Instructions to Offerors_Evaluation Criteria_12 November 2020.pdf

12 November 2020 W81K00‐21‐R‐3005

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1

Offerors shall submit proposals in electronic form via email no later than 2:00 P.M., Central Time (CT)((San Antonio, Texas)), 15 December, 2020. The point of contact is Ms. Vickie Drumming, Contract Specialist, at vickie.v.drumming.civ@mail.mil and Robin M. Castro, Contracting Officer, at robin.m.castro.civ@mail.mil.

Offers shall be submitted via e-mail only. Proposals received after 2:00 P.M., CT on 15 December 2020 will be late and will not be considered for award. Failure to submit the required documentation as specified in the following paragraphs will make the Offeror non-responsive and ineligible for award. It is vital that Offerors follow instructions provided and adhere to page limits specified.

Questions shall be submitted via e-mail to Ms. Vickie Drumming (vickie.v.drumming.civ@mail.mil) and Robin M. Castro (robin.m.castro.civ@mail.mil) not later than 1400 CT 17 November 2020. No questions will be entertained after this date. Do NOT submit multiple emails for questions. Answers to vendor questions will be posted to FedBizOpps/beta.SAM.gov.

Note: Only electronic (e-mail) offers will be accepted. Offers submitted by any other method are unacceptable. Each volume shall be submitted as a separate file in .pdf format, with the files names clearly identifying the volume number and contractor’s name. Offerors shall also submit a sanitized version (name of contractor and personnel removed or redacted) of Volume II – Technical Capability.

Pricing shall be submitted on the Excel spreadsheet attached to the solicitation (Attachment 4), renamed with the same naming convention. A .pdf of pricing is not required. Pricing information shall be included in Volume V – Pricing only and shall not be included or summarized in any other volume. The proposal shall not contain any extraneous information such as advertisements or marketing information.

Files larger than 20MB may need to be transmitted in separate emails. All emails, regardless of size, need to be received by the Government server, by the stated submission deadline. The Government will not be responsible for any failure of transmission or receipt of the proposal, or any failure of the Offeror to verify receipt of the emailed proposal. All proposals submitted after the deadline will be considered untimely and ineligible for award.

The proposal shall be clear, concise and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiation of the validity of stated claims. Responses to this solicitation shall strictly adhere to the requirements set forth in the solicitation. Submissions that do not adhere to format and content requirements may be considered non-responsive. The Government reserves the right to eliminate any such proposals from consideration for award.

The proposal shall be prepared in five (5) separate volumes as follows.

Volume I – Administrative Volume II – Past Performance Volume III – Compensation Plan Volume IV – Pricing

VOLUME I – ADMINISTRATIVE

Volume I – Administrative shall include the following:

1. A one (1) page summary or title page identifying the Offeror, the full address, phone, DUNS number, CAGE code, point(s) of contact (POC(s)) of the Offeror, and the solicitation number. Offeror shall include a statement that the Offeror agrees to hold the offered prices firm for 180 calendar days after the proposal closing date. (Page limit: 1 page.)

2. A completed copy of PAGE 1 ONLY of the SF 1449, with the signature of a corporate officer authorized to negotiate for the company. Electronic signature is acceptable. Do not include the entire SF 1449. (Page limit: 1 page.)

3. Signed copies of PAGE 1 ONLY of any amendments to the solicitation, if any are issued.

(Page limit: 1 page per amendment, if any are issued.)

4. Representations and Certifications. Offerors shall be registered in the System for Award

Management (SAM) with the appropriate NAICS Code and shall not have any Active Exclusions listed within SAM. If the Offeror is currently registered in SAM with completed representations and certifications, an affirmation on the title page (or separate page) that these representations and certificates are current, complete, and accurate as of the date proposals are due shall suffice. Otherwise, the Offeror shall complete and include with its proposal one (1) copy of the following provisions located within the solicitation: FAR Provision 52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications, Alternate I; FAR Provision 52.209-7, Information Regarding Responsibility Matters; plus any other provisions herein.

(Page limit: 1 page if registered in SAM; unlimited pages if including provisions.)

