N0018918RZ017-0002.docx

N0018918RZ017

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 02

Amendment 02 is hereby issued to revise the answer to Q22 in Amendment 01 in Section A to state: No, the Total Compensation Plan will only be evaluated for the Prime contractor. It will not be reviewed at the subcontractor level.

This amendment transfers the statement "The Small Business subcontracting goal for contracts awarded from this solicitation is 23% of the subcontracted level of effort." from Submission of Proposals in Section L to Subcontracting Plan – Incorporated in Section G.

Also, this amendment corrects the spelling of proposals in Section M.

The deadline for submissions remains unchanged.

The following have been modified:

AMENDMENT 01

Amendment 01 is hereby issued to answer the following questions and to revise the RFP:

Q1: Is this program a re-competition of an existing effort? if so, can you provide any information on the incumbent performer and/or contract number?

A1: See Part E of the Solicitation Form in Section A of the RFP.

Q2: Will an Interim Top Secret Facility Clearance at the time of submission be acceptable?

A2: A successful offeror shall possess security clearances identified within Section 5.7. Specific task order requirements are not defined at this time; therefore, the contractor shall be prepared to maintain the clearances throughout the term of the contract.

Q3: Will the Government please clarify that the instructions for Section L (2) Volume II - Cost/Price located on page 73 with regard to ratios of Contractor Facility (10%) and Government facility (90%) are correct?

A3: The solicitation is clear on its face.

Q4: Section L.III(2)(b) paragraph 3 (pg. 72) of the solicitation reads “To the extent that an Offeror is proposing a subcontractor on a cost-reimbursement basis, the documentation substantiating the accuracy of the subcontractor’s proposed direct labor rates is also required.” Will the Government confirm that only a subcontractor being proposed on a CPFF basis needs to submit a sealed package?

A4: A sealed package is required of all subcontractors regardless of contract type.

Q5: If the answer to the question above is “yes”, will the Government confirm that the submission instructions for Subcontractors are the same as for the Prime?

A5: The solicitation is clear on its face.

Q6: Are there any minimum percentages that offerors are to propose for our Small Business Subcontracting Plan?

A6: The solicitation is amended to include the following statement to Section L: The Small Business subcontracting goal for contracts awarded from this solicitation is 23% of the subcontracted level of effort.

Q7: FAR 52.219-9 is included in this effort, however the prime contractor is not authorizing any 2nd tier subcontracts under this effort. Will the Government accept a statement from the Prime in our cover letter stating that there are no 2nd tier subcontractors authorized, or would the Government accept a letter from any Large Businesses subcontractor stating that they will not subcontract for effort authorized under any duly executed subcontract?

A7: The solicitation is clear on its face.

Q8: In section L.III (a) on pg. 70, the solicitation reads, “If a subcontractor or subcontractors are proposed, the management approach should address, in terms of scope and percentage of effort, what portion of the solicitation's requirements will be performed by each subcontractor.” Will the government please clarify how the Offeror should present portions to be performed by subcontractors at the IDIQ level without knowing the scope and level of efforts of all the Task Orders under the IDIQ?

A8: The solicitation is clear on its face.

Q9: Is there an anticipated breakdown of clearance requirements (TS-SCI, TS, S,) by labor category and hours that can be shared?

A9: No. The highest level of any task order issued under this program will be TS/SCI.

Q10: Section L, III, (1) (b), page 70/71 of 79, Past Performance. Are Past Performance Questionnaires required? If yes, is there a preferred form?

A10: The Past Performance Information Form (PPIF) is an attachment to the solicitation and is available for download on NECO.

Q11: Section L, III, (1) (c), page 71 of 79, Socio-Economic Plan. “The offeror shall provide targets, expressed as percentages of total contract value, for [list of small business types].” Please confirm that the total contract value itself is not to be included in Volume I in the Socio-Economic Plan.

A11: The total contract value is not to be included in Volume I.

Q12: Section A, B). Please confirm that Federal Express is an acceptable mail option.

A12: Yes

Q13: List of System Suppliers Requested: RFP page 37, Clause H( b)(i), Organizational Conflict of Interest, Warranty Against Existing Conflicts of Interests asks contractors to warrant that they do not have contracts or interests with system suppliers identified in the statement of work of this contract. The SOW does not list any system suppliers.

“(b) (i) The contractor warrants that it and its affiliates do not have any contracts with or any substantial interest in the system suppliers identified in the task order statement of work of this contract, other than those disclosed to the Government and listed in the Section L solicitation provision entitled “Notice of Inclusion of an Organizational Conflict of Interest clause.”.”

A13: The solicitation has been revised.

