Combined_Synopsis_Solicitation_-_FM_Admin.pdf

Combined Synopsis/Solicitation

For

Financial Management Administrative Assistant at Barksdale AFB, LA

(1) This solicitation is a 100% Small Business set-aside. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code is 561110 - Other Administrative Services with a Small Business Size Standard of $7.5M.

(2) The purpose of this combined synopsis and solicitation is to provide administrative services, in accordance with this PWS, to support AFGSC/FM at Barksdale AFB, Bossier City, LA with one (1) Contracted Man-year Equivalent (CME). The main purpose for this contract is to serve as the principal office assistant performing various administrative and clerical duties in support of the AFGSC/FM Directorate. The bid schedule and the contract CLIN schedule are:

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QTY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

CLIN 0001

Financial Management Administrative Assistant

FFP

Provide one (1) Contracted Man-year Equivalents (CME) to provide “on-site” Administrative Assistance IAW the PWS.

Period of Performance is 15 Sep 2018 – 14 Mar 2019

6 Months

CLIN 1001

Financial Management Administrative Assistant

FFP

Provide one (1) Contracted Man-year Equivalents (CME) to provide “on-site” Administrative Assistance IAW the PWS.

Period of Performance is 15 Mar 2019 – 14 Mar 2020

12 Months

CLIN 2001

Financial Management Administrative Assistant

FFP

Provide one (1) Contracted Man-year Equivalents (CME) to provide “on-site” Administrative Assistance IAW the PWS.

Period of Performance is 15 Mar 2020 – 14 Mar 2021

12 Months

CLIN 3001

Financial Management Administrative Assistant

FFP

Provide one (1) Contracted Man-year Equivalents (CME) to provide “on-site” Administrative Assistance IAW the PWS.

Period of Performance is 15 Mar 2021 – 14 Mar 2022

12 Months

CLIN 4001

Financial Management Administrative Assistant

FFP

Provide one (1) Contracted Man-year Equivalents (CME) to provide “on-site” Administrative Assistance IAW the PWS.

Period of Performance is 15 Mar 2022 – 14 Mar 2023

12 Months

(3) Refer to the attached PWS for a detailed description of requirements for the service being acquired.

(4) Period of Performance is as follows:

CLIN 0001 15 September 2018 – 14 March 2019

CLIN 1001 15 March 2019 – 14 March 2020 CLIN 2001 15 March 2020 – 14 March 2021 CLIN 3001 15 March 2021 – 14 March 2022 CLIN 4001 15 March 2022 – 14 March 2023

(5) 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors -- Commercial, applies to this acquisition. With the following addendum:

52.212-1 Addendum

The offeror agrees to hold the prices in its offer firm for 90 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of offers.

PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

1. General Instructions

1.1. To assure timely and equitable evaluation of the proposal, the offeror must follow the instructions contained herein. The proposal must be complete, self-sufficient, and respond directly to the requirements of this solicitation. The response shall consist of two (2) separate proposal volumes: Volume I – Mission Capability (Technical), and Volume II – Price.

1.2. ONLY THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF INFORMATION REQUIRED TO PROVIDE

FOR PROPER EVALUATIONS IS REQUESTED. EFFORTS SHOULD BE MADE TO

KEEP OFFERS AS CONCISE AS POSSIBLE WITH THE EMPHASIS BEING ON

PROVIDING INFORMATION ESSENTIAL FOR PROPER EVALUATION. The proposal shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail to provide for adequate evaluation and for substantiation of the validity of stated claims. Submitted documents must contain adequate information to enable the evaluation board to fully ascertain offerors capability to perform contract requirements, must meet the requirements of the RFP, and must address the evaluation factors for award.

1.3. The contracting officer has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition. Upon examination of the initial offers, the contracting officer will review this determination and, if in the contracting officer’s opinion adequate price competition exists, no additional cost information will be requested and certification under FAR 15.406-2 will not be required. However, if at any time during this competition the contracting officer determines that adequate price competition no longer exists offerors may be required to submit information other than cost or pricing data to support a determination of price reasonableness.

Offerors are cautioned to submit their best pricing and technical information up-front.

1.4. All information contained in the proposal that an offeror feels is “Proprietary Information”, and therefore, not releasable under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), should be labeled “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104”.

1.5. Offerors shall acknowledge, in writing, awareness of all amendments to the solicitation.

1.6. Specific Instructions:

1.6.1. Documents submitted in response to this solicitation must be fully responsive to and consistent with the following:

- Requirements of the solicitation (Item Numbers) and Performance Work Statement (PWS), and government standards and regulations pertaining to the PWS.

