68_inst_SBAHQ16Q0043.pdf

Solicitation Notification Research on Crowdfunding as Capital Source for the National Women’s

Business Council

SBAHQ-16-Q-0043

The Small Business Administration, National Women’s Business Council (NWBC) intends to procure a fixed price order for Research on Crowdfunding as Capital Source. Please see the attached Performance Work Statement (PWS) description of our requirements.

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

Submission of Quotes. Please submit your technical and price quote as described below. If you have any questions, please contact John Babcock, Contract Specialist, by e-mail – john.babcock@sba.gov.

Offers that do not contain all applicable labor categories, technical approach, past performance information, and price will be considered non responsive.

Quotes shall be received via e-mail at john.babcock@sba.gov by 10:00 AM, Mountain, June 7, 2016. PLEASE BE SURE THE SOLICITATION NUMBER (SBAHQ-16-Q-0043) AND

SUBJECT TITLE (Research on Crowdfunding as Capital Source) ARE CLEARLY MARKED

ON THE E-MAIL SUBJECT LINE AND SUBMITTED DOCUMENTS.

Questions shall be submitted not later than 08:30 AM, Mountain May 24, 2016 via e-mail to john.babcock@sba.gov

To facilitate processing please include the following as separate files and in Adobe PDF format in your response and labeled as such:

- Technical

- Past Performance

- Price

FAX AND OR PHONE REQUESTS ARE NOT AUTHORIZED AND WILL NOT BE

ACCEPTED. Requests and responses shall include complete company name, address, DUNS, telephone and fax number.

FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE DELINEATED SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS WILL

RESULT IN REJCTION OF YOUR QUOTE.

*If you experience difficulty or problems when emailing your quote’s please contact me (John Babcock) via e-mail at john.babcock@sba.gov or phone at 303-844-7253 as soon as practicable.

mailto:john.babcock@sba.gov

Technical Approach: The contractor shall submit a technical response defining the scope of work and resources necessary to execute the work to be performed under this contract including your applicable labor category descriptions.

Proposals shall include the following:

1. Demonstration of offeror’s capacity to execute all components of the contract including, but not limited to, biographies for key personnel and examples of related and/or past projects;

2. A writing sample, no longer than five pages, which demonstrates the offeror’s ability to convey innovative ideas concisely.

3. A statement of interest and initial research questions that will guide the approach to Task A;

4. At least one example of research methodology that could be included in Task B, to which the offeror shall not be bound;

5. Projected cost and timelines for each task outlined in this Performance Work Statement.

Other information of relevance:

• Interview Option. Offerors may be asked to respond via teleconference, in writing, or in person to follow up or clarifying questions.

• Special Access Data and Data Rights. Some data sources require special access due to privacy concerns or for other reasons. Offers must document the proposed process for acquiring access to any data proposed for use under this award. All costs associated with the contractor’s acquisition of this data shall be inclusive of the offered fixed price for the service. Rights in Data under FAR 52.227-14-15 shall apply, see also detailed Performance Requirements.

• Information collection. Bids that suggest the use of additional survey(s) for information should demonstrate familiarity with survey procedures, provide the source for respondents, provide collection details and provide realistic estimates of the response rates. Bids suggesting surveys need to include the survey approval process in the timeline as required under the Paperwork Reduction Act’s clearance process within the Office of Management and Budget. Preference will be shown to bidders with demonstrated experience with the PRA process or planning the use of a specific subcontractor with demonstrated experience.

Surveys are not preferred over using existing data, as they can place a burden on small businesses, but we recognize that on occasion they are necessary.

• Impartiality. Initial hypotheses or questions for research should be identified in the technical proposal, but the offeror must demonstrate their intention to fully investigate the topic without bias or agenda.

• Page limit. It is encouraged that proposals are no longer than 10 pages, not including company credentials, references, and writing sample (Required items (1) and (2), as listed above).

• Project goal. The intent of this contract is to conduct groundbreaking research that provides insight into women business enterprises, and to share the findings to ultimately incite constructive action and policies. As such, preference will be shown to bidders demonstrating the ability to conduct action-oriented and conclusive research. See Appendix A for a description of our research philosophy.

• Examples. Previously completed research funded by the National Women’s Business Council can give researchers perspective when creating bids. See http://www.nwbc.gov/issues-and-research for examples.