Q14: Request to Clarify/Revise Clause H, Organizational Conflict of Interest, Definition of “System Suppliers” in H(a)(ii) The definition of “systems suppliers” is unclear. For example, it could appear to prohibit executing contracts at Echelons below OPNAV for similar services that would not create a conflict as a condition of holding the ID/IQ contract. Will the Government clarify its definition to make it clear that analysis of systems in support of the Government (not as a system supplier) is not a conflict, and consider the following revision to the definition to clarify the restriction is only applicable based on actual performance as follows:

“(a) Definitions - In this clause: …

(ii) “System Supplier” means any firm engaged in or having a known or prospective interest in the development and production, or analysis of DCNO N2N6 systems or equipment or programs which are identified in the statement of work of this contract.

A14: The solicitation has been revised.

Q15: Request to Clarify/Revise Clause H (c)(i), Organizational Conflict of Restrictions on Contracting in H(c)(i): We assume that that the limitation of contracting restrictions is limited to restricting contractors from forming contracts and relationships with system suppliers that would be subject to direct review, assessment, or evaluation under task orders issued under this contract. Is this correct?

a. If so, please revise the Section H – OCI Clause language in (c)(i) to state:

“ (c) (i) The contractor agrees that during the term of this contract, and for a period of 24 months thereafter, neither it nor its affiliates shall (1) enter into any contract for supplies, services or materials, related directly supported to the under task orders issued under this contract with the system suppliers; (2) create for themselves any interest in the system suppliers that it has directly reviewed , assessed, or evaluated under task orders performed under this contract; (3) consult or discuss with the system supplier any aspects of work under this contract; or (4) furnish to the United States Government, either as a prime contractor or as a subcontractor any component of a system it has directly worked on supported or had access to non-public, source selection or contractor proprietary information while performing task orders issued under this contract.”

A15: The solicitation has been revised.

Q16: Possible Reversion to OCI Clause and Restrictions Used in Predecessor RFP: In the alternate to changes requested in the previous two questions, would the Government consider reverting to the previous Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) clause’s (a) Definitions and (b) Restrictions on Contracting Sections included in the predecessor IDIQ Contract # N00189-13-D-Z031 (excerpted below) in lieu of the H OCI Clause- (a) Definitions and (c)(i) Restrictions on Contracting included in the current RFP. This modification will ensure that limitation of future contracting restrictions are tied to actual performance under specific task orders, and the nature of the restrictions are clearly delineated.

Organizational Conflict of Interest Predecessor IDIQ RFP # N00189-13-R-Z028 “(a) Definitions - In this clause:

(b) Restrictions on Contracting - The Contractor agrees that during the term of this contract, and for a period of 24 months thereafter that:

(i) If the Contractor and any affiliates perform a task order under this contract, neither the Contractor nor its affiliates who performed under the task order shall:

(1) enter into any contract for the provision of services, supplies, or material related to a U.S. Department of Defense program for which the Contractor has provided support under the task order,

(2) create for themselves any interest in the contractors providing services, supplies, or material related to a U.S. Department of Defense program for which the Contractor has provided support under the task order,

(3) consult or discuss any aspect of work under the task order, unless required under the terms of the task order, with contractors providing services, supplies, or material related to a U.S. Department of Defense program for which the Contractor has provided support under the task order, or (4) furnish to the U.S. Government, either as a prime contractor or as a subcontractor, any services, supplies, or material related to a U.S. Department of Defense program for which the Contractor has provided support under the task order, or

(ii) The Contractor further agrees that neither it nor its affiliates under a given task order will conduct a review nor make recommendations under the task order concerning any services, supplies, or material which is the product of work performed by the Contractor or its affiliates under any other contract.”

A16: The solicitation has been revised based on the previous questions.

Q17: Section A and Section L: Due to the need for hard copy delivery and to avoid excessive costs for overnight/weekend delivery rates and ensure that responders have access to the full solicitation period, would the government please consider extending the submission deadline to February 28th?

A17: The solicitation has been revised to so that the closing date is extended to 28 February 2018.

Q18: Page 48, Personnel Qualifications clause – States that the government will review resumes. Will this review be completed at the task order (TO) level and will this be required for ALL personnel on the contract?

A18: The solicitation has been revised to remove section b of clause 5252.237-9401.

Q19: Page 77, Section M(1),Evaluation criteria – Will the government consider making the Non-price evaluation “significantly” more important than the price evaluation?

A19: No.

Q20: Section L – Volume II requirements – States that offerors must provide cost and pricing information for each time period listed in Section B. Section B lists both a 60-month time period and the five, single year sections. Which is preferred?

A20: The offeror should breakdown their offer by year for a total of 60 months.

Q21: Page 16, Section 5.5, Minimum Qualification. The first paragraph states 3 levels of Technical LCATs but only 2 are listed. Would the government please define the 3rd level?

A21: The solicitation has been amended to state 2 levels of Technical LCATs.

