ID05180023_Sections_LM_082718.pdf

ID05170023

ATTACHMENT 4

Sections L&M

Section L: INFORMATION TO OFFERORS AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR PROPOSAL

PREPARATION

General Instructions

(a) This section of the Information to Offerors provides general guidance for preparing proposals as well as specific instructions on the format and content of the proposal. The offeror's proposal must include all data and information requested by the Request for Proposal (RFP) and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. The offeror shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the Performance Work Statement (PWS), Attachment 1. Non-conformance with the instructions provided in this Information to Offerors may result in removal of the proposal from further evaluation.

(b) The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims to address how the offeror intends to meet the Government’s requirements. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of offeror’s facilities and experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offeror's proposal.

(c) Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed art work, internet hyperlinks, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

(d) The proposal acceptance period is specified in Section A of the solicitation. The offeror shall make a clear statement that the proposal is valid through one hundred twenty (120) days.

General Information

The General Services Administration Contracting Office (CO) and Program Manager (PM) are the sole points of contact for this procurement. Address any questions or concerns you may have to the CO and PM. Written requests for clarification must be sent to the CO via email Jacqueline.johnson@gsa.gov and robin.swaney@gsa.gov.

The CO will notify offerors of any decision to exclude them from the competition; whereupon, they may request and receive a debriefing in accordance with FAR 15.505. Offerors excluded from the competition may request a pre-award debriefing or they may choose to wait until after the source selection decision to request a post-award debriefing. However, offerors excluded from the competition are entitled to no more than one debriefing for each proposal. The CO will notify unsuccessful offerors in the competition of the source selection decision in accordance with FAR 15.506. Upon such notification, unsuccessful offerors may request and receive a debriefing. Offerors desiring a debriefing must make their request in accordance with the requirements of FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable.

Communications mailto:Jacqueline.johnson@gsa.gov mailto:robin.swaney@gsa.gov

Exchanges of source selection information between Government and offerors will be controlled by the CO. 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. Otherwise, source selection information will be transmitted via secure mail.

Award without Discussions The Government intends to award without discussions. Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best approach/terms for technical, past performance, and price;

however, despite this intent, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the CO determines they are necessary.

If an offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the offeror shall immediately notify the CO 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.

Organizational and Consultant Conflict of Interest (OCCI) Each offeror shall specifically identify in its proposal whether or not any potential or actual OCCI, as described in FAR Subpart 9.5, exists for this procurement. If the offeror believes that no OCCI exists, the OCCI response shall set forth sufficient details to support such a position. If an offeror believes that an actual or perceived OCCI does exist on this procurement, the offeror shall submit an OCCI plan with the proposal, explaining in detail how the OCCI will be mitigated and/or avoided.

Organization/Number of Copies/Page Limits

The offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization Table (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 below. The contents of each proposal volume are described in the information to offerors paragraph as noted in the table below.

VOLUME VOLUME TITLE COPIES PAGE

LIMIT

I Executive Summary electronic

3 pages

II Technical/Management electronic 20 pages

III Past Performance electronic No page limit

IV Cost Price electronic No page limit

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 forwarding 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, and executive summaries.

A page is defined as each face of a sheet of paper containing information. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two pages. Page size shall be 8.5 x 11 inches, not including foldouts. Pages shall be single spaced. The text size shall be no less than 10 point Times New Roman font for all text. Use at least 1 inch margins on the top and bottom and ¾-inch side margins. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume. The technical volume of the proposal is to be submitted as a Microsoft (MS) Word or PDF document

Indexing

Each volume shall contain a more detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections.

Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, and with an explanation for each. The glossary will not be included in the page limitations.

Proposal Submission

ITSS Registration

Although this requirement is being solicited through the Government E Portal, FedBizOpps, offerors must submit proposals through the GSA Information Technology Solution Shop (ITSS) procurement portal (web.ITSS.gsa.gov) under the solicitation number noted above. The contract and subsequent task orders will be awarded and administered through the GSA ITSS system.

Offerors must register and submit their proposal/quote in ITSS prior to the due date for Government receipt of proposals/quotations to be considered for award. If your company is not registered in the ITSS system, you must register to submit your proposal prior to the proposal due date of this announcement. Instructions for registering are provided on the web site (web.ITSS.gsa.gov). Additionally, phone technical support for ITSS is available by calling toll free 877 / 243-2889 and following the prompts (currently press #2 for registration).

