H9240022R0008_0004.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to to add clarifying language based on questions submitted.

See Summary of Changes

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

S 1 16

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 13-Jan-2022

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X H9240022R0008

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

22-Dec-2021

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, X is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

13-Jan-2022

CODE

HQ USSOCOM

SOF AT&L-KH

7701 TAMPA POINT BLVD

TAMPA FL 33621-5323

H92400 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

H9240022R0008

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION J - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

The following have been modified:

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

Attachment Number Description Date 01 Service Deliverable Summary

(SDS)

N/A

02 HRTO Self Score Matrix (Amd 04) N/A 03 Work Sample Cover Sheet (Amd

04) N/A

04 SEPS Price Template (Contract Labor Schedule) (Amd 04)

N/A

05a USASOC SARM SOW(Amd 04) 13 Jan 2022 05b FIAR SOW 17 Nov 2021 05c J3 SOW(Amd 04) 13 Jan 2022 06 QnA Template N/A 07 SEPS Industry Day Briefing 2 Dec 2021 08 Responses to Draft RFP Questions

(QnA) (Amd 04) 12 Jan 2022

09 DD 254 (IDIQ) 16 Dec 2021 09a DD 254 (USASOC SARM) 16 Dec 2021 09b DD 254 (FIAR) 16 Dec 2021 09c DD 254 (J3) 16 Dec 2021 10 32 CFR Part 117

Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 245 / Rules and Regulations

21 Dec 2020

11 DOD M 5220.22, VOLUME 2

NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL

SECURITY PROGRAM:

INDUSTRIAL SECURITY

PROCEDURES FOR

GOVERNMENT ACTIVITIES

1 Aug 2018

Note: RFP Attachment Number 01 will be incorporated into the resulting IDIQ contract and Numbers 04, 05a, 05b, 05c, 09a, 09b, 09c will be incorporated into the applicable task order, upon award.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

L1.0 General Guidance The Section provides general guidance for preparing proposals as well as specific instructions on the format and content of the proposal. The Offeror's proposal must include all data and information requested herein and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. If the Technical Volume and Cost Volume provide contradictory information for the same subject, the proposal may be ineligible for award. Of important consequence: If a proposal fails to conform to the instructions provided herein (Section L), it may be deemed to fail to assent to a material term of the solicitation and ineligible for award. Administrative errors, i.e SF 33 not signed or missing a phone number, a page missing for reps/certs. Etc. will not make the proposal ineligible for award. All proposal information submitted in response to this solicitation is subject to verification by the Government. Falsification of any proposal submission, document, or statement may subject the Offeror to disqualification from this Competition.

L1.1 Compliance with Requirements Offerors shall comply with the requirements as stated herein. IMPORTANT: Unsubstantiated and/or misleading claims, for even a single category, could result in the Government determining that the Offeror’s proposed self-score is disingenuous and/or artificially inflated and the proposal would not continue to be evaluated and determined unawardable. The next highest rated self-scored technical offer would then be evaluated.

L1.2 Clarity of Proposal The proposal shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and substantiating the validity of stated claims. The burden of proof to substantiate the Offeror’s self-score rests solely with the Offeror.

The proposal shall include bodies of evidence supporting each self-score that the Offeror provides with the proposal.

The Offeror shall provide cross references with their proposal that will clearly demonstrate the connection between the submitted documents and criteria identified in Section M, and in Attachment 02 – Highest Rated Technical Offer (HRTO) Self-Scoring Matrix. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of its facilities, capabilities, and experience and will base the evaluation solely on the information presented in the Offeror's proposal.

L1.3 What Not to Submit / Suggested References Offerors shall not submit elaborate brochures or documentation, detailed artwork, or other embellishments. For Factor 1, Offerors should refer to both Section M, M5.3 Burden of Proof and below section L5.1.6 for a description of suggested and acceptable documentation for each evaluation category; as well as Attachments 02 and 03. It is NOT necessary to submit an entire document to include a section that provides required substantiation of self-scoring information. Unless otherwise stated, the Government will NOT accept discretely generated documentation for the sole purpose of point validation. Discretely generated documentation is defined as documentation that is newly generated expressly for the purpose of responding to this solicitation and was in no way a product of the work sample.

L1.4 Statement of Proposal Validity The Offeror shall clearly state in its contract documentation volume that the proposal is valid for 280 calendar days from the proposal due date.

L1.5 Facility Clearance Certification The Offeror shall provide a copy of its Facility Clearance Level (FCL) notification to validate possession of Top- Secret Facility Clearance. Failure to possess and provide this certification at proposal submission renders the proposal unacceptable. The FCL notification shall confirm the FCL as active at the date/time of proposal submission. A joint venture (JV) shall provide an FCL for the JV OR copies of FCLs for the individual partner(s) to the JV. If the Offeror chooses to provide FCLs for individual partners of the JV and one or more partner(s) does not hold the required Top Secret Facility clearance, the proposal will be determined unacceptable.

