RFQ_PO201611251_COMBINED_SYNOPSIS_SOLICITATION_DS_SSA_ICT_SECTOR_SERIES.pdf

U . S . T R A D E A N D D E V E L O P M E N T A G E N C Y

SUBJECT: COMBINED/SYNOPSIS SOLICITATION: Request for Quote for a Sub-

Saharan Africa Regional – ICT Sector Opportunities Desk Study (DS) Series.

SOLICITATION NUMBER: RFQ-PO201611251

ISSUANCE DATE: August 15, 2016 CLOSING DATE: August 30, 2016, 5:00 PM, Washington, D.C. Local

Time

This request for commercial item prepared in accordance with the format in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 12.6 and procedures in Subpart 13.1 as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. This announcement constitutes the only RFQ; offers are being requested and written solicitation will not be issued.

This solicitation is being issued IAW FAR Subpart 15.203. The Government will offer one award resulting from this solicitation to the offeror who is deemed responsible and is determined, based on the evaluation factors and sub factors, to represent the best value to the Government.

This procurement is a 100 percent set-aside for Small Business under NAICS Code 541690. Award is limited to U.S. Firms or U.S. individuals. Contractor and U.S.

subcontractor employees used shall be either U.S. citizens on non-U.S. citizens lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States. Contractor use of subcontractors is limited to less than fifty percent of the proposed price. International transportation and insurance must have their nationality; source and origin in the U.S., local lodging, food and transportation in the host country are not subject to this restriction.

THE FOLLOWING ITEMS REPRESENT THE "PROPOSAL PACKAGE" THAT

SHOULD BE RETURNED IN RESPONSE TO THIS SOLICITATION (Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors – Commercial Items (APR 2014)).

1. Quote Due Date:

Your quote must be received no later than 5:00 PM local Arlington, VA time on Tuesday, August 30, 2016. Late quotes will be processed in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation guidance.

2. Offer Submission:

Send your offer by email to contractproposals@ustda.gov which is due no later than 5:00 PM, local Arlington, VA time on Tuesday, August 30, 2016. Proposals submitted by facsimile or to alternate email addresses will NOT be accepted.

3. Questions Relating to This Solicitation:

All questions must be emailed to the POC listed in the solicitation at contractproposals@ustda.gov no later than 5:00 PM, August 19, 2016. Please reference the Solicitation Number in the SUBJECT LINE of your email.

4. Notice Regarding Suspension/Debarment/Ineligibility:

Any contract awarded to a contractor who, at the time of award was suspended, debarred, and ineligible for receipt of contract with Government Agencies or in receipt of a notice of proposed debarment from any Government Agency, is voidable at the option of the Government.

5. System for Award Management (SAM) Database:

All Contractors must be registered in the SAM database via https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/ in order to be eligible for contract award. Lack of registration in SAM will make an Offeror ineligible for award as described in FAR 52.204-7.

Do NOT delay submission of your offer pending receipt of a CAGE code.

6. Inspection and Acceptance:

All services are subject to the COR's and/or ACOR’s final approval. All work will be inspected and accepted at USTDA's Office, Arlington, VA.

7. Deliveries or Performance:

The Contractor shall submit all deliverables under this contract to the Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) as stated in the Performance Work Statement. The performance of this contract shall be twenty-four (24) months form the date of the Contracting Officer’s signature on the Contract. Performance of this contract shall be at the contractor’s site.

8. Contract Clauses:

The clauses at 52.214-4, Contract Terms and Conditions-Commercial Items and 52.212-5, Contract Terms and Conditions Required to Implement Statutes or Executive Orders- Commercial Items, apply to this acquisition.

9. Proposal Content:

SF 1449, Solicitation/Contract/Order for Commercial Items – Offeror should ensure the CAGE CODE and DUNS Numbers are placed in Block 17A and complete blocks 24 (PRICE QUOTE), 30A, 30B, and 30C. Finally, the offeror should sign and date in blue or black ink while ensuring that all changes made are initialed. PLEASE DO NOT SUBMIT

YOUR PRICES IN ANY OTHER FORMAT.

