Attachment_4_FAP_West_-1_ _-2.pdf

FA8052-16-R-0012

Addendum to 52.212-1 -- Instructions to Offerors -- Commercial Items.

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

This section of the Request for Proposal (RFP) provides general guidance for preparing proposals as well as specific instructions about the format of the proposal. The offeror's proposal must include all data and information requested in the RFP. The offeror shall comply with the solicitation requirements as stated and the Performance Work

Statement (PWS). The offeror’s proposal must reflect a thorough understanding of the services required and display a logical presentation of the offeror's capability to perform all tasks.

ONLY THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF INFORMATION REQUIRED TO PROVIDE FOR PROPER

EVALUATION 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, shall be concise, and shall 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 team to fully ascertain offerors capability to perform contract requirements, must meet the requirements of the RFP, and must address the evaluation factors for award. All information contained in the proposal that an offeror feels is proprietary should be labeled “Source Selection

Information—See FAR 2.101 and 3.104.”

Offerors shall acknowledge awareness of all amendments to the solicitation by signing and dating Page 1 of each

Standard Form 30, Amendment of Solicitation/Modification of Contract, and including it in Volume IV, General, of the proposal.

Period for acceptance of offers. The offeror agrees to hold the prices in its offer firm for 180 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of offers.

FORMAL COMMUNICATIONS

Please inform the Government on your intention to prime on this effort by 27 June 2016, 12:00 P.M. CST via the emails listed below.

Any formal communication such as requests for clarification and requests for information concerning this solicitation must be submitted in writing not later than 27 June 2016, 12:00 P.M. CST via e-mail to the addresses listed below:

AFICA 773 ESS/PK

Reference: Solicitation No. FA8052-16-R-0012

E-Mail: andrew.geisel.3@us.af.mil and steven.lewis.41@us.af.mil

SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS

Proposal Delivery Instructions

The proposal shall be emailed to 773ess.pk.proposal@us.af.mil on or before the date and time specified in Block 8 of

Standard Form (SF) 1449; Solicitation/Contract/Order for Commercial Items.

The Proposal shall be received no later than 12:00 PM Central Time, 7 July 2016. All proposals shall be mailed to the following address: 773 ESS/PKB, ATTN: Andrew Geisel, 210-395-9380; 773 ESS, 3515 S. General McMullen, Ste 200, San Antonio, TX. 78226-1865 (UPS/FEDEX/DHL) or 773 ESS, 2261 Hughes Ave, Ste 162, Lackland AFB, TX 78236-9856

(US MAIL). Your package must show the Solicitation Number and the name and address of the Offeror. All proposals must be in English.

It is the responsibility of each Offeror to ensure that their proposals reach the designated mailing address above on or before the request for proposal due date/time established in this RFP. 773 ESS/PKB is not responsible for lost proposals and proposals delivered to locations other than the location outlined in paragraph above.

mailto:andrew.geisel.3@us.af.mil mailto:steven.lewis.41@us.af.mil mailto:773ess.pk.proposal@us.af.mil

The e-mail Subject line shall state the following:

Proposal for Solicitation No. FA8052-16-R-0012, ATTN: Mr. Andrew Geisel and Steven Lewis, AFICA 773 ESS/PKB

E-mail size shall not exceed 10MB. Multiple e-mails are allowed for proposal package submission. Where multiple e-mails are submitted offeror’s shall indicate in the subject line how many e-mails are being sent (e.g. 1 of 3, 2 of 3, 3 of 3). Offerors are advised to strictly comply with all instructions within this solicitation in order to ensure their submission of complete proposals. Failure to furnish a complete proposal at the time of proposal submission may result in the proposal being unacceptable to the Government and eliminated from consideration for award. The

Government will not accept any changes to the offeror’s original proposal after the offer due date for receipt of proposals. (See FAR 15.208; Submission, modification, revision, and withdrawal of proposals, for information regarding late proposals.)

DISPOSITION OF UNSUCCESSFUL PROPOSALS

In compliance with FAR Subpart 4.8, Government Contract Files, the Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals. Additional copies of unsuccessful proposals will be destroyed.

PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

The following instructions prescribe the format for proposals, and describe 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 specific instructions. Failure to include all information requested may adversely affect the evaluation and may result in a determination that the proposal is non-responsive. 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 of it.

