W81XWH-17-R-0074-0005_Modification_Copy.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

This amendment is for the limited purpose of clarifying ambiguity related to OCI certif ication requirements for subcontractors. This amendment applies to all offerors w ho have already submitted a proposal. Responses are due by 4:00PM Eastern Time on 10 July 2018.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

S 1 16

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 05-Jul-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

W81XWH-17-R-0074

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

12-Apr-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 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

05-Jul-2018

CODE

USA MED RESEARCH ACQ ACTIVITY

820 CHANDLER ST

FORT DETRICK MD 21702-5014

W81XWH 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W81XWH-17-R-0074

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

1. General Information

POINT OF CONTACT: The Government’s main Point of Contact is Dana Kavitski, Contract Specialist, at dana.kavitski.civ@mail.mil. Questions and proposals shall be sent to this e-mail address with the following points of contact copied: Samantha L. Connors at samantha.l.connors.civ@mail.mil, and Herbert Caj Keen at herbert.e.keen.civ@mail.mil. The Offeror is responsible for ensuring receipt by the main POC.

PROPOSAL DUE DATE: Proposals will be due at 3:00PM Eastern Time on 14 May 2018. All proposal formats must be received by the contracting officer prior to the submission date and time or risk not being considered for award.

SOLICITATION QUESTIONS: Questions concerning this Solicitation are due no later than 3:00pm Eastern Time, 23 April 2018. Questions shall be submitted in writing to the points of contact above by this closing date and time.

Questions received after this time will not be accepted or answered. The e-mail must have a subject title of

“W81XWH-17-R-0074: Solicitation Questions.” Telephone inquiries will NOT be accepted at any time. The

Government will issue a solicitation amendment containing answers to the questions.

SUBMISSION: Each volume shall be submitted (1) in hard copy as a separate file/three-ring binder and (2) on CDs with each proposal volume written to its own CD, and (3) via email with each proposal volume attached as its own file. Each file/binder and disc shall be clearly labeled with its Title and a copy number (e.g., copy 1 of 5).

Formatting should be single spaced. Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line. A standard, 12-point font size applies. Arial or New Times Roman fonts are required. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size no less than 8-point and may be landscape.

Failure to meet any of the requirements of the Proposal Submission section may result in elimination from the competition.

The following volumes of material shall be submitted:

Proposal

Volume Volume Title

Required

Copies Required Sections and Titles

Page

Limits

Non-Cost Proposal

I

Management

Approach

Volume

2 CDs /

7 hard copy /

1 email attachment

Cover Page, Table of Contents, and Glossary No Limit

Management Approach, Program Management

Plan, Quality Control Plan, and Transition In

Plan

II

Experience

Volume

2 CDs /

7 hard copy /

1 email attachment

Cover Page, Table of Contents, and Glossary No Limit

Experience 10

Resumes/Letters of Intent for Key Personnel No Limit mailto:dana.kavitski.civ@mail.mil mailto:samantha.l.connors.civ@mail.mil mailto:herbert.e.keen.civ@mail.mil

NOTE: Pages that exceed the required page limitations will not be evaluated. Additional pages over the maximum allowed will be removed and will not be evaluated by the Government.

The Submission shall be mailed or hand delivered to:

US Army Medical Research Acquisition Activity

C/O Dana Kavitski

839 Chandler Street

Fort Detrick, MD 21702

Courier delivery is acceptable.

ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION:

Format. The submission shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled. Each volume shall be clearly identified and shall begin at the top of a page. All pages of each volume shall be appropriately numbered and identified by the complete company name, date and RFP number in the header and/or footer. A Table of Contents should be created using the Table of Content feature in MS Word. MS Word (doc) files shall use the following page setup parameters:

Margins – Top, Bottom, Left, Right – 1”

