Section_L_-_Instruction_to_Offerors_v2.0.docx

UNCLASSIFIED

INSTRUCTION TO OFFERORS

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212.-1 INSTRUCTION TO OFFERORS - - COMPETITIVE ACQUISITION

Addendum to Paragraph (b) FAR 52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors – Commercial Submission of offers. In addition to those requirements as stated in paragraph (b), the following are added and shall apply to the submission requirements in response to this solicitation:

1.0 GENERAL

1.1. This acquisition is a small business set aside. It is the Government’s intent to issue a Time & Material contract to the successful offeror. The Government will conduct a competitive acquisition using FAR Part 12 procedures. The contract is for (1) one-year base period and (4) one-year option periods. This document provides instructions for submitting information and proposals for consideration by the government in establishing a single-award contract. Information should be complete and accurate to enable the government to fully assess an Offeror’s ability to provide the required services and whether it represents a best value to the government. The Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussions.

1.2. This Request For Proposal (RFP) does not commit the government to pay any cost for preparation and submission of proposals. In addition, a government contracting officer is the only individual who can legally commit the government to the expenditure of public funds in connection with this proposed acquisition.

1.3. This section is provided to assist the Offeror in preparing a proposal in response to this solicitation. These instructions are not intended to restrict the Offerors’ proposal effort.

1.4. Offeror’s are reminded to thoroughly read the solicitation. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to the identified evaluation criteria factors. Failure to comply may result in the Offeror being eliminated from the competition.

1.5. The proposal shall include all data and information requested within this section in accordance with these instructions. The offer shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in this Request for Proposal (RFP). Non-conformance with the instructions provided in this section may result in offeror’s proposal being determined unacceptable.

1.6. The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal shall not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet these requirements.

1.7. Failure to adhere to any of the labeling, classification marking, packaging, or other general proposal instructions may cause the Government to reject the Offeror's proposal in its entirety.

1.8. GOVERNMENT FACILITIES SHALL NOT BE USED TO PREPARE PROPOSALS to include document preparation, saving documents on Government servers, or email support between Offerors and Offerors’ employees that may work at a Government site.

1.9. The NAICS code for this acquisition is 541611 (Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services). The size standard is $15.0M.

2.0 USE OF NON-GOVERNMENT EVALUATORS.

a. Offerors are advised that non-government employees will serve as advisors for assisting the government during evaluation of proposals. The government will authorize these persons access only to those portions of the proposal data and limit discussions only for the purpose of providing technical advice on specialized matters or particular issues. They shall be expressly prohibited from scoring, ranking, or recommending the selection of a source.

b. The Government is responsible for proper safeguards to ensure proposal evaluation objectivity. In this regard, the government exclusively retains all source selection decision authority and supporting decision responsibilities. Moreover, all participants in the proposal review process with access to source selection sensitive information are required to execute a government nondisclosure agreement.

c. Government support contractors who may be involved in review of proposals submitted in response to this solicitation are identified as follows:

Annapolis Junction, MD 20701 301-617-3000

d. Offerors who submit proposals in response to this solicitation do so with the express understanding that government support contractors serving as advisors in the proposal review process may have access to the Offerors’ proposal information, as described above. Offerors requiring nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) with any government support contractor are not relieved of solicitation submission time requirements, nor is the Government required to provide additional time to Offerors requiring their own bilateral nondisclosure agreements with any government support contractors.

e. Offerors requiring NDAs with any government support contractor shall:

(i) Inform the contracting officer of the Offerors’ requirement;

(ii) Contact the Government support contractor and negotiate the necessary terms and conditions and obtain the contractor’s written agreement;

(iii) With the proposal submission, provide a signed copy of each executed nondisclosure agreement to the contracting officer; and

(iv) Indicate in the proposal that the support contractor(s) may utilize the Offerors’ proprietary data in evaluating the Offerors’ proposal.

f. The Offeror shall notify its prospective subcontractor(s) who are submitting proprietary information that the above government support contractors may require similar access to this information. Any such subcontractors may execute agreements directly with the above government support contractors or may authorize an Offeror to permit such access on such reasonable terms as the subcontractor may provide. For each such subcontractor agreement executed, Offerors shall provide copies of such agreements within their proposals, and shall indicate in the proposals that the government support contractor(s) may utilize subcontractor proprietary data in evaluating the subcontractor's proposal for this acquisition.

