W5J9JE18R0012_Evaluation_Criteria.pdf

The following are the evaluation factors for this procurement:

FACTOR 1 – EXPERIENCE

Subfactor 1 – SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE Subfactor 2 – CONTINGENCY DEPLOYMENT EXPERIENCE

FACTOR 2 – MANAGEMENT

Subfactor 1 – MANAGEMENT APPROACH Subfactor 2 – KEY PERSONNEL

FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE

FACTOR 4 – PRICE

SECTION V: INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES

TO OFFERORS

A. BASIS OF AWARD

1. This is an unrestricted, full and open source selection procurement which will utilize FAR Part 15 to evaluate proposals and award the contract.

After proposal evaluation, the Contracting Officer will award a firm-fixed-price, non-personal service contract to the responsible* offeror whose proposal conforms to the solicitation; whose price was determined fair and reasonable; and, whose proposal offers the best overall value to the Government, considering all price and non-price evaluation factors described herein.

*‘Responsible’, in this instance, refers to the meaning of the word as described in FAR 9.104-1.

2. Any information provided in the offeror’s proposal or in response to negotiations, is subject to verification. If the Government discovers false, inaccurate, misleading or misrepresented information in the offeror’s proposal, that proposal will immediately be removed from consideration and will not be further evaluated or receive contract award.

3. The following are the evaluation factors for this solicitation:

Factor 1 – Experience Factor 2 – Management Factor 3 – Past Performance Factor 4 – Price

4. ORDER OF IMPORTANCE OF FACTORS

No. 1 being the most important:

1. Factor 1 - Experience

(a) Subfactor 1 – Specialized Experience*

(b) Subfactor 2 – Contingency Deployment Experience

2. Factor 3 - Past Performance

3. Factor 2 - Management

(a) Subfactor 1 – Management Approach

(b) Subfactor 2 – Key Personnel**

* Denotes the more important Experience subfactor between the two.

** Denotes the more important Management subfactor between the two.

Pursuant to the relative importance notification requirement of FAR 15.304(e), Factors 1- Experience, 2-Management, and 3-Past Performance, when combined, are approximately equal to cost or price (Factor 4) in importance.

5. Tradeoff source selection procedures, using adjectival ratings, will be utilized for the evaluation of proposal submittals for Factor 1-Experience and Factor 2-Management. Factor 3-Past Performance will be evaluated using Confidence Assessment Ratings – see Table of Confidence Assessment Ratings on page 15 herein.

The following Table of Combined Technical/Risk Ratings contain the adjectival ratings that will be used by the Government technical evaluation board to rate the proposal submittals for Factors 1 and 2:

ADJECTIVAL

RATING

DESCRIPTION

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

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

Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. 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.

The following Table of Confidence Assessment Ratings contain the ratings that the technical evaluation board will use for Factor 3/Past Performance:

Adjectival Rating Description 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.

6. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without conducting discussions with offerors. However, the Government reserves the right to hold discussions if the Contracting Officer determines them to be necessary. The Government may request clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a) at any time after receipt of offeror proposal. For purposes of efficiency, pursuant to FAR 15.306(c)(2), the number of proposals in the Competitive Range, should one be established, may be limited by the Contracting Officer to the quantity that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

B. EVALUATION FACTORS

1. The following are the evaluation factors for this solicitation:

FACTOR 1 - EXPERIENCE

EVALUATION CRITERIA

This factor evaluates the experience of the offeror, as an organization, in performing the following responsibilities pertinent to information management and information technology (IMIT) services: (1) Cybersecurity; (2) Help Desk Support; (3) Technology Solutions (for example, Identification of System/Network Problems and Solving Complex Technical Problems); and, (5) Providing IMIT Services in Deployed Contingency Environment. Experience noted should not be more than six (6) years from the issuance date of this solicitation.

FACTOR 2 – MANAGEMENT

This factor evaluates the offeror’s project management skills and approach to managing issues and processes pertinent to human resources, projects and schedules in an environment that is dynamic and with constantly changing priorities.

FACTOR 3 - PAST PERFORMANCE

In past performance evaluations, the offeror’s performance record on similar contract efforts, is examined to predict the probability the offeror will successfully perform the proposed contract. The difference between an offeror’s experience and the offeror’s past performance is, experience is what work the offeror has done, and past performance is how well the offeror did it.

