IndustryDaySETAIVSlidesFinal.pdf

AIR FORCE SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND

Air Commandos Quiet ProfessionalsAir Commandos – Quiet Professionals

Systems Engineering andSystems Engineering and Technical Assistance

(SETA IV) S i(SETA IV) Services Industry DayIndustry Day

Captain Edens, Program Manager Mr. Buchanan, Contracting Specialist

6 May 09

SETA IV Industry Day Morning SessionMorning Session

0825 Administrative Announcements

0840 Opening Remarks

0845 HQ AFSOC Mission Overview

0905 SETA History/Overview

0940 Cost/Price Proposal Overview

1010 Technical Requirements Overview

1020 Sample Task Orders

1040 Solicitation Overview1040 Solicitation Overview

1100 Questions & Answers

1130 Lunch

Return 1300 (1PM)Return 1300 (1PM) 1130 Lunch

Afternoon SessionAfternoon Session

1300 Contractor Presentations

1350 Break

1400 Contractor Presentations

1450 Break

1500 Contractor Presentations1500 Contractor Presentations

1540 Break

1600 Contractor Presentations

1640 AFSOC Closing Remarks

Administrative

This conference is UNCLASSIFIED

Silence pagers and wireless phones

Public Restrooms

Emergency Exits

No Food/drink permitted in auditorium/lobby

Smoking area outside the building

Public telephones

Industry Day Ground Rules

Questions Comments, Observations & Feedback welcome

If in doubt, Ask for Clarification

Sensitive Information will be protected

Written questions about draft solicitation on 3x5 cards

Deposit in box at sign-in tablep g

Review during lunch break--answer today if able

All Q&A will be posted to FedBizOpps.gov

E-mail questions to: SETA4@hurlburt.af.mil NLT 15 May 09

IAW FAR 15.201, presentation available at FedBizOpps.gov

Disclaimer

Industry Day presentations and discussions are for informational and planning p rposes onland planning purposes only

A warranted Contracting Officer is the only authorized individual that can commit the Government

Remarks and explanations at this conference shall not qualify the terms and conditions of the draft Request For Proposal (RFP)

Formal solicitation takes precedence over all preliminary or draftFormal solicitation takes precedence over all preliminary or draft documents, discussions or postings

All dates, technical information and other aspects of the program may change without specific notificationp g y g p Please carefully read the final RFP in total, as the information may have changed from what was published in the draft RFP

If in doubt contact the AFSOC Contracting Officer Mr Lowman

If in doubt, contact the AFSOC Contracting Officer, Mr. Lowman at 850-884-2022.

Ethics & Communication

Integrity of the acquisition process paramount

Ethical conduct and Integrity at the forefront

Not only “do things right" but “do the right thing”

Intrinsic part of everyday decision-making and practice

Communication throughout source selection

Ensure even-handed treatment of interested parties

Offerors treated so no unfair competitive advantage

AFSOC Contracting Officer sole focal point after RFP release

AFSOC Contracting Officer, Mr. Lowman, 850-884-2022 g , , Opening RemarksOpening Remarks

Maj Gen Kurt A. Cichowski Vice Commander

Command BriefCommand Brief

Lt Col Michael A. Wormley Commander’s Action Group

Air Commandos – Quiet Professionals

AFSOC Command

Brief

This Briefing Is: UNCLASSIFIED

Overview

Air Commando Heritage

Missions & Organization

Weapon Systems

Air Commando Heritage

Korean

War

World War II http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.cantho-rvn.org/soc-trang/verebely-patch-SocTrang102-550.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.cantho-rvn.org/insig.html&usg=__BwV_I-tntD87XrhsATzddqfgcdA=&h=679&w=550&sz=87&hl=en&start=2&tbnid=ZALhlZRQok2yiM:&tbnh=139&tbnw=113&prev=/images?q=1st+air+commando+group+patch&gbv=2&hl=en

Air Commando Heritage

Desert

One

Southeast Asia

Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia

AFSOC Core Missions

Aviation Foreign Internal Defense

Specialized Air Mobility

Battlefield Air Operations

Intelligence, Surveillance, and Recon

Precision Aerospace Fires

Agile Combat Support

Command and Control

Specialized Refueling

Information Operations

Psychological Operations

AFSOC Weapon Systems

Current as of: 27 Apr 09

1 SOW

Organization

27 SOW 720 STG 352 SOG 919 SOW353 SOG 193 SOWAFSOTC

Wings/Groups

Location:

Duke Field, FL

Weapon System:

MC-130E

Unit: 919 SOW

Location:

Hurlburt Field, FL

Weapon Systems:

AC-130H/U, MC-130H/P, CV-22,

U-28A

Units: 23 AF, 1 SOW, 720 STG, AFSOTC

Location: Harrisburg, PA

Weapon System: EC-130J

Unit: 193 SOW

Location:

RAF Mildenhall, UK

Weapon Systems:

