DRFP TEAMS-Next C3PO Sec L 17 Dec 19.pdf

Approved for Public Release 19-MDA-10290 (11 Dec 19)

HQ0858-20-R-0001

TEAMS-Next

Contracting, Compliance, Cost/Price and

Operations

(C3PO)

DRAFT Section L

Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

17 December 2019

DRAFT Section L

Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

1.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

2.0 SOURCE SELECTION METHODOLOGY

3.0 PROPOSAL CONTENT

4.0 PROPOSAL ORGANIZATION

5.0 CONTRACT DOCUMENTATION (VOLUME I)

6.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (VOLUME II)

7.0 FACTOR 1: MISSION CAPABILITY (VOLUME III)

8.0 FACTOR 2: IMCP (VOLUME IV)

9.0 FACTOR 3: OCI MANAGEMENT PLAN (VOLUME V)

10.0 FACTOR 4: PAST PERFORMANCE (VOLUME VI)

11.0 FACTOR 5: COST AND PRICE (VOLUME VII)

Section L

Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Section L: Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

1.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

1.1 The proposal instructions in this section are designed to assist Offerors in preparing a complete response that reflects a full understanding of the approach proposed to accomplish all contractual requirements. Section M details how proposals will be evaluated.

1.2 Offerors are expected to comply with all requirements of the Request for Proposal (RFP).

The term “Subcontractor” is defined as any tier subcontractor or Inter-Company Work Transfer Agreements (IWTAs). Team Members are the entities that make up a joint venture or any other partnership or teaming arrangement that is formed for the purpose of responding to this solicitation. All forms of joint ventures that are classified as a small business in accordance with FAR part 19 and the Small Business Administration (SBA) requirements are acceptable for this acquisition. Industry should review FAR subpart 9.6, FAR part 19, and 13 CFR part 121 for information on joint ventures. The responsibility for ensuring that any joint venture meets the SBA requirements to be classified as a Small Business rests with the Offeror. Teaming agreements should be provided with a joint venture’s proposal.

1.3 Entities (including companies and academic institutions) engaged in providing goods or services to the U.S. Government involving access to, or creation of, classified information must have an approved facility security clearance (FCL) commensurate with the level of information to be accessed. FCLs must be in place prior to contract award. For more information about obtaining a FCL, please visit www.dcsa.mil/mc/ctp.fc/. For additional questions regarding a sponsorship, please contact the PCO.

1.4 The Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) is the primary point of contact for this acquisition. Address any questions or concerns you may have to the PCO. The Contract Specialist is the secondary point of contact. Written requests for exchanges of information may be sent to the PCO via email. Email is the preferred method for exchanges of information. The PCO for this acquisition is as follows:

Joshua B. Kachelman

MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY (MDA)

CONTRACTS DIRECTORATE - MDA/CTS

5222 Martin Road Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898-0001

(256) 450-0343 Email: joshua.kachelman@mda.mil

The secondary point of contact is as follows:

Ondrea Wilbourn

19-MDA-10290 (11 Dec 19)

CONTRACTS DIRECTORATE - MDA/CTS

5222 Martin Road Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898-0001

(256) 955-1765 Email: ondrea.wilbourn@mda.mil

1.5 Non-Governmental personnel from the contractors identified below:

The Government may release submitted proposal data to non-Government advisors for review, analysis, and evaluation. The following firms may assist in the proposal evaluation process in an advisory capacity. The Government may also employ administrative and engineering support services contractors in the handling of solicitation documentation for purposes of security and document control. All such personnel will be required to execute a statement to preserve and protect from disclosure any source selection and contractor proprietary information disclosed to them during the course of these evaluations. It is anticipated that the following firms will be involved in the source selection process:

Manage the Isolated Local Area Network (ISOLAN) during source selection:

LinTech Global, Inc.

31600 W 13 Mile Rd, Ste 122 Farmington Hills, MI 48334-1407 Attn: Michael Linn

(248) 553-8033 mlin@lintechglobal.com

Manage FEDSELECT© source selection evaluation database:

CACI, Inc. - Federal 7725 West Reno Ave.

Oklahoma City, OK 73127 Attn: Regan Anderson (405)367-2486 regan.anderson@caci.com

These support contractor advisors are subject to contractual Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) restrictions and are expressly prohibited from competing on this acquisition in any fashion, i.e., being a prime, subcontractor, or teaming partner. Contractor personnel supporting this acquisition have signed Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) and are subject to OCI restrictions. Individuals will be authorized access only to those portions of the proposal data and discussions that are necessary for them to perform their respective duties.

Objections to disclosure of proposals, or specific portions, to the non-Government advisors listed above must be provided in writing to the PCO within five (5) business days of solicitation issuance. If no objections are submitted, the Offeror(s) must enter into a non-disclosure agreement with the non-government advisor(s), or with the company employing the non-government advisor before the non-government advisor(s) are given access to the Offeror(s) proprietary or source selection information. The fully executed NDAs must be submitted NLT

19-MDA-10290 (11 Dec 19)

10 days prior to the proposal submission. The NDAs can be sent to joshua.kachelman@mda.mil and ondrea.wilbourn@mda.mil.

