ID06190003_SF33_Attach_3_Ordering_Guide_20190620.pdf

Solicitation ID06190003 Attachment 3

Ordering Guide

Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center (DLIFLC) DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development Multiple

Award IDIQ

General Services Administration Federal Acquisition Services

Region 6 Assisted Acquisition Services

June 20, 2019

Original

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter 1: General Information

A. Overview

B. Purpose

C. Applicability

D. Scope

E. Ordering Period

F. Period of Performance for Task Orders

G. Program Ceiling

H. Authority to Place Task Orders

Chapter 2: Roles and Responsibilities

A. Administrative Contracting Officer

B. General Services Administration, Federal Acquisition Services, Region 6 Assisted

Acquisition Services

C. Task Order Ombudsman

D. Contracting Officer Representative

E Contractors

Chapter 3: The Requirements Process and Placing Orders

A. Acquisition Planning

B. Performance Base Work Statement (PWS)

C. Funding

D. Task Order Types

E. Securtiy Requirements

F. Ordering Procedures and Fair Opportunity

G. Evaluation Method – Best Value Trade-off or Best Value LPTA

H. Minimum Order

I. Request for Task Order Response

J. Task Order Pricing

K. Changes in Team Members/Subcontractors

L. Organizational Conflict of Interest at the Task Order Level

M. Work on a Government Installation

N. Task Order Execution Plan (TOEP)

O. Addition of Clauses at the Task Order Level

P. Selection of Contractor and Documentation to Support Task Order Award

Q. Post Award Notifications and Debriefings

R. Enterprise Cntract Manpower Reporting Application (eCMRA)

S. Official Task Order File

Chapter 4: Creating and Tracking Task Orders in GSA ASSIST

A. Task Order Process

Chapter 5: Task Order Monitoring and Contract Administration

A. Task Order Review and Approval Procedures

B. Contract Administration of Master Contracts

C. Performance Assessment Report (PAR)

D. Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

E. Metrics

F. Quarterly Progress Reports

G. Invoices and Payments

Attachments:

1. Contract numbers, mailing addresses, points of contacts, telephone numbers and email addresses of Prime Contractors

2. Request for Task Order Response (TOR) Template

CHAPTER 1

GENERAL INFORMATION

A. OVERVIEW: The Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center (DLIFLC) is continuously developing and updating listening and reading proficiency tests in order to measure the foreign language proficiency of military and government personnel. Accurate assessment is critical to placing the right personnel with the requisite skills commensurate with the requirements of a particular operational environment. Thus, the development of reading and listening language Test Items in various proficiency levels is a recurring requirement. The need is satisfied through task orders issued against the DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ contracts which specify the individual languages needed, quantity of Test Items, and the ILR proficiency ratings associated with each Item. The government then utilizes these delivered Test Items in creating the actual exams taken by personnel across DoD as well as other Federal agencies.

B. PURPOSE: The DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ Ordering Guide contains the information needed to properly use the Multiple Award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (MAIDIQ) to award Task Orders (TO) responsive to the Ordering Office’s requirements. The Ordering Guide also describes the steps for preparing a requirements package, the roles and responsibilities for managing the awarded task orders, as well as guidance, oversight,and review and approval procedures.

C. APPLICABILITY: The DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ Ordering Guide is applicable to GSA Region 6 Assisted Acquisition Services (AAS) Ordering Contracting Officers (OCO), appointed Contracting Officer’s Representatives (COR), and contractors awarded IDIQ master contracts.

D. SCOPE: In accordance with individual Task Order Requests (TOR), contractors will develop DLPT5 test items that conform to DLPT item development specifications as outlined in the master contract Performance Work Statement (PWS, and that cover multiple Interagency Language Roundtable language proficiency (ILR) levels, from level 06 through level 4. The government has the right to add ten (10) additional languages that are currently not on the list. The government will determine whether the test format will be in Multiple Choice or Constructed Response for each language and dialect. The quantities of test items developed are subject to the limitations of the master contract ordering clauses and individual Task Order Requests (TOR).

E. ORDERING PERIOD: The DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ provides for the following ordering periods:

Year Period of Performance Base August 5, 2019 – August 4, 2020 Option Year One August 5, 2020 – August 4, 2021 Option Year Two August 5, 2021 – August 4, 2022 Option Year Three August 5, 2022 – August 4, 2023 Option Year Four August 5, 2023 – August 4, 2024

F. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE FOR TASK ORDERS: Performance under task orders or associated options may extend beyond the ordering period above. However, a task order may not have a period of performance that extends beyond 2 years from the contract end date.

G. PROGRAM CEILING: The DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ contract has a collective ceiling of 35,000 Test Items that will be measured against all task orders awarded over the five (5) year contract life. The IDIQ ceiling is based on estimated annual quantities of 5000 Test Items during the Base Year and 7500 Test Items during each option year.

