N2ITSM _Amend_0002 _19_May_2016_KH.docx

FA2517-15-R-7001

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION I - CONTRACT CLAUSES

The following have been deleted:

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

SECTION L – INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS OR RESPONDENTS

A. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1. The Offeror's proposal must include all data and information requested by this solicitation and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. The Offeror shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the Performance Work Statement (PWS), Request for Proposal (RFP) and RFP attachments. Non-conformance with the instructions provided in this solicitation may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation. A responsive proposal is one which follows the requirements of this solicitation, includes all documentation, is submitted in the format outlined in this solicitation and is of timely submission. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in the proposal being deemed non-responsive.

1.1 TEAMING ARRANGEMENTS/OR JOINT VENTURE (JV): Provide complete information as to the arrangement and relationship and copies of any Teaming Arrangement/or JVAgreement. FAR 9.104 will be used to determine responsibility for Teaming Arrangement/or JV Agreements. Subcontractor management will be IAW FAR 52.244-2. An Offeror may submit a proposal in the form of a JV if the existing JV has a corresponding DUNS number in SAM.GOV. JV Agreements must be submitted with the proposal submission documents and be in the name of the existing JV and in a name separate from the individual JV partners. The JV together with partners is considered a Prime Offeror. NOTE: The Teaming Arrangement/or JV Agreement are excluded from the page count.

2. The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements but rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet these requirements. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities and experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Offeror's proposal.

3. Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed art work, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

4. The proposal acceptance period is specified to be 180 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of proposal.

5. Proposals shall not contain classified information.

6. Alternate proposals will not be accepted.

7. In accordance with FAR Subpart 4.8 (Government Contract Files), the Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals. The Government will destroy extra copies of such unsuccessful proposals.

B. GENERAL INFORMATION

1. Point of Contact. The Procurement Contracting Officer (PCO) is the sole point of contact for this acquisition. Address any questions or concerns to the PCO, Karen L. Holderfield, at (719) 556-0050 or email: karen.holderfield@us.af.mil and copy the Contract Specialist (CS), Christian Freire via email: christian.freire@us.af.mil.

2. Contract Type. This contract will be awarded as a Single Award Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ), Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contract with Cost Reimbursement Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) for Contingency, Travel, and Other Direct Costs (ODCs) utilizing a Tradeoff Source Selection Process.

3. Small Business Set-Aside. This acquisition is a Total Small Business Set-aside under North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code 541519, Other Computer Related Services with a small business size standard of $27.5 million. An Offeror determined to be other than small business cannot receive contract award.

4. Award. Only one award will be made as a result of this solicitation.

5. Classification and Clearances. Unclassified documents, including all PWS exhibits, attachments, DD 254 and workload data will be located on https://www.fbo.gov. Classified documentation will not be provided during the solicitation. This contract will require a Facility Clearance in accordance with the DD 254. The selected Offeror shall provide proof of the required clearance prior to contract award. The Prime Offeror is required to provide a current Industrial Security Facility Database (ISFD) printout with the initial proposal submission.

6. Certificates. The Prime Offeror (or if Teaming Arrangement the Prime or Joint Venture as one entity) is required to maintain ISO 9001 and CMMI Level II certificate and provide proof of the Certificates (copy of each certificate shall be submitted with the initial proposal submission).

7. For Official Use Only (FOUO) documents will require submission of info by the Offeror to the PCO.

8. Electronic Reference Documents. All referenced documents for this solicitation are available on the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) website at http://www.fedbizopps.gov. Potential offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time email notifications when information has been posted to the website for this solicitation.

9. Discrepancies. If an Offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the Offeror shall immediately notify the PCO in writing with supporting rationale not later than 7 calendar days after the RFP release date. Also, the Offeror shall give written notification to the PCO of ambiguities in the solicitation, including the PWS, not later than 7 calendar days after RFP release date.

10. Questions Concerning the Solicitation. All questions concerning the solicitation must be submitted in writing not later than 2 calendar days following the Site Visit. Questions will be submitted to the point of contacts listed in paragraph B.1.

11. Revisions and Amendments. The Government reserves the right to revise or amend the specifications or the solicitation prior to the proposal closing time. Such revisions or amendments will be communicated by formal amendment (Standard Form 30) to this RFP. If amendments require material changes in quantities or costs, the proposal closing date may be postponed by enough days to enable Offerors to revise their proposals. The amendment will include an announcement of the new proposal closing date and time.

12. Initial Proposals. Offerors shall submit initial proposals with their most favorable terms, from a Past Performance, Technical Capability, and Price standpoint. The Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussions.

