Instructions_to_Offerors_and_Evaluation_Factors_for_Award_-_Amendment_0002.pdf

SP3300-17-R-0001 (Amendment 0002)

Instructions to Offerors

Addenda to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors -- Commercial Items

Provisions incorporated in full text:

FAR 52.209-7 – Information Regarding Responsibility Matters (Jul 2013)

(a) Definitions. As used in this provision—

“Administrative proceeding” means a non-judicial process that is adjudicatory in nature in order to make a determination of fault or liability (e.g., Securities and Exchange Commission Administrative Proceedings, Civilian Board of Contract Appeals Proceedings, and Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals Proceedings). This includes administrative proceeding at the Federal and State level but only in connection with performance of a Federal contract or grant. It does not include agency actions such as contract audits, site visits, corrective plans, or inspection of deliverables.

“Federal contracts and grants with total value greater than $10,000,000” means—

(1) The total value of all current, active contracts and grants, including all priced options; and

(2) The total value of all current, active orders including all priced options under indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity, 8(a), or requirements contracts (including task and delivery and multiple-award Schedules).

“Principal” means an officer, director, owner, partner, or a person having primary management or supervisory responsibilities within a business entity (e.g., general manager; plant manager; head of a division or business segment; and similar positions).

(b) The offeror [_] has [_] does not have current active Federal contracts and grants with total value greater than $10,000,000.

(c) If the offeror checked “has” in paragraph (b) of this provision, the offeror represents, by submission of this offer, that the information it has entered in the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) is current, accurate, and complete as of the date of submission of this offer with regard to the following information:

(1) Whether the offeror, and/or any of its principals, has or has not, within the last five years, in connection with the award to or performance by the offeror of a Federal contract or grant, been the subject of a proceeding, at the Federal or State level that resulted in any of the following dispositions:

(i) In a criminal proceeding, a conviction.

(ii) In a civil proceeding, a finding of fault and liability that results in the payment of a monetary fine, penalty, reimbursement, restitution, or damages of $5,000 or more.

(iii) In an administrative proceeding, a finding of fault and liability that results in—

(A) The payment of a monetary fine or penalty of $5,000 or more; or

(B) The payment of a reimbursement, restitution, or damages in excess of $100,000.

(iv) In a criminal, civil, or administrative proceeding, a disposition of the matter by consent or compromise with an acknowledgment of fault by the Contractor if the proceeding could have led to any of the outcomes specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i), (c)(1)(ii), or (c)(1)(iii) of this provision.

(2) If the offeror has been involved in the last five years in any of the occurrences listed in (c)(1) of this provision, whether the offeror has provided the requested information with regard to each occurrence.

(d) The offeror shall post the information in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (c)(1)(iv) of this provision in

FAPIIS as required through maintaining an active registration in the System for Award Management database via https://www.acquisition.gov (see 52.204-7).

(End of provision)

FAR 52.215-20 -- Requirements for Certified Cost or Pricing Data and Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data, Alternate IV (Oct 2010)

(a) Submission of certified cost or pricing data is not required.

(b) Provide information described below:

(1) In those acquisitions that do not require certified cost or pricing data, the contracting officer shall—

(i) Require submission of data other than certified cost or pricing data, as defined in FAR 2.101, from the offeror to the extent necessary to determine a fair and reasonable price (10 U.S.C. 2306a(d)(1) and 41 U.S.C. 254b(d)(1)) if the contracting officer determines that adequate data from sources other than the offeror are not available. This includes requiring data from an offeror to support a cost realism analysis;

(ii) Require that the data submitted by the offeror include, at a minimum, appropriate data on the prices at which the same item or similar items have previously been sold, adequate for determining the reasonableness of the price unless an exception under 15.403-1(b)(1) or (2) applies;

(2) The contractor’s format for submitting the data should be used (see FAR 15.403-5(b)(2)).

(End of Provision)

FAR 52.216-1 Type of Contract (Apr 1984)

The resulting contract will be an Indefinite Delivery/ Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract. All subsequent task orders written against the contract will be Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) with a Cost Reimbursement (CR) line for travel resulting from this solicitation.

(End of Provision)

FAR 52.222-46 Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees (Feb 1993)

(a) Recompetition of service contracts may in some cases result in lowering the compensation (salaries and fringe benefits) paid or furnished professional employees. This lowering can be detrimental in obtaining the quality of professional services needed for adequate contract performance. It is therefore in the Government’s best interest that professional employees, as defined in 29 CFR 541, be properly and fairly compensated. As part of their proposals, offerors will submit a total compensation plan setting forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the contract.

The Government will evaluate the plan to assure that it reflects a sound management approach and understanding of the contract requirements. This evaluation will include an assessment of the offeror’s ability to provide uninterrupted high-quality work. The professional compensation proposed will be considered in terms of its impact upon recruiting and retention, its realism, and its consistency with a total plan for compensation. Supporting information will include data, such as recognized national and regional compensation surveys and studies of professional, public and private organizations, used in establishing the total compensation structure.

