Sections-L-900-and-M-900-3-26-13.pdf

Request for Proposal FA8555-13-R-0001

L-900. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

A. Proposals shall be submitted in three separate volumes as set forth below: Non-conformance with any instructions provided below may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation.

PAGE NUMBER

VOLUME LIMITS OF COPIES DESCRIPTION

I N/A 3 Completed RFP

5 Total Compensation Plan 5 Voluntary Protection Program Information II N/A 3* Past Performance III N/A 3* Cost/Price Proposal (Schedule B, Attachment 6)

*Past Performance and Cost/Price proposal information shall be submitted in written form (1 copy) and CD-R or DVD-R (write once/read only) (2 copies) that is “closed” so that no further writes can be made to the media. CD-R/W or DVD-R/W media types are not acceptable. Media must be virus scanned by the offeror prior to submitting to the Government.

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

1. Each proposal shall be marked with the RFP number and the offeror’s name and address.

2. Print should be no smaller than a font size of 12 and should be on 8 1/2 x 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.

3. Margins shall be no smaller than 1 inch.

4. Each page within a section shall be numbered consecutively.

5. Each page containing proprietary information should be so marked.

6. Each page should contain the following legend at the bottom of each sheet:

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION--SEE FAR 2.101 and 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

7. Submission of initial packages shall either be mailed or hand-delivered

B. Communications:

Exchanges of source selection information between Government and offerors will be controlled by the Contracting Officer. Email may be used to transmit such information only if the email can be sent encrypted, and must include “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104” in the subject line of the email. Otherwise, source selection information will be transmitted via direct mailing or facsimile. In order to facilitate the sending and receiving of encrypted emails, offerors must use MS Outlook email configured to support encryption or a different email product that is S/MIME compatible and configured to support encryption. If you intend to submit your source selection information via encrypted email, you will need to contact the Buyer/Contracting Officer indicated on the face page of the solicitation prior to that first submittal in order to exchange certificates used for encryption. To ensure the process is working correctly, send a test encrypted message first (without including any source selection information). If the offeror’s computer system cannot support encryption technology, the offeror shall send the contracting officer correspondence at the time that it submits its proposal stating that it accepts the risk of sending and receiving unencrypted electronic mail if it chooses to utilize unencrypted email as a channel of communication.

C. 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. Offerors shall ensure that all clauses and provisions that require “fill-in” information are appropriately completed, including the proposed prices associated with the contract line items in the Schedule of the RFP.

The total compensation plan required by FAR 52.222-46 shall be submitted as part of Volume I and shall be no more than five (5) pages. The plan shall set forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for professional employees and include supporting information to enable the Government to review the proposed salaries and fringe benefits in accordance with FAR 52.222-46. Note: The compensation plan pertains to the offeror only. However, if a populated joint venture is formed (a joint venture in which the employees are employed by the joint venture itself and not by any individual joint venture partner), the joint venture must submit the total compensation plan for the joint venture. If an unpopulated joint venture is formed, each individual joint venture partner must submit its own total compensation plan.

Air Force Voluntary Protection Program (VPP) requirements are applicable to this acquisition as work on an Air Force installation will be required by contractor employees working 1,000 hours or more in any calendar quarter and the employees are not directly supervised by the Air Force installation. As part of Volume I, for each of the past three (3) calendar years ending with the calendar year immediately prior to the calendar year in which this solicitation is being issued, submit your Total Case Incidence Rates (TCIR) and Day Away, Restricted, and or Transfer Case Rates (DART) for the standard Industrial Classification System (SIC) code or North American Industrial Classification Systems (NAICS) code for the applicable industry as identified on the face page of this solicitation. If TCIR/DART rates are not maintained, submit comparable insurance rates or compensation injury rates. This VPP information shall be no more than five (5) pages. Note: This VPP information pertains to the offeror. If an unpopulated joint venture is formed (a joint venture in which the employees are employed by the joint venture partners and not the joint venture itself), each joint venture partner must submit these rates. Any proposed subcontractor with employees working 1,000 or more hours in any calendar quarter on an Air Force installation and whose subcontractor employees are not directly supervised by the Air Force installation must submit these rates as well. For information on TCIR/DART rates, visit the following VPP site:

http://www.osha.gov/dcsp/vpp/index.html

The Government intends to award without discussions, but reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined necessary. Any discussions will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.306. Proposals must be received by AFLCMC/HBK ATTN: Allen Parkerson or Sandra E. Harvey, 750 Third Street, Bldg 350, Robins AFB, GA, 31098-2212, 8 APR 13 no later than 3:30 PM, Eastern Daylight Savings Time. However, offerors are requested to submit Volume II, Present/Past Performance Information, so that it is received ten (10) calendar days prior to the required due date for proposals. Failure to submit Volume II by the earlier date will not result in offeror disqualification.

