RFQ Instructions to Quoters Final.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

WASHINGTON HEADQUARTERS SERVICES

1155 DEFENSE PENTAGON

WASHINGTON, DC 20301-1155

ACQUISITION DIRECTORATE

REQUEST FOR QUOTE

Date: January 9, 2020

Subject: Request for Quote # HQ003420R0057

Title: OUSD(C) Distributed Learning ( DL)

The Department of Defense (DoD), Washington Headquarters Services (WHS), Acquisition

Directorate (AD) is issuing this solicitation electronically using a combined synopsis/solicitation in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 12.6, “Streamlined Procedures for

Evaluation and Solicitation for Commercial Items. This electronic version of the Request for Quote

(RFQ) is the official version for this acquisition and will be evaluated in accordance with FAR subpart

12.602 “Streamlined Evaluation of Offers” and FAR 13.106-2 “ Evaluation of Quotations or Offers” as implemented by FAR 13.5 “Simplified Procedures for Certain Commercial Items”.

This solicitation is a Request for Quotes (RFQ). This RFQ will result in the award of a Firm Fixed-

Price (FFP) competitive set-aside for Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business concerns contract for OUSD(C) Distributed Learning (DL). The solicitation document and incorporated provisions and clauses are those in effect through Federal Acquisition Circular 2005-99 and DFARS change notice 2018710. Solicitation provisions and contract clauses that pertain this contract are contained in RFQ Attachment 1.0 (Provided with the FINAL RFQ).

The Period of Performance (PoP) structure for the subsequent contract is one (1) 12-month base period and three (3) 12-month option periods.

INSTRUCTIONS TO QUOTERS

Quoters shall submit their quote with the following instructions:

(1) In order to maximize efficiency and minimize the effort involved in the quote evaluation process, all Quoters must comply with the following instructions for quote format and content, including applicable page limitations. Quoters that do not comply with these instructions may be considered technically unacceptable and/or ineligible for award. The Quoter shall submit documentation illustrating their approach for satisfying the requirements of this solicitation. Do not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirement, but rather provide convincing rational to address how the Quoter intends to meet the requirements. Quotes must be clear, concise, coherent, and prepared in sufficient detail for effective evaluation of the quoter’s quote against the evaluation criteria and for substantiating the validity of stated claims.

(2) The Government intends to make a single award to the responsible quoter who submits the best value offer and is most advantageous to the Government based upon the factors contained in this request for quote (RFQ) in accordance with FAR 13. The Government may also reject any quote not substantially in compliance with the terms and conditions of the RFQ.

(3) This electronic version of the RFQ is the official version for this acquisition. No hard copy of this

RFQ will be issued. Quoters shall submit their quotes electronically. Any quote received after the due date and time specified for receipt will be considered late and may be rejected. Quotes containing material exceptions to the provisions of the RFQ will be rejected by the

Government and will be ineligible for award.

(4) Pages submitted in excess of the stated page limitations will be removed and not evaluated.

(5) Electronic Submission – All Quoters shall submit their quotes electronically via email to the following points of contact and include the RFQ number, “HQ0034-20-R-0057” in the subject line of the email.

Syreeta Donald Email:syreeta.a.donald.civ@mail.mil

Kimberly Darby Email:kimberly.h.darby.civ@mail.mil

(6) Quoters’ shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their experience or best practices, and that technical evaluation will be based only on the information presented in the

Quoter’s quotation. The information requested, and the manner of submittal is essential to permit prompt evaluation of the quote on a fair and uniform basis. Accordingly, any response in which material information requested is not furnished, or where indirect or incomplete answers or information are provided, may be considered non-compliant for evaluation.

(7) Quotes submitted in response to the RFQ shall be formatted as follows:

mailto:syreeta.a.donald.civ@mail.mil mailto:kimberly.h.darby.civ@mail.mil

a. Page / margin size – Single-spaced on 8½ x 11 inch size paper, with a minimum ¾” margins on all sides. Pages shall be numbered consecutively. A page printed on both sides shall be counted as two pages.

b. Font / Font Size – The entire written quote submission shall use Times New Roman or other plain font that is easily decipherable and minimum 11 point font size for text. Bolding, underlining, and italics may be used to identify topic demarcations or points of emphasis. A font size of 9 may be used for graphics and tables.

c. Labeling – All pages shall include page numbering. The number of pages shown in the table below should be submitted in electronic format. Responses to Factor 1, Technical Capability, Factor 2, Past Performance, and Factor 3, Price shall be in separate electronic volume files.

d. In order for the quote to be evaluated strictly on the merit of the material submitted, the volumes shall be submitted in separate documents. Price information can only be included in

Volume IV. If price information is included in other volumes, quote may be deemed unawardable.

