W81XWH-15-R-0081-0004.docx

W81XWH-15-R-0081

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION C - DESCRIPTIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS

The following have been added by full text:

GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE 12/04/15

W81XWH-15-R-0081 Biomedical Research Application Evaluation Support (BRAES) Services Amendment 0004- Responses to Questions Received as of 04 December 2015 and additional revisions ***IMPORTANT NOTE: Sections L.1.4, Sample Task 2, and Sample Task 3 have been revised.

Questions:

1. Who owns the eBRAP software?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: The software is Government owned.

1. Section 4.4.1: “The contractor shall have the appropriate development environment but they must utilize existing UA testing and production environments”

1. What is the mechanism by which the Contractor can see improvements?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: The Government is unable to provide a response at this time.

1. Does the SAVVIS service center provide server redundancy, data backup, and disaster recovery plan/implementation? If “no” will the Contractor be responsible?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: No, this is currently the responsibility of the existing eBRAP Support Contractor. This will continue to be a requirement for the eBRAP Support Contractor.

1. Is data recovery point-in-time, hourly, daily, or some other unit of time?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: The existing contract requirement for data recovery from a complete disaster recovery scenario is 1 week.

1. What types and levels of test coverage are currently in place in the testing environment?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Currently there are Test Application and Data Base VMs in place.

1. What is the number of monthly calls and e-mails directed to the help desk?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Between 1,500 to 3,500 calls/emails a month (depending on the time of year) Of these calls:

2. How many calls are related to user problems with submission (eGOV and eBRAP) versus those related to questions regarding Program Announcements and various granting mechanisms?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: It is unknown how many of the inquries are related to user problems with submission vs. questions regarding PA’s.

1. Do all pre-applications and full applications undergo both expedited (electronic) compliance Review and manual compliance review? If no, how many full applications undergo manual compliance review each month?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Pre-applications that require a Letter of Intent do not undergo compliance review. Pre-applications that require a Preproposal Narrative (or equivalent) undergo expedited (electronic) compliance review and manual compliance review. All full applications undergo expedited (electronic) review and manual compliance review. The items reviewed for compliance will depend on the requirements of the Program Announcement. Program Announcements for complex and large award mechanisms with numerous application components will require more extensive compliance review than Program Announcements for smaller award mechanisms.

1. Compliance: Section 4.1.2.1 states that work shall be in accordance with the Compliance Standard Operating Procedure”

4. Would the government provide a copy of the “Compliance Standard Operating Procedure” to all bidders?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: The Compliance Standard Operating Procedure is developed by the government together with the contractor. It consists of basic guidelines of what actions will be taken with various components of the applications during compliance review. For example, if a Project Narrative is over the page limit, the SOP indicates that the application will be flagged for compliance review because it is a rejection criterion. Other application components with page limits may have different actions to be taken, such as removing excess pages.

4. Does the current eBRAP computer-automated compliance work to customer satisfaction?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Question is not appropriate and the government will not provide a response.

4. Are the distinctions between “computer-automated compliance” and “manual compliance” detailed in Compliance Standard Operating Procedure?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: No. The Compliance Standard Operating Procedure provides guidance on what actions to be taken with the application components during compliance review. There is no specification as to whether it should be done via computer automation or manually.

1. Appendix 3 Sample Task 3: Under heading “typical Tasks the government directs to the contractor” Using existing code and functionality, continue to expand eBRAP to receive intramural research pre-applications and full applications. Please provide the following information.

5. What are the specifics of the API? For example but not limited to,

0. Architecture is MVC? PAC? MVP? Other?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: The Government is unable to provide a response at this time.

0. What language is used to produce the server pages GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: HTML and JAVA

0. What is the database engine (e.g., Oracle, MSSQl, MySQL, etc) GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Oracle

0. Is relational mapping used (e.g., Hibernate) GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: The Government is unable to provide a response at this time.

0. What server is used (IIS, Tomcat, Apache, etc) GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Tomcat

5. How many lines of code make up the eBRAP platform, and how does the total break down into various concerns (i.e., tests, user interface, models, controllers, etc.)?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: The Government is unable to provide a response at this time.

1. Section 4.4 eBRAP: Are software licenses provided by the customer or will the contractor be expected to furnish those licenses. If so, would the government provide a plug number for this cost?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Currently software license and support agreements are provided by the Government.

1. Will the contractor be responsible for developing and maintaining the disaster recovery plan?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: YES

1. Does the eBRAP system automatically “push” complete proposals to the bidder’s evaluation software or is the bidder’s software required to “pull” the proposal from eBRAP?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: This currently is not an automated process.

1. Given that research proposals submitted to eGOV are submitted by section, does the uniting of the proposal into a single document occur in eBRAP or is the bidder’s evaluation software required to accomplish this?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Occurs in eBRAP

1. Reference Section 4.1.1; is there an established knowledge base for Helpdesk?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: This question is unclear. Please expand on the question.

