TA-PPT(new).doc

L PROVISION

TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE -PERFORMANCE-PRICE TRADEOFF (TA-PPT)

FA8540-08-R-10119

L-900. INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

(a) The following instructions cover the preparation and submittal of the offeror’s proposal for this solicitation. Proposals shall be submitted to the Government in (fill-in number) separate volumes as set forth below:

PAGE

NUMBER

VOLUME

LIMITS

OF COPIES

DESCRIPTION

I

N/A

2* Completed RFP

II

2*

Technical Proposal

III

N/A

Present/Past Performance

*Shall be submitted in written form (1 copy) and electronic form (1 copy).

In addition to the page limitations set forth above, proposals should comply with the following format:

(1) Print should be no smaller than a font size of 12 and should be on 8 1/2 by 11 inch paper. Charts, graphs or spreadsheets may be on fold-out pages, but must fold within the page size specified and will count as one page.

(2) Margins shall be no smaller than 1 inch.

(3) Each page within a section shall be numbered consecutively.

(4) Each page containing proprietary information should be so marked.

(5) Each page should contain the following legend at the bottom of each sheet:

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION--SEE FAR 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

(b) Volume I will consist of the completed and signed RFP with a cover letter delineating any exceptions taken to the RFP terms and conditions. However, offerors are cautioned that any noncompliance with the terms and conditions of the RFP may cause their proposal to be determined unacceptable. The Government intends to make an award without discussions. Discussions, if necessary, will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.306.

Attention: Volume III is due five (5) calendar days prior to the required due date for proposals. Volume III of the RFP are due no later than 13 April 2008, 4:00 PM, Eastern Standard Time. The Past Performance Volume is subject to the late proposals clause (FAR 14.304 or 52.215.1) .

(c) Volume II, Technical Proposal

a. Proposals shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation. Offerors shall cross reference the requirements document, by paragraph number, to the corresponding proposal paragraph which addresses the referenced item. The proposal should 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 facilities and experience, and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offeror’s proposal.

b. The following information shall be provided and will be evaluated to assess technical acceptability and proposal risk in accordance with Section M-900, Evaluation Basis for Award:

(1) Proposals shall describe the offeror’s capability and proposed approach to performing the requirements set forth in Performance-Based Work Statement (PWS) for Low Band Standard Processor Board and Low Band Interface Board Replacement.

(2) Identify any risks associated with the approach and actions to be taken to mitigate that risk.

(3) Technically Acceptability will be determined at the factor level set forth in Section M-900.

(d) Volume III - Present and Past Performance: The offeror shall submit Present and Past Performance Information for itself and each proposed critical subcontractor in accordance with the format contained in the “FACTS Sheet” (See Attachment (1)) and the following paragraphs. A critical subcontractor is defined as an entity (subcontractor, teaming contractor and/or joint venture partner), other than the offeror itself, that will (perform 35 % of the total proposed effort based on the total program price.) OR (perform specific technical aspect(s) peculiar to your program that you consider critical to program success).

(1) The requested present and past performance information shall be provided in a separate section (i.e., 3-ring binder) labeled, "Volume III - Present and Past Performance Information." A summary page shall be provided describing the role of the offeror and each critical subcontractor (both nature of work, criticality of work, and percentage of overall work.). Offerors shall complete a separate "FACTS Sheet" for each active or completed contract (with preferably at least one year of performance history) in the past five (5) years, that the offeror considers relevant in demonstrating its ability to perform the proposed effort. If the total number of such contracts exceeds three (3), the offeror shall address its three (3) most relevant contracts. For each critical subcontractor that is part of the offeror's team, a FACTS Sheet for three (3) of their most relevant contracts shall also be included. For all submittals, the performance on efforts identified shall be restricted to those completed or ongoing during the past five (5) years from the issuance date of this RFP. The offeror's present and past performance information may include data on efforts performed by other divisions or corporate management, if such resources will be used and significantly influence the performance of the proposed effort. Contracts listed may include those with the Federal Government, state and local Governments or their agencies, and commercial customers. Offerors that are newly formed entities without prior contracts or that do not possess relevant corporate past performance should submit FACTS Sheets for three (3) of their most recent/relevant contracts demonstrating the present and past performance for each of their key personnel. In addition to the FACTS sheets for each entity as required above, the offeror must submit a consent letter, executed by each of its proposed critical subcontractors, authorizing release of adverse past performance information to the prime contractor to allow the prime an opportunity to respond. A sample Subcontractor/Teaming Partner Consent Form is attached to this RFP (See RFP Attachment 2). The consent form should be completed by the major subcontractors/teaming partners identified in your proposal. The completed consent forms should be submitted as part of your Past Performance Volume (or Proposal). Include relevant information concerning the offeror’s and critical subcontractor’s (if applicable) compliance with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns and/or FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, if these Clauses are or were contained in any of the three (3) contract efforts identified in Section II, Performance Information, of the offeror’s proposal. If they were not contained in these 3 contracts, submit this information on two additional contracts which contained these clauses. Please note that FAR 52.219-8 does apply to ALL offerors. Address whether or not the offeror and critical subcontractor(s), if applicable, carried out the policy of the United States in the awarding of subcontracts to small business concerns, veteran-owned small business concerns, service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns, HUBZone small business concerns, small disadvantaged business concerns, and women-owned small business concerns to the fullest extent consistent with efficient contract performance.

