FA4819-13-R-0005_-_Mess_Attendant_RFP-Solicitation.doc

Section SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

Mess Attendant Food Service

FFP

Base Year CLIN - Mess Attendant Services for Tyndall AFB, FL, In Accordance With (IAW) the attached Performance Work Statement (PWS) (Attachment 1).

FOB: Destination

PURCHASE REQUEST NUMBER: F4A3783064A001

SIGNAL CODE: A

NET AMT

Food Service Contractors

Minor/Major Maintenance & Repair

Base Year CLIN - Reimbursables for Minor/Major Maintenance & Repair for Mess Attendant Services at Tyndall AFB, FL, IAW Paragraphs 4.18 through 4.18.7 of the attached PWS (Attachment 1).

FOB: Destination

NET AMT

Contingency/Emergency Events

Base Year CLIN - Contingency/Emergency Events/Extended Service Hours for Mess Attendant Services at Tyndall AFB, FL, IAW Paragraphs 6.3 - 6.3.4.8 of the attached PWS (Attachment 1).

FOB: Destination

NET AMT

FFP

First Option Year CLIN - Mess Attendant Services for Tyndall AFB, FL, In Accordance With (IAW) the attached Performance Work Statement (PWS) (Attachment 1).

FOB: Destination

NET AMT

FFP

First Option Year CLIN - Reimbursables for Minor/Major Maintenance & Repair for Mess Attendant Services at Tyndall AFB, FL, IAW Paragraphs 4.18 through 4.18.7 of the attached PWS (Attachment 1).

NET AMT

FFP

First Option Year CLIN - Contingency/Emergency Events/Extended Service Hours for Mess Attendant Services at Tyndall AFB, FL, IAW Paragraphs 6.3 - 6.3.4.8 of the attached PWS (Attachment 1).

NET AMT

FFP

Second Option Year CLIN - Mess Attendant Services for Tyndall AFB, FL, In Accordance With (IAW) the attached Performance Work Statement (PWS) (Attachment 1).

NET AMT

FFP

Second Option Year CLIN - Reimbursables for Minor/Major Maintenance & Repair for Mess Attendant Services at Tyndall AFB, FL, IAW Paragraphs 4.18 through 4.18.7 of the attached PWS (Attachment 1).

NET AMT

FFP

Second Option Year CLIN - Contingency/Emergency Events/Extended Service Hours for Mess Attendant Services at Tyndall AFB, FL, IAW Paragraphs 6.3 - 6.3.4.8 of the attached PWS (Attachment 1).

NET AMT

FFP

Third & Final Option Year CLIN - Mess Attendant Services for Tyndall AFB, FL, In Accordance With (IAW) the attached Performance Work Statement (PWS) (Attachment 1).

NET AMT

FFP

Third & Final Option Year CLIN - Reimbursables for Minor/Major Maintenance & Repair for Mess Attendant Services at Tyndall AFB, FL, IAW Paragraphs 4.18 through 4.18.7 of the attached PWS (Attachment 1).

NET AMT

FFP

Third & Final Option Year CLIN - Contingency/Emergency Events/Extended Service Hours for Mess Attendant Services at Tyndall AFB, FL, IAW Paragraphs 6.3 - 6.3.4.8 of the attached PWS (Attachment 1).

NET AMT

INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE TERMS

Supplies/services will be inspected/accepted at:

DELIVERY INFORMATION

29-SEP-2014

CINDY HOBBS

298 MINNESOTA AVENUE, BLDG. 1690

TYNDALL AFB FL 32403

283-2207

F4A378

29-SEP-2014

F4A378

29-SEP-2014

F4A378

29-SEP-2015

F4A378

29-SEP-2015

F4A378

29-SEP-2015

F4A378

29-SEP-2016

F4A378

29-SEP-2016

F4A378

29-SEP-2016

F4A378

29-SEP-2017

F4A378

29-SEP-2017

F4A378

29-SEP-2017

F4A378

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1

1. GENERAL INFORMATION

A. INFORMATION REGARDING SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL: Proposals shall be submitted no later than the date and time in Block 8 of the SF 1449. If amendments are issued, they must be acknowledged in writing prior to the due date. Proposals must be sealed and must show the time and date specified for receipt, the solicitation number, and the name and address of the Offeror. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to confirm receipt of correspondence. Offerors should submit proposals to the address listed below:

