N40080-13-R-0457_0001.pdf

ACQR3089651

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to update the Contract Specialist for this solicitation. All references for Trang Tran have been changed to Brenda Uyeda. Contact information for Brenda Uyeda: phone number 202-685-3070, email brenda.uyeda@navy.mil.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 22

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 12-Jun-2013

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

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X N40080-13-R-0457

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

12-Jun-2013

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

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

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

12-Jun-2013

CODE

NAVAL FACILITIES ENG COMMAND WASHINGTON

1314 HARWOOD ST SE, LDG 212, 4TH FLOOR

WASHINGTON NAVY YARD DC 20374

N40080 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N40080-13-R-0457

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The solicitation issue date has changed from 11-Jun-2013 to 12-Jun-2013.

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

The following have been modified:

GENERAL INFORMATION

B.1 Contract Title: Janitorial Services at Naval Support Activity (NSA) Bethesda, MD

B.2 Type of Contract: This is a Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) / Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ).

B.3 Minimum Guarantee: The Firm-Fixed Price portion of the contract is the minimum guarantee. Refer to Section H – Special Contract Requirement, NFAS 5252.216-9313 MINIMUM AND MAXMUM

QUANTITIES.

B.4 Set-Aside: This procurement is being set-aside for 100% small businesses.

B.5 NAICS Code: The NAICS Code assigned to this procurement is 561720 with a small business size standard of $16,500,000. Refer to On-Line Representations and Certifications Applications (ORCA) via https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM) (FAR 52.219-1 Small Business Program Representation (May 2004)).

B.6 Wage Determination (Service)/Collective Bargaining Agreement (CB): Service Contract Act (SCA) Wage

Determination and a Collective Bargaining Agreement are included in this solicitation. Refer to Section J.

B.7 Contract Term: This contract contains provision for a Base Period with 4 option periods, not to exceed a total of five (5) years. The Government reserves the right to have a reduced base year. The Government has the option to extend the term of the contract in accordance with Section I, Contract Clause, 5252.217- 9301, Option to Extend the Term of Contract-Services. In the option periods, the Government may adjust the prices, if applicable, based on the new Department of Labor Wage Determination.

B.8 Bid Guarantee/Bonding Requirements: NOT REQUIRED for this procurement.

B.9 Period of Performance: The proposed phase-in period, base period and option periods are as follows:

Phase-In Period 30 January 2014 through 31 March 2014 Base Period 01 April 2014 through 31 March 2015 1st Option 01 April 2015 through 31 March 2016 2nd Option 01 April 2016 through 31 March 2017 3rd Option 01 April 2017 through 31 March 2018 4th Option 01 April 2018 through 31 March 2019

B.10 Evaluation of Proposals: Please refer to Sections L & M

B.11 Contract Line Items (CLINs): Description of the basic contract line items (CLINs), and option CLINs:

CLIN Description

CLIN 7000 Base Period Firm Fixed Price PWD Bethesda CLIN 9000 Base Period Indefinite Quantity

CLIN 7001 1st Option Period Firm Fixed Price PWD Bethesda CLIN 9001 1st Option Period Indefinite Quantity

CLIN 7002 2nd Option Period Firm Fixed Price PWD Bethesda CLIN 9002 2nd Option Period Indefinite Quantity

CLIN 7003 3rd Option Period Firm Fixed Price PWD Bethesda CLIN 9003 3rd Option Period Indefinite Quantity

CLIN 7004 4th Option Period Firm Fixed Price PWD Bethesda CLIN 9004 4th Option Period Indefinite Quantity

B.12 Contract Line Items (CLINs) and Contract Exhibit Line Items:

a. Offerors shall enter unit prices for Exhibit Line Items Number (ELINs) for the Firm-Fixed Price Base Year and IDIQ Base Year. Offerors shall also enter a proposed inflation rate for out year pricing *Inflation shall be submitted as a decimal (e.g. 1.01 inflation rate would indicate a 1% increase year to year), whereas

0.99 = 1% decrease year to year). This inflation rate will be utilized for all modifications throughout the contract period unless another rate is agreed upon both parties for any future ELIN items.

b. In the event there is a difference between the unit price and the extended total amount, the unit price will be held to be the intended bid and the total of the CLIN, SLIN and Exhibits Line Items (ELINs) will be recomputed accordingly. The CLIN, which included the SLIN will also be recomputed to take into account the changes in the contract SLINs or ELINs. If the offeror provides a total amount for a CLIN, SLIN, or ELIN, but fails to enter the unit price, the total amount divided by the CLIN, SLIN or ELIN quantity will be held to be the intended unit price.

c. The Schedule of Firm Fixed Price Work and the Schedule of Indefinite Quantity Work (See B.11 for description of CLINs) will be used as the basis for deductions in accordance with NFAS 5252.246-9303, “CONSEQUENCES OF CONTRACTOR’S FAILURE TO PERFORM REQUIRED SERVICES” in Section E.

