Solicitation Amendment FA441725R00120004 SF 30.pdf

R

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended. is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

Previous edition unusable STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016) Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBE

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

Solicitation/Contract Form

The following modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Response Due Date 25 Apr 2025 03 Jun 2025

Deliveries or Performance

Line Item 0001

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Jun 2025 to 31 Mar 2026 01 Aug 2025 to 31 May 2026

Line Item 0002

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Jun 2025 to 31 Mar 2026 01 Aug 2025 to 31 May 2026

Option Line Item 1001

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2026 to 31 Mar 2027 01 Jun 2026 to 31 May 2027

Option Line Item 1002

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2026 to 31 Mar 2027 01 Jun 2026 to 31 May 2027

Option Line Item 1003

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2026 to 31 Mar 2027 01 Jun 2026 to 31 May 2027

Option Line Item 1004

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2026 to 31 Mar 2027 01 Jun 2026 to 31 May 2027

Option Line Item 1005

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2026 to 31 Mar 2027 01 Jun 2026 to 31 May 2027

Option Line Item 1006

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2026 to 31 Mar 2027 01 Jun 2026 to 31 May 2027

FA441725R00120004

Option Line Item 2001

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2027 to 31 Mar 2028 01 Jun 2027 to 31 May 2028

Option Line Item 2002

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2027 to 31 Mar 2028 01 Jun 2027 to 31 May 2028

Option Line Item 2003

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2027 to 31 Mar 2028 01 Jun 2027 to 31 May 2028

Option Line Item 2004

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2027 to 31 Mar 2028 01 Jun 2027 to 31 May 2028

Option Line Item 2005

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2027 to 31 Mar 2028 01 Jun 2027 to 31 May 2028

Option Line Item 2006

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2027 to 31 Mar 2028 01 Jun 2027 to 31 May 2028

Option Line Item 3001

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2028 to 31 Mar 2029 01 Jun 2028 to 31 May 2029

Option Line Item 3002

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2028 to 31 Mar 2029 01 Jun 2028 to 31 May 2029

Option Line Item 3003

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2028 to 31 Mar 2029 01 Jun 2028 to 31 May 2029

Option Line Item 3004

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2028 to 31 Mar 2029 01 Jun 2028 to 31 May 2029

Option Line Item 3005

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2028 to 31 Mar 2029 01 Jun 2028 to 31 May 2029

Option Line Item 3006

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2028 to 31 Mar 2029 01 Jun 2028 to 31 May 2029

Option Line Item 4001

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2029 to 31 Mar 2030 01 Jun 2029 to 31 May 2030

Option Line Item 4002

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2029 to 31 Mar 2030 01 Jun 2029 to 31 May 2030

Option Line Item 4003

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2029 to 31 Mar 2030 01 Jun 2029 to 31 May 2030

Option Line Item 4004

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2029 to 31 Mar 2030 01 Jun 2029 to 31 May 2030

Option Line Item 4005

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2029 to 31 Mar 2030 01 Jun 2029 to 31 May 2030

Option Line Item 4006

The following Delivery Information modifications were made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Period of Performance 01 Apr 2029 to 31 Mar 2030 01 Jun 2029 to 31 May 2030

Instructions, Conditions, & Notices to Offerors or Quoters

Header Miscellaneous Text (Modified):

Section L - Instructions, Conditions., and Notices to Offerors

1.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS.

1.1.1 The offeror's proposal must include all data and information requested by these Instructions to Offerors and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. The offer shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and solicitation. Non-conformance with the instructions provided in these Instructions to Offerors may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation.

1.1.2 The proposal acceptance period is 120 calendar days past the proposal date of this solicitation.

1.1.3 All referenced documents for this solicitation are available on the SAM.gov website.

1.1.4 The Contracting Officer listed below is the Government's sole point of contact for this acquisition. Written requests for questions or concerns must be sent to the Contracting Officer at the following email address:

Miranda Wiygul - miranda.wiygul.1@us.af.mil

1.1.5 In accordance with FAR Subpart 4.8 (Government Contract Files), the Government will retain copy of all unsuccessful proposals.

