FA481418R0006P0002.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to incorporate changes brought about in the final Q&A round and to add Clause 52.204-23

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 8

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 23-Jul-2018

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X FA481418R0006

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

22-Jun-2018

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

Offer 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 telegram 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 telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter 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 NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, 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.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

23-Jul-2018

CODE

6TH CONTRACTING SQ

2610 PINK FLAMINGO AVE

MACDILL AFB FL 33621-5119

FA4814 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL: (813) 828-7483 ramon.jimenez.7@us.af.mil

FA481418R0006

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The delivery order minimum quantity has increased by 11.00 from 1.00 to 12.00.

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

Global Changes

CLIN 0001 -- CLIN 0010

The IDIQ minimum order quantity has increased by 11.00 from 1.00 to 12.00.

The following have been added by reference:

52.204-23

The following have been modified:

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

1. The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

a. Price

b. Technical Approach

c. Past Performance

Past Performance and Technical when combined are significantly more important than cost or price.

2. Basis for Contract Award:

a. This solicitation is conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 12, Acquisition of Commercial Items in conjunction with the policies and procedures for solicitation, evaluation and award prescribed in Part 13, Simplified Acquisition Procedures; and/or Part 15, Contracting by Negotiation, as appropriate for the particular acquisition. The solicitation is further supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), and the Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFFARS). These regulations are available electronically at the Air Force (AF) FARSite, http://farsite.hill.af.mil.

b. A contract may be awarded to the lowest priced offeror whose offer conforms to the solicitation (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by Addendum to 52.212-1), receives an “Acceptable” Technical Approach rating and receives a

“Substantial Confidence” Past Performance rating, if it offers the best value to the government. Failure to provide a complete offer conforming to the entire solicitation (i.e. 52.212-1, 52.212-2, Applicable Addendums & contract provisions/clauses) will result in that offeror not being eligible for award.

3. Number of Contracts to be Awarded:

The Government intends to award one (1) contract as a result of this solicitation; however, the Government reserves the right to award separate contracts, if this represents the best value to the Government.

4. Evaluation Process

a. First, the Government will arrange all proposals conforming to the solicitation by Total Evaluated Price (TEP) from lowest to highest and evaluate prices in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(b)(2). On the Attachment #2 Bid Schedule, in the highlighted “Unit Price per Month” column, the contractor shall provide the price of the respective CLIN for 1.0 month. In the highlighted “Max Total $” column, the contractor shall provide the price of the respective CLIN for 36.0 months. The Total Evaluated Price, TEP, is the “Max Total $” column added together.

b. Secondly, the Government will evaluate the Technical Approach of the lowest priced offeror and assign a rating of either “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable”. If the lowest priced offeror receives a Technical Approach rating of “Unacceptable”, the Government evaluation team will evaluate the next eligible offeror (in order by price) until an “Acceptable” rating is achieved or until all offerors are evaluated. As part of an offerors Technical Approach, each Sub factor must be individually responded to.

Responses must demonstrate a clear understanding of the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and provide clear evidence of an ability to comply. A failure to address all sub factors and/or provide clear evidence will result in that offeror being determined non-responsive and remove them from consideration. The Government shall evaluate an offerors Technical Approach using the ratings identified in Table 1.

Table 1 – TECHNICAL APPROACH RATINGS Rating

Description

ACCEPTABLE

Offeror’s has provided clear evidence that they meet the requirements of Sub Factors 1-4 and the Government has an expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

UNACCEPTABLE

Offeror’s has not provided clear evidence that they meet the requirements of Sub Factors 1-4 and the Government does not have an expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

c. Once a technically acceptable proposal is found the selection process will move to past performance; if the past performance is rated as “Substantial Confidence” award will be made; if a lower than “Substantial Confidence” past performance rating is assigned, the evaluation team will review the next lowest priced, technically acceptable proposal and the process will restart until a proposal with a past performance rating of “Substantial Confidence” is found. Once a proposal with “Substantial Confidence” is identified, evaluation of proposals stops. No further consideration will be given to the remaining higher priced proposals. At this point a tradeoff analysis between price and performance confidence will be conducted and the Government will make a determination as to the best value to the Government. If no contractor’s past performance is rated “Substantial Confidence” the Government reserves the right to award to a lower confidence rated contractor after a tradeoff analysis between price and performance confidence is conducted and the Government will make a determination as to the best value to the Government.

