Draft RFP_W56KGY-23-R-0010_Information Collection Management_28 October 2022.pdf

DRAFT Request for Proposal For: Project Manager Intelligence Systems & Analytics

Intelligence Application – Information Collection Management (ICM) Solicitation Number: W56KGY-23-R-0010

A. Executive Summary

1. Description of Item(s) Being Procured: The Army Contracting Command - Aberdeen Proving Ground (ACC-APG) has the need to acquire on behalf of Project Manager Intelligence Systems & Analytics (PM IS&A), a commercial item that will provide a software-only solution to meet the Information Collection Management (ICM) interoperability, security, training, usability, and data management capabilities. It includes the associated support services, incidental services, and deliverables for the procurement of a commercial item solution to satisfy the ICM requirements.

2. Program Objective / Needs: The program objectives and needs for this requirement are outlined within the Statement of Work (SOW) (Attachment 0001) and the Performance Requirements Document (PRD) (Attachment 0002). These documents will be provided to interested parties upon request to the following points of contact:

Ms. Meghan C. Whitmore Procuring Contracting Officer E-mail: meghan.c.whitmore.civ@army.mil

And

Mr. Nicholas Mitrocsak Contract Specialist E-mail: Nicholas.m.mitrocsak.civ@army.mil

3. Delivery Schedule: This single award, indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contract will have an ordering period consisting of one (1) year base period and four

(4) option years. Delivery, schedule, and performance requirements will be reflected in each delivery order issued under the proposed contract, based upon the identified program needs during the contract period of performance. The orders may have option periods.

4. Type of Contract: The Government intends to award a single award IDIQ contract with delivery orders issued on a firm-fixed-price (FFP) basis. This procurement will use commercial full and open competition procedures in accordance with FAR Part 12, will be awarded using best value tradeoff procedures and will utilize source selection procedures in accordance with FAR Part 15. The North American industry classification system (NAICS) code is 511210 with a size standard of $41,500,000.00.

5. Format of Contract: The resultant contract will be formatted in accordance with FAR 15.204-1 -- Uniform Contract Format. Orders will be issued with respect to all basic terms and conditions as stated in the base contract, with information as required by FAR 16.505(a)(7).

6. Nature of Work: The scope of this effort is to satisfy the Governments projected need through the ICM requirements described in the SOW and PRD Attachments. The security requirements for the base contract are defined in the Department of Defense Contract Security Classification Specification (DD Form 254) available upon request.

7. Unusual / Specific Aspects of the Acquisition: Refer to Sections L (Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offeror’s) and M (Evaluation Factors for Award) of this DRAFT solicitation.

8. Source Selection Methodology: An award will be made based on the best overall

(i.e., best value-tradeoff) proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the four (4) evaluation factors:

Technical, Price, Past Performance, and Small Business. The order of importance and specific details regarding these evaluation factors and source selection methodology can be found in Sections L & M of this solicitation.

9. During the conduct of this acquisition DOD Safe (safe.apps.mil) will be utilized by the Government to support the proposal evaluation and source selection process. All exchanges with Offerors will occur with the Procuring Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist. Please refer to Section L of this solicitation for further information.

10. Disclaimer: This Executive Summary has been prepared as an aid to the potential

Offerors. The Government has made every attempt to accurately reflect the requirements and information contained in this solicitation.

11. CONTRACT MAXIMUM/MINIMUM TASK ORDER CEILING: The anticipated

MAXIMUM contract ceiling under the PM IS&A Information Collection Management acquisition is $22,827,862.82. The cumulative value of the IDIQ contract, which includes all delivery orders issued, shall not exceed $22,827,862.82.

The MINIMUM guaranteed value under this contract is $3,500.00, which shall be obligated on the first delivery order issuance to the awardee at the time of contract award.

B. Anticipated CLIN Structure

Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) CLIN0001 – Technical Test Support CLIN0002 – Soldier Touch Point Test Support CLIN0003 – Program Protection CLIN0004 – NIPR Risk Management Framework (RMF) Certification

CLIN0005 – Secret RMF Certification CLIN0006 – Functional Configuration Audit CLIN0007 – Army Interoperability Certification (AIC) CLIN0008 – Joint Interoperability Test Certification (JITC) CLIN0009 –Training Solution CLIN0010 – Initial Operational Test Support CLIN0011 – Solution Software (Subscription) CLIN0012 – Annual Sustainment (Subscription) CLIN0013 – Initial Integration Support CLIN0014 – Configuration Management (Not Separately Priced) CLIN0015 – Engineering Change Proposals (Not Separately Priced) CLIN0016 – Exercise Support CLIN0017 – Contractor Manpower Reporting (Not Separately Priced) CLIN0018 – Software Solution Test Licenses CLIN0019 – Cyber Security Support CLIN0020 – Top Secret RMF Certification CLIN0021 – (OPTION) Solution Software - Perpetual Software License CLIN0022 – (OPTION) Annual Sustainment - Perpetual Software License CLIN0023 – (OPTION) Software Solution - Unlimited Enterprise Software License CLIN0024 – (OPTION) Annual Sustainment - Unlimited Enterprise License

C. Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Offerors (Section L)

1. Introduction. During the conduct of this acquisition, all documents will be submitted to Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground via DOD Safe. Request for drop boxes will need to be submitted by email to the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) and Contract Specialist, detailed below, one (1) business day in advance. All communications with Offerors will occur with the PCO and Contract Specialist via email. During the conduct of this acquisition, once proposals/documents are submitted via DOD Safe, the Government requests that Offerors submit a confirmation email to the following points of contacts:

Ms. Meghan C. Whitmore Procuring Contracting Officer E-mail: meghan.c.whitmore.civ@army.mil

Mr. Nicholas Mitrocsak Contract Specialist E-mail: nicholas.m.mitrocsak.civ@army.mil

Offeror’s proposal shall consist of five (5) volumes.

The Volumes are as follows:

I. Executive Summary II. Technical

III. Price IV. Past Performance V. Small Business

Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked. Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the technical requirements or the Statement of Work (SOW) (Attachment 0001) with a statement of intent to perform, does not reflect an understanding of the requirement or capability to perform. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal.

2. Proposal Submission Requirements.

a. Each proposal volume shall be submitted electronically via DoD Safe. Each volume shall be separate files, clearly labeled and include the prescribed files identified in the below Table 1, “Requirements for Submission of Proposal Materials.” Electronic submission of proposal is mandatory IAW the solicitation instructions, with the time of receipt of the required electronic proposal volumes to the PCO and Contact Specialist (detailed in paragraph 1, “Introduction”) serving as the compliance time for directed proposal submission date and time. The electronic proposal files submitted to DOD Safe will be the official submission used for evaluation purposes.

b. Files submitted to the Government shall NOT contain CLASSIFIED data. The use of external hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited. The use of hyperlinks that link within a document, such as table of contents links, are allowed.

c. SAM.gov registration and (active) System for Award Management (SAM) account is required to submit proposals.

d. WARNING: Do not wait until the last minute to submit proposals. To avoid late proposal submissions, Offerors are encouraged to submit proposals twenty-four (24) hours prior to the required due date and time. Request for DOD Safe drop boxes will need to occur at a minimum one (1) business day in advance of submittal as detailed in paragraph A1.

e. Note: Offerors are offered the opportunity to participate in an open integration period of time (approximately 2 weeks) using Commercial Cloud Services provided by the Government, along with sample data sets (for testing purposes). The purpose of this integration period is to prepare the Offeror for the Product Demonstration. Please refer to the Product Demonstration Event Plan (Attachment 0005).

f. Any pages that are changed as a result of negotiations or proposal revisions shall be clearly marked and dated. The changed information shall be clearly marked by a vertical line in the right margin of the page, and underlining and/or strike-through of text shall be used to distinguish the changed information. The revised pages shall be dated. Each file containing change or revisions shall be clearly labeled with its title and a copy number (e.g., copy 1 of 5).

g. The volumes of material shall be submitted as depicted in Table 1, “Requirements for

Submission of Proposal Materials.” All proposal submissions must be in Microsoft Office (MS) Office using a version no earlier than 2007.

Table 1. Requirements for Submission of Proposal Materials

Volume Title File Name

MS

Word Versi on

MS

Excel Versi on

MS

Power Point Versi on

PDF

Versi on

Doc Not

Requir ed

Maximu m Page Count

I Executive Summary

Proposal Summary “PROP_SYN” X* - - X* - 10

Commercial Item Assertions

“COMM_ITEM_ASSE

RT” X* - - X* - N/a

Glossary of Abbreviation s and Acronyms

“GLOSSERY” X* - - X* - N/a

Award Documents/ Certification s/ Representati ons

“AWARDDOC_CERT_

REP” X* X* - X* - N/a

Commercial Plan or Subcontracti ng Plan

“CP” or “SBP” X* - - X* - N/a

Data Assertions “DATA_ASSERT” - X - - - N/a

II

Technical Factor

X N/a

III Price Factor

TEP

Worksheet

“TOTAL_EVAL_PRIC

E” - X - - - N/a

IV Past Performan ce

Past Performance Record

“PAST_PERF” X* - - X* - N/a

* Selection one (1) of the multiple versions offered.

** If the Offeror has both plan types, please submit both.

*** Page Count refers to MS PowerPoint slide count.

NOTE: Pages and slides that exceed the required maximum limitations will not be evaluated.

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

3. Proposal Files.

a. Format. The submission shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled. Each volume should be clearly identified and shall begin at the top of a page. All pages of each volume should be appropriately numbered and identified by the complete company name, date and solicitation number in the header and/or footer. A table of contents shall be created using the table of content feature in MS Word. MS Word files shall use the following page setup parameters:

• Font Type – Arial font is required.

