Amendment_0001_rev.pdf

NSN 7540-01-152-8070 STANDARD FORM 30. (Rev. 10-83) Previous Edition unusable Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Page of Pages AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. Contract ID Code

2. AMENDMENT MODIFICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (if applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6) CODE

(x) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (NO., Street, Country, State and ZIP Code)

CODE FACILITY CODE

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of offers is extended, is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning ______ copies of amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OR OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment your desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS. IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

Check One A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return _______ copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

The purpose of Amendment No. 0001 is to provide updated versions of the instructions to offerors, the evaluation criteria, Attachment D and to respond to offeror's questions. In addition, this amendment extends the due date of proposal submission to 11:00 a.m. (EST) on July 25, 2016.

1 26

0001 JUL 06, 2016 EDOESE-16-000015

CAMPCP

US Dept of ED-550 12th Street SW - Room 7169 Washington DC 20065

CPOB

US Department of Education Contracts & Acq Mgt/Group B, 550 12th St SW - 7th Floor Washington DC 20202-4240

ED-ESE-16-R-0009

JUN 22, 2016

See Schedule

Attachment Page

PAGE 2 OF 26 ED-ESE-16-R-0009/0001

Proposal Instructions

The Government intends to award a firm-fixed-price contract for commercial services as defined in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 2.101 under Commercial Items.

The Offeror is expected to show a thorough understanding of the proposed tasks and the existing resources, as specified in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). The proposal should address the requirements in the PWS, not simply repeat the language. The proposal should be written in enough detail so that a review panel can adequately judge its full merits.

Although the intent of each task is spelled out in the scope of work, it is up to the Offeror to propose the most effective method of carrying out the tasks and the most feasible timeline and dates for all key activities. The Offeror is encouraged to exercise independent judgment concerning the best methods of attaining the objectives of this contract.

Each offer shall consist of two separately packaged proposals: (1) a technical proposal, and (2) a business proposal. All information necessary to judge the technical soundness and management capabilities of the Offeror will be contained in the technical proposal. The business proposal will include all information related to the determination of the costs/prices associated with each of the project’s tasks. The technical proposal will not contain any reference to specific costs or prices, but resource information (e.g., staff hours) may be included so that the Offeror’s understanding of the scope of the work may be evaluated by the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP). Authors of each section will be clearly identified in the proposal’s Table of Contents.

Submission Instructions

The technical proposal should be written in a standard font, no smaller than 12 points for all text outside of titles and headers, and limited to a total of 40 double-spaced pages. Margins should be no smaller than 1 inch on all sides. Specifications about the font do not apply to tables, figures, or exhibits. The page limit ONLY excludes resumes and the letters of agreement from subcontractors and consultants.

Resumes and letters of agreements shall be submitted in separate appendices. No additional appendices are allowable; Offerors shall not put substantive materials in the appendix to subvert the page limit.

The business proposal, which also includes the Conflict of Interest Plan, should follow the same font and margin specifications as the technical proposal. There is no page limit for the business proposal.

All pages falling outside these parameters will be immediately discarded and not considered as part of the evaluation process.

The technical and business proposals shall be submitted as separate volumes. The technical and business proposal must be received at or before 11:00 am EST on July 25, 2016. Proposals shall be submitted electronically to the Points of Contact listed below:

• Alice Mihill, Contract Specialist (Email: Alice.Mihill@ed.gov)

• Gabriella McDonald, Contracting Officer (Email: Gabriella.McDonald@ed.gov)

PAGE 3 OF 26 ED-ESE-16-R-0009/0001

All questions in response to this solicitation must be received at or before 11:00 am EST on June 28, 2016. Questions shall be submitted electronically to the Points of Contact listed below:

• Alice Mihill, Contract Specialist (Email: Alice.Mihill@ed.gov)

• Gabriella McDonald, Contracting Officer (Email: Gabriella.McDonald@ed.gov)

The Department’s email system cannot handle emails larger than 15MB. Submissions should be broken up into separate emails if necessary.

Technical Proposal Details

The technical proposal shall contain:

1. Cover Sheet. The cover sheet shall contain the procurement name, volume name, (i.e., Volume 1, Technical Proposal) Solicitation number, date of submission, and the Offeror’s name. (The cover page will be considered Page 1 of the page count).

2. Table of Contents. The proposal should include a Table of Contents as a means of quickly accessing important points of discussion in the proposal.

3. Introduction. The Introduction should briefly describe the Offeror’s overall plan for achieving the objectives of this contract, the scope of work, intended products, and the applicability of these products to the objectives. Additionally, the introduction shall include a summary of the Offeror’s qualifications and unique strengths relevant to this activity.

