HQ0516-20-R-0045 Amendment 1.pdf

HQ0516017911

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)

30-105-04 EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to:

1) Revise CLINs 3002 & 4002

2) Revise the Relative Importance of Factors and Past Performance Evaluation

3) Extend proposal submission due date

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

S 1 17

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 15C. DATE SIGNED 15B. 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 HQ051620R0045

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

16-Aug-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 X is extended, is not extended.

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

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

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE

RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

P00001

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

26-Aug-2020

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

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODE CODE

EMAIL:TEL:

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 31-Aug-2020 09:00 AM to 03-Sep-

2020 03:00 PM.

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

CLIN 3002

The contract type has changed from FFP to COST.

The pricing detail quantity 12.00 has been deleted.

The unit of issue has changed from Months to Lot.

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

3002 Lot

OPTION Other Direct Costs (ODCs)

COST

This CLIN is established to reimburse the vendor on a cost-reimbursable basis for the following ODCs:Supplies, Material, and Equipment.

FOB: Destination

PSC CD: T006

ESTIMATED COST

CLIN 4002

The unit of issue has changed from Lot to Months.

The following have been modified:

ADDENDUM to FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS- COMMERCIAL ITEMS (JUN 2020)

1. General Instructions

(a) This acquisition will utilize the Tradeoff Process source selection procedures in accordance with (IAW) the

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.101-1. Technical tradeoffs will be made and additional credit will be given for exceeding acceptability.

(b) The Government anticipates awarding a single Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract for the DoD Visual Information

Records Center. However, the Government reserves the right to award no contract if the Source Selection Authority

(SSA) determines it is in the Government's best interest. The SSA will consider the Government's expected volume of work, available funding, adequate competition, and the availability of best value proposals. If the Government determines to not award a contract, the Government will not be liable for costs incurred by Offeror(s) in connection with any response to this Request for Proposal (RFP). The Government intends and reserves the right to award a contract without discussions; therefore, it is imperative Offerors submit their best pricing and proposal terms initially. 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 Revision (FPR) will be considered in making the source selection decision.

(c) Offeror's proposal must include all data and information requested and must be submitted IAW these instructions. Any Offeror who submits an incomplete package may be considered ineligible for award and eliminated from the competitive range. The proposal shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the

Performance Work Statement (PWS), Labor Categories, and Standard Form (SF) 1449 Solicitation/Contract. Non-conformance with these instructions may result in an “Unacceptable” proposal evaluation. The proposal shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal shall not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements, but shall provide convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet these requirements. Offerors shall assume that the

Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities and experience, as the Government will base its evaluation upon the information presented in the Offeror's proposal.

(d) To assure timely and equitable evaluation of the proposal, the offeror must follow the instructions contained herein. The proposal must be complete, self-sufficient, and respond directly to the requirements of this solicitation.

Failure to comply with the instructions provided in this Information to Offerors may result in removal of the proposal from further consideration for award. The response shall consist of four (4) separate parts: Part I –

Administrative, Part II – Technical/Management Proposal, Part III – Past Performance Information, and Part

IV – Price/Cost Proposal. ALL PROPOSALS MUST BE SUBMITTED ELECTRONICALLY VIA EMAIL to

Rodney A. Johnson, Contract Specialist, email: rodney.a.johnson77.civ@mail.mil and Keta Peterson, Contracting

Officer: email: keta.s.peterson.civ@mail.mil. Late proposals will be processed in accordance with FAR 52.212-1(f)

“Late submission, modifications, revisions, and withdrawals of offers.” Written questions must be received by this office no later than 3:00PM Eastern Standard Time (EST), August 24, 2020. Questions received after this date may or may not be answered. TELEPHONE INQUIRIES WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

(e) The Contracting Officer has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this procurement. Upon examination of the initial offers, the Contracting Officer will review for determination. The

Government will not make assumptions concerning intent, capabilities, or experience. Clear identification of proposal details shall be the sole responsibility of the Offeror. Conditional proposals will not be accepted. All prospective offerors must be registered in the Systems for Award Management (www.sam.gov) in order to be eligible for award.