13. Site Visit Information. A Site Visit is tentatively schedule on 27 April 2016 from 08:30 AM Mountain Daylight Time (MDT) to 1:00 PM MDT by N-NC/J6 and the PCO. The Site Visit will be held in Building 2, Stewart Street, Peterson, AFB, CO 80914 and Cheyenne Mountain Air Force Station, 1 NORAD Road, Colorado Springs, CO 80914. Due to space constraints, Offerors participating in the Site Visit will be limited to two (2) individuals per Prime Contractor and one (1) for any major Subcontractor for a maximum of three (3) for any Prime or Subcontractor/Teaming Arrangement. Offerors attending the Site Visit must have a current Secret clearance and must submit a visit request following the information provided in RFP Attachment 18 – N2ITSM Visit Request.

After the Site Visit, the Teaming Arrangement may submit questions to christian.freire@us.af.mil no later than 2 calendar days following the Site Visit. The Offeror shall following the instructions and form provided in RFP Attachment 17 – Site Visit Questions Forms. Answers to questions submitted after the Site Visit will be made available on the FedBizOpps website at https://www.fbo.gov. The terms of the solicitation and specifications will remain unchanged unless the solicitation is amended in writing.

14. Communications. Exchanges of source selection information between Government and Offerors will be controlled by the PCO. To facilitate review and evaluation for this Source Selection the Government proposes to transmit data via commercial email systems. Email may be used to transmit such information to Offerors only if the email can be sent and received encrypted and includes “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 & 3.104” in the Subject line. Should any Offeror object to their proprietary information being shared between Source Selection evaluators and advisors via Offeror’s provided official email as described above, please advise the PCO, Karen L. Holderfield, at (719) 556-0050 to determine another method.

15. Competitive Range Determination. If a Competitive Range Determination is necessary, the Government intends to limit the number of contract proposals to only the most highly rated proposals IAW FAR 15.306(c).

16. Final Proposal Revisions (FPR). Once discussions, if required, have been concluded, the PCO will request that Offerors provide a FPR.

17. Debriefings. The PCO will promptly notify Offerors of any decision to exclude them from the Competitive Range; whereupon, they may request and receive a debriefing in accordance with FAR 15.505. Offerors excluded from the Competitive Range may request a preaward debriefing or they may choose to wait until after the source selection decision to request a postaward debriefing. However, Offerors excluded from the Competitive Range are entitled to no more than one debriefing for each proposal. The PCO will notify unsuccessful Offerors in the Competitive Range of the source selection decision in accordance with FAR 15.506. Upon such notification, unsuccessful Offerors may request and receive a debriefing. Offerors desiring a debriefing must make their request in accordance with the requirements of FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable. If Offerors are eliminated during the Competitive Range Determination they may elect to wait until postaward to receive their debriefing; however, each Offeror may only receive a total of one (1) debriefing.

18. Pre-performance Conference. A Pre-performance Conference will be scheduled by and held at the office issuing this RFP prior to the commencement of any work under the contract that will be awarded as a result of this solicitation and offer. The Contractor or his duly authorized representative is required to attend the Pre-performance Conference.

C. FORMAT INSTRUCTIONS

This section provides general guidance for preparing proposals as well as specific instructions on the format and content of the proposal. Each volume shall be complete in itself. The proposal should include all of the information requested in the subparagraphs. Failure to do so may adversely affect the evaluation. A proposal that is sufficiently documented in a complete, orderly, and specific detailed manner will enable the Government to perform a thorough and fair evaluation. The Offeror’s proposal must include all data and information requested and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. Any Offeror who submits an incomplete package may be considered non-responsive.

1. Proposal Volumes. Offerors shall submit one (1) proposal consisting of three (3) separate proposal volumes: Technical Capability, Past Performance, and Price. The required proposal formats and extent of data are described below.

2. Proposal Volume Organization, Number of Copies and Page Limitations. The titles and contents of the volumes should be as defined in this document, all of which shall be within the required page limits and with the number of copies as specified in the table below. Total page count will be based on the printed proposal submission. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal, but will be retained in the contract file.

Table 1 - Proposal Organization

VOLUME I

Price

VOLUME II

Technical Capability Original plus 6 hard copies, and 1 CD electronic copy Limit to no more than forty-four (44) pages total. Page limitations above shall exclude Executive Summary and Authorized Point of Contact, the Table of Contents, Glossary, ISO 9001 and CMMI Level 2 Certificates, Industrial Security Facility Database (ISFD), Staffing Matrix Atch 20.

VOLUME III

Past Performance

3. Binding: Each volume of the proposal will be separately bound in a standard loose-leaf, three-ring binder. The number of copies for each volume is specified in the table below. The original for each volume will be clearly identified on the cover and the spine. Elaborate format and binding are neither necessary nor desirable. All binders will lie flat when opened. Each volume shall be written on a standalone basis so that its contents may be evaluated on a standalone basis.

4. Proposal Labeling. Each volume (Technical Capability, Past Performance, and Price) of the proposal will be bound separately. The cover and spine of each binder will clearly identify the Offeror's name, volume (Technical Capability, Past Performance, and Price, Request for Proposal (RFP) number "FA2517-15-R-7001", RFP title "N2ITSM", and copy number, e.g., copy “2 of 5”).

