Pre-Proposal_Conference_Slides.pdf

412th Test Wing

I n t e g r i t y - S e r v i c e - E x c e l l e n c e

War-Winning Capabilities … On Time, On Cost

Presented by:

Sandra Sergent, Program Manager Tylan McBride, Buyer

BASE SUPPLY MANAGEMENT AND

OPERATION SERVICES

PRE-PROPOSAL SITE VISIT &

CONFERENCE

EDWARDS AFB

Agenda

• 0830 – 0900 Bus Pick-up at West Gate and Sign-in

• 0930 – 1045 Requirements Overview

• 1045 – 1200 Contracting Overview

• 1200 – 1300 Lunch (Bus to Food Court)

• 1300 – 1500 Facility Visits

*All times are approximate

Ground Rules

• Will attempt to orally answer non-technical questions as a group;

however, prefer written questions for tracking purposes

• All Q&A’s will be formally posted at FedBizOps after the site visit and take precedence over informal responses provided during the pre-proposal conference

• Subsequent questions should be submitted to Tylan J McBride and 2d Lt Daniel Carrillo, and Cynthia Keim for formal response and posting at FedBizOps not later than 30 Oct 2013

Project Description

Base Supply Services

Provide top quality, customer-oriented, Base Supply and Logistics Materiel Control Activity (LMCA) services, to the civilian

(government and contractor) and military workforce of the Air Force Test Center (AFTC) and associate units supported via the

Interservice/Intergovernmental Support Agreement (ISA) process.

• Base Supply Services -

Order, Receive, Store and Distribute Supplies and Equipment

• Logistics Materiel Control Activity (LMCA) - Acquire, Receive, Transfer, and Issue Specialized Test Equipment

• Base Supply Services -

– Customer Service

– Demand Processing

– Equipment Accountability Element

– Inventory Control

– Contingency and Deployment Readiness

– Warehouse Management

– Repair Cycle

– Remote Processing Section

• LMCA -

– Customer Service

– Equipment Control

– Materiel Handling

Request for Proposal (RFP)

• RFP Due Date

– 7 Nov 2013

• Contract Type

– Firm, Fixed Price (FFP), Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity

(IDIQ)

• Period of Performance

– 1 year basic period and four (4) one-year option periods

Business Considerations Competitive Topics

• Competitive Small Business set-aside for Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small

Business (SDVOSB)

• NACIS Code 561210 Size Standard 35.5 Million

• Past Performance Trade-off (PPT) with two Pass/ Fail Technical Volumes IAW FAR Part

15 (MP 5315-3)

Contract Parameters

• Commercial as defined by Far 2.101

• Performance-Based Service contract (PBSC) Base Support

• Office/storage space in Bldgs. 1400, 3610/11, and 3735/3736

• Computers

• Class A telephone line

• Electricity, water, sewage, & natural gas service

• On-base mail distribution for official Government mail

• Prevention and protection, inspection and maintenance of Government-furnished fire extinguishers, system and facilities

• General on-base police & fire protection

• Emergency medical treatment & transport1

• Access to pest control services

1Contractor must reimburse government for costs

Business Considerations Government Furnished Property

• FAR 52.245-1 – Government Property

• FAR 52.245-2 – Government Property Installation Operation Services1

• FAR 52.245-9 – Uses and Charges2

Contract Incentives

• Performance reported in Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting

System (CPARS), which provides an assessment of the contractor’s performance both positive & negative on a given contract during a specific period of time

Surveillance

• Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) will be designated by the

Contracting Officer to monitor contractor performance

• Will document findings in CPARS

1GFP as-is 2No rental fees

Performance Price Tradeoff Source Selection - Evaluation Strategy:

• Performance Price Tradeoff (PPT) with two Pass/Fail Technical Volumes

- IAW – AFFARS 5315.101-1(a)

- Past Performance = Price

- Price Reasonableness:

• Price must be fair, reasonable and affordable

• Price Analysis IAW FAR15.404-1

- Past Performance Must Be

• Relevant - Same or Similar in Nature and Scope

• Recent - Performed within the Last 3 Years

• Technical Evaluation – Pass/Fail

- Government Property Plan

- Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan

Performance Price Tradeoff

• PPT - This process permits a trade-off between price and past performance in reaching the award decision. PPT also allows for Source Selection Authority (SSA) discretion in awarding to higher rated performers over lower rated performers if the price differential is warranted and considered to be best value.

