M0026423R0006-0007 Amendment.docx

M0026423R0006

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:

Q&A CLARIFICATIONS

1. Can the Government please provide some guidance as to the numbers of RCCs required at each location? This is critical to pricing the contract properly given that SCA has set minimum wages for each location. Further, without additional guidance on minimum RCCs required at each location, offerors can simply place all their RCCs in the cheapest location (e.g. Tampa or Camp Lejeune) – a move that would certainly increase efficiency of caseload balancing and RCC backfill for absences. However, we don’t believe that this is what the Government wants as a solution. A ballpark estimate of the percentage of the total cases that are managed at each location would be sufficient.

Section 3.1, Table 1A of the PWS identified RCC support locations where in-person support is required and Table 1B where in-person RCC support may surge due to times of war or crises, such as national emergencies.

In addition to the information provided under Section 3.1, Section 3 of the PWS will also facilitate the Offeror in determining the number of personnel to propose in each RCC location. The contractor is responsible for determining the number of FTEs to be assigned for each location identified under Section 3.1 of the PWS.

Lastly, Addendum 52.212-2 states “The Offeror will be evaluated on: “The proposed roles of management and team resource allocation to ensure oversight and control of performance execution for consistent quality of the performance tasks described in the PWS at Section 4”.

1. Can the Government clarify the total number of RSM cases per year? Several questions in the Amendment 0005 Q&A indicate that there will be approximately 600 cases per year, however, the first paragraph of the PWS section 3.0 Scope, states 900 cases per year.

Approximately 600 new RSMs are assigned to the program a year in addition to the existing open cases.

Adding the new cases to the existing cases, the Government’s best estimate is there will be approximately 900 RSMs that will receive RCC support at any given time per PWS Section 3.

1. The WD provided does not have a minimum wage for two locations. Portsmouth, VA does not have a wage listed (nor is one listed for any adjacent counties). Richmond, VA does not have a wage listed (please note that the City of Richmond is not located in the County of Richmond).

Executive Order 14026 or Executive Order 13658 established the minimum wage for contracts subject to Service Contract Act. The minimum wage for Portsmouth, VA and Richmond, VA should not be lower than what the Department of Labor published on September 30, 2022. The Department of Labor published a notice in the Federal Register announcing that, beginning January 1, 2023, the Executive Order 14026 minimum wage rate will increase to $16.20 per hour (Minimum Wage for Federal Contracts Covered by Executive Order 14026, Notice of Rate Change in Effect as of January 1, 2023).

For additional guidance, please contact the Department of Labor.

1. Can the Government please extend the submission due date? Potential offerors were waiting on answers to several questions pertaining to resumes, named staff, and past performance forms all of which need to be addressed now that we have answers. Addressing these clarified requirements will likely take longer than one week.

Amendment 0006 extended the RFP due date from January 11, 2023 at 10:00 AM EST to January 19, 2023 at 2:00 PM EST.

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been modified:

52.212-1 ADDENDUM

52.212-1 ADDENDUM INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

This acquisition will utilize FAR Part 12 – Acquisition of Commercial Items in conjunction with the policies and procedures for evaluation and award as prescribed under Part 15, Contracting by Negotiations. The Government intends to award a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract from this solicitation to the responsible Offeror, whose offer conforming to the solicitation is most advantageous to the Government.

NOTE: This effort is set aside for small business concerns with a NAICS code of 624190.

I. Submission Information

1. Each Offeror is required to submit an offer that is sufficiently detailed and complete to fully demonstrate an understanding of, and compliance with, all of the requirements of the solicitation. Offerors shall not submit multiple offers representing alternative terms and conditions for satisfying the requirements of this solicitation. To assure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, Offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and all technical requirements of the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Failure to meet a requirement will result in an offer being ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. The response shall consist of four (4) separate volumes, Volume 1 – Administrative, Volume 2 - Technical, Volume 3 – Past Performance, and Volume 4 – Price Proposal. Evaluation will be made in accordance with this solicitation. Non-compliance with any of the provisions herein may lead the Government to determine that an offer is non-compliant and may result in removal from the evaluation. The Government reserves the right to select a response that provides benefit to the government that exceeds the minimum, but is not required to do so.

