RFP HC102825R0012 AMD 0004.pdf

SEE ADDENDUM

(No Collect Calls)

HC102825R0012 24-Feb-2025

b. TELEPHONE NUMBER

667-890-6375

8. OFFER DUE DATE/LOCAL TIME

03:00 PM 31 Mar 2025

5. SOLICITATION NUMBER 6. SOLICITATION ISSUE DATE

AUTHORIZED FOR LOCAL REPRODUCTION

PREVIOUS EDITION IS NOT USABLE

STANDARD FORM 1449 (REV. 2/2012)

Prescribed by GSA – FAR (48 CFR) 53.212

(TYPE OR PRINT)

(SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER)

ADDENDA X ARE

26. TOTAL AWARD AMOUNT (For Gov t. Use Only )

23.

CODE 10. THIS ACQUISITION IS

SUCH ADDRESS IN OFFER

17b. CHECK IF REMITTANCE IS DIFFERENT AND PUT

BELOW IS CHECKED

TELEPHONE NO.

HC10289. ISSUED BY

18b. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN BLOCK 18a. UNLESS BLOCK

7. FOR SOLICITATION

INFORMATION CALL:

a. NAME

HOLLY E. SANDERS

2. CONTRACT NO. 3. AWARD/EFFECTIVE DATE 4. ORDER NUMBER

(TYPE OR PRINT)

30b. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER 30c. DATE SIGNED 31b. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

30a. SIGNATURE OF OFFEROR/CONTRACTOR 31a.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

1 27a. SOLICITATION INCORPORATES BY REFERENCE FAR 52.212-1. 52.212-4. FAR 52.212-3. 52.212-5 ARE ATTACHED.X

25. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

1. REQUISITION NUMBER

20.

ADDITIONAL SHEETS SUBJECT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS SPECIFIED.

OFFEROR TO COMPLETE BLOCKS 12, 17, 23, 24, AND 30

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT/ORDER FOR COMMERCIAL ITEMS

ARE NOT ATTACHED

27b. CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER INCORPORATES BY REFERENCE FAR 52.212-4. FAR 52.212-5 IS ATTACHED. ADDENDA ARE ARE NOT ATTACHED

(BLOCK 5), INCLUDING ANY ADDITIONS OR CHANGES WHICH ARE

SET FORTH HEREIN, IS ACCEPTED AS TO ITEMS:

. YOUR OFFER ON SOLICITATION

28. CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO SIGN THIS DOCUMENT AND RETURN

% FOR:SET ASIDE:UNRESTRICTED ORX

SMALL BUSINESS

17a.CONTRACTOR/ CODE FACILITY

OFFEROR CODE

DISA/DITCO-SCOTT-PS83

2300 EAST DRIVE, BUILDING 3600

SCOTT AFB IL 62225-5406

18a. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY CODE

RATED ORDER UNDER

DPAS (15 CFR 700)

13a. THIS CONTRACT IS A

13b. RATING

CODE15. DELIVER TO CODE 16. ADMINISTERED BY

SEE SCHEDULE

12. DISCOUNT TERMS11. DELIVERY FOR FOB DESTINA-

TION UNLESS BLOCK IS

MARKED

SEE SCHEDULE

14. METHOD OF SOLICITATION

RFQ IFB RFPX

FAX:

TEL: SERVICE-DISABLED

VETERAN-OWNED

SMALL BUSINESS

8(A)

HUBZONE SMALL

BUSINESS

SIZE STANDARD:

$34,000,000

NAICS:

541519

OFFER DATED

29. AWARD OF CONTRACT: REF.

DELIVER ALL ITEMS SET FORTH OR OTHERWISE IDENTIFIED ABOVE AND ON ANY

COPIES TO ISSUING OFFICE. CONTRACTOR AGREES TO FURNISH AND

EMAIL:

TEL:

31c. DATE SIGNED

SEE SCHEDULE

SCHEDULE OF SUPPLIES/ SERVICESITEM NO. QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

24.22.21.19.

WOMEN-OWNED SMALL BUSINESS (WOSB)

ELIGIBLE UNDER THE WOMEN-OWNED

SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAM

EDWOSB

32g. E-MAIL OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT/ORDER FOR COMMERCIAL ITEMS

(CONTINUED)

PAGE 2 OF77

ACCEPTED, AND CONFORMS TO THE CONTRACT, EXCEPT AS NOTED: ______________________________________________________

32a. QUANTITY IN COLUMN 21 HAS BEEN

RECEIVED INSPECTED

32b. SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT

REPRESENTATIVE

32c. DATE 32d. PRINTED NAME AND TITLE OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT

REPRESENTATIVE

32e. MAILING ADDRESS OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE 32f . TELEPHONE NUMBER OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE

37. CHECK NUMBER

FINALPARTIALCOMPLETE

36. PAYMENT35. AMOUNT VERIFIED

CORRECT FOR

34. VOUCHER NUMBER

FINAL

33. SHIP NUMBER

PARTIAL

38. S/R ACCOUNT NUMBER 39. S/R VOUCHER NUMBER 40. PAID BY

41a. I CERTIFY THIS ACCOUNT IS CORRECT AND PROPER FOR PAYMENT

41b. SIGNATURE AND TITLE OF CERTIFYING OFFICER 41c. DATE

42a. RECEIVED BY (Print)

42b. RECEIVED AT (Location)

42c. DATE REC'D (YY/MM/DD) 42d. TOTAL CONTAINERS

STANDARD FORM 1449 (REV. 2/2012) BACK

Prescribed by GSA – FAR (48 CFR) 53.212

AUTHORIZED FOR LOCAL REPRODUCTION

PREVIOUS EDITION IS NOT USABLE

SEE SCHEDULE

20.