WRITTEN OBJECTIONS MUST INCLUDE A DETAILED STATEMENT OF THE BASIS

FOR THE OFFEROR’S OBJECTION AND IDENTIFY SPECIFIC PORTIONS OF THE

PROPOSAL THE OFFEROR OBJECTS TO DISCLOSE TO NON-GOVERNMENT

CONTRACTORS ADVISORS.

1.6 Notice Regarding OCI – Determination to Participate in This Acquisition

a) The acquisition of advisory and assistance services under this solicitation may create actual or potential conflicts of interest for Offerors and their prospective subcontractors.

In assessing and addressing conflicts of interest, MDA will follow the guidance in FAR subpart 9.5. The Offeror is responsible for ensuring that both it and its proposed subcontractors are not restricted from participating in this acquisition due to an OCI caused by any MDA-funded contract or subcontract; Missile Defense System (MDS)-related contract or subcontract; or, other significant, non-MDS related business relationships with firms doing business with or in support of MDA.

b) MDA has developed an OCI memorandum with respect to the acquisition of advisory and assistance services (Section J, Attachment 02 – TEAMS-Next OCI Memorandum).

Certain capability areas under TEAMS-Next contracts present heightened concern to the Government with respect to OCI. Offerors shall consider these areas carefully and fully evaluate potential OCIs. The Government will analyze potential OCIs within these and other areas of concern on a case-by-case basis.

c) Given the broad reach of the contracting discipline in terms of access to contractor proprietary information, as well as sensitive acquisition strategy information, CT requires a robust contract that is free of any OCI, such that the C3PO contractor can support the entire CT enterprise without restriction. Accordingly, the C3PO contract will be exclusive, such that the C3PO contractor and its subcontractor team (at all tiers) is prohibited from supporting any other MDA contract or MDA-funded contract (example:

an Army contract that provides support to MDA) in any capacity – whether as a team member, subcontractor, joint venture, or otherwise.

d) Procedures to follow before submission of proposals:

1. The Offeror should carefully review the TEAMS-Next OCI Memorandum to ensure its proposal and teaming arrangements are consistent with the TEAMS-Next OCI Memorandum. Questions and clarifications regarding the policy should be provided to the Contracting Officer. The Contracting Officer will meet with Offerors on a one-on-one basis, if requested and as necessary, to discuss individual Offeror or team arrangements concerning the TEAMS-Next OCI Memorandum.

19-MDA-10290 (11 Dec 19)

2. The Offeror shall submit completed OCI Disclosure Forms, and supporting documentation, for itself and completed OCI Disclosure Forms, and supporting documentation, for each of its proposed subcontractors, for each contract or subcontract that is an MDA contract or MDA-funded contract (example: an Army contract that provides support to MDA). The OCI Disclosure Forms shall be submitted as Volume I Tab 5. This submission will not count against any proposal page limitation. Should the Offeror or any of its subcontractors have no contract with MDA or subcontract under an MDA contract (any tier), or have no contract or subcontract on an MDA funded contract, the Offeror or subcontractor shall submit a statement in writing in Volume I Tab 5 that it has no MDA contract or subcontract or any MDA-funded contracts or subcontracts.

3. An Offeror’s failure to provide adequate information to avoid or mitigate an OCI may cause its proposal to be 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 discussions as those terms are used in FAR 15.306(d).

a) MDA Engineering Team – Industry (MET-I) (formerly MDA National Team (MDNT))

Participation: Based on the relevant MET-I confidentiality documents and FAR subpart 9.5:

1. MET-I Participants will be restricted from all TEAMS-Next pre-contract award activity, including, but not limited to, marketing activities, IR&D planning in support of TEAMS-Next, bid or no-bid decisions, and proposal preparation activities -including Red-Team participation.

2. After award of a TEAMS-Next contract, MET-I Participants may work for a

TEAMS-Next contract awardee, including direct or indirect involvement with any subsequently competed TEAMS-Next contracts, so long as they are not continuing to also work as a MET-I Participant. Former MET-I Participants have a continuing duty to protect proprietary information acquired under the MET-I program and to refrain from any non-MET-I use of such information without permission of the owner.

3. The term "MET-I Participant" means those individuals who are assigned by their MET-I employer to work on the MET-I and, by reason of this assignment, will have access to the proprietary information of others or information that could provide its employer an unfair competitive advantage.

b) The PCO shall review and determine whether each Offeror selected for award has addressed and resolved all OCIs before making an award. If an OCI is not adequately resolved, the PCO reserves the right to notify the Offeror, as is, and allow the Offeror a reasonable opportunity to respond before making an award decision. The PCO reserves the right to reject offers from Offerors which do not adequately resolve all OCIs or are

19-MDA-10290 (11 Dec 19) inconsistent with the TEAMS-Next OCI policy. The PCO also reserves the right to obtain an OCI waiver and make an award when in the best interests of the United States.

c) The Government has determined that this acquisition may give rise to a potential organizational conflict of interest. Accordingly, the attention of prospective Offerors is invited to FAR subpart 9.5 —Organizational Conflicts of Interest. The nature of this conflict is contractor access to nonpublic information as part of its performance of a Government contract, which may provide the successful Offeror (or an affiliate) with an unfair competitive advantage in future procurements. The successful Offeror, through performance of the resulting contract, will have access to information not available to other contractors (source selection information or other non-public Government information). This information includes such things as government estimates, government schedules, technical data and other forms of internal government data.

