SECTION L INSTRUCTIONS.docx

N0001426R0001 DRAFT

SECTION L INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

1. GENERAL NOTICES

a. This solicitation is reserved for 8(a) competition. The contracting officer has determined there is a reasonable expectation of adequate competition for this acquisition. Submission of offers from other sources will not be evaluated or considered for award.

b. Proposals shall be sufficiently detailed to enable the Government to perform an accurate and complete evaluation strictly from the proposal contents.

c. After receipt of proposals, the Government will conduct a solicitation compliance review on all proposals. Offerors that are not compliant with the solicitation will not be evaluated and are not eligible for award. The Government is not obligated to inform the offeror of noncompliance to the solicitation.

d. The evaluation of this effort will be conducted in a phased approach. See Section M for additional details. Comment by DENT, Mary H CIV USN (USA): Edit if a phased approach is not used.

e. Late proposals from a prime contractor and/or subcontractor/consultant will not be considered.

f. The Government shall not reimburse, as a direct cost, the Offeror’s bid and proposal costs associated with proposals under this solicitation.

g. All offerors will use the First TO PWS and CDRLs to submit their proposal. Once the IDIQ is awarded to one offeror, the Government will use the proposal submitted under the IDIQ by that offeror to make an award to meet the minimum of the IDIQ.

2. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

a. Prime offerors shall provide their electronic proposal via PIEE Solicitation Module. Offerors shall follow the PIEE registration instructions and posting instructions provided by PIEE below. The proposal must be received by the date and time specified in Block 9 of the Standard Form 33, Solicitation, Offer and Award.

b. Emailed proposals and hard copy proposals are not accepted.

c. Registration Instructions: https://www.acq.osd.mil/asda/dpc/ce/cap/docs/piee/PIEE_Solicitation_Module_Vendor_Access_Instructions.pdf

d. Submitting an Offer: https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/sol/Posting_Offer.pdf

e. For assistance with the Solicitation module, contact the PIEE helpdesk at disa.global.servicedesk.mbx.eb-ticket-requests@mail.mil (866)-618-5988.

f. Subcontractor(s) and/or consultant(s) submissions should be included in the prime submission package.

g. Subcontractor(s) and/or consultant(s) that do not wish to submit their proprietary rates to the prime may submit their unsuppressed proposal to the PCO and the CS via email by the date and time established on the SF33.

h. Subcontractor(s) and/or consultant(s) that submit a proprietary rate package to the Government shall follow the same instructions established below.

i. Subcontractor(s) and/or consultant(s) are notified that Navy cannot receive .zip files.

j. Should the subcontractor(s) and/or consultant(s) unsuppressed package be received AFTER the deadline for submission, the information provided will not be used in the evaluation and only the information in the prime submission will be reviewed.

3. SUBMISSION OF QUESTIONS

a. Any/all questions regarding this solicitation must be submitted via email to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist.

b. ONR requests that offerors provide limited emails with questions and urge offerors to thoroughly review the solicitation and send

c. In order to allow sufficient time to answer questions, questions must be submitted no later than Friday DD MMM YYYY at 2:00 pm local time, Washington D.C. The Government has the final discretion to extend or not extend the solicitation deadline and any deadline extensions will be done via a formal amendment.

d. Answers to solicitation questions will be posted via an amendment to the solicitation and posted in the PIEE Solicitation module.

e. Offeror’s who continue to submit questions asking for extensions will not be answered date.

f. Offerors shall not direct any questions concerning this solicitation to any Office of Naval Research (ONR) personnel with the exception of the Contracting Officer.

4. SOLICITATION AMENDMENTS

It is the offeror's responsibility to regularly check the PIEE Solicitation module for any postings of solicitations, amendments and questions and answers for this solicitation. Offerors shall acknowledge, via signature, all amendments to the solicitation in their proposal. Any unacknowledged amendments in the offeror’s proposal will render the proposal deficient and ineligible for award.

5. ANTICIPATED AWARD DATE

The anticipated date of award of the IDIQ is on/around 12 Jan 2027.

6. POINT OF CONTACT

The primary point of contact for this solicitation is Ms. Vivian Truman at vivian.m.truman2.civ@us.navy.mil.

7. PROPOSAL FORMAT AND PAGE LIMITS

a. Offerors shall conform to the following Volumes.