- Evaluation Factors for Award.

2. Formal Communications

2.1. Any formal communication shall be submitted in writing (via email) to the POCs below. It is the offeror’s responsibility to confirm receipt of all formal communications.

AFICA/767 SCONF

Regina C. Blue 841 Fairchild Ave, Room 327 Barksdale AFB, LA 71110 Email: regina.blue@us.af.mil

AMRDEC Safe: https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe/Default.aspx Reference: Solicitation FA6800-18-Q-S025

AFICA/767 SCONF

Maj Patrick Graham 841 Fairchild Ave, Room 327 Barksdale AFB, LA 71110 Email: patrick.graham@us.af.mil

AMRDEC Safe: https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe/Default.aspx Reference: Solicitation FA6800-18-Q-S025 mailto:john.sidor@us.af.mil mailto:patrick.graham@us.af.mil

3. Advanced Questions

3.1. Advanced questions concerning this solicitation may be submitted in writing (via email) to the POC listed above, clearly marked as “Advanced Questions” to include solicitation number, name of person submitting the question(s), company name, and phone number. Each question should reference the specific section, paragraph, and/or attachment number of the solicitation or PWS (as applicable).

3.2. Advanced questions must be received by AFICA/767 SCONF, NLT 16 July 2018 by 4:00 PM (CST) in order for an appropriate response to be given.

4. Submission of Proposals

4.1. The original proposal and copies as specified in this document shall be sent to the issuing office on or before the date and time specified in this solicitation. Please mark all packages as follows:

Via Email:

Subject: Company Name , Solicitation No. FA6800-18-Q-S025, Volume # and Title

Via AMRDEC File Description: Company Name , Solicitation No. FA6800-18-Q-S025, Volume # and Title

4.2. 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 the proposal being considered unawardable by the Government and eliminated from consideration for award. Late proposal will be processed in accordance with FAR 52.212-1(f) “Late submission, modifications, revisions, and withdrawals of offers”. If the proposal is received late, the Government will retain the electronic proposal; a determination will be made after receipt of proposals if the late proposal will be accepted and evaluated IAW FAR 52.212-1(f)(2)(i),

5. Proposal Preparation Instructions

5.1. The following instructions prescribes the format for proposals, and describes the approach to be used for the development and presentation of the proposal data. The proposal shall include all of the information requested in the specified instructions. Failure to include all information requested may adversely affect the evaluation and may result in a determination that the proposal is unawardable. A proposal that merely reiterates or promises to accomplish the requirements of the PWS will be considered unacceptable. A proposal that is orderly and sufficiently documented will enable the Government to easily understand the proposal and perform a thorough and fair evaluation. The Government may incorporate into the contract, by reference or full text, portions of the successful offeror’s proposal as revised and supplemented through the Final Proposal Revision submitted in response to the solicitation.

5.2. Proposal Volumes. Proposals shall be prepared in two (2) separate and distinct volumes:

Volume I – Mission Capability (Technical) Volume II – Price

5.3. Proposal Format. Specific guidance regarding format and content is discussed in the following paragraphs. The Government will only read/evaluate the maximum number of pages allowed. The proposal content should be formatted as follows:

a. Text: Single-spaced and printed on double-sides paper. Each side counts as 1 page (e.g.

two pages per sheet of paper).

b. Font Size: Microsoft Office Word, Times New Roman, 12 font (except for headlines, titles, etc.).

c. Margins: One inch (1”) left, right, top, bottom.

d. Paper Size: 8½” x 11” with a background color of white or ivory stock only.

e. Page Numbering: Sequential (i.e. 1 through 100).

Note: The font size requirements do not apply to charts, graphs, tables, etc.; however, the font size must be reasonable and easily readable. Also, page numbering within each volume must be sequential throughout the entire document. New chapters/sections do not restart the page numbering for that volume.

5.4. Electronic Copies. Electronic Copies: Electronic copies shall be submitted via email or on AMRDEC Safe using Microsoft Office 97 through Microsoft Office 2010, or Adobe PDF Version X or earlier, with the exception of Volume II, Price (Section 2.0. of the RFP). Section

2.0. shall be submitted in Microsoft Excel format only. Offerors may use JPEG for charts or “screen shots”. Offerors shall name files using standard naming conventions (i.e. filename.docx for MS Word, filename.xlsx for MS Excel, filename.pdf for Portable Document Format, etc.).