• Font Size – A standard 12-point minimum is required. An 8-point minimum may be used for tables, illustrations, headers and footers.

• Line Spacing – Pages shall be single spaced.

• Margins – Top, Bottom, Left, Right – 1”

• Gutter – 0”

• From Edge – Header, Footer – 0.5”

• Page Size, Width – 8.5”

• Page Size, Height – 11”

Note: 11X17 folded pages are acceptable for tables/graphic representations; however, each 11X17 page counts as two (2) pages.

b. File Packaging. Proposal file names shall include the volume number proceeding the identified filename stated in Table 1, “Requirements for Submission of Proposal Materials.” All PDF documents shall be provided as searchable PDF files. If proposal files are compressed (zipped), using WinZip version 6.2 or later, into multiple zip files, each zip file must be clearly identified by Volume, as per Table 1 instructions. Note:

Offerors are cautioned that large file sizes of proposals significantly delay submissions, or may not be permitted due to file size restrictions on DOD Safe. High resolution graphics may greatly increase file sizes. Up to five (5) files can be uploaded at one (1) time. The combined size of the five (5) files cannot exceed 100MB. Also note, self-extracting .exe files will not be accepted. Additionally, the Government does not accept responsibility for the organization of electronic proposal submissions. If proposal files are missing or not identified per the instructions provided by this solicitation, the proposal will be immediately eliminated from the competition. The Offeror is responsible for ensuring all appropriate files are included in the proposal submission.

Proposal files may be submitted individually without compression at Offeror’s discretion.

If files are divided into smaller files to support electronic transmission, individual files should be clearly labeled such as “technical 1 of 5,” etc. Break attachments into smaller files or use the upload utility multiple times if files exceed the 100MB size limit.

Filenames MUST be labeled as indicated in Table 7, Requirements for Submission of Proposal Materials.

Updated computer software virus protection is required. Offerors should not submit proposals without first having scanned them using appropriate computer virus protection software. Uploading files with viruses may jeopardize bid submission.

The Government will not accept or consider any proposal submission methods other than as discussed herein.

c. Content Requirement. All information shall be confined to the appropriate file. The

Offeror shall confine submissions to essential matters, sufficient to define the proposal in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal.

Volumes I, IV and V of the proposal shall consist of a table of contents, glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, summary section, and the narrative discussion. The summary section shall contain a brief abstract of the volume. Any proprietary information shall be clearly marked. No price information shall be presented in any part of the proposal except as provided in Volume I, Executive Summary and Volume III, Price Factor. Each volume shall be prepared on a standalone basis so that its contents may be evaluated with minimum cross-referencing to another volume of the proposal. Each table of contents shall delineate the subparagraphs with that volume to the proposal content when applicable. The submission of alternate proposals shall not be allowed.

i. Volume I - Executive Summary. The Offeror shall utilize this volume to provide an overview of the proposal and summarize pertinent information contained in all volumes of the proposal. The information contained in this volume must be consistent with data in the other volumes. References to the proposal locations providing substantiating data shall be given as appropriate. The information contained in this volume is not an evaluation factor, but is required for award.

This volume shall be organized into the following sections:

1) Proposal Synopsis. The Offeror shall utilize this section of the Executive

Summary to summarize pertinent information contained in all volumes of the proposal. The Offeror is free to submit this section of the Executive Summary in any format desired, subject to the limitations previously set forth above, and to include any and all information it believes will support its proposal. Offerors are reminded that the Executive Summary is an introductory summation of the proposal; therefore, no information shall be in the Executive Summary that does not appear elsewhere in the proposal.

2) Commercial Item Assertions. The Offeror shall provide documentation to support that its solution is a commercial item. The commercial item assertions should explicitly detail how the proposed solution fits the definition of a commercial item as stated in FAR 2.101.

The Government may consider applicable law, regulations, policy, and guidance when determining whether an Offeror's solution is a commercial item, as defined in FAR 2.101.

If the Offeror does not provide sufficient evidence that its solution is a commercial item, then the Government may determine that the Offeror is not eligible for award.

3) Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms. The Executive Summary shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used with an explanation for each.

4) Award Documents/Certifications/Representations. The Offeror shall provide any Award Documents, Certifications, and/or Representations to accompany the proposal submission as required by the solicitation under representations, certifications, and other statements of Offerors.

The Prime Offeror shall have an approved Secret facility clearance and safeguarding for classified material and property in effect at time of award, based on the IS&A DoD Security Classification Specification, DD Form 254, and PM IS&A requirements.