D. Volume II - Past Performance Factor: The offeror shall submit Present and Past Performance Information for itself and any joint venture partner, as well as each proposed critical subcontractor (and affiliate, as applicable and as defined in FAR 2.101) in accordance with the format contained in the “FACTS Sheet” (See RFP Attachment 1) and the following paragraphs. A critical subcontractor is defined as an entity (subcontractor and/or teaming contractor) other than the offeror itself that will perform at least 30% of the total price as proposed in Schedule B. NOTE: The Government will evaluate the past performance of affiliates submitted provided they meet the definition of an affiliate in FAR 2.101 if the offeror's past performance volume demonstrates the affiliate company will provide the offeror with resources for the instant effort, such as workforce, management, facilities, or other capabilities demonstrating direct and meaningful involvement in the performance of the instant proposed effort and resultant contract.

(1) The requested present and past performance information shall be provided in a separate volume (i.e., 3-ring binder) labeled "Volume II - Past Performance". For this acquisition, identify the proposed role of the offeror, joint venture partner and critical subcontractor (and affiliate, as applicable and as defined in FAR 2.101) regarding the nature of work and percentage of overall work to be performed by each. Each offeror/joint venture partner shall complete a separate FACTS Sheet for each active or completed contract (with preferably at least one year of performance history) in the past three (3) years that the offeror/joint venture partner considers relevant in demonstrating its ability to perform the proposed effort. If the total number of such contracts exceeds three (3), each offeror/joint venture partner shall address its three (3) most recent and relevant contracts. For each critical subcontractor (and affiliate, as applicable and as defined in FAR 2.101) included in the offeror's proposal, a FACTS Sheet for three (3) of their most recent and relevant contracts shall also be included. Note: If the contract you are submitting is an ordering type contractual vehicle (e.g., an Indefinite Delivery “D” type contract per FAR 16.5), only after issuance of a delivery/task order does performance occur. Given this, an individual order (or orders) under the basic ordering contract shall be submitted in lieu of just the basic ordering contract itself. Each submitted order shall be considered a separate effort unless information is provided indicating follow-on or series of orders for continued performance of the same scope and such can be verified by the user/customer. In this event, such submitted multiple orders shall be considered as a single effort for evaluation purposes. For all submittals, the performance on efforts identified shall be restricted to those completed or ongoing during the past three (3) years from the issuance date of this RFP. The offeror's/joint venture partners’ or critical subcontractor’s present and past performance information may include data on efforts performed by other divisions or corporate management if such resources will be used in 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, joint venture partners, or critical subcontractors (or affiliate, as applicable and defined in FAR 2.101) that are newly formed entities (in existence less than three (3) years from the issuance date of this solicitation) who either have no prior contracts or do not possess relevant corporate past performance, but have key personnel with relevant past performance while employed by another company, may demonstrate the performance of such key personnel by submitting FACTS Sheets for three (3) of their most recent and relevant contracts under which such key personnel performed the same role currently being proposed on the instant acquisition and this performance occurred during the past three (3) years from the issuance date of this solicitation. Note however, that the quality of the key personnel’s performance under the submitted contract must be able to be verified by the Past Performance Team in order to be considered in the assessment of confidence. Any such key personnel must already be employed by the offeror/joint venture partner, or in the case of a critical subcontractor (or affiliate, as applicable and defined in FAR 2.101), must already be employed by the critical subcontractor (or affiliate, as applicable). 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 offeror to allow the prime offeror an opportunity to respond. A sample Subcontractor/Joint Venture Partner Consent Form is attached to this RFP (see RFP Attachment 4). The consent form should be completed by the critical subcontractors identified in your proposal. The completed consent forms should be submitted as part of your Past Performance Volume.

