PACRM RFP 20R0082 Amendment 0002.docx

N6134020R0082

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following items are applicable to this modification:

AMENDMENT 0002

AMENDMENT 0002-Updates the following:

1) Section L, Attachments updated;

a. L-2, Contract Experience (CE) Contract Data

b. L-8, Performance Work Statement (PWS) E2, C2, and LSO

c. L-13, Government Response to Solicitation Question

2) Section L- Updates Bolded

3) Section M- Updates Bolded

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

ATTACHMENTS

SECTION L-ATTACHMENTS

Date

13AUG20

06OCT20

22SEP20

13AUG20

12AUG20

22SEP20

29JUL20

04AUG20

13MAR20

14AUG20

13AUG20

14AUG20

06OCT20

SECTION L

L – 1 CONTENT OF PROPOSALS (Services) 5252.215-9522 ALT 1 This provision has been replaced with the fully tailorable Section L provision below.

L – 2 CONTENT OF PROPOSALS (SERVICES) (16 Aug 2020)

PART A GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

PART A GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.0 GENERAL

1. Offerors are required to submit one proposal with sufficient information concerning all evaluation factors to enable Government personnel to fully ascertain capabilities of the Offeror to perform all requirements. The proposal must be sufficient in detail and scope to enable evaluation and provide the evaluators a clear understanding of the Offeror’s, expertise, experience and capability as required by the solicitation. The Offeror shall not alter or rearrange the solicitation. The burden of proof for all substantiation within the proposal rests with the Offeror. Offerors are expected to comply with all instructions in the RFP. No price information, (e.g., Dollar Values and/or Hourly Rates) shall be included in any volume other than Volume 5 Price, other than historical pricing information to support prior experience portions of the proposal. Alternate proposals are not acceptable.

2. In presenting material in the proposal, the Offeror is advised that quality of information is more important than quantity. Clarity, brevity, and logical organization should be emphasized during proposal preparation. Do not provide elaborate brochures or other presentation beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to present enough information to allow Contract Experience, Technical, and Past Performance, as well as Price, to be meaningfully evaluated without discussions. Unsubstantiated statements that the prospective Offeror has experience or has performed work in the past are considered inadequate and may render a rating of unacceptable or No Confidence.

3. Throughout these instructions, “Offeror” is defined as the prime contractor with its CAGE code identified in Block 15A on Standard Form (SF) 33, Solicitation, Offer, and Award. A “Joint Venture” (JV) is a partnership or teaming arrangement where the prime contractor consists of more than one legal entity. “JV Team Members” are the entities that make up a Joint Venture.

4. The Government anticipates awarding MAC basic contracts to between three to five Offerors.

2.0 PROPOSAL FORMAT AND SUBMISSION

1. Proposals must use Times New Roman, 12 pt. normal font (no reduction permitted), single-spaced, 1-inch margins all around, and must be formatted for/printed on standard 8.5 x 11 inch paper. If Government attachments have a different format/font, the Offeror may use the format/font in the attachment as provided. All pages should be numbered with section and page numbers. Tables shall be presented in no smaller than a 10 pt. font. Text utilized in charts, figures, and graphics should also be no smaller than a 10pt font and may use a font type selected by the Offeror. Each Volume shall be provided separate folder.

3.0 ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL

1. This section is intended to provide information to the Offeror on the electronic format and application software to be used for submitting proposals. Use of the software and procedures described in this section will ensure that the proposals received are suitable for reading electronically.

4.0 ELECTRONIC PROPOSAL MEDIA

1. Method of delivery shall be with https://safe.apps.mil. When submitting proposals in safe.apps.mil the recipients shall be as listed below:

a) Name: Charles Mote

b) Email: Charles.mote@navy.mil

2. Offerors are advised the SAFE restricts the maximum file submission to 8 GB. Chrome and Edge are recommended. Internet Explorer limits SAFE uploads to 2GB; therefore, it is not recommended. Offeror shall include the following information in the SAFE upload comments block: Offeror’s name, Solicitation number, primary and alternate points of contact (POC) (include name, email, and telephone number(s) for each POC).

a) Creating a SAFE Drop-off for proposal submission:

i. For “outside or unauthenticated users”:

ii. In order for an outside user to create a drop-off for proposal submission via SAFE, they must receive a drop-off request from Mr. Charles (Tim) Mote. Offeror shall submit the initial request at charles.mote@navy.mil no later than 10 working days in advance of the proposal submission date. Offeror will receive an email with a link to utilize for proposal submission (drop-off) once the request has been processed by the government. This link is good for a one-time proposal submission. Note: this process must be completed twice. The process will be needed one time in support of the early delivery of volume 2 and 3, and one time in support of the delivery of the proposal in full submittal.

b) For CAC Authenticated users”

i. Create a “drop-off” with charles.mote@navy.mil as the recipient.