1. Reference 4.1.1, Does the government require a ticketing system to log calls for Helpdesk Support or is there another required method to ensure follow-up?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: The contractor should propose an effective system that enables accurate recording and tracking of calls and emails. The proposed system may be a ticketing system, but it is not necessarily required.

1. Is the contractor expected to provide the phone system if the Helpdesk is located at contractor’s site?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Yes

1. Reference 4.1.1, given the broad range of questions that may be directed to the Helpdesk, are there specific call types that are a higher priority than others? Does the government require tracking of time necessary to answer specific types of questions?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Calls that tend to take higher priority include, but are not limited to: 1) Calls within the same day of a submission deadline for a given Program Announcement; 2) Negative callers; 3) Problems with the government's submission system. No, the government does not require tracking of time necessary to answer specific types of questions. It will be the contractor's responsibility to determine how to balance response times to provide timely and excellent support for the high volume of calls and emails received.

1. There is a discrepancy between the list of key personnel listed Section 3.1.1, PWS and Section H, Key Personnel.

14. Please confirm that the Deputy Project Manager is Key.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Amendment 0002 addressed the discrepancies between section 3.1.1 and Section H, Key Personnel. The Deputy Project Director is considered Key Personnel

14. Section 3.1.1 includes key personnel positions described as the eBRAP Lead, and the Meetings Manager while Section H, Key Personnel uses the titles eBRAP Task Order Manager and Logistics Manager. Please confirm that these are the same positions. Which term would the government prefer for the bidders to use?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Amendment 0002 has addressed the discrepancies in titles.

1. We anticipate a number of Science Review Managers throughout the duration of the contract.

15. Are all Science Review Managers to be considered Key or does the government anticipate that a certain number are Key and others may be added during the course of the contract as specific programs change focus?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: All Science Review Managers are considered to be Key. The Government will entertain additional Science Review Managers during the course of the contract as specific programs change focus. Science Review Managers proposed to meet developing needs during the course of the contract will also be considered Key Personnel.

15. How many of these personnel shall be considered Key and how many will be non-Key?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: All Science Review Managers are considered to be Key Personnel.

1. In L.4.3.1.3. It is requested that the Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaire Form (Attachment 6) shall be forwarded by the Offeror by the Offeror’s references to by the submission deadline established in paragraph L.1.4; however, there is no paragraph L.1.4. Would the government indicate the due date for the questionnaire forms to be submitted?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaires to due No later than 9 December 2015, 1PM. See Amendment 0004, Section L.1.4.

1. Appendix 3 (eBRAP sample Task) states that all costs for eBRAP shall be sustainment costs “since development is complete”. Section 4.4.7 of the PWS describes the contractor as evaluating new requirements and implementing new enhancements to eBRAP. Please confirm that the sample task does not include providing enhancements to eBRAP although that option remains a part of the overall contract.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Confirmed. If development is necessary, then the government will issue a modification to the task order.

1. Please clarify the Period of Performance for the Sample Tasks. Although Section F indicates a Period of Performance beginning 1 February 2016, the POP for Sample Task 2 (SAM) and Sample Task 3 (eBRAP) indicate a Period of Performance beginning on 1 January 2016.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: The Period of Performance for the Sample Tasks is 1 February 2016. Sample Task 2 and Sample Task 3 have been updated.

1. The Transition-In plan is listed in Sample Task 2 as well as Section F Deliverable 1. In Section F, the government directs that it be included within the Volume 2 (Technical Approach).

19. Please clarify where it should be placed within this volume (i.e. as an Appendix after the resumes of key personnel.)

19. Will the Transition-In Plan be excluded from the 60 page limit of the volume?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Please see section L.4.2.2.2. “This plan is to be submitted as an Appendix to Volume II and is not subject to the page limitations. “

1. Does the government require contractors to provide a technical approach to the three sample tasks or just a cost estimate as indicated in L.4.5.2.1.2? If a technical approach is required please indicate what Volume and where it should be placed. If it is to be included in Volume 2 Technical, will these technical responses be excluded from the 60 page limit and included as Appendices after the body of the technical volume?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Offerors are to provide a technical approach that clearly demonstrates the excellence and appropriateness of the techniques, methods, and processes the Offeror plans to use to succeffully accomplish the objectives specified in the PWS. Solely cost proposals shall be provided for the three sample task orders labeled as Attachments 1-3.

1. Given that the size and complexity of proposals submitted for 2, 3, 4, or 5 person off site reviews (CLINS 0003, 0004, 0005, and 0006 etc.) may vary tremendously, from simple research plans to full consortiums, would the government consider either allowing multiple FFP sub-CLINS for each of these based on size / complexity of the proposal or using a not to exceed page limit for the proposals at each of the various CLINS?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: No

1. Reference Page 72 of 84, Clauses Incorporated by Reference - FAR 52.222-46, Evaluation of Compensation For Professional Employees – requires we submit a Total Compensation Plan. Please confirm that the Total Compensation Plan should be placed in Volume 5.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Yes, the total Compensation Plan should be placed in Volume 5.