ITSS Proposal Submission

Once registered in ITSS, offerors intending to quote must contact the CO and provide the company name and contact person as it appears on the ITSS registration. This step is necessary so the Government can activate the ITSS RFP screen in the name of your company so you can submit your proposal. Offerors shall submit proposals/quotes electronically through the GSA ITSS system. The ITSS system allows offerors to provide information in text boxes and attach proposal documents. Proposals/qutoes must be received by the date and time specified in the FedBizOpps solicitation announcement to be considered.

ITSS Attachment Process and Restrictions Proposals submitted to ITSS, as attachments, must conform to formats compatible with Microsoft Office software (i.e., MS Word, MS Excel, etc) with all external objects embedded (not linked) or Portable Document Format (.pdf). [Note: This stipulation is for compatibility with government software, only, and is not an endorsement of Microsoft Corporation, Adobe, Inc., or other manufactures of compatible software or of their products.] Multimedia files will not be accepted, e.g., QuickTime or Windows Media Player, RealPlayer, etc. ITSS will accept attachments up to 2MB in size, each, and may accept larger documents. ITSS accepts attachments in groups of six at a time. If you need to attach more than six documents to your proposal, attach and click the “submit” button for the first six attachments and then repeat the attachment process for subsequent documents. Submit each volume as a separate electronic file with the name of the volume from the table in this section. The proposal submission will be considered complete when all volumes have been received. Partial proposals will be considered late.

Hard Copy Proposal Submission Offerors are not required hard copies of their proposals for this requirement

Volume I - Executive Summary In the executive summary volume, the offeror shall provide the below information:

Narrative Summary The narrative summary of the entire proposal should be concise, to include addressing the significant risks, and highlighting any key or unique features, excluding cost/price. Any summary material presented here shall not be considered as meeting the requirements for any portions of other volumes of the proposal.

Table of Contents Include a master table of contents of the entire proposal

Authorized Offeror Personnel Provide the name, title, and telephone number of the company/division point of contact and an alternate who can make decisions with respect to the proposal and who can obligate the company contractually. Also, identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government

Volume II – Technical

The Technical Volume should be specific and complete. Each offeror’s response will be evaluated against the evaluation factors defined in Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award.

Using the instructions provided below, each offeror should provide as specifically as possible the actual methodology it would use for accomplishing/satisfying these subfactors. All the requirements specified in the solicitation are mandatory. Do not merely reiterate the objectives or reformulate the requirements specified in the solicitation.

Format and Specific Content

Technical/Management In the Technical volume, each offeror should address its proposed approach to meeting the performance or capability requirements of each technical/management subfactor. The volume should include a cover page, table of contents, the evaluation factors to include all subfactors and the glossary.

A concise and comprehensive proposal is desired. Organization, clarity, accuracy of information, relevance, and completeness are of prime importance. Statements such as “will comply”, or “noted and understood” without supporting narrative to define compliance are not acceptable.

Cursory responses or responses which merely reiterate or reformulate solicitation language will not be considered as satisfying the requirements of the RFP or as demonstrating the ability to perform.

Volume III: Past Performance

The offeror shall submit a past performance volume with its proposal, containing past performance information in accordance with this section. This information is required for the offeror and subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners who are proposed to perform at least 40% of the proposed effort based on the total proposed price or perform aspects of the effort the offeror considers critical to overall successful performance. 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 Government knowledge of the offeror and its teaming partners past performance with the agency.

Relevant Contracts Submit the past performance information on no more than three (3) recent contracts, including a significant teaming partner’s and/or significant subcontractor’s past performance information submissions, considered most relevant in demonstrating the offerors and proposed significant teaming partner’s and/or significant subcontractor’s ability to perform the proposed effort.

See Section M for a description of the characteristics or aspects the Government will consider in determining recency and relevance. See Table 3 for the definitions of relevancy and recency.

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. 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.

Volume VI: Cost/Price

Price Reasonableness and Completeness This section is to assist the offeror in submitting information other than pricing data that is required to evaluate the reasonableness and completeness of your proposed 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 unreasonably high proposed prices, initially or subsequently, may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition. Additionally, unbalanced pricing poses an unacceptable risk to the Government and may be a reason to reject an offeror’s proposal.

Cost/Price Information 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.

Section M: Evaluation Factors for Award

Basis of Award

The lowest price technically acceptable source selection process is appropriate when best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest price.

When using the lowest price technically acceptable process:

• The evaluation factors and significant subfactors that establish the requirements of acceptability must be set forth in the solicitation. Solicitations must specify that award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors.

• Tradeoffs are not permitted.

• Proposals are evaluated for acceptability, but are not ranked using non-cost/price factors.