L1.6 Team Composition and Adjustment Prime Offerors are ultimately responsible for the composition of their team.

L1.7 Point of Contact (POC) The Contracting Officer (KO) is the primary Government POC for this acquisition. Offerors shall address questions or concerns to the KO. The Offeror shall not contact any other Government personnel or offices regarding this acquisition until after award.

L1.8 Discrepancies If an Offeror believes that these instructions contain errors or omissions, or are otherwise unsound, the Offeror should immediately notify the CO in writing with supporting rationale and any remedy the Offeror may ask the CO to consider. Offerors are reminded that the Government reserves the right to award based upon the Offeror’s initial proposal, as received by the Government, without further confer sessions.

L2.0 Proposal Submission Instructions Offerors shall prepare and submit their proposals as set forth in the Proposal Organization Table below. The title and contents of each proposal volume shall be as set forth in the table. In addition, proposal volumes shall be within required page limits and be submitted with the number of copies specified in the table.

L2.1 Proposal Organization and Due Date.

Due Date/Time: All portions of the Offeror’s proposal shall be received NLT 25 January 2022 at 1100 EST.

VOLUME

NUMBER

VOLUME TITLE

PAGE

LIMIT

I(a) Executive Summary (Not Evaluated)

I(b) Contract Documentation Administrative

No Limit

I(c) Transition Plan

II Technical Proposal Substantiating Data

III Cost/Price No Limit

Attachment 02 - HRTO Self Score Matrix copies and Volume Placement. Offerors shall include an electronic copy of the completed self- scored matrix in both Volumes I(a) and II. The Offeror’s self-scored matrix (Attachment

02) shall be printed to PDF and placed directly behind the cover sheet in Vol I (a) and behind the cover sheet in Vol

II.

L2.2 Page Limits The page limits prescribed above are maximum page limits for each volume. Cover pages, tables of contents, separator tabs, and glossaries shall not be counted against prescribed page limits.

L2.3 Page Formatting A page is defined as each face of a sheet of paper containing information. When both sides of a sheet of paper display printed material, that sheet shall be counted as two pages. Page size shall be 8.5 x 11 inches unless foldouts are necessary and then foldouts count as two pages. Pages shall be no less than single spaced as defined in

Paragraph settings/spacing in Microsoft Word or Adobe PDF, the text size shall be written in no less than 12-point font, font shall be Times New Roman, and margins shall be no less than 1 inch on all sides. The font size and margin requirements are not mandatory for substantiating documents that fall out of this range. The font size requirement for all tables, charts, graphs, and foldouts shall be written in no less than 10-point font, font shall be Times New Roman. The 12-point font and 1 inch margin does not apply to the Uniform Pricing Template (UPT) or any substantiation documentation (e.g., CDRLs, Performance Work Statements, invoices, screenshots), foldouts are permitted for both. However, the Offeror shall ensure that UPT submittals are legible. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by work sample and Category in each volume. For example, the pages of Work Sample 1, Category 5 would be numbered WS1.CAT5.p1-5. The page formatting prescribed here shall also apply to responses to INs, if any.

L2.4 Cost/Pricing Information All cost and pricing data shall be addressed ONLY in the Cost/Price Volume. The Government in its sole discretion may request documents as other than certified cost or pricing data (information to substantiate or understand the Offeror’s proposal.

L2.5 Cross-Referencing To the greatest extent possible, each volume shall be written as a stand-alone document so that it may be evaluated with minimum cross reference to other volumes of the proposal. Failure to include proposal information in the correct designated volume may result in the Government not considering the information in the evaluation.

L2.6 Indexing and Naming Convention Each volume shall contain a detailed table of contents delineating the subsections within that volume. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections. Offerors shall use the following naming convention for each volume: “Volume X- Contractor Name-SEPS

L3.0 Electronic Proposal Submission

L3.1 Contracting Points of Contact Questions and/or Responses shall be received via email by carrie.eastburn@socom.mil, kimberly.r.carberry.civ@socom.mil, and adam.d.stern.civ@socom.mil prior to the date and time listed.

Questions: 12 January 2022 @ 11:00 AM EST Proposals: 25 January 2022 @ 11:00 AM EST

L3.2 Timely and Successful Receipt Submission of your proposal is subject to FAR 52.215-1(c) (3), Late Proposals and Revisions. Offerors are responsible for ensuring the timely and successful receipt of proposals by the Government POCs identified above previous paragraph by the due date/time. Offerors are encouraged to submit the proposal with sufficient time to ensure all documents are successfully received by the contracting team prior to the closing date and time. The contracting team will confirm receipt of your proposal. If you receive a rejection notice from the email system after emailing your proposal, or you do not receive a confirmation, you can assume your proposal was NOT received.

Please be advised that timelines are determined by the date and time an offeror’s proposal is received, not when an offeror attempts transmission.