Volume I – Business/Administrative Comment by DENT, Mary H CIV USN (USA): *****The remainder of Section L is an EXAMPLE only. The CS and PCO will need to decide on volumes, formats, documents in each volume, etc based on the requirement. That means this section may be formatted as needed.

Volume II – Technical Proposal Volume III – Past Performance Proposal Volume IV – Price Proposal

a. All volumes containing text shall have single-spaced pages (“Exactly” spacing is not permitted), on an 8 ½ x 11 inch sheet with a minimum one- inch margin all around.

b. Font shall be Times New Roman no less than 12 point.

c. Text within tables, diagrams, pictorial charts, or graphic material may use no smaller than 10- point font. 11 x 17 inch foldout pages are allowed for tables, diagrams, pictorial charts or other graphic material and will be counted as two pages.

d. Every figure and table shall be numbered and included in a list of tables in the Table of Contents.

e. Pages shall be numbered consecutively within each volume. The page limits prescribed are maximum page limits for each volume.

f. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two (2) pages.

g. Cover pages, tables of contents, cross-reference matrix, tabs, and glossaries shall not be counted against prescribed page limits.

h. Pages submitted in excess of these limits will not be read or considered in the Government’s evaluation of the proposal.

i. Each volume shall be submitted as a separately labeled electronic file.

j. All text within Volumes shall be in or compatible with Microsoft Word 2010 or Adobe Acrobat.

k. All spreadsheets in Volume IV shall be capable of being manipulated in Microsoft Excel 2010 format, and shall be submitted with all formulas intact and unlocked. Offerors shall round up to the nearest dollar with the exception of individual labor rates. All labor rates shall be rounded to the nearest penny.

l. Offerors shall submit all signature pages as scanned documents. Signatures must comply with the term “signature” as defined in FAR Subpart 2.101 and clearly express the Offeror’s present intention to bind the Offeror to perform in accordance with the solicitation. Typed text or initials do not constitute a signature. Proposals with such markings will be considered as lacking a required signature.

m. Offerors must ensure that pricing information is only included in the price proposal. Do NOT include any Pricing information in any other Volume of the proposal.

n. All unit and extended prices provided shall be rounded to the nearest dollar. Extended prices must be divisible by the number of units proposed.

o. No classified information shall be included in the proposal.

p. If more than one subcontractor is proposed, each additional subcontractor shall follow the same format as noted above.

Sub-Factor Volume Contents and Document Order Page Limitation Comment by DENT, Mary H CIV USN (USA): Example only. If you need to change format OR page limits then update.

1. Cover Page*

2. Table of Contents*

3. Signed Offer

4. Any/All Signed Solicitation Amendments

5. VETS 4212 Report

6. NIST SP 800-171 Department of Defense Assessment showing a minimum Basic Rating Screenshot

7. Current CMMC Level Screenshot

8. OCI Attestation

9. OCI Mitigation Plan (if attestation is Yes)

10. Data Rights Assertion (if any) using DFARS Table 227) Unlimited

Subfactor 1.1

1. Cover Page*

2. Table of Contents*

3. Program Approach (Technical, Financial, and IT Requirements) 50 Pages Total Resumes NTE 2 Pages per person Contingent Hire Statement NTE 1 Page per contingent hire

Factor 1 - Technical Proposal Subfactor 1.2 Staffing Plan

NTE 5 Pages

Past Performance Proposal

1. Cover Page*

2. Table of Contents*

3. Example 1 PPIF, CPARS or PPQ, and SOW/PWS

4. Example 2 PPIF, CPARS or PPQ, and SOW/PWS

5. Example 3 PPIF, CPARS or PPQ, and SOW/PWS Unlimited

Price

1. Cover Page*

2. Table of Contents*

3. Excel Pricing Summary Sheet

4. Pricing Narrative Form

5. Subcontractor/Consultant submissions Unlimited

Proposals shall be limited to four (4) volumes and shall be submitted electronically to PIEE SOL. A packing list is below.