DO NOT submit any documents in PDF format that are copied as “images” or Windows Photo Gallery, etc. PDF files shall enable textual search and copy functions. Each volume shall be in a single searchable, editable, file and stored in a folder that corresponds to the proposal volume it represents. The files shall be names in an unambiguous manner using plain language text which facilitates the evaluator’s ease of accessing the files for evaluation. Offerors shall insert the file name in the header of each document. Electronic copies of all proposal information are required for each volume.

5.5. Copies and Page Limit. Evaluators will only read up to the maximum number of pages specified. All pages provided by the offeror in excess of the stated limitations will be returned to the offeror unread. The Government will not include the following in the page limitations: Cover page(s), title pages, table of contents, tab/section divider pages, technical definition page(s), acronym list, or cross reference matrix. Note: These pages will be counted if they contain any other information (i.e. diagrams, extraneous data, etc.). Pages marked “This Page Intentionally

Left Blank” will also not be counted. Page limitations is subject to exclusions stated in the paragraph titled “Exceptions” below. Copy requirements and page limitations are as follows:

VOL TITLE PAPER

COPIES

CD ROM Page Limit Notes

I* MISSION CAPABILITY 3*** 1 50 1 redacted II PRICE 2 1 None

* Executive Summary shall be included in Volume I – Mission Capability, limited to 2 pages, and does not count against the 50 page limit for that volume. Résumés for each CME proposed should be tailored to address the respective evaluation criteria and shall not be more than three

(3) pages each. Offerors are required to only submit one (1) résumé per CME proposed.

*** In the “Notes” column of the above table, 2 of the 3 required copies of the Mission Capability volume shall be redacted for the following information: Company name and any other specific identifying trademarks, symbols, or emblems; company addresses and contact information; and CME résumés name and any other Personally Identifiable Information (PII).

5.6. “Original” Copy. One copy of each volume (Mission Capability, Price, and Past Performance) shall be marked “Original”.

5.7. Cross Referencing – Each volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated without cross referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Information required for proposal evaluation which is not found in its designated volume will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal. Cross-referencing within a proposal volume is permitted where its use would conserve space without impairing clarity.

6. Exceptions

6.1. If the offeror finds it necessary to take exception to any of the requirements specified in this solicitation, the offeror must clearly indicate such exception(s) in the appropriate volume along with a complete explanation of why the exception was taken and what benefit it accrues to the Government. All substantive exceptions to the solicitation requirements and supporting rationale shall be identified as such and consolidated into an overview section of the subject volume. An overview section is only required if the offeror takes exception to any requirements in the solicitation (the overview section will not be included in the proposal page limitation described above). While offerors may propose exceptions to the solicitation requirements, the Government is not obligated to accept or consider such exceptions. Further, exceptions could result in an unacceptable offer. Any change to the requirement as a result of accepting an exception shall be reflected within the resultant contract.

6.2. In the event the offeror takes no exception to the stated requirements, a statement to this effect is required at the front of each subject volume.

7. Instruction for Volume I – Mission Capability (Technical)

7.1. To facilitate the evaluation, the Mission Capability volume should be specific, detailed, and complete to clearly and fully demonstrate that the offeror has a thorough understanding of the requirements for the accomplishment of the effort. Statements that the offeror understand, can, or will comply with the PWS (including Air Force (AF) publications, technical requirements, etc.);

statements paraphrasing the PWS or parts thereof; and phrases such as “standard procedures will be employed”, “well known techniques will be used”, etc., will be considered unacceptable.

Offerors should note that data submitted prior to the proposal submission including data submitted for current contracts and other solicitations will not be considered in the Government’s evaluation. Therefore, such data should not be relied upon nor incorporated in the technical proposal by reference. Offerors shall address the requirements noted in this section by imperative verbs regardless of whether such requirements are preceded by “the offeror shall”. The offeror’s proposal shall, at a minimum, be prepared in a form consistent with the technical criteria set forth in 52.212-2 Addendum, Basis of Award, of this solicitation. All information that the offeror deems appropriate to address for this factor and its subfactors must be included in the proposal in an orderly format. The technical volume shall address all the technical subfactors.

7.2. Technical Contents:

A. Table of Contents – A table of contents shall be included in Volume I. Each subfactor and section shall be clearly marked and tabbed for easy reference. The pages shall be numbered sequentially in a consistent manner as stated under Proposal Preparation Instructions.

B. Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms – Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used with an explanation for each. Glossaries do not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes.

C. Executive Summary – Included in this volume is the offeror’s Executive Summary (limit is two (2) pages).

D. Summary – Describe the nature or portion of the work on the proposed effort to be performed by the offeror and any proposed subcontractor, partner, and/or joint venture partner(s). Also, estimate the percentage of the total proposed effort to be performed by each member. Limit this information to one (1) page.

E. Technical Solution – The purpose of this section is to allow the offeror to set forth in the most comprehensive manner its understanding of the program requirements and to demonstrate its ability to meet the evaluation requirements of 52.212-2 Addendum, Basis of Award, Factor A – Mission Capability (Technical). In this section, the offeror shall present a clear and concise description of how it plans to meet contract requirements. The offeror shall describe the performance standard that have been established in each area and explain how performance standards will be met or exceeded. This section shall not contain any pricing data. The offeror shall describe their proposed understanding of the program requirements and demonstrate their ability to meet the evaluation requirements of

Subfactors 1-5, as described in 52.212-2 Addendum, Basis of Award. The technical section shall be completed as follows:

1. Subfactor 1: Administrative Assistant (1 CME)

2. Subfactor 2: Contractor Facility Clearance

3. Subfactor 3: CME Résumé Certification

7.3. Offerors are reminded to only submit one (1) candidate per CME (2 total) and to tailor each résumé to address the evaluation criteria (maximum of 3 pages per résumé, copies of IT Certification are also required, but not included in the 3-page limit ). Although a signed “Letter of Intent” or similar document for each CME is not required, each proposed CME must be actively seeking employment and must have been in contact with your company in the past expressing a desire to be employed by your company (job fairs, interviews for previous positions, etc.).

If using a “candidate pool” of résumés that your HR department may have on file, at a minimum, offerors are required to verify the proposed candidates are still seeking employment and will consider filling a position on this contract should your company be the successful offeror. Offerors are prohibited from submitting candidates with whom they have not any interaction with in the past (i.e. simply pulling résumés from LinkedIn, Monster.com, etc.).

7.4. Failure to include all information requested may adversely affect the evaluation and may result in a determination that the proposal is unawardable. Award CANNOT be made to an unawardable offeror.

8. Instructions for Volume II – Price

8.1. The offeror shall complete the Schedule of Supplies and Services (CLINs) in section “v” of the RFP by inserting the price elements (unit price and extended amount) for all Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract line item numbers (CLINs) for the Base Year and all Option Years. The completed schedule must be returned with the solicitation as part of the Price Proposal. Any offer received without the completed schedule will be determined nonresponsive and will not be considered for award. For ease of administration, all Unit prices must be in whole dollar values (e.g. $10.00). The extended amount must equal the whole dollar unit price multiplied by the number of units (ensure you adjust for any rounding of figures done by MS Excel, etc.).

8.2. Representations and Certifications. Complete the required Representations and Certifications or indicate if information is contained in the System for Award Management (SAM) located at https://www.sam.gov.

https://www.sam.gov/

9. Debriefing of Offerors

Debriefings are conducted with the goal of identifying, to unsuccessful offerors, where changes can be made to improve future source selection participation.

(End of Addendum)

(ix) 52.212-2 – Evaluation – Commercial Items, applies to this acquisition as follows:

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) Technical Acceptability

2) Price

3) Past Performance

Technical acceptability and past performance, when combined, are approximately equal when compared to price.

(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)

52.212-2 Addendum

1. Basis of Award

1.1. This competitive best value source selection will be conducted using the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable source selection process in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation, Part 15, Contracting by Negotiation; the DoD Source Selection Procedures effective 1 April 2016; and Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFFARS) Mandatory Procedures 5315.3, Source Selection. One award will be made as a result of this solicitation to the offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with FAR Part 9 and whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements with an “Acceptable” rating in all technical subfactors.

If an offeror fails to meet all solicitation requirements, the Government may not make an award to that offeror.

1.2. IAW FAR 15.306, Exchanges With Offerors After Receipt of Proposals, and FAR 52.215-1, the Government intends to evaluate proposals and reserves the right to open discussions, or to award a contract without discussions, with offerors (except clarifications as describes in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determined them to be necessary.