L3.3 FILE SIZE

L3.3.1 USSOCOM recommends emails to not exceed 10MB when sent to ensure the email and all attachments will transmit the system successfully and be received by the contracting office. If your complete proposal exceeds this size, please submit via multiple emails, and indicate in the subject line the number of emails being submitted.

L3.3.2 Additionally, due to the size of the Volumes to be submitted, Offerors may utilize the DoD’s Secure Access File Exchange (SAFE) at DoD SAFE (apps.mil). If an Offeror utilizes DoD SAFE for proposal submission, it is still the responsibility of the Offeror to notify the Contracting team of the submission and ensure receipt of proposal by the required date and time.

L3.4 LATE PROPOSALS

Any proposal received at the Government office designated in the solicitation after the exact time specified for receipt of offers is “late” and will not be considered unless it is (1) received before award is made, (2) the

Contracting Officer determines that accepting the late offer would not unduly delay the acquisition; and (3) there is acceptable evidence to establish that it was received at the Government installation designated for receipt of offers and was under the Government’s control prior to the time set for receipt of offers.

L4.0 Volume I – Executive Summary/Contract Documentation/Responsibility Determination

L4.1 Table of Contents Volume I shall include a Master Table of Contents for the entire proposal.

L4.2 Volume I (a) - Executive Cover Letter/Executive Summary An Executive Summary may be included within Proposal Volume I and shall not exceed two (2) pages in length.

The Executive Summary will not be evaluated.

L4.3 Volume I (b) – Administrative Documentation As part of Volume I, the Offeror shall include all required administrative documentation that does not belong in the Technical Proposal Volume or the Task Order Cost/Price Volume. Note: There is no page limitation for Volume I (b), Contract Documentation. At a minimum, this volume shall include the following documentation:

• Authorized Offeror Personnel

• Government Offices

• Provisions and Clauses Fill-ins

• Cross Teaming Limitations, Teaming Agreements, and Identification of Subcontractors

• Documentation/Certification pertinent to TS Facility Clearance

• Signed SF33

• OCI Certification

L4.3.1 Authorized Offeror Personnel The Offeror shall identify those individuals authorized to communicate with the Government and detail the capacity and any limitations, if applicable, as well as the Prime Offeror POC designated to make decisions and authorized to contractually obligate the Offeror. The Offeror shall provide the following contact information for each Authorized Offeror Personnel: provide the name, title, email address and telephone number of the Prime Offeror POC regarding decisions made with respect to its proposal and who can obligate the Offeror contractually.

L4.3.2 Government Offices Provide the mailing address, email address, and facility codes for the cognizant Contract Administration Office, Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA), and Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA).

L4.3.3 Provisions and Clauses Fill-ins If applicable fill-in provisions and clauses shall be provided in Volume Ib.

L4.3.4 Cross Teaming Limitations, Teaming Agreements, and Identification of Subcontractors The following restrictions on cross teaming applies: If a company is identified as a Prime Offeror or teaming partner/subcontractor on any proposal, then that company cannot participate as a Prime Offeror or teaming partner/subcontractor on any other Offeror's proposal. The Offeror shall provide a list of all proposed subcontractors that will perform work on the Task Order and the mailing address, email address and CAGE codes for the cognizant Contract Administration Office, DCAA, and DCMA for each subcontractor.

L4.3.5 Organizational Conflict of Interest Certification.

The Offeror shall provide written certification attesting that an OCI does not exist with the Prime Offeror nor with or amongst any of the proposed teammates and/or subcontractors.

L4.4 Volume I(c) – Transition Plan

The Offeror shall include a transition plan that meets the requirements stated in the IDIQ PWS and in the Task Order SOW for each of the three awardable task orders. The plan shall include the elements stated in M4.1 and describe the process for transitioning the IDIQ contract, including ability to respond to new requirements when a new Task Order RFP has been issued and general approach to transition task order performance. The plan shall also include a discussion explaining the transition process for future task orders (not yet defined) as well as the specific process planned for transitioning each of the awardable task orders. At a minimum the specific discussion shall adequately explain the proposed team’s ability to timely place qualified personnel in the required positions to maintain program stability . Additionally, transition timelines supporting the Offeror’s narrative approach for the IDIQ contract and for each of the three awardable task order shall be included in the Transition Plan. Each timeline shall highlight key milestones of events planned to reach full operational capability (FOC) timely (in not more than 30 days from award). At a minimum, include planned methods to recruit, train, hire, and retain a qualified and capable workforce with the necessary levels of education, experience, and expertise.

L5.0 Volume II – FACTOR 1: Technical Proposal and Substantiating Data

L5.1 General

L5.1.1 Offerors shall note that legibility, clarity, brevity, and coherence are important in the response submitted. All the requirements specified are mandatory. By submitting a proposal, the Offeror represents that it will perform all the requirements. The Offeror shall not include any proposed price/cost information within Volume II.