Therefore, the successful Offeror and its subcontractors shall be ineligible to perform future work for the MDA as a prime or subcontractor (any tier) under any other MDA contract or any MDA-funded contract (MDA contract or MDA-funded contract (example: an Army contract that provides support to MDA). This restriction shall remain in effect until expiration of the resulting contract to avoid unfair competitive advantage or potential bias.

2.0 SOURCE SELECTION METHODOLOGY

2.1 Competitive, Best Value Source Selection

The Government intends to award a total small business set-aside, cost reimbursement contract under FAR Part 15. The contract will consist of CPFF LOE Labor CLINs, Cost ODC and Travel CLINs, and an option CPFF LOE CLIN; and will have a base period of two years with three, one-year options. Offerors should note that the contract resulting from this solicitation will be awarded on the basis of the best value decision made under this solicitation.

2.2 MDA Intent to Award without Discussions - Offeror’s Best Terms

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with Offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the Offeror’s initial proposal shall contain the Offeror’s best terms for Mission Capability, Information Management and Control Plan (IMCP), OCI Management Plan, Past Performance, and Cost and Price. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the PCO determines them to be necessary.

2.3 Competitive Range

If the PCO determines that discussions are necessary, the PCO will establish a competitive range (as set forth in FAR 15.306(c)) 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

19-MDA-10290 (11 Dec 19) notice of the decision will be provided to the unsuccessful Offeror in accordance with FAR 15.503.

Discussions (if required) may be conducted either orally or in writing. The scope and extent of the discussions are a matter of PCO judgment as set forth in FAR 15.306. Responses from Offerors may be required within two business days.

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.

2.4 Final Proposal Revisions (FPR)

Although the Government intends to award without discussion, should discussions with Offeror(s) be deemed necessary, upon completion of those discussions, the PCO will request that the Offeror(s) provide a FPR.

The Offeror is advised that any changes to the proposal in the FPR shall be fully addressed, explained, and reflected in the proposed price. Failure to comply with this requirement can adversely influence the evaluation of the proposal. The PCO will establish a common due date, time, and instructions for submission of the FPR.

If FPRs are requested, any revisions or non-compliance with contract terms and conditions submitted in the FPR may 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, or percentage rates) but is intended to preclude any misunderstandings by the Government (that could result if new or revised terms and conditions submitted in the FPR have not been fully disclosed, discussed, and understood during discussions or negotiations). Thus, such new or revised terms and conditions are not solicited and, if submitted in the FPR, may render the offer unacceptable to the Government.

The successful proposal may be incorporated into the resultant contract in whole or in part.

2.5 Pre and Post Award Debriefing

Pre and Post award debriefings will be conducted IAW FAR 15.505 and 15.506, respectively.

2.6 Errors or Omissions

If an Offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, ambiguity, or are otherwise unsound, the Offeror shall immediately notify the PCO in writing with supporting rationale no later than five business days after release of this solicitation.

2.7 Mistakes

Mistakes in an Offeror’s proposal discovered after award shall be handled IAW FAR 14.407-4 as referenced in FAR 15.508.

2.8 Evaluation Notices (ENs)

Should the Government need to conduct written exchanges with Offerors, they will be in the form of an evaluation notice (EN). Page format and limitations will be placed on responses to ENs in the event they are issued. The specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the ENs to the Offerors. The ENs may be sent electronically (i.e., via e-mail) at the discretion of the PCO. Offerors must submit their responses by the time and date specified in the letter.

2.9 Request for Proposal (RFP) Revisions or Amendments

The Government reserves the right to revise or amend any portion of this solicitation. Such revisions or amendments will be available on the FedBizOpps website at https://beta.sam.gov/ using Standard Form (SF) 30. Potential Offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications when information has been posted to FedBizOpps. If such amendments require material changes, the proposal due date may be extended at the discretion of the PCO and by enough days to enable an Offeror to revise its proposal. In such cases, the amendment will include an announcement of the new proposal due date and time. The Offeror shall provide written acknowledgement of any solicitation amendments issued by the Government.

3.0 PROPOSAL CONTENT

3.1 Proposal Acceptability

In order to be eligible for award, Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as factors or subfactors. By submission of its proposal, the Offeror consents and agrees to all solicitation requirements and identified constraints. Non-conformance with the instructions provided may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation, or rejection of an Offeror’s proposal, rendering it ineligible for award. Non-conformance includes, but not limited to, failure to follow the instructions required by the RFP and/or failure to submit all required information for each volume described in the Proposal Organizational Table L-1.

