HSCG23-17-Q-P1C004_RFQ_TELERADIOLOGY_SERVICES.pdf

HSCG23-17-Q-P1C004 Page 1 of 6 RFQ Release Date: 07/19/2017

NOTICE FOR FILING AGENCY PROTESTS

It is the policy of the United States Coast Guard (USCG) to issue solicitations and make contract awards in a fair and timely manner. The Ombudsman Program for Agency Protests (OPAP) was established to investigate agency protest issues and resolve them without expensive and time-consuming litigation.

OPAP is an independent reviewing authority that is empowered to grant a prevailing protester essentially the same relief as the Government Accountability Office (GAO). Interested parties are encouraged to seek resolution of their concerns within the USCG as an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) forum, rather than filing a protest with the GAO or some external forum. Interested parties may seek resolution of their concerns informally or opt to file a formal agency protest with the contracting officer or Ombudsman.

Informal forum with the Ombudsman. Interested parties who believe a specific USCG procurement is unfair or otherwise defective should first direct their concerns to the cognizant contracting officer. If the contracting officer is unable to satisfy the concerns, the interested party is encouraged to contact the USCG Ombudsman for Agency Protests. Under this informal process, the agency is not required to suspend contract award performance. Use of an informal forum does not suspend any time requirement for filing a protest with the agency or other forum. In order to ensure a timely response, interested parties should provide the following information to the Ombudsman: solicitation/contract number, contracting office, contracting officer, and solicitation closing date (if applicable).

Formal Agency Protest with the Ombudsman. Prior to submitting a formal agency protest, protesters must first use their best efforts to resolve their concerns with the contracting officer through open and frank discussions. If the protester's concerns are unresolved, an independent review is available by the Ombudsman. The protester may file a formal agency protest to either the contracting officer or as an alternative to that, the Ombudsman under the OPAP program. Contract award or performance will be suspended during the protest period unless contract award or performance is justified, in writing, for urgent and compelling reasons or is determined in writing to be in the best interest of the Government. The agency's goal is to resolve protests in less than 35 calendar days from the date of filing. Protests shall include the information set forth in FAR 33.103. If the protester fails to submit the required information, resolution of the protest may be delayed or the protest may be dismissed. This will not preclude re-filing of the protest to meet the requirement. To be timely, protests must be filed within the period specified in FAR 33.103(e). Formal protests filed under the OPAP program should be submitted to:

Department of Homeland Security United States Coast Guard (CG-91) Ombudsman Program for Agency Protests Email: OPAP@uscg.mil Fax: 202-372-8447 Phone: 202-475-5786

More information about the Ombudsman Program for Agency Protests (OPAP) can be found at http://www.uscg.mil/acquisition/business/ombudsman.asp http://www.uscg.mil/acquisition/business/ombudsman.asp

HSCG23-17-Q-P1C004 Page 2 of 5 RFQ Release Date: 07/19/2017

From: Ms. D. J. Pelis, United States Coast Guard (USCG) Contracting Officer (CG-9121)

To: Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) Firms under the Service-Disabled

Veteran-Owned Small Business Procurement Program, FAR Subpart 19.14

Subject: Request for Quotation (RFQ) # HSCG23-17-Q-P1C004

1. Purpose. The Government invites SDVOSB’s to provide teleradiology services for the USCG Health, Safety and Work-Life Directorate (CG-11) in accordance with RFQ Attachment II, the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

2. Authority and NAICS. This acquisition is being conducted pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation

(FAR) Part 12, “Acquisition of Commercial Items” under the North American Industry Code (NAICS) 621512, “Diagnostic Imaging Centers.”

3. Acquisition Planning Forecast System (AFPS). The relevant APFS record is F2016031694.

4. No Direction to Proceed. This RFQ shall not be considered direction to proceed with the subject effort, nor a promise of future direction to proceed. Offerors are solely responsible for this RFQ’s submission costs.

5. Small Business. This acquisition is set aside for Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Businesses

(SDVOSBs) under the applicable NAICS code noted above.

6. Commercial Items. This acquisition is for items that meet the definition for commercial items as detailed in FAR Subpart 2.101, “Definitions”.

7. Intent. The Government intends to award one (1) Firm-Fixed Price (FFP), single-award task order to one (1) SDVOSB firm.