2. General Information

(a) Point of Contact - The Contracting Officer (KO) and Contract Specialist (CS) are the sole points of contact for this procurement. Address any questions or concerns you may have to the KO and CS. Written requests for clarification must be sent to the CS.

(b) Debriefings - Offerors desiring a debriefing must make their request in accordance with the requirements of FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable.

(c) Discrepancies - If an offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the offeror shall immediately notify the CS in writing. The offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussions.

(d) Electronic Reference Documents - All referenced documents for this solicitation are available on the

Beta.Sam website at https://beta.sam.gov/. Potential offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications when information has been posted to the website for this solicitation.

(e) Oral Presentations - Oral presentations are not applicable for this RFP.

(f) Communications - Exchanges of source selection information between Government and Offerors will be controlled by the KO. Email may be used to transmit such information to Offerors only if the email can be sent and received encrypted and includes

“Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 & 3.104” in the Subject line.

(g) Page Limitations - Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal. Page limitations may be placed on responses to Evaluation

Notices (ENs). The specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters transmitting the ENs to the

Offerors. Page limitations shall not be circumvented by including inserted text boxes/pop-ups or internet links to additional information; such inclusions are not acceptable and will not be considered part of the proposal. The

Government reserves the right not to consider for award any proposal that does not adhere to the administrative requirements of this solicitation. Each page shall be counted except the following: Cover pages, tables of contents, glossaries, resumes.

(h) Legible tables, charts, graphs and figures - Legible tables, charts, graphs and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. The text shall be no smaller than 10 point Times New Roman font for all text included in a table.

(i) Cost or Pricing Information - All cost or pricing information shall be addressed ONLY in the

Cost/Price Proposal Volumes. Cost tradeoff information, work-hour estimates, and material kinds and quantities may be used in other volumes only as appropriate for presenting rationale for alternatives or design and trade-off decisions.

(j) Cross-Referencing - To the greatest extent possible, each volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated with a minimum of cross referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Information required for proposal evaluation which is not found in its designated volume will be assumed to

Table 3.1 - Proposal Organization

VOLUME VOLUME TITLE PAGE

LIMIT

I Administrative (compensation plan, FAR 52.212-3, 52.209-

11)

II Technical/Management 15

III Past Performance 10

IV Cost/Price 10 have been omitted from the proposal. Cross- referencing within a proposal volume is permitted where its use would conserve space without impairing clarity.

(k) Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms - Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, and with an explanation for each.

(l) Labeling - Each volume of the proposal submitted electronically should be clearly labeled and separately identified in the email. An email should accompany the proposal volume that is clearly marked as to volume number, title, solicitation identification, and the offeror's name.

(m) Electronic Offers - In order to respond to this solicitation, the offeror shall deliver a copy of its proposal via email to the KO and Contract Specialist no later than the time and date specified in this solicitation. In accordance with

FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors, the offeror's proposal submission will be considered complete when all volumes are received. The electronic copies of the proposal shall be submitted in a format readable by Microsoft (MS)

Office Word 2007, MS Office Excel 2007, MS Office Project 2007, and MS Office Power Point 2007, and pdf as applicable.

(n) Proposal Submission - Proposals shall be transmitted via email to the Contracting Officer’s and Contract

Specialist’s addresses by the date/time specified in Section 8 of the solicitation. The Government reserves the right to not consider late offers. The Offeror bears all responsibility for submitting their offer by the specified date/time.

(o) Volume I – Administrative Volume - In the Administrative Volume, the offeror shall provide the following information: company’s address, cage code, DUNS, Business Point of Contact. Be sure to apply all appropriate markings including those prescribed in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on Disclosure and

Use of Data, and FAR 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Contractor Bid or Proposal Information and

Source Selection Information. The proposal shall clearly state the length of proposal validity, which shall be at least

180 days.

