M00264-22-Q-0031-0001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to respond to vendor questions and to update the Performance Work Statement.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 11

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 15-Mar-2022

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street , County, State and Zip Code) X M0026422Q0031

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

01-Mar-2022

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, X is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

15-Mar-2022

CODE

MCINCR - RCO

2010 HENDERSON RD

MELISSA CHABOT

QUNATICO VA 22134

M00264 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

M0026422Q0031

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Question 1: Can you please let me know if you would like career services included in our proposal/pricing?

Also, is there a vendor that currently doing the work?

Response 1: This is a new program development so there is no current vendor. Career services, if defined as anything beyond the initial 360 report presentation/discussion, are not needed for this contract.

Question 2: What is the total desired number of 360 feedback providers for each participant? What is the desired number of 360 feedback providers for each category – subordinates, peers, and seniors?

Response 2: The government is expecting to adhere to industry standards – somewhere between 5-10 respondents. 1-2 seniors, 2-3 peers, 3-5 subordinates.

Question 3: What are the desired range limits for the options of varying time lengths for individuals to be mentored, counseled, or coached?

Response 3: For the individual sessions 30-45 minutes is acceptable. For any group sessions a 1 – 2 hour block is preferred.

Question 4: There are currently no industry 360 assessments (that are known or proven) that are FEDRAMP Authorized. While a ‘customizable” 360 is possible, it would need to be administered on the MARSOC infrastructure, with MARSOC tools that are FEDRAMP, in order to be compliant.

In addition, industry leading 360 assessments are based on extensive research and science and provide the most inclusive, informed results for participants. We would suggest that you allow the vendor to suggest an industry leading 360 tool with the option to change, based on your needs, after award.

Response 4: The government will leave it to the vendor to provide the most appropriate and best tool available to meet the requirement in accordance with the Performance Work Statement.

Question 5: Has the Marine Corps conducted a similar project of this nature in the past? If so, could you please provide the contract number and vendor?

Response 5: The Marine Corps has not. There have been multiple schools across DoD that have used these as instructional tools, but never a program used by the Marine Corps.

Question 6: Would the government accept advanced degrees (Master and Doctoral Degrees) in lieu of certifications?

Response 6: Yes, any proof of advanced mastery of the subject matter surrounding human behavior, counseling, and/or psychology broadly would be acceptable.

Question 7: Does the Marine Corps have a budget in mind for this effort?

Response 7: The Government anticipates paying fair market prices for the requested service.

Question 8: How many coaches does the Marine Corps envision for this effort?

Response 8: The evaluation reports and the associated coaching/counseling are required to be provided to the evaluated Marine within 1 month of the feedback being received. The number of coaches/counselors needed to accomplish this is left to the contractor to determine.

Question 9: Is this a current contract, if so, is there an incumbent?

Response 9: No, this is a new requirement.

Question 10: Will the Marine Corps allow contractors to include a COLA with the pricing?

Response 10: All personnel, equipment, supplies, facilities, transportation, tools, materials, supervision, and other items and non-personal services necessary to perform 360-degree leadership reviews as defined in this Performance Work Statement are to be included in the pricing for each line item of the solicitation (0001, 1001, and 2001).

Question 11: Is there a particular 360 Assessment tool that the Marine Corps requires/desires for this effort or can the contractor present their preferred tool with the proposal?

Response 11: The government will rely on the expertise of the contractor to present the best and most appropriate tool that meets the requirement.

Question 12: How many coaching hours will be allotted per participant to debrief the 360 assessment results?

Response 12: For the individual sessions 30-45 minutes is acceptable. For any group sessions a 1 – 2 hour block is preferred. The base year and option year 1 will require all evaluated Marines receive individual sessions. Option year 2 is expected to be a combination of group and individual sessions.

Question 13: Have the selected leaders received a 360 assessment before, or will this be their first time?

Response 13: Some of them may have received 360 assessments through various schools they have attended, but not via the Marine Corp 360 evaluation program.

Question 14: Will the work be conducted virtually or in person?

Response 14: The government expects the surveys to be executed virtually, while the coaching sessions can be virtual or in person depending on timing/location/availability of both the Marine and the coach.