These estimated quantities for each Period of Performance are used to calculate the cumulative IDIQ ceiling and do not service as ceiling quantities for each period. Prior to the initiation of a task order, Ordering Contracting Officers (OCO) should contact the Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO) to verify remaining ceiling capacity.

H. AUTHORITY TO PLACE TASK ORDERS: All Task Orders will be placed by GSA R6 Assisted Acquisition Services (AAS) in support of the Defense Language Institute Foreign language Center (DLIFLC). Only DLIFLC tenant organizations will be permitted to submit Requests for Task Order. All Requests for Task Order will be submitted to the Mission and Installation Contracting Command (MICC), Office – Fort Leavenworth, KS.

CHAPTER 2

ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

A. ACO: The ACO (to be named following contract awards), located within GSA R6 AAS – Kansas City, MO, is responsible for the administration of the DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ master contracts and the following:

• Serving as point of contact for DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development

MAIDIQ customers

• Providing information regarding the services available under the contracts

• Providing the administrative procedures for placing orders, contract administration and issuing contract modifications to the master contracts

• Establishing and maintaining central contract files and databases, as appropriate

• Tracking and reporting contract level metrics

• Ensuring the task order requirements are within the CAC/Fort Leavenworth Support

Services MAIDIQ contract scope

• Ensuring that the Contractor Manpower Reporting requirement is a part of the service acquisition requirements package and that the requirement is included in the PWS of the resultant task order

• Ensuring that the requirement to monitor the contractor’s reporting of the required information obtained for the Contractor Manpower Reporting is included in the Contracting Officer’s Representative appointment letter

• Complying with the fair opportunity for consideration requirement and competing all task orders among the seven CAC/Fort Leavenworth Support Services MAIDIQ contractors

• Ensuring that Quality Assurance Surveillance Plans and appropriate metrics are provided with each order request;

• Coordinating task order requests with the PARC as required, and obtaining approvals prior to execution; and

• Preparing a Performance Assessment Report, as required.

B. GSA R6 HEAD OF CONTRACTING AUTHORITY (HCA): The R6 HCA is responsible for review and approval, overall guidance and oversight of all task orders and procedures in accordance with acquisition regulations and the designated thresholds as outlined in Chapter 5, Paragraph A, of the Ordering Guide. The HCA is responsible for the following:

• Contracting Authority and Agency lead

• Reviewing, processing and providing approvals and guidance for task orders in excess of $10 million

• Simplifying, standardizing and streamlining the process

• Analyzing the adequacy of tools and training

• Sharing lessons learned

• Disseminating GSA and Regional Policy

• Ensuring competition

C. TASK ORDER OMBUDSMAN: As outlined in GSAM 552.216-74, GSA has designated a Task-Order and Delivery-Order Ombudsman who will review complaints from contractors and ensure that they are afforded a fair opportunity for consideration in the award of task or delivery orders under Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) contracts, consistent with the procedures in the contract. Written complaints shall be submitted to the Ombudsman, with a copy to the Contracting Officer. In the case that the contractor is not satisfied with the resolution of the complaint by the GSA Task-Order and Delivery-Order Ombudsman, the contractor may follow the procedures outlined in subpart 33.1. In the case that the contractor is not satisfied with the resolution of the complaint by the GSA Task-Order and Delivery-Order Ombudsman, the contractor may follow the procedures outlined in subpart 33.1. The GSA Task-Order and Delivery-Order Ombudsman is located at the General Services Administration (GSA), Office of Government-wide Policy (OGP), Office of Acquisition Policy (MV). Contact information for the GSA Task-Order and Delivery-Order Ombudsman can be found at: https://www.gsa.gov/policy-regulations/policy/acquisition-policy/gsa-ombudsman.

D. CONTRACTING OFFICER’S REPRESENTATIVE (COR): A COR will be appointed in writing by the ACO. The appointment letter will specify the COR responsibilities and authorities.

The contractor will be provided a copy of the executed appointment letter. The specified delegations will require CORs to ensure that the contractor’s performance is properly documented and that required reports are provided to the contracting activity for contract administration, monitoring purposes and for the official contract file.

E. CONTRACTORS: The DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ prime contractors and their teaming partners/subcontractors are found in Attachment 1. These contractors are all highly and technically qualified and have satisfied the full competitive and past performance requirements of the basic DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ award process. The contractors are responsible for the following:

https://www.gsa.gov/policy-regulations/policy/acquisition-policy/gsa-ombudsman https://www.gsa.gov/policy-regulations/policy/acquisition-policy/gsa-ombudsman

• submitting Monthly Reports to the ACO that cover task orders and contract status as specified in the master contracts

• ensuring that performance and deliverables meet the requirements set forth in the master contracts and individual task orders. Performing work and providing the services in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Task order and prescribed levels of quality control;

• submitting a proposal in accordance with the request from the Ordering Office; and,

• collecting and reporting data for the Enterprise Contractor Manpower Reporting (eCMRA) requirement (See Chapter 3, Section R)

CHAPTER 3

THE REQUIREMENTS PROCESS AND PLACING TASK ORDERS

A. ACQUISITION PLANNING: An Acquisition Strategy has been approved at the MAIDIQ contract level, therefore acquisition strategy documents are not required at the individual Task Order level.

B. PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT (PWS): The PWS incorporated into the master IDIQ contract shall govern contractor performance at the Task order level. Any exceptions will be outlined in the Task order Request (TOR). PWS shall be performance-based, shall identify the customer’s entire needs and shall address those needs with statements describing the required services in terms of output. The requirements should not be presented in such a manner that limits fair opportunity to ‘compete’ for the task order and should not impose requirements that are not specifically required to ensure successful satisfaction of the task order requirements. The requirements should be stated in clear, concise, easily understood and measurable terms. Detailed procedures should not be included that dictate how the work is to be accomplished; rather, the requirements should allow the contractor the latitude to work in a manner suited for innovation and creativity. At a minimum, the performance work statement should address the work to be performed, location of the work, period of performance, delivery schedule, applicable standards, acceptable criteria, and any special requirements (i.e., security clearances, travel, reports, unique or professional qualifications, special knowledge, etc). See FAR 37.6 for additional requirements for Performance-Based Contracting.

C. FUNDING: Funding shall be authorized at the task order level and shall be the type deemed appropriate for the services to be acquired. No unfunded task orders are authorized. Specifics regarding funding streams (e.g., full funding or partial/incremental funding) will be provided with each task order.

D. TASK ORDER TYPES: The types of orders that are authorized for use under the DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ are Firm Fixed Price with reimbursable line items for travel. Most task orders will be solicited, negotiated, and awarded as bilateral orders. In emergency situations or when a bilateral task order cannot otherwise be issued in a timely manner, the government reserves the right to issue unilateral task orders on an undefinitized basis. Any such undefinitized unilateral task order shall be definitized as quickly as possible in accordance with DFARS 252.217-7027 (Contract Definitization) utilizing a “not to exceed” ceiling amount provided by the contractor in the task order.

E. SECURITY REQUIREMENTS: The master contract PWS at C.7.2 outlines general security requirements. It is not anticipated that a DD Form 254 (Department of Defense Contract Security Classification Specification) will be associated with either the master contract or any associated task order.

F. ORDERING PROCEDURES AND FAIR OPPORTUNITY: The DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ will follow the Ordering Procedures outlined in FAR 16.505. In accordance with FAR 16.505(b), the ACO must provide each DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test

Items Development MAIDIQ contractor a fair opportunity to be considered for each task order exceeding $3,500, except as provided for at FAR 16.505(b)(2). The exceptions to fair opportunity are:

(A) The agency need for the supplies or services is so urgent that providing a fair opportunity would result in unacceptable delays.

(B) Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level of quality required because the supplies or services ordered are unique or highly specialized.

(C) The order must be issued on a sole-source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency because it is a logical follow-on to an order already issued under the contract, provided that all awardees were given a fair opportunity to be considered for the original order.

(D) It is necessary to place an order to satisfy a minimum guarantee.

(E) For orders exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, a statute expressly authorizes or requires that the purchase be made from a specified source.

(F) In accordance with section 1331 of Public Law 111-240 (15 U.S.C. 644(r)), contracting officers may, at their discretion, set aside orders for any of the small business concerns identified in 19.000(a)(3). When setting aside orders for small business concerns, the specific small business program eligibility requirements identified in part 19 apply.

At the discretion of the Contracting Officer, orders may be set-aside for Small Business master contract holders under Exception F in order to meet the intent of “Steps Taken to Include Small Business” as outlined in the Consolidation Determination for this procurement. While Small Businesses may respond to all TORs, the Contracting Officer will favor for set-aside task orders involving smaller quantities, lower ILR levels, and/or more common foreign languages where Target Language Experts are more readily available. The Contracting Officer will take the totality of these factors into consideration when deciding to set-aside a TOR for Small Business. There is no pre-defined list of factors that will automatically be set-aside for Small Business. The Contracting officer will also take into account the overall cumulative value of current or prior task orders awarded to Small Business in order to achieve an approximate goal of 50% of Test Item quantities provided by Small Business. This 50% goal is contingent on the number of Small Businesses awarded master contracts.

The competition requirements in FAR Part 6 and the policies in FAR Subpart 15.3 DO NOT APPLY to the ordering process.

The ACO shall:

• Provide a fair notice of the intent to make the purchase, including a description of the work the contractor shall perform and the basis upon which the selection decision will be made to all DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ contractors (to satisfy this requirement, the ACO is allowed to provide an email to all contractors notifying them of the requirement and request a response if the contractor is interested in submitting a proposal or quote);

• Afford all DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ contractors responding to the notice a fair opportunity to submit an offer and have that offer fairly considered;

• Consider price under each order as one of the factors in the selection decision;

• Keep contractor submission requirements to a minimum;

• Use streamlined procedures, including oral presentations; and,

• Consider only past performance on earlier task orders under the DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ master contracts if available. Past performance considerations may include the contractor’s performance regarding quality, timeliness, and cost control.