On the three (3) contracts submitted in Volume II, Present/Past Performance Information, include relevant information in the FACTS Sheet concerning the offeror’s/joint venture partners’ (and critical subcontractor’s, if applicable) compliance with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns or FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, if these clauses are or were contained in the contract. (Please note that FAR 52.219-8 does apply to ALL businesses, whereas FAR 52.219-9 only applies to large businesses.) When subcontracting possibilities existed on the contracts submitted by the offeror/joint venture partner and critical subcontractor, address whether or not the offeror/joint venture partner and critical subcontractor awarded 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. If none of the submitted contracts included these clauses, whenever subcontracting possibilities existed in the performance of these contracts, address whether or not it was the offeror/joint venture partner and critical subcontractor’s policy to utilize 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 FACTS Sheet responses should clearly correlate present and past performance with the requirements of this RFP. Describe the relevance of the effort to the work proposed. The answering space on the FACTS Sheet may be expanded so that the filled-in FACTS Sheet for each relevant contract covers no more than both sides of three (3) 8 ½ x 11 inch pages. Provide the most current information for the Points of Contact (POCs) identified on the FACTS Sheets.

(3) If problems were encountered during the performance of the identified contracts, provide evidence of the ability to isolate the root causes of problems and include in the FACTS Sheet a description of programs or actions taken to resolve those causes. Problems not addressed in the FACTS Sheet, 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.

(4) The Present/Past Performance Questionnaire (see RFP Attachment #5) 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. The offeror shall send out and track the completion of the Present/Past Performance Questionnaires (See RFP Attachment # 5) to each of the offeror’s, joint venture partners’ and/or critical subcontractors’ (and affiliate, as applicable and defined in FAR 2.101) (i.e., each entity’s) Points of Contact (POCs) identified in each FACTS Sheet. The responsibility to send out the Present/Past Performance Questionnaires and track the completion of the Past Performance Questionnaires rests solely with the offeror - i.e., it shall not be delegated to any other entity. The Transmittal Letter (see RFP Attachment #3) shall be used by the offeror in sending out the Present/Past Performance Questionnaires. Exert your best effort 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 for receipt of proposals. POCs may submit their completed Present/Past Performance Questionnaire either electronically, by fax or by mail. If sending electronically, follow the procedures outlined in paragraph B above, and email to:

aflcmc.hbg.ecg@robins.af.mil.

If mailing, mail directly to:

AFLCMC/HBK

ATTN: Allen Parkerson or Sandra E. Harvey 750 Third Street, Bldg 350 Robins AFB, GA 31098-2122

If mailing, the outside envelope must be marked as follows:

NOTE: TO BE OPENED BY ADDRESSEE ONLY

The completed questionnaires should be contained in a second envelope marked with the mailing address and the following legend:

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

POCs may send the completed questionnaires via fax. The fax number is 478-327-5888.

Once the Present/Past Performance Questionnaires are completed by your POCs, the information contained therein shall be considered source selection sensitive and shall not be released to you, the offeror. Therefore, any exchange/contact between the offeror/joint venture partner and/or critical subcontractor (and affiliate, as applicable and defined in FAR 2.101) and its own POCs in regards to comments made on the questionnaire is not permitted. 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.- Other (As specified on the FACTS Sheet)

(5) 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 requesting/ authorizing them to complete a Present/Past Performance Questionnaire. A sample client authorization letter is attached to this RFP (see RFP Attachment #2). 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.

(6) The Government may conduct follow-up discussions with any of the people identified in the FACTS Sheets 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. The Government will take into account past performance information regarding predecessor companies.

(7) RFP Attachments # 1 and 5 (FACTS Sheet, Present/Past Performance Questionnaire) must include the following legend at the top and bottom of the page:

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

E. Volume III- Cost/Price Factor: The Cost/Price volume will consist of Schedule B and completed Labor Category Table, Attachment 6 of the RFP, with prices denoted in whole dollars only.

i. General Instructions: These instructions are to assist Offerors in submitting cost/price information that is required to evaluate Volume III-Cost/Price Factor. Offerors are cautioned that compliance with these instructions is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of the proposal.

ii. Labor Category Table, Attachment 6: In addition to completing the RFP’s Schedule, each Offeror shall also submit prices in accordance with the Labor Categories contained in the RFP at Attachment 6, which will be posted along with the RFP on FedBizOpps. Each Offeror should download the spreadsheet and complete for submission in response to the RFP. Each Offeror shall submit the Cost/Price Volume in hard copy (scanned PDF files not acceptable) and in electronic (Microsoft Excel) format. The paper and electronic copies shall be identical in all respects. Electronic submittals shall comply with the following:

Submittal via CD:

a. They shall be submitted on a CD-R or DVD-R (write once/read only) that is “closed” so that no further writes can be made to the media. CD-R/W and DVD-R/W media types are not acceptable. Media must be virus scanned by the offeror prior to submittal.

b. Data files/CD-Rs should be accessible by a computer running Microsoft XP, Vista, or Windows 7.

c. Data files should be .xls or .xlsx file format (Microsoft Excel 2007 or earlier).

d. MEDIA MUST BE VIRUS SCANNED BY THE OFFEROR PRIOR TO

SUBMITTING TO THE GOVERNMENT.

