Amendment_0001.docx

M0026418R0006

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 19-Mar-2018 02:00 PM to 05-Apr-2018 01:00 PM.

The following have been added by full text:

INITIAL TASK ORDER PWS

Performance Work Statement in Support of Capabilities Based Assessment (CBA) Branch, Marine Air-Ground Task Force (MAGTF) Integration Division (MID), Capabilities Development Directorate (CDD) for Technical and Analytical Support Services

C-1.0 SCOPE

The scope of this effort includes provisions for technical and analytical support to the Capabilities Based Assessment (CBA) Branch, Marine Air-Ground Task Force (MAGTF) Integration Division (MID), Capabilities Development Directorate (CDD), Deputy Commandant for Combat Development and Integration (DC CD&I) in the development of annual CBA products for the Marine Corps.

C-1.1 MID-CBA BACKGROUND AND MISSION

The CDD supports DC CD&I by developing and integrating warfighting capabilities solutions and enabling an effective Marine Corps capability to respond to strategic challenges and opportunities. CDD provides resident expertise for capability integration in the areas of: Command and Control, Cyber and Electronic Warfare, Fires and Maneuver, Force Protection, Intelligence, Logistics, MAGTF, Seabasing, Small Wars and Irregular Warfare, and Total Force Structure. In consideration of overarching national strategic and service guidance and concepts development, CDD conducts analysis across the complete spectrum of Doctrine, Organizational, Training, Materiel, Leadership, Personnel, Facilities, and Policy (DOTMLPF-P). The identification of capability gaps, excesses and risk areas impacting development of the Marine Corps Capability List (MCCL), Marine Corps Gap List (MCGL), Universal Needs Statements (UNS), and other capabilities development documents to include the Marine Corps Solution Development Directive (MCSDD) requires vigilant and dedicated coordination supported by a business infrastructure with which to further capability development from concept to acquisition and fielding.

The MID synchronizes capability development activities through the integration divisions and TFSD as well as convenes a Capabilities Development Integration Board (CDIB) on a routine basis consisting of O-6 level representatives to ensure that thorough MAGTF integration is achieved. The culmination of work and products results in the creation of a Marine Corps Enterprise Integration Plan (MCEIP) and in concert with Program Objective Memorandum guidance and other resource informing efforts further provides integrated Marine Corps capabilities approved by the Marine Corps Requirements Oversight Council (MROC). The MROC is the forum for obtaining senior level leadership guidance and approval as it applies to prioritization of desired warfighting capabilities and identification of requirement solutions.

The MID serves as the coordinating authority for integrating all Marine Corps capability development activities, across Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC), the operating forces (OPFOR), and the supporting establishment as related to capability portfolio management, the Marine Corps Capabilities Based Assessment (MCCBA), doctrine development and maintenance, the Deliberate and Urgent Needs Processes, and management and maintenance of the Marine Corps Task List (MCTL). The MID supports all operational architecture (OA) needs for CDD. Additionally, MID leads all Continuous Process Improvement activities within the CDD, to include management of the Force Development Core Value Stream.

C-2.0 SUPPORT REQUIREMENTS. Annual execution and support requirement of Marine Corps Capabilities Based Assessment (MC CBA) culminates with the production of the MCEIP, which is a consolidated summary of analysis from the MC CBA. MC CBA contents include: an analysis of strategic guidance and results of stakeholder participation in a MC CBA Wargame, identified Marine Corps capability requirements and capability gaps shortfalls and excesses, recommended solution strategies to eliminate or mitigate capability gaps, and an enterprise capability management plan that summarizes resourcing recommendations that are aligned to the Commandant’s strategic goals for the Marine Corps’ 10 year future objectives. Through the identification of the capabilities required by future Marine Corps forces, MC CBA establishes the point of departure for resource decision-making and timely delivery of capabilities to the Marine Corps Enterprise.

Contractor employees shall be identified as contractor personnel by introduction and by displaying visible identification for meetings with Government personnel. In addition contractor personnel shall appropriately identify themselves as contractor employees in telephone conversations and in formal and informal written correspondence including electronic (e.g., email) correspondence.

C-2.1 PLACE OF PERFORMANCE. All work shall be performed off-site at the Contractor’s facilities. If on-site visitation is needed, the contractor shall be responsible for parking in marked contractor spaces with appropriately displayed stickers on vehicles, or using other designated parking areas. As needed, the Government shall provide transport to and from other designated parking areas.

