A23_HQ0034-19-Q-0029_OASD_DISDI_Support_-_Amendment_1.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:

1. Incorporate Questions & Answ ers and

2. Amend the "Instructions & Eval Factors."

The response date remains unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

Y 1 10

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 25-Apr-2019

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 HQ003419Q0029

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

12-Apr-2019

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

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

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

25-Apr-2019

CODE

WHS - ACQUISITION DIRECTORATE

4800 MARK CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 09F09

ALEXANDRIA VA 22350

HQ0034 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

HQ003419Q0029

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been added by full text:

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

Question

RFP or PWS Reference

Question Government Response

1. Evaluation Price reasonableness determinations will be in accordance with FAR 13.

The total evaluated price is the sum of the total prices submitted for (a) the base period, (b) all option periods, and

(c) the six-month extension authorized by FAR clause 52.217-8. For purposes of determining the evaluated price for the six-month 52.217-8 extension, the total price is calculated as one-half of the total price of the final option year.

Evaluation of options will not obligate the government to exercise the option(s). Vendors shall not submit their quotation with the six months period.

Our understanding is that we will submit a price quote for the base period and the option periods. The government will calculate the six-month extension from the price quote for the final option year. Therefore, per instructions above, we will not submit any quote for the six-month extension.

Is this understanding correct?

Yes.

2. General Is there an incumbent on this contract?

If so, please provide the incumbent name, current contract number, period of performance and value of the contract.

The incumbent on this contract is Image Matters LLC. The contract number for the prior competed contract is: HQ0034-14-P- 0117; the value totaled $3,281,708.87 for a period of performance from 7/2014- 1/2019.

The bridge contract that is in place has a current perid of performance of 1/2019 – 5/2019 and a value of $263,001.72.

3. Instructions The RFQ in Section 2.1 under General

Instructions requires proposals to be in minimum 12-point font. Would the Government permit text in tables and graphics be 9-point font or larger?

The instructions are revised to accommodate this request.

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS & EVAL FACTORS

INSTRUCTIONS TO VENDORS/EVALUATION FACTORS

Washington Headquarters Services – Acquisition Directorate requests a quotation (RFQ) for the services specified in the attached Performance Work Statement (PWS). Quotation evaluation will be conducted in accordance with FAR Parts 12 and 13, with the intention to award a firm-fixed price purchase order.

1.1 Questions: The cutoff date and time for questions is 2PM ET, April 18, 2019. Vendors are requested to email questions to Stephanie Hoffman Stephanie.L.Hoffman10.civ@mail.mil and Douglas Boorstein douglas.j.boorstein.civ@mail.mil. Responses to questions will be in the form of an amendment to this quotation and will be posted on FBO. No telephonic requests will be entertained.

1.2 Quotations: Quotations must be received by Stephanie Hoffman Stephanie.L.Hoffman10.civ@mail.mil and Douglas Boorstein douglas.j.boorstein.civ@mail.mil by 2PM ET, May 3, 2019. Quotations that are not received by the date and time specified above shall render the quote as “late” and therefore not eligible for consideration for award.

2. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS:

2.1 Quotations shall include two attachments and shall be submitted in one email. The first attachment represents the vendor’s responses to Technical Factors 1, 2 and 3 and the second attachment represents the vendor’s Price Quote. The first page of each attachment shall include the RFQ number, date of submittal, the vendor’s name, address, Tax ID, CAGE code, POC name, phone, and email. Vendors may use the body of their email as a cover letter. Limit the cover letter to 600 words.

Text shall be single-spaced, on 8 1/2 x 11 inch paper, with minimum one-inch margins on all sides and minimum 12-point font. Text and graphics shall be in a format readable by Adobe mailto:Stephanie.L.Hoffman10.civ@mail.mil mailto:douglas.j.boorstein.civ@mail.mil mailto:Stephanie.L.Hoffman10.civ@mail.mil mailto:douglas.j.boorstein.civ@mail.mil

PDF, Microsoft Word, PowerPoint or Excel. Note: There is a 10MB limit for email submissions.

Note: Graphic presentations, including tables, while not subject to the same font size and spacing requirements, shall have spacing and text that is easily readable.

2.2 Page Limitations. Any pages in excess of the page limitations below will not be considered.

Attachments Page Limits Attachment 1 First Page (see 2.1) 1 page Factor 1 – Technical Approach 9 pages Factor 2 – Corporate Experience 6 pages Factor 3 – Key Personnel Eight pages, two pages for each individual proposed

Attachment 2 First Page (see 2.1) Factor 4 – Price

1 page No Page Limit

3. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

3.1 Factor 1 – Technical Approach (Maximum 9 pages)

Describe your technical approach for meeting PWS requirements. Include a description of the following:

a. Approach to providing expert technical review, development, and maintenance of DoD spatial data standards which conform or align with appropriate International Organization for Standards (ISO) standards, GEOINT Content Semantic Resources (GCSR) standards published by the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), and standards published by the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC). Include the ability to develop standards for vector and raster data, metadata, portrayal, and geospatial services.

b. Approach to writing implementation guidance for authoritative data sources, as well as for the SDSFIE family of standards. Include your approach to developing maturity models, business rules, and DODAF-compliant process models as part of this guidance where appropriate.

c. Approach to developing enterprise-level process models for IGI&S, structured in the current DoD Architecture Framework (DoDAF) and suitable for inclusion in the Business Enterprise Architecture (BEA).