B.13 Indefinite Quantity Contract Line Item Quantities:

Once the estimated quantities for individual line items shown in the Schedule have been ordered, additional quantities may be ordered as long as the overall not-to-exceed (NTE) amount of the contract per year is not exceeded and the Contractor agrees by signing the task order.

B.14 Unit Price Adjustments in Option Periods:

The Contracting Officer will make price adjustments for applicable workers subject to the Service Contract Act in accordance with FAR Clause 52.222-43 Fair Labor Standards Act and Service Act-Price Adjustment (Multiple Year and Option Contracts).

B.15 Period of Performance – Less Than One Year:

Offers shall be submitted for the performance of work for a period of one year. The contractor is cautioned to recognize that the initial term of the contract may be for a period of less than one year. In the event that the period of performance is less than one year, the Government will reduce the individual line item quantities to reflect work remaining in the contract term and no other adjustments to the pro-rated contract price will be made.

B.16 Government Purchase Card:

Indefinite Quantity work may be ordered at the prices offered in one of two ways:

1) by the issuing activity using a DD Form 1155 “Order for Supplies and Services”, or

2) by an authorized Government user via a Government Purchase Card (GPC through the DoD Emall).

When receiving DoD Emall orders against Section B, the contractor shall provide the supplies and services at the offered price without additional markup or handling fee.

B.17 Contractor Support of Electronic Facilities Support Contracting (e-FSC):

This procurement allows for the use of DoD EMALL for issuing orders. Refer to Section H, Special Contract Requirement.

B.18 Proposal Delivery:

a. NOTICE TO OFFEROR

Due to increased security at all military installations, Offerors who do not currently have a valid Contractor’s ID and Vehicle Decal issued by the Department of Defense (DoD), must allow sufficient time to obtain a one-day pass to permit entry to the base. In accordance with Washington Navy Yard security regulations, all prospective visitors and contractor personnel are hereby notified that in order to obtain a one-day visitor’s pass the person must present their driver’s license and vehicle registration and/or rental car contract. Personnel and vehicle one-day passes must be obtained at the Visitor’s Office located at 11th St. & O St. SE, Washington, DC 20374.

It is imperative that the offeror adhere to this notice in order to avoid delay in submitting your proposal.

Also, be advised by this notice that the level of security at Washington Navy Yard may change at any time.

As the level of security heightens, the amount of time required to gain access to the Washington Navy Yard also increases.

b. SUBMITTING YOUR PROPOSAL

The proposal delivery (hand-carried or mailed) must be received PRIOR to the proposal due date and time provided in Block 9 of the Standard Form 33 (*Standard Form 33 must be signed and all amendments must be listed and acknowledged).

The proposal shall be submitted in sealed envelopes/boxes marked in the bottom right corner “Solicitation N40080-13-R-0457, DO NOT OPEN IN MAILROOM.” Proposals shall be mailed or hand-carried (Electronic (E-mail, facsimile, etc.) submissions are not authorized) to the following location, (NO exceptions to place of submission will be made):

NAVFAC Washington 1st Floor Mailroom 1314 Harwood St. SE, Bldg. 212 Washington Navy Yard, DC 20374 ATTN: Brenda Uyeda

**The Visitor Center at the Washington Navy Yard can have wait lines, offerors are reminded to allow sufficient time for your proposal to be received PRIOR to the proposed closing. If walking on site, a state issued identification card will be needed at check-in. For visitors who wish to park on base, proof of vehicle registration AND vehicle insurance will be required as well.**

c. Offeror shall submit complete and accurate information. The Government may elect not to request additional information to perform the evaluation.

B.19 Request for Information (RFI)/Clarification Questions:

Solicitation and RFP files are posted to the Navy Electronic Commerce Online (NECO) website (https://www.neco.navy.mil/) as mandated by our agency. By necessity, these files are protected to prevent unauthorized editing.

