HQ0034-19-R-0156_Amendment_0001_Final.pdf

HQ003419R0156

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

CLIN 0001

The CLIN extended description has changed from:

The contractor shall provide Phase-in for Software Asset Management Services in accordance with the Performance

Work Statement (PWS), Section 5.1 Task 1 through Section 5.6 Task 6, attached documents, and all other applicable requirements listed in the PWS.

To:

The contractor shall provide Software Asset Management Services in accordance with the Performance Work

Statement (PWS), Section 5.1 Task 1 through Section 5.6 Task 6, attached documents, and all other applicable requirements listed in the PWS.

SECTION J - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

The Table of Contents has changed from:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE

Attachment 1 Attachment 1 -

Performance Work

Statement

28 26-APR-2019

Attachment 2 Attachment 2 - Software

Product List

6 26-APR-2019

Attachment 3 Attachment 3 - DD 254

Security Classification

3 26-APR-2019

Attachment 4 Attachment 4 - Personnel

Matrix

1 08-MAY-2019

Attachment 5 Attachment 5 - Non-

Disclosure Agreement

2 08-MAY-2019

Attachment 6 Attachment 6 - Past

Performance

Questionnaire

3 08-MAY-2019

Attachment 7 Attachment 7 - Wage

Determination__2015-

4281 rev 13

Attachment 8 Attachment 8 - Pricing

Template

1 27-JUN-2019

to:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE

Attachment 10 Attachment 1 - Revised

Performance Work

Statement

24 25-JUL-2019

Attachment 2 Attachment 2 - Software

Product List

6 26-APR-2019

Attachment 3 Attachment 3 - DD 254

Security Classification

3 26-APR-2019

Attachment 4 Attachment 4 - Personnel

Matrix

1 08-MAY-2019

Attachment 5 Attachment 5 - Non-

Disclosure Agreement

2 08-MAY-2019

Attachment 6 Attachment 6 - Past

Performance

Questionnaire

3 08-MAY-2019

Attachment 7 Attachment 7 - Wage

Determination__2015-

4281 rev 13

Attachment 8 Attachment 8 - Pricing

Template

1 27-JUN-2019

Attachment 9 Attachment 9 - Q&A

Document

1 24-JUL-2019

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

Washington Headquarters Services (WHS) is releasing this solicitation electronically only via Federal Business

Opportunity (FBO). This electronic version of the Request for Proposal (RFP) is the official version for this acquisition. No hard copy of this solicitation will be issued. Offerors will be notified of any and all applicable amendments to this solicitation electronically via FBO. All Offerors must acknowledge any and all applicable amendments by signing and returning the accompanying Standard Form (SF) 30 for all amendments issued with the

Offeror’s proposal submission under Volume I. Failure to acknowledge all amendments issued by the Government may result in the proposal submitted in response to the solicitation being found nonresponsive by the Government.

Offerors shall submit their proposals electronically. Any proposal received after the due date and time specified for receipt will be considered late and will be rejected.

All Offerors must comply with the following instructions for proposal format and content. Proposals that do not comply with these instructions may be deemed nonresponsive and may render the Offeror ineligible for award. The

Offeror shall submit documentation illustrating its approach for satisfying the requirements of this solicitation.

Proposals must be clear, coherent, and prepared in sufficient detail for effective evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal against the evaluation criteria. The documentation shall address all aspects of this solicitation and include the

Offeror’s approach to performing and satisfying the requirements specified in the Performance Work Statement

(PWS).

The Government intends to award without discussions, but reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined to be in the Government’s best interest. If discussions are held the government may limit negotiations to the most highly rated offerors for efficiency purposes.

A. PROPOSAL VOLUMES REQUIREMENTS

The proposal shall be accompanied by a cover letter (letter of transmittal) prepared on the company’s letterhead stationery. The cover letter (letter of transmittal) shall identify all enclosures being transmitted and shall be used only to transmit the proposal and shall include no other information. In addition, it shall clearly state the length of proposal validity, which shall be at least 120 days.

The following are further descriptions of the information that shall be provided with the proposal.

