RFP-200-1219-CS_Amendment_0003.pdf

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT I I 5

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION I PURCHASE REQ. NO. PROJECT N0.(1fApplicabteJ

0003 08/16/2013 717Nega

6. ISSUED BY I CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

Federal Bureau of Prisons Same as Item 6 Residential Reentry Contracting Office 320 First Street, NW Room 5005 Washington, DC 20534

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO Code)

X RFP 200-1219-CS

9B. DATED (See Item 11) 08/16/2013

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

CODE I FACILITY CODE 10B. DATED(See Item 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

[x] The above number solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers [X] is extended, []is not extended.

Offers 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 copy 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 submittedsuch change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is receed prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA(/f required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OR CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

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

A. THE CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO(Specify Authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. ll'fEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office. appropriation data. 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/MODIF/CATIONorganized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible)

The above numbered solicitation (RFP-200-1219-CS) is amended as set forth in item 14. The purpose of the amendment is to correct parts of the Solicitation and revise Attachment(s). RFP-200-1219-CS, for Residential Reentry Center (RRC) and Home Detention services located in Vanderburgh County, Indiana.

Please see continuation sheet(s) for the summary of changes.

Except as provided herein, all items and conditions of the document referenced in item 9A or 1 OA, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect

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

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

PREVIOUS EDITION UNUSABLE

15C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print) Robert Bland, Chief Contracting Officer

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

30-105

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

PAGE OF PAGES

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT- Continuation

11. CONTRACT ID CODE

I 2 I 5

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION I PURCHASE REO. NO. PROJECT NO. (If Applicable)

0003 See Block 16c 717Nega

1) Page One (1 ), Header of the SF 33 referencing the number of pages has changed from Page 1 of 40 to Page 1 of 39.

2) Page One (1), Block Five (5) of the SF 33 has changed. The issue date for solicitation no. RFP-200-1219-CS has changed from August 2, 2013 to August 16, 2013.

3) Page One (1), Block Nine (9) of the SF 33 has changed. The closing date for solicitation no. RFP-200-1219-CS has changed from October 15, 2013, 2:00p.m. EST to October 29, 2013, 2:00P.M. EST.

4) Page One (1), Block Eleven (11) of the SF 33, Section J, List of Attachments, number of page(s). The number of pages has changed from forty-seven (47) to forty-six (46).

5) Page Seventeen (17) of the SF 33, Section I - Contract Clauses- Clauses by Reference:

To incorporate the following clause in effect through Federal Acquisition Circular 2005-67, 2005-68 and 2005-69.

FAR 52.204-10 Reporting Executive Compensation and First-Tier Subcontract Awards (Jul2013).

6) Page Twenty (20) of the SF 33, Section I -Contract Clauses- Clauses by Full Text:

Sections One (1) and Two (2) of FAR Clause 52.216-19 Order Limitations (Oct 1995), have been revised to include the number of inmate days for Home Detention services for both the Base and all Option Years.

7) Page Twenty-Six (26) of the SF 33, Section J - List of Attachments:

The number of pages for Identifier number 7 entitled "Compliance Matrix" has changed from 12 to 11.

8) Page Twenty-Seven (27) of the SF33, Section K- Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors, Provisions By Full Text:

Subdivision (a)(1) of FAR 52.204-8 has been revised to include the NAICS code (623990) applicable to this requirement.

Subparagraph (3) of FAR 52.204-8 has been revised to include the small business size standard ($1 O.OM) for the NAICS code assigned.

9) Page Thirty-two (32) of the SF 33, Section L- Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Offerors, Provisions By Full Text:

Provision 52.27-103-71 Faith-based and Community-based Organizations (Aug 2005), has been revised to include the Provision text.

1 0) Page Thirty-four (34) of the SF 33, Section L- Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Offerors, Provisions By Full Text:

A mechanical error within Paragraph (a) of Provision L.6 Content of Technical/Management Proposals, has been revised to remove the hyphen between the letters "T" and "A" of the word DOCUMENTATION.

11) Section M- Evaluation Factors for Award, Provisions By Full Text:

The following Provision replaces M.5 Evaluation Criteria and their Relative Importance.

The following Provision is incorporated by Full Text:

M.5 Evaluation Criteria and their Relative Importance

Offeror proposals will be evaluated in three areas: Past Performance, Technical/Management and Price. Technical/Management and Past Performance, when combined (Non-Price), are significantly more important than Price. In the Non-Price areas, Past Performance is more important than Technical/Management. The Technical/Management areas are composed of the six factors, listed in paragraph

2.0. Offerors should recognize that Price, although of lesser importance than Technical/Management and Past Performance, might contribute substantially to the Source Selection Official's (SSO's) contract award decision. As the evaluation of competing offeror proposals in the Technical/Management and Past Performance areas become more equal in rating, the more important Price will become in selecting the best value for the Government. The Government will assign an adjectival rating to each of the factors/sub factors identified below as well as assigning an overall adjectival rating to each of the evaluation areas. The adjectival rating depicts how well the offeror meets the evaluation areas/factors/sub factors and solicitation requirements. The adjectival definitions are defined below:

EXCEPTIONAL: Offeror's technical proposal exceeds requirements of the solicitation in many areas. Benefits to the Government/Bureau of Prisons (BOP) are identifiable.

