HQ003420R0129 RETS IDIQ RFP Amendment 01.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

Provide answ ers to questions submitted by the industry and to revise RFP documents accordingly.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

S 1 14

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 08-May-2020

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 HQ003420R0129

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

20-Apr-2020

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 1 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

08-May-2020

CODE

WHS - ACQUISITION DIRECTORATE

4800 MARK CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 09F09

ALEXANDRIA VA 22350-0002

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

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

HQ003420R0129

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

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 01

Accounting System

Checklist

29-MAR-2020

Attachment 2 Attachment 02 OCI

Analysis Disclosure Form

Attachment 3 Attachment 03 NDA

Form

29-MAR-2020

Attachment 4 Attachment 04 Mission

Engineering TO01 Seed

Task

29-MAR-2020

Attachment 5 Attachment 05 RETS

IDIQ Sample Problems

29-MAR-2020

Attachment 6 Attachment 06 RETS

IDIQ Past Performance

Questionnaire

29-MAR-2020

Attachment 7 Attachment 07 TO01

Labor Qualification KP

Identifier a Prici

Attachment 8 Attachment 08a DD254

Attachment 9 Attachment 8b DD254

Continuation to:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE

Attachment 1 Attachment 01

Accounting System

Checklist

29-MAR-2020

Attachment 10 Attachment 10

Amendment 01 Questions

& Answers

Attachment 2 Attachment 02 OCI

Analysis Disclosure Form

Attachment 3 Attachment 03

Amendment 01 NDA

Form

Attachment 4 Attachment 04

Amendment 01 Mission

Engineering TO01

Attachment 5 Attachment 05

Amendment 01 RETS

IDIQ Sample Problems

Attachment 6 Attachment 06 RETS

IDIQ Past Performance

Questionnaire

29-MAR-2020

Attachment 7 Attachment 07

Amendment 01 Pricing

Template

Attachment 8 Attachment 08a DD254

Attachment 8b Attachment 8b DD254

Continuation

Attachment 9 Attachment 09

Amendment 01 Minimum

KP Qualifications / LOE

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

L.1.0 INSTRUCTIONS TO THE OFFEROR

The Washington Headquarters Services, Acquisition Directorate (WHS/AD) intends to establish a Multiple-Award

Contract Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) upon which one (1) task order will be awarded concurrently.

WHS/AD is looking to establish a pool of at least two (2) IDIQ awardees qualified small businesses under NAICS

Code 5417151 Research & Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Aircraft, Aircraft

Engine and Engine Parts)(<1,500 employees) only (applies to IDIQ and the Task Order). The Government reserves the right to award to some, none, or to all offerors based on submissions. The Period of Performance (POP) for the resultant IDIQ contracts is (60) months, not including the potential extension under FAR 52.217-8 Option to Extend

Services.

To ensure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, Offerors must follow the instructions contained herein.

Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to evaluation factors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. The Offeror’s proposal must be valid for at least 150 days from the due date specified in Section L.1.2 of this Solicitation. The Government may waive informalities and minor irregularities in offers received.

Your proposal should address the following:

Each Offeror will provide a proposal that addresses the overarching IDIQ as well as Task Order 0001 and all

Sample Problems.

The response shall be formatted into a transmittal letter and four separate electronic folders by volume number and title as follows:

Transmittal Letter

Volume 1 – Administrative

Volume 2 – Technical

1 See https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/2019-08/SBA%20Table%20of%20Size%20Standards_Effective%20Aug%2019%2C%202019_Rev.pdf

Volume 3 – Past Performance

Volume 4 – Price

L.1.1 Solicitation Questions: Offerors should submit questions, concerns, or requests for clarification via e-mail to the point of contact listed below no later than 28 April, 2020 at 10:00 AM Eastern Time. Telephonic inquiries will not be accepted. WHS/AD assumes no responsibility for non-delivery due to problems with e-mail servers, and extensions will not be granted for these matters. Responses to all questions will be in the form of an amendment to this solicitation. E-mail questions to Sharon Hilton at sharon.a.hilton.civ@mail.mil.