(p) Volume II – Technical/Management Volume - Limited to no more than 15 pages. Offerors shall submit their Technical/Management Approach as Volume II of the written proposal. The Technical/Management

Proposal shall not include cost/price information, classified information, or "For Official Use Only" information. The

Technical/Management Volume should be specific and complete. Legibility, clarity, and coherence are very important.

Your responses will be evaluated against the technical/management factor defined in Addendum 52.212-2. Using the instructions provided below, provide as specifically as possible the actual methodology you would use for accomplishing/satisfying these tasks outlined in the PWS. Do not merely reiterate the objectives or reformulate the requirements specified in the solicitation. In the Technical/Management volume, address your proposed approach to meeting or exceeding the minimum performance or capability requirements, as well as the risks in your proposed approach in terms of technical/performance, cost, and/or schedule.

1. Technical: Offerors shall submit information detailing the following minimum technical capabilities:

Describe and demonstrate the ability to provide Visual information Services which include media identification, preparation for digitization, media research, keywording, captioning, physical media storage and retrieval, automated storage system operation and maintenance, transfer of records to NARA, and destruction of non-record VI material.

Demonstrate and describe the ability of the proposed Caption Editors, Media

Researchers and Media Specialists to; collect, organize and input descriptive information required to create a complete archival record for military related audio, still and motion imagery using automated systems; identify, preserve and prepare media for storage and digitization; perform and assist with complex media searches.

Demonstrate and describe the ability to provide daily preventive maintenance and operation of the DIMOC Automated Storage and

Retrieval System (ASRS).

Demonstrate and describe the ability shipping/receiving personnel to process incoming and outgoing mail and the use appropriate postage systems.

2. Management: Offerors shall submit information detailing the following minimum technical capabilities:

Describe and demonstrate the ability to recruit and provide qualified personnel who are subject matter experts in the principles, techniques, and applications of media captioning, media research media handling and equipment maintenance.

Demonstrate the ability to provide management of a complex integrated mission support contract.

3. Key Personnel

The personnel listed below are considered essential to the work being performed hereunder. Prior to substituting, removing, replacing, or diverting any of the specified individuals, the Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer 15 working days in advance and shall submit a written request and justification (including proposed substitutions) in sufficient detail to permit evaluation of the impact on this Contract. The proposed substitution of personnel must meet or exceed the education, experience, and other technical requirements of the personnel being replaced. No change in personnel shall be made by the Contractor without the prior written consent of the Contracting

Officer. However, in urgent situations, as determined or agreed to by the Contracting

Officer, an oral request to substitute key personnel may be approved and subsequently ratified by the Contracting Officer in writing.

Such ratification shall constitute the consent of the Contracting Officer required by this paragraph. The Contracting Officer will notify the Contractor within 10 working days after receipt of all required information of the decision on the substitution(s). In the event the proposed substitution of key personnel does not meet or exceed the education, experience, and other technical requirements of the personnel being replaced, the

Government reserves the right to require continued performance of previously approved key personnel or to require substitution of acceptable replacements for the individuals specified below. The key personnel listed below may, with the consent of the contracting parties, be amended from time to time during the course of the Contract to either add or delete personnel as appropriate.

Category Minimum Qualification/Experience

Lead Caption Editor High School Diploma or equivalent, fluency in reading, writing and speaking English and 6 years of experience relevant to PWS.

Lead Media Researcher High School Diploma or equivalent, fluency in reading, writing and speaking English and 6 years of experience relevant to PWS requirements.

Lead Media Specialist High School Diploma or equivalent, fluency in reading, writing and speaking English and 4 years of experience relevant to PWS requirements.

ASRS Maintenance Specialist High School Diploma or equivalent, fluency in reading, writing and speaking English and 4 years of experience relevant to PWS requirements.

Program Manager Bachelor’s Degree in business, finance, or management. An exception may be made for a person with two or more years’ experience managing a Government contract of similar size.

At least five years of experience at a senior manager level and three years of experience related to one or more of the contract functional areas or familiarity with the processes.

