N6247024R0065 Amendment 0002.pdf

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

Amendment 0002 - Responses to Request for Information and solicitation modification

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 17

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 06-Mar-2025

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 N6247024R0065

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

04-Feb-2025

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

06-Mar-2025

CODE

COMNAVFACSYSCOM ATLANTIC

6506 HAMPTON BLVD

NORFOLK VA 23508-1278

N62470 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N6247024R0065

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION FACTORS

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

Factor 1– Management Structure & Key Personnel Factor 2 – Corporate Experience Factor 3 – Small Business Utilization Factor 4– Safety Factor 5 – Past Performance on Recent, Relevant Projects

The distinction between corporate experience and past performance is that corporate experience pertains to the types and 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-price evaluation factors is the technical factors technical factors 1, 2, and 3 are the most important and of equal importance to each other, and factor 4 is of lesser importance. Technical factors 1-4 combined are equal in importance to the past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment factor (Factor 5). When the proposal is evaluated as a whole, the technical factors (Factors 1–4) and past performance/performance confidence assessment factor (Factor 5) combined are more important than price.

The importance of price will increase if the Offerors’ non-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-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.

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

(a) Price

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: Price Proposal—Volume 1

Offeror shall submit one electronic copy of the price proposal via the PIEE Solicitation Module.

Offeror shall label the price proposal as “Volume 1 “Price Proposal”: The Government will not evaluate price information provided in the Technical Proposal, but not included in the price proposal. Unbalanced pricing will be evaluated according to FAR 15.404-1(f) as directed by legal. Electronic copies of the proposals shall be submitted in a format readable by Microsoft (MS) Word 2016, PDF, MS Excel 2016 and MS PowerPoint 2016, as applicable.

Please note that any submissions by any other method in place of the PIEE Solicitation Module WILL NOT be accepted and will not be evaluated. In order to submit your proposal on the PIEE Solicitation Portal, Offerors will first need to register for the PIEE ‘Proposal Manager’ role. For step-by-step instructions, see “Vendor Access Instructions” at:

https://dodprocurementtoolbox.com/sitepages/solicitation-module

Price Proposal shall be organized in the general format as follows:

-Cover page -Corporate name (no abbreviations) -Address -Point of contact -Phone number -UEID number -CAGE Code -Introductory Sheets (e.g. Table of Contents, List of Figures, List of Acronyms, and Cross-Reference Sheet)

SECTION I - STANDARD FORM 33

Tab 1– Shall include a signed and completed SF33 (solicitation, offer and award) and all amendments (if applicable). Indicate period of validity of the offeror’s proposal in block 12 (at least 180 days) and the following information:

a. Include Cage Code, UEID, and tax ID numbers for the prime contractor. For joint ventures the cage code for each member of the joint venture, as well as the joint venture should be provided.

b. Date of Last Equal Employment Opportunity Report (EEO-1) certified filing for prime contractor and each member of a joint venture.

Tab 2 - When proposing as a joint venture, all members of the joint venture shall sign the SF 33 unless a written agreement by the joint venture is furnished with the proposal designating one firm with the authority to bind the other member(s) of the joint venture. In addition, a copy of the joint venture agreement shall be submitted with the proposal. Failure to comply with the foregoing requirement may eliminate the proposal from further consideration.

If the joint venture is subject to the SBA Mentor-Protégé Program, a copy of the SBA approval of the joint venture arrangement shall be included.

Tab 3- Representation and Certifications (see Section K)

SECTION II - PRICE AND RELATED INFORMATION

The price submission shall include the following:

• Attachment JL.1A – Fully Burdened Direct Labor Hourly Ceiling Rates Build-up Form (This attachment is for proposal purposes only and will not be incorporated into any resulting contract.)

• Attachment JL.1 – Fully Burdened Direct Labor Hourly Ceiling Rates and Other Direct Costs Multiplier(s) Ceiling(s)/Direct Charges to Labor Base. (Attachment JL.1 will be incorporated into any resulting contract.) The burdened direct labor hourly ceiling rates, other direct costs multiplier ceilings and direct cost(s) ceilings applied to labor base provided in Attachment JL.1 will remain in effect for the life of the contract. The contractor may propose lower rates, but SHALL NOT EXCEED these rates in their task order or task order modification proposals.

• Attachment JL.2 – Proposed Distribution of Work (This attachment is for proposal purposes only and will not be incorporated into any resulting contract.)

• Attachment JL.3 – Price Model Worksheet (This attachment is for proposal purposes only and will not be incorporated into any resulting contract.)

• Attachment JL.4 – Price Model Summary Sheet (This attachment is for proposal purposes only and will not be incorporated into any resulting contract.)