L.1.2 Proposal Submission: All submissions must be unclassified, including Past Performance summaries and questionnaires. The proposal should be valid for at least 150 days. Offerors shall submit their proposals before the due date and time for this solicitation. The due date and time for receipt of proposals is 20 May, 2020 at

12:00 PM Eastern Time. Proposals received after the due date and time set forth above will be considered “late” and will not be evaluated or considered for award in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(c)(3). It is the offerors responsibility to ensure timely receipt of proposals. Proposals shall be emailed to sharon.a.hilton.civ@mail.mil.

Ensure that the subject line reads as follows: “HQ0034-20-R-0129”. All responses to the solicitation shall be in separate files and volumes corresponding to the evaluation factors identified in paragraph L.1.0. The

Government will not consider the text of the emails, only the attachments. A single email cannot exceed 10

Mbs; zip files are accepted. Multiple emails are acceptable; provided the subject line reads as follows: First email

– “HQ0034-20-R-0129 [Offeror Name] email 1 of X” Second email – “HQ0034-20-R-0129 [Offeror Name] email 2 of X”.

Subcontractors not submitting proposals through the prime contractor shall submit proposals and information that is proprietary directly to the Government via e-mail to the Contract Specialist, sharon.a.hilton.civ@mail.mil.

All subcontractor proposals shall clearly indicate the Prime Contractor for which they are proposing within the proposal and file name. File names shall be formatted as: PRIME-subcontractor-Volume XX. The subject line of the email(s) shall read as follows: “HQ0034-20-R-0129 – [Prime Contractor Name]-subcontractor”. Prime contractors are responsible for ensuring their subcontractors submit timely proposals.

E-mail transmission to a government address is not instantaneous and delays in transmission often occur.

Offerors are responsible for ensuring timely receipt of proposals.

L.1.3 Text: Text shall be at least single-spaced, on 8 1/2 x 11 with one (1) inch margins. Submit separate electronic files, by Volume. Text and graphics portions of the electronic files shall be in a format readable by

Microsoft Word or Excel. All Excel files are to be submitted as “.xls” or “.xlsx” files and all Word document files must be submitted as “.doc” or “docx”. Note: Volume 1 and Volume 3 shall be submitted in Microsoft Word and

Portable Document Format (PDF).

L.1.4 Font Size: Print shall be of a minimum 12-point font size in “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.

L.1.5 Page Limitations: Offerors shall not exceed the following page limitations in the table below. Pages shall be numbered consecutively. Pages submitted in excess of the page limitations stated will be removed and not evaluated.

Page Limitation

Transmittal Letter 3

Volume 1 – Administrative

Table of Contents Unlimited mailto:stormy.l.anthony.civ@mail.mil mailto:sharon.a.hilton.civ@mail.mil mailto:sharon.a.hilton.civ@mail.mil

Security Clearance Unlimited

Joint Venture/Teaming Arrangements Unlimited

Accounting System Unlimited

Completed SF 33 Unlimited

FAR and DFARS Clauses Unlimited

OCI Form Unlimited

OCI Mitigation Plan (if applicable) Unlimited

NDA Forms Unlimited

Volume 2 – Technical

Factor 1 60 Total:

Sub-Factor 1: Task Order 0001 (inclusive of 8 Key Personnel resumes) 35

Sub-Factor 2: Sample Problems 1 – 5 25

Volume 3 – Past Performance

Up to six relevant contract summaries (2 pages each) 12 Total

Organizational Structure Change History (if applicable) Unlimited

Volume 4 – Price

Task Order 0001 Price Unlimited

L.1.6 Transmittal Letter: Offerors must submit all (if any) assumptions, conditions, or exceptions with any of the terms and conditions of this solicitation in a Transmittal Letter. If not noted in this section of your proposal, it will be assumed that the Offeror proposes no assumptions for award, and agrees to comply with all of the terms and conditions as set forth herein. The Transmittal Letter shall not exceed three pages and must contain the following information:

Solicitation Number: HQ0034-20-R-0129;

Name and address of Offeror;

Name, telephone number, and e-mail address of Offeror’s primary and alternative points-of-contact;

Name of Offeror’s contract administration office (if available);

Names, CAGE/DUNS for any proposed sub-contractors or teaming partners, and indicate for each if relationship is exclusive or non-exclusive

Date of submission;

Name, title and signature of authorized representative;

Offeror’s Cage Code/DUNS#;

Offeror’s Tax ID Number;

Statement of Compliance: Offer shall include a statement indicating complete compliance with this solicitation, or detailed analysis of any objections, exceptions, contingencies, or additions. Any objections, exceptions, contingencies, or additions shall also cross-reference the particular sections/paragraphs in this solicitation to which it applies.

