DRAFT_Sections_H,_L_and_M.docx

FA4890-14-R-0023

SECTION H - SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

H-1 ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

H-1.1 The Contractor will support pre-award, award, and post-award contract activities for task/delivery orders and post award assistance with quality assurance; therefore, there is a concern with Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI). OCI violations are a significant contract performance issue. Lack of adherence to the OCI Plan or this clause may have serious consequences that may include contract termination, suspension and debarment, or other appropriate remedies or administrative actions.

H-1.2 PROHIBITION: Contractors awarded under the following ID/IQ contracts as primes, teaming partners or subcontractors are not eligible to perform under this CN&GT Support Services Contract:

CN&GT Program Programmatic Support (PPS) ID/IQ: W9113M-16-D-0006, W9113M-16-D-0007, W9113M-16-D-0008, W9113M-16-D-0009

CN&GT Command, Control, Communications, Information, Detection and Monitoring (C3IDM) ID/IQ: W9113M-16-D-0017, W9113M-16-D-0018, W9113M-16-D-0019, W9113M-16-D-0020

CN&GT Operations & Logistics ID/IQ: FA4890-16-D-0001, FA4890-16-D-0002, FA4890-16-D-0003, FA4890-16-D-0004, FA4890-16-D-0005, FA4890-16-D-0006, FA4890-16-D-0007, FA4890-16-D-0008, FA4890-16-D-0009, FA4890-16-D-0010, FA4890-16-D-0011, FA4890-16-D-0012, FA4890-16-D-0013, FA4890-16-D-0014, FA4890-16-D-0015

CN&GT Training ID/IQ: FA4890-16-D-0016, FA4890-16-D-0017, FA4890-16-D-0018, FA4890-16-D-0019, FA4890-16-D-0020, FA4890-16-D-0021, FA4890-16-D-0022, FA4890-16-D-0023

Boston Whaler Boats ID/IQ: FA4890-16-D-0025

Jeep J8 Tactical Vehicles ID/IQ: FA4890-16-D-0026

Harris Radios ID/IQ: FA4890-16-D-0027

In addition to the ID/IQ contracts listed above, the contractor may be required to provide for any and all contracts that are supported by AMIC/PMT and issued by AMIC/PKD in support of the CN&GT mission. Historical contract vehicles that have been used in the past include, but are not limited to, GSA OASIS (All Pools), NETCENTS-II, GSA Alliant, etc.

H-1.3 OCI Identification. Identify any current performance on the contracts listed above. Describe this work and how any OCI that may impact the CN&GT Support Services requirement can be neutralized, avoided or mitigated.

H-1.4 The Contractor shall maintain an Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Plan to reduce the likelihood of an actual or perceived OCI. In order to prevent OCI under this contract, guidance in this clause will apply to eliminate:

1. Conflicting roles which might bias a Contractor's judgment or objectivity

1. An unfair competitive advantage to a Contractor

1. The appearance of an unfair competitive advantage

H-1.5 If the Contractor discovers an actual or potential organizational conflict of interest not previously considered and adequately mitigated under this clause and the Government-approved OCI Plan, the Contractor shall make a prompt and full disclosure in writing to the Contracting Officer. This report shall include a description of the violation and the actions the Contractor has taken or proposes to take to mitigate and avoid repetition of the violation. The Contractor shall routinely monitor its proposed business development and shall discuss any real or perceived OCI issues with the Contracting Officer and affected customers to proactively resolve and/or mitigate those potential OCI issues. After full analysis, the Contracting Officer and the Contractor will agree on appropriate corrective action, if any, or the Contracting Officer will direct such action, subject to the terms of this contract.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

INSTRUCTIONS

L-1 SPECIAL NOTICE TO OFFERORS

L-1.1 The exclusive responsibility for Source Selection will reside with the Government. Each individual involved in this acquisition has executed a Non-Disclosure Agreement with ACC AMIC.

L-1.2 Proprietary information submitted in response to this solicitation shall be clearly marked as such and will be protected from unauthorized disclosure as required by Subsection 27 of the Office of Procurement Policy Act as amended (41 USC 423) (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) as implemented in the FAR. Any unmarked proprietary information will be considered releasable under the restrictions of the Freedom of Information Act.

L-1.3 Funds are not presently available for this effort. No award will be made until funds are available. The Government reserves the right to cancel this solicitation, either before or after the closing date. In the event the Government cancels this solicitation, the Government has no obligation to reimburse an Offeror for any costs.

L-2 FORMAL COMMUNICATIONS

Any formal communication such as requests for clarification, discussions, and information concerning this solicitation shall be submitted in writing (by e-mail) to the Contracting Officer (CO), Mr. James Robinson, at james.robinson.54@us.af.mil, and the Contract Manager (CM), Ms. Shiran Zerach, at shiran.zerach@us.af.mil.

L-3 SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS

L-3.1 The offerors’ proposal shall be submitted via email to the CO and CM listed in section L-2.