3.0 PROPOSAL FORMAT AND CONTENT.

3.1 Paper, Page Size and Format. Page size shall be 8.5 x 11 inches. Pages shall be single-spaced. Use at least 1 inch margins on the top, bottom and side margins. Headers and Footers are allowed in the margins. Partial pages count as a full page for page limitation purposes. All pages within a page-limited volume shall be consecutively numbered, starting at page one, and not exceeding the page limitations. Front and back side of a single sheet are counted as two (2) pages if both sides are printed upon. Pages exceeding the page limitation set forth will not be read or evaluated and will be removed from the proposal prior to evaluation by the Contracting Officer. Pages shall not contain any graphics or illustrations for other than for the purposes of depicting the technical approach.

3.2 Text Spacing and Type. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the text size shall be no less than Times New Roman, 12 point. Pages shall be numbered consecutively throughout the volume.

3.3 Illustrations and Tables. Illustrations, charts, and graphs other than for the purposes of depicting the technical approach are not required. Tables, charts, graphs, diagrams and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. These displays shall be uncomplicated, legible and shall not exceed 8.5 x 11 inches. Foldout pages shall not be used. For tables, charts, graphs and figures, the text shall be Times New Roman, no smaller than 10 point. Elaborate formats, bindings or color presentations are not required. Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed artwork, or other embellishments are not required and neither are they desired.

Graphics that are embedded into documents should be kept as simple as possible. All graphics must be fully narrated in the text. Graphics should comply with the following guidelines:

1. Limit colors to 256 colors at 1024 x 768 resolution and avoid color gradients.

1. Simplify the color palette used in creating figures.

1. Monitor the size of graphics files; large files are discouraged.

1. Scanned images are not acceptable and will not be reviewed.

1. Text size shall be no less than 10 point. The font shall be Times New Roman or Arial Narrow.

3.4. Table of Contents, Glossary, Compliance Matrix

3.4.1. A table of contents shall be incorporated into each volume and shall include a listing of the section titles, subsection titles, and paragraph titles. A page number for each title shall be indicated. These pages shall not be included in the page count of any volume. Page numbering for this may be separate than the pages within the page-limited portion.

3.4.2. A glossary of acronyms shall be provided in each volume. All acronyms shall be defined at first use. These pages shall not be included in the page count of any volume. Page numbering for this may be separate than the pages within the page-limited portion.

3.4.3. Each volume shall include a compliance matrix as an appendix. Each matrix shall be used only to show compliance and shall not be used to describe or elaborate upon the Offeror’s capabilities, thus it will not be counted toward page limit. Page numbering for this may be separate than the pages within the page-limited portion. The compliance matrix shall consist of the following elements:

Volume I: Technical Capability RFP: HB0001-19-R-0011

3.5. Multimedia. Offerors shall not embed sound or video files into their proposal documents.

3.6. Classification Markings

3.6.1. All material presented for evaluation by the Government, including electronic media, must be appropriately classified and marked in accordance with appropriate security classification guidance. Volumes shall be marked “UNCLASSIFIED” in header & footer markings on each page, as well as the cover and spine, will be sufficient. Markings on the various sections of this RFP do not impose a corresponding level for the volumes in the Offeror’s proposal.

3.6.2. Offerors proposal submission shall not include information higher than “UNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY” classification level.

3.6.3. The Offeror will be financially responsible for damages caused by incorrectly classifying or marking classified information that contaminate a Government network.

3.7. Number of Copies/Page Limits. The offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization Table below.

The titles and contents of the sections shall be as defined in the following table, all of which shall be within the required page limits and with the number of copies specified. The contents of each proposal section are described as noted in the table below.