Question 15: Will the client consider leadership workshops or team coaching sessions for the engagement?

Response 15: In option year 2 the use of these group sessions is expected to be implemented for select groups in combination with individual sessions for key personnel.

Question 16: Will the leaders and their supervisor sign a program commitment?

Response 16: It is the Government's intent to issue a single Firm-Fixed Price Contract to satisfy this requirement.

Question 17: Where the quote should be a single fixed value for each year (item numbers 0001, 1001, and 2001), what is your preference or recommendation on how we handle variable costs associated with certain services. For example, in the RFQ, such as at the bottom of page 7 and the top of page 8, it states, “Provide group coaching/education to select cohorts” and “Provide 1 on 1 coaching/mentoring as needed”.

As services that can have a variable number of occurrences, we would normally count each instance

Response 17: The base year and option year 1 will require all evaluated Marines receive individual sessions (qty 200 and 300 respectively). Option year 2 (qty 1000) is expected to be a combination of group and individual sessions. Option year 2 would likely include an estimated 400 individual sessions with the remaining 600 conducted in groups.

for invoicing after the fact. That way our client wouldn’t pay for a service they don’t end up fully utilizing.

Question 18: Is it possible to get a copy of the Marine Corps' leadership qualities and traits?

Response 18: Yes. Please see Attachment 1: Marine Corps Leadership Trait with the two institutionalized occurrences of leadership traits.

Question 19: Will the coaching sessions take place remotely or face to face?

Response 19: The government expects the surveys to be executed virtually, while the coaching sessions can be virtual or in person depending on timing/location/availability of both the Marine and the coach.

Question 20: “Provide the capability for different cohorts of Marine Corps leaders to take unique, cohort-tailored reviews.” Does this mean different 360 question sets for each cohort? How is a cohort defined?

If yes, how many cohorts for the 200 leaders, for the 300 leaders, for the 1000 leaders?

Response 20: This statement is designed to allow the adjustment of a small number of the questions, not the entire questionnaire. A cohort can be any group of Marines that share a quality or situation (ie. same rank, same school, same occupational specialty). The 200 will be treated as a single cohort. There will be 2 cohorts for the 300 and up to 4 cohorts for the 1000.

Question 21: How many follow-on coaching/mentoring sessions does the government anticipate per year?

Response 21: The base year and option year 1 will require all evaluated Marines receive individual sessions (qty 200 and 300 respectively). Option year 2 (qty 1000) is expected to be a combination of group and individual sessions. Option year 2 would likely remaining 600 conducted in groups

Question 22: Can the Government please expand on what types of certifications are needed for contractor personnel?

Response 22: Any proof of advanced mastery of the subject matter surrounding human behavior, counseling, and/or psychology broadly would be acceptable. This proof can be certifications from accredited learning institutions, board certifications, or collegiate degrees.

Question 23: “Provide group coaching/education to select cohorts” and “Provide 1 on 1 coaching/mentoring as needed”. As services that can have a variable number of occurrences, we would normally count each instance for invoicing after the fact. How do you recommend we develop a fixed-price quote that is reasonable for both sides, given the variable nature of these services?

Response 23: The base year and option year 1 will require all evaluated Marines receive individual sessions (qty 200 and 300 respectively). Option year 2 (qty 1000) is expected to be a combination of group and individual sessions. Option year 2 would likely remaining 600 conducted in groups.

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been modified:

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT (PWS)

360-DEGREE LEADERSHIP REVIEWS

1. General. This is a non-personal services contract to provide 360-degree leadership reviews. The Government shall not exercise any supervision or control over the contract service providers performing the services herein.

Such contract service providers shall be accountable solely to the Contractor who, in turn is responsible to the Government.

1.1. Introduction. The contractor shall provide all personnel, equipment, supplies, facilities, transportation, tools, materials, supervision, and other items and non-personal services necessary to perform 360-degree leadership reviews as defined in this Performance Work Statement. The contractor shall perform to the standards in this contract.