1. The Contracting Officer (CO) has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition. Upon examination of the initial offers, the CO will review this determination and if, in the CO’s opinion, adequate price competition exists, no additional price information will be requested and certification under FAR 15.406-2 will not be required. However, if at any time during this competition the CO determines that adequate price competition no longer exists, Offerors may be required to submit information to the extent necessary for the CO to determine the reasonableness of the price.

1. The Government intends to award a single Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contract for a base period of 12 months, with four 12-month option periods and one 6-month option period in accordance with FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services. The Government is not obligated; however, and reserves the right to exercise any or all options.

II. Instructions

1. Questions

All contractors’ questions in response to this solicitation must be emailed to ligaya.wallace@usmc.mil and no later than November 9, 2022 at 10:00 AM Eastern Time. To ensure the Government understands the context of the question, and therefore responds accordingly, Offerors shall ensure the referenced document name, section number, page number, and paragraph number are provided as applicable. The Government will not be held responsible for answering any questions after this time. If, however, in the Government's opinion, the question(s) cites an issue of significant importance, the Government may provide written responses. All questions/answers resulting from this solicitation will be posted on sam.gov.

NOTE: Your subject line should read “WWR Recovery Care Coordinator – RFP M00264-23-R-0006”.

1. Proposals

Offerors are to submit an electronic copy of their proposal.

Proposals must be sent to Ligaya Wallace at ligaya.wallace@usmc.mil no later than the date and time referenced in Block 8 of the SF 1449. To be timely, an electronic proposal must be received in its entirety in the designated e‐mail inbox by the due date and time for Proposals. An E‐mail proposal that resides on a Government server, but has not appeared in the designated E‐mail inbox by the due date and time for proposal submission will be considered late unless an exception at FAR 52.215‐1(c)(3) applies.

Note: It is the Offeror’s responsibility to ensure all electronic submittals are received by the Contracting Office in the timeframe referenced in Block 8 of the SF 1449.

Proposal Format

In order to maximize efficiency and minimize the time for proposal evaluation, it is required that the Offeror submit its proposal in accordance with the format and content specified throughout and below:

· The proposals will be 8 1/2” x 11” paper or standard A4 paper, except for fold-outs used for charts, tables, or diagrams, which may not exceed 11” x 17”. All tables, charts, graphs, figures, etc., must be legible.

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

· Typing shall not be less than 10-point font.

· Elaborate formats, bindings or color presentations are not desired or required.

· Electronic Submission – IAW FAR 52.215-1 – Instructions to Offerors, only e-mailed proposals will be accepted. E-mail size must not exceed 10 MB. If the proposal is more than 10 MB, please submit as email 1 of 2, etc. Attachment format must be a Word Document, PDF, PowerPoint or Excel sheet. The Government may be unable to receive other types of electronic files (e.g., .zip files). The Offeror must request and obtain an acknowledgement of receipt for electronic submission. E-mail subject line should include solicitation number and project title.

· Page limitations specified below shall not be exceeded. Title/cover pages, table of contents, appendices (except teaming arrangements, joint venture agreement and/or commitments by subcontractors that can be provided as an Appendix in the Past Performance Volume and are excluded from the page count), references, glossaries, etc., as well as graphs, tables, charts, diagrams, and etc., are included in the page count. All material in excess of the specified page limits will neither be read nor evaluated.

· Page limitations may be placed on responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs), if issued. The specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the ENs to Offerors or on the EN form itself. Each page containing proprietary information should be properly marked.

· Page numbering: Pages shall be numbered consecutively within each volume showing volume and page. For example, page 9 of Volume 1 would be numbered 1.9 and page 10 of Volume 2 would be numbered 2.10.

· Each page must include the solicitation number, and the Offeror’s name.

· Each page of the proposal should include the following footer: “Source Selection Information: See FAR 2.101 and 3.104.

· Hyperlinks are not permitted.

1. Additional Documentation

· Acknowledgement of all amendments to the solicitation IAW the instructions on the SF 30 (amendment form).

· Offerors should allow sufficient time when submitting the proposals to the Contracting Office prior to the closing time. Late proposals will be processed IAW the provisions established in FAR 15.208 “Late Submission, Modifications, and Withdrawals of Proposals”.

