W564KV-18-R-0001-00001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this solicitation amendment is as follow s:

A. To provide the answ ers to the questions submitted by vendors.

B. To update the Addendums to 52.212-1 and 52.212-2.

C. To update the PWS, Attachment #4, and Attachment #5.

D. To change the Quantity and Unit of Issue for CLIN 0001 from "1 Job" to "9 Months" All other terms and conditions remain unchanged to this solicitation.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 80

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 09-Oct-2018

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X W564KV-18-R-0001

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

24-Aug-2018

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, X is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

09-Oct-2018

CODE

TCC-KAISERSLAUTERN

KLEBER KASERNE MANNHEIMER STRASSE 238

BLDG 3233

67657 KAISERSLAUTERN

GERMANY

W564KV 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W564KV-18-R-0001

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

CLIN 0001

The pricing detail quantity has increased by 8.00 from 1.00 to 9.00.

The unit of issue has changed from Job to Months.

CLIN 0009 is added as follows:

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES MAX

QUANTITY

UNIT UNIT PRICE MAX AMOUNT

0009 1 Job Special Event Guard Services

FFP

Performance of Special Event Guard Services IAW the Performance Work Statement. See Attachment #5 - Price Matrix for ELIN list and pricing.

FOB: Destination

PSC CD: S206

MAX

NET AMT

DELIVERIES AND PERFORMANCE

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0001 has been changed from:

DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

9 mths. ADC 1 INSTALLATION MANAGEMENT

COMMAND EUROPE

RAY KELEDEI

SEMBACH KASERNE, BUILDING 111

67681 SEMBACH HUEBERG

GERMANY

W91P1A

To:

CAGE

9 mths. ADC 9 INSTALLATION MANAGEMENT

COMMAND EUROPE

RAY KELEDEI

SEMBACH KASERNE, BUILDING 111

67681 SEMBACH HUEBERG

GERMANY

W91P1A

The following Delivery Schedule for CLIN 0009 has been added:

CAGE

POP 01-JUN-2019 TO

31-MAY-2024

N/A N/A

INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

The following Acceptance/Inspection Schedule was added for CLIN 0009:

INSPECT AT INSPECT BY ACCEPT AT ACCEPT BY

Destination Government Destination Government

The following have been modified:

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1

Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 - INSTRUCTIONS FOR WRITTEN SUBMITTALS

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

Paragraph (b) of FAR 52.212-1 is supplemented as follows:

(b) Submission of Offers. The following instructions are provided to offerors to ensure sufficient information necessary for the Government to fully understand and evaluate the proposal. The Government intends to award a single Firm Fixed-Price (FFP) Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) type contract for this requirement.

1. General.

a. A representative of the firm authorized to commit the firm to contractual obligations must sign the offeror’s proposal.

b. All proposals, questions, and correspondence, SHALL BE submitted in the ENGLISH language. Offers submitted in a language other than English will not be evaluated.

c. All pricing shall be submitted in EUROS only. Offers submitted in a currency other than EUROS will not be evaluated.

d. The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited.

e. The Government will evaluate the proposal using only the information provided with the proposal. Failure of an offeror to submit information sufficient to evaluate the offer, or that does not follow the guidelines as stipulated herein, may result in a rating of unacceptable.

f. All proposals shall be valid for at least 240 days from the solicitation due date.

2. Delivery of Proposals. Offerors shall submit its proposal via email to Mr. Edward Sido, Contract Specialist, edward.t.sido.civ@mail.mil, telephone +49-611-143-542- 6885, Mr. Benjamin Kamp, Contract Specialist, benjamin.m.kamp.civ@mail.mil, telephone +49-611-143-542-6862, and Mr. Daniel Cowell, Contracting Officer, daniel.l.cowell2.civ@mail.mil, telephone +49-611-143-542-6907. The subject of the email shall be: “W564KV-18-R-0001 – GWISS Proposal.”