(b) The compensation levels proposed should reflect a clear understanding of work to be performed and should indicate the capability of the proposed compensation structure to obtain and keep suitably qualified personnel to meet mission objectives. The salary rates or ranges must take into account differences in skills, the complexity of various disciplines, and professional job difficulty. Additionally, proposals envisioning compensation levels lower than those of predecessor contractors for the same work will be evaluated on the basis of maintaining program continuity, uninterrupted high-quality work, and availability of required competent professional service employees. Offerors are cautioned that lowered compensation for essentially the same professional work may indicate lack of sound management judgment and lack of understanding of the requirement.

(c) The Government is concerned with the quality and stability of the work force to be employed on this contract. Professional compensation that is unrealistically low or not in reasonable relationship to the various job categories, since it may impair the Contractor’s ability to attract and retain competent professional service employees, may be viewed as evidence of failure to comprehend the complexity of the contract requirements.

(d) Failure to comply with these provisions may constitute sufficient cause to justify rejection of a proposal.

(End of Provision)

FAR 52.233-2 Service of Protest (Sep 2006)

(a) Protests, as defined in section 33.101 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, that are filed directly with an agency, and copies of any protests that are filed with the Government Accountability Office (GAO), shall be served on the Contracting Officer (addressed as follows) by obtaining written and dated acknowledgment of receipt from Margaret K. Ross, Acquisition Operations, DLA Distribution, J Ave, Building 404, New Cumberland PA 17070

(b) The copy of any protest shall be received in the office designated above within one day of filing a protest with the GAO.

FAR 52.252-1 Solicitation Provisions Incorporated by Reference (Feb 1998)

This solicitation incorporates one or more solicitation provisions by reference, with the same force and effect as if they were given in full text. Upon request, the Contracting Officer will make their full text available. The offeror is cautioned that the listed provisions may include blocks that must be completed by the offeror and submitted with its quotation or offer. In lieu of submitting the full text of those provisions, the offeror may identify the provision by paragraph identifier and provide the appropriate information with its quotation or offer. Also, the full text of a solicitation provision may be accessed electronically at this/these address(es):

http://farsite.hill.af.mil/

DLAD 52.233-9000 Agency Protests (Nov 2011)

Companies protesting this procurement may file a protest 1) with the contracting officer, 2) with the Government Accountability Office, or 3) pursuant to Executive Order No. 12979, with the Agency for a decision by the Activity’s Chief of the Contracting Office. Protests filed with the agency should clearly state that they are an "Agency Level Protest under Executive Order No. 12979." (Note: DLA procedures for Agency Level Protests filed under Executive Order No. 12979 allow for a higher level decision on the initial protest than would occur with a protest to the contracting officer; this process is not an appellate review of a contracting officer's decision on a protest previously filed with the contracting officer). Absent a clear indication of the intent to file an agency level protest, protests will be presumed to be protests to the contracting officer.

DLAD 52.233-9001 Disputes: Agreement to Use Alternative Dispute Resolution (Nov 2011)

(a) The parties agree to negotiate with each other to try to resolve any disputes that may arise. If unassisted negotiations are unsuccessful, the parties will use alternative dispute resolution (ADR) techniques to try to resolve the dispute. Litigation will only be considered as a last resort when ADR is unsuccessful or has been documented by the party rejecting ADR to be inappropriate for resolving the dispute.

(b) Before either party determines ADR inappropriate, that party must discuss the use of ADR with the other party. The documentation rejecting ADR must be signed by an official authorized to bind the contractor (see FAR 52.233-1), or, for the Agency, by the contracting officer, and approved at a level above the contracting officer after consultation with the ADR Specialist and with legal counsel (see DLA Directive 5145.1). Contractor personnel are also encouraged to include the ADR Specialist in their discussions with the contracting officer before determining ADR to be inappropriate.

(c) If you wish to opt out of this clause, check here [ ]. Alternate wording may be negotiated with the contracting officer.

Communications Between the Government and Offerors:

1. Questions regarding this solicitation prior to proposal submission may occur for the purpose of clarifying elements of the solicitation.

a. Questions concerning this solicitation shall be submitted by electronic mail to

Kimberly.sprenkle@dla.mil, with the subject: Solicitation SP3300-17-R-0001

b. Offerors shall submit questions in an MS Word Table landscape format with the following column headings:

Question RFP Page

RFP Para (if question relates to the RFP)

Name of Firm

POC

Tel No.

Fax No.

e-mail

c. No information concerning this RFP or requests for clarification will be provided in response to offeror-initiated telephone calls. All such requests must be made by electronic mail in the format noted above and submitted to the above email address.

2. The hour and date for receipt of BOTH the electronic and hard copy offer is 11:00 AM

Eastern Standard Time, , Friday, May 19, 2017. BOTH MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE CLOSING DATE AND TIME. Facsimile submission of proposals will not be accepted.