Q22: Page 78 of 79, Section M – Evaluation Factors For Award, Paragraph 2: FAR 52.222-46 is a requirement for the Prime Contractor. Does the Government also require a Total Compensation Plan from the Subcontractors?

A22: Yes. No, the Total Compensation Plan will only be evaluated for the Prime contractor. It will not be reviewed at the subcontractor level.

Q23: On RFP Page 31 under SECURITY ADMINISTRATION; it has been mentioned that we need to Submit this information in Proposal. So do we need to submit this for all Subcontractors. Also do we need to submit DD Form 254 along with Proposal.

A23: The solicitation is clear on its face.

Q24: Is it mandatory to have subcontractors to bid this project. If not; then whose information we need to submit under Security Administration.

A24: Subcontractors are not mandatory, but a Socio-Economic Plan is required per Section L.

Q25: Will the Government accept mailed Proposals from Fedex? If not, will the Government please list the courier service that is approved for Proposal delivery?

A25: Fedex is acceptable.

Q26: Physical Delivery (p. 68 and p. 2). The solicitation calls for physical delivery of Hard Copy Offers, yet notes that the Contracting Office is located on a secured compound such that only personnel with current DoD Common Access Cards (CACs) or appropriate military credentials can access the compound. The solicitation further prohibits hand-carried proposals as well as drop-offs outside the compound.

Would the Government consider amending the Solicitation to accept electronic submissions of Offers, either by email or via a secured large file upload service?

Barring this, could the Government please confirm that the submission address as provided on page 2 is sufficient for the use of overnight/express mail freight services such as FedEx, UPS, or DHL:

FLC Norfolk, Contracting Dept., Philadelphia Office

RFP#N0018918RZ017

Attn: Helen Tyson, Code 260.3E 700 Robbins Ave, Bldg. 2B Philadelphia, PA 19111-5083

A26: Electronic submissions are not permitted. The address listed in the solicitation is sufficient for freight services.

Q27: Electronic Data Support. For the purpose of pricing data comparison between competing offers, will the Government supply an Excel template in standardized format to support easy roll-up of proposals?

A27: A template will not be supplied.

Q28: Minimum Qualifications (5.5, p. 16ff). The labor categories minimum qualifications section details experience requirements but no educational or certification requirements. Are any degrees or certifications required for these positions?

A28: The solicitation is clear on its face.

Q29: Far 22.12 applicability Does FAR 22.12 apply to this work? Will the government provide the longevity dates/years of service for incumbent personnel?

A29: FAR 22.12 is not applicable.

Q30: Phase-In period. How much time, if any, does the Government anticipate between award and start of performance?

A30: Award is anticipated by mid May 2018, then the individual task orders will be competed among the MAC awardees. Performance on the first batch of task orders is anticipated to begin 30 August 2018.

Q31: OCI. In which volume should the contractor volunteer any Organizational Conflict of Interest warranties, potential conflicts and/or mitigation plans? Is this section subject to any page limit?

A31: Where required, offerors shall submit an OCI mitigation plan in which the quoter should explain how it intends to avoid, neutralize or mitigate any possible conflicts of interest. Under the task orders, support may entail access to and/or producing information that is not publicly available and result in development of Navy Enterprise guiding principles for use and implementation. At a minimum, responses should address all the aforementioned areas and any other potential Organization Conflicts of Interest (OCIs) identified as a result of performing under the task order; and a resultant mitigation plan should be provided for all identified OCIs.

Q32: Other requirements. Are there any other requirements of the solicitation?

A32: The solicitation is clear on its face.

Q33: Page 13 of 79, Section 4.16 of the RFP states: "The contractor shall provide analytical expertise and support to government personnel in evaluating capabilities, program and end-to-end assessments for Cyber / Information Operations / Information Assurance / PKI/TIS/COMSEC / Computer". Question: The description appears to be truncated. Can the government provide a complete description of this Task?

A33: The PWS has been revised to the following: The contractor shall provide analytical expertise and support to government personnel in evaluating capabilities, program and end-to-end assessments for Cyber / Information Operations / Information Assurance / PKI/TIS/COMSEC / Computer Network Defense / Electronic Warfare. Contractor shall provide assistance with policy drafting, revision and compliance support and support for cross domain solution, identity management, and Defense IA/ Security Accreditation Working Group (DSWAG) items / actions.

Q34: Page 68 of 79, Section I of the RFP states: “Hand-carried proposals are not permitted. The Contracting Office is located on a secured compound. Only personnel with current DoD Common Access Cards (CACs) or appropriate military credentials will be able to access the compound. There will be no ability to drop off the proposals outside the compound.” Question: If the Offeror is able to access the compound with a current CAC or appropriate military credentials, would a hand-delivery become permissible? If allowed, can the Government provide the street address for hand-delivery?