1.2. Background. 360-degree feedback, also known as multi-rater feedback, multi-source feedback, 360-degree review, or multi-source assessments, is a process through which feedback from an individual’s subordinates, colleagues, and supervisors, as well as a self-evaluation by the individual themselves is gathered. Such reviews can also include, when relevant, feedback from external sources who interact with the individual, such as customers and suppliers or other interested stakeholders. 360-degree feedback is so named because it solicits feedback regarding an individual’s behavior from a variety of points of view (subordinate, lateral, and supervisory). These points of views are collectively categorized as raters, feedback providers, or reviewers. 360-degree feedback may be contrasted with “downward feedback” (traditional feedback on work behavior and performance delivered to an individual by their supervisor, or “upward feedback” delivered to a supervisor by subordinates only.

Industry and academia has concluded that adopting the 360-degree review approach is superior to other traditional forms of evaluation and feedback for evaluating an individual’s performance. When successfully implemented, this method initiates a vast positive change and provides a more efficient, thorough, and accurate assessment of performance reviews. More than 85% of Fortune 500 companies have adopted a form of 360-degree review to improve their workforce. Due to industry’s focus on 360-degree reviews, the Department of Defense and the services are assessing how to implement, or have implemented, 360-degree reviews within the department or specific service.

The Marine Corps doctrine currently emphasizes self-awareness and understanding of an individual leader’s strengths and weakness. Marines receive training on professionalism, morality and ethics, self-awareness and unconscious bias. However, these do not provide Marines feedback from subordinates, peers and superiors on how their leadership is perceived. A 360-degree leadership review is recognized as effective method at developing better leaders. The United States Navy and the United States Army currently utilize 360-degree assessments to evaluate prospective commanders.

In a 1 April 2016 memo, the Secretary of the Navy directed the development of an implementation plan for a Department of Navy-wide program that uses innovative personal assessment mechanisms called Full and Inclusive Reviews (FAIR). Part of FAIR is the execution of 360-degree assessments in Navy’s fleet-centered leadership development program. The program includes: continuing the current process of conducting 360 degree assessments in the Prospective Executive Officer and Prospective Commanding Officer courses; continuing the current process of conducting 360 Degree Assessment for Flag Officers; and conducting a critical analysis of the existing surveys and establish survey criteria that will enable the accomplishment of the requirements set forth by SECNAV. The analysis criteria includes: the most appropriate survey vehicle that generates meaningful feedback; the ideal timing of assessment administration; the best and most efficient method to provide assessment feedback to the service member; the process by which the program is managed and documented; and the financial costs of expanding the existing program and sustaining it.

The Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) tasked the Deputy Commandant, Manpower and Reserve Affairs with the development and implementation of 360-degree reviews within the Marines Corps. The CMC’s published posture statement on 29 April 2021 stated “We are currently reviewing the efficacy of implementing a 360-degree review for all lieutenant colonels and colonels eligible for command selection…”

The Marine Corps is initially focusing reviews on Marines eligible for selection and those selected for colonel and lieutenant colonel command positions with the option to expand to include Marines in senior leadership billets (e.g. Sergeant Majors, Master Gunny Sergeants, etc.). The Marine Corps will implement 360-degree leadership reviews via a trusted third-party who will coordinate survey execution and data analysis. Data will reside with the third-party and access to the data will remain with the individual completing the review.

1.3. Objectives. The purpose of implementing a 360-degree leadership review program is to provide command personnel with empirical feedback to improve their leadership effectiveness while informing the institution on trends in leadership qualities and traits.

The objectives are as follows:

Provide a research-based forum to individuals and their feedback providers that focuses on both industry and Marine Corps leadership qualities and traits.

Produce individual output from the research-based forum that identifies the individual’s leadership strengths and weaknesses. The output must also be able to identify an individual’s hidden strengths and weaknesses.

Provide individuals access to coaching, mentorship, and/or counseling to assist the individual in understanding the output, identifying available resources for improvement, and developing an action plan that capsulizes on the individual’s strengths and improves the individual’s weaknesses.

2. Scope.

2.1. General description of the type of services to be performed.

2.1.1. Coordinate with the Marine Corps to develop a Marine Corps tailored 360-leadership review (a.k.a. survey) that maps the research-based analysis to Marine Corps specific leadership qualities and traits.