The following information must be provided to verify the secure facility clearance:

- Contractor Name

- Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code

- Corporate Mailing Address

- Classified Mailing Address

- Security Office Information including:

i. Name

ii. Title

iii. E-mail address Iv. Telephone Number

If the Prime Offeror does not have an approved Secret facility clearance at time of proposal, Offerors shall submit a plan with timeline to achieve those requirements within one hundred eighty (180) days from time of initial award.

5) Data and Software Rights Assertions. IAW the content and formatting requirements for Data and Software Rights Assertions (set forth in the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 252.227- 7017), the Contractors Data and Software Rights Assertions shall comply with the following requirements:

- The Prime Offeror shall not assert license restrictions on items, component, or processes themselves. The asserted license restrictions shall pertain to software or technical data that relates to items, components, or processes.

- The Prime Offeror’s assertions shall not include technical data or software that will not be furnished to the Government under this Contract.

- The Prime Offeror shall provide a concise (but specific) description of the technical data and software deliverables that will be furnished to the Government with restrictions, rather than generically asserting license restrictions in technical data or technology.

- The Prime Offeror is responsible for ensuring that Data and Software Rights Assertions from its subcontractors comply with the aforementioned content and formatting requirements (IAW DFARS 252.227-7017).

- Prime Offerors shall provide Data/Software Rights Assertions in a tabular format prescribed in DFARS 252.227-7017. In addition to the content and formatting requirements set forth in DFARS 252.227-7017, the Prime Offerors Data/Software Rights Assertions table shall list all commercial or non-commercial technical data and software data deliverables that the Prime Offeror intends to furnish to the Government with license restrictions. Thus, the Data/Software Rights Assertions shall include all technical data and software data deliverables that are provided to the Government without an unlimited and/or unrestricted rights license. In the Prime Offerors identification of technical data and software license rights, the Prime Offeror shall reference any applicable commercial software license agreement related to proposed commercial software deliverables. The Government will consider any data deliverables, that are required in the SOW but not listed in the Prime Offeror’s Data/Software Rights Assertions, as technical data or software deliverables furnished to the Government without restrictions.

6) Commercial Plan or Subcontracting Plan. Other than U.S. Small Business Offerors shall submit either a commercial plan as defined at FAR 19.701, or a Commercial Subcontracting Plan meeting the requirements of FAR 52.219-9 and DFARS 252.219-7003, or DFARS 252.219-7004, if the Offeror has a comprehensive subcontracting plan. Other than U.S. Small Businesses must submit acceptable subcontracting plans to be eligible for award. The Commercial Subcontracting Plan or Commercial Plan will be IDIQ level attachments, applicable to all orders issued. The requirements in this paragraph are for compliance purposes and shall not be considered as an evaluation factor during the Government’s award selection trade-off analysis.

ii. Volume II - Technical Factor. The volume submission is required for this factor live Product Demonstrations will be utilized.

1) Product Demonstration. The product demonstration will be conducted at the Booz Allen Hamilton (BAH) System Integration Laboratory (BSIL). The actual demonstration will consist of a one (1) day event, and two (2) weeks of system integration and set-up prior to the day of the demonstration. The system set-up time period (2-weeks) consists of integration of the application, verifying the application can utilize government-provided test data that would be similar to the data provided on the day of the demonstration event, and to familiarize the Offeror with the BSIL environment. The Offeror will be required on site at the Government designated facility for this demonstration and is allotted up to four

(4) Offeror personnel, to include a system operator. Offerors will be permitted to cycle personnel in the demonstration room during scheduled breaks IAW the Product Demonstration Event Plan (Attachment 0005). The Government will provide two (2) workstations. The Offeror’s system operator will perform all steps on the system IAW the Product Demonstration Event Plan (Attachment 0005).

2) Sample Data Available Upon Request. Product Demonstration sample data is available upon request as Government Furnished Information (GFI). Please see the Information Collection Management GFI list (Attachment 0006) for a summary of the information that can be provided. In order to receive a copy of the GFI, the Offeror shall send an email to the PCO with the company CAGE code no later than fifteen (15) days after the issuance of the solicitation. Once in receipt of the request, the Government will coordinate delivery of the Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) data.

iii. Volume III – Price Factor. The Offeror shall submit pricing for all CLINs identified in the TEP Worksheet (Attachment 0003). Offerors shall not re-format or remove cells from the spreadsheet. Submission of the pricing data shall be complete and accurate. All prices will be provided as FFP, therefore all proposed prices shall be inclusive of all direct cost (i.e., direct labor, material, travel, and other direct costs), associated indirect costs, and profit related to each CLIN. Any CLINs where a proposed $0.00 price is submitted shall be accompanied by an additional statement verifying the pricing of $0.00 is correct.

The proposed unit pricing in the Offeror’s proposal and TEP (Attachment 0003) will become the actual firm fixed prices in any resultant contract for the expected five-year ordering period of the basic contract. This also applies to any range pricing as applicable. The prices in the TEP worksheet will be incorporated into the CLINs of the Base IDIQ contract.