A.1 Instructions for Proposal Submittal: This section of the Instruction to Offerors (ITO) provides general guidance for preparing proposals as well as specific instructions on the format and content of the proposal. The

PROPOSAL SUBMISSIONS PAGE LIMITS

VOLUME I

ADMINISTRATIVE – Cover Letter, Representations &

Certifications, completed SF33, signed SF 30s, Listing of all subcontractors, validity statement, Tax Identification Number, Documentation of Approved Accounting System, CAGE Code and

DUNS Number, Evidence for all security requirements, and

Completed FAR clauses/provisions:

(1) 52.204-8 Annual Representations and Certifications

(2) 52.209-2 Prohibition on Contracting with Inverted Domestic

Corporations--Representation.

(3) 52.209-7 Information Regarding Responsibility Matters

(4) 52.209-12 Certification Regarding Tax Matters

(5) 52.219-18 Notification of Competition Limited to Eligible 8(a)

Participants

(6) 52.219-28 Post-Award Small Business Program Representation

(7) 52.225-18 Place of Manufacture

NO PAGE LIMIT

VOLUME II

Pass/Fail Criteria Volume

(1) Facility Clearance Information

(2) Key Personnel Letter(s) of Intent/Commitment Letters

NO PAGE LIMIT

VOLUME III

FACTOR 1- TECHNICAL APPROACH & CAPABILITY MAXIMUM OF TEN (10) PAGES

PERSONNEL MATRIX NO PAGE LIMIT

KEY PERSONNEL RESUMES NO PAGE LIMIT

VOLUME IV

FACTOR 2- PAST PERFORMANCE MAXIMUM OF NINE (9) PAGES

VOLUME V

FACTOR 3- PRICE (Pricing Template) NO PAGE LIMIT

Offeror’s proposal must include all data and information requested by the ITO and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. Non-compliance with the instructions provided in the ITO may make the proposal unawardable or result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation.

A.1.1 Sufficient Detail Proposals shall comply with the following guidelines:

Be complete and respond directly to the requirements of the solicitation.

Address the factors and their related elements as listed in Section L “Instruction to Offerors” and Section M

“Evaluation Factors” of the solicitation.

Be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated assertions. Extraneous, repetitious, or wordy submissions are not desired and could result in lower ratings.

Do not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but rather provide convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet the requirements.

Assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of the Offeror’s capabilities and experience, and will base its evaluation only on the information presented in the Offeror’s proposal.

A.1.1 Validity Statement

The Offeror shall make a clear statement that the proposal is valid for 120 calendar days. In accordance with FAR

Subpart 4.8 (Government Contract Files), the Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals.

A.1.2 Physical Appearance of Submissions

Elaborate brochures or documentation, detailed artwork, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

Proposals will be submitted in electronic copies.

No models, mockups, or videotapes will be accepted.

A.1.3.1 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used with an explanation for each. Glossaries do not count against the page limitation for their respective volumes.

A.1.4 Page Format Restrictions and Limitations

A.1.4.1 Page and Font Size

Text shall be single- spaced on an 8.5 x 11 inches paper format, with a minimum one-inch margin all around. Pages shall be numbered consecutively. A page printed on both sides shall be counted as two pages. No foldout pages shall be used. Page limitations shall be treated as maximum. Pages submitted in excess of the page limitations stated throughout this document will be removed and not evaluated. The excess pages will be deleted from the electronic copy of the proposal. Documents incorporated by reference or as attachments to the proposal shall be included in the overall maximum page lengths and will not be considered or evaluated if they exceed the maximum page.

Font size shall be twelve (12) point Times New Roman. Bolding, underlining, and italics may be used to identify topic demarcations or points of emphasis. Graphic presentations, including tables, while not subject to the same font size and spacing requirements, shall have spacing and text that is easily readable. Lettering within tables, charts, graphs, and figures shall be no smaller than ten (10) point Times New Roman. Margins on all four edges of each sheet will be at least one-inch. Proprietary statements, security markings, and page numbers shall be placed within the defined margin area. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume. In the event discussions are held, these page format restrictions shall apply to the Final Proposal Revisions (FPRs).

A.1.4.1 Labeling

The number of pages shown in the table above should be submitted in electronic format. Responses to

Administrative, Pass/Fail Criteria, Technical Approach & Capability, Past Performance, and Price shall be in separate electronic folders (files). A cover letter shall be inserted in each folder (file), clearly marked as to the RFP identification, date of submittal, acknowledgement of any amendments, the Offeror’s name, address, Taxpayer ID number, CAGE code, and the Offeror’s POC name, phone, and email. The cover letter shall not count against any page limitation. Pages that exceed the maximum page length above shall not be evaluated or considered by the Government.