1. Does the government plan to award the 3 sample task orders under the resultant contract?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: The government may elect to award all of these task orders within the base year. It intends to award two task orders early in the base year– CY16 SAM and CY16 eBRAP

1. We are having difficulty understanding the use of fully burdened (inclusive of fee) labor rates for CPFF work.

24. Reference FAR 16.306, Cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts, (d) Completion and term forms. Will the CPFF work be based on completion or term type task orders?

24. L.4.5.5 states that the labor rates (inclusive of fee) awarded on the contract will be used for task order proposals. How will labor be billed under the resultant contract? Typically labor on CPFF contracts is billed at actual cost burdened with then current Government approved indirect rates and fee.

24. Since fee is included in the labor rates and the labor rates are used for task order proposals (typically done in T&M contracts) instead of the labor and fee being priced separately (typically the case for CPFF work) can you describe how the contractor will earn fee in accordance with FAR 16.306 provisions?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: See Amendment 0002, Question 3 and Government Response.

1. We did not see any discussion or CLIN for ODC’s in the solicitation.

25. Can you confirm that ODC’s will be proposed and reimbursed under the CPFF (xxx1 and xxx2) CLIN’s?

25. Assuming ODC’s will be considered CPFF will they be proposed and reimbursed the Contractors then actual Government approved indirect rates and fee? If not, please clarify.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: ODC’s will be requested, proposed, and reimbursed on a task order basis, if required for the work under the task order. ODC’s will be proposed and reimbursed in accordance with applicable regulations.

1. Reference L.4.5.2.1.2, Sample Task Order Proposal – “These proposals shall utilize the rates and categories proposed…” After reviewing Sample Tasks 1 & 2 there appear to be both FP and CPFF components. For pricing the sample tasks with FFP components should we be utilizing the FFP unit prices proposed in Attachment 5 for the FFP work?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Yes

1. Reference L.4.5.5, Hourly Labor Rates – States “Labor rates shall be proposed…in accordance with the descriptions provided…”

27. Will the Government be providing descriptions and minimum labor qualifications of the labor categories in Attachment 4?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: No

27. If contractors propose alternate/additional labor categories should they provide a labor category description and minimum labor qualifications in their proposal?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Yes

1. Reference Section 4.1.1, Will the government furnish SLAs pertinent to calls and emails (e.g. wait time, call closure rate)?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Please provide further clarification regarding what an SLA is.

1. Reference Amendment 1, Sections L.2.4 and L.4.3.1.3 - Please resolve an apparent conflict between these two sections. The title listed for Volume III in Section L.2.4 suggests that completed past performance questionnaires are to be included within this volume, and it is further stated in Section L.4.3.1.3 that Evaluation Questionnaires do not count against the page limit for Volume III, also suggesting that completed questionnaires are to be submitted by the Offeror with their proposal. However, Section L.4.3.1.3 also indicates that completed Evaluation Questionnaires are to be submitted by the Offeror's references directly to the Contracting Specialist (Jason Kuhns), i.e., not sent via the Offeror, suggesting that completed questionnaires should NOT be included within the Offeror's proposal. Please clarify whether completed questionnaires should be (1) included within the Offeror's proposal and sent independently by references directly to the Contracting Specialist, or (2) excluded from the Offeror's proposal and only sent independently by references directly to the Contracting Specialist.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Past Performance Questionnaires are to be submitted by the Offeror’s references to the POC identified in Section L.4.3.1.3. The questionnaires will not be included in the offerors proposal submittal and therefor will not count against page limitations of Volume III.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

SECTION L

Instructions to Offerors

L.1 General Instructions

This section provides general guidance for preparation of proposals as well as specific instructions on the format and content of the proposal. The Offeror’s proposal must include all data and information requested and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. The proposal shall also be compliant with all requirements as stated in the Performance Work Statement. This acquisition is a full and open (UNRESTRICTED) procurement under NAICS 541690 (size standard 500 employees).

The Government intends to award a Single Award Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (SA-IDIQ) contract to the Offeror that represents best value as determined by the Government. The SA-IDIQ CONTRACT will utilize firm fixed price (FFP) and cost plus fixed fee (CPFF) TASK ORDERS based on the requirements of the task order PWS.

The use of contractor teaming arrangements (as defined in FAR 9.601(1)) and subcontractor relationships are acceptable. Any subcontracting/teaming arrangements contemplated by the Offeror must be presented in detail. The details should disclose those portions of the task which will be subcontracted and the anticipated organizations with which subcontracting or teaming arrangements are planned. Since there is a direct relationship from the Cost/Price proposal to the Management Approach, teaming and functional capabilities, and Past Performance proposal, the Offeror shall include enough information on subcontracting/teaming arrangements to allow for a thorough proposal review from a technical and management perspective.