L5.1.2 For Factor 1, the Offeror shall select a maximum of five (5) work samples (contracts/task orders) to be used by Offeror to self-score each selected work sample and to be submitted as “Offeror elected substantiating evidence”.

Offerors shall self-score each selected work sample using a copy of Attachment 02 - HRTO Self Score Matrix *Important: The Offeror shall consider the entire description in Section M when self-scoring each work sample as Attachment 02 - HRTO Self Score Matrix includes only a summary of each complete criterion. Columm D of Attachment 02 “Max Count” is not a minimum requirement. Offerors may self score a selected work sample with less than stated in the “Max Count” Column D of Attachment 02.

L5.1.3 The Offeror shall determine a self-score for each work sample submitted based on clearly met qualification criteria in the work samples submitted. One Work Sample Cover Sheet (Attachment 03) shall be completed and submitted for each of the Offeror’s selected work samples. Each work sample cover sheet (Attachment 03) shall include current and accurate information as stated for at least two (2) points of contact (POCs) for Government validation of the information provided by the Offeror. The Government must be able to clearly validate the Offeror’s self-score based on the data provided by the Offeror and/or through the POCs. the Government reserves the right to onward adjust the score, potentially all the way down to zero (0) points awarded.

L5.1.4 If the Offeror of this solicitation is a Joint Venture (JV) formed under The All Small Mentor-Protégé Program or the SBA 8(a) Mentor Protégé Program, work samples from either the managing or non-managing venturer are acceptable. If an Offeror’s work sample submitted included work performed as a joint venture, the Offeror’s response shall include a copy of that SBA approved joint venture agreement as “Volume 1(b)”.

L5.1.5 The Government’s Evaluation Team reserves the right to contact any or all POCs provided in Offeror’s Work Sample Cover Sheets, the Prime, any Subcontractors, or any other reasonable resources, for any or all criteria during the Government’s validation of the Offeror’s self-score.

L5.1.6 Acceptable Work Samples. An acceptable work sample is defined as a “stand alone” contract, or task order issued under a master Indefinite Delivery / Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract (FAR 16.501-1). When referring to work samples, the terms “contract” and “task order” are interchangeable with “contract” often used as the all-encompassing term. An IDIQ contract with a specified scope of work, including all task orders, is acceptable as one work sample. An IDIQ contract by itself, without any awarded task orders thereunder, is not an acceptable work sample. Similarly, an offeror may not submit, as separate work samples both (a) a single award IDIQ and all task orders thereunder and (b) one of the task orders under that single award IDIQ, as that would be redundant.

L5.1.7 Offerors shall redact work samples of any unnecessary Potentially Identifiable Information (PII) to the maximum extent practicable while still enabling adequate information for substantiation and Government validation.

PII is defined as any information that includes name, social security or any other personal information that would identify an individual.

IMPORTANT: Any unsubstantiated and/or misleading claims provided in an Offeror’s work sample, for even a single category, could result in the Government determining that the Offeror’s proposed self-score is disingenuous and/or artificially inflated and the proposal may be determined un-awardable, and evaluation would stop. The next highest rated self-score would then be evaluated.

L5.2 Format and Specific Content While the Technical Proposal Volume (Volume II) has no page limit, Offerors shall provide specific evidence to substantiate its self-score.

L5.3. Work Sample Cover Sheet(s) The Offeror shall provide one Work Sample Cover Sheet for each work sample used to substantiate the Offeror’s self-score, along with any additional substantiating documents needed by the Offeror to substantiate their self-score for all evaluation criteria.

L6.0 VOLUME III – FACTOR 2: Cost/Price Proposal

L6.1 Price General Instructions

a) To be eligible for award, the Offeror shall adhere to the directions and submit the following information under Volume III – Cost/Price.

b) Attachment 04 - SEPS Price Template. The Offeror shall submit Section J, Attachment

04 - SEPS Price Template as a Microsoft Excel file. The Offeror’s Total Evaluated Price (TEP) will be calculated as a sum of the three awardable task orders included in this RFP.

The location of the technical requirements for the awardable task orders are in the task order Statements of Work (SOWs) as Attachments 05a, 05b, and 05c. Similarly, the security requirements are in the task order copies of the DD 254s as Attachments 09a, 09b, 09c.

c) Price Narrative File. The Offeror shall submit a separate narrative file in Word or PDF format with information other than the values required in the price template, to support proposed prices/costs and compensation, to include but not limited to applicable information described below in Ground Rules and Assumptions, Accounting System Summary, Accounting System Summary

L6.1.1 “Direct Labor Rates” or unburdened are labor rates that are not burdened with Indirect Rates or Fringe Benefits (ie. Employer Healthcare costs, Unemployment Insurance, Overhead, General and Administrative expenses, and/or Profit L6.2 Other than Certified Cost and Pricing Data The Contracting Officer anticipates adequate data for the Determination of Price Fair and Reasonable; however, Offerors may be required to submit supplemental information for Other than Certified Cost and Pricing Data or (if necessary) Certified Cost or Pricing Data IAW FAR 15.4.