5. Cross Referencing. Each volume shall be written on a standalone basis so that its contents may be evaluated with no cross referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Information required for proposal evaluation which is not found in its designated volume will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal. Cross referencing between volumes is not permitted. Cross referencing within a proposal volume is permitted where its use would conserve space without impairing clarity.

6. Electronic Copies. The content and page size of electronic copies must be identical to the hard copies. The CD-electronic (softcopy) proposal shall be in a Microsoft Operation System format and as a minimum have Office 2007® capabilities. The electronic copy of the proposal will be submitted on compact disk/read only memory (CD/ROM). Replacement disks will be required to update the final proposal resulting from any discussions and updates. Offerors are advised to perform a computer virus check prior to submission. The Government will perform computer virus checks on all submitted electronic media and will immediately return for replacement any disk found to be infected. In the event of discrepancies between hard copies and electronic copies of a proposal, the hard copies will be used for evaluation.

7. Pages. A page is defined as each face of an 8.5 x11-inch sheet of paper containing information. All information except for document numbers, page number, etc., shall be provided in an image area of 7 x 9 inches. Two pages may be printed back-to-back on one sheet of paper; however, each printed side of the page will count as one page. The background color of each page of the proposal submission shall be white or ivory stock only (except for change pages after initial proposal submission). All material must be contained within the page limit identified. Excess pages will not be evaluated.

8. Text. Text type should be Times New Roman or Arial, no smaller than 12-point with normal proportional spacing. Illustrations and tables shall be no smaller than Times New Romans or Arial 10 point. Text lines will be, at a minimum, single-spaced.

9. Charts and Tables. Foldouts used for charts, graphics, tables, exhibits or diagrams may not exceed 11 x 17 inches. All information (except for document numbers, page numbers, etc.) must be contained within an image area of 9 x 15 1/2-inches. For page count purposes, each printed side of a foldout shall be counted as two pages each. Text used in charts, graphics, tables, exhibits or diagrams may be single-spaced and shall be at least six (6) points in height after final reduction.

10. Table of Contents, Indexing and Glossary. Each volume shall contain a table of contents. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections. Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, with a definition for each. Use of abbreviations and acronyms should be limited. Table of Contents and Glossaries do not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes.

11. Change Pages after Initial Proposal Submission. If the Offeror submits proposal revisions, during or after discussions, any changed pages shall be a different color than the original proposal pages and shall have changed information clearly marked by a vertical line in the right margin of the page identifying the changed content. The date of the revision and revision number shall be reflected on each changed page (preferably on, or next to, the vertical change line). Make spreadsheet revisions obvious by highlighting cells that changed.

12. Evaluation Notices (ENs) and Final Proposal Revisions (FPRs). Proposal format restrictions shall apply to responses to ENs and final proposal revisions.

13. Information Regarding Submission of Proposal. Offerors shall deliver proposals to the following address not later than the due date and time established in the solicitation.

21CONS/LGCCA

Attn: Ms. Karen L. Holderfield Procurement Contracting Officer Building 350 135 Dover Street Peterson AFB, CO 80914

All proposals delivered in response to this solicitation shall reflect the following information on the address label:

Solicitation Number FA2517-15-R-7001 The legend "To be delivered unopened to the Procurement Contracting Officer" The volume and copy numbers contained in each box

Offerors are cautioned that Peterson AFB CO has visitor control procedures requiring individuals not affiliated with the installation to obtain a visitor pass prior to entrance. Some delay should be anticipated when hand carrying proposals. Offerors hand-carrying proposals to Building 350, Peterson AFB must obtain visitor passes. Offerors should allow sufficient time to obtain a visitor pass and arrive at Building 350 prior to the time established for the receipt of proposals. Offerors should be aware that the Government has experienced delays in the postal service to Peterson AFB. Late proposals will be processed in accordance with FAR 15.208(b)(1) “Late submission, modifications, revisions, and withdrawals of Offerors.” If using a courier, submit the name of the individual hand-carrying volumes 24 hours in advance to the CO. The courier will be required to provide identification at the time of delivery.

D. PROPOSAL VOLUME INSTRUCTIONS

1. Specific Proposal Instructions. To assure timely and equitable evaluation of the proposal, the Offeror must follow the instructions contained herein. The proposal must be complete, self-sufficient, and respond directly to the requirements of this solicitation. The response shall consist of three (3) separate volumes:

Volume I – Price Volume II – Technical Capability Volume III – Past Performance

1.1 Volume I - Price (Unlimited Pages). The purpose of this volume is to provide information to the Government to determine price reasonableness, balanced pricing, and affordability. Additionally it will assist the Government in preparing other additional supporting files.

1.1.1 General Instructions

1.1.1.1 Adequate Competition. The PCO has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition. Upon examination of the initial proposal, the PCO will review this determination and if, in the PCO’s opinion, adequate price competition exists no additional cost information will be requested. However, if at any time during this competition the PCO determines that adequate price competition no longer exists, Offerors may be required to submit information Other than Cost or Pricing Data to support a determination of price reasonableness IAW FAR 15.403-3.

