Pre-RFP Conference - EC2.pdf

This Briefing is Classified:

UNCLASSIFIED

Headquarters Air Combat Command

Enterprise Cyber Capabilities (EC2) Pre-Request for Proposal (RFP)

Conference

ACC AMIC

17 May 2022

Purpose

The purpose of this pre-solicitation conference is for the Government to meet with prospective

Offerors in order to develop or identify interested sources, request preliminary information based on a general description of the services, explain complicated specifications and requirements, and aid prospective contractors in preparing proposals without the expenditure of effort, time, and money.

Only written responses provided via SAM.gov should be viewed as the government’s official response. Answers being provided here are for conversation/clarification.

Agenda

1. EC2 Vision

2. Contract Overview

3. Milestone Update

4. PWS Overview

5. Section L

6. Section M

7. RFP and Attachments Discussion

8. What We Need From You

9. Questions?

Goal: Help Industry provide the Government the best proposal possible to reduce overall source selection timeline

• The EC2 Multiple-Award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) is a $5.3B multiple award, indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity (IDIQ) de-centralized (Air Force-wide) contract vehicle with a 5-Year Base Period + One, 5-Year Option Period.

• The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education (NICE) Cyber Framework formed the basis for the EC2, which provides users with a common lexicon that can be used to improve processes and practices around identifying, recruiting, developing, and retaining cybersecurity talent.

• Decentralized contracting vehicle available to Air Force requiring activities at all levels.

• Task Orders (TOs) will be placed on the EC2 MAC contract following FAR 16.505 -- Ordering.

Introduction/Vision

Contract Type: Multiple-Award IDIQ

Competitive Procedures: Full and Open Competition w/ Small Business Set-Asides at the Task Order level

NAICS Code: NAICS 541330 Engineering Services, Exception 1 Military and Aerospace Equipment and Military Weapons

Contract Type: Fixed Price & Cost Reimbursement

Contract Period: 5-Year Base Period + One 5-Year Option Period

Maximum Ordering Ceiling: $5.3B for All Task Orders Combined

Trade-Offs: No Tradeoffs. Highest Rated Technically Acceptable Offerors (HTRO)

Contract Overview

Contract Overview – Benefits of the IDIQ

• Offers agency-wide ordering through an established IDIQs increases flexibility to meet mission needs quickly

• Vendor Benefits:

o Forms an ideal partnership for both large and small businesses o Maximizes small business partnerships and teaming o Set asides will be accomplished at the Task Order stage. The Highly Qualified definition is the same for Small Business as it is for Other Than Small Business.

This allows Small Businesses to compete on all Task Orders.

Ordering Contracting Officer (OCO) can restrict individual Task Order to small business categories based on results of Market Research

• Government Benefits:

o Access to pre-vetted, qualified contractors, which reduces performance risk in execution o Offers streamlined ordering procedures for future requirements, which vastly reduces lead time to award

Contract Overview – Streamlined Ordering Process

• Streamlined ordering process will be as follows:

Requiring Activity

- Purchase Request (PR)

- Performance Work Statement (PWS)

- Independent Government Estimate

(IGE)

- Appoint COR

- Work Within Multifunctional Team

(MFT)

Local Acquisition Office

- Reviews Requirement Package

- Form Multifunctional Product/Acquisition Team

- Issue Fair Opportunity Proposal Request

(FOPR)

- Evaluates Proposals

- Award/administer TO

EC2 Contractor(s)

- Provide Task Order Proposal(s)

- Negotiate (if necessary)

- Receive Task Order

- Mobilize/Begin Performance

- Deliver Final Product/ Service

Milestone Update

Key Acquisition Milestones Original Date Revised Date Actual Date Early Strategy & Issues Session: 4/13/2021 07/22/2021 07/22/2021 Acquisition Strategy Panel: 03/15/2022 12/09/2021 12/09/2021 Issue Request For Proposal: 10/18/2022 *07/01/2022 Proposals Due: 10/18/2022 *09/02/2022 Initial Evaluation Briefing: 03/31/2023 *11/18/2022 Source Selection Decision Briefing: 09/12/2023 *4/17/2023 Contract Awards: 11/20/2023 *5/1/2023 Ordering Period Begins: 12/01/2023 *5/9/2023

* Date subject to change.