3. Questions Pertaining to the Solicitation. All questions shall be submitted via email to the Contracting Officer and the Contract Specialists, no later than 10 calendar days after completion of site visit. Questions submitted after this date may not be addressed. The subject of the email shall be: “W564KV-18-R-0001 - GWISS Questions.” Questions shall annotate a reference to the specific solicitation element to which they pertain. The Government is not obligated to provide responses to all questions submitted by Offerors, but will consider them and incorporate changes into the RFP as deemed necessary. Government responses to questions will be incorporated via an amendment to the RFP for review by all Offerors; therefore, do not mark questions/comments with a restrictive legend and do not include proprietary information. It is the responsibility of the offeror to access FedBizOpps (www.fbo.gov) to obtain amendments and the most current information regarding this solicitation. Offerors are deemed to have knowledge of all documents that are posted to www.fbo.gov.

4. Detailed Proposal Instructions:

a. Proposals shall include separate electronic files for each volume listed in Section 4 (f). All file names shall include the respective company name, CAGE, DUNS number, document name, and volume number (using abbreviations as necessary). The Offeror shall confine submissions to essential matters sufficient to define the proposal and provide adequate basis for evaluation. All pages of each volume shall be appropriately numbered and identified by the RFP number in the header and/or footer. Company identifying information, including logos and graphics, shall be limited to the cover page only of the submitted Volume II, or as otherwise requested.

b. Proposals shall include a Table of Contents which outlines the contractor’s proposal submission. The submission shall be clearly indexed, logically assembled, and clearly identified. A page, for purposes of this request for proposal, is defined as one side of standard 8 1/2" x 11" sheet of paper, font size (12), 1 inch margin on all sides, single spaced. Tracking, kerning, and leading values shall not be changed from the default values of the word processing or page layout software.

c. Proposal font type shall be Times New Roman, 12-point font. Graphics, photos, and charts may use color; however, offerors are cautioned to use colors that are legible if printed in black and white. Information submitted on charts and graphs may be no smaller than 9-point font; however, the information must be legible.

For ease of reference, consecutive page numbering is requested. Pages without information (blank pages) do not need to be numbered and shall not be reflected in the page count.

d. All information pertaining to a particular volume shall be confined to that volume.

For example, no Price information shall be included in any volume other than the Price volume.

e. Microsoft Excel files submitted shall be unlocked, formula driven, and numbers shall not be hard coded, where applicable. Spreadsheets shall be in Microsoft Excel 2013 compatible format (.xlsx format).

f. Page Limitation: If the page limits are exceeded, the pages in excess of the limit will be removed and not evaluated. The following are excluded from the page limitations: Covers for volumes, tables of contents, glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, indices, title pages, cross reference indexes, and section dividers if they are inserted solely to provide ease to the reader in locating parts/sections of the proposal. Section dividers will be counted if they contain any other material information required for the evaluation of the proposal. Additionally, pages marked “This page intentionally left blank” will not be counted. Page limitations are as follows:

Volume Section Title Page Limit Format

I General Documents No Page limit MS Word; Adobe PDF

II Technical 75 Pages MS Word; Adobe PDF

III Past Performance 20 Pages MS Word; Adobe PDF

IV Price No Page Limit MS Excel (Attachment 5);

Adobe PDF

g. Electronic proposals provided via e-mail shall be submitted in the formats specified above. WINZIP (.zip) files cannot be accepted as they are routinely blocked by the domain firewall. Proposals that are sent in multiple e-mails shall be numbered to include the total sent, for example “2 of 6.”

h. Offers, modifications, revisions, or withdrawals of Offers received after the date established in this RFP for receipt of proposals will be handled in accordance with FAR Clause 52.212-1.

i. It is the Government’s intention to award without discussions. Offerors are encouraged to present their best technical proposal and prices in their initial proposal submission. However, should discussions become necessary, the Government reserves this right. If this occurs, a competitive range may be determined and offerors will be notified.

j. Offeror must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) and have a Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code.

5. Proposal Contents:

Offeror’s proposal shall consist of four separate Volumes as follows:

a. Volume I: General Documents

i. Standard Form (SF) 1449, Solicitation/Contact/Order for Commercial Items. An authorized official of the firm shall sign the SF 1449 and all amendments and certifications requiring original signature. Contractors shall complete blocks 12 (if applicable), 17a, 30a, 30b, and 30c on page 1 of the SF 1449 and blocks 8, 15a, 15b, and 15c on page 1 of any applicable SF 30 amendments. In doing so, the contractor agrees to the contract terms and conditions as written in the solicitation, amendments, and attachments. The SF 1449 shall include all applicable clause fill-ins to include FAR 52.209-7, FAR 52.209-12, FAR 52.212-3, DFARS 252.229-7001 Alt 1, and FAR 52.228-4.

