Atch_10_-_Addenda_to_FAR_52.212-2.docx

Solicitation: FA3002-16-R-0014 Amendment 0004

ATTACHMENT 10

ADDENDA TO FAR 52.212-2

Addenda to FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation – Commercial Items (October 2014)

1. EVALUATION – COMMERCIAL ITEMS

A. SOURCE SELECTION

(a) Basis for Contract Award. This is a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) source selection conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation FAR Part 12 - Commercial Items, and FAR Part 13 – Simplified Acquisitions, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), the Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFFARS). These regulations are available electronically at the Air Force (AF) FAR Site, http://farsite.hill.af.mil. The Government will select the proposal with the lowest evaluated price from among those meeting the acceptability standards for non-price factors and whose proposal conforms to the solicitation’s requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by Addenda to FAR 52.212-1 of this solicitation). While the Government will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature, is subjective; therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process.

(b) For the purpose of conducting evaluations, the Government will first rank all proposals by price, and then proceed with the simultaneous evaluation of Technical, Past Performance, and Price volumes beginning with the lowest priced offer. If the lowest reasonably priced offer is determined to be “Technically Acceptable,” and judged to have an “Acceptable” Past Performance rating, that offeror represents the best value and award will be made without evaluating higher priced offers. If the lowest priced offer is not determined reasonable and technically acceptable with an “Acceptable” Past Performance rating, then the next lowest priced offer will be evaluated. This process will continue until an offer is determined to be reasonable and technically acceptable with an “Acceptable” Past Performance rating.

(c) Discussions. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions. If, during the evaluation period, it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to hold discussions, offerors responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs) and the Final Proposal Revision (FPR) will be considered in making the source selection decision. If the offeror’s proposal has been evaluated as acceptable at the time discussions are closed, any changes or exceptions in the Final Proposal Revision are subject to evaluation and may introduce risk that

(d) Solicitation Requirements, Terms and Conditions. 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 factors or subfactors. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the offeror being ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and must provide complete supporting rationale. The Government reserves the right to determine any such exceptions unacceptable.

B. EVALUATION FACTORS

(a) Evaluation Factors and Subfactors. The following evaluation factors and subfactors will be used to evaluate each proposal. The Government will evaluate proposals for acceptability, but will not rank the proposals by the non-price factors or subfactors.

FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL ACCEPTABILITY

· Sub-factor 1: FAA Certified Courses and Facilities

· Element 1: FAA Part 141 Certification

· Sub-factor 2: Certified Flight Instructors

· Element 1: Recruit, Qualify, Hire and Retain Personnel

· Element 2: Flight Instructor Certification with Instrument Rating

· Sub-factor 3: Student Management Approach

· Element 1: Student Procedures

· Element 2: Communication Process

· Element 3: Lodging Facilities

· Element 4: Transportation

· Sub-factor 4: Safety Management Program

· Element 1: Establish and Maintain Safety Management Program

· Sub-factor 5: Small Business Sub-Contracting Plan

· Element 1: Establish and Maintain Small Business Sub-Contracting Plan

FACTOR 2 – PRICE

FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE

C. FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL ACCEPTABILITY

The Government’s technical evaluation team shall evaluate the technical proposals on an acceptable or unacceptable basis, assigning one of the ratings described below for each subfactor. Any subfactor evaluated as “Unacceptable” will render the entire proposal unacceptable and, therefore, unawardable. Only those proposals determined to be technically acceptable, either initially or as a result of discussions, will be considered for award. However, the offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussion.

TABLE 1 - TECHNICAL RATINGS

Proposals shall be evaluated against the following technical subfactors:

(a) Subfactor 1: FAA Certified Courses and Facilities. This subfactor assesses the offeror’s ability to provide FAA Part 141Certified courses and facilities. The evaluation will address the offerors response as outlined in the right-hand column (the “Instructions to Offerors” column on the left is verbatim from Addenda to FAR 52.212-1 and is provided here for reference only):

Subfactor 1: FAA Certified Courses and Facilities

Instructions to Offerors Addenda to FAR 52.212-1 Evaluation Criteria Addenda to FAR 52.212-2