Technical Quote Content & Instructions:

Responses shall be separated into four (4) Volumes and organized in the following manner:

Volume Maximum Page Limits

I. ADMINISTRATIVE No Limit

II. Evaluation Factor 1: Technical Capability consists of:

Technical Approach / Management Plan

Staffing Qualifications and Experience

Attachment 1.3 Completed Resume Template

1. Technical

Approach/Management Plan:

Maximum of 30 numbered pages

2. Staffing Qualifications and

Experience: Maximum of 2 pages per resume (excluded from page limitations)

Attachment 1.3 - Resume

Template to be completed

(excluded from page limitations)

III. Evaluation Factor 2: Past Performance consists of:

Up to Four (4) Past Performance

Attachment 1.4 – Completed Past Performance

Template

Maximum of 8 numbered pages for Volume III

IV. Evaluation Factor 3: Price consists of:

Attachment 1.2 - Completed Pricing Template

No page limit

L.1 Quoter Volumes Submission:

Please Note: Quote shall only be submitted as described herein. Quote submitted by any other means will not be evaluated.

L.2 Administrative (Volume 1)

Quoters must submit a two (2) page Cover Letter signed by an individual authorized to commit the company to the quote. The Cover Letter shall identify all enclosures being transmitted as part of the

Quoter response. The Cover Letter shall reference the RFQ number (RFQ# HQ0034-20-R-0057

OUSD(C) Distributed Learning (DL) and acknowledge that it transmits a quote in response to the

RFQ and amendment(s) and the following:

1. Quotes shall remain valid for a period of not less than 90 calendar days after the quote due date;

2. Date of submission;

3. Business size under NAICS 611430.

4. Name, job title, telephone number & email address of the person(s) authorized to conduct negotiations;

5. Name, job title, telephone number & email address of the official authorized to bind the quoter’s organization shall be clearly identified;

6. Taxpayer ID number, CAGE Code, DUNS number, and facility code;

7. Statement of the quoter’s compliance with the solicitation terms and conditions, and acknowledge receipt of any amendments;

8. Completed blocks of the Standard Form 1449 blocks 17a, 30a (signed), 30b and 30c;

9. The SF 1449 must be executed by a representative of the Quoter authorized to commit the

Quoter to contractual obligations;

10. Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI): If a quoter believes that an actual or perceived OCI does exist, the quoter shall submit an OCI plan with the quote as an

“Addendum”, explaining in detail how/what the OCI is and how it will be mitigated or avoided.

11. Note: Page limits for each Volume exclude the following:

a) Standard Form 1449

b) Cover Letter

c) Table of Contents

d) Attachment 1.2 Pricing Template

e) Attachment 1.3 Resume Template

f) Attachment 1.4 Past Performance Template

g) OCI (if applicable)

L.3 QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

(1) The cutoff date and time for Questions/clarifications pertaining to the official Request for Quote

(RFQ) are due via email by 10:00 AM Eastern Time on Tuesday, January 14, 2020.

(2) Questions/clarifications pertaining to this RFQ shall be submitted to the Contract Specialist, Mrs.

Syreeta Donald at Syreeta.a.donald.civ@mail.mil and cc to Contracting Officer, Kimberly Darby at mailto:Syreeta.a.donald.civ@mail.mil

Kimberly.h.darby.civ@mail.mil. Questions that are vague, illegible, or irrelevant to the requirement, or submitted after the cut-off date may not receive a response. Responses to questions will be provided in the form of an amendment to the RFQ and will be provided via beta.SAM.gov. No telephonic requests will be entertained.

All emails shall be clearly labeled in the subject line of the email with the “RFQ# HQ0034-20-R-

0057, OUSD(C) Distributed Learning (DL) - Questions”. Quoters 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 (e.g., 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:

Question

No.