Proposal Format. A complete proposal consists of four (4) separate volumes; Technical Capability, Past

Performance, Price, and General. Type format shall be Microsoft Word Times New Roman Font Size 12 with normal proportional spacing with the exception of charts. Text lines shall be single-spaced. The font style and size for graphics, tables, organizational charts, drawings, and other inserts shall be Arial 10. The background color of each page of the proposal shall be white or ivory only. Evaluators will only read up to the maximum number of pages specified. Information submitted shall not exceed the page limits stated for each volume. If the page limit is exceeded, the pages that exceed the limit shall be removed from the volume, will not be considered as part of the proposal, and will not be read.

Copy Requirement/Page Limitation. Electronic copies of all of the proposal information for each volume are required. Electronic copies shall be submitted using the following programs, Microsoft Word 97 or later versions or

Adobe PDF, with the exception of Volume III, Price; Section 3, Schedule of Supplies and Services (CLINS), which shall be submitted as a Microsoft Excel document. Offerors may use JPEG for charts or screen shots.

Offerors shall name files using standard naming conventions, e.g., filename.doc for MS Word, filename.xls for MS

Excel, filename.PDF for Portable Document Format, etc. Each volume shall be in a single searchable file. Each file may be a zip file, but use of a zip file is not mandatory. Each file shall be entitled with the proposal volume name.

The files shall be named in an unambiguous manner using plain language text in order to facilitate the evaluators’ ease in accessing the files for evaluation. Offerors shall insert the file name in the header of each document. Copy requirements and page limitations are as follows:

Number & Type of Copies Required

VOLUME TITLE

NO. HARD

COPIES

NO. OF DIGITAL

COPIES

PAGE LIMITS

I Technical 1 1 15

II

Past Performance

Information 1 1

30 Excluding CPARS or equivalent performance documents

III Price 1 1 No Page Limit

IV General 1 1 No Page Limit

Page Limits. The page limits prescribed in the table above are maximum page limits for each Volume. Pages submitted in excess of these limits will not be considered in the Government’s evaluation of the Proposal. The

Government may also place page limits on responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs). These page limits will be prescribed in CO letters forwarding ENs to each Offeror. Cover pages, tables of contents, tab separator pages, and glossaries shall not be counted against prescribed page limits nor evaluated.

Page Definition. A page shall be an 8 1/2-inch by 11-inch sheet of paper. The minimum page margin (top, bottom, left, and right) that may be used is 1/2-inch. Fold-out pages will be counted as the appropriate number of pages based on an 8 1/2-inch by 11-inch sheet of paper. The Government requires that offerors number each page. In the event of an ambiguity in regard to the page count, the Government may exercise discretion in determining the page count. Two pages may be printed on one sheet of paper; they will count as two pages. All material shall be contained within the page limit identified for each volume unless otherwise specified. All appendices, charts, graphs, diagrams, tables, photographs, drawings et cetera are included in the page count. Offerors are instructed to specifically identify and separate all pages that are not included in the page count.

EXCEPTIONS

Offerors are advised that taking exception to any of the requirements specified in this solicitation may result in their proposals being found unacceptable. Since the Government intends to award without discussions, offerors are advised of the possibility that their proposals may be found unacceptable if they take exceptions to solicitation requirements. Clarification of Government requirements should be requested by the offeror by submitting questions and/or recommended changes by 10 days after issuance of the solicitation. All exceptions to the solicitation requirements (including the PWS) and supporting rationale shall be identified as such and consolidated into an overview section of subject volume. An overview section is only required if the offeror takes exception to any requirement in the solicitation. The overview section will not be included in the page count. Exception(s) to solicitation requirements may require the Government to amend the solicitation to reflect requirement change(s). If the offeror takes no exception to the stated requirements, a statement to this effect shall be included in the respective volume.

INSTRUCTIONS FOR VOLUME I, TECHNICAL CAPABILITY, FACTOR 1

Offerors’ Technical Capability information, Volume I, shall be provided in a format that facilitates an assessment according to the technical capability evaluation criteria set forth in Addendum to 52.212-2 of this solicitation. The volume shall include a Cross Reference Matrix with the Technical Capability factor listed below.

The matrix shall identify where the information is addressed in the technical volume that pertains to this factor.

Factor 1, Management Approach:

Submit a Staffing Plan that provides the following:

(a) The offeror’s overall management approach for supplying qualified personnel in accordance with the PWS.

(b) The offeror’s approach to provide training and education to maintain current licensing for contractor personnel and validate contractor personnel licensure where required (retention/recruiting plan).

(c) Each offeror shall demonstrate at least three years’ experience in applying its management approach to support the sourcing, hiring, managing, placing, and training of a commercial workforce across CONUS.

Subcontractor’s management approach shall not be included for this requirement. The Government will validate all submittals with the Small Business Administration (SBA).