MC-130H/P, Special Tactics

Unit: 352 SOG

Location:

Kadena AB, JA

Weapon Systems:

MC-130H/P, Special

Tactics

Unit: 353 SOG

Location:

Cannon AFB/

Melrose Range, NM

Weapon Systems:

MC-130W, U-28A,

MQ-1

Unit: 27 SOW

Air Force Major Commands

US Air Forces

Europe

Air Force

Special Operations

Command

Air Combat

Command

Pacific Air

Forces

Air Mobility

Command

Air Force Materiel

Command

Air Force Reserve

Command

Air Force Space

Command

Air Education

& Training

Command

USSOCOM Components

Joint Special

Operations

Command Air Force Special

Operations

Command

Naval Special Warfare

Command

US Army Special

Operations

Command

Marine Corps Forces

Special Operations

Command

Aviation Foreign Internal Defense

6 SOS

Assess

Train

Advise

Assist

Integrate

Specialized Air Mobility Weapon Systems

MC-130E Talon I/MC-130H Talon II/MC-130W Combat Spear

Primary mission: Infil/exfil/resupply

Secondary: SOF aerial refueling

Specialized Air Mobility Weapon Systems

Twice as far and fast in one period of darkness

CV-22 Osprey

318th & 319th SOS Tactical mobility support to

Special Operations Forces

SOF Theater Mobility Weapon Systems

U-28A Exterior ViewPC-12/ U-28 (Light lift)

M-28

U-28A

Specialized Refueling Weapon Systems

MC-130P Combat Shadow

Primary mission: SOF aerial refueling

Secondary: infil/exfil/resupply

Intelligence, Surveillance & Reconnaissance

Weapon Systems

11th IS

MQ-9

MQ-1

Precision Aerospace Fires Weapon Systems

AC-130H/U

“The Gunship”

Entire kill chain: find, fix, finish, exploit, analyze

High ops tempo in OEF & OIF

Psychological Operations Weapon Systems

EC-130

Commando Solo

PSYOP…To Win the Hearts and Minds

Flown by 193 SOW

(ANG), Harrisburg PA

Broadcasts produced by

Army’s 4th Psychological Ops Group

Agile Combat Support

Space Ops

Weather Support

IntelligenceLegal

Operations Support

Agile Combat Support

Communications

Security Forces Civil Engineering

Logistics

Medical https://eis.afsoc.af.mil/sites/A4/AgileCombatSupport/DSC_7324.jpg https://eis.afsoc.af.mil/sites/A4/AgileCombatSupport/CV22 Engine Maintenance.jpg https://eis.afsoc.af.mil/sites/A4/AgileCombatSupport/Airdrop.jpg https://eis.afsoc.af.mil/sites/A4/AgileCombatSupport/070719-F-5957S-070.JPG

Command and Control

• Joint Special

Operations Air

Component

(JSOAC)

• Joint Forces

Special Operations

Component

Commander

(JFSOCC)

• Commander Air

Force Special

Operations Forces

(COMAFSOF)

Special Tactics: Battlefield Air Ops Weapon Systems

- Provide air/ground interface

- Highly skilled, innovative, adaptable, mature operators

- Small, flexible, joint teams

Combat Controller Battlefield Airmen

Terminal Control Operations

Airfield Survey & Assessment

Special Reconnaissance

Special Operations Weather Battlefield Airmen

5 SFG/

160 SOAR

3/160 SOAR

OL-A, Det 2

Savannah

Det 2

Ft Campbell

Det 1

Ft Lewis

10 CWS

Hurlburt

Hurlburt

1 SFG

10 SFG

Rangers

3 &7 SFG

Det 5

Ft Bragg

Det 4

Ft Benning

Det 3

Ft Carson

Environmental Reconnaissance

Objective Area Weather Forecasting

Pararescue Jumper Battlefield Airmen

Personnel and

Equipment Recovery

Combat Search and

Rescue

Battlefield Trauma

Care and Staging

17th ASOS

4 Locations in direct support of Special Forces Groups and the Ranger Regiment

Advanced Terminal Attack, Guidance and Control Ops

Battlefield Targeting

Special Reconnaissance

Tactical Air Control Party Battlefield Airmen

VISION: Transforming Airmen into Air Commandos who can fight and win anytime, anywhere…

MISSION: AFSOC’s focal point for recruiting, assessing, selecting, training and educating Air

Commandos

Recruit, assess and select best qualified candidates

Deliver responsive and relevant training and education that supports the Air Force Special

Operations mission

Foster & build the Air Commando warrior ethos

Air Force Special Operations

Training Center

Questions?

