22R0013 (RFP)_AMD0001.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 1) extend the proposal due date by tw o (2) w eeks 2) incorportate DFARS clause 252.237-7023; 3) revise M95494-22-R-0013 52.212-1, Addendum; 4) revise M95494-22-R-0013 52.212-2, Addendum; 5) revise RFP Attachment L-1 DD254;

6) revise RFP Attachment L-3 Corporate Experience Form; and 7) revise RFP Attachments L-4 Core Sustainment, Manpow er Systems and SABRS Support Task Orders.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 17

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 01-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 M9549422R0013

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

26-Jan-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 X is extended, 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 1 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

01-Mar-2022

CODE

MCICOM HQ

3000 MARINE CORPS PENTAGON

WASHINGTON DC 20350-3000

M95494 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

M9549422R0013

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 08-Mar-2022 10:00 AM to 22-Mar-2022 10:00 AM.

The following have been added by reference:

252.237-7023 Continuation of Essential Contractor Services OCT 2010

The following have been modified:

52.212-1 ADDENDUM

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS OR RESPONDENTS

1) GENERAL

A) This is a FAR Part 12, Acquisition of Commercial Items, procurement conducted using the procedures in FAR Part 15, Contracting by Negotiation. It will be competed on an Unrestricted basis.

B) The proposal submitted in response to this solicitation must be in compliance with the requirements as stated in this solicitation, including all attachments. All claimed capabilities to meet the requirements shall be realistic and are subject to verification by the Government. Non-conformance with these instructions may result in rejection of the proposal, an unfavorable proposal evaluation, or the proposal being deemed ineligible for award.

C) Points of Contact – The Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) and the Contract Specialist are the sole points of contact for this procurement. All questions and interchanges, as further discussed below, will be controlled by the PCO. The PCO may use e-mail to transmit information to Offerors. E-mails shall be marked with the following restrictive legend: “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104.”

The PCO and Contract Specialist’s contact information is as follows:

Role Name E-Mail Phone PCO F. Paul Lirio francis.lirio@usmc.mil (703) 604-3236

Contract Specialist Brandon Payne brandon.m.payne@usmc.mil (703) 604-0086

D) Questions – All questions concerning any aspect of this solicitation shall be submitted via email to the

POCs above by 10:00 AM EST no later than ten (10) business days after release of the solicitation. As time may not permit responses to questions received after the stated deadline, the Government may decline to answer questions received after the deadline. The Government will use its best efforts to respond to Offeror questions; however, the Government cannot guarantee responses to questions submitted after the deadline.

Offerors shall not provide questions or comments that include proprietary information. Unless expressly stated by the PCO, questions and answers published throughout this solicitation’s open period do not constitute an amendment to this solicitation.

mailto:francis.lirio@usmc.mil mailto:brandon.m.payne@usmc.mil

E) Discrepancies – If an Offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the Offeror shall immediately notify the PCO via the Contract Specialist prior to the solicitation closing date and time.

F) Estimated Award Date – For proposal purposes, the estimated contract award is in the fourth quarter of

FY22.

G) Proposal Incorporation – Portions of the successful Offeror’s technical proposal may be incorporated into the Contract. Where portions of the technical proposal are incorporated, the successful Offeror will be responsible for delivering in accordance with both the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and the provisions of its offer.

2) INSTRUCTIONS FOR PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

A) Proposals shall be submitted electronically via the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment Capabilities (PIEE) Solicitation Module to F. Paul Lirio (francis.lirio@usmc.mil) and Brandon Payne (Brandon.m.payne@usmc.mil). Electronic files shall be compatible with Microsoft Word (*.docx), Microsoft Excel (*.xlsx), Microsoft PowerPoint (*.pptx), and/or Adobe (*.pdf) format. Faxes, e-mails, and/or responses through the System for Award Management (SAM) or any other method are not acceptable.

PIEE Solicitation Module Resources:

Memo - https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/policy/policyvault/USA000728-20-DPC.pdf

Vendor Registration Guide for Contractors:

https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pdi/eb/docs/PIEE/PIEE_Solicitation_Module_Vendor_Ac cess_Instructions.pdf

PIEE Solicitation Web Based Training - https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/xhtml/wbt/sol/index.xhtml

B) Proposal Due Date and Time – The time and date for receipt of offers is stated in Block 8 of the Standard Form (SF) 1449. The Offeror must submit its proposal by the date, time, and place for receipt of offers in order to be evaluated. Initial proposals and any modifications thereto must be submitted on or before the closing date and time cited in Block 8 of the SF1449. Late submissions will not be considered for evaluation unless the conditions of FAR 15.208(b) apply.

