OID_Tables_-_Amendment_5.pdf

Solicitation TIRNO-17-R-00009 Original Issue Discount Tables Amendment 5 May 19, 2017

The purpose of this amendment is to add the

(1.) Proposal Preparation Instructions (2.) Evaluation Instructions, Factors and Rating definitions.

PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

Each offeror’s proposal shall include a technical proposal including past performance references, and a business proposal as addressed below.

TECHNICAL PROPOSAL AND PAST PERFORMANCE REFERENCES

TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

The offeror’s technical proposal shall include the offeror’s technical response to the requirements of solicitation TIRNO-17-R-00009. No pricing data shall be submitted in the technical portion of the proposal.

Simple statements by offeror’s attesting to their understanding and compliance with all technical requirements or paraphrasing such requirements will not be deemed adequate and will cause an offeror to be rejected as technically unacceptable. The proposal shall clearly demonstrate how the requirements in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) at number three and all sub-sections (3 – 3.7) of the specifications will be met.

PAST PERFORMANCE

(1) Each offeror is requested to provide past performance references regarding at least three but no more than five currently active or contracts completed after January 1, 2012 that demonstrate that the offeror has performed requirements similar to those contained in the (PWS) of solicitation TIRNO-17-R-00009. Past performance data should include examples that clearly illustrate performance of all aspects of the evaluation factors noted in this amendment. The past performance information submitted by each offeror should include past performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to the requirement identified in the PWS contained in solicitation TIRNO-17-R-00009. Each past performance reference submitted should include the following information:

a. Name of the Government agency (including Federal, state or local government) or commercial entity including the point of contact’s name, title, address, and telephone number;

b. Contract type (fixed-price, time and materials, etc.);

c. Contract number or other identifier issued by the client organization;

d. Initial dollar amount of the contract;

e. Actual annual sales volume under the contract;

f. Beginning and ending dates of the period of performance. If options were not exercised, explain why the options were not exercised;

g. A brief description of the work performed for each reference. The description shall demonstrate the relevance of each reference to the evaluation factors identified in Evaluation Factors for Award.

(2) Offeror’s shall provide information on problems encountered on the contracts submitted in response to (b) above, and the offeror’s corrective actions in response to those problems.

(3) If an offeror is unable to provide, or has no relevant past experience with a commercial or Government entity, the offeror shall provide a statement to that effect in the Past Performance section of the offeror’s proposal.

BUSINESS PROPOSAL

(a) The business proposal shall include pricing information submitted by the offeror by completing SF 1449, Solicitation/Contract/Order for Commercial Items. Pricing information submitted by the offeror shall include a complete description of the pricing assumptions underlying the pricing data submitted in SF 1449 of the proposal.

The pricing information should describe the major elements of price or cost included in each contract line item number (CLIN). Detailed cost information is not requested.

(b) For every instance where the offeror does not propose to comply with or agree to a requirement, the offeror shall propose an alternative and describe its reasoning therefore.

EXCEPTIONS

The offeror shall identify all exceptions the offeror takes to the technical requirements of the RFP and all deviations from the RFP for which the offeror requests approval.

52.212-2 Evaluation— Commercial Items.

As prescribed in 12.301(c), the Contracting Officer may insert a provision substantially as follows:

EVALUATION—COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014)

(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

EVALUATION METHOD

The evaluation method to be used for the purpose of proposal evaluation is listed below.

A. Technical

The Government will evaluate the below technical factors. The factors are listed in the order of importance. The relative importance of each is identified within the factor. The factors, when combined, are significantly more important than price.

Factor 1 - Method of Accomplishment

The offeror must provide the results of the random sample test (Attachment B of solicitation) that demonstrates the overall accuracy of the software it will use to calculate OID. The offeror will be evaluated on the documentation provided that describes how the offered software meets the specifications provided in the Performance Work Statement (PWS), including quality assurance. The random sample test results will be evaluated and compared to the calendar year amounts calculated by the IRS. The offeror will also be evaluated on the schedule provided detailing the OID for the life of the bond to demonstrate that its software program meets the accuracy standards noted below.

(1.) The software program used by the Contractor shall produce overall OID figures accurate within +/- $0.10.

(2.) The text or tabular material produced for Publication 1212 shall be 100% typographically correct.

The offeror must demonstrate an understanding of the specific tasks and objectives of the project, proposed plan of accomplishing the requirements of the contract, and the ability to complete the project while adhering to the requirements. Tasks include understanding the project, its objective, and methodology, and the schedule of https://www.acquisition.gov/sites/default/files/current/far/html/Subpart%2012_3.html%23wp1084399 milestones and deliverables. Offeror will be evaluated on its detailed procedures that demonstrate how it proposes to attain the highest degree of accuracy.