Notes:

(1) The proposal shall include information for KEY SUBCONTRACTORS and affiliates/subsidiaries/parent/LLC/LTD member companies (name is not exactly the same as stated on the SF33), for whom experience is submitted under Factor 1, in the same level of detail as provided by the Offeror. Subcontractor information may be submitted separately for proposal purposes. However, it is noted that the burdened hourly ceiling rates for direct labor and other direct costs multiplier(s) ceiling(s) provided by each key subcontractor on Attachment JL.1 will be incorporated into any resulting contract. (Note: if the Offeror is a joint venture, and the joint venture members are proposing separate rates, information must be provided in the same level of detail for each member of the joint venture. One submittal may be submitted for the Joint Venture (JV) entity only if the JV has an established separate cost center for the JV entity.

(2) Offerors shall not deviate from the basic format of the forms identified in this solicitation. The price proposal shall include the completed mandatory rate forms and supporting information in the general format outlined below:

Tab 1 - PRICE PROPOSAL WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

a. Fully Burdened Direct Labor Hourly Ceiling Rates and Other Direct Costs Multipliers/Direct Costs Applied to Labor Base Ceilings (Attachments JL.1A and JL.1)

(1) A separate rate sheet shall be submitted by the prime, affiliates and each key subcontractor. Note: If the Offeror is a JV and the JV partners are proposing separate rates, separate rate sheets must be provided by each member of the JV. The prime, each JV member and key subcontractor shall provide fully burdened direct labor hourly ceiling rates for all labor categories listed in Attachment JL.1, for the base year and each option year (option years 1 through 4). If the contractor/subcontractor does not currently employ the listed employee, a market rate shall be provided.

The contractor/affiliate/subcontractor shall complete Attachment JL.1A and JL.1 as follows:

Attachment JL.1A Burdened Direct Labor Hourly Ceiling Rates Build-Up Form

(1) Column B – Insert the contractor’s/affiliate’s/subcontractor’s equivalent internal labor category or composite of labor categories for each labor category listed in Column A.

(2) Column C – Provide base year hourly direct labor rates.

(3) Column D – Provide total percent mark-up, including all applicable indirect rates (e.g. fringe, overhead, G&A, FCCOM, etc.) and profit applied to direct labor to arrive at the base year burdened direct labor hourly ceiling rates.

(4) Column E – Provide base year fully burdened direct labor hourly ceiling rates (direct labor rate (Column C) times % mark-up (Column D) + Column C).

Shown below are sample entries for Attachment JL.1A, Burdened Direct Labor Hourly Ceiling Rates Build-Up Form:

A B C D E Solicitation Labor Category

Contractor Labor Category

Direct Labor Rate % Mark-Up (including all indirect costs and profit)

Base Year Burdened Direct Labor Hourly Ceiling Rate

Program Manager Program Manager I $50 95% $97.50 Technical Project Manager

Task Order Manager

$45 95% $87.75

Attachment JL.1 – Burdened Direct Labor Hourly Ceiling Rates and Other Direct Costs Multiplier(s) Form

Burdened Labor Rate Ceilings – JL.1 – Chart 1

(1) Column B – Insert the contractor’s/affiliate’s/subcontractor’s equivalent internal labor category as provided in Column B on Attachment JL.1A.

(2) Column C – Enter base year burdened direct labor hourly ceiling rate for each labor category from Column E on Attachment JL.1A.

(3) Columns D through G – Enter the burdened direct labor ceiling rates for option years one through four for each labor category listed.

Other Direct Cost Multipliers/Direct Costs applied to Labor Base Ceilings JL.1 – Chart 2

(1) Other Direct Costs Multiplier(s) Ceilings – Offerors shall provide Other Direct Cost Multiplier(s) ceilings (e.g.

handling fees, G&A, FCCOM, etc.) and profit, which will be applied as mark-ups to Other Direct Costs (materials, equipment, travel, etc.) and subcontractors under task orders. The multiplier is an expression of the relationship between the direct cost incurred by a contractor and the cost that will be charged to the Government. Round all multipliers to the nearest three decimal places.

For example:

Handling fee on material of 2.5%, G&A on material and handling fee of 3.5%, plus 5% profit on material, handling fee and G&A equates to a total multiplier of 1.114 on $100.00 of material, or a total cost of $114.00.

(2) The Other Direct Cost Multipliers shall be entered for the base year and all option years in Columns C through G on JL.1 – Chart 2, as applicable for Other Direct Costs (equipment, supplies, materials, etc.), subcontractors, and travel. If no multipliers are applied to Other Direct Costs, subcontractors, and/or travel, enter N/A in Chart 2.

(3) Offerors shall also provide any direct costs (e.g. hourly computer usage charges, hourly health and safety charges, etc.), including any profit, that will be applied to the labor base and the labor base (total hours) that the charge is applied to (e.g. all labor categories listed on JL.1 or only specific labor categories listed.)