(2) The offeror shall focus its FACTS Sheet responses so that they clearly correlate present and past performance with the requirements of this RFP. The FACTS Sheet submitted by the offeror and each critical subcontractor must clearly describe the relevance of the effort to the work proposed by that entity. The offeror may expand the answering space on the FACTS Sheet so that the filled-in FACTS Sheet for each relevant contract covers no more than both sides of two 8 ½ x 11 inch pages. The offeror shall provide the most current information for the Points of Contact (POCs) identified on the FACTS Sheets.

(3) Offerors shall include two additional pages (8 1/2 X 11 page with 0.5” margins), in spreadsheet format, that simply list all contracts that the offeror is performing or has performed in the past five (5) years. Also, provide a spreadsheet on each critical subcontractor. If the list of said contracts exceeds two (2) pages per entity, only the most recent contracts ongoing/completed shall be listed. The purpose of the spreadsheet is to capture the total scope of work (whether the offeror deems the work relevant or not to this instant RFP) that the offeror and each critical subcontractor have ongoing or completed in the past five (5) years. The Government may obtain and use performance information on any or none of these programs. The spreadsheet(s) shall include (as a minimum) current information as follows:

Period of Max. Stage of the Contracting Phone and Fax Brief Program

Contract Performance Total Est. Program & Agency or Numbers for at Description, include

Number (Max Yrs) Dollars Brief Status Customer least two POCs Relevancy and Qtys

(4) It is not presumed that the offeror's performance has been perfect. Rather, the proposal should contain evidence of the offeror's ability to isolate the root causes of problems and should include in their FACTS sheet a description of programs or actions taken to resolve those causes. Problems not addressed by the offeror, but found by the Government during the evaluation of the information in this volume, will be assumed to still exist. Note: In the case of Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS), if your input has already been provided and the rationale/ circumstances have not changed, DO NOT repeat them here. The Government will use data provided by each offeror in this volume and may use data obtained from other sources in the development of the confidence assessment. The Present/Past Performance Questionnaire, provided as an attachment to this RFP, will be one means used by the Government to obtain present/past performance information. The Government reserves the right to change, alter, and/or supplement the questionnaire without further notice to the offeror(s).

(5) The offeror shall send out -- and track the completion of -- the Present/Past Performance Questionnaires (See RFP Attachment (4)) to each of the offeror’s, critical subcontractors’, teaming contractors’ and/or joint venture partners’ (i.e., each entity’s) Points of Contact (POCs) identified in each FACTS Sheet. The responsibility to send out and track the completion of the Present/Past Performance Questionnaires (See Attachment (6)) rests solely with the offeror - i.e., it shall not be delegated to any other entity. The Transmittal Letter (See Attachment (5)) shall be used by the offeror in sending out the Present/Past Performance Questionnaires. The offeror shall exert its best efforts to ensure that at least two POCs, per relevant contract, submit a completed Present/Past Performance Questionnaire directly to the Government not later than the date established in this RFP (final, not draft RFP) for the present/past performance proposal submission. Each of the offeror’s POCs shall fax or mail its completed Present/Past Performance Questionnaire directly to:

542 CBSSS/PKS

ATTN: Carol Renner 460 Richard Ray Blvd.