L-3.2 Offerors are cautioned to strictly comply with all instructions within this solicitation to ensure submission of a complete proposal. Failure to furnish a complete proposal at the time of proposal submission may result in an unacceptable proposal that the Government eliminates from consideration for award. The Government will not accept changes to Offerors’ proposals after the closing date of this solicitation (see FAR 15.208 for further information regarding late proposals).

L-3.3 Proposals in response to this solicitation will be valid for 150 calendar days. Block 12 of the SF 1449 shall be completed to read 150 calendar days.

L-3.4 Contact Information. Offeror shall provide:

L-3.4.1 Names, Companies Cage Code, and DUNS, TIN titles, addresses, telephone numbers, and email addresses of persons authorized to negotiate on the Offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation.

L-3.4.2 Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal. Proposals signed by an agent shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent’s authority, unless that evidence has been previously furnished to the issuing office.

L-4 DISPOSITION OF UNSUCCESSFUL PROPOSALS

In compliance with FAR Subpart 4.8, the Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals. Extra copies of unsuccessful proposals will be destroyed. No destruction certificate will be provided.

L-5 PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

L-5.1 The instructions below prescribe the format of proposals and describe the approach for development and presentation of proposed data. Proposals shall include all of the information requested in the specific instructions. Failure to include all information requested may adversely affect the evaluation. A proposal that merely reiterates or promises to accomplish the requirements of the PWS will be considered unacceptable.

L-5.2 A proposal that is orderly and sufficiently documented will enable the Government to easily understand and perform a thorough and fair evaluation. The Government may incorporate into this contract, by reference or full text, portions of the successful Offeror’s proposal submitted in response to this solicitation as revised and supplemented through the final proposal revision.

L-5.3 Proposal Format. A complete proposal consists of two (2) separate volumes: Technical and Price.

L-5.3.1 Page Format. The proposal text shall be printed single-sided versus duplex. Type size for text shall not be smaller than Microsoft Word Times New Roman 10 point font, single column, normal proportional spacing and one inch (1”) margins (top, bottom, left and right). The text for charts, tables, graphs, and figures shall be no smaller than Microsoft Word, Times New Roman or Arial Narrow, 8 point font, and used only when absolutely necessary. Text lines and table lines of text shall be single-spaced. Page color for each page of the proposal submission shall be white or ivory. Information submitted shall not exceed the pages limits established in L-5.3.3 below.

L-5.3.2 Electronic Copies. Proposal information for each volume shall be submitted as a Portable Document Format (PDF) file using Acrobat Adobe 9.0 or latest version. Offerors shall NOT submit any documents in PDF that are copied as images. Offerors may use JPEG images for charts or screen shots. Volume III Price – Schedule B, Table B-1, shall be submitted in Microsoft Excel 2003, 2007, or 2010. Offerors shall name files in an unambiguous manner, using plain language text, which facilitates the evaluator’s ease of accessing the files for evaluation, using standard naming conventions (e.g., Offeror Name-Volume Name). Each volume shall be in a single searchable file, with copy/paste capability, and stored in a folder that corresponds to the proposal volume it represents. All charts in the proposal shall be searchable. Offerors shall insert the file name in the header of each document.

L-5.3.3 Organization/Copies/Page Limit. Information submitted shall not exceed the page limits stated below for each volume. Evaluators will only read up to the maximum number of pages specified. If the page limit is exceeded, the pages in excess of the limit will be removed from the applicable volume and will not be considered as part of the evaluation. Copy requirements and page limitations are as follows:

L-5.3.4 Cross-Referencing. Offerors shall not cross-reference among volumes. Each volume shall be written as a stand-along document so that its contents may be evaluated without cross-referencing to another volume. Information included in another volume but not included in the designated volume for proposal evaluation purposes, will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal.

L-5.3.5 What Counts as a Page. A page shall be an 8 ½” x 11” sheet of paper. Fold-outs shall be kept to a minimum, and shall be used only where a single 8 ½” x 11” page cannot accommodate a table or other graphic. Fold-outs shall not exceed (11” x 17”), and shall count as one page. All material shall be contained within the page limit identified for each volume. All appendices, charts, graphs, diagrams, tables, photographs, drawings, etc., are included in the page count, with exception of items stated in L-5.3.6.

L-5.3.6 Pages Not Included in Page Count. The organizational chart, acronym list, and overview section (for exceptions) will not be included in the page count. Covers for volumes, tables of contents, indices, title pages, and section dividers/tables will not be included in the page count if they are inserted solely to provide ease to the reader in locating parts/sections of the proposal. They will be counted if they contain any other information, e.g., diagrams, extraneous data, etc. Pages marked “This page intentionally left blank” will not be counted.