Page

Question

Category

Section, Paragraph, or

Attachment

Question/Comment/Clarification

L.4 DATE OF SUBMISSION OF QUOTATIONS

Quotations shall be submitted via email to the Contract Specialist, Mrs. Syreeta Donald at

Syreeta.a.donald.civ@mail.mil and cc to Contracting Officer, Ms. Kimberly Darby at

Kimberly.h.darby.civ@mail.mil. Quotations must be received in the email box by 10:00 AM, EDT, on Tuesday, January 21, 2020 and include in the subject line of the email “RFQ# HQ0034-20-R-

0057, OUSD(C) Distributed Learning (DL) – Quote Submission”. Quotations that are received late

(i.e. after the date and time shown in the previous sentence) will be considered late and will not be accepted or evaluated by the Government.

There is a 10 MB limit for all electronic submissions via e-mail. The 10 MB size limitation applies to a single e-mail. Quoters may submit multiple e-mails but all e-mails including attachments must be explicitly marked as part of the quotation submission and received before the closing date and time for quotations. When sending electronic files, the Quoter shall account for potential delays in file transfer. Quoters are encouraged to submit their responses early to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high demand or problems encountered in the course of the submission.

All submissions shall be received in their entirety before the due date and time in order to be considered. E-mail transmission to a government address is not instantaneous and delays in transmission often occur anywhere along the route. The Government takes no responsibility for any delays in the transmission of an e-mail quotation.

L-5 Factor 1: Technical Capability (Volume II)

The Quoter shall submit a clear, concise, and complete description of the Quoters proposed technical capability to accomplishing the requirement outlined in the PWS. Technical responses shall contain sufficient content for the Government to determine whether Quoter understands and is capable of performing the tasks outlined in the PWS requirements. To demonstrate understanding, the Quoter shall propose sound, practical, and feasible methods to accomplish all tasks identified in the PWS, including but not limited to, those tasks in PWS.

mailto:Kimberly.h.darby.civ@mail.mil mailto:Syreeta.a.donald.civ@mail.mil mailto:Kimberly.h.darby.civ@mail.mil

A. Technical Approach/Management Plan:

The Quoter shall submit their Technical Approach/Management Plan, their Draft Project

Management Plan (PMP) and their Draft Transition-In Plan to accomplish the training requirements and all requirements described in the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

The Quoter shall demonstrate the establishment of clear lines of authority and continuity between the

Contractor and the Government with their Technical Approach/Management Plan. The Quoter shall demonstrate effective process and resource management of workforce. As part of the proposed technical approach/management plan, the Quoter shall provide a collaborative organizational chart identifying leadership, quality control and executive reporting structure. The Quoter shall demonstrate their plan to provide the required deliverables in accordance with PWS section 6./

Deliverables.

The Quoter shall deliver a Draft Deliverable #1/Project Management Plan (PMP). The Draft PMP shall describe the contractor’s approach to the government’s new course and refresh course development schedule. The Quoter shall address any potential issues and mitigation strategies that may be encountered during this phase.

The Quoter shall deliver a Draft Deliverable #17/Transition-in Plan, IAW the PWS. The transition-in-plan shall facilitate a seamless start-up and transition to full operations. The Transition-In Plan shall identify transition-in risks and give mitigation strategies.

B. Staffing Qualifications and Experience: Quoters must describe resources required and the allocation of resources to satisfy the performance requirements. Quoters shall submit a completed

Attachment 1.3 - Resume Template and resumes for all proposed personnel and shall describe the individual’s specific experience as it relates to the requirements of the PWS.

The resumes shall detail all experience and skills relevant to the tasks of the PWS. Resumes of any proposed personnel not currently employed by the Quoter, or a subcontractor or teaming partner of the Quoter, must contain a statement signed by the individual that using their resume for this solicitation is authorized.