ii. Licenses/Certifications. Offeror shall provide documentation of its capability to perform the required services in Germany. This documentation shall include all necessary licenses/certifications as outlined below in items a. through i. of this section. An offeror that fails to provide proof of the required licenses/certifications at the time of proposal submission may be deemed non-compliant and may not be evaluated or further considered for award. Licenses/certifications issued in a language other than English shall be submitted in both the original format, and with an English translation.

a. A permit under §34a GewO (German Trade Code) which is required for providing commercial security services in Germany. [Note: as of 1 December 2016, a proficiency examination is required for the permit under § 34a GewO.

Existing permits are exempt from that increased requirement.]

b. Documentation of financial capability. / Nachweis der wirtschaftlichen Leistungsfähigkeit.

c. Disclosure from the Federal Central Criminal Register ("Good Conduct Certificate for Government Authorities").

d. Clearance certificate from the business tax office. / Steuerliche Unbedenklichkeitsbescheinigung des Betriebsstättenfinanzamtes.

e. Clearance certificate from the social insurance agencies. / Unbedenklichkeitsbescheinigung der Sozialversicherungsträger.

f. Proof of liability insurance in accordance with § 6 BewachV / Nachweis über den Abschluss einer Haftpflichtversicherung entsprechend § 6 BewachV.

g. A Company Firearm License (CFL -"Firmenwaffenschein") IAW § 28 WaffG (Weapons Law). [Note: because of the geographic dislocation of U.S. Army kasernes/installations in the belonging to any garrison, the contractor shall have the appropriate authorization to transport loaded firearms between installations. Additionally, for every guard carrying a firearm the necessary consent must have been obtained from the competent authority.

h. A permit under §11 (1) 6 TierSchG (Animal Protection Law) to commercially train security dogs for third parties, if the contractor has personnel who trains security dogs for use by other personnel or if the contractor operates dog training facilities.

i. Permits under § 7, 20 Sprengstoffgesetz (Explosives Law) for handling explosives in connection with the use of explosive detection dogs.

iii. Partnerships / Teaming Arrangements. If applicable, offerors participating in partnerships / teaming arrangements for this requirement shall submit their partnership / teaming agreements with their proposal. This information may be used as part of the evaluation of Volume II and/or Volume III. All partnership / teaming agreements shall include the following information:

Provide a complete list of the corporate names (no abbreviations) of all partners / team members, addresses, points of contact, phone numbers, DUNS numbers, and CAGE Codes.

Submit a copy of the partnership / teaming agreement that demonstrates the relationship between firms and identifies the contractual authority to bind the firms. This agreement needs to be signed by the appropriate individuals of each firm. In the event the agreement was originally not written in English, both the original version and a copy translated into English shall be provided.

b. Volume II: Technical Factor. The Offeror shall submit a comprehensive technical proposal addressing the subfactors outlined below. The offeror’s proposal shall not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but shall demonstrate an ability to execute the requirements without introducing unacceptable risk, and provide appropriate mitigation of risk for continuity of operations.

i. Subfactor 1: Mobilization Plan. The offeror shall provide, in detail, its plans to mobilize its workforce at all locations within the nine month mobilization period IAW PWS 1.5.2 to ensure readiness prior to full performance of all contract requirements. The mobilization/phase-in period shall be no longer than nine (9) months, but an offeror may propose and price a shorter period. The mobilization plan shall address, at a minimum, detailed processes and a feasible timeline for:

a. Recruitment and hiring

b. Drug Abuse Testing IAW PWS 1.19

c. Medical screening IAW PWS 1.12

d. Physical Agility Testing IAW PWS 1.15.5

e. Conducting background checks IAW PWS 1.7.4

f. Conducting language verification IAW PWS 1.12

g. Obtaining installation access IAW PWS 1.7.3

h. Training a full workforce including Explosive Detection Dogs during the mobilization period to assure readiness prior to full performance under the contract.