1.3. The Government reserves the right to incorporate into this contract, by reference or full text, portions of the successful offeror’s proposal submitted in response to this solicitation and as revised and supplemented through the date of Final Proposal Revision (FPR). The Performance Work Statement (PWS) and the terms and conditions of this contract take precedence over any ambiguity in the contractor’s proposal. In those areas where the contractor’s proposal exceeds the stated PWS requirements, the contractor’s proposal is binding and prevails. The contractor is expected and required to adhere to their proposed approach in meeting the contract requirements.

1.4. 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.

2. Final Proposal Revisions (FPRs)

2.1. The Government reserves the right to open discussions, or to award without discussions, based on the initial proposals submitted. Therefore, offerors are cautioned to submit their best proposal initially. However, discussions may be held and result in FPRs. The intent of FPRs is for price changes only; however, technical changes will be evaluated. The Government cautions offerors not to change material aspects of their technical proposals as this could render the offeror’s proposal technically unacceptable, and therefore, unawardable. This provision is not intended to restrict the offeror’s opportunity to revise figures (i.e. 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 FRP that have not been fully disclosed, discussed, and understood during discussions or negotiations. 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. The Government intends to award after receipt of FPRs without obtaining any further revisions or conducting any further discussions.

3. Evaluation Methodology

3.1. The award decision will be made on the basis of Lowest Price Technically Acceptable. In order to be eligible for award, offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and evaluation factor requirements; and be deemed responsible in accordance with FAR Part 9. If an offeror fails to meet all solicitation requirements, the Government may not make an award to that offeror.

3.2. Proposals will be evaluated using three (3) Factors: (A) Mission Capability (Technical), (B) Price, and (C) Past Performance. There are two (2) Technical Subfactors within the Mission Capability Factor.

3.3. Proposals will be evaluated by Mission Capability (Technical), Price, and Past Performance.

The proposals will be evaluated for acceptability, but not ranked using the non-price factors/subfactors. In order to be considered awardable, there must be an “acceptable” rating in every non-price factor/subfactor. Price analysis will be used to determine the reasonabless of total evaluated price to support the selection of the lowest priced, technically acceptable offer.

Past performance will be rated on an “acceptable” or “unacceptable” basis. The Government reserves the right to award without discussions, open discussions, or to establish a competitive range IAW FAR 15.306(c). If discussions are utilized, Evaluation Notices (ENs) will be issued to those offerors in the competitive range allowing them the opportunity to revise their proposals.

Once the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) determines that all ENs have been satisfactorily answered, discussions will be closed. Once discussions have concluded, if an offeror’s proposal has an “Unacceptable” rating for any Technical Subfactor, this proposal will be unawardable. Proposals shall meet the PWS requirements and the evaluation criteria requirements in order to be considered for award.

4. Factor A – Mission Capability (Technical)

4.1. Initially, the Government Technical Evaluation Team shall evaluate the technical proposals on an “Acceptable/Unacceptable” basis assigning one of the ratings described below at the Subfactor level; an overall factor-level rating will not be assigned. The technical rating reflects the degree to which the offeror’s proposal meets or does not meet the minimum performance or capability requirements. The focus is on the ability of the offeror’s proposal to meet the minimum requirements of the PWS. 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 1 April 2016. To be eligible for award, offerors are required to receive an “Acceptable” rating in each Technical Subfactor. Proposals that exceed the evaluation criteria will not receive higher ratings. In assessing the acceptability of each Subfactor, any weaknesses or deficiencies will be noted in accordance with the definitions located in Section 5, Definitions, of the DoD Source Selection Procedures. Proposals that receive weaknesses in a Subfactor may receive an “Unacceptable” Subfactor rating depending on the nature of the weakness. Proposals that receive a deficiency in a Subfactor will receive an “Unacceptable” Subfactor rating.

Table C-1: Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Method Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

4.2. Offerors are again reminded to only submit one candidate per CME and to tailor the résumé to address the evaluation criteria (maximum of 3 pages per résumé). Although a signed “Letter of Intent” or similar document for each CME is not required, each proposed CME must be actively seeking employment and must have been in contact with your company in the past expressing a desire to be employed by your company (job fairs, interviews for previous positions, etc.). If using a “candidate pool” of résumés that your HR department may have on file, at a minimum, offerors are required to verify the proposed candidates are still seeking employment and will consider filling a position on this contract should your company be the successful offeror. Offerors are prohibited from submitting candidates with whom they have not any interaction with in the past (i.e. simply pulling résumés from LinkedIn, Monster.com, etc.).