A34: Hand delivery is not permitted

Q35: Page 68 of 79, Section I of the RFP states: “Hand-carried proposals are not permitted. The Contracting Office is located on a secured compound. Only personnel with current DoD Common Access Cards (CACs) or appropriate military credentials will be able to access the compound. There will be no ability to drop off the proposals outside the compound.” Question: Is delivery via a commercial delivery service such as Fedex required?

A35: Offerors may use any delivery service including US Mail.

Q36: Page 70 of 79, Section II.5 of the RFP states: "Volume I, “Non-Cost Proposal,” is limited to a maximum of 30 pages in length inclusive of any charts, diagrams, and/or other graphics. Each “page” is defined as one sheet, 8 ½” x 11”, with at least one inch margins on all sides, using a font with a point size of 10 or greater (e.g., "Times New Roman" style with 10 point font)." Question: May graphics and tables be in a font size smaller than 10 point as long as they remain legible (recommend 8.5 point font for graphics and 9 point font for tables)?

A36: The solicitation is clear on its face.

Q37: Page 70 of 79, Section III.1.a of the RFP states: "If a subcontractor or subcontractors are proposed, the management approach should address, in terms of scope and percentage of effort, what portion of the solicitation's requirements will be performed by each subcontractor. Team members other than the offeror are considered proposed subcontractors to the offeror." Question: Is "percentage of effort" measured in hours or dollars?

A37: “Percentage of effort” is measured in hours.

Q38: Page 71 of 79, Section III.1.b of the RFP states: "The offeror should complete a “Past Performance Information Form” for each reference submitted. The form is an attachment to the solicitation. The forms will count toward the Volume I page limit described above. For additional information regarding a particular reference beyond that which will fit on the form, the offeror may continue on additional sheets of paper. Such continuation sheet(s) for submitted references will count toward the page limit for Volume I. Only a single set of up to three references shall be submitted." Question: May the Past Performance Information Form be adjusted to match general proposal formatting requirements (e.g. 1” margin)?

A38: Yes.

Q39: Page 71 of 79, Section III.1.c. of the RFP states: "If the offeror fails to provide targets for the contract and/or any of the seven socio-economic factors, the offeror's proposal will be evaluated at zero percent and/or zero dollars for the contract and/or any socio-economic factor for which a target is not provided." Question: Are offerors required to propose a target greater than zero for all seven socio-economic factors for their proposal submission to be compliant?

A39: The solicitation is clear on its face.

Q40: The Past Performance Information Form (PPIF) states “Total dollar amount for this effort during the past five (5) years: (For ordering vehicles, show both the annual estimated contract amount and the amount of orders actually performed):” and states to “Show calendar year and dollars”. Additionally, the last section of the PPIF also requests the annual dollar value of all subcontracts. Question: Can the annual estimated contract and subcontract amounts and the amounts of orders actually performed be shown in contract years (base and any options years) instead of calendar years?

A40: Yes

Q41: Given the existing N2N6 MAC and it’s similarities to the current solicitation, would the Government consider leveling the playing field by releasing at the minimum the SOW and Level of Effort (LOE) of the individual task orders awarded under the current MAC to provide new offerors equal access to the nature of the work as current N2N6 incumbents currently possess?

A41: No.

Also, the following language has been added to Submission of Proposals in Section L:

In addition to the original and copies for each volume requested above, the offeror shall provide a CD/DVD containing the complete .pdf versions of the proposals. Specifically with regard to Volume II, the offeror shall provide their cost breakdown as part of their Cost/Price Proposal in a spreadsheet format compatible with Microsoft Excel 2007 or 2010.

Note: In the event of a discrepancy between the hardcopy and the CD copy, the hard copy shall take precedence.

The deadline for submitting proposals is extended to on or before close of business (4:30 PM EST) on 28 February 2018.

SECTION G - CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA

NOTE

The following clause will be included in contracts awarded to Large Businesses. If the contractor is a Large Business, the Small Business Subcontracting Plan submitted in accordance with this clause (as part of the proposal, in accordance with Section L, Submission of Offers clause) will become an attachment to the contract.

SUBCONTRACTING PLAN - INCORPORATED (SEP 2015)

In accordance with FAR 19.702, the contractor has submitted a subcontracting plan which has been reviewed and approved by the contracting officer. The plan is hereby incorporated into this award as attachment * . The ACO is hereby delegated authority to monitor implementation of The Small Business and Small Disadvantaged Business Subcontracting Plan.

* to be completed at time of award.

The Small Business subcontracting goal for contracts awarded from this solicitation is 23% of the subcontracted level of effort.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS

SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS (BEST VALUE/TRADE-OFF)

I. GENERAL

The offeror’s proposal shall be in the form prescribed by, and shall contain a response to each of the areas identified in in this solicitation section. The following instructions are provided in addition to instructions to offerors contained elsewhere in this solicitation.