1. Confidential Information

4.1 The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and its amendments have resulted in an increasing number of requests from outside the Government for copies of contract qualifications and offers submitted to federal agencies. If an Offeror’s submissions contain information that it believes should be withheld from such requestors under FOIA on the grounds that they contain “trade secrets and commercial or financial information” (5 USC 552(b)(4)), the Offeror should mark its submissions in the following manner:

4.2 The following notice should be placed on the title page: “Some parts of this document, as identified on individual pages, are considered by the submitter to be privileged or confidential trade secrets or commercial or financial information not subject to mandatory disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. Material considered privileged or confidential on such grounds is contained on page(s) _______.”

4.3 Each individual item considered privileged or confidential under FOIA should be marked with the following notice: “The data or information is considered confidential or privileged and is not subject to mandatory disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.”

1. Proposal Content (M00264-23-R-0006)

The proposal must demonstrate an understanding of and an ability to meet all the requirements set forth in the PWS. The Offeror shall provide sufficient detail to substantiate the validity of all statements. The Offeror shall demonstrate that the proposal is following the requirements, terms, and conditions of the RFP.

Comprehensive responses to the requirements of the RFP are required to enable the Government to evaluate the Offeror’s understanding of and capability to accomplish the requirements of the PWS. General statements that the Offeror can or will comply with the requirements, that standard procedures will be used, that well known techniques will be used, or paraphrasing the solicitation’s requirements in whole or in part, will NOT constitute compliance. Failure to conform to any of the requirements of the solicitation may form the basis for rejection of the proposal.

Brochuremanship is not desired, rather clarity, completeness, and conciseness are essential. Since only the proposal submitted in response to this solicitation will be evaluated, the Offeror must make certain that its proposal is complete with regard to the information provided. Data previously submitted, or presumed to be known, e.g., previous projects performed for the Government, will not be considered in the evaluation unless that information is physically contained in the proposal. Information provided must be consistent amongst all volumes.

The Offeror is advised that the Government may selectively verify any information provided in the proposal. The Offeror is cautioned that it is responsible to ensure that material that it desires to have evaluated for a particular section is contained in that specific section.

Proposals shall be presented in four (4) separate volumes (not combined as one Microsoft Word or .pdf document):

Table 1

1. VOLUME 1 - ADMINISTRATIVE: No page limit. This volume shall address the following:

3. Solicitation and Amendments cover sheet with the appropriate blocks filled in by the Offeror;

3. Offer Letter. The Offer Letter shall be signed by an authorized company official and include the following:

· The solicitation number;

· Company Information. The name, address, Unique Identity Identifier (UEI) number, Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code, telephone number, and Tax Identification Number (TIN);

· Authorized Personnel. Provide the name, title, telephone number, facsimile number, and e-mail address of the company/division point of contact who can obligate your company contractually. Also, identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government and who can answer questions regarding your proposal;

· Terms of any express warranty;

· “Remit to” address, if different than mailing address;

· State the length of proposal validity (at least a minimum of 120 days);

· Acknowledgment of solicitation Amendments (if applicable or not previously acknowledged);

· Agreement with terms. A statement specifying the extent of agreement with all terms, conditions, and provisions included in the RFP. Offerors are to clearly detail any exceptions taken and the rationale for the exceptions taken to the RFP. Please note that exceptions taken to the RFP may render the proposal unacceptable to the Government.

3. Organization Conflict of Interest (OCI) - Offeror shall provide an affirmative statement that no OCIs exist or a detailed plan that mitigates existing or anticipated OCIs. Confirmation of DFARS 252.204-7012 compliance;

3. A completed copy of all solicitation representations and certifications. If the Offeror completed the representations and certifications in the System for Award Management (SAM), it shall include a statement stating its representations and certifications are up to date in SAM. Any representations and certifications that are not available for completion within SAM must be submitted in this volume;

3. Identification and Assertion of Restrictions on the Government's Use, Release, or Disclosure of Technical Data or Computer Software – For technical data (other than computer software documentation) pertaining to items, components, or processes developed at private expense, identify both the deliverable technical data and each item, component, or process. For computer software or computer software documentation, identify the software, and software documentation using a format similar to the chart in DFARS 252.227-7017. When all data, software, or documentation will be submitted without restrictions, the Offeror shall so state in the chart provided as an attachment to this volume;