Suite 200 Robins AFB, GA 31098

The fax number is 478-926-7211. Please have your POCs call (Carol Renner at 478-926-7000) before faxing their response. Mailing the questionnaire(s) to the address above is an acceptable alternative method of transmission. If mailing, the outside envelope must be marked as follows:

NOTE: TO BE OPENED BY ADDRESSEE ONLY

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - See FAR 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Once the Present/Past Performance Questionnaires are completed by your POCs, the information contained therein shall be considered sensitive and shall not be released to you, the offeror. Questionnaires shall be sent to and best efforts made to ensure completion, and submission directly back to the Government from at least two of the following (in descending order of availability):

(a) Procuring Contracting Officer/Contract Negotiator or equivalent

(b) Program/Project Manager, or equivalent

(c) Administrative Contracting Officer/Contract Administrator or equivalent

(d) System Engineer

(6) In the event that commercial contracts are presented as present/past performance sources of information, a client authorization letter shall be issued to those commercial POCs authorizing/instructing them to complete a Present/Past Performance Questionnaire. A sample client authorization letter is attached to this RFP (See RFP Attachment (3). The offeror is required to send the client authorization letter(s) with the Present/Past Performance Questionnaire(s) to each POC on commercial contracts. A separate copy of client authorization letter(s) for each commercial contract shall be included in the offeror’s Present/Past Performance submission for the Government’s use in case additional questionnaires need to be sent by the Government after RFP closing.

(7) A Present/Past Performance Questionnaire Tracking Record, (See Attachment (4)), or equivalent form(s), containing the same information, shall be maintained by the offeror, documenting all exchanges between and follow-ups made to each of the POCs identified in the FACTS Sheets. All Present/Past Performance Questionnaire Tracking Records shall be submitted with the offeror’s Present/Past Performance Volume. This exchange/contact between the offeror and its POCs shall cease upon submission of the offeror’s proposal to the Government in response to this RFP. The Government may conduct follow-up discussions with any of the people identified in the Tracking Records or in the offeror’s Present/Past Performance Volume. The Government may obtain other information by sending out additional questionnaires and/or through other sources.

(8) RFP Attachments (Questionnaire Transmittal Letter, Client Authorization Letter, And Present/Past Performance Questionnaire Tracking Record) must include the following legend at the top and bottom of the page:

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - See FAR 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

RFP FA8540-08-R-10119

ATTACHMENT 1

Present/Past Performance “FACTS Sheet”

(TO BE COMPLETED BY OFFEROR)

Request the offeror complete a separate FACTS Sheet for each relevant contract. See Clause L-900 of this RFP for detailed instructions and limits on number and recency of contracts. Offeror is requested to provide frank, concise comments regarding present/past performance on the program identified in B. below.

A. OFFEROR: (Including: (1) Name (Company/Division), (2) Address: (3) CAGE Code)

B. PROGRAM TITLE and CONTRACT NUMBER:

C. NAME OF CONTRACTING ACTIVITY OR CUSTOMER:

D. CONTRACT TYPE(S) – PLEASE LIST ALL THAT APPLY (firm fixed price, time & materials, etc.)

E. CONTRACT $ VALUE:

1. Original contract $ value and current $ value:

2. Estimated value at completion and primary causes of changes:

3. If Award Fee Contract, what percentages of the fee have been awarded in each of last 3 years?:

F. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF EFFORT AS: _____ PRIME _____ SUBCONTRACTOR

1. As a part of this narrative description, highlight portions considered most relevant to the current acquisition; addressing how and to what extent the proposed effort relates to the program identified in B. above. To supplement the data provided in response to this paragraph, complete the following regarding relevancy of the effort identified in paragraph B to the proposed effort. This is limited to two pages beyond the page limitation of the FACTS sheet information.

NOTE: BUYER/PCO SHOULD TAILOR THE TABLE BELOW TO THE SPECIFIC PROGRAM.

Facility 2: production

6. Quantities produced, # repaired or other quantitative data

7. Program Similarity

8. Program Complexity

11. Other

2. This paragraph shall also include details to support the offeror’s record for on time delivery, technical quality and cost control for this effort identified in paragraph B. above.