Initial proposals and any modifications thereto are to be submitted to the Contracting Officer on or before the closing date and time cited elsewhere in the solicitation. Faxes, e-mails, and/or responses through NECO or any method other than Hard Copy format are not acceptable.

Hand-carried proposals are not permitted. The Contracting Office is located on a secured compound. Only personnel with current DoD Common Access Cards (CACs) or appropriate military credentials will be able to access the compound. There will be no ability to drop off the proposals outside the compound.

Offerors shall submit their proposals in two separate volumes as follows:

Volume I Non-Cost Proposal Original and 3 copies

Volume II Cost Proposal Original and 1 copy

In addition to the original and copies for each volume requested above, the offeror shall provide a CD/DVD containing the complete .pdf versions of the proposals. Specifically with regard to Volume II, the offeror shall provide their cost breakdown as part of their Cost/Price Proposal in a spreadsheet format compatible with Microsoft Excel 2007 or 2010.

Note: In the event of a discrepancy between the hardcopy and the CD copy, the hard copy shall take precedence.

In addition, offers shall include the following in Volume II:

Solicitation cover sheet with appropriate blocks completed by the offeror.

Solicitation pricing pages completed by the Offeror (Section B CLINs)

Acknowledgement of solicitation amendments pursuant to FAR 52.215-1 (if not previously acknowledged).

Representations and Certifications completed by the offeror in accordance with instructions contained elsewhere in this solicitation. If the offeror has completed all of the representations and certifications required by this solicitation in SAM (www.sam.gov) in accordance with FAR 52.204-8 and DFARS 252.204-7007 ALT A, then the offeror need not submit the hardcopy Representations and Certifications.

The offeror’s Small Business Subcontracting Plan (this Plan not required for Small Business offerors).

The completion and submission of the above items will constitute an offer (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. Offerors shall respond to all requirements of the solicitation document. Offerors are cautioned not to alter the solicitation. Any affirmative exception to the material terms and conditions of the solicitation will render the offer ineligible for award. Alternate proposals are not authorized.

Potential offerors are encouraged to carefully review all solicitation requirements and, if they have questions concerning the solicitation, should submit one consolidated list of questions concerning the solicitation via email to the solicitation point of contact, helen.tyson@navy.mil, NO LATER THAN 2:00 PM, Philadelphia time, on 06 February 2018. Questions should be submitted as early as feasible prior to the above date and time; questions received later may be answered at the discretion of the Navy.

In the event any person who is not a bona fide employee of the offeror participated in the creation, formulation, or writing of any portion of the proposal, a certificate to this effect shall be included in the proposal which shall be signed by an officer of the offeror. Such certificate shall identify the name of the person who is not a bona fide employee, that person’s employment capacity, the name of the person’s firm, the relationship of that firm to the offeror, and the portion of the proposal in which the person participated.

II. REQUIREMENTS FOR PROPOSAL CONTENT

(1) Do not include CLASSIFIED data in your proposal.

(2) Introduction and Purpose - This section specifies the format that offerors should use in proposals submitted in response to this solicitation. The intent is not to restrict the offerors in the manner in which they will perform their work but rather to ensure a certain degree of uniformity in the format of the proposals for evaluation purposes.

(3) Each volume should contain the following items in addition to the other information required by this solicitation:

DUNS and CAGE of offeror.

Identification of original signature copies

Table of Contents: The table of contents should provide detail sufficient to allow the important elements to be easily located. The use of tabs and dividers is encouraged.

(4) Requirements for Style: Each offeror shall submit a proposal that clearly and concisely sets forth the contractor’s response to the requirements of the solicitation. Unnecessary elaboration or other presentations beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal are not desired. Elaborate artwork, expensive paper or bindings, and expensive visual or other presentation aids are neither necessary nor desired. The proposal shall contain all the pertinent information in sufficient detail in the one area of the proposal where it contributes most critically to the discussion. When necessary, the offeror shall refer to the initial discussion and identify its location within its proposal.

(5) Page Limitations

Volume I, “Non-Cost Proposal,” is limited to a maximum of 30 pages in length inclusive of any charts, diagrams, and/or other graphics. Each “page” is defined as one sheet, 8 ½” x 11”, with at least one inch margins on all sides, using a font with a point size of 10 or greater (e.g., "Times New Roman" style with 10 point font). Lines shall, at a minimum, be single-spaced. Pages shall be consecutively numbered. Multiple pages, double pages, two-sided pages, or foldouts will count as an equivalent number of 8 ½" x 11" pages. The cover sheet, table of contents (not to exceed one page per volume), tabs, and dividers will not count toward the page limit. Pages submitted in excess of the page limitations described above will not be evaluated. Volume II, “Cost/Price Proposal,” is not page limited.

III. PROPOSAL CONTENT

(1) Volume I – Non-Cost Proposal

Volume I of the proposal shall include all information required for the evaluation of the offeror’s Non-price Proposal. It shall exclude any reference to the price aspects of the proposal.

