Section M v4-1.pdf

AN/TYQ-23A & AN/TSC-250 Contractor Logistic Support Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

SECTION M

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFEROR OR

RESPONDENTS FOR PROPOSAL PREPARATION USING LOWEST PRICE

TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE PROCEDURES

1.0 SOURCE SELECTION

1.1 Basis for Contract Award

This acquisition will utilize lowest price technically acceptable evaluation in accordance with FAR 15.101-1, Source Selection Procedures DFARS 215.3, and DFARSPGI 215.3. The solicitation requirements include all stated clauses, terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by Section L of this solicitation. The Government reserves the right to award without discussions. Therefore, each initial offer should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a technical standpoint and price. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined necessary by the Source Selection Authority (SSA).

1.2 Number of Contracts to be Awarded

The Government intends to award one (1) contract as an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) issuing task orders for this effort. However, the Government reserves the right not to award a contract at all, depending on the quality of the proposals and prices submitted and the availability of funds. In the event that the Government decides not to award a contract, offerors should not expect to be reimbursed for cost incurred in preparation of their proposal.

1.3 Correction Potential of Proposals

The Government may consider, throughout the evaluation, the "correction potential" of any deficiency or ambiguity. The judgment of such "correction potential" is within the sole discretion of the Government. If an aspect of an Offeror's proposal not meeting the Government's requirements is not considered correctable by the Government evaluation team, the Offeror may be eliminated from the competitive range.

1.4 Competitive Advantage from Use of GFP

The Government will eliminate any competitive advantage resulting from an Offeror’s proposed use of Government- Furnished Property (GFP). All offerors will have the opportunity to review the same list of current GFP. This list will be the only GFP used during the evaluation.

1.5 Evaluation Methodology

The evaluation of factors and sub-factors may be quantitative, qualitative, or a combination of both. The two lowest priced offers will be evaluated for technical acceptability. If one of the offerors is found unacceptable the next lowest priced offer will be evaluated to establish competition.

The Government technical evaluation team will evaluate the technical volume on a pass/fail basis, by assigning ratings of Acceptable or Unacceptable. Only those Offerors determined to be technically acceptable will be considered for award. The Government contracting team will evaluate proposals for adequacy and for price reasonableness, balance, realism (if deemed necessary from the cost proposal) and Total Evaluated Price (TEP).

Discussions may be held if determined to be in the best interest of the Government. Award will be made through the lowest price technically acceptable process to the evaluated acceptable proposal that is found to be technically acceptable. Cost/Price will be evaluated on the two lowest proposals as stated above for price reasonableness, balance, realism (if deemed necessary from the cost proposal) and TEP.

2.0 Evaluation Factors and Sub-Factors

2.1. List Factors and Sub factors

The Government will evaluate for the following factors and sub factors described below:

Factor 1: Mission Capability

Sub factor 1: Subject Matter Experts Sub factor 2: Contractor’s Facility and SIPRNet Connection Sub factor 3: Technical Capability Sub factor 4: Organization and Management Sub factor 5: Transition Plan

Factor 2: Cost and Price

Each sub factor within the Mission Capability factor will receive one of the technical ratings described below. Sub factor ratings shall not be rolled up into an overall rating for the Mission Capability factor. An “Unacceptable” sub factor assessment will render the offer not awardable.

The following technical rating definitions will be used in the assessment of mission capability:

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Volume I – Executive Summary

If a subcontractor is being used, provide the same information for all subcontractors and certify that 50% of the effort will be accomplished using Prime Contractor employees.

Volume II - Technical

Factor 1: Mission Capability

Sub factor 1: Subject Matter Experts Describe the Subject Matter Experts currently on staff, as well as your approach to staff, if needed, additional personnel to meet the requirements set forth in PWS paragraph 10.4. Include details on recruitment, training, retention, and specific qualifications and certifications. Provide examples of how you have successfully met similar requirements in past contracts.

Sub factor 2: Contractor’s Facility and SIPRNet Connection The offeror shall provide a detailed description of the contractor’s facility and locations to meet the facility requirements in PWS paragraph 8.1 and 14. Include details on the size, security measures, equipment, and compliance with relevant standards, to include the facility SIPRNet Authority to Operate (ATO).