INSTRUCTIONS FOR VOLUME II, PAST PERFORMANCE, FACTOR 2

Offerors’ Past Performance information, Volume II, shall be provided in a format that facilitates an assessment according to the past performance evaluation criteria set forth in Addendum to 52.212-2 of this solicitation. The

Government requests that such information be provided, to the extent it is available, of the Prime Contractor and all subcontractors, teaming partners, and joint venture partners who will perform 30 percent, or more of the proposed effort based upon total proposed price or perform aspects of the effort that the Offeror considers critical to successful performance.

Unless otherwise stated, the term “Offeror” includes the prime contractor, subcontractors, teaming partners, and joint venture partners. “Prime Contractor” is the specific company division and legal entity with which the Government creates contractual privity by entering into a contract. “Subcontractor,” “teaming partner,” and “joint venture partners” mean any supplier, distributor, vendor, or firm that furnishes supplies or services to or for a prime contractor or another subcontractor, teaming partner, or joint venture partner.

In the evaluation of past performance, the Government may use data provided by the Offeror in Volume II or obtained from other sources. The Offeror shall submit a consent letter executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner, or joint venture partner, that perform 30 percent or more of the proposed effort based upon total proposed price or perform aspects of the effort that the Offeror considers critical to successful performance authorizing release of past performance information to the Government. The Offeror shall also submit a consent letter for each commercial/non-Government customer identified in Volume II authorizing release of information concerning the

Offeror's past performance. Consent letters shall be included in the Past Performance Volume. If consent letters fail to be submitted for subcontractors, teaming partners, and joint venture partners who will perform 30 percent of the effort, then the Government will only rely on Past Performance of the Prime Contractor.

The Offerors shall submit a Past Performance Volume containing the following:

Table of Contents (not included in page limit)

Past Performance Information Sheets. A sample is included in this document.

CPARs or equivalent performance documents, if applicable (not included in page limit)

Consent Letters executed by each proposed subcontractor authorizing release of past performance information so that the Offeror can respond to such information. A sample consent letter is included in this document.

Consent Letters for each identified effort for a commercial/non-Government customer authorizing release to the Government of requested information on offeror’s or proposed subcontractor(s)’ performance.

A history of organizational structure change in accordance with the paragraph entitled as such.

Specific Content. The Proposal shall describe contract(s) deemed relevant to the proposed effort and identify the related contractual elements (i.e., what parts of the past performance contracts relate to the current proposed effort).

Such descriptions shall include a discussion of Offeror problems encountered on prior contracts as well as past efforts to identify and manage program risk.

Each Offeror is required to provide a Past Performance Volume. For the Past Performance Volume, no more than five (5) relevant past performance contracts should be submitted. For past performance references, an individual task order counts as a contract; multiple task orders under a contract count as separate contracts. Task Orders will be evaluated separately and will not be combined with other task orders.

The Offeror shall identify which aspects of the contracts identified are considered by the Offeror as being most relevant to the proposed effort. The Offeror shall explain how each identified aspect of the most relevant contracts relates to the proposed FAP WEST CONUS Program effort. The Offeror shall include a discussion of accomplishments to resolve problems, and successful efforts to identify and manage/mitigate program risks. The

Offeror shall clearly identify the management actions taken to overcome and resolve problems, or mitigate risks.

The Government will consider the number and severity of the problems and the appropriateness and effectiveness of any corrective actions taken, not just actions planned or promised.

Recent and Relevant Contracts. The Offeror is encouraged to submit Relevant Past Performance Information for recent contracts [utilizing the Past Performance Information Sheet below] the Offeror considers most relevant for demonstrating the Offeror’s ability to perform the proposed FAP WEST CONUS effort. The Offeror shall submit

Relevant Past Performance Information only for contracts for which one years’ worth of work has been performed within the past five (5) years from the date of issuance of the solicitation. Furthermore, references for contracts for which there is less than one (1) year of performance will not be considered. Only past performance information that satisfies this recency condition will be evaluated.

The Offeror shall include supporting rationale that states why each selected past performance contract is considered most relevant. Note: the Government is not bound to the offeror’s relevancy assertions. The Offeror shall include information for recent contracts performed by each key or major subcontractor, teaming partner, and joint venture partner that are considered most relevant in demonstrating their ability to perform the proposed effort.