Proprietary Information: Offeror shall include a statement indicating whether the Offeror intends to make use of any proprietary information;

Format and Content: Offeror shall describe any deviation in their proposal from the specified format of this solicitation. If the content of the Offeror’s proposal differs significantly from these guidelines, state the differences and explain the reasons for the differences.

L.2.0 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

L.2.1 Volume 1 – Administrative: This volume shall include all solicitation documents as outlined below. If the

Offeror fails to provide or adequately comply with any of the following requirements, their proposals will be considered unacceptable, will not be evaluated further, and will be unawardable.

L.2.1.1 Security Clearance: The contractor shall possess a TOP SECRET Facility Clearance from the

Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) (formerly Defense Security Service) at the time proposals are submitted, evidence of which must be included in the proposal in the form of a letter from DCSA or a NISS Facility Clearance Validation memo.

L.2.1.2 Joint Venture/Teaming Arrangements: Offeror shall provide, if applicable, a summary describing the

Joint Venture/Teaming arrangement established for this solicitation and a document establishing the legally binding nature among the joint venture. or teaming partners. The Offeror shall indicate on the summary if any of the teaming arrangements are exclusive.

L.2.1.3 Accounting System: The Government may compete and award Task Orders utilizing the Cost Type family of contract types under this IDIQ. The Offeror must state whether or not they have a DCAA-approved accounting system. In accordance with FAR subparts 16.301-3(a) (1) and 9.104-1(e), the Offeror must use an accounting system that is adequate for determining costs applicable to the contract. The Offeror must provide a summary description of the Offeror’s accounting system and state whether it is compliant with Generally Accepted

Accounting Principles. The Offeror must also state whether the accounting system has been reviewed and approved by the Government and provide evidence of the review and approval by DCAA / DCMA. The Offeror must provide any known/cited accounting system deficiencies and identify any deviations from the Offeror’s standard procedures in preparing this proposal. For known/cited accounting system or methods non-compliances, provide a schedule and description of corrective actions the Offeror is taking to eliminate the non-compliance issues. If the Offeror does not currently have a DCAA-approved accounting system, they must fill out the Accounting System Checklist

(Attachment 01) and include it in this section. If an offeror is unable to demonstrate having or being able to have a

DCAA-approved accounting system, the offer’s proposal may be deemed unawardable.

L.2.1.4 SF 33 and FAR/DFARS Clauses: Offeror shall provide the following:

A completed SF33, including the following:

Block 12, Validity Period of Offer

Block 13, Discount Terms for Prompt Payment

Block 14, Acknowledgement of Amendments (if applicable)

Block 15A. and B., Contractor Name, Address, and Telephone Number

Block 16, Name and Title of Person Authorized to Sign

Block 17, Signature

Block 18, Offer Date

Schedule CLIN values

The FAR and DFARS clauses found on the continuation pages, Including:

252.209-7992

52.204-8

252.204-7007 Alternate A

L.2.1.5 Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Mitigation Plan/OCI Form/NDA Form:

Identify any current OCI that will occur as a result of this IDIQ award, within OUSD(R&E) and WHS and include a specific mitigation plan. (Attachment 02)

Conflicts must be described in adequate detail for the Contracting Officer to determine if an actual or potential conflict exists and if it has been adequately mitigated (e.g., provide contract numbers of contracts that will continue to be supported, contracts that will be terminated, or contracts that will be lapsed to terminate any conflicts).

Failure to provide adequate information on an Offeror’s avoidance or mitigation will result in the proposal being rejected and relieves the Government of any further responsibility to resolve OCI issues. See FAR

9.504(e). Notices to Offerors of OCIs and their responses thereto are not negotiations or discussion as those terms are used in FAR 15.306(d).

If an Offeror determines that an actual or potential OCI does not currently exist they shall include a statement to that effect as part of the proposal and are not required to submit a specific mitigation plan.

