N0042119R0018_Amendment_0001.docx

N0042119R0018

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The following have been modified:

Amendment 0001:

The purpose of this amendment is to update/revise:

1) Updated resume page limit in Section L, Part A, 3.0, paragraph 3, table 1.2,

2) Clarified language in Section L, Part B, 2.0, paragraph 4 and

3) Updated magnitude contract dollar value in Section M, Part B, 2.0, paragraph 2.

Government Points of Contact:

Contract Specialist: Erik Seastrand Phone: 301-757-2532 Email: erik.seastrand@navy.mil

Contracting Officer: Lynn Kaniss Phone: 301-757-3421 Email: lynn.kaniss@navy.mil

Contract Type:

The contract resulting from this solicitation will be a Single Award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ).

Product Service Code:

The Product Service Code (PSC) for this solicitation is R706, Support – Management: Logistics Support.

Small Business Set-Aside:

This solicitation is reserved as a Total Small Business Set-Aside under NAICS Code 541330.

Proposal shall remain valid for 180 days after proposal due date, in accordance with Section L.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

L – [1] CONTENT OF PROPOSALS (SERVICES) (JULY 2019)

PART A GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.0 GENERAL

The Offeror must respond to all requirements of the solicitation and not alter or rearrange the solicitation. The Offeror is advised that the Government may incorporate any portions of the Offeror’s proposal into the resulting contract.

In presenting material in the proposal, the Offeror is advised that quality of information is more important than quantity. Clarity, brevity, and logical organization shall be emphasized during proposal preparation. Statements that the prospective Offeror understands, can comply with, or will comply with, the specifications, and paraphrasing the requirements or parts thereof without supporting information are considered inadequate by the Government, and may result in assessing weaknesses and/or deficiencies.

The Offeror must include any data that illustrates the adequacy of the various assumptions, approaches, and solutions to problems. Failure to address a specific factor or subfactor clearly may be considered a deficiency. Unnecessarily elaborate brochures or other presentation materials beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal is neither necessary nor desired.

The Government advises the Offeror that taking exception or deviating from any term or condition of the RFP may result in the assessment of a deficiency to the proposal.

Throughout these instructions, a “principal subcontractor” is defined as a subcontractor who provides at least 20% of the proposed total price/cost (excluding the Offeror’s profit/fee), for the contract or provides one or more Key Personnel. “JV Team member” is defined as one of the entities that make up a joint venture (JV) formed for the purpose of responding to this solicitation.

Questions: Offerors may submit questions requesting clarification of solicitation requirements by emailing the contract specialist at erik.seastrand@navy.mil and the contracting officer lynn.kaniss@navy.mil. It is required that all questions be received within 10 calendar days of the date this solicitation is issued.

2.0 PROPOSAL FORMAT

Written proposals must be formatted using a Times New Roman 12 pt Normal font (no reduction permitted), single-spaced with 1-inch margins all around, and formatted for standard 8.5 x 11 inch paper. All pages should be numbered with section and page numbers. Graphs and tables shall be presented in no smaller than a 10 pt font and should contain a grid, which allows values to be read directly from the graph. Graphic resolution, including such data as tables or charts, should be consistent with the purpose of the data presented.

The Offeror shall provide two complete copies of the proposal to the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) as electronic files fully compatible with Microsoft Office 2016 and for information not supported by MS Office products, with the latest Adobe Acrobat reader on two separate CD-ROMs or DVDs. The Offeror will ensure that the Price/Cost Volume is provided on a separate CD-ROM or DVD. Each CD-ROM or DVD is to be labeled for content and the Offeror’s name.

3.0 PROPOSAL CONTENT AND VOLUMES

The Offeror must present proposal information in a manner that facilitates a one-to-one comparison between the information presented and this Proposal Instruction. Proposal information must be structured such that its Volume/paragraph number matches the Proposal Instructions Volume/paragraph number provided in section “Part B Specific Instructions” to which it is responding, although the Offeror may add lower tier subparagraphs. The Offeror must provide reasons it will not provide information for a particular paragraph. The proposal information instructions are structured by paragraph numbers where first, second, third, and fourth parts correspond to the volume, section, and element, etc., in the Offeror’s proposal.

Each volume of the proposal shall be submitted as two (2) electronic copies as specified in the table below. The table below supersedes the copies requested in Block 9 of the Standard Form (SF) 33. All volumes of the proposal shall be delivered to the address provided in Section 4.0 prior to the closing date/time stated in this solicitation. Page limitations for each volume, if any, are also specified in the table below; title and table of contents pages do not count towards the page limit. Any pages submitted exceeding the page limit shall be disregarded and NOT evaluated.