III

Past

Performance and Small

Business

Volume

2 CDs /

2 hard copy /

1 email attachment

Cover Page, Table of Contents, and Glossary No Limit

Past Performance References No Limit

Past Performance Questionnaire Points of

Contact No Limit

Small Business Participation Plan No Limit

Subcontracting Plan 25

IV

Administrative

Volume

2 CD /

2 hard copy /

1 email attachment

Cover Page, Table of Contents and Glossary No Limit

Signed Solicitation Offer and Award Documents

(SF33 Cover Page, Section B, and Section K

Representations and Certifications not already included in System for Award Management)

No Limit

Non-Disclosure Agreement with CACI No Limit

Evidence of All Subcontractor Agreements and

Teaming Arrangements No Limit

Organizational Conflict of Interest Certification including Comparative Analysis (and Mitigation

Plan, if applicable)

No Limit

Cost Proposal

V Cost Proposal

Volume

2 CD /

2 hard copy /

1 email attachment

Cover Page, Table of Contents, and Glossary No Limit

Cost Proposal (including the completed Cost

Summary Sheet provided at RFP Attachment 6) No Limit

Supporting Cost Information No Limit

Evidence of Acceptable Accounting System (see

DFARS 252.242-7006)

No Limit

Current Forward Pricing Rate Agreement (if available) No Limit

Proposed Level of Effort No Limit

Gutter – 0”

From Edge – Header, Footer 0.5”

Page Size, Width – 8.5”

Page Size, Height – 11”

NOTE: 11X17 folded pages are acceptable for tables/graphic representations; however, each 11X17 page counts as two pages.

The following additional restrictions apply:

File Packaging. All of the proposal files shall be compressed (zipped) into one file entitled proposal.zip using

WinZip version 6.2 or later, or as separate uploads in their native format, i.e. doc, xls, ppt, etc., and provided on CDs or DVDs. Zip disks are not permitted. Files shall be in read-only format, using PDF files. All cost breakdown information to aide in the cost evaluation shall be submitted in Microsoft Office Excel Read/Write format and viewable in Microsoft Excel 2007 or higher. Each disc shall be externally labeled with the volume number, date, and the offeror’s name. **Please note – Self extracting exe files are not acceptable. ** If the hard-copy proposal differs from the electronic version, the hard copy will govern.

Email Size Limits: Email messages with attachments are limited to 20 MB. If necessary, it is acceptable for

Offerors to break down proposal volumes and submit in multiple emails in order to comply with the size limit.

2. FED SELECT SOURCE SELECTION TOOL:

The Government will be utilizing Fed Select software by CACI as a source selection tool for this evaluation.

Offerors are advised that employees of the firm identified below may have access to proposal information as necessary for information to be loaded into the Fed Select software. Such firms are expressly prohibited from competing on the subject acquisition:

CACI International Inc.

In accomplishing its duty related to the source selection process, the aforementioned firm may have access to proprietary information contained in the offeror’s proposals. A non-disclosure agreement is required to be provided in the Offeror’s Administrative Volume.

3. PROPOSAL CONTENT AND FORMAT INSTRUCTIONS.

All information shall be confined to the appropriate file. The offeror shall confine submissions to essential matters, sufficient to define the proposal in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal.

Each Volume of the proposal shall contain a Cover Page with the solicitation number, proposal date, proposal volume, and Offeror’s name, along with a Table of Contents and glossary. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked on every page containing such information. Cost information is prohibited from being provided in Volumes

1 and 2. The following shall be included in the proposal:

3a. VOLUME I – Management Approach Volume.

The Offeror shall demonstrate a clear, effective management approach which relates management activities to all contract requirements as well as the methodology and flexibility that will be utilized to manage requirements within cost and on schedule.

The Offeror shall detail and fully describe its management strategies as well as its management structure and lines of authority.

The Offeror shall explain how its chain of command practices will contribute in a positive manner to ensuring completion of all tasks (particularly emphasizing communications, accounting, crosschecks on schedule early enough to take necessary corrective actions, and flexibility in allocating resources based on Government established priorities).