Each page of each copy should include the following legend:

Source Selection Information - See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

The Non-price evaluation factors are listed below. Management Approach is more important than Past Performance, and both are significantly more important than Socio-Economic Plan.

(a) Management Approach

The offeror shall provide in detail a management approach that will ensure the successful accomplishment of the requirements of the solicitation, including the PWS. If a subcontractor or subcontractors are proposed, the management approach should address, in terms of scope and percentage of effort, what portion of the solicitation's requirements will be performed by each subcontractor. Team members other than the offeror are considered proposed subcontractors to the offeror. The management approach should address how the offeror will ensure effective communications both within its team and between the contractor and the Government. The offeror should describe any risks associated with the solicitation, including the PWS and any risks associated with implementation of the offeror's management approach; describe any techniques and actions to mitigate such risks; and explain whether the techniques and actions identified for risk mitigation have been successfully used by the offeror. The offeror should provide any other information the offeror considers relevant to the solicitation.

(b) Past Performance

The offeror shall demonstrate relevant past performance or affirmatively state that it possesses no relevant past performance. Relevant past performance is performance under contacts or efforts (within the past 5 years) that is of similar scope and magnitude to that which is described in the solicitation.

To demonstrate its past performance, the offeror shall identify up to three of its most relevant contracts or efforts within the past five (5) years. The offeror should complete a “Past Performance Information Form” for each reference submitted. The Offeror shall provide a detailed explanation demonstrating the relevance of the contracts or efforts to the requirements of the solicitation. The offeror should aslo provide information on any problems encountered on the identified contracts or efforts and the offeror’s corrective actions. The offeror may identify contracts or efforts for its proposed subcontractors among the three past performance references provided in its proposal. If subcontractor past performance is provided as part of the 3 of its most relevant contracts or efforts, the subcontractor past performance will be given weight relative to the scope and magnitude of the aspects of the work under the solicitation that the subcontractor is proposed to perform. Therefore, the offeror’s proposal should detail clearly the aspects of the work in the solicitation that the subcontractor is proposed to perform. It is the contractor’s responsibility to adequately explain the relevance of a reference provided for a subcontractor’s past performance to the effort that the subcontractor is proposed to perform under this solicitation.

The offeror should complete a “Past Performance Information Form” for each reference submitted. The form is an attachment to the solicitation. The forms will count toward the Volume I page limit described above. For additional information regarding a particular reference beyond that which will fit on the form, the offeror may continue on additional sheets of paper. Such continuation sheet(s) for submitted references will count toward the page limit for Volume I. Only a single set of up to three references shall be submitted.

The Past Performance evaluation will result in a past performance confidence assessment.

The offeror should address its past performance in complying with requirements of the clauses at FAR 52.219-8, "Utilization of Small Business Concerns," and 52.219-9, "Small Business Subcontracting Plan."

(c) Socio-economic Plan

The offeror shall address the extent of participation of small businesses, small disadvantaged businesses, women-owned small businesses, historically black colleges or universities and minority institutions, veteran-owned small businesses, service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses, and HUBZone small businesses in performance of any resultant contract. The solicitation, however, does not require participation by such entities. The offeror shall provide targets, expressed as percentages of total contract value, for small businesses, small disadvantaged businesses, women-owned small businesses, historically black colleges or universities and minority institutions, veteran-owned small businesses, service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses, and HUBZone small businesses in any of the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Major Groups as determined by the Department of Commerce. The targets may provide for participation by a prime contractor, joint venture partner, teaming arrangement member, or subcontractor. Targets will be incorporated into and become part of any resultant contract.

The Small Business subcontracting goal for contracts awarded from this solicitation is 23% of the subcontracted level of effort.

If the offeror fails to provide targets for the contract and/or any of the seven socio-economic factors, the offeror's proposal will be evaluated at zero percent and/or zero dollars for the contract and/or any socio-economic factor for which a target is not provided. However, an offeror that provides no socio-economic plan in response to this factor may be considered ineligible for award.

Note: The Socio-Economic Plan is a non-cost evaluation factor and is separate and distinct from the requirement, set forth elsewhere in the solicitation, for the offeror to submit a “Small Business Subcontracting Plan.” The Small Business Subcontracting Plan is a matter of contractor responsibility and is not a component of the comparative evaluation of proposals.

(2) Volume II – Cost/Price

Volume II, “Cost Proposal,” is not page limited.