3. Offerors are hereby notified that the Government will not reimburse for any costs incurred for solicitation preparation.

4. Late Proposals: Offerors are advised that the time identified on Block 9 of the Standard Form (SF) 33 applies. Delivery is defined as having occurred based on the DOD Safe’s email notification time stamp to the charles.mote@navy.mil. If multiple drop offs occur, any drop off after the time identified on Block 9 of the SF 33 is considered “late.” Offerors are strongly encouraged to deliver as early as possible to avoid any risk of late submission.

5. The Offeror shall submit all volumes of its proposal electronically compatible with the operating system and applications defined in Section 5.0 (Operating System and Applications). The Offeror should put as much proposal material as possible on each file, keeping the portions of the proposal that contain pricing information on separate file(s) from the portions of the proposal that do not contain pricing information.

6. Table G-3 (Proposal Structure) identifies the proposal structure for each volume. Each volume should be clearly marked with the Offeror's name and address, the point of contact's name and phone number, the proposal volumes contained therein, and “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104”.

5.0 OPERATING SYSTEM AND APPLICATIONS

1. The proposals will be accessed utilizing the Microsoft Windows Operating System. Proposal information shall be submitted using the following applications: Microsoft Word 2016, Microsoft Excel 2016, and Microsoft PowerPoint 2016; however, letters and other signed documents shall be provided as a fully searchable Portable Document Format (.pdf) file. Use of other application software for submission of proposals is prohibited except where specific instructions for non-.pdf or Office 2016 applications are provided.

2. Hyperlinks

a) Offerors may NOT use hyperlinks within and among proposal volumes. Additionally, there shall be no links from volumes that do not contain price information to volumes that do contain price information.

3. Virus Free Electronic Submission

a) Offerors are responsible for ensuring that its electronic proposal is virus free. The Offeror shall certify, in its proposal cover letter, that all electronic proposal information delivered throughout the evaluation (e.g., original proposal submission, responses to evaluation notices, Final Proposal Revisions) has been checked for viruses and certify that its files are/will be virus free. The Offeror should specify the software, version, and virus definition used to check the data. The Offeror shall not use macro and/or script enabled files.

4. Multimedia and Graphics

a) Large files require greater computer system resources and are discouraged. The Offeror shall not embed sound or video (e.g., MPEG) files within proposal documents. The offeror is encouraged to:

i. Simplify the color palette used in creating figures;

ii. Minimize size of graphics files; and

iii. Avoid scanned images.

5. File Naming Conventions

a. Valid extensions for files using their associated applications are listed below in Table G-1 (file Extensions):

Table G-1 File Extensions

6. The Offeror shall follow the basic structure of the file naming convention in Table G-2 (Offeror Electronic File Naming Convention) for electronic file submissions (e.g., proposal volumes, attachments, appendices), where "#" represents the sequential numbering of files (if needed), and [CAGE] represents the offeror’s CAGE code. Offerors shall keep the file name as short as possible (i.e., under 40 characters) so that the files are accessible on Government share drives. Files with longer names may become corrupt or inaccessible.

7. The Offeror should provide one folder for each volume or annex, containing all electronic files requested within the volume or annex. Please submit each volume or annex as one file if possible. Offerors should not provide each section/paragraph as separate files.

8. The Offeror shall ensure that the electronically submitted files are directly traceable to paper copy submittals.

Table G-2 Offeror Electronic File Naming Convention

Annexes

AnnA SOW PWSs # [CAGE].docx Please note: The Offeror should provide both a .pdf and .docx version if they are available. If not, a .pdf version only is acceptable.

Notes * File names shall not exceed 40 characters in length inclusive of spaces and file extension.

6.0 PROPOSAL CONTENT AND VOLUMES

1. The Offeror must present its proposal information in a manner that facilitates a one for one comparison between the information presented and Section L proposal instructions. Proposal information must be structured such that its paragraph number/letter corresponds to the Proposal Instructions paragraph number/letter, although the Offeror may add lower tier sub paragraphs.

2. Each volume and annex of the proposal shall be submitted as original electronic copies as specified in Table G-3 (Proposal Structure). The Offeror shall submit all electronic copies of the proposal to the address provided in Section L, Part A, paragraph 7.0. Suggested page counts for each volume, if any, are also specified in Table G-3 (Proposal Structure). The title and table of contents pages, as well as tables, are not included in the suggested page count.

3. Price information, (e.g., dollar values and/or hourly rates) other than historical pricing information to support prior experience portions of the proposal, shall not be included in any volume other than Volume 5 Price.

