Attachment_1_-_52.212-1_and_2_.pdf

FA4417-15-R-0007 Attachment 1

Custodial Services Addendum to 52.212-1 & 52.212-2

Hurlburt Field, FL

Addendum to FAR 52.212-1

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 - INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL

ITEMS (APR 2014)

*** THIS SECTION IS FOR SOLICITATION PURPOSES ONLY. THIS SECTION WILL BE

PHYSICALLY REMOVED FROM THE RESULTANT AWARD. ***

Addendum to 52.212-1(b), Submission of offers. This paragraph is tailored as follows: “Submit signed and dated offers, by mail or hand-carrier no later than Monday, 13 April 2015 at 12:00 p.m. Central Standard Time (CST), to:

ATTN JORDAN ROBY & DAVID JESMAIN

1 SOCONS/LGCA

350 TULLY STREET, BLDG 90339

HURLBURT FIELD, FL 32544

Addendum to 52.212-1(c), Period for Acceptance of Offers. The paragraph is tailored as follows: “The offeror agrees to hold the prices in its offer firm for 139 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of offers.”

Offers shall be complete, include a Cover Sheet (Attachment 2), & Teaming

Arrangement/Joint Venture Documentation (If Applicable) and be organized into the following parts: Volume I – Price Proposal, Volume II – Technical Proposal, Volume III –

Past Performance, As a minimum, offers must include the following to be eligible for award:

1. Cover Sheet with the following information:

1.1 Time specified in the solicitation for receipt of offers: Monday, 13 April 2015 at 12:00 p.m.

Central Standard Time (CST);

1.2 Company name;

1.3 Company address and remit to address if different than mailing address;

1.4 Company telephone number;

1.5 Company e-mail address;

1.6 Company point of contact(s);

1.7 SAM registration expiration date;

1.8 CAGE code;

FA4417-15-R-0007 Attachment 1

1.9 DUNS number;

1.10 Registration confirmation for NAICS code 561720;

1.11 Acknowledge Solicitation Amendments;

1.12 There is no page limitation for the Teaming Arrangements/Joint Venture Documentation.

Failure to submit this documentation, if offeror is claiming this is their business approach, will render the offerors’ proposal non-responsive and no further evaluation of the offeror’s proposal will be conducted; and

1.12.1 Teaming Arrangement/Joint Venture Documentation (If Applicable). If Teaming

Arrangements are contemplated they must comply with the appropriate Federal Regulations (13

C.F.R. Part 121 (Size Regulations), Part 124 8(a) & SDB) and Part 125 (Government

Contracting Programs)).

Acknowledge Solicitation Amendments; and the offeror must submit:

1.12.1.1 Teaming Agreements as a Prime and Subcontractor relationship (if applicable):

Offerors must provide the following information not later than the date and time proposals are due:

1.12.1.1.1 Teaming Agreement with SBA Approval;

1.12.1.2 Include size of each concern required at 13 CFR 121.103(h)(i)(2)(ii) and 124.513(b)(1);

1.12.1.3 Clearly establish roles of each party (who is prime and who is subcontractor, who is responsible for what tasks, contract administration, proposals, work management, etc.);

1.12.1.4 Subcontractor past performance cannot be disclosed to the prime offeror without the subcontractor’s consent. Provide a letter from all subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement, consenting to the release of their past performance information to the prime contractor, only if it is being used as part of the past performance evaluation;

1.12.1.5 Identify each member’s share of the prospective contract, 50/50, 51/49, etc.;

1.12.1.6 Include exclusivity that the team member will not be replaced for the duration of the contract, any exceptions should be identified and assurance that the team members are not teaming with another firm for the same procurement;

1.12.1.7 Include a statement of acknowledgement that the Prime Contractor is responsible for adhering to contract terms and conditions and daily management. The Prime Contractor is obligated to negotiate in good faith and responsible for conveying mandatory Government terms and conditions to subcontractors; and

FA4417-15-R-0007 Attachment 1

1.12.1.8 Include a statement of acknowledgement that the prime contractor shall remain fully responsible for contract performance, regardless of any teaming agreement between the prime contractor and its subcontractors.

