Attachment_3_Section_L_and_M,_Instructions_to_Offerors_and_Evaluation_Basis_of_Award.doc

SOLICITATION

ATTACHMENT 3

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS AND BASIS FOR EVALUATION

L-900. Proposal Requirements

I. Proposal Format

A. General: The following instructions cover the preparation and submittal of the offeror’s proposal for this solicitation. Offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are cautioned that any noncompliance with the terms and conditions of the RFP may cause their proposal to be determined not eligible for award. If a joint venture arrangement exists for this acquisition, the offeror shall provide a copy of the joint venture agreement that is signed and dated by all joint venture members as part of the proposal submission. Offerors shall submit only one proposal for the C2 Systems acquisition, as the Government will review only one proposal per offeror. Proposals must be received by HQ AFRC/PKA, Attention: Debra F. Scarborough, no later than the date and time specified in Block 8 on the face page of the RFP. However, offerors are requested to submit Volume III, Past Performance Information, so that it is received ten (10) calendar days prior to the required due date for proposals. Failure to submit Volume III by the earlier date will not result in offeror disqualification.

B.Point of Contact: The Contracting Officer (CO) is the sole point of contact for this acquisition. Address any questions or concerns to the CO. Written requests for clarification may be sent to the CO via email. Email is the preferred method of communication. The CO for this acquisition is as follows:

Debra F. Scarborough

255 Richard Ray Blvd

Robins AFB GA 31098

Commercial Phone: 478-327-1616

Email address: debra.scarborough@us.af.mil C. Communications: Exchanges of source selection information between Government and offerors will be controlled by the Contracting Officer. Email may be used to transmit such information only if the email can be sent encrypted, and must include “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104” in the subject line of the email. Otherwise, source selection information will be transmitted via direct mailing or facsimile. In order to facilitate the sending and receiving of encrypted emails, offerors must use MS Outlook email configured to support encryption or a different email product that is S/MIME compatible and configured to support encryption. If you intend to submit your source selection information via encrypted email, you will need to contact the Buyer/Contracting Officer indicated on the face page of the solicitation prior to that first submittal in order to exchange certificates used for encryption. To ensure the process is working correctly, send a test encrypted message first (without including any source selection information). Otherwise, source selection information will be transmitted via direct mailing or AMRDEC SAFE at https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe/guide.aspx .When submitting source selection information via email, file suppression utilities, to include but not limited to zip files, will not be accepted.

D. Responsibility Determination and Supporting Documentation

In accordance with FAR 9.104-5, Representation and Certifications Regarding Responsibility Matters, the offeror is required to comply with the submission regarding FAR 52.209-5, Certification Regarding Responsibility Matters found in Section K of this RFP. Since it is the Government’s intent to make Award without Discussions IAW FAR 52.215-1, the Government may request an offeror submit additional information so a responsibility determination can be made. This request for additional information will not be construed as communications or discussions with an Offeror as defined by FAR 15.306. An incomplete proposal may be considered to indicate lack of understanding of the requirement and may result in the entire proposal being determined “Unacceptable” and eliminated from further consideration.

To assist the Government in determining contractor responsibility in accordance with FAR 9.104-3(a), the Offeror shall:

(a) Explain how they plan to maintain adequate financial resources for a contract of this magnitude and length;

(b) Address a fiscal plan for covering mobilization, unexpected or emergency situations, and initial performance costs prior to recoupment in the form of monthly invoice payments;

(c) Provide complete financial statements for one (1) fiscal year and year-to-date financial information through the last quarter available. The year-end financial statements must be certified by an independent accounting firm;

(d) If the Offeror intends to rely on internally available working/operation capital, documentation of availability must be submitted. If the Offeror plans to rely on financial support from external sources, documentation of availability and maximum lines of credit available (based upon the inclusion of this contract effort) must be submitted. Evidence of external funding must be provided in the form of a dated letter from the external source.

II. Volume Organization

A. General: Proposals shall be submitted to the Government in four separate volumes as set forth below:

3 Pages

Mission Essential Services

5 Pages

Technical Capabilities

5 Pages

Life Cycle Management Plan

3 Pages

Integrated Master Schedule

3 Pages

Enhancements (if any)

*All Volumes shall be submitted in CD-R or DVD-R form (write once/read only) (1 copy) that is “closed” so that no further writes can be made to the media AND submitted via AMRDEC. CD-R/W or DVD-R/W media types are not acceptable. Media must be virus scanned by the offeror prior to submitting to the Government. Offerors are to ensure electronic copies on CD-ROM or DVD are virus free. The offeror shall submit a CD-ROM or DVD with all four proposal volumes containing all of the required information in Section L, Instructions to Offerors. These electronic copies shall not be linked to any other document. The CD-ROM or DVD and protective sleeve shall be clearly marked as to the Offeror’s name, solicitation title and solicitation number. The format shall be Microsoft Office compatible. The Government will not perform a word-by-word check of the AMRDEC proposal versus the CD-ROM or DVD. However, if discrepancies are identified between the AMRDEC submitted proposal and the CD-ROM or DVD proposal, the AMRDEC proposal shall prevail. Sound or video (e.g. MPEG) files shall not be embedded into the proposal files (exception is the oral presentation briefing). Oral proposals will be recorded and the recording will be part of the contract file.