The Mobilization Plan submitted by each offeror shall describe the events demonstrating how it will recruit and hire all required personnel using the historical workload data. In addition to recruiting and hiring, the Mobilization Plan shall address all the aforementioned specified tasks (e.g. drug testing, medical screening, etc.). Each of these tasks shall be addressed in detail and in accordance with the requirements of the PWS.

ii. Subfactor 2: Staffing Plan. The offeror shall provide a detailed staffing plan which addresses the execution of the scenario below and how the staffing plan will scale-up to perform all the requirements of the solicitation.

Scenario: Execution of services IAW the solicitation in the geographical region of Grafenwöhr/Vilseck (Tower Barracks and Rose Barracks), Germany (USAG Bavaria).

The plan shall include:

a. Detailed staffing (including supervision) with numbers and types of qualified, trained, and certified personnel to meet and sustain the scenario using the solicitation requirements outlined in the “Business Rules” and the workload data provided .

b. Address how the staffing and supervision will reduce the Government’s risk of receiving unsatisfactory performance of the services in the scenario and the solicitation.

iii. Subfactor 3: Management Plan. The offeror shall provide its management plan to perform a contract of this magnitude. The management plan shall address all of the following elements as outlined below:

a. The Offeror’s organizational and management structure demonstrating clear and logical lines of authority and communication among all potential Access Control Points, to include identification of which positions are performing supervisory and/or management functions. The offeror shall provide details regarding the type of management structure (centralized, decentralized), the decision making processes, and the relationship between the management for this contract and the higher corporate management. The Offeror shall provide an organizational chart which includes key personnel as defined in the solicitation and other relevant positions as identified in the management plan. Offeror shall provide letters of commitment for the Project Manager and Area Managers as described in PWS section 1.11 Key Personnel. There is no required format, however;

the letters shall include a description of the employee’s qualifications and a signed statement by each key employee which confirms that he or she has made a commitment to work for the offeror on the pending contract if its proposal is successful.

b. The offeror’s risk management process for identifying and mitigating risks associated with the proposed execution of the scenario and performance for the solicitation requirements. In addition, address the following Government identified risk areas:

Compliance with German labor law;

Unanticipated base openings/closures;

Recruitment and Retention;

Performing special guard orders;

Accomplishing training requirements and maintaining required licenses/certifications throughout the life of the contract IAW PWS paragraphs 1.12(f), 1.15, 5.2, applicable Army Regulations, and German law, and emerging safety and security Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTPs);

Performing mission essential contractor services during a crisis IAW DFARS 252.237-7024 section (2)(i through v).

c. Volume III: Past Performance Factor. The offeror may submit recent and relevant past performance information. The Government will evaluate the quality of an offeror’s past performance to assess overall performance risk and the offeror’s likelihood of success in meeting the requirements of the PWS. The Offeror may submit recent and relevant past performance for itself and any teaming partners identified in Volume I: General Documents (iii). The Government may review sources of past performance information other than the Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs). The Government reserves the right to determine relevancy of submitted past performance.

i. Past Performance Ratings. The past performance factor considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying services that are the same or similar to this requirement. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: Recency, Relevancy and Performance Confidence Assessments.

1. Recent: Any contract under which any performance, delivery, or corrective action has occurred within the following time standards: five (5) years prior to this RFP closing date, even if the contract award date is outside this five (5) year window.

2. Relevance: There are four levels of relevancy as described in the table below:

Adjectival Rating Description

Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

ii. The Government is under no obligation to search for additional information in order to identify contracts/performance references.

iii. Any additional information or narrative provided beyond what is requested in this section is not required or desired, and will not be evaluated if provided.

iv. Past Performance References. The Offeror is afforded the opportunity to provide up to five (5) past performance references. In the case of partnerships or teaming arrangements, the Offeror may provide references for the joint venture itself, or references from either joint venture partner. If an offeror submits more than five

(5) references, only the first five (5) as listed sequentially in Volume III will be considered in the past performance evaluation.

v. Past Performance Questionnaire(s).

1. For each reference provided, the Offeror shall complete and submit Part I of Attachment 3: Past Performance Questionnaire.

2. For each reference provided, the Offeror shall email a blank copy of Attachment 3: Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) to its customer or appropriate Government or Prime contractor representative, requesting they complete the PPQ in its entirety. Completed questionnaires shall be emailed directly to both Mr. Benjamin Kamp (benjamin.m.kamp.civ@mail.mil) and Mr.