Information submitted as an Annex to the proposal includes manuals, specifications, plans, procedures, and policies that exist as an official document of the company or facility, as well as other information requested in Part B Specific Instructions. Page limitations for Annexes, if any, are specified below. The authorized Annexes are summarized in the table below.

Each volume shall contain the following information:

The Offeror shall submit a Cross Reference Matrix (CRM) for the Technical Volume, similar to the example below, to help ensure that all solicitation requirements are addressed and to facilitate the evaluators’ review of the Offeror’s proposal. The CRM should be a single integrated matrix and cross-reference the proposal volumes and paragraphs to specific RFP requirements, as well as other parts of the proposal that contain relevant information. The Offeror’s CRM may be identical to the example below or revised such as to add columns to indicate the page number on which information may be found, identify where other relevant information in the proposal is located, or provide other comments. The CRM does not count against any of the proposal page limitations.

EXAMPLE OF A CROSS REFERENCE MATRIX (CRM)

Volume 1 Technical Example: Para 3.1 Note: This column shall address all paragraphs in Sections xx and xy of the SOW/PWS.

Volume 1 Technical

Volume 1 Technical

4.0 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION:

Clearly mark all packages with the solicitation number. The submission date for all Volumes shall be no later than the date and time specified in Block 9 of the SF 33 of the RFP. It is requested that Volume 2 Past Performance information be submitted 10 days prior to the submission date specified in Block 9 of the SF 33of the RFP.

Offeror shall submit proposals via United States Postal Service or through a commercial carrier using the address provided below. Offeror shall not submit proposals by facsimile or electronically via email.

Naval Air Warfare Center – Aircraft Division Attn: Erik Seastrand 21983 Bundy Road, Building 3272 Patuxent River, MD 20670 Solicitation Number: N00421-19-R-0018

Hand carried proposals may be delivered to the address above, attention (PCO) and/or (Specialist).

5.0 PROPOSAL PACKAGING:

6.0 CLASSIFIED DATA

All proposals must be UNCLASSIFIED.

7.0 SOLICITATION CHANGES

For notice of any changes and additional information provided by the Government for the solicitation, please go to www.FedBizOpps.gov.

PART B SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS

Cost or pricing information shall only appear in the Price/Cost volume.

1.0 VOLUME 1: TECHNICAL

The Offeror shall provide all information and data required to conduct a thorough and complete technical evaluation. The Offeror shall address the following in the proposal:

1.1 Sample Tasks

The sample tasks are representative of the work to be performed under the resultant contract and task orders. The Offeror shall provide a written narrative demonstrating an understanding of the technical requirements of the sample tasking.

1.1.1 Sample Task 1 – Business Process Re-engineering (BPR).

NAVAIR ALE is tasked to provide program and project management within the NAVAIR logistics IT portfolio. Effective planning and management of existing resources, responsible retirement of legacy resources, and identification of new portfolio resources are keys to the success of ALE in supporting an integrated and rationalized enterprise readiness strategy. BPR provides for a logical methodology for assessing process weaknesses, identifying gaps, and implementing opportunities to streamline and improve these processes to create a solid foundation for success in changes to the full spectrum of operations.

Within the ALE logistics portfolio are multiple weapons platform ground station solutions supporting the organizational, intermediate, and depot maintenance of NAVAIR weapons systems. The current solutions deliver a combination of ‘Government Off The Shelf’ (GOTS) and Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) ‘Commercial Off The Shelf’ (COTS) technologies. These multiple solutions are expensive, have capability gaps, compete for the same sustainment funding, and the data is not exposed or available for enterprise analytics and trending. ALE, as a Defense Business System (DBS), is seeking development and modernization funding to explore an agnostic and consolidated ground station. ALE must conduct BPR prior to receiving certification of funding per the requirements of the Clinger-Cohen Act (CCA), National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and Title 10 U.S.C sec. 2222. Describe your approach to support the BPR, to include consideration of the business problem.

The Offeror’s written narrative shall:

1. Explain the technical approach, and unique considerations and methodologies to be used to assess current NAVAIR ground stations in order to provide substantive details to be used in the rationalization of the portfolio of products. Include a listing of all applicable laws, policies, instructions and/or guidelines.

1. Detail all assumptions relative to the sample task and the technical approach to ensure full understanding of your response by the Government.