4. Technical Capability. This section should fully describe the technical and theoretical approach the Offeror shall employ in complying with the Performance Work Statement.

a. Describe procedures that are specific to each task and sub-task, and reflect efficient utilization of the Offeror's resources.

b. Provide an organizational chart and proposed skills mix that clearly identifies the management, team, and key positions to be utilized.

c. Identify potential and/or anticipated problems and suggest proposed variations in the design of the effort, the time frame for completing tasks, and/or deliverable due dates that may facilitate successful completion of the scope of work’s tasks and objectives.

d. Demonstrate sound technical approach and a thorough understanding of Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) and Capital Planning

e. Demonstrate research capabilities to address complex business and technical problems.

5. Personnel. The Offeror shall propose a team with appropriate knowledge, skills and abilities to support the Department’s goals and objectives for this initiative. The proposal shall describe in detail the qualifications of key personnel, detailing their competencies and experience in performing work of similar size and scope to that outlined in the Performance Work Statement, and describing their role in the project. The Offeror’s selected staff must possess knowledge and skills in the following areas: IV&V, Capital Planning, process re-engineering, system analysis, information assurance/security standards and procedures; quality assurance and compliance; customer satisfaction, strategic planning, and project management.

The contractor shall include specifics about the level of effort invested in the project by all key personnel proposed for this project.

PAGE 4 OF 26 ED-ESE-16-R-0009/0001

The proposed key staff section should indicate clearly the relationship between past staff experience and proposed task assignments under this contract.

Resumes shall be included for all key staff for this contract, including key staff from subcontractors, and consultants. Resumes should document only directly related experience, industry certifications, educational background, publications, and professional activities. All resumes should share a common format and organization. A letter of commitment from all proposed consultants and key staff not currently employed by the Offeror should be included. The need for any proposed consultants shall also be fully justified, including how they would contribute to the project.

If key personnel are unknown at the time of submission, a position description (including job duties, qualifications required, and selection criteria) should be substituted for resumes. The Government reserves the right to review the resumes of key personnel, including the project director, to verify that the employee has sufficient expertise and qualifications for the work of the position. By listing key personnel as part of the proposal, the Offeror is making a firm commitment to use said personnel to carry out the activities in the performance work statement.

Required Key Personnel

Key Personnel Minimum Qualifications

Program/Project Manager 1. Ability to obtain federal clearance at the 5C level or equivalent

2. A minimum of five years of experience in project management

3. A minimum of five years of experience in IV&V of IT systems

4. Experience with scheduling, budgeting and capital planning

5. Strong leadership, organization and communication skills.

Business System Analyst 1. Ability to obtain federal clearance at the 5C level or equivalent

2. Experience in Computer Science or related field

3. Experience in IV&V of IT systems

4. Thorough understanding of industry and federal IT requirements, and business implications of the application of technology to the current and future business environment

5. Ability to communicate technical information to lay individuals

6. General experience with work associated with the tasks in the PWS

Strategic/Capital Planner 1. Ability to obtain federal clearance at the 5C level or equivalent

2. Experience in budgeting and financial management or related field

3. A minimum of five years of experience in strategic planning documentation, including OMB Form 300

4. Experience with scheduling, budgeting and capital planning

5. Ability to communicate technical information to lay individuals

5. Experience; Past Performance; Institutional Capacity. This section should demonstrate the Offeror’s organizational capacity and ability to carry out all phases of work associated with the major activities stated in the PWS. The Offeror should describe its past and current experience in conducting projects of a similar or comparable nature as well as its experience with different federal programs. Brief summaries of such work should be submitted, including the names, current affiliations, and current

PAGE 5 OF 26 ED-ESE-16-R-0009/0001

telephone numbers of appropriate references. Include also: (1) vehicle number and type; (2) funding agency (DOL, HHS, etc.); (3) original dollar value and final dollar value (including options if a contract);

(4) original completion date and final (or current) completion date; (5) the scope of the effort; (6) relevance of the work to this contract; (7) performance experience summary; (8) methodology and tools used; (9) challenges in the effort and how they were overcome; and (10) explanation as to why the effort was considered “successful.”

The Offeror shall describe in detail how it has worked in the past to provide IV&V and Capital Planning services. The Offeror shall describe relevant experiences in evaluating resource formats and suggesting revisions or improvements to enhance business, financial, and technical artifacts, as well as system functionality. The Offeror shall describe past experiences conducting and analyzing customer satisfaction surveys, as well as collecting and analyzing users' feedback virtually and in-person. The Offeror shall describe relevant experiences researching and performing Analysis of Alternatives (AoAs).

It is the responsibility of the Offeror to ensure that telephone numbers and points of contact for references are current and accurate. Inability to contact references may figure negatively in any evaluation of past performance. The Government also reserves the right to obtain past performance information from other sources.