1.1.6 The Contracting Officer will promptly notify offerors of any decision to exclude them from the competition, where-upon, offerors may request and receive a debriefing in accordance with FAR 15.505. Excluded offerors may request a pre-award debriefing or they may choose to wait until after the source selection decision to request a post award debriefing. However, excluded offerors are entitled to no more than one debriefing for each proposal. The Contracting Officer will notify unsuccessful offerors of the source selection decision in accordance with FAR 15.503. 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 or15.506, as applicable.

1.1.7 If an offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the offeror shall immediately notify the Contracting Officer in writing with supporting rationale as well as the remedies the offeror is asking the Contracting Officer to consider as related to the claimed omission or error.

1.1.8 The offeror is reminded that the Government intends to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussions.

1.1.9 The Contracting Officer has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition. Upon examination of the initial offers, the Contracting Officer will review this determination and if, in the contracting officer's opinion, adequate price competition exists no additional cost information will be requested and certification under FAR 15.406-2 will not be required. However, if at any time during this competition the contracting officer determines that adequate price competition no longer exists, offerors may be required to submit information to the extent necessary for the contracting officer to determine the reasonableness and affordability of the price.

1.1.10 This solicitation is a set aside to be competed exclusively by 8(a) Program Small Businesses and the State Licensing Authority (SLA) under the Randolph Sheppard Act (20 U.S.C 107, et. seq). At the time of initial contract offer and at time of award, each business must be in the 8(a) Program or a FL State's SLA (see paragraph 1.1.10.1 below). In order to submit an offer on a solicitation, each business concern (with exception of a SLA) in a teaming agreement must be an 8(a) under the designated NAICS size standard, and must also be small when combined in the aggregate of all teaming affiliates.

1.1.10.1 SLA Requirements -In accordance with 34 C.F.R. (S) 395.2 and Florida Statute413.011(3)(f), the FL State's SLA, in coordination with the selected blind vendor and his/her teaming partner, submits one bid on behalf of the state. The SLA proposal must be from an approved blind vendor that was selected by the State of FL's SLA.

2.0 SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS

2.1. Offerors are responsible for submitting proposals(including any revisions, and amendments) to reach the Government office designated in this solicitation by the time specified in this solicitation. Only electronic versions of the proposals will be accepted. Paper copies of proposals will not be evaluated, will be rejected, and will not be considered for award. Proposals may be submitted via DoD Safe.

2.1.1. Contractors may submit proposals electronically to the Government via the DoD SAFE site(https://safe.apps.mil/). If submitting via DoD Safe site, the offeror shall send an email requesting an "Electronic Drop Authorization" to all personnel listed below no later than (NLT) 48 hours prior to proposal due date/time. All documents submitted must be saved in .pdf format and shall follow the instructions in 2.1.4 below. Title of the documents should include the offerors CAGE code (i.e., "Vol 1 Tech Proposal CAGE#").

Miranda Wiygul - miranda.wiygul.1@us.af.mil

Tyler Peterson - tyler_john.peterson@us.af.mil

Benton Medcalf - benton.medcalf@us.af.mil

2.1.2 Any proposal, modification, or revision, that is received at the designated Government office after the exact time specified for receipt of proposals will be "late" and will not be considered unless the Contracting Officer determines the criteria set forth in FAR 15.208 exists.

2.1.3 Proposals shall be complete, clearly presented, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation as detailed in section M Evaluation Factors for Award of this solicitation and for substantiating validity of stated claims. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements but rather provide convincing rationale to clearly demonstrate how the offeror intends to meet these requirements. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of the offeror's facilities and/or experience and will rely heavily on the information presented in the offeror's proposal. Proposals shall be neat, indexed (cross-indexed as appropriate) and assembled electronically in an orderly manner. Elaborate artwork and expensive visual and other presentation aids are neither necessary nor desired. Include only information that is relevant to this source selection.

2.1.4 Organization /Page Limits.

2.1.4.1 A complete proposal shall consist of three (3)volumes: Volume I, Technical Proposal, Subfactor 1, Subfactor 2, and Subfactor3; Volume II (a), Past Performance; Volume II (b), Signed Teaming Agreement (if applicable); and Volume III, Cost/Price Proposal (Executed RFP Documents)/Contractor Responsibility.

Specific guidance regarding the content of each volume will be discussed further below. Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal. When Evaluation Notices (ENs) are necessary, the Government will issue them by electronic means to prospective offerors. Page limitations may be placed on responses to these ENs and such limitations will be provided at the time the EN is issued.