C) Offerors shall submit their proposals in four (4) separate volumes as follows:

Volume Description

I Administrative Proposal II Gate Criteria Proposal* III Technical Proposal* IV Price Proposal

*Volume II and III shall not contain any pricing information.

3) PROPOSAL FORMAT

A) Proposal Requirements – Offerors shall submit proposals in the format set forth herein. The completion and submission of all items in accordance with this solicitation will constitute a proposal and will be considered the Offeror’s unconditional assent to the terms and conditions of this solicitation and any attachments and/or exhibits hereto. Failure to submit complete information may be considered “Unacceptable” and may result in the exclusion of the proposal from further consideration. Alternate proposals are not authorized.

An objection to any of the terms and conditions of the solicitation will constitute a deficiency (see FAR 15.001), which will render the proposal ineligible for award. Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation shall be UNCLASSIFIED.

mailto:francis.lirio@usmc.mil mailto:Brandon.m.payne@usmc.mil https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/policy/policyvault/USA000728-20-DPC.pdf https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pdi/eb/docs/PIEE/PIEE_Solicitation_Module_Vendor_Ac%20cess_Instructions.pdf https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pdi/eb/docs/PIEE/PIEE_Solicitation_Module_Vendor_Ac%20cess_Instructions.pdf https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/xhtml/wbt/sol/index.xhtml

B) Format – Electronic proposals shall be prepared so that, if printed, the proposal meets the following format requirements: No smaller than 12-font size, Times New Roman font on standard 8-1/2 x 11 inch paper.

One-inch minimum margins on each side, including top and bottom are required. Text within tables, diagrams, pictorial charts, or graphic material may use no smaller than 8-point font. 11 x 17 inch foldout pages are allowed for tables, diagrams, pictorial charts or other graphic material and will be counted as two pages. Every figure and table shall be numbered and included in a list of tables in the Table of Contents. At a minimum, the following information shall be included in either the header or footer of each page.

• the Offeror’s name;

• the solicitation number;

• the volume number;

• the page number; and

• a restrictive legend (if applicable).

The Offeror must apply the appropriate controlled unclassified information (CUI) markings to their proposals, as applicable (see DFARS 252.204-7008 and National Institute of Standards and Technology

(NIST) 800-171).

C) Electronic Format – Electronic files shall be compatible with Microsoft Word (*.docx), Microsoft Excel

(*.xlsx), and/or Adobe (*.pdf) format, unless otherwise specified. All Excel files shall be operable versus value only spreadsheets (i.e., formulas shall be included in all applicable cells) and the spreadsheets shall be editable (i.e., not “read only”). All signed documents shall be submitted as Adobe Acrobat (*.pdf) files (e.g., signed SF1449, Cover Letter, Letter(s) of Intent, etc.). All Adobe Acrobat files must be searchable.

All files shall use naming conventions in accordance with the table under Section (2)(C) above, as applicable. No files shall be password protected.

Any graphics software that produces embedded objects and pictures compatible with Microsoft Office may be used for graphics within the Offeror’s proposal. Tables, figures, and graphics that are placed or embedded into Word (*.docx) or Adobe Acrobat (*.pdf) documents or other Office compatible files shall be kept simple, understandable, and must be legible. No sound, animation, or video files are acceptable.

D) The proposal shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal shall not simply re-phrase or re-state the Government’s requirements, but rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet these requirements. Statements that the Offeror will provide a particular feature or objective without explaining how the Offeror proposes to meet that feature or objective are generally inadequate and may adversely impact the Government’s evaluation of the Offeror. The following types of statements may also be deemed inadequate:

(1) Unsupported statements that the Offeror allegedly understands the requirements and risks;

(2) Unsupported statements that the Offeror allegedly can or will comply with requirements;

(3) Unsupported statements that merely paraphrase the requirements;

(4) Undefined or unexplained statements such as “best commercial practices will be used”;

(5) Undefined or unexplained statements such as “standard procedures will be used”; and

(6) Undefined or unexplained statements such as “well-known techniques will be employed.”

Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of the Offeror’s capabilities and experience and that the Government will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Offeror’s proposal.