M-900 EVALUATION BASIS FOR AWARD

1. Basis for Contract Award

A.-This acquisition will utilize the Tradeoff source selection procedures in accordance with FAR 15.3 as supplemented by the DoD Source Selection Procedures referenced in DFARS 215.300 and the AFFARS Mandatory Procedures 5315.3 to make an integrated assessment for a best value award decision. The Government intends to award one contract as a result of this solicitation. Tradeoffs will be made between past performance and cost/price, with past performance significantly more important than cost/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. Award will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal conforms to all required terms and conditions, includes all required representations and certifications, meets all requirements set forth in the RFP and also provides the best value to the Government based on the results of the evaluation as described in paragraph 2 below.

B.-The Government intends to award without discussions, but reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined necessary. Any discussions will be conducted in accordance with FAR

15.306. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer, with the concurrence of the Source Selection Authority, may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

C.-The total compensation plan and supporting information will be evaluated per FAR 52.222-46 to assure it reflects a sound management approach and understanding of the contract requirements.

Failure by the offeror/populated joint venture/each joint venture partner in an unpopulated joint venture to submit this total compensation plan will result in the offeror being considered as failing to meet the RFP terms and conditions. A total compensation plan indicating unrealistically low professional employees’ compensation may be assessed adversely.

D.-The submitted Total Case Incidence Rates (TCIR) and Day Away, Restricted, and or Transfer Case Rates (DART) or other comparable rates for the past three (3) calendar years ending with the calendar year immediately prior to the calendar year in which this solicitation is being issued, shall be compared to the most recently published Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) national average for the specific Standard Industrial Classification System (SIC) or North American Industrial Classification Systems (NAICS) code identified on the face page of this solicitation. Failure by the applicable offeror/joint venture partner(s)/subcontractor to submit TCIR/DART or other comparable rates will result in the offeror being considered as failing to meet the RFP terms and conditions.

2. Proposal Evaluation

The evaluation process will be accomplished as follows:

A.-Past Performance Factor. The past performance assessment will assess the confidence in the offeror’s/joint venture partners’ ability (which includes, if applicable, the extent of its critical subcontractors’

(and affiliates’, as applicable and defined in FAR 2.101) 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 and/or teaming contractor), other than the offeror itself, that will perform at least 30% of the total costs as proposed in Schedule B. NOTE: The Government will evaluate the past performance of affiliates submitted provided they meet the definition of an affiliate in FAR 2.101 if the offeror's past performance volume demonstrates the affiliate company will provide the offeror with resources for the instant effort, such as workforce, management, facilities, or other capabilities demonstrating direct and meaningful involvement in the performance of the instant proposed effort and resultant contract. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s/joint venture partners’ and, if applicable, the critical subcontractors’ (and affiliates’, as applicable and defined in FAR 2.101) demonstrated record of contract compliance in supplying products and services that meet users’ needs, including cost and schedule. The recency 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. More recent and more relevant performance usually has a greater impact in the confidence assessment than less recent and less relevant performance. For purposes of this evaluation, recency is defined as active or completed efforts performed within the past three (3) years from the issuance date of this solicitation. The Government will perform an independent determination of relevancy of the data provided or obtained. A relevancy determination will be made for each of the recent three (3) submitted contracts. The Government is not bound by the offeror’s opinion of relevancy. The following relevancy criteria apply:

VERY RELEVANT: Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. The effort must have been an Advisory and Assistance Services (A&AS) similar administrative services contract that supports Department of Defense (DoD) requirements and included management analyst and at least four of the following: human resources, logistical, financial, and administrative/clerical, training, and management assistance requirements as defined under paragraphs 1.1 through 1.1.3 and 1.3 through 1.3.3 in the Performance-based Work Statement (PWS) included herein.

RELEVANT: Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. The effort must have been an A&AS or similar administrative services contract that included management analyst and at least three of the following: human resources, logistical, financial, administrative/clerical, training and management assistance requirements as defined under paragraphs 1.1 through 1.1.3 and

1.3 through 1.3.3 in the PWS included herein.