3. Discuss your compliance with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns. That is, did you carry out the policy of the United States in the awarding of subcontracts to small business concerns, veteran-owned small business concerns, service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns, HUBZone small business concerns, small disadvantaged business concerns, and women-owned small business concerns to the fullest extent consistent with efficient contract performance? This is applicable to all offerors. [PCO note: include this when the contract amount is expected to exceed the simplified acquisition threshold unless: a personal services contract is contemplated, OR, the contract, together with all of its subcontracts, will be performed entirely outside of the United States and its outlying areas.]

4. Identify whether a subcontracting plan in accordance with FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, was required by this effort you are submitting. If one was required, complete the following regarding subcontracting goals and status-to-date for effort identified in paragraph B. If goals were not met, please explain. This is applicable to large business concerns only. [PCO note: include this in solicitations that offer subcontracting possibilities, are expected to exceed $550,000, and are required to include the clause at 52.219-8,Utilization of Small Business Concerns, unless the acquisition is set aside or is to be accomplished under the 8(a) program.]

Small Business

Small Disadvantaged Business

Women-Owned Small Business

HUBZone Small Business

Veteran-Owned Small Business

Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business

HBCU/MI

5. Include relevant information concerning your compliance with subcontracting plan goals for small disadvantaged business (SDB) concerns, monetary targets for SDB participation (FAR 52.219-24), and notifications submitted under FAR 52.219-25, Small Disadvantaged Business Participation Program-Disadvantaged Status and Reporting. [PCO note: include this in all solicitations except those that are: sb set-asides, hubzone set-asides, service-disabled veteran-owned sb set-asides, 8(a) acquisitions or contract actions that will be performed entirely outside the u.s.and its outlying areas.]

G. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE:

1. Original schedule and current schedule:

2. Estimate @ completion:

3. How many times changed and primary causes of changes:

H. PRIMARY POINTS OF CONTACT: (The offeror is responsible for exerting its best efforts to ensure that current information is provided for all individuals.)

I. Specify, by name, key individual(s) who will participate in the proposed effort under this acquisition who also participated in the program identified in B. above, and indicate their contract role. Describe how participation of these key personnel contributed to the success of the previous effort and how this indicates probability of success on the proposed effort.

J. Use this space to address any aspect about this program considered unique. Describe quality awards or certifications that indicate the offeror possesses a high-quality process for developing and producing the product/service required.

K. Summarize contract issues relative to the number and severity of quality deficiencies recorded/contract discrepancy reports issued, cure notices, show cause letters, termination for default or cause, disputes, claims, latent defects; and, corrective actions taken for the contract listed in paragraph B. above.

L. Additionally, for those efforts where the offeror is cognizant of unfavorable and/or marginal past performance ratings/reports previously assessed by customers or clients, but feel that significant progress has been made but not yet credited or formally documented, provide the program name, contract number, customer location and a narrative explaining "fixes" made to date, or any other information regarding the unfavorable/marginal assessment. This narrative portion is limited to one (1) additional page beyond the FACTS sheet required page limitation. It is not presumed that the offeror's performance has been perfect. Rather, the proposal should contain evidence of the offeror's ability to isolate the root causes of problems and should describe programs or actions taken to resolve those causes. Demonstrated corrective actions (not just planned or promised), and the overall work record will be considered. Problems not addressed by the offeror, but found by the Government during the evaluation of the information in this volume, will be assumed to still exist. Note: In the case of Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS), if your input has already been provided and the rationale/ circumstances have not changed, DO NOT repeat them here.

M. Was this contract effort (as identified in paragraph B. above) submitted as a past performance source of data for a previous WR-ALC procurement. Yes No . If yes, identify the buyer and/or contracting officer, their phone number and office symbol and solicitation number of the procurement for which this effort was submitted.

PLEASE NOTE: The Government is not bound by the offeror's opinion of relevancy. The Government will perform an independent assessment of relevancy of the data provided or obtained.

RFP FA8540-08-R-10119

ATTACHMENT 3

NOTE TO OFFERORS: This procurement could be similar to commercial supplies/services. Therefore, to assist the Government’s Performance Confidence Assessment Group (PCAG) in assessing your present and past performance on relevant commercial contracts, the following letter must be sent to your points of contact (POCs) for those commercial efforts that you identify to us in your past performance volume. Should you propose to use critical subcontractors, teaming contractors, and/or joint venture partners, you must obtain a similar client authorization letter from each entity. HOWEVER, it is your sole responsibility, as the offeror, to then send out these authorization letters (with the questionnaires – delete if they are not tracking) to your own POCs and to those of your subcontractors, teaming contractors, or joint venture partners and include a copy in your past performance volume.