1.1.1.2 Cost/Price Data. Data beyond that required by this instruction shall not be submitted, unless you consider it essential to document or support your cost/price position. Under no circumstances shall this data and documentation be included elsewhere in the proposal.

1.1.1.3 Schedule B. The Offeror is not required to complete the schedule B of this solicitation. Schedule B shows how the IDIQ contract will be set up.

1.1.1.4 Rounding. All dollar amounts provided shall be rounded to the nearest dollar. All loaded labor rates shall be rounded to the nearest penny.

1.1.1.5 Plug-in Figures. Regarding Pricing for Travel, Other Direct Cost (ODC), and Contingency, the Offeror shall not change the plug-in figures provided in RFP Attachment 16 – Pricing (TAB 1- TCP;

TAB 2 - TO 1 Pricing; TAB 3 - TO 2 Pricing).

1.1.2 Price Volume Organization. The Offeror’s proposal shall include the following:

SECTION A – PRICING INFORMATION.

The Offeror’s Section A – Pricing Information shall include the following:

Tab 1: Labor Rate Matrix under N2ITSM Pricing Attachment. Offerors shall provide labor rates to be used for the entire N2ITSM contract ordering period. The rates shall be used on Task Order (TO) 1, TO 2, and all future TOs. See RFP Attachment 16 - N2ITSM Pricing – TAB 4 Labor Matrix. The labor categories shall be the same as the categories provided in the Professional Employee Compensation Plan.

Tab 2: Total Combined Pricing for Network O&M (TO 1) and Office of Defense Coordination (ODC) Mexico (TO 2): Offerors shall provide individual pricing for Network O&M and ODC Mexico, and a combined total pricing for both TOs. The Total Combined Pricing includes the price of all services (CLINS 0001, 0002, 0003, 0004, 0005, 0008, 0009), Contingency (CLIN 0006), N2ITSM Projects (CLIN 0007), Travel (CLIN 0010), and ODC (CLIN 0011) for the base year and all option year periods to include the 6-month extension period. The labor categories shall be the same as the categories provided in the Professional Employee Compensation Plan.

Tab 3: Contingency Rates: Offerors shall provide a fully burdened Fixed-Price Rate for Contingency Services as outlined in RFP Attachment 2, Network O&M PWS. This fully burdened Fixed-Price Rate will be used in future Contingency TOs. The labor rates shall match to the rates used in TO 1 and TO 2. See RFP Attachment 16 - N2ITSM Pricing – TAB 6 Pre-priced Services.

NOTE: Offerors shall not provide pricing for material procurements in the pricing volume.

SECTION B – ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. Additional Information shall include the following:

Tab 1: Completed Standard Form 33. The Offeror shall complete blocks 15 through 18. A completed form signed by the Offeror constitutes an offer, which the Government may accept.

Tab 2: Acknowledgement of all Amendments (if applicable). Each Offeror must sign and return one copy of the Standard Form (SF) 30 by the date specified on the form.

Tab 3: Representation and Certifications (Prime). Offerors shall complete the necessary fill-ins, certifications, and provisions described in the System for Award Management (SAM). A copy of either version of the representation and certifications shall be returned along with the proposal.

Tab 4: Professional Compensation Plan: Utilizing RFP Attachment 16 - N2ITSM Pricing – TAB 5 Professional Compensation Plan and IAW FAR 52.222-46, the Offeror and Subcontractors/Teaming Partners/Joint Venture Partners shall submit a Total Professional Compensation Plan setting forth salaries and fringe benefit package proposed for the Prime’s professional employees. The Prime Offeror should instruct its Subcontractors to submit their Total Professional Compensation Plan directly to the PCO. The Prime Offeror shall also submit a list of the Subcontractors, to include POCs and phone numbers, on who will be submitting Professional Employee Compensation packages to the Government. The Total Professional Employee Compensation Plan submitted in the proposal will not become part of the contract award. The plan shall set forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for professional employees as prescribed in the instructions below:

a. Total Professional Compensation Plan. The Offeror shall provide the planned compensation for all professional employee labor categories proposed to perform the effort. Describe the job skills and qualification requirements associated with each identified labor category. Identify the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) code for each labor category using the Bureau of Labor Statistics SOC system (http://www.bls.gov/soc/). Provide the corresponding salary and quantified fringe benefits for each labor category and skill level. The fringe benefit data shall also include a description of the benefits offered, and to which professional employee category(ies) the fringe benefits would apply.

b. Surveys and Studies. Provide a summary of the recent surveys and studies from professional, public, and private organizations (e.g., Watson & Wyatt, Economic Research Institute, Bureau of Labor Statistics, etc.) used to support the proposed salaries and fringes. Identify the sources with the provided summary of surveys and studies. If not using one of the sources listed above, explain the credibility of the sources providing the surveys and studies.