SOF Truths

Humans are more important than hardware

Special Operations Forces cannot be mass produced

Quality is better than Quantity

Competent Special Operations

Forces cannot be created after emergencies occur

SETA IV Acquisition q Strategy Overview

Kurt Buchanan Contracting Specialist

6 May 096 May 09

SETA History/Overview Mission need

SETA III b k dSETA III background

SETA IV support objectives/parameters

SETA IV timeline/milestones

SETA III to IV transition

Risk assessment

Small business considerations

Cost/Price proposal overview

Technical requirements overview

Solicitation overview

Mission Need

AFSOC has a continuing requirement for Contractor support on a ld id b i d ithi b d f A&AS iworld-wide basis and within a broad range of A&AS services

Selected SETA contractors will provide short-term non-personal professional services to HQ AFSOC organizations

SETA contractors support AFSOC, DRU’s, and other SOF entitiespp

To ensure continuity of services, SETA IV will be awarded for a 5-year period prior to the expiration of SETA IIIyear period prior to the expiration of SETA III

SETA III Background

SETA III Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) C i 16 D 2009 (TO d 120 d )Contract expires 16 Dec 2009 (TOs extend up to 120 days) Small Business Set Aside <10 proposals received, 3 contracts awarded $75M ceiling, expect $63M total

HQ AFSOC is principal customer; others include 720th STG, AFSOTC, USAFSOS…etc.

SETA III Customers

A2 (Intel)

14% 22%

A3 (Ops)

A4 (Logistics)

23%

A4 (Logistics)

A5 (Requirements)

23%

18% A8,9 (Planning / Analysis)

CCX (Cmd Section) 2%

16%3%

2% AFSOTC (Training)

OTHERS (SOF Units)% Contractor Man% Contractor Man--yearyear

OTHERS (SOF Units)% Contractor Man% Contractor Man year year Equivalents (CMEs) AwardedEquivalents (CMEs) Awarded

SETA IV Support Overview

Provide technical & analytical tools to support / improve:

P li d l tPolicy development Management & administration Government systems

Planning Programming Acquisition Implementation Sustainment Training

SETA IV Objectives

Centralized contract management & execution Continuity with contractors with a local presence

Acquire intellectual capital to support:q p pp Ops & Training Management & Professional Support Services Acq & Log Management & Professional Support Services Intelligence Management & Professional Support ServicesIntelligence Management & Professional Support Services Studies, Analyses & Evaluations Engineering & Technical Services

SETA IV Contract Parameters

Contract type Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ)

Contract structure Anticipate up to 4 awards Performance period – 5 years with no options Estimated ceiling -- $85M aggregate over the 5-year periodEstimated ceiling -- $85M aggregate over the 5-year period Government expects $3,000.00 minimum award met with award of Initial Task Order

SETA IV Contract Parameters

Pricing arrangements Labor

Firm Fixed Price Labor hours

Cost reimbursable Travel MaterialsMaterials New Mexico Gross Receipts Tax

Overseas allowances Overtime

Milestones

EVENT DATE

INDUSTRY DAY 06 May

RFP RELEASE 05 Jun

PROPOSALS RECEIVED 09 Jul

EVAL/COMPETITIVE RANGE BRIEFING 18 Aug

FINAL DECISION BRIEFING 01 Oct

DECISION DOCUMENTS DUE 08 Oct

CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION 27 Oct

CONTRACT AWARD 30 Oct

CONTRACT AWARD 30 Oct

SETA III to IV Transition

Plan as of April 2009 SETA III Incumbents

Blackhawk Mgt Corp WinTec Arrowmaker Inc

Tasks (32)

CME

(121)WinTec Arrowmaker Inc.

Current TOs may continue to:

Dec 5 11

Jan 7 43 16 Apr 2010 Enable smooth transition Feb 8 29

Mar 8 30Mar 8 30

Apr 4 8

Risk Assessment

Risk Statement - If the contractor: L-0006 M-0001 lacks sufficient breadth and depth of management & 3 2 1 5 1 1 1lacks sufficient breadth and depth of management & technical experience to accomplish the technical specification of the PWS, then the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance is increased.

3.2.1 5.1.1.1 lacks a sound methodology for selecting and retaining key personnel, then disruption of schedule and degradation of performance will result.

3.2.2 5.1.1.2 lacks sound rationale for selecting lead and other selected subcontractors, then performance will be degraded for the 5 PWS functional specialties.

3.2.3 5.1.1.3 lacks effective processes for team communication, monitoring of team performance, quality control, and conflict resolution, then there will be a need for increased Government oversight.

3.2.4 5.1.1.4

Government oversight.

Risk Statement - If the contractor: L-0006 M-0001 lacks a sound methodology for responding to time 3 2 5 5 1 1 5lacks a sound methodology for responding to time-constrained requirements or unexpected surges in activity, then mission degradation & disruption of schedule will result.

3.2.5 5.1.1.5 lacks an acceptable plan for continuous compliance with FAR 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting, then there will be a need for increased Government oversight.

3.2.6 5.1.1.6 lacks a sufficient screening mechanism to recognize potential OCI issues, & viable measures to avoid or mitigate potential conflicts of interest, then there will be a need for increased Government oversight

3.2.7 5.1.1.7 need for increased Government oversight.