For example:

$3.00 computer usage charge (including profit) applied to all labor hour equates to 168,900 total labor hours x $3.00 = $506,700.00 in “Direct Costs” applied to the labor base.

b. Proposed Distribution of Work – Complete Attachment JL.2 “Proposed Distribution of Work” by prime (including each member of a joint venture) and each Key Subcontractor.

EXAMPLE: For JV Prime

Prime %

Joint Venture Company A – Firm ABC 30 % Company B – Firm Z 25 %

Key Subcontractor Company X 20 %

Key Subcontractor Company Y 25 %

Total 100%

Tab 2 – Price Model Information

(1) A separate Price Model Worksheet (Attachment JL.3) for the base year and each option year shall be completed/submitted by the prime, each joint venture member, affiliate, and key subcontractor in its entirety.

Additionally, if multiple cost centers will be used in the performance of this contract, a completed price model shall be submitted for each cost center. (Note: If a joint venture has an established separate cost center for the joint venture entity, one form may be submitted for the joint venture entity). Attachment JL.3 should also be provided by unpopulated JVs in which the JV itself has fees/mark-ups as further explained below.

2. Offeror shall not add labor categories, make structural changes, or change the hours on this form.

3. For unpopulated JVs, the offeror shall also complete Attachment JL.3 for the base and each option year if the JV itself has fees/mark-ups. In this situation, the unpopulated JV is not required to complete Attachment JL.3 in its entirety. The price model worksheet (JL.3) should only reflect the fees/mark-ups for the JV. The total calculated JV fees/mark-ups on Attachment JL.3 should also be reflected on the Price Model Summary Sheet, Attachment JL.4.

Note: Each joint venture partner, affiliate, and key reimbursable subcontractor is still required to complete Attachment JL.3 in its entirety.

4. Each team member (prime/JV, affiliates, key subcontractors) submitting this form shall input their fully burdened direct labor hourly ceiling rates from Attachment JL.1-Chart 1, which correspond to the labor categories listed on JL.3-Table 1 for each respective year (base and four option years).

5. Under Other Direct Costs and Multiplier(s) Ceiling- JL.3-Table 2, offerors shall input the applicable multipliers for ODCs, subcontractors and travel and, as applicable, the “direct cost applied to labor base” from JL.1 Chart 2.

Note: If the “direct cost” is not applied to the total labor base (168,900 hours) shown on JL.3, e.g. applied to only certain labor categories, adjust the number of hours to reflect the correct number of hours using the applicable hours from Table 1 in JL.3. If more than one “direct cost” (e.g. $3.00/hr. computer and $2.50/hr. health and safety) is applicable, modify Table 2 on JL.3, as necessary, to show these costs.

6. Table 2 of the Price Model Worksheet Form (JL.3) does not include formulas. In addition to the hard copies, Offerors shall submit form JL.3 in Microsoft Excel format to show all calculations (i.e. multiplier application to other direct cost) used to arrive at the total cost. The Government will review the spreadsheets for accuracy. In the event that there is a difference between the ceiling rates provided in JL.1 and the rates provided in the Price Model Worksheet (JL.3), the Price Model Worksheet will be corrected to reflect the rates provided in JL.1. If corrections are made to the Price Model, the total price after corrections will be utilized in the Price Model Summary Sheet for price evaluation.

7. The Price Model Summary Sheet (JL.4) shall be submitted by the prime contractor/JV entity only. This form does include formulas. For evaluation purposes, the percentages listed on ATTACHMENT JL.2 (DISTRIBUTION OF WORK), shall be used for the prime/JV, affiliate and each key subcontractor listed on the Summary Sheet. In the event an offeror (prime, JV member, affiliate, or key subcontractor) utilizes multiple cost centers, the price model will be completed for each cost center expected to be utilized in the performance of this contract. For evaluation purposes, the cost center with the highest “Total” price for the price model shall be utilized on the summary sheet. The Prime contractor’s other direct costs multiplier ceiling for subcontractors provided in Attachment JL.1-Chart 2 shall be added to the total price for each year. If the prime contractor is a JV, the rate for the JV member with the highest multiplier ceiling rate for subcontractors shall be used. In addition to a hard copy, the summary form shall be submitted in Microsoft Excel Format. . In the event that there is a difference between the total values provided for the Prime/JV, affiliates and/or key subcontractors in JL.3 and total values provided in the Price Model Summary (JL.4), the Price Model Summary will be corrected to reflect the correct values from JL.3.

Any Calculations/formula errors in the Summary Price Model Spreadsheet will also be corrected. If corrections are made to the Price Model Summary, the total price after corrections will be utilized for price evaluation.