To support the Contracting Officer’s Responsibility Determination, Offeror’s proposal shall describe an approach the prime contractor will use to comply with Department of Defense (DoD) Class Deviation 2019-O0003 to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Clause 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting for small businesses during efficient performance of the contract’s entire period of performance. When applicable, the proposed approach shall clearly specify any similarly situated entity(s) used to comply with Limitations on Subcontracting for small businesses. "Similarly situated entity" means a first-tier subcontractor, including an independent contractor, that has the same small business program status as that which qualified the prime

19-MDA-10290 (11 Dec 19) contractor for the award; and is considered small for the NAICS code the prime contractor assigned to the subcontract the subcontractor will perform.

Calculation of the amount that can be subcontracted (Limitations on Subcontracting): A small business shall not pay more than 50 percent of the amount paid to it by the government to firms that are not similarly situated.

The proposed approach to comply with Limitations on Subcontracting for small businesses must not violate the ostensible subcontractor rule. The ostensible subcontractor rule treats a prime offeror and its subcontractor “as joint ventures, and therefore affiliates, for size determination purposes” when the subcontractor “performs primary and vital requirements of a contract,” or the prime offeror is “unusually reliant” upon the subcontractor.

The following four key factors contributed to the findings of unusual reliance:

(1) the proposed subcontractor is the incumbent contractor and is ineligible to compete for the procurement; (2) the prime offeror plans to hire the large majority of its workforce from the subcontractor; (3) the prime offeror’s proposed management previously served with the subcontractor on the incumbent contract; and (4) the prime offeror lacks relevant experience and must rely upon its more experienced subcontractor to win the contract.

When these four factors are present, “violation of the ostensible subcontractor rule is more likely to be found if the proposed subcontractor will perform 40% or more of the contract.”

3.2 The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation by the Government and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal shall provide convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet the areas to be evaluated. Proposals shall not simply rephrase or restate the Government's statement of work (SOW) requirements nor restate applicable laws, policy, or regulations.

Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of the Offeror’s experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Offeror’s proposal. The Offeror’s proposal shall demonstrate that the Offeror possesses the ability to perform all requirements of the SOW. Alternate proposals – defined herein as proposals that deviate in any way from the solicitation terms and conditions and the stated SOW requirement – will not be considered nor evaluated.

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 that performance is contingent upon any sort of provisioning from the Government that is not set forth in the RFP.

The Offeror’s proposal shall include all of the information requested and shall comply fully with these Section L instructions. Failure to do so may cause the Offeror’s proposal to be eliminated from consideration for award. Offerors are reminded to properly mark their proposal documents which contain proprietary or restricted information.

3.3 Offerors are advised that, should it be awarded a contract, the Government may incorporate into the final contract enhancing features included in the Offeror’s proposal deemed beneficial to the Government. With the exception of the Cost and Price Volume, no cost or pricing information should appear in any other volume. The Government advises Offerors that taking exception to, or deviating from, any term or condition of the RFP may make an offer unacceptable and the Offeror ineligible for award.

3.4 The Offeror shall make a clear statement in the Executive Summary that the proposal is valid at least 180 days from the proposal due date. NOTE: IF THE PROPOSAL IS NOT

RECEIVED BY THE DUE DATE AND TIME SPECIFIED, THE OFFEROR’S PROPOSAL IS

CONSIDERED LATE IN ACCORDANCE WITH FAR 52.215-1.

4.0 PROPOSAL ORGANIZATION

4.1 In presenting material in the proposal, the Offeror is advised that quality of information is more important than quantity. Clarity, brevity, and logical organization should be emphasized during proposal preparation. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to present enough information to allow the various technical and management approaches, as well as cost and price, to be meaningfully evaluated without discussions. The Offeror must include any data necessary to illustrate the adequacy of the various assumptions, approaches, and solutions to problems.

Unnecessarily elaborate brochures or other presentation materials beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal is neither necessary nor desired.

4.2 The Offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization Table L-1 below. The titles and contents of the volumes shall be as defined in this table, all of which shall be within the required page limits and with the number of copies as specified in Table L-1. The hard copy volumes identified in the table shall be separately bound in three-ring, loose-leaf binders, as necessary. The contents of each proposal volume are described in the Proposal Organization paragraphs as noted in the table below. In the event of a discrepancy between the hard copy and the electronic copies of the proposal, the electronic copies of the proposal shall be the official copy.

4.3 Each proposal volume shall be unclassified. Each volume shall be written in Standard English and be complete in and of itself.

The Offeror shall provide a Proposal Cross Reference Matrix as set forth in Table L-2. This proposal matrix is only a tool to assist in the proposal evaluation process.