4.3. Mission Capability (Technical) Subfactors

Subfactor 1 –Administrative Assistant (1 CME). The offeror’s proposed approach must provide a qualified CME who can successfully accomplish mission requirements. This Subfactor is met when the offeror’s proposed CME meets the following requirements IAW PWS paragraph 2.1.1:

a. CME must have a minimum of 4 years of education above the high school level obtained in an accredited business, secretarial or technical school, junior college, college or university.

b. CME must possess a minimum of an active SECRET Clearance.

Subfactor 2 – Facility Clearance. Offeror must provide evidence that their company possesses a minimum of an active (final adjudicated) SECRET Facility Clearance from the Defense Security Service (DSS) Facility Clearance Branch (FCB) at time of proposal submission IAW PWS paragraph 2.3.1.

Subfactor 3 - CME Résumé Certification

The Government request verification that the proposed CMEs are actively seeking employment at the time of proposal submission or that the proposed CMEs have given their consent for the offeror to use their résumés. The offeror will receive an acceptable rating for this subfactor if the offeror’s proposal details:

a. Signed CME Résumé Certification Form (Attachment 3) which certifies that each proposed CME is actively seeking employment and has been in contact with your company expressing a desire to be employed by your company (job fairs, interviews for previous positions, etc.) or that the proposed CMEs have given their consent for the offeror to use their résumés.

5. Factor B – Price

5.1. Next, the Government shall rank all technically acceptable offers by price, including all option prices. An offeror’s proposed prices will be determined by multiplying the quantities identified in the schedule by the proposed unit price for each Contract Line Item Number to confirm the extended amount for each. The price evaluation will document the reasonableness and affordability of the proposed total evaluated price. As part of the price evaluation, the Government will evaluate the Option to Extend Services, under FAR Clause 52.217-8, by adding one-half of the offeror’s final option-period prices to the offeror’s total price. Thus, the offeror’s total price for the purpose of evaluation will include the Base Period and all Option Periods, including the potential six-month extension of services period. Offerors are required to price the Base and Option CLINs. Offerors shall not submit a price for the potential six-month extension of services period.

Note: Evaluation of the Option Periods shall not obligate the Government to exercise such options.

5.2. Price will be evaluated using techniques established in FAR 15.404-1 to ensure the Government receives a fair, reasonable, and balanced prices.

5.3. In addition to the price analysis as described in FAR 15.404-1(b), price proposals will be analyzed to identify any potential unbalanced pricing (see FAR 15.404-1(g)). If the Government sees a wide variation in proposed CLIN prices, the Technical Evaluation Team will be informed as soon as possible during the initial evaluation of proposals so the appropriate personnel may seek clarity through offeror exchanges. Absent any issues related to the stated requirement, unbalanced pricing may pose an unacceptable risk to the Government and may be a reason to reject an offeror’s proposal.

5.4. There is a great expectation of competition for this requirement; thus, offerors are cautioned to present their best price proposal up-front. The offeror’s price proposal shall represent the offeror’s best effort to respond to the solicitation. In instances where proposed prices appear exceptionally low, offerors may be requested to address this disparity, providing evidence of their capability and/or experience providing similar service(s) at similar price(s). An exceptionally or unrealistically low offer may pose an unacceptable risk to the Government and may be a reason to reject an offeror’s proposal.

5.5. If the Government cannot determine the proposed pricing to be fair and reasonable, other than certified cost and pricing data will be obtained from the offerors.

6. Factor C – Past Performance

6.1. The Government evaluators, known as the Past Performance Evaluation Team, will conduct an in-depth review and evaluation of all performance data obtained through other Government sources, to determine how closely the work performed under those efforts relates to the proposed effort.

6.2. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation. The first is to determine whether the offeror’s performance information is recent. The second is to determine if the performance information is relevant to the effort to be acquired (this acquisition). The third aspect is to determine how well the offeror performed on those contracts and the quality of the product or service provided.

6.3. For purposes of this evaluation, the terms “offeror” and “Prime contractor” are the same.

Where the offeror proposes any subcontractor, partner, or Joint Venture partner or other arrangement, the Government will consider the offeror’s performance information as a whole record. If an offeror is proposing as a sole entity, then the performance information will be evaluated on the individual basis. Each offeror will receive an integrated assessment. This assessment may include the recent and relevant present/past performance information relative to the amount and type of work to be performed by each entity of the offeror’s team. Further, if proposing such arrangements/subcontractor(s), the offeror will be required to indicate the scope of work the subcontractor(s), partner(s), etc. will perform (both nature of work, criticality of the work, and percentage of overall effort). In determining relevancy for individual contracts, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the offeror, partner, subcontractor, etc. whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated. The Government will base the relevancy determination on the portion of the effort accomplished, compared to the related portion of the proposed effort.