A.1.4.2 Pages Counted

Each page shall be counted except the following:

past performance questionnaires past performance questionnaire point of contact list cover pages

RFP cross-reference matrix teaming arrangements letters of commitment past performance consent letters client authorization letters tables of contents glossaries lists of figures, tables, or drawings tabs dividers blank pages

A.1.5 Indexing

Each volume shall contain a detailed table of contents to delineate the sections within that volume. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections.

A.1.6 Electronic Submission

All Offerors shall submit their proposals via email to: Contract Specialist Kealon Wallace at kealon.d.wallace.civ@mail.mil and the Enterprise Security & Services Division inbox at whs.ncr.ad.mbx.essd-services-branch@mail.mil. Subject line: HQ0034-19-R-0156 JSP Software Asset Management Support Services.

ALL OFFERORS SHALL SUBMIT PROPOSALS BY THURSDAY, AUGUST 8, 2019 AT 10:00AM,

EASTERN TIME (ET). There is a 10MB limit for all electronic submissions per email. One email per proposal is preferred. The proposal volumes shall be submitted as attachments when submitting it to the aforementioned email address. Text and graphics portions of the electronic copies shall be in a format readable by Adobe (.PDF), MS

Word 2010. Data submitted in spreadsheet format shall be readable by Adobe (.PDF), MS Excel 2010. All responses to the solicitation shall be in separate files and volumes corresponding to the evaluation factors identified in the above Proposal Submission Chart. Offerors are solely responsible for ensuring that the proposal is successfully emailed to the Government and successfully received by the Government by the proposal due date and time.

Offerors shall provide a listing of all subcontractors under its proposal in the Administrative Volume I.

A.1.6.1. Questions: The Questions for this solicitation are due Wednesday, July 10, 2019 at 10am Eastern

Time (ET). All questions shall be emailed to Contract Specialist Kealon Wallace at kealon.d.wallace.civ@mail.mil and the Enterprise Security & Services Division inbox at whs.ncr.ad.mbx.essd-service-branch@mail.mil Subject

Line: HQ0034-19-R-0156 JSP Software Asset Management Support Services Questions. No comments, questions, or inquiries shall be made of any Government person other than the Contracting Officer. Questions received after this date and time may not be responded to by the Government. All emails shall be clearly labeled in the subject line of the email with the RFP Number: HQ0034-19-R-0156 JSP Software Asset Management Support Services

Questions. Offerors shall clearly identify the specific section of the solicitation to which each question relates when submitting questions. Reference should be made to the solicitation Section Heading, page number of the solicitation, and specific location on the page (i.e. third paragraph) in order to facilitate the Government’s response to each question. Questions shall be submitted in a Microsoft Excel file following a format similar to the table below:

mailto:kealon.d.wallace.civ@mail.mil mailto:whs.ncr.ad.mbx.essd-%20%20%20services-branch@mail.mil mailto:whs.ncr.ad.mbx.essd-%20%20%20services-branch@mail.mil mailto:kealon.d.wallace.civ@mail.mil mailto:whs.ncr.ad.mbx.essd-service-branch@mail.mil

Question No. Reference Question Category Question

# Solicitation or

Attachments, and Section

Contract or Technical Question

Questions and responses will be provided to all Offerors via amendment to the solicitation on FBO. If amendments to the final solicitation are issued, all Offerors must acknowledge the amendments by signing the accompanying

Standard Form (SF) 30 and returning the signed SF 30 for all amendments issued with the Offeror’s proposal submission under Volume I. Failure to acknowledge all amendments issued by the Government may result in the proposal submitted in response to the solicitation being found nonresponsive by the Government.

No phone calls will be accepted for this solicitation. All correspondence shall be conducted via email.

A.1.7 Pricing Data/Cost Information

Price information shall be addressed in Volume V – Price and the Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) structure listed in the RFP No. HQ0034-19-R-0156. All labor rates shall be rounded to the nearest dollar. All price information must be submitted in the attached price template.

A.1.8 Cross Referencing & Volume Designation

Information required for proposal evaluation that is not found in its designated volume will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal. Each volume, other than the Price volume, shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated without cross-referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Exceptions to the above include only teaming arrangements, letters of commitment, socio-economic commitment information and

Organizational Conflicts of Interest assertions which must be submitted in Volumes I – IV, but may be cross-referenced in other volumes.