E) Elaborate brochures or documentation, detailed artwork, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

F) Cover Page, Table of Contents, and Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms – Each proposal volume shall include a cover page, a table of contents, and a glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, which will not count against the page limit. The cover page and table of contents should be included as the first files within each proposal Volume. The cover page shall identify the solicitation number, proposal volume and title, the Offeror’s name, and if applicable, restrictive legend. The glossary of abbreviations and acronyms shall include all abbreviations, acronyms, and the corresponding definitions.

G) Page Limits – Information submitted in excess of page limits specified within the table below will not be read or evaluated. Page limits do not include cover pages, tables of contents, lists of figures, lists of drawings, lists of proprietary data, glossaries, tabs, dividers, or blank pages. All proposal material must be contained within the page limit(s) identified for each volume, unless otherwise specified. No hyperlinks to locations outside a document are acceptable. A partial page counts as a full page. Pages shall be numbered consecutively within each volume showing volume and page. For example, page 9 of Volume I would be numbered I-9 and page 10 of Volume II would be numbered II-10. Offerors are cautioned that they are responsible to ensure that material that they desire to have evaluated for a particular section is contained in that specific section. Proposals shall be submitted to the Government in four (4) separate volumes and each volume shall be a separate electronic file as follows:

Volume Description Page Limits Electronic Copies

I Administrative N/A 1 II Gate Criteria 30 1 III Technical 35 1 IV Price N/A 1

Each page of each copy shall include the following footer, “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104.” The exception to the format and font size requirement shown above are that:

(1) Tables, charts, diagrams, and graphics may be completed with a font size of 8 or greater.

4) PROPOSAL CONTENT

Information shall be confined to the appropriate volume to facilitate independent evaluation. Each volume must be presented on a stand-alone basis so that the Government can evaluate its contents without cross-referencing to other volumes of the proposal unless otherwise specified in this RFP. The Government may consider information it requires for proposal evaluation not found in its designated volume as having been omitted from the Offeror’s proposal.

A) VOLUME I – ADMINISTRATIVE

This volume shall contain the following:

(1) Proposal Cover Letter – The Proposal Cover Letter shall be signed by an authorized company official and include the following:

(a) Solicitation Number.

(b) Company Information – The name, address, DUNS number, CAGE Code, telephone number, and

Tax Identification Number (TIN) of the Offeror.

(c) Authorized Personnel – Provide the name, title, telephone 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.

(d) Terms of any express warranty.

(e) “Remit to” address, if different than mailing address.

(f) Acknowledgment of Solicitation Amendments (if applicable).

(g) Agreement with Terms – A statement specifying the Offeror’s unconditional assent to the Terms and Conditions of the RFP.

(h) Technical data and software documentation required to be identified by DFARS 252.227-7028, Technical Data or Computer Software Previously Delivered to the Government. Offerors shall fill out Attachment L-2. If none, so state.

(i) Proposal Expiration Date – The Offeror agrees to hold the prices in its offer firm for 365 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of offers.

(2) Signed SF1449 – Include a signed SF1449 with the appropriate blocks completed by the Offeror.

(3) DD 254 – Include a completed copy of DD Form 254, Contract Security Classification Specification

(Attachment L-1) with Blocks 6(a-c) filled out.

(4) Representations and Certifications – Complete your representations and certifications in SAM. Ensure all representations and certifications included in this solicitation are completed in SAM. If any representations and certifications included in the solicitation are not available in SAM, submit your representations and certifications in Volume I in addition to certifying that all other representations and certifications have been completed in SAM.

(5) Organizational Conflict of Interest – Disclose any potential or actual organizational conflicts of interest

(OCIs) that your company, subcontractors, and any other teaming partners may have with the requirements of the PWS and solicitation. Include a description of the OCI(s) and the action(s) taken, if any, to avoid, mitigate, or neutralize the OCIs. A negative response is required.

(6) Organization Structure – Provide your team’s composition under this solicitation to include teaming partners and subcontractors. Offerors shall include all companies’ names and CAGE codes.

B) VOLUME II – GATE CRITERIA

VOLUME II SHALL HAVE NO PRICING/COST INFORMATION INCLUDED

Volume II shall contain the requested information for the two (2) Gate Criteria.

(1) Gate Criteria 1 – Corporate Experience (Acceptable/Unacceptable)

(a) The Offeror shall complete and submit the Corporate Experience Form (Attachment L-3) for up to, but no more than four (4) contracts/task orders (TO), or commercial experience(s), performed within the past five (5) years from the date the solicitation was released. No more than two (2) contracts/task orders may be from a subcontractor or team member. The Offeror’s Corporate Experience noted within Attachment L-3 shall be for the performance of actual technical requirements – master contract vehicles (e.g., Blanket Purchase Agreements, Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity contracts) will not satisfy the Gate Criteria, Corporate Experience, requirement. Offerors are advised to review and follow the instructions within Attachment L-3.