The Offeror shall include evidence (e.g., statement of intent to enter into a teaming agreement) of all subcontractor relationships (with both large and small businesses) in Volume IV of their proposal.

The Offeror shall submit documentation illustrating its approach for satisfying the requirements of this solicitation. Proposals must be clear, coherent, and prepared in sufficient detail for effective evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal against the evaluation criteria. This documentation shall cover all aspects of this solicitation and include the Offeror’s approach for integration and program management activities. Proposals must clearly demonstrate how the Offeror intends to accomplish the project and must include convincing rationale and substantiation of all claims. Unnecessarily elaborate brochures or other presentations beyond those sufficient to present a complete effective response to the solicitation are not desired.

The Offeror may describe its proposal through the use of graphs, charts, diagrams and narrative in sufficient detail for the Government to understand and evaluate the nature of the approach. In its evaluation and confidence assessment, the Government will consider the degree of substantiation of the proposed approaches in all proposal volumes.

The Government will evaluate only one proposal from each prime Offeror. The Government will not accept alternate proposals. Offeror's proposals must include a statement that the proposal shall remain valid for a minimum of 90 days from the date of submission.

The Government intends to award without discussions. Therefore, the Offeror’s proposal is presumed to represent the Offeror’s best effort in response to the Solicitation. If discussions are required they will be conducted with Offerors in the competitive range to the extent deemed necessary by the Contracting Officer in accordance with FAR 15.306. Discussions will be conducted on the content of the proposal and, if discussions have been conducted, a Final Proposal Revision (FPR) will be solicited from those Offerors within the competitive range. A common cut-off date will be established for receipt of all FPRs.

Offerors are prohibited from modifying any documents, printed or electronic, associated with this solicitation and any amendments in any way, shape or form, unless specifically authorized to do so. The electronic solicitation documents posted on http://www.fbo.gov shall be the official documents for this solicitation.

All proposal information is subject to verification by the Government. Falsification of any proposal submission, documents, or statements may subject the Offeror to civil or criminal prosecution under Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

All Offerors must comply with FAR Clause 52.204-7 System for Award Management (SAM). In complying with this clause, the Offeror must ensure that ALL representations and certifications contained in Solicitation Section K are completed and uploaded to its SAM record at http://www.sam.gov by the date specified for receipt of proposals. Any Offeror that does not have an active SAM record or has a record that does not include all representations and certifications required in Section K may be found non-responsive and may not be considered for award.

Any data previously submitted in response to another solicitation to USAMRAA or another agency shall be assumed to be unavailable during this proposal evaluation and source selection process. Proposal data shall not be incorporated into this proposal by referring to another proposal or other source.

The Government will not reimburse any Offerors for costs incurred as a result of preparation and submission of a proposal in response to this solicitation.

Offers submitted in response to this solicitation shall be in the English language. Offers received in other than English shall be determined non-responsive.

L.1.2. TECHNICAL QUESTIONS

Questions shall be submitted to Courtney Chase at Courtney.F.Chase.civ@mail.mil by COB 17 November 2015, but interested contractors are encouraged to submit questions at any point prior to 17 November 2015. The Government its best effort to provide responses in a timely manner. All responses will be provided via amendments to the solicitation. No telephone calls will be accepted.

L.1.3 PROPOSAL DUE DATE

No later than 10 December 2015 at 1:00 PM ET.

L.1.4 PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRES DUE DATE

No later than 10 December 2015 at 1:00PM ET

L.2. PROPOSAL FORMAT AND CONTENT INSTRUCTIONS

Failure to submit all documents concurrently, and in accordance with these instructions, may render a proposal unacceptable. The Government will not consider pages submitted in excess of the stated page limitations.

L.2.1. MEDIA

The Offeror shall provide one (1) compact disc (CD) containing all proposal Volumes using Microsoft Office 2007 applications. The Government will count this CD as the original copy. The Offeror shall also provide seven (7) hard-copies of the proposal. The hard-copies shall be organized as described below, with each volume submitted in a separate 3-ring binder. If a discrepancy exists between the original paper copy of the proposal and the electronic CD copy required to be submitted, the electronic CD copy will take precedence. Documents contained in electronic copies on CDs will be the considered the official proposal documents.

All electronic submissions, with the exception of Volume 5, shall be submitted as “Read Only” and be compatible with Microsoft Windows XP, Microsoft Excel 2007, Microsoft Word 2007, Microsoft Project 2007, and Adobe Acrobat Reader 8.0.

L.2.2. PROPOSAL EVALUATION

To aid in evaluation, proposals shall be practical, specific and complete as well as being indexed (cross-indexed, as appropriate) and logically assembled. The proposal shall be in a clear, concise form. All pages of each proposal Volume shall be numbered and dated and include the solicitation number.