3. Technical Data or Computer Software Previously Delivered to the Government - The Offeror shall attach an identification of all documents or other media incorporating technical data or computer software it intends to deliver with other than unlimited rights that are identical or substantially similar to documents or other media that the Offeror has produced for, delivered to, or is obligated to deliver to the Government under any contract or subcontract as required by DFARS 252.227-7028. The attachment shall identify the contract number under which the data or software were produced; the contract number under which, and the name and address of the organization to whom, the data or software were most recently delivered or will be delivered; and any limitations on the Government's rights to use or disclose the data or software, including, when applicable, identification of the earliest date the limitations expire.

THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL MUST NOT CONTAIN ANY PRICING DATA

1. VOLUME 2 – TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES PROPOSAL: Limited to no more than 75 pages. The Offeror shall address its technical capability relating to Factor 1 Management and Factor 2 Staffing. Title pages, executive summaries (to include company’s mission statement) cover letter and the compliance matrix are included in the 75-page limit.

The Volume I - Technical Capabilities Proposal shall include:

The cover letter that identifies the RFP number, corporate principal submitting the proposal, key points of contact within the firm who are authorized to bind the firm, (e.g., contracts, pricing, technical), and a summary of the material content.

A table of contents pertinent to the proposal material organization and providing traceability from the Offeror’s submission, to the PWS, to the evaluation criteria, and to other solicitation sections as necessary. Clarity, completeness, and conciseness are essential.

Note: Only one cover letter and summary of the material content is required for Factors 1 and 2, both are included in the 75-page limit.

a. Factor 1 – Management:

The proposal shall include all management personnel with a description of their work experience relating to projects similar in scope.

The proposal shall provide a narrative which demonstrates the Offeror’s management experience with projects like that of the PWS. Offerors may include subcontractors, affiliate companies, sister companies, teaming arrangements, joint venture’s management experience in addition to their own (if applicable). When submitting a subcontractor experience, a commitment signed by Offeror and subcontractor certifying that if a contract is awarded resulting from the proposal, the parties commit to joint performance as proposed shall be included and fully executed by both parties to be evaluated or considered. Affiliate companies, sister companies, teaming arrangements, joint venture agreement, etc., will be considered provided that sufficient documentation is included in the proposal (copies of teaming arrangements, joint venture agreement and/or commitments by subcontractors can be provided as an Appendix in the Past Performance Volume and are excluded from the page count). The primary offering entity must demonstrate that the affiliate will perform significant and critical aspects of the contract if awarded. Documentation includes a copy of the signed arrangement such as documented affiliation, a copy of the teaming agreement, a copy of the joint venture agreement, etc.

The Offeror shall provide a management approach suitable to respond to the types of requirements described in the PWS. The discussion shall provide a comprehensive approach to include: management of task-based work requirements necessary to provide Recovery Care Coordinator Support as described in the PWS; and illustration of the roles of management and team resources relevant to Offerors approach to ensure suitable oversight and control of performance execution in a manner that ensures consistent quality of the performance tasks described in the PWS. Collectively, the Offeror’s integrated approach shall demonstrate that the Offeror possesses the capabilities and resources to establish and operate an efficient organization that is both responsive and flexible to meet the requirements of the PWS.

The Offeror shall submit a Daily Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) and Transition-In Plan as required in the PWS Section 5.2 and 5.10 in draft form. The Offeror’s draft Daily SOP must detail how it will operate their responsibilities in the day-to-day operation for successful execution of the PWS requirements. Details shall include its management approach and processes, and quality measures. Minimum content required in the Draft SOP is listed in Section 5.2 of the PWS. The contractor shall update its draft Daily SOP submitted with its solicitation response and provide the Government a final Daily SOP addressing Government comments within 30 business days after the Kick-Off meeting. The Offeror’s Draft Transition-In plan must detail phase-in support and coordination with the incumbent contractor to facilitate successful transition-in for up to thirty (30) days. Minimum content required in the Draft Transition-In Plan is listed in Section 5.10 of the PWS. The incoming contractor shall update its draft Transition-In Plan submitted with its solicitation response and provide the Government a final Transition-In Plan addressing Government comments within three business days after the Kick-Off meeting.