Relevant efforts are considered any effort of similar scope, magnitude, and complexity to the FAP WEST CONUS

Program that supported the sourcing, hiring, managing, relocating, and training of a commercial workforce across

CONUS. Past and/or present performance should include all of these aspects to be considered relevant. The

Government will conduct an evaluation of all recent performance information obtained to determine how closely the products provided and/or services performed relate to the FAP WEST CONUS Program. Each past performance effort, which meets the recency requirement, will receive one of the performance relevancy assessments as described in DoD Source Selection Procedures, dated 01 July 2011, paragraph 3.1.3.1, Table 4. – Past Performance Relevancy

Ratings. With respect to relevancy, more relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment.

Past and Present Performance Information Sheets. Submit information on contracts you consider most relevant in demonstrating your ability to perform the proposed effort. This information is required for the Offeror and proposed subcontractors that the Offeror considers critical to overall successful performance. Each reference will include a

Past Performance Information Sheet, identifying active or completed contracts, either government or commercial for each prime contractor and/or proposed subcontractor. Each Past Performance Information Sheet is limited to six (6) pages not including attached CPARs or equivalent performance documents. See the sample that is provided in this section of the solicitation. If the Offeror does not have Government past and/or present performance references, the

Offeror may provide private industry references. The information included on the attachment, including the following, must be provided by the Offeror for each reference: (1) Contract Number, (2) Brief Description of

Services Provided specifically noting those areas relevant to this requirement, (3) Total Contract Performance

Period including option years if applicable, (4) Total Contract Amount including exercised option years, if applicable, (5) Contract Administration Office including current address, telephone number, and e-mail address of at least one Point-of-Contact (POC), but preferably both a contract administration POC and a program management

POC, and (5) CPARs or equivalent performance documents for all completed periods of performance.

Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR). Completed CPARs or similar reports from equivalent performance assessment systems used to record past performance data shall be submitted when available. If a

Government office has used another evaluation forms to record performance assessments, the offeror may submit that form or report instead of CPARs. If a CPAR or another evaluation form has been completed for a contractor’s work, but the contracting office for that requirement will not release the information to the Offeror, the Offeror shall immediately notify the Contracting Officer for this solicitation. The contractor should provide the contract number for the CPAR, and the name and telephone number of the POC from which the past performance information should be obtained. This information should be provided to the Contracting Officer for this solicitation as soon as the contractor becomes aware of this circumstance and before the due date for receipt of the Past Performance Volume.

If the Offeror is obtaining information for a contract with a non-governmental organization, the information provided should be the same or similar as that required on the CPAR form. The Offeror shall not alter in any way including extracting or paraphrasing portions of past performance information provided by any other party. Past performance forms and reports shall be provided unaltered in their entirety.

Offeror’s Rebuttal of Adverse Past Performance Information. The Offeror is allowed to provide a rebuttal of unfavorable past performance information if it did not do so on the report or form. The Offeror shall limit this rebuttal to addressing the specific negative comments. The Offeror shall clearly distinguish between any rebuttal already provided on a form or report and those rebuttals provided specifically for the purposes of this proposal.

Organizational Structure Change History. Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or have otherwise merged with, other companies or reorganized their divisions, business groups or subsidiary companies. In many cases, these changes have taken place during periods of relevant past performance or subsequent to the conclusion of recent past performance. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine whether past performance is relevant to the current acquisition. To facilitate this relevancy determination, Volume II shall include a "roadmap" describing all such changes in company organization. A pamphlet or other commercial pre-existing document describing such reorganization may suffice. This explanation should demonstrate the relevance of any efforts identified.

Additional Past Performance Research. Past performance information for contracts not listed by the Offeror and/or past performance information for contracts of planned subcontractor(s) may also be evaluated. References other than those identified by the Offeror may be contacted by the Government and the information obtained during such contact used in the evaluation of the Offeror’s past performance. While the Government may elect to consider data obtained from other sources, the burden of demonstrating relevancy and providing current, accurate, and complete past performance information rests with the offeror.

Past Performance Used for Determination of Contractor Responsibility. Even though the assessment of Past

Performance is separate and distinct from the Determination of Responsibility required by FAR Part 9, Contractor

Qualifications, past performance information obtained during the evaluation process may be used to support the

Determination of Responsibility for the successful Offeror.

SAMPLE

Past and Present Performance Information Sheet

Provide the information requested in this form for each contract/program being described. Provide frank and concise comments regarding your performance on the contracts you identify. Provide a separate completed form for each contract/program submitted. Limit the number of past and/or present efforts submitted and the length of each submission to the limitations set forth in Addendum to 52.212-1 of this solicitation.