It is the sole responsibility of the offeror to obtain the RFP files, along with any Amendments, from this website.

Unprotected editable file copies of the RFP documents including: Word, Excel and/or PDF files (Adobe Acrobat Files) will not be provided. Please plan accordingly.

Contractors are required to review the entire solicitation package before submitting questions. Inquiries during the proposal preparation period shall be submitted via email to Brenda Uyeda at brenda.uyeda@navy.mil at least ten (10) days before proposals are due.

RFI Cut-off date: 15 July 2013.

Inquiries must be in Word Document format and submitted through the Prime Contractor only.

Subcontractors with questions must submit them through the Prime Contractor.

B.20 Solicitation:

This solicitation incorporates by reference a Performance Work Statement (PWS) developed by using NAVFAC performance-based specifications. The PWS consists of Annexes 1, 2 and 15. The contractor will be required to meet the specification in those Annexes as if they were set forth in Section C.

B.21 Pre-Proposal Conference and Site Visit: Please refer to Section L, Instructions, Conditions, and notices to offerors.

B.22 Phase-In Period:

After official notification of award, the contractor will be provided a phase-in period of 60 days to prepare for the start of the contract. Rapidgate is a requirement of this contract and can take up to 30 days to be processed. Please ensure that upon award you are registered for base access. The offeror will have to utilize daily passes for deliveries until granted rapid gate access.

B.23 Bid Schedule:

To be completed via Attachment J-0200000-06 ELINs in Section J, List of attachments.

END GENERAL INFORMATION

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

INSTRUCTIONS

L.1 PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS:

a. General.

1. The proposal submitted in response to this solicitation shall be clear, concise, and shall contain sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposals should not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but rather should demonstrate convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet these requirements. The offer shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the RFP. Nonconformance with the solicitation requirements, specified organization and content may result in elimination or misevaluation of the proposal. All claimed technical capabilities to meet the requirements shall be realistic and are subject to verification by the Government. Offerors should assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of the offeror’s business and that the Government will base its evaluation on the information contained in the offeror’s proposals.

2. Team Arrangements: FAR 9.6 defines contractor team arrangements. Team arrangements mean: (1) two or more companies form a partnership or joint venture to act as a potential prime contractor or (2) a potential prime contractor agrees with one or more other companies to have them act as its subcontractor under a specified Government contract or acquisition program.

3. All offerors proposing a partnership, joint venture, other teaming arrangement, or resource of a parent company/subsidiary/affiliate shall submit the following information in the front of the technical and price proposals:

• Provide a listing of the team members’ corporate name (no abbreviations), address, point of contact, phone number, DUNS Number, and CAGE Code.

• Submit a letter of commitment from the team members. The commitment letter shall clearly identify the expected relationship, role and responsibility of the team member.

b. Proposal Organization and Number of Copies.

• Volume 1: Technical Proposal - submit one (1) original and four (4) copies in 8-1/2 x 11 format, font size 10. Proposals shall be submitted in three ring binders and tabbed appropriately by major evaluation factor and subfactors. In addition, submit two (2) complete copies of the technical proposal on CDs. The document should be Adobe Acrobat files (pdf format). No pen and ink changes are allowed. Page limit is one hundred twenty five (125) pages (front and back) total for Volume 1: Technical Proposal. Submission over this page limit will NOT be evaluated.

• Volume 2: Price Proposal - Submit one (1) original of the price proposal in a three ring binder. Submit on one (1) CD, a complete copy of the price proposal. Documents should be in Microsoft Word or Excel. Please do not submit Adobe Acrobat files.

• Staples or other binding shall not be used. Elaborate brochures or documentation, detailed art work, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

• The proposal shall be written to the greatest extent possible on a stand-alone basis so that its content may be evaluated with a minimum of cross-referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Cross-referencing within a proposal volume is permitted where its use would conserve space without impairing clarity. Hyperlinking of cross-references is permissible.

Information required for proposal evaluation, but not provided in its designated volume or cross-referenced, is assumed omitted from the proposal.

L.2 NOTICE TO OFFERORS:

1. Your acquisition points of contact for this project are Contract Specialist Brenda Uyeda at 202-685-

3070, or email brenda.uyeda@navy.mil and Contracting Officer James Waite at 202-685-3141, or email james.h.waite@navy.mil.