Proposals sent via US Postal Service or Commercial Carrier (i.e., FedEx, UPS, DHL, etc.) shall be addressed to the Contracting Officer, Ms. Margaret K. Ross and mailed to:

DLA DISTRIBUTION

ATTN: MARGARET K. ROSS

ACQUISITION OPERATIONS (J7)

430 MIFFLIN AVE, SUITE 3102A

NEW CUMBERLAND, PA 17070-5008

If the offeror plans to hand deliver the proposal, they shall contact the Acquisition Specialist via e-mail (kimberly.sprenkle@dla.mil) at least one (1) business day in advance to coordinate the proposal delivery.

3. The packaging of the proposals must be clearly marked with the Offeror’s Name, solicitation number, and the following statement:

“FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY -- SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - SEE FAR

2.101 AND FAR 3.104”

All pages of all resumes, and other documents containing PII, shall be marked

“PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION (PII) SAFEGUARD IAW DOD

PRIVACY PROGRAM AND PRIVACY ACT OF 1974”

4. It is expected that there will be adequate competition therefore; certified cost and price data may not be required. However, if at a later time it is determined that such data is required, the KO reserves the right to require additional detailed cost data in accordance with FAR 52.215-20, and request an audit as determined necessary by the KO.

5. If an offeror has questions regarding this solicitation or believes that the requirements in this instruction contain an error or omission, the offeror shall immediately notify the Acquisition Specialist, Kimberly Sprenkle (kimberly.sprenkle@dla.mil) in writing in the format provided in paragraph 1 above. If an offeror believes that the requirements in this instruction are otherwise unsound, the offeror shall immediately notify the KO, Ms. Margaret K. Ross (margaret.ross@dla.mil), in writing with supporting rationale. The offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussions.

6. Submission of a proposal that does not contain all of the items requested may result in elimination from consideration for award.

Proposal Preparation Requirements:

1. Organization/Number of Copies/Page Limits: The offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization Table below. The titles and contents and number of copies required for each volume are defined in this table. Proposals shall be submitted as four (4) separate volumes as follows:

VOLUME TITLE

PAPER

COPIES

ELECTRONIC

ZIPPED FILES

SUBMITTED

VIA EMAIL

PAGE

LIMITATION

I Solicitation, Offer and Award Document (SF-1449) 1 1 N/A Section 1: Cover Letter and Section A (SF-1449) Section 2: Section B (Supplies or Services and

Prices/Costs)

Section 3: Offeror Representation and Certifications – Commercial Items

II Past Performance Proposal 1 1 N/A III Technical Proposal 3 1 N/A

Section 1: Management Approach Sub-Section 1.1: Management Plan Sub-Section 1.2: Staffing Plan Section 2: Technical Capability Sub-Section 2.1: Technical Approach Sub-Section 2.2: Quality Control Plan

IV Price Proposal 1 1 N/A

1. Each section/subsection of the proposal corresponds to the factors and subfactors that will be evaluated as described in Section M of the RFP.

2. Cross-Referencing: To the greatest extent possible, each volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated with the minimum of cross-referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Information required for proposal evaluation which is not found in its designated volume will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal. Cross-referencing within a proposal volume is permitted where its use would conserve space without impairing clarity.

3. Indexing: Each volume shall contain a more detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. The detailed table of contents is not part of or included in the page limitation. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections.

4. Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms: Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, with an explanation of each.

5. Page Size and Format:

a. The offeror’s proposal shall be prepared on standard 8.5 x 11 inch paper and submitted in three-ring binders. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document and chart labels, the text size shall be no less than 10 point font. Use at least 1-inch margins on the top and bottom and ¾ inch side margins.

Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume.

b. Legible tables, charts, graphs and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. These displays shall not exceed 11 X 17 inches in size. Foldout pages shall fold entirely within the volume, and may only be used for large tables, charts graphs, diagrams and schematics.

c. The footer of each page submitted by the Offerors shall be marked ‘SOURCE

SELECTION INFORMATION – SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104

6. Binding and Labeling: Each volume of the proposal shall be separately bound in a three-ring loose-leaf binder which shall permit the volume to lie flat when open. Staples shall not be used. A cover sheet should be bound in each book, clearly marked as to volume number, title, copy number, solicitation identification and the offeror’s name. Offerors are advised to apply all appropriate markings including those prescribed in FAR 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection and Marking of Contractor Bid or Proposal Information and Source Selection Information.

7. Electronic Proposal Submission Instructions: An electronic version of the proposal is required and shall be submitted to the Acquisition Specialist at Kimberly.sprenkle@dla.mil.

a. Each volume of the proposal shall be submitted as a separate electronic file.

b. The total electronic file (Volumes I thru IV) size shall not exceed 15MB.

c. The subject line of each email shall clearly state the offeror’s name, solicitation number, date of submission and the proposal volume (name and number).

d. As stated in Paragraph 2 under Communications Between the Government and

Offerors, An electronic and hard copy of the proposal is required. If there are any discrepancies between the electronic version and the hardcopy version submitted in response to this RFP, the hardcopy (paper) version will be considered binding.