A. Offeror Name (Company/Division): _______________________________________________

CAGE Code: _____________________________________

DUNS Number: ___________________________________

(NOTE: If the company or division performing this effort is different from the Offeror or the relevance of this effort to subject acquisition is impacted by any company/corporate organizational change, note those changes. Refer to the

"Organizational Structure Change History" you provided as part of your Past Performance Volume).

B. Program Title: __________________________________________________________________________

C. Contract Specifics:

1. Contracting Agency or Customer: _________________________________________

2. Contract Number: ______________________________________________________

3. Contract Type: ________________________________________________________

4. Period of Performance: _________________________________________________

5. Original Contract $ Value: _________________ (Do not include unexercised options.)

6. Current Contract $ Value: __________________ (Do not include unexercised options.)

7. If amounts for No. 5 and No. 6 above are different, provide a brief explanation of the reason.

D. Brief Description of Effort as Prime Contractor or Brief Description of Effort of Proposed Subcontractor

(Please indicate whether the effort was developmental and/or production and/or some other phase in nature, and highlight portions considered most relevant to subject requirement.)

E. Completion Date:

1. Original Date: ________________________________________________

2. Current Scheduled Date: ________________________________________

3. Estimate at Completion: $_______________________________________

4. How Many Times Changed: _____________________________________

5. Primary Cause(s) of Change(s): ___________________________________

F. Primary Customer Points of Contact: (For government contracts, provide current information on all three individuals. For commercial contracts, provide points of contact fulfilling these same roles.)

1. Program Manager and/or Name ____________________

Site Manager: Office ____________________

Address____________________

Telephone Number ____________

FAX Number _______________

2. Procuring Name ____________________

Contracting Officer: Office ____________________

Address____________________

Telephone Number ____________

3. Administrative Name _____________________

Contracting Officer: Office ____________________

Address _____________________

Telephone Number ______________

G. List the CPAR, or equivalent performance document, with its period of performance that are included in the proposal Past Performance volume below.

CPAR, or equivalent performance document Period of Performance

H. Address any technical or other area(s) about this contract/program considered unique.

I. Illustrate how your experience on this program applies to the requirement.

J. In accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iii), relevant experience from key personnel may be evaluated. If you wish to have the performance of individual key personnel considered, include names of key personnel who participated in this project and are proposed to work on the contract for subject requirement. Also, indicate their contractual roles for both projects.

K. Describe the nature or portion of the work on subject effort to be performed by the business entity being reported on here. Also, estimate the percentage of the total of subject effort to be performed by this entity as the prime contractor.

Subcontractor Consent Letter. Past performance information concerning subcontractors cannot be disclosed to or requested from a private party without the subcontractor’s consent. Because a prime contractor is a private party, the

Government requires consent before disclosing subcontractor present and past performance information to the prime contractor and/or requesting such information about the subcontractor from references. The completed consent letters should be submitted as part of Volume II, Past Performance. This matter is addressed in Addendum to

52.212-1 of this solicitation.

Sample Consent Letter

To: Contracting Officer

[Insert name of Offeror or proposed subcontractor.] is currently participating as a [prime contractor or proposed subcontractor][Circle appropriate role.] in responding to the Air Force Installation Contracting Agency (AFICA) 773

Enterprise Sourcing Squadron (ESS), JBSA-Lackland, Texas, Request for Proposal, Solicitation No. FA8052-16-R-

0012 for the Air Force Family Advocacy Program (FAP) Western Region within the Contiguous United States

(CONUS) Requirement.

[Insert name of Offeror or proposed subcontractor.] understands that the Government is placing increased emphasis on past performance in source selections in order to obtain best value defined in the Federal Acquisition Regulation

(FAR) as “the expected outcome of an acquisition that, in the Government’s estimation, provides the greatest overall benefit in response to the requirement”. In order to facilitate the performance confidence assessment process, [Insert name of Offeror or proposed subcontractor.] is signing this consent letter in order to allow you to discuss our present and past performance information with the Government during the source selection process.

Signature and title of individual who has authority to sign for and legally bind the company:

Date:

Company Name:

Address:

Cage Code:

Telephone Number and FAX Number:

INSTRUCTIONS FOR VOLUME III, PRICE/COST, FACTOR 3

Offerors shall include pricing for the Fixed-Price Item Number listed in the Schedule of Supplies/Services of the solicitation. This section shall include all unit costs (if applicable) and total extended amounts for the Fixed-Price

Item Number. Offerors shall not propose against the Item Number denoted as “Cost.” These are Government-

Directed amounts. Offerors shall also complete the Pricing Model Spreadsheet. Offerors shall ensure that the total amount in Block 26 on the SF1449 and Pricing Model Spreadsheet Summary Tab, in Attachment 2, agree.