8. Period of Performance. The approximate period of performance will be a base period of 12 months and four (4) 12-month options, for a total potential period of performance of 60 months if all options are exercised. The anticipated award date is Monday, August 14th, 2017.

9. Questions. All questions shall be submitted via email no later than Monday, July 24th, 2017 at

3:00PM Eastern Time. Questions submitted via any other method other than email will not be accepted. All questions or concerns regarding this RFQ shall be submitted via email to the Contract Specialist, Kerri Laws, at Kerri.L.Laws@uscg.mil.

This deadline ensures that timely responses can be provided to each question. Questions asked after the deadline may or may not be answered.

Answers will be provided to all timely submitted questions. Answers will be sent out in an Excel sheet via email to all Offerors as soon as possible. All questions and answers will be stripped of any identifying company information.

Commandant United States Coast Guard

2703 Martin Luther King Jr Ave, SE Washington, DC 20593-7828

STOP 7828

Staff Symbol: CG-9121 Phone: (860) 701-6771 E-mail: Dorothy.J.Pelis@uscg.mil mailto:Kerri.L.Laws@uscg.mil mailto:Dorothy.J.Pelis@uscg.mil

HSCG23-17-Q-P1C004 Page 3 of 5 RFQ Release Date: 07/19/2017

10. Incumbent Contractor. The incumbent contract is order HSCG84-12-N-AA5389. The incumbent contractor is Semper Fi Ventures LLC, located at 552 Camano Way, McDonough, GA, 30253-8378.

11. Basis for Award. The Government intends to award the single-award task order to the Offeror whose quotation is determined to be the Lowest Price, Technically Acceptable (LPTA).

12. Quotation Package Instructions. All quotations shall be submitted via email no later than

Tuesday, August 1st, 2017 at 3:00PM Eastern Time. Quotations submitted via any other method other than email will not be accepted. All quotations shall be submitted via email to the Contract Specialist, Kerri Laws, at Kerri.L.Laws@uscg.mil.

It is the Offeror’s responsibility to ensure that all elements of the quotation arrive in a timely fashion.

Please do not wait until the last minute to submit a quotation; please allow adequate time for the quotation to be transmitted. Quotations with missing and/or untimely delivered volumes risk rejection by the Contracting Officer.

Quotations shall be submitted as three (3) separate volumes as identified below. All electronic file names shall include the Offeror’s name and the last six digits of this RFQ – “-P1C004”.

Each volume shall be submitted as a separate document, but all three (3) documents may be submitted in one (1) email. Please note that the size of each email shall be ten (10) megabytes or less. If necessary, Offerors may break up their quotation volume submissions into separate emails.

Volume 1: Technical Capability Volume 2: Price Volume 3: Representations and Certifications

Each volume of the Offeror’s quotation shall be written Arial font with a font size of 11 with single-spacing on 8.5 x 11-size pages. A smaller font size of 8 or higher is acceptable for charts, graphs, and captions. The document background shall be white and use of color limited to table and charts.

Each volume shall be provided in a Microsoft Word format (readable by Microsoft Office 2007) or in PDF. The sole exception is for the Volume 2 pricing spreadsheet, which is to be provided in Microsoft Excel format (readable by Microsoft Office 2007).

Each volume shall contain only the contents noted below. Do not attempt to extend the technical volume into the other volumes or vice versa. Any such attempts will not be evaluated and will not factor into the source selection process.

13. Volume 1, “Technical Capability”, Contents. The Offeror shall provide the following in its Volume 1 to be considered responsive: a technical capability that demonstrates the Offeror’s understanding of and capability to perform the requirements set forth in the PWS.

Please note that simply repeating the PWS requirements may render the Offeror’s quotation technically unacceptable. It is the obligation of the Offeror to fully explain how it intends to thoroughly meet all PWS requirements. Offerors should describe how they plan to provide this support in enough detail so that the Government is confident the Offeror understands the work required and is capable of performing it.

The technical quotation shall not exceed ten (10) pages, exclusive of the cover sheet, and table of contents. Any material provided beyond the tenth (10th) page will not be evaluated.

mailto:Kerri.L.Laws@uscg.mil

HSCG23-17-Q-P1C004 Page 4 of 5 RFQ Release Date: 07/19/2017

14. Volume 2, “Price”, Contents. The Offeror shall provide the following in its Volume 2 to be considered responsive: a completed quotation pricing spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel (Pricing Sheet, Attachment

III).