L6.3 Ground Rules and Assumptions - Price The Offeror shall include a general discussion of the ground rules and assumptions (e.g. contract type, contract items, delivery schedule, Government-Furnished Equipment (GFE), Property (GFP), Information (GFI), or Material (GFM)) used to develop the proposed prices. All assumptions, scope limitations, and/or qualifications of the cost/price proposal shall be addressed and explained. Offerors shall note that proposals including Exceptions to this Solicitation are not permissible. An Offeror assertion of an Exception to the terms and conditions of this solicitation may be deemed as non-compliant and ineligible for ward. Otherwise, assumptions may be included in the appropriate section accordingly.

L6.4 Rounding All dollar amounts shall be rounded to the nearest dollar (e.g. $1,234), except that all labor rates shall be rounded to the nearest penny (e.g. $12.34). Percentages shall be rounded to the nearest hundredth of a percent (e.g. 12.34%).

Standard rounding methodology otherwise applies. Offerors are encouraged to utilize the “Round” function in Microsoft Excel to eliminate rounding errors from their proposal.

L6.5 Additional Price Proposal Excel Instructions The Cost-Reimbursable CLINs include Government-established (plug) values for Travel and/or ODCs and shall not be adjusted on the Price Template, Attachment 04.

L6.6 SECTION 1: Introduction The Offeror shall prepare a proposal summary that includes an introduction, overview, summary description of their accounting systems, and, if applicable, changes to approved/ disclosed accounting systems.

L6.6.1. Accounting System Summary

a) The Offeror shall provide a current (within 12 months from the date of proposal submittal) audit report, finding, or letter from the Offeror’s cognizant DCMA Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO) or DCAA office stating that the Offeror’s accounting system has been audited and/or determined to be both compliant with the FAR and is adequate for cost type contracts. A cost type contract may only be awarded if the limitations in FAR 16.301-3 are met. This reference establishes limitations that the Contractor’s accounting system must be adequate for determining costs applicable to the contract. Therefore, no award can be made to an Offeror whose accounting system has not been determined to be adequate for cost type contracts. This impacts all Team Members/Subcontractors if the Prime Offeror anticipates awarding cost type subcontracts to them. If no cost type subcontracts are to be awarded, the Offeror shall so state. If cost type subcontracts for Team Members/Subcontractors are to be awarded, the Offeror shall provide the necessary information from them.

b) If it has been over 12 months since the accounting system was reviewed, the Offeror shall provide a statement that the accounting system has not changed since being reviewed along with the most recent audit report, finding, or letter from the ACO or DCAA. If the accounting system has changed, a certification shall be provided indicating that the changes have not impacted the approval or adequacy of the accounting system.

The certification (if needed) shall be signed by someone with the legal authority to bind the company.

c) If the Offeror has not had an audit as stated in paragraph a), the offeror shall so state.

d) If the Offeror does not meet the above requirements and they’re evaluated as the HRTO and otherwise eligible for award, then the KO will contact the Offeror to secure the required information to conduct a Pre- Award Survey of Prospective Contractor Accounting System (SF 1408 criteria).

L6.7 Professional Employee Compensation Plan / Total Compensation Plan – (TCP))

a) In accordance with FAR 52.222-46, “Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees (Feb 1993)”, is applicable to this RFP, and the Government will evaluate whether the offeror considered for award, understands the contract requirements, and have proposed a compensation plan appropriate for those requirements. In addition, the Offeror’s Compensation for Professional Employees Plan, shall clearly address the following concern:

b) The Government is concerned with the quality and stability of the work force to be employed on this contract. Professional compensation that is unrealistically low or not in reasonable relationship to the various job categories, since it may impair the Contractor’s ability to attract and retain competent professional service employees, may be viewed as evidence of failure to comprehend the complexity of the IDIQ contract requirements and/or future task order requirements under this contract.

c) Professional compensation that is unrealistically low or not in relationship to the various job categories may impair the Contractor’s ability to attract and retain competent professional service employees may be viewed as evidence of failure to comprehend the complexity of future requirements under this contract.