Failure to submit Attachment L-3 in accordance with the instructions stated therein may result in a proposal being rated “Unacceptable” and excluded from further consideration for award.

(b) The Offeror’s Corporate Experience Form (Attachment L-3) shall demonstrate how its proposed team has experience performing the following services:

2.1 Software Development Lifecycle (SDLC)

2.2 Web BIS Infrastructure and Operations

2.3 Cybersecurity

2.4 Data and Platform Analysis

2.5 Financial Audit

2.6 Mainframe BIS Operations

2.7 Business Process Management

2.8 BIS Data Calls

(2) Gate Criteria 2 – Small Business Utilization

(a) Small Business Subcontracting Plan – Large Business Offerors shall submit a Small Business

Subcontracting Plan as required under FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan. Large Businesses shall ensure the Small Business Subcontracting Plan adequately responds to each of the required elements of FAR 52.219-9(d). In accordance with FAR 19.704, Subcontracting Plan Requirements, Small Businesses are exempt from having to submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

The Small Business Subcontracting Plan must demonstrate the below Minimum Quantitative Requirements (MQR). The MQR provides a minimum for the socio-economic categories under this requirement and Offerors are encouraged to exceed these minimum where possible.

Socio-Economic Group Percentage Total Small Business 39.0% Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) 5.0% Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB) 5.0% Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) Small Business 3.0% Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) 3.0% Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB) 3.0%

(b) Small Business Participation Plan – Large Business Offerors shall also submit a Small Business

Participation Plan. Since small businesses are exempt from submitting a Small Business Subcontracting Plan as required under FAR 52.219-9, small business offerors shall submit a small Business Participation Plan. The Small Business Participation Plan must demonstrate the below MQR. The MQR provides a minimum for the socio-economic categories under this requirement and Offerors are encouraged to exceed these minimum where possible.

Socio-Economic Group Percentage Total Small Business 39.0% Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) 5.0% Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB) 5.0% Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) Small Business 3.0% Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) 3.0% Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB) 3.0%

C) VOLUME III – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

VOLUME III SHALL HAVE NO PRICING/COST INFORMATION INCLUDED

This volume shall contain the following:

(1) Factor 1 – Technical Approach

Applicable to Sample Task Orders – The Offeror shall provide its Technical Approach for accomplishing the following three (3) Sample Task Orders (Attachment L-4) in accordance with the GO-GO-CS operating model discussed in Section 1.2 of the Base IDIQ PWS:

Sample Task Orders Description 1 Core Sustainment Support 2 Manpower System Support

3 SABRS Support

The Government selected these Sample Task Orders as representative of the type and complexity of work likely to be required of the Offeror during contract performance.

The Offeror’s proposal for each Sample Task Order shall contain:

(a) The Offeror’s qualifications, capabilities, personnel, and any additional resources employed to efficiently accomplish all requirements set forth in the Sample Task Orders.

(b) A description of how the Offeror intends to address challenges associated with effectively managing the tasking established within the Sample Task Orders.

(c) A description of the risks associated with the Sample Task Orders and the experience and methodology the Offeror will employ to reduce the impact of those risks.

(d) A description of how the Offeror intends to address, on a technical level, both business aspects

(i.e., underlying business requirements and translating business rules into system logic) and technology aspects (i.e., architectures, technologies, and tools) of the requirements for the Sample Task Orders.

(e) A description of how the Offeror intends to address the technical challenges of working on subcomponents of the systems identified in the Sample Task Orders such that the work products can be integrated into larger Government controlled processes and systems.

(2) Factor 2 – Management Approach

The Offeror shall provide its Management Approach for the following:

(a) Program Management

Applicable to Base IDIQ PWS – The Offeror shall provide a detailed description to meet the requirements of Sections 3.0 – 3.5, 7.0 – 7.3, and 11.0 – 11.3 of the Base IDIQ PWS.

Applicable to Sample Task Orders – The Offeror shall provide a detailed narrative describing their management approach to successfully accomplish the requirements set forth in the contract. The Offeror shall demonstrate their ability to effectively manage the contract and any Sample Task Order requirements and perform on or ahead of schedule to minimize technical and performance risk. The Offeror shall describe their approach towards providing quality control and quality assurance, including identification of their relevant key performance metrics and how they will ensure successful completion of all requirements at a high quality level. The Offeror shall describe their approach to resolve negative performance issues and unsatisfactory deliverables and prevent performance gaps.