L.2.3. COST/PRICE INFORMATION. Cost/Price information shall be included in the cost/price proposal Volume only. The proposed cost/price shall not be discussed or exhibited in any other Volume of the Offeror’s proposal.

L.2.3.1. INNOVATIVE APPROACHES. Wherever the Contractor is proposing an innovative approach that may significantly impact the cost/price, the Contractor shall identify this within the technical proposal, without actually referencing the labor rates or labor costs. Any significant inconsistency between the cost/price proposal and any other section of the proposal, if unexplained, may be interpreted as a lack of the Offeror’s understanding of the nature and scope of the requirement and the Offeror’s ability to perform the CONTRACT within the financial restraints therein.

L.2.4. THE OFFEROR’S PROPOSAL

The overall proposal shall consist of five (5) separate Volumes, individually titled. All copies of each Volume shall be appropriately titled. The required number of copies of each proposal Volume, each of which shall be contained in separate 3-ring binders, is as follows:

L.3. PAGE LIMITATIONS

L.3.1. There are page limitations associated with each proposal Volume. If the Offeror’s proposal Volume exceeds the defined page limitations, the pages exceeding the limit will be removed and will not be evaluated.

L.3.2. The Table of Contents will not be counted toward the page limit.

L.4. CONTENT OF PROPOSAL PARTS

L.4.1. VOLUME I Executed Solicitation Documents (Section K) and SF 33

The Offeror shall fill out page 1 of the Solicitation Form (SF) 33, Solicitation, Offer and Award. The Offeror shall fill out blocks 12 through 19 accordingly:

The Government requires a minimum acceptance period of not less than 90 calendar days. The Offeror shall complete Block 12 with full cognizance of the minimum acceptance period of 90 calendar days. “Acceptance Period” means the number of calendar days available to the Government for awarding a contract from the date specified in this solicitation for receipt of an offer. The offer may specify for a longer acceptance period than the Government’s minimum requirement but shall not specify a shorter period. .

If any amendments to the solicitation are issued, the Offeror must acknowledge each amendment number and date in Block 14 of the SF 33. Failure to acknowledge all solicitation amendments may render the Offeror non-responsive.

The Offeror’s legal name and address in Block 15A on the SF33 must match the information for the Offeror in SAM.gov at http://www.sam.gov including the corresponding Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code number and Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number (Note: the address listed in Block 15A will be the official mailing address used by the Government for letter correspondence, if necessary).

The name, title, signature and date identified in Block 16, 17 and 18 must be an authorized representative with authority to commit the Offeror to contractual obligation.

L.4.2. VOLUME II – Executive Summary, Technical Approach, Management Approach, Experience

All sections of the Offeror’s proposal shall make direct reference to the PWS specification paragraph numbers. Proposed approach and methods shall be presented in a clear and logical order. Statements such as “will comply”, “meets the intent of”, or “we intend to meet the requirements” and the like, will not suffice for evaluation purposes.

Volume II shall be divided into five (5) sections: Executive Summary, Technical Approach, Management Approach, Experience, and resumes of Key Personnel. Note that the resumes of Key Personnel shall follow the Experience section, but are not included in the page limits. Technical Approach, Management Approach, and Experience are further defined below. Volume II, shall not exceed sixty (60) pages, including appendices, matrices, and tables. Fold-outs (either 8 ½” by 14” or 11” x 17”) shall count as two (2) pages each. Proposals shall be double-sided, typed in 12-point, Times New Roman font using 1” margins on the top, bottom and sides. Graphics, tables and matrices are exempt from the 12-point font requirement; however, any materials not legible to the evaluators will be disregarded. Cover pages containing plain names (example - title pages) will not be include in total page counts.

L.4.2.1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Executive Summary shall not exceed 1 page.

L.4.2.2. TECHNICAL APPROACH

L.4.2.2.1 Offerors shall submit a Technical Approach that clearly demonstrates the excellence and appropriateness of the techniques, methods, and processes the Offeror plans to use to successfully accomplish the objectives specified in the Performance Work Statement (specifically “how” the objectives will be accomplished), namely:

(a) Providing helpdesk support

(b) Conducting application/proposal compliance

(c) Conducting in person peer review panels

(d) Conducting online peer review panels

(e) Conducting teleconference peer review panels

(f) Conducting video teleconference peer review panels

(g) Conducting online/electronic individual peer reviews

(h) Completing and delivering summary statements

(i) Completing all peer review logistical requirements

(j) Operating, maintaining, and enhancing eBRAP

L.4.2.2.2 Offerors shall submit a Transition-In Plan for 30 days of incoming transition support from contract to contract. This plan is to be submitted as an Appendix to Volume II and is not subject to the page limitations.