Pricing shall be completed for each item in Column E to reflect the Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) pricing in Column F or the quotation will be considered non-responsive. Offerors may not change the estimated quantities in Column C.

Offeror’s price quotation shall not exceed two (2) pages, including the supplied spreadsheet and a one (1) page Word document describing any details the Offeror wishes to add on its pricing approach.

15. Volume 3, “Representations and Certifications”, Contents. This volume shall not contain any technical or pricing information. This volume shall contain the Offeror’s:

a. Completed Terms and Conditions. (Attachment IV, Additional Contract Clauses and Provisions or indicate that the required information is available in the System for Award Management or

SAM),

b. Contact Information Sheet, Offeror’s company and contract information to include the Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number, Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code, points of contact (POCs), etc.

c. Any Exceptions or Assumptions Made by the Offeror Regarding the RFQ . Please note that any exceptions taken to the RFQ may render the Offeror’s quotation to be technically unacceptable and ineligible for award.

This volume does not have a page limit.

16. Quote Evaluations. The Government reserves the right to award without discussions. The Government will select an awardee based on a lowest-priced technically acceptable basis. The Government will evaluate the lowest-priced quote for technical acceptability. If it is acceptable, other quotes will not be evaluated. If the lowest-priced quote is not technically acceptable, the Government will evaluate the second-lowest priced quote, and so on, etc.

Factor 1: Technical Capability Factor 2: Price Factor 3: Past Performance

Factor 1: Technical Capability. The Government will evaluate each Offeror’s Technical Volume to determine understanding of and adherence to all of the requirements outlined in the PWS.

Offerors that merely state compliance with the PWS requirements may be rated as “Unacceptable”.

Offerors that re-state the PWS in a fashion that does not clearly demonstrate the Offeror’s approach to successfully completing the requirements may be rated as “Unacceptable”.

An evaluation rating of technically “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” will be assigned upon completion of the technical quotation’s evaluation. If an Offeror receives a technical rating of “Unacceptable”, it will not be considered for award.

The following table shows the possible ratings for technical capability.

Factor 1 – Technical Capability Ratings Rating Definition Acceptable Quotation meets or exceeds the solicitation requirements

Unacceptable Quotation does not meet all solicitation requirements

HSCG23-17-Q-P1C004 Page 5 of 5 RFQ Release Date: 07/19/2017

Factor 2: Price. In accordance with FAR provision 52.217-5, “Evaluation of Options”, the Government will evaluate the total price by combining the price for the base period, the four (4) option years, and the six-month option per FAR clause 52.217-8, “”Option to Extend Services”, as noted below.

In order to evaluate each Offeror’s pricing under the FAR clause 52.217-8, “Option to Extend Services”, the Government will look at the total price of each Offeror’s Option Year 4 (Contract Line Item Numbers or CLINS 40001A and 40001B combined) and divide it by twelve (12) to determine the monthly price. Once that monthly price is calculated, it will be multiplied by six (6) months and then added to the Offeror’s Total Evaluated Price (TEP) to determine the price reasonableness of the 52.217-8 clause.

This additional pricing for the six-month 52.217-8 clause will not be included in the contract award and will be used solely in the TEP for evaluation purposes only.

Once this TEP is calculated for all Offerors, each Offeror’s TEP will be compared against the other Offerors and the Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE).

Factor 3: Past Performance. The Offeror’s past performance will be evaluated to determine the extent to which its past performance demonstrates the likelihood of successful performance on the present requirement.

In conducting its past performance evaluation, the Government reserves the right to utilize past performance information available in the Department of Defense’s (DoD’s) Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS). Offeror provided past performance questionnaires will NOT be accepted, nor will they be evaluated.

An Offeror who receives a rating of “Neutral” for past performance shall also be considered for award if evaluated to be technically “Acceptable”. The following table shows the possible ratings for past performance:

Rating System for Factor 3 – Past Performance Rating Definition Acceptable Based on the Offeror’s relevant past performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral A Neutral rating applies to an Offeror who does not have an adequate record of relevant past performance from which to assign a rating. A Neutral rating also applies if relevant past performance for the Offeror is not otherwise available. A Neutral rating does not provide the Offeror with an advantage or disadvantage.

Unacceptable Based on the Offeror’s relevant past performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

17. Attachments.

(I) List of Clinics (II) Performance Work Statement (PWS) (III) Pricing Spreadsheet (IV) Terms and Conditions