Page Limit

15 Pages

4.0. PROPOSAL FORMAT:

4.1 Volume I – Technical Capability:

This volume shall be sufficiently specific, detailed, and complete while articulating the offeror’s understanding and knowledge of the complexities inherent in the performance of this requirement. This is volume shall be written such as to enable evaluators to make a thorough evaluation as to the extent to which the services proposed meet or exceed the specific Government requirements.

The technical narrative shall provide an in-depth description of the Offeror’s experience and capability to perform the requirements of the Statement of Work (SOW). Statements that the Offeror understands, can, or will perform the requirements of the SOW without supporting information or narratives are inadequate. Paraphrasing the SOW or parts thereof, is similarly inadequate, as are phrases such as “standard procedures will be employed” or “well-known techniques will be used”.

At a minimum Offerors shall provide:

· Detailed information regarding their understanding and knowledge of this requirement.

· Detailed information on Offeror’s capability to provide the qualified team members and personnel to successfully execute the proposed scope of work outlined within the SOW.

· A Draft Project Management Plan shall be included and formatted as defined in CDRL 002 of this solicitation. This plan will not count against the page count limitations for this volume

· Resumes – Offerors shall submit at a minimum one (1) resume, but no more than two (2) per key personnel for this effort. The resumes shall not count against the page count limitation, however, each resume shall not exceed two (2) pages. Reference Part 3.1 of this Section for formatting instructions.

4.2 Volume III – Past Performance:

Offerors shall submit no more than two (2) contract references to meet this requirement. Past performance references concerning the Prime offeror shall be provided first, followed by proposed teaming partners.

For each contract reference the offeror may provide up to 2 Points of Contact (POC) and send the attached Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) (Attachment 2) to that government entity (or prime contractor) for them to fill out and return to the government Contracting Office. Any subcontractor references will be submitted directly to their prime contractor POC. References shall explicitly state the complete contract number. Offeror’s may be asked to respond to adverse past performance information. Adverse past performance is defined as past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation aspect or any unfavorable comment received from sources without a formal rating system.

In order to be considered, the PPQ’s shall be returned by the evaluator to Robert Sheehan, Contract Specialist at rasheeh@cybercom.mil and proposal_submission@cybercom.mil no later than 12:00 Noon EST on 19 April 2019.

The Offeror must provide a summary table of the past performance efforts included in the volume similar to the table below. The past performance reference must explain in detail the relevancy and recency of each reference to the tasks required in the SOW. When a past performance effort concerns work performed by the Offeror’s proposed subcontractor, the table below (as modified by the Offeror) and the past performance volume must clearly explain how the past performance of the proposed subcontractor relates to the tasks expected to be performed by the proposed subcontractor under this contract. This table will count in the page count.

Contract PoP POC/Contact Information

Offeror shall demonstrate understanding of the requirement by providing past performance information presented showing the offerors ability to meet price/cost, schedule, and performance requirements in providing solutions similar in to those in the size, scope, and complexity required by this acquisition. When conducting the evaluation, the Government may use data included by offerors in their proposal, PPQ responses, as well as past performance information obtained from other sources. The offeror is responsible for ensuring that the data they submit is thorough, accurate, and complete in addressing all solicitation requirements.

In addition, past performance information presented will document the offeror’s ability to meet recency, relevancy, and quality information.

1. Recency. Offerors shall submit recent past performance, performed since September 2016 for a period of at least 12 months.

2. Relevancy. Offerors shall submit past performance that is relevant and similar to this effort in terms of the type of support services, complexity, and dollar value in providing solutions similar to those in the scope, complexity, and size required by this acquisition. To further clarify:

· Offerors may submit Past Performance references less than a contract value of at least $2.0 million. However, Offerors are reminded that pursuant to Section M which states, “Aspects of relevancy evaluation will include the following: similarity to SNOOK support services, complexity, and dollar value”. As such the Agency will evaluate relevancy across all four of these relevancy elements including dollar value. Therefore, Offerors submitting contract references as part of their past performance submission that are less than $2.0 million may result in a lower relevancy score when dollar value is evaluated along with all of the other three past performance elements listed above.