The Transition In Plan shall describe in detail how the Contractor will transition in to the resultant contract to include being capable of providing full performance on the day after the end of the transition-in period. This may include the following tasks:

- Obtaining Ft. Detrick ID and Common Access Card (CAC) for appropriate personnel, scheduling and completing Government required training and certification in accordance with the AT/ OPSEC requirements listed in PWS Section 3.1.2, Orientation phase and program to introduce Government personnel, programs, and users to the Contractor's team, tools, methodologies, and business processes, Coordination with Government representatives, Review, evaluation, and transition of incumbent support services, Transition of historic data to new Contractor system, Transfer of hardware warranties and software licenses (if applicable), Transfer of all necessary business and/or technical documentation, Distribution of Contractor purchased Government owned assets, including facilities, equipment, furniture, phone lines, computer equipment, etc., Transfer of Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) and Government Furnished Information (GFI), and GFE inventory management assistance.

L.4.2.3 MANAGEMENT APPROACH

L.4.2.3.1 Offerors shall submit a Management Approach that clearly demonstrates the how Offeror’s proposal reflects a management approach (including approach to staffing) that will lead to the successful accomplishment of the requirement.

Within the Management Approach, the Offeror shall submit the following:

L.4.2.3.1.1 Recruitment and Retention Strategy: The Recruitment and Retention Strategy shall demonstrate how the contractor plans to meet the requirement in the PWS specific to staffing and managing qualified personnel, as well as the recruitment of scientific reviewers. The Offeror shall also address their plan to address unanticipated personnel issues.

L.4.2.3.1.2 Management Plan: The Management Plan shall describe the Offeror’s organizational structure and subcontracting relationships. The Management Plan should describe the Offeror’s chain of command practices and how they will contribute in a positive manner to ensure the completion of all objectives on schedule and flexibility in allocating resources. The Management Plan shall also address methods for managing subcontracts and mitigating organizational conflicts of interest.

L.4.2.3.1.3 Quality Control Plan: The Offeror’s Quality Control Plan shall describe how the Contractor will meet and comply with the quality standards established in this PWS. At a minimum, the QCP shall include a self-inspection plan and an outline of the procedures that the Contractor will use to maintain quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and any other requirements set forth in this solicitation. The Offeror’s Quality Control Plan shall describe the Offeror’s approach to quality control identifies processes, procedures, and metrics which, are likely to result in successful outcome within cost and on schedule.

L.4.2.1.4 Risk Mitigation Plan: The Offeror’s Risk Mitigation Plan shall describe how the Contractor plans to reduce the risk associated with this requirement. The Risk Mitigation Plan shall discuss the Contractor’s planned approach to potentially problematic situations, to include, but no limited to, the unexpected introduction of new research programs, significant increases or decreases to appropriation levels across fiscal years, and delays in funding appropriations.

L.4.2.4 EXPERIENCE

L.4.2.4.1. The Offeror’s proposal shall describe demonstrated performance of identical, similar to, or related to performing tasks contained within the Performance Work Statement, as well as contracts of comparable risk-the functions, responsibilities, and control exercised by the Offeror are essentially the same as required under this solicitation.

The proposal shall describe evidence of relevant corporate experience in managing subcontractors and providing personnel with an appropriate mix and balance in education and training relates to the tasks required in the PWS.

The Offeror shall also demonstrate evidence of relevant corporate experience, as well as demonstrate evidence of relevant experience of Key Personnel. The Offeror shall provide resumes for all individuals proposed to fill Key Personnel positions. For individuals proposed as Key Personnel who are not current employees of the Offeror’s company or a subcontractor, a signed letter of intent is required.

L.4.3. VOLUME III – PAST PERFORMANCE

The entirety of the Volume III past performance narrative shall not exceed fifteen (15) pages, including appendices, matrices, and tables. Fold-outs (either 8 ½” by 14” or 11” x 17”) shall count as two (2) pages each. Proposals shall be single-sided, typed in 12-point, Times New Roman font using 1” margins on the top, bottom and sides. Graphics, tables and matrices are exempt from the 12-point font requirement; however, any materials not legible to the evaluators will be disregarded.

L.4.3.1. PAST PERFORMANCE REFERENCES

The Offeror, shall submit NO MORE THAN four (4) past performance references for itself as the prime contractor of relevant CONTRACTS in scope, magnitude of effort, and complexities with this requirement. The Offeror shall also submit NO MORE THAN two (2) references for each subcontractor. The contracts may be past or current as long as the recent performance did not end more than three (3) years prior to the due date for the submission of the Offeror’s proposal, and the referenced contracts may have been with Federal, State, or City agencies and commercial customers.

L.4.3.1.1. Offerors are reminded the Government may elect to consider data obtained from other sources. Other sources available to the Government include, but are not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), and Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). The burden of demonstrating relevancy of the past performance rests with the Offeror.

L.4.3.1.2. The Offeror shall provide a Past Performance Narrative for each reference that discusses the Offeror’s ability to perform all the requirements identified in the PWS. The narrative should include the following information:

(1) Customer's name, address and current telephone number and e-mail address provided for one (1) point of contact.