Tab 5: Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI): The PCO has determined that there is no current OCI IAW FAR 9.505 based on an initial analysis utilizing the AFICA Mandatory Procedures OCI checklist. If any future OCIs should occur, then the Offeror shall submit an OCI Plan to avoid, neutralize, or mitigate any identified OCIs. The Offeror shall identify any potential or actual OCIs, the possible impact(s), and their mitigation plan for each identified OCI. Any mitigation plan accepted by the Government will be incorporated into any resultant contract.

1.1.3. Budget Information.

a. Network O&M TO 1: Total Estimated Budget is $67M (includes 60-day transition estimate: $160K)

b. ODC Mexico TO 2: Total Estimated Budget is $ 5M (includes 60-day transition estimate: $ 15K)

1.1.4. Ceiling Information. The IDIQ Ceiling is $99M, with $25K minimum guarantee.

1.2 Volume II - Technical Capability (Limited to 44 Pages).

1.2.1 General Instructions. The purpose of this volume is to enable the Government to make a thorough evaluation of the Offeror’s technical competence and the ability to comply with the PWS and Service Summary requirements. All pages after forty-four (44) pages will be removed and will not be considered for evaluation. All the requirements specified in the solicitation are mandatory. NOTE: The Continuations of Essential Contractor Services Plan, covers, cover sheets, and cover letters will be counted towards the 44 pages.

1.2.2 Technical Capability Volume Organization. The Offeror’s proposal shall include the following:

Tab 1: Executive Summary and Authorized Point of Contact (Tab 1 is not included in the 44 page count):

Provide a one (1) page summary and authorized personnel who can obligate and negotiate for your company.

Tab 2: Table of Contents (Tab 2 is not included in the 44 page count). Include a master table of contents of the entire proposal.

Tab 3: Glossary (Tab 3 is not included in the 44 page count). Include a glossary of all acronyms and Industry terminology used.

Tab 4: RESERVED. (Tab 4 is not included in the 44 page count).

Tab 5: Technical Capability (Limited to 44 Pages). Technical Capability shall be prepared in an orderly format and in sufficient detail to address the Offerors response to the Technical Factors and Sub-Factors described below. The Offerors response shall be organized as follow:

Sub-Factor 1: Program Management and Staffing Plan (Acceptable/Unacceptable). The Offeror shall describe its approach to:

a. Manage enterprise operations and maintenance.

b. Provide ISO 9001 and Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Level 2 certification/appraisal at the Prime level.

c. Provide current Industrial Security Facility Database (ISFD) in accordance with DD254.

d. Provide Phase-In/Out approach.

e. Provide DOD 8570 compliance with personnel certifications to meet the Basic PWS

f. Recruiting personnel, including employee accession, retention, experience, and continuity of services during personnel absences.

g. Provide the staffing required per task/subtask that includes description of position, labor category, key personnel, certification, security clearance, proposed workforce composition showing manning numbers by labor category and hours to meet the Network O&M PWS and ODC Mexico PWS. The Contractor shall use the provided Staffing Matrix (RFP Attachment 20 Staffing Matrix) Note: Staffing Matrix (Atch 20) is excluded from overall proposal page count, but the Staffing Matrix is limited to 5 pages.

Sub-Factor 2: Service Operations and Stability (PWS Task and Service Descriptions) (Acceptable/Unacceptable). The Offeror shall describe its approach to:

a. Demonstrates the offeror’s ability to provide Information Technology Service Desk functions (incident management, request fulfillment, access management, problem management, application management) supporting a user environment of greater than 1,000 users supporting 2 or more networks (i.e. NIPR / SIPR).

b. Demonstrates the offeror’s ability to provide Information Technology Network Operations and Maintenance and technical management of a Network Infrastructure Enterprise.

c. Demonstrates the offeror’s ability to provide Information Technology Operations Management providing 24x7/365 Situational Awareness and network monitoring, event management and cyber security management and countermeasures.

d. Demonstrates the offeror’s ability to provide continuity of mission essential IT services during real world events and exercises.

Sub-Factor 3: Service Transition and Support (PWS Task and Service Descriptions) (Acceptable/Unacceptable). The Offeror shall describe its approach to:

a. Provide Change Management processes for controlling the lifecycle of all changes for IT Services.

b. Provide service asset and configuration management for all delivered IT Services (Hardware and Software asset management).

c. Provide IT Enterprise Architecture developing and maintaining technical products supporting IT Baseline and vision.

d. Provide IT Financial and Supplier management processes to ensure proper procurement of necessary IT hardware and software meeting DoD standards and mission requirements.

e. Provide IT Knowledge Management for gathering, storing, analyzing and sharing information in accordance with best Industry practices.