(3) Provide a detailed description of the technical approach including a step-by-step procedure and methodology which would be used in accomplishing the task.

(4) Identify contingent events inherent to the nature of the effort that could, if they were to occur, endanger satisfactory performance, and ways to mitigate those identified risks.

(5) Provide a detailed schedule of events and briefly describe each activity with its inputs and outputs and the interrelationships and interdependencies among the activities.

1. Identify any models and other tools that would be utilized to perform the task.

1. Identify process to track progress towards completion of task.

1. Provide a list of all required artifacts to document the task.

1. Identify how the BPR process will ensure the business process supported by the DBS is (or will be) as streamlined and efficient as practicable.

1. Identify the contractor team members that need to participate in the effort; and if applicable, describe the roles and responsibilities of any subcontractors, and/or Joint Venture (JV) team members required to perform the work.

1. Provide an outline of hours by labor category required to complete the sample task; do not include cost.

1.1.2 Sample Task 2 – NAVAIR ALE Integrated Product Team (IPT) Programmatic Support.

NAVAIR ALE is comprised of multiple IPTs, which manage and execute projects supporting all elements of the logistics lifecycle. Project managers, analytical support, and a variety of advising technical staff ALE IPTs. ALE is responsible for both the management and execution of core Naval Aviation Enterprise (NAE) solutions comprised of sustainment and development/modernization appropriations. ALE success is contingent upon sustainable and repeatable IPT programmatic rigor and governance across all ALE IPTs.

The ALE Product Lifecycle Management/Enterprise Service Bus (PLM/ESB) is a new IPT within the recently reorganized ALE organization. Short-term concerns include resourcing, contracts, risk management, funding, and management directed tasks to deliver technical data package health assessment, and optimized scheduled maintenance improvements across the enterprise within Fiscal Year (FY)20. Long-term concerns include identifying ALE capabilities that are within scope of being part of the ALE PLM solution/roadmap, a large $5M+ architecture refresh required in FY21, and ensuring sustainment of the solution as capabilities are rolled out.

The Offeror’s written narrative shall:

(1) Explain the technical approach, and unique considerations and methodologies to be used to provide programmatic support to the ALE IPT lead ensuring proper consideration of current acquisition policies, processes, instructions, and guidelines.

(2) Address an overall program management support strategy in addition to project planning, project monitoring and control, portfolio rationalization and consolidation, risk management, configuration management, PPBE support, facilitation, training, capability studies, trade-off analyses, business cases, integrated scheduling, and requirements elicitation, analysis, and management.

(3) Provide a detailed description of the technical approach including a step-by-step procedure and methodology which would be used in accomplishing the task.

(4) Identify contingent events inherent to the nature of the effort that could, if they were to occur, endanger satisfactory performance, and ways to mitigate those identified risks.

(5) Provide a detailed schedule of events and briefly describe each activity with its inputs and outputs and the interrelationships and interdependencies among the activities.

(6) Identify the models and other tools that would be utilized to perform the task.

(7) Identify process to track progress towards completion of task.

(8) Provide a list of recommended reports(s) to document the task.

(9) Identify the contractor team members that need to participate in the effort; and if applicable, describe the roles and responsibilities of any subcontractors, and/or Joint Venture (JV) team members required to perform the work.

(10) Provide an outline of hours by labor category required to complete the sample task; do not include cost.

1.2 Workforce Qualifications

The Offeror shall propose personnel that meet all labor category requirements as specified in the Statement of Work.

The following definitions apply to this section.

- A “contingent hire” is an individual who has committed, under a signed letter of intent, to being employed by the Offeror if the Offeror is awarded the contract.

- A “prospective hire” is an individual that the Offeror has committed to hiring if the Offeror is awarded the contract whose identity may not be known until after contract award.

A "current employee" is an individual who is currently employed by the Prime or subcontractors identified in proposal.

Note: The Offeror is forewarned that it may be assessed a proposal risk if it proposes the predominance of a labor category or Statement of Work (SOW) section tasking using prospective or contingent hire employees and the evaluation team deems this a risk to successful performance.

1.2.1 Key Labor Categories:

Key personnel shall meet or exceed the labor category requirements outlined in the SOW in Section C of this solicitation. If the “Key” employee is a contingent hire, the Offeror shall submit a corresponding letter of intent in Volume 3. The letter of intent is a separate written agreement signed by the potential employee(s) to work for the Offeror effective at the contract award. Key personnel employed by subcontractors and other team members shall provide letters of intent either separately or included with the prime contractor’s submission of this document.