In addition to the page limitations set forth above, proposal volumes shall comply with the following format:

1. A sealed package shall be used to submit the CD-ROM or DVD and must show the time and date specified for receipt. For the AMRDEC submission, the email notification to the PCO there is a package awaiting will serve as this time and date stamp for receipt. Each volume shall be marked with the RFP number and the offeror’s name and address, and the number of the Volume, i.e. I, II, III, etc. Proposals shall be in the English language and all monies shall be proposed in United States dollars.

2. Print shall be no smaller than a font size of 12. Paper size shall be 8 1/2” X 11,” excluding any drawings, diagrams, and/or supporting illustrations, spreadsheets, etc. Charts, graphs, drawings, diagrams, supporting illustrations, or spreadsheets shall not be greater than 11” x 17.” Each volume within the proposal shall be separately tabbed and identified. Margins shall be no smaller than 1 inch and each page within a volume shall be numbered consecutively. Elaborate formats, bindings, color presentations are not desired or required.

3. The page limitation for Volume II, Written Technical Proposal is 19 pages. The page limitations include any cover page, charts, graphs, drawings, diagrams, supporting illustrations, spreadsheets, etc., but excludes any table of contents or list of acronyms (if utilized). Offerors are cautioned that any pages that exceed the page limitations shall not be read but shall be removed and either retained in the contract file without being considered in the evaluation, or, sent back to the offeror.

4. Page limitations may be placed on responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs), if issued. The specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the ENs to offerors or on the EN form itself.

5. Each page containing proprietary information should be so marked.

6. Each page should contain the following legend at the bottom of each sheet:

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION--SEE FAR 2.101 and 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

7. CD-ROM or DVD proposal packages shall either be mailed or hand-delivered. Offerors are cautioned that Warner Robins Air Logistics Complex 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-delivering (CD-ROM or DVD) proposal packages. Offerors should allow sufficient time to obtain a visitor pass and arrive at the specified office PRIOR to the time specified for receipt of proposals. The address to mail or hand deliver the CD-ROM or DVD is as follows: NOTICE THE ADDRESSES ARE DIFFERENT Mail:

Debra Scarborough

HQ AFRC/PKA

255 Richard Ray Blvd

Robins AFB GA 31098-1637

Hand Deliver:

Debra Scarborough

HQ AFRC/PKA

Bldg 549 Pine Street

Robins AFB GA 31098-1336 B. Volume I, Completed RFP

1. General: Volume I, Completed RFP shall consist of the completed and signed RFP, to include any amendments issued, with a cover letter delineating any exceptions taken to the RFP terms and conditions with accompanying rationale. However, offerors are cautioned that any noncompliance with the terms and conditions of the RFP may cause their proposal to be determined not eligible for award. Offerors shall also include the proposal validity date in the cover letter. Offerors shall ensure that all clauses and provisions that require “fill-in” information are appropriately completed, including the proposed prices associated with the contract line items in the Schedule B of the RFP.

C. Volume II, Certifications The offeror shall submit the following certifications:

1. Security Plus Certification- Security Plus Certification is required for System Administration privileges. The offeror shall self-certify that employees working on this program will have security plus certification prior to award.

2. System Certification- Approved Products List (APL) certification- All products offered to the government (DoD) must be fully Joint Interoperability Test Center (JITC) approved. The offeror must self-certify the products are on the APL with the proposal.

D. Volume III, Oral and Written Technical Proposal

1. General: The oral and written technical proposal shall be clear, concise, and include all the information required by this provision in sufficient detail for effective evaluation. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet these requirements. Offerors shall assume the Government has no prior knowledge of their capabilities, work processes, facilities, and experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offeror’s technical proposal.