For clarification purposes the following example for the Summary Sheet is provided:

Total Price Model Value for Base Year

% of work

(JL2)

Total Value of Base Year based on % of Work

Prime / JV member 1 $490,000.00 30% $147,000.00 Prime/JV member 2 $505,000.00 25% $126,250.00 Key Subcontractor A $479,000.00 20% $95,800.00 Key Subcontractor B $515,000.00 25% $128,750.00 100% $497,800.00 Key Sub Total % Mark-up Key Sub Mark-up Prime/JV multiplier ceiling mark-up on Key Subcontractors as provided on JL.1

$224,550.00 7.5%* $16,841.25

TOTAL VALUE OF PRICE MODEL FOR BASE YEAR $514,641.25

Note: The Prime’s percent mark-up applied to the total price for the key subcontractors is based on the other direct cost multiplier ceiling for subcontractors for JV member #1, whose rate was higher that JV member 2. The rate was applied to the total subcontract price ($95,800 + 128,750) shown under “Total Value of Base Year based on % of Work Column. “

SECTION III – APPENDICES:

Appendix A – Pre-award Survey Information

A pre-award survey may be conducted on all firms submitting a proposal. The following information shall be submitted in a separate envelope marked “Pre-Award Survey”.

a. The company’s last three complete fiscal years’ financial statements, audited, reviewed, or compiled by an independent accounting firm, including the accounting firm’s cover letter and full disclosure notes for the prime and each party to a joint venture. Additionally, the offeror shall provide its current year-to-date financial statements as of the quarter ending prior to submission of offers. Any offeror that intends to rely on the financial backing of its parent corporation must submit separate financial statements for both the partially-owned or wholly owned subsidiary and the parent corporation. If a partially-owned or wholly-owned subsidiary relying on the financial backing of a parent corporation cannot submit its own financial statements, provide a detailed explanation why. If a partially-owned or wholly-owned subsidiary which will be performing the contract is relying on a parent corporation for financial backing, a financial guarantee letter must also be submitted.

b. Financial resources available to perform the contract. Submit evidence of availability of working/operating capital that will be used for the performance of the contract. If the offeror plans to rely on financial support from other sources, identify the maximum lines of credit that will be available to include documentation to support the amounts. The maximum lines of credit should be based upon the inclusion of this contract effort. For joint ventures/teaming arrangements discuss the financial responsibilities among companies and provide same information.

c. The Government may request additional information if needed to determine responsibility.

Appendix B - Compensation Plan for Professional Employees

1) In Appendix B, provide a total compensation plan in accordance with FAR 52.222-46, Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees (Feb 1993), setting forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the contract.

2) Advise if you have different compensation plans for various skill levels and describe.

3) Describe your ability to maintain program continuity, uninterrupted high-quality work, and availability of required competent professional employees.

(2) Basis of Evaluation: Price Proposal

The offeror’s price proposal shall be in the format prescribed by, and shall contain a response to, each of the areas identified in Section L. THE GOVERNMENT MAY REJECT ANY OR ALL PROPOSALS THAT DO NOT

CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS STATED HEREIN IF SUCH ACTION IS IN THE GOVERNMENT’S

BEST INTEREST.

The Government will evaluate the following JL Attachments submitted in response to the solicitation.

• Attachment JL.1A - Burdened Direct Labor Hourly Ceiling Rates Build-Up Form

• Attachment JL.1 - Burdened Direct Labor Hourly Ceiling Rates and Other Direct Costs Multiplier(s)

Ceiling(s)/Direct Charges to Labor Base

• Attachment JL.2 - Proposed Distribution of Work

• Attachment JL.3 - Price Model Worksheet

• Attachment JL.4 - Price Model Summary Sheet

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s price proposal on the basis of:

• Completeness - All information required under Provision L.2 of the solicitation.

• Price reasonableness in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(b), including analysis of data other than certified cost or pricing data provided by the offeror within their price proposal, under Section II - Price and Related Information, Tab 1 - Price Proposal Supporting Information and Tab 2 - Price Model Information.

B. Non-price Factors:

Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

Non Price - Electronically submit font size 12 in PDF format. Tables and charts can be in landscape format, font size 12. Offerors may submit a one-page organizational chart as required under Factor 1 in, font size 10. This will count as one (1) page. The document should be submitted as an Adobe Acrobat file (.pdf). (Note: Cover page, JV agreements, and past performance questionnaires may be submitted in Adobe only). Non-price proposal submission is limited to 75 pages. Note that Joint Venture agreements, organizational conflicts of interest statements, resumes, or past performance questionnaires are not applied against the overall page limit. Additionally, under Factor 3—Small Business Utilization, –Small Business Past Performance,–Small Business Subcontracting Plan, Small Business Offeror Small Business Participation Breakdown, SF1420/DD2626/or equivalent, and SF294s/ISRs will not be applied against the overall page limit. Further, blank pages, introductory sheets (e.g. Table of Contents, List of Figures, List of Acronyms, and Cross-Reference Sheet), and the listings of team member’s corporate names and point of contact information are not applied against the overall page limit. There is no page limitation for the introductory sheets. Any pages in excess of the maximum limits stated herein shall be removed and not evaluated.