(1) The government will evaluate the quality and extent of offeror’s past performance deemed relevant to the requirements of the PWS. The evaluation of past performance information will take into account past performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel (if applicable) who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to this acquisition. The Government shall evaluate an offerors Past Performance using the ratings identified in Table 2.

Table 2 – Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Method

Adjectival Rating

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.

Neutral Confidence

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.

(2) The Government will use the following recency and relevancy definitions when assessing recent and relevant contracts:

(a) 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 five (5) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Any single reference that fails this condition may be deemed to be “Not Recent” and may result in a Past Performance rating lower than “Substantial Confidence”.

(b) Relevancy Assessment: As described in Table 3 below, the Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all recent performance information obtained to determine how closely the provided products/services performed under those contracts relate to the Performance Work Statement.

Each reference will be assigned a rating IAW Table 3. Common aspects of relevancy include, but are not limited to, the following: similarity of product/service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, use of key personnel (for services), and extent of subcontracting/teaming. A cumulative relevancy determination of the offeror’s past performance will be made based upon the aforementioned considerations, including joint venture partner(s) and major and critical subcontractor(s). In determining relevancy for individual references, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the offeror, teaming partner, or subcontractor whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated. Past performance information deemed “Not Relevant” may result in a lower than “Substantial Confidence” past performance rating.

Table 3 – Past Performance Relevancy Rating Method

Adjectival Rating

Very Relevant

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

Relevant

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

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

(c) In conducting the Past Performance evaluation, the Government reserves the right to use both the information provided in the offeror’s Past Performance volume and information obtained from other sources available to the Government, 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; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers and Fee Determining Officials; the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), and commercial sources. Negative performance revealed as a result of sources above may result in a past performance rating lower than, “Substantial Confidence”.

5. Evaluation Factors & Sub Factors

a. Factor One, Price (Volume I): For the purpose of evaluation the Government will evaluate an Offerors proposed price utilizing one or more of the techniques located at FAR 15.404- 1(b)(2). Proposed prices shall be fully burdened inclusive of all direct and indirect costs (e.g., profit, fringe benefits, salary, and indirect rates.) An offeror’s Total Evaluated Price will be determined by adding (CLINs 0001-0010).

As part of an offerors pricing volume, you are required to provide a completed Bid Schedule provided as attachment #2. Failure to provide a completed bid schedule with the TEP will result in that offeror being determined non-responsive and remove them from consideration.

b. Factor Two, Technical Approach (Volume II): The purpose of the technical factor(s) is to assess the offeror’s proposed approach, as detailed in its proposal, to satisfy the Government’s requirements.

(1) Sub Factor 1, Capability Statement: Offeror shall provide a capability statement detailing their understanding and ability to meet all technical core requirements and performance standards in the PWS. This sub factor is met when the offeror provides a capability statement reflecting an understanding of PWS Sections 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, 4.5, 4.5.1, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0–7.4, 8.0, 9.2.1, 9.8–9.8.4,

9.11 and Appendix A-C. Do not just regurgitate the PWS. Offerors who repeat the PWS will be deemed to have a lack of understanding and comprehension. Failure to identify each section listed above will result in an “Unacceptable” Technical Approach rating and that offeror will not be considered for award.

(2) Sub Factor 2, Staffing Plan: Offeror shall provide a detailed and effective staffing plan containing a personnel matrix which identifies the personnel resources to perform the PWS tasks.

The plan shall provide a logical approach that ensures timely support and shall specifically address the following requirement: The identification of “key personnel” and the requisite educational and experience level showing the individuals’ ability to comply with the minimum requirements of the PWS (subtasks 4.1 through 4.4) through the use of acceptable formats, such as sample resumes and/or qualification summaries. Any deviation from the Government provided estimated workload, Appendix B in the PWS, must be identified in the staffing plan. In addition, if a deviation does occur, the offeror must specifically address their plan to accomplish the workload with their offered workload days. This sub factor is met when the offeror provides a detailed plan with the use of acceptable formats, such as sample resumes and/or qualification summaries, demonstrating a clear understanding of all staffing you will be required to provide in support of this contract. Each organization (50 ARS, 91 ARS, 99 ARS) operates independently from one another. Cross-utilization of manpower and/or failure to identify a complete understanding of the staffing required will result in an “Unacceptable” Technical Approach rating and that offeror will not be considered for award.