2.1.4.2 Electronic Page Size, Format and Limit.

2.1.4.2.1 An electronic page is defined as each face of an 81/2" X 11" electronic sheet of paper containing information. Page limits apply to all electronic files submitted via DoD SAFE. Pages in excess of the maximum page limits defined below will not be evaluated. For the purposes of formatting, the type of font shall not be less than 12 pitch. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume.

Volume I - Technical Proposal: 40 Page Limit

Subfactor 1 - 20 Page Limit

Subfactor 2 - 10 Page Limit

Subfactor 3 - 10 Page Limit

Volume II (a) - Past Performance: 20 Page Limit

Volume II (b) - Signed Teaming Agreement (required if proposing a teaming agreement): No Page limit

Volume III - Cost/Price Proposal and Contractor Responsibility: No Page Limit

2.1.4.2.2 All pages of each part shall be appropriately numbered and identified with the Request for Proposal (RFP) number.

2.1.4.3 Cost or Pricing Related Data. All cost and/or pricing data shall ONLY be addressed in the Cost/Price Proposal Volume.

2.1.4.4 Indexing. Electronic files should be titled appropriately to easily discern each volume as outlined in 2.1.4.1. Each file shall contain a more detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that file. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections. Indexing is not included in the page limitations.

2.1.4.5 Proposal Acceptance Period. The proposal acceptance period is 120 calendar days past the proposal due date of this solicitation.

3.0 General: The technical proposal shall be prepared in accordance with these instructions and shall be evaluated in accordance with the evaluation criteria and evaluation standards in Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award. Technical proposals shall include necessary information to enable the evaluators to form a definitive conclusion concerning the offeror's ability to perform the requirements outlined in the PWS.

3.1 FACTOR 1, Volume 1- Technical Proposal (Submit one (1)original and one (1) sanitized copy with CAGE code only in place of Company Name). Sanitized copy shall be provided as a separate file name. (i.e., "Subfactor1 Sanitized Tech Proposal CAGE#"). Sanitized copy shall include all subfactors.

3.1.1 SUBFACTOR 1 - Management Plan

3.1.1.1 Management Plan:

Offerors shall submit a Management Plan that clearly demonstrates offerors' understanding of the managing and staffing requirements of the PWS.

The Management Plan shall include an organizational chart that identifies key personnel such as the on-site contract manager, alternate contract manager(s), and all other personnel offerors propose to manage and staff this requirement. The organization chart shall also identify the labor category and number of personnel proposed, and a narrative description for each duty title on the organizational chart.

The Management Plan shall detail how the labor category and number of personnel proposed will meet the guest flow rates identified in paragraphs 1.3.3 of the

PWS.

The Management Plan shall detail how the offeror intends to recruit, retain, and replace sufficient personnel who have the knowledge, experience, and skills to perform Mess Attendant services as required in the PWS.

The Management Plan shall identify how the offeror intends to continue uninterrupted services during personnel absences, such as sickness, vacations, etc.

without any degradation in services provided.

The Management Plan shall identify how personnel will be trained to ensure personnel comply with the sanitation requirements in paragraphs 1.3.5 thru 1.3.5.5 of .the PWS

3.1.2 SUBFACTOR 2 - Transition Schedule

3.1.2.1 Transition Schedule:

Offerors shall provide a Transition Schedule as required in paragraph that contains key milestones that illustrate when offerors intend to manage, 5.3 of the PWS staff, equip, and complete all required tasks within 30 days after contract award and to be able to perform in accordance with the PWS on the first day of the performance period without degradation of services from the previous contract.

3.1.3 SUBFACTOR 3 - Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan

3.1.3.1 Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan:

Offerors shall submit a written plan clearly describing how it will continue to perform the essential contractor services during periods of crisis. The following CLINs are determined essential services that are required during times of crisis:

CLINX001 - Mess Attendant Services @ The RIPTIDE DFAC

CLINX002 - Mess Attendant Services @ The REEF 2 GO

CLINX003 - OCO Contingency Cooks @ RIPTIDE & REEF 2 GO

CLINX004 - Extended Hours @ RIPTIDE DFAC

CLINX005 - Extended Hours @ REEF 2 GO

CLINX006 - Mess Attendant Services Supplies

The offeror shall address all the requirements in DFARS Provision 252.237-7023 Notice of Continuation of Essential Contractor Services(OCT 2010) paragraphs

(b) through (b) (2) (v) and paragraph 5.1 of the PWS.

