Section_M_-_Protocol_5-2-18.docx

HQ0147-18-R-0007 Protocol

SECTION M: EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M-1.0 EVALUATION METHODOLOGY AND CRITERIA

M-1.1 This acquisition will utilize Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) source selection procedures in accordance with FAR 15.101-2, as supplemented. Technical tradeoffs will not be made and no additional credit will be given for exceeding acceptability. Award will be made to the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price, that is deemed responsible in accordance with the FAR and whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements. The solicitation requirements include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, acceptable security and OCI plans, and all other information required by Section L of this solicitation. The Government intends to select one contractor for Protocol Support Services Requirements. However, the Government reserves the right to award no contract at all, if the SSA determines it is in the Government’s best interest. Contingent proposals are not allowed, nor will they be accepted, considered or evaluated by the Government. Contingent proposals are defined herein as proposals that include terms or conditions that imply performance is contingent upon any sort of provisioning from the Government that is not set forth in the RFP.

M-1.2 It is the Government’s intent to award without discussions (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)); therefore, the offerors initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint. However, if during the evaluation period, it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to hold discussions, offeror responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs), and the Final Proposal Revisions (FPRs) will be considered in making the source selection decision. If the PCO determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the PCO may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

M-1.3 Competitive Range

If discussions are conducted, the PCO will establish a competitive range based on the ratings of each proposal against all evaluation criteria. If the PCO determines that an offeror’s proposal should not be included in the competitive range, the proposal will be eliminated from consideration for award and written notice of the decision will be provided to the unsuccessful offeror in accordance with FAR 15.503, whereupon they may request and receive a debriefing in accordance with FAR 15.505 and 15.506, respectively.

M-1.4 Final Proposal Revisions

Final proposal revisions will be requested if discussions have been conducted. Offerors are advised that unsupported final proposal revisions may be penalized in the overall proposal evaluation, and an otherwise acceptable proposal could be placed in jeopardy. Any changes to or non-concurrence with contract terms and conditions submitted in the final proposal revision will not be subject to further discussion or negotiation and may render the offer unacceptable to the Government. This provision is not intended to restrict the offeror’s opportunity to revise figures (e.g., prices, discounts, percentage rates, etc.). Rather, it is intended to preclude any misunderstandings by the Government, which could result if new or revised terms and conditions are submitted in the final proposal revision that have not been fully disclosed, discussed and understood during discussions or negotiations. Hence, such new or revised terms and conditions are not solicited and, if submitted in the final proposal revision, may render the offer unacceptable to the Government.

M-1.5 Factors/Subfactors

The following evaluation factors and sub-factors will be used for evaluation. Award will be made to the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price, which is deemed responsible in accordance with the FAR and whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements based upon an assessment of the evaluation factors and sub-factors described below.

TABLE M-1: EVALUATION FACTORS

Non-Price Evaluation Factor

Factor F1: Mission Capability

Subfactor MCS1: Security Plan

Subfactor MCS2: Key Personnel and Qualifications

Subfactor MCS3: Corporate Experience

Subfactor MCS4: Small Business Compliance Plan

Price Evaluation Factor

Factor F2: Cost/Price

Technical acceptability will be evaluated starting with the proposal with the lowest evaluated price until two proposals are determined to be acceptable. The remaining proposals, if any, will not be evaluated further. Factor F1 will be evaluated on an “Acceptable/Unacceptable” basis using the ratings at Table M-2. Offerors assessed with an “Unacceptable” in any of the F1 subfactors will receive an “Unacceptable” rating for Factor F1. Offerors assessed with an “Unacceptable” in any of the Subfactors will not be eligible for award.

Of these two “Acceptable” proposals, the one with the lowest evaluated price will be selected for award.

TABLE M-2: Acceptable/Unacceptable Definitions

M-2.0 FACTOR F1: Mission Capability

For evaluation purposes, the Government will limit its evaluation to the criteria stated below. Offerors must submit information sufficient to evaluate their approach based on the detailed criteria provided. Failure to provide a complete proposal will indicate a lack of the understanding/ability to perform the work required and will result in a determination that the offeror’s proposal is unacceptable. Unacceptability of any respective subfactor under the Mission Capability factor will result in an unacceptable Mission Capability factor rating. The following subfactors will be assessed as part of this factor:

M-2.1 Subfactor MCS1: Security Plan

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed security plan to verify appropriate facility and personnel clearances, processes for safeguarding classified materials (to include handling, storage, and transmission) in accordance with the requirements of the DD Form 254; processes for safeguarding Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) (to include handling, storage, and transmission); and providing cleared personnel upon completion of the contract transition period and throughout contract performance, including short-notice change orders. To be rated acceptable for award, the offeror must meet all security requirements as identified in DoD 5220.22-M “National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual”, DoD Manual 5200.01, Volume 4 “Controlled Unclassified Information” and the DD Form 254 “Department of Defense Contract Security Classification Specification.”

