shows management structure, lines of authority and chain(s) of command including teaming partners and subcontractors as well as applicable experience and qualification summaries;

· clearly identified responsibilities and functional relationships while also describing the approach for proactively managing all TO PWS requirements, and teaming partner/subcontractor relationships; and

· description of how continuity of services during personnel absences due to sickness, leave, voluntary or involuntary termination from employment will be ensured.

3.3.2 Aspect 2: Transition Approach

· Provide a transition approach that details how the offeror will successfully transfer all requirements from the incumbent upon contract award, within established timelines while minimizing risk to continuity of services for all requirement stakeholders.

(Sample Tasks: Some source selection teams find it useful to use a sample scenario or task to aid in the evaluation of a Technical subfactor. In some cases a sample task or scenario may be particularly useful, such as where the problem-solving skills are themselves a critical discriminator (for example, contracts for engineering services or critical analysis). If appropriate, make the sample task the first known delivery order/task order. It is suggested that you limit sample tasks/scenarios to address only the most critical aspects of the program. Tasks/scenarios that are too broad or complex may overwhelm the offerors in terms of the time and cost of producing an acceptable solution and thus, not provide the insight that was intended to be provided. Also, keep in mind, your evaluation team will have to read and evaluate each proposed solution. Sample tasks/scenarios need to be designed with a specific purpose in mind. They should be focused on obtaining only the information needed to satisfy the intended purpose. They must not be based on known or contemplated requirements, unless the sample task will become the first order under the contract. (For instance, if your requirement is for scientific or engineering services to solve specific problems then do not ask the offerors to solve those problems in their proposals. This would be seen as attempting to get the offerors to solve your problems at their expense rather than contracting for their services.) Be certain to limit redundancy between the sample task/scenario and other Technical subfactors.

Note: If you include a sample task/scenario, you must discuss in Section M how it will be evaluated and contribute to the rating of the applicable Technical subfactor.)

D. Volume III - Past Performance (Factor 2)

1. General: The offeror shall submit Present and Past Performance Information for itself and any joint venture member. The evaluation of the offeror’s/joint venture member’s present/past performance WILL NOT include the present/past performance of any subcontractor(s), even though they may perform major or critical aspects of this requirement.

2. Past Performance Format: The requested present and past performance information shall be provided in a separate volume labeled "Volume III - Past Performance". A summary page shall be provided for this acquisition, describing the proposed role of the offeror, any joint venture member and subcontractor (nature of work and percentage of overall work). Each offeror/joint venture member shall complete a separate Past Performance Information (PPI) Sheet (Attachment L3) for four (4) active or completed contracts (with at least one year of performance history) in the past four (4) years from the issuance date of the RFP, that the offeror/joint venture member considers relevant in demonstrating its ability to perform the proposed effort. If the total number of such contracts exceeds four (4), each offeror/joint venture member shall address its four (4) most recent and relevant contracts. The offeror's/joint venture member’s present and past performance information may include data on efforts performed by other predecessor companies, affiliates, other divisions or corporate if such was provided for evaluation and if the offeror’s past performance volume demonstrates the company, affiliate, or division will provide the offeror with resources for the instant proposed effort, such as workforce, management, facilities, or other capabilities demonstrating direct and meaningful involvement in the performance of the instant proposed effort. The offeror shall clearly indicate the division or corporate organization that performed or is presently performing the contract. Contracts listed may include those with the Federal Government, state and local governments or their agencies, and commercial customers.

3. Subcontractor/Teaming Member Consent Form: In addition to the information provided in the Past Performance Information Sheet (RFP Attachment L3) for each entity as required above, the offeror must submit a consent letter executed by each of its proposed teaming member(s) authorizing release of adverse past performance information to the prime offeror to allow the prime offeror an opportunity to respond. A sample Subcontractor/Teaming Partner Consent Form is attached to this RFP (see RFP Attachment L4). The consent form shall be completed by the team member(s) and/or critical subcontractors identified in your proposal. The completed consent forms shall be submitted as part of your Past Performance Volume III.