G. EVALUATION METHOD – BEST VALUE TRADE-OFF OR LOWEST PRICE

TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE: The government reserves the right to evaluate Task Order Execution Plans (TOEPs) using either Trade-Off or Lowest Price Technically Acceptable evaluation procedures. The method of evaluation will be disclosed in the Task Order Request (TOR) document. Normally, LPTA will be used for task orders involving smaller quantities, lower ILR levels, and/or more common foreign languages where Target Language Experts are more readily available. The Government will take the totality of these factors into consideration when deciding to use LPTA.

H. MINIMUM ORDER: If the Government requires supplies and services covered by this contract in an amount less than 150 Test Items, the Government is not obligated to purchase, nor is the contractor obligated to furnish those supplies or services under the contract.

I. REQUEST FOR TASK ORDER RESPONSE (TOR): The ACO may solicit responses to requirements from DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ contractors in written or verbal forms. The nature of the requirements and detail of response required may serve as guides to determine which medium is most appropriate. For example, urgent requirements that can clearly be articulated verbally may be solicited orally.

A Request for Task Order Response (TOR) request for quote or other communication tool should be prepared and issued for each task order requirement conveyed in writing. The TOR and supporting documents should clearly define:

• the requirement (Performance Work Statement, applicable workload data, Performance Requirements Summary (PRS), etc);

• instructions for completing of submissions in response to the request and order placement procedures that will be employed;

• additional clauses/provisions unique to the task order;

• period of performance and CLIN structure instructions;

• the order placement procedures defining the method in which the task order award will be made; and,

• the basis of award that will be used to select a contractor, as well as criteria that will form the award decision.

The ACO may exercise broad discretion in developing the most appropriate order placement procedures. Actual TORs will be tailored to each specific task order and may differ from the TOR template at Attachment 2. Formal evaluation plans or scoring of quotes or offers are not appropriate for orders competed under the DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ. ACO’s should consider the nature of the requirement, the value of the requirement, the duration of the requirement, the extent of existing information (e.g., past performance information, existing quality control plans, etc), and the extent of information requested when determine the order placement approach, submission requirements and response time. When best-value trade-off approaches are contemplated, the ACO should consider what is being traded off. For example, for requirements that are routine in nature but require considerable management emphasis to ensure effective and efficient operation under time and fiscal constraints, the Government might consider a trade-off between price and management approach.

The contracting officer should keep submission requirements to a minimum. Oral task order responses may be considered. Ordering Offices should strive to minimize the contractor’s proposal costs associated with responding to requests for specific task orders. Streamlined evaluation approaches are encouraged. Information from offerors should be tailored to the evaluation criteria and should be sufficient to conduct the evaluation.

The basis of award will be either Subjective Tradeoff procedures or Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) procedures, IAW DoD Source Selection Procedures. Choose the approach that best suits the requirement. The task order evaluation factors should be developed by the customer and coordinated with the ACO. The evaluation factors may vary from one requirement to another and should be tailored to satisfy the unique aspects of each requirement.

Where possible, Past Performance should be limited to past performance information of previous DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ task orders.

FAR Part 15 does not apply to the DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ ordering process. Therefore, formal evaluation procedures and competitive range decisions are not applicable.

J. TASK ORDER PRICING:

a. Services: All Task Orders are issued on a fixed price basis subject to the maximum ceiling rates per Test Item awarded at the master contract level. Evaluation should simply entail a fair and reasonableness determination (see FAR Part 15.404-1(b) for price analysis techniques to be used). Competition should be the predominant evaluation tool. In some instances, Other Than Certified Cost and Pricing Data may be required. When LPTA is used as the basis for award, once the Task Order Execution Proposal (TOEP) is deemed acceptable, price will be used to determine the selection of the lowest priced, technically acceptable offeror. When Subjective Tradeoffs are used as a basis for award, trade-offs between cost and non-cost factors are permitted.

THEREFORE, THE GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO AWARD TO OTHER

THAN THE LOWEST PROPOSED COST.

b. Travel: Reimbursement for travel, subsistence, and lodging shall be paid to the Contractor only to the extent that it is necessary for performance of task orders under this contract.

Official travel of contractor personnel away from their duty station that was not identified in the negotiated task order shall not be undertaken unless advance written approval has been obtained from the task order Contracting Officer or COR. See FAR 31.205-46 for additional information regarding travel costs. Only per diem that does not exceed the maximum rates set forth in the following shall be considered to be reasonable. Indirect rates listed on the contractor’s master contract travel CLINs are authorized for reimbursement. Fee or profit on travel expenses is not an allowable reimbursement. The following regulations will apply:

(1.) Federal Travel Regulations (in effect at the time of travel) prescribed by the General Services Administration for travel in the contiguous 48 United States;

(2.) Joint Travel Regulations Volume 2, DoD Civilian Personnel, Appendix A, prescribed by the Department of Defense for travel in Alaska, Hawaii, The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the territories and possessions of the United States;

Instances where lodging rates at TDY locations are higher than established rates, will be dealt with on a case by case basis.

