03_Section_L_(Draft_20190510).docx

Section L - Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Bidders

L-1 GENERAL INFORMATION

L1.1 General. This section provides guidance for preparing proposals as well as instructions on the format and content of the proposal. The proposal must include all data and information requested and must be submitted in accordance with (IAW) these instructions; incomplete proposals may be considered nonresponsive. Taking exception to any of the requirements specified in this solicitation may result in the proposal being found unacceptable. Do not merely reiterate the SOW or reformulate the requirements specified in the solicitation. In no case shall words like “we will comply with the requirements of the contract,” or equivalent statements, be acceptable to meet the requirements of this RFP. The Government will not provide reimbursement for any cost incurred during proposal submission. Proposals must be complete, self-sufficient, and respond directly to the requirements of the solicitation. Any commitments made in the proposal, to include, but not limited to the Transition and Management Plans called for in this solicitation, shall become part of the resultant contract. Any significant inconsistency, if unexplained, raises a fundamental issue of the Offeror’s understanding and/or ability to perform the contract.

L.1.2 Notice Regarding Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) – Determination to Participate in Task Order Solicitations released under this Acquisition

L.1.2.1 The acquisition of services under this solicitation may create actual or potential conflicts of interest for offerors and their prospective subcontractors. In assessing and addressing OCI, USSOCOM will follow the guidance in FAR Subpart 9.5. OCI will primarily be evaluated at the task order (TO) level. Offerors are responsible for ensuring that both they and their proposed subcontractors are not restricted from participating in subsequent SCS TO acquisitions due to an OCI caused by any existing or in-process USSOCOM contract. This includes all USSOCOM funded contracts or subcontracts, including those at the headquarters, components, and either the Theater Special Operations Commands (TSOCs) or the Geographic Combatant Commands (COCOMs).

L.1.2.2 USSOCOM prefers that offerors competing for the SCS effort have no known OCIs. While mitigation plans will be considered, they create considerable work for the Government and each offeror to adequately mitigated OCI at the time of contract and/or task order award. Consequently, industry is encouraged to employ prudent teaming arrangements and avoid OCI concerns to the maximum extent practicable prior to proposal submission for the SCS effort.

L.1.2.3 Certain capability areas under SCS present heightened OCI concern to USSOCOM. SCS contractors, in many instances, provide program management, advisory, and engineering support through existing USSOCOM programs and/or contracts. In some instances, this may create biased ground rules or impaired objectivity for an offeror or proposed subcontractor. In such cases, this will make that prime offeror ineligible for that specific task order award. Establishing an acceptable OCI mitigation plan for SCS will be challenging, if not impossible. Therefore, individual contractors and contractor teams are encouraged to contact the SCS Contracting Officer during task order solicitations prior to the proposal due date to obtain an informal written assessment of whether their OCI mitigation efforts will be adequate. The informal assessment will not be binding upon the Government, but is intended to better inform industry of the Government’s probable response to its OCI mitigation efforts. Please note that a proposal of 100% subcontracting and firewalls WILL NOT be considered an acceptable OCI mitigation plan.

L1.3 Proposal Format and Content.

L1.3.1 Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed art work, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

L1.3.2 Proposals shall be submitted in MS Word or searchable PDF format (MS Office 2013 compatible). The proposal when printed must fit on 8.5 x 11 size paper, in 12 point, Times New Roman, single line spacing, with one inch margins. Tables, charts, graphs and figures shall be used when necessary to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. These displays shall be uncomplicated, legible, and shall not exceed 11 by 17 inches in size. Foldout pages may only be used for large tables, charts, graphs, diagrams, and schematics, and will be counted as 2 pages. Foldout pages shall not be used for pages of text. For tables, charts, graphs, and figures, the text shall be no smaller than Microsoft Word 10 point, Times New Roman. At a minimum, each Volume shall be submitted as a separate file.

L1.3.3 Titles and contents of the volumes shall be provided as defined in Table L.1. If page limits in Table L.1 are exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal. The following will be exempt from page limitations for the RFP: Cover sheets; Table of contents; List of Table and Drawings; Glossaries; Acronym List; Compliance Matrix; Subcontractor Consent Letters; and Client Authorization Letters.