The Program Management Plan (PMP) shall document how the Offeror will meet and comply with the requirements to control, coordinate, and direct performance; and organize and manage resources that will achieve the technical/scientific requirements as established in the PWS. The PMP shall consist of control policies and procedures IAW standard industry practices for project administration, execution and tracking. The PMP shall also identify milestones where Government information/activity is required and timeline dependencies for subsequent

Contractor activities. The PMP shall describe the Contractor’s overall management approaches, policies and procedures including suggested project metrics, as well as the use of onsite Contractor leads. The PMP shall include a detailed staffing plan which shall describe the Offeror’s approach to ensuring continuity of services, coordination, direction, management of all subcontractors, and meeting all security requirements. The staffing plan shall address recruitment and retention with an emphasis on filling vacancies with qualified individuals able to obtain security clearances as described in the PWS in a timely manner continuously throughout the term of the contract. Contractors are strongly encouraged to utilize Right of First Refusal to current Contractor employees performing services on existing contracts.

The proposed Quality Control Plan (QCP) shall document how the Contractor shall meet and comply with the quality standards established in the PWS. At a minimum, the QCP shall include a self-inspection plan, an internal approval routing plan, and an outline of the procedures that the Contractor will use to maintain quality, timeliness, responsiveness, and customer satisfaction.

The Offeror’s transition-in plan shall describe how the Contractor will maintain continuity of services upon the first day of full performance. The Offeror’s transition in plan shall describe the following minimum tasks:

Obtaining a Fort Detrick Identification (ID) and Common Access Card (CAC), Scheduling and completing Government required training;

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 Provided Equipment and Government Furnished Information (GFI), and equipment inventory management assistance;

Transfer of accountability for Government keys and security codes.

3b. VOLUME II – Experience Volume.

Experience

The Offeror’s proposal shall demonstrate the amount of relevant corporate experience the Offeror possesses, as well as the amount of relevant experience possessed by proposed subcontractors and Key Personnel which is identical to, similar to or related to performing all services contained within the PWS and in performing proposed processes and procedures. The Offeror’s proposal shall demonstrate an appropriate mix and balance of education and training of

Key Personnel.

The proposal shall demonstrate corporate experience in all aspects of DoD lifecycle management, acquisition processes, the DoD 5000 regulations, and advanced development methodologies, processes and capabilities.

Resumes/Letters of Intent for Key Personnel

For all Key Personnel positions, provide a list of individuals proposed to fill Key Personnel positions along with a description of the portion of the solicitation’s Performance Work Statement that each individual is being proposed to perform. For all individuals proposed to fill Key Personnel positions, the Offeror shall submit resumes. Please do not submit resumes for all labor proposed; resumes are only required for those Key Personnel identified below and any additional Key Personnel positions identified by the offeror. For those individuals proposed as Key Personnel who are not current employees of the Offeror’s company, include a signed a letter of intent. Offerors do not have to provide a letter of intent for individuals proposed as Key Personnel who are current employees of the prime contractor. Offerors shall include a letter of intent for any other individual proposed as Key Personnel to include subcontractor employees, teaming partner employees, and consultants.

The following positions are estimated to be filled by Key Personnel:

Contractor Task Manager

Pharmacovigilance Physician

3c. VOLUME III – Past Performance and Small Business Volume. The volume shall be organized into the following sections:

Past Performance References

This volume shall contain past performance information regarding similar contracts. Offerors shall submit no more than three past performance references from Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime Offeror and no more than three past performance references from Government and/or commercial contracts for each major subcontractor performed during the past three (3) years from the issue date of this RFP, which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation. A major subcontractor is any subcontractor performing 20% or more of the overall proposed effort. Data concerning the Offeror shall be provided first, followed by each proposed major subcontractor. The Offeror shall also submit the written consent of its major subcontractors to allow the disclosure of its subcontractor’s past performance information to the Offeror. In addition, letters of intent shall be included for all major subcontractors for their past performance to be considered. Each reference shall contain the following information:

(a) Contractor/Subcontractor place of performance, CAGE Code and DUNS Number. If the work was performed as a subcontractor, also provide the name of the prime contractor and Point of Contact (POC) within the prime contractor organization (name, and current address, e-mail address, and telephone and fax numbers).

(b) Government contracting activity, and current address, Procuring Contracting Officer’s name, e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers.