4. Past Performance Information (PPI) Sheet (Attachment L3): The offeror/joint venture member shall focus its Past Performance Information Sheet responses so that they clearly correlate present and past performance with the requirements of this RFP. The PPI Sheet responses shall clearly describe the relevance of the effort to the work proposed. The answering space may be expanded so that the filled-in PPI Sheet for each relevant contract covers no more than both sides of three (3) 8 ½ x 11 inch pages (i.e., no more than six (6) pages). Provide the most current information for the Points of Contact (POCs) identified on the PPI Sheets. At least two Government POCs should be identified in the “Customer Points of Contact” within the PPI Sheet with at least one of those POCs being a Contracting Officer/Contract Specialist.

If problems were encountered during the performance of the identified contracts, provide evidence of the ability to isolate the root causes of problems and include in the Past Performance Information Sheet a description of programs or actions taken to resolve those causes. Problems not addressed in the Past Performance Information Sheet, but found by the Government during the evaluation of the information in this volume, will be assumed to still exist. Note: In the case of Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS), if your input has already been provided and the rationale/circumstances have not changed, DO NOT repeat them here.

5. Past Performance Questionnaire: The Present/Past Performance Questionnaire (see RFP Attachment L5) will be one means used by the Government to obtain present/past performance information. The Government reserves the right to change, alter, and/or supplement the questionnaire without further notice to the offeror(s). The offeror shall send out and track the completion of the Present/Past Performance Questionnaires (See RFP Attachment L5) to each of the offeror’s, joint venture members and/or critical subcontractors’ (i.e., each entity’s) Points of Contact (POCs) identified in each Past Performance Information Sheet. The responsibility to send out and track the completion of the Present/Past Performance Questionnaires rests solely with the offeror - i.e., it shall not be delegated to any other entity. Exert your best effort to ensure that at least two POCs per relevant contract submit a completed Present/Past Performance Questionnaire directly to the Government not later than the date established in the RFP for receipt of proposals. POCs may submit their completed Present/Past Performance Questionnaire via e-mail to joseph.willard@spaceforce.mil and shawn.mcgee.1@spaceforce.mil.

Once the Present/Past Performance Questionnaires are completed by your POCs, the information contained therein shall be considered source selection sensitive and shall not be released to you, the offeror. Therefore, any exchange/contact between the offeror/joint venture member and/or critical subcontractor and its own POCs in regards to comments made on the questionnaire is not permitted.

6. Follow-up Discussions: The Government may conduct follow-up discussions with any of the people identified in the Past Performance Information Sheets or in the offeror’s Present/Past Performance Volume. Pursuant to FAR 15.305(a)(2)(ii), the Government may obtain other information by sending out additional questionnaires and/or through other sources, other than those listed within the Past Performance Information Sheets.

E. Volume IV, Small Business Commitment (Factor 3)

1. General: The Small Business Commitment is required from all offerors, including small businesses and companies with Master, Individual, commercial subcontracting plans and/or comprehensive subcontracting plans. The offeror/joint venture member and each proposed critical subcontractor shall include only the first tier of subcontractors for this effort. Offerors are advised that the Small Business Commitment is not the same as the Small Business Subcontracting Plan required by FAR 52.219-9. Large business offerors shall not utilize the Small Business Subcontracting Plan in the place of the Small Business Commitment.

2. Small Business Commitment. The two areas that will be evaluated under Small Business Commitment are a Minimum Quantitative Requirement (MQR) of 35% for small business participation and a defined commitment to small business as evidenced by signed teaming agreements. The offeror shall submit a “Small Business Participation Commitment Document” which specifies the offeror’s level of commitment to small business utilization in performance of this requirement. The Small Business Participation Commitment Document will be incorporated into the apparent successful offeror’s Small Business Subcontracting Plan prior to award.

Small Business Commitment will be evaluated on an “acceptable or unacceptable” basis as described in Section M, paragraph I.E.1. An offeror’s proposal must receive an “acceptable” rating in order to be eligible for award.

If your company is registered as a small business under NAICS 541990 in the System for Award Management (SAM), a Small Business Participation Commitment Document is not required and your company will be given a rating of “Acceptable”. All other proposals must address the following two areas in the Small Business Participation Commitment Document:

a. A minimum quantitative requirement (MQR) of 35% of total contract cost for small business concern participation is required. Total contract cost is defined as the cumulative total amount of the contract costs.