A.1.9 Confidential Information

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and its amendments have resulted in an increasing number of requests from outside the Government for copies of contract qualifications and proposals submitted to federal agencies. If an Offeror’s submissions contain information that he/she believes should be withheld from such requestors under

FOIA on the grounds that they contain “trade secrets and commercial or financial information” [5

USC§552(b)(4)], the Offeror should mark its submissions in the following manner:

The following notice should be placed on the title page: “Some parts of this document, as identified on individual pages, are considered by the submitter to be privileged or confidential trade secrets or commercial or financial information not subject to mandatory disclosure under the Freedom of Information

Act. Material considered privileged or confidential on such grounds is contained on page(s) .”

Each individual item considered privileged or confidential under FOIA should be marked with the following notice: “The data or information is considered confidential or privileged, and is not subject to mandatory disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.”

B. ADMINISTRATIVE (VOLUME I)

The offeror shall present all cover letters, certifications, Organizational Conflict of Interest Form (OCI), signed SF

30s, Listing of all subcontractors, validity statement, documentation from the Defense Contract Audit

Administration (DCAA) of an approved accounting system in accordance with FAR 16.301-3(a)(3), and the completion of Clauses/Provisions and a Signed SF33.

C. PASS/FAIL CRITERIA (VOLUME II)

The Government will evaluate a proposal ONLY IF the offer/proposal satisfies all of the following elements, which will be evaluated on a pass/fail basis*:

(1) The offeror submits a letter from Defense Security Services (DSS) that demonstrates the offeror holds an active Secret Facility Clearance or the Government is able to independently verify that the Offeror holds the appropriate security clearance in the Defense Security Services (DSS) database. The Government shall evaluate the proposal to determine if the offeror possesses a current, active Secret Facility clearance at the time of proposal submission. If the Government determines that an offeror does not possess the required

Secret Facility Clearance on the proposal due date, the offeror shall receive a “fail” and no further evaluation of element 2 will be performed. The offeror will not be considered for award; and

(2) Commitment letters for all key personnel shall be submitted with the proposal submission by the proposal due date established in the latest version of the solicitation. The date of signature on the commitment letters must be within 10 days of the proposal due date. The letter of intent shall affirmatively state: (1) that the key personnel granted permission to the prime contractor to use his/her resume, and (2) is willing to work for the proposing offeror on the instant solicitation.

D. TECHNICAL APPROACH & CAPABILITY (VOLUME III) – (10 page limit, excluding Personnel

Matrix and Key Personnel Resumes)

The offeror shall submit sufficient information for the Government to make a comprehensive evaluation of the offeror’s technical approach and capability in meeting the requirements listed in the solicitation (including all attachments) and PWS for successful performance. This section must also address the Offeror’s ability to meet security requirements. The proposal shall describe the methods and techniques used to complete each task, and discuss managing all aspects of this requirement to include the following elements:

The proposal shall describe the offeror’s phase-in approach by submitting a phase-in plan that demonstrate the offeror’s approach for providing the necessary resources to ensure and maintain service quality levels and staffing levels for the thirty day (30) calendar days phase-in period. The phase- in plan shall include the following information: (1) How transition risks shall be identified and mitigated; (2) How the Offeror plans to shadow the incumbent and reach a 100% staffing capacity by the end of the transition period; (3) How knowledge, material and property transfer (e.g. IP addresses, source codes, keys, etc.) shall be managed throughout the contract transition period; and, (4) How the Offeror plans on assuming 100% of authority and responsibilities after completion of the 30 - calendar day phase-in period in the PWS without the further need of the incumbent contractor.

The offeror shall provide a narrative describing how qualified personnel will be provided as required by the

PWS. The offeror shall describe their company’s historical ability to retain personnel and how this will be utilized to meet the requirements of this PWS. The offeror shall describe their overall staffing and recruiting process utilized to attract, retain, and maintain qualified personnel at optimal staffing levels to accomplish task requirements over the life of the contract.

The offeror shall complete the attached Personnel Matrix template by filling out all of the required elements listed in the matrix for Volume III - Technical Approach & Capability.