• Previously completed research funded by the National Women’s Business Council can give researchers perspective when creating bids. See http://www.nwbc.gov/issues-and-research for examples.

• The intent of this contract is to conduct groundbreaking research that provides insight into women business enterprises, and to share the findings to ultimately incite constructive action and policies. As such, preference will be shown to bidders demonstrating the ability to conduct action-oriented and conclusive research. See Appendix A for a description of our research philosophy.

Past Performance: Provide documentation and references for past performance on previous comparable projects in the past three years. Whereas experience describes the work performed, past performance describes the knowledge and/or skills you gained from the work performed.

Provide “lessons learned” from your past performance. For those contracts with less than positive performance, provide a description of the problems and the efforts made to correct and prevent future occurrences.

Price Quote. Price must be contained in a separate document excluded from technical and past performance information.

Line item 0001 – Research on Crowdfunding as Capital Source for the National Women’s Business Council. Please provide your labor categories applicable to this award with your proposed, fully burdened rates including G & A costs for the entire term of the contract in a spreadsheet format similar to the sample schedule of items shown below.

http://www.nwbc.gov/issues-and-research http://www.nwbc.gov/issues-and-research

Evaluation Factors

The Government reserves the right to award the contract to other than the lowest priced offeror.

The government will consider three factors: Technical Approach, Past Performance, and Cost/Price. Technical Approach and Past Performance, when combined, is more important than cost or price. A good rating is the minimum technically acceptable overall rating (after averaging 1a, 1b and 1c for the technical approach).

FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL APPROACH

a. Quality of the technical proposal and likelihood of timely product delivery; its clarity and demonstrated ability to perform the research in a timely manner.

Evaluation shall assess the detailed technical description of how all the required work will be accomplished. This will include evaluation of the novelty of ideas put forth, literature review, demonstrated knowledge of covered literature and subject matter, familiarity with small business research, quality and use of data sources, and soundness of methodologies proposed for analysis and their appropriateness to the overall research being conducted relevant to the Statement of Work. In addition, the project timeline will be assessed to assure that the research report is completed in a timely manner and consistent with the methodologies prescribed in the proposal. Researchers whose proposals include surveys should expressly consider and account for the Paperwork Reduction Act and OMB clearance requirements. For a good or excellent evaluation, the offeror must show the ability to accomplish the desired results and demonstrate the quality of work in providing services in a timely fashion.

The following rating method shall be used in the evaluation of the technical approach Factor 1a (Quality of Technical Approach):

o Excellent - Based on the offeror's technical approach, no doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. The technical approach shows a complete understanding and methodology for completing the Statement of Work within the standards and workload specified.

o Good - Based on the offeror's technical approach, little doubt exists that the shows an acceptable understanding and methodology for completing the Statement of Work within the standards and workload specified.

o Marginal - Based on the offeror's technical approach, some doubt exists that the shows a marginal understanding and methodology for completing the Statement of Work within the standards and workload specified.

o Poor - Based on the offeror's technical approach, serious doubt exists that the demonstrates significant deficiencies in understanding and implementing performance of the Statement of Work within the standards and workload specified.

b. Likelihood that this research will make a fundamental contribution to the literature or small business data universe; produce an innovative concept or idea; offer policy relevant results; or develop new ground that has previously not been fully mined or understood.

The evaluation will assess the quality of the proposal based on its overall potential contribution to the literature in terms of innovativeness, policy relevance, or furthering the debate.

Factor 1b (Likelihood research will make a fundamental contribution):

o Excellent - Based on the offeror's proposal, no doubt exists that the offeror’s proposal will make a fundamental contribution to the literature or small business data universe; produce an innovative concept or idea; offer policy relevant results;

or develop new ground that has previously not been fully mined or understood.

o Good - Based on the offeror's proposal, little doubt exists that the offeror’s o Marginal - Based on the offeror's proposal, some doubt exists that the offeror’s o Poor - Based on the offeror's proposal, serious doubt exist that the offeror’s

c. If applicable, quality of contractor’s proposal to maintain a high standard of performance on multiple, simultaneous contracts for NWBC.

The evaluation will assess the offeror’s ability to devote sufficient resources to multiple projects at one time, should the contractor bid on—and be awarded—more than one contract. Offerors bidding on more than one project should indicate the maximum number of contracts they can responsibly execute.