6.4. Past Performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractor that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirements will be considered as past performance information for each offeror.

6.5. Past performance data will be obtained through sources such as the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), through Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) channels, interviews with Program Managers and Contracting Officers, or other sources known to the Government. Data from previous source selections or contractor capability assessments should be used if the data is recent and relevant. The Past Performance Evaluation Team will review the past performance information and determine the quality of the product or service provided as it applied to the performance assessment. The Government is not bound by the offeror’s opinion of relevancy.

6.6. Past performance will be rated on an “acceptable” or “unacceptable” basis.

(x) Include a completed copy of the provision at 52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications -- Commercial Items, with your offer.

(xi) Clause at 52.212-4, Contract Terms and Conditions -- Commercial Items, applies to this acquisition.

(xii) Clause at 52.212-5, Contract Terms and Conditions Required To Implement Statutes Or Executive Orders -- Commercial Items, applies to this acquisition with the following clauses cited within the clause applicable to this acquisition:

http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/52_000.htm#P1479_204463 http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/52_000.htm#P1760_244281 http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/52_000.htm#P1959_284871

52.203-6, Restrictions on Subcontractor Sales to the Government (Sept 2006), with Alternate I (Oct 1995) (41 U.S.C. 253g and 10 U.S.C. 2402) 52.204-10, Reporting Executive Compensation and First-Tier Subcontract Awards (Oct 2015) (Pub. L. 109-282) (31 U.S.C. 6101 note) 52.209-6, Protecting the Government’s Interest When Subcontracting with Contractors Debarred, Suspended, or Proposed for Debarment. (Oct 2015) (31 U.S.C. 6101 note) 52.219-6, Notice of Total Small Business Set-Aside (Nov 2011) (15 U.S.C. 644) 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns (Oct 2014) (15 U.S.C. 637(d)(2) and (3)) 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting (Nov 2011) (15 U.S.C. 637(a)(14)) 52.219-28, Post Award Small Business Program Rerepresentation (Jul 2013) (15 U.S.C.

632(a)(2)) 52.222-3, Convict Labor (June 2003) (E.O. 11755) 52.222-17, Nondisplacement of Qualified Workers (May 2014) 52.222-19, Child Labor – Cooperation with Authorities and Remedies (Feb 2016) (E.O.

13126) 52.222-21, Prohibition of Segregated Facilities (Apr 2015) 52.222-26, Equal Opportunity (Apr 2015) (E.O. 11246) 52.222-35, Equal Opportunity for Veterans (Oct 2015)(38 U.S.C. 4212) 52.222-36, Affirmative Action for Workers with Disabilities (Jul 2014) (29 U.S.C. 793) 52.222-37, Employment Reports on Veterans (Feb 2016) (38 U.S.C. 4212) 52.222-40, Notification of Employee Rights Under the National Labor Relations Act (Dec 2010) (E.O. 13496) 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking In Persons (Mar 2015) 52.222-54, Employment Eligibility Verification (Oct 2015) 52.223-18, Encouraging Contractor Policies to Ban Text Messaging While Driving (Aug 2011) (E.O. 13513) 52.225-3, Buy American - Free Trade Agreement (May 2014) 52.225-13, Restriction on Certain Foreign Purchases (Jun 2008) (E.O.’s, proclamations, and statutes administered by the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the Department of the Treasury).

52.232-33, Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer— System for Award Management (Jul 2013) (31 U.S.C. 3332)

(xiii) The following additional clauses and provisions apply to this solicitation and are included by reference. Clauses with an asterisk indicate they will be incorporated by full text in the actual contract award (contact the CO with any questions you may have pertaining to the fill-in data if you feel it may have an effect on your proposal):

52.203-3, Gratuities (Apr 1984) 52.203-12, Limitation on Payments to Influence Certain Federal Transactions (Oct 2010) 52.203-16, Preventing Personal Conflicts of Interest (Dec 2011) 52.204-9, Personal Identify Verification of Contractor Personnel (Jan 2011)

* 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services (Nov 1999)

* 52.217-9, Option to Extend the Term of the Contract. (Mar 2000) 52.219-1 Alt 1 Small Business Programs Representations - Alternate I (Sep 2015) 52.222-17, Nondisplacement of Qualified Workers (May 2014)