Risk Statement - If the contractor: L-0006 M-0003 lacks a sound approach to providing technical expertise to 3 3 5 1 1 8lacks a sound approach to providing technical expertise to address anticipated technical challenges when accomplishing TOs, then disruption of schedule, increased cost, & an increased likelihood of unsuccessful contract

3.3 5.1.1.8 performance will result.

lacks a sufficient number of qualified personnel physically located within a reasonable commuting distance (or a l ) th th lik lih d f ffi i t il bilit f

3.4.1 5.1.1.9 plan), then the likelihood of sufficient availability of personnel at TO competition and TO start date is decreased.

Risk Statement - If the contractor: L-0006 M-0003 lacks a recruitment approach to ensure both technical and 3 4 2 5 1 1 10lacks a recruitment approach to ensure both technical and SOF expertise is available at the time of TO competition and TO start date, then competition may decrease which may result in increased cost.

3.4.2 5.1.1.10 lacks retention practices that enhance flexibility and redundancy of personnel available at the time of TO competition and start date, then competition may d hi h lt i i d t

3.4.3 5.1.1.9 5.1.1.10 decrease which may result in increased cost.

lacks personnel available that can satisfy the contract security specification as required by TO, then disruption of schedule and degradation of performance will result

3.5.1 – 3.5.4

5.1.1.9 5.1.1.11 of schedule and degradation of performance will result along with the need for increased Government oversight.

Small Business ConsiderationsConsiderations

100% Set-Aside for Small Business Engineering and Management Services NAICS Code 541330 Small Business Size – $27M or less gross avg annual revenueg g Market research shows small business teams capable of performing all tasks in PWS

Offeror required to perform at least 50% of the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel

Plan for continuous compliance; close monitoring by GovPlan for continuous compliance; close monitoring by Gov

Competition

“Median” source selection procedures required for:

Acquisitions estimated value of > $10M < $100M

Best value--performance may outweigh cost difference p y g

Multiple awards--up to 4 IDIQ contracts Establish pool of qualified contractorsEstablish pool of qualified contractors Obtain technical expertise needed

Points of Contact

Points of Contact for SETA IV Email: SETA4@hurlburt.af.mil Contract Specialist: Kurt Buchanan, phone (850) 884-3196 Contracting Officer: Jeff Lowman, phone (850) 884-2022g p ( )

Draft RFP / Final RFP / Amendments will be issued on FBO:

https://www fbo gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=bahttps://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=ba ef94f576809566c54fc5ca144fe7c3&tab=core&_cview=1

BreakBreak

Cost/Price Proposal p Overview

Capt Jeff Edens Program Manager

6 May 20096 May 2009

Importance of Cost/price

Cost/Price is the Least Significant of the Evaluation Factors:

Mission Capability Proposal Risk Past Performance Cost

Cost/Price Evaluation Criteria

Reasonableness Must reflect sound business judgment and represent a price to the Government that a prudent person would pay in the conduct of competitive business

Realism Proposed costs are sufficient for the work to be performed, p p reflective of a clear understanding of the requirements, and consistent with the unique methods of performance and materials described in the offeror’s proposal

Value/Use of Attached SpreadsheetSpreadsheet

Value added for Government Evaluation Evaluation is greatly facilitated when all the offerors propose to the same format and assures that some important piece of information didn’t “fall through the cracks.”

This approach historically also reduced contractor error

Value Added for Contractor Proposal Generationp The e-spreadsheet provides clear and precise guidance There is very little ambiguity involved Provides for more accuracy & lessens possibility of “typos”Provides for more accuracy & lessens possibility of typos

Structure of Spreadsheets

1.0 Instructions - Prime

2 0* I t ti S b t t2.0* Instructions - Subcontractor 3.0* General Information 4.0* Offeror Calculations 5 0 Composite Calculations5.0 Composite Calculations

6.0 Fully Burdened Labor Rates (FBLR)

7.0A Task Pricing 7.0B Task Pricing7.0B Task Pricing

8.0 Most Probable Distribution

9.0 Miscellaneous

* Required of Major Subcontractors (>20% of effort)q j ( )

Yellow Cells: Offeror enters cost data Blue Cells: Totals usually referenced from other worksheets

Cells that pull their values directly from another worksheet Red Cells:

DO NOT ADD VALUES TO ANY CELL WITH A RED BACKGROUND

Green Cells: Cells containing specific information

Red Cells:

Offeror Calculations

I l l i h

Worksheet 4.0: Offeror Calculations Calculates the Average/Maximum FBLR for the Prime (or Subcontractor)

Insert columns only in the green area Note: Offerors have the option of either using formulae or direct inputting values for the indirect columns.