4.4 Table L-1 shall serve as the Offeror’s guide for proposal organization and content by volume.

19-MDA-10290 (11 Dec 19)

b) Table of Contents

c) List of Tables and Figures

d) Glossaries and Acronym List

e) Tabs and Dividers

f) Blank pages

4.5 Page size shall be 8.5 x 11 inches, not including foldouts. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document and any non-narrative sections (e.g., tables, graphs, charts, figures), the text size shall be no less than Microsoft Word Times New Roman 12 point font, single-spaced. Use at least 1-inch margins on the top and bottom and 1-inch side margins.

Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume. In the event the Offeror creates an ambiguity, the Government may exercise its own discretion in counting pages. If the page count is exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal.

Special consideration will not be given for colors, pictures or unnecessary graphics. Other than the electronic media solicited, audio and video recordings, or any other electronic media (i.e., CD & tape) will not be accepted.

4.6 The Government may need to conduct exchanges with Offerors which will be in the form of an EN. Page format and specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the ENs to the Offerors. ENs may be sent electronically (i.e., via email) at the discretion of the Government. The EN will request an email response, and Offerors must submit their responses by the time and date specified in the letter.

4.7 Foldout pages may only be used for large tables, charts, graphs, diagrams and schematics.

Foldout pages may not be used for pages of text. Legible tables, charts, graphs, diagrams, schematics and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, and plans. These displays shall be uncomplicated, legible and shall not exceed 11 x 17 inches in size. Each printed side of a foldout will count as two pages.

For tables, charts, graphs and figures, the font shall be no smaller than 10 point. All information (except documentation numbers, classification markings, and page numbers) shall be contained within an image area of 9 x 15 inches. Foldout pages shall fold so that the Government can read and evaluate them without removal from the proposal binder. Foldout pages shall fold entirely within the volume.

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

4.9 Each volume shall contain a detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. A Master Table of Contents, contained in Volume I, shall contain a consolidation of the individual Table of Contents for all Volumes (I through VI) - See Section 5.1.

19-MDA-10290 (11 Dec 19)

4.10 Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections within each volume. The Offeror shall index the sections identified in the volume organization outlined in each volume. Tabs do not count against the page limitations for these respective volumes.

4.11 Tables and figures can be used to illustrate quantitative or qualitative data. Tables and figures are not required. If provided, each volume shall contain a list of all tables and figures within that volume. The List of Tables and Figures will not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes. Tables, graphs, charts, and figures are considered non-narrative sections of the proposal and are only to be provided to enhance the proposal narrative. If, at the PCO’s discretion, an excessive amount of narrative is included in a table, chart, graphic, or illustration in an effort to subvert the proposal’s page limitations, the text may be severed from the non-narrative section and included in the page count of the narrative section of the proposal.

4.12 Each volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated without cross-referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Each response to each subfactor shall be self-contained.

4.13 All copies (hard copy and electronic copies) of an Offeror’s proposal must be submitted together in accordance with the scheduled submission date for the particular volumes. All prime and team member information must be incorporated into one coherent submittal. Be sure to identify appropriate markings such as the legend at FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on disclosure and use of data.

4.14 The hard copy of each volume shall be formatted as follows:

a) Assembled in a 3 ring binder;

b) Printed on both sides, long edge (note: pages should be printed in order to flip pages right to left)

4.15 A cover sheet shall be inserted in the front of each binder, clearly marked with volume number, Offeror’s name, solicitation title, and solicitation number.

4.16 A label shall be placed in the spine of each binder clearly identifying the solicitation number, volume number and name, and Offeror’s name.

4.17 Complete electronic volumes shall be submitted in Microsoft Office 2016 or compatible format. Offerors are permitted to submit documents such as signed letters (i.e., OCI, Consent and Client Authorization Letters) and embedded graphics (if applicable) in .pdf format, with the exception of pricing. Pricing spreadsheets (Excel Price Workbook (EPW)) should be submitted using MS Excel 2016 or compatible. The EPW must contain all formulas used in developing the proposal and all cells in the EPW must be “unlocked” and without password protection. If files contain links, the links must be intact and maintained through all revisions. Electronic copies shall not be password protected. All electronic copies shall be submitted on DVD-R in a protective sleeve. The DVD-R and protective sleeve shall be clearly marked as to volume number, Offeror’s name, solicitation title, and solicitation number. Electronic file directory titles

19-MDA-10290 (11 Dec 19) and organization shall reflect the titles and organization of these instructions. Each directory shall contain a Microsoft Word file with the Master Table of Contents for that directory.

Offerors shall ensure electronic copies on DVD-R are virus free. If there are disagreements between the paper copy and the electronic copy, the electronic copy shall take precedence.

4.18 Sound or video files shall not be embedded into the proposal files.

4.19 All proposals shall be submitted to the following address:

ATTN: Joshua Kachelman, MDA/CTS MDA Source Selection Facility 5222 Martin Road Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898-0001

If hand delivering proposals, call Joshua Kachelman, PCO, at (256) 450-0343 to schedule a date and time.