2.1.2. Provide/leverage a technology back-bone/base for the execution of 360-degree leadership reviews.

The technology backbone/base must be able to:

Meet Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program (FedRAMP) standard for security if the contracted service is cloud-based.

Be easily accessible by individuals, feedback providers, and administrators.

2.1.3. Provide and execute research-based 360-degree leadership reviews. Reviews include:

The individual’s self-review of their leadership qualities and traits.

The feedback providers’ (subordinates, peers, and seniors) review of the individual’s leadership qualities and traits. The government is expecting to adhere to industry standards –between 5-10 respondents. 1-2 seniors, 2-3 peers, 3-5 subordinates.

The aggregation and analysis of the information into a printable report.

The availability for the individual to receive coaching, mentorship, or counseling from a trained individual that assists the individual in understanding the report, identifying available resources for improvement, and developing an action plan that capitalizes on the individual’s strengths and improves the individual’s weaknesses. The base year and option year 1 will require all evaluated Marines receive individual sessions (qty 200 and 300 respectively). Option year 2 (qty 1000) is expected to be a combination of group and individual sessions. Option year 2 would likely include an estimated 400 individual sessions with the remaining 600 conducted in groups.

2.2. Specific services to be performed.

2.2.1 Provide a specific 360-degree leadership review for Marine Corps leaders that is researched-based and tailored to the Marine Corps. The review must be:

Web-based Accessible on government-owned networks, private networks, and mobile devices User interface that is intuitive, easy to navigate, and professional The website a “one-stop” site/portal for all individuals involved either as an administrator or individuals completing the reviews.

2.2.2 Provide a technology back-bone that allows flexibility in the administering of 360-leaderhsip reviews. This includes:

Provide the capability for different cohorts of Marine Corps leaders to take unique, cohort-tailored reviews. A cohort can be any group of Marines that share a quality or situation (i.e. same rank, same school, same occupational specialty). The 200 will be treated as a single cohort. There will be 2 cohorts for the 300 and up to 4 cohorts for the 1000.

Provide the capability for either individuals to identify their feedback providers or for feedback provider to be identify on the individual’s behalf.

Provide the capability for results reports to be tailored based on requested desires.

2.2.3 Provide a notification methodology/mechanism that efficiently and effectively informs individuals that they were identified to participate in a 360-leadership review either as the individual being reviewed or as a feedback provider.

2.2.4 Provide a range of options of varying time lengths, technology medium, and capacity for individuals to be mentored, counseled, or coached.

3. Period of Performance. The period of performance shall be for one (1) base period and two (2) 12-month option periods. The base period shall commence at the time of award and will operate until 31 December 2022. The option (assessment) periods are as follows:

Base Period Time of award – 31 December 2022 Option Period One 1 January 2023 – 31 December 2023 Option Period Two 1 January 2024 – 31 December 2024

3.1. Base Year. Provide 200 unique 360-degree leadership reviews completed reports for Marines that can be accessed and completed between award of this contract and December 31, 2022.

3.1.1 Additional Specifications.

Data: Delivered in electronic format that can be formatted for hard copy printing.

End/result/deliverable: Individual 360-degree leadership review reports delivered electronic copies to the

Marine.

Tool for creating deliverable: Contractor will initiate contact with the Marine and provide online data entry for all participants in the 360-degree leadership review process consolidate data and provide electronic copies to the Marines.

Acceptance criteria: Receipt of reports and line item reporting depicting what has been issued against the contract and what is available to the Technical Point of Contact in the following format:

o Number of the 360-degree leadership reviews administered.

o Intended use (when applicable): 360-degree leadership review reports will be used to satisfy

Command Qualification and student coaching as outline in the objective portion of the SOW.

3.2. Option One. Provide 300 unique 360-degree leadership reviews completed reports that can be accessed and completed between January 1, 2023 and December 31, 2023. (Specifications same as 3.1.1.)

3.3. Option Two. Provide 1,000 unique 360-degree leadership reviews completed reports that can be accessed and completed between January 1, 2024 and December 31, 2024. (Specifications same as 3.1.1.)