YEAR 1

Yearly Base Prime Ktr Disciplines/Skill Levels Salary Rate Fringe Overhead G&A C.O.M. Profit FBLR FY 10 Proposed Indirect Rates

Management Senior Advisor V -$ -$Senior Advisor V $ $ Program Manager IV -$ -$ Project Manager IV -$ -$ Project Manager III -$ -$ Project Manager II $ $Project Manager II -$ -$

Composite FBLR

Composite Fully Burdened Labor Rates (FBLR) YEAR 1

Worksheet 5.0 Composite Calculation.

Calculates the "composite" Average FBLR used in Worksheet 6.0

AVERAGE Prime Subkr 1 Subkr 2 Subkr 3 N/A N/A YEAR 1

Disciplines/Skill Levels Contractor Composite

FBLR FBLR FBLR FBLR FBLR FBLR FBLR

Management Senior Advisor V -$Senior Advisor V $

100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%

Program Manager IV -$ 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%

Project Manager IV -$ 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%

Project Manager III -$ 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%

Project Manager II -$ oject a age $ 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%

Fully Burdened Labor Rates

Labor Category

YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6

Worksheet 6: Fully Burdened Labor Rates (FBLR)

AVERAGE FBLR RATE

YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6

Management

Senior Advisor V -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Program Manager IV -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Project Manager IV -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ P j t M III $ $ $ $ $ $Project Manager III -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Project Manager II -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Analyst Analyst IV -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Analyst III -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ y Analyst II -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Analyst I -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Engineer Engineer III -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Engineer II $ $ $ $ $ $Engineer II -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Engineer I -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Systems Engineer IV -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Systems Engineer III -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Task Pricing Worksheet 7.0A

Sample Task 1

Disciplines/Skill Levels Ave FBLR HOURS Rate Cost

Management Senior Advisor V -$ -

$Program Manager IV -$ - Project Manager IV -$ - Project Manager III -$ - Project Manager II -$ -

AnalystAnalyst Analyst IV -$ - Analyst III -$ - Analyst II -$ - Analyst I -$ -Analyst I $

Engineer Engineer III -$ - Engineer II -$ - Engineer I -$ -g Systems Engineer IV -$ - Systems Engineer III -$ -

DCAA (www.dcaa.mil) Information for ContractorsInformation for Contractors

Technical Requirements q Overview

Capt Jeff Edens

Performance Work Statement

PWS 1.0 Description of Services Scope Background Requirementsq Security Administration Management and Administration Task OrdersTask Orders Travel Requirements Material Requirements Transition Release of Information Limitation of Subcontracting g

Performance Work Statement

PWS 2.0 Service Delivery Summary Objectives directly related to mission critical items Minimum acceptable levels of service required

PWS 3 0 G t F i h d P tPWS 3.0 Government Furnished Property

PWS 4.0 General Information Work HoursWork Hours Place of Performance Contractor Training Motor Vehicle Operation Services During Crisis Declared by the President, Secretary of Defense, or Overseas Combatant Commander

Deployments

SMALL UNMANNED AIRCRAFTSMALL UNMANNED AIRCRAFT

SYSTEMS (SUAS) JOINT

TRAINING CENTER SUPPORTTRAINING CENTER SUPPORT

Sample Task Order #1

Capt Jeff Edens

Description of Service

What

Provide analysis, research, training development, instruction, and management support

Supports Major Command (AFSOC) role to organize, train, and equip joint forces to successfully employ SUASq p j y p y

Description of Service – Cont.

How

SUAS Program Management Support

SUAS Instruction/Evaluation Support

SUAS Training Courseware SupportSUAS Training Courseware Support

SUAS Range Complex Scheduling Support

SOF MOBILITY AIRCRAFT

SUPPORTSUPPORT

Sample Task Order #2

Capt Jeff Edens

Description of Service

What

Assist in the development of policies, procedures, and planning for operational requirements, and operational test & evaluation (OT&E)

Assist in conversion of AFSOC concepts, roles, & missions p into operational requirements for SOF Mobility Aircraft & support systems

Support the development of concepts, policies, and doctrine for joint and unilateral employment of SOF Mobility Aircraft

Description of Service – Cont.

How Support design reviews, source selections, Analysis of Alternatives (AOAs), and technical reviews Support AFSOC’s role as focal point with industry, civil, and military research agencies Assist AFSOC in managing the OT&E of the SOF Mobility Aircraft and support systems Provide support necessary toward achieving initial operational capability (IOC) for the SOF Mobility Aircraft Define a team of personnel to provide expertise in the following functional areas:

Requirements definition, aircrew and aircraft training, aircraft systems maintenance and logistics/sustainment and operational systems employment.