VOLUME I – BUSINESS AND ADMINISTRATIVE has an unlimited page count and the contents shall include:

1. Cover Page

2. Table of Contents

3. Signed Offer

4. Any/All Signed Solicitation Amendments

5. VETS 4212 Report

6. NIST SP 800-171 Department of Defense Assessment showing a minimum Basic Rating Screenshot

7. CMMC Level Screenshot

8. OCI Attestation

9. OCI Mitigation Plan (if attestation is Yes)

10. Data Rights Assertion (if any) using DFARS Table 227)

VOLUME II – FACTOR 1 - TECHNICAL has an 25 limit page count and the contents shall include:

1. Cover Page

2. Table of Contents

3. Response to Factor 1 Technical Proposal Subfactor 1.1

a. Program Approach

i. The contractor shall identify how they plan to assist the Government with operating the program. Detail a comprehensive management plan for the full lifecycle of all specified internship and outreach programs (SEAP, NREIP, HBCU/MI, etc.). The proposal should outline the processes for marketing, application management, participant on-boarding, and mentorship coordination.

ii. Describe the systems and controls that will be used to ensure financial accuracy and timeliness.

iii. Provide a detailed plan for website and application portal management that addresses security, uptime, and data integrity.

4. Response to Factor 1 Technical Proposal Subfactor 1.2

a. Staffing Plan

i. Present an organizational chart and include resumes for key personnel. Highlight specific experience managing programs of similar size and complexity, particularly in government contracting, STEM outreach, and financial administration.

VOLUME III – FACTOR 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE has an unlimited page count and the contents shall include:

1. Cover Page

2. Table of Contents

3. Example 1 PPIF, CPARS or PPQ, and SOW/PWS

4. Example 2 PPIF, CPARS or PPQ, and SOW/PWS

5. Example 3 PPIF, CPARS or PPQ, and SOW/PWS

VOLUME IV – FACTOR 3 - PRICE has an unlimited page count and the contents shall include:

1. Cover Page

2. Table of Contents

3. Section B Fill Ins

4. Excel Pricing Summary Sheet

5. Pricing Narrative Form

6. Subcontractor/Consultant submissions

8. PROPOSAL CONTENTS

VOLUME I – BUSINESS AND ADMINISTRATIVE

The Cover Page shall include:

Solicitation Number Requirement Name Business Point of Contact – Name, Email, Phone Technical Point of Contact – Name, Email, Phone Cage Code and Unique Entity Identifier Number for offeror and proposed subcontractors Name of any/all subcontractors

Table of Contents Signed Offer: The offer shall indicate the offeror’s unconditional agreement to the terms and conditions in this solicitation. It shall state proposal validity through 245 days. Finally it shall acknowledge and accept the terms and conditions reflected in any amendments to the solicitation. The Offer may be submitted in PDF format. Comment by DENT, Mary H CIV USN (USA): Discuss with your PCO a Signed Offer from authorized representative

b. Any/All signed Amendments

VETS 4212 Report: In accordance with FAR 52.222-35, Equal Opportunity for Veterans, the offer must provide evidence regarding their submission of the required annual VETS-4212, Federal Contractor Veterans' Employment Report with respect to the preceding fiscal year if the offer was subject to the reporting requirements of 38 U.S.C. 4212 (d) for that fiscal year. Evidence of this submission may be submitted in PDF format.

NIST SP 800-171 Department of Defense Assessment showing a minimum Basic Rating Organizational Conflict of Interest Attestation: ONR has determined that an actual or potential organizational conflict of interest (OCI) exists when a contractor (including its parent, subsidiaries, and affiliates) performs for ONR both scientific and engineering technical assistance (SETA) or other support services and Research and Development (R&D) work. Such situations give rise to OCIs or potential OCIs based on impaired objectively, biased ground rules, and unequal access to information. ONR prefers that companies avoid such situations altogether by choosing to do only one type of work for ONR.

· The name of the entity the offeror, its subcontractors, partners, consultants or affiliates supports.

· The number of the contract, subcontract, or agreement that creates the actual or potential OCI. If ONR did not award the contract or agreement, provide a copy of the document. If ONR awarded the contract, provide the name of the technical point of contact.

· A description of the actual or potential OCI. The statement must describe in a concise manner all relevant facts concerning any past, present or currently planned interest (financial, contractual, organizational, or otherwise) relating to the work to be performed hereunder and bearing on whether the offeror has a possible organizational conflict of interest with respect to impartial, technically sound, and unbiased assessments, recommendations, or evaluations, or being given an unfair competitive advantage. If relevant, offerors shall address the personal conflicts of their employees.

· A Mitigation Plan. Offerors should refer to FAR Subpart 9.5 for policies and procedures for avoiding, neutralizing, or mitigating organizational conflicts of interest.

· A concluding statement as follows: “I [NAME] as an authorized negotiator on behalf of [NAME OF OFFEROR] certify that I have, to the best of my knowledge and belief, disclosed all actual or potential organizational conflicts of interest (OCI) under [SOLICITATION NUMBER]. I understand that the failure to disclose the existence of an actual or potential OCI shall result in the offeror not being considered for award.”