Facilities and Equipment: Describe the contractor’s facilities and their locations. Describe any unique support equipment, capabilities and interfaces in supporting the systems listed IAW PWS paragraph 10.1 – 10.2 & 10.11.4. Describe process to track provided GFP/E IAW PWS paragraph 8.1-8.2. Describe how you will meet the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) SP 800-172 CMMC level 3 requirements in PWS paragraph 4.3.2 within 90 days of contract award.

Sub factor 3: Technical Capabilities The Offeror’s technical approach successfully demonstrates the ability to meet the full range of requirements IAW PWS paragraph 10.1 – 10.2 & 10.11.4 The proposal demonstrates that the offeror is able to provide the skills and experience required to perform IAW PWS 10.1 – 10.2 & 10.11.4.

Sub factor 4: Organization and Staffing Management

The Offeror’s proposed management structure and plan for coordinating activities among the

1171238141C Highlight

1171238141C Highlight team members will be evaluated for the ability to accomplish tasks with minimal Government intervention while maintaining effective communication between the Government and the Offeror. Demonstration of accomplishing a ‘Field Maintenance Request’ (FMR) is requested to include internal communication, communication with the ACS Unit, and communication with the Program Management Office (PMO), and demonstrate the labor categories supporting the FMR process.

The Offeror outlined processes for internal team communication and monitoring team performance and accomplishing tasks in a timely manner. The organizational approach demonstrates clear lines of communication with a delegated authority identified, which allow for timely accomplishment of tasks and submission of deliverables, and prompt resolution of task issues and discrepancies (IAW PWS paragraph 10.4).

Sub factor 5: Transition Plan The Transition Plan demonstrates, with rational, the methodology that will be utilized to meet all activities 60 days after contract award IAW PWS paragraph 17. Contractor acknowledges they shall provide necessary assistance in transferring all GFP/E/M at the end of the contract IAW PWS paragraph 17.

Volume III – Price

General Instruction on Evaluating TEP.

All modifications and the first page of the RFP are signed and dated by an authorized representative of the company. All fill-ins in the section B and clauses are filled-in and complete.

The TEP calculation for this acquisition will be established by adding together the fully loaded CONUS labor rates in Section J Attached titled Contractor Labor Rate Matrix. The government will apply the pre-determined notional data for every year including the outlying years. When submitting the rates the Offeror shall assume these rates will be applied as pre-priced rates on the

IDIQ.

Refer to the [Instructions] tab in the Labor Rate Matrix when completing Section J attachment titled Contractor Labor Rate Matrix. All offerors will be evaluated on the same basis starting with the lowest two offerors and the Government will apply the offeror’s proposed amounts to the applicable multipliers in calculating the TEP. Details of this method and Government developed notional hours/quantities/labor mix will not be revealed to the offeror, with no exception, but the method will be applied consistently and equally to the two lowest priced offerors. Starting with the lowest two offers will be evaluated on the same basis.

2.3 Factor 2 – Price

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Price Volume for price reasonableness, balance, affordability, and realism (if deemed necessary from the cost proposal). A Total Evaluated Price (TEP) will be evaluated and used for award purposes. Compliance with these requirements is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of the offerors proposal. Offers shall be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate their acceptability in all of the above criteria. The burden of proof for credibility of proposed costs and prices rests with the offeror.

Evaluation Techniques and Methods– When responding to the Section J attachment Contractor Labor Rate Matrix, all fill ins and labors hours must be completed. Any zeroed out columns will result in a non-responsive proposal. Do not add labor categories or change worksheet columns or rows. If practicable the Offeror may fill in their version on the corresponding labor categories for clarification during evaluation. The government will take one composite NTE rate per labor category per year and will apply to all members of the offeror's team (including the prime offeror, inter-divisions, and all subcontractors). No additional labor rate categories will be evaluated for award. This table shall be contractually binding for all fully burdened labor rates for all future contract actions and modifications affecting these items. Any deviations or modifications to this table will solely be at the government's discretion.

The TEP will consist of the Contractor’s firm-fixed and cost plus fixed fee fully-loaded labor hour rates submitted in the matrix, with profit/fee separately added (as appropriate) and multiplied by the government pre-determined generated notional data for all years including the outlaying year (FY31). Details of this method and Government developed notional hours/quantities/labor mix will not be revealed to the offeror, but the method will be applied consistently and equally starting with the two lowest offerors. The two lowest priced offers will be evaluated on the same basis if found technically acceptable.