Sub-Factor 4: Service Optimization (PWS Task and Service Descriptions) (Acceptable/Unacceptable). The Offeror shall describe its approach to:

a. Provide IT Project Management from concept to completion of a project (including charter, project management plan, status reporting, service design, release and deployment, validation and testing and project closure).

b. Provide IT Portfolio Management from concept throughout lifecycle for IT Services.

c. Provide Transition Planning and Support to transition a closed IT project to daily service operations.

Sub-Factor 5: Continuous Service Improvement (PWS Task and Service Descriptions) (Acceptable/Unacceptable). The Offeror shall describe its approach to:

a. Provide continuous service improvement of IT services to improve IT service quality and efficiency and effectiveness of all enabling IT Service Management functions. Change Management processes for controlling the lifecycle of all changes for IT Services.

b. Provide recommendations to the Government for service improvements with supporting data that was measured, collected, processed and analyzed, with recommended courses of action for government decision-making.

c. Provide continuous downward cost efficiency initiatives to achieve saving funding.

1.3 Volume III– Past Performance (25 pages).

1.3.1 General Instructions. Each Offeror shall submit a Past Performance Volume with its proposal, containing Past Performance Information (PPI). Offerors shall submit PPI using the PPI Tool. See RFP Attachment 11 - PPI tool instructions.

Offerors are cautioned that the Government will use data provided by each Offeror in this volume and data obtained from other sources in the evaluation of Past Performance.

1.3.1 Past Performance Volume Organization. The Past Performance Volume shall consist of the following items:

Tab 1: Authorized Point of Contact (POC): Provide contact information for the Offerors Past Performance POC. This POC is someone within the Offeror’s company that is able to respond to questions or concerns regarding Past Performance.

Tab 2: Business Relationships. The Offeror shall identify all Prime and Sub-prime organizations. Submission of past business relationships shall be made via EZ Source. Submission of PPI shall be made using the Past Performance Tool (RFP Attachment 10 – Past Performance Information Tool). See RFP Attachment 11 - PPI tool instructions.

Tab 3: Past Performance Contract Citations. The Offeror shall provide five (5) total recent and relevant performance citations for the proposed Contractor team in accordance with the information below. At least two

(2) of the citations must be of the Prime. In a Joint Venture (JV) arrangement the individual JV partners Past Performance citations may count as Prime citations and will be evaluated against the Past Performance criteria.

Offerors shall submit the following contract information through the Past Performance Tool (RFP Attachment 10 – Past Performance Information Tool):

· Contractor Name

· Cage Code

· Contract Number

· Program Title

· Contracting Agency/Customer

· DUNS Number

· Delivery Task/Order

· Contract Type

· Short Program Title

· Contract Dollar Value

· Period of Performance

· Brief Description of Effort

· Explanation of how performance on this contract is relevant for each applicable Factor or Sub-Factor, as instructed under Past Performance in the Section M – Evaluation of Offerors of the RFP

Offerors shall submit the following POC & Key Individuals information, through the Past Performance Tool (RFP Attachment 10 – Past Performance Information Tool), for each reference submitted for Past Performance consideration:

· Key Individuals

· Customer Points of Contact

Tab 4: Past Performance Questionnaires and Point of Contact Listing. Offerors will send out the Past Performance Questionnaire (See RFP Attachment 12 - Past Performance Questionnaire) to each reference identified in the Past Performance Volume. The responsibility to send out the Past Performance Questionnaires rests solely with the Offeror. References will return completed questionnaires directly to the Government POCs utilizing the Past Performance Transmittal Letter provided (See RFP Attachment 13, Past Performance Transmittal Letter). The information contained in completed questionnaires will be considered Source Selection Sensitive and will not be released to the Offeror. The Government assumes no responsibility to ensure the Past Performance Questionnaires are delivered in accordance with the information provided in RFP Attachment 12 - Past Performance Questionnaire.

Point of Contact Listing. Provide a list of questionnaire recipients with POC and phone number for each contract reference provided as part of the Past Performance Volume. The Offeror is solely responsible for the accuracy of the contact information provided. The Government reserves the right to contact the references provided by the Offeror and any other references generated by the Government to discuss the Offeror’s present and Past Performance.

Tab 5: Consent Letters. Subcontractor PPI cannot be disclosed to the Prime Offeror without the Subcontractor’s consent. Provide a letter in the Past Performance Volume (RFP Attachment 14 - Consent Letters) from all Subcontractors consenting to the release of their PPI to the Prime Contractor. The written consent(s) should be submitted as part of the Past Performance Volume. Should the Offeror not submit consent, the Government will only discuss PPI directly with the prospective Subcontractor or Teaming Partner that is being reviewed. If there is a problem with the proposed Subcontractor’s or Teaming Partner’s present/past performance, the Offeror can be notified of a problem but no details may be discussed without the Subcontractor’s or Teaming Partner’s permission.

Tab 6: Client Authorization Letters. In the event that commercial contracts are presented as Source of Information, the Offeror shall issue a client authorization letter with the request to complete a Past Performance Questionnaire. The Offeror shall follow the guidance provided in the sample client authorization letter RFP Attachment 15 - Client Authorization Letters.