Within the 35% MQR, a minimum of 5% shall be reserved for Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) and another 5% shall be reserved for Women Owned Small Business (WOSB).

b. Signed teaming agreements in which each small business concern utilized as a teaming partner or subcontractor is specifically identified and formally committed to by name. Signed teaming agreements may be submitted in a format determined by the contractor. As a minimum, the teaming agreement will address the name of subcontractors to be utilized, type of small business, type of service(s) and percentage of contracted support the small business will provide. The Government will evaluate the teaming agreement based on the extent of commitment to use the teaming partner as well as the level of enforceability. The purpose of signed teaming agreements are to ensure the prime contractor follows through with utilizing the small businesses they propose to use on this acquisition. Failure to comply with this requirement in a submitted proposal may result in a determination of unresponsiveness and may render the offeror ineligible for award.

F. Volume V, Cost (Factor 4)

1. General. In accordance with FAR 15.403-1(b) and 15.403-3(a), the Government shall require data other than certified cost or pricing data to support a determination of price reasonableness and cost realism. Data shall be provided in accordance with FAR 15.403-5. If, after receipt of proposals, the CO determines that there is insufficient data available to determine price reasonableness or cost realism and none of the exceptions in FAR 15.403-1 apply, the Offeror shall be required to submit additional cost data.

All cost information shall be addressed in the Cost Volume. Cost information is only required for the initial task order PWS listed as Attachment L2.

The Offeror shall prepare and submit the Cost proposal in Microsoft (MS) Office Word and Excel 2016 or later native formats. Files received in any other format are unacceptable, will not be reviewed, and will result in the entire proposal being unawardable unless the Government enters into discussions. The Offeror is encouraged to provide narrative substantiation and rationale in MS Word and any numerical source data, cost summaries, tables, calculations, or similar detailed information in MS Excel. For information submitted in MS Excel, the Offeror shall use formulas and functions to the maximum extent practical and avoid using output type “value only” cells. If links are utilized, the Offeror shall provide those reference files. Spreadsheets and cells within spreadsheets shall not be protected. Worksheets within spreadsheets shall not be hidden.

Numerical data presented in the MS Word narrative that corresponds to a MS Excel submission must be clearly referenced. Numerical data pasted into MS Word as a picture out of another file is discouraged unless it is clearly referenced to a corresponding MS Excel file or its derivation is unambiguous. The Offeror is responsible for ensuring that the information provided, whether in MS Word or MS Excel, is traceable throughout the Cost Volume and the remainder of the proposal, as applicable.

2. Format. The Cost Volume contains no page limitations. However, all information provided must relate to cost. Cost information submitted outside of the Cost proposal volumes will not be evaluated.

The Cost Volume shall consist of the following sections:

a. Table of Contents

b. Glossary of terms and abbreviations

c. Estimating System - The Offeror shall provide a summary description of its standard estimating system or methodology. The summary description shall cover separately each major cost element (e.g. Engineering Labor, Manufacturing Labor, Indirect Costs, Other Direct Costs, Overhead, General & Administrative (G&A)). Identify any deviations from stated standard estimating procedures in preparing this cost proposal volume. Indicate whether Government approval of stated system was obtained and, if so, provide evidence of such approval.

d. Purchasing System - The Offeror shall provide a summary description of standard purchasing system or methods (e.g., how material requirements are determined, how sources are selected, when firm quotes are obtained, and what provision is made to ensure quantity and other discounts). Identify any deviations from stated standard procedures in preparing this proposal. Indicate whether Government approval of stated system was obtained and, if so, provide evidence of such approval.

e. Subcontractor Information - The Offeror shall provide a list of all subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners.

f. Ground Rules and Assumptions - The Offeror shall provide an explanation of ground rules and assumptions necessary to fully understand the cost estimates. Topics to be addressed should include, but are not limited to: business base, labor and overhead rates, cost-sharing arrangements, prime-subcontractor relationships, and cost escalation.