K. CHANGES IN TEAM MEMBERS/SUBCONTRACTORS:

The contractor may not add any team members or subcontractors to the contractor’s team without prior authorization to do so. The contractor shall advise the ACO of team member deletions as they occur.

Contractors are permitted to add team members as required to meet the unique requirements of task orders being competed by individual ordering offices. These actions are viewed as single events. Changes to team composition that impact more than one task order shall be executed at the prime contract (vice task order) level. Request to modify team composition may be submitted to the ACO at anytime.

L. OCI AT THE TASK ORDER LEVEL:

a. OCI Possibilities.

It is recognized by the parties hereto that some of the services provided may include activities that create a potential for certain conflicts of interest, as set forth in FAR 9.505-1, 9.505-2, 9.505-3, and 9.505-4.

It is the intention of the parties that the Contractor will not engage in any other contractual or other activities which could create an organizational conflict of interest with its position under this contract; which might impair its ability to render unbiased advice and recommendations; or, in which it may derive an unfair competitive advantage as a result of knowledge, information, and experience gained during the performance of this contract. Therefore, the Contractor agrees that it will seek the prior written approval of the ACO before participating in any task order that may involve such a conflict.

The Contractor agrees that it shall not release, disclose, or use in any way that would permit or result in disclosure to any party outside the government any information provided to the Contractor by the Government during or as a result of performance of this task order. Such information includes, but is not limited to, information submitted to the Government on a confidential basis by other persons. Further, the prohibition against release of Government provided information extends to cover such information whether or not in its original form, where the information has been included in Contractor generated work, or where it is discernible from materials incorporating or based upon such information. This prohibition shall not expire after a given period of time.

Whenever performance of this contract requires access to another Contractor’s proprietary information, the Contractor shall (i) enter into a written agreement with the other entities involved, as appropriate, in order to protect such proprietary information from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary; and (ii) refrain from using such proprietary information other than as agreed to, for example; to provide assistance during technical evaluation of other Contractors' offers or products under this contract. An executed copy of all proprietary information agreements by individual personnel or on a corporate basis shall be furnished to the ACO within fifteen (15) calendar days of execution.

The Contractor shall promptly notify the ACO, in writing, if it has been tasked to evaluate or advise the Government concerning its own products or activities or those of a competitor in order to ensure that proper safeguards exist to guarantee objectivity and to protect the Government's interest.

In the event that a task order is issued to the Contractor that would require activity that would create a potential conflict of interest, the Contractor shall:

(1) Notify the ACO of a potential conflict, and;

(2) Recommend to the Government an alternate tasking approach which would avoid the potential conflict, or,

(3) Present for approval a conflict of interest mitigation plan that will:

- Describe in detail the task order requirement that creates the potential conflict of interest; and,

- Outline in detail the actions to be taken by the Contractor or the Government in the performance of the task to mitigate the conflict, division of subcontractor effort, and limited access to information, or other acceptable means.

(4) The Contractor shall not commence work on a task order related to a potential conflict of interest until specifically notified by the ACO to proceed.

(5) If the ACO determines that it is in the best interest of the Government to issue a task order, notwithstanding a conflict of interest, a request for waiver shall be submitted in accordance with FAR 9.503.

(6) Conflicts Of Interest Compliance Plan: In the event of a waiver is requested, the Contractor shall submit with his waiver request a Conflicts of Interest (COI) Compliance Plan to the ACO for approval. The COI Compliance Plan shall address the Contractor's approach for adhering to the Section H Provision entitled “Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI)” and describe its procedures for aggressively self-identifying and resolving both organizational and employee conflicts of interest. The overall purpose of the COI Compliance Plan is to demonstrate how the Contractor will assure that its operations meet the highest standards of ethical conduct, and how its assistance and advice are impartial and objective. The COI Compliance Plan shall specifically address:

• how the Contractor will protect confidential, proprietary, or sensitive information;

• preventing the existence of conflicting roles that might bias a contractor’s judgment;

and,

• preventing an unfair competitive advantage.

Contractors are invited to review Federal Acquisition Regulation Subpart 9.5 “Organizational and Consultant Conflicts of Interest (OCI). “ Particular attention is directed to FAR 9.505, 9.505-1, 9.505-2, 9.505-3 and 9.505-4.

b. Avoidance of OCI.

The policy of the government is to avoid contracting with contractors who have unacceptable organizational conflicts of interest as defined in H.___.