* 52.222-42, Statement of Equivalent Rates for Federal Hires. (May 2014) 52.222-46, Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees (Feb 1993) 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons (Mar 2015) 52.224-1, Privacy Act Notification (Apr 1984) 52.224-2, Privacy Act (Apr 1984) 52.225-25, Prohibition on Contracting with Entities Engaging in Certain Activities or Transactions Relating to Iran—Representation and Certification (Oct 2015) 52.232-8, Discounts for Prompt Payment (Feb 2002) 52.232-23, Assignment of Claims (May 2014) 52.232-33, Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer—System for Award Management (Jul 2013) 52.232-40, Providing Accelerated Payments to Small Business Subcontractors (Dec 2013) 52.233-3, Protest After Award (Aug 1996) 52.237-2, Protection of Government Buildings, Equipment, and Vegetation (Apr 1984) 52.237-3, Continuity of Services (Jan 1991) 52.246-4, Inspection of Services—Fixed Price (Aug 1996)

* 52.252-5, Authorized Deviations in Provisions (Apr 1984)

* 52.252-6, Authorized Deviations in Clauses (Apr 1984) 252.201-7000, Contracting Officer's Representative (Dec 1991) 252.203-7000, Requirements Relating to Compensation of Former DoD Officials (Sep 2011) 252.203-7002, Requirement to Inform Employees of Whistleblower Rights (Sep 2013) 252.204-7003, Control of Government Personnel Work Product (Apr 1992)

252.204-7008, Compliance with Safeguarding Covered Defense Information Controls (Dec 2015) 252.204-7009, Limitations on the Use or Disclosure of Third-Party Contractor Reported Cyber Incident Information (Dec 2015) 252.204-7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting (Dec 2015) 252.209-7004, Subcontracting with Firms That Are Owned or Controlled by the Government of a Country That is a State Sponsor of Terrorism (Oct 2015) 252.209-7999, Representation by Corporations Regarding an Unpaid Delinquent Tax Liability or a Felony Conviction under any Federal Law (Jun 2016) 252.226-7001, Utilization of Indian Organizations, Indian Owned Economic Enterprises, and Native Hawaiian Small Business Concerns (Sep 2004) 252.232-7003, Electronic Submission of Payment Requests (Jun 2012)

* 252.232-7006, Wide Area Workflow Payment Instructions (May 2013) 252.232-7010, Levies on Contract Payments (Dec 2006) 252.243-7002, Request for Equitable Adjustment (Dec 2012)

* 5352.201-9101, Ombudsman (Jun 2016)

* 5352.204-9000, Notification of Government Security Activity and Visitor Group Security Agreements (Mar 2012)

* 5352.215-9000, Facility Clearance (May 1996)

* 5352.223-9000, Elimination of Use of Class I Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS) (Nov 2012) (No substances identified)

* 5352.223-9001, Health and Safety on Government Installations (Nov 2012)

* 5352.242-9000, Contractor Access To Air Force Installations (Nov 2012)

* 5352.242-9001, CAC for Contractor (Nov 2012)

The following additional clauses and provisions apply to this solicitation and are included by full text:

52.252-2 Clauses Incorporated By Reference (Feb 1998)

This contract incorporates one or more clauses by reference, with the same force and effect as if they were given in full text. Upon request, the Contracting Officer will make their full text available. Also, the full text of a clause may be accessed electronically at this/these address(es):

http://farsite.hill.af.mil/vffara.htm http://farsite.hill.af.mil/vfdfara.htm http://farsite.hill.af.mil/vfaffara.htm http://farsite.hill.af.mil/vffara.htm http://farsite.hill.af.mil/vfdfara.htm http://farsite.hill.af.mil/vfaffara.htm

(End of Clause)

(xiv) Reserved

(xv) Any advanced questions pertaining to this requirement (i.e. PWS clarifications, etc.) must be submitted NLT 15 August 2018, at 3:00 PM Central Time. Proposals, to include Volumes I – Mission Capability (Technical), and Volume II – Price, are due NLT 24 August 2018, at 4:00 PM Central Time. Proposals are requested to be sent IAW 52.212-1 Addendum Section 4, Submission of Proposals, to the Contracting Officer, Regina Blue.

(xvi) Please contact Regina Blue at 318-456-8295 or regina.blue@us.af.mil with any questions.

mailto:john.sidor@us.af.mil

List of Attachments

Attachment 1 Performance Work Statement Attachment 2 DD254 – Contract Security Requirements Attachment 3 DOJ Wage Determination