OCI Mitigation Plan (if attestation is Yes) OCI Mitigation Plan Contents. At a minimum, a Mitigation Plan shall:

a. Provide organizational charts showing the offeror’s (and, as appropriate, those of its subcontractors, partners, consultants, and affiliates) structure as it relates to performance of the contract awarded under this solicitation and all contracts and agreements relevant to the OCI, highlighting those elements that create the actual or apparent OCI.

b. Demonstrate how the elements that create the actual or apparent OCI will be isolated from the resources that will perform the contract awarded under this solicitation.

c. Provide information showing whether the organizational elements that will perform the contract awarded under this solicitation will be geographically or physically separated from the elements that create the actual or apparent OCI.

d. For each contract or agreement relevant to the OCI, describe the process for reassigning personnel, including those belonging to subcontractors, partners, consultants, and affiliates, from one organization to another. Include restrictions that apply.

e. For each contract or agreement relevant to the OCI, describe the controls, including nondisclosure agreements, that are exercised over the future employment of departing employees as it relates to the OCI.

f. For each contract or agreement relevant to the OCI, describe any OCI training the employees are offered or required to attend, along with the timing (before or after starting work on a government contract), frequency, length, and content of such training.

g. Provide evidence of facts and circumstances that the offeror asserts mitigate or address the concerns related to the actual or potential OCI.

VOLUME II – FACTOR 1 - TECHNICAL has an 25 page count and the contents shall include:

The Cover Page shall include:

Solicitation Number Requirement Name Business Point of Contact – Name, Email, Phone Technical Point of Contact – Name, Email, Phone Cage Code and Unique Entity Identifier Number for offeror and proposed subcontractors

Name of any/all subcontractors

Table of Contents

Response to Factor 1 Technical Proposal Subfactor 1.1

a. Program Approach

i. The contractor shall identify how they plan to assist the Government with operating the program. Detail a comprehensive management plan for the full lifecycle of all specified internship and outreach programs (SEAP, NREIP, HBCU/MI, etc.). The proposal should outline the processes for marketing, application management, participant on-boarding, and mentorship coordination.

ii. Describe the systems and controls that will be used to ensure financial accuracy and timeliness.

iii. Provide a detailed plan for website and application portal management that addresses security, uptime, and data integrity.

iv. Address how the contractor will meet the quality standards in the QASP.

Contractor proposals must demonstrate how you have successfully performed similar work in the past. For each major task in the PWS, provide a narrative example from a previous project that describes the requirement, the specific actions your team took, and the measurable results you achieved.

2. Response to Factor 1 Technical Proposal Subfactor 1.2

a. Staffing Plan

i. Present an organizational chart and include resumes for key personnel. Highlight specific experience managing programs of similar size and complexity, particularly in government contracting, STEM outreach, and financial administration.

ii. Identify how the contractor will staff the positions, retain personnel, and fill positions should personnel leave the contract.

Offerors must describe their specific methodologies for recruitment, personnel retention, and the rapid backfilling of vacancies, substantiating this plan with concrete data and examples from contracts of similar scope, such as historical employee retention rates and average time-to-fill for key positions.

VOLUME II – FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

The Cover Page shall include:

Solicitation Number Requirement Name Business Point of Contact – Name, Email, Phone Technical Point of Contact – Name, Email, Phone Cage Code and Unique Entity Identifier Number for offeror and proposed subcontractors

Name of any/all subcontractors

Table of Contents

Past Performance Example 1 Past Performance Information Sheet. See Section J for reference.

CPARS or Past Performance Questionnaire. See Section J for reference.

Statement of Work for Example 1

Past Performance Example 2 Past Performance Information Sheet. See Section J for reference.

CPARS or Past Performance Questionnaire. See Section J for reference.

Statement of Work for Example 2

Past Performance Example 3 Past Performance Information Sheet. See Section J for reference.

CPARS or Past Performance Questionnaire. See Section J for reference.

Statement of Work for Example 3

Offerors shall provide information relative to previous work for the same or similar services provided for all past and on-going work in Government and Non-Government contracts for technical, financial and program management support services.

Offerors must complete the Past Performance Information Form to detail and summarize the past performance information requested in this volume. See Section J for reference.