In accordance with FAR 15.208 Submission, Modification, Revision, and Withdrawal of Proposals, Offerors are reminded that:

(a) Offerors are responsible for submitting proposals, and any revisions, and modifications, so as to reach the Government office designated in the solicitation by the time specified in the solicitation. Offerors may use any transmission method authorized by the solicitation (i.e., regular mail, electronic commerce, or facsimile). If no time is specified in the solicitation, the time for receipt is 4:30 p.m., local time, for the designated Government office on the date that proposals are due.

(b)

(1) Any proposal, modification, or revision, that is received at the designated Government office after the exact time specified for receipt of proposals is “late” and will not be considered unless it is received before award is made, the contracting officer determines that accepting the late proposal would not unduly delay the acquisition; and—

(i) If it was transmitted through an electronic commerce method authorized by the solicitation, it was received at the initial point of entry to the Government infrastructure not later than 5:00 p.m. one working day prior to the date specified for receipt of proposals; or

(ii) There is acceptable evidence to establish that it was received at the Government installation designated for receipt of proposals and was under the Government’s control prior to the time set for receipt of proposals;

8 . Distribution:

a. The original hard copy of the proposal shall be clearly identified as the “ORIGINAL”, and bear the original signature(s) of the offeror. The “copies”, if required, shall be complete and clearly identified as “COPY” or “DUPLICATE”. Offerors are advised that the proposal is “For Official Use Only” and are considered “Source Selection Information” – See FAR 2.101 & 3.104 and should be marked accordingly.

b. An electronic version of the proposal for each Volume shall be submitted to the Acquisition Specialist at Kimberly.sprenkle@dla.mil. See Paragraph 7. above.

9. Table of Contents: A master table of contents for the entire proposal and a table of contents for each volume are required. The master table of contents for the entire proposal should be filed in Volume I.

VOLUME I - SOLICITATION, OFFER AND AWARD DOCUMENTS

SECTION 1: COVER LETTER AND SECTION A (SF-1449)

The Cover Letter shall include the contractor’s full company name and address, CAGE Code, and DUNS Number, Official points of contacts and their contact information including telephone numbers and email addresses.

If the Offeror makes any qualifications to any provisions in the RFP, all such qualifications shall be listed in a cover letter to the proposal. Qualifications may also be annotated on the Solicitation, Offer and Award document, if such annotation is necessary to clarify the qualifications.

The SF-1449 included in this RFP may be used as part of the contract award document. Offerors shall fully complete, execute and return the SF-1449 as part of this Volume. Special attention should be taken to ensure that an authorized Contractor Representative signs the offer in Block 17.

Offerors must acknowledge any amendments to the solicitation by completing Block 14 of the SF-1449.

SECTION 2: SECTION B (SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS)

Section B shall contain the proposed amount for each CLIN, the total for all the CLINS for each respective year, and shall be consistent with the Offeror’s price proposal. The unit prices shall not be carried out past two decimal points.

SECTION 3: OFFEROR REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS – COMMERCIAL

ITEMS

By the proposal submission, the Offeror is representing the firm will perform all the requirements specified in the solicitation. Restating the PWS requirements is unacceptable and may be grounds for determining the proposal unacceptable and removal from the competitive range.

The Offeror shall address each representation and certification required by this solicitation under the section entitled Offeror Representations and Certifications -- Commercial Items.

The Offeror shall provide verification that the Offeror has a Defense Security Service (DSS) approved facility clearance.

VOLUME II – PAST PERFORMANCE PROPOSAL

The Offeror shall provide information on its Past Performance Record. This information will be utilized to determine the relevancy and quality of the Offeror’s past performance record to the proposed effort as outlined in the Statement of Work (SOW) and the level of confidence the Government has for successful performance based upon the Offeror’s actions under previously awarded, relevant contracts.

The Offeror shall identify its most relevant contracts or efforts within the past five (5) years, and provide any other information the Offeror considers relevant to the requirements of the solicitation. The Government recommends submission of five (5) contracts, but will evaluate all past performance submissions. Offerors shall provide a detailed explanation of the relevance of the contracts or efforts to the requirements as stated in Attachment 1 SOW of the solicitation. If major subcontractor (defined as those providing twenty percent (20%) of total dollar threshold AND/OR twenty-five percent (25%) of total man-hour effort) experience is provided as part of the past performance references, it will be given weight relative to the percentage of effort being provided by that particular subcontractor in the offer submitted. The references will be evaluated in the aggregate in order to allow Offerors who may not have the entire scope, magnitude, and complexity of the requirement under one individual contract to still be considered relevant if experience with the full scope, magnitude, and complexity of the requirement can be demonstrated within the allotted number of references as described above.