(2) Contract number, type and total original and present or final CONTRACT value.

(3) Date of CONTRACT, place(s) of performance, and period of performance.

(4) Brief description of CONTRACT work and comparability to the proposed effort. It is not sufficient to state that it is comparable in magnitude and scope. Rationale must be provided to demonstrate that it is comparable as set forth above.

(5) Method of acquisition: competitive or noncompetitive.

(6) Discuss any major technical problems and how they were overcome. List major deviations or waivers to technical requirements granted by the customer.

(7) Whether delivery was on time and, if not, why; adherence to program schedules, incentive performance (e.g., schedule and technical) history, if applicable.

(8) Cost and price management history, cost over-runs and under-runs, and cost and price increase modifications and the reasons, if applicable.

(9) Removed via Amendment 0002.

(10) Average number of personnel on the CONTRACT per year and the percent turnover of personnel per year.

L.4.3.1.3. The Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaire Form (Attachment 6) shall be forwarded by the Offeror to the references provided in the Past Performance Narrative. Completed past performance questionnaires shall be submitted by the Offeror’s references to Courtney.F.Chase.civ@mail.mil by the submission deadline established in paragraph L.1.4. The Evaluation Questionnaires do not count against the page limit.

L.4.3.1.4. List any CONTRACTS cancelled or terminated (partial or complete) within the past five (5) years and basis for termination (convenience or default). Include the CONTRACT number, name, address and telephone number of the terminating Contracting Officer. Include CONTRACTS “de-scoped" by the customer because of performance or cost problems. This information shall be provided under a separate heading within the Past Performance Volume.

L.4.4. VOLUME IV – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN, SUBCONTRACTING PLAN

L.4.4.1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Executive Summary shall not exceed 1 page.

L.4.4.2. SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN

L.4.4.2.1 All Offerors (both large and small businesses) are required to complete a Small Business Participation Proposal. Offerors should propose the level of participation of small businesses (as a small business prime and/or small business subcontractors) in the performance of the acquisition relative to the following small business objectives/goals.

The Department of Defense (DOD) has established small business goals as an assistance to assure small business receives a fair proportion of DOD awards. The goals for this procurement are as follows:

Small Business :{15.0%} of the total *contract value;

Small Disadvantaged Business: {2.0%} of the total contract value;

Woman-Owned Small Business: {2.0%} of the total contract value;

Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) Small Business: {1.0%} of the total contract value;

Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business: {1.0 %} of the total contract value.

(Note, for example, that a participation plan that reflects {4.0%} of the contract value for Woman-Owned Small Business would also count towards the overall Small Business Goal).

*The Government recognizes that these goals are stated as a percentage of the total contract value for the small business participation plan; whereas, the goals included in the subcontracting plan (FAR Clause 52.219-9) are stated in terms of a percentage of total subcontract dollars.

L.4.4.2.2 Check the applicable size and categories for the PRIME Offeror only -- Check all applicable boxes:

{ } Small Business Prime; also categorized as a { } Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) { } Woman-Owned Small Business (WOSB) { } Historically Underutilized Zone (HUB Zone) Small Business { } Veteran Owned Small Business (VOSB) { } Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB)

L.4.4.2.3 Submit the total combined percentage of work to be performed by both large and small businesses (include the percentage of work to be performed both by Prime and Subcontractors):

Example: If Prime proposes a price of $1,000,000 (including all options), and small business(es) will provide $250,000 in services/supplies as a prime or subcontractor, the % planned for small businesses is 25%; and 75% for large business equaling 100%.

L.4.4.2.4 Please indicate the total percentage of participation to be performed by each type of subcategory small business. The percentage of work performed by Small Businesses that qualify in multiple small business categories may be counted in each category:

Example: Victory Prop Mgt (WOSB and SDVOSB) performing 2%; and Williams Group (SDB, HubZ and WOSB) performing 3%. Results equate to: SDB 3%; HubZone 3%; WOSB 5%; SDVOSB 2%; VOSB 2%;). SDVOSBs are also VOSBs automatically; however VOSBs are not automatically SDVOSBs.

L.4.4.2.5 List principle supplies/services to be performed by Small Businesses:

Example: If a Small Business qualifies also as a WOSB and a SDVOSB, and you can add them to each category below in which they qualify.

Name of Company Identify Type of Service/Supply

Small Business (SB):

Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB):

Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB):

Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUB Zone):

Veteran Owned Small Business (VOSB):

Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVO):

Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority Institutions (HBCU/MI):

L.4.4.2.6 Describe the extent of commitment to use small businesses (for example, what types of commitments if any are in place for this specific acquisition either – small business prime, written contract, verbal, enforceable, non-enforceable, joint venturing, mentor-protégé, etc.)