5. The Continuation of Essential Contractor Services Plan. This plan shall be prepared in accordance with DFARS 252.237-7024, Notice of Continuation of Essential Contractor Services, contained in this solicitation. There is no page limit for this plan; however, Offerors are encouraged to be as succinct as possible in describing how it will continue to perform the essential contractor services listed in the Performance Work Statement during periods of crisis. The plan shall identify provisions made for the acquisition of essential personnel and resources, if necessary, for continuity of operations for up to 30 days or until normal operations can be resumed, and shall address, at a minimum, (i) Challenges associated with maintaining essential contractor services during an extended event, such as a pandemic that occurs in repeated waves; (ii) The time lapse associated with the initiation of the acquisition of essential personnel and resources and their actual availability on site; (iii) The components, processes, and requirements for the identification, training, and preparedness of personnel who are capable of relocating to alternate facilities or performing work from home; (iv) Any established alert and notification procedures for mobilizing identified “essential contractor service'' personnel; and (v) The approach for communicating expectations to contractor employees regarding their roles and responsibilities during a crisis.

VOLUME II – PAST PERFORMANCE.

The Offeror shall submit with its proposal evidence of relevant past performance under which YOUR company (the Offeror) provided the same or similar Emergency Room Physician services with similar magnitude and scope in the public and/or private sector. Performance must have been by the Offeror (not by a subsidiary or sister company) either as the prime contractor or subcontractor.

Offerors shall complete and provide the Past Performance Information (PPI) Sheet (Attachment 1) on three (3) task orders or stand-alone contracts/purchase orders the Offeror will complete or has completed within the past three (3) years from the closing date of this solicitation for a Government or commercial client that the Offeror considers most relevant in demonstrating YOUR company’s (the Offeror’s) ability to perform the proposed effort.

Include rationale supporting the assertion of relevance. For a description of the characteristics or aspects the Government will consider in determining recency and relevance, see the Evaluation Criteria for Factor 2 – Past Performance.

The PPI shall explain what aspects of the task order or contract 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 task orders or contracts as well as past efforts to identify and manage performance 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.

If the Offeror performed as a subcontractor on the reference project, the PPI shall explain what percentage and type of work that was performed by the Offeror as subcontractor.

NOTE: Past performance reference projects performed by a proposed teaming partner or a proposed subcontractor will only be considered if: (1) the Offeror submits at least one recent and relevant past performance project that the Offeror has performed, either as a prime or subcontractor; (2) the teaming partner or subcontractor is identified as a teaming partner or subcontractor in the proposal, and (3) the role and percentage of work proposed to be performed by the teaming partner or subcontractor on the proposed requirement is detailed in the proposal.

Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) in accordance with the PPQ Form (Attachment 2).

The Offeror will send blank PPQs to Government agencies and/or private sector companies requesting past performance information on applicable projects.

It is the responsibility of the Offeror to track and ensure the completion/submission of the PPQs by the proposal due date. The Government will not accept incomplete or late PPQs.

Note: The PPQs shall reference the exact same projects detailed in the PPIs. Each PPI Sheet is limited to 3 pages per project.

The Government reserves the right to use both the information provided in the Offeror’s Past Performance submittals and information obtained from other sources available to the Government. Failure to submit three (3) PPIs and PPQs with the proposal may result in the proposal being removed from consideration.

VOLUME III – COMPENSATION PLAN

Compensation Plan: Offerors shall include a total employee compensation plan for the base period and each option period indicating the hourly rate. A sample compensation plan worksheet is included at Attachment 3. NOTE: For Personal Service Contracts, Total compensation for health care providers shall not exceed either $400,000 per year (to include bonuses and incentives) or the Full Time Equivalent Rate (FTER) of $208.33 based on Title 10 U.S.C. Section 1091.

VOLUME IV – PRICING

The Offeror shall submit proposed pricing for all contract line item numbers identified in the solicitation on the Excel spreadsheet provided as Attachment 4. The Pricing Worksheet shall be submitted in Microsoft Excel format with all formulas intact. Provide total pricing for the base period and each option period, as well as a grand total of the entire quote. Cost and Pricing Data is not required under competitive and commercial acquisitions; however, if only one proposal is received - Other than Certified Cost or Pricing data may be required.