The Contractor shall provide facilities for meetings and Integrated Process Team (IPT) (e.g., 10-50 personnel), as well as a suitable infrastructure to manage program requirements throughout the course of performance to support the scope of activities. Such facilities are not reimbursed as ODCs. Laptops, cellular equipment/services, and other items of convenience are not reimbursable as ODCs.

CONUS travel must be in accordance with the JTR. No travel is anticipated at this time.

C-2.2 SECURITY REQUIREMENTS. ALL CONTRACTOR PERSONNEL REQUIRING ACCESS TO CLASSIFIED INFORMATION AND ASSIGNED TO THIS PROGRAM SHALL POSSESS A SECRET CLEARANCE. The Prime Contractor and all Sub-contractors (through the Prime Contractor) shall certify in writing to the Government that personnel supporting this task order are "Qualified United States (U.S.) Contractors" per DoD Directive 5220.22-M Chapter 2 Section 2. Qualified U.S. Contractors are restricted to U.S. citizens, persons admitted lawfully into the United States for permanent residence, and are located in the United States. All personnel identified on the certification and/or supporting this task order shall be in compliance with DoD, Department of the Navy (DoN), and Marine Corps Information and Personnel Security Policy to include completed background investigations (as required) prior to classified performance. This task order shall include a DoD Contract Security Classification Specification (DD-254 Form) as an attachment. The Contractor shall have a valid Secret Facility Clearance prior to classified performance or classified meetings at the Contractor’s facility. The Government shall assist the Contractor in gaining access to Government agencies and installations related to the systems in question. The Contractor shall ensure that the employees are on the approved Government access list prior to entering any access controlled area. The Contractor shall notify the Government by written notice within twenty-four hours of Contractor personnel that are to be added or removed from the access control list.

The Contractor shall be required to store, access and handle unclassified and classified (up to the SECRET level). Overarching security requirements and Contractor access to classified information shall be specified in the DD-254 form. Security management, inclusive of retention of clearances and document handling/storage, are to be considered as part of the contractor’s indirect base. The Government will not be responsible for getting subcontract companies cleared through any security measures. The Government will sponsor the Contractor’s access to other Government facilities as required. Additional Contractor badging requirements will be delineated on the DD-254. The Government shall also provide the Contractor access to NATO and Secured Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet) at the Government facility located at Raymond G. Davis Building, 3300 Russell Road, Quantico, VA 22134.

C-3.0 SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS.

C-3.1.1 Technical Support. Contractor shall consolidate and contribute input required for updating the Marine Corps Capabilities List (MCCL) in order to identify Marine Corps capability requirements (tasks, conditions, standards, and performers) based on the concept of operations and a concept of support for the scenario exercised during the MC CBA Wargame.

C-3.1.2 The Contractor shall consolidate and contribute input required for updating the Marine Corps Gap List (MCGL) in order to identify Marine Corps capability gaps based on the inability of the current and programmed Marine Corps forces to perform capability requirements identified in the MCCL.

C-3.2.1 The Contractor shall consolidate and contribute input required for updating the Marine Corps Solutions Development Directive (MCSDD) in order to develop solution strategies to eliminate or mitigate capability gaps through Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel, Leadership, and Education, Personnel, Facilities, and Policy (DOTMLPF-P) assessments.

C-3.2.2 The Contractor shall produce and maintain a monitoring and tracking capability for combat development activities and changes in programing decisions, which must result in a quarterly report

C-3.2.3 MC CBA Support. The contractor shall provide research and analysis to draft input regarding Force Protection MC CBA analysis and institutionalization efforts codifying enduring requirements for inclusion in the Marine Corps Capabilities List (MCCL), Marine Corps Gap List (MCGL), and produce associated solutions to address those gaps.

C-3.3.1 The Contractor shall consolidate and contribute input required for producing the Marine Corps Capabilities Investment Plan (MCCIP) that enables Marine Corps programmers to make informed resource allocation decisions that support the Commandant’s future 10 year objectives.

C-3.3.2 The Contractor shall compile all of the above CBA products (MCCL, MCGL, MCSDD and MCCIP) in preparation for timely leadership review via staffing and adjudication for MROC approval of the annual Marine Corps Enterprise Integration Plan (MCEIP)

C-3.3.3 The Contractor shall annually develop draft packages for O-6, 1-Star, and 3-Star for staffing each of the above mentioned CBA products.