6. Management Plan. The Offeror shall provide a summary description of the management control system that is used internally for planning, scheduling, budgeting, managing, and reporting the accomplishments of this requirement. The application of the proposed management system should include procedures for effective management of project resources, procedures for controlling the quality of products/services, and procedures for early identification of potential problems in carrying out task activities. The Offeror must describe how the internal management control system will be applied to the work of this proposal as specified in the performance work statement and the evaluation criteria.

The proposal shall provide details on how the Offeror will coordinate and communicate with OME, and any identified or potential subcontractors.

In addition to describing the management system, the Offeror should present the following information in the proposal:

• Sub-contractual arrangements including the work to be done, responsibilities for tasks, reporting arrangements, and any other terms of the agreement. A letter from the proposed subcontractor delineating the nature of the agreement must be included.

• Proposed lines of communication, responsibility, and authority for planning, execution, management, and improvement of the tasks in the PWS.

• Proposed policies and procedures for managing and directing the effort for quality, cost control, and cost management.

• Time commitments, to be expressed in person-hours and shown in tabular form as follows:

PAGE 6 OF 26 ED-ESE-16-R-0009/0001

Staff/Consultant Task

Total %

FTE

% time on other Federal

Projects

% time on non-Federal

Projects

The Offeror should outline all existing obligations over the period of the contract for staff proposed for the contract, including the percentage of time allotted for existing projects. The chart must include a total for each task, as well as for the entire contract.

• A schedule of task activities and the delivery of products in calendar days from the effective date of the contract.

• Time for any contractor internal review and clearance procedures as well as Department review.

• Listings of materials or services the Offeror expects the Department to make available (e.g., data, reports, etc.).

• Establish baselines and set targets for performance metrics and performance measures utilizing the sample chart of performance metrics provided below:

Desired Outcomes

(What are the goals as a result of this contract?)

Required Services

(What task must be accomplished to achieve the desired result?)

Performance Standard

(What should the standards for completeness, reliability, and quality be?)

Acceptable Quality Level

(AQL)

(How much error is acceptable?)

(Monitoring Method)

(How is success defined?)

In summary, the management approach should provide a clear indication that all tasks can be completed on time, and with a high level of quality. For planning purposes, the contract award is planned for September 25, 2016.

7. Use of Subcontractor and Consultants. Proposals may include plans to subcontract part of the work, provided that evidence is presented that any proposed subcontractor is fully capable of performing the assigned tasks and that the Offeror has effective control of the participation of the subcontractor(s) in the project. The proposal should identify the roles in which consultants would serve on this contract.

Letters from proposed subcontractors/consultants indicating their willingness to serve, if selected, must be included in the Offeror’s proposal. All proposed contractors and subcontractors shall sign a Conflict of Interest Certificate, and this shall be included in the technical proposal submission.

Alternative Approaches

Offerors are encouraged to suggest better, more efficient or creative ways to conduct this work than have been outlined in the Performance Work Statement. Offerors are also encouraged to suggest additional/alternative strategies that complement, update, or more appropriately address the issues discussed in the Performance Work Statement. The Offeror shall fully describe and justify significant

PAGE 7 OF 26 ED-ESE-16-R-0009/0001

differences from the approach suggested in the Performance Work Statement and alternative strategies from those listed in the Performance Work Statement.

Business Proposal

It is assumed that the Government shall execute a firm fixed price contract. Offerors shall structure their business proposal in a manner that will allow for a fair and reasonable business evaluation of each discrete task and subtask. The business proposal shall be submitted as a separate document from the Technical Proposal.

The business proposal shall contain:

1. Budget Narrative. The narrative shall provide a complete Per-Task and Subtask Price Breakdown that includes the identification of proposed labor categories by named individuals, fully burdened hourly labor rates and labor hours. Any applicable markup or indirect cost applied to these non-labor costs should be included. The prices shall be presented by task and shall include any applicable assumptions used to formulate the price build-up.

2. Pricing Schedule. A section entitled “Pricing Schedule” that shall include a chart showing labor categories and loaded labor rates for each year of the contract.

3. Personnel. A spreadsheet of key personnel to include the number of hours, personnel titles, and rates of personnel proposed. The business proposal must match the same functional labor categories and/or named individuals provided in the staff mix for the technical proposal and the same hours and/or percentage of time committed for each functional labor category and/or named individual in the technical proposal.

4. Pricing for Optional Tasks. Complete pricing to include the identification of proposed labor categories by named individuals, their functional category, level of effort, effective hourly rate, extended labor price, other direct costs (including the identification of any applicable indirect cost and how it is applied to other direct costs), and profit/fee.

5. Authorized Negotiators. The Business Proposal shall list the names and telephones numbers of persons authorized to conduct negotiations and a statement to the effect that the offer submitted is firm for a period of at least 60 calendar days from the due date for proposals specified by the Government.