4.0 FACTOR 2, Volume II - PAST PERFORMANCE Submit one (1)copy. Volume II (a) is limited to 20 pages and Volume II (b) - Signed Teaming Agreement has no page limit. Past Performance Questionnaires and Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluations are not included in the page limitation.

4.1 Volume II (a) - PAST PERFORMANCE - Offerors shall provide no more than 10 adequate past performance information on current or completed contracts (including Federal, State, local government and private) considered most recent and relevant in demonstrating the ability to perform the proposed work as identified within the PWS. Recency is above relevancy.

4.1.1 Provide a summary of the previous contracts described above, not to exceed 2 pages of past performance information per reference. The summary should explain what aspects of each contract are deemed recent and relevant as related to the requirements of this solicitation and in accordance with Section M. Failure to provide required recency description may impact the confidence rating, (i.e. aspects of previous projects should match work elements identified in the solicitation/ PWS). The maximum number of past performance references shall not exceed 10. The summary should not exceed 2 pages per reference (maximum total of 20 pages) and include:

a) Name of project (Contract number, if applicable)

b) Name and address of customer or Government agency

c) Name, telephone, fax number and/or email of customer contact or contracting officer

d) Dollar value

e) Period of performance/Completion date

f) Brief description of work performed, and why the effort is relevant

g) Comments regarding any known performance deemed unacceptable to the customer, or not in accordance with the contract terms and conditions

1) Recency Assessment

An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past three (3) years from the issuance month of this solicitation. Past performance references determined not recent will not be evaluated.

2) Relevancy Assessment

The Government will conduct a relevancy assessment of all past performance references determined to be recent. Considerations will begiven to projects of similar scope and complexity, including joint venture partner(s). In determining relevancy for individual contracts, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the offeror or teaming partner whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated. The past performance questionnaires and information obtained from other sources will be used to establish the degree of relevancy of past performance.

Offerors are required to explain what aspects of each contract are deemed relevant to complexity and magnitude as related to the requirements of this solicitation and in accordance with Section M. Failure to provide required relevancy description may impact the confidence rating, (i.e. aspects of previous projects should match work elements identified in the Solicitation/PWS).

4.1.2 Complete Section A, Contractor Information, of Attachment4, Past/Present Performance Questionnaire and email the questionnaire to all past performance references you provide and instruct them to return the completed questionnaire to the individual(s) indicated in paragraph 4.1.3below. References shall only use the provided questionnaire; altered or substituted questionnaires will not be evaluated. Past Performance Questionnaires will only be accepted electronically by email from Project Owners or their authorized representatives. Past Performance Questionnaires will not be accepted from Prime Contractors, Subcontractors, or Manufacturers. Offerors are responsible to ensure questionnaires are transmitted to their references.

4.1.3 Inform references that they shall return completed questionnaires directly to the emails below not later than the closing date of the solicitation. CPARS reports shall be accepted in lieu of P/P questionnaire. Electronic submissions shall be sent to:

Miranda Wiygul - miranda.wiygul.1@us.af.mil

Tyler Peterson -tyler_john.peterson@us.af.mil

Benton Medcalf - benton.medcalf@us.af.mil

4.1.4Lack of any past performance will not automatically disqualify an offeror. An offeror with no past performance will be given an unknown confidence (neutral)rating per Table 5 of the Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award.

4.1.5 If the offeror claims there is no past performance, then that status must be identified to the contracting officer not later than the date/time proposals are due from all offerors.

4.2 Volume II (b) Signed Teaming Agreement - If Teaming Agreements are contemplated, they must comply with the appropriate Federal Regulations (13 C.F.R.

Part 121 (Size Regulations), Part 124 (8(a) & SDB),Part 125 (Government Contracting Programs), and/or Part 126 (HUBZone). The teaming members shall provide recent and relevant past performance references individually or a part of a previous agreement. The maximum number of references combined shall not exceed 10 total.