• PPT can be used when it is unnecessary to distinguish levels of technical merit among the proposals to make an award decision

– Proposals are evaluated for acceptability

– Tradeoffs can only be made between:

• Price/cost and

• Past performance

Acquisition Strategy

• Small Business Set-Aside

- SDVOSB

• PPT

- Past Performance = Price

- Two Pass/Fail Technical volumes

- Government Property Plan

- Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan

• Five year FFP, IDIQ contract w/Options

– Base period with 4 option years

• Labor Laws

– Service Contract Act w/Collective Bargaining Agreement

CLIN Structure Base Contract

CLIN Description Type Qty Unit

0001 Base Supply Services (Mon-Fri, 0700-1600) FFP 12 Month 0002 Swing Services (Mon-Fri, 1600-0001) FFP 12 Month 0003 Night Services (Mon-Fri, 0001-0700) FFP 12 Month 0004 Saturday Operations (Sat, 0700-1600) FFP 52 Day 0005 Sunday Operations (Sun, 0700-1600) FFP 52 Day 0006 Logistics Material Control Activity FFP 12 Month

Option Year 1

CLIN Description Type Qty Unit

1001 Base Supply Services (Mon-Fri, 0700-1600) FFP 12 Month 1002 Swing Services (Mon-Fri, 1600-0001) FFP 12 Month 1003 Night Services (Mon-Fri, 0001-0700) FFP 12 Month 1004 Saturday Operations (Sat, 0700-1600) FFP 52 Day 1005 Sunday Operations (Sun, 0700-1600) FFP 52 Day 1006 Logistics Material Control Activity FFP 12 Month

CLIN Structure

Option Year 2

CLIN Description Type Qty Unit

2001 Base Supply Services (Mon-Fri, 0700-1600) FFP 12 Month 2002 Swing Services (Mon-Fri, 1600-0001) FFP 12 Month 2003 Night Services (Mon-Fri, 0001-0700) FFP 12 Month 2004 Saturday Operations (Sat, 0700-1600) FFP 52 Day 2005 Sunday Operations (Sun, 0700-1600) FFP 52 Day 2006 Logistics Material Control Activity FFP 12 Month

Option Year 3

CLIN Description Type Qty Unit

3001 Base Supply Services (Mon-Fri, 0700-1600) FFP 12 Month 3002 Swing Services (Mon-Fri, 1600-0001) FFP 12 Month 003 Night Services (Mon-Fri, 0001-0700) FFP 12 Month 3004 Saturday Operations (Sat, 0700-1600) FFP 52 Day 3005 Sunday Operations (Sun, 0700-1600) FFP 52 Day 3006 Logistics Material Control Activity FFP 12 Month

CLIN Structure

Option Year 4

CLIN Description Type Qty Unit

4001 Base Supply Services (Mon-Fri, 0700-1600) FFP 12 Month 4002 Swing Services (Mon-Fri, 1600-0001) FFP 12 Month 4003 Night Services (Mon-Fri, 0001-0700) FFP 12 Month 4004 Saturday Operations (Sat, 0700-1600) FFP 52 Day 4005 Sunday Operations (Sun, 0700-1600) FFP 52 Day 4006 Logistics Material Control Activity FFP 12 Month

Contract Award Schedule Milestones

Pre-Proposal Site Visit/Conference 23 Oct 2013

Receipt of Proposals 7 November 2013

Evaluations of Proposals Complete 23 December 2013

Contract Award 28 March 2014

Post Award Conference 3 April 2014

Debriefings Complete 8 April 2014

Instructions to Offerors

Main Points

• Performance Information Form Format

• Contract Submission Limits

• Content

• Predecessor Companies

• Key Personnel

• Partnership Agreements Past Contracts

• Major Subcontractor Consents

• Major Subcontractor/Teaming Partner Performance Assurance

• Past Performance Questionnaire

Basis for Award

1. BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD: This is a competitive selection in which competing offerors past and present performance history will be evaluated on a basis approximately equal to price. By submission of its offer in accordance with the instructions provided in clause FAR 52.212-1, Instructions To Offerors, the offeror accedes to the terms of this model contract and all such offers shall be treated equally except for their prices, technical submissions and performance records. The evaluation process shall proceed as follows:

2. Price: Initially, offers shall be ranked according to price (low to high), including option prices. An offeror’s proposed prices will be determined by multiplying the quantities identified in the Pricing Schedule by the unit price for each item to confirm the extended amount for each.