The offeror shall submit resumes for Key Personnel, as identified in PWS Section 1.6.12, listing the individual’s name, education, experience, security clearance, and certifications. Each resume shall specify which PWS tasks the individual will perform, and it shall specify the individual’s proposed duties and responsibilities. Key Personnel are defined as certain skilled experienced professionals and/or technical personnel essential for successful contractor accomplishment of the work to be performed under this contract. All proposed personnel shall have required clearances at time of proposal submission.

This volume must not contain any reference to cost; however, resource information such as data concerning labor categories, subcontracts, etc. must be provided to demonstrate the Offeror's understanding of the requirement.

Note. Resumes for Key Personnel Matrix under Management (Volume III) shall not count against the page limitation.

E. PAST PERFORMANCE (VOLUME IV) - 9 pages (3 page limit for each reference)

The Government is requesting that the Offeror provide up to three (3) past performance contract references that reflect recent and relevant experience. Recent experience is defined as that completed within the past three (3) years from the proposal due date with twelve (12) months of the period of performance completed. Relevant experience is defined as that which is similar in scope, size, and complexity to the work described in the attached Performance

Work Statement and contract type. Past performance contract references can come from the Offeror or the subcontractor, as long as they served as the Prime Contractor for the past performance reference. If the Offeror submits recent and relevant projects performed by a subcontractor as a past performance reference the Offeror must also explain how the subcontractor significantly contributed to the performance of the referenced project, and how the Offeror expects the subcontractor to significantly contribute to the successful performance of the solicited work.

All past performance references shall include contract/delivery order number, contract type, program name, total contract cost, short description of work performed, reasons why the project is considered relevant by the Offeror, names, email addresses and valid telephone numbers for the person completing the PPQ. For those references where a PPQ will be submitted the offeror shall also include a valid telephone numbers for the person completing the PPQ.

Past performance contract references must be completed by the customer, Contracting Officer Representative

(COR), or the Contracting Officer using the Past Performance Questionnaire's (PPQs) (Attachment 6). PPQs are required for contracts not listed in Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS).

The Offeror shall provide Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) to its customer references and instruct them to email the completed Questionnaires to whs.ncr.ad.mbx.essd-services-branch@mail.mil for evaluation.

Questionnaires must be received via email no later than August 8th, 2019 by 10:00am ET to the specified email addresses above. Questionnaires that are not received by the due date and time may not be evaluated.

F. PRICE FACTOR (VOLUME V)

The contract will be awarded as a hybrid FFP and CR contract. The offeror shall propose a firm-fixed price by submitting Price Volume V in Attachment 8 – Pricing Template. The Price Volume shall contain two tabs entitled

(1) Price Schedule and (2) Labor Categories of which must be completed by the offeror.

The proposal shall include a personnel matrix, outlining the title, PWS tasks assigned, labor category, level and number of hours proposed, and labor rate; the matrix shall include clearance level. All pricing shall be traceable to the CLINs and PWS task areas. This price volume has no page limit.

NOTE: The offerors shall propose to the Government provided plug number for the ODCs and material costs under CLINs 0002, 1002, 2002, 3002, and 4002.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS

2) BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD

Unless all offers are rejected, the Government intends to award a single hybrid type contract through a competitive process, that consist of Firm Fixed Price (FFP) and Cost Reimbursement (CR) contract line item numbers (CLINs), order to the responsible offeror whose offer, conforming to the solicitation, provides the best value basis using trade-offs, price, and other factors considered. The Government may select for award the Offeror whose price is not necessarily the lowest, but whose technical proposal is more advantageous to the Government and warrants the mailto:whs.ncr.ad.mbx.essd-services-branch@mail.mil additional cost. Offerors must satisfy the requirements described in the Performance Work Statement (PWS), to include Task Sections 5.1 – 5.6, as well as all other Request for Proposal (RFP) requirements.

Proposals shall be reviewed, evaluated, and awarded in accordance with the evaluation criteria identified in this document. Proposals that take exception to any requirement, state assumptions or impose requirements not in or contrary to the solicitation or otherwise qualify the proposal shall not be considered and shall be deemed unacceptable for award.