The Pricing Model Spreadsheet is where Offerors shall input all pricing data. Tab 1 of the Pricing Model

Spreadsheet provides instructions for completing the spreadsheet. The Offeror shall propose each labor category at each MTF. This is to ensure that all potential labor mixes are encompassed. Offerors shall enter all data in the

Pricing Model Spreadsheet for each ordering period. The pricing to be entered is the unburdened labor hourly rate, fringe rate, and the fully burdened hourly rate (which includes base labor, fringe, overhead, G&A, and profit).

Offeror shall also insert their monthly rate for each labor category at each MTF. The Total Evaluated Price (TEP) will be the combined monthly rates of one FTE in each labor category at each MTF in the Western region, for the ordering period. This TEP will not be the basis of award for the contract ceiling and subsequent task orders. The proposed monthly prices for each ordering period will establish the contracted rate table. Task orders will be issued from these rates based on current need of FTE labor categories within the MTFs. Offerors shall submit the Pricing

Model Spreadsheet in the same format posted in this solicitation.

Fair and Reasonable: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed pricing for fairness and reasonableness.

The TEP will be the only discriminator among Offerors for the price factor. Normally, competition establishes price reasonableness, however, price analysis will be used to evaluate the reasonableness of each Offeror’s TEP to satisfy

FAR 15.305(a)(1). A price is reasonable if, in its nature and amount does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of competitive business. An assessment of price reasonableness will be performed on the TEP using techniques and procedures described under FAR 15.404-1(b), Price analysis. The

Offeror’s proposal will be reviewed for compliance with the requirements specified in the Instructions to Offerors and the Addendum to 52.212-1 of the solicitation. Price analysis techniques may include a comparison of proposed prices received in response to the solicitation, comparison with other contract prices for similar services, and/or a comparison of proposed prices with the Independent Government Cost Estimate. The burden of proof of price credibility rests solely with the Offeror.

Realism: Proposals will be evaluated for realism to ensure base rate, fringe, and fully burdened rates are sufficient to recruit and retain fully qualified individuals for all labor categories at all locations. The proposal will contain the completed Pricing Model Spreadsheet at Attachment 2 for this evaluation. The Offeror will also provide documentation that the proposed labor and fringe rates are sufficient to hire and retain fully qualified individuals.

Completeness: A proposal is complete when all pricing data required under FAR 52.212-1 of the Request For

Proposal is provided in the format prescribed.

INSTRUCTIONS FOR VOLUME IV, GENERAL

The offeror’s response to the Schedule of Supplies/Services; and Offeror Representations and Certifications shall be provided as separate sections in Volume IV, General. Page 1 of the solicitation must be completed as follows:

Complete the following blocks of the Standard Form (SF) 1449, Solicitation/Contract/Order for Commercial Items:

12, Discount Terms; 17, Contractor/Offeror; 23, Unit Price; 24, Amount; 26, Total Amount; and 30, Signature of

Offeror/Contractor, Name and Title of Signer, and Date Signed. An official having the authority to bind your company contractually must sign the SF 1449 in accordance with FAR 4.102, Contractor’s signature. One copy of the SF 1449 must bear an original signature. The Offeror shall acknowledge any amendments to the solicitation in accordance with the instructions on the SF 1449 and FAR 52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors – Commercial Items.

FAR 52.212-3 Offeror Representation and Certifications -- Commercial Items – The Offeror shall ensure that FAR

52.212-3 is submitted thoroughly completed with all blocks in each certification/representation completed truthfully and completely.

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. 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, Preaward debriefing of offerors, and FAR 15.506, Postaward debriefing of offerors.

(End of Addendum)

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

(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.

(b) 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.

Addendum to 52.212-2 -- Evaluation -- Commercial Items.

BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD

This is a best value Tradeoff Source Selection Process. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers: (1)

Technical Capability, (2) Past Performance, and (3) Price. Past Performance is the more important factor. Technical

Capability will be evaluated on an “Acceptable/Unacceptable” basis. In accordance with FAR 15.304(e), the technical and past performance evaluation factors, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price; however, cost/price will contribute substantially to the selection decision.

This competitive best value source selection will be conducted in accordance with the following parts all entitled

“Contracting by Negotiation”: FAR Part 15, DFARS Part 15, Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement

(AFFARS) Part 5315 and the DoD Source Selection Procedures. Award will be made to the offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the FAR, whose proposal conforms to the solicitation’s requirements, and is judged by an integrated assessment of the proposal based on evaluation criteria to represent the best value to the

Government. As defined in the FAR, “Best value means the expected outcome of an acquisition that, in the

Government’s estimation, provides the greatest overall benefit in response to the requirement.”