C-3.4. Meeting Support. The Contractor shall provide facilities for meetings and Integrated Program Reviews (e.g., 10-50 personnel), as well as a suitable infrastructure to support and manage program requirements and the scope of activities throughout the course of performance. Laptops, cellular equipment/services, and other items of convenience are not reimbursable as ODCs.

C.3.5 PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS. The contractor shall adhere to the PWS in the development of its performance solution and annotate any deviations from the material content of that document in accordance with the PWS. Where the contractor seeks to improve upon the standard, this should be clearly annotated in its response.

C-3.6 DELIVERABLES. The Contractor shall provide the following deliverables in relation to the specified PWS paragraphs. The level of effort necessary for each deliverable is annotated by a Due Date and Quantity which signifies when and how often the product is required, i.e. Due: Monthly; Qty: 1 (signifies 1 per month for a total of 12). Those deliverables with due dates beyond the anticipated period of performance are not ‘final’ end-items to be delivered by the Contractor, but the Government requires input for the end-items so that the Government can complete the final products on time. The Government and Contractor together shall ensure proper submission workflow is established at time of award. All deliverables should be provided to either the COR or other designated point of contact at the start of the period of performance.

Unless otherwise agreed to by all parties, the Government will provide written acceptance, comments, and/or change requests, if any, within five (5) business days from receipt of any formal deliverable. If written acceptance, comments, and/or change requests are not provided within five (5) business days, the deliverable shall be deemed acceptable as written by the Contractor. If the Government provides comments and/or change requests, the Contractor shall have five (5) business days from receipt of the Government correspondence to incorporate the comments and/or change requests and resubmit the deliverable. Formal quality control measures are expected to be executed for all formal deliverables under this task order. Upon task order expiration all Government work must be turned over to the Government in electronic format.

Para.

C-3.6.1 CONTRACT PERFORMANCE REVIEW. The Contractor, in conjunction with guidance provided by the COR, shall schedule and conduct a quarterly (based upon fiscal year) Program Review within fifteen (15) calendar days of the final day of the month for the period of performance (e.g., October - December – before Jan 16th). The location for this review shall be at the discretion of the Government. The agenda for the review shall be developed between the Contractor’s Program Manager and the COR. The agenda items shall include the task level elements of the Monthly Progress Report, performance metrics, as well as any additional items deemed important by the parties. The Government reserves the right to change the timing (e.g., semi-annually vice quarterly), content and format, as required.

C-3.6.2 MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORT. The Contractor shall submit a Monthly Progress Report to the COR NLT the 10th day of the following month for work accomplished from the first (1st) through the final calendar day of the previous month. This report shall be provided in both hardcopy and electronic media compatible with conventional MS Office applications. The report shall include the following information, at a minimum:

· Comparison of planned and actual task order performance by WBS element;

· Task progress during the past month, plans for the forthcoming month;

· Problems (actual or anticipated) requiring Government action and summary of action required;

· Travel costs, including purpose of trips, duration, and related actions, by task order;

· Total contract staffing by position and assignment;

· Personnel turnover, utilization of subcontractors, and future staffing projections; and

· Deliverables (by task) accepted or rejected, inclusive of the final day of the month, as well as the reason for rejection and timeline for resubmission.

C-3.7 TRAVEL REQUIREMENTS. Daily travel to and from work, and any local travel aboard the installation in the performance of daily duties is not reimbursable by the Government.

CONUS travel must be in accordance with the JTR. No travel is anticipated at this time.

C.3.8 PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE. The period of performance shall be a 12 months based period from the contract award date.

C.3.9 ENTERPRISE-WIDE CONTRACTOR MANPOWER REPORTING APPLICATION (ECMRA). The contractor shall report ALL contract labor hours (including subcontractor labor hours) required for performance of services provided under this contract for the USMC/MCCDC/CDI & CDD via a secure data collection site. The contractor is required to completely fill in all required data fields using the following web address: https://doncmra.nmci.navy.mil. Reporting inputs will be for the labor executed during the period of performance during each Government Fiscal Year (FY), which runs October 1 through September 30. While inputs may be reported any time during the FY, all data shall be reported no later than October 31 of each calendar year. Contractors may direct questions to the help desk, linked at: https://doncmra.nmci.navy.mil.

