FA8053-11-R-0002 0002 Released.doc

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

H.3c.4.a)1)iii), Other pertinent information. The sentence has been modified.

From: Requirements for award must include the work schedule, billable hours (e.g., duty hours, overage hours [when required], and overtime hours [when required]), planned closures (e.g., federal holidays, family days, goal days), and addendum requirements (when required).

To: Requirements for award must include the work schedule, billable hours (e.g., duty hours, overage hours [when required], and overtime hours [when required]), planned closures (e.g., federal holidays, family days, goal days), and addendum requirements (when required).

H.3p.6, Other pertinent information. The sentence has been modified.

From: Requirements for award must include the work schedule, billable hours (e.g., duty hours, overage hours [when required], and overtime hours [when required]), planned closures (e.g., federal holidays, family days or goal days), and addendum requirements (when required).

To: Requirements for award must include the work schedule, billable hours (e.g., duty hours, overage hours [when required], and overtime hours [when required]), planned closures (e.g., federal holidays, family days or goal days), and addendum requirements (when required).

SECTION I - CONTRACT CLAUSES

The following have been added by reference:

The following have been added by full text:

5352.201-9101 OMBUDSMAN (APR 2010)

(a) An ombudsman has been appointed to hear and facilitate the resolution of concerns from offerors, potential offerors, and others for this acquisition. When requested, the ombudsman will maintain strict confidentiality as to the source of the concern. The existence of the ombudsman does not affect the authority of the program manager, contracting officer, or source selection official. Further, the ombudsman does not participate in the evaluation of proposals, the source selection process, or the adjudication of protests or formal contract disputes. The ombudsman may refer the party to another official who can resolve the concern.

(b) Before consulting with an ombudsman, interested parties must first address their concerns, issues, disagreements, and/or recommendations to the contracting officer for resolution. Consulting an ombudsman does not alter or postpone the timelines for any other processes (e.g., agency level bid protests, GAO bid protests, requests for debriefings, employee-employer actions, contests of OMBC A-76 competition performance decisions).

(c) If resolution cannot be made by the contracting officer, concerned parties may contact the Center/MAJCOM ombudsmen, Director, Enterprise Sourcing Group, 1940 Allbrook Drive, Building 1, Door 24 Wright Patterson AFB, OH 45433 Phone # 937-257-3517. Concerns, issues, disagreements, and recommendations that cannot be resolved at the MAJCOM/DRU level, may be brought by the concerned party for further consideration to the Air Force ombudsman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary (ADAS) (Contracting), SAF/AQC, 1060 Air Force Pentagon, Washington DC 20330-1060, phone number (703) 588-7004, facsimile number (703) 588-1067.

(d) The ombudsman has no authority to render a decision that binds the agency.

(e) Do not contact the ombudsman to request copies of the solicitation, verify offer due date, or clarify technical requirements. Such inquiries shall be directed to the Contracting Officer.

The following have been deleted:

SECTION K - REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS AND OTHER STATEMENTS OF OFFERORS

The following were previously included by reference and are now included by full text:

52.209-7 INFORMATION REGARDING RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS (JAN 2011)

(a) Definitions. As used in this provision--

Administrative proceeding means a non-judicial process that is adjudicatory in nature in order to make a determination of fault or liability (e.g., Securities and Exchange Commission Administrative Proceedings, Civilian Board of Contract Appeals Proceedings, and Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals Proceedings). This includes administrative proceedings at the Federal and State level but only in connection with performance of a Federal contract or grant. It does not include agency actions such as contract audits, site visits, corrective plans, or inspection of deliverables.

Federal contracts and grants with total value greater than $10,000,000 means--

(1) The total value of all current, active contracts and grants, including all priced options; and

(2) The total value of all current, active orders including all priced options under indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity, 8(a), or requirements contracts (including task and delivery and multiple-award Schedules).

Principal means an officer, director, owner, partner, or a person having primary management or supervisory responsibilities within a business entity (e.g., general manager; plant manager; head of a division or business segment; and similar positions).

(b) The offeror ( ) has ( ) does not have current active Federal contracts and grants with total value greater than $10,000,000.