Table L.1

No page limit

No page limit

No page limit

No page limit

No page limit

No page limit

50; Plus Key Personnel resumes*

Limit 3 pages per citation

No page limit

*Not-to-exceed 3 pages per resume

L1.5 Electronic Proposal Submission. Offeror shall submit its proposal electronically through FedBizOpps (www.fbo.gov). Follow instructions on FBO for submitting an electronic response. Large File Notice: Follow FBO instructions for uploading files larger than 10MB. If needed, break the file down into smaller sections in order to upload it to the system. PROPOSALS SUBMITTED THROUGH OTHER MEANS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. Clearly mark the description for each uploaded document by Offeror Name, Solicitation Number and Volume number. Proposals submitted electronically will be considered late unless all proposal documents are transmitted to and successfully uploaded to www.fbo.gov prior to the closing date and time for receipt of proposals (See L1.6). USSOCOM is not responsible for technical difficulties associated with the transmission of any electronic files to the website. The offeror is responsible for ensuring the successful electronic delivery of its proposals. Offerors are encouraged to submit proposals with sufficient time to ensure all proposal documents are successfully uploaded to the website prior to the closing date and time. The Contracting team will confirm receipt of your proposal. If do not receive a confirmation, you can assume your proposal was NOT received, and should take steps to contact the Contracting team as soon as possible. Please be advised that timelines are determined by the date and time an offeror’s proposal is received by the Government, not when an offeror attempted transmission.

L1.5.1 In the event of an FBO system outage, the only alternative the Government will consider is submission by mail, using separate CD-Rs to segregate proposal volumes. In the event that this is required, the Government will provide a minimal extension window (no more than 2-3 business days) and a mailing address for delivery.

L1.6 Proposal Due Date/Time: 30 August 2019/4:00 PM Eastern Time

L1.7 Proposal Validity. All proposals submitted in response to this solicitation shall be binding on the offeror for a minimum of 365 days.

L1.8 Discrepancies. If an offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error or omission the offeror shall immediately notify the KO in writing with supporting rationale.

L1.9 Cross-Reference. Each volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated with a minimum of cross referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Information required for proposal evaluation which is not found in its designated volume will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal. Volumes shall not include individual glossaries, compliance matrices or acronym lists. Offerors shall submit, as a standalone document marked “Cross-Reference”, a comprehensive glossary, compliance matrix and acronym list. This “Cross Reference” document shall not be included in any volume and has no page limit. Lists of Tables and Drawings are not needed or required. If included, lists shall be placed at the end of the volume.

L-2 VOLUME I – ADMINISTRATIVE AND RESPONSIBILITY MATERIAL

L2.1 General. The purpose of this volume is to provide information to the Government for preparing the contract document and supporting file; as well assist the KO in making a responsibility determination. Offerors shall provide the following additional documentation.

L2.2 Facility Security Clearance. The offeror must possess, at the time of proposal submission, a Top Secret Facility Clearance as accredited by the Defense Security Service (DSS) in accordance with the contract level Contract Security classification Specification (DD Form 254). Storage of classified information is not anticipated to be required at the contract level, however the need to store classified RFPs/SOWs for task order level requirements is expected. As such offerors are encouraged to prepare for this eventuality. If an offeror does not possess a TS facility clearance at the time of proposal submission, their proposal will be excluded from competition.

L2.2.1 Task Order requirements that dictate more stringent clearance requirements will be accompanied by task specific DD Form 254s that offerors must meet at the time of task order solicitation.

L2.3 Financial Capacity. Interested Small Businesses with the capabilities necessary to meet or exceed the stated requirements shall submit a Letter of evidence to a line of credit for at least $1M in order to demonstrate financial capacity to perform the work. Offerors who do not submit evidence of this line of credit will be excluded from completion.

L2.4 Organizational Conflict of Interest

L2.4.1 Each offeror must submit, for itself AND its subcontractors, an OCI Disclosure Form (Attachment 2) and applicable supporting documents. The submission shall identify all of the team’s USSOCOM contracts or subcontracts, including any USSOCOM-funded contracts or subcontracts at the TSOCs or COCOMs. For each identified contract, the offeror shall disclose the contract number; name and telephone number of the Contracting Officer; a brief description of the work performed; and any other information, as applicable, for the Contracting Officer to determine possible OCIs. This information shall be retained by the Contracting Officer for use during individual TO solicitations to preclude the need for resubmission with each TO proposal. Offerors shall be required to submit an updated OCI Disclosure Form at the TO level only when new contract awards have been made that meet the above reporting criteria. An offeror that has determined there is no actual or potential OCI shall provide a written statement affirming no OCI has been found.