(c) Government’s technical representative/COR and current email address, telephone and fax numbers.

(d) Government contract administration activity and the Administrative Contracting Officer’s name, and current e-mail address, telephone and fax number.

(e) Contract Number and, in the case of Indefinite Delivery type contracts, GSA contracts, and Blanket Purchase

Agreements, include Task/Delivery Order Numbers.

(f) Contract Type (specific type such as Fixed-Price (FP), Cost Reimbursement (CR), Time & Material (T&M), etc.). In the case of Indefinite Delivery contracts, indicate specific type (Requirements, Definite Quantity, and

Indefinite Quantity) and secondary contract type (FP, CR, T&M, etc.).

(g) Awarded price/cost.

(h) Final or projected final price/cost.

(i) Original delivery schedule, including dates of start and completion or work.

(j) Final or projected final, delivery schedule, including dates of start and completion of work.

Past Performance Questionnaire Points of Contact. For all past performance reference contracts identified in

Section 1 – Past Performance References, a Past Performance Questionnaire must be completed and submitted. The

Offeror shall complete Part I of the Past Performance Questionnaire (Solicitation Attachment 3) and e-mail the questionnaire to both the Government contracting activity and technical representative responsible for the past/current contract. The POCs shall be instructed to electronically complete Part II of the questionnaire and e-mail the entire questionnaire to the Contracting Office no later than the proposal due date, to Ms. Dana Kavitski at

Dana.Kavitski.civ@mail.mil, and Mr. Herbert (Caj) Keen, at herbert.e.keen.civ@mail.mil. The Offeror shall provide in its proposal a list of all the POC’s who were sent a questionnaire. The Government must receive this list no later than the proposal due date. The POC List shall be submitted in Word for Windows Table Format to include the following fields: Solicitation Number; Company Name; Contract Number; Government Agency; POC Last

Name, First Name; POC Title; POC Telephone Number; POC E-mail Address; and Date E-Mail to POC

(month/day).

Small Business Participation Plan and Small Business Subcontracting Plan

All Offerors (both large and small businesses) shall submit their level of small business commitment under the proposed acquisition and their level of commitment and ability to utilize small businesses in performance of prior contracts for similar products or services. Large businesses shall submit a small business sub-contracting plan.

Evidence of the following should be present in the small business participation plan:

(a) The extent to which such firms, as defined in FAR Part 19, are specifically identified in proposals;

(b) The extent of commitment to use such firms (enforceable commitments will be weighted more heavily than non-enforceable ones);

(c) The complexity and variety of the work small firms are to perform;

(d) The realism of the proposal;

(e) Past performance of the offeror in complying with the requirements of the clauses at FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of

Small Business Concerns, and, for all large business Offeror’s, FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan;

(f) The extent of participation of such firms in terms of the value of the total acquisition, consistency between the small business sub-contracting plan and the small business participation plan;

(g) The extent to which the offeror provides detailed explanations/documentation supporting the proposed participation percentages.

Small Business Participation Goal mandatory minimum shall be no less than 16%.

Category Goal

Small Business (inclusive of all categories below) 16%

Small Non-Disadvantaged Business 0%

Small Disadvantaged Business 5%

Woman-Owned Small Business 5% mailto:Dana.Kavitski.civ@mail.mil mailto:herbert.e.keen.civ@mail.mil

Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business 3%

Veteran Owned Small Business 0%

HUBZone Small Business 3%

The Offeror shall submit a completed version of the Small Business Participation Plan Template (Solicitation

Attachment 4) and provide it with the proposal.

3e. VOLUME IV – ADMINISTRATIVE VOLUME. The volume shall contain the following:

Signed Solicitation Offer (SF33 Cover Page) and Award Documents

An authorized official of the firm shall sign the SF 33 and all certifications requiring original signature. An Acrobat

PDF file shall be created to capture the signatures for submission.

Section A – SF33 Cover Page, Solicitation, Offer and Award

Section B – Contract Administration Data

Section K – Representations, Certification and Other Statements of Offerors not already included in System for

Award Management (SAM)

Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations shall not be addressed in any proposal

Volume.