Table G-3 Proposal Structure

Notes *The Government will not count the SF33, SF30s, and Section K documents in volume 1 page count.

7.0 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION AND PACKAGING

1. All Proposals shall be UNCLASSIFIED.

2. Proposal Submission

3. Clearly mark all SAFE electronic packages as identified in Section 4.0, (a). The submission date for all Volumes of the proposal shall be no later than the date and time specified in Block 9 of Standard Form 33 (Solicitation, Offer and Award) of the solicitation.

4. It is requested that a complete advanced electronic copy of the Offeror’s Volume 2 and 3 be submitted two weeks prior to the submission date/time specified on Standard Form 33 (Block 9). In the follow-on official complete proposal submission, offeror shall state what changes were made to the advanced electronic copy information that was previously submitted, if no changes are made, state so at the beginning of Volume 1 (Executive Summary and Contract Administration), Volume 2 (Contract Experience), and Volume 3 (Past Performance).

5. Offerors will submit electronic copies of the entire proposal in accordance with Table G-3 by date and time shown in Block 9 of the SF33.

8.0 PROPOSAL PACKAGING

1. The electronic files shall be marked “For Official Use Only; and Source Selection Sensitive – See FAR-2.101 and 3.104,” for the intended recipient identified in paragraph 4.0, (a). Method of delivery shall be https://safe.apps.mil. Proposal recipients shall be Name: Charles Mote, Email: Charles.mote@navy.mil.

9.0 CLASSIFIED DATA

1. All proposals must be UNCLASSIFIED.

10.0 SOLICITATION QUESTIONS

1. Solicitation questions shall be emailed to the Contract Specialist, Kelly Stevens, kelly.stevens@navy.mil with a copy to the Contracting Officer, Mr. Rafael Soberal, rafael.soberal@navy.mil. using Attachment L-1, Solicitation Question & Answer Form, and must be received no later than 1400 Eastern Standard Time (EST) on the 10th day after the RFP release date, or the next business day if the 10th day falls on a non-workday. Questions and answers will be provided via a formal RFP amendment. Thus, Offerors are cautioned not to include proprietary information in the questions because the Government may release it to all Offerors. The Government reserves the right not to respond to any questions received concerning this solicitation after the deadline. Accordingly, Offerors are encouraged to carefully review all solicitation requirements and submit questions to the Government early in the proposal preparation cycle.

11.0 CHANGES TO SOLICITATION

1. For any changes and additional information to the solicitation, please go to website: https://beta.sam.gov/ Search the database for the solicitation number N6134020R0082.

PART B SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS

1.0 VOLUME 1 –EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION

1. The purpose of the Executive Summary and Contract Administration volume is to provide the Government with an overview of the Offeror’s entire proposal, excluding price. Each section within the Executive Summary shall contain the salient points contained in each of the proposal volumes. In addition, this volume should be used by the offeror to identify and highlight significant features of its proposal.

2. The Executive Summary and Contract Administration volume should be divided into the sections outlined below:

1.1 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION

1. The Offeror shall provide the following contract administration information.

2. Offeror Representatives and Information: The Offeror shall provide a summary sheet comprised of the information listed below for the prime or JV and for each member of a JV, if applicable.

a) Prime Contractor.

b) Business Name.

c) Address.

d) Principal point of contact for this solicitation (Name, title, phone number, email).

e) Secondary point of contact for this solicitation (Name, title, phone number, email).

f) Individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government and contractually bind the Offeror (Name, title, phone number, email).

g) Establishment Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN).

h) TIN of Parent Corporation (if applicable).

i) DUNS.

j) CAGE CODE.

k) Business size for this effort (large or small).

3. JV Team Members.

a) Business Name.

b) Address.

c) DCMA point of contact and telephone number, if applicable.

d) DCAA point of contact and telephone number, if applicable.

e) DUNS.

f) CAGE CODE.

4. Government Agency Information:

a) Provide the mailing address, telephone, fax numbers, email address and facility codes for the Offeror’s local Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) and Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA). In addition, provide the point of contact, telephone number, fax number and email address for the Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO) at DCMA.

5. Terms and Conditions:

a) The Offeror shall provide one of the following two statements in this section.

i. If the Offeror takes any exceptions to the provisions of the solicitation and its applicable documents, the Offeror shall provide the following statement: “All exceptions taken from the solicitation terms, conditions or requirements, including any applicable documents, are included in this section”.

ii. If the Offeror does not take any such exceptions, then the Offeror shall provide the following statement: “No exceptions are taken to the terms and conditions or any requirement of the solicitation.”

b) An exception is where an Offeror states it will not comply with a solicitation requirement, usually involving contract terms and conditions. Offerors shall not take exception to contract terms and conditions. Any exceptions will make the proposal ineligible for award.

c) A deviation is where an Offeror states it will not comply with a solicitation requirement but proposes an alternative to meet the intent of the requirement, usually involving a Statement of Work/Performance Work Statement (SOW/PWS) requirement.

