H9821022R0001 Amendment 0002_Final.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 change the Point of Contact for proposal submissions. See highlighted section in Summary of Changes below . This amendment also clarif ies a couple of items. Sample Task Orders 1 and 2 are samples only and are for evaluation purposes only. They are separate from the First Task Order w hich w ill be evaluated and aw arded after the aw ard of the IDIQ contract. Additionally, PWS sections 4.16, 4.17, and 4.19 have not been removed from the PWS, they are only removed from the technical evaluation and instructions. The proposal due date and time remain the same.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

Y 1 11

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 03-Oct-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 H9821022R0001

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

11-Aug-2022

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 1 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

03-Oct-2022

CODE

DEFENSE HUMAN RESOURCES ACTIVITY

4800 MARK CENTER DRIVE,

SUITE 03E25

ALEXANDRIA VA 22350-4000

H98210 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

H9821022R0001

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been modified:

ADDENDA TO 52.212-1 AND 52.212

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

The following paragraphs are deleted/removed from FAR 52.212-1:

(d) Product samples, is hereby deleted

(e) Multiple Offers, is hereby deleted

(h) Multiple awards, is hereby deleted

The following paragraph is modified in its entirety:

(b) Submission of Offers. Submit signed and dated proposals via email to the Contract Specialist, Constance Reedus, at constance.r.reedus.civ@mail.mil, and the Contracting Officer, Melissa Tamayo, at melissa.s.tamayo.civ@mail.mil. The size limit per email is 22MB. Multiple emails may be submitted. Proposals shall utilize Times New Roman no smaller than 11pt font with no less than one inch margins. PDF or MS Word is acceptable except for pricing proposals which shall be submitted unprotected in Excel. Questions are due no later than 25 August 2022, at 10:00 Eastern Time.

Proposals may be submitted on the SF 1449 or letterhead stationery. Submit proposals in three volumes as follows:

(i) Volume 1: BUSINESS AND PRICE (FACTOR 3). At a minimum, include:

(1) The solicitation number;

(2) The time specified in the solicitation for receipt of offers;

(3) The name, address, and telephone number of the offeror;

(4) Terms of any express warranty;

(5) Price and any discount terms;

(6) “Remit to” address, if different than mailing address;

(7) A completed copy of the representations and certifications at FAR 52.212-3 (see FAR 52.212-3(b) for those representations and certifications that the offeror shall complete electronically);

(8) Acknowledgment of Solicitation Amendments;

(9) If the offer is not submitted on the SF 1449, include a statement specifying the extent of agreement with all terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation. Offers that fail to furnish required representations or information, or reject the terms and conditions of the solicitation may be excluded from consideration.

(10) Completed Pricing Spreadsheet (Attachment 4)

(11) Completed Pricing for the First Task Order

(12) OCI Mitigation Plan for Offerors that have a contract(s) with any of the Military Services in accordance with

FAR 9.5

(13) Details on compensation for professional employees in accordance with FAR 52.222-46

(ii) Volume 2: TECHNICAL (FACTOR 1) - At a minimum, include:

mailto:constance.r.reedus.civ@mail.mil

Subfactor 1: Technical Approach and Methodology (limited to 40 pages). The offeror must describe its proposed technical approach and methodology to demonstrate understanding of, and ability for the requirements of Sections

4.1 – 4.9 and 4.11 – 4.13 of the PWS.

Subfactor 2: RMF (limited to 2 pages). The offeror must describe its experience with, and understanding of, operating a Government- owned and Contractor-operated system or enclave hosted in the cloud in accordance with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Risk Management Framework (RMF) Security and

Privacy Controls for Federal Information Systems and Organizations, NISP SP 800-53 Rev. 4., and (NIST) SP 800-

37: Guide for Applying the Risk Management Framework to Federal Information Systems, as well as Assessment and Accreditation (A&A) procedures defined in NIST SP 800-115: Technical Guide to Information Security Testing and Assessment. In addition, the offeror must describe its proposed personnel, their qualifications, training and professional certifications, (e.g. Security+, etc.) for Information Assurance positions and functions consistent with

Change 4 to DoD Directive 8570.01 and supporting issuances. At a minimum, the offeror must list those personnel holding Security+ certification.