1.12.2 Joint Ventures (if applicable): Offerors must provide the following information not later than the date and time proposals are due:

1.12.2.1 Joint Venture Agreement with SBA Joint Venture approval;

1.12.2.2 Include all requirements at 13 C.F.R. Part 124.513, including size concern information;

1.12.2.3 Include a statement confirming that the 8(a) firm will manage and furnish employee project manager, earn at least 51% of profits; and furnish 50% of personnel costs IAW FAR

52.219-14(c)(1); and

1.12.2.4 Joint Venture registration in SAM with NAICS code on representations and certifications 561720.

2. Volume I: Price Proposal and any discount terms with the following information:

There is no page limitation for Volume 1. Offerors shall submit an original and one (1) copy:

2.1 Submit all pages of the Standard Form (SF) 1449, pages 1 through 105 with blocks 12, 17a and b, and 30a through c completed with an original, authorized signature and the Contract

Clauses section filled-in;

2.2 Submit a copy of the representations and certifications at FAR 52.212-3 (see FAR 52.212-

3(b)(2) for those representations and certifications that the offeror shall complete electronically);

and

2.3 Submit all pages of each solicitation amendment(s) (SF 30) with the original solicitation documents, signed by the same official authorized to sign the SF 1449.

3. Volume II: Technical Proposals shall include the following three (3) parts: (1) Annual

Schedule, (2) Transition Plan and (3) Quality Control Plan. Do not repeat the PWS or state general comments such as “Standard Procedures will be employed” within your technical proposal. Submit your technical proposal with the following information. There is no page limitation for Volume 2. Offerors shall submit an original and two (2) sanitized copies with only

CAGE code and no other markings or logos identifying the company name:

3.1 Part 1: Annual Schedule:

3.1.1 Include a hard copy and electronic copy of the annual schedule. Submit the electronic schedule on a CD using Excel with columns allowing the information to be sorted by building number, task, day cleaned and time cleaned. The annual schedule shall be IAW PWS paragraph

4.19 and identify facilities by building number in numerical order, each task at PWS paragraphs

FA4417-15-R-0007 Attachment 1

1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, all subsequent subparagraphs and Appendices A and B, the days cleaned and the approximate time cleanings will occur. The annual schedule shall also include the following:

3.1.1.1 Include the number and labor category of personnel, equipment and supplies to be used;

3.1.1.2 Include information on how services will continue uninterrupted in the event of personnel absences.

3.2 Part 2: Transition Plan:

3.2.1 Include a transition plan that details how the offeror intends to manage, staff, schedule

(with key milestones), equip and complete all required tasks within 30 days of contract award and be able to perform IAW the PWS on the first day of the performance period without degradation in service from the previous contract; and

3.2.2 Include the number and labor category of personnel, equipment and supplies to be used.

3.3 Part 3: Quality Control Plan IAW PWS paragraph 2.1 that details:

3.3.1 Quality Control Procedures used to ensure compliance with PWS paragraph 2, Service

Summary and procedures used to identify, prevent, and ensure non-performance and continual repeat of defective service does not occur; and

3.3.2 Inspection procedures, including a detailed schedule per month, quarter, and year.

4. Volume III: Past Performance Proposal with the following information:

Limited to no more than two (2) pages per contract listed and six (6) pages total. Pages exceeding the page limitations set forth in this section will not be read or evaluated, and will be removed from the proposal Only references for same or similar type contract desired.

Offerors shall submit an original and two (2) copies:

4.1 Submit a list of no more than three (3) recent and relevant contracts performed for Federal agencies or commercial customers as a prime contractor that demonstrates the ability to successfully perform the scope and breadth of the requirements as described in the PWS for this soliciatation. Any past performance references in excess of the first three submitted will not be evaluated. If a teaming arrangement/Joint Venture is contemplated, include any relevant and recent performance information on previous teaming arrangements/Joint Ventures with the same partner or as this entity (CAGE). If this is a first time joint effort, each party to the arrangement must provide a list of no more than three (3) contracts each. Subcontractor past performance may only be disclosed for use by the prime contractor if a letter of consent to release past performance information to the prime is completed by the subcontractor and included with the past performance:

4.1.1 RECENT. The definition of recent as related to this solicitation includes performance within the last three years from the issue date of this solicitation; and

FA4417-15-R-0007 Attachment 1

4.1.2 RELEVANCE. Offerors shall identify what elements of each contract are deemed relevant to this solicitation and indicate what percentage of service was performed by the offeror

(prime), subcontractor (if applicable) and teaming contractor (if applicable); the definition of relevance as related to this solicitation includes (1) Experience with custodial contracts, and (2)