Offerors shall provide three (3) relevant past performance examples of contract efforts performed with similar size, scope, and complexity. Past performance examples must have been performed within the past three (3) years as of the date of the solicitation. Relevant past performance is defined as efforts performed in the past three (3) years that directly track to the functional areas of the PWS (Section C) for this effort. Data concerning the offeror shall be provided first, followed by the proposed major subcontractor (if applicable), in alphabetical order. A major subcontractor is defined as one who is performing at least $5M worth of the total proposed price, excluding ODCs and profit/fee. Past performance information from subcontractors will not be considered unless 5the subcontractor is performing at least $5M worth of the total proposed price, excluding ODC’s and profit/fee. Subcontractor past performance can only replace one (1) past performance example for the offeror. The offeror is still required to provide two (2) past performance examples if a major subcontractor is providing one (1) past performance example.

Offerors citing an IDIQ award as an example shall also include the Task Order number work is performed under.

If the offeror does not have three (3) recent and relevant contract efforts, the offeror shall make such a statement in this section of the proposal.

Offerors can elect to submit their most recent final CPARS or a PPQ. If submitting a PPQ, Offerors shall request customer POC’s to complete past performance questionnaires on their behalf. See questionnaire template in Section J. Completed Past Performance Questionnaires shall be e-mailed directly from the client (POC/COR) to Ms. Vivian Truman at vivian.m.truman2.civ@us.navy.mil on or prior to the closing date of this solicitation.

Questionnaires received after the due date for submission of proposals may not be considered.

While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

VOLUME III – FACTOR 3 – PRICE

The Cover Page shall include:

Solicitation Number Requirement Name Business Point of Contact – Name, Email, Phone Technical Point of Contact – Name, Email, Phone Cage Code and Unique Entity Identifier Number for offeror and proposed subcontractors

Name of any/all subcontractors

Pricing Summary Sheet – Prime - Excel – Includes ONR Service Contract Metrics aka Tripwire and Section B Fill Ins

Pricing Narrative Form – Includes Prime’s Compliance with FAR 52.219-14 and Prime’s Analysis of Subcontractor Proposal

Subcontractor Submissions

Pricing Summary Sheet (Excel) – Prime

Offerors shall bid the Not-to-Exceed amount of $450,000 for each year for Other Direct Costs (Travel/Misc) (ODC). The NTE amount shall be proposed inclusive of G&A if required by the offeror’s accounting practices, but without profit, fee, or any other burdens. Offerors shall not propose any higher or lower ODC amounts. Comment by DENT, Mary H CIV USN (USA): If you are using ODC's for other than travel update.

Offerors shall complete the Pricing Spreadsheet in Section J.

The price proposal submitted by offerors shall consist of the following: a general worksheet, a total amount worksheet, separate worksheets for each of the five (5) years of contract performance (Base through O-IV). To evaluate the option to extend services (FAR 52.217-8) CLINs, one-half of the proposed price for the last year of the performance period shall be added to the Total Evaluated Cost. No offeror input on the Excel form is required.

All formulas shall remain in the spreadsheet(s), so as to allow for the Government’s evaluation of cost. For example, the Government should be able to change a cell containing a specific labor rate for an individual and have the change flow through the spreadsheet automatically. However, offerors may revise the formulas to accurately reflect their proposed accounting practices. If offerors revise the formulas, the offeror must provide a detailed narrative explaining the changes made to formulas and the worksheet(s) impacted by the changes. Offerors who manipulate formulas without a narrative explanation of what is revised may be ineligible for award.

Any proposal that does not contain subcontractor price information (if applicable) may be considered incomplete and non-responsive, rendering the prime’s proposal ineligible for award.

ONR Service Contract Metrics (Excel)

The Office of Naval Research (ONR) has established service contracting tripwires for service contracts funded and executed at ONR. The service contracting tripwire applicable to the base and all option periods for this solicitation is a fully burdened labor rate of $250 per hour. This tripwire applies to prime, subcontract, and consultant labor inclusive of all subcontractor, consultant, and prime contractor indirect costs and applicable fee or profit.

Offerors and their subcontractors must provide their fully burdened labor rate computations, via a separate worksheet within the Pricing Spreadsheet (see Section J) which shall be labeled "Tripwire Data". The worksheet will demonstrate how the fully burdened proposed labor rate(s) were computed by the offeror and subcontractor(s) in order to show compliance or non-compliance with ONR’s service contracting tripwire requirement. This separate worksheet can be provided in contractor format and must be added to the Pricing Spreadsheet (see Section J) by the offeror and subcontractor in each of their respective cost proposal spreadsheets.