The Offeror’s proposal shall describe the corporate approach to program control, including the methods of communication, such as working meetings, directives, and memoranda. The Offeror’s proposal shall discuss the procedures by which the Program Manager exercises control.

(b) Staffing Approach

Applicable to Sample Task Orders – The Offeror shall describe their approach for recruiting and retaining personnel to support the requirements of this contract and all of its Task Orders with the appropriate skillset, technical expertise, security requirements, and experience, in a timely manner.

The Offeror shall provide a notional staffing plan matrix for each of the Sample Task Orders in Microsoft Excel (*.xlsx), as an appendix in Volume I, that supports the requirements of this solicitation. The Offeror shall provide an explanation detailing how its proposed labor mixes will meet the requirements of the PWS.

(c) Key Personnel

Applicable to both Base IDIQ PWS and Sample Task Orders – The Offeror shall demonstrate each Key Person’s ability to meet the requirements of the Base IDIQ PWS and Sample Task Orders from Factor 1, as applicable. The Offeror shall include a resume and a signed Letter of Intent for all Key Personnel as follows:

(i) Resumes for Key Personnel shall contain the following:

• Employee Name

• Years of Professional Experience

• Current Position/Title

• Educational History/Degrees Held

• Chronology of Professional Experience (most related first)

• Current Level of Security Clearance

Resumes shall not exceed two (2) pages per person and must include the title of the position for which the Key Personnel are being proposed. Resumes are to be submitted as part of the Appendix to Volume III and do not count against the page limit.

(ii) Offerors shall provide Letters of Intent (LOI) for all Key personnel. The LOIs shall be signed by the proposed individual and contain their name and assigned labor category.

Although this solicitation contemplates some Key Personnel becoming unavailable prior to contract award, Offerors shall only propose Key Personnel resumes for individuals that, at the time of proposal submission, the Offeror has a good faith expectation of providing at award. The Government considers the submission of LOIs for proposed contingent Key Personnel to be material to the proposal since these LOIs demonstrate the Offeror’s ability to hire personnel with the qualifications proposed at the salary proposed. LOIs for current employees of an Offeror should express an understanding of being designated as Key Personnel under the resultant contract and a willingness to be committed to the program.

(3) Factor 3 – Past Performance

Offerors are not required to submit any additional information in response to this factor. For the evaluation of this factor, the Government will assess the Offeror’s past performance on the contracts submitted in response to Volume I, Gate Criteria.

D) Volume IV – Price Proposal

(1) Factor 4 – Price

All information relating to pricing data shall be included in Volume IV.

Price Proposals must be consistent with data contained in the Technical Proposal and consistent with the populated CLINs in the solicitation. The total evaluated price will consist of 1) Total proposed price for the Core Sustainment Sample Task Order (inclusive of 52.217-8); 2) Total proposed price for the Manpower Systems Sample Task Order (inclusive of 52.217-8); 3) Total proposed price for the SABRS Sample Order (exclusive of any Option Year four (4) and 52.217-8); and 4) Total proposed price of the Additional Labor Categories. Pricing will be incorporated into Schedule of Supplies/Services of the SF 1449 upon contract award. The Price Proposal must support the level of resources required to complete the requirements of this effort. The Offeror shall provide sufficient price information to allow the Contracting Officer to determine the reasonableness of the proposed price in accordance with the following:

(a) Price Proposals for the Sample Task Orders and Additional Labor Categories – Provide a priced proposal for each Sample Task Order and the Additional Labor Categories in the Attachment L-5, Pricing Template. The price proposal shall include a breakdown, by CLIN, for all labor rates and hours used to develop the price/cost breakdown for all Sample Task Orders. The Government has provided the Additional Labor Categories and the estimated hours which are also included in Attachment L-5. Prices for all Sample Task Orders and the Additional Labor Categories must be fully burdened, meaning inclusive of all Overhead, General and Administrative costs, Profit, and any other indirect cost or cost element. Offerors shall provide the Unit Price, Unit of Issue, Quantity, and Total Price for each CLIN and all Unit Pricing must be rounded to two (2) decimal places (i.e., $12.34).

(b) In accordance with Section 13.0 of the PWS, Travel will be funded by the Government on a reimbursable basis when required. The Government has estimated the Travel amount for the contract, which is included in Attachment L-5. The Offeror shall not adjust these values.