Management of employees that commensurate with cleaning a minimum of 200,000 square feet weekly to standard, including office space and restrooms serviced bi-weekly and gymnasiums and child care facilities serviced twice per day. Definitions of relevancy are as follows:

4.1.2.1 RELEVANT. Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires; and

4.1.2.2 NOT RELEVANT. Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

4.2 Submit the following information for each contract submitted for past performance evaluation:

4.2.1 Company/Division name;

4.2.2 Product/Service;

4.2.3 Contracting Agency/Customer;

4.2.4 Contract Number;

4.2.5 Contract Dollar Value;

4.2.6 Period of Performance;

4.2.7 Verified, up-to-date name, address, e-mail address, telephone number of the Government evaluator, contracting officer or customer POC responsible for procuring your services;

4.2.8 Number of square feet cleaned weekly (200,000 per paragraph 4.1.2 above); frequency of cleanings in office spaces and restrooms (bi-weekly per paragraph 4.1.2 above); and frequency of cleanings in gymnasiums and child care facilities (twice per day per paragraph 4.1.2 above).

4.2.9 Comments regarding compliance with contract terms and conditions; and

4.2.10 Comments regarding any known performance deemed unacceptable by the customer, or not in accordance with the contract terms and conditions, the resolution(s) implemented and results.

4.2.11 Explanation of how the scope of the referenced contract is relevant to the PWS in this solicitation.

FA4417-15-R-0007 Attachment 1

4.3 Submit Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment 3) for each of the references identified at Part III, Past Performance Proposal. Any past performance questionnaires received in excess to the first three references in the Past Performance Proposal for the prime or, if applicable, for each party to the first time joint effort, will not be evaluated. The responsibility to send out the questionnaires rests solely with the offeror and shall not be delegated to any other entity:

4.3.1 Complete General Information and mail, fax or email the attached transmittal letter and questionnaire to the evaluator. Evaluators are only allowed to use Attachment 3; altered or substituted questionnaires will not be evaluated:

4.3.1.1 Offerors shall indicate at Volume III, Past Performance Information, which evaluator the questionnaire was transmitted to and confirm that the questionnaire was received.

4.3.2 Once all questionnaires are completed by the evaluator, the information contained in the questionnaires shall be considered source selection sensitive and not releasable to you, the offeror. Completed questionnaires received or routed through the offeror, subcontractor or teaming contractor will not be accepted. Questionnaires shall be sent by the evaluator directly to

Jordan Roby and David Jesmain at Jordan.Roby@us.af.mil, and David.Jesmain.1@us.af.mil. If the questionnaire cannot be e-mailed, mail the questionnaire to:

HURLBURT FIELD, FL 32544

4.3.3 The offeror shall track the questionnaires and ensure that Jordan Roby, and David Jesmain receive them by Monday, 13 April 2015 at 12:00 p.m. Central Standard Time (CST). It is also the sole responsibility of the offeror to inform the evaluators of any extensions the Government approves to the date and time proposal are due to be submitted; and

4.3.4 If the offeror claims there is no past performance, notification of this fact must be included at Volume III, Past Performance Proposal.

5. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors; failure to meet a requirement of the solicitation may be excluded from consideration. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale; and

6. Documents submitted in response to this solicitation must be fully responsive to and consistent with:

6.1 Requirements of this solicitation, Government standards and regulations;

mailto:Jordan.Roby@us.af.mil mailto:David.Jesmain.1@us.af.mil

FA4417-15-R-0007 Attachment 1

6.2 Evaluation Factors for Award;

6.3 Format for proposal Parts II and III shall be as follows:

6.3.1 Proposals shall be on 8 ½” x 11” paper, except for fold-outs;

6.3.2 Each page shall be numbered; if a sheet of paper has print on both sides it is considered two

(2) pages; and

6.3.3 Font shall be Times New Roman and no smaller than 12 font size.”

Addendum to 52.212-1(e), Multiple offers. This paragraph is deleted for this solicitation and marked “reserved.”

Addendum to 52.212-1(f)(1), Late submissions, modifications, revisions and withdrawals of offers. This subparagraph is tailored as follows: “Offerors are responsible for mailing or hand-carrying offers, and any modifications, revisions, or withdrawals, by Monday, 13 April 2015 at

12:00 p.m. Central Standard Time (CST), to:

HURLBURT FIELD, FL 32544.