Resumes shall contain the following information:

Heading Section:

1. Proposed Position

2. Full Name; identify if key/non-key

3. Employment status:

-Specify whether the proposed individual is currently employed by the prime, sub-contractor, contingent hire, etc.); include anticipated start date for all contingent hires

4. Security clearance and citizenship. Proof of active Secret clearance.

Education Section:

5. Education to include degree(s), degree-granting institution, date degree awarded, and specialization

6. Certifications, professional licenses (CPA per the PWS), and professional affiliations

Experience Section:

7. Employer, total years of experience, and total years of experience related to the requirements of the PWS (by employer), customer support (for contract work)to include location/organization, job title, dates of employment (by employer) start and end dates include the month and year (for example: OCT 2015 – SEP 2018)

8. Relevance of the individual’s experience to the specific requirements in the PWS Part 4

Specific Tasks Section, responsibilities for each assignment, and a brief description of how each assignment relates to the PWS requirements

9. Percentage of time available to the task order

L.6 Factor 2: Past Performance (Volume III)

Quoters must submit up to four (4) recent and relevant Past Performance projects using Attachment

1.4 Past Performance Template. Quoters shall limit their Past Performance response to two (2) numbered pages per experience.

“Recent” Past Performance is defined as projects that are on-going (no break in service) and/or were completed on or after January 15, 2015.

To be considered “relevant” projects must be similar in size, scope, and complexity. The “size” refers to the dollar value of the Past Performance on an average annual basis. The “scope” of the

Past Performance refers to range of the Quoters support with respect to the supported organization, the extent of services provided, the subject matter expertise and skills required, and the role the Quoter played, i.e. prime or subcontractor. For example, the scope of this requirement involves support to the entire 54,000 member DoD FM Workforce; provision of all of the services required to develop, deliver, and refresh distributed learning courses in support of the DoD FM Certification Program; and all of the general knowledge and DoD Financial

Management experience and expertise identified in the PWS.

For each project, identify the role performed as follows: the Quoter was the prime contractor for the project or the Quoter was a subcontractor for the project. For each project, demonstrate how the project is:

Directly similar in size, scope, and complexity, to each Distributed Learning PWS Part

Specific Tasks 4.0 through 4.6.2 (as applicable)

At a minimum, quote must address the following for each past performance project reference:

Contract/task order/call order number (as applicable)

Project title, period of performance (From: day, month, and year To: day, month, and year), and role as prime or subcontractor

Customer reference: name, title, email, and phone number. Type of customer (DoD/Non-

DoD, GOV/Private)

Dollar value, contract type (FFP, CFPP, DIDQ, etc.)

Brief history of the project to include the Classification level and description of relevant work performed that is similar in size, scope, and complexity to the work required by this solicitation.

The Government will assess the Quoter’s Past Performance as either a prime Contractor or a

Subcontractor, on other similar Government contracts or programs.

The Government prefers projects based on the following descending order of preference:

Projects performed as the prime working with the DoD.

Projects performed as a subcontractor working with DoD

Projects performed as the prime working with non-DoD government

Projects performed as a subcontractor working with non-DoD government

If a quoter has no relevant past performance history of the same or similar size and scope of this requirement, the Quoter shall affirmatively state that it possesses no past performance of the same or similar size and scope.

Note: 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.

L.7 Factor 3: Price (Volume IV)

The quoters shall submit its pricing information via the attached pricing template. In addition, the quoter’s shall submit an unlocked (shall contain no locked or hidden cells and all viewable formula access) Microsoft Excel spreadsheet (versions 2003 or higher) with the same information. Any technical information located in the price volume will not be considered for evaluation.

A. The Price Volume must be submitted as a separate document. Quoters shall submit a Firm

Fixed-Price quote for one (1) 12- month base period and three (3) 12-month option periods.

B. Quoters shall submit a completed Attachment #1.2 – Pricing Template along with any documentation it determines necessary to support pricing rationale. The Price Volume shall contain three (3) worksheets (tabs) that are entitled (1) Quoter Unit Price Quote (2) CLIN

Pricing Summary, and (3) Course List. Quoters shall complete Tab 1, Tab 2, and Tab 3 and provide an overall pricing summary for the Base Period and Option Periods. As stated in

Section 2.0 of the PWS, Any additional expenditure such as programmatic support requirements required for management and oversight shall be incorporated in the price calculations for each individual training course within the curriculum.”

EVALUATION CRITERIA & AWARD

M-1 Basis for Award:

The Government will award a single, firm-fixed price award resulting from this solicitation to the responsible Quoter whose Quote is submitted by the specified closing date/time, conforms to the solicitation and is determined to be the best value and is the most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate quotes:

Factor 1 - Technical Capability

Factor 2 - Past Performance

Factor 3 - Price

Order of Importance: In determining best value, Factor 1, Technical Capability, is equally important as Technical Factor 2, Past Performance. The Technical Capability and Past Performance Factors are each more important than the Factor 3, Price. Best value may be determined using the trade-off method.