3. Government Property Plan: Next, the offeror’s Government Property Plan (PP) will be evaluated.

Offerors must illustrate that their overarching property management procedures will meet the government-desired outcomes outlined in FAR 52.245-1, paragraph f. The PP will be Technically Acceptable if it adequately addresses the requirements of FAR 52.245-1 paragraph f and does not simply parrot-back or copy FAR language.

4. Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan: The government will evaluate that the contractor adequately addressed plan elements as outlined in paragraph 3 of the plan template in Attachment 7 of this document.

Basis for Award (cont.)

5. Past Performance Assessment Methodology:

(a) Using questionnaires, the contracting officer shall seek relevant performance information on all offerors based on (1) the references provided by the offeror and (2) data independently obtained from other government and commercial sources. Relevant performance includes present/past performance of efforts involving Base Supply Services that are similar or greater in scope, magnitude, and complexity than this solicitation requires. The government reserves the right to seek information on higher priced offerors if none of the lower priced offerors receive a “Substantial Confidence” performance assessment rating.

(b) Past performance regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, will be considered as highly as past performance information for the principal offeror. However, teaming partner’s and major subcontractor’s relevant experience will not be considered as highly as past performance information for the principal offeror. The principal offeror must identify upfront the tasks that their teaming partners and/or major subcontractors will perform on the awarded Edwards Base Supply contract. The Government will only evaluate the past performance of key personnel and subcontractors which relates to the PWS tasks they will perform on the awarded Edwards Base Supply contract.

(c) Offerors with no relevant past or present performance history or the offeror’s performance record is so limited that no confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned shall receive the rating “Unknown Confidence,” meaning the rating is treated neither favorably nor unfavorably.

(d) The purpose of the past performance evaluation is to allow the government to assess the offeror’s ability to perform the effort described in the solicitation, based on the offeror’s demonstrated present and past performance. The assessment process will result in an overall performance confidence assessment rating of Substantial Confidence, Satisfactory Confidence, Limited Confidence, No Confidence, or Unknown Confidence as defined below.

PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS

Rating Description

SUBSTANTIAL

CONFIDENCE

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

SATISFACTORY

CONFIDENCE

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 successfully perform the required effort.

NO

CONFIDENCE

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

UNKNOWN

CONFIDENCE

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

(e) Recent and Current Assessment. An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent or current. Current performance will generally have greater impact in the performance assessment than recent performance. Performance that is more recent will usually have more impact than less recent performance.

Recent/current contracts are: (a) contracts, which have been completed within the last 3 years from the date of issuance of the last amendment to this solicitation, or (b) contracts that are currently being performed (with a performance record of at least one year from the date of issuance of the last amendment to this solicitation). Past performance information that is found to be neither current nor recent will not be evaluated.

(f) Relevancy Assessment. The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all current or recent performance information obtained to determine how closely the Base Supply Services performed under those contracts relate to the scope, magnitude/complexity, contract type and contract environment of the Edwards AFB requirement. For each recent or current past performance citation reviewed, the relevance of the work performed will generally be assessed for the scope, magnitude/complexity, contract type and contract environment aspects (however, all aspects of performance that relate to this acquisition may be considered). Consideration will be given to efforts that are considered to be of the type that are similar in scope; magnitude/complexity; contract type, and contract environment when compared to the services described in this solicitation. A relevancy determination of the offeror’s (including joint venture partner(s) and major/critical subcontractor(s)) past performance will be made based upon the aforementioned considerations. In determining relevancy for individual contracts, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the offeror, teaming partner, or subcontractor whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated. The past performance information forms (PIFs) submitted by the offeror and information obtained from other sources will be used to establish the degree of relevancy of past performance.

The relevancy considerations in descending order of importance are as follows:

i. Scope

ii. Magnitude/Complexity

iii. Contract Environment

iv. Contract Type

Past Performance - Relevancy Criteria In Order of Importance

As stated in 52-212-2 Evaluation - Commercial Items:

• Scope: Scope is related to the various Base Supply Services and tasks required by the

PWS.