6. Payment Schedule. Draft payment schedule for separate payments for each deliverable by PWS task for each performance period.

7. Conflict of Interest Plan. The Offeror shall submit a Conflict of Interest Plan, providing details on its policies and procedures to identify and avoid potential organizational or personnel conflicts of interest (or apparent conflicts of interest). The Plan should also address procedures taken to neutralize or mitigate such conflicts if they have not been or cannot be avoided. The Plan should indicate that such policies and procedures are operative throughout the period of outside activities financial interests, or other significant connections or identifications that would establish, or give the appearance of establishing, a conflict of interest. A method for periodically reviewing financial interests of employees, subcontractors, and consultants, and their immediate families, in order to assess actual or apparent

PAGE 8 OF 26 ED-ESE-16-R-0009/0001

conflicts of interest, should be included in the plan. The term “potential conflict” means a reasonably foreseeable conflict of interest.

The thoroughness, completeness, and effectiveness of the Plan shall be evaluated as part of the Offeror’s overall proposal. The Plan will be incorporated into the contract awarded to the successful Offeror.

8. Small Business Subcontracting Plan. The Department's goal for small business subcontracting is that 31.0% of all subcontracting be subcontracted to small businesses, in the following categories:

• Women-owned small business concerns (5%);

• Small disadvantaged business concerns (8a) (5%);

• HUB Zone small business concerns (3%);

• Veteran Owned small business concerns (3%); and

• Other small business concerns.

Note--The categories listed above imply no order of preference.

The Department values an approach where substantive work in a meaningful capacity is performed by small businesses more highly than an approach in which only menial work or supply line work is performed by small businesses. A meaningful capacity for substantive work includes work other than courier services, office supplies or travel services. Therefore, a valued approach for this contract will be one in which technical, analytical, or significant service is performed by a small business.

Other than small businesses shall submit a plan in accordance with FAR 52.219-9 (Alternate II).

Consultants’ agreements should be included in the subcontracting plan.

PAGE 9 OF 26 ED-ESE-16-R-0009/0001

Evaluation Criteria

Award of this procurement will be made on a competitive best value basis, using a “trade-off” among price and non-price factors. The evaluation factors are as follows:

Factor 1 – Quality of Technical Capability Factor 2 – Quality of Management Approach Factor 3 – Quality of Organizational Capability and Experience Factor 4 – Small Business Participation Factor 5 – Price

Factors 1, 2, 3, and 4 as well as the overall quotation, shall be rated as “Outstanding”, “Good”, “Acceptable”, or “Unacceptable.” These terms are defined as follows:

Outstanding: The proposal has exceptional merit and reflects an excellent approach which should clearly result in the superior attainment of all requirements and objectives. The proposed approach includes strength(s), and contains no weaknesses, significant weaknesses, or deficiencies. The solutions proposed are considered very low risk in that they are exceptionally clear and precise, fully supported, demonstrate a complete understanding of the requirements, and can be expected to result in outstanding performance.

Good: The proposal demonstrates a sound approach which is expected to meet all requirements and objectives. This approach includes strength(s), and may include weaknesses but contains no significant weaknesses or deficiencies. The solutions proposed are considered to reflect low risk in that they are clear and precise, supported, demonstrate a clear understanding of the requirements, and can be expected to result in better than satisfactory performance.

Acceptable: The proposal demonstrates an approach which is capable of meeting all requirements and objectives. The approach may have strengths, weaknesses, and significant weaknesses but contains no deficiencies. In addition, the combined advantages outweigh the disadvantages. The solutions proposed are considered to reflect moderate risk in that they are for the most part clear, precise, and supported, demonstrate a general understanding of all the requirements, and can be expected to result in satisfactory performance with minor government intervention.

Unacceptable: The proposal demonstrates an approach which will very likely not be capable of meeting all requirements and objectives. This approach has one or more weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and/or deficiencies. Collectively, the advantages and disadvantages are not likely to result in satisfactory performance. The solutions proposed are considered to reflect high risk in that they lack clarity or precision, are unsupported, or indicate a lack of understanding of the requirement.

In addition to the rating of the technical merit of the vendor’s quotation, the Overall Risk factor assesses the risks and weaknesses associated with each offeror’s proposed approach to performing the requirements stated in the PWS. This rating is an overall assessment derived from the technical evaluation and is driven by each of the sub-factors with the technical factor. Therefore, in assessing quotation risk, the offeror’s proposed approach will be rated as follows:

Adjective Description Low Risk Any proposal weaknesses have little potential to cause disruption of schedule and/or degradation of performance.

Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will probably minimize any difficulties.

PAGE 10 OF 26 ED-ESE-16-R-0009/0001

Moderate Risk Approach has weaknesses that can potentially cause some disruption of schedule and/or degradation of performance.

However, special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will probably minimize any difficulties.