Factor 2 - Capabilities and Experience

The offeror must show successful completion of similar projects within the last three

(3) years. The offeror’s previous experience will be evaluated to determine the similarity to the requirements in Paragraph three and its sub-sections (3 – 3.7) of the solicitation. The Government will attribute more significance to similar work and the related number of projects. Each project should demonstrate the offeror’s ability to accumulate, calculate, and produce OID or similar financial information. These projects should have involved developing and/or manipulating financial-based databases from a variety of sources, perfecting and implementing validity procedures, maintaining a recognized audit trail, and delivering a usable product under tight deadlines. The Government will attribute more significance to work that was similar in nature, magnitude, or complexity to the work that will be required by the contract described in this solicitation.

Offeror’s computer hardware and software capability, programming expertise to operate the program, and the ability of the offeror’s computer system must be transferable and/or readable by the IRS’ IBM compatible personal computers.

Factor 3 - Staffing Plan

The offeror must demonstrate that the proposed Project Manager is qualified and experienced to perform the requirements of the PWS. The Project Manager must have at least two (2) years of experience/expertise projects involving financial computations similar in magnitude and complexity to this project.

The offeror must provide a plan for ensuring sufficient, experienced, and otherwise qualified personnel are available to perform services required by the contract.

Factor 4 - Past Performance

1. An offeror’s past performance will be evaluated as an indicator of an offeror’s ability to perform the contract successfully. The evaluation of performance is a subjective assessment of how well each offeror has satisfied its customers in the past. It will not be based on absolute standards of performance. The Government reserves the right to consider all aspects of an offeror’s performance history. Of equal importance in evaluating the quality of an offeror’s performance is:

(a) Quality of Service: confirming to the contract requirements and standards of good workmanship.

(b) Cost Control: the contractor’s adherence to budget estimates.

(c) Timeliness: the contractor’s adherence to schedules including the administrative aspects of performance.

2. Offerors without a record of recent and relevant performance or for whom information on performance is not available will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorable on quality of past performance and as a result, will receive a “neutral/unknown confidence” rating.

3. The offeror must provide at least two (2) examples of past performance. These examples must include the following:

(a) Project name and contract number

(b) Organization/Government Agency

(c) Point of contact name, telephone number, fax number and email address

B. Price

A price evaluation of the total price proposed will be evaluated for price reasonableness. The offeror’s total price shall include the price for the base and all option years. Adequate price competition will normally determine price reasonableness; however, other techniques may be used to ensure a realistic, fair, and reasonable price. Price evaluation will not be assigned a numerical weight, point score, or adjectival rating.

C. Scoring Guidelines

The following adjectival ratings and associated scores will be used in this evaluation.

Rating Description

Outstanding

Proposal meets all stated requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal does not take issue with or ignore material terms and conditions and presents no foreseeable or identifiable risk of failure during contract performance. The proposal is complete in terms of basic content and level of information sought by the Government for evaluation and complies materially with the proposal preparation instruction in the RFP. The proposal contains no deficiencies or significant weaknesses or excesses.

Excellent

Proposal meets all stated requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal does not take issue with or ignore material terms and conditions and presents little foreseeable or identifiable risk of failure during contract performance. The proposal is complete in terms of basic content and level of information sought by the Government for evaluation and complies materially with the proposal

***Random Sample Test: Attachment B reference is corrected to read as underlined.

Perform the calculations to arrive at the daily OID per $1,000 for the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd periods of 2006, and the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd periods of 2007. Prepare a table based on the format for Paragraph 4.5 (b) Section I-B and insert all the appropriate data for each column.

If you would like to submit a revised proposal please submit to Juanita.L.Winbush@irs.gov and Lisa.S.Martin@irs.gov by noon 12:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, Wednesday, May 31, 2017.

preparation instructions in the RFP. The proposal contains no deficiencies or significant weaknesses or excesses.

Acceptable

Proposal meets all stated requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal does not take issue with or ignore material terms and conditions and presents a moderate risk of failure or significant problems during contract performance. The proposal is complete in terms of basic content and level of information sought by the Government for evaluation and complies materially with the proposal preparation instructions in the RFP. The proposal contains no deficiencies or significant weaknesses or excesses except those that are minor and easily correctable and falls under FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv) – “In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance for whom information on a past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorable on past performance.

Marginal

Proposal fails to make clear that it meets all stated requirements and presents severe risk of failure or significant problems during contract performance.

Proposal is inadequate in terms of the basic content and level of understanding the Government seeks for evaluation and contains deficiencies and significant weaknesses which appear to be susceptible of correction through discussions or any combination of the above.

Unacceptable

Proposal fails to meet the stated requirements and lacks essential information or is conflicting or unclear or any combination of these three. The proposal presents an almost certain risk of failure or significant problems during contract performance and contains deficiencies which do not appear to be susceptible of correction through exchanges, including discussions or any combination of the above.

mailto:Juanita.L.Winbush@irs.gov mailto:Lisa.S.Martin@irs.gov

52.212-2 Evaluation— Commercial Items.