BreakBreak

Solicitation OverviewSolicitation Overview

Capt Jeff Edens

Section L-0003 General InformationGeneral Information

Restrictions on Contacts Point of Contact

DD Form 254 Bidder’s Library / ElectronicPoint of Contact

Caution Personnel Changes Notice – Availability of Funds Discrepancies

Bidder s Library / Electronic Reference Documents Retention of Proposals Unnecessary Elaboration &Discrepancies

Contract Limitation Evaluation

Unnecessary Elaboration & Formatting Classified Materials Operation of Hurlburt FieldProposal Delivery

Proposal Suspense Dates

Operation of Hurlburt Field Local Area Network (LAN) and Base Information Transfer System (BITS)Transfer System (BITS)

Section L-0004 Proposal Prep InstructionsProposal Prep Instructions

BINDER VOLUME VOLUME TITLE NUMBER OF COPIES * PAGE

LIMITATION**

# 1 I E ti S P O i i l + 5 10# 1 I Executive Summary Paper: Original + 5 10

# 1 II Mission Capability Paper: Original + 5 60

# 1 III P l Ri k P O i i l 5 10# 1 III Proposal Risk Paper: Original + 5 10

# 2 IV Present and Past Performance Paper: Original + 4 50

# 3 V C t / P i P l P O i i l 2 N Li it# 3 V Cost / Price Proposal Paper: Original + 2 No Limit

# 3 VI Solicitation, Offer, and Award Paper: Original + 2 No Limit

* Submit virus-free CD-ROM(s) containing the entire proposal in a sleeve(s) placed in the front of the “Original” binder #1. Additionally, submit a separate CD-ROM containing only Volume IV proposal information either with the Volume IV proposal submission or separately to arrive at the same location identified in Section L-0003, Paragraph 8.0.

**Excluded from Page Limitation: Blank Pages Dividers Cover Pages Title Pages Tabs Indexes Table

Excluded from Page Limitation: Blank Pages, Dividers, Cover Pages, Title Pages, Tabs, Indexes, Table of Contents, Glossaries, Cross-Reference Matrix, Consent Letters, Present and Past Performance Recipient List, Resumes (2-page limit per resume), and Organization Charts.

Section L-0004 Proposal Prep InstructionsProposal Prep Instructions

Description Section L Section M Proposal Volume, Table 3.1 – Cross-Reference Matrix p Para No. Para No.

p , Section No., Page &

Para No.

F t 1 Mi iFactor 1 Mission Capability

S bf t 1 L-0006 3 2 1

M-0001 5 1 1 1Subfactor 1:

Management / Technical / Staffing

/ Security

3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3 2 4

5.1.1.1 5.1.1.2 5.1.1.3 5 1 1 4/ Security

(Ref PWS Paras. 1.3, 1 4 and 1 5)

3.2.4 3.2.5 3.2.6 3.2.7

5.1.1.4 5.1.1.5 5.1.1.6 5.1.1.7

1.4, and 1.5) 3.2.7 5.1.1.7

Section L-0005 Volume I – Executive SummaryVolume I – Executive Summary

Not evaluated; serves to orient evaluators to the approach and f t f th ff ’ lfeatures of the offeror’s proposal

Volume Organization/Content Electronic copies of entire proposal (in “original” copy only) Master Table of Contents Master Glossary of AbbreviationsMaster Glossary of Abbreviations Section I--Executive Summary Section II--Other information, if any

Section L-0006 Volume II – Mission CapabilityVolume II – Mission Capability

Offeror shall provide as specifically as possible the actual th d l d t li h/ ti f i tmethodology used to accomplish/satisfy requirements

Offeror proposal shall describe the capability to perform this contract including pertinent aspects of the proposed approach such as teaming or subcontracting arrangements

Primary basis for evaluating your proposed approach to meeting or exceeding the minimum performance/capability requirements

Section L-0006 Volume II – Mission CapabilityVolume II – Mission Capability

Table 3.1 - Team Structure Matrix

# PWS Functional PWS Para. Lead Other Supporting Vol. II Section ## PWS Functional

Specialty PWS Para.

Reference

Lead Contractor

Other Supporting Contractor(s)

Section # Page # Para #

Operations and Training Management & 1.3.1.1 through

1 Professional Support Services (O&T

M&PSS)

through 1.3.1.1.9

Acquisition and Logistics Management & 1.3.1.2

2 Management & Professional Support Services (A&L

M&PSS)

through 1.3.1.2.3

Intelligence Management & 1.3.1.3 thro gh

3 g Professional Support Services (I M&PSS) through 1.3.1.3.1

Studies, Analyses and Evaluations

(SA&E)

1.3.2

1.3.2.9

Engineering and Technical Services

(E&TS)

1.3.3

1.3.3.4

Section L-0007 Volume III – Proposal RiskVolume III – Proposal Risk

Offeror shall address Proposal Risk by identifying those aspects of the proposal considered to have the potential for:of the proposal considered to have the potential for:

Disruption of Schedule Increased Cost D d ti f P fDegradation of Performance The need for increased Government oversight Unsuccessful contract performance

Classify each risk IAW AFFARS Mandatory Procedure MP5315.3

Provide the rationale for each risk and its rating

Describe the impact of each identified risk

Propose a realistic "work-around" for identified risks

Identify & classify any new risks introduced by risk mitigation

Section L-0008 Volume IV Present & Past Performance

Offeror shall submit past performance IAW Attachment 10 on:

Present & Past Performance

Offeror and subcontractors, teaming partners, joint venture partners proposed to perform 20 percent or more of the effort

Present & past performance info shall be recent & relevantp p Recent: work completed or ongoing during the three (3) years prior to the Government due date for proposal Volume IV Relevant: how closely the magnitude of effort and complexitiesRelevant: how closely the magnitude of effort and complexities resemble the solicitation requirements

Organizational Structure Change History Include a “roadmap” describing all such changes in org for the offeror, joint venture partners & proposed major subcontractors

If no recent or relevant info, document in Volume IV

Submit NLT 25 Jun 09

Offeror shall provide Relevancy Matrix (RFP Atch 9)

Present & Past Performance

1) Contractor

Factor

Subfactor

Subfactor 2Subfactor 1

FACTOR 1 - MISSION CAPABILITY

REFERENCES

1) Contractor

Factor

Subfactor

Subfactor 2Subfactor 1

FACTOR 1 - MISSION CAPABILITY

REFERENCES

*Offeror shall submit no more than fourteen (14) “Present and Past

Cost/ Price

Sample

TO #2

Sample TO #1SecurityStaffingTechMgtE &TSSA&EI M &PSS

A & L

M &PSS

O & T

M &PSS

1) Contractor

2) Prime Contract No. (and DO / TO # or Subcontract #, as applicable)

Citation #* Cost/ Price

Sample

TO #2

Sample TO #1SecurityStaffingTechMgtE &TSSA&EI M &PSS

A & L

M &PSS

O & T

M &PSS

1) Contractor

2) Prime Contract No. (and DO / TO # or Subcontract #, as applicable)

Citation #*

Offeror shall submit no more than fourteen (14) Present and Past Performance Citations” for all “Prime Contributors” identified in the “Team Structure Matrix” in Volume II

At l t (1) “P t d P t P f Cit ti ” i i dAt least one (1) “Present and Past Performance Citation” is required for each “Lead Contractor”

At least fifty percent (50%) of Present and Past Performance

Citations shall be relevant work performed by the Offeror

Present and Past Performance Questionnaires with transmittal l tt (RFP At h 8)

Present & Past Performance letter (RFP Atch 8)

Offeror send to POCs familiar with each example

Responses due on proposal due date of Volumes I, II, III, V, & VI If no response 1 week after due, 1 phone & fax attempt to POC If no response 2 weeks after due, CO will notify OfferorIf no response 2 weeks after due, CO will notify Offeror If no response 3 weeks after due, survey scored neither favorably nor unfavorably

Consent letters for subcontractors and teaming partners shall be t d (RFP At h 11)

Present & Past Performance executed (RFP Atch 11) Complete all information required on the Present and Past Performance Recipient List (RFP Atch 12)

Questionnaire Recipient Information Name Of Effort Citation #:

Date Sent

Mode ofMode of Transmittal

Point of Contact Name

Phone / Fax / E-Mail Phone Fax E-mail

C NCompany Name

Address

Date of Last Contact

Date Sent

Date Sent

Comments

Section L-0009 Volume V – Cost/PriceVolume V – Cost/Price

The offeror shall submit “Cost Proposal Workbook” (RFP Atch 7) Do not compress files; do not password protect

Competitive acquisition w/ adequate price competition anticipatedp q q p p p Cost documentation is considered to be other than cost or pricing data and shall not be certified in accordance with FAR Part 15.406-2

Section L-0009 Volume VI – Solicitation Offer & Award

Offeror to provide information necessary to the Government for i th t t d t d ti fil

Volume VI Solicitation, Offer & Award preparing the contract document and supporting file Signature Page (Section A – Solicitation / Contract Form) Proposal Expiration Statement Solicitation (Sections B – J) Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors (Section K)( )

Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA) http://orca.bpn.gov

DD Form 254DD Form 254

Section M-0001 Evaluation ProceduresEvaluation Procedures

Based on AFFARS Mandatory Procedure MP5315.3 http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/af_afmc/affars/MP5315.3.doc

Best Value; integrated assessment of Mission CapabilityBest Value; integrated assessment of Mission Capability, Proposal Risk, Present & Past Performance, Cost/Price

Gov intends to evaluate proposals & award w/o discussionsp p

Awardable contract must Meet all PWS technical requirements Conform to all required terms and conditions Include all required certifications

Evaluation Factors and Subfactors

Factor 1: Mission Capability

Evaluation Factors and Subfactors

Subfactor 1 - Management / Technical / Staffing / Security Subfactor 2 - TO Evaluation – Small UAS Joint Training Subfactor 3 – TO Evaluation – SOF Mobility Aircrafty

Factor 2: Proposal Risk Factor 3: Past Performance Factor 4: Cost/PriceFactor 4: Cost/Price

Order of Importance Mission Capability & Past Performance are equal Proposal Risk is of less importance than Mission Capability & Past Performance, but of greater importance than Cost/Price

Mission Capability RatingsMission Capability Ratings

• Exceptional: Exceeds specified minimum performance or capabilityExceptional: Exceeds specified minimum performance or capability requirements in a way beneficial to the Government: proposal must have one or more strengths and no deficiencies to receive a blue.