Faxed or e-mailed proposals will not be accepted. All offers shall be in a sealed package and clearly labeled with the time and date specified for receipt, solicitation number FA4417-15-R-

0007, name, address and DUNS number of the offeror.

The Government designated office for receipt of offers is located on a military instillation and a visitor pass is required. To obtain a visitor pass, the offeror shall e-mail Jordan Roby and David

Jesmain at Jordan.Roby@us.af.mil, and David.Jesmain.1@us.af.mil no later than Thursday, 26

March 2015 at 4:30 p.m. CST, and request a visitor pass; all visitor pass requests shall include in the subject line: “FA4417-15-R-0007: Visitor Pass Request” and include the individual’s full-name, phone number and business name in the body of the e-mail. Offerors should anticipate delay and allow sufficient time to obtain a visitor pass and deliver the proposal prior to the time specified for receipt.”

Addendum to 52.212-1(j), Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number. This paragraph is expanded to include the following statement: “All offers submitted through a Joint Venture shall have an assigned DUNS number for the Joint Venture Entity.”

Addendum to 52.212-1(k), System for Award Management (SAM). This paragraph is expanded to include the following statement: “All offers submitted through a Joint Venture shall have an active SAM account for the specific Joint Venture Entity.

mailto:Jordan.Roby@us.af.mil mailto:David.Jesmain.1@us.af.mil

FA4417-15-R-0007 Attachment 1

All of the time and date references for receipt of offers in this addendum shall be superseded by any subsequent solicitation amendments that extend the time and date for receipt of offers.

(End of Addendum)

FA4417-15-R-0007 Attachment 1

Addendum to FAR 52.212-2

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2 - EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014)

This acquisition will utilize the best value approach, in which the Government seeks to award to an offeror who provides the greatest confidence that they will meet the Government’s requirements affordably. The Best Value technique for this acquisition will be Performance

Price Tradeoff (PPT), where technical and past performance, when combined, are significantly more important than price.”

Below is a synopsis of the evaluation steps; the evaluation process is defined in more detail immediately following the synopsis.

The first (1 st ) step of the evaluation process is to review the cover page and if applicable, any proposed Teaming Arrangement/Joint Venture Documentation for completeness. Teaming arrangements shall conform to all requirements identified in the Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 of this solicitation and including all elements stated in the addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors – Commercial Items. If an offeror is claiming this business approach, failure to submit Teaming Arrangement/Joint Venture documentation will render the offerors proposal non-responsive and no further evaluation will be conducted.

The second (2 nd

) step of the evaluation process is to evaluate prices and rank all responsive proposals by price from lowest to highest.

The evaluation team will then proceed to the third (3 rd

) step. The first five (5) of the lowest priced responsive proposals shall be evaluated for technical acceptability. In the event that the first five (5) evaluated proposals do not yield an offer with an acceptable technical rating, the evaluation process will continue in increments of the next five (5) lowest priced responsive proposals until a technically acceptable proposal is identified.

After technical evaluations conclude, the fourth (4 th

) evaluation step begins. For those offerors deemed technically acceptable, past performance will be evaluated for the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal. If the lowest priced evaluated offer has been determined technically acceptable, and is judged to have a Substantial Confidence rating that offer represents the best value for the Government and the evaluation process stops. Award shall be made to that offeror without further consideration of any other offers.

If the lowest priced technically acceptable offeror is not judged to have a Substantial Confidence rating, the next lowest priced technically acceptable offeror will be evaluated and the process will continue in order by price until an offeror is judged to have a Substantial Confidence rating or until all offerors are evaluated. The Source Selection Authority shall then make an integrated assessment to render the best value award decision.

FA4417-15-R-0007 Attachment 1

Offerors are cautioned to follow the detailed instructions fully and carefully, as the Government reserves the right to make an award based on initial offers received, without discussion of such offers. Non-responsive proposals will not be evaluated.

Proposals that are unrealistic in terms of technical acceptability or price may be rejected at any time during the evaluation process. The Government reserves the right to establish a competitive range; discussions or negotiation may be conducted with all offerors in the competitive range.

Offerors may be required to participate in telephone discussions or in face-to-face oral discussions at the 1 st Special Operations Contracting Squadron, 350 Tully Street, Hurlburt Field, FL.