Offerors may submit Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quality (IDIQ) Past Performance references (“D” type contract). However, the reference must only be for the relevant Task Order for which the work was performed and identify the specific dollar value of the Task Order. Each Task Order listed will be considered a separate Past Performance reference. The referenced Task Order dollar value should at lease be $2.0 million to be considered relevant. In addition, for any subcontractor Past Performance references, the dollar value must reflect the value of the subcontract, not the prime contract dollar amount.

· Past Performance references should state how services were accomplished to support missions similar to this effort. Past Performance references that only state an offeror supported a location/agency that provided Services similar to the this requirement without describing how that support was accomplished and how such support related to the SNOOK SOW will make it more difficult for the Government to evaluate the relevancy of that particular reference to the SNOOK SOW requirements. As such, past performance references submitted without describing how the strategic all-source analysis was provided and how such support related to the SNOOK SOW could potentially result in a lower relevancy rating for that reference as part of the Agency’s overall relevancy evaluation which includes all the relevancy evaluation elements identified in Section M and factor into the Government’s overall Past Performance Confidence Assessment for the Offeror.

· Past Performance references shall thoroughly address the sub-tasks in the SNOOK SOW. When comparing Offeror work to the SNOOK SOW sub-tasks, ensure each aspect of the task is addressed.

· Highlighting the outcome of a past performance reference activity without describing the CI all source analytical steps taken to accomplish said outcome could potentially result in a lower relevancy rating for that reference as part of the Agency’s overall relevancy evaluation which includes all the relevancy evaluation elements identified in Section M and factor into the Government’s overall Past Performance Confidence Assessment for the Offeror.

· Using several past performance references to address the same task in the SNOOK SOW may result in a finding that the past performance references are only relevant to that certain aspect of the SNOOK SOW, as such the relevancy ratings for the references themselves will factor into the Government’s overall Past Performance Confidence Assessment for the Offeror.

3. Quality. Offerors shall complete for each contract referenced, the information identified in Section 1 of the form “Past Performance Questionnaire” at Attachment 2 and email the questionnaire to the technical representative responsible for the referenced past/current contract. The questionnaire states that the technical representative should complete Section 2 of the questionnaire and email entire questionnaire within the date and time designated on the questionnaire to the point of contact designated within Section 4.2 of this document. Offerors may request/remind the technical representative to complete and email the form to the POC listed on the questionnaire.

NOTE: Offerors shall clearly identify themselves on the form as the proposing offeror so that questionnaires can be tracked to the correct vendor.

4.4. Volume IV – Price:

4.4.1 Price will be evaluated for price reasonableness in accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(1) based on the total proposed price for the base period of performance and all option periods together. The determination that the total price is reasonable will be made by a comparison of other offers received. If only one offer is received, the determination may be based on a comparison to the Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE) or by any other reasonable basis. Under no circumstances shall this information and documentation be included elsewhere in the proposal.

Offerors shall provide:

· Offeror shall propose fully burdened labor rates for each contract year. Offeror shall insert fully burdened labor rates in the ‘yellow’ highlighted cells only. The Government will complete Schedule B based the proposed labor rate within Offeror’s price proposal.

4.4.2 Labor rates shall be rounded to two (2) decimal spaces. All cells other than the Labor Rate cells are locked. All formulas are provided and calculated. The excel sheet will automatically calculate the Extended Price by multiplying the Offeror’s proposed fully burdened labor rates by the number of FTEs by the number of hours illustrated (Rate x # FTEs x Hours).

4.4.3 The Offeror’s total price shall be equal to the sum of the base period and option periods one through four. Ref. Attachment 3 Workbook:

Tab 1 - Base Year Tab 2 - Option Year 1 Tab 3 - Option Year 2 Tab 4 - Option Year 3 Tab 5 - Option Year 4 Tab 6 - Extension of Services Tab 7 - Summary.