Subfactor 3: Staffing Plan (limited to 8 pages). The offeror will provide its staffing plan via a crosswalk between the labor categories and the PWS requirements mentioned in Subfactor 1. The staffing plan shall provide specific details of personnel that demonstrate they have the following experience outlined below:

Professional account management expertise and experience.

Expert knowledge of and experience in leading and managing a diverse and complex marketing communications program.

Expert knowledge and experience in the area of military recruiting, such as in-depth knowledge of the DoD’s major market segments (parents, educators, recruiters, and youth).

Expert knowledge and familiarity with all aspects of marketing communications, including traditional and emerging media, direct marketing, interactive (digital) marketing, magazine publication design and development, production and printing, social media/social influence, and public relations.

Expert knowledge and familiarity with media planning and media buying across all forms of media to include

National Broadcast TV, nontraditional TV media and digital media.

Expert knowledge of and expertise in the development, management, and security of interactive (digital) websites including user testing, and implementing site updates based on testing results and recommendations.

Expert knowledge, thorough understanding and mastery of DoD/CIO digital policy.

Expertise in list purchasing, secure cloud database management, and the Risk Management Framework (RMF) certification and accreditation process.

Expertise in coordinating, executing, managing, and maintaining talent contracts, e.g. Screen Actors Guild –

American Federation of Television and Radio Artist (SAG-AFTRA) or other labor union requirements, talent residuals, digital, artwork, music rights, and other information pertaining to the usage or distribution of broadcast or internet products.

Expert knowledge and expertise in end user licensing agreements for usage of commercial type fonts, font libraries, and imagery/videography across developed marketing products.

Expert knowledge and expertise in advertising industry measures of effectiveness in media planning, purchasing, placement, and evaluation.

Expert knowledge and expertise in brand strategy research, special studies, analysis, and reporting, and developing customized brand/media research.

Expert knowledge and expertise in coordinating and executing marketing communications training through conferences and seminars, and media training.

Subfactor 4: The offeror must provide a proposed technical approach for Section 4.0 of the PWS’, limited to 10 pages per Sample for Sample Tasks 1 and 2, Additionally, submit a price proposal for Sample Task 2, in the contractor’s format, for evaluation of understanding of the requirement, the price proposal shall break down the labor and ODEs that make up the total proposed price.

1. Sample Task 1 – JAMRS Direct Marketing Program (Attachment 1)

2. Sample Task 2 – JAMRS Public Relations (Attachment 2)

Subfactor 5: Case Studies. The offeror will provide information on its experience from within the past five years demonstrating successful accomplishment of at least one example, each example limited to four pages, for EACH of the following:

1. Demonstrate experience developing a national umbrella brand positioning campaign and to execute that positioning and campaign across multiple integrated marketing disciplines. Discuss how select brands were positioned under umbrella brands.

2. Demonstrate experience developing and distributing a national magazine publication that is a minimum of 20 pages in length.

3. Demonstrate experience developing advertising targeted to parents and other influencers of young adults regarding the decisions young adults make.

4. Demonstrate experience executing a multi-million-dollar media plan with over half of the spend devoted to National TV advertisement placement that includes broadcast (i.e., non-Cable) TV. Half of the spend must be devoted to Linear National TV advertisement, some of which must have been spent on broadcast TV. The other half of the spend can include streaming video and/or Over The Top advertising media.

Subfactor 6: First Task Order (limited to 10 pages). The Government will evaluate the offeror’s technical approach to Section 4.0 for completeness and the price proposal for understanding of the labor mix and ODEs needed to perform the effort. The offeror must submit a written technical and a separate price proposal (Attachment 5) in response to the Performance Work Statement (PWS) for the First Task Order. (Attachment 6)

Subfactor 7: Error-free Documents. Proposal will be free of typographical and grammatical errors to demonstrate the offeror’s understanding of the importance of, and ability to, provide error-free documents that reflect well on a communication services provider’s creative and outreach materials.

Subfactor 8: Small Business Subcontracting. Offerors must submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan. The Small

Business Subcontracting Plan shall adhere to the format outlined in FAR 52.219-9. The Government will review and evaluate the subcontracting plan proposed to ensure that it reflects robust goals and efforts. Small business utilization is vital and expected, and offerors should strive to provide maximum practicable opportunities (the DoD subcontracting goal is 32.2%). The plan should include detailed explanation of the complexity of the work small businesses will perform, the nature of current and future plans your company has for developing subcontracting opportunities for small business concerns during the contract performance, plans that target opportunities to vendors in small business sub-categories in all tiers (small and disadvantaged, HUBZone, Woman-Owned, Service Disabled

Veteran-Owned).