For all proposed Key Personnel, as stated in Section C, Paragraph 3.4, the contractor shall provide a resume of the work assignments, training, etc., that demonstrates the required education and experience specified in Section C for one personnel from each proposed key labor category. The number of resumes required for submission with an Offeror's proposal are one (1) resume for each of the Key Labor Categories. Resumes shall contain, at a minimum, the following information:

No prospective hires may be proposed as Key personnel

1.2.2 Key Personnel Update Requirement - Offerors are obligated to advise the Government of changes in proposed key personnel staffing within three (3) business days after learning of the change, even after submission of proposals. Pursuant to this requirement, following such notification to the Government, Offerors may update pricing and technical proposals only when the Government elects to establish a competitive range and conduct discussions with Offerors.

2.0 VOLUME 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

2.1 General

Sources of past performance evaluation information include information provided by the Offeror in response to the solicitation, information obtained from questionnaires, and any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information Systems, Electronic Subcontract Reporting System, or other databases; the Defense Contract Management Agency; and interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining Officials.

The Offeror shall complete the Past Performance Information Form, Attachment P1, for each past performance reference (contract or delivery/task order) performed within five years of the solicitation release date. The Offeror shall indicate if they were the Prime, Subcontractor, or JV member for each contract and/or task order submitted. The Offeror shall submit no more than five Past Performance Information Forms as the Prime Contractor, no more than two forms for each principal subcontractor, and no more than two forms for each JV team member. For contract references that contain delivery/task orders, additionally provide the work description(s) for each specific delivery/task order deemed relevant by the Offeror to this solicitation’s requirements. For contract references where the Offeror performed as a subcontractor, the Offeror shall clearly identify the applicable portion of the contract requirements that they performed. The Offeror shall submit written consent from its principal subcontractor(s) and JV team member(s) that will allow the Government to coordinate any past performance issues directly with the Offeror. If the Offeror does not submit the written consent, the Government will address any past performance issues directly with the principal subcontractor or JV Team member and the Offeror will forfeit the opportunity to participate in any related discussions. Consequently, for any principal subcontractor and JV team member that does not provide the written consent, the Offeror shall provide the name, address, phone number, and email address with whom the Government may address any past performance issues.

The Offeror shall provide a narrative on each Past Performance Information form in the “Contract Effort Description” area that clearly describes how each contract reference has relevant work effort that matches the relevancy definitions specified in Section M of the solicitation. Additionally, the Offeror shall provide one electronic copy of the Statement of Work/Performance Work Statement, and include the contract number, whether submitted for Prime or Subcontractor, subcontract portion, Period of Performance, number of employees performing the tasking, for each contract reference as attachments to the Past Performance Volume submission.

The primary source of past performance information will be PPIRS. If a Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR) exists for multiple years for the same contract/order, all periods of performance within the recency period specified above, for that contract/order, will be used for evaluation. In the event a CPAR does not exist for a past performance reference, the Offeror shall submit a Contractor Performance Assessment Questionnaire (CPAQ), Attachment P2, to the Program Manager who is the Assessing Official. The Offeror shall include instructions for the Program Manager to send completed questionnaires within two weeks of its receipt via e-mail to Erik Seastrand, Contract Specialist, at Email erik.seastrand@navy.mil, thereby allowing the customer approximately two weeks to complete their response. All CPAQs should be received by the Government concurrently with the Offeror’s proposal submission. Volume 2 deadline remains unchanged to be submitted with the proposal at the solicitation due date.

3.0 VOLUME 3: PRICE/COST PROPOSAL

-If subcontractors are proposed, subcontractors shall provide the same price/cost proposal information required for the prime contractor, unless otherwise noted below.

3.1 Volume Content:

(a) This Volume shall contain the Contract Compliance information specified below as follows:

i. Offeror Summary Table: The Offeror shall complete the table below. The Offeror shall include all subcontractors and JV team members who will be involved with the performance of the contract and list all sites where the work will be performed. If a JV teaming or subcontracting arrangement is proposed, identify the work share, distribution elements, and ratios that each contractor will perform using the table below. Also provide a definition of the legal relationship between the entities if it is other than a Prime/subcontractor relationship.