Quoters are not to include any extraneous information other than that which relates to the PWS requirements or these three items with their quote. It will not be evaluated.

3.2 Factor 2 – Corporate Experience (Maximum 6 pages)

Quoters shall detail no more than three project references. For Teaming Arrangements or prime/subcontractor relationship, when submitting corporate experience information for all parties, at least 2 of the Corporate Experience submissions shall be for the team lead or prime contractor. Quoters shall provide a brief history of the project to include the agency or firm for whom the work was or is being performed, the contract number, the date of award, the period of performance, the contract/project value (to include all options), the type of contract (IDIQ, fixed price, cost reimbursable, time and materials, etc.), whether the Quoter performed as a subcontractor or as a prime, and point of contact information (including name, telephone, email, and the title of a reference who can verify the work experience on the project(s) identified).

a. Projects listed may include those entered into by a private firm, Federal Government and military customers for the same or similar services as described under this RFQ. If a firm has no experience of the same or similar scope, size, and complexity of this requirement, the quote will be rated Unacceptable. All projects submitted shall have been underway for at least twelve months and either in progress or completed within the past seven (7) years of the RFQ closing date to be considered in the evaluation.

b. Failure to provide the correct/current telephone, and/or email address for each point of contact (POC) listed may result in a lower rating for this factor.

c. Quoters shall submit its complete Technical Factor 2 – Corporate Experience response, with verifiable POC information, as part of Attachment 1 in accordance with the table above.

d. The government requires that the contractor have experience in performing standards development, implementation guidance development, and enterprise-level architecture as describe above in section 3.1 Technical Approach.

3.3 Factor 3 – Key Personnel (Maximum eight pages, two pages for each individual proposed) Provide individual Resumes and a short Capability & Experience statement for each key personnel proposed to meet PWS requirements. Key personnel proposed must perform the majority of the workload. Substitution of key personnel requires Government approval. Vendors must state whether key personnel proposed are subject to a contingency offer of employment.

For key personnel proposed, identify relevant and recent (last 3 years) projects performed (completed or ongoing) of similar scope, magnitude, and complexity to the requirements of the PWS. Include the following information:

- Name of project and customer who is knowledgeable of the vendor’s performance on the project, include title, phone number, and email address.

- Describe the nature of the project, the relevance to this requirement, the specific tasks performed, and the role the proposed personnel played in the performance of the project.

3.4 Factor 4 – Price (No page limitation)

The vendor’s price quote shall identify the number of hours and hourly rates for each labor category, and any materials or supplies required to perform the PWS for the base period and each option periods. In addition, complete the CLIN structure provided with total for each CLIN.

Offerors are to use the following plug numbers for the travel CLINS. Offerors are not to alter these plug numbers.

CLIN Amount 0002 $17,100.00 1002 $18,000.00

2002 $18,900.00 3002 $19,800.00 4002 $20,700.00

4.0 EVALUATION

The Government intends to evaluate quotations and award a firm fixed-price order based upon the vendor’s proposed technical approach, corporate experience, key personnel, and price based on its initial quotation. Therefore, the vendor’s initial quotation should contain the best terms from a pricing and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct exchanges if it’s later determined by the Contracting Officer to be necessary.

The award shall be made to the responsible vendor whose quotation represents the best value to the Government. The Government may reject any or all quotations if such action is in the public interest; accept a quotation other than the lowest priced quotation; and waive informalities and minor irregularities in quotations received. The vendor evaluation will be conducted in accordance with the FAR Parts 12 and 13.

4.1 Factor 1 - Technical Approach

The vendors will be evaluated on their technical approach summary, which will include a description of the following:

a. Approach to providing expert technical review, development, and maintenance of DoD spatial data standards which conform or align with appropriate International Organization for Standards (ISO) standards, GEOINT Content Semantic Resources (GCSR) standards published by the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), and standards published by the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC). Include the ability to develop standards for vector and raster data, metadata, portrayal, and geospatial services.

b. Approach to writing implementation guidance for authoritative data sources, as well as for the SDSFIE family of standards. Include your approach to developing maturity models, business rules, and DODAF-compliant process models in this guidance where appropriate.

c. Approach to developing enterprise-level process models for IGI&S, structured in the current DoD Architecture Framework (DoDAF) and suitable for inclusion in the Business Enterprise Architecture (BEA).