4.2.1 The Government will recognize the integrity and validity of formal contractor teaming agreements provided, the agreements are identified and company relationships are fully disclosed in an offer. Failure to provide a teaming agreement with a proposal shall make teaming arrangements and related subcontractor past performance ineligible for evaluation and consideration of award. Teaming Agreements must provide the following information as part of their proposal, Volume II (b), not later than the date/time proposals are due:

4.2.1.1 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.)

4.2.1.2 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.

4.2.1.3 The prime contractor shall remain fully responsible for contract performance, regardless of any teaming agreement between the prime contractor and its subcontractors.

5.0 FACTOR 3, VOLUME III - Price/Cost Proposal. Submit the Standard Form 1449 and all pages originally included in the RFP. Submit one (1)copy.

5.1 Complete blocks 12, 17a, and 30a-c of the SF 1449, Solicitation, Offer, and Award. An authorized official of the firm submitting the offer must sign and date the SF 1449 in block 30a-c. In doing so, the offeror accedes to the contract terms and conditions as written in the RFP.

5.2 Insert prices in Section B for each Contract Line Items Number (CLIN), including all options. All line items Unit Price and Total Amount must be filled in. Total Amount extended price must equal whole dollar unit price multiplied by the number of units. Failure to provide prices for all line items may eliminate an offer from competition.

5.3 Complete representations and certifications in Section K or the System for Award Management (SAM).

5.4 Acknowledgement of all amendments referenced in para1.1.4.

6.0 Relationship between Instructions and Evaluation.

Your attention is directed to the functional relationship between Sections L and M of this solicitation. Section L provides information for the purpose of organizing the proposal and is not intended to be all-inclusive. Section M describes evaluation factors for award. Since the Government evaluation of proposals will cover areas identified in Section M, proposals should address all such areas of evaluation.

7.0 Amendment of Solicitation Prior to Closing.

The Government reserves the right to revise or amend the PWS or the solicitation prior to the proposal closing time. Such revisions or amendments will be communicated by amendments to the solicitation and posted on the SAM.gov website. If such amendments require material changes in quantities or prices, the proposal closing date may be extended to enable offerors to revise their proposals. In such cases, the amendment will include an announcement of the new proposal date and time. Offerors MUST acknowledge all amendments in their proposal (Volume III), either by providing signed copies of the amendments with their proposal, or by separate letter which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers.

8.0 Pre-proposal Conference/Site Visit.

A site visit will be conducted at:

1 SOCONS, 350 Tully Street Bldg 90339, Hurlburt Field, FL

Monday, at 1000 AM CSTMarch 24, 2025

Please submit the names of all attendees (not to exceed two)to Tyler Peterson via e-mail at tyler_john.peterson@us.af.mil by Thursday, March 20, 2025. This information must be provided in advance to ensure access to the military base. A bus will not be provided. Interested parties must drive their privately owned vehicles for transportation during the site visit. All interested parties must obtain a visitor pass from the 1 SOSFS/VCC Visitor Control Center prior to the site visit.

To obtain a visitor pass, you must go into the VCC and sign in via the kiosk at the front. Once you are called, provide the desk operator with the name, "Tyler

(Once all questions are answered, interested Peterson" and they will issue a pass. Please arrive early and plan accordingly to ensure on time arrival to the site visit.

parties will have the opportunity to visit both facilities, the Reef2 Go and the Riptide. The Reef is within walking distance from 1 SOCONS. Interested parties must follow CONS personnel from the Reef 2 Go to the Riptide, this is where the meeting will conclude). Please contact the following personnel for questions regarding this requirement: , Phone: , Tyler Peterson -tyler_john.peterson@us.af.mil, Miranda Wiygul - miranda.wiygul.1@us.af.mil 850-884-3261 Phone: 850-884-2097 and/or Benton Medcalf -benton.medcalf@us.af.mil, Phone: 850-884-6200.

9.0 Questions.

All questions regarding this solicitation must be submitted in writing.

All questions and subsequent answers will be posted to theSAM.gov website. It is the responsibility of the contractor to continuously monitor the site for updates. To mitigate the risks associated with the cancellation of this solicitation due to untimely submission of questions, all questions must be submitted electronically to the individual(s) listed below no later than close of business (28 March 2025). Any questions submitted after this period may not be answered.