SCHEDULE OF SUPPLIES/ SERVICES

21.

QUANTITY UNIT

22. 23.

UNIT PRICE

24.

AMOUNT

19.

ITEM NO.

HC102825R0012

Section SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

RFP AMD & ATTACHMENTS

Request for Proposal (RFP) Amendment (AMD) 0001, 00002, 00003, and 0004

The purpose of RFP AMD 0001 is to:

1. Update Attachment CLIN Pricing Worksheet (Attachment 3 AMD 0001) to reflect CLINs x002, x004, x006, and x009 as Optional (Optl) Tasks.

2. Provide Question and Answer Responses (Attachment 4 AMD 0001)

3. Update Addendum to 52.212-2(a), Evaluation-Commercial Items “Evaluation Phase 1” to state, “The Government intends to complete Evaluation Phase 1 without conducting discussions. Proposals rated with an unacceptable rating in any of the Evaluation Phase 1 subfactors listed above, may be ineligible for award and may not be evaluated in Phase 2 of the technical evaluation. If all proposals receive at least one unacceptable rating, the Government reserves the right, but is not obligated, to conduct discussions during Evaluation Phase 1.”

4. Update Addendum to 52.212-2(a), Evaluation-Commercial Items “Evaluation Phase 2” to state, “A short narrative for each technical report must be submitted that identifies… the software used to obtain the technical reports…”

5. The following Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Provisions/Clauses were removed in accordance with (IAW) Class Deviation—Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity in Federal Contracts (Deviation 2025-O0003)

a. FAR Clause 52.222-21, Prohibition of Segregated Facilities

b. FAR Provision 52.222-24, Preaward On-Site Equal Opportunity Compliance Evaluation

c. FAR Clause 52.222-26, Equal Opportunity

6. The FAR Provisions/Clauses were updated in accordance with (IAW) Class Deviation—Restoring Merit- Based Opportunity in Federal Contracts (Deviation 2025-O0003)

a. FAR Provision 52.212-3 Offeror Representations and Certifications—Commercial Products and Commercial Services.

b. FAR Clause 52.212-5 Contract Terms and Conditions Required To Implement Statutes or Executive Orders—Commercial Products and Commercial Services. (And Alternate II)

The purpose of RFP AMD 0002 is to:

1. Provide additional Question and Answer Responses (Attachment 4 AMD 0002) The purpose of RFP AMD 0003 is to:

1. Update Addendum to 52.212-1(b), Submission of Offers to identify Non-Government Advisors in paragraph (12)(i)(E).

2. Extend the due date for responses to no later than 3:00 p.m. Central Time on Monday, March 31, 2025

The purpose of RFP AMD 0004 is to:

1. Update Performance Work Statement (Attachment 1 PWS HC102825R0012 AMD 0004_CUI) to reflect OCONUS tasks as optional.

2. Update the CLIN Pricing Worksheet (Attachment 3 CLIN Pricing Worksheet HC102825R0012 AMD 0004) as indicated.

3. Update Addendum to 52.212-1(b), Submission of Offers as indicated.

4. Update Addendum 52.212-2(a), Evaluation-Commercial Items as indicated.

5. Extend the due date for responses to no later than 3:00 p.m. Central Time on Monday, August 11, 2025.

Attachments Attachment 1, PWS HC102825R0012 CUI AMD 0004 Attachment 2, QASP HC102825R0012 CUI Attachment 3, CLIN Pricing Worksheet HC102825R0012 AMD 0004 Attachment 4, Questions and Answers HC102825R0012 AMD 0002

(end of text)

AMD 0004 52.212-1(B) ADDNDM

Addendum to 52.212-1(b), Submission of Offers is rescinded in its entirety and replaced with the following language:

(b) Submission of offers:

(12) Other Instructions

(i) General Information

(A) Points of Contact: The contracting officer (KO) and contract specialists (CS) are the sole points of contact for this procurement. Address any questions or concerns you may have to the KO/CS. Written requests for clarification must be sent to the CS at holly.e.sanders.civ@mail.mil with a copy to the KO at rebecca.d.mooney.civ@mail.mil.

(B) Discrepancies: If an offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the offeror shall immediately notify the KO in writing with supporting rationale. The Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussion.

(C) Electronic Reference Documents: All referenced documents for this solicitation are available on the Contracting Opportunities page (SAM) web site at https://www.sam.gov. Potential offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications when information has been posted to the website for this solicitation.

(D) Communications: Exchanges of source selection information between the Government and offerors will be controlled by the KO and CS. Email will be used to transmit such information to the offeror and will include “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 & 3.104” in the Subject line.

(E) Use of Non-Government Advisors: Non-Government personnel will be used on the source selection evaluation team. The non-government advisor(s) may have access to all aspects of the offeror’s proposal except for past performance information. The non-government advisors are from the following companies:

Koniag Government Services 4840 Westfields Boulevard Suite 200 Chantilly, VA 20151

If offerors object to the company listed as participating on the source selection team, the offeror must send their objection to the contracting office point of contact immediately, but no later than RFP close.