SUBCONTRACTOR COMPENSATION PLAN SUBMISSIONS: Each proposed subcontractor shall submit to the prime offeror a separate Total Compensation Plan meeting the requirements of 52.222-46. If there are concerns sharing the plan with the prime offeror, the subcontractor may submit their plan in a sealed package to the prime offeror, which will only be opened by the Government. The prime offeror shall submit its complete Price Matrix as well as all proposed subcontractor Total Compensation Plans as part of its proposal submission. The Government will not accept direct submission from any subcontractor.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

EVALUATION FACTORS

M1.0 Basis for Award

a) Within the best value continuum, FAR 15.101 defines best value as using any one or a combination of source selection approaches. The source selection process under this Solicitation will not be based on the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) or Tradeoff process. The best value basis for awards will be determined by the Highest Rated Technical Offer with a Fair, Realistic, and Reasonable Price (HRTO-FRR). Factor 1 is significantly more important than Factor 2 - Price.

b) The HRTO-FRR approach will best achieve the objective of awarding a contract to the Offeror of varying core expertise in a variety of professional services disciplines with qualities that are most important to USSOCOM and our customers.

c) The Government intends to award without discussions. Initial proposals must contain the best and final offer. The Government may conduct clarifications as described in FAR 15.306. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined necessary.

d) The Government intends to strictly enforce all the proposal submission requirements outlined in Section

L. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in an Offeror’s proposal being non-compliant to the Solicitation and rejected.

e) (FACTOR 1) CAUTION: In the event the evaluation team discovers an inaccurate Self-Score with numerous point deductions based on ambiguous, deceptive, faulty, misleading, or inadequate supporting documentation, the Offeror shall immediately be eliminated from further consideration for award.

M2.0 General Evaluation Processes

1) FIRST STEP: First, an acceptability (solicitation conformance) review will take place, as specified in Section M4.0. Any proposal that includes incomplete information or does not comply with the instructions set forth in this RFP and minimum submission requirements will be removed from consideration for award without further evaluation.

2) Any discrepancies (defined as: difference between conflicting facts or claims or opinions) will be treated as clarifications. that support documentation (i.e., work samples, cross reference matrix, self-scoring worksheet, price template, etc.) exists for all the evaluation criteria and that the documents are completed in accordance with the directions specified in this solicitation.

3) Next, the Government will rank the proposals in numeric order based on the Offeror’s submitted self-score provided on the Self Score Card.

4) Once ranked in numeric order, the highest ranked (self-scored) Offer will be identified. That Offeror’s Transition Plan will be reviewed in accordance with M4.1 Volume I(c) – Transition Plan and determined acceptable or unacceptable.

5) If the Offeror’s Transition Plan is determined acceptable, the Government will begin the process to substantiate and/or validate the Offeror’s Self-Scoring worksheet. However, If the Transition Plan is determined unacceptable, that Offer will be eliminated, and the Government will repeat the above steps for the next highest (self-scored) offer, beginning with “STEP ONE” above.

6) Once the Transition Plan has been determined as acceptable, the Government will begin the process to validate/substantiate the Offeror’s Self-Score by assessing the Offeror’s proposal submission in comparison to the self scores stated in the Offeror’s Self Scoring worksheet. If the data on the Offeror’s Self-Scoring worksheet is not substantiated and/or validated by the Government and the self-score of another Offeror’s proposal displaces the previous highest self-scored proposal, then the next-highest self-scored proposal will start the process, beginning with “STEP ONE” above. If applicable, the Government will use the process defined in paragraph 2 for Government identification of identified Discrepancies

7) After completion of the steps above, the Government will assign an independent Government preliminary score in accordance with the evaluation methodology set forth in this section.

8) An Offer who fails any of the requirements for acceptability, including those for the Transition Plan will be removed from consideration for award and notified, in writing, as soon as practicable.

9) The next highest rated Offeror (based upon Self Scoring Worksheet) who passes the acceptability and responsibility review, shall be evaluated in the eliminated Offeror’s place.

10) In the event any scored evaluation credit claimed by the Offeror is not substantiated and not given credit for by the evaluation team, the Offeror will have the point value of the refuted score deducted and the Offer will be re-sorted numerically based upon the Government’s assessment and revised score. If the Offeror does not remain the highest scored offer, the next highest rated Offeror (based on self-score) will start the process, beginning with “STEP ONE” above.

11) This cycle will continue until the evaluation team has verified and validated the highest offer’s self-score (Solicitation Attachment 02_Self Scoring Worksheet Template).

12) Once a highest scored offer has been verified and validated (in accordance with the above process), the Government will then begin price evaluation (Factor 2) to determine if the proposed price is fair and reasonable, and realistic (total compensation plan (TCP)) in accordance with Section M6.0.

13) In the event this offer’s proposed price is determined not to be Fair and Reasonable or the TCP is determined unrealistic, then the Offer will be eliminated from further consideration for award (unless discussions are determined necessary) and the next highest rated proposal identified will start the process, beginning with “STEP ONE” above.

14) This cycle will continue until the Government has verified and validated Factor one and determined that Offeror’s proposed price to be Fair and Reasonable and Realistic.

15) The Government will then complete the Contractor Responsibility Determination (CRD) requirements IAW FAR Part 9. If determined to be responsible, that Offeror’s proposal will represent the HRTO-FRP -- Highest Rated Technical Offer with a Fair and

Reasonable; and Realistic (TCP) Price, as providing the Best Value to the Government in accordance with this solicitation.