(c) If the Offeror is currently being audited, or has been audited, by the Defense Contract Audit

Agency (DCAA), the name and location of the assigned DCAA office, along with a current point of contact, shall be furnished with the price/cost proposal.

(End of provision)

52.212-2 ADDENDUM

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1) GENERAL

Due to the interrelationship of services to be provided hereunder, the Government intends to issue, if at all, a Single Award (SA) Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract to the responsible Offeror whose proposal conforms to the solicitation’s requirements and is determined to provide the best value to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors described below. Therefore, proposals containing less than the entire effort specified herein shall be determined to be unacceptable and may be removed from consideration for award.

One (1) award will be made, if any, of one SA IDIQ contract that contains firm-fixed-price (FFP), FFP level-of-effort (LOE) and cost-only (no fee) Contract Line Items (CLINs) and will consist of a five-year ordering period.

The Offeror’s proposal shall be in the prescribed format and shall contain a response to each of the areas identified in FAR 52.212-1, Addendum, of this solicitation. After receipt of proposals, the Government may, with or without notice, negotiate with and, if desired, seek proposal revisions from as many or as few Offerors as it, in its discretion, deems appropriate. Conversely, the Government reserves the right to award a contract based on initial offers received, without discussion of such offers. Accordingly, each initial offer shall be submitted on the most favorable terms from the standpoint of both price/cost and non-price factors.

The Government reserves the right to award the contract to other than the lowest priced Offeror. In accordance with FAR 15.306(c)(2), the Contracting Officer may determine that the number of most highly rated proposals that might otherwise be included in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted. As such, unless the Government elects to make an award based on initial offers, the Government intends to establish a competitive range to Offerors whose proposals demonstrate a high likelihood of receiving an award, price and non-price factors considered. Award will not be made to any Offeror who does not meet the test of responsibility prescribed in FAR 9.104 or the Administrative Proposal requirements of the solicitation.

The Government anticipates award of any or all of the Sample Task Orders herein. Additionally, the Government reserves the right to issue one or more of these Sample Task Orders, any part thereof or none, in the resultant contract.

2) EVALUATION PHASES

The Government will complete an initial review of the Offeror’s proposal to ensure adherence to the instructions under 52.212-1, Addendum. Evaluation of solicitation documents will ensure the proposal complies with all prescribed requirements, which includes the timeliness of proposal submission, format compliance, and completeness of each volume. The Government may consider an Offeror ineligible for award and discontinue evaluations if the proposal is incomplete (missing items, signatures, etc.) or does not comply with format requirements. Following the initial review, the Government will conduct a two-phased source selection based on the following factors:

Phase Factors 1 Gate Criteria

Factor 1, Technical Approach (Sample Task Orders) Factor 2, Management Approach Factor 3, Past Performance Factor 4, Price

A) Phase 1 – Phase 1 is the evaluation of the Gate Criteria, which will be rated on an

Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. Proposals that receive a rating of “Acceptable” on each of the two (2) Gate Criteria (Corporate Experience, Small Business Utilization) will be eligible for the Phase 2 evaluation. A proposal that receives a rating of “Unacceptable”, on any of the Gate Criteria, will not be evaluated further and render the entire proposal ineligible for award.

B) Phase 2 – Phase 2 is the evaluation of the non-price, technical factors (Factors 1, 2, and 3) and the price factor (Factor 4) in accordance with the evaluation criteria below.

3) EVALUTION CRITERIA

A) Phase 1 – Acceptable/Unacceptable (Non-Tradeoff)

The Gate Criteria that will be evaluated as either Acceptable or Unacceptable include the following:

(1) Gate Criteria 1 – Corporate Experience

The Government will evaluate whether the Offeror has demonstrated the experience performing the services identified in 52.212-1, Addendum.

The Gate Criteria is not an element of responsibility, and is not subject to the Certificate of Competency (CoC) process of FAR Subpart 19.601. Therefore, the Government will not accept a CoC as a substitute for the Experience specified in 52.212-1, Addendum.

NOTE: The Government is not bound by the Offeror's self-assessment of its own Corporate Experience.

(2) Gate Criteria 2 – Small Business Utilization

(a) Small Business Subcontracting Plan – Large Business Offerors’ proposals will be evaluated to ensure that a Small Business Subcontracting Plan meets all elements required by FAR 52.219-9 and DFARS 252.219-7003. Offerors that do not meet the MQRs stated in FAR 52.212-1 will be rated as Unacceptable.