Contractor Name (Indicate Prime, JV Team Member, or Sub)

(b) This Volume shall also contain a copy of Section B with the Contract Line Item (CLIN) Unit Prices and, for evaluation purposes, the Total Prices filled in using the estimated quantities value in the solicitation and the instructions below. Section B prices shall be provided separately in two (2) digital data copy in MS Office 2010 Excel format on CD-ROM or DVD media. Within all Excel spreadsheets, the Offeror shall use formulas and functions to the maximum extent possible and avoid using output type “value only” cells. If links are utilized, supply those referenced files. Spreadsheets shall not be protected.

(c) All price/cost and price/cost supporting information shall be contained in Section B and the price/cost proposal. No price or pricing information shall be included in any other technical volume including cover letters. Offeror are responsible for submitting sufficient information to enable the Government to fully evaluate their price/cost proposal.

3.2 Ground Rules and Assumptions:

(a) As this is a competitive acquisition with adequate price competition anticipated, certified cost or pricing data in accordance with FAR 15.403-1 is not required. However, in the event that adequate price competition does not exist after receipt of proposals, the Government reserves the right to request additional cost or pricing data as necessary from both the Offeror and subcontractors. Further, the Offeror may be required to provide a Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data prior to award, pursuant to FAR 15.406-2.

(b) The Offeror shall provide sufficient information to support its price/cost as well as an explanation of all ground rules and assumptions that affect the price/cost estimates.

(c) If subcontractors are proposed, they shall provide the same information required for the prime contractor, unless otherwise noted in the Price/Cost Information section below

3.3 Price/Cost Information:

Offerors shall submit their fully completed price/cost proposal utilizing the Cost Summary Format (Attachment P6). The spreadsheet shall be provided in Microsoft Excel on a CD or DVD and shall be formatted for letter size (8.5 X 11) paper and shall be unprotected and unlocked, with formulae intact to show mathematical operations. The Offeror shall use the CLIN Summary tab to breakout total proposed costs by CLIN.

Complete Attachment P7, (Fully Burdened Labor Rates), detailing the fully burdened labor rates for all prime contractors and their subcontractor personnel. Fully burdened labor rates are defined as direct labor rates plus all applicable burdens, to include indirect rates, fee, and subcontractor pass-through costs where applicable. For subcontractor labor, the fully burdened labor rates shall be inclusive of any pass-through charges (e.g., subcontractor handling, fixed fee on subcontractor labor, etc.) applied by the prime contractor. Proposed fully burdened labor costs may be subject to the NAVAIR labor tripwire identified in Section M. Offerors that propose a fully burdened per employee labor cost exceeding the labor tripwire shall provide rationale in their cost proposal narrative section that justifies the reasonableness of the tripwire cost for the applicable employees.

(a) Direct/Indirect Rates: The Offeror shall submit Forward Pricing Rate Agreements (FPRAs), Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBAs), and Area Wage Determinations (AWDs) as applicable for all proposed personnel. The Offeror shall identify whether the labor rates proposed are FPRAs, CBAs, AWDs, ACO/DCAA recommended rates (FPRRs), or Offeror proposed rates (FPRPs). The Offeror shall propose in compliance with the current hourly rate set forth in the Department of Labor Wage Determination as applicable. The Offeror shall provide Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) Information/Payroll Verification information as follows: A DCAA point of contact, with a current e-mail address, must be provided for the prime and each subcontractor. The Offeror and proposed subcontractors shall provide the most current DCAA Provisional Billing Rate Approval Letter, DCAA Final Billing Rate Approval Letter, and/or DCAA Forward Pricing Rate Agreement recommendation, payroll verification for currently employed proposed personnel, and any other information necessary to substantiate the rates proposed. Payroll verification shall consist of a form containing the title, direct labor rate, and a signed certification by an authorized representative of the company that the information contained in the form is correct. For key personnel contingent hires, the offeror shall provide contingent offer letters outlining salary information for contingent hire employees. For any prospective hires for non-key personnel, provide information to substantiate the rates proposed. All contingent hires shall have a letter of intent submitted under the Cost Volume. The letter of intent is a separate written agreement signed by the potential employee(s) to work for the Offeror effective at contract award. Any proposed consultants shall have a consultant agreement substantiating the rates proposed. If a composite rate or other pricing methodology (e.g. cost estimating relationships) is utilized, the Offeror shall demonstrate how those rates were developed. Subcontractors and team members shall provide this information either separately or included in the Offeror’s submission of this document. If any of the rates utilized by the Offeror or any subcontractors differ from the DCAA information and/or payroll verification, a justification shall be provided for the difference. If DCAA has not reviewed the rate information for an Offeror or one of its subcontractors, the Offeror must submit a detailed justification of the proposed direct and indirect rates. The Offeror shall also provide documentation verifying that it has a DCMA approved Accounting System in accordance with DFARS clause 252.242-7006, or state that it’s Accounting System has not been approved by DCMA pursuant to the requirement at FAR 26.402-4(a)(3). If DCMA has reviewed accounting system more than 3 years ago, offeror shall certify whether or not any changes in accounting system were incorporated and whether or not the accounting system is currently in compliance with DFARS 252.242-7006.