(c) If the offeror checked “has” in paragraph (b) of this provision, the offeror represents, by submission of this offer, that the information it has entered in the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) is current, accurate, and complete as of the date of submission of this offer with regard to the following information:

(1) Whether the offeror, and/or any of its principals, has or has not, within the last five years, in connection with the award to or performance by the offeror of a Federal contract or grant, been the subject of a proceeding, at the Federal or State level that resulted in any of the following dispositions:

(i) In a criminal proceeding, a conviction.

(ii) In a civil proceeding, a finding of fault and liability that results in the payment of a monetary fine, penalty, reimbursement, restitution, or damages of $5,000 or more.

(iii) In an administrative proceeding, a finding of fault and liability that results in--

(A) The payment of a monetary fine or penalty of $5,000 or more; or

(B) The payment of a reimbursement, restitution, or damages in excess of $100,000.

(iv) In a criminal, civil, or administrative proceeding, a disposition of the matter by consent or compromise with an acknowledgment of fault by the Contractor if the proceeding could have led to any of the outcomes specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i), (c)(1)(ii), or (c)(1)(iii) of this provision.

(2) If the offeror has been involved in the last five years in any of the occurrences listed in (c)(1) of this provision, whether the offeror has provided the requested information with regard to each occurrence.

(d) The offeror shall post the information in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (c)(1)(iv) of this provision in FAPIIS as required through maintaining an active registration in the Central Contractor Registration database at http://www.ccr.gov (see 52.204-7).

(End of provision) L6.1.1, Price Reasonableness. First sentence in paragraph has been modified.

From: This section is to assist the offeror in submitting information other than pricing data that is required to evaluate the reasonableness and balance of the proposed price. Compliance with these requirements is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of the proposal. Note that unreasonably high proposed prices, initially or subsequently, may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition on the basis that the offeror does not understand the requirement. Additionally, unbalanced pricing poses an unacceptable risk to the Government and may render a proposal unawardable. Offers should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate their reasonableness and balance. The burden of proof for credibility of proposed prices rests with the offeror.

To: This section is to assist the Offeror in submitting information other than cost and pricing data that is required to evaluate the reasonableness and balance of the proposed price. Compliance with these requirements is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of the proposal. Note that unreasonably high proposed prices, initially or subsequently, may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition on the basis that the offeror does not understand the requirement. Additionally, unbalanced pricing poses an unacceptable risk to the Government and may render a proposal unawardable. Offers should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate their reasonableness and balance. The burden of proof for credibility of proposed prices rests with the offeror.

L6.1.3, Pricing Information Requirements. First and last sentence in paragraph has been modified).

From: In accordance with FAR 15.403-1(b) and 15.403-3(a) , information other than pricing data may be required to support price reasonableness. If, after receipt of proposals, the CO determines that there is insufficient information available to determine price reasonableness and none of the exceptions in FAR 15.403-1 apply, the offeror shall be required to submit pricing data.

To: In accordance with FAR 15.403-1(b) and 15.403-3(a) , information other than cost and pricing data may be required to support price reasonableness. If, after receipt of proposals, the CO determines that there is insufficient information available to determine price reasonableness and none of the exceptions in FAR 15.403-1 apply, the offeror shall be required to submit cost and pricing data.

L6.1.5.2, Section J, Attachment 8, Table B-1 Representative Task Order (Tab 2). First paragraph has been modified.

From: Table B-1 was designed for offerors’ use when submitting pricing. This table will be used by the Price Evaluation Team during the source selection process. Follow the instructions listed in the tab titled “Instructions”. Offerors must complete the table as designed. Any attempt to reformat or remove cells is unauthorized and may be a reason to reject an offeror’s proposal. The submission of information needs to be complete and accurate. Incomplete pricing may result in an offeror’s proposal being deemed unawardable.

To: Table B-1 was designed for offerors’ use when submitting pricing. This table will be used by the Price Evaluation Team during the source selection process. Follow the instructions listed in the tab titled “Instructions”. Offerors must complete the table as designed. Any attempt to reformat or remove cells is unauthorized and may be a reason to reject an offeror’s proposal. The submission of information needs to be complete and accurate. Incomplete pricing may result in an offeror’s proposal being deemed unawardable. (Note: All yellow highlighted cells in Attachment 8, RTO must be completed by the Offeror. Any yellow highlighted cells left blank will result in the proposal being determined unawardable.)