(b) Small Business Participation Plan – The Small Business Participation Plan will be evaluated to ensure all MQRs stated in FAR 52.212-1 have been met. Offerors that do not meet the MQRs stated in FAR 52.212-1 will be rated as Unacceptable.

B) Phase 2 – Best Value (Tradeoff)

The tradeoff evaluation process permits the Government to make a best value determination based on a tradeoff among Non-Price and Price/Cost evaluation factors and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal or other than the highest technically rated proposal to obtain objective performance, lower risk, or innovative and technologically superior solutions. In order to determine the offer providing the best value, a tradeoff process of the following factors will be conducted:

Factor Description

1 Technical Approach 2 Management Approach 3 Past Performance 4 Price

The factors above are listed in descending order of importance. Technical Approach (Factor 1) is more important than Management Approach (Factor 2), which is more important than Past Performance (Factor 3). The non-price factors, Factors 1 through 3, when combined, are significantly more important than Factor 4, Price. Factor 4 becomes increasingly more important as competing proposals approach parity in the Non-Price factors 1 through 3.

Offerors are forewarned that a proposal meeting solicitation requirements with the lowest evaluated price may not be selected for award if a higher technically-evaluated proposal is determined to be most advantageous to the Government.

An overall adjectival rating will be assigned to each of the non-price factors as a result of the source selection evaluation. The adjectival ratings under this solicitation follow the Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method of the 2016 DoD Source Selection Procedures. Any proposal rated ‘Marginal’ or ‘Unacceptable’ for any non-price factor will be ineligible for award, and may be excluded from any discussions or clarifications that might take place. Offerors with a Past Performance rating of Limited or No Confidence will not be considered for award, and may be excluded from any discussions that might take place.

(1) Factor 1 – Technical Approach

The Offeror will be evaluated on how effectively their Technical Approach meets the requirements in 52.212-1, Addendum. Technical approaches that demonstrate an increased potential to address both the business and technical aspects of the Sample Task Orders will be evaluated more favorably. Technical approaches that demonstrate integration with the GO-GO-CS operating model discussed in Section 1.2 of the Base IDIQ PWS will be evaluated more favorably.

(2) Factor 2 – Management Approach

The Offeror will be evaluated on how effectively their Management Approach meets the requirements in 52.212-1, Addendum.

(i) Program Management – Program Management Approaches that demonstrate an increased ability to manage any Sample Task Order requirements as well as perform on or ahead of schedule will be evaluated more favorably. Offerors that demonstrate a comprehensive approach to quality control and quality assurance will be evaluated more favorably. Offerors that demonstrate a more effective approach to resolve negative performance issues and unsatisfactory deliverables and prevent performance gaps will be evaluated more favorably.

(ii) Staffing Approach – Staffing Approaches that demonstrate increased potential to recruit and retain high-quality personnel in a timely manner will be evaluated more favorably. Staffing plans that demonstrate a comprehensive approach to support the requirements of the solicitation and Sample Task Orders will be evaluated more favorably.

(iii) Key Personnel – Key Personnel that exceed the preferred experience criteria for the Base IDIQ and Sample Task Orders will be evaluated more favorably.

(3) Factor 3 – Past Performance

The past performance evaluation will result in an assessment of the degree of confidence the Government has in the Offeror’s ability to meet the requirements of this solicitation based on a demonstrated record of performance. The past performance evaluation considers each Offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements. 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. These will be combined to establish one performance confidence assessment rating for each Offeror. The Government will evaluate only recent and relevant past performance to make its assessment as to whether the Offeror has the ability to successfully execute the services as described in this solicitation. For all Offerors, the Government will consider historical compliance with the requirements of FAR 52.219-8 (Utilization of Small Business Concerns). For large Offerors, the Government will consider historical compliance with the requirements of FAR 52.219-9.

In conducting the past performance evaluation, the Government reserves the right to use the information obtained from other sources available to the Government. This includes, but is not limited to, the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) or other databases; interviews with Contracting Officers, Fee Determining Officials and Program Managers; commercial sources and the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA). This information may include Award Fee letters and related reports, Letters of Concern, and any other performance notification, whether positive or negative. The Government is not responsible for searching for data to resolve inconsistencies or ambiguities in the information provided by the Offeror.

In the case of Offerors for which there is no information on past contract performance, where past contract performance information is not available, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance. In this case, the Offeror’s past performance is unknown and assigned a performance confidence rating of “neutral.”

(4) Factor 4 – Price

(i) The anticipated ceiling price for the resultant contract is $155 million. Please note that this ceiling includes any future Task Orders beyond the anticipated initial award of the three (3) Sample Task Orders.