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

PREVIOUS EDITION UNUSABLE

30-105 STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

11. CONTRACT ID CODE

I 3 I 5

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION I PURCHASE REO. NO. PROJECT NO. (If Applicable)

0003 See Block 16c 717Nega

VERY GOOD: Offeror's technical proposal meets requirements of the solicitation and exceeds requirements in some areas. Benefits to the GovernmenUBOP are identifiable. Problems may exist, but are minor, and may be resolved through discussions.

SATISFACTORY: Offeror's technical proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation. Some minor problems exist, but can be resolved through discussions.

MARGINAL: Offeror's technical proposal does not meet some of the requirements of the solicitation. Contractor's technical proposal has identified problems that may result in a negative impact on service delivery (a negative impact on the Government). Problems are serious but can be resolved through discussions.

UNSATISFACTORY: Offeror's technical proposal fails to meet most of the requirements of the solicitation. Technical proposal has problems that will result in a negative impact on service delivery (a negative impact on the Government). Problems are serious, and it is not likely that they can be resolved through discussions.

1.0 Past Performance Evaluation Area

The Past Performance area addresses the Government's confidence in the offeror's probability of successfully performing the effort as proposed based on their record of performance in current and past relevant contract efforts. The Past Performance evaluation will be accomplished by reviewing aspects of an offeror's relevant present and recent past performance, focusing on and targeting performance that is relevant to the Past Performance factors outlined below.

The recency and relevancy of Past Performance information is critical to the Government's evaluation. More recent, more relevant performance information will have a greater positive impact on the Past Performance evaluation than less recent, less relevant performance. The Government may consider efforts performed by the offeror for agencies of the federal, state, or local governments and commercial customers as potentially relevant to the Past Performance evaluation. Where relevant performance record indicates performance problems, the Government will consider the number and severity of the problems and the appropriateness and effectiveness of any corrective actions taken (not just planned or promised). The Government may review more recent contracts or performance evaluations to ensure corrective actions have been implemented and to evaluate their effectiveness. Offerors without a record of relevant company past performance or for whom information on Past Performance is not available will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on Past Performance. The specific Past Performance factors for 1.1 through 1.5 for In-House RRC services are described below and are equal in importance to each other. Past Performance factor 1.6 for Home Detention services is described below as well. The evaluation factors for elements related to the In-House RRC services will be given greater significance over those related to Home Detention services.

However, all elements will be considered when determining the overall rating. Each factor considers the offeror's record of performance and levelofsuccessin:

1.1 FACTOR: In-House RRC- Accountability

The offeror's record of performance and level of success in developing and implementing offender accountability programs.

1.2 FACTOR: In-House RRC - Programs

The offeror's record of performance and level of success in assisting offenders in successfully reentering the community. The offeror's ability to leverage and network with other relevant community resources to offer offenders a more comprehensive and robust support structure.

1.3 FACTOR: In-House RRC -Community Relations

The offeror's record of performance and level of success in acquiring and maintaining public support for residential re-entry programs.

1.4 FACTOR: In-House RRC- Personnel

The offeror's record of performance and level of success in recruiting, training and retaining an adequate staff of personnel with the necessary skills and integrity to ensure successful, continuous performance of the contract.

1.5 FACTOR: In-House RRC- Communications and Responsiveness

The offeror's record of performance and level of success in ensuring open communications about and rapid response to customer needs and requirements.

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

PREVIOUS EDITION UNUSABLE

11. CONTRACT ID CODE

I 4 I 5

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION I PURCHASE REO. NO. PROJECT NO. (If Applicable)

0003 See Block 16c 717Nega

1.1 FACTOR: Home Detention

The offeror's record of performance and level of success in developing and implementing offender home detention accountability programs.

The offeror's record of performance and level of success in assisting offenders in successfully reentering the community through home detention. The offeror's ability to leverage and network with other relevant community resources to offer offenders a more comprehensive and robust support structure.

2.0 Technical/Management Evaluation Area

The Technical/Management area is composed of six factors: (1) Site Location; (2) Accountability; (3) Programs; (4) Facility; (5) Personnel;

and (6) Home Detention. Site Location is composed of two sub factors, which are equal in importance: (1) Site Validity and Suitability; and

(2) Community Relations Program. Home Detention is composed of two sub factors which are equal in importance:

(1) Home Detention Accountability; and (2) Home Detention Programming. The evaluation factors for elements related to the In-House RRC services will be given greater significance over those related to Home Detention services. However, all elements will be considered when determining the overall rating. The specific Technical/Management area factors are described below.

2.1 FACTOR: Site Location

This factor is composed of two sub factors: (1) Site Validity and Suitability and (2) Community Relations Program.

2.1.1 SUBFACTOR: Site Validity and Suitability

The Site Validity and Suitability sub factor evaluates the proposed site location and considers the validity of the offeror's Right-to-Use and Zoning approval. The assessment of validity includes both the legality of the instrument and the nature of the interest and appropriate zoning as it relates to any potential risk it poses to the Government. This sub factor also evaluates the Suitability of the Site Location with regards to environmental impacts and the responsiveness to proximity requirements defined in the SOW and RFP Section J.

2.1.2 SUBFACTOR: Community Relations Program

The Community Relations Program sub factor evaluates the innovativeness, credibility and effectiveness of the offeror's proposed program for educating and interacting with the local community in order to acquire and maintain public support.

2.2 FACTOR: Accountability

This factor evaluates the comprehensiveness, credibility and effectiveness of the offeror's offender accountability program. The offeror will be evaluated on the plans, procedures and practices they will employ to ensure that offenders are accurately accounted for, at all times, while (1) in the facility; (2) at work assignments; (3) in all other activities outside the facility; and (4) under home detention.

2.3 FACTOR: Programs

This factor evaluates the quality and effectiveness of the offeror's plan for assessing the individual needs of each offender to assist their reentry into the community. This includes an evaluation of the offeror's programs for assisting with employment and housing, and developing improved life skills to include, but not limited to, money management, parenting and family reunification. This factor also includes an evaluation of the offeror's understanding of and ability to leverage and network with other relevant community resources in order to offer a more comprehensive and robust support structure for the offender.

2.4 FACTOR: Facility

This factor evaluates the offeror's proposed facility with regard to (1) overall quality; (2) degree of compliance to applicable local, state, national health, safety, environmental laws, regulations, Executive Orders, and building codes; and (3) the soundness and credibility of the offeror's plan for ensuring operational availability within 120 days after contract award.

2.5 FACTOR: Personnel

This factor evaluates the offeror's quality, credibility and innovativeness of the offeror's approach for recruiting, training and retaining an adequate staff of Community Correction Programs (CCP) personnel with the necessary skills to ensure successful, continuous performance of the contract. This also includes evaluating the effectiveness of the offeror's plan for ensuring all personnel will be aware of and abide by the standards of employee conduct as defined by the SOW, Chapter 2.

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

PREVIOUS EDITION UNUSABLE

11. CONTRACT ID CODE

I 5 I 5

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION I PURCHASE REQ. NO. PROJECT NO. (If Applicable)

0003 See Block 16c 717Nega

2.6 FACTOR: Home Detention

This factor is composed of two sub factors: (1) Accountability and (2) Programming.

2.6.1 SUBFACTOR: Accountability

The factor evaluates the comprehensiveness, credibility and effectiveness of the offeror's offender accountability program while on home detention. The offeror will be evaluated on the plans, procedures, and practices they will employ to ensure that offenders are accurately accounted for at all times while (1) on home detention, (2) at approved work locations, and (3) in all activities outside of the home detention location.

2.6.2 SUBFACTOR: Programming

This factor evaluates the quality and effectiveness of the offeror's plan for assessing the individual needs of each offender to assist them in successful reentry into the community. This includes an evaluation of the offeror's programs for assisting with employment and developing life skills to include, but not limited to, money management, parenting, and family reunifications. This factor also includes an evaluation of the offeror's understanding of and ability to leverage and network with other relevant community resources in order to offer a more comprehensive and robust support structure for the offender.

3.0 Price Evaluation Area

The Government will evaluate the offeror's price for the overall requirement to ensure it is reasonable. The offeror's evaluated price will be assessed against the evaluation results of the non-price areas in conducting possible tradeoff analysis and determining best value to the Government. The competitiveness of the offeror's price for In-House RRC Services is significantly more important than the competitiveness of the offeror's price for Home Detention Services. However, as offerors' proposals become more equal in the non-price factors, the overall price of the entire contract will be given greater importance.

Risk Assessment Area

The Government will conduct a proposal risk assessment. The proposal risk assessment reflects the Government's degree of confidence in the offeror's ability to perform the effort described in their Technical/Management proposal. Proposal risk considers if any aspect of the proposed Technical/Management solution could pose potential adverse impacts on price, schedule or performance of the effort. A separate proposal risk assessment and rating may be applied to all evaluation criteria, with the exception of the sub factor "Site Validity and Suitability." In this sub factor, the level of risk associated with the offeror's proposal is inherent in the sub factor definition and will thus be reflected in the sub factor color/adjectival rating and rationale. The findings and results of the proposal risk assessment will be a general consideration in determining the best value offeror to the Government.

[END OF SECTION]

12) A revised copy of the Solicitation is attached.

13) A revised copy of the Compliance Matrix is attached.

14) A revised copy of the Bid Cover Sheet is attached.

All other terms and conditions remain the same.

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

PREVIOUS EDITION UNUSABLE