The Government expects adequate price competition under this effort. If, however, at the time of proposal due dates there is not adequate price competition, then Offerors may be required to submit information to the extent necessary for the Government to determine fair and reasonable price.

All information related to pricing shall be included in the section of the proposal defined as Volume III Price Factor. In the event the PCO determines additional information (Certified or other than certified cost or pricing data in accordance with FAR 15.403) is necessary in order to determine the reasonableness of price, information below may be requested:

- Catalog Pricing: Relevant Offeror commercial catalog, its date, catalog prices, and related discounts. Include an explanation of any differences between the offered price, the established catalog price, and price of recent sales in quantities similar to the proposed quantities.

- Market Pricing: Description of the nature of the relevant market and how that market affects the offered price including the source and date or period of any relevant market quotation or other basis for market price, the base market price, and applicable discounts or other price adjustments.

- Other evidence of prices charged: Evidence of prices charged other customers under similar circumstances. For example, the firm could provide copies of contracts with other customers to document the prices charged.

- Unbalanced Pricing – If the Offeror’s unit prices appear unbalanced when comparing them from quantity range to quantity range or ordering period to ordering period, the Offeror shall provide documentation, including calculations and supporting rationale, explaining the apparent unbalanced pricing.

For proposal preparation purposes only, the expected or approximate date for initiation of contract performance for the Single Award base IDIQ, as well as the first Delivery Order, is 30 June 2023. The actual performance dates may vary.

iv. Volume IV – Past Performance Factor. This volume shall contain past performance information regarding similar contracts. Offerors shall submit Government contracts for the Prime Offeror and each major subcontractor in performance or awarded during the past thirty-six (36) months (three (3) years), from the issue date of this solicitation, which are relevant to the requirements of this solicitation, to include the NAICS code the work was completed under. The Offeror shall submit only those recent and relevant contracts for itself and its major subcontractor(s) for identical or similar efforts to the requirements of this RFP.

The proposal volume shall contain no more than five (5) contracts for the Prime Offeror and three (3) contracts for each of the Prime Offeror’s major subcontractors. A minimum of one (1) contract reference is required for each proposed major subcontract. Major subcontractors are defined as members of a Prime Offeror’s overall team who are anticipated to perform more than twenty percent (20%) of the proposed TEP. Relevant efforts are defined as efforts that are essentially the same as or similar in scope and complexity as the SOW (Attachment 0001) with a minimum of one (1) year of completed performance, within the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 511210 (Software Publishers). In order to be considered relevant, the Offeror must demonstrate for each proposed contract that it, or its major subcontractor, performed a minimum of 33% of the dollar value of the contract. Data concerning the Prime Offeror shall be provided first, followed by each proposed major subcontractor, in alphabetical order. The Offeror shall also submit the written consent of its major subcontractors to allow the disclosure of its subcontractor’s past performance information to the Prime Offeror.

1) Section 1 – Contract Descriptions. This section shall include the following information in the following format.

i. Contractor/Subcontractor place of performance, CAGE code and Unique Entity ID (UEI) number. If the work was performed as a subcontractor, also provide the name of the prime contractor and point of contact (POC) within the prime contractor organization (name, and current address, e-mail address, and telephone and fax numbers).

ii. Government contracting activity, and current address, PCO name, e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers.

iii. Government’s technical representative name, current email address, telephone and fax numbers.

iv. Government contract administration activity and the Administrative

Contracting Officer’s name, and current e-mail address, telephone and fax number.

v. Government contract administration activity’s pre-award monitor’s name, and current e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers.

vi. Contract number and, in the case of indefinite delivery type contracts, General Services Administration contracts, and blanket purchase agreements, include delivery/task order numbers.

vii. Contract Type (specific type such as fixed-price (FP), cost reimbursement (CR), Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF)-term form, CPFF-completion, time & material (T&M), etc.). In the case of indefinite delivery contracts, indicate specific type (requirements, definite quantity, and indefinite quantity) and secondary contract type (FP, CR, T&M, etc.).

viii. Awarded price/cost.

ix. Final or projected final price/cost.

x. Original delivery schedule, including dates of start and completion of work.

xi. Final or projected final, delivery schedule, including dates of start and completion of work.

xii. One (1) contract, Delivery Order counts as a single reference. Do not combine multiple contracts, Delivery Order into one (1) reference.

The Offeror must provide the current SOW with each reference. The Prime Offeror/major subcontractor must cross reference the relevancy of the work they accomplished under the provided SOW to the Information Collection Management.