SOMEWHAT RELEVANT: Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. The effort must have been an A&AS or similar contract.

NOT RELEVANT: Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

NOTE: When assigning a relevancy rating, the scope, magnitude of effort, and magnitude of complexity are each considered as separate aspects. If all of these aspects are not reflected in the submitted contract, the relevancy rating assigned to that contract will be affected. For example, if the submitted contract meets essentially the same technical complexities, but in terms of scope and magnitude of effort it only involved some of what the solicitation requires, a lesser relevancy rating will be assigned.

Magnitude of effort and complexities not only includes the technical features and characteristics identified above, but also the logistical and programmatic considerations including but not limited to length of effort and the following.

For this evaluation, the magnitude of the effort relates to the number of Full Time Equivalents (FTEs) associated with the evaluated effort.

For this evaluation, the magnitude of complexity relates to whether the evaluated effort involved similar functional capabilities associated with the acquisition, integration, or sustainment for multiple systems and/or programs.

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

(i). The Past Performance Team evaluation is not limited to review of the information provided in the offeror’s Present/Past Performance volume. Present/Past performance information shall be obtained from the Government’s Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) and the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS). The Government reserves the right to use performance information from other sources such as Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), Fee Determining Officials, or commercial sources.

(ii). Offerors shall be given an opportunity to address adverse past performance information if the offeror, joint venture partner and/or critical subcontractor (and affiliate, as applicable and defined in FAR 2.101) 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 overall work record. Prompt corrective action in isolated instances may not outweigh overall negative trends.

(iii). For offerors/joint venture partners or critical subcontractors (or affiliate, as applicable and defined in FAR 2.101) that are newly formed entities in existence less than three (3) years from the issuance date of this solicitation who either have no prior contracts or do not possess relevant corporate past performance, but have key personnel with relevant past performance while employed by another company, the quality of such key personnel’s performance as verified by the Past Performance Team will be considered if the submitted contract involves the key personnel performing the same role currently being proposed on the instant acquisition and this performance occurred during the past three (3) years from the issuance date of this solicitation. Any such key personnel must already be employed by the offeror/joint venture partner, or in the case of a critical subcontractor (or affiliate, as applicable and defined in FAR 2.101), must already be employed by the critical subcontractor (or affiliate, as applicable).

The Government will take into account past performance information regarding predecessor companies, other divisions, or corporate management if such information was provided for evaluation and if such resources will be used in the performance of the proposed effort.

(iv). The Government shall consider an offeror’s/joint venture partners’/critical subcontractors (or affiliates, as applicable and defined in FAR 2.101) contracts in the aggregate in determining a confidence assessment rating, should the present and past performance lend itself to this approach. That is, an offeror’s three (3) contracts may by definition represent only a rating less than very relevant 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 reflect greater magnitude of complexities and/or magnitude of effort. A joint venture partner’s three (3) contracts may by definition represent only a rating less than very relevant 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 reflect greater magnitude of complexities and/or magnitude of effort. The Government may consider a critical subcontractor’s (or affiliates, as applicable and defined in FAR 2.101) submitted contracts in the aggregate in this same manner if their submitted efforts were performed concurrently (in part or in whole). Then considering the offeror’s/joint venture partners’ respective role and their work in aggregate as well as the critical subcontractor(s) (and affiliate(s), as applicable and defined in FAR 2.101) role and their work in aggregate, a confidence assessment rating will be assigned for the team as a whole.

As a result of the recency, relevancy and quality assessments of the contracts evaluated, one confidence assessment rating as described in the DoD Source Selection Procedures will be assigned to the Past Performance factor. The performance confidence assessment ratings are excerpted below.

Rating Definition

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.

Limited Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a low expectation that the offeror will

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

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

Offerors without a record of past performance or for whom information is so sparse that no confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and, as a result, will receive an “Unknown Confidence” rating. A strong record of relevant past performance may be considered more advantageous to the Government than an “Unknown Confidence” rating.

Pursuant to DFARS 215.305(a)(2), the assessment will consider whether the past performance demonstrated the offeror’s/joint venture partners’ and critical subcontractor’s compliance with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns, or FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, when these clauses were contained in the submitted contracts. That is, on the three (3) respective contracts submitted for evaluation by the offeror/joint venture partner(s) (and critical subcontractor(s), if applicable), when subcontracting possibilities existed, did the offeror/joint venture partner (and critical subcontractor, if applicable) award 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, whereas FAR 52.219-9 only applies to large businesses.) If none of the contracts submitted by the offeror/joint venture partner(s) (and critical subcontractor(s), if applicable) included these clauses, when subcontracting possibilities existed in the performance of these contracts, address whether or not it was your policy to utilize 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.