3. Task Order PWS Cost Estimate Instructions: IAW FAR 15.403-5(b)(2), the Contracting Officer has determined the use of a specific format is not required for the submission of data other than certified cost or pricing data. Therefore, Offerors may submit data other than certified cost or pricing data in their own unique format to support the proposed cost and fee associated with the Task Order proposal. Although not required for data other than certified cost or pricing data, the Government recommends Offerors utilize Table 15-2 -- Instructions for Submitting Cost Proposals When Certified Cost or Pricing Data Are Required, located at FAR 15.408 and the Proposal Adequacy Checklist located at DFARS 252.215-7009 in the development of the Task Order cost proposal. In the event certified cost or pricing data becomes required, the Offeror shall conform to the Proposal Adequacy Checklist. The cost summary submitted by the Offeror shall include: (1) Total Task Order Cost Summary, (2) Task Order Cost by year Summary, (3) Task Order Cost by CLIN summary, and (4) Task Order Cost by CLIN by year Summary.

4. Task Order PWS Cost Estimate Proposal Breakdown:

TO Rates and Escalation. The following provides guidelines for the major cost elements normally associated with the buildup of labor rates and required support documentation, which is intended to be CPFF. The following breakout is required from Offerors. Offerors shall provide complete breakouts of proposed labor following the criteria below:

a. The Offeror shall propose Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) labor rates and labor hours for all labor categories required for successful performance of the Task Order PWS which will serve as the initial task order. The Offeror’s cost proposal shall indicate the labor rate build up and yearly escalation as indicated below.

b. Base Labor Rates and Hours: Show base labor rates and hours associated with each labor category. Base rates are the hourly rates that the employees will be paid for performance under the contract. A labor rate shall be proposed for each labor category along with the basis and rationale for all proposed base labor rates. The most common basis for a proposed base rate is the actual rate the employee is currently being paid. When a composite base labor rate is proposed, a separate worksheet that identifies the individuals, their rates, and the weighting assigned to each rate to arrive at the single composite rate shall be provided. If an individual in a particular labor category is currently not employed, a verifiable method used to establish the reasonableness of the proposed rate shall be provided, e.g. Salary.com, quotes, etc. Supporting payroll data and rationale for all position classifications anticipated to be used under the contract shall be submitted as part of the proposal.

c. Base Labor Rate Escalation: Current rates will require adjustment for annual cost of living increases. Base rate adjustments can occur when calculating year one rates if employees would normally receive pay increases prior to the end of the first contract year. Base rates for contract out-years will require escalation adjustments to reflect what employees will receive for those periods. The methodology used to escalate out-year rates shall be provided to include the basis for the escalation factors used and the date that pay increases are effective.

d. Indirect Rates: Common indirect rates are Labor Overhead, Fringe Benefits, and General & Administrative (G&A). In the proposal, show each individual rate, as applicable, and describe the allocation base. The allocation base is the cost category that the rate is multiplied by to calculate the indirect dollars. An example is a labor overhead rate applied to direct labor dollars; the latter being the allocation base. If current Forward Pricing Rate Agreements (FPRAs) or approved provisional billing rates are available, provide a copy of the FPRAs or approved provisional billing rates in addition to identifying the cognizant Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO) and his/her location. If a current FPRA or approved provisional billing rates are not available, provide the name and address of any Government audit agency or independent audit firm that has conducted an audit and include a copy of said audit in the cost proposal. If no such audit exists, so state.

If no indirect rate audit information is available, financial data and the methodology used to calculate the proposed indirect rates shall be submitted. Identify costs not allowed by FAR 31.2 as well as the build-up of the indirect rates, including applicable pools and bases. In addition, provide actual indirect rates for the previous three years.

e. Fee Rates: Fee rates/dollar values shall be indicated separately. Offerors are encouraged to provide rationale to support the proposed fee rates/dollar values.

f. Offerors proposing as a Joint Venture (JV) shall use one of the following two methods to propose based upon the JV’s make-up. If the JV is populated with employees from each member of the JV and will be dedicated to the basic contract, then new base labor rates and indirect rates based on that situation shall be proposed. If the JV remains as separate entities, then base labor rates and indirect rates shall be proposed for each member of the JV, as applicable.

g. Offerors shall submit a list of the proposed subcontractors, teaming partners, joint ventures, and inter-divisional transfers for the initial Task Order showing (a) the supplier, (b) description of effort, (c) type of contract, (d) price and hours proposed by each, (e) price and hours included in prime’s proposal to the Government, and (f) commercial item/service determination support, if applicable.