(1) 325th Contracting Squadron/LGCA Attn: TSgt Brian Swanson/SrA Benjamin Nieto 501 Illinois Ave., Ste. 5

Tyndall AFB, FL 32403-5526

(2) TELEGRAPHIC OR FACSIMILE PROPOSALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

(3) Hand carrying proposals: Offerors are cautioned that Tyndall AFB, FL has visitor control procedures requiring individuals not affiliated with the installation to obtain a visitor pass prior to entrance. Some delay should be anticipated when hand carrying proposals. Offerors should allow for sufficient time to obtain a visitor pass and arrive at the 325th Contracting Squadron PRIOR to the time specified for receipt of proposals. Late proposals will be processed in accordance with FAR 52.212-1(f) “Late submission, modifications, revisions, and withdrawals of offers.”

(4) Period for Acceptance of Offers: The offeror agrees to hold the prices in its offer firm for 120 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of offers.

B. JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENTS: Joint Ventures are allowable with competitive 8(a) set-asides; however, the joint venture agreement must be received by the assigned Small Business Administration (SBA) prior to the proposal due date and approved before award of any resulting contract. If you are contemplating a joint venture on this project, you must advise your assigned SBA Business Opportunity Specialist (BOS) as soon as possible. It is also recommended that the agreement be submitted as soon as practicable to ensure compliance with established regulations. Any corrections and/or changes needed can be made only when your BOS has adequate time for a thorough review before the proposal due date. No corrections and/or changes are allowed after the due date/time of submission of proposals.

C. SITE VISIT: There will be a site visit held on 3 October 2013 at 09:00AM Central Standard Time (CST) which will provide a firsthand view of the dining facilities for all potential offerors and to ask questions as necessary. Contractors will need to coordinate with TSgt Brian E. Swanson at 850-283-8617 or by e-mail at brian.swanson.3@us.af.mil to confirm attendance no later than 27 September 2013 at 12:00PM CST. The Government will not guarantee attendance for anyone who fails to register for the site visit by that time. Contractors will be allowed to have a total party of two (2) persons each. The following information must be submitted to be cleared to attend the site visit:

(1) Prefix (Mr., Mrs., Ms., Dr.):

(2) First name:

(3) Last name:

(4) Company Organization:

(5) E-mail address:

(6) Position/Title:

(7) Address (Street, City, State, & Zip Code):

All questions resulting from the site visit must be submitted in writing to TSgt Swanson at the aforementioned e-mail address no later than 8 October 2013 at 4:30pm CST. Answers to questions will be posted no later than 11 October 2013. No reimbursements will be made by the Government for site visit travel teams.

D. DISCREPANCIES: 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 (CO) in writing with supporting rationale as well as remedies the Offeror is asking the CO to consider as related to the perceived omission or error. The Offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussions in accordance with FAR 52.212-1(g).

E. EXCEPTIONS TO TERMS AND CONDITIONS: Exceptions taken to terms and conditions of the Request for Proposal (RFP), to any of its formal attachments, or to other parts of the solicitation shall be identified to the CO as soon as they are identified and prior to the proposal due date. Each exception shall be specifically related to a paragraph and/or specific part of the solicitation to which the exception is taken. Provide rationale in support of the exception and fully explain its impact, if any, on the performance, schedule, cost, and specific requirements of the solicitation. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the Offeror being removed from consideration for award.

2. PROPOSAL PREPARATION- To assure timely and equitable evaluation of the proposal, the offeror must follow the instructions contained herein. 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 or subfactors. Non-conformance with these instructions may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award.

A. The proposal shall be clear, concise and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirement, but rather shall provide facts and convincing rationale addressing how the Offeror intends to meet these requirements. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities and experience, and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Offeror’s proposal.

B. Offerors shall prepare their proposal as set forth in Table 1 below. Proposals shall be submitted in the number of hard copies specified and one compact disc with electronic files. The titles and contents are defined in Table 1 of this document, all of which shall be within the required page limits and with the number of copies as specified in the table. The contents of each proposal are described in the table below and the paragraphs that follow it. In the event that this table conflicts with the detailed instructions in the paragraphs that follow, the detailed instructions shall take precedence.

C. The response shall consist of four (4) separate volumes; Volume I – Executive Summary, Volume II – Technical Capability, Volume III – Price Proposal, and Volume IV – Past Performance Information.