Edward Sido (edward.t.sido.civ@mail.mil). PPQs must be received by the closing date and time of this RFP. Questionnaires received after the proposal due date may not be considered.

3. Completed PPQs are not to be reviewed by the Offeror. Once the questionnaire is completed, it is considered For Official Use Only. The names of the individuals who complete the questionnaires will not be disclosed to the Offeror. Note that Past Performance Questionnaires returned directly to the contracting office will not be subject to page limits per the proposal instructions of this section.

vi. Contract Narrative. For each reference provided, the offeror may provide a specific narrative explanation describing the objectives achieved and detailing how the effort is relevant to the requirement of this RFP. The offeror shall also either provide a copy of any Cure Notices or Show Cause Letters received on each contract listed, or state that there were none. If copies are provided, the offeror shall also provide a description of any corrective action implemented by the offeror or proposed joint venture partner. The offerors shall indicate if any of the contracts listed were terminated, in whole or in part, and the type and reasons for the termination. If none of the contract references were terminated, the contractor shall state such.

vii. Letter(s) of Consent. The Offeror shall provide a consent letter for each joint venture partner proposed, regardless of whether or not the Offeror is submitting past performance references for those companies. This letter shall allow the release of joint venture partners’ present and past performance information to the Offeror. Failure to include written consent from each joint venture partner will result in the Government’s inability to contact the Offeror to communicate the findings from its past performance evaluation as related to those companies.

d. Volume IV: Price Factor

i. The offeror shall submit a price proposal that will be evaluated for completeness, reasonableness, and balance. All proposed prices shall be based on the PWS requirements and workload data provided. All pricing shall be submitted in Euros.

ii. The Offeror shall complete Attachment #5 - Price Matrix for the mobilization and all out years by populating the highlighted blue cells. All blue highlighted cells shall be populated for compliance purposes. For areas that the Offeror intends to propose no cost, Offerors shall populate those cells with a zero (0). Proposals received without a completed Attachment #5 - Price Matrix will be considered non-compliant and may not be considered for contract award. Any documentation furnished to support the Price Matrix are to be provided in a format chosen by the offeror that is easily traceable to the Price Matrix.

iii. Unit Prices. The unit prices proposed shall be all inclusive of wages, fringe benefits, overtime and/or shift differential, overhead, general and administrative expenses, profit, material handling, subcontract handling, and any phase-out costs. A detailed breakout of these costs may be requested.

iv. Mobilization Price. The offeror shall submit a total firm fixed price for mobilization.

This price must be inclusive of all costs associated with the mobilization actions to become fully operational on day one of operations. No additional mobilization costs will be considered in the future. The mobilization/phase-in period shall be no longer than nine (9) months, but an offeror may propose and price a shorter period.

v. Estimating Techniques and Methods. When responding to the Price Proposal requirements in the solicitation, the Offeror may use any generally accepted estimating technique to develop its proposal. These techniques and basis of estimates shall be described in a word or PDF document. This shall include assumptions made to determine the monthly price (e.g. number of employees, hours).

vi. Pricing assumptions. Summarize all significant pricing assumptions, scope limitations, exceptions and /or qualifications of the Price Proposal.

vii. Cost or Pricing Information Requirements. In accordance with FAR 15.402, 15.403-1(b) and 15.403-3(a), “data other than certified cost or pricing data” may be required to support price reasonableness. If, after receipt of proposals, the Contracting Officer determines that there is insufficient information available to determine the reasonableness of the proposed pricing, the Offeror shall be required to submit additional information other than cost or pricing data. If, during the evaluation process, the Contracting Officer determines that adequate competition no longer exists, then cost or pricing data may be required.

viii. Do not complete pricing information on the SF 1449. All pricing shall be submitted via Attachment #5 - Price Matrix.

This solicitation does not commit the Government to pay any costs incurred in the preparation and submission of offeror’s proposal(s) or in making any necessary studies for the preparation thereof, or for any visit the Contracting Officer may request for the purpose of clarification of the proposal or for preparation for negotiations.