Note: Transition-In Plan shall not be separately priced; the cost attributed to transitioning in shall be included in the fixed price.

1. Factor 2 – Staffing:

The proposal shall provide a staffing matrix demonstrating the required RCC support. The matrix shall include the qualifications and capabilities (e.g., experience, training, education, etc.) and capacities (e.g., process X number of transactions per hour per person) for each proposed individual and demonstrate how the proposed labor mix will allow the contractor to meet or exceed all requirements in the PWS (capability requirements and capacity requirements). The proposal shall demonstrate how the Offeror will maintain the required level of fully qualified support, as described in the PWS, throughout the contract performance period.

The proposal shall also demonstrate how the Offeror plans to meet the secret eligibility requirements addressed in PWS Section 17 (e.g., all proposed personnel shall possess secret eligibility on the first day of contract performance) and demonstrate how the Offeror will maintain these secret eligibility requirements during contract performance

Note: The awardee should plan for Right of First Refusal IAW Executive Order 14055.

1. VOLUME 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE: Limited to no more than 20 pages. The Assessor Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 1) is excluded from the page count. Past performance will be rated using the confidence assessment described in DoD Source Selection Procedures, Table 5 – Performance Confidence Assessments.

Factor 3 - Past Performance:

Pages shall include:

1. Past Performance Cover Letter with name of Firm, CAGE code, UEI code, Tax ID, Statement of Registration in the System for Award Management (SAM). Vendor POC and Alternate POC information (name, title, telephone number, e-mail), Solicitation Number.

1. Table of Contents

1. Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) (Attachment 2) for every past performance reference.

The Offeror must provide information on three (3) contracts within the last five (5) years (projects may be ongoing) that are relevant in scope and similar in size and complexity to the tasks required in the PWS, using Attachment 2, “Past Performance Questionnaire”. If the reference provided does not have an official completed CPARS, an Assessor Past Performance Questionnaire shall be sent by the contractor to the POC identified in the PPQ with instructions to complete and send back to the Contract Specialist by January 11, 2023.

The Assessor’s Past Performance submissions shall be from Points of Contact (POCs) that can attest to the Offeror’s past performance. If an Offeror has no POC, they must state that either no Past Performance has been completed within the past five years or they have no past performance history performing on a contract.

Offerors may include subcontractor past performance. When submitting a subcontractor past performance, a commitment signed by Offeror and subcontractor certifying that if a contract is awarded resulting from the proposal, the parties commit to joint performance as proposed shall be included. If the signed commitment is not fully executed by both parties and provided with the Past Performance Proposal, subcontractor references will not be evaluated or considered. Affiliate companies, sister companies, teaming arrangements and joint venture’s past performance in addition to their own (if applicable) may also be included and will be considered provided that sufficient documentation is included in the proposal. The prime contractor must demonstrate that the affiliate will perform significant and critical aspects of the contract if awarded. Documentation includes a copy of the signed arrangement such as documented affiliation, a copy of the teaming agreement, a copy of the joint venture agreement, etc. (copies of teaming arrangements, joint venture agreement and/or commitments by subcontractors can be provided as an Appendix in the Past Performance Volume and are excluded from the page count). For Single Award IDIQ contract past performance record, all task orders collectively under an IDIQ contract count as one (1) past performance record. For a Multiple Award IDIQ contract past performance record, each task order referenced in the proposal counts as a past performance record.

1. VOLUME 4 – PRICE: No page limit. All information relating to pricing/cost data shall be included in this volume. The price proposal shall cover all resources required to complete the requirements of the proposed effort. Offerors are to include a narrative of their pricing methodology /basis of pricing.

Factor 4 – Price:

3. Complete SF1449 contract line item with prices not exceeding two (2) decimals after the decimal point, for each period of performance and shall equate to the total price. Additionally, the contract line items shall mimic the prices submitted in the Attachment 3, Pricing Template.

3. Complete and submit the attached Excel Pricing Template, Attachment 3. This template provides a breakdown of pricing associated with completing this effort.

3. Data contained in the price proposal shall be consistent with data in the filled-out CLINs. This volume should contain the Offeror’s most competitive price and terms.

3. All labor rates and pricing totals shall be inclusive of all overhead, G&A, profit, etc. for the firm-fixed-priced CLINs.