1.2 JOINT VENTURES:

1. If proposing as a Joint Venture, the offeror shall provide a copy of the Joint Venture agreement. In accordance with (IAW) 13 CFR 121.103(h), a joint venture must be in writing and must do business under its own name; must be identified as a joint venture in the System for Award Management (SAM); may be in the form of a formal or informal partnership or exist as a separate limited liability company or other separate legal entity; and, if it exists as a formal separate legal entity, may not be populated with individuals intended to perform contracts awarded to the joint venture (i.e., the joint venture may have its own separate employees to perform administrative functions, but may not have its own separate employees to perform contracts awarded to the joint venture).

1.3 CONTRACT DOCUMENTS:

1. The Offeror shall provide the following documents within this section:

a) Original signed SF33 (Solicitation, Offer, and Award) cover page of the solicitation and a signed SF30 cover page of each amendment (as applicable) with all applicable Blocks completed and acknowledgement of receipt of each amendment (as applicable) to this solicitation. The SF-33 Block 12 “fill-in” (proposal validity date) shall be completed with an amount of no less than 270 days.

b) Signed Representations, Certifications, and Acknowledgements (Section K). To include, statement regarding what changes were made to the advanced electronic copy information per Section L, Part A, paragraph 7.0, b. above.

2.0 VOLUME 2 CONTRACT EXPERIENCE:

Note: This volume shall not contain any reference to the price aspects of the offer.

1. The Offeror shall complete Attachment L-2 according to the instructions within the attachment. Only applicable contract references should be used in completing the attachment.

2.1 CONTRACT EXPERIENCE PASS/FAIL CRITERIA

1. The Offeror shall identify and submit not more than three contract references that collectively meets the 2.1 Contract Experience Pass/Fail Criteria (PFC). Offeror’s shall NOT provide contract references for any subcontractors. Each contract reference shall meet the definition of “Recent” (as defined under Recency in Section M, Part C) to be considered further (as defined in Section M). In order to collectively meet the PFC, the offeror’s referenced contracts must individually include at least one of the PFCs and, when combined, the referenced contracts must meet all of the PFCs. The Offeror shall demonstrate that each of the Volume 2 Contract Experience references submitted for evaluation meet the definitions of Contract Reference and Applicable Contract Reference (defined in Section M, Part C) and collectively meet the pass/fail criteria specified below:

a. Contract experience demonstrates performance for at least one year as the Prime;

b. Contract experience demonstrates performance of curriculum revision and maintenance (as defined in Attachment J-1 PARCM Scope paragraphs 2.2 and 2.2.1) of U.S. Federal Government operator courseware at two or more sites;

c. Contract experience demonstrates performance of maintenance and operation of Electronic Classroom (Training Delivery System (TDS) as defined in Attachment J-1 PARCM Scope paragraph 4.16) equipment required for delivery of course content for instructor / students;

d. Contract experience demonstrates having contract(s) with the annualized average contract value (see AACV definition in Section M) greater than or equal to $3 million; and

e. Contract experience demonstrates offeror was granted the authority to work with Secret information. Offeror may also satisfied this criteria by providing its current Facility Clearance Level (FCL) that demonstrates offeror has an active SECRET (S) or higher Facility Clearance.

2. The Offeror shall not submit information on individual employee experience of the entities as part of this proposal; the Government will not consider this information in the Contract Experience evaluation.

2.2 CONTRACT REFERENCE SUBSTANTIATION

1. For the contract reference included in Attachment L-2, the Offeror shall provide the following in the Volume 2 Annex A:

a) A complete copy of the contractually executed final version of the substantiating documents (drafts are not acceptable) including the full contract, modifications, statement of work (SOW) or performance work statement (PWS), and any other elements of the contract (e.g., Specification, CDRLs, DD254 Contract Security Classification Specification ) that demonstrates compliance with the Contract Experience criteria.

b) A requirement not specifically identified in the SOW/PWS or otherwise supported through documents as discussed herein will not be considered to have demonstrated compliance with this Contract Experience criterion.

2. Within Annex A, the contract referenced in Attachment L-2 should be clearly identified and the Offeror shall highlight, in yellow, the portions of the documents that clearly identify that the contract references meet the pass/fail criteria in Section L, Part B, paragraph 2.1. The Offeror shall denote which highlighted areas correspond to each requirement within Attachment L-2.