It is the prime Contractor’s responsibility to ensure that each subcontractor with a proposed cost-reimbursement subcontract type has an adequate accounting system. If a subcontractor does not have an adequate accounting system, they should be priced on a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) or Time-and-Materials (T&M) basis. The prime Contractor shall provide a list of all subcontractors/consultants by name and shall specify the type of subcontract (i.e., CPFF, FFP, T&M, etc.). For those subcontractors who will be priced on a cost-type basis, documentation verifying possession of a DCAA approved Cost Accounting System shall be provided.

In addition, the Prime Offeror shall provide the following:

Contractor’s Estimating System: Date determined acceptable by ACO (DFARS 215.407-5;

Contractor’s Accounting System: Date determined adequate by CAO/DCAA (FAR 16.301-3);

Disclosure Statement: Date determined current, accurate and complete by ACO (FAR 42.302(a)(11);

Contractor Purchasing System: Date determined to be approved by the ACO (FAR 42.302(50), FAR 44.304;

Property System: Date reviewed for acceptability by ACO (FAR 45.105).

Offerors shall provide the last three (3) years of actual indirect information. The Government may compare a prospective Offeror’s labor category rate to the average labor rate from industry.

(b) The Offeror shall fully disclose the buildup of price/cost of each CLIN.

(c) When completing the Cost Summary Spreadsheet (Attachment (P6), the Offeror shall not utilize any fully burdened hourly rates when pricing the labor of its employees.

(d) Offeror's labor classifications should cross-reference to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Standard Occupational Classifications (SOCs).

If the Offeror’s proposed employees are under a collective bargaining agreement, the Offeror shall provide a copy of the agreement.

(e) This requirement is being set-aside for the small business. Provide a breakout to demonstrate how the prime contractor will not pay more than 50 percent of the amount paid by the Government for contract performance to subcontractors that are not similarly situated entities, and any work that a similarly situated entity further subcontracts will count toward the 50 percent subcontract amount that cannot be exceeded; in accordance with FAR clause 52.219-14 -- Limitations on Subcontracting. (DEVIATION 2019-O0003). Cost of contract incurred for personnel includes direct labor cost, overhead that has only direct labor as its base, and the small business’s General and Administrative (G&A) rate multiplied by the labor cost.

(f) Provide a narrative that addresses any assumptions made during the preparation of the price/cost proposal and discuss the basis for the cost elements listed below:

· Direct labor rates by category. The Offeror is required to submit labor rates for all proposed current, contingent, and prospective hire individuals. If composite or category averages are proposed, provide a breakdown of how rates are developed. If necessary provide a narrative to describe derivation of labor rates, use of uncompensated overtime, pools to which indirect rates are applied, historical /provisional billing rates for indirect rates for the last 3 years and description, and amount of proposed other direct costs. If the Offeror requires the use of consultants in performance of the effort, the consultant cost shall be captured under the appropriate labor CLIN not the ODCs CLIN.

· Escalation on labor. Offerors, including subcontractors, shall address escalation for all labor categories, and shall provide rationale for the specific escalation rate used. Offerors that do not include escalation, or an explanation as to why it is not included, may be considered unrealistically low and may have their proposals adjusted by the Government to include or increase escalation to a realistic rate in the “outyears”.

· Indirect costs (e.g., Overhead, Fringe Benefits, General & Administrative (G&A), etc.)

· Information needed to explain the offeror’s estimating practices

· Profit/Fee: Identify profit/fee rate and total amounts proposed and identify the various cost elements to which the profit/fee is being applied. Profit, Base, Award, and Incentive fee rates, as applicable in Section B, must be clearly distinguishable. Profit/Fee shall not be applied to ODCs.

· Other Direct Costs (ODCs) by specific cost element (e.g., Travel). Reimbursement for Travel will be in accordance with FAR 31.205-46. If the Offeror proposes burdens on the Government provided ODC estimates, the Offeror shall provide a percentage breakdown of the Offeror’s indirect costs and burdens added to the Government estimates for any and all Cost Reimbursable CLINs in Section B.

