Flight Physician (Four-FTEs-TDY) - Combined Synopsis Solicitation.pdf

Request for Proposal: FA301625Q6029

This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial services prepared in accordance with the format in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 12.6, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. This announcement constitutes the only solicitation; proposals are being requested and a written solicitation will not be issued.

The solicitation number is FA301625Q6029_and is issued as a request for proposal (RFP).

This combined synopsis/solicitation incorporates provisions and clauses which are in effect through Federal Acquisition Circular 2025-04, DFARS change notice 17 Jan 2025 and DAFFARS change notice 16 Oct 2024.

This purchase is restricted to: Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB).

NAICS code: 621111 Small business size standard: _$16,000,000

HQ Air Education and Training Command Surgeon General (HQ AETC/SG) Aerospace Medicine Physician (Flight Surgeon / 4-FTEs)

Please respond to this RFP by emailing response to: Ying Yang at E-mail: ying.yang@us.af.mil & Micheal Simington at

Email: michael.simington@us.af.mil no later than 1:00pm CST, 08 August 2025 (early submissions are acceptable) in order to be considered timely. Please contact Ying Yang/Michael Simington with additional questions on or before 1:00pm CST,18 July 2025 at the above noted email address.

Please provide a proposal for the line items listed in the attachment 2 – Schedule of Services. Failure to propose on all CLINs will render the proposal unacceptable and ineligible for award consideration.

Attachments:

Attachment 1 - Performance Work Statement Attachment 2 - Schedule of Services Attachment 3 - Applicable Clauses and Provisions Attachment 4 - Past Performance List of References Attachment 5 – Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

Period of Performance (PoP):

Base Year: 1 Sep 2025 to 31 Aug 2026 Option Year 1: 1 Sep 2026 to 31 Aug 2027 Option Year 2: 1 Sep 2027 to 31 Aug 2028 Option Year 3: 1 Sep 2028 to 31 Aug 2029 Option Year 4: 1 Sep 2029 to 31 Aug 2030

Special Notes and Instructions:

1. This RFP is issued in accordance with (IAW) FAR 13.106-1(a). This requirement is 100% Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) Set-Aside. Only proposals submitted by SDVOSB concern will be accepted by the Government. Any proposal that is submitted by a offeror that is not SDVOSB concern will not be considered for award.

2. It is each offeror’s responsibility to ensure their proposal, and all data is complete (applicable clauses and provisions, attachments, and amendments {if applicable}), and in accordance with the RFP. The Government assumes no responsibility for late or incomplete responses to the RFP. Late responses will be processed in accordance with FAR 52.212-1(f).

3. The Government intends to evaluate the complete proposal and award a Firm Fixed-Price (FFP) contract based on the initial submissions without conducting interchanges (INs); therefore, each proposal should contain the best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to hold INs if determined by the Contracting Officer (CO) to be necessary during the evaluation, or when it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government set forth by FAR 52.212-1(g). Interchanges are fluid interaction(s) between CO and the Offerors that may address any aspect of the proposal, and may or may not, be documented in real time. Offeror’s responses to the INs will be considered in making the order selection decision. Interchanges may be conducted with one, some or all mailto:ying.yang@us.af.mil mailto:michael.simington@us.af.mil

Offerors as the Government is not required to conduct interchanges with any and/or all Offerors responding to the

RFP.

4. The Government will incorporate into the contract, the attached Contract Clauses (Attachment 3). For full text references, go to www.acquisition.gov.

5. A single award will be made to the offeror that meets the following:

a. Is currently registered as a Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB), and

b. Has the supplies and services to be provided with scope of the Performance Work Statement (PWS), and

c. Is registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) system located at https://www.sam.gov/SAM, with the applicable NAICS of 621111, and

d. Meets and complies with all the terms and conditions of the RFP, and

e. Whose proposal is the most advantageous to the Government, and

f. Is not listed on the Excluded Parties List within SAM.

6. The Government will award a Firm Fixed-Price contract to the offeror whose proposal conforms to the RFP and is the most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. Factors being utilized to evaluate offers are:

Factor 1 – Price Factor 2 – Technical Factor 3 – Past Performance

OFFER PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS: Provide one (1) electronic proposal. The proposal shall be submitted in three (3) Parts: Part I -Price, Part II - Technical, and Part III – Past Performance.

Proposals shall be received electronically via email ying.yang@us.af.mil & michael.simington@us.af.mil no later than

1:00pm CST, 08 August 2025. Amendments must be acknowledged in writing, or the offer may be considered non-responsive. Offerors are strongly advised to submit their proposals well in advance of the closing date and time to mitigate the risk of technical difficulty and ensure that the complete proposal is received timely. Late proposals will not be considered. Hard copies of the proposals are not required and will not be accepted.