Offers and subcontractors who propose fully burdened labor rates in excess of $250 per hour for the base and option periods identified within this solicitation must provide a written narrative to support the rationale for proposing fully burdened labor rates in excess of $250 per hour. Offerors and subcontractors who propose fully burdened labor rates in excess of $250 per hour shall be subject to additional analysis and a higher level of review to assess cost/price reasonableness.

Pricing Narrative Form – Prime (Use the Section J, Pricing Narrative Form) All primes shall fill out Pricing Narrative Sheet (See Section J).

Prime’s Compliance with FAR 52.219-14 (Use the Section J, Pricing Narrative Form) Prime offerors are responsible for providing the applicable certification or assurance in accordance with FAR 52.219-14, that at least 50% of the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel shall be expended for employees of the concern. Prime offerors must demonstrate in the cost volume narrative how this will be accomplished; however, if the prime and subcontractor are similarly situated they should state as such in the document.

Prime’s Analysis of Subcontractor Proposal (Use the Section J, Pricing Narrative Form) The prime contractor shall include a detailed analysis of their proposed subcontractor(s) and/or consultants to determine the price the prime has included is fair and reasonable. At a minimum, this should include how the subcontractor(s) and/or consultants were selected, the type of contract they will be awarded, and analysis of the overall price. Subcontractor(s) and/or consultants that are selected on a sole source basis require additional scrutiny from the prime contractor. Primes that fail to provide this information, or do not perform an adequate analysis may be deemed to be non compliant with the solicitation and removed from consideration.

Applicability of Documents to Proposed Subcontractors and Consultants Comment by DENT, Mary H CIV USN (USA): If PCO/CS wish to spell out what they want from subs include that here.

All proposed subcontractors and/or consultants shall use all pricing documents which are consistent with the prime offeror. See Section J for reference. Any proposal that does not contain subcontractor price information (if applicable) may be considered incomplete and non-responsive, rendering the prime’s proposal ineligible for award.

ONR Pre Award Acquisition Survey

Vendors are encouraged to take a survey about the ONR pre award process. The link is:

https://forms.osi.apps.mil/r/f3w1LQcAen?origin=lprLink

SECTION M EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD Comment by DENT, Mary H CIV USN (USA) [2]: Start here

1. GENERAL NOTICES

The Government intends to award a contract to the responsible Offeror whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements and is determined to be the best value to the Government. The evaluation of an offeror’s proposal will be conducted using the procedures outlined in this solicitation.

i. “Best Value” means the expected outcome of an acquisition that, in the Government’s estimation, provides the greatest overall benefit in response to the requirement (FAR 2.101). In making this decision, the Government is more concerned with obtaining offers demonstrating superior merit under the non-cost evaluation factors at a reasonable price than with making an award to the Offeror with the lowest proposed price. Accordingly, the Government may be willing to pay a reasonable premium for a proposal offering superior merit under the non-cost factors. The determination of a reasonable premium rests with the Selection Official.

ii. Although the Government may waive informalities and minor irregularities in proposals received, the failure to comply with terms and conditions of the solicitation may adversely impact the Offeror’s evaluation results, and could result in the Offeror being removed from consideration for award.

iii. Any proposal determined to have an existing organizational conflict of interest (OCI) pertaining to the prime or any of the proposed subcontractors may be removed from further consideration for award at any point during the evaluation. Task order award will only be made to an Offeror that has no organizational conflicts of interest as defined in FAR Subpart 9.5 or has provided a satisfactory mitigation plan, as determined by the Government.

iv. The evaluation of an offeror’s proposal shall be done initially with a compliance review to ascertain if offerors have met the compliance requirements. Only those offerors who meet the compliance requirements will be evaluated. Should an offeror not meet the compliance requirements, the Government is NOT required to notify the offeror they will not be evaluated.

v. While OCI is not an evaluation factor, it is analyzed to determine OCI risk. Any proposal determined to have an organizational conflict of interest (OCI) pertaining to the prime or any of the proposed subcontractors may be removed from further consideration for award at any point during the evaluation. Task order award will only be made to an Offeror that has no organizational conflicts of interest as defined in FAR Subpart 9.5 or has provided a satisfactory mitigation plan. The determination regarding the satisfactory nature of the mitigation plan is determined by the Government.