(iii) Volume 3: FACTOR 2 - Past Performance (limited to 4 pages per past performance reference 20 pages total).

At a minimum, include:

At least two, but no more than five, relevant and recent past performance references. All references must address current projects or those completed within the last three years. Past performance of the offeror, its subcontractors and its Key Personnel will be considered, however at least one reference must be from the offeror performing as a

Prime contractor. Multiple task orders on a single contract will NOT be considered as multiple past performance references rather they will be considered one past performance reference. Past performance references can include commercial or Government work. At least one commercial reference is highly encouraged. The Past Performance reference information shall include the following:

Name, email, and telephone numbers for points of contact

Project Name

Date of Contract

Type of Contract

Dollar Value of Contract

Period of Performance

Description of services/supplies provided

Description of the relevance to the current requirement being solicited

Copies of eSRS reporting (when a Small Business Subcontracting Plan was required by the contract) to demonstrate past commitment and success with small business participation

For Commercial references or if performance was as a subcontractor, written authorization for the references to speak with the Government about the offeror’s past performance must be included in the proposal.

Offerors are advised that the Government may use all data provided by the Offeror in this proposal and data obtained from other sources, including, but not limited to, other DHRA contracts and information from Government repositories (e.g., CPARS, PPIRS, etc.) as part of the past performance evaluation. Past Performance information on contracts not listed by the offeror, or that of planned subcontractors, may also be evaluated. The Government may contact references provided by the offeror, as well as any other source the Government identifies. Information received may be used in the evaluation of the Offeror’s Past Performance. While the Government may elect to consider data obtained from other sources, the burden of providing current, accurate, and complete Past Performance information rests with the offeror.

The offeror must indicate if it has no past performance. In this case, the offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and will be assigned a rating of Neutral Confidence.

Past Performance Questionnaire: The offeror must send a Past/Present Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

(Attachment 3) to its references. It is the responsibility of the offeror to ensure questionnaires are submitted and received by the proposal submission due date. Offerors will not receive copies of the questionnaires, they are submitted directly to the Contracting Office, as outlined on the PPQ.

(c) Period of acceptance of offers. The offeror agrees to hold the prices in its offer firm for 120 days from the date specified for receipt of offers.

The following paragraphs are added:

(m) Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the PWS with a statement of intent to perform does not reflect understanding of the requirement or capability to perform. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposal for typographical and grammatical errors to determine the offeror’s understanding of the importance and ability to provide error-free documents that reflect well on a communication services provider’s creative and outreach materials.

(END OF INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS)

52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES (NOV 2021)

(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

SEE ADDENDUM TO THIS PROVISION

(b) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(c) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer's specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

(End of provision)

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-2

FAR 52.212-2 is changed to read:

Basis of Award

(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors, in descending order of importance, shall be used to evaluate offers:

1. Technical

2. Past Performance

3. Price

Technical and Past Performance, when combined, are significantly more important than Price.

(b) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(c) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer’s specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

(d) The Government intends to evaluate proposals and make award without discussions. However, the Government reserves the right to hold discussions, at the sole discretion of the Source Selection Authority (SSA). The

Government will evaluate all proposals in accordance with FAR 15.305(a), and, if discussions are to be conducted, establish the competitive range comprised of all the most highly rated proposals, unless the range is further reduced for purposes of efficiency

(e) The Contracting Officer will review any OCI Mitigation Plans prior to technical evaluation to ensure acceptability. Any unacceptable plan will not be considered for further evaluation.

2.0. TECHNICAL EVALUATION (FACTOR 1).

2.1. The purpose of the technical factor is to assess the offeror’s proposed approach, as detailed in its proposal, to satisfy the Government’s requirements. There are many aspects which may affect an offeror’s ability to meet the solicitation requirements to include technical approach, risk, management approach, personnel qualifications, facilities, small business subcontracting and others. The evaluation of risk is related to the technical assessment.