(q) Volume III - Past Performance

Limited to no more than three (3) pages per past performance cited. Only references for same or similar type contract desired.. All past performance surveys (one electronic copy) must be submitted and received by the closing date of the RFP. Each offeror shall submit a past performance volume with its proposal, containing past performance information in accordance with the format contained in Attachment L-1, Past and Present

Performance Information. Offerors are cautioned that the Government will use data provided by each offeror in this volume and data obtained from other sources in the evaluation of past performance, including but not limited to the Past Performance

Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), any other available Government and commercial databases, and interviews with Contracting Officers, Points of Contact, and Government or commercial customers.

When submitting past performance references and questionnaires, there should only be one contract, task order or delivery order per reference/questionnaire. Contracts, task orders or delivery orders SHALL NOT be combined or bundled and submitted as one effort, even if there were predecessor or follow-on efforts involving the same type of work. Submitting past performance references in this manner may be considered non-responsive, and such references may not be considered in the

Agency’s past performance evaluation.

If any past performance reference was performed under an IDIQ contract, you must provide the correct task order number associated with the work for that contract. This also applies to any GSA Schedule effort. You should list the task or delivery order number, not the GSA Schedule number. A reference containing only an IDIQ or GSA Schedule number may not be considered in the Agency’s past performance evaluation.

Along with the information required in this paragraph, the offeror shall submit a consent letter executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner, authorizing release of past performance information to the offeror so the offeror can respond to such information. Client authorization letters cannot exceed more than one page.

Relevant Contracts

Submit information using the format contained in Attachment L-2, Organization’s

Performance Questionnaire. The information submitted shall identify whether the effort pertains to the Offeror or to one of the Offeror’s proposed subcontractors, teaming partners, or joint venture partners, and the information on each effort must include whether the Offeror, subcontractor, teaming partner, or joint venture partner performed the effort as a prime contractor, partner, or subcontractor. The maximum number of past performance efforts submitted by the prime offeror and all of its subcontractors, teaming partners, and Joint Venture (JV) partners may not exceed three (3). This allows for a JV and members to submit their references related to the solicitation. However, if there is no

JV or partners refer to the section below. The total page count for this Past

Performance volume is annotated above in Table 3.1. Include rationale supporting your assertion of relevance. The Government uses degrees of relevancy when assessing recent, relevant contracts.

Specific Content

Offerors are required to explain what aspects of the contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort and to what aspects of the proposed effort they relate. This may include a discussion of efforts accomplished by the offeror to resolve problems encountered on prior contracts as well as past efforts to identify and manage program risk. Merely having problems does not automatically equate to a limited or no confidence rating, since the problems encountered may have been on a more complex program, or an offeror may have subsequently demonstrated the ability to overcome the problems encountered. The offeror is required to clearly demonstrate management actions employed in overcoming problems and the effects of those actions in terms of improvements achieved or problems rectified. Categorize the relevant information into the specific technical/management factor used to evaluate the proposal.

The Past Performance volume shall be organized according to the following general outline:

a) Part A – Summary Pages, in accordance with the page limitations set forth in Table 3.1 above, describing the proposed role of the offeror and each teaming partner, joint venture partner, and/or significant subcontractor for which the offeror is providing past performance information.

b) Part B – Subcontractor/Teaming Partner Consent Letters executed by each teaming partner, joint venture partner and/or significant subcontractor authorizing the release of past performance information so the offeror can respond to such information.

c) Part C – Client Authorization Letters for each identified effort for a commercial customer authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the offeror’s performance.

d) Part D – Past Performance References

Recent and Relevant Contracts

The information submitted shall reference the Offeror's past performance and the past performance of the

Offeror's teaming partners, joint venture partners, and/or significant subcontractors. Submit past performance information on no more than three (3) recent contracts that the prime offeror considers most relevant in demonstrating the prime’s ability to perform the proposed effort.