Each page of each copy of Volume II should include the following legend:

Source Selection Information - See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

Volume II shall include the completed solicitation documents and a complete and detailed cost breakdown of the offeror’s cost plus fixed fee (CPFF) with all supporting documentation. The cost proposal shall be based upon the government’s estimated level of effort and labor categories in Section B of the solicitation. The offeror’s cost proposal shall not deviate from the level of effort set forth in Section B of the solicitation. The Cost/Price proposal shall include all elements of cost and such other cost information as considered appropriate to support the offeror’s proposal. The burden of proof for establishing the realism of all proposed costs rests with the offeror. The cost and pricing information shall be completed in accordance with the following:

(a) Separate cost and pricing information shall be submitted for each time period specified in the pricing pages (Section B) of the solicitation.

(b) Supporting data including direct labor rates and hours,burden rates, material lists and costs, travel charges, and “other direct costs” used in developing the cost breakdown should be furnished. The supporting data for “other direct costs” shall include an itemization of those costs and an explanation and justification for each cost so itemized.

In accordance with FAR 52.222-46 “Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees,” Offerors shall submit a total compensation plan setting forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the Contract. Supporting information should include data such as recognized national and regional compensation surveys and studies of professional, public and private organizations used in establishing the total compensation structure. The compensation levels proposed should reflect a clear understanding of work to be performed and should indicate the capability of the proposed compensation structure to obtain and keep suitably qualified personnel to meet mission objectives. The salary rates or ranges must take into account differences in skills, the complexity of various disciplines, and professional job difficulties. Offerors are cautioned that lower compensation for essentially the same professional work may indicate lack of sound management judgment and lack of understanding of the requirement. Professional compensation that is unrealistically low or not in reasonable relationship to the various job categories may impair the Contractor’s ability to attract and retain professional service employees, and thus, may be viewed as evidence of failure to comprehend the complexities of the contract requirements. Failure to comply with these provisions may constitute sufficient cause to justify rejection of a proposal.

Offerors shall clearly state whether they are proposing on the basis of uncompensated overtime, and, if so, for each applicable labor category set forth the average number of uncompensated overtime hours per week. Uncompensated overtime is not encouraged as work schedules averaging more than 40 hours per week can, over a period of time, lead to degradation of performance.. Pursuant to FAR 52.237-10, “Identification of Uncompensated Overtime”, which is set forth in full text in Section L, offerors are reminded (1) “Whenever there is uncompensated overtime, the adjusted hourly rate (including uncompensated overtime), rather than the hourly rate, shall be applied to all proposed hours, whether regular or overtime hours”, (2) “All proposed labor hours subject to the adjusted hourly rate (including uncompensated overtime) shall be identified as either regular or overtime hours, by labor categories, and described at the same level of detail. This is applicable to all proposals whether the labor hours are at the prime or subcontract level. This includes uncompensated overtime hours that are in indirect cost pools for personnel whose regular hours are normally charged direct.” In that 52.237-10 requires that the offeror’s accounting practices used to estimate uncompensated overtime be consistent with the offeror’s cost accounting practices used to accumulate and report uncompensated overtime hours, each offeror proposing on the basis of uncompensated overtime should provide evidence of that consistency. Also, pursuant to FAR 52.237-10, each offeror proposing on the basis of uncompensated overtime is required to include a copy of its policy addressing uncompensated overtime with its proposal. To the extent that an offeror is proposing on the basis of uncompensated overtime, the offeror is required to explain why the use of uncompensated overtime will not degrade the level of technical expertise required to fulfill the Government’s requirements.

All Offerors shall submit, as part of their Cost Proposal, documentation substantiating the accuracy of their proposed direct labor rates. To the extent that an Offeror is proposing a subcontractor on a cost-reimbursement basis, the documentation substantiating the accuracy of the subcontractor’s proposed direct labor rates is also required. Acceptable documentation, for both prime contractor and subcontractor labor, may include the following:

(1) Payroll data (if proposing current, named employees)

(2) Actual billing records showing direct labor rates (if proposing current, named employees),

(3) Copies of signed Letters of Intent that indicate agreed upon annual salary (if proposing named, new hires)

(4) Copies of current or prior fiscal year DCMA Forward Pricing Rate Agreement (FPRA), Forward Pricing Rate Recommendation (FPRR), Provisional Billing Rate Approval and Provisional Billing Rate Submission.

(5) If labor category averages are used as consistent with the offeror's accounting practice and approved by DCAA, provide a detailed narrative and include the calculation used to establish the category average. For example, provide a list of the current salaries for all employees working in that labor category, divided by the number of current employees in that labor category.

(6) If proposing rates that do not fall within one of the above criteria, provide a detailed, comprehensive description of the methodology used to establish the proposed direct rate. The description shall include both the source where the rate was obtained and a description of how the resulting rate was calculated. Merely stating that a "salary survey" or "market survey" was used is not sufficient.

In addition to the foregoing, the offeror shall explain why its proposed direct labor rates are realistic for the requirements to be performed, considering the technical and experiential qualifications necessary to accomplish the task.