5.0 CONTRACT DOCUMENTATION (VOLUME I)

5.1 The Offeror shall include a master table of contents of the entire proposal (include in Contract Documentation volume only). See Section 4.9 and Table L-1: Proposal Organization and Content.

5.2 Model Contract (SF33)

The Offeror shall provide a complete copy of this RFP (including Section L and Section M, less other attachments, with any amendments) with the original signature of an official authorized to contractually bind the Offeror in Block 30 of the SF33. The Offeror must complete the following sections within the RFP:

Section A (SF33, Blocks 13 through 18)

Section B - Offerors will populate the estimated cost and fixed fee values for CPFF LOE CLINs.

Section K, Representations, Certifications and other Statements of Offeror

Offerors shall complete representations, certifications, acknowledgments and statements via the System for Award Management (SAM) at https://www.sam.gov. A hardcopy shall be included in the Contract Documentation volume. Any additional Section K information shall also be included in this section. NOTE: Offerors shall verify that “reps and certs” are also contained in SAM to ensure that all “reps and certs” completed and submitted via SAM correspond with those included in the solicitation. For example, the solicitation may contain new cybersecurity clauses that are not available in SAM. In such cases, the Offeror shall complete the applicable “reps and certs” included in the solicitation and submit with its proposal.

5.3 Solicitation Exceptions Matrix

The Offeror is required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements. The Offeror must clearly identify any exceptions to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. Each exception shall refer to a paragraph and/or specific part of the solicitation to which the exception is taken. The Offeror shall provide rationale in support of the exception and fully explain its impact, if any, on the performance, schedule, cost, and specific requirements of the solicitation to document any exceptions to, or deviations from, any of the clauses or special contract requirements along with justification. However, any exceptions which fail to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the Offeror being removed from consideration for award.

5.4 Ground Rules and Assumptions

The Offeror must clearly identify any ground rules and assumptions made in preparing the proposal.

6.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (VOLUME II)

6.1 The Executive Summary shall include company information and a summary of the Offeror’s proposal. This portion may be utilized by the evaluation team to support its evaluation of each factor. However, any summary material presented here shall not be considered as meeting the solicitation requirements for any portions of other volumes of the proposal.

Company Information: The Offeror shall provide the Company/Division Address, Identifying Codes, and Applicable Designations, company/division's street address, county and facility code, CAGE code, DUNS code, and size of business (large or small). The Offeror shall also provide the mailing address, telephone and fax numbers and facility codes for the cognizant Contract Administration Office, Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA), and Government Paying Office including the name, telephone and fax number for the Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO). The Offeror shall provide a single point of contact and one alternate for all matters dealing with its proposal including name, position title, address, phone number, fax number and email address. In addition, the Offeror shall provide the name and contact information for its Facility Security Officer that is responsible for managing the Offeror’s facility and personnel clearance actions.

Proposal Summary: The Offeror shall provide a top-level summary of its proposal suitable for describing its approach to Agency senior leadership.

6.2 Proposal Cross Reference Matrix: The Offeror shall provide a matrix using the format below (Table L-2) to cross reference its proposal to, at a minimum, the SOW, Section L, and Section M. The Offeror’s proposal paragraph number and format shall mirror Section L and

19-MDA-10290 (11 Dec 19)

Section M paragraph numbering to the maximum extent practicable. The Offeror shall include and populate additional columns as it sees fit to accommodate a more efficient evaluation.

TABLE L-2: Proposal Cross Reference Matrix Format PWS Paragraph Section L Section M Offeror’s Proposal Paragraph Reference

XX.X L-XX.X M-XX.X XX.X

7.0 FACTOR 1: MISSION CAPABILITY (VOLUME III)

7.1 The Offeror’s Mission Capability volume will consist of the following subfactors:

Mission Capability Subfactor 1 (MCS1): Source Selection and Policy Support Mission Capability Subfactor 2 (MCS2): Contract Cost/Pricing Support Mission Capability Subfactor 3 (MCS3): Acquisition Support Mission Capability Subfactor 4 (MCS4): E-Business Support Mission Capability Subfactor 5 (MCS5): Human Capital Management

7.2 Subfactor MCS1: Source Selection and Policy Support Capability

The Offeror will be required to perform all SOW 3.2.2 requirements. However, for proposal evaluation purposes, the Offeror shall propose its Source Selection and Policy Support capability based on its (inclusive of team members such as prime, subcontractor, joint or venture) approach to, and understanding of, elements #1, #2, and #3 to include the corporate resources and requisite experiences to accomplish the mission tasks:

Element #1: Procurement Management Review (PMR) Support. Preparing, executing, outbriefing, and training associated with a comprehensive PMR; include approach for development and promulgation of lessons learned for future PMRs.

Element #2: Policy Formulation and Compliance. Reviewing, formulating and promulgating contract policy from statutory, regulatory, and local (Agency) environments; includes directives, manuals, issuances, templates, instructions, and procedures. Policy compliance reviews of contract documentation, as well as policy advice to Procuring Contracting Officers and Directors of Contracts.