(1) Factor 1, Management Structure & Key Personnel:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

a) One-page organizational chart showing lines of authority with roles and responsibilities. Primary focus should be on demonstrating flow of authority, responsibility, and communication between program management staff, technical project managers, key technical experts, and notional sub-contractors that may provide support to projects or as part of data management and overall QA/QC processes.

b) Narrative (5-page maximum) summarizing established data management processes, integrated QA/QC processes, and technical project management capabilities across Atlantic and Pacific regions – reference org chart where applicable. If a JV is being proposed then also outline the anticipated division of responsibilities among the individual entities highlighting the relative roles of each for supporting the requirements under this contract (e.g. will one primarily be responsible for overall program management and the other focus on technical project management)

c) Curriculum Vitae (3-page maximum, submitted on Attachment JL.11- Attachment D - Resume Submittal) for the Program Manager (1 individual) and Technical Project Managers (up to 6 individuals). For each name submitted provide education, other qualifications, skills, and certifications, experience in relevant projects and roles, role expected to play under this contract, and roles played in the examples addressed in Factor 2 (if applicable). Program Manager and Technical Project Managers must be direct full-time employees of the offeror or JV member. Preference will be given to offerors demonstrating recent and most relevant management experience and technical expertise across a wide variety of marine species taxa, technical research and monitoring methods, and geographic regions of interest (i.e. CONUS Atlantic, CONUS Pacific, Pacific Islands).

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

This factor considers the effectiveness of the offeror’s organization and management structure specifically as it applies to this contract, and the qualifications and experience of their key personnel to adequately perform the requirements of this solicitation. The Government seeks a comprehensive and effective approach that will maximize quality, be cost effective, and result in optimal use of resources.

This requirement is intended to demonstrate offeror’s ability to maintain program continuity and uninterrupted high-quality work, as well as availability of required competent professional employees (i.e. the ability of the offeror to coordinate, collaborate, and manage complex requirements, and highlight qualifications and expertise of key personnel).

The Government will evaluate the extent to which the offeror’s proposal under Factor 1 - Management Structure & Key Personnel: (1) demonstrates an effective and efficient organizational structure and a logical approach to providing a quality end result; (2) offers program manager and technical project managers that demonstrate a depth and breadth of experience in work as it relates to the personnel requirements provided in the statement of Work; (3) provides an effective approach for staffing and subcontracting to perform the required work in multiple geographic locations concurrently throughout both the NAVFAC Atlantic and Pacific AORs; and (4) provides for QA/QC and data management processes that demonstrate established and effective means for maintaining consistency and high levels of quality in products and deliverables.

Offerors may be rated more favorably by demonstrating the following:

• Clear and effective program management organizational structure

• Established and successful implementation of QA/QC processes for scientific research (data and written deliverables)

• Established and successful implementation of processes for marine species monitoring data management

• Key personnel who have directly served in their proposed capacity in the past (i.e. most relevant experience)

• Key personnel who played a role in examples listed under Factor 2.

• Collectively, staff who possess a wide range of experience and expertise across a wide variety of marine species taxa, technical research and monitoring methods, and geographic regions of interest (i.e.

CONUS Atlantic, CONUS Pacific, Pacific Islands).

(2) Factor 2, Corporate Experience:

a) Submit a maximum of two (2) relevant examples (“Element A Examples”) demonstrating corporate experience managing large-scale complex technical programs (e.g. biological monitoring, scientific research, technology, engineering). The intent is to demonstrate that the offeror has managed a program of at least similar size and scope, involving multiple coordinated projects or components spanning several years, preferably involving numerous performers either as subcontractors or individual entities within the company. Element A Examples submitted must have at least 3 years of performance within the last 8 years.

Element A Examples submitted may be active programs (i.e. not yet completed) but must have been underway for a minimum of 3 years at the time of the proposal submission deadline.

Any Element A Examples submitted under this requirement must be identified as an “Element A Example”.

An Indefinite Quantity/Indefinite Delivery (IDIQ) contract as a whole should not be submitted as an Element A Example unless the collective task orders under the IDIQ represent a cohesive integrated program and it is presented in a way that clearly illustrates corporate experience managing a large-scale complex technical program rather than a simple collection of unrelated task orders.

b) Submit a maximum of six (6) relevant examples (“Element B Examples”) demonstrating the technical capabilities and expertise of the offeror and/or offeror’s ability to manage complex integrated marine species research and monitoring projects. Each Element B Example must be valued at a minimum of $250,000 and demonstrate relevant experience in coordinating and managing AND/OR performing marine species research and monitoring or related tasks, with significant field work, analysis, data integration and management components. Element B Examples submitted must have at least 12 months of combined fieldwork and analysis completed within the last 5 years. Element B Examples submitted may be active projects (i.e. not yet completed) but must have at least 12 months of combined fieldwork and analysis completed at the time of the proposal submission deadline.