4.2 Factor 2 – Corporate Experience

Corporate experience will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the Quoter demonstrates experience with work of the same or similar scope, size, and complexity as the DISDI Technical Support PWS requirements.

Specifically, the Government will evaluate:

a. The extent to which the Quoter proposed verifiable corporate experience with work/projects of the same or similar scope, size, and complexity of this requirement, that have been underway for at least 12 months and be either in progress or completed completed within the past seven (7) years of the RFQ closing date. The Government will thus consider relevancy. If the quote does not establish corporate experience in these areas, it will be rated Unacceptable.

b. The extent to which the Quoter proposed verifiable corporate experience performing the work described in section 3.1 Technical Approach. This verifiable corporate expereince must have been underway for at least twelve months and be either in progress or comploted within the past seven (7) years of the RFQ closing date. If the quote does not establish corporate experience in these areas, it will be rated Unacceptable.

4.3 Factor 3 – Key Personnel

The vendor’s resumed Key Personnel will be evaluated for the extent of their qualifications and experience with respect to the functions they are proposed to manage. The Government will evaluate the extent to which the vendor’s Project Manager and alternate(s) meet and exceed the requirements of Performance Work Statement (PWS) Part 5 and 6. The Project Manager and other resumed Key Personnel will be evaluated based on the submitted resumes.

4.4. Factor 4 – Price

Price reasonableness determinations will be in accordance with FAR 13. The total evaluated price is the sum of the total prices submitted for (a) the base period, (b) all option periods, and

(c) the six-month extension authorized by FAR clause 52.217-8. For purposes of determining the evaluated price for the six-month 52.217-8 extension, the total price is calculated as one-half of the total price of the final option year. Evaluation of options will not obligate the government to exercise the option(s). Vendors shall not submit their quotation with the six months period.

5.1 Order of Importance.

Factor 1 – Technical Approach is more important than Factor 2 – Corporate Experience. Factor 2 is more important than Factor 3 – Key Personnel. Combined, Factors 1, 2, and 3 are more important than the Factor 4 – Price. However, the importance of price will increase as quotations become more equal in relation to non-price factors.

To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for the Technical Approach, Corporate Experience, and Key Personnel. A marginal or unacceptable rating will render an offeror ineligible for award.

5.2 Definitions

The following evaluation definitions are provided to assist the evaluator(s):

deficiency: A material failure of a quotation to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a quotation that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

weakness: A flaw in the quotation that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

A significant weakness in the quotation is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

strength: A proposed method or technique in the quotation that exceeds the solicitation requirements.

5.3 Ratings

Table 1, through an assessment of any strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies, will be used to assign ratings to Factor 1 – Technical Approach.

Table 1 – Combined Technical/Risk Ratings Outstanding Quotation meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Good Quotation meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Quotation contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Acceptable Quotation meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal Quotation does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The quotation has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable Quotation does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Quotation is un-awardable. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very high.

Table 2, Corporate Experience Ratings, shall be used to assign ratings to Factor 2 – Corporate Experience.

Table 2 – Corporate Experience Ratings Outstanding Quotation meets requirements and indicates an exceptional level of relevant corporate experience. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Good Quotation meets requirements and indicates a moderate level of relevant corporate experience. Quotation contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Acceptable Quotation meets requirements and indicates an adequate level of relevant corporate experience. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance.

Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Unacceptable Quotation does not meet requirements and does not establish corporate experience performing the work described in section 3.1 Technical Approach. Quotation is un-awardable. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very high.

Table 3 – Key Personnel Ratings. Key personnel will be rated in accordance with the following table:

Outstanding (O) Resumes meet all of the qualifications and experience of Part 6 of the PWS, and exceeds many of the qualifications and experiences. Resumes contain strengths and no weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Good (G) Resumes meet all of the qualifications and experience of Part 6 of the PWS. Resumes contain strengths and no weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Acceptable (A) Resumes meet most of the qualifications and experience of Part 6 of the PWS. Resumes contain strengths and some areas of weakness. Risk of unsuccessful performance is moderate.

Unacceptable (U) Resumes do not meet the qualifications and experience of Part 6of the PWS. Resumes contains significant areas of weakness and deficiencies.

Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

4.4. Factor 4 – Price

Price reasonableness determinations will be in accordance with FAR 13. The total evaluated price is the sum of the total prices submitted for (a) the base period, (b) all option periods, and

(c) the six-month extension authorized by FAR clause 52.217-8. For purposes of determining the evaluated price for the six-month 52.217-8 extension, the total price is calculated as one-half of the total price of the final option year. Evaluation of options will not obligate the government to exercise the option(s).

(End of Summary of Changes)