Section L and M - DRAFT.pdf

Section L- Instruction, Conditions and Notices to Bidders

SECTION L

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

In order to be considered for award, Offeror must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) under NAICS 541219, Other Accounting Services (Size Standard $22M).

The Offeror’s proposal shall be submitted electronically. No hard copies or CD’s will be accepted. The proposal must be received by the Government before the deadline for proposal submissions listed in block 9 of the SF33 form. Proposals shall remain valid for a period of 120 days from the date listed in block 9 of the SF33 form, providing a reasonable response period in accordance with (IAW) FAR 16.505(b)(1)(iv)(B). Proposals shall be emailed to the following address:

Mrs. Suzanne (Sue) Levush Army Contracting Command – Aberdeen Proving Ground Suzanne.m.levush.civ@army.mil

The Offeror’s proposal shall consist of five (5) Volumes. The Volumes are:

I. Executive Summary II. Solution Development (Factor I)

III. Past Performance (Factor II) IV. Small Business Participation (Factor III) V. Price (Factor IV)

Offerors shall submit all information that the Offeror wishes to have considered with the initial proposal.

The Offeror shall present the information in the proposal in a clear, coherent, and prepared in sufficient detail for effective evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal against the evaluation criteria. The Offeror shall not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but rather provide rationale that addresses how the Offeror intends to meet the requirements. The Offeror shall assume the Government has no prior knowledge of its capabilities and experience. Offeror’s proposals with vague or terse statements such as “will comply,” “noted,” and “understood,” etc. may not be accepted by the Government. The Offeror shall submit documentation illustrating their approach for satisfying the requirements of this solicitation.

The Government will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Offeror’s proposal unless stated otherwise. Proposals must clearly demonstrate how the Offeror intends to accomplish the performance of work and must include convincing rationale and substantiation of all claims. The Offeror shall describe its proposal, through the use of graphs, charts, diagrams and narrative, in sufficient detail for the Government to understand and evaluate the nature of the approach. In its evaluation and confidence assessment, the Government will consider the degree of substantiation of the proposed approaches in the proposal volumes.

The Offeror’s proposal must include all information requested, and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. The Government will consider how well the Offeror complied with these instructions when evaluating the Offeror’s capability to perform the prospective contract. Offerors are advised to ask the Contracting Office for clarification of any part of these instructions they do not understand. Questions shall be submitted to Sue Levush, Contract Specialist at the above email address no later than 12:00 noon, [insert date].

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

1. The Offeror’s proposal must include all information requested, and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. Any Offeror who submits an incomplete package may be considered unacceptable. The offer shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Non-conformance with the instructions provided may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation.

2. The Government does not desire excess verbiage, unnecessary and elaborate brochures, or lengthy, repetitious, disorganized presentations beyond that sufficient to present a complete and clear proposal. Proposals must not merely parrot back performance requirements, but rather must provide convincing evidence that Offeror can actually fulfill performance requirements.

Proposals received that fail to provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet the solicitation requirements may be determined unacceptable and may not be considered for award.

3. The Offeror’s proposal is presumed to represent its best efforts to respond to the solicitation. All inconsistencies, whether real or apparent, between promised performance and price shall be explained in the proposal. Unexplained inconsistencies, such as those appearing to result from the Offeror’s lack of understanding of the nature and scope of work for the overall solicitation or their lack of financial ability to perform the contract, may be grounds for rejection of a prop

4. Content Requirements. All information shall be confined to the appropriate volume. Information included in the incorrect volume will not be evaluated. Each volume of the proposal shall consist of a Title Page, Table of Contents (no more than two levels e.g. 1.1, 1.2), Summary Section and the Narrative discussion. The Summary Section shall contain a brief abstract of the volume.

Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

5. The Government intends to award without discussions and for this reason, Offerors are cautioned that they might not have the opportunity to correct or improve their proposals during discussions and/or final proposal revisions. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions and requested final proposal revisions if the Government determines it is in the Government’s interest to do so. Offerors are also cautioned that the Government may, but is not required to, engage in clarifications that give Offerors an opportunity to clarify certain aspects of the proposal or to resolve minor errors.

6. No pricing information shall be in any volumes other than Factor IV – Price. Proposals that fail to separate the price factor may be determined unacceptable and may not be considered for award.

7. Prior to award, The Government may, at its discretion, incorporate portions of the successful

Offeror’s proposal, including information provided by the Offeror during discussions, into the resultant contract.

8. Each factor shall be submitted as a separate volume in accordance with the below table. Each volume shall be written a stand-alone basis so that its content may be evaluated with no cross-referencing to other volumes of the proposal. The use of hyperlinks in proposal is prohibited.