2.1. Operate and Maintain (O&M).

2.2. Management and Policy.

2.3. Protect and Defend.

2.4. Analyze.

2.5. Collect and Operate.

2.6. Investigate.

2.7. Securely Provision.

PWS - 7 Categories

Note: This is PWS numbering.

2.1.1. Data Administration

2.1.2. Knowledge Management

2.1.3. Customer Service and Technical Support

2.1.4. Network Services

2.1.5. Systems Administration

2.1.6. Systems Analysis

2.2.1. Cybersecurity Management

2.2.2. Strategic Planning and Policy

2.2.3. Project/Program Management, Administration, Financial, and Acquisition

2.2.4. Training, Education, and Awareness

2.3.1. Cybersecurity Defense Analysis

2.3.2. Cybersecurity Defense Infrastructure Support

2.3.3. Incident Response

2.3.4. Vulnerability Assessment and Management

2.4.1. Threat Analysis

2.4.2. Exploitation Analysis

2.4.3. All-Source Analysis

2.4.4. Targets

2.4.5. Language Analysis

PWS – 31 Specialty Areas (SAs)

2.5.1. Collection Operations

2.5.2. Cyber Operational Planning

2.5.3. Cyber Operations

2.6.1. Cyber Investigation

2.6.2. Digital Forensics

2.7.1. Risk Management

2.7.2. Software Development

2.7.3. Systems Architecture

2.7.4. Technology Research and Development (R&D)

2.7.5. Systems Requirements Planning

2.7.6. Test and Evaluation

2.7.7. Systems Development

Note: This is PWS numbering.

9.1. Primary:

• Joint Base San Antonio (JBSA):

o Lackland, Port San Antonio, Fort Sam Houston, Camp Bullis, and other locations in or around the greater San Antonio, Texas area.

• Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Virginia

• Scott AFB, Illinois

9.2. Alternate:

• Additional Locations, including overseas and or OCONUS areas may be required and amplifying information will be located in TOs resulting from this contract.

9.3. Primary Office of Responsibility:

• Acquisition Management and Integration Center (AMIC) Detachment 2, OL-C PK - Tinker Air

Force Base, Oklahoma City, OK.

PWS Work Locations

RFP SECTION L: GENERAL

PROPOSAL PREPARATION

INSTRUCTIONS

Section L - Instructions to Offerors (ITO)

• This is a source selection conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.3 and DoD Source Selection Procedures, as supplemented.

• A technically acceptable proposal is one that conforms to all the material requirements of this Request for Proposal (RFP) including responsibility, past experience, past performance, and conformance with all other requirements described herein.

• Teaming arrangements are not restricted

Proposal Format

• VOLUME I – CONTRACT & RESPONSIBILITY DOCUMENTATION

• Contract Documents (SF 33 & SF 30s)

• Responsibility Information

• Financial/Other Resources

• Accounting System

• Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI)

• VOLUME II – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

• Offeror Company Information

• Team Structure

• Teaming Agreements

• Joint Venture Agreement (if applicable)

• Subcontractor/Teaming Member Consent Letter

• VOLUME III – PAST EXPERIENCE

• Self-Scoring Matrix

• Cross Reference Matrix

• Work Samples

• VOLUME IV – PAST PERFORMANCE

• Past Performance Submissions o Past Performance Information (PPI) Sheet o Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) or Contractor Performance

Assessment Reports (CPARs)

• Organizational Structure Change History

• Specific Content

PIEE Proposal Submission

• Proposals shall be submitted via the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) Solicitation module, in accordance with the module procedures

• The Offeror shall submit each volume in electronic format, unclassified only

• Offerors will utilize PIEE and will not rely on any other electronic transmission

• Transmissions via email will not be accepted

• Vendors must register in PIEE and submit a request for the Proposal Manager role

• It is the Offeror's responsibility to be fully knowledgeable and capable

• Offerors must not rely on the Government Contracting Officer to assist them in understanding how to use or transmit proposals

Interested vendors, think about what CONCERNS you for the Q&A at the end?