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2

1. BASIS FOR AWARD:

This acquisition will be conducted using a Best Value Tradeoff Process authorized at FAR 15.101-1; therefore, the proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government given appropriate consideration to the three (3) evaluation factors (Technical, Past Performance, and Price) will be awarded. The Government expects to make a single award with a five-year ordering period and a six-month option period IAW FAR 52.217-8 as a result of this RFP. The Government will make an award to the responsible Offeror (in accordance with FAR 9.1) whose proposal conforms to the solicitation and offers the overall best value to the Government based on the established evaluation criteria set forth in the solicitation.

2. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

a. The Government will compare the Offeror's proposal to the RFP submission criteria in Addendum to 52.212-1 in order to perform a compliance review. The compliance review will include verification that the required licenses/certifications were submitted with the offeror’s proposal. Failure to provide proposals in accordance with the instructions specified in this RFP may render the Offeror’s proposal non-compliant.

b. The Technical Factor and the Past Performance Factor will be evaluated using a qualitative assessment by assigning adjectival ratings IAW the DoD Source Selection Procedures. The Technical subfactors are of approximately equal importance. The Technical Factor is more important than past performance. All non-price factors, when combined, are approximately equal to price. The Price Factor will be evaluated for completeness, reasonableness, and balance, but will not be assigned a rating. In order to be considered for award, an Offeror shall receive a rating of “Acceptable” or higher under all technical subfactors, and a rating of “Neutral Confidence” or higher under Past Performance.

c. A single award will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal offers the overall best value to the Government based on the established evaluation criteria.

The Government reserves the right to award to other than the lowest price or highest rated technical proposal.

d. Past Performance will be an evaluation factor. Data from the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs), and other pertinent information available to the Government will be utilized in the past performance evaluations. If no recent/relevant performance information is available for a particular offeror, they will be given a Neutral Confidence rating and will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

e. Evaluation Definitions:

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

Strength: An aspect of an offeror's proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Weakness: A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

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

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

Uncertainty: Any aspect of a non-cost/price factor proposal for which the intent of the offeror is unclear (e.g., more than one way to interpret the offer or inconsistencies in the proposal indicating that there may have been an error, omission or mistake).

Adverse Past Performance. Past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating from sources where the information is from other than formal rating systems such as “PPIRS” or “FAPPIS.”

f. The Government will evaluate the Technical factor against all of the listed criteria identified in section 3.b Volume II: Technical Factor. A combined technical/risk rating will be assigned to each subfactor based on an overall assessment of the risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, and uncertainties identified in the offeror’s proposal. The Technical Factor includes the following three subfactors, which are considered to be of approximately equal importance:

Subfactor 1: Mobilization Plan Subfactor 2: Staffing Plan Subfactor 3: Management Plan

g. The Technical subfactor ratings and definitions are as follows:

TABLE 1 – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Rating Description

Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

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

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

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

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

3. EVALUATION CRITERIA

a. Volume I: General Documents. The Government will review the items i-iii of this section for completeness and compliance with FAR 52.212-1 and its addendum.

Incomplete submissions may not be evaluated and the proposal may be eliminated from the competition.

i. Standard Form (SF) 1449, Solicitation/Contact/Order for Commercial Items - Addendum to 52.212-1 (b)(5)(a)(i).

ii. Licenses/Certifications - Addendum to 52.212-1 (b)(5)(a)(ii).

iii. Partnerships / Teaming Arrangements - Addendum to 52.212-1 (b)(5)(a)(iii).

b. Volume II: Technical Factor. This factor considers the extent of the adequacy, effectiveness, and comprehensiveness of the offeror’s technical approach, the extent to which the approach meets the requirements of the solicitation, and whether the Offeror’s technical approach demonstrates an ability to execute the requirements without introducing unacceptable risk, and provides appropriate mitigation of risk for continuity of operations. The Government will perform an integrated assessment of all technical subfactors, assessing them against the criteria set forth below in order to determine a combined Technical Risk/Rating, for each subfactor.

iv. Subfactor 1: Mobilization Plan. The offeror will be evaluated on its proposed approach and understanding of the solicitation for meeting or exceeding the mobilization requirements IAW PWS 1.5.2 in order to provide full contract performance at all locations within the nine month mobilization period and the feasibility of the timeline and elements detailed below:

a. Recruitment and hiring;

b. Drug testing IAW PWS 1.19;

c. Medical screening IAW PWS 1.12;

d. Physical Agility Testing IAW PWS 1.15.5;

e. Conducting background checks IAW PWS 1.7.4;

f. Conducting language verification IAW PWS 1.12;

g. Obtaining installation access IAW PWS 1.7.3; and

h. Training a full workforce including Explosive Detection Dogs during the mobilization period to assure readiness prior to full performance under the contract.