2.2. Risk assesses the degree to which the offeror’s proposed technical approach for the requirements of the solicitation may cause disruption of schedule, increased costs, degradation of performance, the need for increased

Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. Risk will be assessed as part of the technical factor rating.

2.3. Any proposal receiving a rating of “Unacceptable” is deemed to have a risk that is so high that award cannot be made against the proposal and the proposal will not be further evaluated.

2.4. A color and adjectival rating will be assigned, in accordance with DoD Source Selection Procedures paragraph

3.1.2.2, Table 1, to evaluate the offeror’s proposed approach and the degree to which it demonstrates an understanding of the requirements through an assessment of the proposal, including its strengths, deficiencies, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and risk. Technical will be rated at the Factor Level, subfactors will be separately evaluated but will not be separately rated.

2.4.1. Subfactor 1: Technical Approach and Methodology. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed technical approach and methodology for completeness, and to determine the offeror’s understanding of, and ability to successfully accomplish, the requirements of the PWS.

2.4.2. Subfactor 2: RMF. The Government will evaluate the offeror's experience with, and understanding of, operating a Government-owned and Contractor-operated information system or enclave in accordance with the

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Risk Management Framework (RMF) Security and Privacy

Controls for Federal Information Systems and Organizations, NISP SP 800-53 Rev. 4., and (NIST) SP 800-37:

Guide for Applying the Risk Management Framework to Federal Information Systems, as well as Assessment and

Accreditation (A&A) procedures defined in NIST SP 800-115: Technical Guide to Information Security Testing and

Color

Rating

Adjectival

Rating

Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.

Assessment. In addition, the Government will evaluate the proposed personnel, their qualifications, training and professional certifications, (e.g. Security+, etc.). for Information Assurance positions and functions consistent with

Change 4 to DoD Directive 8570.01 and supporting issuances.

2.4.3. Subfactor 3: Staffing Plan. The Government will evaluate how the offeror’s staffing plan supports its technical approach by reviewing the crosswalk between the labor categories and the PWS requirements mentioned in

Subfactor 1. The Government may evaluate the extent to which the offeror’s proposed staffing demonstrates they have the following experience outlined below:

Professional account management expertise and experience.

Expert knowledge of and experience in leading and managing a diverse and complex marketing communications program.

Expert knowledge and experience in the area of military recruiting, such as in-depth knowledge of the DoD’s major market segments (parents, educators, recruiters, and youth).

Expert knowledge and familiarity with all aspects of marketing communications, including traditional and emerging media, direct marketing, interactive (digital) marketing, magazine publication design and development, production and printing, social media/social influence, and public relations.

Expert knowledge and familiarity with media planning and media buying across all forms of media to include

National Broadcast TV, nontraditional TV media and digital media.

Expert knowledge of and expertise in the development, management, and security of interactive (digital) websites including user testing, and implementing site updates based on testing results and recommendations.

Expert knowledge, thorough understanding and mastery of DoD/CIO digital policy.

Expertise in list purchasing, secure cloud database management, and the Risk Management Framework (RMF) certification and accreditation process.

Expertise in coordinating, executing, managing, and maintaining talent contracts, e.g. Screen Actors Guild –

American Federation of Television and Radio Artist (SAG-AFTRA) or other labor union requirements, talent residuals, digital, artwork, music rights, and other information pertaining to the usage or distribution of broadcast or internet products.

Expert knowledge and expertise in end user licensing agreements for usage of commercial type fonts, font libraries, and imagery/videography across developed marketing products.

Expert knowledge and expertise in advertising industry measures of effectiveness in media planning, purchasing, placement, and evaluation.

Expert knowledge and expertise in brand strategy research, special studies, analysis, and reporting, and developing customized brand/media research.

Expert knowledge and expertise in coordinating and executing marketing communications training through conferences and seminars, and media training.

2.4.4. Subfactor 4: Sample Task Orders. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s Sample Task proposal technical approach for completeness, and to determine the offeror’s understanding of, and ability to successfully accomplish, the requirements of the Sample Task PWSs. The Government will also evaluate the offeror’s Sample Task price proposals for price reasonableness.

2.4.4.1. Sample Task 1 – JAMRS Direct Marketing Program

2.4.4.2 Sample Task 2 – JAMRS Public Relations

2.4.5. Subfactor 5: Case Studies. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s approach for successful accomplishment of at least one example from within the past five years for EACH of the following:

2.4.5.1 Demonstrate experience developing a national umbrella brand positioning campaign and to execute that positioning and campaign across multiple integrated marketing disciplines.

