A.09.03_W81K04-17-R-0006_Preproposal_Conference.pptx

Pre-Proposal Conference w/Site Visits USAR Regional Training Sites – Medical Training and Operations Services W81K04-16-R-0006

25 and 26 April 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 – 25 April 17

Agenda – 26 April 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 Photos of Government Facilities 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 – Ms. Cheryn Fasano Technical Representative – Ms. Cheryn Fasano CP and FHL Site Director – COL Don Colt

Introduction of Government Team

FAR 12 Commercial Terms and Standards

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

Competitive, Trade-Off 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

A Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract will be awarded.

The award will be made based on the best overall (i.e., best value) proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the four (4) evaluation factors: Technical Approach, Present and Past Performance, Small Business Participation Plan, and Price.

To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for the Technical Approach factor, a rating of no less than “Satisfactory Confidence” or “Neutral Confidence” must be achieved for the Present and Past Performance factor, and a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for Small Business Participation Plan factor. The Price factor will be evaluated to establish reasonableness of the otherwise successful offeror’s price, but will not receive an evaluation rating.

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

Factor 1: Technical Approach Factor 2: Present and Past Performance Factor 3: Small Business Participation Plan Factor 4: Price

Basis of Award

Tradeoff Process, FAR 15.101-1

A tradeoff source selection approach

The relative importance of price may vary in relation to other evaluation factors as communicated by the Government to potential offerors in the solicitation per FAR Subpart 15.304(d) and (e).

For this solicitation, Technical Approach is more important than Present and Past Performance, which is more important than Small Business Participation Plan. All three factors combined are significantly more important than Price. Offerors are cautioned that the awards may not necessarily be made to the lowest-priced offers.

Best Value – FAR 15.101

FAR Provision 52.212-1

Unclassified//FOUO

Each proposal received will be evaluated with the criteria outlined in the solicitation for the purpose of assessing the proposal and the offeror’s ability to perform the prospective contract successfully.

Technical factors will be assigned an adjectival rating using the combined technical/risk ratings from the DoD Source Selection Procedures dated 31 March 2016.

The Past Performance factor, on the basis of “recent” past performance information, will be assigned a relevancy rating and a performance confidence assessment.

The Price factor will be evaluated to establish reasonableness of the otherwise successful offeror’s price and will not receive an evaluation rating. In order for a proposal to be considered for award, it shall not have any technical deficiencies that have been determined to be marginal or unacceptable.

All proposals shall be subject to evaluation by the Source Selection Team (SST) based on:

Adequacy of Response. The proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the offeror’s methods and approach have adequately and completely considered, defined, and satisfied the requirements specified in the RFP. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement has been addressed in the proposal in accordance with the proposal submission section of the Request for Proposal (RFP) Feasibility of Approach. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven devices and techniques. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule.

FAR Provision 52.212-2

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