N4008018R03070005.docx

N4008018R0307

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

Q & A 2

1. Q: There is a discrepancy between the Factor 3 corporate experience and Factor 5 Past Performance. Factor 3 states that the projects must be completed within the past five (5) years and Factor 5 states that the project must show a history of performance within the last five (5) years. Can you please confirm that both of these statements are correct

A: The statements are not correct. Factor 3 has been corrected to read:

The offeror shall submit a minimum of two (2) projects and maximum of three (3) projects that best demonstrate their experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope and complexity to the solicited project. For the purpose of this evaluation, recent, relevant corporate experience is defined as a project that has a history of performance within the five years preceding the release of the solicitation:

2 Q: Please confirm that we can provide different sets of projects for Factor 3 and Factor 5.

A: No. The projects for Factor 3 and Factor 5 should be the same.

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been modified:

52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014)

(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

Evaluation factors are listed in descending order of importance.

NOTE: Offerors MUST be evaluated ACCEPTABLE under factors 2, 3, 4 and 5 in order to be considered technically acceptable overall.

Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method

(b) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(c) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer's specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

(End of provision)

ADDENDUM 52.212-2 EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

Basis of Award

1. The solicitation will result in a single award IDIQ contract in which task orders for each location will be awarded and performance shall be evaluated at each location during the periods of performance for each task order.

2. 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 lowest priced, technically acceptable offer.

3. 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.”

4. The Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) process is selected as appropriate for this acquisition because the best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price.

5. An overall non-price factors rating must be at least “ACCEPTABLE” in order to be eligible for award. An “UNACCEPTABLE” rating in any factor results in the overall non-price factors proposal being rated “UNACCEPTABLE” unless corrected through discussions. An overall non-price factors rating of “UNACCEPTABLE” makes a proposal ineligible for award.

6. The number of proposals to be evaluated for technical acceptability shall be limited to the three (3) lowest priced offerors. If sufficient quantity of technically acceptable proposals is not found within the first group of proposals, the Government will review the next lower price proposal.

7. The Government will utilize the following methodology:

Proposals will initially be screened for price and placed in order of price (lowest to highest price). The Government will then evaluate the non-price factors of the three (3) lowest-priced proposals. However, the Government, at its sole discretion, reserves the right to increase the number of proposals it will review under this methodology. Accordingly, under this methodology, the technical factors of some proposals may not be evaluated by the Government.

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

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

NOTE: Offerors MUST be evaluated ACCEPTABLE under factors 2, 3, 4 and 5 in order to be considered technically acceptable overall.

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

(a) FACTOR 1 - PRICE:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

Offerors shall complete the ELINs Spreadsheet. The Total Evaluated Price (TEP) shall be the sum of the ELINs and the sum of the CLINs for the Recurring and Non-Recurring Work for the base period, and four (4) option periods. If there is any discrepancy between the ELINs and CLINs, we will assume the ELINs are correct. Total potential contract duration is 54-60 months; however, the Government is not obligated to exercise any option. The offeror shall 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, and exhibit line items in the ELINs spreadsheet, Section J Attachment J-0200000-07, Exhibit Line Item Numbers (ELINs).xls.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

The Government will evaluate price based on the total price. Total price consists of the Recurring and Non-Recurring Work requirements for the base period and option years (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 ADDENDUM FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation – Commercial Items, of the solicitation. In accordance with FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). Analysis will be performed by one or more of the following techniques to ensure a fair and reasonable price:

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

b. Comparison of proposed prices with the IGE.

c. Comparison of proposed prices with available historical information.

The offer will be evaluated on the total price of “All or None basis.” Failure to include a unit price and extended amount for each and every ELIN within the schedule of the solicitation may exclude the offeror from further consideration for award. Price is determined by multiplying the unit price by the estimated quantity. The product of these is the Estimated Amount for the ELIN. The estimated amounts of the all ELINS for all Option Periods represent the total proposed price. The total proposed price will be evaluated for fair and reasonableness in accordance with (IAW) FAR 15.404-1.

For the purpose of initial evaluation of offers, the following will be utilized in resolving arithmetic discrepancies found on the face of the bidding schedule as submitted by the offeror:

(1) Obviously misplaced decimal points will be corrected:

(2) Discrepancy between unit price and extended price, the unit price will govern;

(3) Apparent errors in extension of unit prices will be corrected;

(4) Apparent errors in extended prices per E will be corrected;

(5) Rounding for the unit price shall be limited to 2 digits after the decimal.