2.4.5.2 Demonstrate how select brands were positioned under the umbrella brands.

2.4.5.3 Demonstrate experience developing and distributing a national publication (magazine that is a minimum of

20 pages)

2.4.5.4 Demonstrate experience developing multi-channel advertising targeted to parents and other influencers of young adults regarding the decisions young adults make.

2.4.5.5 Demonstrate experience executing a multi-million-dollar media plan with over half of the spend devoted to

National TV advertisement placement that includes broadcast TV.

2.4.6. Subfactor 6: First Task Order. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s technical approach for completeness and understanding of the labor mix and ODEs needed to perform the work.

2.4.7. Subfactor 7: Error-free Documents. The Government will evaluate the offeror's technical proposal for typographical and grammatical errors to determine the offeror's understanding of the importance and ability to provide error-free documents that reflect well on a communication services provider's creative and outreach materials.

2.4.8. Subfactor 8: Subcontracting Plan. The Government will review and evaluate the offeror’s proposal for subcontracting to ensure that it reflects robust goals and efforts. Small business utilization is vital and expected, and the offeror should strive to provide maximum practicable opportunities (the DoD subcontracting goal is 32.2%).

The Small Business Subcontracting Plan shall adhere to the format outlined in FAR 52.219-9.

3.0. PAST PERFORMANCE (FACTOR 2). The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s past performance information to assess the relevance and quality of past performance in order to assess the probability of the offeror successfully meeting the total requirements as described in the RFP and its attachments. The Government will evaluate past performance that is recent and relevant to the acquisition requirements. Past Performance references that are not determined to be recent (performance occurred within the last three (3) years of the published date of this solicitation) will not be evaluated. Past performance is an indicator of future performance. The assessment will include performance history of the entire contractor team and will focus on the overall quality of the product/service, adherence to required schedules, conduct of business relations, effectiveness of financial and resource management, and any other additional information pertaining to the performance history.

3.1. Potential sources of performance data are Government sources such as the Past Performance Information

Retrieval System (PPIRS), SAM.gov, Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), questionnaires, and/or non-Government sources, such as commercial past performance references submitted by an offeror.

3.2. References will first be evaluated for recency. Recency refers to the state or quality of being current. Recent is defined as performance that has occurred within 3 years from the date of RFP. Past performance that is not determined recent, will not be considered.

3.3. Recent references will be evaluated to determine relevancy. Relevance is defined in the following table:

PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY RATINGS

Rating Definition

Very Relevant Present/Past performance effort for advertising services for a Commercial or

Federal entity, demonstrates experience in 12 or more of the major requirements of the PWS Section 4.0 (4.1 through 4.14), is greater than $10M per year.

Relevant Present/past performance effort for advertising services for a Commercial or

Federal entity, demonstrates experience in 10 or more of the major requirements of the PWS Section 4.0 (4.1 through 4.14), is between $5-10M per year.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort for advertising services for a Commercial or

Federal entity, demonstrates experience in 8 or more of the major requirements of the PWS Section 4.0 (4.1 through 4.14), is at any dollar value.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort for advertising services for a Commercial or

Federal entity, demonstrates experience in less than 8 of the major requirements of the PWS Section 4.0 (4.1 through 4.14).

3.4. Recent and Relevant past performance will be evaluated and assigned a Confidence Assessment Rating. The

Past Performance Evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements, based on past performance information of the prime contractor and proposed subcontractors. The

Performance Confidence Assessment rating is assessed as an overall factor after evaluating aspects of the offeror’s recent past performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the technical factors and cost or price. One of the following ratings will be assigned at the Past Performance Factor level.

PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS RATINGS

Rating Description

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

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

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

The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

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

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

3.5 Price Evaluation. (FACTOR 3) Price factor will not be assigned an adjectival rating however they will be reviewed to determine whether they are fair and reasonable. The total evaluated price will be taken from Attachment 4, row 9. Note that the award will be made with a ceiling price that is higher than the total evaluated price, as stated in

Attachment 4, row 10.

(END OF ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2)

(End of Summary of Changes)