2) Section 2 – Performance. Offerors shall provide a specific narrative explanation of each contract listed in Section 1, Contract Description, describing the objective achieved and detailing how the effort is relevant to the requirement of this solicitation. For any contracts that did not/do not meet original schedule or technical performance requirements, provide a brief explanation of the reason(s) for the shortcomings and any corrective action(s) taken to avoid recurrence. The Offerors shall list each time the delivery schedule was revised and provide an explanation of why the revision was necessary. All requests for variance shall be addressed with respect to causes and corrective actions. The Offerors shall also provide a copy of any cure notices or show-cause letters received on each contract listed and a description of any correction action implemented by the Offeror or proposed subcontractor. The Offerors shall indicate if any of the contracts listed were terminated and the type and reason(s) for the termination.

3) Section 3 – Subcontracts. Offerors shall provide an outline of how the effort required by the requirements will be assigned for performance within the Offeror’s corporate entity and among the proposed subcontractors. The information provided for the Prime Offeror and each proposed major subcontractor must include the entire company name, company address, CAGE code, UEI number, and type of work to be performed by citing the SOW subparagraph number. This includes all major subcontractors. The Offeror must define the dollar value of work that each Offeror/major subcontractor will accomplish.

4) Section 4 – New Corporate Entities. New corporate entities may submit data on prior contracts involving its officers and employees; however, in addition to the other requirements in this section, the Offeror shall discuss in detail the role performed by such persons in the prior contracts cited. Information should be included in the files described in the sections above.

5) Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ). For all contracts identified in Section

1, Contract Descriptions, a PPQ must be completed and submitted.

• The Offeror shall complete Part I of the PPQ and e-mail the completed questionnaire to both the Government contracting activity and Government technical representative responsible for the past/current contract.

• The Offeror may not fill in and/or submit any past performance information for data entered into Part 1.

• The Offeror must instruct the POCs for the cited past performance data in Part 1 that the questionnaires must be filled out by Government personnel for Government contract vehicles.

• Past performance data for commercial past performance may be filled out by personnel of the commercial entity cited.

• Offerors must instruct the POCs for past performance data cited in Part 1 of the PPQ to complete Part II of the questionnaire electronically and email the entire questionnaire to the cited PCO and Contract Specialist no later than the proposal due date. The Offeror shall e-mail these two individuals a list of all the POCs who were sent a questionnaire. The Government must receive this list no later than the proposal due date. The POC list shall be submitted in MS Word for Windows table format to include the following fields: Solicitation Number; Company Name; Contract Number;

Government Agency; POC Last Name, First Name; POC Title; POC Telephone Number; POC E-mail Address; and Date E-Mail to POC (month/day).

6) Submissions. Offerors are discouraged from providing POCs with another contractor’s facility, i.e., in case an Offeror (or one of his/her team members) is in a subcontract with another contractor who has submitted a proposal on the same requirement. Offerors shall provide and submit the prime contract number and all Governmental agency POC information, in lieu of subcontract numbers or prime contract POC information in situations as described above.

d. Discussions.

i. General Information.

• The Government reserves the right to award without discussions.

• The Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated as set forth in Section M of this solicitation. IAW FAR 15.306(d), the Government may hold discussions with Offerors. Clarifications and/or discussions may be deemed necessary, as described in FAR 15.306(a); however, the Offeror’s initial proposal should contain its best terms and conditions from a price and technical standpoint as the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award the resultant contract without discussions. The Government reserves the right to hold discussions, if necessary.

• If the PCO 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 PCO 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.

ii. Discussion Scheduling. If in-person discussions are conducted, the PCO may schedule discussion session(s) to clarify Offerors’ questions on Evaluation Notices (ENs), and each Offeror will be notified of the time and place prior to its discussion session. Appropriate security clearances should be provided by the Offerors in sufficient time to process the requests. The PCO will provide additional instructions with the notification. The discussion sessions will take place at a facility of the Government’s choosing in the Aberdeen, MD area.

iii. Non-Government Advisors. Offerors are advised that non-Government advisor subject matter experts (SMEs) have participated in the development of the requirement or may participate in the source selection process. The non- Government advisor SMEs that may participate in the source selection process will have access to all of the necessary parts of the Offeror’s proposal pertinent to the SMEs’ area of expertise. Non-Government SMEs that will participate in the source selection process will not have access to price data or past performance information.

These individuals are non-voting members of the evaluation team. The companies listed below are precluded from being a prime contractor or from participating in any teaming arrangement with potential Offerors due to Organizational Conflict of Interest concerns. Offerors must advise the PCO as soon as possible of any concerns/questions with regard to the use of the non-Government SMEs from the companies listed below. Any Offeror that is affiliated with or is contemplating a contractual relationship with the companies listed below must notify the PCO as soon as possible. In accomplishing its duties, the below firms may require access to proprietary information contained in the Offerors’ proposals. Therefore, pursuant to FAR 9.505-4(b), these firms must execute an agreement with each Offeror that states that they will (1) protect the Offerors information from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary, and (2) refrain from using the information for any purpose other than that for which it was furnished. To expedite the evaluation process, each Offeror must contact the above companies to effect execution of such an agreement prior to the submission of proposals. Each Offeror shall submit copies of the agreement with its proposal within Volume I - Executive Summary (4) - Award Documents/Certifications/ Representations.