Proposals shall adhere to the following page count limitations.

9. Pages that exceed the required page limitations will not be evaluated. Additional pages over the maximum allowed will be removed from the proposal by the Contracting Officer, prior to turning the proposal over to the Government evaluation team(s), and will not be considered in the evaluation. Documents shall use the following page setup parameters:

Margins – Top, Bottom, Left, Right – 1” Gutter – 0” From Edge – Header, Footer 0.5” Page Size, Width – 8.5” Page Size, Height – 11” Font – 12 point Arial or Time Roman required.

Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size no less than 8-point and may be landscape. All volumes and plans shall include pagination with the exception of any excluded pages.

10. Each file name submitted shall be with the Volume number 1st, then the Volume

Title/Description, then AWCF, and lastly the company name which may be abbreviated.

11. File Packaging: Files shall be in read-only format, using PDF files. All price breakdown information to aide in the cost evaluation shall be submitted to Microsoft Office Excel unprotected format and viewable in Microsoft Excel 2010 and later. Please note – Self extracting exe files are not acceptable.

Volume Title/Description Page Count

1 Executive Summary N/A 2 Factor I: Solution Development

Sub-Factor I – Technical Approach Sub-Factor II – Staffing and Key Personnel Sub-Factor III – Transition Plan

25 pages

3 Factor II: Past Performance 25 pages 4 Factor III: Small Business Participation N/A 5 Factor IV: Price N/A

Note: Pages that exceed the page limitation will not be evaluated. Page count includes all pages including but not limited to: body, table, figures, and all appendices. Cover sheet, table of contents, resumes, consent letters, letter of commitment/intent, acronym lists are excluded from the page count.

Additional pages over the maximum allowed will be removed and not read and will not be evaluated by the Government.

12. Restriction of Disclosure/Proprietary Information. If the Offeror wishes to restrict the disclosure or use of its proposal, use the legend permitted by FAR 52.215-1(e). Individual subcontractor/vendor proprietary information may be submitted via separate emails. The information contained in these emails must be referenced (title, page and section number as appropriate) within the main proposal where the information would have been included if it were not subcontractor/vendor proprietary. The information in these submissions is subject to all other requirements of the RFP and must be well.

13. The Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Risk Mitigation Plan will be assessed by the

Contracting Officer as part of a responsibility determination. Based on the OCI Risk Mitigation Plan information required in Section L, if the Contracting Officer determines that the offeror has an OCI that cannot be mitigated, then the Offeror will not be eligible for award. The OCI Risk Mitigation Plan is required to address any conflicts that may come up during the period of performance, as well as address existing OCI conflicts. The OCI Risk Mitigation Plan does not count against the page count. A statement or certification in a cover letter does not constitute a Risk Mitigation Plan

PROPOSAL CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

Volume 1 – Executive Summary

Offerors shall provide a Title Page, a Table of Contents, Summary Section, and a Narrative Discussion.

The Narrative Discussion must include an overview of the Offeror’s ability to meet the requirements of the PWS. This volume shall include the following: (1) Request for Proposal number; (2) Company’s Name, Cage Code, and Tax ID No.; (3) proposal title; (4) point of contact and alternate, including last name, first name, street address, city, state, zip code, telephone, and electronic mail; (5) administrative point of contact, including last name, first name, street address, city, state, zip code, telephone, and electronic mail; (6) date proposal submitted; (7) proposal expiration date (valid minimum 120 calendar days); (8) signed solicitation form; (9) Organizational Conflict of Interest Identification and Risk Mitigation Plan (10) System for Award Management (SAM) record print out of the company/Offeror ’s “Core Data.” (11) Provide a matrix of all proposed subcontractors that includes information from items 2 and 4 of this paragraph. (12) Completed Representations and Certifications (Section K). (13) A list of any assumptions or contingent conditions with a narrative describing the rational for them.

1. Organizational Conflict of Interest Identification and Risk Mitigation Plan: The Offeror shall conduct due diligence and submit with their proposal an Identification and Mitigation Plan. This plan shall identify all facts that a reasonably prudent person would consider relevant in determining whether a potential conflict of interest currently exists or might arise under the performance of this contract. The Offeror shall identify at a minimum all current contracts or financial interests that might be effected by the performance of the PWS. Additionally, the Offeror shall identify any potential conflicts of interest, as that term is defined in FAR part 9, that the Offeror reasonably believes could arise during the performance of this contract. The Offeror’s submission should include any subcontractors or team members. Offerors should be aware that the technical, financial, and operational assistance efforts anticipated under this contract may implicate budgets, priorities, or recommendations of other service or product/system acquisition of the Army or DoD. Accordingly, offerors should be particularly sensitive to the potential conflicts that might arise should the offeror or its affiliates/subcontractors have any financial interest in other DoD audit contracts where the Offeror may be in a position to evaluate remediation efforts performed in this contract. The accuracy of the findings presented shall be certified to the best of their knowledge and belief by an official authorized to bind the company.