Provide an IDIQ OCI mitigation plan which addresses how potential OCI will be handled and mitigated on Task

Order 001 and future task order awards. (Required if applicable.)

Attachment 02 “Organizational Conflict of Interest Form.”

Attachment 03 “NDA Form” for each person planning to work on the contract.

L.2.2 – Volume 2 -Technical

L.2.2.1 Task Order 0001: The Offeror shall submit a proposal to meet or exceed the Performance Work Statement

(PWS) requirements of Task Order 0001 (Attachment 4) which shall include, a staffing plan and resumes of proposed Key personnel, and subcontracting approach. Offerors shall provide the specific and actual means and methodology that will be used to satisfy the requirements of the Task Order 0001 PWS.

The Offeror’s Staffing Plan shall include tables and data that identify the fulltime and fractional equivalent staff being proposed mapped to the PWS of Task Order 0001. These tables and data shall clearly detail the names of all

Key and Non Key staff proposed, matrix labor category assignmentfit, current security clearance, company affiliation, employment status (i.e., either current full-time/part-time employee, signed contingent hire, or consultant), and a summary of experience by type or specialty area. The staffing plan shall also address the

Offerors timeline plan after award and approach to transition and start-up.

The Offeror shall propose Key Personnel identified in the Task Order 0001 PWS and corresponding labor category matrix (Attachment 079 – Minimum KP Qualifications and LOE). In addition to Task Order 0001 resumes, the offeror shall provide a resume for the overall IDIQ Program Manager who is designated as a Key Person. The resumes for these Key Personnel shall identify the specific roles and responsibilities of the individuals, their previous job positions and experience in relation to the PWS and their roles, and the specific acquisition development projects they have been engaged with and in what capacity. The resume shall also identify all formal education (e.g., college, training courses, etc.), the dates completed, and degrees or certifications earned. These resumes will be submitted in a MS Word format in accordance with the resume format template (see figure 1). Each resume shall be no more than three pages in length.

The following statement is required in the staffing plan: “The Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer prior to making any changes in personnel assigned to key positions.”

(To be completed by the Offeror and annotated on the staffing plan.)

Figure 1. Resume Format three (3) page limit, not inclusive of commitment letters)

Name of Individual: Scheduled Position and Location: (identify if Key positions here)

Proposed Position/Labor Category and Company: (state here if contingency)

Time in Current Position:

Level of Security Clearance:

Highest Security Clearance Held:

Years of Professional Experience:

Years of Specialized Experience related to the specific sections in the PWS:

Education: (Degrees held; Date Received and Respective Institution) Unique or Special Qualifications:

Experience/Work History: (List in chronological descending order)

Professional Memberships/Accreditations:

Patents and Publications:

Awards Received:

Insert at the end of page of the resume or footer: “Attestation: We attest to the accuracy of the information contained herein and that an agreement has been reached regarding salary, position, and work commitment.”

Individual/Employee Signature Date

Corporate Officer Signature Date

L.2.2.2 The Offerors shall address each Sample Problem found in Attachment 5 in accordance with the evaluation criteria stated in Section M.1.2.1.2.

L.2.3 Volume 3 – Past Performance: Offeror shall demonstrate the quality of the Offeror’s past performance for services either identical or similar in technical scope, complexity, and magnitude to this solicitation’s specified scope of work as delineated in all 7 IDIQ PWS Tasks. Each Offeror shall complete and submit summaries as described below for no more than six (6) contracts (completed or ongoing) most relevant to the

IDIQ’ PWS Tasks. Completed or ongoing contracts are defined as work performed not more than five (5) years prior to the date of the final RFP issue.

For past performance contract submissions, at least half (50%) must be from the SB Prime Offeror. Past performance submissions from SB prime Offeror will be given greater consideration preference than past performance submissions from Large Business sub-contractors and teaming partners. Additionally, past performance submissions that demonstrate experience in all seven (7) IDIQ task areas of the PWS and will be given greater consideration than submissions that involve only a portion of the IDIQ task areas. All submitted past or ongoing contract performance information submitted for the Prime Offeror or any team member shall be for contracts performed as a prime contractor.

