Inst_to_Offeror_SBAHQ17Q0020.pdf

Solicitation Notification Research on the Burden of Regulations on Small Businesses

SBAHQ-17-Q-0020

1.1.1.1.1 The Small Business Administration’s Office of Advocacy intends to procure a fixed price order for Research on the Burden of Regulations on Small Businesses. Please see the attached Statement of Work (SOW) description of our requirements.

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

a. Submission of Quotes

1. 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.1

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

3. Quotes shall be received via e-mail at john.babcock@sba.gov by 07:30 AM, Mountain, August 1, 2017. PLEASE BE SURE THE SOLICITATION NUMBER (SBAHQ-17-Q-0014) AND SUBJECT TITLE (Research on the Burden of Regulations on Small Businesses ARE CLEARLY MARKED ON THE E-MAIL

SUBJECT LINE AND SUBMITTED DOCUMENTS.

4. Questions shall be submitted not later than 07:30 AM, Mountain July 13, 2017 via e-mail to john.babcock@sba.gov.

5. 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

• Writing Sample

6. 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.

7. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE DELINEATED SUBMISSION

REQUIREMENTS WILL RESULT IN REJCTION OF YOUR QUOTE.

b. 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. Scope

• Research Contracts. Research report proposals should include a review of the literature, establish a set of hypotheses to be tested, describe the model, and describe the data to test the model, show the policy relevance of the

1 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.

SBAHQ-17-Q-0020

research, list a timeline, include resumes for relevant subject matter and technical experts who will conduct and present the research.

• Information/Data Collections or Data Projects. Information/data collection or data project proposals should a thorough explanation of relevant data and technical expertise relevant to the information/data collection or data project, as well as a timeline, and resumes for relevant subject matter and technical experts who will conduct and present the research.

2. Writing Sample Offerors are required to submit a brief writing sample authored by the proposed research team. The sample must be a double-spaced, 12-pt font, sample academic journal style literature review for the research topic listed in the Statement of Work. This sample should not exceed 5 pages in length.

3. Discussions Offerors may be asked to respond in writing and possibly via teleconference to follow up or clarifying questions.

4. 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 of the Statement of Work.

5. Information Collections Surveys or information collections are not preferred over using existing data when existing data is applicable, as they can place a burden on small businesses. Offers that include uses of additional survey(s) for information should: demonstrate familiarity with the proposed survey procedures; provide the source for respondents; provide clarification of the collection process; and provide realistic estimates of the response rates. Offers suggesting that surveys be conducted need to include the survey approval process in the timeline as required under the Paperwork Reduction Act’s (PRA) clearance process within the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg_infocoll). It is the offeror’s responsibility to prepare any materials necessary to obtain PRA clearances associated with the work to be performed. See also detailed Performance Requirements for further requirements under the contract.

6. Examples Examples of previously completed research funded by the Office of Advocacy can be found at: http://www.sb1.gov/advocacy/7540

7. Additional Terms Any additional terms must be submitted with the proposal. No additional terms or agreements will be considered following award.

c. 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.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg_infocoll http://www.sb1.gov/advocacy/7540

SBAHQ-17-Q-0020

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

e. Page Limit Page limit for technical and past performance sections when added together shall not exceed 25 pages. This page limit does not include the cover page, company credentials, references and writing samples.

f. Line item 0001 Research on the Burden of Regulations on Small Businesses. 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.

SBAHQ-17-Q-0020

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 marginal 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 information:

– 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.

– Good - Based on the offeror's technical approach, little doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. The technical approach shows an acceptable understanding and methodology for completing the Statement of Work within the standards and workload specified.

– Marginal - Based on the offeror's technical approach, some doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. The technical approach shows a marginal understanding and methodology for completing the Statement of Work within the standards and workload specified.

– Poor - Based on the offeror's technical approach, serious doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. The technical approach 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

SBAHQ-17-Q-0020

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.

The following rating method shall be used in the evaluation of the technical approach Factor 1b (Likelihood research will make a fundamental contribution):

– 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.

– Good - Based on the offeror's proposal, little 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.

– Marginal - Based on the offeror's proposal, some 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.

– Poor - Based on the offeror's proposal, serious doubt exist 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.

c. Researcher qualifications, experience and knowledge of literature in the field.

The evaluation will assess the qualifications of the researcher(s) relevant to the analysis being performed in the proposal and knowledge and experience in researching the topics as stated in the Statement of Work. Evaluation will include assessment resumes submitted for key personnel demonstrate the minimum technical qualifications as stated in the Statement of Work Performance Requirements Section.

The following rating method shall be used in the evaluation of the technical approach Factor 1c (Quality of contractor’s proposal to maintain a high standard of performance):

– Excellent - Based on the offeror's qualifications and knowledge of the field, no doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort delineated in the Statement of Work.

– Good - Based on the offeror's qualifications and knowledge of the field, little doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort delineated in the Statement of Work.

– Marginal - Based on the offeror's qualifications and knowledge of the field, some doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort delineated in the Statement of Work.

SBAHQ-17-Q-0020

– Poor - Based on the offeror's qualifications and knowledge of the field, serious doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort delineated in the Statement of Work.

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 Statement of

Work.

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 Statement of Work.

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:

– 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.

– 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 perform the required effort of the Statement of Work.

– 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 perform the required effort of the Statement of Work.

– 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 perform the required effort of the Statement of Work.

– 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

SBAHQ-17-Q-0020

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 the Burden of Regulations on Small Businesses 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.

SBAHQ-17-Q-0020

SCHEDULE OF ITEMS: Base Period

Labor Category Estimated Quantity of Hours

Unit Price

Total Price

Total Base Costs

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