Recency is defined as an effort that is ongoing or has been performed during the past three (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation, or for ongoing efforts, must have been in place at least six (6) months before the proposal due date. For all Past Performance Information submitted, include rationale supporting your assertion of relevance.

Organizational Structure Change History

Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized their 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 source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this procurement. To facilitate this relevancy determination, include in this proposal volume a

"roadmap" describing all such changes in the organization of your company. A pamphlet or other commercial document describing such reorganizations may suffice. As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevance of any efforts you identify for past performance evaluation/confidence assessment. Since the Government intends to consider past performance information provided by other sources as well as that provided by the offerors, your "roadmap" should be both specifically applicable to the efforts you identify and general enough to apply to efforts on which the Government receives information from other sources.

Questionnaires

The offeror shall provide the Past Performance Questionnaire found at Attachment L-2 herein, to each of the customer Points of Contact (“POC”) identified for each of the relevant past performance efforts. In order to expedite the assessment process, the Offeror may complete Sections 1 - 9 of the Past Performance

Questionnaire for the convenience of the POC. The Offeror shall not, however, complete any other section of the Past Performance Questionnaire. Once the questionnaires are completed by the POCs, the information contained therein shall be considered Source Selection Information in accordance with FAR

2.101 and 3.104 and shall not be released to the Offeror. Early submission of the Past Performance

Questionnaires are strongly encouraged. Questionnaires shall be sent directly via email to the contract specialist and contracting officer no later than the proposal due date. Past Performance Questionnaires submitted for an Offeror’s significant joint venture/teaming partners and significant subcontractors shall clearly indicate the name of the Offeror within the questionnaire. If the Offeror, joint venture/teaming partner, or significant subcontractor performed the effort as a subcontractor, the Offeror must request that the POC specifically address the portion of the work performed by the subcontractor, rather than address the performance of the prime contractor.

(r) Volume IV - Cost/Price (shall be submitted in MS Excel)

Pricing submitted for the base period and all option periods, including pricing for an additional six-month period that may be authorized IAW FAR 52.217-8 "Option to Extend Services" will be evaluated. See FAR

52.217-8 which authorizes the Government to require continued performance of any services within the limits and at the rates specified in the contract. The pricing proposal should include separate line items by

CLIN for the additional six-month period IAW FAR 52.217-8. These prices shall be identical to the six months prior to expiration of the final option period. The total evaluated price will consist of the proposed price for the base period, all option periods, and the option pricing for the additional 6-month period.

Price Reasonableness, Realism, and Completeness

This section is to assist you in submitting other than certified cost or pricing data that is required to evaluate the reasonableness, completeness, realism, and/or balance of your proposed cost/price. The Government will verify that all solicitation requirements have been priced, figures are correctly calculated, and prices are presented in a clear and useful format. Note that unrealistically low or high proposed prices, initially or subsequently, may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition either on the basis that the offeror does not understand the requirement or has submitted an unrealistic proposal. Additionally, unbalanced prices pose an unacceptable risk to the Government and may be a reason to reject an offeror’s proposal. Price submissions should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate their reasonableness and be adequate enough to support and sustain a DCAA audit.

Estimating Techniques and Methods

When responding to the Cost/Price Volume requirements in the solicitation, the offeror and associated partners/subcontractors may use any generally accepted estimating technique, including contemporary estimating methods (such as Cost-to-Cost and Cost-to-Non-Cost Estimating Relationships, commercially available parametric cost models, in-house developed parametric cost models, etc.), to develop their estimates. If necessary, reasonable and supportable allocation techniques may be used to spread hours and/or costs to lower levels of the Work Breakdown Structure WBS.

Cost/Price Information

Information beyond that is required by this instruction shall not be submitted, unless you consider it essential to document or support your cost/price position. All information relating to the proposed price, including all required supporting documentation must be included in the section of the proposal designated as the Cost/Price Volume. Under no circumstances shall this information and documentation be included elsewhere in the proposal.