If an Offeror or its major subcontractor(s) determines they have no relevant past performance data, they shall provide the following statement in lieu of the information request below: “(Insert Offeror or major subcontractor’s name) has determined that they possess no relevant past performance information IAW the RFP”.

To be compliant with Factor 1, Past Performance Record, Offerors shall provide the following information for both the Offeror and proposed major subcontractors. The Offeror shall submit the information in separate, tabbed sections (1), (2), (3), (4), and (5), as outlined below.

(1) An index of Previous Contract Data for the Offeror. The index shall contain all relevant PRIME contracts and relevant SUBCONTRACTS that the Offeror is currently performing or has completed during the last five (5) years. The index shall include:

– Contractor Name;

– Name of the customer /agency;

– Contract/Purchase Order Number;

– Customer points of contact (minimum of two (2), provide name, telephone number, fax number and e-mail addresses);

– Length of contract;

– Period of performance (dates);

– Initial Contract Price;

– Final Contract Price or price as of the last modification;

– Description of product/service provided (include sufficient detail to demonstrate the scope, complexity, and magnitude of the product/service provided);

– Discussion of the similarities and differences of experience (include sufficient detail to demonstrate similarities/dissimilarities to the requirements of this solicitation);

– Facilities in which the product/service was performed and;

– Quality of Past Performance; to include a discussion of actual performance under each contract listed, including problems encountered; how they were resolved; the timeliness of deliverables required;

how costs were controlled; business relationships; management of key personnel, and any other areas deemed necessary to provide insight into actual performance issues.

(2) A narrative synopsis that shall describe the specific nature of the work, similarities with the proposed work and the relevant experience gained. The narrative portion shall also indicate any occurrence of cost growth and/or schedule delays encountered. The appearance of growths and/or schedule delays on past contracts must be explained.

(3) An index of Previous Contract Data for all major subcontractors containing the information listed in

(1) above as it relates to relevant PRIME and SUBCONTRACTS that the major subcontractor is currently performing or has completed during the last five (5) years.

(4) Attachment four (4) Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ). Offerors and all major subcontractors shall send this questionnaire to previous customers of relevant prime and subcontracts. All questionnaires shall be sent by the proposal due date and time identified in the Addenda to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors -- Commercial Items. All previous contracts the Offeror utilizes for Questionnaire information must be contained in the Previous Contract Data index for the Offeror/major subcontractor. The Offeror/major subcontractor shall complete Part IV of Attachment 2 prior to submitting the questionnaire to the customer. The Offeror/major subcontractor shall ask the customer to complete the questionnaire and return it directly to the Acquisition Specialist identified in Part I – RETURN INFORMATION of the questionnaire. Evaluation members may contact the named individuals to clarify, obtain additional information, or conduct a telephonic survey of present/past performance. As such, the Offeror/subcontractor shall provide a list of all Questionnaires submitted that provides the following information:

– Name of the customer/agency;

– Date submitted to customer/agency;

– Contract/Purchase Order Number

– Customer points of contact (minimum of two (2), provide name, telephone number, fax number and e-mail addresses) and;

– Whether the offeror/major subcontractor was a Prime or Subcontractor.

(5) Offerors and their subcontractors may describe any quality awards or certifications that indicate technical excellence in the service requested. Examples of such awards or certifications include, the Malcolm Aldridge Quality Award, other Government quality awards, and private sector awards or certifications (e.g. the automobile industries QS 9000, Semitic’s SSQA, or ANS/EIA-599). Indicate what segment of the company (or division or the entire company) received the award or certification and the date. If the award or certification is over three years old, present evidence the qualifications still apply.

The Government may utilize the Federal Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining Officials;

responses received from the Performance Risk Assessment Questionnaire; and the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) to determine the quality and relevance of the Offeror’s past performance.

VOLUME III – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

The Technical Proposal must be succinct, well written, and presented in a clear straightforward manner that clearly demonstrates the relationship of the processes to the resources (e.g., personnel, equipment, supplies and materials, and services) and a complete understanding of the requirements. Statements such as “The Offeror understands,” “will comply with the performance work statement,” standard procedures will be employed”, “well known techniques will be used”, and general paraphrasing of the SOW are considered inadequate.

Section 1: Management Approach

The Offeror shall describe in detail each of the following items in their proposal.

Section 1.1: Management Plan

a. The Offeror’s overarching management methodology and how that methodology will translate into successful contract performance.

b. The Offeror’s overarching management approach to ensuring they can meet all Government requirements for the entire contract period. This discussion should address the Offerer’s approach to managing multiple task orders at the same time.

c. The interrelationships of the technical, on-site team and the business management. All interfaces with the Government must be clearly delineated.

d. The organizational structure, policies, procedures, and techniques for efficiently managing the work.

e. The organizational layout for this contract. The Offeror shall provide an organizational chart specific to this effort, identifying all skill set positions by title.

