Combined_Synopsis_-_DMS.pdf

This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 12.6, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. This announcement constitutes the only solicitation;

proposals are being requested and a written solicitation will not be issued.

The Request for Proposal (RFP) number is FA8052-18-R-0021, Document Management System and is supplemented with additional attachments. Provisions and clauses in effect through Federal Acquisition Circular 2005-85 are incorporated.

This requirement is a 100% Woman Owned Small Business Set-Aside under NAICS 519130, with a Size Standard of 1,000 Employees [FAR 19.502-2(a)]. Proposals from any other business category will not be accepted.

All qualified businesses under this industry are encouraged to submit proposals. Qualified businesses must meet the Federal government’s definition of a “woman-owned small business”.

The Department of the Air Force, Air Force Installation Contracting Agency (AFICA), 773rd Enterprise Sourcing Squadron (773 ESS/PK) has a requirement for the Air Force Medical Operations Agency (AFMOA) per the requirements described in the attached Statement of Work (SOW) dated 3 May 2018 (Attachment 1).

The mission of the Air Force Medical Operations Agency (AFMOA) is to support Department of Defense (DoD) health professionals in optimizing the health and wellness of their populations through appropriate, effective, and efficient healthcare practices and service delivery through coaching and partnering for improved performance. There is a significant need to standardize processes for cleaning and sterilizing multiple types of instrumentation used in Air Force Military Treatment Facilities (MTFs). Currently, MTFs use variable systems that lack vendor authorization and reliable instruction for cleaning and processing surgical instruments.

Incorporation of a Document Management System (DMS) across the Air Force Medical Service (AFMS) will promote higher levels of quality and safety by ensuring access to the latest specific manufacturers’ instructions for use (IFU) for reprocessing. This contract shall provide manufacturers’ IFU database available for viewing via a user name and password. The web-based commercial sterile processing DMS stores and updates device manufacturer’s IFU for reprocessing and sterilizing instruments. A link to the database and internet protocol (IP) authentication shall be required for each U.S. Air Force Military Treatment Facility (MTF).

The Period of Performance for this requirement is 12-months (base period) plus four (4) - one year option periods. Proposal shall be submitted via e-mail to organizational box at 773ess.pk.proposal@us.af.mil, with a courtesy copy to the Contract Specialist (CS), Juan Huerta at juan.huerta.2@us.af.mil, and the Contracting Officer (CO) at christal.jackson.6@us.af.mil. The Proposals shall be submitted not later than NLT 3:00 PM (CST) on Friday, 10 August 2018. The Government anticipates awarding a single contract on or about 01 September 2018.

Should there be a conflict between this synopsis and the SOW, the SOW will take precedence.

All numbers are estimates.

mailto:773ess.pk.proposal@us.af.mil mailto:juan.huerta.2@us.af.mil mailto:christal.jackson.6@us.af.mil

The evaluation methodology will be a limited trade-off Technical acceptability will be evaluated and given ratings of acceptable or unacceptable. Unacceptable offers will not be eligible for award. Past Performance will be evaluated as significantly more important than Price.

The contract will be Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) with a 12 month base period and four (4) – one year option periods. Clauses and provisions throughout this solicitation can be viewed by accessing website http://farsite.hill.af.mil/vffara.htm and https://www.acquisition.gov/. FAR provision 52.212-1 [Instructions to Offerors Commercial Items] applies to this acquisition to include the following addenda: All Offerors are cautioned that if selected for award, they must be registered with the System for Award Management (SAM) program. The SAM can be accessed via the internet at www.sam.gov/. Confirmation of SAM registration will be validated prior to awarding a contract.

The proposals will be evaluated based on the following three (3) evaluation factors:

Factor 1: Technical /Risk Capability Factor 2: Past Performance Factor 3: Price

FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL. The Technical Capability evaluation provides an assessment of the Offeror’s proposed approach to satisfy the Government’s minimum requirements. 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 award to meet the requirements of the SOW. The technical evaluation criteria factors accessing technical acceptability can be found in the addendum of RFP FA8052-18-R-0021.

Technical Factor Ratings. The Technical Factor will receive one of the adjectival ratings defined in, Table 1 – Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings, 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.

(See Table 1):

Table 1. Technical Ratings Rating Description

Acceptable

The proposal meets all the requirements identified in the solicitation.

Only those proposals determined acceptable, either initially or as a result of discussions, will be considered for award. Once deemed acceptable, all proposals are considered equal.

Unacceptable

Fails to meet one or more requirements in the solicitation identified and major revisions would be required to make the proposal acceptable. Proposals with an unacceptable rating will not be considered for award.

a. If deemed technically acceptable: Proceed to evaluate Offeror’s past performance and price.

b. If deemed technically unacceptable: The Offeror's proposal will not be considered for award.

The Government will rate each Technical Sub-Factor either Acceptable or Unacceptable, as follows:

Factors and Sub-Factors Instructions to Offerors Evaluation Criteria

SOW

Reference

Factor 1. Technical Capability: The approach the offeror proposes to meet the SOW requirements dated 3 May 2018.

Sub-Factor 1.1

Database will provide manufacturers’ instructions for use (IFU) for reusable medical equipment (e.g.

surgical & dental instruments, endoscopes & other reusable devices).