If the conclusion reached by the Offeror is that no OCI exists, then a statement certifying that the Offeror (including subcontractors and affiliates) has no OCI issues relating to this Request for Proposal or contract, including supporting rationale, shall be submitted as well. In the context of OCI, involvement is defined as any participation or connection to a project, contract, program, or product which may create actual or perceived OCI. The Contracting Officer will review statements provided by each Offeror as to the work the company has performed; evaluate the submittals considering in-house knowledge as to the company's program support; and determine whether or not there is an OCI. This must include all subcontractors and affiliates. Subcontractor and affiliate OCI is equivalent to a prime contractor OCI.

To prevent the improper release or disclosure of information, or any actual or perceived personal or organizational conflict of interest that might arise in the performance of this contract, the contractor shall bring any potential conflicting relationships or financial interests held by the contractor, its key employees, or others executing performance on behalf of the contractor to the attention of the Contracting Officer throughout the life of this contract. If the Contracting Officer determines that an unacceptable conflict or violation exists, the contractor will take the actions necessary to mitigate or eliminate the conflict or violation.

If the Offeror's approach to mitigation is not deemed satisfactory by the Contracting Officer, the Contracting Officer may take other actions. The Contracting Officer will review statements provided by each offeror as to the work the company has performed or anticipates; evaluate the submittals considering in-house knowledge as to the company’s program support; and determine whether or not there is an Identification and Mitigation Plan. The Government’s consideration of this information is for purposes of assessing the contractor’s responsibility and is not otherwise part of the evaluation factors to be considered for award.

For any potential conflicts of interest, the Offeror shall provide a mitigation plan to be reviewed and approved by the Contracting Officer. The mitigation plan shall provide verifiable means of eliminating any significant conflict of interest in the performance of this contract. The mitigation plan shall also describe the contractor's current policies for identifying, reporting, and preventing future organizational and personal conflicts of interest that might arise in the performance of this contract.

The contractor is responsible for ensuring compliance, both organizationally and individually, with regulatory and professional standards, including any standards relating to ethics, obtaining and releasing proprietary information, and individual or organizational conflicts of interest.

2. Subcontractors/Team Members/Affiliates. Offerors proposing subcontractors/team members/affiliates or other organizational elements not part of the entity submitting the offer shall provide evidence of the commitment from these organizations to perform as presented in the proposal. Examples might include teaming agreements, subcontracts, joint venture agreements, or other similar commitments. If the Offeror is a division or subsidiary of another company, provide an organizational chart depicting all parent and affiliated companies of the Offeror.

3. Personnel with Binding Authority. The Offeror shall provide the name, title, and contact information (current telephone number and email address at a minimum) of the personnel within the company who possess contractual binding authority and will be supporting the bid as well as any resulting contract award.

Volume 2 - Factor I – Solution Development

The Solution Development volume shall address the following:

The Offeror shall demonstrate an understanding of the issues presented below and clearly demonstrate a complete understanding of the PWS requirements and deliverables to present a logical, comprehensive, and actionable plan to successfully overcome the presented issues. With regard to resources, any solution presented must have a two year timeline and not be dependent on major system changes or enhancements (assumption can be made that any/all proposed system changes will not be worked in time to align to the two year timeline).

1. Solutions Development: Sub-Factor I – Technical Approach

The scenarios the offeror must address are:

1. How to effectively implement an approach from the Statement of Federal Financial

Accounting Standards (SFFAS) 48: Opening Balances for Inventory, Operating Materials and Supplies, and Stockpile Materials or AWCF Inventory. This approach should consider impacts to the budgeting process, rate setting, annual Net Operating Results, and implementation of controls and processes to properly value AWCF Inventory after the implementation of deemed cost.

2. How to overcome the Completeness Material Weakness identified in Army’s Annual

Statement of Assurance. This approach should consider feeder system reconciliations, accounting system general ledger detail transaction through the published financial statement reconciliation, the impacts of a lack of Information Technology General Controls, coordination of service providers and data owners.

3. How to overcome the Fund Balance with Treasury Material Weakness reported in the Army’s

Annual Statement of Assurance. This approach should consider working with Army Service Providers, development of tools, processes and technology to replace the existing tools and processes, or any other initiatives to streamline the reporting and reconciliation of disbursements and collections with the US Treasury.

4. How to most effectively and efficiently align existing personnel resources to support increasing demands from financial statement audits throughout the AMC enterprise.