v. Subfactor 2: Staffing Plan. The offeror will be evaluated on its proposed staffing requirements of the scenario IAW the “Business Rules” and workload data; and the plan for scaling up the staffing to meet the full requirements of the solicitation, including evaluation of:

a. Staffing (including supervision) numbers and qualifications, training and personnel certifications to meet and sustain the scenario using the solicitation requirements outlined in the “Business Rules” and the workload data provided.

b. How the staffing and supervision will reduce the Government’s risk of receiving unsatisfactory performance of the services in the scenario and the solicitation.

vi. Subfactor 3: Management Plan. The offeror will be evaluated on its proposed management plan elements described below:

a. The offeror’s organizational and management structure demonstrating clear and logical lines of authority and communication among all potential Access Control Points, to include identification of which positions are performing supervisory and/or management functions. The offeror will be evaluated regarding the type of management structure (centralized, decentralized), the decision making processes, and the relationship between the management for this contract and the higher corporate management. The organizational chart of key personnel as defined in the solicitation and other relevant positions as identified in the management plan will be used as part of the evaluation. The offeror will be evaluated regarding the letters of commitment for the Program Manager and Area Managers as described in PWS section 1.11 Key Personnel. Each letter will be evaluated to insure it includes a description of the employee’s qualifications and a signed statement by each key employee which confirms that he or she has made a commitment to work for the offeror on the pending contract if its proposal is successful.

b. The offeror’s risk management process for identifying and mitigating risks associated with the proposed execution of the scenario and performance for the solicitation requirements. In addition, the following Government identified risk areas:

Compliance with German labor law;

Unanticipated base openings/closures;

Recruitment and Retention;

Performing special guard orders;

Accomplishing training requirements and maintaining required licenses/certifications throughout the life of the contract IAW PWS paragraphs 1.12(f), 1.15, 5.2, applicable Army Regulations, and German law, and emerging safety and security Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTPs);

Performing mission essential contractor services during a crisis IAW DFARS 252.237-7024 section (2)(i through v).

c. Volume III: Past Performance Factor.

i. Past performance information is evaluated as a predictor of future contract performance. The Government will assess the degree of confidence it has in the expectation that the Offeror will successfully complete the requirements in accordance with the contract terms based on the Offerors demonstrated record of recent and relevant performance.

ii. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s (to include valid partnerships / teaming arrangements provided in Volume I) record of past performance to ascertain the probability of successfully performing the required efforts of the

PWS.

iii. The Government will evaluate the offeror's past performance of performing services that are both recent and relevant as defined in section viii below. In conducting the past performance evaluation, the Government may use information obtained from the Offeror as well as from other sources, or may use information with regard to other contracts performed by the Offeror of which it has knowledge, whether or not those contracts are disclosed to the Government by the Offeror. Other sources of information may include, but are not limited to, Past Performance Questionnaire responses, Government files or databases, and/or data obtained through interviews with personnel familiar with the contractor’s performance. The Government is not required to interview all points of contact identified by Offerors. The Government may consider a wide array of information from a variety of sources, but is not compelled to rely on all of the information available. The Government will consider the relevancy of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor's performance. It may also use any past performance that occurs after the RFP closing date and prior to award.

iv. The Government will assess the contract references provided in the Offeror's proposal, and potentially information available from sources other than those identified by the Offeror, against the past performance evaluation criteria set forth below.

v. An Offerors past performance record will be assessed to determine its Past Performance Confidence Assessment Rating. If an Offeror proposes the use of partnership / teaming arrangement, the Offeror’s past performance record will be assessed, along with any partnership / teaming arrangement past performance record, to determine the Offerors past performance confidence rating.

vi. The Government may consider the recency, relevancy, source and context of the past performance information it evaluates, as well as general trends in performance, and demonstrated corrective actions. A significant achievement, problem, problem resolution or lack of relevant data in any element can become an important consideration in the assessment process. An adverse finding in any element or a lack of relevant data in regards to a performance issue may result in an overall lower confidence assessment rating.

vii. Absent any recent and relevant past performance history or when the performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror will be assigned a “Neutral Confidence” rating and its proposal will not be evaluated either favorably or unfavorably on past performance, which will neither be used to the advantage nor disadvantage of the offeror.

viii. Past Performance Ratings. The past performance factor considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying services that are the same or similar to this requirement.