2. The proposals and all copies shall be sent via FEDEX or hand-carried to the address and POC shown below:

NAVFAC Washington Attn: Brenda Uyeda 1314 Harwood Street SE, Bldg 212, First Floor Mail Room Washington Navy Yard Washington, DC 20374

Proposals must be received no later than 25 July 2013, 2:00 P.M local time (EST).

If hand-delivering, please deliver to the first floor mailroom of BLDG 212 at the Washington Navy Yard. Visitors will first need to obtain a visitor’s pass at the Visitor Office by entering the O St, SE and 11th St, SE gate.

Facsimile copies and email copies will NOT be accepted.

Please allow SUFFICIENT TIME for your proposal to be received prior to the proposed closing time. Technical and Price proposals shall be submitted in sealed envelopes/boxes marked in the bottom right corner “Solicitation N40080-13-R-0457, DO NOT OPEN IN MAILROOM.”

**All proposals must be received prior to the due date and time. Any proposals submitted after the time set for receipt will be stamped with the date and hour of receipt and held unopened until after award. The file shall be documented in accordance with FAR 14.304-4.

L.3 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) INFORMATION/CLARIFICATION QUESTIONS:

All questions from offerors concerning any aspect of this request for proposal (RFP) must be submitted in writing. Prospective offerors are requested to submit written questions specifying the section paragraph of the specification for which clarification is desired. All inquiries will be answered in writing. Telephone questions will not be entertained. Offerors are specifically cautioned that verbal discussions and replies to question shall not have the effect of changing the provisions of the written RFP.

Prospective offerors are required to review the entire solicitation package before submitting questions.

Requests for Information (RFI’s) during the proposal preparation period shall be submitted by email to brenda.uyeda@navy.mil and james.h.waite@navy.mil. RFI’s must be submitted in a WORD document and submitted by the Prime Contractor only. Subcontractors with questions must submit them through the Prime Contractor.

THE RFI CUT-OFF DATE IS COB 15 JULY 2013.

L.4 DISPOSITION OF PROPOSALS

Proposals from unsuccessful offerors will not be returned to the offeror, but shall be destroyed by the Contracting Officer. No certificate of destruction will be issued.

L.5 PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE/SITE VISIT:

Invitation is hereby extended to all prospective proposers to attend a pre-proposal conference and site visit for this project. The pre-proposal conference has been scheduled for WEDNESDAY 19 June 2013. The pre-proposal conference will begin at 9:00 AM EST, at the WRNMMC, Building 10 (Main Hospital Building), Laurel B Clark Auditorium, second floor room 2010. The site visit will follow the pre-proposal conference.

INFORMATION REQUIRED:

Date and time:

Wednesday, 19 June 2013 at 09:00 AM EST.

Meeting location:

Walter Reed Nation Military Medical Center (WRNMMC) 8901 Wisconsin Ave, Bldg 10 (main hospital building) Bethesda, MD 20889-5609 Conference Room: Laurel B Clark Auditorium

All attendees MUST sign in at the sign-in table outside of room 2010, second floor building 10

Transportation:

Government transportation will not be provided.

PLEASE NOTE – PARKING IS EXTREMELY LIMITED. Therefore, please plan accordingly.

Offerors must submit the following information for each visitor, NO LATER THAN COB, 14 June 2013 to Madalyn Hawkins at Madalyn.Hawkins@Navy.mil.

Full name Company name

Important Information:

**Only two (2) people per offeror will be permitted to attend.

**Cameras, cell phones, laptops, and any other type of communication device may not be permitted at some secure areas or sites on the site visits.

**Please note that questions resulting from the pre-proposal conference and site visits must be submitted to brenda.uyeda@navy.mil and james.h.waite@navy.mil

**Bring copies of maps provided in the solicitation.

**Visitors are required to present documentation evidencing personal identification and firm affiliation.

L.6 FINANCIAL INFORMATION:

Although Financial Information will not be considered under the Technical Evaluation Factors, it shall be considered part of the responsibility determination. The following information shall be submitted separately with the offeror’s proposal:

a. Furnish financial statements from the Offeror and Subcontractor(s) for the last two (2) years. Financial statements must include the accountant’s letter, balance sheet, income statement, statement of retained earnings, statement of cash flow, Profit/Loss Statement and accompanying footnotes to the statements.

b. Furnish a detail projected, monthly cash flow analysis for this contract only for the first year of performance.