Section 1.2: Staffing Plan

The Offeror shall provide a detailed description of their approach to obtain, maintain and organize personnel and resources. To be compliant, the Offeror must address the following items in their proposal.

a. A detailed description of the standardized processes and procedures they will implement and how those processes and procedures will result in successful staffing of each individual task order by the specified start date.

b. Offeror’s staffing approach to execute all SOW requirements, which include both recurring and non-recurring services, and demonstrate the effective and efficient use of personnel and adequate supervision for tasks to be performed.

c. A detailed description of their approach for recruiting and hiring qualified personnel which includes possessing the requisite knowledge, skills, abilities, and applicable licenses and certifications in accordance with the SOWand how the Offeror plans to retain those personnel and prevent a high turn-over rate.

d. The offeror shall provide resumes for all personnel as stated in the SOW. Offerors shall respond to the separate requirements for each personnel labor category for experience. All personnel resumes shall include a description of past experience and accomplishments.

e. ALL RESUMES MUST BE MARKED PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION (PII). Resumes shall be no longer than three (3) pages in length. Resumes shall include, as a minimum, the employee’s training and specific experiences directly related to the requirements in the SOW and shall clearly describe the relationship between the proposed individual’s relevant qualifications and the tasks to be performed by the individual.

f. All proposed personnel shall either be current employees of the Offeror or have current letters of intent (LOI) in the proposal, and otherwise comply with the requirements for personnel.

g. The Offeror shall address their approach to completion of all pre-employment requirements, to include base access and security clearance, IT III eligible, possess Common Access Cards (CAC), if required, and have completed favorable background checks prior to the start of the Task Order start date.

h. A detailed description of their approach for training personnel in accordance with the SOW.

Section 2: Technical Capability

Section 2.1: Technical Approach

The Offeror shall submit a detailed description of their technical approach to perform each task in the SOW. The Offeror’s technical approach must demonstrate an understanding of the requirements in the SOW and the ability to perform all performance tasks and objectives listed in the SOW while maintaining quality and timeliness. This cannot be a mere summary of the requirements stated in the SOW, but rather the Offeror’s detailed approach to performing the requirements that clearly demonstrates his understanding of that work. The approach shall also address as a minimum the Offeror’s:

a. Knowledge of the content of the work in terms of constituent activities, their inputs and outputs, and their interrelationships and interdependencies.

b. Recognition of the appropriate sequence and realistic duration of the work activities.

c. Familiarity with difficulties and uncertainties associated with the work.

d. Discussion of potential problems, such as increasing utilization and present strategies dealing with them.

Section 2.2: Quality Control Approach

The Offeror shall describe in detail their Quality Control approach, including policies and procedures, that will be implemented to assure successful contract performance. The Offeror shall provide an overview of their Quality Control approach, policies, quality control methodology, processes, procedures, techniques, and tool(s) that will be used to meet or exceed the performance requirements in the contract for quality and timeliness while adhering to the SOW and mitigating risk to sustain Audit Readiness compliance.

The overview shall address the methods for meeting performance quality and timeliness standards, customer requirements, and complying with applicable regulations.

Volume IV: Price Proposal

1. The Offeror’s Price Proposal shall be submitted for the period of performance in accordance with the Schedule of Supplies/Services CLIN structure of the solicitation. The offeror shall provide the total price for each yearand the total total estimated contract price.

2. Prices will be evaluated for price reasonableness; therefore a complete and detailed price breakdown as described herein with all supporting documentation shall be provided:

(a) The fully-burdened direct rates for the labor categories found in the Performance Work Statement;

(b) The fringe and overhead rates, including how they are applied to the direct labor;

(c) The G&A rates;

(d) Any other indirect rates applicable to the offeror’s price proposal;

(e) Any fee, if applied.

3. The Offeror’s Price Proposal shall include a “Total Compensation Plan” in accordance with FAR

52.222-46 as part of their Price narrative and for any major subcontractors proposed, to include salaries and fringe benefits.

4. Any and all subcontracts identified in the Non-price proposal shall be identified and priced in the Price proposal. Subcontracts (regardless of dollar value) shall be adequately documented.

Subcontractor Price breakdowns may be submitted in separate sealed envelopes.

5. The Government does not anticipate nor require more than forty (40) hours per week, per full time equivalent (FTE).

6. The offeror shall include the information required for the price proposal, in table format, as indicated below.

7. The Offeror shall provide proposal pricing worksheets which show the formulas used to calculate their labor rates and estimated travel costs in an EXCEL file.