Offerors may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of their written proposals (e.g., defining the relevance of the offeror’s technical information and adverse past performance information to which an offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond) or to resolve minor clerical errors. Any such exchange between the offeror and the Government will be for clarification only and will not constitute discussions within the meaning of FAR 15.306(a).

BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD: By submission of its offer, the offeror accedes to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications. The

Government intends to award one contract to the offeror deemed responsible in accordance with

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), as supplemented, whose proposal conforms to the

Request for Proposal (RFP) requirements including all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by the RFP and is judged, based on the evaluation criteria, to represent the best value to the Government. The Government intends to award to the offeror who in the Government’s estimation, provides the greatest overall value in response to the requirements.

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and make award without discussions (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)) however, IAW FAR 15.306(a) & (b) prior to establishing the competitive range of proposals for this acquisition, the contracting officer may conduct discussions, request clarifications, and/or have communications with offerors to determine technical acceptability of their proposal IAW the solicitation requirements. Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a technical, performance and price standpoint.

The evaluation process shall proceed as follows:

1. All offerors’ cover pages and (if applicable) teaming arrangements will be reviewed for completeness in accordance with the elements stated in the addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors – Commercial Items, incorporated into this solicitation to determine the offeror as responsive or non-responsive. Only those offers determined complete and responsive will be considered for further evaluation.

FACTOR 1: PRICE: All offers will be ranked by price:

FA4417-15-R-0007 Attachment 1

2.2 Price proposals conforming to all requirements of this solicitation will be ranked based on the

Total Evaluated Price:

2.2.1 Total Evaluated Price = (Total Evaluated Price for Base Period) + (Total Evaluated Price for Option Period 1) + (Total Evaluated Price for Option Period 2) + (Total Evaluated Price for

Option Period 3) + (Total Evaluated Price for Option Period 4) + (Total Evaluated Price for

Option to Extend Services IAW FAR 52.217-8):

2.2.1.1 Total Evaluated Price for Base Period Option Periods 1 through 4: Quantities identified will be multiplied by the unit price to confirm the extended price and then the extended price for all CLINS will be added together for a total for that specific period.

2.2.1.1.1 Unit prices shall be used in the event that extended prices are calculated incorrectly.

2.2.1.2 Total Evaluated Price for Option to Extend Services IAW FAR 52.217-8: Offerors shall not submit pricing for the Option to Extend Services CLINS. The Government will calculate the

Total Evaluated Price for Option to Extend Services IAW FAR 52.217-8 by multiplying a quantity of 6 months by the unit prices proposed at Option Period 4. The prices are evaluated in the Total Evaluated Price for evaluation purposes only. The Option to Extend Services is not considered part of the contract period of performance and resultantly these totals will not be included in the contract value, however the CLINS will be included in the contract as information only. If the government exercises FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services, the extension will not exceed 6 months total and the information only CLINS will be changed to priced CLINS at a monthly price equal to the preceding period of performance’s most current monthly price.

2.2.2 Prices will be evaluated for fair and reasonableness:

2.2.2.1 The Government may use various price analysis techniques and procedures to ensure a fair and reasonable price; and

2.2.2.1.1 Unrealistically low prices, initially or subsequently, may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition.

2.2.2.2 All CLIN prices will be evaluated to determine if any prices are unbalanced IAW FAR

15.404-1(g).

3. FACTOR 2: TECHNICAL: The first five lowest priced offers will be evaluated for technical acceptability. If none of the first five lowest priced offers are determined technically acceptable, the technical evaluation will continue in increments of five until all offers are evaluated or until a technically acceptable offer is identified. Procedures at FAR 15.306, Exchanges with Offerors

After Receipt of Proposals, may be implemented to determine technical acceptability in accordance with the solicitation requirements. Only those offerors determined to be technically acceptable will be considered for further evaluation.