RFP SECTION M: GENERAL

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR

AWARD

Basis for Contract Award

• The Government intends to make an award to each and all qualifying

Offerors that submit a technically acceptable proposal o Three (3) Criteria Need Met:

Eligibility and Responsibility Past Experience (90% Overall Score) Past Performance (Substantial Confidence)

• Potential Challenges o Financial Capability -- $500,000 (M.2.7) o Certified Cost Accounting System (M.2.8) o 2 Work Samples per Specialty Area (M.4.2)

Interested vendors, think about what CHALLENGES you have for the Q&A at the end?

Responsiveness / Responsibility Determination – Criteria 1

• The Gov’t will:

• Determine Responsibility (M.2.3.)

• Verify Completed SF 33 and SF 30(s) (M.2.4 & M.2.5)

• Verify Insurance Certificate Provided (M.2.6)

• Verify Financial Resources (M.2.7)

• Verify Certified Accounting System (M.2.8)

• Verify Complete & Accurate Proposal (M.2.1)

Past Experience – Criteria 2

Self Scoring Matrix – Attachment 7 (Excerpt)

Past Experience – Criteria 2

Cross Reference Matrix – Attachment 8 (Excerpt)

Past Performance – Criteria 3

• Past Performance Proposals Include:

• Cover Pages & Tables of Contents, as applicable

• Past Performance Submissions

• PPIs and either

• A PPQ, or a CPARS Data Sheet

• Past Performance Submissions Will be Evaluated For:

• Recency (Within 3 Years of RFP Release)

• Relevancy (Scope, Magnitude, Complexity)

• Quality

Evaluation Methodology Highest Technically Rated Offerors (HTRO)

Does proposal conform to ITO in

Section L

Affirmative Responsibility Determination

Evaluate/Validate Past Experience, Self Scoring Matrix

Past Experience Score qualifying experience >90% EC2 Specialty

Area

Evaluate Past Performance and

Assign Confidence

Rating

Confidence Rating of

SUBSTANTIAL

Proposal =Technically Acceptable

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3

Nonconformance = nonresponsive ineligible for award

Ineligible for award

Past Experience Score qualifying experience <90% = ineligible for award

Confidence Rating of less than

SUBSTANTIAL =

ineligible for award

No

Yes Yes

No No

Yes Yes

No

Yes Yes

The Government intends to make an award to each and all qualifying Offerors that submit a technically acceptable proposal.

RFP and Attachments Discussion

Self Scoring Matrix Discussion

• L.8.6.3. There is a limit of 2 work samples per Specialty Area (SA). The Offeror shall submit work sample(s) for each scored EC2 SA of the Self-Scoring Matrix in order to demonstrate their past experience. IDIQ contracts are not an acceptable proof of past experience (or past performance) and shall not be provided as a work sample. However, individual Task Orders, performed under an IDIQ contract, can be used as a work sample.

• L.8.6.4. Multiple contract/Task Orders cannot be combined and counted as one contract reference. Note: Contract/Task Order for the purpose of evaluating work samples is defined as a singular agreement used to document a mutually binding legal relationship obligating the seller to furnish supplies or services in exchange for the buyer paying for them.

• 5 points will be awarded per SA for a single validated Work Sample, 10 points will be awarded per SA for two validated Work Samples.

Self Scoring Matrix Discussion Cont.

• L.8.4.1. Scoring: Proposals shall be scored beginning with the O&M Category through the Securely Provisioned Category on the Self Scoring Matrix. All SAs shall be independently scored in column D of Attachment 7 Self-Scoring Matrix. Scores shall be either zero (0), five (5), or ten (10). A score of 0 is input if no Work Sample was provided, a score of 5 is inputted if one work sample is provided, or a 10 is inputted if two work samples are provided for each SA. Only 0, 5, or 10 is permitted and the Government will not evaluate any solicitations with any other values in Column D of Attachment 9 - Self-Scoring Matrix.

