LSCO Submission Instructions_Basis for Award_Evaluation.pdf

Submission Instructions / Basis for Award / Evaluation

A. Submission Instructions.

1. The submission instructions are designed to provide general guidance for preparing proposals as well as providing specific instructions on proposal organization, format, and content. The proposal must comprehensively address the creation of educational materials, including fictional narratives and videos.

Include specific documents such as storyboards, project plans, or video scripts, as relevant to your approach. Offerors shall include all documents and information requested and shall be submitted in accordance with the instructions. The offeror is cautioned to follow the instructions carefully, as the Government reserves the right to make an award based on initial proposals received without discussion of such proposal.

2. Offerors shall submit a proposal that is self-sufficient and responds directly to the requirements of the solicitation. Proposals must demonstrate expertise in Multidomain Operations within the context of Large-Scale Combat Operations (LSCO), aligning with the project's educational goals. The proposal shall be clear, concise, and include adequate detail for effective evaluation. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements, but rather provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet the requirements of the solicitation. The proposal shall contain sufficient information to enable the Government to fully evaluate and determine the offeror's capability to comply with the requirements identified in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Proposals that are overly verbose or include marketing material may distract from the evaluators’ ability to ascertain compliance with the PWS.

3. Offers shall submit a response that describes the procedures, processes, controls, etc. that are established for the solicitation. Offerors shall clearly outline innovative and engaging methods for content presentation, reflecting the project's focus on engaging and effective learning materials. The offeror shall provide any assumptions upon which its approach/solution is based, and the rationale supporting the assumption (i.e., why do you believe the assumptions are valid). Express your best understanding of the ramifications inherent in the PWS. Discuss alternatives considered, risks involved, impact to the missions (both detriments, as well as efficiency), impacts from external sources, etc.

Provide any other explanations or supporting data (matrix, charts, or other graphics) determined necessary for the Government to fully understand the offeror's methodology and technical approach.

4. Wage Determination No. 2015-4527. Revision 24 dated 26 December 2023 applies to this solicitation.

5. The offeror shall provide its proposal with a cover sheet that contains the company's name, address and telephone number, name and title of the person authorized to sign and negotiate the proposal, offer validation period of sixty (60) days, RFQ1676639, and the original date of response. The original date shall be located in the upper right-hand corner of the cover sheet.

a. Response Organization and Format: To me considered for evaluation the response shall consist of two (2) volumes. The volumes are:

Volume 1 – Technical Submission Volume II – Price Submission

6. Proposals shall comply with the page limitations and format specified for each volume. Information submitted beyond limitations identified could negatively impact the evaluation during the rating process. The following table and paragraphs provide the specific information required for each volume.

Volume Format Page Limitation Submission Type

I – Technical PDF

12, including the table of contents.

(8.5 x 11 inch pages; 12 font, 10 font acceptable for graphics & tables)

Electronic only

II – Price Excel

None.

(8.5 x 11 inch spreadsheet or 8.5 x 14 inch spreadsheet; 12 font)

Electronic only

7. Format for proposals for Volumes I and II must comply with the following:

a. A page is defined as one face of a sheet of paper containing information.

Foldouts, 11” x 17”, pages will be counted as two pages.

b. Typing must be 12 Times New Roman font; 10 font is acceptable for graphics and tables.

c. The table of contents does count against the 12-page limitation.

8. Volume I - Technical Submission. The technical submission should be clearly marked "Volume I - Technical Submission, RFQ1676639." Volume I must present a clear, concise, and comprehensive narrative showcasing the offeror's proposed solutions to fulfill the requirements outlined in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). It should demonstrate practical and innovative approaches, emphasizing specificity and completeness without including price information. A list of attachments, exhibits, tables, and figures as necessary. Note that the table of exhibits and all attachments will count towards the 12-page limitation.

Volume I shall consist of a written narrative that is the offeror’s proposed solutions to the requirement contained in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) for this task order.