For subcontracted efforts that are competed, Offerors shall provide competitive pricing. However, for non-competitive subcontracts, a complete proposal breakdown is required. Prime contractors shall provide clear rationale and proposal evaluation for any subcontracted efforts that are not competed, IAW FAR 15.404-3. In addition to a breakout of labor as described above, non-competitive subcontractors must provide complete breakouts of any other costs anticipated under this effort, i.e. travel, material, lower-tier subcontracts, etc. Subcontractors may provide cost information directly to the Procuring Contracting Officer.

h. For the CLIN summary, offerors will complete Attachment L6 – CLIN Structure and submit it as part of the proposal. The CLIN Structure attachment will require the offeror to break out the total costs per contract option year. Additionally, it lists a Government provided dollar value for projected travel costs ($550K per contract year). The travel costs is not subject to fee/indirect rates.

List of Section L Attachments:

L1 – Basic IDIQ Performance Work Statement dated XX 2020 L2 – Space & Cyber Operations Support Performance Work Statement dated XXXX 2020 L3 – Past Performance Information Sheet L4 – Subcontractor/Teaming Member Consent Form L5 – Present/Past Performance Questionnaire L6 – CLIN Structure Sheet L7 – Staffing Approach Table

SECTION M PROVISION

PAST PERFORMANCE AND PRICE TRADEOFF WITH COMBINED TECHNICAL/TECHNICAL RISK, AND SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION ACCEPTABILITY (IF APPLICABLE)

M-900. EVALUATION BASIS FOR AWARD

I. Basis for Contract Award

A. Source Selection Methodology: This acquisition will utilize the Tradeoff source selection procedures in accordance with FAR 15.101-2 and 15.3 as supplemented by the DoD Source Selection Procedures referenced in DFARS 215.300 and the AFFARS Mandatory Procedures 5315.3 to make an integrated assessment for a best value award decision. The Government intends to award one contract as a result of this solicitation. In using the best value approach, the Government seeks to award to the offeror who gives the Space Force the greatest confidence that it will best meet or exceed our requirements affordably in a way that will be advantageous to the Government. This may result in an award to a higher rated, higher priced offeror where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors and the Source Selection Authority (SSA) reasonably determines that the technical superiority and/or overall business approach of the higher priced offeror outweighs the cost difference. To arrive at a best value decision, the SSA will integrate the source selection team’s evaluations of the factors and subfactors described in this provision. While the Government will strive for maximum objectivity, the tradeoff process, by its nature, is subjective; therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the selection process. Offerors are reminded that the Government will only evaluate one proposal from each offeror. Award will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal conforms to all required terms and conditions, includes all required representations and certifications, meets all requirements set forth in the RFP, has an acceptable Small Business Commitment, and also provides the best value to the Government based on the results of the evaluation as described in paragraph II below.

B. Factors, Subfactors and Relative Importance

1. Factors and Subfactors: A detailed and complete analysis of each offeror’s proposal will be performed. The Government’s evaluation will be based on the following factors and subfactors:

Factor 1: Technical

· Subfactor 1 - Strategic Approach:

Aspect 1: Staffing Approach Aspect 2: Quality Control Approach

· Subfactor 2: Technical Approach Aspect 1: C2 Operations Support Aspect 2: DCO-S Support Aspect 3: Enterprise SATCOM Support Aspect 4: Facility Support Aspect 5: Space Cadre Talent Management Support

· Subfactor 3- Task Order Staffing/Transition Approach Aspect 1: Staffing Approach Aspect 2: Transition Approach

Factor 2. Past Performance

Factor 3. Small Business Commitment

Factor 4. Cost

2. Relative Importance: Among the evaluation factors considered in the tradeoff decision, Technical Subfactor 2, is significantly more important and is the ONLY trade off factor/subfactor with Cost. Technical Subfactor 1, Technical Subfactor 3, Factor 2, and Factor 3 are of equal importance and will be evaluated on a pass/fail basis and rated as acceptable/unacceptable

II. Proposal Evaluation: The evaluation process will be accomplished as follows (Organized by volume):

A. General

1. Discussions: The Government intends to award without discussions, but reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined necessary. Any discussions will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.306. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer, with the concurrence of the Source Selection Authority, may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

B. Volume I, Contracting Volume

1. The Offeror is required to submit the required documentation addressed in Section L.II.B. Required contract documents are included, complete, and address all elements identified in Section L.II.B.