L2.4.2 If an offeror has identified actual or potential OCI, the offeror shall submit a Mitigation Plan that addresses the conflict(s) in sufficient detail for the Contracting Officer to determine whether an OCI still exists or has been successfully mitigated. The OCI Mitigation Plan shall specifically address the OCI disclosures required in this section and explain how the prime contractor is in full compliance with this solicitation. As part of its Mitigation Plan, the offeror shall identify which contracts or subcontracts it will continue to support and those it intends to terminate or allow to lapse to eliminate any conflicts. The OCI Mitigation Plan will not be evaluated as part of Factor 1; rather, the Mitigation Plan will be reviewed in conjunction with the Contracting Officer’s responsibility determination prior to award. An offeror with no actual or potential OCI risk shall include a statement to that effect as part of its proposal, and is not required to submit an OCI Mitigation Plan.

L2.4.3 An offeror’s failure to provide adequate information to avoid and/or mitigate an identified OCI may cause its proposal for a specific task order to be rejected and relieves the Government of any further responsibility to resolve OCI issues. OCI will be evaluated as a contractor responsibility determination in accordance with FAR Part 9 – Contractor Qualifications. Therefore, any notices to offerors regarding OCI and their responses thereto will NOT be considered negotiations or discussions in accordance with FAR Part 15.

L2.5 Contract Forms and Certifications.

L2.5.1 Proposal cover page which includes names, office phone numbers, cell phone numbers, and email addresses for individuals who are authorized to discuss the proposal with government personnel on behalf of the offeror.

L2.5.2 Section A – Solicitation/Contract Form Complete blocks 12-16, and the Signature and Date blocks 17 and 18, of the Standard Form 33, and include within Volume I under the heading “Section A – Solicitation/Contract Form”. A signature by the Offeror on the Standard Form 33 constitutes an offer, which the Government may accept,.

L2.5.3 Section K – Representations, Certifications, and other Statements of Offerors FAR 52.204-7, System for Award Management, is incorporated by reference in Part II, Section I. The Offeror shall follow the instructions cited in this Section K, FAR 52.204-08 and complete all representations, certifications, acknowledgments, and statements electronically in the System for Award Management (SAM) accessed through as part of responding to this RFP (https://www.sam.gov). If a representation, certification, acknowledgement or statement cited in this Section K cannot be found in SAM, then the Offeror shall submit that Section K representation, certification, acknowledgement or statement. Failure to adhere to these instructions will render an Offeror as being ineligible for award.

L2.6 Current Adequate Accounting System. IAW Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) Part 30; Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) do not apply to small business concerns. IAW FAR 16.306 (c), no cost type contract may be awarded unless the limitations in FAR 16.301-3 are met. One of the limitations cited is that the contractor’s accounting system must be adequate for determining costs. The offeror shall provide valid documentation from DCMA, DCAA or other Federal Audit Agency that they have an adequate accounting system for operating Government cost type contracts to be considered for award. The offeror may provide other information that allows the contracting officer to determine that the contractor's accounting system will permit timely development of all necessary cost data for the cost type CLINs and the negotiation of cost in accordance with the FAR and applicable supplements in order to be considered for award. If the offeror does not currently have valid documentation (within the last 3 years) regarding an adequate accounting system, the Offeror shall complete Attachment 3 – Preaward Accounting System Checklist with supporting documentation. The Preaward Accounting System Checklist with supporting documentation shall be forwarded to the cognizant DCAA and to the Contracting Officer as soon as practicable but no later than the proposal due date. Offeror’s are cautioned that determination of the adequacy of the accounting system must be accomplished to be eligible for contract award. Therefore, offerors shall be prepared to support DCAA audits upon the initiation of the audit.

L2.7 Mentor-Protégé Joint Venture Agreement Offeror’s submitting a proposal as a Mentor-Protégé Joint Venture shall provide a copy of their approved JV agreement, outlining the roles and responsibilities of both joint venture partners.

L-3 VOLUME II IDIQ MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL

L3.1 General. Volume II shall address your proposed approach to meeting the requirements of Factor 1. Volume II must provide specifics and be complete. All the requirements specified in the solicitation are mandatory. Offerors shall provide the following information to assess their capability (which includes the consideration of risk).