Questions. Any questions must be received electronically via above noted email addresses on or before 1:00pm CST, 18 July 2025. Questions submitted after the question due date may not be accepted.

7. The following addendum to provision at 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors-Commercial Products and Commercial

Services, applies to this acquisition.

52.212-1(b) is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:

The proposal shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation. Submissions that do not adhere to format and content requirements may be considered non-compliant. The Government reserves the right to eliminate any such offer from consideration for award. The proposal shall not contain any extraneous information such as advertisements or marketing material.

Factor 1 – PRICE: Schedule of Services; a unit price shall be inserted for each Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Contract Line-Item Number (CLIN) and shall be rounded to two decimal places. The extended amount must equal the unit price multiplied by the number/quantity of units. The estimated total for the basic https://www.sam.gov/SAM mailto:ying.yang@us.af.mil https://www.acquisition.gov/far/part-52#FAR_52_212_1 performance period will then be added to the estimated total for each Option period to obtain the Total Evaluated Price. The Total Evaluated Price consists of the base and all options periods.

Offerors must submit a comprehensive compensation plan as a separate document, detailing compensation for all required positions. This plan should include, but not be limited to, hourly rates, paid time off (PTO) accrual, medical benefits (including employer contribution), and any potential incentive structures or bonus programs. Failure to provide a complete and competitive compensation plan, or the submission of a plan that is deemed substantially below industry standards, may render the offeror ineligible for award.

Factor 2 – TECHNICAL: The Technical Volume shall be specific and complete. The maximum page limitation for the Technical Volume is 18 pages. Excess pages will not be considered in the evaluation.

Electronic documents shall be in Microsoft Word and/or Excel format or Adobe Acrobat Reader. In the Technical Volume, address your proposed approach to meeting the minimum performance or capability requirements of each technical factor. Your responses will be evaluated against 52.212-2, Evaluation Factors. Provide as specifically as possible, the actual methodology you would use for accomplishing and satisfying the requirements. All the requirements specified in the RFP are mandatory. By your proposal submission, you are representing that you will perform all the requirements specified in the RFP.

Proposals shall be evaluated against the following technical sub-factors:

1) Sub-factor 1: Recruit, Hire and Retain Qualified Personnel Offerors shall demonstrate an acceptable approach to recruit, hire and retain qualified and certified personnel capable of satisfying the requirements included in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) Section 3. (Attachment 1)

2) Sub-factor 2: Quality Control Plan (QCP) The Technical response shall include a QCP that (1) identifies the process employed to inspect the services/deliverable in the PWS Section 6;(2) addresses roles and authorities of the Primary Quality Personnel; and (3) addresses methods used for identifying and preventing defects before performance becomes unacceptable and identifies corrective actions.

Factor 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE: The Past Performance Information shall be submitted using Attachment 4 and 5. Offerors are advised that the Government may obtain past performance information as necessary, including, but not limited to, that contained in Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) reports, the past and present efforts provided by the vendor, Past Performance List of References(Attachment 4), PPQs (Attachment 5) and/or data independently obtained from other government or commercial sources.

Offerors shall submit the Past Performance List of References (Attachment 4) and send blank PPQs (Attachment 5), to present and/or past Government and/or industry customers for no more than three (3) most recent and relevant contracts performed within the last three (3) years. In assessing Offerors past performance, the Government will utilize the information on past and present efforts submitted by the offeror on the Past Performance List of References (Attachment 4) and PPQs (Attachment 5) to evaluate how well offerors performed on the submitted projects. Therefore, offerors should submit projects that reflect the highest quality of performance that is relevant to the Government’s requirement.

Offerors shall follow-up to ensure that the Government receives completed questionnaires. Forms submitted directly to the Government by the offeror will NOT satisfy the requirement for past performance information and will not be evaluated. It is the offeror’s responsibility to ensure that their customers complete the form and return it DIRECTLY to Ying Yang, Contract Specialist, at ying.yang@us.af.mil and Michael Simington, Contracting Officer, at michael.simington@us.af.mil by the closing date and time.

52.212-1(c) Period of acceptance of offers, is tailored as follows:

The vendor agrees to hold the prices in its proposal for 60 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of proposals, unless another time period is specified in an addendum to the RFP.

52.212-1(d), Product Samples, is deleted in its entirety.

52.212-1(e), Multiple Offers, is deleted in its entirety.

52.212-1(h), Multiple Awards, is deleted in its entirety.