L-6 EXCEPTIONS

The Government reserves the right to award without discussions; therefore, Offerors are advised that taking exception to any requirements specified in this solicitation may result in the Government finding the proposal unacceptable. Clarification of Government requirements shall be handled by submitting questions/recommendations prior to submission of proposals. If Offerors still find it necessary to take exception to any of the requirements specified in this solicitation (Sections A through M, to include the PWS and all other attachments), clearly identify each exception in the overview section of the appropriate volume along with a complete explanation of why the exception was taken and the resulting benefit to the Government. Exception to solicitation requirements may require the Government to amend the solicitation to reflect a changed requirement. The Government will consider the absence of a stated exception to mean the Offeror takes no exception to the applicable volume and the proposal will be evaluated as submitted. The Government may consider any included Assumptions as an Offeror taking exception to the Government’s requirements which may result in the Government finding the proposal unacceptable.

L-7 INSTRUCTIONS FOR VOLUME I, TECHNICAL (FACTOR 1)

L-7.1 To facilitate evaluation, the Technical Volume shall be specific, detailed, and complete to clearly and fully demonstrate that Offerors have a thorough understanding of the requirements. Statements that Offerors understand, can, or will comply with the PWS (including referenced AF publications, etc.); statements paraphrasing the PWS or parts thereof (including applicable AF publications, etc.); and phrases such as “standard procedures will be employed” or “well known techniques will be used,” etc., will be considered unacceptable. Offerors should note that data submitted prior to the proposal submission will not be considered in the Government’s evaluation; therefore, such data should not be relied upon or incorporated in the Technical proposal by reference.

L-7.2 Acronym List. Offerors shall provide an acronym list as an attachment within the Technical Volume.

L-7.3 Purpose and Contents. The purpose of this section is to set forth, in the most comprehensive manner, an Offeror’s understanding of the program requirements and to demonstrate an Offeror’s ability to meet the evaluation requirements of Section M, Factor 1, Technical. This section shall present a clear, concise description of how Offerors plan to meet award requirements. This section shall not contain any pricing data.

Offerors shall submit a Technical Volume containing the following:

L-7.3.1 Subfactor 1: Technical Approach.

· Describe an effective approach to meet all elements/requirements in the PWS

· Provide an effective Acquisition Support Plan that clearly depicts how the Contractor will provide support to program management and acquisition activities to meet the PWS requirements

· Describe an effective approach for Quality Control that clearly depicts how the provided services will be determined to be compliant with the terms of the PWS. Key performance indicators and metrics shall be presented.

L-7.3.2 Subfactor 2: Staffing and Management Approach.

· Describe how candidates meet the minimum Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities required in the PWS.

· Describe an effective approach to attract, recruit, hire, and retain qualified personnel to meet PWS requirements.

· Describe an effective approach to ensure continuity of services during personnel absences due to sickness, leave, and voluntary or involuntary termination from employment to avoid disruption of needed services.

· Describe an effective approach to manage teaming partners and/or subcontractor relationships.

L-7.3.3 Subfactor 3: Organizational Conflict of Interest Plan.

· Provide an Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Plan that includes and explains the following:

· Approach for detecting, disclosing, avoiding, mitigating, and neutralizing OCI issues/risks;

· Any known cross-teaming arrangements, as well as any exclusive teaming arrangements;

· Processes that will be implemented to resolve OCI identified in the course of contract execution, to include separate physical locations, work forces, management and computer systems;

· Representation that there will be no “cross-talk” or information shared between affiliates in connection with all identified OCI L-7.3.4 Subfactor 4: Phase-In.

· Describe an effective approach to accomplish a phase-in to meet PWS requirements at contract start and include a logical timeline to ensure a smooth start of the contract tasks without interruption or degradation of service levels.

L-8 INSTRUCTIONS FOR VOLUME II, PAST PERFORMANCE (FACTOR 2)

L-8.1 Contents. Offerors shall submit a Past Performance Volume containing the following:

Past Performance Volume Contents

See paragraph L-8.1.1 and subparagraphs and Attachment 1

(Note: Page limit is for description of all requirements, not per PPI reference) See paragraph L-8.1.2

See paragraph L-8.1.3

L-8.1.1 Past Performance Information Sheets (Attachment 1). Offerors shall provide up to three (3) contract references considered most relevant in demonstrating the ability to perform CN&GT Support Services requirements as described in the PWS. Offerors shall submit Past Performance Information (PPI) Sheets on each contract references IAW the page limitation set forth in the table at L-8.1.

L-8.1.1.1 Types of PPI References. Offerors may provide various contracts as PPI references, to include C-type contracts or a single task/call/delivery/purchase order. Offerors may also submit an ID/IQ or Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA) as a PPI reference; in these cases, the Government will only assess performance at the ID/IQ or BPA level and not performance on each individual, underlying task/delivery order.

L-8.1.1.2 Recency Determination. Each relevant contract shall have active work/services that was/were performed during the last three (3) years preceding the date of issuance of this solicitation. This includes contracts that were awarded prior to this period, but still had a minimum of six (6) months of active performance during the previous three (3) years. References for contracts with less than 6 months of performance will not be considered.