Consideration should be given to the fact there are multiple layers of command and organizational structure between the auditor and the responsible party, a limited number of competently trained staff, multiple levels of reporting (HQDA staff, AMC HQ, OSD- Comptroller), and the inability to increase staff and/or financial resources in support of financial statement audits.

2. Solution Development: Sub-Factor II – Staffing and Key Personnel

The Offeror shall identify how the organization will be staffed to accomplish the task outlined in the PWS. The Offeror will outline plans to hire and retain qualified personnel to meet the requirements of the PWS. The Offeror must address the following to demonstrate their ability to provide qualified personnel with the experience necessary to perform the type of work that may be required.

1. Key Personnel and Resumes: For the seven (7) positions designated as Key Personnel identified in Section 5.1.3 Requirements by Labor Category of the PWS, the offeror shall submit resumes addressing the education and experience requirements as well as letters of intent for the Key Personnel indicating that the individual has accepted an offer of employment (with the prime contractor or major subcontractor) contingent on successful contract award. Resumes may not exceed three (3) pages each. Award of a contract will constitute the Government’s acceptance of initial Key Personnel.

For each of the Key Personnel resumes submitted, Offeror shall submit a resume showing how their work experience directly relates to audit or audit readiness activities within the DoD, then provide specific examples from those experiences where the individual was instrumental in the successful design and/or implementation of a corrective action to overcome a financial statement audit issue within that organization. For the example provided, describe the problem, the solution, and the outcome using both quantitative and qualitative measures. This example can be related to an auditor identified Notice of Finding and Recommendation or an internally identified issue.

Key Personnel shall also describe their effort in the project and its relevance to this PWS. The offeror shall demonstrate key personnel experience with the DoD Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) tools/systems and/or DoD financial/audit improvement and remediation efforts. Key Personnel shall demonstrate experience, understanding as relates to proposed responsibilities and address the requirements in Section 5.1.3 of the PWS.

Additionally, for all Key Personnel, as specified in the PWS, the Offeror shall include signed letters of intent (one page max) that shall include individuals name, contingent start date, position/title, and annual salary.

2. Identify how key individuals fit into the overall organization and identify the proposed responsibilities for each Key Personnel, PWS 5.1.3.

3. Identify methods/procedures in hiring and retention of qualified personnel. PWS 5.4.17.

4. Provide an organizational structure that is satisfactory aligned with the technical specifications of the PWS, to include adequate quantities and labor categories. PWS 5.1.3

3. Solution Development: Sub-Factor 3 - Transition Plan:

The Transition Plan volume shall address the following:

1. Transition-In Plan shall detail the following:

The Offeror should present their approach to transition-in work from the incumbent vendor with minimal disruption to ongoing operations. The transition-in plan shall not exceed 30 days. All Key Personnel shall begin performance on the first day of the transition-in period and all remaining employees shall begin performance no later than the 20th day of the transition-in period.

1. Phase-In Plan shall not exceed thirty (30) calendar days.

2. Clearly demonstrates a reasonable, achievable approach for assuming full contractual responsibility without disruption or degradation of performance during the transition period.

3. Identifies risk and proposes appropriate mitigation strategies.

4. Proposes a reasonable, achievable and efficient transition schedule and staffing plan.

5. Ensures sufficient resources are on hand and available to begin work on the effort.

6. Offers an approach to ensure the availability of trained and qualified personnel.

2. Transition-Out Plan shall detail the following:

The Offeror should present their approach to transition-out work to the new contractor with minimal disruption to ongoing operations. The transition-out plan shall not exceed 30 days.

1. Enables a smooth transition to replacement services and ensures no disruption in service when the existing contract performance period ends.

2. Provides for phase-in support for up to 30 days to the selected contractor if the incumbent contractor is not selected herein.

3. Allows for the transfer of knowledge, experience and lessons learned to the new contractor.

4. Includes a process to appropriately transfer all property, documentation, digital and hard copies of all in-progress working files, historical files, and briefings for incoming personnel, timelines and standards for completion.

Volume 3 - Factor II - Past Performance

Offerors shall submit up to three (3) Government contracts for the prime offeror and each major subcontractor in performance or awarded during the past five (5) years, from the issue date of this solicitation, which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation. Relevant efforts are defined as services/efforts that are the same as or similar to the effort (as compared to NAICS code 541219) required by the solicitation. Data concerning the Offeror shall be provided first, followed by each proposed major subcontractor, in alphabetical order. The Offeror shall also submit the written consent of its major subcontractors to allow the disclosure of its subcontractor’s past performance information to the Offeror.

In addition, letters of commitment shall be included for all major subcontractors for their past performance to be considered.