2. Format and Specific Content: The following information shall be provided in the written technical proposal and will be evaluated to assess the proposed technical approach and associated technical risk in accordance with Section M-900, Evaluation Basis for Award. The written technical proposal shall address each of the following subfactors to describe the offeror’s proposed approach to performing the requirements set forth in the C2 Systems PWS dated 15 Apr 19. For each subfactor, the offeror shall identify risks, if any, associated with the proposed approach and actions the offeror will take to mitigate the identified risks. If no risks/mitigations are identified in the offeror’s proposal, it indicates the offeror does not consider there to be any risk associated with their proposed approach.

Subfactor 1- Mission Essential Services (3 pages): The Contractor shall submit a plan in accordance with PWS Paragraph 5.6.2. describing procedures for continuing performance of mission-essential services during a crisis. The Contractor shall identify provisions for ensuring required personnel and resources are available to support continuity of operations for up to 30 calendar days or until normal operations can be resumed.

Subfactor 2-Technical Capabilities-Oral Proposal: The offeror must present an oral and functional demonstration (provides a workable model and any supportive hardware or software of the proposed console platform) that adequately demonstrates the proposed system meets the technical requirements, functionalities and performs at the capabilities outlined in the PWS. The oral proposal must demonstrate the functionalities identified in Attachment 1 of this solicitation. The offerors will have 30 min to set up for the oral presentation, one hour to provide the oral proposal covering the capabilities in Attachment 1 and allow for 30 min for discussions if required. Oral proposals will be recorded and made a part of the official contract file

Subfactor 3- Technical Capabilities-Written Proposal (5 Pages)- The offeror must provide a detailed Technical Approach specifically identifying the approach/technology proposed, along with the standards utilized and the tools and methodologies of how the solution/approach is developed. This written proposal shall include a Life Cycle Management Plan, Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) and any functionalities that enhance the mission capabilities.

A. Life Cycle Management Plan (5 Pages)- The offeror must submit a written plan for the sustainability of the installed systems throughout the life of the contract (5 years) to include all hardware, software and accessories.

B. Integrated Master Schedule (IMS)(3 Pages)- The offeror must submit a proposed master schedule, including details/plans for removals/installs at the locations included in the PWS by 20 Dec 19.

C. Enhancements (3 Pages) Functionalities that enhance mission capabilities above the minimum requirements (if any). Or provide statement that you are only providing minimal requirements and you have no enhancements.

E. Volume IV, Cost/Price Proposal

1. All information relating to the proposed price must be included in the section of the proposal designated as the price/financial volume.

2. General Instructions: Information is provided to assist you in submitting information other than certified cost or pricing data that is required to evaluate the reasonableness and balance of your proposed cost/price. Compliance with these requirements is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of your proposal. Unbalanced pricing poses an unacceptable risk to the Government and may be a reason to reject an offeror's proposal. Offers should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate their reasonableness and balance. The burden of proof for credibility of proposed prices rests with the offeror.

3. Exceptions: List any exceptions taken to the pricing requirements stated in this solicitation and state assumption(s) made by the offeror. Provide complete rationale.

4. Insert proposed unit and extended prices in Section B for each Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Contract Line Item Number (CLIN), including all option periods. The extended amount must equal the whole dollar unit price multiplied by the number of units. All dollar amounts provided shall be rounded to the nearest dollar. Offerors are not required to provide an amount for the Cost Reimbursable (CR) (Travel) CLINs. The Cost Reimbursable CLIN will be funded at the Government’s discretion. The offeror shall submit the attached excel spreadsheet that documents basic plus all options (per CLIN) and the total price for the effort. Insert pricing into Schedule B and Attachment 2, Pricing Spreadsheet. Due to constraints in CON IT, our new contract writing system, the option CLINs X004 and X005 may not have the BEQs where it allows for the offeror to price out the different quantities. It is allowable to put “See Attachment 2” for these CLINS on Schedule B.

5. Data beyond that required by this instruction shall not be submitted, unless you consider it essential to document or support your price position. All data relating to the proposed price, including all required supporting documentation, must be included in the section of the proposal designated as the Price volume. Under no circumstances shall this data and documentation be included elsewhere in the proposal.

6. In accordance with FAR 15.403-l(b) and l 5.403-3(a), data other than certified cost or pricing data may be required to support a determination of price reasonableness. Data shall be provided in accordance with FAR 15.403-5. If, after receipt of proposals, the CO determines that there is insufficient data available to determine price reasonableness and none of the exceptions in FAR 15.403-1 apply, the offeror shall be required to submit additional cost or pricing data.