In order to verify the realism of the Offeror’s proposed indirect rates, all Offerors shall submit, as part of their Cost Proposal, documentation substantiating the accuracy of their proposed indirect rates. To the extent that an Offeror is proposing a subcontractor on a cost-reimbursement basis, the documentation substantiating the accuracy of the subcontractor’s proposed indirect rates is also required. Acceptable documentation may include the following:

(1) Copies of the most current DCMA FPRA, FPRR or DCAA audit of the offeror's indirect rates.

(2) If the most current FPRA, FPRR or DCAA audit of the offeror's indirect rates are not available, historical indirect data, to include provisional rates, actual incurred rates, and annual incurred cost claims (if submitted), shall be provided for the three years prior to the Offeror's current fiscal year. This data shall include the all of the Offeror's indirect rates as applicable to the Offeror's accounting system. If proposing indirect rates that are significantly different from recent incurred rates, Offerors shall include a detailed explanation and supporting cost data (including budget information).

If the offeror is proposing subcontracts on other than a CPFF basis, the offeror shall submit information as to whether the rates for the subcontractors are fixed based on a firm bilateral agreement with the subcontractor or merely proposed. In addition, the offeror shall explain why it believes the subcontractor can perform at those rates.

The burden of proof for establishing the realism of all proposed costs rests with the offeror.

(c) For proposal purposes, the following ratios of Contractor facility and Government facility labor performance are established for all labor categories:

Offerors shall apply the contractor facility 10% and the government facility 90% ratio to each labor category. The offeror may use a blended rate if it clearly demonstrates how the rate was derived.

(d) An offeror's cost proposal shall be based upon the level of effort, education and minimum experience information described in the solicitation.

(e) Offerors shall use the following estimated costs as “plug-in” amounts for the travel CLIN when preparing their cost proposal. These estimated amounts will be used as common evaluation amounts in all offerors’ cost proposals; the amounts specified below include no associated indirect costs. Application of material handling charges and/or G&A rates, as appropriate, will be allowed only if the contractor maintains separate accounts for such costs and will be in addition to the common evaluation amounts. The offeror shall include the estimated travel costs specified below in its cost proposal, and load the costs appropriately with indirect costs. The estimated amounts below, plus indirect costs, as determined cost realistic by the Government, will be used in the evaluation of proposals, and will be included in resultant contracts as “not-to-exceed” amounts under which the offeror will be permitted to invoice its actual costs.

(i) Travel estimated above is for travel and subsistence associated with performance under any resultant contract which will be reimbursed in accordance with the clause entitled “Reimbursement of Travel Costs.”

(f) Any and all subcontracts identified in the Non-Cost proposal shall be identified and priced in the Cost/Price proposal. Subcontracts (regardless of dollar value) shall be adequately documented.

(g) If the offeror is currently being audited, or has been audited, by the Defense Contract Audit Agency, the name and location of the assigned DCAA office must be furnished with the Cost/Price proposal.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

SECTION M

EVALUATION CRITERIA AND THE BASIS FOR AWARD

(1) Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the instructions set forth in Section L as well as the evaluation criteria contained in this section. The Government intends to award a contract or contracts resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror(s) whose proposal(s) represent the best value after evaluation in accordance with the factors in the solicitation. The offeror’s poropsal proposal shall be in the form prescribed by, and shall contain a response to each of the areas identified in the Section L solicitation provision entitled “Submission of Proposals”. The evaluation of proposals will consider the offeror’s Non-Cost proposal more important than the offeror’s Cost proposal. The Government reserves the right to award the contract or contracts to other than the offeror(s) with the lowest evaluated CPFF.

The Government reserves the right to make multiple awards. The Government reserves the right to limit the number of awards.

(2) The non-price evaluation factors are listed below in descending order of importance. Management Approach is more important than Past Performance, and both are significantly more important than Socio-Economic Plan.

In considering the relevance of an offeror’s past performance, the past performance references provided by the offeror will be evaluated individually and in the aggregate. If subcontractor past performance is provided as part of the three of its most relevant contracts or efforts, the subcontractor past performance will be given weight relative to the scope and magnitude of the aspects of the work under the solicitation for which the subcontractor is proposed. The Government reserves the right to obtain information for use in the evaluation of past performance from any and all sources including sources outside of the Government. When an offeror is determined to have relevant past performance, the quality of its relevant past performance will be evaluated. Offerors lacking relevant past performance history will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably under the Past Performance factor. However, the proposal of an offeror with no relevant past performance history, while not rated favorably or unfavorably for past performance, may not represent the most advantageous proposal to the Government and, thus, may be an unsuccessful proposal when compared to the proposals of other offerors. The evaluation of Past Performance is separate and distinct from the Contracting Officer’s responsibility determination. The assessment of the offeror’s past performance will be used as a means of evaluating how capable the offeror is of successfully accomplishing the requirements of the solicitation.