(ii) Offerors are requested to submit a written technical proposal and a price proposal (“CLIN Pricing Worksheet”, Attachment 3) in response to the attached Performance Work Statement (PWS) (Attachment 1). The Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) (Attachment 2) is provided for contractor reference. Information on submission of technical and price proposals is provided below. The proposal shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of statements asserted in the proposal.

The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements, rather, shall provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet these requirements. Offerors shall assume the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities and capabilities and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offeror's proposal. The offeror's proposal must include all data and information requested by the Request for Proposal (RFP) and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. The proposal should sufficiently address the requirements as stated in the PWS. Non-conformance with these instructions may result in removal of the proposal from further evaluation.

(iii) In accordance with (IAW) Defense Information Systems Agency Special Contract Requirement H1, each offeror shall specifically identify in its proposal whether or not any potential or actual Organizational and Consultant Conflicts of Interest (OCCI), as described in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 9.5, exists for this instant procurement. If the offeror believes that no OCCI exists, the OCCI response shall set forth sufficient details to support such a position. If an offeror believes that an actual or perceived OCCI does exist on the instant procurement, the offeror shall submit an OCCI plan with the proposal, explaining in detail how the OCCI will be mitigated and/or avoided.

(iv) Page limitations, if applicable, are identified below and will be treated as maximums. A page is defined as each face of a sheet of paper containing information. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two pages. Page size shall be 8.5 x 11 inches. If exceeded, excess pages will not be read or considered in evaluation of the proposal. The following items will not be considered when calculating page limits:

cover page, table of contents, glossary, executive summary, generic resumes, past performances, OCCI mitigation plans, Fixed Price Payment Plans, Technical Reports, and Section 508 compliance. In the event any evaluation notices are issued, page limitations may also be placed on those. Page limitations shall not be circumvented by including inserted text boxes/pop-ups or internet links to additional information; such inclusions are not acceptable and will not be considered part of a proposal. The Government reserves the right not to consider for award any proposal that does not adhere to the administrative requirements of this RFP.

(v) Organization/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 volumes shall be as defined in this table, all of which shall be within the required page limits and with the number of copies as specified. The contents of each proposal volume are described in the information to offerors paragraph as noted in the table below. To the greatest extent possible, each volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated with a minimum of cross referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Information required for proposal evaluation which is not found in its designated volume will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal. Cross-referencing within a proposal volume is permitted where its use would conserve space without impairing clarity. Each volume may contain a more detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. Tab indexing may be used to identify sections.

Additionally, each volume may contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, and with an explanation for each. Glossaries do not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes.

Table 1 Proposal Organization

VOLUME VOLUME TITLE COPIES PAGE LIMIT

I Executive Summary 1 electronic 1 II Technical/Management 1 electronic 30 III Price 1 electronic No page limit IV Contract Documentation 1 electronic No page limit

(vi) Electronic Offers. The offeror shall submit volumes I through IV in electronic format via email and must include “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 & 3.104” in the Subject line. Each volume shall be a separate file. If files are compressed, the necessary decompression program must be included. The file size of each document shall not exceed 20MB. Proposals shall be submitted to the KO/CS identified below:

Holly Sanders (CS) – holly.e.sanders.civ@mail.mil R. DeAnn Mooney (KO) – rebecca.d.mooney.civ@mail.mil

(vii) Proposal Organization:

(A) Volume I - Executive Summary. In the executive summary volume, the offeror shall describe the significant attributes and theme of its proposal. It should be concise, to include addressing any significant risks, and highlighting any key or unique features, excluding price. Any summary material presented in the Executive Summary shall not be considered as meeting the requirements for any portions of other volumes of the proposal. Include a master table of contents for the entire proposal.

(B) Volume II – Technical/Management. The technical/management volume should be specific and complete and will be evaluated against the technical/management factors and subfactors defined in FAR 52.212- 2, Evaluation – Commercial Items. The technical portion of the proposal is to be submitted as a Microsoft (MS) Word 2007 or newer file. The page format shall have a 1-inch margin using no smaller than a 12-point Times New Roman font for all text to include any text contained in a table. Using the instructions provided below, provide as specifically as possible the actual methodology you would use for accomplishing/satisfying the factors/subfactors.

In the Technical/Management volume, address your proposed approach to meeting or exceeding the minimum performance or capability requirements of each technical/management factor/subfactors, as well as any risks in your proposed approach in terms of technical/performance, price, and/or schedule. Address any technical/management risk by identifying those aspects of the proposal considered to have the potential for disruption of schedule, increased cost, poor performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and/or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. Describe the impact of each identified risk in terms of its potential to interfere with or prevent the successful accomplishment of other contract requirements (e.g., PWS or specification requirements), whether or not those requirements are identified as subfactors. Propose a realistic "work-around" or risk mitigation for identified risks that will eliminate or reduce risk to an acceptable level. Identify any new risks introduced by such risk mitigation.

Factor 2 of the technical approach will contain technical reports that demonstrate an offeror’s actual Continental United States (CONUS) Point-of-Sale (POS) Scan Data derived from the offeror’s existing platform. Technical reports are NOT included in the proposal page count.