QASP

Attachment 1

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

1. Objective. This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) serves as the principal basis for assessing overall performance quality associated with the CDD support services task. This document will be used by the Government to assess the effectiveness of the Contractor’s quality with respect to management and technical services provided. This QASP provides the methodology by which the Contractor's performance will be monitored to determine compliance with established performance objectives and to establish performance benchmarks that ensure a quantifiable basis for measuring effectiveness. The plan is designed so that surveillance is limited to that which is necessary to verify the Contractor is performing management and technical services satisfactorily and relates directly to performance objectives of the performance objectives delineated in the PWS.

2. Government Surveillance. The CDD COR will serve as the technical authority for this task, and her/his authority will be limited to administering specific technical aspects of the task order as set forth at in, Inspection and Acceptance. The COR will not provide direction that is outside the scope of responsibilities delineated under this task order and will defer any conditional interpretations to the Contracting Officer. The COR will:

· Maintain a detailed knowledge of the technical requirements of the contract;

· Document Contractor performance in accordance with the QASP and the approved Contractor's Quality Plan (QP);

· Identify and immediately forward notifications of deficient, or non-compliant performance to the Contracting Officer;

· Approve priorities of support, resources, and associated schedules.

3. Surveillance Methods. Surveillance of Contractor performance is the method used by the Government to determine whether the Contractor is effectively and efficiently complying with all terms and conditions of the task order. In addition to statistical analysis, the functional expertise of the COR plays a critical role in adequately evaluating Contractor performance. The below listed methods of surveillance shall be used in the administration of this QASP and the standards are delineated by WBS element in the Performance Requirements Survey (PRS) table at Enclosure 1:

Demonstration - A qualification method that is carried out by operation and relies on observable functional operation. It does not require the use of instrumentation or special test equipment;

Analysis. A qualification method that is carried out by examining and assessing the application of techniques in order to determine if they are appropriate and sufficient. The quality of performance can be determined from Government or Contractor task-based or Management Information System (MIS) reports, Contractor ISO 9000 techniques and procedures, or from Government observation of completed tasks. In some instances, reports may be available in the form of information on a Contractor's performance against contract requirements. Reports generally provide information regarding various characteristics of tasks and can, therefore, be used to determine acceptability of a Contractor's performance.

Inspections: A qualitative inspections can be accomplished through one of the following techniques:

· Random or Stratified Sampling: With random sampling, services are sampled to determine if the level of performance is acceptable. Random sampling works best when the number of instances of the services being performed is very large and a statistically valid sample can be obtained. Stratified sampling focuses on selected parts of total Contractor output for sampling. Computer programs may be available to assist in establishing sampling procedures.

· Periodic Inspection, Judgmental Inspection or Planned Sampling: This method, sometimes called "planned sampling,” consists of the evaluation of tasks selected on other than a 100% or random basis.

Quality of Work Performed: Provide acceptable or better results through the following:

· Technical accuracy, thoroughness of analysis / findings; and

· Completion and preparation to a professional standard < 5% rejection rate of all formal deliverables submitted under the performance provisions of the contract; and

<10% rejection rate of draft and first time submissions.

- Reconciled weekly by Division Leads;

- Reconciled monthly by COR / Contractor's PM (CPM) and tracked as a 3-mos. moving average.

Responsiveness: Timely response to discrete work requirements emerging at the CDD Division levels, including:

· Timely delivery of deliverables;

· Attendance at required

· meetings Initial Response to any requests provided to COR within 24-hrs., strategy provided to COR <48-hrs. from notification, including:

· Delivery Schedule

· Project Timeline

· Deliverables; and

· Availability of staff.

- Periodic assessment by the COR, CDD Division Task Leads as to the thoroughness of the response;

- Reconciled monthly by COR / CPM and tracked as a 3-mos. moving average.

Management and Administration:

Includes the following measures of performance and compliance:

· Deliverables shall be complete, accurate, and prepared to a professional standard;

· Quality of the Contractor’s overall technical management strategy;

· Ability to identify and preclude problems, or resolve issues; and

· Effectiveness of their use corporate quality practices, resolution of invoice anomalies, WBS compliance, and effectiveness of their overall subcontract management.

Aggregation of subordinated areas assessed using progressively more objective criteria – ratings considered:

Excellent – Exceeded performance expectations and abated, or immediately mitigated known problems;

Acceptable – Met performance expectations and generally responded to problems in a satisfactory manner; and Unacceptable – Areas of inconsistent performance, prolific problems remain unresolved, and two, or more performance areas are noted as substandard.

- Assessment by the COR, CDD Division Task Leads. Performance evaluation at TBD milestones;

- Reconciled monthly by COR / CPM and tracked as a 3-mos. moving average.