Award will be made to the technically acceptable offeror that represents the lowest evaluated price, as this is a LPTA requirement.

Evaluation:

The technical proposal should include all information the offeror wants the Government to consider and evaluate regarding its company’s ability to perform all required tasks and conform to all required terms and conditions.

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions or seek clarifications if the CO determines they are necessary. In the event issues pertaining to a proposed contract cannot be resolved to the CO’s satisfaction, the Government reserves the right to withdraw and cancel the proposed contract. In such event, offerors will be notified in writing.

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 pricing proposal should include a separate line item for the additional six-month period IAW FAR 52.217-8. These prices shall be identical to the proposed pricing in the six months prior to expiration of the base period, or the final option period, if option periods are present. The total price will consist of the contractor’s proposed price for the base period, all option periods, and the option pricing for the additional six-month period. The Government reserves the right, but is not obligated, to review option prices to determine if they are significantly unbalanced.

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

Number of Contracts to be Awarded

The Government intends to award a single contract for the Better Business Deal (BBD)/Industry Insight Course; however, the Government reserves the right to make no award at all.

Evaluation criteria:

Evaluation Factors and Subfactors Proposals will be evaluated with regard to how they meet the technical evaluation factor, past performance factor, and cost/price factor. After receipt of proposals, the Government will first evaluate the lowest price proposal. If the lowest priced proposal is technically acceptable and is properly awardable, award will be made and no further evaluations will be conducted. If the lowest priced proposal is not technically acceptable, and otherwise non-awardable, the Government will continue with evaluations.

Relative Importance of Factors and Sub-factors. The relative importance of each factor and sub-factor is as follows: All non-cost factors are of equal importance.

Factor 1: Technical

Subfactor 1: The offeror’s response will be evaluated on the ability to execute the required tasks identified the PWS.

Subfactor 2: The offeror’s response will be evaluated based on a workshop course that your organization has previously taught or developed as a response to this solicitation related to the topics listed in Appendix A

Subfactor 3: The offeror’s response will be evaluated based on the ability to obtain the required staffing identified in the PWS.

The Technical subfactors will be evaluated and rated either Acceptable or Unacceptable. In order for a proposal to be rated overall Technically Acceptable, each of the following subfactors must be rated Acceptable. The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate the proposal. The following factors will be rated on an acceptable/unacceptable basis:

Table 1. Technical Ratings

Rating Description

Factor 2: Past performance

Past Performance will be rated on an “acceptable” or “unacceptable” basis using the ratings described in the table below.

The past performance evaluation is an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the minimum past performance solicitation requirements. This assessment is based on the offeror’s record of relevant and recent past performance information that pertain to the products and/or services outlined in the solicitation requirements

NOTE: In the case of an offeror without a record of recent and relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered “acceptable.”

Table 2. Past Performance Ratings Adjective rating Description Acceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown. (See note above)

Unacceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Sources of Past Performance Information for Evaluation

Sources are as follows:

Acceptable Proposal/quotation clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal/quotation does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

1. Past performance information provided by the offeror in Volume III.

2. Past performance information may also be utilized from established systems such as the Past PPIRS, Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System, Electronic Subcontracting Reporting System, or other databases; and may be obtained from other sources available to the Government, such as the Defense Contract Management Agency; and interviews with program managers, COs, etc.

Recency and Relevancy

The past performance references submitted must adhere to the recent and relevant definitions below to be considered acceptable.

a. Recency. 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 original date of issuance of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails the recency condition will not be evaluated for relevancy or quality.

b. Relevancy. The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all recent past performance submissions. For each recent past performance reference reviewed, the relevance of the work performed will be assessed. Relevant past performance means providing evidence demonstrating experience with past contracts to provide on-site teaching and educational services described in the PWS. Table 3 below describes the ratings to be used for the relevant evaluation of each past performance reference for each proposal.

Table 3: Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Rating Definition Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities to successfully perform the required effort as related to technical subfactors

Not relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities to successfully perform the required effort as related to technical subfactors

Factor 3: Cost/Price

The offeror’s price proposal will be evaluated to determine if it is reasonable and complete.

Normally, price reasonableness is established utilizing one or more of the price analysis techniques defined in FAR 15.404-1. The Government will determine completeness of the offeror's proposal by verifying that all solicitation requirements have been priced, figures are correctly calculated, and costs are presented within the mandatory pricing template provided in Attachment 4, Price Template, to the Request for Proposal.

Award will be made to the technically acceptable offeror that represents the lowest evaluated price, as this is a LPTA requirement.

Evaluation Factors and Subfactors