Volume II - Technical/Management shall be organized as follows:

Table of Contents List of Table and Drawings Glossary Factor 1, Technical Approach Phase 1 o Subfactor One o Subfactor Two o Subfactor Three

Factor 2, Technical Approach Phase 2 o Subfactor One

Technical Report* Technical Report Narrative** o Subfactor Two Technical Report* Technical Report Narrative** o Subfactor Three Technical Report* Technical Report Narrative** o Subfactor Four Technical Report* Technical Report Narrative**

All other aspects of the PWS

*Technical reports are exempt from page limitations.

**Technical report narratives are NOT included in the 30 page limit; however, they are limited to five pages per technical report and must be formatted IAW the directions discussed above in paragraph (vii)(B), “Proposal Organization”.

(C) Volume III – Price.

1. The price proposal will be evaluated using one or more of the techniques defined in FAR Part

15.404 in order to determine reasonableness and completeness. Reasonableness is established through cost and price analysis techniques as described in FAR 15.404. For a price/cost proposal/quotation to be complete, all solicitation requirements must be priced, figures correctly calculated, and prices/costs presented in in a clear and useful format. You shall submit pricing for the base period and all option periods, including option pricing for an additional 6-month period that may be authorized IAW FAR 52.217-8. See FAR 52.217-8 which authorizes the Government to require continued performance of any services within the limits and at the rates specified in the contract. The Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) Pricing Worksheet should include a separate line item for the additional 6-month period IAW FAR 52.217-8. These prices shall be identical to the proposed pricing in the 6 months prior to expiration of the base period, or the final option period, if option periods are present. The total evaluated price will consist of the contractor’s proposed price for the base period, all option periods, the option pricing for the additional 6-month period, and surge pricing as requested below. The price proposal spreadsheet shall be submitted in MS Excel 2007 format or newer. All formulas shall remain present in the spreadsheet for verification. Information beyond that required by this instruction shall not be submitted, unless considered essential to document or support the price. All information relating to the proposed price, including all required supporting documentation must be included in the section of the proposal designated as the Price Volume. The Offeror shall propose a fixed price payment plan as a separate document commensurate with the value of the deliverables and/or significant milestones in the PWS for this requirement. A firm fixed price payment plan with the total dollar amount divided into equal monthly payments will not be accepted unless the offeror provides justification for this plan that the Government subsequently deems adequate. Under no circumstances shall the information and documentation from the Price Volume be included elsewhere in the proposal other than Volume III, Price Volume and Volume IV, Contract Documentation, which includes CLIN pricing.

2. Price submissions should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate their reasonableness. Offerors should ensure price proposals include detailed information regarding the resources required to accomplish the task (e.g., labor categories, labor hours, number of employees for each labor category, rates, materials, etc.).

The Government is requesting data other than certified cost and pricing data in accordance with FAR 15.403- 3(c).

The contractor shall provide:

(a) Evidence of prices charged to other customers under comparable terms and conditions. For example, sales data in the form of copies of contracts, invoices, or sales reports with other customers which demonstrate the prices charged. Sales data includes records of sales for both the proposed item and similar items where the record should include order data, such as customer name, product number, serial number, product description, sales order number, date of sale, quantity sold, and price. Sales data must be comparable to the quantities, capabilities, specifications, etc., of the product or service proposed. The sales data does not need to be an exact match. However, the participant shall identify any differences from the sales data and the proposed items or services and explain why the sales data being provided as support is relevant/comparable to the proposed items or services.

(b) Cost data is factual information about the costs of a project, product, service, or other activity. Provide a bottom-up cost estimate to identify all proposed cost elements (e.g., Direct Material, Direct Labor, Subcontractor Labor, Indirect rates, Overhead, G&A, Other Direct Costs, Fee) along with a basis of estimate describing the development of each rate (e.g., internal salaries, market salaries, forward pricing rates, provisional billing rates, trends, and budgetary data).

(1) For direct labor rates, the contractor’s response shall provide screen shots of information such as payroll records, salary survey data, or other estimating techniques. Salary surveys, payroll data, or other estimating techniques for proposed direct labor must clearly identify the proposed direct labor rates. If using salary survey data, ensure the contractor’s response shall provide the salary survey source, salary survey labor category title, salary survey labor category description, salary survey geographic location, and salary survey education/ experience (if required). If using payroll data or other estimating techniques, ensure personnel with equivalent technical expertise, level of education, and years of experience as required by the solicitation are used. The contractor shall provide traceability between payroll stubs/salary surveys/supporting data and unsanitized cost proposals (e.g. John Doe is listed as Network Engineer – Intermediate).

(2) For indirect rates the contractor’s response shall provide their basis of estimate. The preferred method for providing support detail is through the submission of a Forward Pricing Rate Agreement (FPRA) or Forward Pricing Rate Recommendation (FPRR). Absent of FPRA/FPRR, the contractor shall provide Forward Pricing Rates Proposal (FPRP) or approved provisional billing rate letter along with the historical trend for the past three years.

If FPRP or approved provisional billing rates do not exist, provide the submission of proposed rate calculations (including detailed pools & bases) and basis of all calculations (e.g. accounts breakdowns, trends, and budgetary data). The basis shall include, at a minimum, three years of historical trend data for each aspect of applicable indirect rates to the Government. If three years of historical data is not available, a justification shall be provided as part of the price proposals.