Contract Summaries

For each contract submitted, the Offeror shall summarize the following information, not to exceed one (2) pages for each contract:

Identify the Prime contractor, contract number and type (e.g., IDIQ, MAC, BPA etc), period of performance, dollar ceiling value and actual incurred revenue, and security clearance level for work performed

Identify the customer, and provide the name, title/ role, phone number, e-mail address of a customer point of contact (POC) that is knowledgeable of the Offeror’s performance on the contract.

Describe the scope of the contract and the actual work performed by the Offeror.

Describe the relevance of work performed to the PWS IDIQ Tasks 1-7

Describe cost, schedule, and performance (include explanations for any cost and/or time growth experienced (if applicable).

Provide the date the Past Performance Questionnaire was requested and to whom it was sent (see below).

The Offeror shall initiate the Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 6) for each submitted contract. The

Offeror shall complete blocks 1 through 7 on the form. The Offeror shall request that the client’s representative most knowledgeable of the contract complete block 8 on the form and submit the Past Performance Questionnaires directly to sharon.a.hilton.civ@mail.mil no later than 01 June, 2020, 04:00PM EST. Completed questionnaires may be sent to the POC listed above in PDF format. Offerors are responsible for ensuring that the telephone numbers provided for the owner’s representative indicated on each Contract Summary are accurate and that the representative is aware that the WHS/Acquisition Directorate may be contacting them regarding the Offeror’s past performance.

In the conduct of past performance evaluation of Offerors, the Government may use a variety of sources in addition to information provided by the Offeror. These sources may include, but are not limited to CPARS, Past Performance

Information Retrieval Systems (PPIRS), evaluator’s personal knowledge, commercial or any available published information, and information derived from present or past Government or commercial customers of the Offeror.

L.2.3.1 Organizational Structure Change History: Many Offerors have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized its divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of relevant past efforts or between conclusion of recent past efforts and this solicitation. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this procurement. To facilitate this relevancy determination, the Offeror shall include in this proposal volume (if applicable) a “roadmap” describing all such changes in the offer’s company within the past 7 years. As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevance of any efforts identified for past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment. Since the Government intends to consider past performance information provided by other sources, as well as that provided by the Offeror, the Offeror’s “roadmap” should be specifically applicable to the efforts identified but general enough to apply to efforts on which the Government receives information from other sources. This information is required for the Offeror and any teaming partners(s) being used for past performance submissions.

L.2.42 Volume 34 – Price:

L.2.24.1 Task Order 0001: Offeror shall provide their proposed price for Task Order 0001 which will be of Firm

Fixed Price (FFP) contract type by completing Tab 01 (Price Proposal) of Attachment 07. Attachment 07 must be submitted as an MS Excel file. The Period of Performance for Task Order 0001 will be 12 months for the support portion, however the contractor shall complete each of the three discrete study tasks within 5 months from Task

Order award. No more than two individual study tasks will substantially overlap one another at any given time. The

Offeror shall provide a basis for the price, identifying all prospective labor categories, showing labor hours and rates for all labor categories, and any materials or supplies to be used. Pricing assumptions and supporting narrative must be included, and both must be disclosed in Volume 4 by adding a new tab to Attachment 7. The labor mix and key personnel qualifications are provided on Tab 02 (Min Qualifications) of Attachment 7. The offeror must use

Attachment 7 as the basis for forming the price proposal. Lack of detail may result in a rating of a higher risk by the

Selection Authority in the selection process.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION CRITERIA

M.1 EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The Washington Headquarters Services, Acquisition Directorate (WHS/AD) intends to establish a Multiple-Award

Contract Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) upon which one (1) task order will be awarded concurrently.

WHS/AD is looking to establish a pool of at least two (2) IDIQ awardee qualified small businesses under NAICS

Code 541715 Research & Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Aircraft, Aircraft

Engine and Engine Parts)(<1,500 employees) only (applies to IDIQ and the Task Order). The Period of

Performance (POP) for the resultant contracts is (60) months, not including the potential extension under FAR

52.217-8 Option to Extend Services.

The contractor shall possess a TOP SECRET Facility Clearance from the Defense Counterintelligence and Security

Agency (DCSA) (formerly Defense Security Service) at the time proposals are submitted, evidence of which must be included in the proposal in the form of a letter from DCSA or a NISS Facility Clearance Validation memo. If the offeror’s proposal does not contain this letter, the proposal will be deemed unawardable.