7. All dollar amounts provided shall be rounded to the nearest dollar.

Section M

Evaluation Basis for Award

M-900. EVALUATION BASIS FOR AWARD

I. Basis for Contract Award A. Source Selection Methodology: This acquisition will utilize the Tradeoff source selection procedures in accordance with FAR 15.101-2 and 15.3 as supplemented by the DoD Source Selection Procedures referenced in DFARS 215.300 and the AFFARS Mandatory Procedures 5315.3 to make an integrated assessment for a best value award decision. The Government intends to award one contract as a result of this solicitation. A decision on the technical acceptability of each offeror’s proposal will be made. For those offerors who are determined to meet all the solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, and representations and certifications, technically acceptability will be determined by evaluating both oral and written technical proposals; tradeoffs may be made between technical and cost/price. Technically unacceptable proposals will not be considered for award. When combined, technical is considered significantly more important than cost/price. Volume I will be evaluated for completeness and will be acceptable/unacceptable. Volume II, Certifications and Volume III, Technical Subfactors 1 and 2 will be evaluated as Acceptable/Unacceptable, Volume III Technical subfactor 3 will receive one of the color/adjectival ratings and be considered in the trade-off process. 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 technical proposal of the higher priced offeror outweighs the cost difference. To arrive at a best value decision, the SSA will integrate the source selection team’s evaluations of the factors and subfactors described in this provision. While the Government will strive for maximum objectivity, the tradeoff process, by its nature, is subjective; therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the selection process. Offerors are reminded that the Government will only evaluate one proposal from each offeror. Award will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal conforms to all required terms and conditions, includes all required representations and certifications, meets all requirements set forth in the RFP and also provides the best value to the Government based on the results of the evaluation as described in paragraph II below.

II. Proposal Evaluation: The evaluation process will be accomplished as follows (Organized by volume):

A. General

1. Discussions: The Government intends to award without discussions, but reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined necessary. Any discussions will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.306. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer, with the concurrence of the Source Selection Authority, may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

B. Volume I, Completed RFP

1. Completed RFP: Volume I, Completed RFP shall be evaluated to ensure the RFP and any amendments issued are signed, Schedule B pricing completed, Attachment 2 is completed, joint venture agreements are completed, and all “fill-in” clauses and provisions are completed as required. The cover letter shall be evaluated to determine the number, types, and accompanying rationale of exceptions taken to the RFP terms and conditions. The Government reserves the right to determine any exceptions taken to the RFP terms and conditions as being non-compliant with the stated solicitation requirements, and thus render the proposal not eligible for award. This volume will be evaluated for completeness and will be evaluated as acceptable/unacceptable. Failure to provide the information requested may render a proposal unacceptable.

C. Volume II, Certifications

The overall system certification standards will be evaluated. All products offered to the government (DoD) must be fully Joint Interoperability Test Center (JITC) approved. Security Plus Certification is required for System Administration privileges. Volume 2 will be evaluated as acceptable/unacceptable.

1. Security Plus Certification- Security Plus Certification is required for System Administration privileges. The offeror shall self-certify that employees working on this program will have security plus certification prior to award.

2. System Certification- Approved Products List (APL) certification- All products offered to the government (DoD) must be fully Joint Interoperability Test Center (JITC) approved. The offeror must self-certify the products are on the APL with the proposal.

This subfactor is met when the offeror provides, with the proposal, self-certification that employees have Security Plus Certification and that all products are on the Approved Products List (APL). Any proposal that does not include these certifications will be deemed unacceptable.

D. Volume III, Oral and Written Technical Proposal

1. General: Each offeror’s oral and written technical proposal shall be evaluated, based on the subfactors below, to determine if the offeror provides a sound, compliant approach that meets the requirements of the C2 Systems PWS dated, XXX and demonstrates a thorough knowledge and understanding of those requirements. The technical proposal must address each of the following subfactors in sufficient detail.

SUBFACTOR 1 and 2 will be evaluated as Acceptable or Unacceptable. SUBFACTOR 3 will be evaluated as a Trade-off.

Subfactor 1: Mission Essential Plan The offeror must submit a plan describing procedures for continuing performance of mission-essential services during a crisis. The Contractor shall identify provisions for ensuring required personnel and resources are available to support continuity of operations for up to 30 calendar days or until normal operations can be resumed.

This subfactor is met when the offeror’s proposal provides a plan that clearly addresses the personnel and resources required to support continuity of operations for up to 30 calendar days.

Subfactor 2: Oral Proposal The offeror must present an oral and functional demonstration that adequately demonstrates the proposed system meets the technical requirements, functionalities and performs at the capabilities outlined in the PWS. The oral proposal must demonstrate the functionalities identified in Attachment 1 of this solicitation.