L.4.4.2.7 Small Business Subcontracting Plan: If applicable (for large business concern Offerors under the assigned NAICS code herein), the Offeror shall submit a subcontracting plan in accordance with FAR Clause 52.219-9 and DFARS Clause 252.219-7003 (for reference see FAR 19.704 and DFARS 219-704). The negotiation of a subcontracting plan shall not be considered discussions or a reopening of Solicitation W81XWH-15-R-0081. The subcontracting plan requirement is not applicable to small business concerns qualified as such under the NAICS code assigned to this solicitation. Master subcontracting plans can be included as an appendix to the subcontracting plan and will not count towards the page count.

L.4.5 VOLUME V- COST/ PRICE PROPOSAL

L4.5.1 EXEUCITVE SUMMARY

The Executive Summary shall not exceed 1 page.

L.4.5.2 COST/ PRICE PROPOSAL

The cost/price proposal has no page limitation. Offerors shall provide cost/price information to meet the cost reimbursable and fixed price nature of the contract.

L.4.5.2.1. COST PROPOSAL: The Government is not requesting an overall cost for all activities to be performed under this requirement. An overall contract ceiling costs of $180,000,000 will be applied to this SA-IDIQ.

In order to evaluate costs, the Government shall evaluate the following:

L.4.5.2.1.1 Labor Categories/ Rates: Attachment 4 provides a list of potential labor categories. Offerors are not bound to propose these labor categories, rather Offerors are expected to provide their best solution citing the labor mix required to accomplish the tasks. If Offerors have determined the labor categories provided are not consistent with their technical solution, Offerors shall replace the provided labor categories with those that more closely match their technical proposal.

Offerors shall complete Attachment 4 and include it with the submission of their Cost Proposal. Note that labor rates proposed will be utilized throughout the duration of the contract. Each individual labor rate will be evaluated for fair and reasonable pricing. Note that after award of the contract, if additional labor categories are deemed necessary by the Contractor, they may be added with the concurrence of the Contracting Officer through a modification. The Government’s expectation is that any labor categories added after award will be supplemental in nature and not command a significant portion of the effort. The Government encourages Offeror’s to be forward-thinking and include all potential labor categories that could be utilized under this contract.

In addition to providing all proposed labor categories and rates, the contractor shall cross-map each labor category back to the specific tasks from the Performance Work Statement. This cross-mapping may be submitted as part of Attachment 4 or as a separate, clearly labeled document.

The Offeror shall provide cost build up data for loaded labor rates beginning with the unloaded labor rate through application of indirect and profit or fee. The Offeror shall not propose labor rates that are derived from blending two or more separate Contractors, Subcontractors, or Consultants.

All percentages and rates shall be rounded to two decimal places. The Offeror shall ensure mathematical computations are correct. Errors in addition or multiplication may be considered a reason to be removed from competition.

L.4.5.2.1.2 Sample Task Order Cost Proposal: Attachments 1-3 provide sample task orders. Offerors shall provide cost proposals for each task order in accordance with the task order PWS. Offerors may submit their cost proposals in a format of their choosing. These proposals shall utilize the rates and categories proposed in response to Section L.4.5.2.1.1 of this document and shall delineate the estimated number of hours for each labor category proposed. The proposed cost estimates shall be reflective of the Technical Approach proposed by the Offeror.

L.4.5.2.1.2.1 Attachment 1: Peer Reviewed Medical Research Program (PRMRP)/ CPFF Task Order: The Offeror shall provide estimated costs based on the Government’s anticipated application submissions. Offerors shall submit cost information to reflect each of the individual Cycles, as well as cumulative cost estimate for the FY16 PRMRP (Cycles 1-4). When determining the costs for the onsite panel reviews, the Offeror shall assume a meeting location within the DC Metro region.

L.4.5.2.1.2.2 Attachment 2: Science, Administration, and Management (SAM)/ CPFF Task Order: The Offeror shall provide estimated costs based on the Government’s estimates provided in the task order PWS.

L.4.5.2.1.2.3 Attachment 3: Electronic Biomedical Research Application Portal (eBRAP)/ CPFF Task Order: The Offeror shall provide estimated costs based on the Government’s estimates provided in the task order PWS.

L.4.5.2.2 PRICE PROPOSAL: Offerors shall complete Attachment 5, utilizing the annual estimates provided at the CLIN level for all CLIN’s ending in X003, X004, X005, and X006.

L.4.5.3 FINANCIAL RESOURCES

To be determined responsible, a prospective Contractor must have adequate financial resources to perform the contract or the ability to obtain them. Offerors shall submit either reviewed or audited financial statements to include an Independent Accountants’ Review Report or Independent Auditors Report or compiled financial statements signed by the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) in accordance with Sarbanes-Oxley Act Section 302 certifying (a) The signing officers have reviewed the financial statements, (b) The financial statements do not contain any material untrue statements or material omission or be considered misleading, (c) The financial statements and related information fairly present the financial condition and the results in all material respects, (d) The signing officers are responsible for internal controls and have evaluated these internal…