(b) Subfactor 2: Provide Certified Flight Instructors. This subfactor assesses the offeror’s overall approach staffing plan approach to obtain and maintain certified/qualified workforce. The evaluation will address the offeror’s response as outlined in the right-hand column (the “Instructions to Offerors” column on the left is verbatim from Addenda to FAR 52.212-1 and is provided here for reference only):

Subfactor 2: Provide Certified Flight Instructors

Instructions to Offerors Addenda to FAR 52.212-1 Evaluation Criteria Addenda to FAR 52.212-2

Section - Volume I, Para 2(a) - Recruit, Qualify, Hire and Retain Personnel The Offeror shall provide a detailed technical approach to attract, recruit, hire, train, and retain qualified personnel for a minimum of two years (or the life of the contract) as well as certified, trained, and qualified technical personnel to meet task order requirements and demonstrates the ability to ensure coverage of instructors when on leave, illness, or due to a no notice departure from the company. The detailed technical approach shall include the requirements in PWS Paragraphs 2.3.2 and 3.6.

Section – C, Factor 1, Para (b) - Recruit, Qualify, Hire and Retain Personnel The offeror presented viable approaches for attracting, recruiting, hiring, training, and retaining qualified personnel for a minimum of two years (or the life of the contract) as well as certified, trained, and qualified technical personnel to meet task order requirements and demonstrates the ability to ensure coverage of instructors when on leave, illness, or due to a no notice departure from the company. The offeror presented an adequate technical approach and understanding to meet the requirements in PWS Paragraphs 2.3.2 and 3.6.

Section - Volume I, Para 2(c) - FAA Certified Instructors with Instrument Rating The Offeror shall provide a detailed technical approach to ensure each instructor maintains currency and qualification in accordance with FAA Part 61 regulations and be ready to conduct training when students are available. The detailed technical approach shall include the requirements in PWS Paragraph 1.3.3.3, 2.3.3 and 3.6.

Section – C, Factor 1, Para (b)(i) - FAA Certified Instructors with Instrument Rating The offeror presented an acceptable technical approach to meeting the requirement to ensure each instructor maintains currency and qualification in accordance with FAA Part 61 regulations and be ready to conduct training when students are available. Indicates an adequate technical approach and understanding to meet requirements in PWS Paragraph 1.3.3.3, 2.3.3 and 3.6.

(c) Subfactor 3: Student Management Approach. This subfactor assesses the offeror’s proposed student management and communications approach. The evaluation will address the offerors response as outlined in the right-hand column (the “Instructions to Offerors” column on the left is verbatim from Addenda to FAR 52.212-1 and is provided here for reference only):

Subfactor 3: Student Management Approach

Instructions to Offerors Addenda to FAR 52.212-1 Evaluation Criteria Addenda to FAR 52.212-2

Section - Volume I, Para 3(a) - Student Procedures The Offeror shall provide detailed technical approach to manage, schedule, and track the progression of students attending training in Private Pilot License PPL, Instrument Rating (IR) and Commercial Multi-Engine Courses. The detailed technical approach shall include student recording keeping, student accountability, course evaluation and student certificates IAW the requirements in PWS paragraphs 3.9.

Section – C, Factor 1, Para (c)(i) - Student Procedures The offeror presented an acceptable technical approach to manage to include student record keeping, schedule, and track progression of students attending training in Private Pilot License PPL, Instrument Rating (IR) and Commercial Multi-Engine Courses IAW PWS Paragraphs 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, and 3.9..

Section - Volume I, Para 3(b) - Communication Processes The Offeror shall provide a detailed technical approach on how the offeror’s will communicate with the AFSAT TPM/COR and the CO in regards to the student training issues and incidents. The detailed technical approach shall include the requirements in IAW PWS Paragraphs 3.9f, 3.11c and 4.4.

Section – C, Factor 1, Para (c)(ii) - Communication Processes The offeror presented an acceptable technical approach to communicating with the AFSAT TPM/COR and the CO in regards to student training issues and incidents. Indicates an adequate technical approach and understanding to meet the requirements in PWS Paragraphs 3.9f , 3.11c and 4.4

Section - Volume I, Para 3(c) - Lodging The Offeror shall provide a detailed technical approach on the offeror’s plan to provide and maintain student lodging. The detailed technical approach shall include the requirements in PWS Paragraphs 1.3.3.1 and 3.11f.