(m) The Government will award a contract resulting from the solicitation to the responsible Offeror whose proposal conforms to the solicitation and is the most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

(End of Addendum to 52.212-1)

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2

Paragraph (a) is hereby replaced with the following:

(a) Award will be made using the Best-Value Tradeoff source selection process. Past Performance is of more importance than Compensation Plan, and both are more important than price when combined.

However, price could become the determining factor, if the quotes are determined to be essentially equal.

The trade-off between past performance and compensation plan could result in awarding to other than the low Offeror. The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible Offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

(1) FACTOR 1 - PAST PERFORMANCE

(2) FACTOR 2 - COMPENSATION PLAN

(3) FACTOR 3 - PRICE

Past Performance is significantly more important than the Compensation Plan and Price when being evaluated. Ultimately, the contract will be awarded to the Offeror whose proposal, based upon the evaluation criteria, represents the best value to the Government. The Contracting Officer will review all proposals received to determine if they are responsive to the requirement. A responsive proposal is one that meets all of the terms, conditions and specifications in the solicitation. The Offeror must provide all documents listed and comply with all proposal instructions in order for their proposal to be considered “responsive” to the solicitation. Only responsive proposals will be evaluated for award.

The Contracting Officer will conduct an integrated assessment on responsive proposals received that comply with the instructions in the solicitation. Current and relevant information should be provided to assist the Government with the evaluation process. Therefore, each initial proposal should contain the Offeror’s best terms for past performance, compensation, and price.

Award may be made without discussions with Offerors (except communications conducted for the purpose of minor clarification). Therefore, each initial offer should contain the Offeror's best terms from a technical and price standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if it is later determined by the Contracting Officer to be necessary. When discussions/negotiations occur, each participating Offeror shall be given an opportunity to revise their proposal to reflect any changes that may have resulted from the discussions/negotiations. The Contracting Officer will award the contract to the Offeror offering the best value to the Government, based on either the initial or a revised proposal.

EVALUATION CRITERIA

The Government evaluation process is as follows:

Step 1 – The Government will conduct a compliance review to determine if each Offeror met the submission requirements as outlined in 52.212-1 and Addendum to 52.212-1. If a proposal is found to be non-responsive no further consideration will be afforded to that proposal.

Step 2 – Once the Government has determined which proposals are responsive, only those proposals will continue with the evaluation process as outline below.

A phased approach will be utilized to evaluate responsive proposals. Factor 1 - Past Performance will be reviewed first; Factor 2 - Compensation Plan and Factor 3 - Price will be evaluated last. Contractors must demonstrate recent past performance (as defined below), receive a Confidence rating of “Satisfactory” or higher (as defined below) in order to move on to the compensation evaluation phase. If past performance does not meet the criteria described in this paragraph, the proposal may not receive further consideration.

FACTOR 1 – PAST PERFORMANCE:

Provide three (3) PPIs and PPQs to verify YOUR company (the Offeror) provided recent and relevant services either as the prime contractor or subcontractor. Past Performance must be with the Department of the Army, other US Government departments or agencies, state and local governments and/or private sector clients. You may also submit Past Performance for work performed by YOUR company (the Offeror) as a subcontractor. Work performed by a subsidiary company or sister company will not be considered. Past Performance references may be contacted. Narratives are required on questionnaires (PPQs) for ratings other than satisfactory. If the narratives do not support the rating or if there is no narrative for a rating higher than satisfactory, the questionnaire rating will be evaluated as satisfactory.

Offerors are reminded that the government may elect to consider any additional past performance information that is available and obtained from other sources.

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, the Offeror will not be evaluated either favorably or unfavorably on past performance and will be assessed a Neutral Confidence rating and will not be eligible for award.

The Past Performance evaluation results in an integrated assessment of the Offeror’s probability of meeting the requirements and the assignment of an overall rating based on consideration of the Offeror’s recent, relevant, and quality past performance based on the Offeror’s submittals (PPI Sheets and PPQs) and other information.