High Risk Approach has weaknesses, significant weaknesses and/or deficiencies that have the potential to cause serious disruption or schedule and/or degradation of performance even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.

In addition to the adjectival rating, the following elements will be considered when evaluating the technical proposal. When evaluating these elements, the following definitions shall be applied in the rating and supporting narrative.

Strength: An element of the quotation which enhances a requirement of the solicitation in a beneficial way to the Government. A discussion of a strength in the quote shall be accompanied by the benefit to the Government associated with that strength.

Weakness: A flaw in the quotation that increases the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. A discussion of a weakness in the quote shall be accompanied by the risk to the Government associated with that weakness.

Significant Weakness: A flaw in the quotation that appreciably increases the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. A discussion of a significant weakness in the quote shall be accompanied by the risk to the Government associated with the significant weakness.

Deficiency: A material failure of the quotation to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses that increase the likelihood of unsuccessful performance to an unacceptable level. If a deficiency is contained in the quote, the quote is determined to be unacceptable and ineligible for award.

Risk: An element of the quotation that could potentially impact the successful performance of the contract, such as quality and timeliness of products and services.

The non-price evaluation factors (1-4) are listed in descending order of importance. Sub-criteria are also listed in descending order of importance. All non-price factors individually and when combined are more important than Price.

Evaluation Criteria Criterion 1. Quality of Technical Capability Criterion 2. Quality of Management Approach Criterion 3. Quality of Organizational Capability and Experience Criterion 4. Small Business Participation

PAGE 11 OF 26 ED-ESE-16-R-0009/0001

Criterion 1: Quality of Technical Capability The evaluation of the Technical Capability factor will be a composite evaluation using all of the sub-factors associated with this factor, and will assess the extent to which an offeror's proposal demonstrates a sound, practical methodology for meeting the full scope of technical requirements anticipated to accomplish the performance objectives, tasks, and requirements as specified in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). The Technical Capability Factor is subdivided into the following two sub-factors of equal importance:

Technical Understanding: The extent to which the offeror demonstrates an understanding of the work. In making the evaluation, the Government will consider an offeror's knowledge of the specifications in the PWS in terms of the concept, purpose, importance, salient operational procedures, inherent problems and ideas for solutions. The evaluation will include an appraisal of the contractor's knowledge of the PWS’s relationship to other factors considered necessary to present an understanding of the contractor's ability to accomplish these services.

Soundness of Technical Approach: The extent to which the proposal describes the offeror’s proposed approach to comply with each of the performance objectives, tasks, and requirements as specified in the PWS. The proposed approach of ensuring the achievement of timely and acceptable performance is well documented and sound. Milestone and/or phasing charts illustrate a logical sequence of proposed events.

Criterion 2: Quality of Management Approach The evaluation of the Management Approach factor will be a composite evaluation using all of the sub-factors associated with this factor, and will assess the extent to which an offeror's proposal demonstrates knowledge of standard business practices, including macro-level business processes and project management.

The proposal identifies policies and procedures to ensure effective management of subcontractors, quality workmanship, and timely completion. Methods and criteria describe consideration of subcontractor‘s previous experience, present capabilities, and quality of previous jobs, as applicable.

Subcontracting/teaming arrangements, including proposed prime/subcontractor‘s relationships, tasks to be performed by subcontractors, negotiated methods of performance monitoring, and authority/autonomy delegated to subcontractors by the prime contractor are clearly identified.

The Management Approach Factor is subdivided into three sub-factors of similar importance:

Organizational Structure: The extent to which the offeror’s organizational chart clearly identifies management, IV&V, and Capital Planning teams as well as key positions. Lines of authority and communications between home office, IV&V, and Capital Planning teams and key positions are clear, logical, and effective. Responses to changes in customer needs, tasking, and workload requirements, including appropriateness of the organizational structure in relationship to the ED environment and the approach for accommodating short term increases and decreases in workload, are identified.

Quality Control: The extent to which the offeror's proposal demonstrates an administrative framework satisfactory for performing IV&V and Capital Planning efforts for MSIX. The proposed quality control processes and methods are logical, effective, and easily monitored and ensure high quality performance. Tools/methods described are adequate and logical and reflect a sound management approach.

Personnel: The extent to which the proposed project personnel have the appropriate qualifications and experience to manage this federal contract and to accomplish their assigned project tasks. Qualifications, availability, company affiliation, corporate experience, roles and

PAGE 12 OF 26 ED-ESE-16-R-0009/0001

responsibilities of the key personnel proposed and the qualifications proposed by the offerors to fulfill other personnel requirements under the contract are clearly identified. The labor hours proposed adequately represent the proposed techniques to fulfill the requirements of the PWS.