FA4417-15-R-0007 Attachment 1

3.1 The rating assigned to this factor will be based on the written technical proposal. The validity and thoroughness of the offeror’s technical proposal will be evaluated as specific evidence of the offeror’s understanding and capability to perform this requirement. An overall rating will be assigned; failure to be assigned an acceptable rating in any element will render the proposal unacceptable:

Definitions: Evaluators shall assign a rating which falls within one of the following definitions according to the degree which the offeror’s technical proposal meets the minimum requirement described below:

Acceptable: Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable: Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

3.2 Annual Schedule:

3.2.1 The Annual Schedule will be rated as acceptable if it demonstrates a reasonable approach to successfully perform the requirement in accordance with the PWS and as a minimum includes an annual schedule identifying facilities by building number in numerical order, with the approximate time cleanings will occur, that addresses PWS paragraphs 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, all subsequent subparagraphs and Appendices A and B IAW PWS paragraph 4.19 that includes:

3.2.1.1 Includes the number and labor category of personnel, equipment and supplies to be used;

3.2.1.2 Includes information on how services will continue uninterrupted in the event of personnel absences.

3.3 Transition Plan:

3.3.1 The Transition Plan will be rated as acceptable if it demonstrates a reasonable approach to successfully perform the requirement in accordance with the PWS and as a minimum includes a transition plan detailing how the offeror intends to manage, staff, schedule (with key milestones), equip and complete all required tasks within thirty (30) days of contract award and be able to perform IAW the PWS on the first day of the performance period without degradation in service from the previous contract; and

3.3.2 Includes the number and labor category of personnel, equipment and supplies to be used.

3.4 Quality Control Plan:

3.4.1 The quality control plan will be rated as acceptable if it demonstrates a reasonable approach to successfully perform the requirement in accordance with the PWS paragraph 2 and as a minimum addresses:

FA4417-15-R-0007 Attachment 1

3.4.1.1 Quality Control Procedures used to ensure compliance with PWS paragraph 2, Service

Summary and procedures used to identify, prevent, and ensure non-performance and continual repeat of defective service does not occur; and

3.4.1.2 Inspection procedures, including a detailed schedule per month, quarter, and year.

3.5 Only technically acceptable proposals will move on to the Past Performance phase of the evaluation.

4. FACTOR 3: Past Performance: The Government will evaluate the recency, relevancy and quality of the offerors’ provided past performance information, past performance questionnaires received and other past performance information data independently obtained from other

Government and commercial sources to include, but not limited to: the Past Performance

Information Retrieval System (PPIRS); Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information

System (FAPIIS); Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases.

4.1 Past Performance will first be evaluated for recency; all performance prior to three years from the date of the solicitation or not yet performed on the date of this solicitation will not be evaluated;

4.2 Past Performance will then be evaluated for relevancy and rated as relevant or not relevant:

4.2.1 RELEVANCE. The definition of relevance as related to this solicitation includes (1)

Experience with custodial contracts, and (2) Management of employees that commensurate with cleaning a minimum of 200,000 square feet weekly to standard, including office space and restrooms serviced bi-weekly and gymnasiums and child care facilities serviced twice per day.

Definitions of relevancy are as follows:

4.2.1.1 RELEVANT. Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires; and

4.2.2.2 NOT RELEVANT. Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

4.3 Past Performance will finally be evaluated for quality and assigned one of the following performance confidence assessment ratings based on the information provided in the Past

Performance Proposal, other past performance information data independently obtained from other Government and commercial sources, to include, but not limited to: the Past Performance

Information Retrieval System (PPIRS); Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information

System (FAPIIS); Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases, and questionnaires received:

4.3.1 Substantial Confidence: Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort;

FA4417-15-R-0007 Attachment 1

4.3.2 Satisfactory Confidence: Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort;

4.3.3 Limited Confidence: Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort;

4.3.4 No Confidence: Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort; and

4.3.5 Unknown Confidence (Neutral): No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned:

4.3.5.1 In the case of an offeror without a record of recent and 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)).

4.4 Performance confidence assessment is an evaluation of the likelihood for the Government’s confidence that the offeror will successfully perform the solicitation’s requirements based upon the offeror’s past performance information.

4.5 Past performance regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or sub-contractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement will not be considered as highly as past performance information for the principal offeror. Past performance regarding minor members of Joint Ventures will be considered in accordance with the member’s share of the prospective contract;

4.6 If the lowest priced evaluated offer has been determined technically acceptable, and is judged to have a Substantial Confidence rating, that offer represents the best value for the

Government and the evaluation process stops. Award shall be made to that offeror without further consideration of any other offers; and

4.7 If the lowest priced technically acceptable offeror is not judged to have a Substantial

Confidence rating, the next lowest priced technically acceptable offeror will be evaluated and the process will continue in order by price until an offeror is judged to have a Substantial Confidence rating or until all offerors are evaluated. The Source Selection Authority shall then make an integrated assessment to render the best value award decision.

(End of Addendum)