This subfactor is met when the offeror provides a workable model and any supportive hardware or software of the proposed C2 platform for evaluation by the government. Government will not consider any products solutions not on the JITC APL. Non-DoD locations using the proposed systems will not be considered for evaluation by the Technical Evaluation Team. The model will be brought to HQ AFRC/A6 at Robins AFB GA at a designated time, for a full up demonstration. System will be hooked into a test database to determine operability. Inability to provide a workable model will be deemed unacceptable. This subfactor will evaluated as acceptable/unacceptable.

Subfactor 3: Written Proposal- The offeror must provide a detailed Technical Approach specifically identifying the approach/technology proposed, along with the standards utilized and the tools and methodologies of how the solution/approach is developed. This will be evaluated as a trade-off. This written proposal shall also include a Life Cycle Management Plan, Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) and any functionalities that enhance the mission capabilities. The written technical proposal and these three areas will be evaluated as a trade-off.

This subfactor is met when the offeror’s proposal clearly demonstrates an understanding of the requirements set forth in the PWS and adequately articulates their proposed approach for meeting all requirements set forth within the PWS.

A. Life Cycle Management Plan (5 Pages)- The offeror must submit a written plan for the sustainability of the installed systems throughout the life of the contract (5 years). This plan must specifically address end of life equipment and the plan to support AFRC Command Posts. Trade-off This subfactor is met when the offerors proposal adequately addresses sustainment of the systems, to include all hardware, software and accessories, through the life of the contract, five years. A strength will be given to the solution that allows for continuous modernization of software and one that AFRC owns the data rights which may be adopted at the end of life of the contract. A robust life cycle management plan will be considered during the trade-off evaluation decision.

B. Integrated Master Schedule (IMS)(3 Pages)- The offeror must submit a proposed master schedule, including details/plans for removals/installs at the locations included in the PWS by 20 Dec 19. Trade-off This subfactor is met when the offerors proposed schedule for the removal of legacy systems and installation of new systems, IAW the PWS, are adequately addressed and scheduled in the required timeframe by 20 Dec 19 or before. A strength will be given for earlier completion. Efficiency in schedule will be considered in the trade-off decision.

C. Enhancements (3 Pages) Functionalities that enhance mission capabilities above the minimum requirements stated in the PWS. Or provide statement that you are only providing minimal requirements and you have no enhancements Trade-off This subfactor is met when the offerors proposal contains functionalities over and above those cited in the PWS that will enhance mission capabilities. Or provide statement that you are only providing minimal requirements and you have no enhancements NOTE: Technical proposals will be incorporated into the contract at time of award.

2. Technical Rating: The technical rating reflects the evaluation of the acceptability of the offeror’s technical approach for meeting the Government’s requirement. The offeror’s proposal shall be evaluated for Subfactors 1 and 2 to determine whether the proposal is acceptable or unacceptable, using the ratings and descriptions outlined in the Table A below. One technical rating will be assigned to each technical subfactor. In order to be considered awardable, there must be an “acceptable” rating in every subfactor. Subfactor 3 will be evaluated using the Technical Rating Method in Table B below. The color/adjectival rating depicts how well the offeror’s proposal meets the technical subfactor requirements. Subfactor ratings shall not be rolled up into an overall color/adjectival rating for the technical factor.

Table A. Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings: Subfactors 1 and 2

Table B. Subfactor 3

E. Cost/Price Proposal Factor Offerors whose price is determined to be unreasonable, unbalanced, or unaffordable may not be considered for award.

(1) The offeror’s Price proposal will be evaluated, for award purposes, based upon the total price proposed for basic requirements (basic award) and all options.

(2) Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise such options.

(3) Reasonableness: The existence of adequate price competition is expected to support a determination of reasonableness. Price analysis techniques may be used to further validate price reasonableness. If adequate price competition is not obtained 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.

(4) Balance: Offerors are cautioned against submitting an offer that contains unbalanced pricing. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of proposal analysis techniques. The Government shall analyze offers to determine whether there are unbalanced separately priced line items or sub-line items. Prices submitted will be compared and evaluated to assure that a logical progression exists as related to price and quantity changes within each offeror’s response to the pricing structure in Section B. Offerors that are determined to be unbalanced may be rejected if the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

(5) FFP- The Total Evaluated Price (TEP) shall be calculated by calculating the extended prices (Quantity x Unit Price) for all of the firm fixed price CLINS and the corresponding Option CLINS and then totaling those amounts.

(6) For evaluation purposes only, CLINS X004 and X005 will be evaluated utilizing the Quantity of 5 multiplied by the unit price proposed for a total price.

(7) Cost Reimbursable CLIN for travel will not be evaluated.

In addition to filling out your pricing in Schedule B, the offeror’s shall complete the pricing in the excel spreadsheet, Attachment 2 of the Solicitation, to include the total evaluated price.