Definitions

The following definitions will be utilized for the Performance Confidence Assessment determination:

(a) Recency Assessment An assessment of the past performance information contained in the Offeror’s submittals will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed within the past three (3) years from the closing date of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated.

(b) Relevancy Assessment An assessment of the recent past performance information will be made to determine its relevancy. This information will be evaluated to determine how closely the services performed under those contracts relate to the requirements of this requirement and assigned a rating.

Relevancy Ratings: The Government will use the following relevancy definitions/ratings when assessing relevant past performance:

Relevancy Rating

Adjectival Rating Description

Very Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

(i.e., services included providing the same or larger sized full-service team, providing the same services, in the same environment as the solicited requirement.)

Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. (i.e., services included providing a slightly smaller sized full-service team, providing similar services in a similar environment as the solicited requirement.)

Somewhat Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. (i.e., services included providing a smaller full-service team, providing somewhat similar services in a similar environment as the solicited requirement.)

Not Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. (i.e., services included providing a considerably smaller sized team that did not encompass full-service, or where the scope, magnitude and complexities are dissimilar to the solicited requirement.)

*Note: The parenthetical information above is provided as an example only and does not constitute all the factors the Government may consider when making a relevancy determination.

Confidence Ratings: The Government will use the following definitions/ratings when making an overall Performance Confidence Assessment (PCA).

Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Methods

Rating Description

Substantial Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence

No recent/relevant performance record is available or the Offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

Limited Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Evaluation Process

The overall PCA rating is based on an integrated assessment of the Offerors recent, relevant, and quality past performance. The resulting PCA rating is determined at the factor level and represents an overall evaluation of contractor performance. Offerors without a record of recent, relevant and quality past performance or for whom information on past performance is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and, as a result, will receive an "Neutral Confidence" rating for the Past Performance factor.

A PCA rating of Satisfactory Confidence or better must be obtained in order to be further considered in the evaluation process; proposals receiving a PCA rating lower than Satisfactory Confidence will be removed from consideration and no further evaluation will be conducted.

FACTOR 2 – COMPENSATION PLAN

A compensation plan shall be submitted for the specialty reflected in this solicitation. The plan shall reflect compensation for the base period and each option period. A sample compensation plan worksheet is included at Attachment 3.

The proposed compensation plan will be considered in terms of its impact upon recruiting and retention and its consistency with a total plan for compensation that is sufficient to attract and retain quality Health Care Providers (HCPs). This factor will be rated as either “acceptable” or “unacceptable”.

Any offer that receives a rating of “unacceptable” will be ineligible for award. Any compensation plan that is incomplete, does not show the breakdown of fringe benefits (or explanation if hiring independent contractors), or is not submitted with amounts as hourly (not annual) rates will be rated “unacceptable.”

Acceptable Rating - Based on Regional Health Contracting Office - Central’s market research, the proposed compensation is sufficient to attract and retain quality HCPs and does not exceed personal service contracts compensation limits.

Unacceptable Rating – Based on Regional Health Contracting Office - Central’s market research, the proposed compensation to the HCP is not sufficient to attract and retain quality HCPs and or exceeds personal service contracts compensation limits.

FACTOR 3 – PRICE:

Price Analysis will be conducted. Proposals will be evaluate for price reasonableness. The proposed price will be evaluated on the bottom line price for the entire effort, inclusive of all options. A price is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of competitive business. The Government may use various price analysis techniques and procedures to ensure a fair and reasonable price. Some of those techniques are, but not limited to, comparison of proposed prices received in response to the solicitation and/or comparison of proposed prices with the Independent Government Estimate. Price must be determined fair and reasonable.

(c) Options. The Government will evaluate proposals for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that a proposal is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(d) Given that FAR 52.217-8 provides that the Government may exercise the Option to Extend Services at the rates specified in the contract (i.e., the rates in effect when the Extension of Services option is exercised), for purposes of evaluating the Option to Extend Services, the Contracting Officer will consider the prices submitted for the last option year, since those are the binding prices should the Option to Extend be exercised.

(e) The award decision will be based on the best value offered to the Government and not solely on price and price related factors. In making the award decision, the Contracting Officer will consider the evaluated rating of all factors. Ratings of “unacceptable” will not be eligible for award.

END OF ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2