WBS stability and forecast use of labor resources to meet quality standards without increasing current performance scope (e.g., change orders <1%)

Consequence of Non-compliance –

- Rejected Invoices/Delayed Payments

- Reduced likelihood of future task order awards under this contract

- Negative CPARs entry

- Contractor Consideration to the Government

4. Performance Requirements. The performance requirements set forth in this section correspond to the material content cited in the PWS and the evaluation factors at the Instructions to Offerors, Addendum to FAR 52.212-1. Corresponding ratings will be generated for each of the weighted performance areas and aggregated monthly. The COR will track and reconcile performance with the Contractor's Program Mgr., RCO Contracts staff, and CDD Division Task Leads. This information will also be included in CPARs reports and offered in response to past performance assistance requests:

Acceptable / Meets: .85 - .94 Unacceptable: <.85

Acceptable / Meets: .85 - .94 Unacceptable: <.85

Acceptable / Meets: .85 - .94 Unacceptable: <.85

Acceptable / Meets: .85 - .94 Unacceptable: <.85

The criteria that will used to accomplish the evaluation ratings is derived from the RFP and from the elements of performance determined to be most influential to performance. The Contractor’s Quality Plan (QP) should address each of the respective areas. Using the criteria from the Performance Requirements Survey (PRS) task orders can be tailored using all, or some combination of the relevant performance characteristics. This allows for measuring performance at both the individual task order level, as well as aggregating performance in the respective functional areas to assess trends.

PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SURVEY (PRS)

QUESTIONS/ANSWERS

Past Performance

Attachment 9 - Past Performance Client Authorization Letter

Security Requirements

DD254

Item 8: All classified work accomplished on this contract will be done so withn US Government - accredited SCI facilities. Only unclassified work will be performed at contractor facilities. These two statements are in conflict with what has been stated in the PWS paragraph 2.7 Security Requirements. Q Will the Government confirm the validity of the DD254; or if classified access, handling and storage is required at the contractor facility, will the government clarify and revise by amendment of the DD254 the highest level of classified access, handling and storage required at the contractor's facility?

The DD-254 is confirmed valid.

The provided DD-254 seems to have all relevant sections already completed. Please specify if vendors should complete a blank DD-254 or which sections of Attachment 2 should be completed.

The requirement to submit a DD-254 has been removed.

Will a separate DD-254 be generated for each Task Order, or just the main contract for the Prime and all subcontractors?

A DD-254 will be issued at both the base contract and task order level.

PWS Inquiries

Please clarify what this model is, and its purpose.

MCCBA support includes compiling and managing an Excel-based dataset resident on CBA SIPR SharePoint site. No model is required for this aspect of MCCBA.

Please define what government’s expectations for this “environment” are, and its purpose.

Environment is more of a model or simulation tool.

3.1.1 Task 1 (and all other Integration Division Task 1's) indicate "Assessment of tools and methodologies that improve the DoD Architecture Framework (DoDAF) modeling process."

Please clarify if it’s the government’s intent that the contractor will evaluate the tools and methodologies by which DoDAF architectures are created.

This should be removed.

3.1.3, 3.2.3, 3.3.3, 3.4.3, 3.5.3, 3.6.3, 3.7.3, 3.8.3 and 3.9.3 All of the sub-paragraphs under paragraphs 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, and 3.9 are the same. It appears that all of the Division requirements were summed together with no distinction of the different requirements unique to each division. Some examples, Para 3.1.2, 3.2.2, 3.3.2, 3.4.2, 3.5.2, 3.6.2, 3.7.2, 3.8.2 and 3.9.2 contains the following text:

...review documents and conduct research or communicate with external partners at the SCI-level across the spectrum of topics and functional areas of intelligence, cyberspace operations and MAGTF EW This may be appropriate under 3.1.2 but is not appropriate under the rest of the paragraphs.

…provide survivability engineering expertise to support Live Fire Integrated Product Team (IPT) and Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP) combat developer inputs as well as inputs to Live Fire scoring assessments.

This may be appropriate for 3.2 Fires and Maneuvers Integration (FMI) and 3.5 Logistics Integration (LI) but not the other Divisions covered under this PWS.

Para 3.1.3, 3.2.3, 3.3.3, 3.4.3, 3.5.3, 3.6.3, 3.7.3, 3.8.3 and 3.9.3 contains the following text:

…development and maintenance of an environment (e.g., modeling & simulation) capable of supporting sustained analytical efforts using…