Cost or Pricing Information Requirements

IAW FAR 15.403-5(b)(1),(2), and (3), the Offeror's format for submitting such information should be used unless the contracting officer decides that use of a specific format is essential and the format has been described in the solicitation. In accordance with FAR 15.403-1(b) and 15.403-3(a), information other than certified cost or pricing data may be required to support price (or cost, as applicable) reasonableness. If, after receipt of proposals, the Contracting Officer determines that there is insufficient information available to determine price reasonableness and none of the exceptions in FAR 15.403-1 apply, the offeror shall be required to submit certified cost or pricing data (see FAR 15.406-2 -- Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing

Data).

Volume Organization

The Offeror shall comply with instructions contained herein for development of its cost / price proposal.

The Offeror is required to submit all pricing data for this contract. Offerors may use Exhibit 3 – Estimated

Workload Data (see PWS) in contructing their labor categories and labor allocation; however, it is not required. Irrespective of what labor categories or labor allocation the offeror chooses to utilize, the

Cost/Price spreadsheet shall provide labor categories/personnel according to the Labor Category Task

Level (i.e. Archival Technical Support, Keywording and Caption Editing, Physical Media Records

Management) designated in the Estimated Workload Data exhibit, this includes:

1) Table of labor categories for the base, option years, and six-month extension (a separate column shall be prepared for each period of performance (i.e., Base, Option Year 1); 2) Inflation rate summary and explanation; 3) All cost and labor hour tabulations must include totals and subtotals, as appropriate; 4)

Offerors shall identify all indirect rate percentages utilized in calculating these burdened rates and any associated escalation factors and provide rationale if the base direct/indirect and escalation rates utilized in this build-up provided in an excel spreadsheet showing all applicable formulas used to compute each fully burdened rate. Failure to provide Contractor proposed prices for all labor categories for all years (to include the Option to Extend Services under FAR 52.217-8) may result in a rejection of the offeror’s proposal.

2) Other Direct Costs (ODCs) - All ODCs shall annotate the specific detail (qty, part number, manufacturer, etc.) to include supporting documentation to justify the cost (i.e., vendor quotes, price history, etc.). ODCs will be reimbursed on a cost-reimbursable basis. All travel shall be authorized by the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR), in writing, prior to performance and will be paid IAW

FAR Part 31.205-46. We also request information on whether the prime contractor has performed an evaluation to determine the reasonableness of subcontractor prices or hourly labor rates and if so please provide that analysis to the Contracting Officer. This analysis may be submitted in accordance with the Offeror’s internal accounting procedures. There is no specified format. Additionally please discuss what type of contract you anticipate giving to your various subcontractors such as firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee, etc.

Estimating System

Provide a summary description of your standard estimating system or methods. The summary description shall cover separately each major cost element (e.g., Direct Material, Engineering Labor, Manufacturing

Labor, Indirect Costs, Other Direct Costs, Overhead, G&A, etc.). Also, identify any deviations from your standard estimating procedures in preparing this proposal volume. Indicate whether you have Government approval of your system and if so, provide evidence of such approval.

Purchasing System

Provide a summary description of your purchasing system or methods (e.g., how material requirements are determined, how sources are selected, when firm quotes are obtained, what provision is made to ensure quantity and other discounts). Also, identify any deviations from your standard procedures in preparing this proposal. Indicate whether you have Government approval of your system and if so, provide evidence of such approval.

Accounting System

Indicate whether the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) has determined your accounting system to be adequate and if so, provide evidence of such determination. Also, identify any deviations from your standard procedures in preparing this proposal. If you do not have an accounting system, state so.

Explanation of Estimating Methods Used

Explain the methodology used to estimate each cost element. As a minimum, provide the following information for each cost element. If a portion of the required information is not applicable for a particular cost element, so state.

Percentages

Percentage should be limited to four decimal points; for example 25.15 percent shall be reflected as .2515.

Total Compensation Plan

The offeror shall include a Total Compensation Plan as required by FAR 52.222-46 (see Administrative

Volume).