The government will rely on the unit price, as proposed by the offeror, multiplied by the estimated quantity to correct any apparent arithmetic discrepancies in the estimate amount of for each ELIN (and CLIN). The totals calculated by resolution of the arithmetic discrepancies listed above will represent the TEP. These procedures will not be used if the TEP displaces the low offeror. Discussions may then be conducted.

(b) FACTOR 2 - TECHNICAL

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit a narrative response that clearly details 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 components below must be tabbed in the technical proposal and discussed separately:

a. Phase-In Transition Plan:

The anticipated phase-in transition period is 45 days.

Offeror shall submit a Transition Plan detailing projected milestone schedule, the transition of personnel, equipment, supplies, and materials. in each location. Specifically, offerors’ plan must clearly detail the number of days required to accomplish the transition at each location.

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

iii. Provide a staffing plan including the number of productive hours per week or year for each full time and part time employee.

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

v. Provide company and employee Security Clearances (Secret and/or Top Secret).

c. Key Personnel:

Provide resumes showing experience and qualifications stated in Annex 0200000, Spec Item 2.7.1 for the following Key Personnel: Project Manager, Quality Manager, Site Safety Health Officer and Environmental/Energy Manager.

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.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

Acceptability will be based upon the quality of the Offeror’s technical and management approach. To receive a rating of “Acceptable” for this factor, the narrative must provide an explanation of how the offeror will meet the requirements. The Government will evaluate the feasibility of the offeror’s technical/management approach to provide the full range of support services described in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Simple statements that the offeror will fulfill the requirements without a detailed description of how an offeror will accomplish the work maybe insufficient to demonstrate that the offeror can perform the contract requirements, which may result in a technical rating of “Unacceptable”. Do not assume the evaluator(s) is/are familiar with the technical approach of your company based on other contracts with this or another agency

a. Transition Plan. The Government will evaluate the transition plan to ensure it sets forth a schedule to accomplish the transition in 45 days.

b. Workforce Management: The Government will evaluate the proposed staffing plan to ensure it includes a staffing chart that shows the level of authority, chain of command to the lowest level including subcontractors, the number of productive hours per week or year for each full time and part time employee and the rational for the direct labor hours consistent with the staffing plan. Also, the Government will evaluate whether the offeror has the required security clearances to ensure they will be able to perform work where Secret and Top Secret clearances are required.

c. Key Personnel. The Government will evaluate the proposed Key Personnel to ensure they meet the qualifications stated in Annex Annex 0200000, Spec Item 2.7.1.

d. Subcontractor Management. The Government will evaluate the methods and procedures used to select, monitor and manage subcontractors to ensure their compliance with performance standards.

e. Quality Management System (QMS). The Government will evaluate the proposed Quality Control plan to ensure it includes a methodology to identify, track and address performance deficiencies necessary to ensure that quality services are provided in a timely manner and 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.

(c) FACTOR 3 - CORPORATE EXPERIENCE

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

a. The offeror shall submit a minimum of two (2) projects and maximum of three (3) projects that best demonstrate their experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope and complexity to the solicited project. For the purpose of this evaluation, recent, relevant corporate experience is defined as a project that has a history of performance within the five years preceding the release of the solicitation:

1. Project must involve multiple buildings and multiple locations simultaneously;

2. Project at a Child Development Center (CDC) or Medical Clinic.*

b. The offeror shall use the exact same projects submitted for Past Performance, Factor 5. For each project, the offeror shall complete the Corporate Experience Questionnaire included as Attachment D.

1. Joint Venture. All example projects must have been performed by the Offer as the prime contractor or as a member of a Joint Venture, as opposed to performance as a subcontractor under another firm's contract. Corporate experience presented for any other entity (e.g. team subcontractor or a prime that did not provide field staffing and direct field work oversight, but only provided general management) will not be evaluated.

2. If the Offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), at least one of the relevant projects should be submitted for the JV entity. If the JV does not have shared relevant experience, at least one project shall be submitted for each JV partner, unless the JV is an SBA approved mentor/protégé agreement, in which case only the mentor is required to submit projects. If a project was performed by a JV, and not all partners from that JV are on the JV proposed for this contract, the offeror shall clearly demonstrate what portion of the work was performed by the JV partner offering on this contract and shall not include work performed by the JV as a whole. The JV member proposed for this contract shall specifically address field work performed by that JV member including field staffing and direct field work oversight. The JV member proposed for this contract shall also address home office management performed by that JV member including the number/percent of employees provided for the overall contract by the JV member as well as the overall percentage of work performed by the JV member. If the Offeror does not specifically address what portion of the work under the submitted project was performed by the JV member offering on this contact, the project will not be evaluated.