L-8.1.1.3 Relevancy Determination. Offerors shall submit performance information on contracts they consider relevant to this effort. Offerors shall describe how each reference is relevant in demonstrating the ability to perform the PWS requirements. As applicable, address how the proposed reference provided relates to each of the four (4) technical subfactors shown in paragraph L-7.3/M-3.2.

L-8.1.2 PPI Summary. Offerors shall submit a narrative that provides frank, concise statements regarding the Contractor(s)’ performance on all of the PPI references provided. Offerors shall describe how each reference is relevant in demonstrating the ability to perform CN&GT Support Services IAW PWS requirements and the relevancy definitions at M-3.3.2. The PPI Summary shall meet the page limitation set forth in the table at L-8.1.

L-8.1.3 Organization Structure Change History. Many companies have acquired, have been acquired by, or have otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of relevant efforts or between conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this acquisition. To facilitate this Past Performance evaluation, Offerors shall include in this proposal volume a detailed "roadmap" describing all such organizational changes (if applicable), to include specific names and dates. The Organization Structure Change History shall meet the page limitation set forth in the table at L-8.1.

L-8.2 Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment 2). If PPI References are not documented in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Offerors shall send a PPQ to the Government POC for the PPI Reference and direct them to submit a completed PPQ via email to the CO and CM listed in section L-2. PPQs are due no later than the closing date and time of the solicitation. It is the responsibility of the offeror to ensure the Contracting Office receives the past performance information. PPQs are not included in the Past Performance Volume’s page count.

L-8.3 Other Sources. The Government may utilize references other than those identified by Offerors in evaluation of Offerors’ Past Performance. While the Government may elect to consider data obtained from other sources, the burden of providing accurate and complete, recent and relevant PPI that demonstrates the ability to perform this requirement rests with each Offeror.

L-9 INSTRUCTIONS FOR VOLUME III, PRICE (FACTOR 3)

Offerors shall complete the provided Attachment 3, Pricing Table, which contains the CLINs found in Section B of the RFP

L-9.1 The Price Proposal shall be clear and concise and provide sufficient detail so the Government can ensure the proposed price reflects the work to be performed. Offerors shall provide the following per RFP Section B, Pricing Table paragraph and format specified in Section B and Pricing Table (the table is provided as the template/format for submission; the burden of providing mathematically accurate and complete pricing proposals (total overall evaluated price) using the format provided in Attachment 3, Pricing Table, rests with each Offeror):

L-9.1.1 Labor Rates. Offerors shall propose loaded labor rates including G&A, overhead, fringe, etc., for each labor category. One rate is required for each labor category for each year of the contract.

L-9.1.2 Indirect Rates. Offerors shall propose indirect rates for the items specified in Section B.

L-9.2 Supporting Price Backup Data. Supporting data is requested and should explain the methodology used in developing proposed labor rates and breakout of Other Direct Costs (ODCs). Offerors should provide support for all indirect rates proposed based on the Offeror’s accounting system and any applicable Forward Pricing Rate Agreements. Offerors should also provide their profit rates. Supporting data may be submitted in a format selected by the offeror. The Government reserves the right to request additional pricing information after receipt and evaluation of proposals. Certified cost or pricing data may also be required.

L-9.3 Proposal Documentation. Offerors shall provide the following as a separate section contained in the Price Volume and shall be completed as follows:

L-9.3.1 Section A. Complete in its entirety the “Offeror” portion of the Standard Form (SF 33). An official having the authority to contractually bind the company shall sign the SF 33 IAW FAR 4.102. In doing so, the Offeror accedes to the contract terms and conditions as written in the RFP Sections A through K. These sections constitute the model contract.

L-9.3.2 Sections C through I. Complete the necessary fill-ins and provide any information requested. The Offeror shall submit only those pages that require a fill-in.

L-9.3.3 Section K. Complete all required Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors, and provide a copy of information completed in Online Representations and Certifications (ORCA) located at https://www.sam.gov.

L-9.3.4 Amendments. Offerors shall acknowledge any and all amendments per the directions on the amendment cover page (Standard Form 30). Failure to acknowledge any amendments to the solicitation may result in the Offeror being deemed nonresponsive. Award CANNOT be made to a nonresponsive Offeror.

L-9.3.5 Exceptions and Deviations. Describe any exception(s) and deviation(s) to the RFP. See paragraph L-6.

L-9.3.6 Adequate Accounting System. Offerors shall provide evidence of an adequate accounting system (certified or compliant) to adequately track, segregate, accumulate and report incurred costs for each CLIN as applicable. Offerors shall provide the name and address of the cognizant Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) and any point(s) of contact in that office if applicable. If an Offeror has never dealt with DCAA, the Offeror shall review the website at www.dcaa.mil and identify the cognizant DCAA office. If DCAA has already determined the Offeror’s accounting system adequate, the Offeror shall provide the referenced DCAA audit report number and date. Offerors shall provide any information that pertains to a recent Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) or DCAA financial capability assessment or any other independent audit showing that the Offeror’s accounting system is adequate for government cost type contracts.