CLIN 0001 PROFESSIONAL SUPPORT SERVICES LABOR

CLIN 0001 - YEAR ONE

Labor Category

Estimated Number of

Hours

Fully Burdened

Hourly Rate

Subtotal Labor (Number of Hours * Burdened Base Rate)

Program Manager (Key) 600 Senior Project Manager (Key) 2000 Project Manager 10000 Business Systems Analyst II 16000 Supply Systems Analyst 2000

Functional Analyst Jr. 2000

Functional Analyst Mid-Level 2000 Functional Analyst Senior 22000 Technical Writer/Editor 2000 Industrial Engineer 4000 Logistics Management Specialist/Logistics Specialist Lead 2000

Graphic Artist/Media Designer 2000 Total Labor for all

Categories:

CLIN 0001 - YEAR TWO

Number of

Hours

Fully Burdened

Hourly Rate

Subtotal Labor (Number of Hours * Burdened Base Rate)

Program Manager (Key) 600 Senior Project Manager (Key) 2000 Project Manager 10000 Business Systems Analyst II 16000 Supply Systems Analyst 2000

Functional Analyst Jr. 2000

Functional Analyst Mid-Level 2000 Functional Analyst Senior 22000 Technical Writer/Editor 2000 Industrial Engineer 4000 Logistics Management

CLIN 0001 - YEAR THREE

Number of

Hours

Fully Burdened

Hourly Rate

Subtotal Labor (Number of Hours * Burdened Base Rate)

Program Manager (Key) 600 Senior Project Manager (Key) 2000 Project Manager 10000 Business Systems Analyst II 16000 Supply Systems Analyst 2000

Functional Analyst Jr. 2000

Functional Analyst Mid-Level 2000 Functional Analyst Senior 22000 Technical Writer/Editor 2000 Industrial Engineer 4000 Logistics Management

CLIN 0002 – TRAVEL COSTS IN SUPPORT OF 0001 (COST REIMBURSEMENT)

The offeror shall include the information for their proposed costs, in table format, as indicated below.

1. Offerors shall identify the specific “Applicable Indirect Rate” (G&A rate, Material Handling Rate, or other Indirect Rate supported by the offeror’s accounting system) applied to the Government Provided Estimated Travel Cost for each year.

2. Offerors shall calculate the proposed indirect costs supported by the offeror’s accounting system for each year as shown by the formula below:

Government Provided Estimated Travel Cost X Applicable Indirect Rate = Offeror Proposed Indirect Costs.

3. Offerors shall sum the Government Provided Estimated Travel Cost and their proposed indirect costs to arrive at the proposed NTE amount in the last column. No fee is allowed under this

CLIN.

CLIN X002 Government Provided Estimated Travel Cost

Applicable Indirect Rate

(Offeror to identify)

Offeror Proposed Indirect Costs

Not-to-Exceed Total Contract Cost

YEAR ONE (1) $75,000.00

YEAR TWO (2) $75,000.00

YEAR THREE (3) $75,000.00

TASK ORDER ONE

(0001) $75,000.00

OFFEROR TOTAL ESTIMATED CONTRACT PRICE – (CLINS 0001 AND 0002) YEARS ONE,

TWO, AND THREE

The Offeror’s CLIN totals must match those entered in Section B and in the Price Proposal Summary Table shown below.

ITEM

YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3

TOTAL

ESTIMATED

CONTRACT

PRICE

CLIN X001

Professional Support Services Labor (FFP)

CLIN X002

Travel Costs for X001 (Total NTE, inclusive of proposed Indirect Rate) (CR)

TOTAL ESTIMATED CONTRACT PRICE

Evaluation Factors for Award

FAR 52.212-2 -- Evaluation -- Commercial Items (OCT 2014)

1. Evaluation Approach

The Government intends to award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible Offeror whose offer conforms to the solicitation and will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered, using the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) source selection procedures in accordance with FAR 15.101-2, as supplemented. Proposals shall be evaluated for acceptability or unacceptability only and shall not be rated. Offerors must be determined to be responsible according to the standards of FAR Subpart 9 to be eligible for award. Award will be based on the lowest evaluated price of proposal meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for the non-price factors. Any Offeror who has submitted a technically acceptable proposal and who has been found to have an acceptable past performance will then have the proposal evaluated for the lowest price.

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the Offeror's initial proposal should contain the offeror's best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined necessary by the Contracting Officer.

Factors 1 through 4 shall be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv), Past Performance Evaluation). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance.

In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” past performance shall be considered “acceptable.”

A proposal is considered acceptable for award if it (i) addresses itself to all the essential requirements of the RFP, (ii) shows the offeror understands all essential requirements of the RFP, and has demonstrated a full capability to perform the prospective requirements, (iii) offers a feasible technical approach, and (iv) although some discussion of the proposal may be desirable, the proposal is complete to the extent that an award could be made on its present terms. A proposal must have an “acceptable” determination on all factors and subfactors to be determined “acceptable for award.”

A proposal will be considered unacceptable for award if award cannot be made on the present terms of the proposal, and corrective action would require essentially rewriting the proposal or require the submission of an approach which would be new or almost entirely different from that previously proposed. A major item and/or gross omission which precludes meeting solicitation objectives that cannot be corrected prior to or during discussions without major revision or complete resubmission of the proposal will cause a proposal to be found unacceptable. If any factors or subfactors are determined to be “unacceptable,” the proposal will be deemed “unacceptable for award.”