Element #3: Source Selection Advisory Support. Implementing multiple concurrent competitive source selections, to include RFP development support, exchanges with Industry, Red Team review of source selection documentation, source selection execution advisory support (including Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) caucuses, Proposal Analysis Report (PAR), Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD) development and SSA briefing), and post-award debriefing support. Consider competitive environments for services, systems, as well as non-FAR methods such as Other Transactions.

19-MDA-10290 (11 Dec 19)

To demonstrate an approach to, and understanding of, the SOW 3.2.2 requirements and associated SOW 4.3.1.7 qualifications, the Offeror shall propose a resume for each key staff position identified in the following element:

Element #4: Key Staff Position defined as Contract Program Manager (CPM). Provide a resume that addresses all the following qualifications from SOW 4.3.1.7 for the following key staff position: CPM.

Contract Program Manager

(Key Staff Position) SOW (para 3.1 & 3.2)

Functional Description:

• BA/BS and 25 years directly related experience in federal contracting discipline

• Former Director of Contracts (managing 50+ employees) for a DoD buying activity

• 10+ years combined DoD procurement experience with ACAT I systems development and

A&AS

• Experience in internal review, formulation and promulgation of contract policy and DCMA

PMR experience

• Previous DAWIA Certification Level III in Contracting or equivalent

7.3 Subfactor MCS2: Contract Cost/Pricing Support Capability

The Offeror will be required to perform all SOW 3.2.3 requirements. However, for proposal evaluation purposes, the Offeror shall propose its Contract Cost/Pricing Support capability based on its (inclusive of team members such as prime, subcontractor, joint venture) approach to, and understanding of, the following element to include the corporate resources and requisite experiences to accomplish the mission tasks:

Element #5: Sole Source Procurements. Executing cost/price analysis of multi-billion dollar systems acquisitions, to include complex modeling techniques (advanced Excel functions such as SUMIF, VLOOKUP, pivot tables) as well as design and implementation of cost models for purposes of what-if analysis, negotiations support, and price objective development. Address analytical approach for developing price objectives and real-time support to negotiations (to include quick-turn revisions and what-if analysis). Address steps in evaluating reasonableness and realism of contractor proposed price and underlying quantitative aspects of proposals (e.g., resources and rates), utilizing various methods (e.g. forecasting, learning curves, and /or regression analysis).

To demonstrate an approach to, and understanding of, the SOW 3.2.3 requirements and associated SOW 4.3.1.7 qualifications, the Offeror shall propose a resume for the key staff position identified in the following element:

19-MDA-10290 (11 Dec 19)

Element #6: Key Staff Position defined as CTQ Cost/Price Analyst Lead (Advanced). Provide a resume for Cost/Price Lead that addresses all the following qualifications from SOW 4.3.1.7:

CTQ Cost/Price Analyst Lead (Advanced)

(Key Staff Position) SOW (para 3.2.3)

Functional Description:

• BA/BS and 20 years total relevant experience as a cost/price analyst for a DoD buying activity and/or as a cost/price analyst, proposal analyst, project control analyst, or cost accountant at DoD contractor.

• 10+ years’ experience conducting cost/price analysis of complex cost-type proposals for major systems development and production in a sole source environment for a DoD buying activity.

• 3+ years’ experience conducting cost/price analysis in competitive source selections.

• Direct experience developing fully-integrated formula-driven MS Excel cost models to calculate the proposed, objective, and negotiated amounts by cost element and CLIN, with focus on VLOOKUP and SUMIFS formulas.

• Experience in forecasting, learning curves, and regression analysis.

7.4 Subfactor MCS3: Acquisition Support Capability

The Offeror will be required to perform all SOW (3.3) requirements. However, for proposal evaluation purposes, the Offeror shall propose its Acquisition Support capability based on its (inclusive of team members such as prime/subcontractor, or joint venture) approach to, and understanding of, the following element to include the corporate resources and requisite experiences to accomplish the mission tasks:

Element #7: Acquisition Analysis and Support. Supporting procurement operations, to the DA/DAP core program planning, policy, program execution and acquisition strategy support functions. Providing programmatic and Acquisition Analysis for the DA front office and the DAP Director across the MDA acquisition lifecycle pertaining to both acquisition of weapons systems and services.

7.5 Subfactor MCS4: E-Business Support Capability

The Offeror will be required to perform all SOW 3.2.1.1 requirements. However, for proposal evaluation purposes, the Offeror shall propose its E-Business Support capability based on its (inclusive of team members such as prime, subcontractor, or joint venture) approach to, and understanding of, the following element to include the corporate resources and requisite experiences to accomplish the mission tasks:

Element #8: E-Business Service Desk Support. Providing system administration, help-desk support, and user training for various E-business automated DoD systems to include the

19-MDA-10290 (11 Dec 19)

Procurement Desktop Defense (PD2)/Standard Procurement System (SPS), the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE), and beta.SAM.gov. Address capability to provide fully trained personnel on the first day of full contract responsibility and throughout performance.