L6.1.5.2, Section J, Attachment 8, Table B-1 Representative Task Order (Tab 2). Second paragraph has been modified.

From: Section J, Attachment 8, Table B-1 represents known task order requirements used primarily for initial contract price evaluations; however, since these are known requirements, the Government may award all, some or none of the requirements using the firm fixed prices provided in Table B-1. Therefore, Table B-1 will form the offeror’s firm fixed price fully burdened hourly rates for the labor categories at each of the identified bases. After contract award, the fully burdened hourly rates on Table B-1 will only be used to award the requirements listed on the representative task order (RTO) through 30 Jun 2012. After 30 June 2012, new price competitions will occur using the procedures outlined in Section H.3 for subsequent task orders.

To: Section J, Attachment 8, Table B-1 represents known task order requirements used primarily for initial contract price evaluations; however, since these are known requirements, the Government may award all, some or none of the requirements using the firm fixed prices provided in Table B-1. Therefore, Table B-1 will form the offeror’s firm fixed price fully burdened hourly rates for the labor categories at each of the identified bases for the representative task order (RTO) requirements. After contract award, the fully burdened hourly rates on Table B-1 will only be used to award the requirements listed on the representative task order (RTO) through 30 Jun 2012. After 30 June 2012, new price competitions will occur using the procedures outlined in Section H.3 for subsequent task orders.

L6.1.5.3, Exceptions/Assumptions and Rationale (Tab 3). Added sentence to end of paragraph.

From: Offerors shall identify any exceptions taken to the pricing requirements stated in this solicitation. Provide complete rationale for each exception. Offerors shall identify any assumptions made in the preparation of the pricing information. Provide complete rationale for each assumption.

To: Offerors shall identify any exceptions taken to the pricing requirements stated in this solicitation. Provide complete rationale for each exception. Offerors shall identify any assumptions made in the preparation of the pricing information. Provide complete rationale for each assumption. Note: Offerors are reminded that all solicitation requirements for pricing must be met or the offeror’s proposal will be determined unawardable.

M2, Basis for Contract Award. Last sentence in third paragraph has been modified.

From: Evaluate the price of all technically “Acceptable” or “Reasonably Susceptible of Being Made Acceptable” proposals. The Government will determine the offeror’s total evaluated price by adding the total proposed prices from Table B-1, Representative Task Order (Section J, Attachment 8). All technically “Acceptable” or “Reasonably Susceptible of Being Made Acceptable” proposals will be evaluated for price reasonableness in accordance with paragraph M3.2.2 and M3.2.5.

To: Evaluate the price of all technically “Acceptable” or “Reasonably Susceptible of Being Made Acceptable” proposals. The Government will determine the offertory’s total evaluated price by adding the total proposed prices from Table B-1, Representative Task Order (Section J, Attachment 8). All technically “Acceptable” or “Reasonably Susceptible of Being Made Acceptable” proposals will be evaluated for price reasonableness and unbalanced pricing in accordance with paragraph M3.2.1, M3.2.2 and M3.2.5.

M3.2.4, Total Evaluated Price (TEP). Added three sentences to the paragraph (new sentences are underlined).

From: The TEP will be calculated as the sum of the offeror’s proposed prices for each labor category and task order option period using the national escalation rate in Section J, Attachment 8, Table B-1 RTO. Although the TEP is shown in Cell A19 of the “instructions” Tab of Table B-1, it is the offeror’s responsibility to ensure the fully burdened hourly rates and the national escalation rates highlighted in yellow are complete and accurate. While the TEP will be used for evaluation purposes, it also represents known requirements, which the Government may use to award all, some or none of the requirements using the fully burdened hourly rates as firm fixed prices. Therefore, the offeror is cautioned to provide reasonable and balanced pricing since it will form the firm fixed price of fully burdened hourly rates on those labor categories listed in Table B-1. After contract award, the fully burdened hourly rates on Table B-1 will be used to award requirements listed on the Representative Task Order (RTO) through 30 Jun 2012 using the procedures outlined in Section H.2. The Government intends to allocate the RTO requirements among the awardees based on the number of awardees and the amount of work as outlined in Section M3.2.6.