Miranda Wiygul - miranda.wiygul.1@us.af.mil

Tyler Peterson - tyler_john.peterson@us.af.mil

Benton Medcalf - benton.medcalf@us.af.mil

Evaluation Factors for Award

Header Miscellaneous Text (Modified):

Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award

1.0 SOURCE SELECTION

1.1 Basis for Contract Award.

This is a best value source selection conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.3, Source Selection, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), the Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DAFFARS). These regulations are available electronically at https://www.acquisition.gov/.

FA441725R00120004

https://www.acquisition.gov/.

1.1.1 In accordance with the Randolph Sheppard Act Arbitration Decision and Award, R - S 17-03, July 2019, and consistent with State of Haw., Dep't of Human Servs. v. U.S. Dep't of Educ., Rehab. Servs., 46 F.4th 1148 (9th Cir. 2022) and Tex. Workforce Comm'n v. U.S. Dep't of Educ., Rehab. Servs., 973 F.3d 383 (5th Cir. 2020), this solicitation is also conducted in accordance with the Randolph Sheppard Act, 20 U.S.C 107, et. seq, (RSA) and its implementing regulations, 34 C.F.R. (S) 395.33 (a) and (b). As such, this solicitation invites the Florida Department of Education, Division of Blind Services, as the state licensing agency (SLA), to respond to this solicitation.

1.1.2 The Best Value technique chosen for this acquisition will be a Performance Price Tradeoff (PPT). The PPT technique permits tradeoffs between price/cost and past performance and includes an evaluation for technical acceptability. Contract award will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements, is considered technically acceptable, and provides the best value to the Government, considering price and past performance, and subject to the requirements of the RSA. The Government seeks to award to the offeror who gives the Air Force the greatest confidence that it will best meet, or exceed, the requirements. This may result in an award to a higher rated, higher priced offeror, where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors, and the Services Acquisition Decision Authority (SADA) reasonably determines that the past performance of the higher price offeror outweighs the cost difference. The SADA will base the source selection decision on an integrated assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria (described below) and in accordance with the solicitation. While the Government source selection evaluation team and the SADA will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature, is subjective; and therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process.

1.1.3 If an award is intended to be made to the SLA proposal for blind vendor operation, the Contracting Officer shall first consult with the Department of Education in order to validate that the galley "operation can be provided at a reasonable cost, with food of a high quality comparable to that currently provided employees." 34

C.F.R. ( 395.33 (a) and (b).S)

1.2 Options.

For price evaluation purposes, only the offerors price will be ranked by adding the total of all Contract Line-Item Numbers (CLINs).

2.0 Evaluation Factors

The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate proposals. Evaluation of proposals will occur using the PPT approach defined in paragraph 1.1.2.

Factor 1: Technical

Subfactor 1: Management Plan

Subfactor 2: Transition Schedule

Subfactor 3: Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan

Factor 2: Past Performance

Factor 3: Cost/Price

2.1 This is a competitive best value fair opportunity selection allowing for a trade-off between Past Performance Confidence and Price. Proposals must be technically acceptable to be awardable. Past performance is considered more important than Price, and the Government may choose to trade past performance for price on technically acceptable proposals.

3.0. Technical Evaluation Factor

Offers will be evaluated for technical acceptability. Only those offerors determined to be technically acceptable will be considered for further evaluation. The rating assigned to this factor will be based on the offeror's technical volume. The validity and thoroughness of the offeror's technical volume 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 entire technical volume unacceptable.

3.1. Evaluators shall assign a rating, which falls within one of the following definitions according to the degree with which the offeror's technical proposal meets the minimum requirement described below:

3.1.1. Acceptable: Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

3.1.2. Unacceptable: Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

3.2. Subfactor 1 - Management Plan. The Management Plan will be rated acceptable if it meets all the requirements of paragraphs 3.2.1. through 3.2.5. below.

3.2.1. The Management Plan clearly demonstrates a reasonable approach to managing and staffing the contract based on the requirements of the PWS. The plan shall include an organizational chart that identifies key personnel such as the on-site contract manager and alternate contract manager(s), and all other personnel the offeror proposes to manage and staff this requirement. The organization chart shall also identify the labor category and number of personnel proposed, and a narrative description for each duty title on the organizational chart.