B.-Cost/Price Factor. The offeror's Cost/Price proposal will be evaluated for reasonableness and balance. See paragraphs (i) and (ii) below. The total evaluated price (TEP) will be calculated in accordance with paragraph (iii) below.

(i) Reasonableness: The existence of adequate price competition is expected to support a determination of reasonableness. Price analysis techniques may be used to further validate price reasonableness. If adequate price competition is not obtained or if price reasonableness cannot be determined using price analysis of Government obtained information, additional information in accordance with FAR 15.4 may be required to support the proposed price.

(ii) Balance: Offerors are cautioned against submitting an offer that contains unbalanced pricing.

Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of proposal analysis techniques. The Government shall analyze offers to determine whether there are unbalanced separately priced line items or sub-line items. Prices submitted will be compared and evaluated to assure that a logical progression exists as related to price and quantity changes within each offeror’s response to the pricing structure in Section B. Offers that are determined to be unbalanced may be rejected if the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

(iii) Total Evaluated Price: A Total Evaluated Price (TEP) will be used for evaluation purposes only and will be calculated as follows:

a. All evaluated CLINs (X001-X051) will use the best estimated quantity (Man Months) times the proposed man-month rate for each labor category shown in Attachment 6, Labor Category Table.

b. NOTE: Included in the total evaluated price is a short option period (maximum of 6 months) as specified in clause 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services. This short option may be exercised at any time prior to the end of the last option contract period at the rates specified in the contract for Option 4. For purposes of evaluation, the evaluated price for the short option period shall be calculated as fifty percent (50%) of the evaluated price for Option 4. This price will be added to the total evaluated price.

c. Cost Reimbursable (CR) and Not Separately Priced (NSP) CLINs will not be included in the TEP.

d. The sum of all evaluated CLINS (X001-X051) will represent the total evaluated price.

Offerors are advised that the evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise such options. An example of CLIN price calculation for each Ordering Period and calculation of the TEP is shown below.

EXAMPLE ONLY

CLIN Price Calculation

CLIN TITLE SKILL LEVEL MM RATE PRICE MM RATE PRICE MM RATE PRICE MM RATE PRICE MM RATE PRICE

100X 1 72 100.00$ 7,200.00$ 72 100.00$ 7,200.00$ 72 100.00$ 7,200.00$ 72 100.00$ 7,200.00$ 72 100.00$ 7,200.00$

100X 2 48 110.00$ 5,280.00$ 48 110.00$ 5,280.00$ 48 110.00$ 5,280.00$ 48 110.00$ 5,280.00$ 48 110.00$ 5,280.00$

100X 3 12 115.00$ 1,380.00$ 12 115.00$ 1,380.00$ 12 115.00$ 1,380.00$ 12 115.00$ 1,380.00$ 12 115.00$ 1,380.00$

100X 1 12 100.00$ 1,200.00$ 12 100.00$ 1,200.00$ 12 100.00$ 1,200.00$ 12 100.00$ 1,200.00$ 12 100.00$ 1,200.00$

100X 2 12 110.00$ 1,320.00$ 12 110.00$ 1,320.00$ 12 110.00$ 1,320.00$ 12 110.00$ 1,320.00$ 12 110.00$ 1,320.00$

100X 3 12 115.00$ 1,380.00$ 12 115.00$ 1,380.00$ 12 115.00$ 1,380.00$ 12 115.00$ 1,380.00$ 12 115.00$ 1,380.00$

17,760.00$ 17,760.00$ 17,760.00$ 17,760.00$ 17,760.00$ Total

CLIN Price Calculation

Administrative Support

(ADMSPT)

Contract On‐Site Mgr

(COSM)

Option 4Option 3Option 2Option 1Basic Contract Period

EXAMPLE ONLY

TEP Calculation

TOTAL

Basic Contract Period 17,760.00$

Option 1 17,760.00$

Option 2 17,760.00$

Option 3 17,760.00$

Option 4 17,760.00$

*Serv Ext (6mths) 8,880.00$

Total Evaluated Price (TEP) 97,680.00$

*Calculated as 50% of Option 4 price

TEP Calculation