(ii) The Offeror’s total evaluated price includes all proposed services for the three (3) Sample Task Orders and the Additional Labor Categories. For award purposes, the Government will evaluate proposals by adding the total price for the three (3) Sample Task Orders, which includes all periods of performance in accordance with FAR 52.217-8 and 52.217-9, with the total price for all Additional Labor Categories. For the Core Sustainment and Manpower Systems Sample Task Orders, the option to extend services under FAR 52.217-8 will be based on the price of the final period of performance divided by two.

Offerors are advised that the number of labor hours for each category in tab “Additional Labor Categories” are for evaluation purposes only. The numbers are based on historical data and are indicative of the number of hours that the Government anticipates within the execution of the IDIQ in addition to the 3 Sample Task Orders. However, proposed labor rates will be fixed ceiling rates for each year within the 5 year ordering period, regardless of how many hours are procured, up to the total ceiling of the contract. Offerors must utilize Attachment L-5 to document the price proposal.

(iii) The Government will conduct a price reasonableness analysis of the Offeror’s proposed price.

Proposed total prices that are excessively high that are not supported by sufficient justification may be considered unreasonable and may receive no further consideration. In order to be considered for award, the proposed price must be determined to be fair and reasonable.

(iv) The estimated amounts for Travel are included in Attachment L-5. The amounts for Travel will be added to the Offeror’s total evaluated price to calculate the total contract value.

C) Definition and Adjectival Ratings

(1) TERMS – As used throughout this solicitation, the following terms shall have the meanings set forth below:

(a) PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT – is an evaluation of the likelihood (or

Government’s confidence) that the Offeror will successfully perform the solicitation’s requirements; the evaluation is based upon past performance information.

(b) RECENCY – as it pertains to past performance information, is a measure of the time that has elapsed since the past performance reference occurred. Recency is the time-period during which past performance references are considered relevant. For the purposes of this solicitation, the Government will only consider work performance within the time period specified within FAR 52.212-1 Addendum Section 4.B.(1).

(c) RELEVANCY – means a measure of the extent of similarity between the service/support effort, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and subcontract/teaming or other comparable attributes of past performance examples and the source solicitation requirements; and a measure of the likelihood that the past performance is an indicator of future performance.

(d) RISK – means the potential for unsuccessful contract performance. The consideration of risk assesses the degree to which an Offeror’s proposed approach to achieving the technical factor may involve risk of disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

(e) STRENGTH – means an aspect of an Offeror's proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

(f) WEAKNESS – means a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

(g) DEFICIENCY – means a material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. See FAR 15.001.

(2) ADJECTIVAL RATINGS

(a) Gate Criteria will be rated on an acceptable/unacceptable basis as shown in the table below:

RATING RATING DESCRIPTION

ACCEPTABLE Proposal meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

UNACCEPTABLE Proposal does not meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

(b) The following adjectival ratings/definitions shall be used for Factor 1 – Technical Approach and

Factor 2 – Management Approach. An adjectival rating of ‘Marginal’ or ‘Unacceptable’ for either Factor 1 or 2 will result in the entire proposal being deemed unawardable.

OUTSTANDING Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

GOOD Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

ACCEPTABLE Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

MARGINAL Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

UNACCEPTABLE

Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.

(c) There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation, Factor 3. The first is to evaluate the

Offeror’s past performance for recency. The second is to evaluate the Offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the Offeror is to the effort to be procured under this solicitation. The third aspect of the past performance evaluation is to assess the Offeror’s performance on the referenced contracts and assign a performance confidence rating.

Recency will be determined based upon the definition provided above. The past performance relevancy rating, as defined in the table below, is the assessment of the Offeror’s demonstrated recent an relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements.

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

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved much of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant

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

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

The past performance confidence rating, as defined in the table below, is the evaluation of the Offeror’s demonstrated ability to successfully perform the contract’s requirements, based on past performance information.

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

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

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

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

Unknown Confidence (Neutral)

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

(End of provision)

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

Contract Attachments

Attachment 1 – Appendix A

RFP Attachments

Attachment L-1 – DD254 (to be incorporated upon award)

Attachment L-2 – DFARS 252.227-7028

Attachment L-3 – Corporate Experience Questionnaire

Attachment L-4 – Sample Task Orders

Attachment L-5 – Pricing Template (to be incorporated upon award as proposed)

Exhibits

CDRLs A001 – A011

(End of Summary of Changes)