ATTACHMENT_3__RFP_CPI_27_Jul_2016.pdf

ATTACHMENT 3

THIS SECTION IS FOR SOLICITATION PURPOSES ONLY. THIS SECTION WILL BE

PHYSICALLY REMOVED FROM ANY RESULTANT AWARD, BUT WILL BE DEEMED

INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE.

52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS--COMMERCIAL ITEMS

Addendum to 52.212-1(c), Period for Acceptance of Offers. The paragraph is tailored as follows: “The offeror agrees to hold the prices in its offer firm for 90 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of offers.”

ADDENDA TO 52.212-1, PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

A. 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 three (3) separate parts; Part I – Price Proposal, Part II

– Past Performance Information and Part III – Technical Capability.

B. 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 data 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 cost data to the extent necessary for the contracting officer to determine the reasonableness and affordability of the price.

Please ensure a Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF) account has been initiated or is already established. All invoices shall be submitted using WAWF. Use of WAWF will speed up your payment processing time and allow you to monitor your payments status online. To get more information about how to register for WAWF contractors can go to the following web site and download the Contract Pay information:

http://www.dfas.mil/contractorsvendors.html

The Offeror must be registered and current in the System for Award Management website (https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/), no exceptions.

C. Specific Instructions:

1. The overall evaluation methodology will be Performance Price Tradeoff (PPT). The Government will select the best value in which competing offers’ past performance history will be evaluated. The evaluation criteria are divided into three factors: Technical Capability, Past Performance and Price.

Technical Capability will be assessed utilizing, acceptable or unacceptable based on demonstrated technical expertise and management approach to meeting the requirements of the PWS.

Acceptable - Meets all specified technical capability requirements necessary for acceptable contract performance. Unacceptable -Fails to meet one or more specified technical capability requirements.

Proposals with an unacceptable rating are considered not awardable. The tradeoff will occur only between the past performance factor and the price factor. Past Performance will be evaluated as significantly more important than Price.

file://periwinkle_vnx/SAF_AQC_ORG/AQCP/5640%20-%20AFFARS/Templates%20Project%20--%20Sep%202013/5315/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/Content.Outlook/far/FAR52.000.doc#b522121 file://periwinkle_vnx/SAF_AQC_ORG/AQCP/5640%20-%20AFFARS/Templates%20Project%20--%20Sep%202013/5315/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/Content.Outlook/far/FAR15.DOC#b154062 http://www.dfas.mil/contractorsvendors.html https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/

2. The Offeror’s proposal shall include all data and information requested and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. Failure to submit proposals as outlined below may render a vendor ineligible for award.

3. The proposal shall not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet these requirements. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offeror’s proposal. The offeror’s proposal must convey to the Government that the offeror is capable; possesses sufficient technical expertise and experience;

possesses sufficient resources; and is able to plan, organize, and use those resources in a coordinated and timely fashion such that technical requirements will be achieved.

4. Offeror’s proposal shall consist of a cover letter and three (3) separate volumes:

Cover Letter shall include the following:

Small Business Status/Categories as appropriate Company point of contact with email, phone and facsimile number Cage Code & DUNS number

A statement that your company understands the requirements specified in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and will meet the performance standards and requirements therein.

A statement that your company does or does not take exception to any of the requirements of the PWS or terms/conditions of the resulting contract.

1. PART I – PRICE PROPOSAL - Submit original

(a) Insert proposed unit and extended prices in the Pricing Schedule (Attachment 1). The extended amount must equal the whole dollar unit price multiplied by the number of units. The proposal(s) must be submitted for a base year plus two (2), one (1) year option periods.

2. PART II – PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION - Only references for relevant contracts are desired. Submit original.

(a) Quality and Satisfaction Rating for Contracts Completed in the Past Three Years: Provide any information currently available (letters, metrics, customer surveys, independent surveys, etc.) which demonstrates customer satisfaction with overall job performance and quality of completed product for relevant past efforts/contracts (similar in scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires). In addition, explain corrective actions taken in the past, if any, for substandard performance and any current performance problems such as cost overruns, extended performance periods, numerous warranty calls, etc.

(b) Performance Surveys: The government will evaluate the quality and extent of offeror's performance deemed relevant to the requirements of this RFP. The government will use information submitted by the offeror and any other sources of information available to the Government to assess past performance in recency and relevancy. Provide a list of no more than three (3), of the most relevant contracts performed for Federal agencies and commercial customers within the last three (3) years. Furnish the following information for each contract listed:

i. Company/Division name

ii. Product/Service

iii. Contracting Agency/Customer

iv. Contract Number

v. Contract Dollar Value

vi. Period of Performance

vii. Verified, up-to-date name, address, FAX & telephone number of the contracting officer

viii. Comments regarding compliance with contract terms and conditions

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

(c) If a teaming arrangement is contemplated, provide complete information as to the arrangement, including any relevant and recent past performance information on previous teaming arrangements with same partner. If this is a first time joint effort, each party to the arrangement must provide a list of past relevant contracts.

(d) Subcontractor Consent: Past performance information pertaining to a subcontractor cannot be disclosed to the prime offeror without the subcontractor’s consent. Provide with the proposal a letter from all subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement, consenting to the release of their past performance information to the prime contractor.

(e) Documents submitted in response to this solicitation must be fully responsive to and consistent with the following:

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

2. Evaluation Factors for Award.

(f) In conducting the past performance evaluation, the Government reserves the right to use both the information provided in the Offeror’s Past Performance Volume and information obtained from other sources, such as the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), the Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) or similar systems, and commercial sources. Offerors are reminded that both independent data and data provided by Offerors in their proposals may be used by the Government to evaluate Offeror past performance. However, the burden of providing thorough, complete, and current past performance information as requested in this paragraph remains with the Offerors. Proposals that do not contain the information requested, risk rejection.