Provide current list of medical equipment that’s maintained in the database

Paragraph:

2.1.1

Sub-Factor 1.2

Service will provide multiple, simultaneous access to the site via internet/world wide web, 24/7 access and technical support—Excluding maintenance periods (for periods 30 days or more appropriate notification is required.

Provide server capability, COA for maintenance periods

Paragraphs:

2.2.1, 2.1.2, 2.1.3, 2.1.4

Sub-Factor 1.3

Provide a monthly usage report displaying the number of users and number of reviews accessed.

Provide a detailed list of users to include high volume items, peak times by name/MTF/area

Paragraph:

2..2.6

FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE (No page limit). The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the Offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements based on recency and relevancy. 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 (see Table 2 below):

This source selection will be conducted in accordance with Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFFARS) 5315.3, Performance Price Tradeoff (PPT) procedures.

Therefore, the proposal selected for award will provide the best overall value to satisfy the Air Force requirement. This decision will be based upon the criteria under addendum of this solicitation, the terms and conditions agreed upon during discussions (if conducted) and the capability (i.e., Technical, Past Performance Confidence Assessment, and Cost/Price) to fulfill the subject requirement. The Source Selection Authority (SSA) shall then make an integrated assessment best value award decision. Offeror’s with no relevant past or present performance history or the Offeror’s performance record is so limited that no confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned shall receive the rating “Unknown Confidence”, meaning the rating is treated neither favorably nor unfavorably. To be eligible for the comparison assessment of Past Performance and Price, Offeror’s must have received an acceptable technical rating, i.e. all requirements of the technical factor had to be met for an Offeror’s technical proposal to be determined acceptable. Offeror’s technical proposals were assigned an adjectival rating of Acceptable or Unacceptable. Past Performance will not be evaluated for Offeror’s rated as technically unacceptable, i.e. not awardable.

(c) FACTOR 3 – PRICE. Price will be scored or rated, based on the ranking from lowest to highest Total Evaluated Price (TEP) of all proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria in the paragraph of this section. TEP will be calculated as the sum of the Offeror proposed prices for the base period and all options. TEP will be used for evaluation purposes; evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise such options. Evaluation of price will be performed using one or more of the price analysis techniques in accordance with FAR 15.404-1.

These pricing techniques are necessary to determine if the price is complete, reasonable, realistic

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

Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Limited Confidence

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.

Unknown Confidence (Neutral)

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.

and balanced. Through these techniques, the Government will determine whether the proposed prices are complete, reasonable, realistic and balanced. For additional information see FAR 31.201-3. The pricing evaluation criteria factors can be found in Attachment 2 – DMS Pricing Worksheet of addendum RFP FA8052-18-R-0021.

Past Performance as well as pricing will not be considered for any offer unless the proposal has a technical rating of “acceptable” for every technical sub-factor.

PROVISIONS/CLAUSES: The clause at FAR 52.204-23, Prohibition on Contracting for Hardware, Software, and Servises Developed or Provided by Kaspersky Lab or Other Covered Entitities. FAR 52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications, Commercial Items, applies to this solicitation and the Offeror must include a completed copy of this provision with their proposal. FAR 52.212-4, Contract Terms and Conditions Commercial Items, applies to this Solicitation. The clause at FAR 52.212-5, Contract Terms and Conditions Required to Implement Status or Executive Orders, Commercial Items, applies to this solicitation. FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services may apply, and FAR 52.217-9, Option to Extend the Terms of the Contract will apply if terms of this contract are extended.

Addendum 1 to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors – Commercial Items (Jun 2008):

Submission of Offers.

(a) General Instructions:

(i) Interested parties capable of providing the specified services must submit a written offer to 773ess.pk.proposal@us.af.mil inbox.

(ii) 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.

(iii) Software Compatibility. Use a word processing and spreadsheet program compatible with Microsoft ® Word 2010 ® and Microsoft ® Excel 2010 ®. PDF is Adobe ® Portable Document Format.

(iv) Solicitation Questions. Any questions relating to the solicitation shall be submitted to the 773rd ESS PK inbox noted in paragraph (i) above by 3:00 PM on 1 August 2018. Any questions received after this time/date may or may not be answered due to time constraints of the solicitation.

(v) See Addendum L of RFP FA8052-18-R-0021 for additional General Instructions Information.

The following documents are attached:

Request for Proposal FA8052-18-R-0021 Attachment 1 Statement of Work dated 3 May 2018 Attachment 2 Pricing Worksheet Attachment 3 Clauses and Provisions

Attachment 4 Contract Provision on Delinquent Taxes mailto:773ess.pk.proposal@us.af.mil

Attachment 5-1 Past Performance – Contract Reference Sheet Attachment 5-2 Past Performance – Client Authorization Letter Sample Attachment 5-3 Past Perfomance – Assessment Questionnaire

Contracting Office Address:

Attn: Juan Huerta, Contract Specialist 773 ESS/PKB – Port San Antonio 3515 S. General McMullen San Antonio, TX 78226

PH: 210-395-9181

FAX: 210-395-9864

E-mail: juan.huerta.2@us.af.mil