A.09.03_W81K04-17-R-0001_Preproposal_Conference.pptx

Pre-Proposal Conference Enterprise (Off-Site) Remote Medical Coding Services W81K04-17-R-0001

3 May 2017

Presented By:

Kathleen Henderson, Contracting Officer And Yvonne Camarce, Contract Specialist Health Readiness Contracting Office

Unclassified//FOUO

Kathleen Henderson/kathleen.d.henderson2.civ@mail.mil /(210)221-3109 25 April 2017 Slide ‹#› of x

Agenda – 3 May 17

Clarifications and Questions related to the RFP Must be submitted in writing

To be Posted on FedBizOpps after Conference:

Briefing Slides and Attendees List Official responses to clarifications and questions Company and authors’ names excluded

Unauthorized Activities Sidebars with Government Personnel Use of Recording Devices

Visitor’s badge must be worn in full view Administrative Announcements

Procuring and Administrative Contracting Officer – Ms. Kathleen Henderson Contract Specialist – Ms. Yvonne Camarce Branch Chief – Ms. Linda Lorillard

Technical Representatives Contracting Officer Representative – MAJ Mahealani McFarland Technical Representative – MAJ Michael Ace

Introduction of Government Team

FAR 12 Commercial Terms and Standards

Contract Type Firm Fixed Price (FFP) and Cost Reimbursable Contract Line Items (CLINS)

Competitive, LPTA Source Selection Procedures

Instructions to Offerors (FAR 52.212-1)

Evaluation of Offers (FAR 52.212-2)

Proposal Due Date: Anticipated Mid-June

Solicitation Terms and Conditions

Acquisition will utilize the lowest-price, technically acceptable (LPTA) source selection techniques in accordance with FAR Subpart 15.101-2, as supplemented, to make best value award decisions. Technical tradeoffs will not be made and no additional credit will be given for exceeding acceptability.

Three regional Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ), Single Award Task Order Contracts (SATOCs) will be awarded (Central, Pacific, and Europe); one offeror may win all three SATOCs. Awards will be made to the acceptable offeror(s) with the lowest evaluated price, technically acceptable, deemed responsible in accordance with the FAR, and whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements.

The following evaluation factors will be set forth in the solicitation:

Factor 1: Price Factor 2: Technical Acceptability Factor 3: Past and/or Current Performance

Basis of Award

Factors to Be Evaluated.

Factor 1 – Price. Price reasonableness will be utilized in the evaluation of the Firm Fixed Price Contract Line Items (CLINs) for each region. CLINs (to include SubClins) are as follows:

Factor 2 – Technical Acceptability.

Factor 3 – Past and/or Current Performance.

Best Value – FAR 15.102

FAR Provision 52.212-1

Unclassified//FOUO

Factor 1 – Price

Adequate price competition

Overall price for each anticipated contract will be established by totaling the proposed prices for each CLIN for the entire five-year ordering periods. An offeror may propose on all CLINs or specific CLINs.

CLINs 0001AE-AJ, 0002AE-AJ, and 0003AE-AJ (Travel). Offerors shall not provide separate pricing for travel as travel is considered incidental to the required services and an estimated amount will be established by the Government in basic IDIQ for each CLIN with maximum ceilings on applicable Task Orders; however, each CLIN travel amount estimated by the Government will be included in the total evaluated price for each offeror.

CLINs 0001AK, 0002AK, and 0003AK (Post Award Conference). Offerors shall not provide separate pricing for post-award conference; however, the post-award conference amount of $1,500 for each CLIN will be included in the total evaluated price for each offeror.

CLINs 0001AL, 0002AL, and 000LAG (Contractor Manpower Reporting). Annual CMR requirements will not be evaluated as a separate price and therefore shall be rendered in the offeror’s price proposal as not separately priced, “NSP” and will be incorporated into resultant contracts as such.

Proposed CLIN unit prices will be evaluated for unbalanced pricing (IAW FAR15.404-1(g)).

FAR Provision 52.212-2

Factor 2 - Technical Acceptability.

A decision on the technical acceptability of each offeror’s technical proposal will be made. Each technical proposal will be assigned a rating of:

Each offeror’s technical proposal must clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation. A technical review team composed of key government personnel will use their technical skills, knowledge, and experience to thoroughly review the adequacy of the technical proposals. The government will assess whether the offeror’s technical proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation by evaluating the following:

Technical acceptability will be evaluated in the technical proposal as follows:

Description: The government will evaluate this factor to determine if the offeror’s technical approach, to include the supplements, demonstrates understanding, compliance, and clearly meets the minimum solicitation requirements.

Measure of Merit: This factor is met when the offeror submits, as part of its technical proposal, specific narrative detailed and/or description of its technical approach (to include supplements) with actual methods, processes, and procedures that demonstrate the offeror’s compliance and understanding of the minimum solicitation requirements.

Factor 3 - Past and/or Current Performance.

An assessment of the offeror's probability of successfully performing the required effort; therefore, past and/or current performance evaluation is not a responsibility-type factor.

There are two (2) aspects to the past and/or current performance evaluation. First aspect, whether the lowest priced, technically acceptable offerors' past and/ or current performance is recent and relevant to the effort to be acquired. The second aspect of the past and/or current performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts.

A decision on the past and/or current performance acceptability of each offeror's past and/or current performance proposal will be made. Each past and/or current performance proposal will be assigned a rating of:

Each offeror’s past and/or current performance proposal must clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation. The government will assess whether the offeror’s past and/or current performance proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

An offeror without a record of recent and relevant past and/or current performance, or for whom information on past and/or current performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past and/or current performance rating can be reasonably assigned, shall be assigned an “unknown” past and/or current performance rating. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably regarding an “unknown” past and/or current performance rating. In the context of acceptability/ unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

Questions

Summary

Unclassified//FOUO

Unclassified//FOUO Introduction/Administrative Announcements

Solicitation Terms and Conditions/CLINs/Basis of Award/Tradeoff Process

Solicitation Discussion (FAR Provision Addendum 52.212-1)

Solicitation Discussion (FAR Provision Addendum 52.212-2)

Solicitation Discussion (Wrap-Up)

Questions image4.jpeg image5.jpeg image1.png image3.png image2.png