FA4486-08-T-0003-0004.doc

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 18-Aug-2008 04:00 PM to 21-Aug-2008 12:00 PM.

The following have been modified:

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2

ADDENDUM to FAR 52.212-2 EVALUATION - COMMERCIAL ITEMS (JAN 1999)

BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD: “Best Value”, Price Performance Tradeoff (PPT) source selection. This is a competitive selection in which competing offerors technical qualifications and and price will be evaluated on a basis approximately equal to past performance. By submission of its offer in accordance with the instructions provided in clause FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors, the offeror accedes to the terms of this model contract and all such offers shall be treated equally. By submission of its offer, the offeror agrees to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being determined technically unacceptable. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. The evaluation process shall proceed as follows:

A. Price Evaluation. Initially, offers shall be ranked according to price, including option prices. An offeror’s proposed prices will be determined by multiplying the quantities identified in the Pricing Schedule by the unit price for each Contract Line Item Number to confirm the extended amount for each. Prices will be considered complete when the offeror has proposed Firm Fixed Prices for all CLINS.

B. Technical Acceptability. Next, the government technical evaluation team shall evaluate the technical proposals submitted on a pass/fail basis, assigning a rating of Acceptable or Unacceptable. The proposals shall be evaluated against the following subfactor:

1. SUBFACTOR 1 – Certification: The contractor’s employees shall be security certified for Portugal. The following documents are required:

i. Insurance of Civil Responsibility

ii. Respective licenses demanded by Portuguese law

C. Past Performance Evaluation: Using questionnaires, the contracting officer shall seek relevant performance information based on (1) the references provided by the offeror and (2) data independently obtained from other government and commercial sources. Relevant performance includes performance of efforts involving Security services that are similar or greater in scope, magnitude and complexity than the effort described in this solicitation. The government reserves the right to seek information on higher priced offerors if none of the lower priced offerors receive a “Substantial Confidence” or HIGHER performance assessment rating. The purpose of the past performance evaluation is to allow the government to assess the offeror’s ability to perform the effort described in the solicitation, based on the offeror’s demonstrated present and past performance. The assessment process will result in an overall performance confidence assessment rating of Substantial Confidence, Satisfactory Confidence, Unknown Confidence, Little Confidence, or No Confidence, as defined in AFFARS MP5315.3, Table 3.

The government will evaluate each offeror’s past performance information provided. Each offeror will then be assigned an overall Performance Confidence rating. In conducting a performance confidence assessment, each offeror shall be assigned one of the ratings listed in the table below.

AFFARS MP5315.3 TABLE 3- PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS

NO

CONFIDENCE

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

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. Offerors with no relevant past or present performance history shall receive the rating “Unknown Confidence”, meaning the rating is treated neither favorably nor unfavorably.

D. In evaluating past performance, the government reserves the right to give greater consideration to information on those contracts deemed most relevant to the effort described in this solicitation.

E. Using responses to the past performance questionnaires included in the attachment titled, “Past Performance Questionnaire”, references provided by the offeror, and data independently obtained from other Government and commercial sources, the Government will evaluate past performance information. The Government will consider Relevancy, Recency, the Extent of the past performance, size and complexity of the past performance relative to this RFP. The Government will focus on the following subfactors of equal importance:

1. SUBFACTOR 1 – Quality: The Government will evaluate the contractor’s level of conformance to contract requirements, specifications and standards of good workmanship.

2. SUBFACTOR 2 – Management: The Government will evaluate the contractor’s integration and coordination of all activities to execute the contract, especially focusing on management of staffing, equipment, supplies and records

F. The Government may also consider the following awards/recognitions in the Government’s evaluation of an offeror’s past performance to help differentiate between two or more offerors or to provide additional guidance in deciding a descriptive Performance Confidence Assessment (i.e., “Substantial Confidence” or “Significant Confidence”) for a specific offeror if there is a question as to which adjective is most appropriate:

i. Professional / Industry Awards

ii. Letters of appreciation, recognition or commendation

iii. Unique skills and accomplishments

Note: The evaluation will be based on, but not limited to the contractor’s RELEVANT present and past performance questionnaires.

G. Offerors are cautioned to submit sufficient information and in the format specified in the proposal preparation instructions. Offerors may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal or respond to adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond. Adverse past performance is defined as past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation element or any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system. Communication conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute discussions and the contracting officer reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for proposal revision.

H. The government intends to award a contract without discussions with respective offerors. The government, however, reserves the right to conduct discussions if deemed in its best interest.

(End of Summary of Changes)