(3) The contractor shall provide their Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) and Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) cognizant points of contact, as well as the contractor’s CAGE code;

(4) The contractor shall identify subcontractors in their price (or technical) proposals regardless of assigned workshare, in accordance with FAR 15.404-3(b). The prime contractor shall conduct appropriate cost or price analyses to establish the reasonableness of proposed subcontract prices and include the results of these subcontractor analyses in the price proposals. The contractor’s response shall identify the subcontractor relationship between the prime and subcontractor, and ensure subcontractor(s) provide the following information:

a) Unsanitized subcontractor cost proposals or quotes, to include a cost build-up identifying direct labor rates, all applicable indirect rates, and profit/fee.

Subcontractor costs shall also be substantiated in accordance with the requirements detailed for prime contractor costs—as described in the paragraphs above. If needed, the subcontractor may submit its unsanitized cost proposal and supporting documentation directly to the Contract Specialist identified in the solicitation.

b) The subcontractor shall also provide a DCAA-approved letter of an approved accounting system (if relationship is predicated on a cost-reimbursable basis)

c) The subcontractor must provide their DCMA and DCAA cognizant points of contact, as well as the contractor’s CAGE code.

FAR 12.504(a) The following laws are not applicable to subcontracts at any tier for the acquisition of commercial items or commercial components at any tier:

(7) 41 U.S.C. 4706(d) and 10 U.S.C. 2313(c), Examination of Records of Contractor, when a subcontractor is not required to provide certified cost or pricing data (see FAR 15.209(b)), unless using funds appropriated or otherwise made available by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Pub. L. 111-5).

Volume III – Price shall be organized as follows:

Attachment 3, CLIN Pricing Worksheet (Attachment 3 AMD 0004) Price Narrative to include cost or pricing information, supporting data - including data other than certified cost and pricing data, estimating methodology.

Fixed Price Payment Plan - A firm fixed price payment plan with the total dollar amount divided into equal monthly payments will not be accepted unless the offeror provides justification for this plan that the Government subsequently deems adequate.

(D) Volume IV - Contract Documentation. The purpose of this volume is to provide information to the Government for preparing the contract document and supporting file.

1. The offeror's proposal must include a signed copy of the solicitation and completion of blocks 12, 17, 23, 24, and 30 a, b, and c of the Standard Form (SF) 1449. Signature by the offeror on the SF1449 constitutes an offer, which the Government may accept.

2. This solicitation contains provisions that apply and clauses that will be applicable to the resulting award. Some of the provisions and additional Defense Information Technology Contracting Office (DITCO) text require a response from the offeror and shall be submitted with the proposal. This includes, but may not be limited to, FAR 52.212-3 Alt I (completed representations, certifications, acknowledgments, and statements), FAR 52.204-24, Defense FAR Supplement (DFARS) 252.204-7017, DFARS 252.239-7009, and DITCO Contract Administration Data G1, Points of Contact. As previously discussed, some solicitation provisions will require a specific response from the offeror. In addition, by signing block 30 of the solicitation, the offeror acknowledges compliance with the other clauses and information provided in the solicitation

3. Representations, Certifications, and other Statements of Offerors. This RFP contains provisions that apply to this solicitation and clauses that will be applicable to the resulting award. The offeror must comply with the clause in the solicitation – FAR 52.204-7 entitled “System for Award Management.” The Contracting Officer will check the System for Award Management (SAM). The offeror is also required to complete additional representations, certifications, acknowledgments, and statements reflected in this solicitation.

4. OCCI Mitigation Plan or a statement that an OCCI does not exist.

5. Authorized Offeror Personnel. Provide the name, title, and telephone number of the company/division point of contact regarding decisions made with respect to the proposal and who can obligate the company contractually. Also, identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government. Contractor Point of Contract information will be used for the Contract Administration Data Item G1, Points of Contact.

6. Company/Division Address, Identifying Codes, and Applicable Designations. Provide company/division's street address, county, and facility code; Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code;

Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) code; Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN); size of business (large or small); and labor surplus area designation. This same information must be provided if the work for this contract will be performed at any other locations. List all locations where work is to be performed and indicate whether such facility is a division, affiliate, or subcontractor, and the percentage of work to be performed at each location.

7. By submitting a proposal in response to this solicitation, you are submitting an offer that the Government may accept, and you agree that if the Government awards you the contract, the award document sent by the Government to the contractor is a binding and enforceable contract. The contractor has a legal obligation to perform in compliance with all aspects of the PWS if awarded the contract.

8. Portions of the offeror’s proposal may be incorporated into the contract.

9. In response to this RFP, no terms, conditions, or assumptions will be entertained. All issues will be resolved with questions and answers. Submission of terms, conditions, or assumptions included in your proposal may be cause for your proposal to be determined non-responsive to this RFP.

10. Questions should be submitted via email by using Attachment 4, Question and Answer Template. Please provide any questions, in writing, no later than August 4, 2025, at 11:00 am Central Time (CT) to Holly Sanders at holly.e.sanders.civ@mail.mil and R. DeAnn Mooney at rebecca.d.mooney.civ@mail.mil. The Government reserves the right to not answer questions submitted after this time.

11. Proposals are due no later than August 11, 2025 at 3:00 PM CT and should be submitted via email to Holly Sanders at holly.e.sanders.civ@mail.mil and R. DeAnn Mooney at rebecca.d.mooney.civ@mail.mil.

52.212-1(c), Period for Acceptance of Offers is tailored as follows:

(c) Period for acceptance of offers. The offeror agrees to hold the prices in its offer firm for 180 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of offers. The offeror shall make a clear statement in the proposal documentation volume that the proposal is valid through this date.