L.7 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

1. The Government reserves the right to eliminate from consideration for award any or all offers at any time prior to award of the contract; to negotiate with offerors in the competitive range; and to award the contract to the offeror submitting the proposal determined to represent the best value the proposal most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

2. As stated in the solicitation, the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. In addition, if the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

3. The tradeoff process is selected as appropriate for this acquisition. The Government considers it to be in its best interest to allow consideration of award to other than the lowest priced offeror or other than the highest technically rated offeror.

4. As stated in the solicitation, all technical factors when combined are of equal importance to the performance confidence assessment (past performance) rating; and all technical factors and the performance confidence assessment (past performance) rating, when combined are approximately equal to price.

5. Any proposal found to have a deficiency in meeting the stated solicitation requirements or performance objectives will be considered ineligible for award, unless the deficiency is corrected through discussions.

Proposals may be found to have either a significant weakness or multiple weaknesses that impact either the individual factor rating or the overall rating for the proposal. The evaluation report must document the evaluation board’s assessment of the identified weakness(s) and the associated risk to successful contract performance resulting from the weakness(s). This assessment must provide the rationale for proceeding to award without discussions.

B. ADJECTIVAL RATINGS/DESCRIPTIONS

1. The technical rating reflects the degree to which the proposed approach meets or does not meet the minimum performance or capability requirements through an assessment of the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, deficiencies, and risks of a proposal.

A combined technical/risk evaluation considering risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings shall be used. The technical risk evaluation shall utilize the combined technical/risk ratings listed in the following table. Adjectival ratings and rating descriptions will be used to assign an overall rating to each technical proposal and to assign a rating for each technical factor. Use upper case letter ratings for major technical factors as well as the overall rating. The addition of plus (+) or minus (-) to an adjective rating is not allowed.

Table 1. Combined Technical/Risk Ratings

Rating Description

Outstanding (O)

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Good (G)

Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Acceptable (A)

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal (M)

Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable (U)

Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is unawardable.

2. Definitions: The following definitions are provided to assist evaluators in the evaluation of each non-cost/price factor.

a. Strength: An aspect of an offeror’s proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract

b. Weakness: A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

c. Significant Weakness: A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract

d. Deficiency: A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

C. CORPORATE EXPERIENCE EVALUATION

1. Corporate experience evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s experience pertains to the volume of work completed by a contractor that are comparable to the types of work described under the definition of recent and relevant projects, in terms of size, scope, and complexity. Also, of particular importance is the company’s breadth and depth of experience in projects of similar size, scope and complexity.

2. There are two aspects to corporate experience evaluation. The first is to evaluate the offeror’s experience to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection.

Recent, Relevant corporate experience is defined as:

Experience of the team with respect to the proposed responsibility regarding hospital/healthcare and commercial janitorial services of similar size, scope, and complexity to this requirement performed within the last five years preceding the release date of the solicitation.

Size: Approximately $10M or greater Scope: Hospital/Healthcare and Commercial janitorial services Complexity: Hospital/healthcare janitorial services in the following areas: critical care, Main

Operating Room (MOR), in-patient, out-patient, and watch standing.

3. This source selection requires a greater level of discrimination within the corporate experience evaluation, therefore, the relevancy ratings in the following table shall be used:

Table 2. Relevancy Ratings

Rating Definition

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

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

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

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

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

4. The second aspect of the corporate experience evaluation is to evaluate the breadth and depth of experience in projects of similar size, scope, and complexity. Each offeror shall be assigned one of the Adjectival ratings in Table 1 above.

D. SAFETY EVALUATION

1. Per NFAS 15.304(d), solicitations utilizing source selection procedures for procurements within the 50 United States and the District of Columbia shall contain a standard “Safety” technical evaluation factor.

This factor shall be included as a stand-alone evaluation factor and not as a sub-factor or an element of the Past Performance evaluation factor. This action will result in the selection of contractors that have consistently demonstrated a commitment to safety and the ability to properly manage and implement safety procedures for themselves and all tiers of subcontractors under their purview.

2. The safety evaluation has three elements: Experience Modification Rate (EMR), Occupational Safety and

Health Association (OSHA) Days Away from Work, Job Restriction, or Transfer (DART), and Technical Approach to Safety.

3. The three elements of safety identified above, are not sub-factors. The evaluators should collectively consider all elements of safety when assigning an overall adjectival rating for this factor. The SSEB will need to make a qualitative determination of the rating for this factor, taking into account the risk ratings for EMR and DART and the subjective evaluation of the narrative.