4.4.4 One FTE is defined as 1920 direct charge labor-hours per year. Any percentage of a FTE shall be calculated based upon the 1920 hours.

4.4.5 Plug numbers have been provided for Travel. Do not alter or remove these numbers. Offerors are expressly prohibited from applying fee to travel costs.

4.4.6 All work will be performed at Government sites.

4.5 Volume V – Contract Documentation:

4.5.1 Model Contract: The RFP represents the model contract, however may be altered at the time of award if determined necessary by the Contracting Officer.The model contract consists of the terms and conditions of the future award. By completing the SF 33, the Offeror accepts the contract terms and conditions as written in the RFP unless otherwise expressed.

Offerors shall provide:

· The offeror’s authorized official shall complete the first page of the SF 33 by completing blocks 15a, b, and 16-18. The contract documentation shall also include the signed copy of any amendments.

· The offeror’s names, phone numbers, and emails of the authorized signers for the company.

· The Offerors CAGE code.

· The Offerors DUNS number.

· The Offerors Representations and Certifications. – complete all Section K provisions or certify that an on-line version of their representations and certifications are current and available at https://www.sam.gov. Offeror shall provide a SAM.gov printout of its company profile within this volume, including an extended breakout of FAR 52.219-1 to show small business qualifications.

· Attachment 1 - DD Form 254. The company information in the form shall be completed including the name of the cognizant security officer (CSO), title, phone number, and email address.

· Any Ground Rules or Assumptions for the proposal response.

· Any exceptions to the terms of the contract. Offerors shall clearly identify any exceptions to the Terms and Conditions of the model contract. Each exception shall be specifically related to each paragraph, and/or specific part of the solicitation to which the exception is taken. Provide rationale in support of the exception and fully explain its impact, if any. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the offeror being removed from consideration for award. If none are taken, please provide a statement to that effect.

· Cover Letter. The original hard copy of the Contract Documentation Volume shall include a cover letter with an original signature of an official authorized to legally bind the Offeror.

· Statement of the period for which the proposal is valid (must not be less than 150 days from the submission date of proposal).

4.5.2 Conflict of Interest:

4.5.2.1. Offerors are directed to FAR Subpart 9.5 for detailed information concerning organizational conflicts of interest. In its Cost proposal, each Offeror and each of its subcontractors shall include one of the following statements:

· a statement certifying that, to the best of its knowledge, it is not aware of any facts which create any actual or potential organizational conflicts of interest relating to the award of this contract; or

· a statement that describes concisely all relevant facts concerning any past, present, or planned interest (financial, contractual, organizational, or otherwise) relating to the work to be performed under the proposed contract and bearing on whether the Offeror has a possible organizational conflict of interest.

4.5.2.2. The Contracting Officer may require further relevant information from an Offeror. Refusal to provide further relevant information required by the contracting officer, or the willful misrepresentation of any relevant information will result in disqualification of an Offeror from further consideration for award of a contract under this solicitation.

4.5.2.3. The Contracting Officer will use all relevant information submitted by the Offeror, and any other relevant information known to the Program Office, to determine whether a potential conflict exists. If the Contracting Officer determines that a potential conflict exists, the Offeror shall not receive an award unless the conflict can be avoided or otherwise resolved through the inclusion of a special contract clause or other appropriate means.

4.5.2.3 Government Contract Files. The Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals. Unless the offeror provides written request otherwise, the Government will destroy extra copies of such unsuccessful proposals. After contract award, unsuccessful proposals will be destroyed except for one copy, which will be retained with the contract file.

5. PROPOSAL DELIVERY

5.1. Delivery Instructions

5.1.1. Due Date. Proposals are due no later than 11:00am EST on 25 April 2019.

5.1.2. Proposals shall be emailed directly to:

United States Cyber Command J9 Acquisition Office Robert Sheehan rasheeh@cybercom.mil

In addition to direct email, all submissions shall CC’ the USCYBERCOM proposal alias at proposal_submission@cybercom.mil.