• Acceptable: Meets specified minimum performance or capability

Blue

• Acceptable: Meets specified minimum performance or capability requirements delineated in the Request for Proposal; proposal rated green must have no deficiencies but may have one or more strengths.

• Marginal: There is doubt regarding whether an aspect of the proposal

Green

• Marginal: There is doubt regarding whether an aspect of the proposal meets a specified minimum performance or capability requirements, but any such uncertainty is correctable.

• Unacceptable: Fails to meet specified minimum performance or

Yellow

• Unacceptable: Fails to meet specified minimum performance or capability requirements. The proposal has one or more deficiencies and is not awardable.

Red

Proposal RiskProposal Risk

Focuses on the risks and weaknesses associated with an ff ’ d hofferor’s proposed approach

Includes assessment for Disruption of scheduleDisruption of schedule Increased cost Degradation of performance N d f i d i hNeed for increased government oversight Likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance

Considers submitted risk analysis as well as risks that are knownConsiders submitted risk analysis as well as risks that are known to the evaluators based on experience with similar contracts

Evaluation will address offeror’s plan for mitigating risks and p g g why that approach is or is not manageable

Proposal Risk RatingsProposal Risk Ratings

Low* Has little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring willof performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Moderate* Can potentially cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome difficulties.

High* Likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Extraordinary contractor emphasis and rigorous Government it i b bl t diffi ltimonitoring may be able to overcome difficulties.

Unacceptable The existence of a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses that is very likely to cause unmitigated disruption of schedule, drastically increased cost or severely degraded performance Proposals with an unacceptable rating are notseverely degraded performance. Proposals with an unacceptable rating are not awardable.

* A plus “+“ rating may be used as an option when risk is evaluated to be in the upper boundaries of a Proposal Risk Rating, but is not high enough to merit the next inferior rating. For example, p g, g g g p , where in the judgment of the evaluator, an offeror has risk that approaches or is nearly rated as a Moderate Risk, a Proposal Risk Rating of “Low+” may be assigned.

Present & Past PerformancePresent & Past Performance

Performance Confidence Assessment Group (PCAG)

Targets performance relevant to Factor 1 (subfactors) & Factor 4

Confidence rating based on Recency (para 7.4) Relevancy (para 7 5)Relevancy (para 7.5) Quality (para 7.6)

Confidence RatingsConfidence Ratings

Substantial Based on the offeror’s performance record the Government has a highSubstantial Confidence

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has an expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effortConfidence expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Limited Confidence Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Unknown Confidence No performance record is identifiable or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

Recency & Relevancy DefinitionsRecency & Relevancy Definitions

Recency: effort must be ongoing or must have been performed d i th t th (3) i t th G t d d tduring the past three (3) years prior to the Government due date

Rating is Pass / Fail Information that fails this condition shall not be evaluated

Relevancy: “Not Relevant” citations shall not be rated for quality Highly Relevant (HR) Past/present performance effort involved essentially the same magnitude f ff t d l iti thi li it ti iof effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant (R) Past/present performance effort involved much of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant

(SR)

Past/present performance effort involved some of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant (NR) Past/present performance effort did not involve any of the magnitude of

Not Relevant (NR) Past/present performance effort did not involve any of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Present and Past Performance Quality DefinitionsQuality Definitions

EXCEPTIONAL Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many, to the Government’s (or customer’s) benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

VERY GOOD Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some, to the Government’s (or customer’s) benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor

Blue g p problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

SATISFACTORY Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

Purple corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

MARGINAL Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions or the contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented

Green

Yellow marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

UNSATISFACTORY Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective. Red

NOT APPLICABLE The question does not apply. No performance record identifiable within the area of evaluation.

White

Evaluation Process

Evaluation Process Past Performance Volume Received and Evaluated Other Volumes Received and Evaluated Competitive Range Established p g Pre-Award Debriefing Period Discussions with Offerors in Competitive Range Final Proposal RevisionsFinal Proposal Revisions Best Value Contractors Selected Post-Award Debriefing Period

QuestionsQuestions

Afternoon SessionAfternoon Session

CONTRACTOR PRESENTATIONS

1300 – Symvionics, Inc.

1310 – Chenega Federal Systems 1330 – P3I Incorporated1330 P3I, Incorporated 1340 – PE Systems, Inc.

1350 – BOSH Global Services 1400 Ch G t C lti1400 – Chenega Government Consulting 1410 – Zel Technologies, Inc.