Table 1 – Proposal Organization

Tab 1 – Master Table of Contents

Tab 2 – Narrative & Authorized Offeror Personnel

Tab 3 – Proof of Financial Responsibility

Tab 4 – 8(a) Joint Venture Certifications (if any)

Tab 5 – SF1449 & All Amendments

Tab 6 – Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

None

5*

None

None

None

Tab 1 – Table of Contents

Tab 2 – Staffing Plan

Tab 3 – Security Requirements

Tab 4 – Quality Control Plan

Tab 5 – Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

Tab 1 – Table of Contents

Tab 2 – SF1449

Tab 3 – Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

Tab1 – Table of Contents

Tab 2 – Reference 1

Tab 3 – Reference 2

Tab 4 – Reference 3

Tab 5 – Reference 4

Tab 6 – Reference 5

5*

5*

5*

5*

5*

*Excess pages will not be evaluated.

D. Page Limitations: Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. Compliance with page count limits shall be verified via the hard copy. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal.

E. Page Structure: A page is defined as each face of a sheet of paper containing information. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two pages. Pages shall be 8.5 x 11 inches. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the text size shall be no less than 12 point font. Margins on all four edges of each sheet will be at least one inch. Legible tables, charts, graphs and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. These displays shall be uncomplicated, legible, and shall not exceed 11 x 17 inches. Foldout pages shall fold entirely within the volume. Foldout pages may only be used for large table, charts, graphs, diagrams, and schematics, not for pages of text. For tables, charts, graphs and figures, the text shall be no smaller than 12 point font. Pages shall be numbered sequentially.

F. Binding and Labeling: Each volume shall be separately bound in a three-ring loose-leaf binder permitting that binder to lie flat when opened. Do not use staples. A cover sheet should show volume number, title, copy number, solicitation identification, and the Offeror’s name. The same identifying data should be placed on the spine of each binder. Be sure to apply all appropriate markings including those prescribed in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on disclosure and use of data, and FAR 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Contractor Bid or Proposal Information and Source Selection Information.

G. Electronic Offers: The content and page size of electronic copies must be identical to the hard copies. For electronic copies, indicate on each CD the volume number and title. Use separate files to permit rapid location of all portions, including subfactors, exhibits, annexes, and/or attachments, if any. The Offeror shall submit volumes I through IV in electronic format, using recordable CDs. Each volume shall be in a different directory on a CD. The electronic copies of the proposal shall be submitted in a format readable by Microsoft (MS) Office Word 2010, MS Office Excel 2010, and MS Office Power Point 2010, as applicable. In the event that there are any discrepancies between the hard copies and the electronic copies of the proposal, the hard copies will be used for evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal.

H. VOLUME I – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The executive summary volume shall consist of the following sections.

(1) Tab 1: Table of Contents. Include a master table of contents for the entire proposal.

(2) Tab 2: The Offeror’s narrative summary of the entire proposal should be concise, in include addressing the significant risks, and highlighting any key or unique features, excluding price. The salient features should tie in with 52.212-2 evaluation factors/subfactors. Also identify authorized Offeror personnel. Provide the name, title, and telephone number of the company/division point of contact regarding decisions made with respect to the Offeror’s proposal and who can obligate the company contractually. Also, identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government. Additionally, provide the name, title, and telephone number of the CEO, Division President, and/or Vice President of the company for notification purposes. Any summary material presented here shall not be considered as meeting the requirements for any portions of other volumes of the proposal. The narrative portion of the executive summary has a limit of five (5) pages.

(3) Tab 3: The offeror shall include Proof of Financial Responsibility (letter from the Offeror’s bank on the bank letterhead) as acceptable evidence to the CO that the Offeror has sufficient financial resources to cover startup expenses for this acquisition in accordance with FAR 9.104-3(a).

(4) Tab 4: If the Offeror is part of an 8(a) Joint Venture, the Offeror shall provide a copy of the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) approved 8(a) Joint Venture certification documentation. For 8(a) Joint Ventures, the SBA must receive the certification documentation prior to the proposal due date and must be approve the documentation before award of any contract.

(5) Tab 5: Complete the Offer section of the SF1449, Solicitation, Offer, and Award. In doing so, the offeror accedes to the contract terms and conditions as written in the RFP. These sections constitute the model contract. The “original” copy shall be clearly marked under separate cover. Each amendment of solicitation will be signed.