Any Element B Examples submitted under this requirement must be identified as an “Element B Example”.

An Indefinite Quantity/Indefinite Delivery (IDIQ) contract as a whole should not be submitted as an Element B Example and will not be evaluated. Rather, offerors should submit Element B Examples that are discrete projects, specifically either 1) standalone contracts, 2) individual task orders, or 3) a combination of work under multiple task orders within a larger contract that combine to form a discrete project.

The attached Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment JL.10 Attachment C ) is mandatory and should be used to submit information for both Element A Examples and Element B Examples. This form is set at 10pt font and the font size shall not be altered by the offeror. The Government WILL NOT consider information submitted in addition to this form. Individual blocks on this form may be expanded; however, total length for each data sheet shall not exceed five single-sided pages. If more than five pages are submitted, only the first five pages (in consecutive order) will be evaluated. Additional notes/directions for completing the form are provided below:

Block 1: UEID under which the example submitted was performed.

Block 2: (1) Check if work was performed as a prime, subcontractor, member of a joint venture, or other.

(2) If example provided was performed by the firm as a subcontractor, include company name, point of contact, phone number, and e-mail address for prime contractor.

(3) If example provided was performed by the firm as the prime contractor, provide the percent of work self-performed. (Note: If the firm performed the example as a prime under a JV agreement and the JV is not the same as the JV proposing under this solicitation, the percent of work performed shall reflect the work performed by the JV partner providing the experience, not the JV as a whole.) For work performed as a subcontractor, the percent performed should be based on the work self-performed by them under the subcontracted portion, and not work under the example as a whole.

Block 4: For examples that are not yet complete, provide estimated percent complete as of the proposal submittal date and provide anticipated completion date. If a completion date is unknown, provide the current duration of performance to date in years and months.

Block 7: Award amount includes value at award, amount added/deducted by modification, and final total invoiced amount. (Note: For examples that are not yet complete, provide total value of work performed to date, versus final anticipated amount.) If the example was performed as a subcontractor, this amount should reflect the value of the subcontract and not the total value of the example as a whole. In the case of Element A Examples, provide the approximate aggregate cost of all components and supporting labor under the program.

Block 8: Provide a detailed description of the example and the relevancy to the requirements of the RFP. (Note: If performed as a subcontractor, the description shall be for the subcontract work and not the example as a whole. If performed as a joint venture, and all members of the joint venture are not offering on this contract, the description shall make clear the work performed by the entity offering on this contract.)

Block 9: Provide a detailed description of the work self-performed. The offeror shall describe its primary role/duties in execution of the example (i.e., the major components completed by their staff and major components which were subcontracted out.) Description of work self-performed, should include, as applicable: (1) technical, management, and administrative functions-describe the complexity of functions performed; (2) distinctive and/or unique features; (3) type of action performed; (4) type of technology utilized—describe any innovative technologies used; (5) regulatory and stakeholder interactions; and (6) summary of the work accomplished and how it relates to the work required by this solicitation.

Block 10: Provide a listing of any personnel proposed under Factor 1 of this solicitation who worked on the example and their role at the time.

If the Offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), relevant experience should be submitted for examples completed by the Joint Venture entity when possible. If the Joint Venture does not have shared experience, examples shall be submitted for the Joint Venture members individually. Offerors who fail to submit experience for all Joint Venture members will be Unacceptable. Proposals are still limited to a total of two (2) Element A Examples and five (5) Element B Examples combined.

Due to the size, scope, and technical complexity of the Navy’s marine species monitoring program, it is anticipated that a significant amount of work required will be performed by subcontractors. However, it is also advantageous if the offeror has substantial experience conducting as well as managing relevant projects. The intent of this factor is to demonstrate both technical and management experience and expertise as well as established working relationships with a variety of key sub-contractors expected to be involved in future projects.

The Government will evaluate the extent to which the proposal demonstrates (1) relevant corporate experience and depth of experience in managing complex large-scale technical programs similar in size, scope, and complexity to the statement of work for this solicitation (Element A Examples); and (2) relevant corporate experience and depth of experience in performing and managing marine species monitoring field work and analyses projects similar in size, scope, and complexity to the statement of work for this solicitation (Element B Examples).