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

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

(End of provision revisions)

AMD 0004 52.212-2(A) ADDNDM

Addendum to 52.212-2(a), Evaluation-Commercial Items is tailored as follows:

a. Basis for Contract Award

Award will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal is determined to represent the overall best value to the Government using a best value tradeoff evaluation process. The technical proposal should include all information the offeror wants the Government to consider and evaluate regarding its ability to perform all required tasks and conform to all required terms and conditions. The offeror’s proposal must sufficiently address all aspects of the PWS. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the offeror being ineligible for award.

With regard to the best value analysis for the award decision, the below evaluation factors and subfactors will be used to determine technical acceptability. Section 508 Accessibility Standards do apply to this requirement. Section 508 requirements are listed in the attached PWS (Attachment 1). Compliance with Section 508 standards will be considered prior to evaluating any of the selection criteria listed below. Any proposal failing to meet the Section 508 Accessibility Standards, as listed in the PWS, may be eliminated from consideration for award.

b. Evaluation Factors and Subfactors

EVALUATION PHASE 1

(1) The following evaluation factors and subfactors will be used to evaluate each proposal.

Factor 1, Technical Approach Phase 1: An offeror’s technical approach will be evaluated as acceptable or unacceptable for each Factor 1 subfactor. In order to achieve an acceptable rating for a subfactor, the offeror must demonstrate a technical approach that clearly meets all program feature requirements identified in each subfactor.

(a) Subfactor 1: Point of Sale (POS) Scan CONUS, including Alaska and Hawaii data. In order for this subfactor to be rated acceptable, the offeror’s proposal must demonstrate their ability to provide a solution that includes scan data for all Universal Product Code (UPC) assigned food and non-food products, including national brand name and private label/store brand equivalents, and fresh and random weight items in all perishable, semi-perishable, and non-perishable grocery market departments. (Reference PWS Subtask 6.1.1)

(b) Subfactor 2: Retail Grocery Panel Data Database Access. In order for this subfactor to be rated acceptable, an offeror's proposal must demonstrate its ability to provide access to a database of retail grocery panel data that includes the following groups eligible to utilize Defense Commissary Agency (DeCA) commissaries: active duty, retired, guard and reserve members of the military, military veterans with commissary shopping privileges, and disabled veterans with commissary shopping privileges. (Reference PWS Subtask 6.3.1)

The offeror’s proposal must also demonstrate the analytics to assist DeCA with answering shopper behavior questions, explicitly, who commissary patrons are; where they live; where they shop; when they shop; what they buy; and what influences their shopping decisions. (Reference PWS Subtask 6.3.5)

(c) Subfactor 3: Program Analyst Support. In order for this subfactor to be rated acceptable, an offeror’s proposal must demonstrate their ability to provide one on-site program analyst available to respond to questions and provide customer support during regular business hours within 60-days of award. (Reference PWS 6.4.1)

Under Factor 1, the Government will evaluate the offeror’s technical approach to meeting the requirements of Subfactors 1 through 3 listed above. The offeror’s technical approach will receive a rating of “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” for each of the above-referenced Subfactors in accordance with Evaluation Table 1, “Technical/Risk Ratings for Factor 1”, found in paragraph “c. Ratings” below. The Government intends to complete Evaluation Phase 1 without conducting discussions. Proposals rated with an unacceptable rating in any of the Evaluation Phase 1 subfactors listed above, may be ineligible for award and may not be evaluated in Phase 2 of the technical evaluation. If all proposals receive at least one unacceptable rating, the Government reserves the right, but is not obligated, to conduct discussions during Evaluation Phase 1.

EVALUATION PHASE 2

Factor 2, Technical Approach Phase 2: In accordance with (IAW) Evaluation Phase 2/Factor 2, all offerors shall submit four technical reports derived from their existing platform using the reporting criteria identified below. A short narrative for each technical report must be submitted that identifies the reporting criteria used, date and time in which the technical report was generated, the software used to obtain the technical reports, and a brief summary of any data/report manipulation that occurred outside of the offeror’s existing platform that was necessary to complete the technical report submission. Technical reports are NOT included in the proposal page count; however, each corresponding technical report narrative shall not exceed five pages and shall follow the administrative requirements of Addendum to 52.212-1(b), paragraph (b)(12)(vii)(B), Proposal Organization.

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s technical approach to meeting or exceeding the requirements of Factor 2, Subfactors 1 through 4, by evaluating each report IAW Evaluation Table 2 “Technical/Risk Ratings for Factor 2” and the related definitions as described (see paragraph c. “Ratings”). All Factor 2 subfactors are of equal importance in the best value trade-off.