Tab 7: Organizational Structure Change History. Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of relevant present or past efforts or between conclusion of recent past efforts and this Source Selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what PPI is relevant to this acquisition. To facilitate this relevancy determination, include in the proposal volume a “roadmap” describing all such changes in the company’s organization within the last 6 years. As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevance of any efforts identified for the Past Performance Evaluation/Performance Confidence Assessment. Since the Government intends to consider present and PPI provided by other sources as well as that provided by the Offeror(s), the “roadmap” should be both specifically applicable to the efforts identified and general enough to apply to efforts to which the Government receives information from other sources. Include CAGE codes for any predecessor companies to facilitate Government research.

1.4 Exceptions to Solicitation Requirements. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as Evaluation Factors or Sub-Factors. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. Each exception shall be specifically related to each paragraph and/or specific part of the solicitation to which the exception is taken. Provide rationale in support of the exception and fully explain its impact, if any, on the performance, schedule, cost, and specific requirements of the solicitation. This information shall be provided in the format and content of the following Table:

Solicitation Exceptions

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

SECTION M - EVALUATION OF OFFERORS

A. BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD

This is a competitive best value Source Selection using Performance Price Tradeoff (PPT), in which competing Offerors' technical capability will be evaluated on Acceptable/Unacceptable basis and Past Performance history will be evaluated on a basis significantly more important than price considerations. By submission of its offer, the Offeror accedes to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation Factors or Sub-Factors. The tradeoff will occur only between the Past Performance Factor and the Price Factor. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale.

The Source Selection Evaluation Team (SSET) will perform comparative analysis between the lowest priced Offeror with a “Substantial Confidence” rating with an “Acceptable” technical rating and the lowest priced Offeror with a “Satisfactory or Neutral Confidence” rating with an “Acceptable” technical rating to determine the best value to the Government. The Government will not differentiate between confidence ratings (e.g. All “Satisfactory Confidence” ratings will be considered equal, all “Substantial Confidence” ratings will be considered equal).

This may result in an award to a higher-rated, higher-priced Offeror where the decision is consistent with the Evaluation Factors, and the SSA reasonably determines that a more highly assessed Past Performance rating of the higher-priced Offeror outweighs the price difference. While the Government’s SSET and the SSA will strive for maximum objectivity, the Source Selection process by its nature is subjective. Therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process.

Source Selection. This solicitation is being conducted in accordance with FAR 15.3, Source Selection, Department of Defense Source Selection Procedures, dated July 1, 2011, and AFFARS 5315.3 including Mandatory Procedures (MP) 5315.3 and Informational Guidance (IG) 5315.404-3. Offerors will be evaluated using the Factors and Sub-Factors under Section L, Proposal Preparation Instructions and the Performance Work Statements. Non-compliance with the RFP may be grounds to eliminate the proposal from consideration for contract award.

B. EVALUATION FACTORS

1. Factors. The proposal that is most advantageous to the Government will be selected. To arrive at a decision, the SSET will assess each offer IAW with the following Evaluation Factors for the contract:

Factor I: Price Reasonable, Balanced, Affordable

Factor II: Technical Capability Sub-Factor 1: Program Management and Staffing Plan Sub-Factor 2: Service Operations and Stability Sub-Factor 3: Service Transition and Support Sub-Factor 4: Service Optimization Sub-Factor 5: Continuous Service Improvement

Factor III: Past Performance Recency, Relevancy, and Quality

C. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

1. Performance Price Tradeoff (PPT). The Source Selection Evaluation will be as follows:

Step 1. Price Evaluation. The Government will screen total proposed prices for accuracy and completeness and then rank responsive proposals by the total combined price of TO 1 and TO 2, from lowest to highest. The individual prices for TO 1 and TO 2 will be determined separately to be reasonable, balanced, and affordable. Only reasonable, balanced, and affordable proposals will move onto Step 2.

Step 2. Technical Capability Evaluation. The Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated either Acceptable or Unacceptable on all Sub-Factors (if rated “Unacceptable,” each proposal’s correction potential will be documented in case discussions are conducted).

Step 3. Past Performance Evaluation. The Government will perform a Past Performance Confidence Assessment starting with the lowest Total Evaluated Price determined fair, reasonable, and balanced. The proposal will be evaluated to determine if it has a “Substantial Confidence” Past Performance rating. If the proposal does not have a “Substantial Confidence” Past Performance rating, the evaluations will continue with the next lowest evaluated priced proposal with a “Substantial Confidence” Past Performance rating. At that time the evaluations will stop. If there are no proposals with a “Substantial Confidence” Past Performance rating, only those proposals who receive a “Satisfactory Confidence” Past Performance rating will be considered for evaluation under Step 4.

