Attachment 27 A - Q and A Round 1 Response 4 Feb 2022.pdf

FA300222R0002

Attachment 27a

04 Feb 22

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE:

The Government proposes the following changes in response to the Question Received, as stated in Section J, Attachment 27, dated 04 Feb 2022:

Attachment 22 - Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Add L.3.2.4.1 Past Performance Information (PPI) Worksheet (Section J, Attachment 25) Requirements for Protégé Joint Ventures. The Protégé may submit a minimum of one (1), but no more than three (3) PPI worksheets for their past performance contracts. Contracts may include federal, state, and local Government and commercial customers.

Each PPI Worksheet must cover recent and relevant performance consistent with the definitions in Section L, paragraphs L.3.2.8.1. The PPI worksheets should be submitted within 30 days after solicitation and emailed to the Contracting Officer and Contracting Specialist listed in Table L.2 only. The length of each PPI worksheet submission is limited to no more than seven (7) pages. PPI worksheets do not count against the page limitation (40 pages) for Volume II - Past Performance. The partners to the joint venture in the aggregate must demonstrate the past performance, experience, business systems and certifications necessary to perform the contract.

Add L.3.2.5.1 Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) (See Section J, Attachment 26) Requirements for Protégé Joint Ventures. The information contained in the questionnaires will be used as part of evaluation of the Offeror’s past performance. The Protégé may provide PPQs on a minimum of one (1), but no more than three (3), recent and relevant contracts IAW Section L, paragraph L.3.2.4.1 and identified on their PPI worksheets. The protégé and their joint venture(s), partner(s), affiliate(s), subcontractor(s), as applicable, shall complete Section 1 and forward the PPQs to the POC responsible for monitoring contract performance. The responsibility to send out and ensure Government receipt of the PPQs rests solely with the Offeror. The Offeror shall exert its best effort to ensure that a current POC, per relevant contract, submits a completed PPQ directly to the Government not later than the required due date. The contract POCs shall return the questionnaires via email DIRECTLY to the points of contact listed in Table L.2, Email and Telephone Contact Information, no later than the Proposal due date. Any questionnaires not returned directly to the Government POCs, or received after the due date, will not be reviewed and evaluated.

Add L.3.2.8.1 Protégé Joint Ventures Recency Definition. To be recent, at least six (6) months of the effort’s period of performance must have been performed during the past six (6) years from the date of issuance of this Solicitation.

Amend L.3.2.9 Relevancy Definitions. Relevancy, as it pertains to past performance information, is a measure of the extent of similarity between the service/support effort, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and subcontract/teaming or other comparable attributes of past performance examples and the solicitation requirements;

and a measure of the likelihood that the past performance is an indicator of future performance. Relevancy is further defined in Section M, paragraph 3.4.4. The Government is not bound by the Offeror’s opinion of relevancy.

Amend L.5.11.3.2 If applicable, Offerors shall provide written contract teaming arrangement agreements, subcontracting letters of intent and other necessary agreements associated with joint ventures and protégés that clearly identify roles and responsibilities. All associated parties must sign the corresponding agreements and they must be in effect prior to date of proposal submission. This information will not be counted towards Offeror page limitations (unlimited) as noted in Table L.1. Proposal Organization. If an Offeror proposes to use any type of joint venture, the Offeror must provide a copy of that agreement. The joint venture agreement must be signed by all parties, clearly identify the roles and responsibilities of each party, and be submitted along with the Offeror’s proposal. The copy of the joint venture agreement provided by the Offeror will not be counted towards the Offeror’s page limitations (unlimited) as noted in Table L.1.

Attachment 23 - Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

Amend M.3.4.1 Evaluation Process. Past performance will be evaluated as an indicator of an Offeror's ability to perform the contract successfully, and as a measure of the Government’s confidence in the Offeror’s ability to perform successfully. This will be accomplished through a confidence assessment rating based on the Government assessing Offeror’s past performance history that is relevant to the requirements of this solicitation. The partners to

FA300222R0002

Attachment 27a

04 Feb 22 the joint venture in the aggregate must demonstrate the past performance, experience, business systems and certifications necessary to perform the contract. The Past Performance evaluation considers each Offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance of services that are like the solicitation requirements and the quality of the Offeror’s performance record. 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 other sources available to the Government to include, but not limited to: the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS); Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS); Electronic Document Access (EDA), or other databases; and interviews/questionnaires with Program Managers, COs, the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), and commercial sources.

Add M.3.4.2.1 Recency for Protégé Joint Ventures is defined as at least six (6) months of the effort’s period of performance must have been performed during the past six (6) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation.

The entire contract will be evaluated if there are 6-months of performance within the six (6) year recency window.

Performance efforts that do not meet these criteria will not be evaluated for relevancy or performance quality.

Delete M.3.4.3 Relevant performance measures the extent of similarity in scope, magnitude, and complexity of the Offeror’s past performance and the solicitation requirements. For each Past Performance effort, relevancy will be determined by the similarity to the scope, magnitude of effort and complexity of the Offerors’ performance.

Magnitude similarity will be calculated as an estimated annual value (EAV) as part of the relevancy determination.

Relevancy will be assigned a rating outlined in Section M, Table M.5, IAW the DoD Source Selection Procedures.

Performance efforts that are determined to be Not Relevant will not be further evaluated.

Amend M.3.4.6 Past Performance Evaluation Confidence Ratings: The Government will evaluate past performance and assign an overall confidence rating outlined in Table M.6 IAW DoD Source Selection Procedures, based on an Offeror’s recent and relevant past performance. The partners to the joint venture in the aggregate must demonstrate the past performance, experience, business systems and certifications necessary to perform the contract.

Note: 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 reasonably assigned, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance and will be assigned a performance confidence rating of “Neutral”. A “Substantial” or “Satisfactory” confidence rating may be considered more advantageous to the Government than a “Neutral Confidence” rating.

(End Response to Question 1)