Work Samples

• A Work Sample Cover Sheet (Attachment 6), shall be completed for each work sample submitted

• Each work sample shall provide at least two (2) Points of Contact (POC)

• Work Samples shall include the signed cover page of the contract and supporting documents (PWS, SOW, SOO, CDRLs, etc.) to demonstrate the Offeror (or teaming partners have performed the Specialty Area work in the past

• Multiple Contract/Task Orders cannot be combined and counted as one contract reference

• Qualifications:

• Efforts similar to the Government requirement (Relevancy)

• Performed the work for a minimum of six months (Recency)

• Work was accomplished by a legal business entity included in the Team

Structure (Relevancy)

Work Sample Example - Good

(Cover Sheet Excerpt)

Work Sample Example (Excerpt) – Good (Continued)

(Contract Cover Sheet Excerpt)

Matches cross-reference

(PWS Excerpt)

(Cross-Reference Excerpt)

You just earned 5 Points!

Do it again for 10 points!

• Pay attention to proposal volume instructions/plain language (i.e., page numbers, level of detail requested, etc.)

• Don’t leave out critical sections. If we asked for it, we must evaluate it.

• Answer all components of each sub-factor

• Be sure your proposal is clearly organized and information correlates to

RFP

• Marketing or generic statements are non-value added

• Don’t restate/paraphrase the PWS requirements/language in proposal o Reflects lack of technical understanding & RFP non-compliance o May result in a technically unacceptable proposal—happens to incumbents too.

• Submit your best proposal up-front – we intend to Award Without Discussions

What We Need From You

Questions?

Questions

• From a "Highly Qualified Offeror's" perspective, does the government intend to reserve spots for Small Business and if so what are the Government’s Small Business goals for EC2?

• Acquisition is now Full and Open without pools….set asides will be accomplished at the task order stage. Highly Qualified requirement is same for Small and Other Than Small Business.

• On a Work Sample, recognizing multiple sections of a PWS/SOW/CDRL, will the Government permit the offeror to extract non-relevant pages from the document and only include the cover page and pages that include relevant information?

• Yes, only required to provide relevant information

• For a Joint Venture Mentor Protégé: From the thirty-one defined categories/specialty areas, the JV must demonstrate the contributions/experience of the protégé member in a minimum of six of the defined categories/specialty areas. Will the Government confirm that the protégé providing one of the two Work Samples demonstrating experience in a minimum of six defined specialty areas meets this requirement?

• Yes, protégé does not need to provide both work samples for a specialty area. Within a specialty area, one Work Sample can be from the mentor, one from the protégé.

Only written response provided via SAM.gov should be viewed as the government’s official

• Classified work samples will not be accepted from Offerors. Will the Government accept classified work samples if only unclassified substantiating documents were provided in Offeror proposals? An example would be a signed letter from a program Contracting Officer or Contracting Officer Representative outlining unclassified responsibilities by the Offeror.

• Yes, only unclassified submissions will be accepted; provided the submission includes contact information for the government POC for validation purposes.

• Will the Government accept subcontracted work samples as long as they describe the scope of work being claimed was performed by the entity claiming credit?

• Yes, provided it shows offeror claiming credit for the actual performance.

• RFP unclear about number of examples Offerors are to include for past performance evaluation. Would Government consider whether past performance information for a subset of all Work Samples provides information needed to assess past performance and clarify how many past performance examples are required?

• Past Performance information must be provided for each work sample used to satisfy past experience.

• There is a wide range of variability on how different federal agencies and contract offices assign scores on CPARs. Some have policies that they give no scores higher than Satisfactory. Given the wide variability in how CPAR ratings are assigned, would the Government confirm that having some CPARs with Satisfactory ratings would not preclude a finding of Substantial Confidence in the Past Performance evaluation?

• Yes, some CPARS with Satisfactory ratings will not preclude a Substantial Confidence finding.

• The self-scoring matrix released on 5/2/22 does not contain instructions to score each Category/Specialty Area based on the Tasks associated with Attachment 2. PWS Supplement - Task Descriptions. Are those instructions still applicable to Attachment 7. Self-Scoring Matrix?

• Yes, the task descriptions provide the basis for whether a work sample supports the specialty area, however, the score is 5 for a yes, and 0 for a no, not one point per task as before.

• This form's instructions refer to SOC-E and defines Scope of Work as "Program Management, Operations

& Maintenance, Install/Warehouse, SOC-Enterprise Services/Helpdesk.“ Will the Government update the form to reflect the EC2 Scope of Work?

• Oops, yes, will be updated.