This factor evaluates present and past performance information from the offeror’s customers and past performance databases, on the offeror as they relate to a various criteria, such as: (a) the offeror’s technical knowledge and capability to perform IMIT services; (b) ability to meet project milestone schedules; (c) quality of performance/workmanship; (d) responsiveness to requests for project or help desk support; (e) knowledge of, and compliance with, applicable regulations, procedures, standards and practices; (f) whether the offeror is efficient; (g) ability to effectively manage simultaneous projects; (h) ability to communicate effectively with the appropriate customer or end user POC on status of help desk request or project requirement; (i) being proactive and diligent in providing courses of action, solution or recommendations in response to IMIT-related issues or problem areas; (j) whether the client/customer would contract with the offeror on future IMIT requirements.

Past performance information on the offeror will be obtained through various means, including telephonic inquiries or emails to references or previous customers, previous past performance questionnaires, Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) Reports and retrieval from Government databases, such as PPIRS/CPARS, which contain contractor performance evaluations. Past performance information should be for contracts or orders that are currently ongoing or were completed within the last eight (8) years of the issuance date of this solicitation.

If adverse past performance is obtained on the offeror, the offeror may be contacted for further information on the circumstances surrounding the situation or issues, and may be afforded a reasonable opportunity to address any adverse information obtained.

In the case of offerors for which there is no information on past contract performance or where past contract performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past contract performance, per FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv). Therefore, the offeror’s past performance is unknown and assigned a performance confidence rating of “Neutral Confidence.”

FACTOR 4 - PRICE

Price will be evaluated and considered in establishing the competitive range, if discussions are to be held, and in making the final determination for award. But, price will not be rated.

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s price proposal in order to identify risks to the Government based on the following criteria and conditions:

1. The offeror can successfully perform at the proposed price, and the proposed price reflects a clear understanding of the requirements.

2. The Price Proposal is complete. Completeness means the offeror has costed and priced all aspects of work to be performed, on the Price Schedule attachment and on the offeror’s cost/price breakdown spreadsheet, which should include the following cost elements: labor rate per position; subcontract costs if proposed individual(s) will be subcontracted; breakdown of Other Direct Costs (ODCs) to include Visa per employee, R&R costs, mobilization and demobilization travel costs;

hazardous/danger pay; profit. All cost elements and pricing information on the offeror’s breakdown sheet should align with, and serve as supporting data to, the SF 33 Section B CLINs and ELIN Price Schedule.

3. Price proposed is fair and reasonable. Reasonableness has to do with a determination that the proposed price is fair and reasonable based on the results of the Government’s application of one or more price analysis techniques described in FAR 15.404-1(b)(1) and (2). For example, an offeror’s proposed price can be determined reasonable if it represents a price that provides best value to the Government when compared to historical data, the Independent Government Estimate (IGE), prices in the market, prices proposed by competing offerors and/or when weighing against the technical and functional capabilities of the Offeror. Price realism will determine if the proposed price is realistic for the type of work required. As permitted by FAR 15.403-4(b)(1), the Contracting Officer can request ‘data other than certified cost or pricing data’ required to determine that the proposed price is fair and reasonable.

Unreasonably high or unreasonably low proposed cost and/or price as determined by the Contracting Officer through the use of cost or price analysis techniques under FAR 15.404-1, may be grounds for eliminating a proposal whether a Competitive Range is established or not. Proposed prices that are deemed to be unreasonably high or low when compared to other offerors’ prices and/or the Independent Government Estimate, may be indicative of an inherent lack of understanding of the solicitation requirements and may result in the proposal being deemed unreasonable, and thus, ineligible to receive contract award. Therefore, it is imperative that the offeror understand all facets of the project scope of work and offeror submittal requirements before submitting the offeror’s proposal. If there is any question or doubt as to the scope of work or solicitation requirements, it is incumbent upon the offeror to inquire as soon as practicable, but no later than five (5) days before the closing date of the solicitation.

4. Proposed unit prices for the exhibit line items (ELINs) are balanced for the work to be performed;

reflects a clear understanding of the scope of work and technical requirements in the solicitation; and, are not inexplicably front-loaded onto the base period CLINs.

C. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

FACTOR 1 – EXPERIENCE

SUBFACTOR 1 – SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

The offeror shall provide an Executive Summary of its history/background, qualifications, number of employees, list of Government and private sector clients, parent company information (if applicable) and experience performing information management and information technology (IMIT) services. The Executive Summary should also include the offeror’s:

(a) plan to establish and maintain a low risk Cybersecurity posture;

(b) approach to providing responsive, diligent and efficient help desk support;

(c) approach to providing proactive technology solutions by identifying system/network problems and solving or recommending solutions to complex technical problems;

(d) approach to anticipating and executing life cycle replacement;

(e) website and/or a company brochure if available;

(f) organization chart of company principals with their job titles;

(g) history and background, qualifications, list of clients and experience information of the partner company, if offeror is a Joint Venture team.

Experience noted should not be more than six (6) years from the issuance date of this solicitation. This subfactor submittal should not exceed ten (10) pages total.

SUBFACTOR 2 – CONTINGENCY DEPLOYMENT EXPERIENCE

The offeror shall provide a narrative which describes its experience, as an organization, in providing IMIT services in remote, contingency environments in CENTCOM, AFRICOM, PACOM and/or EUCOM areas of responsibility. Provide the number of employees deployed, the job title positions of the deployed employees, the specific services provided, dates of deployment and systems managed. This subfactor submittal should not exceed three (3) pages total.

FACTOR 2 – MANAGEMENT

SUBFACTOR 1 – MANAGEMENT APPROACH

The offeror shall provide a narrative which explains how their onsite Project Manager (PM) will manage human resources, projects and schedules in a work environment that is dynamic with constantly changing priorities. Describe how this PM and your Reach Back Management/Home Office (if necessary) will handle issues, such as early deployment curtailments, recruitment of personnel with security clearance, R&R scheduling, training/certification requirements, poor employee performance, customer service and catastrophic systems failure. This subfactor submittal should not exceed five (5) pages total.

SUBFACTOR 2 - KEY PERSONNEL

The offeror shall provide detailed information, such as experience, education, qualification, skillset, security clearance and certification (as applicable), with dates, in a curriculum vitae (CV) or resume in the Adobe Acrobat Portable Document Format (.pdf), for the individual that the offeror is proposing for each Key Personnel role listed below:

Lead Network Administrator Lead System Administrator Lead Helpdesk Technician Project Manager

The offeror shall provide a copy of the candidate’s certification (as applicable) and Letter of Commitment signed by the candidate if not already employed by the offeror. Each CV/resume must not be more than five (5) pages long. Any accompanying certificate(s) and Letter of Commitment will not count towards this page limitation. The Key Personnel position title should be at the very top of the CV.

Requirements of Key Personnel positions are as follows:

(a) Lead Network Administrator – At a minimum, must have five (5) years of experience managing networks with at least sixty (60) network devices, such as switches, routers, firewalls, etc. Must possess a current Cisco Certified Network Associate (CCNA) certification. Must have a current Information Assurance Technical (IAT) Level 2 certification in accordance with

Department of Defense (DoD) Directive 8140 (formerly DoD 8570), which requires compliance with the DoD 8570.01-M manual.

(b) Lead System Administrator – At a minimum, must have five (5) years of experience managing and administering a minimum of forty (40) servers (physical and/or virtual). Must have a current Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer (MCSE) 2012R2 in Server Infrastructure certification.

Must have a current IAT Level 2 certification in accordance with DoDD 8140.

(c) Lead Helpdesk Technician – At a minimum, must have five (5) years of experience in Help

Desk operations, two (2) years leading a Help Desk Team and have a current Microsoft Certified Solutions Associate (MCSA) certification in a current Windows Operating System. Must have a current IAT Level 2 certification in accordance with DoDD 8140.

(d) Project Manager (PM) – At a minimum, must have at least three (3) years of supervisory experience and five (5) years of experience managing diverse teams with multiple competencies and experience. The PM will have overall responsibility over all projects and tasks required of the PM’s team of subordinates from inception to completion, so this PM must have a proven track record of leading a team. The Project Manager must have skills and experience creating, documenting and updating schedules for projects and tasks being worked, and have experience using scheduling tools. Must have current Project Management Professional (PMP) certification.

FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE

The offeror shall provide a list of three (3) customers or clients who can provide present and/or past performance information on the offeror for information management and information technology (IMIT) services performed by the offeror the last eight (8) years from the issuance date of this solicitation. The Government may contact these POCs to request/verify past or present performance information on the offeror. The offeror’s list of three customers shall consist of the following information:

1. Name of organization or company of the customer

2. Name of POC(s) in the organization who are knowledgeable of offeror’s work

3. Email address of POC(s)

4. Telephone number(s) of POC(s)

5. Contract and/or Order Number, description of services provided to customer, period of performance of contract, location of IMIT services performed

6. Value of contract or order in U.S. Dollars

The above information will also be used to obtain past performance information on the offeror from the PPIRS/CPARS database, agency COR reports, telephonic inquiries, etc.

FACTOR 4 – PRICE

1. The offeror’s Price Proposal shall be in a volume that is separate from the Technical Proposal.

2. The offeror shall submit a completed (a) SF 33 Section B; (b) Price Schedule Attachment of Exhibit Line Item Numbers (ELINs); and, (c) Cost/Price Breakdown spreadsheet in .pdf format. Failure by an offeror to provide any of these 3 aforementioned documentation may result in disqualification of the offeror’s proposal.

D. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

The offeror must include the following in the offeror’s proposal:

b) Signed SF 33 Solicitation, Offer and Award, with Blocks 12-18 completed, including acknowledgement of any amendments issued

b) Completed Section B of the SF 33 (Proposed Price of CLINs)

c) Completed Section K Representations and Certifications

d) Required Submittals for Factor 1 – Experience

c) Required Submittals for Factor 2 – Management

f) Required Submittals for Factor 3 – Past Performance

g) Completed Price Schedule Attachment, which lists each individual base & option year Exhibit Line Items (ELINs), with the Grand Total Amount matching Section B’s CLIN Totals

h) Cost/Price Breakdown to support base & option ELIN prices

i) Completed Financial Standing Questionnaire Attachment (for Financial Responsibility

Determination)

j) Completed Certificate of Offeror Authority Attachment**

**If the offeror is a corporation, complete the Corporate Certificate. If the offeror is a partnership, complete the Authority to Bind Partnership and provide a copy of the Partnership Agreement. If the offeror is a Joint Venture, complete the Corporate Certificate for each member of the Joint Venture and provide a copy of the Joint Venture Agreement.

(a) The offeror’s proposal shall be in an Adobe Acrobat portable document format (PDF). A Table of Contents shall be included and shall identify major areas within the proposal by Technical Evaluation Factor, Subfactors, Subject Title and Page Number.

The proposal’s cover page or cover letter should include, at a minimum, the following information:

1. RFP #W5J9JE-18-R-0012 – Information Management and Information Technology (IMIT) Services for USACE Afghanistan

2. The offeror’s official business name; company’s official mailing address; business telephone number(s); full name and email address of official(s) who have authority to contractually bind the offeror.

3. The offeror’s Cage Code, DUNS Number, and Tax ID Number

(b) The offeror should not modify the terms and conditions of the solicitation, nor add conditions or qualifications to his proposal based on an assumption or based on his own modification of the terms and/or conditions of the solicitation. Should the offeror include terms and conditions that conflict with the terms and conditions of the solicitation, that offeror’s proposal may be determined to be ineligible for further evaluation or for award. Any questions related to specific terms and conditions contained within the solicitation should be resolved with the Contracting Officer prior to proposal submission.

(c) References in the offeror’s proposal to, and examples of “confidential” or “classified” projects or contracts, should not be included in the offeror’s proposal unless the information is authorized to be disseminated or can legally be provided to the Government for review and evaluation. Offerors who include information in their proposals that they do not want disclosed to the public or to anyone without a need-to-know, must clearly mark their proposals in accordance with the instructions at FAR 52.215-1(e) Restriction on Disclosure and Use of Data.

(d) An offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms, as discussions may not be conducted with the offeror.

(e) All proposals must be submitted via email or AMRDEC Safe to nikisha.w.cook@usace.army.mil and mary.j.harding@usace.army.mil. No other forms of submission will be accepted by the Government. It is the offeror’s responsibility to ensure its proposal is received by the Government by the date and time of the proposal deadline. Undeliverable emails due to an offeror’s proposal size is not the responsibility of the Government.

The Proposal is due no later than 1500 HRS, Local Kabul Time, on 3 July 2018.

mailto:nikisha.w.cook@usace.army.mil mailto:mary.j.harding@usace.army.mil