M3.0 Ties and Tiebreakers In the event of a tie for highest score based upon the Offerors’ initial self-scores, the following tiebreaker will be used, in the following order. The Offeror with the highest score in the first tiebreaker will be considered the highest scoring Offeror and the Government will validate the Offeror’s self-score. If the tied Offerors scored the same for the first tie-breaker criteria then they will move to the second tiebreaker, and so on.

1. First tiebreaker: Category 4

2. Second tiebreaker: Category 6

3. Third tiebreaker: Category 5

4. Final tiebreaker: Drawing lots

M4.0 VOLUME I – Executive Summary/Contract Documentation/Responsibility Determination

a) The acceptability review consists of submitting all the documents according to instructions (within this solicitation) and meeting all the minimum requirements set forth in Section L. Offerors who fail any of the minimum requirements in the acceptability review will be removed from consideration for award and notified, in writing, as soon as practicable.

b) Offerors that initially pass all the minimum requirements in the acceptability review will be further evaluated in accordance with Section M., below.

c) M2, Step 15. Responsibility. The overall responsibility determination will be evaluated in accordance with FAR Part 9. Offerors that are not deemed responsible will not be considered for award.

M4.1 Volume I(c) – Transition Plan The Government will evaluate the adequacy of the offerors proposed Transition plan including elements addressing transition of the contract and each awardable task order to determine the Offeror’s capability to meet key milestones and reach FOC. A plan will be determined acceptable or unacceptable based on the following criteria and specific requirements (i.e., personnel qualifications) stated in the contract PWS and in the SOW of each awardable task order. Plans meeting the PWS/SOW requirements and addressing the following will be considered acceptable: (1) meeting with government stakeholders within three business days from the start of the transition period; (2) methods and resources to communicate with and provide offer letters to incumbent employees targeted for transition within 15 calendar days of start of transition period; (3) additional/new hires identified with offers issued NLT 20 calendar days from the start of transition period; (4) CAC issuance and clearance transfer process initiated NLT 25 calendar days from the start of the transition period; (5) Contractor employees ready to begin performance NLT 30 days from the start of the transition period.

M5.0 VOLUME II – FACTOR 1: Technical Proposal and Substantiating Data M5.1 General.

The Government will validate each self-score criteria up to the maximum score possible for each criterion. Each criterion is normalized to a 100-point baseline, to account for differences in units of measure and maximum relevant/possible counts, as indicated in Columns D and F in Attachment 02. A weighting factor is then applied, as shown in Column G, Weight Factor. A separate tab is provided as part of Attachment 02 that explains the purpose of each column, and the progressive logic that ultimately results in a total “self-score.”

M5.2 Evaluation of Work Samples While the maximum number of work samples that can be submitted is five (5), it is acceptable to submit fewer, but not less than three (3) should the Offeror determine submitting less than five (5) is beneficial to their self-score to do

so. This is solely at the discretion of the Offeror. However, the minimum number of work samples that can be submitted is three (3). Regardless of the number of work samples submitted (three, four, or five), at MINIMUM of two (2) must be work samples performed by the Offeror. These are Category 1 samples described in Section M5.2 below. Further, and also regardless of the number of work samples provided (three, four, or five) a MAXIMUM of two (2) can be work samples performed by a Team Member. These are Category 2 samples described in Section M5.2 below. To clarify, these two can be work samples performed by the same teammate or can be work samples performed by two different teammates. But, this does NOT mean that it is acceptable to provide two work samples from one teammate and additionally two work samples from another/different teammate.

All work samples must meet the minimum qualifications. The individual categories in paragraph 3.1 may add additional restrictions in addition to these minimums:

1. Must be a federal contract or task order.

2. Must fall into one of the following categories:

a. Category 1: Work samples performed by the Offeror. Category 1A: Work samples performed with the Offeror acting as the prime contractor.

i Category 1B: Work samples performed with the Offeror acting as a subcontractor. The Offeror must provide substantiating evidence that personnel employed by the Offeror actually performed the relevant portion(s) of the work for these samples to count.

ii If the Offeror on this solicitation is a Joint Venture formed under The All Small Mentor-Protégé Program or the SBA 8(a) Mentor Protégé Program, work samples from either the managing or non-managing venturer are acceptable.

b. Category 2: Work samples performed by a Team Member. A maximum of two (2) Category 2 work samples may be used per Offeror.

i Category 2A: Work samples performed with the Team Member acting as the prime contractor. For the work sample to qualify, the Team Member must be considered a Major Subcontractor who will perform at least 10.00% of the work-share on this effort.

Signed teaming agreements between the Prime Offeror and each respective Team Member must be provided if Category 2 work samples are to be used. Signed teaming agreements shall be placed in Volume 1(b).

ii Category 2B: Work samples performed with the Team Member acting as a subcontractor. For the work sample to qualify, the Team Member must be considered a Major Subcontractor who will perform at least 10.00% of the work-share on this effort.