52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014)

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2

In accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), no contract shall be entered into unless the

Contracting Officer ensures that all requirements of law, executive orders, regulations, and all other applicable procedures, including clearances and approvals, have been met. This includes the FAR requirement that no award shall be made unless the contracting officer makes an affirmative determination of responsibility. To be determined responsible, a prospective contractor must meet the general standards in FAR Part 9 and any special standards set forth in the solicitation.

BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD:

The Government will select the best overall offer, based upon an integrated assessment of technical/management, past performance, and cost/price. A contract may be awarded to the offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the FAR, as supplemented, whose proposal conforms to the solicitation’s requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by Addendum 52.212-

1 of this solicitation) and whose proposal contains the combination of those factors offering the best overall value to the Government utilizing a tradeoff process.

This will be determined by comparing differences in the merit for Technical/Management and Past Performance with the differences in price to the Government. In making this comparison the Government is more concerned with obtaining a superior evaluated proposal. However, the Government will not make an award at a significantly higher price to the Government to achieve a slightly superior Technical/Management and Past Performance proposal. The

Government reserves the right to make an award to other than the lowest priced offer or to the offer with the highest rating if the Contracting Officer determines that to do so would result in the best value to the Government. Subject to the provisions contained herein, award will be made to one (1) Offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation; who conforms to the solicitation requirements; and whose proposal, judged by an overall assessment of the evaluation criteria and other considerations specified in this solicitation provides the best value to the Government.

Rejection of Unrealistic and Nonresponsive Offers. The Government may reject any proposal that is evaluated to be unrealistic in terms of program commitments, contract terms and conditions, or unreasonably high or low cost/price when compared to Government estimates, such that the proposal is deemed to reflect an inherent lack of competence or failure to comprehend the complexity and risks of the program.

Correction Potential of Proposals. The Government will consider, throughout the evaluation, the "correction potential" of any proposal. The judgment of such "correction potential" is within the sole discretion of the

Government. If an aspect of an offeror's proposal does not meet the Government's requirements and is not considered correctable, the offeror may be eliminated from award consideration or the competitive range.

Evaluation of Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the base period. The offeror shall submit pricing for the base period and all option periods, including option pricing for an additional six-month period that may be authorized IAW FAR 52.217-8. See

FAR 52.217-8 which authorizes the government to require continued performance of any services within the limits and at the rates specified in the contract. The total evaluated price will consist of the contractor’s proposed price for the base period, all option periods, and the option pricing for an additional extension period under FAR 52.217-8.

Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

Pass/Fail – Key Personnel. To be eligible for contract award, the offeror must pass the requirements for Key

Personnel (see Section L)

Evaluation Factors and Subfactors. The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each proposal.

Award will be made to the offeror proposing the combination most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors described below.

Factor 1 - Technical/Management

Factor 2 - Past Performance

Factor 3 - Price

Relative Importance of Factors. The relative importance of each factor is as follows: Factor 1:

Technical/Management, Factor 2: Past Performance and Factor 3: Cost/Price are listed in descending order of importance. When combined, Factors 1 and 2 are significantly more important than Factor 3 (Price).

Factor 1 - Technical/Management Factor

Technical/Management Offerors shall submit information detailing the following minimum technical/management capabilities:

• Describe and demonstrate the ability to provide Visual information Services which include media identification, preparation for digitization, media research, keywording, captioning, physical media storage and retrieval, automated storage system operation and maintenance, transfer of records to NARA, and destruction of non-record

VI material.

• Demonstrate and describe the ability of the proposed Caption Editors, Media Researchers and Media Specialists to; collect, organize and input descriptive information required to create a complete archival record for military related audio, still and motion imagery using automated systems; identify, preserve and prepare media for storage and digitization; perform and assist with complex media searches.

• Demonstrate and describe the ability to provide daily preventive maintenance and operation of the DIMOC

Automated Storage and Retrieval System (ASRS).