6.0 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

All questions and inquiries concerning this RFP shall be submitted no later than 12:00 PM EST on Friday, April 12, 2019. The Government will consolidate questions received and provide a respons in a timely manner (to manximum extent practicable) to all offerors at the same time. All questions and answers will be published to FBO. No oral communications are permissible. Questions and/or comments received afte the specified date/time may not be addressed by the Government. The Offeror shall submit questions to Robert Sheehan at rasheeh@cybercom.mil. When submitting the questions please reference in the Subject Line: “HB0001-19-R-0011 SNOOK Questions”.

7.0 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

7.1 Proposals submitted after the time and date specified for receipt in the request for proposals shall be considered late in accordance with FAR 52.212-1(f) Late submissions, modifications, revisions, and withdrawals of offers, and may be rejected by the Government. The government may evaluate a hard copy proposal delivered on time if the electronic copy is emailed late, but will not evaluate a proposal if the hard copy is late.

7.2 ELECTRONIC (CD) PROPOSAL VOLUMES: This section provides guidance to Offerors on the electronic format and application software to be used for submitting electronic copies. The information regarding electronic products presented below should not be construed as government endorsement for these particular products. Efforts by the government to clarify and upload electronic proposal submissions in accordance with FAR 15.207(c) will not be considered discussions.

7.5.1 The Government will access the electronic copy of the Offerors’ proposal using Microsoft Windows 2007 Client/Server network and Microsoft Office 2013.

7.5.2 Offerors must submit proposals using Microsoft Office 2013 (or a previous compatible version); do not use Apple/Mac versions of these programs. All proposal volumes must be submitted using Microsoft Word 2013 (or a previous compatible version); cost and pricing information must be submitted using Microsoft Excel 2013 (or a previous compatible version). Before submitting spreadsheets, Offerors must remove or disable macros and external links, but retain all computational functionality and embedded formulas. Use of other application software for submission of proposals is prohibited.

7.5.3 Offerors must submit proposals using Microsoft Office 2013 (or a previous compatible version); do not use Apple/Mac versions of these programs. All proposal volumes must be submitted using Microsoft Word 2013 (or a previous compatible version); cost and pricing information must be submitted using Microsoft Excel 2013 (or a previous compatible version). Before submitting spreadsheets, Offerors must remove or disable macros and external links, but retain all computational functionality and embedded formulas. Use of other application software for submission of proposals is prohibited.

7.6 AMENDMENTS - Amendments to the solicitation will be announced on the web page www.FBO.gov. It is the Offerors’ responsibility to review this location periodically for updates and/or amendments.

7.7 DISCUSSIONS - The Government does not contemplate holding discussions, however, it reserves the right to hold discussions if necessary. The primary objective of discussions is to maximize the Government’s ability to obtain best value, based on the requirement and the evaluation factors set forth in the solicitation. If discussions are necessary due to perceived weaknesses or other issues that must be addressed before award, the Government will evaluate all Offeror’s proposals in accordance with FAR 52.212-2 and establish the competitive range. Based on ratings of each proposal against ALL evaluation criteria, the Contracting Officer will establish the competitive range comprised of all of the most highly rated proposals unless the range is further reduced for purposes of efficiency. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals. Discussions resulting from the competitive range determination may be conducted in writing and/or in verbal discussions as follows:

Written and/or verbal discussions will be utilized by issuing Evaluation Notices (ENs). The Contracting Officer will issue ENs to Offerors within the competitive range to communicate those areas of his or her proposal which are considered deficient, where weaknesses exist, or where other aspects of the Offeror’s proposal (such as cost, price, technical/management capability, past performance and terms and conditions) are significant enough to affect the selection decision and/or where data presented by the Offeror is unclear.

7.8 PROPOSAL REVISIONS - Revisions to either the technical or Price proposal shall have changed information clearly marked by a vertical line in the right margin of the page.

Offerors are cautioned that changes or revisions at the final proposal revision stage may render a proposal unacceptable for award.

UNCLASSIFIED