Non-Disclosure Agreement with CACI.

Pursuant to FAR 9.505-4, CACI must execute an agreement with each prime Offeror that states that it will (1) protect the offeror’s information from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary and (2) refrain from using the information for any purpose other than that for which it was furnished. To expedite the evaluation process, each Offeror must contact CACI to effect execution of such an agreement prior to the submission of proposals. Each offeror shall submit a copy of the agreement with their proposal in accordance with the instructions in Section L of this solicitation. Contact information for obtaining a non-disclosure agreement is:

CACI International Inc.

1100 N Glebe Rd

Arlington, VA 22201-5798

Phone: (571) 290-4035

Evidence of all Subcontractor Agreements and Teaming Arrangements

Evidence of all subcontractor agreements and teaming arrangements shall be provided in this section.

Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Certification (and Mitigation Plan if applicable)

The Offeror shall complete the attached OCI Certification (Solicitation Attachment 1) and provide an OCI

Avoidance or Mitigation plan if necessary for itself and all subcontractors. Prime offerors and major subcontractors are required to provide the completed OCI Certification (Attachment 1) as well as the comparative analysis required in the attachment. Subcontractors that are not major subcontractors are only required to provide the completed

Attachment 1. An OCI Avoidance or Mitigation Plan must be provided for any prime or subcontractor that identifies a real or potential OCI.

3f. VOLUME V – Cost Proposal Volume. This volume shall consist of all information, required to support proposed costs. Certified cost and pricing data are not currently required; however, the Government reserves the http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/09.htm#P1165_99995 right to request such data prior to award. The information submitted in this volume shall comply with FAR 15.408, Table 15-2, and the requirements set forth below. There are no page limitations for this volume.

Cost Proposal.

The Offeror shall ensure that the information submitted in this volume is consistent with and fully supports the amounts set forth in the SF33 and continuation sheets.

The proposal shall set forth a summary of the total estimated costs by cost element and shall provide a breakdown of the proposed estimated costs of each CLIN separately, including all direct and indirect costs and fees for the base period and each option period. All documentation furnished to support the cost summaries are to be provided in a format chosen by the Offeror that is easily traceable to the cost summary sheets.

The Offeror’s proposal shall include a completed version of the Cost Summary Sheet provided at Attachment 6. The

Offeror shall ensure all mathematical computations are correct. If the Offeror os proposed Contractor Manpower

Reporting (CMR) as “Not Separately Priced” it shall enter “0.00” into the CMR line items in the template. Offerors shall ensure all proposed subcontractors use the same Cost Summary Sheet for all subcontract proposals submitted against this requirement.

Estimated transition-in costs and transition-out costs shall be included separately in the Offerors cost proposal.

Plug number estimates provided in the ODC CLINs are for travel purposes only. If the Offeror determines additional

ODCs are necessary beyond travel, it shall propose additional ODCs for the appropriate period in its cost proposal and include the necessary supporting documentation associated with the ODC costs proposed.

Supporting Cost Information.

The specific direct labor rates utilized to price the proposal must be identified in the cost proposal only. The proposal shall set forth a complete breakdown of the direct and indirect rates by category and the rationale thereof.

Provisions for overtime and shift differential charges shall be clearly addressed on a per-hour basis.

Direct labor rates shall identify the baseline (takeoff point) plus projected escalation for each basic and option period, and the methodology for computing composite labor rates shall be shown. For example: 3 months of FY12

+ 9 months of FY13 divided by 12 = the average labor rates for the contractual period of performance. The Offeror and each subcontractor shall clearly state their fiscal year. Offerors are advised that projected escalation must be applied to both exempt and non-exempt labor categories.

Direct labor hours and rates shall be delineated by labor category by contract year for the Offeror and each subcontractor. The labor hour delineation must be directly traceable to the same information proposed in the non-cost proposal.

Indirect expense rates shall be proposed in the same manner as direct labor rates, i.e., by contract year with the methodology used to derive any composite rates proposed.