• Demonstrate and describe the ability shipping/receiving personnel to process incoming and outgoing mail and the use appropriate postage systems.

• Describe and demonstrate the ability to recruit and provide qualified personnel who are subject matter experts in the principles, techniques, and applications of media captioning, media research media handling and equipment maintenance.

• Demonstrate the ability to provide management of a complex integrated mission support contract.

The ratings focus on the strengths, deficiencies, and uncertainties of the offeror's proposal. The color rating depicts how well the offeror’s proposal meets the technical/management factor requirements.

If the offeror passes the Pass/Fail requirements, the offeror will then be evaluated under Factor 1 and provided an adjectival rating. If the offeror does not pass Factor 1, it will be ineligible for award and will not be further evaluated. If an offeror receives a “Marginal” or “Unacceptable” rating under Factor 1, the offeror shall be ineligible for award and shall not be further evaluated. If an offeror receives a rating of “Acceptable” or above, the offeror will be evaluated under Factor 2 (Past Performance). If the offeror receives a “No Confidence” rating under Factor 2

(Past Performance), the offeror shall be ineligible for award and shall not be further evaluated. If an offeror receives a rating greater than “No Confidence” under Factor 2, then the offeror’s price shall be evaluated under Factor 3

(Price).

A “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. A “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. A “weakness” means a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. A “significant weakness” in the proposal is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Table 1 – Technical Adjectival Rating

Color

Rating

Adjectival

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.

In responding to the Technical/Management Approach, do not merely restate or reformulate the evaluation criteria or PWS requirements specified in the solicitation. Restating or reiterating the criteria or PWS requirements specified in the solicitation may render your proposal as non-responsive.

Factor 2 – Past Performance

The past performance evaluation factor assesses the degree of confidence the Government has in an offeror’s ability to supply products and services that meet users’ needs, based on a demonstrated record of performance.

Performance confidence is assessed at the overall past performance factor level after evaluating aspects of the offeror’s recent past performance. Past performance information may be obtained from any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), 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. The Past Performance Evaluation Team will review this past performance information and determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to performance confidence assessment.The currency and relevancy of the past performance information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in Offeror’s performance shall be considered as part of the past performance evaluation.

(1) Recency Assessment

An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past three (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated. If any part of the performance falls within the above timeframe, the contract in its entirety may be evaluated for past performance

(2) Relevance Assessment

The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all recent performance information obtained. For each recent past performance reference reviewed, the relevance of the work performed will generally be assessed for the technical/management factor. Relevant past performance is defined as work of similar scope and magnitude that reflects experience within and across the DVIRC Visual Information Services. A relevancy determination of the offeror’s past performance will be made based upon the aforementioned considerations.

If the Government evaluators consider the offeror’s past performance reference to be recent, then the Government will assess the relevancy of the referenced past performance task order/contract. The Government determines relevancy by evaluating the past performance references against the technical factor contained in the solicitation.

The past performance factor does not contain subfactors. The past performance questionnaires (if used) and information obtained from other sources will be used to establish the degree of relevancy and quality of past performance. Past Performance relevancy definitions are located in Table 2.

Table 2

Adjectival Rating Description

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.

Assigning Performance Confidence Assessment. As a result of the relevancy and quality assessments of the recent contracts evaluated, offerors will receive an integrated performance confidence assessment rating. The resulting performance confidence assessment rating is made at the past performance factor level and represents an overall evaluation of contractor performance. Offerors without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and, as a result, will receive an

"Neutral Confidence" rating for the past performance factor.

More recent and relevant performance will have a greater impact on the Performance Confidence Assessment than a less recent or relevant effort. A strong record of relevant past performance may be considered more advantageous to the Government than an "Unknown Confidence" rating. Likewise, a more relevant past performance record may receive a higher confidence rating and be considered more favorably than a less relevant record of favorable performance. The past performance factor will receive one of the performance confidence assessments described in Table 3 - Performance Confidence Assessments.

Performance Confidence Assessment

Table 3

Adjectival 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.

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance…