MDR_RFQ.pdf

WHS AD Solicitation # RC051920150146

1.0 General

In order to maximize efficiency and minimize the effort involved in the quote evaluation process, all vendors must comply with the following instructions for quote format and content. Quotes that do not comply with these instructions may be considered non-responsive and may render the vendor ineligible for award. Quotes must be clear, coherent, and prepared in sufficient detail for effective evaluation of the vendor’s quote against the evaluation criteria. The documentation shall cover all aspects of this solicitation and include the vendor’s approach for to satisfy the requirements specified in the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

The Washington Headquarters Services, Acquisition Directorate (WHS/AD) intends to make a single award to the responsible vendor who submits the best value offer and is most advantageous to the Government based upon the factors contained in this request for quotes. The

Government may reject any quote not substantially in compliance with the terms and conditions of the solicitation. Communication conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute discussions and the Contracting Officer reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for quote revision. The Government may reject any or all quotes if such action is in the public interest; accept a quote other than the lowest cost/priced quote; and waive informalities and minor irregularities in quotes received.

This solicitation will be distributed solely through the Federal Business Opportunities web-site

(FBO.gov). No hard copy of this solicitation will be issued. Any amendments made to this solicitation will be posted electronically on FedBizOpps. Vendors shall submit their quotes electronically.

2.0 Proposal Submission

Quotes submitted in response to the solicitation shall be submitted as follows:

2.1 Questions – The cutoff date and time for questions is 11 June 2015 at 10:00 AM EST.

Vendors are requested to email questions to Robin Castoldi at robin.castoldi@whs.mil.

Responses to all questions will be in the form of an amendment posted electronically at FBO.

No telephonic requests will be entertained.

2.2 Due Date - Vendors shall submit their quotes before the due date and time for this solicitation. The due date and time for quotes is 18 June 2015 at 10:00 AM EST. Proposals that are not received by the date and time specified will be considered “late” and will not be considered for award.

2.3 Text – Text shall be at least single-spaced, on 8 1/2 x 11 inch paper, with a minimum one-inch margin all around. Pages shall be numbered consecutively. No foldout pages shall be used.

2.4 Font Size – Print shall be of a minimum 10-point font size or a maximum 10 characters per inch (10-pitch, pica) spacing. Bolding, underlining, and italics may be used to identify topic demarcations or points of emphasis. Graphic presentations, including tables, while not mailto:robin.castoldi@whs.mil subject to the same font size and spacing requirements, shall have spacing and text that is easily readable.

2.5 Cover Sheet – A cover sheet shall be included with each file, clearly marked as to the RFQ identification, date of submittal, acknowledgement of all amendments, the vendor’s name, address, CAGE code, DUNS Number, and the vendor’s POC name, phone, and email. The cover sheet does not count against the page limits.

2.6 Table of Contents – A Table of Contents may be included in the file, if desired, but will count towards the page limit.

2.7 Files and Page Limitations – Responses to Technical Approach & Capability, Past

Performance, and Price shall be in separate electronic files. No pricing information shall be included in the Technical or Past Performance files. A separate Administrative file shall also be included. Specific requirements and page limitations are as follows:

PROPOSAL SUBMISSIONS PAGE LIMITS

VOLUME I

ADMINISTRATIVE:

Cover Letter

Signed OCI

Analysis/Disclosure Form

Completed Clauses FAR

52.209-5, 52.212-3, DFARS

252.209-7992

No Page Limit

VOLUME II

FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL

APPROACH & CAPABILITY

Maximum of five (5) pages

VOLUME III

FACTOR 2 –

PAST PERFORMANCE

Maximum of two (2) pages

VOLUME IV

FACTOR 3 –

PRICE

No page limit

Pages submitted in excess of the stated page limitations will be removed and not evaluated.

Past Performance Questionnaires while part of the evaluation, are provided directly to the

Contracting Officer from the reference(s) and are not part of the Past Performance Proposal page limitation.

2.8 Electronic Submission – Vendors shall submit their quotes via email to robin.castoldi.civ@mail.mil. Quotes sent by any other means (e.g. hand-carried, postal service mail, commercial carrier, fax or e-mail) will not be considered. Text and graphics portions of the electronic copies shall be in a format readable by Adobe (.PDF) or MS Word

2010. Data submitted in spreadsheet format shall be readable by Adobe (.PDF) or MS Excel

2010. There is a 10 MB limit for all electronic submissions via e-mail. The 10 MB size mailto:robin.castoldi.civ@mail.mil limitation applies to a single e-mail. Vendors may submit multiple e-mails but all e-mails from a vendor must be received before the closing time for quotes.

Vendors are responsible for submitting quotes so as to be received at the Government site indicated in this RFP no later than the date and time specified in the Section 2.2. When sending electronic files, the Vendor shall account for potential delays in file transfer.

Vendors are encouraged to submit their responses early to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high demand or problems encountered in the course of the submission. All submissions shall be received in their entirety before the due date and time in order to be considered – No exceptions.

3.0 PROPOSAL VOLUME DETAILS

3.1 Administrative (Volume I) - The vendor shall provide a cover letter, signed OCI

Disclosure/Analysis form (Attachment 2), and the completion of Clauses FAR 52.209-5, 52.212-3, and DFARS 252.209-7999 in this volume.

3.2 Technical Approach & Capability (Volume II) – The vendor shall submit sufficient information for the Government to make a comprehensive evaluation of its approach and capability in providing the requirements listed in the PWS for successful performance. To be considered for award, quotes must be for the MarkLogic Server, brand name only. No

“equals” will be accepted. Any vendor proposing an “equal” product will be considered Technically Unacceptable and will not be evaluated further for the factors below.

The vendor’s quote shall include a personnel matrix, outlining the personnel name/title, PWS tasks assigned, labor category, and number of hours proposed. The matrix shall include clearance level and experience. This section must also address the Offeror’s ability to meet security requirements. No labor rates shall be included in the technical volume.

3.3 Past Performance (Volume III) - The vendor shall provide no more than two (2) past performance contract references that reflect recent and relevant experience where the vendor has served as the prime contractor for a minimum of one of the two contract references.

Recent experience is defined as that performed within the past three (3) years. Relevant experience is defined as that which is similar in scope as that found within the attached

Performance Work Statement. Include contract/delivery order number, contract type, program name, total contract cost, short description of work performed and its relevance to this requirement, and the name, title/role, and phone number or email address of a customer

POC (i.e. the COR or KO) that is knowledgeable of the Vendor’s performance on the contract.

The vendor shall provide Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ), to its customer references and instruct them to email the completed Questionnaires directly to the Contract Specialist for evaluation. Questionnaires must be received via email no later than the date and time specified in Section 2.2 of the Instructions to Vendors. Questionnaires that are not received by the due date may not be evaluated. The Questionnaire is provided as Attachment

1 to these instructions.

3.4 Price (Volume IV) - The vendor shall propose a firm-fixed price for the contract by submitting Price Volume IV, to include the completed Contract Line Item Number (CLIN)

Structure provided in Attachment 3 of this solicitation. The quote shall also include proposed labor categories, number of hours proposed, and labor rate. There are no travel or ODCs costs associated with this requirement.

4.0 EVALUATION

4.1 Basis for Contract Award - Unless all quotes are rejected, award will be made to the responsible vendor whose quote, conforming to the solicitation, is determined to be the best overall value, price and other factors considered. In determining the best overall response, the combined non-price factors are more important than the cost/price factor; however, price is a significant factor. The Government may select for award the vendor whose price is not necessarily the lowest, but whose technical quote is more advantageous to the Government and warrants the additional cost. Vendors must satisfy the requirements described in the performance criteria, as well as other RFP requirements. Quotes that take exception to any performance criteria are unacceptable.

4.2 Evaluation Factors

The evaluation will be based on a complete assessment of the vendor’s quote. Quotes shall be evaluated on the following three factors listed in descending order of importance. Price will become increasingly more important as the non-price evaluation factors become increasingly equal.

Factor 1 – Technical Approach & Capability

Factor 2 – Past Performance

Factor 3 – Price

4.2.1 Factor 1 - Technical Approach & Capability - To be considered for award, quotes must be for the MarkLogic Server, brand name only. No “equals” will be accepted. Any vendor proposing an “equal” product will be considered

Technically Unacceptable and will not be evaluated further for the factors below.

The Government will evaluate the adequacy of the vendor’s approach, completeness and understanding of the requirements specified in the solicitation and all attached documents, including the Performance Work Statement (PWS), as demonstrated by the proposed technical approach and capabilities. The quote shall be sufficiently complete to demonstrate how the vendor will comply with Government tasking and requirements and ensure high quality services and deliverables are provided throughout the performance period. Data previously submitted, or presumed to be known, i.e., descriptions of previous projects performed for the Government, cannot be considered as a part of the quote unless physically incorporated in the quote. Clarity, completeness and conciseness are essential.

4.2.2 Factor 2 – Past Performance - Past performance is a measure of the degree to which the vendor satisfied its customers in the past and complied with Federal, State, and local laws and regulations. The Government may contact some, all or none of each

Vendor’s customers to request additional information. The Government reserves the right to limit or expand the number of references it decides to contact and to contact references other than those provided by the Vendor.

The Government may also use other information available from other sources that may include Federal, State and local Government agencies, Better Business Bureaus, published media, and electronic databases to evaluate a Vendor’s past performance.

Databases such the CPARS, the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System and PPIRS, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System or other past performance assessment tools may be used.

The Government may give more weight to past performance information that is considered more relevant and/or more current. In cases where a vendor lacks relevant past performance history or in which information on past performance is not available, the vendor will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. The neutral rating provided to these vendors is at the Contracting Officer's discretion based on the past performance ratings for all other vendors. Prior to assigning a "neutral" past performance rating, the Contracting Officer may take into account a broad range of information related to a vendor’s past performance.

4.2.3 Factor 3 – Price - In accordance with FAR 13.106-3, the government will evaluate whether the proposed price is fair and reasonable. For evaluation purposes only, the total evaluated price is the sum of the total prices submitted for (a) the base period, (b) all option periods, and (c) the six-month extension authorized by FAR clause 52.217-8.

For purposes of determining the evaluated price for the six month 52.217-8 extension, calculations include six-months of the total price of the final option CLIN. Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

5.0 RATING METHODS

5.1 Factor 1 – Technical Approach & Capability - The Evaluation Process for Factor 1 is specified below. The rating reflects the degree to which the proposed approach meets or does not meet the minimum performance or capability requirements through an assessment of the strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, and risks of a quote. The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. Combined technical/risk evaluations shall utilize the ratings listed in Table 1.

TABLE 1 – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Rating Description

Outstanding

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

Good

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

Acceptable

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

Marginal

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

Unacceptable

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

5.2 Factor 2 – Past Performance - The Past Performance evaluation process is specified below.

The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the vendor’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. The past performance evaluation considers each vendor's demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements. One performance confidence assessment rating is assigned for each vendor after evaluating the vendor's recent and relevant past performance. There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation.

Step 1 - The first aspect is to evaluate the vendor’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the vendor is to the effort to be acquired through the evaluation (defined in Table 2). Common aspects of relevancy include similarity of service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and degree of subcontract/teaming.

TABLE 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY RATINGS

Rating Definition

Very relevant

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

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

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

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

Step 2 - The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts. The past performance information collected will be evaluated to determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to performance confidence assessment. In conducting a performance confidence assessment, each vendor shall be assigned one of the ratings in Table 3.

TABLE 3 – PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS

Rating Description

Substantial Confidence

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

Satisfactory Confidence

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

Limited Confidence

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

No Confidence

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

Unknown Confidence (Neutral)

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

5.3 Factor 3 – Price - Price will not receive a rating, however, a determination will be made on whether the proposed price is fair and reasonable in accordance with FAR 13.106-3.

5.4 Ineligibility - A determination of “Unacceptable” for Factor 1 renders the entire quote unacceptable and therefore will not be eligible for award. A determination of “No

Confidence” for Factor 2 renders the entire quote unacceptable and therefore will not be eligible for award. Any proposed price found to be not fair and reasonable will be ineligible for award.

6.0 Attachments:

1) Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ)

2) OCI Disclosure/Analysis form

3) Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) Structure

7.0 APPLICABLE PROVISIONS & CLAUSES

52.203-3 Gratuities Apr 1984

52.203-6 Restrictions on Subcontractors (Alt 1) Sep 2006

52.204-9 Personal Identity Verification of Contractor Personnel Jan 2011

52.204-4 Printed or Copied Double-Sided on Recycled Paper May 2011

52.204-10 Reporting Executive Compensation Jul 2013

52.217-8 Option to Extend Services Nov 1999

52.217-9 Option to Extend the term of the contract Mar 2000

52.209-6 Protecting the Government’s Interest When Subcontracting AUG 2013

With Contractors Debarred, Suspended, or Proposed for

Debarment

52.209-9 Updates of Publicly Available Information Jul 2013

Regarding Responsibility Matters

52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors--Commercial Items Apr 2014

52.212-2 Evaluation -- Commercial Items (SEE RFQ SECTION 4.2) (Jan 1999)

52.212-3 Offeror Representations and Certifications -- Commercial Items Mar 2015

52.212-4 Contract Terms and Conditions—Commercial Items DEC 2014

52.212-5 Contract Terms and Conditions Required to Implement DEC 2014

Statutes or Executive Orders—Commercial Items

52.222-3 Convict Labor JUN 2003

52.222-21 Prohibition of Segregated Facilities Apr 2015

52.222-50 Combating Trafficking in Persons MAR 2015

52.223-16 Acquisition of EPEAT – Registered Personal Computer JUN 2014

Products

52.223-16 Alt I Acquisition of EPEAT – Registered Personal Computer JUN 2014

Products – Alternate I

52.225-13 Restrictions on Certain Foreign Purchases Jun 2008

52.228-5 Insurance – Work on a Government Installation Jan 1997

52.232-23 Assignment of Claims MAY 2014

52.232-33 Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer –System for Award JUL 2013

Management

52.232-39 Unenforceability of Unauthorized Obligations JUN 2013

52.233-3 Protest After Award AUG 1996

52.233-4 Applicable Law for Breach of Contract OCT 2004

52.233-9000 Agency-Level Protests MAR 2015

52.237-2 Protection of Government Buildings, Equipment, and Vegetation Apr 1984

52.237-3 Continuity of Services Jan 1991

52.242-13 Bankruptcy Jul 1995

52.247-34 F.O.B. Destination NOV 1991

52.227-1 Authorization and Consent DEC 2007

52.252-2 Clauses Incorporated by Reference FEB 1998

52.252-6 Authorized Deviations in Clauses APR 1984

52.253-1 Computer Generated Forms Jan 1991

252.201-7000 Contracting Officer’s Representative DEC 1991

252.203-7000 Requirements Relating to Compensation of Former DoD SEP 2011

Officials

252.203-7002 Requirement to Inform Employees of Whistleblower Rights SEP 2013

252.203-7003 Agency Office of the Inspector General DEC 2012

252.203-7998 Prohibition on Contracting with Entities that Require Certain Feb 2015

Internal Confidentiality Agreements Class Deviation 2015-O0010

252.204-7004 Alternate A, System for Award Management Feb 2014

252.209-7992 REPRESENTATION BY CORPORATIONS REGARDING AN UNPAID

DELINQUENT TAX LIABILITY OR A FELONY CONVICTION UNDER ANY

FEDERAL LAW-FISCAL YEAR 2015 APPROPRIATIONS (DEVIATION 2015-

OO0005) DEC 2014

252.204-7003 Control of Government Personnel Work Product Apr 1992

252.204-7006 Billing Instructions OCT 2005

252.204-7012 Safeguarding of Unclassified Controlled Technical Information NOV 2013

252.232-7003 Electronic Submission of Payment Requests and Receiving JUN 2012

Reports

252.232-7006 Wide Area Workflow Payment Instructions MAY 2013

252.232-7010 Levies on Contract Payments DEC 2006

252.243-7001 Pricing of Contract Modifications DEC 1991

252.243-7002 Requests for Equitable Adjustments Dec 2012

252.247-7023 Transportation of Supplies by Sea APR 2014

52.237-9000 WHS/AD Local Clause: Mandatory Contractor MAR 2015

Manpower Reporting