Teaming agreements between the Prime Offeror and each respective Team Member must be provided if Category 2 work samples are to be used. Teaming agreements shall be placed in Volume 1(b). The Offeror must provide substantiating evidence that personnel employed by the Team Member actually performed the relevant portion(s) of the work for these samples to count.

3. Period of Performance must be at least 6 months and no more than five years prior to the issuance date of this solicitation.

4. Must have received a Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) rating of “satisfactory” or above in all CPAR rating categories on the most recent finalized assessment.

a. In the event a CPAR has not been finalized for a given work sample, the Government will attempt to contact at least one of the Government Points of contact (POCs) provided with the work sample to establish an assessment of contractor performance.

b. In the event the work sample was assessed using a performance assessment system other than CPARS, the contractor must provide the most recent rating.

c. The rating must be commensurate to the CPARS rating of “satisfactory” or above.

d. In the event the offeror submits a work sample where the offeror was a subcontractor, the CPARS rating for the prime contractor of the work sample must be satisfactory or above.

Unless specifically stated within a criteria’s restriction, each work sample category may be used for the rating criteria and all work samples may be combined towards the Offeror’s total self-score within the criteria. To be included in a position count, the work sample must reflect filled positions. A position may only count against one labor category criteria within the HRTO Objective Criteria Categories 4 and 5. For example, a position calling for a Special Operations Management Analyst may perform duties including, but not limited to: Operational Research, System Analysis, Budget Management, and Program Management. However, the primary purpose of this position must be determined and declared and counted as a single position against only one of the two evaluation categories

– not both.

IMPORTANT: The Govt Tech Team will only adjust the Offeror’s self-score downward, not upward.

M5.2.1 Category 1: Total positions on a single work sample DEFINITION: Of the work samples submitted, the Offeror shall rate itself based on the total number of filled positions (i.e., excluding vacancies) at any moment in time against the requirements of a single selected work sample, with a maximum number of 100 filled positions. All labor categories in the work sample may be included and can include subcontractors performing in support of the work sample.

RESTRICTIONS: This category is restricted to a single work sample chosen from among the five submitted and must be PRIMED by the OFFEROR (to include either of the partners of a Joint Venture). Work samples wherein the offeror was a subcontractor or work samples of teaming subcontractors are not acceptable.

RELEVANCY: The USG has determined this qualification to be important as it directly demonstrates the offeror’s basic capacity to perform a contract of this magnitude in terms of total number of filled positions.

M5.2.2 Category 2: Geographic locations DEFINITION: The Offeror shall rate itself based on the number of submitted work samples where performance occurred in at least three separate geographic locations on each work sample, not including TDY assignments.

Performance at the three separate geographic locations must have occurred concurrently. Geographic locations must be separated by at least 100 miles.

RESTRICTIONS: None.

RELEVANCY: The USG has determined this qualification to be important as it directly relates to the Offeror’s ability to understand the nuances of multiple and distinct geographical labor markets as well as manage a distributed workforce.

M5.2.3 Category 3: Positions transitioned within 30 days DEFINITION: Of the work samples submitted, the Offeror shall rate itself based on the number of positions, across all samples, staffed with properly qualified and experienced personnel, within 30 days of PoP start.

RESTRICTIONS: None.

RELEVANCY: The USG has determined this qualification to be important as it directly relates to mitigating transition risk. These realities support the relevance of an offeror’s combined abilities to attract/retain incumbent contractors and recruit/hire/integrate new (non-incumbent) employees with proper qualifications.

M5.2.4 Category 4: Positions for business or financial management support DEFINITION: Of the work samples submitted, the Offeror shall rate itself based on the number of positions across all samples whose primary purpose is providing business and financial management support. In order for a position from one of the five provided work samples to count against this category score, that position must contractually require the following minimum qualifications/certifications/experience: Bachelor’s Degree (or higher) in Business Management, Business Administration, Finance, Accounting, Logistics Management, Operational Research, or a related field (The Government reserves the right to determine any related field degree as adequate); five years of experience with DoD or other Federal Agency in a Financial or Acquisition Management role; two years of experience in major headquarters (2-star equivalent or higher) preparing and delivering products to GO/FO/SES leadership.

RESTRICTIONS: None.

RELEVANCY: The USG has determined this qualification to be important as it directly relates to previous performance on DoD contracts/TOs, the company’s reach into and familiarity with applicable labor pools, and the ability of company leadership to understand unique DoD missions, statutes, and regulatory environment.

M5.2.5 Category 5: Positions for SOF Strategic Planner/Operations Analyst DEFINITION: Of the work samples submitted, the Offeror shall rate itself based on the number of positions across all samples whose primary purpose is providing SOF Strategic Planning and/or Operational Analysis support. In order for a position from one of the five provided work samples to count against this category score, that position must contractually require the following minimum qualifications/certifications/experience: Any Bachelor’s Degree;

Graduate of a senior service…