(3) Sub Factor 3, Quality Control/Recruitment Plan: Offeror shall provide a detailed plan presenting what quality control/recruitment methods offeror will have in place to ensure you continue to meet all PWS requirements. The plan shall provide a logical approach that ensures timely support and shall specifically address the following requirement: The identification of how the offeror will continue services during personnel turnover. If the original personnel are terminated or resign, how will the staffing plan be adjusted to recruit new personnel to keep quality control of the contract? The plan must include the degree to which and the manner in which your organization effectively recruits qualified personnel. The plan must demonstrate your ability to retain valuable contract employees to prevent the negative impact of frequent turnover to include: Recruiting and retention procedures, promotion policy, termination policy, and risk mitigation efforts and how they will mitigate risk associated with award of the contract. This sub factor is met when the offeror provides a detailed narrative demonstrating a clear understanding of the quality control/recruitment you will be required to provide in ongoing support of this contract.

Failure to identify a complete understanding of the ongoing quality control/recruitment required will result in an “Unacceptable” Technical Approach rating and that offeror will not be considered for award.

(4) Sub Factor 4, Compensation Plan: Offeror shall submit a total compensation plan setting forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the contract. The Government will evaluate the plan to assure that it reflects a sound management approach and understanding of the contract requirements. This evaluation will include an assessment of the offeror’s ability to provide uninterrupted high-quality work. The professional compensation proposed will be considered in terms of its impact upon recruiting and retention, its realism, and its consistency with a total plan for compensation. The compensation levels proposed should reflect a clear understanding of work to be performed and should indicate the capability of the proposed compensation structure to obtain and keep suitably qualified personnel to meet mission objectives. Professional compensation that is unrealistically low or not in reasonable relationship to the various job categories, since it may impair the Contractor’s ability to attract and retain competent professional service employees, may be viewed as evidence of failure to comprehend the complexity of the contract requirements. This sub factor is met when the offeror provides a detailed narrative demonstrating a clear understanding of the total compensation of professional services you will be required to provide in support of this contract. Failure to identify a complete compensation plan will result in an “Unacceptable” Technical Approach rating and that offeror will not be considered for award.

c. Factor Three, Past Performance (Volume III): The past performance evaluation factor assesses the degree of confidence the Government has in an offeror’s ability to supply services that meets users’ needs, based on a demonstrated record of performance. Offerors must provide (as part of Volume III) a list (references) of no more than three (3) of their the most recent and relevant contracts performed for Federal agencies and commercial customers (only the first three references found in Volume III will be evaluated).

All submissions will be evaluated cumulatively.

Offerors must furnish the following information for each reference provided:

- Company/Division name

- Product/Service

- Contracting Agency/Customer

- Contract Number

- Contract Dollar Value

- Period of Performance

- Verified, up-to-date name, address, telephone number and email address of the contracting officer or any representative able to validate performance history

- Summary of services provided and a description of how closely the provided services performed under those contracts relate to the Performance Work Statement

- Comments regarding compliance with contract terms and conditions

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

Offerors whom do not provide references due to a lack of relevant past performance must identify such in writing as part of Volume III. Offerors lacking relevant past performance will be assigned a rating of “Neutral Confidence” IAW ratings identified in Table # 2. However, a “Substantial Confidence” and “Satisfactory Confidence” will be rated higher than a “Neutral Confidence”.

6. A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer's specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

(End of provision)

52.216-19 ORDER LIMITATIONS (OCT 1995)

(a) Minimum order. When the Government requires supplies or services covered by this contract in an amount of less than 12 months, the Government is not obligated to purchase, nor is the Contractor obligated to furnish, those supplies or services under the contract.

(b) Maximum order. The Contractor is not obligated to honor -

(1) Any order for a single item in excess of 12 months;

(2) Any order for a combination of items in excess of 120 months; or

(3) A series of orders from the same ordering office within 3 days that together call for quantities exceeding the limitation in paragraph (b) (1) or (2) of this section.

(c) If this is a requirements contract (i.e., includes the Requirements clause at subsection 52.216-21 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)), the Government is not required to order a part of any one requirement from the Contractor if that requirement exceeds the maximum-order limitations in paragraph (b) of this section.

(d) Notwithstanding paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, the Contractor shall honor any order exceeding the maximum order limitations in paragraph (b), unless that order (or orders) is returned to the ordering office within 3 days after issuance, with written notice stating the Contractor's intent not to ship the item (or items) called for and the reasons. Upon receiving this notice, the Government may acquire the supplies or services from another source.

(End of clause)

(End of Summary of Changes)