(6) Tab 6: Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms.

I. VOLUME II – TECHNICAL CAPABILITY (Maximum 50 pages): The Technical Capability Volume shall be specific and complete. Clarity and coherence are very important. The offeror’s responses will be evaluated against the technical evaluation criteria in 52.212-2, Evaluation—Commercial Items. Using the instructions provided below, provide as specifically as possible the actual methodology the Offeror would use for accomplishing/satisfying these subfactors. The Technical Capability Volume shall not contain any reference to cost. All the requirements specified in the solicitation are mandatory. By the Offeror’s proposal submission, the Offeror is representing that the Offeror’s firm will perform all the requirements specified in the solicitation. Do not merely reiterate the objectives or reformulate the requirements specified in the solicitation, but instead discuss how the Offeror plans to accomplish each of the requirements. The Technical Capability Volume shall address the proposed approach to meeting the minimum capability requirements of the following three (3) subfactors: Staffing Plan, Security Requirements, and the Quality Control Plan.

(1) Tab 1: Table of Contents.

(2) Tab 2: Subfactor 1 – Staffing Plan Offerors shall submit their staffing plan demonstrating a clear understanding and sound approach to all mess attendant service tasks outlined in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Logical and concise methodology must be presented in the offeror’s proposal as to what staffing techniques will be used to ensure adequate staffing is provided throughout the life cycle of the contract. The plan shall include as a minimum:

i. The verification/validation of qualified personnel intended to staff in order to meet the requirements of paragraphs 4.1 through 5.1, 6.3 through 6.3.2, 6.3.4.3, 6.3.4.4, 10.2 & 10.3 of the PWS.

ii. The number of qualified employees by task that are presently available from the contractor’s existing workforce that will be used in this effort.

iii. The recruitment approach to ensure the minimum technical expertise is available by the contract start date.

iv. The retention approach to retain the most qualified personnel.

(3) Tab 3: Subfactor 2 – Security Requirements

Offeror shall submit their proposed security requirements plan demonstrating the Offeror’s ability to ensure qualified personnel with the required clearance/investigations are available to satisfy the contract security requirements by the contract start date. The plan shall include as a minimum:

i. The verification/validation of qualified personnel intended for use in order to meet the requirements of paragraph 11.3 of the PWS.

ii. The number of qualified personnel available by the contract start date.

(4) Tab 4: Subfactor 3 – Quality Control Plan Offerors shall submit an effective and complete Quality Control Plan that adequately addresses requirements of the PWS in accordance with paragraph 7 & 12 to ensure quality service. The plan shall include as a minimum:

i. The role and authority of the Primary Quality Control personnel.

ii. Methods to be used for identifying and preventing defects before performance becomes unacceptable.

iii. Procedures used to identify, prevent, and ensure non-recurrence of defective services and what corrective actions will be taken.

(5) Tab 5: Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms.

J. VOLUME III – PRICE PROPOSAL (Maximum 15 pages): This section is to assist the offeror in providing pricing information that is required to evaluate the reasonableness and balance of the proposed price. Compliance with these requirements is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of the proposal. The price proposal shall be based on the Offeror’s own technical approach submitted in the Technical Capability proposal (Volume II) and the PWS requirements. Note that unreasonably high proposed prices, initially or subsequently, may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition on the basis that the Offeror may not understand the requirement. Additionally, unbalanced pricing poses an unacceptable risk to the Government and may render a proposal unawardable. Unreasonably low prices may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition on the basis that the Offeror may not understand the requirement. The burden of proof for credibility of proposed prices rests with the Offeror. Information beyond that which is required by this instruction shall not be submitted, unless the Offeror considers it essential to document or support a price position. The information listed below must be included in the section of the proposal designated as the Price Proposal Volume. Under no circumstances shall this information and documentation be included elsewhere in the proposal. The price proposal shall consist of the following sections:

(1) Tab 1: Table of Contents.