4. Evaluators will not average the rating from the three years for the EMR and the DART.

5. The following should be utilized by evaluators as a general guideline to evaluate the EMR and DART rates:

Risk EMR Very Low Risk Less than 0.6 Low Risk From 0.6 to less than 0.8 Moderate Risk From 0.8 to 1.0 High Risk Greater than1.0 to 1.1 Extremely High Risk Greater than 1.1

Risk DART Rate Very Low Risk Less Than 1.0 Low Risk From 1.0 to 1.99 Moderate Risk From 2.0 to 2.99 High Risk From 3.0 to 4.0 Extremely High Risk Greater than 4.0

E. PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

1. The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. The past performance evaluation considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements. One performance confidence assessment rating is assigned for each offeror after evaluating the offeror’s recent past performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the contract requirements.

2. There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation. The first is to evaluate the offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection.

Recent, Relevant project is defined as:

Experience of the team with respect to the proposed responsibility regarding hospital/healthcare and commercial janitorial services of similar size, scope, and complexity to this requirement performed within the last five years preceding the release date of the solicitation.

Complexity: Hospital/healthcare janitorial services in the following areas: critical care, Main

Operating Room (MOR), in-patient, out-patient, and watch standing.

3. This source selection requires a greater level of discrimination within the past performance evaluation, therefore, the relevancy ratings in the following table shall be used:

Table 3. Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Rating Definition

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

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

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

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

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

4. The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts. The past performance evaluation performed in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the offeror’s past performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the offeror performed those past contracts.

5. Performance Confidence Assessment. In conducting a performance confidence assessment, each offeror shall be assigned one of the ratings in Table 4 below:

Table 4. Performance Confidence Assessments

Rating Description

Substantial Confidence

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

Satisfactory Confidence

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

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

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

Unknown Confidence (Neutral)

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

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

EVALUATION FACTORS AND AWARD

1. The solicitation requires the evaluation of price and the following non-cost/price factors:

Factor 1– Technical/Management Approach Factor 2 – Corporate Experience Factor 3 – Safety Factor 4 – Past Performance on Recent, Relevant Projects

PRICE

The distinction between experience and past performance is that experience pertains to the volume of work completed by a contractor that are comparable to the types of work described under the definition of recent, relevant projects, in terms of size, scope, and complexity. Past performance pertains to both the relevance of recent efforts and how well a contractor has performed on the contracts.

2. The relative order of importance of the non-cost/price evaluation factors is the technical factors (Factors 1, 2, and 3) are of equal importance to each other and, when combined are equal in importance to the past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment factor (Factor 4). When the proposal is evaluated as a whole, the technical factors and past performance/performance confidence assessment factor combined (i.e., the non-cost/price evaluation factors) are approximately equal to price.

The importance of price will increase if the Offerors’ non-cost/price proposals are considered essentially equal in terms of overall quality, or if price is so high as to significantly diminish the value of a non-cost/price proposal’s superiority to the Government. Award will be made to the responsible Offeror(s) whose offer conforms to the solicitation and represents the best value to the Government, price and non-price factors considered.

Volume 1: Technical Proposal - submit one (1) original and four (4) copies in 8-1/2 x 11 format, font size

10. Proposals shall be submitted in three ring binders and tabbed appropriately by major evaluation factor and subfactors. In addition, submit two (2) complete copies of the technical proposal on CDs. The document should be Adobe Acrobat files (pdf format). No pen and ink changes are allowed. Page limit is one hundred twenty five (125) pages (front and back) total for Volume 1: Technical Proposal. Submission over this page limit will NOT be evaluated.

Volume 2: Price Proposal - Submit one (1) original of the price proposal in a three ring binder. Submit on one (1) CD, a complete copy of the price proposal. Documents should be in Microsoft Word or Excel.

Please do not submit Adobe Acrobat files.

Staples or other binding shall not be used. Elaborate brochures or documentation, detailed art work, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

The proposal shall be written to the greatest extent possible on a stand-alone basis so that its content may be evaluated with a minimum of cross-referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Cross-referencing within a proposal volume is permitted where its use would conserve space without impairing clarity.

Hyperlinking of cross-references is permissible. Information required for proposal evaluation, but not provided in its designated volume or cross-referenced, is assumed omitted from the proposal.