(End of Addenda)

8. Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation—Commercial Products and Commercial Services (Nov 2021).

52.212-2(a) is tailored as follows:

The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be the most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

(i)Price (ii) Technical (iii) Past Performance Technical and past performance, when combined, are approximately equal to price.

This is a Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business Set-Aside, and the government will award a contract that provides the greatest overall benefit based on the responses to the evaluation criteria outlined in this RFP. By submission of its proposal, the offeror accedes to all RFP requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or sub-factors. If five (5) or fewer proposals are received, the Government will evaluate all proposals for technical acceptability. If more than five (5) proposals are received, the Government will then evaluate five (5) lowest priced proposals for technical acceptability. However, the Government reserves the right to evaluate additional proposals for technical acceptability if deemed to be in its best interest. If additional proposals are evaluated for technical acceptability, they will be evaluated in the order of increasing total evaluated price, when the agency determines that none of the initial five (5) lowest priced proposals are qualified as acceptable. The agency will reject and not consider for award any proposal found technically unacceptable and ineligible for award under the terms of this RFP, in the absence of interchanges.

a. Price Evaluation: The Government will evaluate the price, and any other relevant proposal data submitted, to determine if proposed prices are reasonable. An offeror’s proposed prices will be determined by multiplying the quantities identified in the Schedule of Services (Attachment 2) by the proposed unit price for each CLIN. The extended amounts for each CLIN will then be totaled to obtain the total for each performance period. The total for the basic performance period will then be added to the total for each Option period to obtain the total proposed price.

All proposed prices for all contract periods will be evaluated for reasonableness, which may be determined based on prices submitted by the competition, historical pricing, current market conditions, comparison to the Independent Government Estimate, and/or other price analysis techniques. Evaluation of option prices will not obligate the Government to exercise options. The compensation plan will be evaluated IAW FAR 52.222-46. The Government may require submission of information other than cost or pricing data to the extent necessary to evaluate price reasonableness. After price evaluation is complete the Government will rank all Technically Acceptable proposals by total evaluated price.

b. Technical Acceptability: The Government will first evaluate the 5 lowest priced proposals for technical acceptability. To be eligible for award an offer must be technically acceptable. To be acceptable all technical sub-factors must be rated technically acceptable. If, any technical sub-factor is rated unacceptable, the overall proposal will receive a rating of unacceptable. Only proposals rated as technically acceptable can receive an award.

1. Each technical factor will receive one of the ratings listed below:

Acceptable – Proposal meets the requirements of the RFP Unacceptable – Proposal does not meet the requirements of the RFP

2. Proposals shall be evaluated against the following technical sub-factors:

a) Sub-factor 1: Recruit, Hire, and Retain Qualified Personnel Offerors shall demonstrate an acceptable approach to recruit, hire and retain qualified and certified personnel capable of satisfying the requirements included in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) Section 3, (Attachment 1).

Standard: A technically acceptable standard is met when an offeror provides a sufficiently detailed technical approach to recruit, hire, and retain qualified personnel that clearly meets the required credentials as outlined in the PWS.

b) Sub-factor 2: Quality Control Plan (QCP) The Technical response shall include a QCP that (1) identifies the process employed to inspect the services/deliverable in the PWS Section 6.0, (2) addresses roles and authorities of the Primary Quality Personnel; and (3) addresses methods used for identifying and preventing defect before performance becomes unacceptable and identifies corrective actions.

Standard: A technically acceptable standard is met when a offeror provides the QCP identifying (1) the process employed to inspect the services/deliverable in PWS Section 6.0, (2) addresses roles and authorities of the Primary Quality Personnel; and (3) addresses methods used for identifying and preventing defect before performance becomes unacceptable and identifies corrective actions.

c. Performance Confidence Assessment: Using past performance questionnaires and data provided by the offeror, and data independently obtained from other Government and commercial sources, the contracting officer will evaluate recent and relevant past performance information and use this information to develop a performance confidence assessment. The Government will use the following procedures in evaluating performance confidence:

(1). Past Performance – The Government will accomplish the past performance evaluation, assigning a performance confidence assessment rating to the offeror’s proposal based on performance ratings of recent and relevant efforts. The Government will seek recent and relevant performance information from: Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) reports, the past and present efforts provided by the offeror, Past Performance List of References (Attachment 4), Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment 5) and/or data independently obtained from other government or commercial sources.