3. Other than certified cost or pricing data may be requested by the Government. Offeror should be prepared to submit the cost or pricing data within five (5) business days of request.

3. No price information should be included in the technical or past performance proposals.

(End of Provision)

52.212-2 ADDENDUM

52.212-2 ADDENDUM

EVALUATION AND BASIS OF AWARD

EVALUATION FACTORS:

1. Basis for Contract Award

This acquisition will utilize tradeoff process source selection conducted IAW Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15, Contracting by Negotiation. A tradeoff process is appropriate when it may be in the best interest of the Government to consider award to other than the lowest priced Offeror or other than the highest technically rated Offeror. The Government will conduct a competitive source selection. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

Order of Precedence:

The Government will award a single Firm-Fixed-Price contract to the Offeror who is deemed responsible IAW FAR Part 9.1, as supplemented, whose proposal conforms to the solicitation’s requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by this solicitation). The Government will employ a Tradeoff analysis of cost or price and non-price factors (FAR 15.101-1). The Government intends to make an award off of an initial proposal; therefore, Offerors should provide their most competitive and complete proposal assuming there will not be a future opportunity to revise its proposal. However, after receipt of proposals the Government reserves the right to cancel solicitation or if desired, negotiate with and seek proposal revisions, in its discretion. The Government will make a best value determination and is not bound to make award to the highest technically-rated proposal nor is it bound to make award to the lowest-priced proposal.

II. Evaluation Criteria

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposal to determine the extent to which the Offeror has demonstrated its ability to accomplish the tasks listed in the PWS, as outlined in 52.212-1 Addendum, Instructions to Offerors. The following evaluation factors shall be used to evaluate the Proposal:

1. Technical Capabilities

A. Factor 1 – Management:

This factor evaluates the Offeror’s management approach identifying all key/critical personnel with a description of their work experience relating to projects similar in scope.

The Offeror will be evaluated on:

· The proposed roles of management and team resource allocation to ensure oversight and control of performance execution for consistent quality of the performance tasks described in the PWS at Section 4;

· Controls for execution of task-based operations and provisions for objective quality assurance;

· Its draft Daily Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) meeting the minimum content requirement in the PWS Section 5.2 and detailing the operational responsibilities, to include its management approach and processes, and quality measures, in day-to-day operations to successfully execute PWS requirements; and

· Its draft Transition-in Plan meeting the minimum content requirement in the PWS Section 5.10 and detailing phase-in support for up to thirty (30) days. The incoming contractor will work with the incumbent contractor to facilitate a successful transition-in to ensure service continuity.

B. Factor 2 – Staffing:

The Government will evaluate the Offerors staffing matrix that demonstrates the required RCC support. The Government will evaluate the qualifications and capabilities (e.g. experience, training, education, etc.) and capacities (e.g., process X number of transactions per hour per person) for each proposed individual and demonstrate how the proposed labor mix will allow the contractor to meet or exceed all requirements in the PWS (capability requirements and capacity requirements). The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s plan to meet the secret eligibility requirements addressed in PWS Section 17 (e.g., all proposed personnel shall possess secret eligibility on the first day of contract performance) and how they demonstrate they will maintain these secret eligibility requirements during contract performance.

Technical Ratings for Factors 1 and 2 – Technical Capability (Management and Staffing)

Based on the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies, the evaluation team will assign each factor an adjectival rating using the following adjectival rating scale:

Table 1 - Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method

Note: Any Offeror who receives a rating of Unacceptable on any Technical factor cannot receive an award.

2. Past Performance

1. Factor 3 - Past Performance:

The Past Performance evaluation results in an assessment of the Offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements.

1. Ratings

Each Offeror will receive an integrated performance confidence assessment. This integration will include the recent and relevant present/past performance of the Offeror. An Offeror’s overall confidence assessment will be impacted by past performance findings. More recent performance or more relevant past performance may have greater impact on the performance confidence assessment. Although the past performance evaluation focuses on performance that is relevant to the RCC, the resulting performance confidence assessment is made at the past performance factor level and represents an overall evaluation of Contractor performance. Each Offeror will receive one of the performance confidence ratings as described in DoD Source Selection Procedures.