Technical Proposal – Technical proposal, not exceeding 5 pages, that documents their Technical expertise and experience to meet the requirements in the solicitation.

Past Performance Information – Please include reference information for at least one but not more than three clients for relevant work of similar size, scope, and complexity you have performed in the last three years. The name and contact information of Offeror’s references will not count towards the page limit.

10. Past Performance Questionnaire:

The Offeror shall provide information for a maximum of three (3) contracts and/or subcontracts held within the last three (3) years. Also, ensure the attached Past Performance Questionnaire is forwarded by the Offeror to the contract POC for which the past performance reference is being provided. The government will use information submitted by the Offeror’s past performance POC, such as other Federal Government offices and commercial sources, to assess performance. The attached Past Performance Questionnaire MUST be completed by the POC providing the reference. Upon completion, the past performance POC should forward the completed questionnaire to USTDA via email to contractproposals@ustda.gov no later than 5:00 P.M., Washington D.C. time on August 30, 2016.

11. Evaluation Factors for Award: FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation, Commercial Items (available at www.farsite.hill.af.mil under FAR), is being used. (b) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). The following non-price factors are of equal importance and will be used to evaluate all offers. All evaluation factors, other than cost or price, when combined, are significantly more important that cost or price.

a. TECHNICAL: The following two subfactors are of equal importance:

Sub-factor 1: Technical Experience

The RFQ respondent's relevant technical background and professional experience in the information and communications technology (ICT) sector (including various ICT sub-sectors, such as cable and wireless systems, telephone/cellular, satellite, broadcasting, data accumulation and processing, cybersecurity, emergency communication systems, etc.) as it relates to the Statement of Work (SOW) including experience in drafting Terms of Reference/Scopes of Work and Budgets for studies shall be evaluated to determine the likelihood that the RFQ respondent can successfully perform the contract requirements and the degree of the risk of non-performance.

Sub-factor 2: Prior Relevant Regional Experience

The RFQ respondent's relevant technical knowledge of the region (sub-Saharan Africa) as it relates to the SOW and the ICT sector shall be evaluated to determine the likelihood that the RFQ respondent can successfully perform the contract requirements and the degree of the risk of non-performance.

Technical Subfactors 1 and 2 are all approximately equal. However, if the rating of any of the Technical Subfactors is Unacceptable, then such a rating will have a negative impact on the overall rating for the Technical Factor. In that case, the overall Technical rating will be Unacceptable —regardless of any rating (other than unacceptable) of the other Technical Subfactors.

(2) PAST PERFORMANCE

(3) PRICE: The Government will evaluate price to determine the following--

Completeness: All information required by the solicitation has been submitted and is accurate.

Reasonableness: Price is fair and reasonable in accordance with FAR.

Technical factor and sub-factors shall be evaluated using the following adjectival ratings:

Table 1. Technical 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 proposal 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.

Past Performance factor shall be evaluated using the following adjectival ratings:

Table 2. Past Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Description Substantial Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

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

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

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

Unknown Confidence (Neutral) No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD: The Government will use Trade-off Source Selection Procedures to evaluate offers and determine the best value. The Government will award a contract resulting from this RFQ to the offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation, as supplemented, who's proposal conforms to the RFQ requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by this solicitation) and is determined, based on the evaluation factors to represent the best value to the Government. The Government seeks to award to the offeror who gives USTDA the greatest confidence that it will best meet or exceed the requirement affordably. This may result in an award to a higher rated, higher priced offeror, where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors and the Contracting Officer reasonably determines that the technical approach of the higher priced offeror outweighs the cost difference.

//Signed//

TYRONE W. JOHNSON

Contracting Officer, Office of Acquisition Management