Criterion 3: Quality of Organizational Capability and Experience Organizational capability and experience is a measure of the degree to which an offeror has satisfied its customers and complied with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Organizational capability and experience will be evaluated to assess the offeror’s past performance on contracts of similar size, scope, and complexity to assess performance risk for this contract. The Government will evaluate the offeror's organizational capability and experience based on the information submitted by the offeror, as well as information that the Government collects by itself. The Government may call or visit the offeror's references reported hereunder to examine their assessment of the offeror's performance.

Each performance risk assessment of the sub-factors listed below will consider the number and severity of problems, the effectiveness of corrective actions taken, and the overall work record. The Organizational Capability and Experience evaluation factor has the following three sub-factors:

Technical Quality: Evaluation will be based on the extent, depth, and quality of recent corporate experience in performing the same or similar work. The offeror will be evaluated on compliance with previous contract requirements, accuracy of reports, and technical excellence to include quality.

Timely Delivery of Services: The offeror will be evaluated on meeting milestones, reliability, responsiveness to technical direction, deliverables completed on time, and adherence to contract schedules including contract administration.

Concern for the Customer‘s Interests/ Reasonableness of Business Behavior: The offeror will be evaluated on cooperative and proactive behavior with the technical representative(s) and Contracting Officer, flexibility, responsiveness to inquiries, problem resolution, and customer satisfaction. The offeror must also demonstrate a willingness to cooperate and help in problem solving.

Criterion 4: Small Business Participation Offerors who present an agreement with at least one subcontractor who is factually proven to satisfy one or more of the following socio-economic business types will receive a rating of outstanding for this evaluation criterion. The relevant business types include: small disadvantaged business (SDB); woman-owned small business (WOSB); service disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB); and HUB Zone small business (HUBZone). Offerors not meeting the requirements for one or more of these business size and socio-economic categories will receive an unacceptable rating for this criterion.

If the offeror is itself one of these socio-economic small business types, they will receive a rating of outstanding and will not need to identify one of these specific socio-economic small business concerns as a subcontractor partner. These offerors will not receive any type of “extra-credit” or score adjustment in the event that they do identify one of the specified socio-economic small business types as a subcontractor.

The Government will evaluate small business type by reviewing the offeror’s current Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA) located at www.sam.gov.

Price Evaluation

Although price/cost is an evaluation factor, it will not be evaluated based upon a predetermined evaluation rating scale. The business proposal will be evaluated to determine if the offeror’s price is fair

PAGE 13 OF 26 ED-ESE-16-R-0009/0001

and reasonable and if the business proposal is commensurate with their proposed technical approach. The business proposal shall contain complete information in sufficient detail for the Government to make a price reasonableness determination. The Contracting Officer may reject a proposal if a negative determination is made.

Options

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

PAGE 14 OF 26 ED-ESE-16-R-0009/0001

Attachment Small Business Subcontracting Plan

U.S. Department of Education

SUBCONTRACTING PLAN REVIEW FORM

Requisition No: Multiple Awards? Yes: No: (If yes, attach a copy of each subcontracting plan)

PROJECT INFORMATION

Solicitation/Contract No.: MOD No. (If applicable):

Title of Acquisition:

Contractor’s Name:

Period of Performance: (mm/dd/yy-mm/dd/yy) Total Contract Amount (including options): $

Total Modification Amount: (if applicable) $ Base Period (if there are options): $

Option 1 (if applicable): $ Option 2 (if applicable): $

Option 3 (if applicable): $ Option 4 (if applicable): $

Contracting Officer/Specialist Name: Tel&Fax:

Operating Component/Division: Email:

SUBCONTRACT PLAN REQUIREMENTS

1. Type of Plan (check one): Individual Master Commercial

(A=Acceptable; U=Unacceptable) C.O. SBS SBA/PCR

2. Subcontracting Goal Data A U A U A U

a. Total Subcontracting Dollars [(2b+2h=2a), except when subcontract baseline equals contract value]

b. Total Subcontracting Dollars & Percentage with Small Businesses (incl. SDB, WOSB, HUBZone, SDVOSB) - [Percentage of 2a.]

$ and %

c. Total Subcontracting Dollars & Percentage with Small Disadvantaged Businesses - [Percentage of 2.a.]

$ and %

d. Total Subcontracting Dollars & Percentage with Woman-owned Small Businesses - [Percentage of 2.a.]

$ and %

e. Total Subcontracting Dollars & Percentage with HUBZone Small Businesses - [Percentage of 2.a.]

$ and %

f. Total Subcontracting Dollars & Percentage with Veteran Owned Small Businesses - [Percentage of 2.a.]

g. Total Subcontracting Dollars & Percentage with Service-Disabled Veteran Small Businesses - [Percentage of 2.a.]

$ and %

PAGE 15 OF 26 ED-ESE-16-R-0009/0001

Attachment Small Business Subcontracting Plan

h. Total Subcontracting Dollars & Percentage with “Other” than Small Businesses (i.e., large companies, non-profits, etc.) [Percentage of 2.a.]