4. General Information.

4.1. Hours of Operation. The contractor is responsible for conducting business, between the hours of 0730 and 1730, Monday through Friday except Federal holidays or when the Government facility is closed due to local or national emergencies, administrative closings, or similar Government directed facility closings. The Contractor must at all times maintain an adequate workforce for the uninterrupted performance of all tasks defined within this PWS when the Government facility is not closed for the above reasons. When hiring personnel, the Contractor shall keep in mind that the stability and continuity of the workforce are essential.

4.2. Place of Performance. The work to be performed under this contract will be performed virtually from the location(s) of the contracted company.

4.3. Security Requirements. Contractor personnel performing work under this contract are not required to have a security clearance.

4.3.1. Physical Security. The contractor shall be responsible for safeguarding all government equipment, information and property provided for contractor use.

5. Personnel.

5.1. Individuals that are designated to conduct the coaching or mentorship must be certified in the company’s assessment criteria and methodology. Certification must be provided to the government for review and concurrence.

Any proof of advanced mastery of the subject matter surrounding human behavior, counseling, and/or psychology broadly would be acceptable. This proof can be certifications from accredited learning institutions, board certifications, or collegiate degrees.

5.2. The follow personnel are considered key personnel by the government:

5.2.1. Contract Manager and Alternate Contract Manager. The contractor shall provide a contract manager who shall be responsible for the performance of the work. The name of this person and an alternate who shall act for the contractor when the manager is absent shall be designated in writing to the contracting officer. The contract manager or alternate shall have full authority to act for the contractor on all contract matters relating to daily operation of this contract. The contract manager or alternate shall be available between 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday thru Friday except Federal holidays. The contract manager and alternate contract manager must have a high degree of expertise with the company’s 360-degree leadership review system(s).

5.3. Identification of Contractor Employees. All contract personnel attending meetings, answering Government telephones, and working in other situations where their contractor status is not obvious to third parties are required to identify themselves as such to avoid creating an impression in the minds of members of the public that they are Government officials.

6. Quality.

6.1. Quality Control. The contractor shall develop and maintain an effective quality control program to ensure services are performed in accordance with this PWS. The contractor shall develop and implement procedures to identify, prevent, and ensure non-recurrence of defective services. The contractor’s quality control program is the means by which they assure themselves that their work complies with the requirement of the contract. A quality control program must be delivered within 30-days after the contract award. After acceptance of the quality control plan the contractor shall receive the contracting officer’s acceptance in writing of any proposed change to his quality control system.

6.2. Quality Assurance. The government shall evaluate the contractor’s performance under this contract in accordance with the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan. This plan is primarily focused on what the Government must do to ensure that the contractor has performed in accordance with the performance standards. It defines how the performance standards will be applied, the frequency of surveillance, and the minimum acceptable defect rate(s).

7. Performance Requirements Summary (PRS). 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 contract. The functional expertise of the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) plays a critical role in adequately evaluating contractor performance. The below listed methods of surveillance shall be used in the administration of the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) and the standards are delineated by the PWS in the PRS set forth below:

Performance Objective/PWS

Paragraph

Performance Standards Acceptable Quality Level

Method of Surveillance

Incentive/Remedy

Survey Administration (Paragraph 1.3, 2.1.1, and 2.2.1)

Create researched-based survey that evaluates key leadership characteristics

Tailor questions appropriately for select cohorts IAW USMC guidance

Make the survey available via any modern web-browser platform including mobile app

99% COR observation and periodic progress evaluations during development and random sampling during administration of surveys

The Contractor shall correct performance issues within 2 weeks of the Government notification and must re-complete at no additional cost to the Government.

Report generation (Paragraph 1.3, 2.1.3, and 2.2.2)

Provide a timely analytically-supported report of the subject’s surveys

Report analysis will indicate trends of success and growth opportunity

Report will be delivered to the subject NLT 1 month post survey completion

100% COR, random sampling of reports, and subject debriefs

The Contractor shall notify the Government and correct performance issues within 5 days of the realization of non-compliance with this performance standard at no additional charge to the Government.