3. Basis of Evaluation and Submittal Requirements for Each Factor.

a. PRICE

i. Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The evaluated price shall be the sum of the FFP and IDIQ CLINs for the base period, and four (4) Option Years. Total potential contract duration is 60 months. Provide the total price for performance of work required by the solicitation for all contract line items, including options, as presented in Section B including filling out and submitting unit prices and amounts for the contract line items, sub-line items, and exhibit line items in the ELIN spreadsheet, Section J, Attachment J-0200000-06 ELINs.xls.

Within the Price Proposal, offerors shall provide the following:

a) Provide a narrative description of the price proposal and any underlying assumptions that influenced its preparation.

b) Provide a narrative detailing the linkage of the proposed price with the proposed level of effort proposed in Factor 1 – Technical/Management Approach.

c) Provide a narrative of rationale for the inflation rates applied to each of the option years pricing.

d) Completed Section B, Contract Line item Numbers (CLINs) 7000 through 9004

e) Completed Section J, ELIN Pricing, Attachment J-0200000-06 ELINs.xls.

f) Provide an Excel spreadsheet with detailed basis for the prices listed in the ELINs, so that the Government may gain insight into unit prices in order to validate them.

ii. Basis of Evaluation:

The Government will evaluate price based on the total price. Total price consists of the basic requirements and all option items (see Section B of the solicitation). The Government intends to evaluate all options and has included the provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) in Section M of the solicitation. In accordance with FAR 52.217-5, evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

In addition, the Government will evaluate the consistency of the linkage of the proposed price with the proposed level of effort proposed in Factor 1 – Technical/Management Approach.

Analysis will be performed by one or more of the following techniques to ensure a fair and reasonable price:

i. Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the RFP.

ii. Comparison of proposed prices with the IGCE.

iii. Comparison of proposed prices with available historical information.

iv. Comparison of market survey results.

b. Non-cost/price Factors:

1) FACTOR 1 - TECHNICAL/MANAGEMENT APPROACH:

The offeror shall submit a narrative response that clearly demonstrates its understanding of and approach to accomplishing the complexity and magnitude of service requirements set forth in the performance objectives and standards of the Performance Work Statement. Each of the six components below must be tabbed in the technical proposal and discussed separately:

a. Phase-In Transition Plan:

The phase in transition period is 60 days.

Offerors shall submit a Transition Plan detailing projected milestone schedule, the transition of personnel, equipment, etc. in each location. Specifically, offerors’ plans must clearly detail the number of days require to accomplish formally relieve the incumbent contractor of responsibilities at each location within the Contract. Transition plans, which reflect more expeditious assumption of contracted responsibilities at all locations, will be viewed more favorably.

b. Workforce Management:

i. Provide an explanation of how the offeror will organize, staff and retain qualified workers at management and operational levels under the contract.

ii. Identify the management positions and personnel, along with qualifications necessary to demonstrate that the offeror’s management approach is sound, and that there is a high likelihood of offeror’s ability to provide uninterrupted service.

iii. Provide detailed Staffing Chart depicting levels of authority, chain of command to the lowest level including subcontractors.

iv. Provide a staffing plan including the number of productive hours per week or year for each full time and part time employee for the following management areas:

• Critical Care Areas including:

o Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) o Intensive Care Unit (ICU) o Emergency Room (ER) o Main Operating Room (MOR) o Recovery Room – outside MOR o Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) o Mother Infant Care Center (MICC) o Watch Standing

• Inpatient areas

• Outpatient areas

• Child Development Centers

• Administrative areas

v. Provide rationale for the direct labor hours consistent with the Staffing Plan provided.

c. Key personnel:

Provide resumes showing job responsibilities, authority level, and copies of certification certificates for the following key personnel: project manager, quality control manager, site safety/health officer, Executive Housekeeper, and Assistant Executive Housekeeper proposed for this contract.

d. Subcontractor Management

Provide methods and procedures to select, monitor and manage subcontractor effort to ensure their compliance with performance outcomes.

e. Quality Management System (QMS)

Describe the proposed Quality Control structure and processes to ensure that quality services are provided utilizing appropriate inspection techniques in a specified schedule at each location. The offeror should describe the methodology to identify, track and address performance deficiencies necessary to ensure that quality services are provided in a timely manner. The plan should also address processes necessary to ensure that operating procedures are monitored, changed to correct and prevent performance deficiencies, and that personnel are appropriately trained to accomplish operating procedures, including necessary changes.

f. Questions for Custodial, Specification 1503010

Offeror shall provide the following:

i. Proposed methods or techniques used to clean: Main Operating Rooms (MORs), Intensive Care Units (ICUs), Pediatric Intensive Care Units (PICUs), and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICUs).

ii. Specific materials, equipment and cleaning chemicals for performing cleaning services for the following areas:

a. Critical care areas

b. Main Operating Room (MOR)

c. In-patient wards

d. Out-patient Clinics

e. Watch Standing

f. Public areas

iii. Infection Control Bloodborne Pathogens Training Program for employees, supervisors and managers.

iv. Experiences in meeting Joint Commission (JC) Standards.