The evaluation process will consist of the following steps:

1. All eligible proposals will be evaluated using the Technical Capability Performance Evaluation

Ratings for Factor 1 - Technical Capability.

2. If the Quoters Technical Capability rating is “Acceptable” or better, then the Quoters Past

Performance will be evaluated using the Past Performance ratings outlined herein. If the Quoters

Technical Capability Rating is Marginal or Unacceptable, the quotation does not clearly meet requirements and risks unsuccessful performance. Subsequently, Evaluation Factor 2, Past

Performance, and Evaluation Factor 3, Price will not be evaluated.

3. A Past Performance Confidence Rating of “No Confidence” or “Unknown Confidence” renders the quotation ineligible for award. Price will not be evaluated in accordance with this

RFQ.

4. Thereafter, the Contracting Officer will make an award to the Quoter representing the best value to the Government. The Quoters initial quotation should contain the Quoters best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to award without discussions and/or to request revisions if the Contracting Officer later determines the need.

Quoters are advised that the award may not be made to the lowest priced, nor the highest technically rated Quoter.

M-2 Evaluation Factor 1: Technical Capability

A. Technical Approach/Management Plan The Technical Approach/Management Plan will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the

Quoter demonstrates understanding of the PWS requirements. The Government will evaluate the

Quoters understanding of the work and any anticipated difficulties and problem areas, including creativity and thoroughness to include an understanding of the PWS and the specific tasks and planned execution of the project. The evaluation will consist of:

The Government will evaluate the establishment of clear lines of authority and continuity between the Contractor and the Government with their Technical Approach/Management Plan. The

Government will evaluate if the proposal demonstrates effective process and resource management of workforce. The Government will evaluate if the Quoter demonstrates a collaborative organizational chart identifying leadership, quality control and executive reporting structure. The Government will evaluate the Quoter’s plan to provide the required deliverables in accordance with PWS section 6, Deliverables.

The Government will evaluate Draft Deliverable #1, Project Management Plan (PMP). The

Government will evaluate the completeness, effectiveness and efficiency of the contractor’s approach to the Government’s new course and refresh course development schedule. The Government will evaluate if the Quoter addressed any potential issues and mitigation strategies that may be encountered during this phase.

The Government will evaluate Draft Deliverable #17, Transition-in Plan, IAW the PWS. The

Government will evaluate the Transition-in Plan to ensure it facilitates a seamless start-up and transition to full operations. The Government will evaluate the Transition-In Plan ensuring it identifies transition-in risks and gives mitigation strategies.

B. Staffing Qualifications and Experience

The government will evaluate contractor personnel resumes against the requirementslisted in the

PWS to confirm that the staff, as a whole, has the required subject matter expertise to successfully perform the PWS requirements.

The Program Manager’s resume will be evaluated to ensure it meets the minimum qualification requirements in the PWS.

Note: Receipt of a “Marginal” or “Unacceptable” rating for Evaluation Factor 1 Technical

Capability will make the quote unawardable and the Quoter will be ineligible for award and not further evaluated.

M-3 Evaluation Factor 2: Past Performance

The Government will evaluate how well the Quoter has performed on contracts that have been determined to be both recent and relevant to the PWS. The Government reserves the right to contact references provided on the Past Performance Template to verify the Quoter’s past performance.

There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy, and quality of performance:

Step 1 - Recency: An assessment of the Past Performance will be made to determine if it is recent.

To be recent, Past Performance projects must be on-going (no break in service) and/or were completed on or after January 15, 2015. Past Performance that fails this condition will not be evaluated.

Step 2 - Relevancy: The second step is to determine how relevant each of the quoter’s projects are to the solicited work. Each project will be assigned a relevancy rating from Table 3. Projects which are rated “Not Relevant” will not be further considered and will not be factored into the quoter’s overall Performance Confidence Assessment Rating.

Step 3 - Quality of Products or Services: The third step of the Past Performance evaluation is to establish the quality of the Quoter’s performance on each project. The Government may determine quality of performance through a variety of methods to include: contacting customers, reviewing databases such as the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), or reviewing other sources of information. The Government’s evaluation documentation will discuss the Quoter’s quality of performance on each of the projects that are considered recent and relevant, however it will not assign a quality of performance rating for each individual past project.