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - See FAR 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Client Authorization Letter

(TO BE ACCOMPLISHED BY OFFEROR)

Dear (Client):

We are currently responding to the Department of the Air Force (AF), Robins Air Force Base (RAFB), Request For Proposal (RFP) (fill in the #) for the procurement of the (fill a brief program description/title).

As you know an offeror’s past performance has become an element of increased emphasis in the AF’s acquisitions. They are requesting that clients of companies who submit proposals in response to their RFP for the (fill in your program’s name) Program be contacted, and that their participation in the validation process be requested. We, therefore, respectfully request and hereby authorize you to complete the attached Questionnaire with regards to work we have performed for you, and forward it directly to the Government Point(s) of Contact at the following address:

WR-ALC/( )

ATTN:

(List PCO and/or Buyer’s names) (Street Address) Robins AFB, GA 31098-(fill in the 4-digit #)

Reference: RFP: (fill in the #) We have identified Mr./Ms. (Name) of your organization as the point of contact based on their knowledge concerning our work. Your cooperation in this matter is appreciated. Any questions may be directed to: [NAME, PHONE NUMBER, FAX NUMBER FOR THE OFFEROR’S POINT OF CONTACT]

Sincerely, [OFFEROR'S POINT OF CONTACT]

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

RFP FA8540-08-R-10119

ATTACHMENT 4

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - See FAR 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Past Performance Questionnaire Tracking Record

[TO BE ACCOMPLISHED BY OFFEROR]

OFFEROR’S REFERENCES COMPANY/AGENCY NAME:

REFERENCE ADDRESS:

REFERENCE CONTRACT NUMBER/PROGRAM NAME:

Phone #

RFP FA8540-08-R-10119

ATTACHMENT5 For use only if offeror is tracking questionnaires Transmittal Letter for Government Sources to Accompany Present/Past Performance Questionnaire

[TO BE COMPLETED BY OFFEROR]

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - See FAR 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

MEMORANDUM FOR: [OFFEROR’S POC]

FROM:

[OFFEROR’S ADDRESS AND POINT OF CONTACT]

SUBJECT:

Present/Past Performance Questionnaire for Contract(s) .

1. We are currently responding to the Department of the Air Force (AF), Robins Air Force Base (RAFB), Request For Proposal (RFP) (fill in the #), for the procurement of the (fill in the Program). This RFP is being conducted as a Technically Acceptable Risk Performance Price Tradeoff (TA-RPPT) and specifically requires that we, as an offeror, do the following:

The offeror shall send out -- and track the completion of -- the Present/Past Performance Questionnaire to each of the offeror’s, critical subcontractors’, teaming contractors’ and/or joint venture partners’ Points of Contact (POCs). The responsibility to send out and track the completion of the Present/Past Performance Questionnaires rests solely with the offeror - i.e., it shall not be delegated to any subcontractors, teaming contractors, and/or joint venture partners. The completed Present/Past Performance Questionnaire shall be submitted directly to the Government not later than [OFFEROR FILL-IN RFP CLOSING DATE]. Each of the offeror’s POCs shall fax its completed Present/Past Performance Questionnaire directly to:

542 CBSSS/PKS

ATTN: Carol Renner 460 Richard Ray Blvd. Suite 200 Robins AFB, GA 31098 The RAFB fax number is 478-926-7211. The POCs must call Carol Renner before faxing the completed questionnaire(s). Mailing the questionnaire(s) to the address above is an acceptable alternative method of transmission. If mailing, the outside envelope must be marked as follows:

NOTE: TO BE OPENED BY ADDRESSEE ONLY

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - See FAR 3.104 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

2. We have identified subject contract(s) as relevant to this acquisition and you as our POC. As such, please take a few moments of your time to fill out the attached questionnaire and send it directly back to RAFB. The information contained in the completed Present/Past Performance Questionnaires is considered sensitive and can not be released to us, the offeror. If you have any questions about the acquisition or the attached questionnaire, your questions must be directed back to the Government’s points of contact identified above. Thank you for your timely assistance.