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.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

To be evaluated acceptable the offeror must demonstrate at least two (2) recent and relevant projects and collectively demonstrate experience providing custodial services to CDC and Medical Clinic experience.

(d) FACTOR 4 - SAFETY EVALUATION

1. Per NFAS 15.304(d), solicitations utilizing source selection procedures for procurements within the 50 United States, the District of Columbia, and outlying areas 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 Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rates.

3. The safety elements should be collectively considered and then assigned an overall adjectival rating for the safety factor. The board will need to make a qualitative determination of the rating for safety taking into account the risk ratings for EMR, DART, TRC.

4. The board will not average the rating from the three previous complete calendar years for the EMR, DART and TRC and should consider data trends.

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

Note: The only ratings for evaluation of the safety factor are “acceptable” or “unacceptable.” A rating of “High Risk” or better for three consecutive years is an “acceptable” rating. When EMR, DART or TRC fall into the “Extremely High Risk” category, for any one year. Offerors with an “Extremely High Risk” for any one year of any one element must provide an explanation. The Government will consider information provided along with the “Risk” of the other elements to determine if the overall rating should be elevated to the “acceptable” level.

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit the following information: For a partnership or joint venture, the following submittal requirements are required for each contractor who is part of the partnership or joint venture. EMR, DART and TRC Rates shall not be submitted for subcontractors.

(1) Experience Modification Rate (EMR): Include three previous complete calendar years’ (2015, 2016, and 2017) worth of data. This rate compares company’s annual losses in insurance claims against its policy premiums. The offeror may submit an insurance company-provided equivalent rate if no EMR exists. If the offeror has no EMR or premium, for any year, affirmatively state so and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affect the EMR and negative trends should be addressed as part of the factor submission.

(2) Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate and Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rate: Submit three previous complete calendar years’ (2015, 2016, and 2017) worth of data. If an offeror cannot submit an OSHA DART and TRC rates, for any year, affirmatively state so and an explanation must be provided. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the DART and TRC rate data negatively must be addressed as part of this factor submission.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

The evaluation will collectively consider the following:

· Experience Modification Rate (EMR)

· OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) and Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rates

· Other sources of information available to the Government

(1) The offer will be considered acceptable when the EMR, DART and TRC are high risk or better for three consecutive years (2015, 2016, and 2017) or the offeror provides an acceptable explanation for any higher rates.

(2) Other Sources of Information Available to the Government: Other sources for safety may include but are not limited to OSHA data, NAVFAC’s Contractor Incident Reporting System (CIRS) in Enterprise Safety Applications Management System (ESAMS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and other related databases.

(e) FACTOR 5 - PAST PERFORMANCE:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The offeror must ensure submission of completed CPARS and/or Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) if CPARS is not available, for those projects submitted for Factor 3. Offerors shall clearly demonstrate a history of successful performance within the past five (5) years. The offeror shall be the prime contractor on a minimum of two (2) and no more than three (3) relevant contracts (including current/on-going contracts) of similar size, scope and complexity to the RFP. The prime contractor will not be found acceptable on the basis of the subcontractor’s past performance.

AN OFFEROR SHALL NOT SUBMIT A PPQ WHEN A COMPLETED CPARS IS AVAILABLE.

IF A CPARS EVALUATION IS NOT AVAILABLE, ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ (Attachment C), which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Shonn Gilkes via email at Shonn.gilkes@navy.mil by the closing date and time.

Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs or CPARS previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation. In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAST PERFORMANCE FACTOR, RECENCY AND RELEVANCY SHALL BE DEFINED AS a multiple year commercial custodial services contract performed within the last 5 years.

While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

A copy of the blank Past Performance Questionnaire to be used for requesting client references is included as Attachment C.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

The degree to which past performance evaluations and all other past performance information reviewed by the Government (e.g., PPIRS, Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), performance recognition documents, and information obtained from any other source) reflect a trend of satisfactory performance considering:

- A pattern of successful completion of tasks;

- A pattern of deliverables that are timely and of good quality;

- A pattern of cooperativeness and teamwork with the Government at all levels (task managers, contracting officers, auditors, etc.); and

- Recency of tasks performed that are identical to, similar to, or related to the task at hand”

(End of Summary of Changes) image1.wmf