The Government seeks to award to the Offeror who gives the Air Force the greatest confidence to best meet or exceed the requirements. This may result in an award being made to an Offeror with a higher-rated, higher-priced proposal when the decision is consistent with the evaluation methodology and the Source Selection Authority (SSA) determines that the higher-rated past performance of the Offeror with the higher-priced proposal outweighs the price difference. This may also result in award being made to an Offeror with a lower-rated, lower-priced proposal when the decision is consistent with the evaluation methodology and the SSA determines that the higher-rated past performance of the offeror(s) with the higher-rated proposal(s) does not outweigh the price difference. The SSA bases the source selection decision on an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors. All proposals will be evaluated against the stated evaluation criteria. While the Government evaluation team and the SSA will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature, is subjective. Therefore, the use of professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process.

As set forth in FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors—Competitive Acquisition, “The Government intends to evaluate offers and award a contract without discussions with offerors. Therefore, the offeror’s initial offer should contain the offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if later determined, by the Contracting Officer, to be necessary. The Government may reject any or all offers if such action is in the public interest; accept other than the lowest offer; and waive informalities and minor irregularities in offers received.” The Government may enter into discussions if it determines that discussions are in its best interest. The Government may make a final determination as to whether the Offeror’s proposal is acceptable or unacceptable solely on the basis of the initial proposal as submitted. Accordingly, offerors are advised to submit initial proposals that are fully and clearly acceptable without the need for submission of additional information. A competitive range, if required, may be further reduced for purposes of efficiency pursuant to FAR

15.306(c)(2).

Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as factors to be eligible for award.

The Government intends to select one contractor to meet the FAP WEST CONUS requirement. However, the

Government reserves the right not to award a contract based on the quality of proposal(s) submitted or the availability of funds.

Award will be made on an all-or-none basis. Offers conditioned on award of less than the full quantity for all Item

Numbers will be rejected and not further evaluated.

FINAL PROPOSAL REVISION

The Government intends to make an award based on initial proposals; however, discussions or negotiations may be held and result in a request for a Final Proposal Revision. If it is determined to be in the best interest of the

Government to hold discussions, the Government will decide which proposals are in the competitive range. Offerors with proposals in the competitive range may then be issued evaluation notices. Responses to evaluation notices as well as Final Proposal Revisions will be considered in making the best value decision. Offerors should be aware that a complete understanding in regard to past performance, price, technical approach, and all the terms and conditions of the proposed contract must exist between the offeror and the Government at the conclusion of discussions.

Any technical revision or other revision that is not in accordance with contract terms and conditions submitted in the

Final Proposal Revision may not be subject to further discussion or negotiation, 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 that have not been fully disclosed, discussed, and understood during discussions or negotiations are submitted in the Final Proposal Revision. Hence, such new or revised terms and conditions are not solicited and, if submitted in the Final Proposal Revision, may render the offer unacceptable to the Government.

EVALUATION FACTORS

FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

The Government will conduct an in-depth review and evaluation of Offeror’s Technical Capability proposal to determine if it meets the Government’s requirements.

Offerors shall meet all requirements in order to receive an acceptable rating and to be considered responsive to the solicitation. Therefore, no offers with an unacceptable rating in Technical Capability will be considered for award.

The Technical Capability evaluation provides an assessment of the Offeror’s capability to satisfy the Government’s minimum requirements. The Offeror’s Technical Capability proposal will be evaluated to determine: (1) The degree to which the Offeror’s technical approach demonstrates a clear understanding of the FAP WEST CONUS personal services requirement as defined in the PWS, (2) Whether all of the items required to be submitted in the Staffing

Plan, as noted in the Instructions to Offerors, have been submitted, and (3) Whether the offeror adequately addresses the issues noted in the items. The Government will determine the adequacy of the Offeror’s proposal in addressing these items. Proposals should display a clear understanding and reasonable, well-thought-out approach that demonstrates the Offeror's understanding of all tasks to be performed as well as the technical approach and methodology for accomplishing all tasks under any resultant contract to meet the requirements of the PWS.

The proposals will be evaluated for technical acceptability/unacceptability against the following factor:

Factor 1, Management Approach

In order to determine the acceptability or non-acceptability of the Offeror’s Management Approach, the Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Staffing Plan to determine the adequacy of the Offeror’s proposal in addressing the following:

(a) Provides a comprehensive management approach for supplying qualified personnel in accordance with the

Performance Work Statement (PWS);

(b) Provides a clear and comprehensive training and education approach to maintain current licensing for contractor personnel and validate contractor personnel licensure where required (retention/recruiting plan); and

(c) Demonstrates at least three years of experience in applying its management approach to support the sourcing, hiring, managing, placing, and training of a commercial workforce across CONUS. Subcontractor’s management approach will not be evaluated for this requirement.