(2) Tab 2: Complete blocks 12, 17a, and 30a, b, and c of the SF1449. In doing so the Offeror accedes to the contract terms and conditions as written in the Solicitation, with attachments. The Solicitation constitutes the model contract. Complete all fill in clauses and provisions in the solicitation completely. Insert all proposed fillable CLIN unit prices and CLIN extended prices in the Pricing Schedule. The proposal(s) must be submitted for a base period plus three (3) Option years. Note that some CLIN’s unit and extended prices will be pre-populated by the Government on a Not To Exceed (NTE) basis. The contractor will not be responsible for populating any portion of the NTE CLINs, but those prices will be applied to every proposal submitted. The Government’s NTE amounts for CLINs 0002, 0003, 1002, 1003, 2002, 2003, 3002 and 3003 are shown below. Offerors are to include these amounts in all offers.

(3) Tab 3: Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms.

K. VOLUME IV – PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION (Maximum 25 pages, 5 pages per reference): The Government will evaluate the quality and extent of Offerors’ recent and past performance deemed relevant to the requirements of this solicitation. Offerors shall select a minimum of three (3), but no more than five (5) past contracts for past performance information (PPI) consideration. These contracts may include Federal, State, and local government and private efforts similar to the requirements of this solicitation performed within the last three (3) years from the date of this solicitation. The Government will use this information to assess performance. Accordingly, it is critical that the Offeror provides the Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 4) to interests your firm has performed for and ensure they prioritize its prompt completion and submission to: 325th Contracting Squadron, Attn: TSgt Brian Swanson/SrA Benjamin Nieto, 501 Illinois Ave., Ste. 5, Tyndall AFB, FL 32403-5526, or e-mail to brian.swanson.3@us.af.mil or benjamin.nieto@us.af.mil. The Past Performance Volume shall consist of the following sections:

(1) Tab 1: Table of Contents.

(2) Tab 2-6: Past Performance Information.

i. The evaluation of PPI will take into account PPI regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to the instant acquisition. Provide information currently available (letters, metrics, customer surveys, independent surveys, etc.) which demonstrates customer satisfaction with overall job performance and quality of completed product(s) for recent and relevant contracts as defined below in paragraphs iii and iv. In addition, explain corrective actions taken in the past, if any, for substandard performance and any current performance problems such as cost overruns, extended performance periods, numerous warranty calls, etc. The Government will not use any provided information that is not defined as both recent and relevant when evaluating past performance. Furnish the following information for each contract referenced:

(a) Company/Division name

(b) Product/Service

(c) Contracting Agency/Customer

(d) Contract Number

(e) Contract Dollar Value

(f) Period of Performance

(g) Verified, up-to-date name, address, email and telephone number of the Contracting Officer

(h) Comments regarding compliance with contract terms and conditions

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

ii. Early Proposal Information: The Government requests Offerors ensure that their PPI is received by the CO no later than ten (10) calendar days prior to the date set for receipt of proposals. Federal agencies and commercial customers will use the past performance questionnaire to submit PPI on the Offeror. The sources utilized to complete the Performance Surveys must complete the Past Performance Questionnaire attached to this solicitation and return the fully completed survey to this office directly via one of the means listed in paragraph K of this addendum.

iii. Recent Contracts: Each PPI submission shall be recent. An assessment of the PPI will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, a completed effort must have been performed during the past three (3) years with at least six (6) months of that effort within the past three (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. The PPI that fails this condition will not be evaluated.

iv. Relevant Contracts: Submit PPI on at least three (3), but no more than five (5) recent contracts that the Offeror considers most relevant in demonstrating the ability to perform the proposed effort. Information must include a minimum of three (3) recent contracts performed by the Offeror, as either a prime contractor or subcontractor. For the Offeror proposing to be the prime contractor, past performance will be weighted more heavily than past performance as a subcontractor. If a teaming arrangement is contemplated, provide complete information as to the arrangement, including any relevant and recent past/present performance information on previous teaming arrangements with the same partner. If this is a first time joint effort, each party to the arrangement must provide a list of past and present relevant contracts. If there are more than five (5) teaming partners or subcontractors proposed, PPI shall be included for those teaming partners or subcontractors the Offeror considers most relevant in demonstrating their ability to perform the proposed effort. Include rationale supporting any assertion of relevance for each PPI submitted. Relevant performance includes performance of work efforts involving full food service operations and management that are similar or greater in scope, magnitude and complexity than the effort described in the PWS.

v. Subcontractor consent: PPI pertaining to a subcontractor cannot be disclosed to the prime Offeror without the subcontractor’s consent. With the proposal, provide a letter from all subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement, consenting to the release of their PPI to the prime contractor.