L3.2 FACTOR 1 – IDIQ Management

L3.2.1 Program Management. The offeror shall submit a Program Management Plan (PMP) which includes a clear and comprehensive description of its management approach and corporate resource capabilities to execute all SCS requirements delineated in the SOW. Describe how you will meet USSOCOM’s Services Imperatives to provide organizational stability, agility and reach (synonymous with ‘Ends’) in support of the SCS effort by describing the team’s capability, organization and processes (synonymous with ‘Ways’, ‘Means’) as follows:

L3.2.1.1 Capabilities. Summarize the capabilities of your team to meet the requirements of the SOW that results in your team’s stability, agility, and reach in accomplishing the overall mission. Include a summary of your team’s experience in providing services of similar scope. Stability is informed by the team’s capability to sustain a technical workforce with requisite expertise in a dynamic environment. Agility is informed by the team’s aggregate ability to address all mission areas. Reach is informed by the team’s organizational capability and processes to effectively execute all requirements.

L3.2.1.2 Management Approach/Organization. Describe the organization structure that will ensure corporate support to this effort, which includes a summary of the total portfolio for which this organization is responsible. Describe how that structure will manage the SCS efforts to include planning, monitoring, control and communication to manage cost, schedule and performance of awarded IDIQ and task orders. This shall include management of geographically dispersed efforts, multiple task orders and multiple subcontractors. Explain how your management structure will be capable of delivering SCS requirements across the full range of potential workload as outlined in the Statement of Work (SOW). Explain how your management structure will be flexible enough to allow rapid response to multiple, sometimes diverse tasks, when necessary. Show lines of authority and chain(s) of command to include teaming partner and/or subcontractor relationships. Clearly demonstrate how the teaming arrangement will provide the expertise required to successfully perform all contract requirements. Describe how the offeror’s management of subcontracts will provide sufficient oversight placing the full burden of oversight and correction with the contractor to effectively manage subcontractors, develop processes for assigning subcontractors work, and integrate subcontractors, including a process for accounting and reporting any first tier subcontractor, sub-contract dollars expended and to provide for on-site task leaders to coordinate sub-contractor efforts on task orders. The offeror shall summarize its plan for contract transition as it relates to an ability to respond to a released RFP, and its generic approach to transitioning task order performance. These plans shall discuss the proposed team’s ability to obtain and continuously retain suitably qualified personnel in order to maintain program stability. Provide timelines at both the contract and task order levels that support the transition narrative and highlight key milestones to reaching full operational capability (FOC) in not more than 30 days from award. Describe proposed Key Personnel who will be tasked with managing the overall contract for the offeror and explain how the individuals fit within the offeror’s management structure. If proposed Key Personnel are contingent hire pending award, the offeror shall provide a contingent hire letter signed by the individual.

L3.2.1.3 Human Resource Management/Process. Describe your methods to recruit, train, hire, and retain a capable workforce with the appropriate levels of education, experience, and expertise; to include sourcing unexpected surges, required to accomplish the mission in a timely manner, generally within two weeks of notification. Explain your procedures to ensure compliance with gaining/documenting approvals for OCONUS contractor support as required. This should include your understanding and implementation of requirements such as Theater Business Clearance/Licenses, Status-of-Forces Agreement (SOFA), Department of Defense Contractor Personnel Office, Technical Expert Status Accreditation (TESA), Synchronized Pre-deployment and Operational Tracker (SPOT) approvals etc. Describe your procedures to support deployed personnel and management of geographically dispersed personnel. Describe how you will handle the requirement for mission essential travel to hostile environments and the impact to benefits and costs. Demonstrate an understanding of the processes required to hire non-US Citizens, perform OCONUS travel, and place employees at OCONUS performance locations.

L3.2.1.4 Security Management/Process. Describe your process for facility and personnel clearances and how you manage cleared spaces and personnel to include safeguarding classified materials and controlled unclassified information. This shall include handling, storage, and transmission of materials and information at the contract and task order level.

L3.2.1.5 Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Management/Process. Describe your internal processes and procedures for identifying, evaluating and resolving actual or potential OCI that occurs through the life of the contract. The offeror shall describe their OCI training and oversight programs, and the offeror’s procedures for complying with Section H.6. The offeror shall also address firewalls, separate corporate divisions, separate reporting chains and similar measures used to ensure proprietary and nonpublic information is properly used and safeguarded consistent with Section H.6. The offeror shall demonstrate an effective process for providing OCI training to employees and ensuring compliance with non-disclosure policy regulation at FAR 9.5. Note: Current OCI will be evaluated IAW Volume I as a responsibility matter; Factor II shall address future OCI concerns.