(a) Subfactor 1/Technical Report 1: POS Scan CONUS, including Alaska and Hawaii Data. The offeror’s technical report shall demonstrate a solution that includes a store clustering capability including statistically major markets and customizable regions, and allow for multiple customizable regions, as defined by DeCA. (Reference PWS Subtask 6.1.2.9)

The offeror’s technical report shall also demonstrate a solution that incorporates the DeCA-defined product merchandising hierarchy consisting of major department, sub-department, major category, sub-category, and segment. The contractor shall accommodate updates to the product hierarchy. (Reference PWS Subtask 6.1.2.3)

The offeror’s technical report must demonstrate their ability to incorporate fresh and random weight items in all perishable, semi-perishable, and non-perishable grocery market departments and shall include grade, size, and quality attributes. (Reference PWS Subtask 6.1.2.4)

Report Criteria: Factor 2, Subfactor 1/Technical Report 1 Product: 1. Perishable: Shredded Cheese Category, UPC Level

2. Fresh Meat: Beef Category, Item Level

3. Fresh Produce: Apple Category, Item Level Reporting Date: Any 1-week period during the proposal period.

Sample: 1. Total United States CONUS (Lower 48 and Alaska and Hawaii)

2. DeCA East, West, Central and Pacific Regions (As defined in PWS Appendix A) Data

Requirements:

1. Current Period: DeCA Sales, DeCA units/quantity (qty), Market Retail Sales, Market Retail Units, and DeCA Patron Savings compared to Market Retail.

2. Same Period Previous Year: DeCA Sales, DeCA units/qty, Market Retail Sales, Market Retail Units, and DeCA Patron Savings compared to Market Retail.

3. Change versus (vs) Previous Year: DeCA Sales, DeCA units/qty, Market Retail Sales, Market Retail Units, and DeCA Patron Savings compared to Market Retail.

Market Retail Definition:

In a separate tab or document, the offeror must define “market retail” to include what channels (e.g. grocery, mass merchandisers, convenience stores, club stores, etc.) and what store banners (e.g. Walmart, Kroger, CVS, Costco, etc.) are within each category.

(b) Subfactor 2/Technical Report 2: POS Scan for Outside the Continental United States (OCONUS) (in all foreign countries and United States (U.S.) territories where DeCA operates (PWS Appendix A)). Each of the following elements will evaluate the offeror’s ability to provide POS Scan data for OCONUS in accordance with Task 6.1 of the PWS. The offeror’s technical report must be based upon actual OCONUS POS Scan data derived from the offeror’s existing platform.

1) The offeror’s technical report shall demonstrate a solution that includes scan data for all

UPC/European Article Number (EAN) assigned food and non-food products, including national brand name and private label/store brand equivalents, and fresh and random weight items in all perishable, semi-perishable, and non-perishable grocery market departments.

(Reference PWS 6.1.1)

a. The scan data will be by-item/UPC where available. If scan data is not available, the solution must include the capability to assess DeCA’s average retail price by category equivalized (e.g., units of measure/currency) against the average retail price in the corresponding category in the market defined as all other channels excluding DeCA. (Reference PWS 6.1.2)

2) The offeror’s technical report must also demonstrate their solution for store clustering including statistically major markets and customizable regions, including by country, and allow for multiple customizable regions, as defined by DeCA. (Reference PWS 6.1.2.9)

Report Criteria: Factor 2, Subfactor 2/Technical Report 2

2. Fresh Meat: Beef Category, Item Level

3. Fresh Produce: Apple Category, Item Level

Reporting Date: Any 1-week period during the proposal period.

Regions: Total Overseas, DeCA Europe, DeCA Pacific, and Country as defined in Appendix A.

Data Requirements:

1. Current Period: DeCA Sales, DeCA units/qty, Market Retail Sales, Market Retail Units, and DeCA Patron Savings compared to Market Retail.

2. Same Period Previous Year: DeCA Sales, DeCA units/qty, Market Retail Sales, Market Retail Units, and DeCA Patron Savings compared to Market Retail.

3. Change vs Previous Year: DeCA Sales, DeCA units/qty, Market Retail Sales, Market Retail Units, and DeCA Patron Savings compared to Market Retail.

Market Retail Definition:

In a separate tab or document, the offeror must define “market retail” to include what channels (e.g. grocery, mass merchandisers, convenience stores, club stores, etc.) and what store banners (e.g. Tesco, Sainsbury, Conad, Globus, Aldi, etc.) are within each category.

(c) Subfactor 3/Technical Report 3: CONUS Web Scrape Data. Each of the following elements will evaluate the offeror’s ability to provide CONUS Web Scrape data in accordance with Task

6.2 of the PWS. The offeror’s technical report must be based upon actual CONUS Web Scrape data derived from the offeror’s existing platform.

1) The offeror’s technical report shall demonstrative their ability to provide DeCA with the ability to measure its retail prices for food, inclusive of UPC/EAN assigned and fresh and random weight products, and non-food items in all perishable, semi-perishable, and non-perishable grocery departments against relevant local competitors in the commercial marketplace for all CONUS commissary locations including Alaska and Hawaii. (PWS 6.2.1)

2) The offeror’s technical report must also demonstrate their existing platform can provide a list of competitors with details including, store banner, physical address, store format (e.g., grocery, supercenter, club store), monthly sales by total volume, and monthly sales by grocery volume. (Reference PWS Subtask 6.2.3)

Report Criteria: Factor 2, Subfactor 3/Technical Report 3

2. Fresh Meat: Beef Category, Item Level

3. Fresh Produce: Apple Category, Item Level

Reporting Date: Any 1-week period during the proposal period.

Sample: Fort Gregg-Adams, Pearl Harbor, San Diego

Data Requirements: 1. Current Period: DeCA Sales, DeCA units/qty, Market Retail Sales, Market Retail Units, and DeCA Patron Savings compared to Market Retail.

2. Same Period Previous Year: DeCA Sales, DeCA units/qty, Market Retail Sales, Market Retail Units, and DeCA Patron Savings compared to Market Retail.