Sincerely, 2 ATCH

[OFFEROR’S POINT OF CONTACT]

Present/Past Performance Questionnaire

[Client Authorization Letter(s), if applicable]

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - See FAR 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

RFP FA8540-08-R-10119

ATTACHMENT 2

NOTE TO OFFERORS: Past performance information concerning subcontractors and teaming partners cannot be disclosed to a private party without the subcontractor's or teaming partner's consent. Because a prime contractor is a private party, the Government will need that consent before disclosing subcontractor/teaming partner past and present performance information to the prime during exchanges. In an effort to assist the Government's Performance Confidence Assessment Group (PCAG) in assessing your past performance relevancy and confidence, we request that the following consent form be completed by the major subcontractors/teaming partners identified in your proposal. The completed consent forms should be submitted as part of your Past Performance Volume (or Proposal). (Note: Section L should specify if past performance is to be submitted as a separate proposal volume).

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - See FAR 3.104

SUBCONTRACTOR/TEAMING PARTNER CONSENT FORM FOR THE RELEASE OF PAST AND PRESENT PERFORMANCE INFORMATION TO THE PRIME CONTRACTOR

Dear (Contracting Officer)

We are currently participating as a (subcontractor/teaming partner) with (prime contractor or name of entity providing proposal) in responding to the Department of the Air Force, (location) request for Proposal (solicitation number) for the (program title or description of effort).

We understand that the Government is placing increased emphasis on past performance in order to obtain best value in source selections. In order to facilitate the performance confidence assessment process we are signing this consent form to allow you to discuss our past and present performance information with the prime contractor during the source selection process.

(Signature and Title of individual who has the authority to sign for and legally bind the company)

Company Name:

Address:

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - See FAR 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

M PROVISION

RFP FA8540-08-R-10119

Technically Acceptable Performance-Price Tradeoff (TA-PPT) Procedure

M-900. EVALUATION BASIS FOR AWARD

(a) This acquisition will utilize the Technically Acceptable-Risk/Performance/Price Tradeoff (TA-RPPT) source selection procedure to make an integrated assessment for a best value award decision. A decision on the technical acceptability of each offeror’s proposal will be made. For those offerors who are determined to be technically acceptable, tradeoffs will be made between proposal risk, past performance and price. Proposal risk and past performance are of equal importance, and when combined, are considered (significantly more important than, price). While the Government will strive for maximum objectivity, the tradeoff process, by its nature, is subjective; therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the selection process. The Government intends to make an award without discussions. Discussions, if necessary, will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.306. Award will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal conforms to all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, technical requirements, and also provides the best value to the Government based on the results of the evaluation described in paragraph (b) below.

(b) The TA-PPT evaluation process will be accomplished as follows:

(1) Technical Acceptability. Each offeror’s technical proposal will be evaluated to determine if the offeror provides a sound, compliant approach that meets Performance- Based Work Statement (PWS) for Low Band Standard Processor Board and Low Band Interface Board Replacement dated 1 November 2007 and demonstrates a thorough knowledge and understanding of those requirements and their associated risks. The factors are as follows:

FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL APPROACH: The factor is met when the offeror’s response demonstrates to the extent applicable, a sound, thorough understanding of, viable approach to, and capability for the following:

(a.) Recreation of Missing Technical Data (Reverse Engineering)

(b.) Implementation of failure analysis recommendations

(c.) Design Approach/Process

(d.) Qualification Testing Plan

(e.) Form Fit Function Approach

FACTOR 2: SCHEDULE: The factor is met when the offeror’s response provides a schedule which demonstrates a sound, thorough understanding of, viable approach to, and capability for meeting the required milestones in the two following areas:

(a.) Design Schedule

(b.) Qualification Schedule

FACTOR 3: MIX/AVAILABILITY OF SKILLS: The factor met when the offeror’s response provides a description of the mix of skills proposed in the numbers needed in the time required. This description must demonstrate to the extent applicable, a sound, thorough understanding of, viable approach to, and capability for completing the requirements of the Performance Based Work Statement.