L-9.3.7 Host Nation Laws. Offerors shall provide a written statement that they will comply with all applicable Host Nation (HN) laws.

L-9.3.8 Financial Statements. Provide previous three (3) fiscal year-end financial statements for use in the Government determining the apparent low Offeror's responsibility IAW FAR 9.104-1. Also include documentation to show capability to access credit markets if necessary.

L-9.3.9 Department of Labor Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Clearance. In accordance with FAR Part 22.805, the CO must request pre-award clearance on Prime contractors or Teaming Partners (not subcontractors) from the appropriate Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) regional office. If an Offeror is listed in OFCCP’s National Pre-award Registry (http://www.dol-esa.gov/preaward/pa_reg.html), Offerors shall provide the CO a copy of the database registration for Government verification as part of the proposal submission. If an Offeror is not listed in the registry, the CO will request an EEO clearance review.

L-9.3.10 Small Business Subcontracting Requirement. Offerors shall provide a plan that complies with FAR Part 19, Small Business Programs, and its supplements. Offerors shall identify the percentage of intended business with each of the following small business socioeconomic categories: Veteran-Owned Small Business, Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business, HUB-Zone Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, and Women-Owned Small Business. Pursuant to AFFARS 5319.704, all small business subcontracting goals shall be expressed in terms of percent of contract value, in addition to percent of subcontracted amount. Each offeror shall complete and submit the Small Business Subcontracting Plan Checklist (Attachment 4) with the plan. Per FAR 19.702(a)(1), if the apparently successful offeror fails to negotiate a subcontracting plan acceptable to the CO within the time limit prescribed by the CO, the offeror will be ineligible for award.

L-9 DEBRIEFING OF OFFERORS

Successful or unsuccessful Offerors may request debriefings by providing a written request to the Procuring Contracting Officer. Debriefings shall be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.505 for pre-award debriefings and FAR 15.506 for post-award debriefings.

L-10 CHANGES RESULTING FROM DISCUSSIONS

In the event any adjustment of price becomes necessary to reflect changes made to technical proposals resulting from discussions, if discussions are held, a complete traceable trail shall be provided to show how the changes took place.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M-1 BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD

M-1.1 This competitive best value source selection will be conducted using the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) source selection process IAW FAR Part 15, Contracting by Negotiation, Department of Defense (DoD) Source Selection Procedures effective 31 March 2016, and Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Mandatory Procedures 5315.3, Source Selection dated 6 April 2015.

M-1.2 Award will be made to one Offeror deemed responsible in accordance with FAR Part 9.1, whose proposals conform to the solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, with the lowest total evaluated prices and with an “Acceptable” rating in all Technical subfactors and an “Acceptable” rating for Past Performance. If an Offeror fails to meet all solicitation requirements, the Government may not make an award to that Offeror.

M-1.3 The Government reserves the right to award without discussions and make award based on initial proposals, but may conduct discussions if the Government determines it is necessary. If it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to hold discussions, the SSA, with CO concurrence, will make a Competitive Range determination, evaluation notices may be issued to Offerors in the competitive range, responses will be requested from applicable Offerors, and discussions will be opened. The competitive range may include proposals rated as “Unacceptable” at the sole discretion of the Government. Offerors should be aware that a complete understanding as to price, technical, and all other terms and conditions of the proposed contract must exist between the Offeror and the Government at the conclusion of discussions.

M-2 FINAL PROPOSAL REVISION

M-2.1 If the Government conducts and concludes discussions, the Government will request a Final Proposal Revision (FPR) from all Offerors remaining in the competitive range once discussions are closed. Formal responses to FPRs will be considered in making the award decision.

M-2.2 Any revision or non-concurrence to contract terms and conditions submitted in the FPR may not be subject to further discussion, and may render the offer unacceptable to the Government. This provision is not intended to restrict the Offeror’s opportunity to revise figures (e.g., prices, discounts, percentages, rates, etc.); rather, it is intended to preclude any misunderstandings by the Government, which could result if new or revised terms and conditions are submitted in the FPR that have not been fully disclosed, discussed and understood during discussions. Hence, such new or revised terms and conditions are not solicited and, if submitted in the FPR, may render the offer unacceptable to the Government.

M-2.3. If, upon submission of the FPR, an Offeror materially changes its proposal such that the price is no longer fair and reasonable or sufficient to keep them among the lowest priced Offeror, or other factor inputs change their ranking among other Offerors, the Offeror may be removed from consideration for award.

M-3 EVALUATION FACTORS AND METHODOLOGY

Proposals will be evaluated using three (3) evaluation factors: (1) Technical, (2) Past Performance, and (3) Price.