Step 4. Best Value Decision: The SSA will perform comparative analysis of the lowest priced Offeror with a “Substantial Confidence” rating and the lowest priced Offeror with a “Satisfactory or Neutral Confidence” rating to determine the best value to the Government. The Government will not differentiate between confidence ratings (e.g. All “Satisfactory Confidence” ratings will be considered equal, all “Substantial Confidence” ratings will be considered equal). Tradeoff process for this acquisition will permit a tradeoff between Price and Past Performance (where Past Performance is significantly more important than Price) for technically acceptable proposals in reaching the contract award decision. This may result in an award to a higher rated, higher priced Offeror, where the decision is consistent with the Evaluation Factors and the SSA reasonably determines that the superior Past Performance of the higher priced Offeror outweighs the price difference.

Discussions: It is the Government’s intent to evaluate proposals and award without discussions; however, the Government reserves the right to hold discussions. Accordingly, Offerors are advised to submit initial proposals that are fully and clearly acceptable without additional information. If it is determined that discussions are necessary, the Government reserves the right to limit the number of Offerors in the Competitive Range for the purpose of holding an efficient competition.

In the event the Government enters discussions, the competitive range will only consist of offerors that are either technically acceptable or can reasonably be made technically acceptable and are lower priced than the lowest priced offeror with a “Substantial Confidence” past performance rating. If the Government receives no offers determined with a “Substantial Confidence” past performance rating, the Government will include only those Offerors whose technical proposal can reasonably be made acceptable through discussions.

The Government will issue Evaluation Notices (ENs) to all Offerors within the Competitive Range. ENs will be sent electronically to Offerors to ensure complete understanding of any discrepancies. Any necessary page changes to the Offeror’s proposals will be obtained prior to concluding discussions. Throughout the discussion process, the Government will document changes in ratings and Total Combined Price. Discussions shall be conducted with Prime Offerors only.

Offeror’s may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal (for example, the relevance of Past Performance Information) or respond to adverse Past Performance Information to which the Offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond. Adverse Past Performance is defined as Past Performance Information that supports a less than “Satisfactory” rating on any evaluation element or any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system. Communication conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute discussions and the PCO reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for proposal revision.

1. Factor I: Price. The basis for evaluating price is total evaluated price. Price will be evaluated for reasonableness. The evaluation techniques described under FAR 15.404-1(c), as determined appropriate, may also be performed in further determining reasonableness of the proposed price/cost. The Price Evaluation assesses each Offeror’s total price for TO 1 and TO 2 and evaluates for price reasonableness, balanced pricing, and affordability. An assessment that the Offeror’s total price is not reasonable or affordable will result in the Offeror being disqualified for award. RFP Attachment 16 – N2ITSM Pricing must be submitted by the Offeror to support a determination of price reasonableness, balanced pricing and affordability. The burden of proof rests with the Offeror.

2.1 Price Evaluation. The Offeror’s proposal shall represent the Offeror’s best efforts to respond to the solicitation. Price is not assigned a rating; Offerors are advised to clearly show justification for unique practices that affect price.

2.1.1 Price Reasonableness. The techniques and procedures described under FAR 15.404-1(b)(2)(i), comparison of proposed prices received in response to the solicitation, will be used to assess proposal price reasonableness.

2.1.2 Balanced Pricing. The techniques and procedures described under FAR 15.404-1(g) will be the primary means of assessing unbalanced pricing.

2.1.3 Affordability. The affordability assessment will consider the total proposed price for TO 1 and TO 2 as compared to the projected budget of $67M for TO 1, and the projected budget of $5M for TO 2. If the Offeror’s total price for either TO exceeds the available budget. The proposal will be evaluated as unaffordable. The proposal will be excluded from the Competitive Range (if established) and will be ineligible for contract award.

The Offeror shall propose to TO 1 and TO 2 separately; however, proposals will be ranked by Total Evaluated Price (TEP) for both TOs. See RFP Attachment 16 - N2ITSM Pricing for pricing instructions.

1. TO 1 (Network O&M). TO 1 will include a base year, four (4) – 1-year option periods, and one 6-month extension. To be affordable, the TEP for TO 1, inclusive of all option periods, will not exceed $67M.

1. TO 2 (ODC Mexico). TO 2 will include a base year, four (4) – 1-year option periods, and one 6-month extension. To be affordable, the TEP for TO 2, inclusive of all option periods, will not exceed $5M.

2.1.4 Labor Rate Matrix under Pricing Attachment. Offerors shall provide labor rates to be used for the entire N2ITSM requirement. Rates will be evaluated to ensure they are fair and reasonable and consistent with the Professional Employee Compensation Plan.

2.1.5 Contingency Rates. The Offeror shall provide a Fully Burdened Fixed-Price rate for Contingency Services as outlined in the Network O&M PWS paragraph 5.9. Rates will be evaluated to ensure they are fair and reasonable and consistent with the Professional Employee Compensation Plan.

2.1.6 Travel, Other Direct Cost, and Contingency. Offerors should not change the provided information for Travel, Other Direct Costs, and Contingency.