An “Unacceptable” determination on the one (1) or more of the nonprice factors Factors 1 - 4 will render the proposal ineligible for award, or if discussions are held, a proposal found to be “unacceptable for award” (as defined above) may be excluded from the competitive range. A determination of “Unacceptable” on any subfactor will result in a determination of “Unacceptable” at the factor level. An initial determination of "Unacceptable" in the Past Performance Factor (Factor 1) will not automatically eliminate an offeror from award eligibility or the competitive range, but may be considered in making the competitive range determination if communications have been conducted pursuant to FAR 15.306(b)(1)(i), Communications with offerors before the establishment of the competitive range.

Communications shall be held with offerors whose past performance information is the determining factor keeping them from being placed within the competitive range, if the communications are necessary, to allow them to address adverse past performance information to which the offeror(s) had not had a prior opportunity to respond.

It is the intention of the Government to award without discussions; however, if it is determined that discussions are required, then the determination of the competitive range will include all proposals which are considered to be the most highly rated offers that have a reasonable chance of being selected for award, unless the competitive range is further limited in accordance with FAR 15.306(c)(2), Competitive Range.

Those offerors whose proposals are determined by the KO to be in the competitive range will be contacted by the Acquisition Specialist for discussions. Discussions will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.306(d), Exchanges with offerors after the establishment of the competitive range. If verbal discussions are held, they will be followed by a written reiteration of the discussion. Written discussions may also be held, whereby the Government provides a written list of discussion questions to each offeror, as appropriate. In the case of both verbal and written discussions, the offeror will provide a written response to each discussion question and revision to the proposal as required. This response and revision (if required) will be marked accordingly to distinguish it as a supplement to their original proposal. More than one (1) round of discussions may be held. At the conclusion of final discussions, the Government will request each offeror in the competitive range to submit a FPR. A common cut-off-date for submission of FPRs will be established by the KO in accordance with FAR 15.307(b), Proposal Revisions. In the event further discussions are required after receipt of the FPRs, the KO may reopen discussions and offerors will be required to submit another FPR.

The FPR will be evaluated as to its revised technical, past performance, and/or price approach in response to the issues identified during discussions. After each round of discussions and the FPR, the appropriate evaluation committee will perform an evaluation of the responses. A consensus meeting will be held to revise any subfactor and/or factor acceptability determination. The Chairperson will then document the file via a revised report. All members who concur will sign the report. If approval is not unanimous, a minority report(s) shall be submitted to the SSA, via the Chairperson, by the dissenting member(s).

If discussions are held, in accordance with FAR 15.306(d), Exchanges with offerors after the establishment of the competitive range, a proposal will be determined “unacceptable” for award if any of the non-price factors are rated as “Unacceptable” following evaluation of FPRs.

2. Basis for Contract Award The award of a contract as a result of this solicitation will be made to the responsible offeror using lowest price technically acceptable (LPTA) source selection procedures in accordance with FAR 15.101-2 as supplemented. Technical trade-offs will not be made and no additional credit will be given for exceeding acceptability. Award will be made to the technically acceptable offeror with the lowest evaluated price, who is deemed responsible in accordance with the FAR, and whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements. The requirements include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications and all other requirements of this solicitation.

Proposals will be evaluated for acceptability or unacceptability only and shall not be rated. Award will be made to the lowest evaluated price proposal that meets or exceeds the acceptability standards for the non-price factors. Any offeror who has submitted a technically acceptable proposal and who has been found to have acceptable past performance will then have the proposal evaluated for lowest price.

In addition, in order to be acceptable for award, the apparent successful Offeror will be required to have a Defense Security Service (DSS) approved facility clearance prior to beginning work on the contract.

Prior to contract award, the DLA Distribution Contracting Officer shall verify that the apparent successful Offeror possesses a DSS approved facility clearance. If it cannot be determined that the apparent successful Offeror possesses a DSS approved facility clearance, the Offeror will not be acceptable for award.

3. Evaluation Factors The Government will use the following non-price factors to determine acceptability of a proposal:

Factor 1: Past Performance Proposal

Factor 2: Management Approach Subfactor (a) Management Plan Subfactor (b) Staffing Plan

Factor 3: Technical Capability Subfactor (a) Technical Approach Subfactor (b) Quality Control Plan

Factor 1: Past Performance

The Offeror's proposal will be evaluated on the demonstrated experience, within the past five (5) years, in performing the same or similar tasks as set forth in the PWS. To be considered relevant, the Offeror must demonstrate past execution of similar contracts in terms of complexity, magnitude of effort, and scope.

The Government may utilize the Federal Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining Officials;

responses received from the Performance Risk Assessment Questionnaire; and the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) to determine the quality and relevance of the Offeror’s past performance.

Each proposal will be evaluated to the extent to which the Offeror has demonstrated an ability and willingness to perform: 1) A quality product or service (i.e.