M-3.1 Evaluation Methodology.

M-3.1.1 Initial Proposals. The Government will evaluate the minimum number of proposals for efficiency and to maintain adequate competition, as specified in this section. Upon receipt of the Technical, Past Performance and Price proposals, the Government will:

M-3.1.1.1 Step 1: Rank by Initially Proposed Total Price. The Government intends to rank all proposals by the initially proposed total price, from lowest to highest by strictly reviewing price for mathematical accuracy and completeness. The initially proposed total price includes the sum of all option / performance years. Evaluation and determination of the proposed Total Evaluated Price (TEP) as fair, reasonable and balanced will occur as specified in Step 2 below, paragraph M-3.1.1.2.3, and paragraph M-3.4. The Government intends to establish an initial evaluation pool of the three (3) lowest price proposals. The Government will then evaluate technical proposals of offerors in the initial evaluation pool. Those outside the initial evaluation pool will NOT be evaluated, unless necessary to obtain the desired effective competition of three (3) offers rated as “acceptable” in all technical subfactors or until all offerors have been evaluated. The Government reserves the right to not evaluate all offerors once three (3) offers in the initial pool are determined technically acceptable. If the Government receives three (3) or fewer proposals, the Government will evaluate all proposals.

M-3.1.1.2 Step 2: Factor Evaluations. Upon establishment of the evaluation pool as described above, the Government will evaluate each factor, as follows:

M-3.1.1.2.1 Technical Evaluation. The Government will evaluate the technical proposals of Offerors in the evaluation pool as specified in paragraph M-3.2. If any of the proposals receives any “Unacceptable” ratings and these proposal(s) are not determined to be easily correctable, the Government reserves the right to pull in the next lowest priced proposal(s) to ensure adequate competition, or until all proposals are evaluated.

M-3.1.1.2.2 Past Performance Evaluation. The Government will evaluate the past performance of the Offerors in the evaluation pool. Past performance will be evaluated as specified in paragraph M-3.3.

M-3.1.1.2.3 Price Evaluation. The Government will evaluate the price proposals of the Offerors in the evaluation pool. Price proposals will be evaluated as specified in paragraph M-3.4.

M-3.1.2. Award Decision. If the Technical proposals provided by the three (3) Offerors in the evaluation pool are “Acceptable” and at least one (1) of the Offerors in the evaluation pool has an “Acceptable” Past Performance rating and fair and reasonably priced proposal, the Government may award with or without discussions.

M-3.2 Factor 1: Technical. The Technical Factor evaluation provides an assessment of each Offeror’s capability to satisfy the Government’s minimum requirements. The Technical Factor consists of four (4) subfactors: (1) Technical Approach, (2) Staffing and Management Approach, (3) Organizational Conflict of Interest Plan, and (4) Phase-In. Technical proposals will be assessed a rating of "Acceptable" or "Unacceptable" at the subfactor level IAW Table C-1 of the DoD Source Selection Procedures effective 31 March 2016, as revised below:

In assessing the acceptability of each subfactor, any weakness or deficiency will be noted in accordance with Chapter 5 of the DoD Source Selection Procedures. Proposals that receive deficiencies or weaknesses in a subfactor will receive an “Unacceptable” rating. The Government will not search for data to cure problems or address inconsistencies in an Offeror’s proposal. Proposals that exceed the evaluation criteria will not receive higher ratings. To be eligible for award, an “Acceptable” rating for all technical subfactors is required. The Government may incorporate into this contract, by reference or full text, portions of the successful Offeror’s proposal submitted in response to this solicitation as revised and supplemented through the final proposal revision.

M-3.2.1 Subfactor 1: Technical Approach.

· Demonstrates an effective approach to meet all elements/requirements in the PWS

· Demonstrate an effective Acquisition Support Plan that clearly depicts how the Contractor will provide support to program management and acquisition activities to meet the PWS requirements

· Demonstrate an effective approach for Quality Control that clearly illustrate how the provided services will be determined to be compliant with the terms of the PWS. Key performance indicators and metrics shall be presented.

M-3.2.2 Subfactor 2: Staffing and Management Approach.

· Demonstrate how candidates meet the minimum Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities required in the PWS.

· Demonstrates an effective approach to attract, recruit, hire, and retain qualified personnel to meet PWS requirements.

· Demonstrates an effective approach to ensure continuity of services during personnel absences due to sickness, leave, and voluntary or involuntary termination from employment to avoid disruption of needed services.

· Demonstrate an effective approach to manage teaming partners and/or subcontractor relationships.

M-3.2.3 Subfactor 3: Organizational Conflict of Interest Plan.