3. Change vs Previous Year: DeCA Sales, DeCA units/qty, Market Retail Sales, Market Retail Units, and DeCA Patron Savings compared to Market Retail.

Market Retail Definition: Named competitor must be in a grocery or mass merchandiser channel.

(d) Subfactor 4/Technical Report 4: OCONUS Web Scrape Data. Each of the following elements will evaluate the offeror’s ability to provide OCONUS Web Scrape data in accordance with Task

6.2 of the PWS. The offeror’s technical report must be based upon actual OCONUS Web Scrape data derived from the offeror’s existing platform

1) The offeror shall describe their approach to provide DeCA with the ability to measure its retail prices for food, inclusive of UPC/EAN assigned and fresh and random weight products, and non-food items in all perishable, semi-perishable, and non-perishable grocery departments against relevant local competitors in the commercial marketplace for all OCONUS commissary locations (in all foreign countries and U.S. territories where DeCA operates (PWS Appendix A). (Reference PWS Subtask 6.2.1)

2) The offeror’s proposal must also demonstrate their ability to provide a list of competitors with details including, store banner, physical address, store format (i.e., grocery, supercenter, club store), monthly sales by total volume, and monthly sales by grocery volume. For OCONUS, solution must include the capability to assess DeCA’s average retail price by category equivalized (units of measure/currency etc.) against the average retail price in the corresponding market defined as all other channels excluding DeCA. (Reference PWS Subtask 6.2.3)

Report Criteria: Factor 2, Subfactor 4/Technical Report 4

2. Fresh Meat: Beef Category, Item Level

3. Fresh Produce: Apple Category, Item Level

Reporting Date: Any 1-week period during the proposal period.

Region: Offeror can select store in each; Japan, Korea, United Kingdom, and Germany.

Data Requirements: 1. Current Period: DeCA Sales, DeCA units/qty, Market Retail Sales, Market Retail Units, and DeCA Patron Savings compared to Market Retail.

2. Same Period Previous Year: DeCA Sales, DeCA units/qty, Market Retail Sales, Market Retail Units, and DeCA Patron Savings compared to Market Retail.

3. Change vs Previous Year: DeCA Sales, DeCA units/qty, Market Retail Sales, Market Retail Units, and DeCA Patron Savings compared to Market Retail.

Market Retail Definition: Named competitor must be in a grocery or mass merchandiser channel.

(2) Relative Importance of Factors and Subfactors. In order to be considered for Phase 2 evaluation, which includes the evaluation of Factor 2: Technical Approach Phase 2 and Factor 3: Price, the offeror MUST have been found “Acceptable” under every Subfactor in Factor 1. A proposal evaluated with an “Unacceptable” rating for any Phase 1 subfactor will be unawardable, will not be evaluated further, and will be ineligible for award. For the best value trade-off, ONLY Factors 2 and 3 will be considered. For the best value trade-off, all Subfactors within Factor 2 are of equal importance and Factor 2 is considered to be more important than Factor 3, Price.

c. Ratings

(1) Each technical/management subfactor will receive one of the ratings described in Table 1. The subfactor ratings will not be rolled up into an overall color rating for the Technical/Management factor.

The combined technical management/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. Combined technical/risk evaluations shall utilize the combined technical/risk ratings listed in the applicable Evaluation Table 1. Definitions relating to the technical evaluation rating process are provided in the tables.

Evaluation Table 1 for Factor 1, Technical Approach Phase 1

Each technical subfactor under Factor 1, Technical Approach Phase 1 will receive one of the ratings described in Evaluation Table 1. These subfactor ratings will not be rolled up into an overall color rating for the Technical factor.

A proposal receiving an “Unacceptable” rating for any Phase 1 subfactor will be unawardable and ineligible for award.

Technical/Risk Ratings for Factor 1. The technical management/risk rating provides an assessment of the offeror’s proposed solution for satisfying the Government’s requirements.

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Evaluation Table 2 for Factor 2, Technical Approach Phase 2

Proposals evaluated as 100% acceptable under Factor 1, Technical Approach Phase 1 will then be evaluated under Factor 2, Technical Approach Phase 2 using Evaluation Table 2. The combined technical management/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. Combined technical/risk evaluations shall utilize the combined technical/risk ratings listed in the applicable Evaluation Table 1. Definitions relating to the technical evaluation rating process are provided in the tables.

Technical/Risk Ratings for Factor 2. The technical management/risk rating provides an assessment of the offeror’s proposed solution for satisfying the Government’s requirements.

Color 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 un-awardable.

* Color ratings are assessed at the subfactor level only and shall not be rolled up into an overall color rating for the Technical Factor.

d. Evaluation of Options

The offeror shall submit pricing for the base period and all option periods, including option pricing for an additional 6-month period that may be authorized IAW FAR 52.217-8. See FAR 52.217-8 which authorizes the Government to require continued performance of any services within the limits and at the rates specified in the contract. The pricing proposal should include a separate line item for the additional 6-month period IAW FAR 52.217-8. These prices shall be identical to the proposed pricing in the 6 months prior to expiration of the base period, or the final option period, if option periods are present. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

e. Discussions

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without exchanges. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct exchanges or seek clarifications if the KO determines they are necessary.

If exchanges are required, the number of proposals being competitively considered may be narrowed to all of the most highly rated proposals.