A “major subcontractor” is defined as a member of the Offeror’s overall team who is expected to perform 10% of the total proposed price. A “recent” contract is defined as one that is performed during the past five (5) years, which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation. Relevancy is defined as having similar scope, and/or complexity to the proposed requirement of the PWS, and includes experience within Department of Defense (DoD).

The Government reserves the right to use alternative resources to gather past performance information.

The Government may independently obtain information from other sources, which may be used to evaluate past performance against the requirements set forth in the solicitation. Past performance information is used to assess how well the Offeror or major subcontractor(s) performed on contracts for the same or similar items and/or services as an indicator of how well they will perform the proposed requirements. Offerors with no past performance shall state so.

This volume shall be organized into the following sections:

1. Section I – Contract Descriptions. This section shall include the following information in the following format and shall clearly indicate how the contract effort is both recent and relevant:

1. Contractor/Subcontractor place of performance, CAGE code, and DUNS number. If the work was performed as a subcontractor, also provide the name of the prime contractor and Point of Contact (POC) within the prime contractor origination (name, current address, email, and telephone numbers).

2. Government contracting activity, POC’s name, address, email, and telephone numbers.

3. Government’s technical representative/COR email and telephone number.

4. Government contract administration activity and the Administrative Contracting Officer’s

(ACO) name, email and telephone number (if different from 2).

5. Contract number, contract type, contract value, contract award date and completion date.

2. Section II – Performance. Offerors shall provide a specific narrative explanation of each contract listed describing the objectives achieved and detailing how the effort is similar to the requirements of this solicitation including skills mix.

1. For any contracts that did not/do not meet original cost, schedule or technical performance requirements provide a brief explanation of the reason(s) for the shortcomings and any corrective actions taken to avoid recurrence.

2. The offeror shall list each time the delivery schedule was revised and provide an explanation of why the revision was necessary.

3. The offeror shall also provide a copy of any Cure Notices or Show Cause Notices received on each contract listed and a description of any corrective action taken. The offeror shall indicate if any of the contracts listed were terminated and the type and reasons for the termination.

4. The Offeror shall identify any problems encountered during performance and how they were resolved and any other constraints similar to those expected to be encountered in performance of this solicitation.

5. The past performance cited does not have to be related to Army but should reflect with similar DoD activities

3. Section III – Past Performance Questionnaire. For all contracts identified in Volume 3 above, a past performance questionnaire (Solicitation Attachment) shall be completed and submitted. The Offeror shall complete Part I of the questionnaire and e-mail the questionnaire to the Government Contracting Activity and/or technical representative responsible for the past/current contract. The POCs shall be instructed to electronically complete Part II of the questionnaire and email the entire questionnaire to the Contracting Office no later than [insert date], one week prior to the proposal due date, to Suzanne Levush at Suzanne.m.levush.civ@army.mil.

The Offeror shall include a list of all the POCs who were sent a questionnaire in the proposal.

The POC List shall include the following information: Solicitation Number; Company Name;

Contract Number; Government Agency; POC Last Name, First Name; POC Title; POC Telephone Number; POC E-mail Address; and Date E-mailed to POC (month/day). The Government will focus its inquiries on the offeror’s (and major subcontractor’s) record of performance as it relates to all solicitation requirements, including cost, schedule, performance and management of subcontractors. Therefore, offerors will be reminded they must at a minimum include the most recent and relevant efforts (performance within the past three years) in their proposal.

4. Section IV – Small Business Participation Past Performance. All Offerors shall submit information substantiating the Offeror’s past performance in complying with FAR 52.219-8 “Utilization of Small Business”, maximizing opportunities for U.S. small business subcontractors. Offerors shall also provide a statement indicating whether any negative information has been reported in the past five years concerning the Offeror’s past compliance with FAR 52.219-8. If any such negative information has been reported, the Offeror may submit explanations or comments responding to such negative information. Offerors with no prior contracts containing FAR 52.219-8 shall certify the same

Volume 4 - Factor III - Small Business (SB) Participation

This factor is comprised of two distinct components: the Small Business Participation Plan and the Small Business Subcontracting Plan. This factor evaluates the offeror’s approach to maximizing opportunities for small businesses in the effort, both in terms of the percentage of overall contract value (SB Participation Plan) and in terms of the percentage of the subcontracted portion’s value (SB Subcontracting Plan).