The past performance evaluation will take into account past performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to the instant acquisition. The past performance evaluation may also consider the past performance of affiliated companies or operating divisions within the parent company or joint ventures of the parent company when it is reasonable to attribute the experience of these past efforts to the proposed effort and when they clearly demonstrate that the resources (e.g. financial resources, overall oversight and management or other resources) of the parent or affiliated division will fully affect performance of the instant acquisition. The past performance of teaming partners or subcontractors who are proposed to perform less than 20% of the work and are not proposed to perform critical aspects will not be evaluated.

(2). Recency – Present and Past Performance efforts will first be evaluated for recency. To be recent, some portion of the performance effort must have occurred within the last three years prior to the issue date of the RFP. Performance not qualifying as recent will not receive further evaluation or consideration. Non-recent performance will not be evaluated for relevancy or quality of performance.

(3). Relevancy – The Government will next evaluate the relevancy of performance that qualified as recent.

Relevant performance includes performance of efforts that are similar or greater in scope, magnitude and complexity for the effort described in this RFP. Performance that qualifies as relevant will be categorized as either relevant or not relevant. Performance that does not meet the definition of relevant will not be evaluated for quality of performance. The relevancy definitions are as follows:

a. Relevant – Present/Past Performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort as this RFP.

b. Not Relevant – Relevant performance fails to meet requirements for relevant performance.

(4). Quality of Performance – Performance efforts that qualify as recent and relevant will then be evaluated for quality of performance. Each evaluated effort will receive one of the following performance ratings: Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, Unsatisfactory and Unknown.

PERFORMANCE RATING DEFINITION

Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some requirements to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

Satisfactory Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element being assessed contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions or the contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or we not fully implemented.

Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most contractual requirements, and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element being assessed contains serious problems(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

Unknown (Neutral) No relevant past performance information is available, or it is so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be assigned.

Based on the evaluation of individual performance efforts, the Government will then develop one of the following Performance Confidence Assessments for each offeror whose past performance is evaluated.

Rating Definition Substantial Confidence Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has an expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offeror's performance record, the government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Unknown Confidence No performance record is identifiable or the offeror’s performance record is so limited that no confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

The Government will generally apply the following relationship between performance ratings and performance confidence. Offerors with no relevant past or present performance history or whose performance record is so limited that no confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned may receive the rating of “Unknown Confidence”, meaning the rating is treated neither favorably nor unfavorably. Offerors may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal (for example, the relevance of past performance information) 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 or present performance effort that is rated less than satisfactory overall or any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system.

(End of Addenda)

9. Basis for Award. Award will be made utilizing the following process:

1) The Government will first evaluate the past performance for the technically acceptable offer with the lowest evaluated reasonable price. If the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated reasonable price has an overall “Substantial Confidence” performance rating, then that offer represents the most advantageous for the Government and the evaluation process stops at this point. Award will be made to that offeror without consideration or evaluation of the past performance of any other offeror contingent upon a determination of contractor responsibility for that offeror.

2) If the technically acceptable offeror with the lowest evaluated reasonable price does not have overall “Substantial Confidence” performance rating, the past performance evaluation process will continue (in order by evaluated price) until a technically acceptable offeror with a reasonable price is found with an overall “Substantial Confidence” performance rating. At this point the Government will conduct an integrated most advantageous assessment of all technically acceptable offers with a reasonable price whose past performance was evaluated. In either event, the Government will award the responsible, technically acceptable offeror with a reasonable price whose proposal offers the greatest overall benefits to the Government.

10. Mandatory Registrations. To be eligible for award, registration with the System for Award Management (SAM) must be current (legacy for On-line Registration and Certifications Application (ORCA) and Central Contractor Registration (CCR) registrations). To register or update former CCR and Reps & Certs that are not current go to https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/ and provide mandatory information.

11. FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services: The Government has included the clause FAR 52.217-8 into this solicitation and it will be included in the resultant contract. The Government will determine the prices of any extension under FAR 52.217-8 fair and reasonable by determining all the line items on the contract to include any option line items fair and reasonable since those are the prices that will apply to any extension under FAR 52,217-

8. For example, if the Government decides to exercise its rights under FAR 52.217-8 and enters the option to extend services after the base year of the contract, then the prices for the line items under the base year will apply to any extension under FAR 52.217-8. The only adjustment to the base year pricing price will be based on any adjustments to prevailing wage rates provided by the Secretary of Labor. Based on this approach no separate pricing will be allowed or included in the contract.

12. The proposals are due by 1:00pm CST, 08 August 2025. If you have any questions, please contact Ms. Ying Yang, at

(210) 652-8882, or email: ying.yang@us.af.mil and Mr. Michael Simington, at (210) 652-0872, or email:

michael.simington@us.af.mil, no later than 1:00pm CST, 18 July 2025. Email is the preferred method.

https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/