Each Offeror will provide a proposal that addresses the overarching IDIQ (Past Performance) as well as Task

Order 0001 and all Sample Problems.

The evaluation will be conducted in accordance with FAR Part 15 competitive procedures using a trade-off method to obtain the best value for the Government. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than "Acceptable" must be achieved for each non-price factor and sub-factor.

IDIQ holders and the task order awardee will be selected as follows. The Government will first identify a pool of vendors to be IDIQ holders. These vendors will be selected based on Factor 1 - Technical, Factor 2 - Past

Performance, and Factor 3 price, with the weight prescribed in M.1.1. The price proposed for Task Order 0001 under Factor 3 will be used for the trade-off analysis to establish IDIQ awardees. IDIQ awards will be made to vendors who represent the best value to the Government, price and other factors considered. The Government anticipates award of a minimum of two (2) IDIQ contracts.

From that pool of vendors, the Government will select one (1) awardee for Task Order 0001. To do this, the

Government will conduct a tradeoff specifically between Sub-factor 1.1 and Factor 3 price among the IDIQ awardees. Sub-factor 1.1 will be treated as more important than price consistent with the scheme described in M.1.1.

The Government will award the task order to the responsible small business Offerors whose proposal conforming to this solicitation will be the most advantageous to the Government, based on those factors.

From that pool of vendors, the Government will select one (1) awardee for Task Order 0001. To do this, the

Government will conduct a tradeoff specifically between Sub-factor 1.1 and Factor 3 price among the IDIQ awardees. Government will award the task order to the responsible small business Offerors whose proposal conforming to this solicitation will be the most advantageous to the Government, based on those factors.

Overall, the Government will give higher preference to proposers who demonstrate ability to perform on all Task

Areas of the IDIQ PWS as primes as opposed to proposers who will rely heavily on their team (teaming partners and subcontractors). Offerors are cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest price offered or to the proposal with the most highly rated non-price factors.

M.1.1 Factor Order of Importance

Factor 1 – Technical Approach

Sub-Factor 1.1 – Task Order 0001

Sub-Factor 1.2 – Sample Problems 1-5

Factor 2 – Past Performance

Factor 3 – Price

Factors 1 and 2 are equal. Factors 1 and 2 are, individually and combined, more important than Factor 3. Sub-

Factors 1.1 and 1.2 are equal.

M.1.2 – Evaluation Criteria

M.1.2.1 Factor 1 – Technical Approach

In evaluation of Factor 1, the Government will only consider information provided in Volume 2. Each sub-factor will receive an adjectival rating. Factor 1 as a whole will receive a separate adjectival rating.

M.1.2.1.1 Sub-Factor 1.1 – Task Order 0001

The government will evaluate the Offeror’s Staffing Plan to ensure that the Offeror can adequately provide support for the tasks stated in the PWS for Task Order 0001. The proposed personnel (key and non-key) will be evaluated for suitability for the proposed position(s) based on demonstrated experience in performing work similar in size and complexity to the individual’s proposed duties and responsibilities in the PWS, and qualifications (e.g. education, certifications, licenses) as presented in the resumes and the staffing plan. The evaluation will assess the depth and appropriateness of the experience of the Offeror’s proposed Key personnel. The Government will also evaluate the

Offeror’s timeline plan after award and approach to transition and start-up. This sub-factor will be evaluated as a whole and given an overall evaluation rating for the sub-factor

M.1.2.1.2 Sub-Factor 1.2 - Sample Problems 01- 05

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s responses to the sample problems to determine the merit of the

Offeror’s technical approach, generally (including knowledge, methodologies, tools, and techniques) and to determine the extent to which the Offeror understands and is able to perform the type of tasks required under the

IDIQ PWS. The Sample problems will be evaluated as a whole and given a single evaluation rating for this sub-factor.

M.1.3 Adjectival Ratings Combined Technical/Risk Ratings

The following adjectival ratings (combined technical/risk ratings) shall be used as a guide in assigning the ratings for each of the areas to be evaluated, with the exception of Past Performance and Price factors:

Combined Technical/Risk Ratings

Rating Description

(BLUE)

Outstanding

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

(PURPLE)

Good

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

(GREEN)

Acceptable

Proposal 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.