Each Offeror must submit copies of its complete NDA with the following companies:

1) Booz Allen Hamilton Inc., 8283 Greensboro Drive, McLean, VA, 22102-3830; CAGE Code: 17038; POC: Ryan Ludwig, Phone: 732-936-3539, Email: ludwig_ryan@bah.com mailto:ludwig_ryan@bah.com

2) DCI; 6245 Guardian Gateway, Suite 120, APG, MD 21005; POC:

contact@dci-solutions.com; (443)327-6622

3) Decision Engineering; 112 Deer Path Lane, Freehold, NJ 07728;

info@deceng.net; (908)309-1887

4) Phoenix Operations Group; 11185 Stratfield Ct #2nd, Marriottsville, MD 21104; info@Phoenix-OpsGroup.com; (443)252-2151

D. Evaluation Factors for Award (Section M)

The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible Offeror whose best overall proposal is determined to be most beneficial to the Government.

The Government anticipates awarding to a single Offeror in response to this solicitation.

The award will be made based on the best overall (i.e., best value) proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the four (4) evaluation factors: Technical, Price, Past Performance and Small Business. For the Technical and Price factors, the Government will utilize the tradeoff process under the Best Value Continuum.

The Technical factor is significantly more important than the Price factor. Both Technical and Cost are more important than Past Performance. Offerors will be cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest prices offered or the highest technically rated proposals. Past Performance factor will assess the degree of confidence in the Offeror. The Small Business factor will be rated on an Acceptable or Unacceptable basis. A minimum rating of Acceptable must be achieved for the Technical and Small Business factors, and a rating of Limited Confidence or higher for Past Performance to be considered eligible for award. Offeror’s proposed prices within the Price Factor must be equal to or less than the Government affordability values for each Delivery Order identified within the Total Evaluated Price (TEP) Worksheet (Attachment 0003) to be considered eligible for award.

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award the contract without conducting discussions with Offerors. The Government reserves the right to hold discussions as determined necessary or required in the sole discretion of the Government's Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO). Therefore, an Offeror’s initial proposal should contain its best terms from a price and technical standpoint. The PCO may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range if determined that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an effective competition can be conducted. Proposals with an omission, or unclear proposals, may be judged to mean the Offeror does not fully understand the requirements or understand what it takes to meet or exceed the requirements, regardless of the proposed price.

In that case, the Offeror may be found Unacceptable and ineligible for award.

B. Factors to Be Evaluated

Award will be made to the Offeror whose proposal represents the best value to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the proposal. These proposals will be deemed the most advantageous to the Government based upon the evaluation factors described below.

Factor I – Technical mailto:contact@dci-solutions.com mailto:info@deceng.net mailto:info@Phoenix-OpsGroup.com

Factor II – Price

Factor III – Past Performance

Factor IV – Small Business

C. Evaluation Approach

1. Technical Factor. The Government will evaluate the extent to which an Offeror’s solution is able to accomplish the steps set forth in the Product Demonstration Event Plan (Attachment 0005), which is provided for evaluation purposes only.

Product Demonstration:

The Government will evaluate the extent to which an Offeror’s solution is able to successfully complete the requirements detailed in the Product Demonstration Event Plan (Attachment 0005). The individual threads/steps evaluated during the Product Demonstration are detail in the Product Demonstration Event Plan (Attachment 0005) Appendix A. During the demonstration, the Government will assign ratings in accordance with Table 2 – Technical Adjectival Rating and Table 3

– Technical Risk Rating, based on an Offeror’s proposed solution to an individual thread/steps detailed in Appendix A. An Offerors’ solution is not required to successfully complete all requirements in the Product Demonstration Event Plan (Attachment 0005) Appendix A. To receive consideration for award, an Offeror must receive an overall Technical Factor rating of Acceptable, with no thread steps rated unacceptable.

All thread steps in Appendix A are considered "equal", no one step is more important than the other. The Technical Adjectival Rating and Technical Risk Rating from each thread step in Appendix A will be used to formulate the thread step rating. Each thread will be assigned a rating based on the ratings/risk for each step. An Offeror's proposed solution that does not present a viable solution to the Government may receive a combined technical/risk rating of Unacceptable (see Table 2 - Combined Technical/Risk Ratings). Table 2. Technical Adjectival Rating

Color Rating

Adjectival Rating Description

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

Purple Good Proposal demonstrates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength or significant strength.

Table 3. Technical Risk Rating

2. Price Factor. The Government will evaluate for price reasonableness specifically using price analysis and will analyze the line-item pricing to determine if the prices are unbalanced. The TEP will be calculated IAW the TEP Worksheet attached to the solicitation (Attachment 0003) and will be utilized for the purpose of the Government’s award decision. The TEP will reflect the five (5) year Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) base contract ordering period.