Section – C, Factor 1, Para (c)(iii) - Lodging The offeror presented an acceptable technical approach to providing and maintaining student lodging. Indicates an adequate technical approach and understanding to meet the requirements in PWS Paragraphs1.3.3.1 and 3.11f

Section - Volume I, Para 3(d) - Transportation The Offeror shall provide a detailed technical approach on the offeror’s plan to provide student transportation. The detailed technical approach shall include the requirements in PWS Paragraphs 1.3.3.1, 3.11a, 3.11b, 3.11d and 4.1.2.

Section – C, Factor 1, Para (c)(iv) - Transportation The offeror presented an acceptable technical approach to providing student transportation. Indicates an adequate technical approach and understanding to meet the requirements in PWS Paragraphs 1.3.3.1, 3.11a, 3.11b, 3.11d and 4.1.2.

(d) Subfactor 4: Safety Management Program. This subfactor assesses the offeror’s proposed method for establishing and managing a safety management program. The evaluation will address the offerors response as outlined in the right-hand column (the “Instructions to Offerors” column on the left is verbatim from Addenda to FAR 52.212-1 and is provided here for reference only):

Subfactor 4: Safety Management Program

Instructions to Offerors Addenda to FAR 52.212-1 Evaluation Criteria Addenda to FAR 52.212-2

Section - Volume I, Para 4(a) - Method for Establishing Safety Management Program The Offeror shall provide a detailed technical approach on how the offeror’s intend to establish and maintain a safety program. The safety management plan should provide a framework for continual improvement for safety performance, risk mitigation and demonstrate planning, goal setting, executing and measuring of safety performance. The detailed technical approach shall include the requirements IAW PWS Paragraph 3.8 and provide a contractor equivalent of the Air Force Safety Management System defined in AFI 91-2021.

Section – C, Factor 1, Para (d)(i) - Method for Establishing a Safety Management Program The offeror presented an acceptable technical approach to establishing and maintaining a safety program. The safety management plan provides a framework for continual improvement for safety performance, risk mitigation and demonstrate planning, goal setting, executing and measuring of safety performance. Indicates an adequate technical approach and understanding to meet the requirements in PWS Paragraph 3.8 and the contractor equivalent of the Air Force Safety Management System defined in AFI 91-2021.

D. FACTOR 2 – PRICE

(a) The government will rank all offers by price for entire ordering period. The lowest priced offer will be evaluated for reasonableness. If the lowest priced offer is determined to be reasonable and technically acceptable, no other offer will be evaluated for price reasonableness. If the lowest priced offer is not determined reasonable and technically acceptable with an “Acceptable” Past Performance rating, then the next lowest priced offer will be evaluated. This process will continue until an offer is determined to be reasonable and technically acceptable with an “Acceptable” Past Performance rating.

(b) Total Evaluated Price (TEP): The TEP for each offeror evaluated will be determined by first multiplying the quantities in the Pricing Schedule by the fully-burdened unit price (rounded to the nearest whole dollar amount) entered for each FFP CLIN to confirm the extended total amount for each FFP CLIN, which should exactly equal the quantity multiplied by the unit price. The TEP will not include the Not-To-Exceed cost reimbursable CLINs. The sum of the extended total amounts for all FFP CLINs for the total ordering period will equal the TEP.

(c) FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services, will be incorporated into the resultant contract. Upon exercise, the clause will extend the terms and conditions of the contract period being extended at the rates specified in the contract for a period not to exceed 6 months. Per FAR 17.207(f), all pricing period prices for the FFP CLINs will be evaluated during the initial contract award process and determined fair and reasonable. Therefore, in the event the Government requires continued performance beyond the awarded contract performance period, the Government's evaluation of prices proposed for all pricing periods will be considered fair and reasonable as applied to an extension of services (IAW FAR 52.217-8). Should an extension of services be required, rates will be adjusted only as a result of revisions to applicable prevailing Department of Labor wage rates. Costs associated with the Cost Reimbursable CLINs will be evaluated and negotiated after contract award as needed at the task order level.