· When the Offeror elects to claim Cost of Money (COM) as an allowable cost, the Offeror must submit a COM form and show the calculations of the proposed amount.

(1) The proposed direct labor rate for each professional employee proposed;

(2) The total cost of the proposed fringe benefits package for each professional employee proposed, including:

(a) list and brief summary of the benefits that make up the fringe package (e.g. vacation time, sick leave, stock, incentive plans, family leave, life insurance, severance pay, bonus plans, health insurance, holidays, location allowance, retirement benefits); and

(b) an itemization of the benefits that require employee contributions, and the amount of that contribution as a percentage of the cost of the particular benefit; and

(3) Data, such as recognized national and regional compensation surveys and studies of professional, public and private organizations, used by the Offeror in establishing the total compensation structure.

3.5 Government Furnished Information

3.5.1 ODCs

The Government's estimate for ODCs for the prime and all subcontract efforts, unburdened is listed below:

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

The Offeror shall utilize the estimated amounts provided by the Government for ODCs and include all applicable burdens. If it is the contractor’s accounting practice to apply (and invoice for) burdens with regards to ODCs, then the contractor shall propose the ODC amount plus the addition of the applicable burdens. If the contractor chooses not to burden ODCs, then the contractor shall propose an H-clause the same as or with similar effect, of the following Sample H-clause to establish that burdens will be unallowable for ODCs. NO FEE SHALL BE APPLIED TO ODCs.

SAMPLE H-clause: Prime Offeror___________________ will not be applying any burdens or fee to travel costs.

3.5.2. Labor Hours

The Government estimate is 412,800 hours for the entire ordering period. A work-year is defined as 1,920 hours exclusive of holidays and leave. For evaluation purposes, the Offeror shall propose the labor categories/hours as outlined below: The Offeror shall propose separate rates, as applicable, for each place of performance, and site, identified for each labor category. The proposed rates for each labor category, specific to the place of performance and site, will be incorporated in the contract and used to establish the estimated task orders costs, using streamlined ordering procedures (see B-1)

"*" Signifies Key Personnel Position

"Gov" Signifies Government Site

"Ktr" Signifies Government Site

3.5.3 Incumbent Information

The incumbent contractor is:

TQI Solutions Inc.

2600 Eltham Ave Suite 110 Norfolk, VA 23513 Contract: N00421-18-C-0049

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M - (1) EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD (SERVICES) (JULY 2019)

PART A: GENERAL INFORMATION

1.0 GENERAL

The Government expects to select one Offeror whose proposal offers the “best value” to the Government, using the trade-off method. "Best value" means the expected outcome of an acquisition that, in the Government's estimation, provides the greatest overall benefit(s) in response to the requirement. The Offeror is advised that the lowest priced proposal meeting the solicitation requirements may not be selected for an award if award to a higher priced Offeror is determined to be more beneficial to the Government. However, the perceived benefits of the higher priced proposal must merit the additional price.

2.0 EVALUATION PROCESS

For the Technical factor, a combined Technical/Risk rating will be assigned. This method reflects whether the proposal meets or does not meet the minimum requirements along with an assessment of the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies of the proposal to determine the combined Technical/Risk rating. The benefit to the Government associated with assessed strengths along with technical risk will be considered in determining whether the Offeror’s proposal rises to a level of being thorough or exceptional. Assessment of technical risk considers potential for disruption of schedule, increase in costs, degradation of performance, the need to increase Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. Offerors are advised that during the evaluation process, a technical factor with an “Unacceptable” Technical/Risk Rating may result in the entire proposal being found unacceptable and eliminated from the competition.

Under Past Performance, the Government will evaluate recent performance to determine how well an Offeror has performed work similar to the work required by the solicitation. When proposals are received from joint ventures, specifically formed by the Offeror to propose on a particular acquisition, the past performance evaluation will consider each individual JV team member’s relevant past performance. After evaluating the Offeror’s past performance information, a Performance Confidence Assessment Rating will be assigned. More relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the Performance Confidence Assessment Rating than past performance of lesser relevance. In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance, the Offeror will receive a Performance Confidence Assessment Rating of “Unknown Confidence (Neutral)” which is considered a “Neutral” rating.

3.0 EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

Proposals will be evaluated using the factors listed below in descending order of importance.