Examples should demonstrate the offeror’s direct experience and capabilities and their staff’s expertise which is important both for performing marine species monitoring projects, as well as effectively managing the technical aspects of projects. Examples that demonstrate the ability to effectively coordinate and collaborate with subcontractors are acceptable as long as the prime was directly involved with the work being performed in a significant capacity.

The Government will only review two Element A Examples submitted in the offeror’s proposal. Any Element A Examples submitted in excess of the first two will not be considered. Offerors must label Element A Examples as directed or they will not be evaluated.

The Government will only review six Element B Examples submitted in the offeror’s proposal. Any Element B Examples submitted in excess of the first five six will not be considered. Offerors must label Element B Examples as directed or they will not be evaluated.

Proposals that fail to provide required and complete information may be rated lower.

(3) Factor 3, Small Business Utilization:

1. All Offerors (large, non-profits, AND small businesses) shall use Attachment D Attachment G (Historical Small Business Utilization) to demonstrate their historical utilization of SBs. Each project submitted under Factor 2, Experience, shall be included on Attachment D Attachment G. Failure to include each project submitted under Factor 2, Experience, on Attachment D Attachment G, or the failure to fully complete Attachment D Attachment G for each project may result in a deficiency. Only complete Attachment D Attachment G. Information provided in a different format and/or on a form created by the offeror will not be evaluated. Attachments or addendums to Attachment D Attachment G will not be evaluated. Offerors are permitted to expand portions of the form, as needed, to provide sufficient response. Instructions regarding how to complete Attachment D Attachment G are included at the beginning of the attachment.

2. All Offerors (large, non-profits, AND small businesses) shall use Attachment E Attachment JL.7 (Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD) to submit the following required information for evaluation of this factor:

• To demonstrate commitment to use small business concerns in the performance of this contract, identify by name the subcontractors that will be used to support each small business category, including SDB, WOSB, HUBZone SB, VOSB, and SDVOSBs. Identify the type and complexity of product/service to be subcontracted, and the type of commitment (i.e., teaming agreement, joint venture agreement, mentor protégé agreement, letter of commitment, etc.) with each subcontractor.

• If subcontractors are not identified by name, offerors shall provide a detailed explanation why subcontractors are not identified. If firm written commitments with SBs are not in place, offerors shall provide an explanation and rationale on the ability to achieve the proposed participation. (See Attachment Y Attachment JL.7, paragraph 5)

• If a LB offeror does not intend to subcontract, provide a detailed explanation why subcontracting would not result in efficient contract performance. SBs intending to 100% self-perform are not required to provide an explanation. (See Attachment E Attachment JL.7, paragraph 6)

• To demonstrate maximum practicable participation of small businesses, identify (in terms of dollar value and percentage of the total contract value) the offeror’s proposed small business participation. The minimum required small business participation (i.e. work to be performed by small business as the prime contractor and/or work to be performed by small business subcontractors) is 20% this amount will be modified based on market research). Offerors who are not able to meet the minimum total small business participation requirement of 20% (of the total contract value) shall provide a detailed explanation why the minimum total small business participation requirement cannot be achieved.

• Only complete Attachment E Attachment JL.7. Information provided in a different format and/or on a form created by the offeror will not be evaluated. Attachments or addendums to Attachment E Attachment JL.7 will not be evaluated.

• Large business offerors may achieve the minimum total small business participation requirement through subcontracting to small businesses.

• Small business offerors may achieve the minimum total small business participation requirement through their own performance/participation as a prime as well as through a joint venture, teaming arrangement, and/or subcontracting with other small business concerns.

The Government will evaluate the likelihood of success in achieving the small business objectives of this acquisition based on the following:

1. The extent to which the offeror is able to demonstrate a history of supporting Government policies concerning the utilization of small business concerns, including SDB, WOSB, HUBZone SB, VOSB, and SDVOSB and the success in achieving goals established by subcontracting plans on prior contracts. For projects submitted for Factor Z, Experience, that did not have established small business goals, consideration will be given to the utilization of the small business concerns and the degree of usage of small business relative to the total contract value. Historical Small Business Utilization will only be evaluated if performed by the offeror.

2. The extent to which the offeror has demonstrated an achievable commitment to use small businesses, including SDB, WOSB, HUBZone SB, VOSB, and SDVOSB in the performance of this contract within the

SBPCD.

• The minimum small business participation requirement, through work performed by the small business prime and/or subcontracting with small businesses, shall meet or exceed 20% of the total contract value, unless the offeror provides a reasonable and well-documented explanation for why the minimum 20% small business participation requirement cannot be achieved.

• Offerors that demonstrate a commitment to providing maximum practical opportunity to small businesses may be rated higher.

• Proposing less than 20% total small business participation requirement may result in a deficiency.

• Offerors that do not demonstrate commitment to providing maximum practical opportunity to small businesses may result in a deficiency.