Follow-on coaching/mentoring (Paragraph 2.1.3 and 2.2.4)

All follow-on coaching/mentoring will be provided by trained professionals within 1 month of subject receiving survey report

Provide group coaching/education to select cohorts

Provide 1 on 1 coaching/mentoring

99% Subject debriefs and direct observation

The Contractor shall notify the Government and correct performance issues within 5 days of the realization of non-compliance with this performance standard at no additional charge to the Government.

8. Post Award Conference/Periodic Progress Meetings. The Contractor agrees to attend any post award conference convened by the contracting activity or contract administration office in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation Subpart 42.5. The contracting officer, Contracting Officers Representative (COR), and other Government personnel, as appropriate, may meet periodically with the contractor to review the contractor's performance. At these meetings the contracting officer will apprise the contractor of how the government views the contractor's performance and the contractor will apprise the Government of problems, if any, being experienced.

Appropriate action shall be taken to resolve outstanding issues. These meetings shall be at no additional cost to the government.

9. Data Rights. The Government has unlimited rights to all documents/material produced under this contract. All documents and materials, to include the source codes of any software, produced under this contract shall be Government owned and are the property of the Government with all rights and privileges of ownership/ copyright belonging exclusively to the Government. These documents and materials may not be used or sold by the contractor without written permission from the Contracting Officer. All materials supplied to the Government shall be the sole property of the Government and may not be used for any other purpose. This right does not abrogate any other Government rights.

This project and all materials provided to the Contractor by the Government and results, conclusions and recommendations obtained thereof should be considered confidential in nature and treated with the same level of care that the Contractor treats its own confidential business information. The information shall not be disclosed, copied, modified, used (except in the completion of this project) or otherwise disseminated to any other person entity at any time to include, but not limited to inclusion in any database external to the Government express consent.

The Marine Corps shall have and retain ownership of all reports prepared by Contractor for the Marine Corps. Such reports originate from and through the application by Contractor of those proprietary, copyright, and trade secret materials owned by Contractor and/or licensors, hereby designated as “original works,” to information and data provided by the Marine Corps. Such “original works” are and will at times remain the property of the Contractor and/or licensors. In the event Contractor shall, from time to time, modify or expand such “original works” to apply to the information and data provided it by the Marine Corps, such modification and/or expansion shall constitute as an enhancement or derivative of such “original works” and shall at all times hereunder remain the intellectual property of Contractor. To the extent any “original works” have been modified for the Marine Corps, Contractor shall hold in confidence all such derivative works and will not disclose them to any third party.

All material and information supplied by the Marine Corps to Contractor during the performance of this Agreement shall remain solely the Marine Corps’ property, and Contractor shall have no rights to such material or information whatsoever. The Marine Corps acknowledges that the raw data, test results, and materials that may be gathered by contractor through an assessment or Multi-Rater Feedback process, and upon which Contractor’s reports are based, may be restricted to Contractor under agreement between Contractor and individual participants/respondents, or under state psychology laws and per the American Psychological Association Guidelines and shall not be disclosed to the Marine Corps. Contractor agrees to hold in confidence any data, test results and information so gathered.

Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, Contractor may archive and use the data obtained in connection with the services internally in its database for purposes of group norms, validation, statistical or other database applications.

10. Organizational Conflict of Interest. Contractor and subcontractor personnel performing work under this contract may receive, have access to or participate in the development of proprietary or source selection information (e.g., cost or pricing information, budget information or analyses, specifications or work statements, etc.) or perform evaluation services which may create a current or subsequent Organizational Conflict of Interests (OCI) as defined in FAR Subpart 9.5. The Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer immediately whenever it becomes aware that such access or participation may result in any actual or potential OCI and shall promptly submit a plan to the Contracting Officer to avoid or mitigate any such OCI. The Contractor’s mitigation plan will be determined to be acceptable solely at the discretion of the Contracting Officer and in the event the Contracting Officer unilaterally determines that any such OCI cannot be satisfactorily avoided or mitigated, the Contracting Officer may affect other remedies as he or she deems necessary, including prohibiting the Contractor from participation in subsequent contracted requirements which may be affected by the OCI.

(End of Summary of Changes)