$ and %

h. Subcontracting Opportunities (description of all principal products/services to be subcontracted to all types of concerns) i.j.k. Methodology used to develop goals & identify potential sources (e.g. historical trends, information on technical and competitive bidding, formula for calculating goals, etc.).

PAGE 16 OF 26 ED-ESE-16-R-0009/0001

Migrant Student Information Exchange (MSIX) Management and Support Questions and Answers

QUESTION 1: Is the “Eval Criteria.pdf” listed in Section .4 52.212-2 Evaluation—Commercial Items (Oct 2014) available separately? The link provided in the Solicitation is not functioning and the document is irretrievable.

ANSWER: The Evaluation Criteria have been added as an attachment to Amendment 0001.

QUESTION 2: Can a Subcontractor’s Past-Performance be included in the Offeror’s proposal in order to meet experience requirements?

ANSWER: Yes, past performance from both the prime and subcontractor(s) will be considered.

QUESTION 3: Is the Small Business Sub-contracting Plan mislabeled as “Attachment B?” Section .34 309-1a List of Attachments (April 1984) of the Solicitation states that the Small Business Sub-contracting Plan is Attachment D.

ANSWER: The Small Business Subcontracting Plan should be labeled as Attachment D. This has been corrected in Amendment 0001.

QUESTION 4: Do all past performance requested in section 5. Experience: Past Performance;

Institutional Capacity need to be Offeror’s or may subcontractor or personnel past performance also be used to meet this requirement?

ANSWER: See response to Question 2.

QUESTION 5: The proposal instructions limit technical proposal length to 30 pages, double spaced.

Does the spacing requirement apply to charts, tables or resumes or may those be single spaced?

ANSWER: Charts, tables, and resumes may be single spaced.

QUESTION 6: Is there technical documentation on the MSIX system that may be provided for inspection?

ANSWER: No, there is no relevant technical documentation for the MSIX system that would be needed to respond to this RFP.

QUESTION 7: Can the agency describe the near term development plans for the MSIX system in terms of number of releases and general scope?

ANSWER: Currently there are two functional releases per year and two or more technical releases per year as needed.

QUESTION 8: For purposes of developing a relevant COI Plan, can the agency name all contracting organizations that are active on the MSIX development contract?

ANSWER: Deloitte, Inc.

PAGE 17 OF 26 ED-ESE-16-R-0009/0001

QUESTION 9: Please confirm there is no page limit for the Business Proposal?

ANSWER: There is no page limit for the business proposal.

QUESTION 10: Are contractor Key personnel required to hold current or prior ED clearance as at time of submitting a response?

ANSWER: Contractor Key personnel are not required to hold current or prior clearance at the time of submitting the proposal. However, all Key personnel must have or be eligible to hold ED clearance in order to work on this contract.

QUESTION 11: Should offeror submit a Key personnel resume and a commitment letter but due to no fault by the Offeror, upon award, personnel decides not to accept despite contractors best attempt, will there be a penalty for such?

ANSWER: There is no penalty. However, keep in mind the contractor must supply the resumes of all key personnel to the Department for approval. In other words, the Department has final say on all key personnel.

QUESTION 12: Who is the incumbent contractor?

ANSWER: The incumbent is e-Source Technologies.

QUESTION 13: Can the incumbent MSIX contractor, and/or any of their subcontractors, compete on both this procurement and future procurements related to the MSIX system?

ANSWER: Yes.

QUESTION 14: Page 13, Section .4 52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014) There is a link to a file "Eval_Criteria.pdf" but the link does not seem to be working and the evaluation factors are not otherwise presented. Please clarify.

ANSWER: See response to Question 1.

QUESTION 15: Please confirm that FAR provision "19.1307 – Price Evaluation Preference for HUBZone Small Business Concerns." applies to this solicitation.

ANSWER: Yes.

QUESTION 16: Form 1449; The Government specifies a NAICS code of 541519 with a size standard of $27.5M and then checks the unrestricted box. Given the scope of work, please confirm that this is a full and open competition under that NAICS vice any form of small business set aside.

ANSWER: This is an unrestricted full and open competition.

PAGE 18 OF 26 ED-ESE-16-R-0009/0001

QUESTION 17: Page 12, Section 8, Small Business Subcontracting Plan; if the offeror is a qualified small business under the specified NAICS code and size standard, would the offeror have to submit a small business subcontracting plan? Give the same conditions, is there a maximum percentage of the work that the offeror could offer to a large business concern as a subcontractor?

ANSWER: Small businesses are not required to submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan. Should the successful offeror be a small business, Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.219-14(c)(1) requires that “At least 50 percent of the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel shall be expended for employees of the concern.” The small business primary contractor must perform at least 50% of the labor, as measured by dollars (not hours).