3.0 VOLUME 3 - PAST PERFORMANCE

1. The Offeror shall complete Attachment L-3 according to the instructions within the attachment. The Offeror shall identify and submit not more than three past performance contract references. The past performance contract references shall be the same contract references that were provided in Attachment L-2 for the contract experience pass/fail criteria.

3.1 CONTRACT REFERENCE SUBSTANTIATION

1. For the contract references included in Attachment L-3, the Offeror shall provide the following in the Volume 3 Annex A:

a) A complete copy of the contractually executed final version of the substantiating documents (drafts are not acceptable) including the most recent conformed copy of the contract, statement of work (SOW) or performance work statement (PWS), and any other elements of the contract (e.g., Specification, CDRLs, DD254 Contract Security Classification Specification ) to clearly demonstrate the scope, magnitude and complexity performed by the offeror on the past performance contract reference.

b) A requirement not specifically identified in the SOW/PWS or otherwise supported through documents as discussed herein may not clearly reflect the level of scope, magnitude, and complexity performed by the offeror.

2. Within Annex A, the contract referenced in Attachment L-3 should be clearly identified and the Offeror shall highlight, in yellow, the portions of the documents that clearly identify the scope, magnitude, and complexity performed by the offeror. The Offeror shall denote which highlighted areas correspond to each element of scope, magnitude and complexity identified within Section M.

3. Offeror’s shall NOT provide present/past performance contract references for any subcontractors.

4. Offerors shall also identify contracts within the past five years that had any show-cause notices, cure notices, or termination for default/cause.

5. Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) (Attachment L-4) will be the primary customer feedback data used to evaluate the Offeror’s past performance. The CPARS System will be the only method used to retrieve the CPARS for this source selection.

6. For contracts identified that do not have a CPARS, the Offeror shall forward a copy of the PPQ to that contract’s PCO, ACO, and PM; or commercial contractor equivalents. Please forward all applicable questionnaires within one week from the RFP amendment 0001 release date to allow adequate time for the recipient to respond. The Offeror shall include instructions for the customers to send completed questionnaires within two weeks of its receipt via e-mail to Kelly Stevens, kelly.stevens@navy.mil with copy to Mr. Rafael Soberal, rafael.soberal@navy.mil. The offeror shall copy Ms. Stevens and Mr. Soberal when sending a PPQ request its customers. The Offeror shall ensure that all points of contact are current, include an email address, and phone number. The Offeror shall not conduct follow-up actions with regard to this questionnaire, other than to confirm receipt by the recipient. The Government may contact customers identified by the Offeror to obtain follow-up Past Performance Information as needed.

7. Offerors are reminded that the Government reserves the right to use information to evaluate past performance obtained from sources other than those identified by the Offeror. The Government may send additional questionnaires and/or obtain information from other sources as needed.

3.2 PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION POINT OF CONTACT

1. Any Past Performance information that requires further coordination will be with the Point of Contact identified in Volume 1 – Executive Summary and Contract Administration.

2. Relevant Contract Data

a. The Attachment L-3 and Annex A submitted in Volume 3 will be used to determine Relevancy. All detailed information and comparative analysis of the past performance references shall be provided in Volume 3, (Evaluation).

b. In general, more recent performance will be considered more relevant than older performance. Commercial contracts may be included, but will be considered less relevant. Contract reference provided that are performed by a contractor other than the Offeror (such as teaming partners or subcontractors) will NOT be evaluated as prime contractor past performance unless the other contractor is part of a Joint Venture (JV) Offeror. If the Offeror is proposing as a JV, the Offeror should provide the relevant contract for the JV as a whole or for an individual team member of the JV.

c. The Contract detailed in this volume shall be consistent with the contract identified in Volume 2 (Contract Experience).

3. Relevancy Information

a. The burden of providing thorough and complete past performance and demonstrated systemic improvement information remains with the Offeror.

b. The Offeror shall provide contract data regarding relevancy, past performance information, and demonstrated systemic improvement. As this information is presented in the proposal, demonstrate the relevancy of the Prime’s and JV team members’ past performance with respect to the Attachment L-8 E2 PWS. For the contract referenced where the Prime and/or JV team members are aware of problems, the Offeror shall describe the issues in section 3.0.a (Past Performance Information).

c. Offerors are required to explain what aspects of the contracts are deemed applicable to the relevancy criteria below. Offerors should provide electronic copies of the SOO, SOW, PWSs, or other supporting solicitation or contract documentation. Do NOT provide self-assessed relevancy ratings. In addition, the referenced sections only need to be referenced/identified, and do not need to be broken out separately from the complete SOW/PWS.