vi. Offerors are hereby notified that formal source selection procedures DO apply and will follow formal source selection procedures of FAR Subpart 15.3, procedures such as a competitive range determination, pre- award notifications to Offerors excluded from a competitive range, and requesting final proposal revisions from all Offerors included within a competitive range are required. Offerors should also be aware that the definition(s) of strength, weakness, significant weakness, etc. are found in the most current DoD Source Selection Guide. Offerors are encouraged to view the DOD Source Selection Procedures available via online websites. Comment by Kellington, Catherine M CIV USN CNR ARLINGTON VA (USA): Put in website of where guide can be found.

vii. The evaluation of an offeror’s proposal shall be done initially with a compliance review to ascertain if offerors have met the compliance requirements. Only those offerors who meet the compliance requirements will be evaluated. Should an offeror not meet the compliance requirements, the Government is NOT required to notify the offeror they will not be evaluated.

An unacceptable rating under any of the sub-factors under Technical Factor X will result in an overall unacceptable rating for Technical Factor X. In the event that the first sub-factor is unacceptable the Government will cease the evaluation and the offeror shall be deemed to be unacceptable. Comment by DENT, Mary H CIV USN (USA): Discuss with your PCO and your COR. This approach may be too strict for every requirement.

2. EVALUATION PHASES Comment by DENT, Mary H CIV USN (USA): *****The remainder of Section M is an EXAMPLE only. The CS and PCO will need to decide on evaluation criteria, what to evaluate, etc based on the requirement. That means this section may be formatted as needed.

Proposals that are compliant with the solicitation shall then be reviewed in phases:

i. Phase I: will evaluate the Technical Proposal /Factor 1. Only those proposals rated Acceptable, Good, or Outstanding will move on to the Past Performance evaluation. Should a proposal be rated Unacceptable under one Sub-Factor of the Technical Proposal Factor, the proposal shall be rated Unacceptable overall for Factor 1 (Technical Proposal).

ii. Phase II: will evaluate the Past Performance factor. Only those proposals rated Neutral, Satisfactory, or Substantial Confidence for Past Performance will move on to Phase III. Should a proposal be rated Unacceptable under either Factor 1 (Technical Proposal) or Factor 2 (Past Performance) the entire proposal shall be rated unacceptable.

iii. Phase III: will consist of a Price Analysis evaluation of only those proposals who are rated in Phases I and II shall undergo this analysis.

3. DISCUSSIONS

The Government intends to make award based on the initial proposal submissions without conducting interchanges; therefore, each offer’s proposal should contain the Offerors best terms.

In the event discussions are required, the Government will issue a competitive range decision and will inform offerors who are in or out of the competitive range.

Those offerors not in the competitive range may elect for a pre award debrief or may elect for a post award debrief.

The Government will continue discussions until it is evident award can be made IAW the solicitation procedures herein OR if the Government determines that no reasonable offer can be reached and not make an award.

4. EVALUATION FACTORS AND SUB FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED/WEIGHTING

The evaluation factors will be as follows:

1. Factor 1 – Technical Proposal

a. Sub-Factor 1.1 – Program Approach

b. Sub-Factor 1.2 – Staffing Plan

2. Factor 2 - Past Performance

3. Factor 3 – Price Factors are listed in descending order of importance. Factor 1 is significantly more important than Factor 2. Factor 2 is more important that Factor 3.

Factor 1 includes two sub-factors. Sub-Factor 1.1 is more important than Sub-Factor 1.2.

Offerors are hereby notified that the closer the ratings are in Factors 1 and 2, the more important Factor 3 becomes.

1. EVALUATION OF SUB-FACTOR 1.1 – PROGRAM APPROACH – FACTOR 1, VOLUME II

The Technical Evaluation Board shall evaluate the Program Approach.

The Government may elect to provide above an Acceptable rating to offeror’s who:

The plan should demonstrate a clear understanding of all tasks in the PWS and a low-risk approach to achieving the objectives; and/or The plan includes a financial processes that can ensure compliance with the 98% accuracy and timeliness standard for payments.

2. EVALUATION OF SUB-FACTOR 1.2 - STAFFING PLAN – FACTOR 1, VOLUME II:

The Technical Evaluation Board shall evaluate the Staffing Plan.

The Government may elect to provide above an Acceptable rating to offeror’s who:

Offerors shall demonstrate their understanding of the requirements and tasks for this solicitation. All of the requirements and tasks specified in the solicitation are mandatory. By your proposal submission, you are representing that your company and proposed subcontractors (if applicable) will perform all the requirements and tasks specified in the solicitation. Offerors shall not merely copy, paste, rephrase or restate the requirements and tasks specified in the solicitation; such will result in an “unacceptable” evaluation rating.