· Demonstrate an effective Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Plan that includes and explains the following:

· Approach for detecting, disclosing, avoiding, mitigating, and neutralizing OCI issues/risks;

· Any known cross-teaming arrangements, as well as any exclusive teaming arrangements;

· Processes that will be implemented to resolve OCI identified in the course of contract execution, to include separate physical locations, work forces, management and computer systems;

· Representation that there will be no “cross-talk” or information shared between affiliates in connection with all identified OCI

M-3.2.4 Subfactor 4: Phase-In.

· Demonstrate an effective approach to accomplish a phase-in to meet PWS requirements at contract start and include a logical timeline to ensure a smooth start of the contract tasks without interruption or degradation of service levels.

M-3.3 Factor 2: Past Performance. The Past Performance Factor evaluation provides an assessment of each Offeror’s recent and relevant present and past performance to determine whether there is a reasonable expectation that the Offeror can successfully perform as proposed. Past performance will be assessed a final rating of "Acceptable" or "Unacceptable" at the factor level IAW Table C-2 of the DoD Source Selection Procedures effective 31 March 2016, as revised below:

M-3.3.1 Recency. A Recency determination will be made for each Past Performance reference provided. Recency is defined as active contract performance (minimum of 6 months) during the three (3) years preceding the date of issuance of this solicitation.

M-3.3.2 Relevancy. A Relevancy determination of the Offeror’s Past Performance will be made based on the effort, or portion of the effort, performed by the Offeror under the Past Performance reference provided by the Offeror. The Government will validate the information contained in the Offeror’s Past Performance reference. The Government is not bound by the Offeror’s opinion of relevancy. Relevancy for this solicitation is defined as Relevant or Not Relevant as specified below:

M-3.3.3 The Government will assess performance contained in all applicable performance records to ascertain if the Offeror can successfully perform the minimum requirements. Performance will also be assessed using information obtained through one or more of the following: 1) the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS); 2) similar systems of other Government departments and agencies; 3) DCMA channels; 4) interviews with program managers and COs; and, 5) other sources known to the Government. The assessment will contribute to the overall evaluation of the Offerors’ performance record. The Government is not bound by the Offeror’s opinion of its performance.

M-3.3.4 Adverse past performance is defined as past performance information that supports 1) a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation aspect or 2) any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system that caused evaluator concern. When a relevant performance record indicates performance problems, the Government will consider the number and severity of the problems and the appropriateness and effectiveness of any actual corrective actions taken (not just planned or promised). The Government may review more recent contracts or performance evaluations to ensure corrective actions have been implemented and to evaluate their effectiveness. In accordance with FAR 15.306(b), Communications must be held with any Offeror that will be excluded from competition because of adverse past performance information, unless the Offeror has previously had the opportunity to comment on such information.

M-3.3.5 Even though the assessment of past performance is separate and distinct from determination of responsibility required by FAR Part 9, Past Performance evaluation may be used to support the determination of responsibility for the successful Offeror.

M-3.4 Factor 3: Price. Price will be evaluated using techniques established in FAR 15.404-1 to ensure the Government receives a fair, reasonable and balanced price. This source selection is conducted with the expectation of adequate price competition and rely on market forces and price competition to ensure awarded price is reasonable. The Government will evaluate proposed prices to determine whether prices reflect a clear understanding of the requirements. An offeror may be determined unawardable if its prices is evaluated as unfair or unreasonable.

M-3.4.1. Reasonableness: The existence of adequate price competition is expected to support a determinate of price reasonableness. Price analysis techniques may be used to further validated price reasonableness. If adequate price competition is not realized or if price reasonableness cannot be determined using price analysis of Government obtained information, additional information in accordance with FAR 15.4 may be required to support the proposed price. The Government reserves the right to ask for additional information from technically acceptable offerors with proposed prices that appear exceptionally low. The Government plans on addressing any apparent exceptionally low prices by evaluating the offerors experience and/or capability in providing similar services/commodities at similar prices. An exceptionally or unrealistically low offer may pose an unacceptable risk to the Government and may be the reason to reject an offeror’s proposal without entering discussions.

M-3.4.2. Balance: Offerors are cautioned against submitting an offer that contains unbalance pricing. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable Total Evaluated Price, the price of one or more contract line items, including the Basic ordering period and option ordering period, is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of analysis techniques. The Government shall analyze offers to determine whether there are unbalance separately priced line items or sub-line items. Prices submitted will be compared and evaluated to assure that a logical progression exists as related prices within each offeror’s response to the pricing structure in Section B. Offers that are determined to be unbalanced may be rejected as the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

M-3.4.3. Total Evaluated Price (TEP): A TEP will be calculated for evaluation purposes only. The TEP will be calculated based upon the total priced proposed for the Base period and all Option periods. Evaluation and determination of the proposed TEP as fair, reasonable and balanced will occur as specified in Step 2 above, paragraph M-3.1.1.2.3, and paragraph M-3.4.