To: The TEP will be calculated as the sum of the offeror’s proposed prices for each labor category and task order option period using the national escalation rate in Section J, Attachment 8, Table B-1 RTO. Although the TEP is shown in Cell A19 of the “instructions” Tab of Table B-1, it is the offeror’s responsibility to ensure the fully burdened hourly rates and the national escalation rates highlighted in yellow are complete and accurate. Incomplete pricing will result in an offerors proposal being determined unawardable. While the TEP will be used for evaluation purposes, it also represents known requirements, which the Government may use to award all, some or none of the requirements using the fully burdened hourly rates as firm fixed prices. Therefore, the offeror is cautioned to provide reasonable and balanced pricing since it will form the firm fixed price of fully burdened hourly rates on those labor categories listed in Table B-1. After contract award, the fully burdened hourly rates on Table B-1 will be used to award requirements listed on the Representative Task Order (RTO) through 30 Jun 2012 using the procedures outlined in Section H.2. The Government intends to allocate the RTO requirements among the awardees based on the number of awardees and the amount of work as outlined in Section M3.2.6. (Note: All yellow highlighted cells in Attachment 8, RTO must be completed by the Offeror. Any yellow highlighted cells left blank will result in the proposal being determined unawardable.)

M3.3.4, Recency Assessment. Last sentence in first paragraph has been modified.

From: The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all recent performance information obtained to determine how closely the services performed under those contracts most closely resemble the scope, magnitude and complexity of this solicitation. Scope considers the range of clinical service categories provided. Complexity considers the contract type and geographical distribution of clinical services provided. Magnitude considers the overall dollar value of the effort. Higher relevancy will be assessed for contracts using criteria outlined in Table M-4. For offerors with no relevant performance record, the Government may consider relevant performance information of key personnel.

To: The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all recent performance information obtained to determine how closely the services performed under those contracts most closely resemble the scope, magnitude and complexity of this solicitation. Scope considers the range of clinical service categories provided. Complexity considers the contract type and geographical distribution of clinical services provided. Magnitude considers the overall dollar value of the effort. Higher relevancy will be assessed for contracts using criteria outlined in Table M-4. For offerors with less than three relevant performance record performed by the offeror, the Government may consider relevant performance information of key personnel.

M3.3.5, IDIQ Contract References. Third sentence in first paragraph has been modified.

From: References on indefinite delivery contracts submitted as individual task/delivery orders will be counted as one past performance reference.

To: References on indefinite delivery contracts submitted as individual task/delivery orders will only be counted as one past performance reference regardless of the quantity of task orders submitted for the same contract.

M3.3.6, Past Performance References. Last sentence in paragraph has been modified.

From: The evaluation for the Past Performance section will ensure the offeror provided a record of relevant and recent past performance on at least five (5), but no more than eight (8) previous/current contracts, with a minimum of three (3) being for the offeror‘s performance as a prime Contractor and/or subcontractor. The evaluation will ensure that past performance information is provided for each teaming partner/subcontractor identified on Attachment L-1 Contractor Team Organization. The Government will use data provided by each offeror in this section and data obtained from other sources in the evaluation. If more than eight (8) past performance references are submitted, the Government will only consider information provided for the first 8 references (Tabs 1-8) of the past performance volume.

To: The evaluation for the Past Performance section will ensure the offeror provided a record of relevant and recent past performance on at least five (5), but no more than eight (8) previous/current contracts, with a minimum of three (3) being for the offeror‘s performance as a prime Contractor and/or subcontractor. The evaluation will ensure that past performance information is provided for each teaming partner/subcontractor identified on Attachment L-1 Contractor Team Organization. The Government will use data provided by each offeror in this section and data obtained from other sources in the evaluation. If more than eight (8) past performance references are submitted, the Government will only consider information provided for the first 8 references (Tabs 1-8) of the past performance volume. If the Government determined an offeror submitted less than the required number of references, the offeror will have failed to meet the minimum number of past performance references and the proposal will be determined unawardable.

(End of Summary of Changes)