Factor 1c (Quality of contractor’s proposal to maintain a high standard of performance):

o Excellent - Based on the offeror's proposal, no doubt exists that the offeror has the resources to devote to more than one project.

o Good - Based on the offeror's proposal, little doubt exists that the offeror has the resources to devote to more than one project.

o Marginal - Based on the offeror's proposal, some doubt exists that the offeror has the resources to devote to more than one project.

o Poor - Based on the offeror's proposal, serious doubt exists that the offeror has the resources to devote to more than one project.

o Neutral – In the case of an offeror proposing to execute a single contract, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on this component, and will receive a neutral rating.

FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

The evaluation will be based on the information obtained in the proposal and, when necessary, from other references provided by the offeror. It will also look at other relevant past performance information that may not have been provided by the offeror. The evaluation will consider: (1) the qualifications of the researcher(s) relevant to the analysis being performed in the proposal and

(2) knowledge and previous experience in researching the topic as stated in the Performance Work Statement.

The Government will assess the relevant risks associated with each offeror. Performance risks are those associated with an offeror’s likelihood of success in performing the acquisition requirements as indicated by that offeror’s record of past performance and knowledge and experience of the research in the fields relevant to this Performance Work Statement.

For those offerors who have prior experience as a contractor, the Government will focus on the past performance as it relates to all acquisition requirements, such as cost, schedule and performance, including standards of good workmanship; the offeror’s adherence to contract schedules, including the administrative aspects of performance; the offeror’s reputation for reasonable and cooperative behavior and commitment to customer satisfaction; and generally, the offeror’s business-like concern for the interest of the customer. The Government will consider the number or severity of an offeror’s problems, the effectiveness of corrective actions taken, the offeror’s overall work record, and the age and relevance of past performance information.

The following rating method shall be used in the evaluation of past performance information:

o Excellent - Based on the offeror's past performance record and/or qualifications and knowledge of the field, no doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort of the Statement of Work.

o Good - Based on the offeror's past performance record and/or qualifications and knowledge of the field, little doubt exists that the offeror will successfully o Marginal - Based on the offeror's past performance record and/or qualifications and knowledge of the field, some doubt exists that the offeror will successfully o Poor - Based on the offeror's past performance record and/or qualifications and knowledge of the field, serious doubts exists that the offeror will successfully o Neutral – In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance, and will receive a neutral rating regarding past performance.

FACTOR 3: COST / PRICE

Line Item 0001: Research on Crowdfunding as Capital Source for the National Women’s Business Council

The government will evaluate the proposed rates for the labor categories in the Pricing Schedule of the solicitation for best value and completeness. The Government will also evaluate cost and price realism with regard to the ability of the offeror to meet requirements in terms of skills required, complexity of disciplines and job difficulty, if the Government deems such analysis necessary.

Award Determination:

The SBA reserves the right to award this agreement based on initial quotes received, without discussions or negotiations; therefore, it is critically important that each quote be fully responsive to the solicitation without exception to any provision. The SBA anticipates awarding to the offeror whose response is the “best value” to the SBA, proposed price and other factors considered. The Contracting Officer may consider award to other than the lowest priced offeror when in the best interest of the Government. The SBA reserves the right to make no award pursuant to this solicitation. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of quotes that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of responses in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated quotes. The importance of price will increase as the technical merit of the responses becomes more equal. Among quotes that are substantially equal in technical merit, price may become the determinative factor for award; thus, the responses offering the SBA the best value, technical and price factors considered, shall be considered for award. The award may be made to other than the offeror with the lowest price or the highest technical rating. A written notice of award or acceptance of a quote, as specified in the solicitation, may result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the solicitation’s specified expiration time, the government may accept a quote unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

SCHEDULE OF ITEMS: Base Period

Labor Category

Estimated Qty of hours

Unit Price

Total Price

001 __________________ ______ ______ ______

002 __________________ ______ ______ ______ 003 __________________ ------------ ----------- ----------- 004 __________________ ______ ______ ______ 005 __________________ ______

Total Base Costs

SCHEDULE OF ITEMS: Option Period 1

Labor Category

Estimated Qty of hours

Unit Price

Total Price

001 __________________ ______ ______ ______

002 __________________ ______ ______ ______ 003 __________________ ------------ ----------- ----------- 004 __________________ ______ ______ ______ 005 __________________ ______

Total Option Costs

*Offeror’s may add additional labor category lines if necessary