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (JAN 1999)

(a) 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:

1. Factor 1: Technical Capability

Subfactor 1: Staffing Plan

Subfactor 2: Security Requirements

Subfactor 3: Quality Control Plan

2. Factor 2: Past Performance

3. Factor 3: Cost/Price

A. The relative importance of each factor is as follows: Initially, only those technical proposals determined to be acceptable will be considered for award. Following that determination, Past Performance will be evaluated on a basis significantly more important than cost or price considerations.

(b) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(c) 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)

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2

1. Evaluation Factors, Subfactors & Elements:

Basis for Contract Award: The resulting contract from this acquisition will be a Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) contract. The Government will use Performance Price Tradeoff (PPT) source selection procedures to make a best value award decision. This will be conducted accordance with (IAW) with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 12.602, Streamlined Evaluation of Offers, utilizing the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), and the Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFFARS) Source Selection Procedures for guidance. These regulations are available electronically at the Air Force FAR Site, http://farsite.hill.af.mil. The Government will select the best overall offer, based upon an integrated assessment of Technical Acceptability, Past Performance, and Cost/Price. A contract may be awarded to the offeror who is deemed responsible IAW the FAR, as supplemented, whose proposal conforms to the solicitation’s requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations certifications, and all other information required by this solicitation) and is judged, based on the evaluation factors to represent the best value to the Government. Only offerors who are determined technically acceptable and whose price is determined reasonable are eligible for award. All technically acceptable proposals shall be treated equally except for their prices and performance records. Failure to meet any technical subfactor will result in a proposal being determined technically unacceptable. 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 Source Selection Authority (SSA) reasonably determines that the overall business approach and/or past performance of the higher price offeror outweighs the cost difference. The SSA will base the source selection decision on an integrated assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in the solicitation (described below). While the Government Source Selection Evaluation Team (SSET) and the SSA will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature, is subjective; and therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process. By submission of its offer, the offeror accedes to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications and all technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide a complete accompanying rationale.

The evaluation process shall proceed as follows:

A. Technical Capability: Initially, proposals shall be evaluated according to technical acceptability or unacceptability. Only those technical proposals determined to be acceptable will be considered for award. All Technical Capability subfactors are weighted equally. Each subfactor within the Technical Capability factor will receive either an acceptable or unacceptable Technical Capability rating. An unacceptable subfactor assessment will render the entire proposal unawardable. The proposals will be evaluated against the following three Technical Capability subfactors: Staffing Plan, Security Requirements, and Quality Control Plan.

(2) The offeror’s proposed approach will be rated based on their ability to provide a proposal IAW the instructions in this solicitation, to include all stated terms, conditions, representations certifications, and all other information required by this solicitation. Additionally, blocks 12, 17a, 30a, 30b, and 30c of the SF 1449 must be completed. During the evaluation of each proposal the Government will assign a rating as shown in paragraph (2) below.

(3) The ratings consist of the following:

(4) Subfactor 1 – Staffing Plan: The Staffing Plan is acceptable when the offeror’s staffing plan demonstrates a clear understanding and sound approach to staffing all the mess attendant services tasks outlined in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Logical and concise methodology must be presented in the offeror’s proposal as to what staffing techniques will be used to ensure adequate staffing is provided throughout the life cycle of the contract. The Government will assess risk for this subfactor. Risks that are considered to have the potential for disruption of schedule, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance may be deemed unacceptable. A rating of unacceptable in one or more of the technical subfactors will constitute an overall rating of unacceptable for the technical evaluation. The plan shall include as a minimum:

a. The verification/validation of qualified personnel intended to staff in order to meet the requirements of paragraphs 4.1 through 5.1, 6.3 through 6.3.2, 6.3.4.3, 6.3.4.4, 10.2 & 10.3 of the PWS.

b. The number of qualified employees by task that are presently available from the contractor’s existing workforce that will be used in this effort.

c. The recruitment approach to ensure the minimum technical expertise is available by the contract start date.

d. The retention approach to retain the most qualified personnel.

(5) Subfactor 2 – Security Requirements: The Security Requirements subfactor is acceptable when the offeror’s security requirements plan demonstrates the offeror’s ability to ensure qualified personnel with the required clearance/investigations are available to satisfy the contract security requirements by the contract start date. The plan shall include as a minimum:

a. The verification/validation plan for qualified personnel in order to meet the requirements of paragraph 11.3 of the PWS.

b. The number of qualified personnel available by the contract start date.