(YELLOW)

Marginal

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

(RED)

Unacceptable

Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is unawardable.

M.2.0 Factor 2 – Past Performance.

In evaluation of Factor 2, the Government will only consider information provided in Volume 3.

The Government’s confidence rating is directly tied to the ability of the contractor to demonstrate validated past performance through Past Performance Questionnaires and Past Performance Summaries. Past performance information may also be obtained from any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Past Performance Appraisal System (CPARS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting

System (eSRS), or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining

Officials; and the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA).

Contracts performed for the Department of Defense, depending on relevancy, may be considered more significant in the evaluation.

All things being equal, pPast performance of the prime SB and past performance that demonstrates all seven (7)

IDIQ task areas will be given greater consideration. Relevant work means work that is similar in magnitude

(including size in terms of dollars, FTEs), scope, and complexity to the solicited work performed. The government reserves the right to give greater consideration to information on those contracts deemed most relevant to the effort described in this solicitation. Past performance relevancy will be evaluated in accordance with the following chart.

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

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 project is deemed Somewhat Relevant, Relevant, or Very Relevant, then the Government will determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts and assign one of the below past performance assessment ratings.

Projects evaluated as Not Relevant will not be considered further.

*Marginal is defined as: “Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not / did not identify corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed / taken corrective actions appear / were only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.”

The purpose of the past performance evaluation is to allow the government to assess the Contractor’s ability to perform the effort described in the proposal, based on the Contractor’s demonstrated present and past performance.

The assessment process will result in an overall performance confidence rating in accordance with the following chart. An Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is

Past Performance Assessment

Rating Definition

Outstanding The majority of sources of information indicate that the quality of the offer’s past performance was consistently outstanding.

Excellent The majority of sources of information indicate that the quality of the offer’s past performance was consistently excellent.

Adequate The majority of sources of information indicate that the quality of the offer’s past performance was consistently above Marginal.

Marginal* The majority of sources of information indicate that the quality of the offer’s past performance was Marginal or below.

Not

Observed

The majority of sources of information indicate that the quality of the offer’s past performance was Not Observed or not available.

not available will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and shall receive the rating of

“Unknown Confidence (Neutral).”

Based on these evaluations, offerors will be given an overall confidence rating for past performance.

Performance Confidence Assessments

Rating Description

Substantial

Confidence

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

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

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

Unknown Confidence

(Neutral)

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.

M.3.0 Factor 3 – Price for Task Order 0001

M.3.1 The Government will evaluate the proposed labor rates, labor mix, as well as the price proposed for Task

Order 0001. The techniques and procedures described under FAR 15.404-1 will be the primary means of assessing the price as being fair and reasonable; however, the Government reserves the right to integrate other pricing techniques and procedures. The Offerors are not to change the Travel and Other Direct Costs plug numbers in the pricing template. FAR clause 52.217-8 will be incorporated into the resulting TO 0001 award; for evaluation purposes the price of the potential 6 month extension will be one half of the overall evaluated price of TO 0001.

One (1) Full Time Equivalent (FTE) is considered to be 1920 hours per year. This factor will also be used for trade-off analysis for the IDIQ awards as well as for trade-off analysis for Task Order 0001.

M.4.0 Definitions

The following definitions will be used in the evaluation process.

Clarifications are limited exchanges between the Government and Offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated.

Communications are exchanges, between the Government and Offerors, after receipt of proposals, leading to establishment of the competitive range.

Competitive Range is based on the ratings of each proposal against all evaluation criteria and includes all of the most highly rated proposals, unless the range is further reduced for purposes of efficiency. (See FAR 15.306(c).)

Deficiency is 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. (See FAR 15.001.)

Discussions are negotiations conducted in a competitive acquisition. Discussions take place after establishment of the competitive range.

Evaluation Notice is the written notification to the Offeror for purposes of clarifications, communications, or in support of discussions.

http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/15.htm

Risk, as it pertains to source selection, is the potential for unsuccessful contract performance. The consideration of risk assesses the degree to which an Offeror’s proposed approach to achieving the technical factor may involve risk of disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

Significant Weakness is a flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. (See FAR 15.001.)

Strength is an aspect of an Offeror's 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 is a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. (See FAR

15.001.)

(End of Summary of Changes)