L3.2.1.5 Quality Control Process. Describe your plan for quality control and furnish your Quality Control Plan (QCP). This plan shall include specific methods and procedures for quality monitoring and tracking that identify how you will be able to address problem areas quickly and ensure compliance with all contract requirements. The QCP shall be submitted as part of Volume II and is included in the Volume II page count. The QCP will be incorporated into the resultant contract.

L-4 VOLUME III – PAST PERFORMANCE PROPOSAL

L4.1 FACTOR 2 – Past Performance Contents. Submit information on the contracts considered most recent and relevant which demonstrate the company’s ability to perform the requirements identified in the SOW. Offerors are cautioned that the Government will use this information and information obtained from other sources for an overall evaluation of past performance. The Government will not evaluate personal references. The offeror shall submit a Past and Present Performance Proposal (Volume III) that contains the following:

L4.2 Past Performance Summary. Provide a summary describing the role of the offeror and each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner. Include rationale supporting the assertion of relevance, but note the Government is not bound by the offeror’s opinion of relevancy. Clearly link past performance to the IDIQ Management areas identified in Section L3.2 as they relate to supporting the types of requirements listed in the SCS SOW; explain what aspects of the contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort. This may include a discussion of efforts accomplished by the offeror to resolve problems encountered on prior contracts as well as past efforts to identify and manage program risk.

L4.3 Past Performance Information Sheets (Attachment 4). The offeror shall submit a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 5 Past Performance Information (PPI) Sheets with an emphasis on the prime offeror. Offerors must submit information for those contracts which are relevant to demonstrate the ability to perform the work identified in the SCS SOW.

L4.3.1 A minimum of two PPI sheets shall be submitted by the prime offeror or JV managing partner. The remaining PPI Sheet submissions may be from the Prime, subcontractors, or teaming partners. If proposing as a JV, at least one of the remaining PPI sheets shall be from the Mentor. Offerors are cautioned that a Government determination of “Not Relevant” for either of the two required Prime PPI sheets will automatically prevent the offeror from obtaining a “Substantial Confidence” rating.

L4.3.2 Prime past performance may be as a Prime or subcontractor. Subcontractor, teammate, or mentor past performance may be as a Prime or subcontractor. All past performance as a subcontractor shall have been as a first-tier subcontractor.

L4.3.3 Past performance may be submitted at the contract or task order level. Offerors who submit a PPI sheet at the contract level shall clearly identify the actual performance they provided to the contract, in both dollar amount and personnel provided.

L4.4 Subcontractor Consent Letter (Attachment 5)/Client Authorization Letter (Attachment 6). The offeror shall submit, along with the information required in this paragraph, a consent letter, executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner, authorizing release of adverse PPI to the offeror so the offeror can respond to such information. For each commercial customer citation, the offeror shall also submit a client authorization letter.

L4.5 Relevant Contracts. Recency will be determined based on contract references reflecting past and present performance over the past five years from the date of proposal submission. Contract efforts will be considered either relevant or not relevant. The Government will perform an independent analysis in determining the relevancy of a contract based on the data provided and/or obtained. When making relevancy determinations, the definitions in Table L.4 will be utilized.

Table L.4 Past Performance Relevancy Rating

L4.5.1 For the prime offerors, relevancy is defined as contracts that are most similar to this effort; contract type, dollar value, types of services provided, complexity, numbers of personnel required on the contract being reviewed when compared to those of the SCS requirements as shown in Attachment 7 – SCS Past Performance Relevancy Baseline.

L.4.5.1.1 The more an effort is similar in the areas outlined in the baseline, the more relevant that effort becomes. No one relevancy criterion is more important than another when determining relevancy of a prime offeror effort, but rather all criterion are considered holistically in order to subjectively assess one overall relevancy rating (per the definitions in Table 2) for each prime offeror effort. A prime offeror effort does not have to be “Very Relevant” in all criterion in order to be determined “Very Relevant” overall. Additionally, a prime offeror effort could hypothetically be “Not Relevant” in one or more criterion and still be determined “Somewhat Relevant” or higher for that effort overall

L4.5.2 For proposed subcontractors/teaming partners, relevancy is defined by that which reflects experience in the area of expertise the subcontractor is projected to actually perform under the program, (i.e. specific functional areas in the SOW).

L4.5.3 In the case of a newly formed business entity or in contractor teaming arrangements where the company is relying mostly on the past performance and experience of its key personnel, partners on the team, or on a major subcontractor(s), the proposal must clearly explain "whose" past performance, and "how" that past performance is relevant to the procurement. Resumes or letters of recommendation are not a valid past performance submissions.