The Small Business Participation Factor volume shall summarize the offeror’s SB Participation goals for the total, base, and option requirements in separate columns, and summarize the Offeror’s SB Subcontracting percentage values for the total, base, and option requirements in separate columns, as follows:

SB Participation Plan Minimum Quantitative Requirement (MQR)

SB Subcontracting Plan

Denominator:

Proposed Total Contract Value $ (TCV)

Denominator: Planned Subcontracted $ Total Base Options Total Base Options

SB % % % % % %

WOSB % % % % % %

HubZone

SB

VOSB % % % % % %

SDVOSB % % % % % %

Small Business Participation Plan. This plan is required from all offerors, regardless of the offeror’s size status. The offeror’s SB Participation Plan percentages are to be presented in terms of total dollars of work for each SB category, divided by the total contract value (TCV). The offeror’s plan shall depict the percentage values of the option requirements separately from the base requirement.

The offeror shall identify the extent and nature of participation of Small Businesses (SB), Woman-Owned Small Businesses (WOSBs), HUBZone Small Businesses (HUBZone SBs), Veteran Owned Small Businesses (VOSBs), and Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Businesses (SDVOSBs) in the performance of the proposed contract. The offeror’s own participation as a SB, WOSB, HUBZone SB, VOSB, or SDVOSB shall be identified and included in the percentages.

The plan shall include, at a minimum:

1. the name and DUNS number (or CAGE code) of each of the firm(s) included in the plan

2. the specific components to be produced or services to be performed by each firm

3. the NAICS code (appropriate to the planned subcontract) supporting each firm’s size status

4. the estimated total dollar value (base and options) subcontracted to each firm

5. the estimated total dollar value (base and options) subcontracted to each SB category

6. the percentage of total contract value (base and options) subcontracted to each firm

7. the percentage of total contract value (base and options) subcontracted to each SB category

The offeror shall provide evidence of any enforceable commitments in place between itself and the participating small businesses. Each participation percentage shall be accompanied by detailed supporting documentation regarding the individual commitments.

The offeror shall include evidence of compliance with the requirements of FAR 52.219-8, “Utilization of Small Business Concerns,” and 52.219-9, “Small Business Subcontracting Plan,” in prior contracts containing the clause. This information shall be provided, at minimum, for each of the contracts discussed in the offeror’s Past Performance volume. DFARS 215.304(c)(i)(B) states that proposals addressing the extent of small business performance shall be separate from Small Business Subcontracting Plans submitted pursuant to the clause at FAR 52.219-9 and shall be structured to allow for consideration of offers from small business.

SB Participation Plan Goals. The Government’s minimum requirements for Participation Plan goals for this acquisition are as follows:

Small Business 15% Women-Owned Small Business .5% HubZone Small Business .5% Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business .1%

The SB Subcontracting Plan is a requirement for award to a large business and will be incorporated into any resultant contract. This plan is only required of an offeror which is itself other than a SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZone HZSB, VOSB, SDVOSB, or HBCU/MI. This volume describes the offeror’s approach to maximizing opportunities for small businesses in this effort, relative to the subcontracted portion’s value. The offeror’s SB Subcontracting Plan percentages are to be presented in terms of total dollars of work for each SB category, divided by the total value of subcontracts (including options).

The required elements of the SB Subcontracting Plan are set forth by FAR 52.219-9 and DFARS 252.219-7003, and should be organized to address these elements in similar order to clearly demonstrate that each element has been fully addressed. All small businesses and historically black colleges or universities and minority institutions included in the SB Subcontracting Plan shall be specifically identified to facilitate compliance with 252.219-7003(g). The offeror’s plan shall depict the percentage values of the option requirements separately. The information in the SB Subcontracting Plan must properly correlate with that of the offeror’s SB Participation Plan.

SB Subcontracting Plan Goals. The offeror is requested to consider the Government’s subcontracting goals for this acquisition in responding to this factor, as follows:

SB Subcontracting: 25% SDB Subcontracting: 12% WOSB Subcontracting: 3% HUBZone Subcontracting: 1% SDVOSB Subcontracting: 3%

For each category in which the offeror’s SB Subcontracting Plan contains goals below those described above, the offeror shall provide an explanation as to why.

Volume 5 - Factor IV – Cost/Price Proposal

The total evaluated price (TEP) will be the sum of all CLINs on tab “Section B” of the Cost Matrix. In order to be considered for award, all Offerors much complete and submit the Cost Matrix with the instructions provided therein and an accompanying narrative volume. Any proposed subcontractor shall provide their pricing information in the same form, format and all requested information. Subcontractor’s price proposal volume may be submitted directly to the contracting officer/specialist via email.

Offerors cost/price proposal will be evaluated based on the stated criteria in Section M. This volume shall consist of all information, required to support proposed costs and prices. In accordance with FAR 15.403- 1(b)(1) adequate competition is anticipated in response to this solicitation. Therefore certified cost or pricing data is not required, and data other than certified cost or pricing is currently required in accordance with FAR 15.403-3. However, the Government reserves the right to request and evaluate certified cost or pricing data, if it is determined necessary by the Contracting Officer. If certified cost or pricing data is determined necessary, the Contracting Officer will specify the format and due date for such information and Offerors will be required to provide the requested information. In accordance with FAR 15.403-5(b) the Contracting Officer may specify the format of cost or pricing data or data other than certified cost or pricing data.