7.6 Subfactor MCS5: Human Capital Management

The Offeror will be required to perform all SOW requirements. However, for proposal evaluation purposes, the Offeror shall propose its (inclusive of team members such as prime, subcontractor, or joint venture) approach to, and understanding of, the following two (2) elements:

Element #9: Recruiting & Retaining Personnel. Process of recruiting and retaining qualified personnel. Specifically, address recruiting techniques, compensation plan/benefits and other associated incentives, and a training plan to ensure seamless support. A transition plan detailing on-boarding, security clearances, training needs, kickoff meetings, and any other actions required to ensure full contract responsibility after the completion of the 30 day transition period. The Government is not responsible for training contractor personnel; demonstrate the approach for ensuring fully qualified and trained personnel upon award and post-award oversight, training, and management of resources to ensure seamless transition of employees throughout performance.

Element #10: Problem Resolution Strategy. Problem resolution strategy, to include:

a) Negative performance at the individual level

b) Negative performance at the macro level (e.g. an entire function such as pricing)

c) Personnel conduct issues (timecard fraud, truancy, behavior/conduct, customer complaint resolution)

8.0 FACTOR 2: IMCP (VOLUME IV)

The Offeror shall submit an IMCP that clearly describes its policies and procedures for the dissemination and accountability of Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI), as outlined in

SOW 6.0.

The Offeror’s initial IMCP submission shall only include the “plan” (Paragraph 3a-e). If chosen as the successful Offeror, the prime contractor will have NLT 60 days after contract award to comply with the data requirements in paragraphs 4a-e. The IMCP and any subsequent updates to it will be evaluated as part of the successful Offeror’s annual CPARS rating.

9.0 FACTOR 3: OCI MANAGEMENT PLAN (VOLUME V)

The Offeror shall clearly describe its approach to the management of Organizational Conflicts of Interest in a comprehensive OCI Management Plan. The plan will be incorporated into the contract via CDRL A005 after award and shall be updated as required during the term of the

19-MDA-10290 (11 Dec 19) contract. At a minimum, the plan shall describe the approach to OCI management in the following areas:

a) Self-certification that the C3PO proposal is OCI-free; specifically, that the Prime and all subcontractors at all tiers do not support any MDA-funded contract requirements (whether via MDA contract or other Government agency).

b) The procedures for detecting, eliminating, and reporting any conflicts at any tier;

specifically, identify subcontract policies, practices, and penalties the Contractor will utilize to ensure its subcontractors at all tiers proactively identify and report conflicts.

c) The procedures for protecting agency information that could lead to an unfair competitive advantage if disclosed; specifically, collecting disclosure agreements covering all individuals, subcontractors, and other entities with access to agency-sensitive information, and physical safeguards.

d) Enforcement mechanisms, procedures, and training to ensure promulgation to employees and subcontractors at all tiers (with emphasis on consequences for failing to comply with an OCI-free policy).

e) Processes for identifying and eliminating potential conflicts associated with the employment of recently separated federal Government employees (military or civilian) that may have had unequal, non-public access to TEAMS or TEAMS-Next information.

If an Offeror fails to demonstrate an effective approach in the above areas, it will be assigned an “Unacceptable” rating for OCI Management Plan. Offerors that receive an “Unacceptable” rating for OCI Management Plan is not eligible for award.

10.0 FACTOR 4: PAST PERFORMANCE (VOLUME VI)

The Offeror shall submit a past performance volume containing the following:

a) Table of Contents

b) Summary page describing the role of the Offeror and each subcontractor and teaming partner for which the Offeror is required to provide Past Performance Information in accordance with paragraph 10.2 below.

c) Past Performance Information (PPI) in accordance with Attachment L1 to the solicitation

– see paragraph 10.2 below.

d) Consent Letters executed by each subcontractor and teaming partner, authorizing release of adverse past performance information so the Offeror can response to such information.

A sample letter is attached as Attachment L3.

e) Client Authorization Letter, Attachment L4.

f) Organization Structure Change History – see paragraph 10.5 below.

10.1 Summary Page

The Offeror shall submit recent and relevant past performance information as described below.

Past performance is required for the Offeror and major subcontractors, Inter-Company Work Transfer Agreement (IWTA), joint venture and teaming partners. The Offeror shall provide a

19-MDA-10290 (11 Dec 19) complete list of all subcontractors and joint ventures in this volume. The PPI (Attachment L1) should be submitted only for the prime contractor and major subcontractors expected to perform aspects of the effort the Offeror considers critical to the overall successful performance. As stated in 1.2, “Subcontractor” is defined as any tier subcontractor or IWTA. Team Members are the entities that make up a joint venture or any other partnership or teaming arrangement that is formed for the purpose of responding to this solicitation. The PPI can reflect experience at either the Prime contractor or subcontractor level.

Although performance confidence of Past Performance is separate and distinct from Determination of Responsibility required by FAR subpart 9.1, past performance information contained herein may be used to support the Determination of Responsibility for the successful Offeror.