C. Volume II, Technical Factor

1. General: Each offeror’s written technical proposal shall be evaluated, based on the subfactors below, to determine if the offeror provides a sound, compliant approach that meets the requirements of the PWS and demonstrates a thorough knowledge and understanding of those requirements and their associated risks. Technical Subfactors 1 and 3 will be evaluated on a pass/fail basis assigning ratings of Acceptable or Unacceptable, as further described in paragraph C.3. One subfactor rated unacceptable will result in an unacceptable Technical proposal. Technical Subfactor 2 will be evaluated as a combined technical/risk basis and will be assigned an color and adjectival rating. Technical Subfactor ratings shall not be rolled up into an overall acceptable/unacceptable nor a color/adjectival rating for the Technical factor. To be awardable, the Offeror cannot receive an Unacceptable rating for Technical Subfactor 1or 3, nor may they receive a Red/Unsatisfactory rating for Technical Subfactor 2.

1.1. Subfactor One - Strategic Approach (IDIQ PWS): The subfactor is technically acceptable when the offeror submits a Strategic Approach, which includes the following:

1.1.1. Aspect 1: Staffing Approach

An acceptable approach describing:

· Ability to provide an overarching Program Management capability through oversight of key personnel in performance of the IDIQ contract.

· general recruiting and training strategy, standard operating procedures, capacity, and past recruiting efforts required to respond to all the requirements of the IDIQ PWS;

· process for networking or obtaining outside resources to augment the pool of qualified personnel; and

· process for maintaining a workforce and quickly filling unexpected vacancies, i.e., retention incentives, recruitment bonuses, etc.

1.1.2. Aspect 2: Quality Control (QC) Approach

An acceptable approach addressing how the Offeror will:

· ensure quality, schedule, cost, and performance for both cost reimbursable and Firm Fixed Price task orders;

· provide sufficient oversight to effectively manage and integrate team partners, and the flow-down process of its QC Approach to ensure consistency among the team;

· effectively identify and resolve problems arising between team partners; and

· notify the Government of issues affecting contract performance, contract impact, proposed mitigation, and provide for contractor self-oversight.

1.2. Subfactor Two - Technical Approach (TO PWS):

1.2.1. Aspect 1: Command & Control (C2) Operations Support

· Offeror demonstrates an effective and sound approach specific to the TO PWS paragraph 1.3.1:

· to support Functional Area Managers and the Weapon System Lead for USSF Command and Control (C2) operations units, USSPACECOM’s National Space Defense Center C2, and all required capabilities as they pertain to the Generation, Presentation, and Sustainment of USSF and USSPACECOM NSDC C2 Operational forces; and

· clearly demonstrating an understanding of C2 operations policies and procedures as related to all non-USSF Air Operations Centers, the use of classified systems to include Special Access Program systems.

1.2.2. Aspect 2: DCO-S Support

· Offeror demonstrates an effective and sound approach specific to the TO PWS paragraph 1.3.2:

· providing mission and planning analysis for DCO / Offensive Cyber Operations / Cyber C2 / Cyber Situational Awareness / DoD Information Operations concepts and programs and supporting the strategic technical planning and analysis for current and future proactive defensive cyber operations capabilities;

· to identify recommendations to support the writing of the Concept of Operations to support DCO-S operational capabilities, and provide a sound, approach to the rapid development, acquisition, and fielding of capabilities to meet urgent operational needs; and

· to make recommendations for Special Technical Operations planning/processes in execution of mission capabilities supporting multiple COCOMs, and emergency International Partners.

1.2.3. Aspect 3: Enterprise SATCOM

· Offeror demonstrates and effective and sound approach specific to the TO PWS paragraph 1.3.3:

· to provide the required technical assistance and subject matter expertise (SME) support for the Military Satellite Communications and Commercial Satellite Communications mission areas under Protected, Wideband, and Narrowband systems as described in the PWS;

·…