The analytical techniques and procedures described in FAR subsections 15.404-1 (b) and

(g) will be utilized by the Government to determine that the proposed prices offered are fair and reasonable, or that unbalanced pricing between contract line-item numbers (CLINs) is not occurring. Price analysis may include evaluating data other than certified cost or pricing data obtained from the offeror or contractor when there is no other means for determining a fair and reasonable price. Indications of potential underbidding or unbalanced pricing will be reflected in the pricing report.

Green Acceptable Proposal demonstrates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.

Red Unacceptable Proposal is unawardable.

Adjectival Rating Definition

Low

Proposal may contain weakness/weaknesses which have low potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost, or degradation of performance.

Normal contractor emphasis and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Moderate

Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which may have a moderate potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost, or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

High

Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which is likely to have high potential to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost, or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will unlikely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Unacceptable Proposal contains a deficiency or a combination of significant weaknesses that causes an unacceptable level of risk of unsuccessful performance.

A price reasonableness approach will be utilized by the Government to determine that the proposed prices offered are fair and reasonable and that a “buy-in” or unbalanced pricing between CLIN or base and option period is not occurring. Indications of potential underbidding or unbalanced pricing will be reflected in the pricing report.

In order to determine that price is fair and reasonable IAW FAR 15.404(b) and (g), price analysis for commercial items and analysis will be used to ensure unbalanced pricing between CLINs is not occurring. Indications of potential unbalanced pricing will be reflected in the pricing report, and an offer may be rejected and ineligible for award if the PCO determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government. In accordance with the instructions provided in the TEP worksheet, proposed unit prices will be weighted and added to arrive at a total evaluated price which will be used in the trade-off evaluation.

All of the pricing for each CLIN identified in the TEP Worksheet (Attachment 0003) will be incorporated into the base contract at the time of award. The prices incorporated into the contract shall be ceiling prices which the awardee shall not exceed, binding upon the awardee for the duration of the contract.

3. Past Performance Factor. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s record of recent and relevant past performance to ascertain the probability of successfully performing the required efforts contained in the SOW (Attachment 0001).

a. Evaluation of past performance shall be IAW this plan utilizing the Contractor submitted information, as well as forms and questionnaires set forth in Appendix C.

b. The Government will focus its evaluation on the Offeror’s (and major subcontractors’) record of performance as it relates to all solicitation requirements including cost, schedule, performance and management of subcontractors. Major subcontractors are defined as members of an Offeror’s overall team who are anticipated to perform more than twenty percent (20%) of the proposed TEP (Attachment 3). A significant achievement, problem, or lack of relevant data in any element of the work can become an important consideration in the evaluation process; therefore, Offerors are reminded to include the most relevant recent efforts in the proposal. Recent efforts consist of those proposed by the Offeror that include performance of contracts occurring within thirty-six (36) months (three (3) years) of the date of issuance of this solicitation.

Relevant efforts are defined as efforts that are essentially the same as or similar in scope and complexity to the requirements of the solicitation, with a minimum of one (1) year of completed performance, within the NAICS code 511210 (Software Publishers).

Complexity is defined as the similarity of past performance history compared to the scope and proposed approach in terms of size, breadth, technical difficulty, degree of subcontracting, and involvement of the proposed solution. In the case of an Offeror or subcontractor without a record of recent and relevant past performance history, or when the performance record is so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror will be assigned an unknown (or “neutral”) rating, and its proposal will not be evaluated either favorably or unfavorably on past performance.

c. Offerors shall either provide completed relevant past performance information or, if applicable, include a written statement that it has no relevant past performance.

Offerors failing to comply with this requirement will be considered to have submitted a non-compliant proposal.

d. As set forth below in paragraph iii, Confidence Assessment, the Government is not limited to the information provided by an Offeror regarding and when evaluating past performance. A rating of “unknown” (or “neutral”) will be assigned, meaning the Offeror is evaluated neither favorably nor unfavorably for past performance, if the following criteria exist:

(1) If the Government has no information available regarding the Offeror’s past performance; and

(2) If an Offeror and/or its major subcontractor(s) submit(s) a statement that no relevant and /or recent past performance exists; and

(3) If the Offeror and/or its major subcontractor team member provides reference information that is not recent or relevant as defined in this solicitation.

The Past Performance factor considers an Offerors demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract requirements. There are three (3) aspects of the Past Performance evaluation that are used to develop the Past Performance rating: recency, relevancy, and confidence assessment.

i. RECENCY: The first aspect is to determine if the Offeror’s past performance is recent or not. Recent past performance is one (1) year of completed performance within the past 36 months (three (3) years) of the issue date of the formal solicitation.

ii. RELEVANCY: The second aspect is to assess the Offeror’s recent past performance to…