3) PASS/FAIL CRITERIA

The Government will evaluate a proposal ONLY IF the offer/proposal satisfies all of the following elements, which will be evaluated on a pass/fail basis*:

(1) The offeror submits a letter from Defense Security Services (DSS) that demonstrates the offeror holds an active Secret Facility Clearance or the Government is able to independently verify that the Offeror holds the appropriate security clearance in the Defense Security Services (DSS) database. The

Government shall evaluate the proposal to determine if the offeror possesses a current, active Secret

Facility clearance at the time of proposal submission. If the Government determines that an offeror does not possess the required Secret Facility Clearance on the proposal due date, the offeror shall receive a “fail” and no further evaluation of element 2 will be performed. The offeror will not be considered for award; and

(2) Commitment letters for all key personnel shall be submitted with the proposal submission by the proposal due date established in the latest version of the solicitation. The date of signature on the commitment letters must be within 10 days of the proposal due date. The letter of intent shall affirmatively state: (1) that the key personnel granted permission to the prime contractor to use his/her resume, and (2) is willing to work for the proposing offeror on the instant solicitation.

*The Government will fully evaluate offers that receive a "pass" for both elements; however, a "pass" for both elements above does not guarantee award. Offerors will only be eligible for award after an evaluation is conducted in accordance with the criteria set forth in Section M – Evaluation Factors of this solicitation. If the offeror receives a “fail” for any of these two (2) elements listed above, the offeror’s proposal will not be evaluated further.

4) EVALUATION FACTORS

The evaluation will be based on an assessment of the Offeror’s proposal. Proposals shall be evaluated on the factors listed below. Technical Approach & Capability, and Past Performance are equal, and when combined are significantly more important than Price. For evaluations with equal ratings under Factors 1 and 2, price will become more significant in the award decision.

Factor 1 – Technical Approach & Capability

Factor 2 – Past Performance

Factor 3 – Price

a. FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL APPROACH & CAPABILITY

The Government will evaluate the adequacy of the Offeror’s approach as demonstrated by the proposed technical approach and capabilities. The proposal shall be sufficiently complete to demonstrate how the Offeror will comply with the solicitation requirements and PWS requirements, to include PWS Sections 5.1 - 5.6, throughout the performance period. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s ability to perform the requirements listed in the solicitation based on its technical approach and capabilities, Phase-In Plan, Staffing Plan, and Personnel Matrix.

Data previously submitted, or presumed to be known, i.e., descriptions of previous projects performed for the

Government, cannot be considered as a part of the proposal unless physically incorporated in the proposal. Clarity, completeness and conciseness are essential.

The Government will evaluate and assess the offeror staffing approach to meet the Government’s requirements and how the Offeror plans to attract, select, hire, and retain qualified personnel capable of successfully meeting the PWS requirements, and how that plan minimizes the impact on contract performance. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed Key Personnel to determine if the proposed personnel have the required clearances and the degree to which the personnel proposed will lead to successful performance of the PWS requirements. The offeror shall submit resumes for Key Personnel, as identified in PWS Section 1.6.11.

The Government will review the Key Personnel qualifications and proposed labor mix and assess the following areas:

i. The availability to support the effort as required in the PWS;

ii. The experience of the proposed personnel; and

iii. The labor mix addressing the technical requirements in their entirety.

The Government will evaluate the offerors phase-in plan that adequately describes an approach to provide a smooth, uninterrupted phase-in, which shall take place during the initial 30 calendar days upon contract award, included:

(1) How transition risks shall be identified and mitigated.

(2) Execution of an ODC order to validate processes prior to contract start.

(3) How the Offeror plans to shadow the incumbent and reach a 100% staffing capacity by the end of the transition period.

(4) How knowledge, material and property transfer (e.g. IP addresses, source codes, keys, etc.)

shall be managed throughout the contract transition period.

(5) How the Offeror plans on assuming 100% of authority and responsibilities after completion of the 30 calendar days Transition-In period in the PWS without the further need of the incumbent contractor.

Note. Resumes for Key Personnel Matrix under Management (Volume III) shall not count against the page limitation.

b. FACTOR 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE

The Government will evaluate how well the offeror has performed on contracts that have been determined to be both recent and relevant to the PWS.