4. The Offeror is advised that the Government will assess each present/past performance contract reference and assign a relevancy rating based on the following:

a. SCOPE: Contains a scope including revision and maintenance of DOD operator courseware and maintenance and operation of TDS comparable to the description in Attachment L-8 E2 PWS.

b. MAGNITUDE: Dollar amount of the effort performed on an annualized average contract value (as defined in section M) basis is greater than or equal to $3M annually.

c. COMPLEXITY ELEMENTS: Includes curriculum revision and maintenance of courseware with a DD254 classification level of Secret and support or performance at multiple U.S. Federal Government sites.

3.3 PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

1. Provide a brief description of performance in delivering quality services in each of the Attributes identified below. Include in these descriptions any information that demonstrates the level of performance obtained; where available, provide quantifiable measures/trends to demonstrate past and current performance. Also describe past problems, including when they occurred, what the circumstances were surrounding the situation, and what the consequences were as a result of the problem.

a. Quality.

b. Schedule.

c. Management.

d. Systemic Improvement

2. Demonstrated Systemic Improvement: For the past performance problem identified, describe the status of the systemic improvement efforts and explain actions taken to resolve any past problems identified in 3.0.a Past Performance Information. Provide the records of such results and indicate where they are documented, preferably in Government record systems. Describe the techniques, elements, and tools used to correct problems on the contract and, if applicable, how these techniques, elements, and tools may be used to prevent such problems from occurring on this contract. Provide quantifiable evidence or metrics that substantiate or demonstrate claims of improvement and to demonstrate that the past problem will not occur on this contract. It is incumbent upon the Offeror to explain the relevance of the data provided and substantiate that improvements from past performance problems are being made. The Government does not assume the duty to search for data to cure the problems it finds in the information provided by the Offeror. Consideration for discounting problems may be given when those problems are addressed through demonstrated systemic improvement. Demonstrated Systemic Improvement may be indicated by information as it relates to preventing recurrence of past problems, including: identification of the root cause of a problem, a corrective action plan that systemically addresses the past problem, how and when the plan was implemented, documented timeframe to demonstrate when corrective action was implemented and became successful; and performance data, preferably through Government records, to show performance improvements.

4.0 VOLUME 4 - TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

1. This volume shall not contain any reference to cost or price aspects of the offer. The offeror shall address the elements below to support requirements listed in Attachment L-8 E2 PWS in Volume 4:

a) Element 1: Training Delivery System (TDS) Availability (Hardware/Software) and/or Loss of / Access to TDS

i. The Technical Volume shall provide a detailed plan that ensures that training can continue in the event of a loss of part of or all of the TDS. The plan shall ensure minimal disruption to training. The offeror’s response shall state the process to correct the following issues, to include estimated response time(s):

1) Learning Management System (LMS) Server off line (totally down) / or no student access (e.g., server shows it as up, but students cannot access the LMS – software issue)

3) Individual classrooms stations (maximum of 8 student stations how would they respond to one station off-line, two stations off-line, three stations off-line, up to seven stations off-line.)

4) Failure of items both under and over the $1,500 threshold.

b) Element 2: Manning/Staffing (Human Resourcing)

i. The Technical Volume shall provide a completed Manning/Staffing Chart (Attachment L-6). The period of performance for Element 2 shall be 12 months. The Manning Staffing Chart information shall include all necessary personnel to support the following:

4) Site support personnel

ii. The Manning/Staffing Chart shall list all proposed personnel and their duties by site. All personnel positions proposed to cover more than one responsibility shall be identified and the total number of hours proposed for each responsibility shall be clearly identified.

5.0 VOLUME 5 - PRICE PROPOSAL

1. The offeror shall include the following information in this volume:

a) Prices: Provide the section L, attachment 7, Price Breakout Worksheet (PBW) of the solicitation populated with the CLIN unit prices and CLIN total prices using each CLIN’s quantity value. Note that the PBW pricing for CLINs 2105-2107, 2205-2207, 2305-2307, 2405-2407, 2505-2507, and 2605-2607 shall be based on the Full Time Equivalent (FTE) hours provided in the PBW for each “Task” level of support.

b) Unbalanced Pricing: The offeror shall explain any appearance of unbalanced pricing. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line item(s), Sub line item(s), or task(s) is/are significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques, to include all options.

c) Department of Labor (DOL) Wage Determinations (WD) for locations with Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBA) are provided for labor categories not covered by the CBA. If a proposed labor category is listed in a CBA, then the CBA hourly rate with fringe benefits will replace the DOL WD for that labor category. Any labor category not covered by either a DOL WD or CBA shall be subject to the minimum wage requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

2. The offeror shall propose in compliance with the current hourly rates set forth in the DOL WD or CBA, and shall not escalate for adjustments under the Service Contract Act (SCA). Any appearance of escalated pricing shall be explained in the price volume. Offeror’s failure to adequately explain escalated pricing in option year pricing may result in findings during the price evaluation that negatively impact an offerors evaluation results and potential award selection.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

SECTION M

Section M-1 - Evaluation Factors for Award (Services) 5252.215-9531 ALT 1 – This provision has been replaced with the fully tailorable Section M provision below.