(2) Performance. The past performance assessment will assess the confidence in the offeror’s ability (which includes, if applicable, the extent of its critical subcontractors’ or teaming partners’ involvement) to successfully accomplish the proposed effort based on the offeror’s demonstrated present and past work record. A critical subcontractor is defined as an entity (subcontractor, teaming contractor and/or joint venture partner), other than the offeror itself, that will (perform x % of the total proposed effort based on the total program price.) OR (perform specific technical aspect(s) peculiar to your program that you consider critical to program success (e.g., software engineering, chassis manufacture, final integration and test, etc.). The Government will evaluate the offeror’s demonstrated record of contract compliance in supplying products and services that meet users’ needs, including cost and schedule. The currency and relevancy of the information, the source of the information, context of the data and general trends in the contractor’s performance will be considered. The Government will perform an independent determination of relevancy of the data provided or obtained. A relevancy determination of the offeror’s present/past performance (which includes, if applicable, the extent of its critical subcontractors’ or teaming partners’ involvement) will be made. The Government is not bound by the offeror’s opinion of relevancy. The Government may consider an offeror’s contracts in the aggregate in determining relevancy, should the offeror’s present and past performance lend itself to this approach. For example, an offeror’s work experience on three contracts may, by definition, represent only a somewhat relevant effort when each contract is considered as a stand-alone effort. However, when these contracts are performed concurrently (in part or in whole) and are assessed in the aggregate, the work may more accurately reflect a very relevant effort. The following relevancy criteria apply:

· VERY RELEVANT: Present/past performance programs involved the breadth, magnitude of effort and complexities, which are essentially what this solicitation requires. For example, experience in either of the following would be considered very relevant:

· ALQ-184/ALQ-119 PWA (printed wiring assembly) design and qualification effort

· Airborne Military system PWA design and qualification effort

· RELEVANT: Present/past performance programs involved less breadth, magnitude of effort and complexities, including most of what this solicitation requires. For example, experience in the following would be considered relevant:

· Airborne Electronic Warfare pod component design and qualification effort

· SOMEWHAT RELEVANT: Present/past performance programs involved much less breadth, magnitude of effort and complexities, including some of what this solicitation requires. For example, experience in the following would be considered somewhat relevant:

· Airborne system component design and qualification effort

· NOT RELEVANT: Did not involve any significant aspects of above.

In assessing present and past performance, the Government will employ several approaches, including, but not limited to:

(i). Information utilized may be obtained from the references listed in the proposal, as well as from other sources known to the Government. Although Section L asks the offeror to address the four (4) most relevant contracts, the Performance Confidence Assessment Group (PCAG) evaluation is not limited to review of only those four (4) submitted contracts, but may include performance information from other sources such as spreadsheet lists, questionnaires, CPARS, etc. Data from previous source selections may be used if the data is recent and relevant. Evaluation of present and past performance will include consideration of overall customer satisfaction and conclusions of informed judgment.

(ii). Offerors shall be given an opportunity to address adverse past performance information if the offeror has not had a previous opportunity to respond to the information. Recent contracts will be examined to ensure that corrective measures have been implemented. The confidence assessment will consider issues including, but not limited to, the number and severity of the problems, the appropriateness and/or effectiveness of any corrective actions taken (not just planned or promised), and the offeror’s overall work record. Prompt corrective action in isolated instances may not outweigh overall negative trends.

(iii). Past performance information will also be considered regarding any critical subcontractors and key personnel. If an offeror, or the proposed key employees of the offeror, do not have a past performance history deemed relevant to this solicitation, the offeror will receive an unknown confidence rating. The unknown confidence rating will be considered in the overall assessment for a best value decision.

(iv). An overall confidence assessment rating will be made. The following performance confidence assessment ratings apply:

Rating

Definition High Confidence Based on the offeror’s performance record, the government has high confidence that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Significant Confidence Based on the offeror’s performance record, the government has significant confidence that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror’s performance record, the government has confidence that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Normal contractor emphasis should preclude any problems.

Unknown Confidence No performance record identifiable (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iii) and (iv)).

Little Confidence Based on the offeror’s performance record, substantial doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s performance record, extreme doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

(v). Pursuant to DFARS 5215.305(a)(2), the assessment will consider the extent to which the offeror’s and critical subcontractor’s (if applicable) evaluated past performance demonstrates compliance with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns and/or FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan. That is, did the offeror carry out the policy of the United States in the awarding of subcontracts to small business concerns, veteran-owned small business concerns, service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns, HUBZone small business concerns, small disadvantaged business concerns, and women-owned small business concerns to the fullest extent consistent with efficient contract performance. Please note that FAR 52.219-8 does apply to ALL offerors.