Past performance is a measure of the degree to which the Offeror satisfied its customers in the past and complied with Federal, State, and local laws and regulations, as identified as the Prime Contractor. The Government may contact some, all or none of each Offeror’s customers to ask, among other things, whether: (1) the Offeror is capable, efficient, and effective; (2) the Offeror’s performance conformed to the terms and conditions of its contract;

(3) the Offeror was reasonable and cooperative during performance; (4) the Offeror was committed to customer satisfaction; (5) the Offeror was able to hire and retain qualified personnel to the satisfaction of the customer; and

(6) if they would select the same Contractor or a different Contractor, given the opportunity.

The Government may also use other information available from other sources to evaluate the Offeror’s past performance, which may include, but not limited to: Past Performance Questionnaire, Federal, State and local

Government agencies, Better Business Bureaus, published media, electronic databases such as the Contractor

Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and the Past Performance Information Retrieval System

(PPIRS). The Government may include firsthand experience of the evaluators with the Offerors in this evaluation.

The Government reserves the right to limit or expand the number of references it decides to contact and to contact references other than those provided by the Offeror.

In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom no information on Past

Performance is available, the Offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.

c. FACTOR 3 - PRICE

In accordance with 15.404-1, Proposal Analysis Techniques, proposals will be evaluated to determine if they are fair and reasonable. The offeror’s price must be found to be fair and reasonable in order to be eligible for award. The evaluated price will include all Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) and all options, except for cost reimbursement

(CR) CLINs.

For evaluation purposes only, the total evaluated price is the sum of the following for the order:

Firm Fixed Price (FFP): 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. The

Government may determine that a proposal is unacceptable if the prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).**

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

NOTE: The offerors shall propose to the Government provided plug number for the ODCs and material costs under CLINs 0002, 1002, 2002, 3002, and 4002.

5) RATING METHODS

a. FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL APPROACH AND CAPABILITY

Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method: The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. Each proposal shall be given a rating identified in Table 1 that reflects the degree to which the proposed approach meets or does not meet the threshold performance or capability requirements through an assessment of the relative strengths, deficiencies, weaknesses and significant weaknesses, and risks to successful performance.

Table 1. Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method

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 unawardable.

*NOTE: If an offeror is determined “unacceptable” under Factor 1 – Technical Approach & Capability, the offeror’s proposal will be considered unacceptable overall, shall not be further evaluated or considered for award.

b. FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy, and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information).

Step 1 – Recency. The first step is to evaluate the recency of the offeror's past performance. Recency is generally expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant, and is critical to establishing the relevancy of past performance information. Performance of each reference must be completed within the last three (3) years of the proposal due date to be considered recent.

Step 2 – Relevance. The second step is to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. The relevancy rating evaluates the aspects of an offeror's recent history of contract (or subcontract) performance that would provide the most context and give the greatest ability to measure whether the offeror will successfully satisfy the current requirement. There are four levels of relevancy as shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Past Performance Relevancy Rating Method

Rating Definition

Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

If the offeror submits recent and relevant projects performed by a subcontractor as a past performance reference the offeror must also explain how the subcontractor significantly contributed to the performance of the referenced project and how the offeror expects the subcontractor to significantly contribute to the successful performance of the solicited work.

Step 3 - Quality of Products or Services. The third aspect of the past performance evaluation is to establish the overall quality of the offeror's past performance (see FAR 15.304(c)(2)). The past performance evaluation conducted in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the offeror’s past performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the offeror performed those past contracts. The past performance confidence assessment rating is based on the offeror's overall record of regency, relevancy, and quality of performance. In conducting a performance confidence assessment, each Offeror shall be assigned one of the ratings in Table 3.

In the case of offerors for which there is no information on past contract performance or where past contract performance information is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past contract performance (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv).) In this case, the offeror's past performance is unknown and assigned a performance confidence rating of "neutral."

Table 3 .Performance Confidence Assessment Rating Method

Rating Definition

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

Satisfactory Confidence

Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror shall successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence

No recent/relevant performance record is available or the Offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

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

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

Offerors that receive a rating of No Confidence under Factor 2 shall be considered unacceptable overall and shall not be further evaluated or considered for award.

c. FACTOR 3 – PRICE. The price factor will not receive a rating, but the evaluated price must be found to be fair and reasonable in order to be eligible for award as indicated in Factor 3 - Price Proposal. The pricing evaluation will be based on price analysis techniques found in FAR 15.404-1, Proposal Analysis Techniques, to determine if they are fair and reasonable. If an offeror’s price is not found to be fair and reasonable, the offeror will not be eligible for award.

(End of Summary of Changes)