It is not the intention of the government to foreclose a vendor from a competitive acquisition due to a perceived OCI. The ACO is fully empowered to evaluate each potential OCI scenario based upon the applicable facts and circumstances. The final determination of such action may be negotiated between the impaired vendor and the ACO. The ACO's business judgment and sound discretion in identifying, negotiating, and eliminating OCI scenarios should not adversely affect the government’s policy for competition. The government is committed to working with potential vendors to eliminate or mitigate actual and perceived OCI situations, without detriment to the integrity of the competitive process, the mission of the government, or the legitimate business interests of the vendor community.

c. Examples of OCI concerns. These examples in which OCI issues may arise are not all inclusive, but are intended only to help the ACO apply general guidance to individual contract and task order situtations.

(1) Unequal Access to Information. Access to "nonpublic information" as part of the performance of a government contract could provide the contractor a competitive advantage in a later competition for another government contract. Such an advantage could easily be perceived as unfair by a competing vendor who is not given similar access to the relevant information. If the requirements of the government procurement anticipate the successful vendor may have access to nonpublic information, all vendors should be required to submit and negotiate an acceptable mitigation plan.

(2) Biased Ground Rules. A contractor in the course of performance of a government contract, has in some fashion established a "ground rules" for another government contract, where the same contractor may be a competitor. For example, a contractor may have drafted the statement of work, specifications, or evaluations criteria of a future government procurement. The primary concern of the government in this case is that a contractor so situated could slant key aspects of a procurement in its own favor, to the unfair disadvantage of competing vendors. If the requirements of the government procurement anticipate the successful vendor may be in a position to establish important ground rules, including but not limited to those described herein, the successful vendor should be required to submit and negotiate an acceptable mitigation plan.

(3) Impaired objectivity. A contractor in the course of performance of a government contract, is placed in a situation of providing assessment and evaluation findings over itself, or another business division, or subsidiary of the same corporation, or other entity with which it has a significant financial relationship. The concern in this case is that the contractor's ability to render impartial advice to the government could appear to be undermined by the contractor's financial or other business relationship to the entity whose work product is being assessed or evaluated. In these situations, a "walling off" of lines of communication may well be insufficient to remove the perception that the objectivity of the contractor has been tainted. If the requirements of the government procurement indicate that the successful vendor may be in a position to provide evaluations and assessments of itself or corporate siblings, or other entity with which it has a significant financial relationship, the affected contractor should provide a mitigation plan that includes recusal by the vendor from the affected contract work. Such recusal might include divestiture of the work to a third party vendor.

c. Mitigation plans. The successful contractor will be required to permit a government audit of internal OCI mitigation procedures for verification purposes. The government reserves the right to reject a mitigation plan, if in the opinion of the ACO, such a plan is not in the best interests of the government. Additionally, after award the government will review and audit OCI mitigation plans as needed, in the event of changes in the vendor community due to mergers, consolidations, or any unanticipated circumstances that may create an unacceptable organizational conflict of interest.

M. WORK ON A GOVERNMENT INSTALLATION:

In performing work under this contract on a Government installation or in a Government building, the Contractor shall fully comply with local military installation, city, state and federal laws, regulations and/or ordinances pertinent to performance of the contractual services required under this contract. Specifically, the Contractor shall:

– conform to the specific safety requirements established by this contract;

– the Contractor and his/her employees shall observe all rules and regulations issued by the installation Commanding Officer pertaining to fire, safety, sanitation, severe weather, admission to the installation, conduct not directly addressed in this contract;

– take all reasonable steps and precautions to prevent accidents and preserve the life and health of Government and Contractor personnel connected in any way with performance under this contract; and,

• take such additional immediate precautions as the ACO, COR or COTR may reasonable require for safety and accident prevention purposes.

N. TASK ORDER EXECUTION PLAN:

The Contractor shall submit a Task Order Execution Plan (TOEP) in response to TORs. The TOEP shall include the Contractor’s approach to satisfy the TOR requirements and pricing.

Contract-Level and Task Order Management. The contractor shall manage Task orders using Performance Based Service Contracting (PBSC) techniques to the greatest extent possible.

– Contract-Level Program Management. The contractor shall provide technical and functional program management necessary for the management of the entire master contract effort. The contractor shall provide the centralized administrative, clerical, documentation and related functions.

– TO Management. The contractor shall provide all of the management and supervisory skills required to properly manage all Task Orders awarded to them.

O. ADDITION OF CLAUSES AT THE TASK ORDER LEVEL: Clauses may be added at the task order level in so much as that they do not conflict with clauses included in the basic contract. For example, Option clauses 52.217-8 titled Option to Extend Services and, 52.217-9 titled Option to Extend the Term of the Contract may be included and tailored at the task order level.

P. SELECTION OF CONTRACTOR AND DOCUMENTATION TO SUPPORT TASK

ORDER AWARD:

The evaluator or team designated by the ACO will evaluate the proposals submitted in accordance with the evaluation criteria set forth in the TOR and determine which contractor has submitted the “best value” offer. The evaluation should be free from bias. The ACO should ensure all evaluator(s) have no conflicts of interest or preconceived outcomes. Documentation should have clear ties back to the evaluation criteria provided in the TOR.