QUESTION 18: Page 11, Section 6, Payment Schedule; The RFP States to provide a draft payment schedule for separate payments for each deliverable by PWS task for each performance period. The statement suggests that there will separate deliverable payments in addition to the firm fixed price monthly labor amount and/or applicable other direct costs. Please provide clarification if this is the expectation from the Government.

ANSWER: Payment of any kind must be tied to a deliverable and/or agreed upon milestone to reach that deliverable. There will not be any separate payment for monthly labor. Labor should be tied to the deliverable/milestone. Contract is firm fixed price with a schedule of deliverables throughout the base and option years.

QUESTION 19: Page 6, Submission Instructions; The RFP states that the technical proposal should be written in a standard font no larger than 12 points for all text outside of titles and headers. Typically a minimum font size is specified. Please confirm whether 12 points is the maximum or minimum font size for the response.

ANSWER: This should read no smaller the 12 points. Therefore 12 points in the minimum font size.

QUESTION 20: Page 6, Submission Instructions; The RFP states that Resumes and Letters of agreement are to be submitted in a separate appendix and that no addition appendices are allowed. The RFP then states that “Offerors shall not put substantive materials in the appendix to subvert the page limit”. Given the restrictions on the appendices, what other information (i.e., “Substantive materials”) is the Government expecting in the appendices?

ANSWER: All technical responses to this request should be contained in the technical proposal, with the exception of resumes and letters of agreement/commitment. Again, as it pertains to the technical proposal, the Cover Page/Sheet will be considered Page 1 of the page count and each page thereafter will be considered in the 40 page count with the exception of the resumes and letters of agreement/commitment. Resumes and letters of agreement/commitment should be in separate appendices.

QUESTION 21: Page 7-8, Section 5, Personnel; The scope of services requested in the PWS is broader than the minimum skills specified in the Personnel, specifically the key personnel section. Page 33 of the RFP specifies additional position descriptions which must undergo security screenings to work on the contract. Please confirm that resumes are only required for the identified key personnel listed on page 8 of the RFP.

PAGE 19 OF 26 ED-ESE-16-R-0009/0001

ANSWER: Resumes are only required for the key personnel related to IV&V and capital planning.

QUESTION 22: Page 7, Section 5, Personnel; The RFP states that the contractor shall include specifics about the level of effort invested in the project by all key personnel proposed for the project. Is this information to be provided in the Technical proposal and if so should it be a simple percentage of time allocated to the project so as not to run afoul of restrictions about putting “cost” information into the technical proposal? Is the LOE information required for any part time staff supporting the effort?

ANSWER: Level of effort (LOE) should be a simple percentage of time allocated to the project and is to be included in the technical proposal. The LOE information is only required for key personnel.

QUESTION 23: Who is the incumbent currently providing IV&V support for MSIX?

ANSWER: The incumbent is e-Source Technologies.

QUESTION 24: How many IV&V resources are currently supporting ED under MSIX?

ANSWER: Two for IV&V and one for Capital Planning.

QUESTION 25: Where is the work location? Is the Department’s intention for this to be fully supported on-site at ED Headquarters, 400 Maryland Avenue SW?

ANSWER: It is not the Department’s intention for this contract to be fully supported on-site at ED Headquarters at 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.

QUESTION 26: Task 2.1 Deliverable Reviews Artifact - Roughly how many deliverables need to be reviewed each year?

ANSWER: Please refer to the Schedule of Deliverables and Payments.

QUESTION 27: Task 2.9– Verify MSIX Contractor Delivers Quality Software - Roughly how many software releases are performed each year?

ANSWER: Currently there are two functional releases and two or more technical releases per year as needed.

QUESTION 28: Task 2.9– Verify MSIX Contractor Delivers Quality Software - Does the scope of effort include planning, scripting, and performing acceptance testing?

ANSWER: Planning, scripting and acceptance testing are done by the IV&V contractor.

QUESTION 29: What is the current level of effort (FTE) under the current contract for this scope of work? New contractors need to have the same information as incumbent contractors to ensure fair competition.

ANSWER: The LOE for the current contract is roughly 17,500 hours. The government relies on the expertise of the offeror to propose the LOE it believes is appropriate.

PAGE 20 OF 26 ED-ESE-16-R-0009/0001

QUESTION 30: Task 2: IV&V Oversight of the MSIX Contract - Does the government expect a significant change to the current level of development activity, e.g., a major system upgrade?

ANSWER: The MSIX contract will be undergoing re-competition in 2017. There will also be a migration to the cloud during the base year and on-going efforts related to responsive web design. Option years will see enhancements related to existing functionality, but there are no major system upgrades set for the immediate future.

QUESTION 31: Task 1.3…