M-3.4.4. There is a great expectation of competition for this requirement; thus Offerors are cautioned to present their best price proposals up-front. The Offeror’s price proposal shall represent the Offeror’s best effort to respond to the solicitation. In instances where an Offeror receives “Acceptable” Technical ratings, yet proposed prices appear exceptionally or unrealistically low, Offerors may be requested to address this disparity, providing evidence of capability and/or experience providing similar service(s) at similar price(s). An example of an unrealistically low proposed price would be proposed labor rates that were so low that the Government could not make a reasonable determination that an Offeror could successfully provide and/or retain qualified personnel for the labor categories proposed. An exceptionally or unrealistically low offer may pose an unacceptable risk to the Government and may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition.

M-3.4.5. Option to Extend Services. Both the solicitation and the resultant contract shall contain FAR Clause 52.217-8, entitled “Option to Extend Services.” This clause allows for up to an additional six (6) month continued contract performance if required. Offerors shall not propose pricing for this clause as it will automatically calculate as part of the TEP in the first tab of Attachment 3, Pricing Table.

M-3.5 Small Business Subcontracting Plan. Offerors shall provide and demonstrate an effective approach to meet subcontracting goals in accordance with FAR Part 19, Small Business Programs, and its supplements. Demonstrate sound and effective methods to determine and meet goals, adequately encourage Small Business participation, and provide for implementation of policies that meet goals.

M-3.6. Responsibility Determination. The Government will assess contractor responsibility utilizing the standards established in FAR Subpart 9.104.

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1 - Past Performance Information Sheet

Attachment 2 - Past Performance Questionnaires

Attachment 3 - Pricing Table

Attachment 4 - Small Business Subcontracting Plan Checklist

ATTACHMENT 1

PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION SHEET

Provide the information requested in this form for each contract/program described in the PPI Summary. Limit the number of past efforts submitted and the length of each submission to the limitations set forth at paragraph L-8.1.1.

SUBMISSION FORMAT

PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION SHEET

Contractor

DUNS Number

CAGE Code

Contract Number

Contract Type

Program Title

Contracting Agency / Customer

Contractor’s Role

Original Value

Current Value

Explain Value Differences

Original PoP

Current PoP

Explain PoP Differences

Place of Performance

Key Individuals

Phone:

Email:

Phone:

Email:

Phone:

Email:

Phone:

Email:

ATTACHMENT 2

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

**When completed, this document is Source Selection Sensitive IAW FAR 2.101 AND 3.104**

SECTION I: CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION (TO BE COMPLETED BY OFFEROR)

A. Contractor

B. Contractor Cage Code

C. Role (check): Prime Subcontractor Teaming Partner Joint Venture Partner

Other (specify)

If subcontractor, partner or other, who is the Prime?

D. Contract Number

Task/Delivery Order Number

Note: If the referenced contract is an overarching ID/IQ or BPA, the Government will only assess performance at the ID/IQ level and not performance on each individual underlying task/delivery order. If the Offeror would like assessment of the single task/call/delivery/purchase order, the Offeror shall submit that as a separate reference

E. Contract Type (FFP, CPFF, ID/IQ (include types), LH, etc.)__________________________________________

F. Period of Performance

G. Place(s) of Performance:

Multiple locations? Yes No If yes, specify locations:

CONUS OCONUS Both Provide details:

State Federal DOD Other Provide details:

H. Total Contract or Task/Call/Delivery/Purchase Order $ Value (including options)

I. Has a CPAR (or more than one CPAR) been completed for this contract? Yes No If Yes, provide dates covered by CPARs:

FOLLOWING SECTIONS TO BE COMPLETED BY AGENCY

CONTRACTING OFFICE/CUSTOMER/PROGRAM MANAGEMENT OFFICE

** Please have an individual(s) knowledgeable of the contractor’s day-to-day operations and overall condition of supplies/services being rendered complete this survey.

SECTION 2: TO BE COMPLETED BY AGENCY (CONTRACTING OFFICE/CUSTOMER/PROGRAM MANAGEMENT OFFICE)

A. Customer/Agency Name:

B. Customer/Agency Description: ________________________________________________________________

C. Description of service(s) provided. Provide details on type of work, locations worked, and organizations serviced, to include Department of Defense, Government, or commercial work.

SECTION 3: EVALUATOR IDENTIFICATION

A. Name: ________________________________________ B. Title:

C. Phone: ________________________________________ D. E-mail:

E. Years worked on Subject Contract:

SECTION 4: PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

Please indicate your satisfaction with the Contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block using the scale provided to the right of each question. This scale is defined as follows:

In order to assist us in the evaluation, please provide a brief detailed narrative to support your ratings. At a minimum, please discuss each response for which you indicated E (Exceptional), M (Marginal) or U (Unsatisfactory) performance to the questions below (use additional sheets, if necessary).

Ability of Contractor to: Conform to contract requirements, provide accurate deliverables/reports; meet service specifications of the contract; provide timely proposals; respond to short notice requirements; provide and adhere to quality control/management plan (when required).

Explanation:

Ability of…