Technical support to assist in the evaluation procedure must be provided by requiring activity.

Technical evaluators must be capable of providing knowledge and expertise required to accurately determine adequacy of the proposals. Technical evaluation shall be conducted of each task order response to the terms of the TOR, and shall not be a comparison between contractor responses or to the IGE. The technical evaluation should consider the merits of each response as compared to the evaluation criteria and basis of award stated in the TOR.

Evaluation of price should typically be based upon competition. The ACO should evaluate the proposed price (and should include such in the evaluation criteria) to ensure it is balanced and is presented in accordance with pricing instructions.

The ACO should control all communications with contractors. As stated above, a competitive range decision is not required prior to conducting communications, nor must the ACO conduct communications with each contractor. Upon determination of the apparent task order awardee, the ACO may conduct negotiations to finalize task order terms, conditions and price/cost.

The Task Order Award Decision should be well documented and provide the reader with a clear picture as to how the ACO arrived at the decision to select the contractor for award.

Q. POST AWARD NOTIFICATIONS AND DEBRIEFINGS: FAR 16.505(b)(6) outlines requirements to provide Postaward Notices and Debriefing of Awardees for Orders Exceeding $5.5m. It is unlikely that any DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ task orders will exceed $5.5m. However, to the maximum extent possible, the ACO is encouraged to provide Post Award Notifications and Debriefings meeting the intent of FAR 15.503(b)(1) and FAR 15.506. The feedback shall not include point-by-point comparisons of the contractor’s proposal with those of other contractors. The feedback session is provided only as a courtesy to the MAIDIQ contractors in the interest of transparency and to assist in preparing future proposals.

The feedback may be provided orally, in writing or by any other method deemed appropriate to the

ACO.

R. ENTERPRISE CONTRACTOR MANPOWER REPORTING (eCMRA) APPLICATION: Refer to the master contract PWS at C.11 for information pertaining to the Enterprise Contractor Manpower Reporting Application. The U.S. Department of Defense eCMRA is a business process to collect information for each contract, on the funding source and related financial data, the organization receiving the services, mission/function performed and labor hours and costs, by the Government Fiscal Year (1 October through 30 September).

Contractors report actual labor hours, dollars, and other information from their accounting systems directly into this system. All IDIQ task orders, regardless of dollar amount, must include a separate Contract Line Item Number for Enterprise Contract Manpower Reporting

S. TASK ORDER OFFICIAL FILE: The official task order file will be maintained and administered by the ACO.

CHAPTER 4

CREATING AND TRACKING TASK ORDERS

Task Order process:

1 . Customer identifies the requirement and obtains funding and applicable approvals to submit procurement packages to the ACO.

2. The ACO determines whether the Task Order requirement is within the MAIDIQ contract scope of work.

3. The customer’s procurement package shall include the funding document, PWS, QASP, PRS, IGCE, period of performance, CLIN structure, evaluation factors, and basis of award. The ACO formulates the TOR based on the procurement package submitted by the customer.

4. Upon completion of any required reviews, the ACO submits the TOR to the DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ contractors via email or through the Request for Proposal capability within GSA’s ASSIST platform.

6. TOR solicited contractors submit their proposal by the TOR due date (normally 15 to 30 days depending on the complexity and constraints of the task order requirements) .

7. The ACO assembles the evaluator(s) to evaluate the contractor’s proposals.

8. The evaluator(s) evaluate the proposals and documents their findings in accordance with the evaluation criteria established in the TOR (desired evaluation period is 1 to 3 days).

9. The ACO determines whether discussions are required, if so, notifies Offerors via email regarding discussions, conducts discussions and request revised responses, evaluator(s) evaluate and document revised responses. If discussions are not conducted, the ACO prepares Task Order Decision Document. The ACO shall review the prices for fair and reasonableness.

10. The ACO prepares Task Order Decision Document

11. The ACO awards Task Orders in the GSA ASSIST platform.

12. The ACO provides notification of award decision to Task Order awardee as well as unsuccessful Task Order participants via email.

13. The ACO conducts debrief sessions if desired to unsuccessful participants.

14. The ACO administers the Task Order files.

CHAPTER 5

TASK ORDER MONITORING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION

A. TASK ORDER REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES:

All Task Orders shall be reviewed and approved in accordance with GSA Region 6 Contract Management Review Board (CMRB) procedures and Region 6 AAS standard Operating Procedures (SOP). Additionally, as required by FAR 16.505(b)(5), a Task and Delivery Order Ombudsman is assigned to ensure that contractors are afforded a fair opportunity to be considered, consistent with the procedures in the contract and ordering guide.

B. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION OF MASTER CONTRACTS: GSA R6 AAS –

Kansas City, MO is responsible for contract administration for the master DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ contracts. In no event shall any understanding or agreement, contract modification, change order, or other matter in deviation from the terms and conditions of the contract between the contractor and a person other than the ACO be effective or binding upon the Government. All such actions must be formalized by proper contractual document executed by the ACO. The Contracting Officer for the master DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ contract will be determined after transfer of the awards to MICC-Leavenworth. All MAIDIQ contractors will be notified of the assigned ACO.

Notification of changes in the assigned ACO will be provided by official correspondence. All correspondence pertaining to the DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ master contracts must be addressed to GSA R6 AAS – Kansas City, MO.

C. CONTRACT PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORTING SYSTEM (CPARS) –

ONLY AT THE MASTER CONTRACT LEVEL: FAR 42.1502 requires the preparation of at least annual past performance evaluations for contracts and orders that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. For single-agency task-order contracts, the contracting officer may require performance evaluations for each order in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold when such evaluations would produce more useful past performance information for source selection officials than that contained in the overall contract evaluation. For this particular MAIDIQ, performance evaluations are more appropriate only at the master IDIQ level since the scope of the contract is very narrow with defined quantity based CLINs for Test Item Development in support of DLIFLC.

It is in the Government’s best interest to perform the annual performance evaluations solely at the master Contract or IDIQ Level. Individual orders will not vary in nature and are for the same type of service from task order to task order. Instructions for submitting evaluations into CPARS are available at http://www.cpars.gov/.

http://www.cpars.gov/

D. QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP): A Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan will be included with each Task Order and will be tailored for the task order to ensure the assessment of performance of critical contract elements. The QASP serves as the plan for surveillance of performance and identifies the performance indicators, standards, inspection methods and procedures to be used in monitoring performance. Additionally, the QASP shall include specified procedures for collecting service delivery data, methods of surveillance, thresholds for acceptable and unacceptable performance and sampling guides.

E. METRICS: Metrics shall be included and applied to all task orders performed. At the Task Order Level the contractor’s performance measurement may include metrics such quality of service, cost effectiveness, timeliness of performance, business relations and customer satisfaction.

The following metrics have been established for the DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ Program:

Area Metric Target Quality of Service Meet all Task Order

Requirements and Deliverables meet minimum acceptable standards

As outlined in PRS

Schedule Completed of all requirements within the negotiated schedule

Per Task Order Delivery Schedule

Small Business SB participation goals are met and eSRS reports are timely

Per Small Business Subcontracting Plan

F. QUARTERLY PROGRESS REPORTS: The contractor shall provide a Quarterly Status Report (QSR) in contractor format to the Contracting Officer and COR. The quarterly progress reports shall address all activity under the master IDIQ contract through the last day of the last month of each quarter. The quarterly progress report shall as a minimum, contain the following information:

(1) A listing of ALL task orders issued for the preceding quarter to include:

• Period covered by the report

• Number of Task Orders issued, including Task order number(s), date(s) of issuance, performance period of each order including options total amount ordered and obligated under each individual task order to include any modifications;

• Task Order Status (i.e. Significant Events and potential/outstanding or problem areas, open or closed)

• Indicate number of task order provided fair opportunity. Number responded to, number declined to participate

(2) Cumulative summary of total dollars ordered and obligated to date on IDIQ contract;

(3) Cumulative summary of dollars ordered and obligated by task area when the task order spans more than one.

(4) A listing of task orders that the contractor did not provide a quote on and the reason why a 'no-quote' was rendered."

G. INVOICES AND PAYMENTS: Contractors shall electronically submit invoices and supporting documentation through the GSA web-based procurement system ITSS/ASSIST, Central Invoice Service (CIS). The contractor shall submit invoices electronically by logging into the ITSS/ASSIST portal https://portal.fas.gsa.gov/public/login), navigating to the appropriate order, and creating the invoice for that order. This is the only acceptable means for invoice submissions. Detailed invoice submission instruction can be found at the ITSS/ASSIST portal No paper invoices shall be accepted. For additional assistance and for problem and or error resolution contact the ASSIST Helpdesk at 877-472-4877.

Attachment 1- Pending IDIQ Award

Contract numbers, mailing addresses, points of contacts, telephone numbers and email addresses of Prime Contractors

Attachment 1

Request for Task Order Response (TOR) Template

Request for Task Order Response (TOR) Template {to be tailored for each requirement}

TOR # / ITSS ID#: Date of Issue:

(Revision No. ______)

Description of Services:

Questions Deadline: {generally 4 days following publication} Closing Date/Time: {generally 18 days following publication}

Dear DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development Support Partner:

This is a Request for Task Order Response (TOR) for services to be provided under the DLIFLC DLPT5 Full Range Test Items Development MAIDIQ.

Fair opportunity is herewith provided to all master contract holders.

Fair opportunity is herewith limited to Small Business master contract holders in accordance with FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(F).

Fair opportunity is herewith limited to _____________________ master contract holders in accordance with FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(list applicable exception A - E).

The Government intends to award a single task order as a result of this TOR to the offeror that can fulfill all requirements of this…