(6) Subfactor 3 – Quality Control Plan: The Quality Control Plan is acceptable when the plan provides an effective and complete approach that adequately addresses requirements of the PWS in accordance with paragraph 7 & 12. The plan shall include as a minimum:

a. The role and authority of the Primary Quality Control personnel.

b. Methods to be used for identifying and preventing defects before performance becomes unacceptable.

c. Procedures used to identify, prevent, and ensure non-recurrence of defective services and what corrective actions will be taken.

B. Cost/Price Factors: The Government price evaluation team shall evaluate the price proposals and any other relevant proposal data submitted, to determine if proposed prices are reasonable and balanced.

(1) Each offeror’s Total Evaluated Price (TEP) will be calculated as the sum of all CLINS. This calculation is described in more detail in the proposal preparation instructions section of this solicitation and in paragraph four (4) below. All proposed prices for all contract periods will be evaluated for reasonableness, which may be determined based on prices submitted by the competition, historical pricing, current market conditions, and comparison to the Independent Government Estimate and/or other proposal analysis techniques as described in FAR 15.404-1. Evaluation of option years will not obligate the Government to exercise options.

(2) The Government may require submission of information other than cost or pricing data to the extent necessary to evaluate price reasonableness. A contract will not be awarded to an offeror whose proposed price is not determined reasonable. For the purposes of this acquisition, the Government considers any type of price reduction that is unexplained, including any identified as a management challenge, to be unreasonable.

(3) Price analysis will be used to determine if the prices for the proposed contract line items are balanced or unbalanced. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items or sub line items appears to be significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of price analysis techniques. Unbalanced pricing may result in an offer being rejected if the Government determines that it presents an unacceptable risk to the Government.

(4) Quantities: The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by multiplying the proposed unit price by the quantities for a total line item price. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the line item prices are significantly unbalanced. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite the total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly over or understated as indicated by the application of price analysis.

C. Past Performance: The Government past performance team shall evaluate past performance and assess each offeror’s ability to fulfill the solicitation requirements, while meeting schedule, budget and performance quality constraints. The Government will use the following procedures in evaluating past performance:

(1) The Government past performance team will accomplish the past performance evaluation, assigning a performance confidence assessment rating to the offeror’s proposal based on performance ratings of recent and relevant efforts.

(2) The past performance team will seek relevant performance information from: (1) past, completed projects/efforts provided by the offeror (using questionnaires, forwarded by the offeror to past customers) and (2) data independently obtained from other Government and commercial sources.

a. Recency is defined as performance occurring prior to the last three (3) years from the date of the solicitation.

b. Relevant performance includes performance of efforts involving requirements that are similar or greater in scope, magnitude and complexity than the effort described in this solicitation. Relevancy will be assigned ratings of Very Relevant, Relevant, Somewhat Relevant and Not Relevant. The Government will give greater consideration to information on those contracts deemed most relevant to the effort described in the solicitation. In determining relevancy for individual contracts, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the offeror. For this acquisition, past performance will be considered most relevant when it mirrors the efforts as described in the PWS in the aspects of magnitude, complexity and scope.

c. The following table provides the relevancy definitions that will be utilized:

d. Performance: Performance information may be obtained from the references on each project submitted. The Government may also obtain performance data from other sources (CPARS, PPIRS, etc.)

(i) In addition to evaluating the extent to which the offeror’s performance meets basic contract PWS and technical requirements, the assessment will consider things such as the offeror’s history of forecasting and controlling costs, adhering to schedules (including the administrative aspects of performance), reasonable and cooperative behavior and commitment to customer satisfaction and generally, the contractor’s business-like concern for the interest of the customer.

(ii) Where relevant performance records indicate performance problems, the Government will consider the number and severity of the problems and the appropriateness and effectiveness of any corrective actions taken (not those planned or promised). The Government may review more recent projects or performance evaluations to ensure corrective actions have been implemented and evaluate their effectiveness.

(iii) The following table provides the performance ratings that will be utilized in the assessment of performance:

e. The past performance team will integrate the recency/relevancy and performance on all of the efforts evaluated for the offeror; the integration will result in a performance confidence assessment of Substantial Confidence, Satisfactory Confidence, Limited Confidence, No Confidence or Unknown Confidence as defined below for the offeror.