Technical Factor Ratings. The Offeror’s proposal will receive one of the adjectival ratings defined in Table 1, Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings. The factor rating will be used to determine an overall rating. An offer rated as technically unacceptable for this factor will result in an overall rating of unacceptable and will not be eligible for award.

Table 1. Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings

Rating Description

Acceptable

Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable

Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

The Government evaluation team will conduct an in-depth review and evaluation of all performance data obtained to determine how closely the work performed under those efforts relates to the proposed effort. The team will confirm past and present performance data identified by the Offerors in their proposals and obtain additional past and present performance data, as necessary, if available, from other sources. Each Offeror will receive one of the performance confidence assessments described in the DoD Source Selection Procedures, dated 01 July 2011, paragraph 3.1.3.3, Table 5 - Performance Confidence Assessments. Although the past performance evaluation focuses on performance that is relevant to the aspects of this acquisition, the resulting Performance Confidence Assessment is made at the

Past Performance factor level and represents an overall evaluation of contractor performance.

Offerors without a record of recent and relevant past performance, or for whom information on past performance is not available or is so sparse that no confidence assessment rating may be reasonably assigned, will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably upon past performance and, as a result, will receive an "Unknown Confidence" rating.

Evaluation Process. The Performance Confidence Assessment will be based upon the recency, relevancy, and quality of past performance. This assessment represents an evaluation of an Offeror and its proposed subcontractor(s)’ present and past work record so that the Government can make a determination about its confidence in the Offeror's probability of successfully performing as proposed. Performance confidence is assessed at the overall Past

Performance factor level after evaluating aspects of the Offeror’s recent Past Performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the factors. The evaluation team will review the past performance information and determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to performance competence assessment.

Recency. For past performance consideration, recency for this solicitation is defined as one years’ performance occurring within five (5) years from the date of issuance of the solicitation. Furthermore, references for contracts for which there is less than one year performance will not be considered. Only past performance information that satisfies this recency condition will be evaluated.

Relevancy. Submit information on contracts that you consider relevant in demonstrating your ability to perform the proposed effort. Relevant efforts are considered to be any effort of similar scope, magnitude, and complexity to the

FAP WEST CONUS Program that support the sourcing, hiring, managing, placing, and training of a commercial workforce across CONUS. The Government will conduct an evaluation of all recent performance information obtained to determine how closely the products provided and/or services performed relate to the FAP WEST

CONUS Program. Past and/or present performance should include all of these aspects to be considered relevant.

Each past performance effort which meets the recency requirement will receive one of the performance relevancy assessments as described in DoD Source Selection Procedures, dated 01 July 2011, paragraph 3.1.3.1, Table 4. –

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings. More relevant past performance may be weighed more favorably than less relevant past performance.

In accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iii), the Government’s evaluation may take into account past performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel including current employees and new hires proposed for this contract who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement, when such information is relevant to the instant acquisition.

Past performance information may be obtained from sources, such as the Government’s Past Performance

Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), questionnaires tailored for the subject requirement, the Defense Contract

Management Agency, interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Award Fee Determining

Officials, and other sources known to the Government. Available information from previous source selections or contractor capability assessments may be used if the information is recent and relevant. The recency, relevancy and quality of the past performance information are important in determining the contracts, programs, and efforts that will be reviewed. The Government reserves the right to obtain more past performance data from any source that it deems appropriate. The Government may use all of this information in making its performance confidence assessment. The Government may consider the Offeror’s past performance in aggregate rather than on an individual contract basis.

When relevant performance records indicate performance problems, the Government will consider the number and severity of the problems and the appropriateness and effectiveness of any corrective actions taken, not just actions 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. If Offerors want to provide information on problems encountered on the identified contracts and their corrective action(s) in accordance with

FAR 15.305(a)(2)(ii), the offeror should submit such information with their proposals.

FACTOR 3: PRICE

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Price proposal as stated in this section of the solicitation.

The objective of proposal analysis is to ensure that the final agreed-to price is fair and reasonable. The level of detail of the analysis required is determined by the complexity and circumstances of the acquisition.

Fair and Reasonable: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed pricing for fairness and reasonableness.

The Government will use the totality of all monthly labor rates to formulate a…