· TECHNICAL

· Sample Tasks

· Workforce (Key Personnel Resumes)

· PAST PERFORMANCE

· PRICE/COST

PRICE/COST

Technical and past performance, when combined, are significantly more important than price/cost. Technical is significantly more important than past performance. Past Performance is more important than price/cost. Price/Cost is not the most important evaluation factor, but its degree of importance will increase commensurably with the degree of equality among different Offerors’ Technical and Past Performance proposals.

The proposal must demonstrate to the Government’s satisfaction that the Offeror will provide a quality supply or service that will ensure the successful accomplishment of the solicitation requirements and overall program objectives. If deemed appropriate by the Government, proposal information provided for one factor may be used to assess other factors.

PART B: SPECIFIC INFORMATION

1.0 TECHNICAL

The evaluation will include an assessment of the following:

1.1 Sample Tasks

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s sample task responses to determine if the proposed approach to each Sample Task meets the sample task requirements based upon the information provided in response to the instructions provided in Section L.

1.2 Workforce Qualifications

The Government will evaluate all proposed Key Personnel and the supporting information to determine if they meet the minimum experience and education requirements. In addition, Key Personnel proposed to be utilized in the performance of this effort, whose labor qualifications exceed the minimum requirements in education and experience, may be considered strengths if the additional qualification(s) will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

2.0 PAST PERFORMANCE

There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy, and quality. The first aspect of the past performance is to evaluate the recency of the Offeror’s past performance being evaluated. Past performance will be considered recent if the contract/order has been performed within five years of the solicitation release date. Past Performance that is not recent will not be considered in the evaluation.

The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to evaluate how relevant the Past Performance being evaluated is to the requirements of this solicitation. The Government will use the following aspects to determine relevancy for this evaluation:

• Scope: Naval Aviation Enterprise (NAE) programmatic support of multifaceted logistics technology in the areas of:

· Project Management, to include: identifying project scope, defining objectives, developing the course of action to achieve defined outcomes, authoring key management artifacts in support of efficient and effective cost/schedule/performance planning, execution, monitoring and control activities.

· Business Process Engineering & Reengineering, to include: framework and methodology for planning, implementation and support of the business process transformation-technology initiatives. Perform detailed research and analysis and provide written reports documenting mandatory elements of the BPR process, process assessment activities, identifying gaps, and identifying efficiencies for Government review and approval.

· Financial management, to include: support the NAVAIR PPBE processes by developing and instituting repeatable processes and artifacts, support to the POM process and required artifacts, use of DoN and NAVAIR toolsets used in planning and programming budgets, and support to program offices with various analyses.

· Facilitation and training, to include: Successful development and execution of both end user and ‘train the trainer’ methodologies and documentation.

· Logistics support system documentation/artifacts, to include: capability and functional requirements documentation; e.g. Plan of Action and Milestone (POA&M), sustainment strategies and plans, functional and capability requirements artifacts, traceability matrices, assist in transforming functional requirements technical requirements, project plans, testing and certification artifacts, user manuals, installation and operation manuals, and program management review briefs and artifacts.

· Lifecycle logistics, to include: acquisition, sustainment and disposal support of Total Lifecycle Logistics Systems.

· Requirements analyses, to include: decomposition, facilitation, evaluation, and development of requirements ensuring requirements are traceable, complete, consistent, prioritized, unambiguous, validated and testable.

• Complexity: program management, logistics artifacts, transformation, and total lifecycle logistics support to current, new, and proposed technologies, rather than routine maintenance.

• Magnitude: contract dollar value (approximately $25M-$40M) and contract length (approximately five years).

The third aspect of the past performance evaluation is to evaluate the overall quality of the Offeror’s recent relevant, past performance. The Government will evaluate the Offeror, principal subcontractors, and JV team members performance and focus its evaluation on the following areas:

1) meeting technical requirements, i.e., the quality of technical performance; 2) controlling contract cost; and 3) managing the contracted effort. A separate quality rating will not be assigned, rather the past performance confidence assessment rating is based on the Offeror’s overall record of past performance taking into account the recency, relevancy, and quality of performance.

3.0 PRICE/COST

Cost Reimbursement CLINs:

Except for otherwise unacceptable proposals when awarding on initial proposals, the Government will perform a cost realism analysis to determine the most probable cost (MPC) for each applicable offeror’s proposal. Cost realism analysis is the process of independently reviewing and evaluating specific elements of each Offeror’s proposed cost to determine whether the proposed cost is realistic for the work to be performed and are consistent with the unique methods of performance and materials described in the Offeror’s technical proposal.