M - 2 EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD (SERVICES) (16 Aug 2020)

PART A: GENERAL INFORMATION

1.0 GENERAL

The Government anticipates awarding MAC basic contracts to between three to five Offerors; additionally one of the selected MAC awardees will be selected for award of the first Task Order (TO) under the MAC.

1. Selections will be made based on the multi-step evaluation process described in paragraph 2.0 below. As described in more detail below, the Government will first evaluate the Offeror’s Volume 2 Contract Experience as on a Pass/Fail (i.e., Acceptable or Unacceptable) basis. Only proposals with a Contract Experience rating of “ACCEPTABLE” will be further evaluated. Contractors that receive a rating of “ACCEPTABLE” for Contract Experience will be included in the technical, past performance and price best value trade-off. Proposals with Contract Experience that fails the Pass/Fail criteria will receive an “UNACCEPTABLE” rating and will not be evaluated further. This evaluation is separate from and not a determination of “qualified” as it would pertain to Small Business Administration Certificate of Competency. This evaluation is also separate from and not part of a responsibility determination/assessment. The Contract Experience evaluation establishes the necessary threshold to have sufficient relevant past performance to be competitive in the trade-off, in which past performance is a significant aspect. Not having suitable contract reference(s) is not an assessment that the offeror could not do the work.

1. Proposals with a rating of “ACCEPTABLE” for Contract Experience will be further evaluated based on “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 solicitation. 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.

1. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award contracts without discussions. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions and request proposal revisions if it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government. If a competitive range is established, the Government 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. The Government may use information other than that provided by the Offeror in its evaluation, including past performance information and the results of questionnaires.

1. Non-compliance with the terms, conditions, or requirements set forth in the solicitation, or any exceptions or deviations may make the offer ineligible for award.

1. The Offeror’s proposal will be in the form prescribed by this solicitation and shall contain a response to each of the areas identified in Section L. Failure to comply with proposal instructions may affect the resulting proposal evaluation ratings.

2.0 EVALUATION PROCESS

1. Description of Proposal Evaluation Process. Offeror’s are advised that the Government will use a multi-step approach to perform the evaluation. As a prerequisite, the Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Volume 2 Contract Experience as ACCEPTABLE or UNACCEPTABLE.

a) If the Offeror’s Contract Experience Volume is evaluated as UNACCEPTABLE, the Government will determine the Offeror’s proposal to be unawardable and no further evaluation will be conducted.

b) If the Government determines that the Offeror’s contract references demonstrate the necessary contract experience, then the Offeror’s proposal will be assigned an ACCEPTABLE rating for the Contract Experience factor and the Government will proceed to the next step of the evaluation. Only contract references determined to be ACCEPTABLE in the Contract Experience evaluation will be further evaluated for Past Performance, Technical and Price and considered in the best value tradeoff source selection decision.

2. For Past Performance, the Government will assign a Performance Confidence Assessment Rating. The assessment reflects the government’s level of confidence in the offeror’s ability to successfully perform the solicited effort based on the offeror’s record of recent and relevant past performance.

3. 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.

4. The Government expects to select three to five Offerors for the MAC IDIQ in order to promote effective and efficient fair opportunities at the Task Order level on the basis of proposals providing the “best value” to the Government, all factors considered. Further, “best value” for this IDIQ means the expected number of selectees are the most highly rated proposals all factors considered. Amongst the most highly rated proposals, there may be qualitative differences narratively assessed in competing proposals which receive the same rating(s), which the Government will consider when making award decisions.

5. The Government will make award decisions using a three-step process as follows:

1. Step 1: Determine which proposals meet acceptable/unacceptable (i.e., pass/fail) criteria in the Contract Experience factor.

1. Step 2: All offerors receiving an Acceptable rating in the Contract Experience factor will be evaluated for selection of a basic contract award under the MAC IDIQ utilizing the best value tradeoff approach as noted in section M-2, Part A, 1.0, paragraph 3 above. Such best value tradeoff shall include a consideration of Past Performance, Technical, and Price as described in Paragraph 3.0 below.

c) Step 3: Utilizing the results of the best value tradeoff in Step 2 above, the Government will select one of the MAC award selectees to receive award of the first TO, which will be awarded immediately following award of the MAC under this RFP.