The Technical Evaluation Board will evaluate Factor 1 and each sub-factor thereunder, using the following rating definitions:

An unacceptable rating under any of the sub-factors under Factor 1 will result in an overall unacceptable rating for Factor 1.

5. EVALUATION OF FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE – FACTOR 2, VOLUME III:

The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. The past performance evaluation considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in furnishing services that meet the contract’s requirements. A performance relevancy rating and a performance confidence assessment rating will be assigned for each offeror after evaluating the offeror’s recent and relevant past performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the contract requirements. Past performance information about the offeror as a prime contractor is considered more significant and given more weight in the past performance evaluation.

There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation. The first is to evaluate the offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. In establishing what is relevant for the acquisition, consideration will be given to those aspects of an offeror’s contract history that would give the greatest ability to measure whether the offeror will satisfy the current procurement. Common aspects of relevancy include similarity of service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and degree of subcontract/teaming.

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings. In conducting a performance relevancy assessment, each offeror shall be assigned one of the following ratings:

The second aspect to the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts. The past performance evaluation performed in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the offeror’s past performance; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers and other sources on how well the offeror performed those past contracts.

The Government will review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), including Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPAR), using all CAGE/UEI numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), System for Award Management (SAM) modules including information formerly found under Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

Performance Confidence Assessment. In conducting an overall performance confidence assessment, each offeror shall be assigned one of the following ratings:

6. EVALUATION OF FACTOR 3 – PRICE (FIRM-FIXED-PRICE) – FACTOR 3, VOLUME IV: Comment by DENT, Mary H CIV USN (USA): Include if you do or do not want to evaluate Price Realism. This may be appropriate if you want to evaluate the individual labor rates. If you do NOT plan to do that, recommend that is not included. If you plan to do Price Realism on the rates, state as such in this section.

Price analysis of proposed labor rates will be conducted using the techniques found in FAR 15.404-1(b)(2)(i)-(vii).

Offeror’s Price proposal will be evaluated as follows.

i. Overall Price Proposal Evaluation: The Price proposal for proposed labor rates will be evaluated for the following:

a. Compliance: The Price proposal submitted by the Offeror will be evaluated for compliance based upon the submission requirements contained in the Section L.

b. Unbalanced Pricing: The Offeror’s overall Price proposal will be evaluated for unbalanced pricing as defined in FAR 15.404-1(g). An offer may be rejected if the contracting officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government (see FAR 15.404-1(g)(1) through FAR 15.404-1(g)(3)).

c. Errors: The Offeror’s Price proposal will be reviewed for errors. The Offeror may be given an opportunity to clarify certain aspects of their proposal at the sole discretion of the Contracting Officer via clarifications.

d. Total Evaluated Price: The Total Evaluated Price consists of summing the Offeror’s proposed fixed-price for the base year, the four (4) one-year options and the six-month option to extend services.

ii. To evaluate the option to extend services (FAR 52.217-8) CLINs, one-half of the proposed price for the last year (Option IV) of the performance period shall be added to the Total Evaluated Price. Comment by DENT, Mary H CIV USN (USA): If you say 4 then use that. Be consistent with the numbers or roman numerals assigned to options.

The Government hereby notifies offerors that all offeror pricing may be used to conduct the price analysis even if the offeror does not make it through Phase I and/or Phase II.

7. ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST ANALYSIS

a. The Contracting Officer will review an offeror’s certifications, statements, and OCI Mitigation Plan (if applicable) submitted and may require additional relevant information from an offeror. All such information and any other relevant information will be used by the Contracting Officer to determine whether an award to the offeror may create an OCI. If found to exist, the Government may: (1) impose appropriate conditions which avoid such conflict, (2) disqualify the offeror, (3) determine that it is otherwise in the best interest of the Government to contract with the offeror and include appropriate conditions mitigating such conflict in the contract award, or (4) seek a waiver. If the Contracting Officer determines that an actual or significant potential conflict of interest exists that cannot reasonably be avoided, neutralized or mitigated, the offeror will be ineligible for award. If accepted, the Mitigation Plan shall become part of the contract.

b. An offeror who has refused to disclose the information or make the certification required by this solicitation concerning an actual or potential OCI shall be disqualified from consideration for award.