The information submitted in this volume shall comply with FAR 15.408, Table 15-2, and the requirements set forth below.

1. The Offeror shall ensure that the information submitted in this volume is consistent with and filly supports the amounts set forth in the SF33 and continuation sheets.

2. The proposal shall set forth a summary of the total estimated costs by cost element and shall provide a breakdown of the proposed estimated costs of each CLIN separately, including all direct and indirect charges and fees. In order to maintain a minimum level of commonality between proposals, each offeror is required to complete (in entirety) the Cost Element Workbook provided as a Solicitation Attachment. The spreadsheets contained in the Cost Element Workbook tool shall be completed for the full ordering period. All documentation furnished to support the cost summaries are to be provided in a format chosen by the offeror that is easily traceable to the cost summary sheets. Each offeror and any subcontractors shall submit both a protected and unprotected copy (showing formulas, etc) of the cost summary spreadsheets as part of their cost/price proposal.

3. Direct labor hours and rates shall be delineated by labor category by contract year for the offeror and each subcontractor. The labor hour delineation must be directly traceable to the same information proposed in the Technical Volume.

4. Indirect expense rates shall be proposed in the same manner as direct labor rates, i.e., by contract year with the methodology used to derive any composite rates proposed.

5. Travel/Other Direct Cost: An estimated normalized amount of $[insert value] has been specified annually for proposal purposes. Each Offeror is to include this amount in their proposal. Any material handling and/or G&A shall be inclusive of this normalized amount.

6. Forward Pricing Rate Agreements (FPRA) shall be clearly documented with agreements and responsible Government officials identified. If no FPRA information is available, copies of recent pay stubs, W-2s, or other actual salary information used to form the basis of the proposal.

7. For proposal preparation purposes, the expected or approximate date for initiation of contract performance is [insert date].

8. In accordance with FAR 52.222-46 each Offeror shall include a copy of its compensation plan, to include salaries/base labor rates and fringe benefits, for all proposed professional labor categories in the Staffing and Key Personnel section of Volume I. The Offeror shall provide the estimating basis and supporting documentation for the proposed salaries/base direct labor rates for EACH of the professional labor categories proposed. Supporting documentation shall consist of recognized national/regional salary survey data, actual payroll data, letters of intent, etc. Supporting documentation shall also be provided to support proposed fringe benefits.

Each Offeror shall also specifically address how the proposed salaries/base direct labor and fringe benefits will contribute to the recruitment and maintenance of qualified professional employees during contract performance. Offerors are cautioned that lowered compensation for the same professional work may indicate a lack of sound management judgement and lack of understanding of the requirement. Offerors shall also submit supporting verification information/documentation as attachments to the plan to include actual payroll and fringe benefit/rate data for any proposed employees currently working for the Offeror. For any proposed employees not currently working for the Offeror, the Offeror shall include other verifying data, such as recognized national and regional compensation surveys and studies of professional, public and private organizations, letters of intent, etc. If an Offeror fails to submit the required plan and requested supporting information, the Offeror’s proposal will be considered to be inadequate, unresponsive, and will be excluded from consideration.

9. Whether the offeror: (a) is subject to the Cost Accounting Standards; (b) has submitted a CASB

Disclosure Statement, and if it has been determined adequate; (c) has been notified of possible/actual noncompliance with their Disclosure Statement or CAS, and, if yes, an explanation; (d) whether any aspect of this proposal is inconsistent with disclosed practices or applicable CAS, and, if so, an explanation; and (e), whether the proposal is consistent with established estimation and accounting principles and procedures and FAR Part 31, Cost Principles, and, if not, an explanation.

10. Status of their accounting, purchasing and estimating system. Evidence of such a review by

DCAA/DCMA.

11. Use of uncompensated overtime is not encouraged per FAR 37.115-2(a). In accordance with FAR 52.237-10, Identification of Uncompensated Overtime, the Offeror and/or subcontractor shall indicate / detail the existence of any uncompensated overtime within their proposed labor rates and its cost/price impact on the Offeror's or subcontractor's proposal.

12. There is no page limitation on the cost proposal. Supporting documentation and schedules necessary to substantiate the fairness and reasonableness of the proposed costs is encouraged.