(d) Reasonableness: For the offerors being evaluated, prices and data other than certified cost or pricing data submitted in the Volume II Price, as required by Addenda to FAR 52.212-1, will be evaluated for price reasonableness, pursuant to FAR 12.209 and FAR 13.106-3 based upon each offeror’s proposed approach. For additional information, see FAR 31.201-3. If the CO determines that adequate price competition no longer exists, the CO may request and evaluate additional data other than certified cost or pricing data, as appropriate, to make a determination of price reasonableness.

(e) An offeror’s proposal may not be considered for award if proposed prices are determined to be unreasonably high and pose an unacceptable risk to the Government.

E. FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE

The Past Performance evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. Offerors must receive a past performance rating of “Acceptable” to be eligible for award.

(a) Procedures in Evaluating Past Performance

(b) Recency: An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, the effort must have been performed during the three (3) years preceding the date of issuance of this solicitation, to include at least 90 days of documented performance during the three (3) year period.

(c) Relevancy: The Government will evaluate the relevancy of offeror’s past performance and assign ratings of relevant or not relevant. The Government will combine all recent past performance information obtained and determine an aggregate relevancy assessment. In determining relevancy consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the offeror, teaming partner, or subcontractor. The relevancy of recent contracts will be assessed as defined in Table 2 below.

Table 2: Relevancy Description

magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

To be considered Relevant, the aggregate of the combination of the offeror, major subcontractor, and / or teaming partner’s recent past performance information, up to four (4) contracts, must demonstrate the following:

A minimum ability to provide FAA Part 141 training from no flying experience to Commercial Multi-Engine qualification for 10 Students per year.

magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

To be considered Not Relevant, the aggregate of the combination of the offeror, major subcontractor, and / or teaming partner’s recent past performance information, up to four (4) contracts, did not demonstrate the following:

A minimum ability to provide FAA Part 141 training from no flying experience to Commercial Multi-Engine qualification for 10 Students per year.

(d) Acceptability: The Government will determine how well the offeror performed on past contracts and assign ratings of “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” using descriptions in Table 3 below.

Table 3: Past Performance Evaluation Ratings

* In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

(e) Sources of Past Performance Information for Evaluation: In conducting the Past Performance evaluation, the Government reserves the right to use both the information provided in the offeror’s Past Performance proposal volume and information obtained from Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and the Defense Contract Management Agency.

(f) The quality assessment consists of an evaluation of recent and relevant past performance information available, regardless of its source. The quality assessment may reveal positive or adverse past performance information. Adverse past performance is defined as past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation element or any unfavorable comment received from sources without a formal rating system. Multiple ratings of less than “Satisfactory” in CPARS, PPIRS, or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and the Defense Contract Management Agency may result in a performance quality assessment rating of “Unacceptable.” Offerors may be given an opportunity to respond to adverse past performance information for which they have not previously had an opportunity to address.

F. FACTOR 4 – SUBCONTRACTING PARTICIPATION (PLAN)

(a) Large Business Prime Offerors: FAR 52.219-9 AND DFARS 252.219-7003 are included in this solicitation and will be incorporated into any resultant contract. A subcontracting plan is required from all offerors other than small business concerns for proposals exceeding $700,000 which contain subcontracting opportunities. The plan shall be submitted with the initial proposal and will be concurrently evaluated. Since a price proposal is required by this solicitation, it must relate to, and substantiate, the submissions under FAR 52.219-9(d). Also substantiate the reasonableness of any additional costs to be expended in pursuit of the small disadvantaged business goal. Each large business prime offeror shall provide a clear, detailed, logical and realistic plan that expresses definitive commitments for SB, VOSB, SDVOSB, HUBZone, SDB, and WOSB. The offeror must provide specific small business concern goals expressed as percentages of total planned subcontracting dollars for the base and all option years. Any contract resulting from this solicitation which includes a comprehensive subcontracting plan will include the clause at 252.219-7004, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Test Program), in lieu of the clauses at FAR 52.219-9, and DFARS 252.219-7003.

(end of provision)