Offerors will be evaluated on the quality of the Technical and management approach identified in the Solicitation as well as the evidence of the extent to which the offeror’s approach submitted in response to the PWS will achieve the project’ objectives.

a. The Government will evaluate the effectiveness of the offeror’s Phase-In Transition Plan to accomplish an orderly transition and assuming operating responsibilities. Transition plans, which reflect more expeditious assumption of contracted responsibilities at all locations, will be viewed more favorable.

b. Workforce Management:

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s management methods, processes and techniques used to organize and staff the contract by evaluating the following:

i. How well the offeror will organize, staff and retain qualified workers at management and operational levels under the contract.

ii. The proposed management positions and personnel, along with qualifications necessary to demonstrate that the offeror’s management approach is sound, and that there is a high likelihood of offeror’s ability to provide uninterrupted service.

iii. The proposed Staffing Chart depicting levels of authority, chain of command to the lowest level including subcontractors.

iv. The proposed staffing plan including the number of productive hours per week or year for each full time and part time employee for the all management areas stated above.

v. The rationale for the direct labor hours consistent with the Staffing Plan provided.

c. The Government will evaluate the qualification of the proposed key personnel.

d. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed methods and procedures to select, monitor and manage subcontractor effort to ensure their compliance with WRNMMC performance outcomes and the offeror’s Technical approach. In particular, attention will be paid to methods by which the Prime Contractor maintains control where subcontractors are used substantially.

e. The Government will evaluate the Quality Control concept and procedures submitted with the proposal. The Government will look for a concept that details methods, procedures and tasks necessary to ensure that quality services are provided utilizing appropriate inspection techniques in a specified schedule at each location. The Government will also evaluate on how the offeror address processes necessary to ensure that operating procedures are monitored and changed to correct and prevent performance deficiencies and that personnel are appropriately trained to accomplish operating procedures, including necessary changes.

f. The Government will also evaluate the following:

i. Proposed methods or techniques used to clean: Main Operating Rooms (MORs), Intensive

Care Units (ICUs), Pediatric Intensive Care Units (PICUs), and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICUs).

ii. Specific materials, equipment and cleaning chemicals for performing cleaning services for the following areas:

a. Critical care areas

b. Main Operating Room (MOR)

c. In-patient wards

d. Out-patient Clinics

e. Watch Standing

f. Public areas

iii. Infection Control Bloodborne Pathogens Training Program for employees, supervisors and managers.

iv. Experiences in meeting Joint Commission (JC) Standards.

2) FACTOR 2 – CORPORATE EXPERIENCE

a. The offeror shall clearly demonstrate relevant experience in hospital/healthcare and commercial Janitorial services on contracts similar in size, scope, and complexity to this requirement performed within the last five years preceding the release date of the solicitation.

Offerors shall submit THREE corporate experience examples.

Recent, Relevant corporate experience is defined as:

Experience of the team with respect to the proposed responsibility regarding hospital/healthcare and commercial janitorial services of similar size, scope, and complexity to this requirement performed within the last five years preceding the release date of the solicitation.

Complexity: Hospital/healthcare janitorial services in the following areas:

critical care, Main Operating Room (MOR), in-patient, out-patient, and watch standing.

b. Offerors shall demonstrate experience of Joint Venture and/or significant subcontractors and/or key personnel in successfully performing the same or similar work. For each project, the offeror shall complete the Corporate Experience Questionnaire included as Attachment D.

c. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to clearly explain and demonstrate to the Government how their work experience in each referenced contract is relevant to the contract requirements in this solicitation. If the Offeror does not clearly explain how their experience(s) are relevant to the contract requirements in this specification, the Government may interpret that to mean there is no relevant experience for the contract requirements not mentioned by the offeror.

Offerors will be evaluated based on the experience of the team member relative to the proposed responsibility for the work requirements and demonstrated experience in addressing the requirements of the Performance Work…