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

SECTION M

BASIS FOR AWARD

This acquisition will utilize a Best Value Trade-off approach. Award will be based on an integrated assessment of each offeror’s proposal, and award will be made based on the best overall (i.e. best value) proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the four (4) following evaluation factors: Solution Development (Technical), Past Performance, Small Business (SB) Participation and Cost/Price. The Government intends to award a contract to the offeror who’s Past Performance, SB Participation is acceptable, and whose proposal represents the best value after a trade-off analysis IAW FAR 15.101-1 between Solution Development (Technical) and Cost/Price. Offerors must receive a rating of Neutral Confidence or better in the Past Performance Confidence factor to receive and acceptable rating. Solution Development (Technical) is significantly more important that Cost/Price. Within Solution Development SubFactor I and II and equally weighted but significantly more important that SubFactor III. All evaluation factors, other than cost or price, when combined are significantly more important than Cost/Price. Notwithstanding the relative importance of the evaluation factors, Cost/Price may control the award decision when (a) proposals are otherwise considered approximately equal in their non-cost/price factors, (2) an otherwise superior proposal is not offered at a fair and reasonable cost/price or, (3) the advantages of a higher rated, higher cost/price proposal are not considered to be worth the cost/price premium.

The Government reserves the right to award without discussions; therefore, offerors are cautioned to ensure that their proposals contain all necessary information and are complete in all respects.

FACTORS AND SUBFACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

Factor I: Solution Development

Sub-Factor I – Technical Approach Sub-Factor II – Staffing and Key Personnel Sub-Factor III – Transition Plans

Factor II: Past Performance Factor III: Small Business Utilization Factor Factor IV: Cost/Price

EVALUATION CRITERIA/EVALUATION APPROACH

All proposal shall be subject to evaluation by the Source Selection team. A problem or lack of relevant data in any portion of the proposal may result in an Unacceptable rating. The overarching evaluation approach for all factors and subfactors is as follows:

Adequacy of Response – The proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the offeror’s methods and approach have adequately and completely considered, defined, and satisfied the requirements specified in the RFP. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement has been addressed in the proposal in accordance with the proposal submission section of the solicitation.

Feasibility of Approach. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven devices and techniques. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule.

All proposal submission requirements must be met, clear, concise, and comprehensive and meet the requirements of the PWS in order to be found technically acceptable. Ambiguities may result in an unacceptable rating. Responses to Evaluation Notices (EN), should the Government commence discussions will be evaluated to determine the degree and extent to which the requirements set forth in the solicitation are satisfied. No assumptions will be made by the Government evaluators regarding areas not defined in the Offeror’s proposal. The Government’s evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal will be limited to information provided within proposals submitted, with the exception of Price and Past Performance, where data extrinsic to the Offeror’s proposals may be considered.

Factor I – Solution Development

The Offeror’s proposal shall be evaluated based on the Offeror’s Solution Development in response to Section L of the solicitation. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposal to assess the Offeror’s:

Level of understanding of the PWS requirements and ability to assist the Government in meeting its objectives.

Understanding of the issues presented, The level of innovation and original thought presented in the solution development offering.

Understanding and acknowledgement of risk for success, ways to mitigate any identified risk, and likelihood of success Clear and detailed plan documenting the issue, solution and implementation plan for each issue.

The offeror’s proposal must, at a minimum, demonstrate:

A clear and detailed response which shows a complete understanding of the PWS requirements and ability to assist the Government in meeting its objectives.

A complete understanding of the issue and how different deliverables within the PWS can be utilized to address the weakness.

A realistic approach to solving the issue presented, with enough detail to demonstrate a general understanding of anticipated barriers to success and risks to performance with analysis of potential impacts and provides an achievable, effective, and efficient mitigation strategy.

Sub-Factor I and II will be rated as Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal or Unacceptable (The definitions of which can be found in Table 1). Sub-Factor III will be rated as Acceptable or Unacceptable (Table 2). The ratings for the Sub-Factors will then be summarized and one overall rating will be given for Factor I of either Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal or Unacceptable (Table 1). If an Offeror receives a rating of Unacceptable or Marginal for any of the individual Sub-Factors, the entire Factor will be rated as Unacceptable. All Offerors must receive a rating of Acceptable or better in the Solution Development Factor and all Sub-Factors to be eligible for award.

Table 1 – Combined Technical/Risk Rating Rating Description Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Acceptable Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.

Table 2 – Sub-Factor III Rating

Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the solicitation’s objectives.

Unacceptable Proposal does not indicate an adequate approach and understanding of the solicitation’s objectives.

Definitions:

Significant Strength - an aspect of an Offeror’s proposal that has appreciable merit or appreciably exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be appreciably advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Strength – an aspect of an Offeror’s proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Weakness – a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

See FAR 15.001.

Significant Weakness – a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

Deficiency – a material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. See FAR 15.001.

Risk – as it pertains to source selection, is the…