3.2.2. The Management Plan details a reasonable approach of how the labor category and number of personnel proposed will meet the guest flow rates identified in paragraphs 1.3.3, and 1.3.9 of the PWS.

3.2.3. The Management Plan details how the offeror intends to recruit, retain, and replace sufficient personnel who have the knowledge, experience, and skills to perform Mess Attendant services as required in the PWS.

3.2.4. The Management Plan identifies how the offeror intends to continue uninterrupted services during personnel absences, such as sickness, vacations, etc.

without any degradation in services provided.

3.2.5. The Management Plan identifies how personnel will be trained to ensure personnel comply with the sanitation requirements in paragraphs 1.3.5 through

1.3.5.5 of the PWS.

3.3. Subfactor 2 - Transition Schedule. The Transition Schedule will be rated acceptable if it contains reasonable key milestones that illustrate when offerors intend to manage, staff, equip, and complete all required tasks within 30 days of contract award and be able to perform in accordance with the PWS on the first day of the performance period without degradation of services from the previous contract.

3.4. Subfactor 3 - Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan. The Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan will be rated acceptable if it meets the requirements of paragraphs 3.4.1. and 3.4.2. below.

3.4.1. The Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan demonstrates a reasonable approach to how the offeror will continue to perform the below essential contractor services during periods of crisis. CLIN X001 - Mess Attendant Services @ The RIPTIDE DFAC, CLIN X002 - Mess Attendant Services @ The REEF 2 GO, CLIN X003 - OCO Contingency Cooks @ RIPTIDE & REEF 2 GO, CLIN X004 - Extended Hours @ RIPTIDE DFAC , CLIN X005 - Extended Hours @ REEF 2 GO, CLIN X006 - Mess Attendant Services Supplies

3.4.2. The Mission Essential Contractor Services plan addresses all the requirements in DFARS Provision 252.237-7023 Notice of Continuation of Essential Contractor Services (OCT 2010) paragraphs (b) through (b)(2)(v) and paragraph 5.1 of the PWS.

4.0. Past Performance Factor

The Past Performance evaluation will result in an overall performance confidence assessment as defined below. This performance confidence assessment represents the Government evaluation team's judgment of the probability of an offeror successfully accomplishing the proposed effort based on the offeror's demonstrated past and present performance. The performance confidence assessments are defined as follows:

TABLE 5- PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS

Rating Description

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.

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.

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. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

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.

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.

4.1. Past/Present Performance Questionnaires and Past Performance Questionnaires and Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) Submissions. Offerors shall provide information regarding past or current contracts (including Federal, State, local government, and private) for efforts similar to the Government requirement as stated in this solicitation through either questionnaires or evaluations from CPARS as identified in Section L, paragraph 4.1.2 and 4.1.3.

4.1.1 The Government may evaluate information on problems identified and encountered on previous contracts and corrective actions taken by the offeror. The Government may use information previously obtained from past performance questionnaires or data independently obtained from other Government and commercial sources in the evaluation process.

4.1.2 In the event an Offeror submits a Past Performance Questionnaire, and it is subsequently determined that the referenced project has been formally evaluated in CPARS, the ratings in CPARS shall take precedence.

4.1.3 In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the offeror shall be rated as "Unknown Confidence (Neutral)".

4.1.4 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. Offerors may be asked to clarify or respond to adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond.

4.2 Past Performance Evaluation Process. The past performance evaluation considers each offeror's demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract's requirements. Performance confidence is assessed at the overall Past Performance factor level after evaluating aspects of the offeror's recent past performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the Technical factors and Cost/Price factor. 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 Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases;

interviews with Program Managers and Contracting Officers; the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), and commercial sources.

4.2.1 Recency Assessment

An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past three (3) years from the issuance month of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated.