• The SBPCD will be evaluated to determine the extent to which small business concerns are specifically identified by name and socioeconomic category in the document and the degree to which small business concerns, including SDB, WOSB, HUBZone SB, VOSB, and SDVOSB will participate relative to the total contract value. The complexity and variety of the work small business concerns will perform and the degree of commitment to use named sources through formal teaming agreements, joint venture agreements, mentor protégé agreements, written/signed letters of /commitment, etc. will be evaluated to assess achievability of the commitment.

• The offeror may receive a deficiency if firm commitments with subcontractors are not provided and the offeror fails to provide a detailed explanation for how the proposed small business participation requirement will be achieved.

• The offeror may be rated lower, if they fail to provide a detailed explanation for why subcontracting would not result in efficient contract performance. (Not applicable to SBs intending to 100% self-perform or LBs and non-profits who intend to subcontract.)

(4) Factor 4, Safety:

The Offeror shall submit the following information: The Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate; and Total Case Rate (TCR) for the specified five (5) Calendar Years (CY), as well as a safety narrative, as described further below. For a partnership or joint venture, the Offeror shall submit separate DART rates and TCR for the specified five (5) CY for each contractor who is part of the partnership/joint venture; however, only one safety narrative is required. Any fatalities experienced within this 5-year timeframe must be explained in detail, to include root cause and corrective actions.

NOTE: DART and TCR shall not be submitted for subcontractors

1. DART Rate: Submit five (5) previous complete calendar years’ [CY20XX, CY20XX, CY20XX, CY20XX, and CY20XX] worth of data (not an overall average). If the Offeror has no DART rate, for any year, affirmatively state so and explain why. Should a negative trend occur above moderate risk levels, an acceptable/detailed explanation is required that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. DART cases include injuries or illnesses resulting in death, days away from work, and/or restricted work or transfer to another job days beyond the day of injury/illness.

b. Calculation of DART rate: Multiply the total number of DART cases by 200,000, and then divide by the number of employee labor hours worked.

𝑫𝑨𝑹𝑻 𝑹𝑨𝑻𝑬 = Number of DART Incidents x 200,000

Total Number of Employee Labor Hours Worked

2. TCR Rate: Submit five (5) previous complete calendar years’ [CY20XX, 20XX, 20XX, 20XX, and 20XX] worth of data (not an overall average). If the Offeror has no TCR rate, for any year, affirmatively state so and explain why.

Should a negative trend occur above moderate risk levels, an acceptable/detailed explanation is required that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. TCR cases include injuries or illnesses resulting in death, days away from work, restricted work or transfer to another job days beyond the day of injury/illness, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness.

b. Calculation of TCR rate: Multiply the total number of TCR incidents by 200,000, and then divide by the number of employee labor hours worked.

𝑻𝑪𝑹 𝑹𝑨𝑻𝑬= Number of TCR Incidents x 200,000

Total Number of Employee Labor Hours Worked

3. Technical Approach to Safety: Submit a narrative that addresses the following:

a. Describe the Offeror’ s approach to implementing and executing a Safety Management System (SMS) including Management/Leadership involvement, Employee involvement, Hazard prevention, Hazard control, Worksite analysis, and Safety and health training, to include the standard(s) used to benchmark the

SMS.

b. Describe the evaluation process used to select potential subcontractors.

c. Describe the processes of how the Offeror will oversee safety compliance of subcontractors at all levels throughout performance of the contract (to include the Offeror’s own in-house workforce).

d. The Technical Approach to Safety narrative shall be limited to two (2) single-sided pages or one (1) double-sided page.

4. The Government reserves the right to review other available sources (public/Government internal) of information.

These may include but are not limited to OSHA data, NAVFAC’s Contractor Incident Reporting System (CIRS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Electronic Contract Management System (eCMS), etc.

The Government is seeking to determine that the Offeror has consistently demonstrated a commitment to safety and that the Offeror plans to properly manage and implement safety procedures for itself and its subcontractors. The evaluation will collectively consider the DART rate, TCR, Technical Approach to Safety, and other sources of information available to the Government as part of such collective evaluation. The board will evaluate the DART rates and TCR to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any negative trends and extenuating circumstances that impact the rating.

1. DART Rate: The board will evaluate trends over the last five years considering changes that take it from one risk level (or more) to the next up or down. Negative trends occurring above moderate risk levels require the offeror to provide a detailed explanation that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. Missing data without an explanation is considered a deficiency.

b. Declining trends that push the risk levels from Moderate Risk (MR) or higher to Low Risk (LR) or Very Low Risk (VLR) would indicate a strength.

c. An increasing DART rate trend could be considered a weakness (i.e. MR or better to High Risk (HR) or Extremely High Risk EHR)) if an acceptable explanation is not provided for any trends that rise above Moderate.

d. This chart correlates the DART…