Step 4 – After assessing the recency, relevancy, and quality of performance of the Quoter’s individual projects, the Government will assign one overall Confidence Assessment Rating to the

Quoter (Table 4, below). This rating is based on the Quoter’s overall record of recency, relevancy, and quality of performance across the reviewed past projects. In conducting a Past Performance confidence assessment, each Quoter shall be assigned one of the ratings listed in Table 4.

Note: Receipt of a “No Confidence” or “Unknown Confidence” or “Unknown Confidence” rating for Evaluation Factor 2 Past Performance will make the quote unawardable and the

Quoter will be ineligible for award and not further evaluated.

Evaluation Factor 3: Price

Price will not be scored or receive and adjectival rating. Price will be evaluated for reasonableness.

The overall price will be determined fair and reasonable in accordance with FAR 13.106-3.

The quoter’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 option periods.

For evaluation purposes only, the total evaluated price is the sum of the total prices submitted for

(a) 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 (clause FAR 52.217-

8) extension, the total price is calculated as one-half of the total price of the final option period. Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise any options.

M-4 Evaluation Process and Ratings

Technical Factor 1 Technical Capability will be assigned a rating in accordance with the table below:

Table 1: Technical Capability Ratings

Rating Description

Outstanding (O) Quote indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

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

Acceptable (A) Quote meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal (M) Quote has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable (U) Quote 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.

Definitions – For evaluation purposes the following definitions apply:

Table 2: Technical Capability Ratings

Rating Description

Strength Defined as an aspect of an Quoters proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the

Government during contract performance.

Weakness Defined as a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Significant Weakness Defined as a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Deficiency Defined as a material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

Technical Factor 2, Past Performance will be assigned a rating in accordance with the table below:

There are three (3) aspects to the Past Performance evaluation: recency, relevancy, and quality.

Step 1 - Recency: An assessment of the Past Performance will be made to determine if it is recent.

To be recent, Past Performance projects must be on-going (no break in service) and/or have been completed on or after January 15, 2015. Past Performance that fails this condition will not be evaluated.

Step 2 - Relevancy: The second step is to determine how relevant each of the quoter’s projects are to the solicited work. Each project will be assigned a relevancy rating from Table 2. Projects which are rated “Not Relevant” will not be further considered and will not be factored into the quoter’s overall Performance Confidence Assessment Rating.

Table 3: Past Performance Evaluation Rating (Relevancy)

Very Relevant

Past Performance effort involved essentially the same magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Past Performance effort involved much of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant Past Performance effort involved some of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Past Performance effort did not involve any of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Step 3 - Quality of Products or Services. The third step of the Past Performance evaluation is to establish the quality of the Quoter’s performance on each project. The Government may determine quality of performance through a variety of methods to include: contacting customers, reviewing databases such as the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), or reviewing other sources of information. The Government’s evaluation documentation will discuss the Quoter’s quality of performance on each of the projects, however it will not assign a quality of performance rating for each individual past project.

Step 4 – After assessing the Quality, Recency, and Relevancy of the Quoter’s individual projects, the

Government will assign one overall Confidence Assessment Rating to the Quoter (Table 4). The rating is based on the Quoter’s overall record of recency, relevancy, and quality of performance across the reviewed projects. In conducting a confidence assessment, each Quoter shall be assigned one of the ratings in Table 4.

Table 4: Performance Confidence Assessment Rating

Substantial Confidence

Based on the Quoters quality and recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a high expectation that the Quoter will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the Quoters quality and recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a reasonable expectation that the Quoter will successfully perform the required effort.

Limited Confidence Based on the Quoters quality and recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a low expectation that the Quoter will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the Quoters quality and recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has no expectation that the Quoter will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

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

Attachments

The following attachments constitute the complete RFQ solicitation and are hereby incorporated by reference:

1. Attachment 1.0 RFQ HQ003420R0057 Provisions & Clauses (Provided with the

FINAL RFQ)(Provided with the FINAL RFQ)

2. Attachment 1.1 PWS

3. Attachment 1.2 Pricing Template

4. Attachment 1.3 Resume Template

5. Attachment 1.4 Past Performance Template