3. Recent: Any contract under which any performance, delivery, or corrective action has occurred within the following time standards: five (5) years prior to this RFP closing date, even if the contract award date is outside this five (5) year window.

4. Relevance: There are four levels of relevancy as described in the table below:

Adjectival Rating Description

Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

5. Performance Confidence Assessment: The Past Performance Evaluation Team will review all past performance information collected and determine the quality of the offeror’s performance, general trends, and usefulness of the information and incorporate these into the performance confidence assessment based on the offeror’s overall record of recency, relevancy, and quality of performance.

Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Definition

Substantial Confidence

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Limited Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

d. Volume IV: Price Factor.

i. Total Evaluated Price (TEP). The Government will evaluate offers for award by calculating a TEP for each offeror. The TEP will be calculated as the sum of the offeror’s proposed prices, from Attachment #5 - Price Matrix, for the five year ordering period, which includes mobilization and the six month option period allowed under FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services. To account for the option period(s) possible under Clause 52.217-8 - Option to Extend Services, the Government will take the price for all CLINs of Year 5, prorate it to a six-month value, and add it to the sum of all CLINs. All unit prices that comprise the TEP are contractually binding. Evaluation of the options shall not obligate the Government to exercise such options. An omitted price may result in proposal elimination. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced.

ii. The price proposal will be evaluated for completeness, reasonableness, and balance.

1. Completeness: The Government will review the pricing submission for completeness and compliance with FAR 52.212-1 and its addendum.

Incomplete price submissions may not be evaluated and the proposal may be eliminated from the competition.

2. Reasonableness: The offerors price proposal will be evaluated based on the results of a price analysis, using the proposal analysis techniques and procedures as defined in FAR 15.404-1(b) and DFARS 215.404-1 to ensure a fair and reasonable price.

Balance: The Government will review the proposed prices for balanced pricing. This review will ensure that the price of one or more line items is not significantly over or understated as indicated by the application of price analysis techniques. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price for one or more contract line items is significantly over- or understated as indicated by the application of price analysis techniques. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the out-year prices or individual contract line items are significantly unbalanced. The Government will analyze proposals to determine whether they are unbalanced with respect to separately priced line items, subline items, or exhibit line items. Offers that are determined to be unbalanced may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT (PWS)

Germany Wide Installation Security Services (GWISS), IMCOM Europe

Part 1

General Information

1 GENERAL: This is a non-personal services contract under which the personnel rendering the services are not subject, either by the contract’s terms or by the manner of its administration, to the supervision and control usually prevailing in relationships between the Government and its employees.

1.1 Description of Services/Introduction: This is a non-personal services contract to provide armed security personnel employed under this contract may be used to provide static installation access control, roving security patrols, explosive detection dog teams, intrusion detection system monitoring, pass and badge control, static personal security, or any other security related function associated with the protection of U.S. Government installations, materials, property, and personnel. The Government will not exercise any supervision or control over the contract service providers performing the services herein.

Such contract service providers shall be accountable solely to the Contractor who, in turn is responsible to the Government.

1.2 Background: The US Government requires the contractor to provide armed security services to ensure compliance with DOD, and U.S. Army mandates for physical security on Army installations in Germany.

1.3 Scope: The Contractor shall provide non-personal armed security services specified by this PWS, the Attachments and the Special Guard Orders throughout Germany. The Contractor shall provide all personnel, equipment, and supplies unless identified as Government-furnished. This PWS, workload data, and special guard orders set forth the overall duties, guard post locations, the general operating hours at each post, the number (where mandated) and types of services, the specific equipment and facilities to be provided by the Contractor.

1.4 Objectives: Applying the instructions provided at each specific post, the contractor shall ensure only properly vetted persons are permitted access unescorted to U.S. Government installations and facilities. The contractor shall apply the instructions found at each specific post for allowing access for those persons who will be escorted on to the U.S. Government installations/facilities by those persons who are authorized to escort guests.