(g) The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements.The past performance evaluation considers each offeror's demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements. One performance confidence assessment rating is assigned for each offeror after evaluating the offeror's recent past performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the contract requirements. Past Performance will be evaluated using the following ratings in table 1 and 2:

Table 1. Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Rating Definition Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

All past performance comments received will be taken into account and could affect the overall rating. The overall past performance evaluation is a subjective decision based on the whole of all data received. In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned; the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a) (2) (iv)). Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance and be deemed “neutral.”

Table 2. Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Description Substantial Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Limited Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

(h) Submission Requirements. The offeror shall submit a Past Performance Volume containing the following:

• Client Authorization Letters for each identified effort for a commercial customer authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the Offeror’s performance.

• Relevant Contracts Reference Sheet – (see Attachment 6). The Offeror shall provide documentation outlining the Offeror’s past performance with contracts, as prime, subcontractor, teaming partner, and /or joint venture partner, which is the same or similar in nature, size, and complexity to the services being procured under this solicitation. The submittal shall include rationale supporting the Offeror’s assertion of relevance and how it was determined that the work performed previously was the same or similar in nature, size, and complexity to the work specified by this solicitation. Offerors are required to explain what aspects of the contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort, and to what aspects of the proposed effort they relate.

• Past Performance Questionnaire – (see Attachment 7). For the contracts identified on each Relevant Contracts Reference Sheet, the Offeror shall forward a copy of the past performance questionnaire to the points of contact responsible for monitoring performance under such contracts. The points of contact shall return the questionnaires via email directly to the Contract Specialist, Arthur C. Mitchell not later than the solicitation due date.

Any questionnaires not returned directly to the Government point of contact, Arthur C.

Mitchell, will not be reviewed and evaluated. The information contained in the questionnaires will be used to evaluate the Offeror’s past performance.

3. PART III – TECHNICAL CAPABILITY - Submit original and one (1) redacted copy

(a) Technical Capability will be assessed utilizing, acceptable or unacceptable based on demonstrated technical expertise and management approach to meeting the requirements of the PWS.

Acceptable - Meets all specified technical capability requirements necessary for acceptable contract performance. Unacceptable -Fails to meet one or more specified technical capability requirements.

Proposals with an unacceptable rating are considered not awardable. Technical proposals shall be no more than 25 pages. Each offeror must submit one (1) original and one (1) redacted copy. The redacted copy must have the following removed; company names, logos, the word “incumbent” or similar words meaning the same, and proper names of persons. The Technical Factor will receive an adjectival rating of Technically Acceptable/Unacceptable as defined below. The sub-factor ratings will be used to determine an overall rating for the factor. An offer rated as technically unacceptable in any sub-factor will result in an overall rating of unacceptable and will not be eligible for award.

Submission of Offers:

(a) General Instructions:

a. Interested parties capable of providing the specified services must submit a written offer via email directly to: Arthur C. Mitchell, e-mail: arthur.mitchell@us.af.mil with a courtesy copy to: LaShelle Rabold, e-mail: lashelle.rabold@us.af.mil, following the instructions provided in the combined synopsis/solicitation document.

b. Do not send as an executable or .exe file. Email size shall not exceed five megabytes.

Documents may be compressed (zipped) using WinZip 8.1 or later version. Any corrupted file or media containing a virus could result in the offer not being considered for award.

c. Software Compatibility. Use a word processing and spreadsheet program compatible with

Microsoft ® Word 2007 ® and Microsoft ® Excel 2007 ®. PDF is Adobe ® Portable Document Format.

d. Solicitation Questions. Any questions relating to this solicitation and attachments shall be submitted in writing preferably by email, addressed to the Contract Specialist and Contracting Officer noted in paragraph (i) above by 10:00 AM (Local Time, San Antonio, TX) on 08 August 2016. Any questions received after this date need not be answered due to time constraints of the solicitation.

EACH PROPOSAL MUST HAVE THE FOLLOWING:

Volume Title Copies Delivery

Instructions/Limitations I.

Technical Capability Volume

Factor 1: Technical

Capability

(1 original plus, 1 redacted copy) Redacted copy should not include any reference to the company name and/or any identifying logos

Limit to no more than 25 pages

Additional pages will not be considered for evaluation

II.

Past Performance

Factor 2: Past Performance

(original)

Limited to

3 pages (per relevant contract reference)

III.

Price

Factor 3: Price Proposal

(original)

No page limit

Pricing shall be provided using (attachment 1)

a. Proposals shall be submitted on 8 ½” x 11” paper, except for fold-outs used for charts, tables or diagrams, which may not exceed 11” x 17”.

b. All text shall be single spaced, 12-pitch type, 10 point proportional spacing using Times New

Roman font is acceptable.

c. Elaborate formats, bindings or color presentations are not desired or required.

d. Performance Work Statement (PWS) Appendix B- Business Associate Agreement shall be filled out by the contractor and submitted with proposals.

Period of Acceptance of Offers. The Offeror agrees to hold the prices in its offer firm for 90 days from the date specified for receipt of offers.

ANY PROPOSALS RECEIVED AFTER DESIGNATED CLOSING DATE AND TIME MAY

NOT BE CONSIDERED FOR AWARD.

(b) To ensure timely and equitable evaluation of quotes, offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation and performance work statement requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or sub-factors.