M-2.2 Subfactor MCS2: Key Personnel Staffing and Qualifications

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed personnel staffing approach for compliance with PWS Table 3.0, Protocol Staffing, inclusive of all key personnel; and will evaluate the qualifications of the proposed personnel requirements for compliance with Attachment L-10, TEAMS Labor Competencies. To be rated “Acceptable” for this subfactor, the offeror’s proposal must meet all the requirements for all key personnel. Otherwise, the offeror’s proposal will be rated “Unacceptable.”

Key personnel resumes that are not submitted in accordance with Attachment L-06 will receive a rating of “Unacceptable”. Key personnel for this requirement are the Contract Program Manager, Technical Lead/Assistant and Regional Leads as defined in PWS paragraphs 3.0 and 9.0. The contractor shall specifically identify whether the CPM will perform both roles or if the Technical Lead will be performed by a separate individual.

M-2.3 Subfactor MCS3: Corporate Experience

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s L-13 submittals to determine the offeror’s corporate experience in performing the types of work identified in the PWS. Evaluation of experience does not entail an assessment of how well the firm performed. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s (including subcontractors) experience in the area of relevant protocol support as a corporation, not individual personnel experience. To be rated “Acceptable” for this subfactor, an offeror must demonstrate one [footnoteRef:1]service contract that meets all of the following criteria: [1: Service contract as defined in FAR 37.101 Definitions]

1. twelve (12) months of continuous contract performance;

2. contract performance occurred within the last 5 years from the date of the solicitation;

3. contract supported a Department of Defense organization for at least any five (5) of the following services:

i. military customs and courtesies

ii. receptions/receiving line

iii. flag display

iv. seating arrangements

v. meal selection

vi. rendering of honors

vii. sequence of events

viii. escort duties

ix. planning packages for events

x. event invitations

xi. event VIP lists

4. and contract value of at least $1M annually.

The Government may contact technical and/or contracting points of contact to verify information provided on attachment L-13. If an offeror fails to meet these criteria, they will be assigned an “Unacceptable” rating for Corporate Experience.

M-2.4 Subfactor MCS4: Small Business Compliance Plan

The Government will evaluate the overall Small Business Compliance Plan of each offeror as either “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” (as defined at Table M-3).

To receive an “Acceptable” rating in this factor, the offeror’s plan must:

Demonstrate the Small Business Prime’s total labor cost is at least 50%, as identified in Table L-4 in Section L.

M-3.0 FACTOR F2: Cost/Price Proposal

The Cost/Price factor will not receive an acceptable/unacceptable rating. The Government will only calculate the total evaluated price, ensuring that the offerors propose the RFP-specified values for Travel and ODC cost, and list them in order from lowest to highest. This list will be used to determine the order of the technical evaluations. The total evaluated price is calculated as follows:

· The Offeror’s proposed prices for the firm fixed price CLINs plus;

· The Government specified amounts for the Travel and ODC CLINs plus;

· The Offeror’s proposed cost and fee for the CPFF-Term Surge CLIN.

· Half of the Offeror’s proposed FFP for CLINs 3001, 3002, and 3003 for the six-month Option to Extend Services.

M-4.0 Other Contracting Considerations

M-4.1 The contracting officer shall review and determine whether the offeror selected for award has addressed and resolved all OCIs in its OCI Mitigation Plans before making an award. If an OCI is not adequately addressed or mitigated, the contracting officer reserves the right to notify the offeror and allow the contractor a reasonable opportunity to respond before making an award decision. The contracting officer reserves the right to reject offers from offerors which do not adequately resolve all OCIs or are inconsistent with the agency’s OCI policy. The contracting officer also reserves the right to obtain an OCI waiver and make an award when in the best interests of the United States. Notices to offerors of organizational conflict of interest issues and their responses thereto are not negotiations or discussions as those terms are used in FAR 15.306(d). See L-1.5.