• Magnitude/Complexity: Magnitude and complexity, relates to the projected workload listed in the PWS Appendix A (i.e. number of mobility bags inspected and stored, number of Supply Operations processes, etc.)

• Contract Environment (i.e. Air Force installation, DoD installation, or anything other than a DoD installation).

• Contract Type (i.e. Firm-fixed Price, Cost, Time and Materials)

• Current and Recent: Relevant on-going contracts with a performance record of at least one (1) year and contracts completed within three (3) years from the issue date of the solicitation. Current performance will have a greater impact on the performance confidence assessment than less recent performance.

Table 1 – Relevancy Definitions Assessment Area Very Relevant Relevant Somewhat Relevant Scope (Reference Performance Work Statement (PWS))

Responsible for Supply Services where performance is essentially the same as or greater than tasks as outlined in the PWS

Responsible for Supply Services where the performance involved tasks which were very similar to those outlined in the PWS

Responsible for Supply Services where performance involved some similar tasks outlined in the PWS

Magnitude / Complexity

Responsible for Supply Services with a workload the same as or greater than the historical workload as outlined in the PWS

Responsible for Supply Services with a workload similar to the historical workload as outlined in the

PWS

Responsible for Supply Services with a workload somewhat less than historical workloads as outlined in the

PWS

Contract Environment Contract performance on an Air Force installation

Contract performance on a DoD installation

Contract performance at any other U.S. location.

Contract Type Performance under a DoD Firm- Fixed Price Contract

Performance under a Fixed Price Contract

Any other contract type other than Fixed Price

The Government will use the following degrees of relevancy when assessing current or recent, and relevant contracts:

6. Performance Quality Assessment:

(a) The Government will consider the performance quality of relevant efforts that are recent or current. For each recent or current past performance citation reviewed, the performance quality of the work performed will be assessed for the aspects of performance that relate to this acquisition. The quality assessment consists of an in-depth evaluation of the past performance questionnaire responses, the references provided by the offeror and data independently obtained from other government and commercial sources.

(b) In evaluating past performance, the government reserves the right to give greater consideration to information on those contracts deemed most relevant to the effort described in this solicitation.

(c) If the lowest priced evaluated offer is judged to have a “Substantial Confidence” performance rating and the offeror is determined to be responsible, that offer represents the best value for the government, and the evaluation process stops at this point. Award shall be made to that offeror without further consideration of any other offerors.

(d) If the lowest priced offeror is not judged to have a “Substantial Confidence” performance assessment, the next lowest priced offeror will be evaluated and the process will continue (in order by price) until an offeror is judged to have a “Substantial Confidence” performance assessment or until all offerors are evaluated. The Source Selection Authority shall then make an integrated assessment best value award decision. This integrated assessment best value decision could mean that the government decides to award to a more affordable lowest-priced offeror judged to have a performance assessment rating of “Satisfactory Confidence.” The government could also award to the lowest-priced “Satisfactory Confidence” offeror if no offeror receives a performance rating of “Substantial Confidence.”

6. Performance Quality Assessment (cont.):

(e) Offerors are cautioned to submit sufficient information and in the format specified in the proposal preparation instructions to permit a meaningful assessment of past performance. Offerors may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal or respond to adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond. Adverse past performance is defined as past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation element or any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system. Communication conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute discussions and the contracting officer reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for proposal revision.

(f) The government intends to award a contract without discussions with respective offerors. If, during the evaluation period, it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to hold discussions, offeror responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs) and the Final Proposal Revision (FPR) will be considered in making the source selection decision. If the offeror’s proposal has been evaluated as acceptable at the time discussions are closed, any changes or exceptions in the Final Proposal Revision are subject to evaluation and may introduce risk that the offeror’s proposal be determined unacceptable and ineligible for award.

Questions???

Questions

AFTC/PK CONTACTS

Cynthia Keim, Contracting Officer Tylan J McBride, Contract Specialist 5 S. Wolfe Avenue 5 S. Wolfe Avenue Edwards AFB CA 93524 Edwards AFB CA 93524 Email: cynthia.keim@us.af.mil Email: tylan.mcbride.2@us.af.mil

2d Lt Daniel Carrillo, Contract Specialist 5 S. Wolfe Avenue Edwards AFB CA 93524 Email: daniel.carrillo.4@us.af.mil