Table 2 - Performance Confidence Assessments

PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS

1. Past Performance Ratings Methodology

The Government will consider and evaluate Offeror's past performance information in accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2), the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data and general trends in contractor’s performance shall be considered. Past performance information may include the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), and data independently obtained from other Government and commercial sources. Recency and relevancy are combined to establish one performance confidence assessment rating for each Offeror. The Government will assess if past performance is deemed recent and relevant for the requirements of this RFP. Recent and Relevant are defined in the subparagraph below:

c.1. Recency Assessment

Recency is generally expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant, and is critical to establishing the relevancy of past performance information. Recency will be evaluated using “Recent” or “Not Recent”. Recent is defined as performance occurring within the previous five (5) years from the issuance of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated.

c.2. Relevance Assessment

A relevancy determination of the Offeror’s Present and Past Performance occurring during the recency window five [5] years preceding the solicitation issuance date), will be made. In determining relevancy for individual contracts, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the Offeror whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated. Higher relevancy will be assigned for contracts that are most similar to the effort, or portion of the effort, for which that Offeror is proposing. The Government is not bound by the Offeror’s opinion of relevancy. Scope of effort is defined as that documented in the RCC PWS. The Government will use the past performance relevancy assessment described in DoD Source Selection Procedures, Table 4 – Past Performance Relevancy Ratings. The Government will evaluate the three (3) most current efforts that are deemed recent and relevant for each Offeror, however, the Government reserves the right to contact the references provided and to use recent and relevant past performance information obtained from sources other than those identified by the Offeror. This past performance information may be used for the evaluation of past performance.

6.5.5 The Government may also use other information such as Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), DoD PPIRS and the FAPIIS data available from Government sources to evaluate an Offeror’s past performance. The Government reserves the right to limit or expand the number of references it decides to contact and to contact references other than those provided by the Offeror.

With respect to relevancy, past performance of greater relevancy will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance.

Table 3 - Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

1. Sources of Past Performance Information

The Government may use information such as Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) and the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) data available from Government sources to evaluate an Offeror’s past performance. The Government reserves the right to limit or expand the number of references it decides to contact and to contact references other than those provided by the Offeror.

3. Price Proposal

Factor 4 – Price:

a. The Government will evaluate Offeror’s proposal prices, but this factor will not be given an adjectival rating. Proposals will be evaluated on reasonableness, completeness, and mathematical accuracy. The Government will evaluate the Total Evaluated Price consisting of the sum of all CLINs, including the travel CLIN and the potential option to extend services (FAR 52.217-8) by adding six months of the Offeror’s final ordering period prices. As adequate price competition is anticipated, price analysis techniques will be used to evaluate proposals and support the Contracting Officer’s determination that the price is fair and reasonable in accordance with FAR 15.404. If additional data is needed in order to establish a fair and reasonable price, the Contracting Officer will obtain such data in accordance with FAR 15.403-3 and DFARS 215.403-3.

b. Comparison of the proposed pricing is considered in the overall evaluation of “best value” to the Government based upon the anticipated level of competition. The price of the base period and all option years will be evaluated in accordance with FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options. Offerors shall note that FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services, is included in this RFP. The Government will evaluate this potential option to extend services. Offerors are notified that the Government may choose to use the Option to Extend Services clause at the completion of any performance period.

c. Reasonableness. For the price to be reasonable in its nature and amount, it should not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of a competitive business. Reasonableness takes into account the context of a given source selection, including current market conditions, general economic conditions, and other factors that affect the ability of an Offeror to perform the contract requirements. Normally, adequate price competition establishes a fair and reasonable price.

d. The Government may also determine a proposal unacceptable should the proposed prices be materially unbalanced. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more items is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of price analysis techniques.

e. Completeness and Accuracy. The Government will review the price proposal in the pricing template for completeness and accuracy. A determination will be made as to whether the Offeror properly completed the pricing template. The Offeror’s proposal will be checked for mathematical correctness to include the following:

1) Checking arithmetic in all computations; and

2) Ensuring all prices are summarized correctly.

Note: Any aspect of an offer that exceeds any aspect of the requirement, deemed valuable by the Government at the time of evaluations, can and will be incorporated into the proceeding award, in total or partiality as deemed by the Government.

(End of Provision)

(End of Summary of Changes) image1.wmf