4.2.2 Relevancy Assessment

The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all recent performance information obtained to determine how closely the products provided/services performed under those contracts relate to the Technical factors and Cost/Price factor. Consideration will be given to projects involving the type of services described in the attached PWS. Relevant past performance information must demonstrate experience involving the type of service described in the attached solicitations PWS. A relevancy determination of the offeror's past performance will be made based upon the aforementioned considerations, including joint venture partner(s). In determining relevancy for individual contracts, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the offeror or teaming partner whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated. The past performance questionnaires and information obtained from other sources will be used to establish the degree of relevancy of past performance. A relevancy determination of the offeror's past performance will be made based upon the aforementioned considerations, including joint venture partner(s). In determining relevancy for individual contracts, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the offeror or teaming partner whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated. The past performance questionnaires and information obtained from other sources will be used to establish the degree of relevancy of past performance. The Government will use the following relevancy definitions when assessing recent contracts:

Rating Definition

VERY RELEVANT - Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

(1) Served at least 15,000 meals each month and

(2) Provided cooks in accordance with paragraph 1.4 of the PWS

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

(1) Served at least 13,000 meals each month and

(2) Provided cooks in accordance with paragraph 1.4 of the PWS

SOMEWHAT RELEVANT - Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

(1) Served at least 10,000 meals each month and

(2) Provided cooks in accordance with paragraph 1.4 of the PWS

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

(1) Served less than 10,000 meals each month or

(2) Did not Provide cooks in accordance with paragraph 1.4 of the PWS

4.2.3 Quality of Performance. All recent past performance that is determined to be somewhat relevant, relevant, or very relevant will be reviewed to determine the quality of the offeror's performance, general trends, and the usefulness of the performance. This information will be used by the evaluation team in determining the overall performance confidence assessment rating.

4.2.4 Assigning Ratings. As a result of the relevancy and quality of the performance of the recent contracts evaluated, offerors will receive an integrated performance confidence assessment rating. Although the past performance evaluation focuses on performance that is relevant to the technical factors and cost/ price factor, the resulting performance confidence assessment rating is made at the factor level and represents an overall evaluation of contractor performance.

Offerors without a record of recent/relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and, as a result, will receive an "Unknown Confidence" rating for the Past Performance factor.

More recent performance will have a greater impact on the Performance Confidence Assessment than less recent effort. A strong record of relevant past performance may be considered more advantageous to the Government than an "Unknown Confidence" rating. Likewise, a more relevant past performance record may receive a higher confidence rating and be considered more favorably than a less relevant record of favorable performance.

Past performance regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement will not be considered as highly as past performance information for the principal offeror.

4.2.5 If a Teaming Agreement is submitted as part of the proposal as outlined in Section L para 4.2, each teaming offeror's past performance will be evaluated separately using the same evaluation methods described above. The Prime Contractor's past performance will be weighted slightly more than equal based on their overall responsibility for contract management. The separate ratings of each party in the Teaming Agreement will be combined to determine an aggregate PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT CONFIDENCE RATING as defined in Table 5 of Section M.

5.0 Cost or Price Factor

The offeror's Cost/Price proposal will be evaluated to determine if it is complete, fair and reasonable, and no unbalanced pricing exists. Offers whose price is determined to be incomplete or unreasonable will not be considered for award. Additionally, an offer may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines unbalanced pricing poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

Offerors' total evaluated price (TEP) will be used for evaluation of the price proposal. The TEP will be calculated as follows: TEP = Base Period (CLINS 0001- 0006) + Option Period 1 (CLINS 1001 - 1006) + Option Period 2 (CLINS 2001 - 2006) + Option Period 3 (CLINS 3001 - 3006) + Option Period 4 (CLINS 4001 - 4006) + Option to Extend Services IAW FAR 52.217-8.

Quantities identified will be multiplied by the unit price to confirm the extended price and then the extended price for each CLIN will be added together for a total for that specific period. It is important for offerors to verify their extended pricing is accurate and to have complete unit prices and exact total amounts. Unit prices shall be used in the event that extended prices are calculated incorrectly on the proposal. Unit Prices shall be rounded off to two decimal points.

Total Evaluated Price for Option to Extend Services IAW FAR 52.217-8. The Government reserves the right to extend services for an additional six (6) month extension period, in accordance with FAR 52.217-8. Offerors shall not submit pricing for the six (6) month extension period. TEP for 52.217-8 will be calculated as follows: TEP for FAR 52.217-8 = (CLIN 4001 unit price x quantity 6) + (CLIN 4002 unit price x quantity 6) + (CLIN 4003 unit price x quantity 2,880) + (CLIN 4004 unit price x quantity 2.5) + (CLIN 4005 unit price x quantity 2.5) + (CLIN 4006 unit price x quantity 6). The TEP for the 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services six-month extension is included in the TEP for evaluation purposes only.