3.0 EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1. As described above, Contract Experience is a prerequisite evaluation factor which will be evaluated on a Pass/Fail (i.e., Acceptable/Unacceptable) basis. Only Offeror’s who demonstrate an Acceptable rating for Contract Experience will proceed to the next step of the evaluation and considered in the best value tradeoff source selection.

1. Factors for consideration in the best value tradeoff decision are as follows: Past Performance, Technical, and Price.

i. Past Performance and Technical are considered approximately equal.

ii. All evaluation factors (i.e., Past Performance and Technical) other than Price, when combined, are significantly more important than Price.

PART B: SPECIFIC INFORMATION

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION

1. Each offeror’s proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the offeror completed the following information requested in Section L, Part B, Volume1, paragraphs a. through e.:

1. Contract Administration Information

1. Government Agency Information

1. Terms and Conditions Information

1. Applicable Joint Venture Information

e) Completed Contract Documents

2.0 CONTRACT EXPERIENCE

1. The Government will evaluate the submission to determine if the Offeror demonstrates the requisite experience in accordance with the Contract Experience requirements specified herein. If the Offeror submits more than three contract references, only the first three contracts listed will be evaluated. If the Government assesses that the Offeror’s contract references collectively meet the requirements of the Contract Experience Volume, then the Government will proceed with evaluating the Offeror's proposal in accordance with Section M, Part A, Paragraph 3.0 Evaluation Factors for Award, as described above. In order to collectively meet the requirements, the offeror’s referenced contracts must individually meet the definitions of Recent, Contract Reference and Applicable Contract Reference as defined in Section M Part C and include at least one of the PFCs and, when combined, meet all of the PFCs. If the Offeror’s Contract Experience Volume is evaluated as Unacceptable, the Government will determine the Offeror’s proposal to be unawardable and no further evaluation will be conducted.

1. The Contract Experience will be assessed utilizing the following Pass/Fail (i.e., Acceptable/Unacceptable) Criteria:

a. Contract experience demonstrates performance for at least one year as the Prime;

b. Contract experience demonstrates performance of curriculum revision and maintenance (as defined in Attachment J-1 PARCM Scope paragraphs 2.2 and 2.2.1) of U.S. Federal Government operator courseware at two or more sites;

c. Contract experience demonstrates performance of maintenance and operation of Electronic Classroom (Training Delivery System (TDS) as defined in Attachment J-1 PARCM Scope paragraph 4.16) equipment required for delivery of course content for instructor / students;

d. Contract experience demonstrates having contract(s) with the annualized average contract value (see AACV definition in Section M) greater than or equal to $3 million;

e. Contract experience demonstrates offeror was granted the authority to work with Secret information. Offeror may also satisfied this criteria by providing its current Facility Clearance Level (FCL) that demonstrates offeror has an active SECRET (S) or higher Facility Clearance.

3. Information on individual employee experience of the entities as part of this proposal shall not be considered in the Contract Experience evaluation.

3.0 PAST PERFORMANCE

1. If the government receives more than three past performance contracts from an offeror, it will only review the first three contract listed in offeror’s proposal. Any additional contracts will not be considered or evaluated. For Multiple Award Contracts and single award ID/IQs the government will only assess individual task orders.

1. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy, and quality.

1. Recency. The first aspect of the past performance evaluation is to evaluate the recency of the Offeror’s past performance. Past performance will be considered recent if the related contract included performance within five years from the initial solicitation issuance date and the government will only consider reports (CPARS/PPQs) that include a performance review end date that falls within five years from the initial solicitation issuance date. Past Performance that is not recent will not be considered in the evaluation. Any past performance contract without recent past performance will deemed to be Not Recent and will receive no further consideration, with no opportunity to submit a replacement, even if the government requests revised proposals.

1. Relevancy. 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. In determining relevancy, the government will compare the scope (revision and maintenance of DOD operator courseware and maintenance and operation of TDS comparable to the description in Attachment L-8 E2 PWS), magnitude (dollar amount of the effort performed on an annualized average contract value (as defined in section M) basis is greater than or equal to $3M annually), and complexity (includes curriculum revision and maintenance of courseware with a DD254 classification level of Secret and support or performance at multiple U.S. Federal Government sites) of the past performance effort to the effort proposed to be performed under this solicitation. The past performance effort must have been performed by the same CAGE Code and DUNS Number as the proposing entity in order to be relevant. Past performance information regarding other entities, such as subcontractors, predecessor companies, or key personnel, will not be considered to establish relevancy. If an offeror proposes under a Joint Venture CAGE Code, the past performance of any member of the Joint Venture team will be considered. In those cases, the CAGE code of the member performing under the Joint Venture will be considered to establish relevancy.

1. Quality. The third aspect of the past performance evaluation is to evaluate the overall quality of the Offeror’s recent relevant, past performance.