Once an Offeror’s price has been determined based on the CONUS rates submitted, the solicitation section B will be filled out per CLIN, total for all years by the Contractor. The total evaluated price will be calculated by adding the total amount of all CLIN totals for all years.

Note: This will include the CLINs for all years, including the option CLINs 4001 and 4007 and outlying year (FY31). The government will exclude CLIN 0006, 0007 and 0008 from the TEP for evaluation purposes only.

Price Reasonableness – The Offeror’s price proposal will be evaluated for reasonableness using one or more of the techniques defined in FAR 15.404-1 (Proposal Analysis Techniques).

Generally, adequate price competition will satisfy the criteria of price reasonableness. The proposed rates in the Contract Labor Rate Matrix will be compared with the Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE).

Travel and other direct costs shall be under a Cost Reimbursable – No Fee CLIN. The Government will establish a ceiling price for this CLIN and shall verify that all travel is billed in accordance with Uniformed Travel Determination (UTD)/Civilian Travel Determination (CTD)

- revised JTR 2025.

The total evaluated price will be calculated by adding the total amount of all fixed price contract line item numbers (CLINs). Note: This will include the labor CLINs for all years.

Balance – The Government will analyze proposals to determine whether they are unbalanced with respect to unit prices and variable quantity matrix factors in accordance with FAR 15.404-1. An offer may be rejected if the CO determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

Realism – The Government will evaluate the realism of each offeror’s proposed costs per FAR 15.404-1(d)(1) for all Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF). All CPFF labor rates will be identical to FFP rates less profit/fee. The Government expects this to satisfy the requirement for Realism. However, if the Government determines it necessary, the Government will direct the Offeror to submit further Cost or Pricing Data to support its rates after initial proposal submission.

Total Evaluated Price (TEP) – The Offeror’s Price proposal will be evaluated on the rates proposed in the Contract Labor Rate Matrix. The TEP calculation will be made by using Government predetermined undisclosed elements, of a one-year sample. These notional quantities will be applied equally amongst all submitted proposals. The TEP will utilize the Offeror’s labor rates proposed in the Contractor Labor Rate Matrix and multiplied by the corresponding notional data that was pre-determined by the Government. The notional hours/ quantities/labor mix will not be disclosed to Offerors. For ease in numbering the below CLINs ‘X’ represents ‘0’ through ‘1’ as applicable for the base and all applicable option periods. It will be calculated as follows:

The Firm Fixed Price (FFP) CLINs (X001, X003, X005, 4001) by utilizing proposed rates plus proposed profit multiplied by Government-determined notional data for all years of the contract.

The Cost Plus Fixed Fee CLIN (X002 and X004) by utilizing proposed rates plus proposed fee multiplied by Government-determined notional data for all years of the contract.

The Cost Reimbursable No Fee (CRNF) CLIN (X006, X007, 4007) will not be included in the TEP.

A cost shall be proposed within section B of the solicitation, but for purposes of the evaluation, the cost will be normalized to zero.

All Not Separately Priced (NSP) CLINs (X008,) are assumed to be included in the costs for other line items and so will not be separately included in the TEP.

Approval of Accounting System – As portions of this contract are other-than fixed price, the Government will evaluate whether the offeror has a Government approved accounting system by DCAA. Failure to possess or obtain Government approval of the accounting system may result in disqualification from award. If the offeror does not currently have Government approval of its accounting system, it may be subject to a Pre-Award Accounting System Audit.

3.0 Source Selection Discussions

It is the Government’s intent to award without discussions; therefore, it is imperative that Offerors submit their best terms initially. However, if, during the evaluation period, it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to hold discussions, the Government will make a competitive range determination, and Offeror responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs) and the Final Proposal Revision (FPR) will be considered in making the source selection decision.

4.0 Solicitation Requirements, Terms and Conditions

In addition to meeting the identified factors and sub-factors, in order for Offerors to be rated acceptable they are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements specifically stated in Section L and Section M to be eligible for contract award. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the complete solicitation may result in the Offeror being rated unacceptable and removed from consideration for award. Any exceptions to the solicitation’s terms and conditions must be fully

1152325793C Highlight

1152325793C Highlight explained and justified by the Offeror.