The technical discussion shall be practical, straightforward, specific, concise, and complete. Volume I should not include price information. A list of attachments, exhibits, tables, and figures, as required, shall be provided. The table of exhibits, tables, and figures will count against the 12-page limitation.

9. Volume II – Price Submission. The price submission should be clearly marked “Volume II, Price Submission, RFQ1676639.”

a. The offeror shall include a price proposal for the Contract Line-Item Number

(CLIN) Structure as outlined in the solicitation, reflecting the complexity and scope of the project.

b. The proposal shall include the labor/pricing matrix(ces) and ON/OFF Site CAP rates as identified in the basic contract; a Discount rate (if applicable); the number of full-time equivalents (FTEs); the number of total hours per labor category; and the total dollar value. The offeror shall include a comparison between the labor categories and hourly rates proposed in this task order to its Labor/Pricing Matrix(ces) in the basic contract. Offerors shall also annotate any discounts.

Evaluation Factors:

Factor 1 – Technical Capability. The offeror shall be evaluated on their ability to provide a qualified and experienced content. Each sub-factor will be rated. The sub-factor ratings will be rolled up to form the Technical Capability Factor rating. Each sub-factor must receive an “acceptable” rating in order for the Technical Capability Factor to be rated “acceptable.”

Sub-Factor 1. Staffing Approach – Proposals will be evaluated to determine if the methodology and detail of the staffing approach can be performed in accordance with the PWS. The Government will assess the proposed approach to ensure that sufficient quality will be available, under a possible contract. The Government will also assess the extent to which personnel are currently on board and/or committed to employment by the contractor and subcontractors.

Sub-Factor 2. Experience – Proposals will be evaluated to ascertain that the offeror has the required experience in the type of service with the same or similar scope, size and complexity as required by the PWS. This experience shall include providing a workforce with skills, abilities, and credentials to accomplish the services and tasks by the PWS.

Factor 2 - Past Performance. The submission of Past Performance is not required.

Past performance will be evaluated from CPARS data.

Factor 3 - Price Submission. Price will be evaluated and rated. The offeror’s price submission will be evaluated considering the proposal crosswalk of labor categories contained in its staffing matrix to labor categories in its pricing matrix. The techniques and procedures described under FAR Part 15.404 will be the primary means of assessing price reasonableness. To be viable for award, an offeror’s price must be determined fair and reasonable, and not in excess of master contract cap rates. The Government will evaluate offeror’s price proposal for reasonableness based on the following:

a. Reasonableness will be determined by comparing the offeror’s total cost proposed to the total costs proposed by the other offerors. Additionally, the government may utilize other techniques identified in FAR 15.404-1(b) (2) to determine the reasonableness of price.

b. The offeror’s price submission shall represent the offeror's best efforts. Any inconsistency between proposed performance and price shall be explained in the submission. For example, if unique, innovative approaches are the basis for an unusually low price, the nature of these approaches and their impact on price shall be explained. If an offeror proposes to absorb a portion of the price, the offeror shall also explain the impact on the estimated price. Any significant inconsistency left unexplained, may raise a fundamental question of the offeror's understanding of the nature and scope of the work required, and of the offeror's ability to perform the tasks within the fiscal constraints thereof. This may be just cause for rejection of the proposal. The burden of proof for price credibility rests with the offeror.

B. Evaluation

1. Evaluation Factors. The following factors and sub-factors will be used to evaluate offers:

Factor 1: Technical Capability

Sub-Factor 1: Staffing Approach Sub-Factor 2: Experience

Factor 2: Past Performance Factor 3: Price

TECHNICAL CAPABILITY RATINGS:

Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

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

C. Basis of Award

1. 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:

a. Technically Capability

b. Past Performance

c. Price

Technical capability and past performance, when combined, are significantly more important than price or cost, IAW FAR 15.304.

2. A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer's specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.