Offerors are reminded to identify any uncompensated or partially compensated overtime included in the proposal – per FAR 52.237-10.

The Offeror shall provide information regarding its cognizant DCAA office, to include point of contact, telephone number and email address.

For proposal preparation purposes, the expected or approximate date for initiation of contract performance is

September 1, 2018 for transition in with full performance beginning October 1, 2018.

The Offeror shall submit a complete breakdown of costs for all subcontractors proposed.

Evidence of Adequate Accounting System

All Offerors are required to have an adequate accounting system to be eligible for award in accordance with FAR

16.3013(3). The adequacy of Offerors’ accounting systems will be determined using the Standard Form (SF) 1408 evaluation checklist. Offerors shall provide evidence of accounting system adequacy in the form of (a) Defense

Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) cost accounting system audit report, (b) completed DCAA SF 1408, or (c) independent third-party audit report of accounting system and methods within the past two (2) years. Prior to award, a DCAA preaward survey may be requested to confirm accounting system adequacy.

Self-certification or unsubstantiated statements of possessing an adequate accounting system or acceptable purchasing system is insufficient and may render the Offeror’s proposal ineligible for award.

These requirements also apply to proposed major subcontractors for any cost-type subcontracts.

Current Forward Pricing Rate Agreement (if available).

Forward-pricing Rate Agreements (FPRA) shall be clearly documented with agreements and responsible

Government officials identified.

Proposed Level of Effort

The offeror shall include the proposed level of effort that is appropriate for its approach. Offerors shall provide a listing of all proposed labor categories for the prime contractor as well as subcontractors. This should include a reference to the PWS sections each labor category is proposed for. Levels of effort shall be in terms of hours. Levels of effort in this section shall not include cost information (i.e., labor category rates or labor costs).

4. DISCUSSIONS

In accordance with FAR 15.306, discussions with each offeror may be held. Should discussions take place, all

Offerors in the competitive range will be requested to submit Final Proposal Revisions. The Government reserves the right to award the contract without discussions. If this occurs, Offerors may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of proposals or correct minor errors, as stated in FAR 15.306(a).

The Government intends to evaluate offers and award a contract without discussions with offerors. Therefore, the offeror's initial offer should contain the offeror's best terms from a cost and technical standpoint. However, the

Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if later determined by the Contracting Officer to be necessary.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

1. BASIS FOR AWARD (Section M)

Award of this contract will be made on a competitive best value basis, using “best value tradeoff” among cost and non-cost factors. A best value tradeoff process will be used, thus the Government may award to other than the lowest priced Offeror, or other than the Offeror with the highest rated non-cost proposal. All proposals shall be subject to evaluation by a Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB). Past Performance will be evaluated independently from the other non-cost evaluation factors utilizing different standards.

The non-cost evaluation factors are numbered in descending order of importance as follows:

(1) Management Approach

(2) Experience

(3) Past Performance

(4) Small Business Participation Plan and Subcontracting Plan

Government evaluators will not assume that the Offeror possesses any capability or knowledge unless it is specified in the proposal.

After the non-cost factors are rated individually, an overall rating will be assigned collectively to these factors. If the Management Approach Factor or Experience Factor receives an individual rating of “Unacceptable,” the collective overall rating of the entire non-cost proposal will also be “Unacceptable.” Only proposals receiving an overall rating of “Acceptable” or higher will be considered for award. In addition, cost proposals that are not determined to be fair and/or reasonable will not be considered for award.

Cost is the least important factor; however, as the collective non-cost factors begin to reach equality in the evaluation, the cost factor becomes more important in the tradeoff analysis.

The Government will utilize information contained within the Offeror’s proposal as well as external sources consulted during past performance evaluation to determine contractor responsibility in accordance with the criteria in FAR 9.104-1. An award will not be made to any Offeror determined to be non-responsible regardless of the ratings given to any of the evaluation factors above.

2. NON COST FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

2a. Management Approach

The Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated for the degree to which it demonstrates a clear, effective management approach which relates management activities to all contract requirements as well as the methodology and flexibility that will be utilized to manage requirements within cost and on schedule.

The Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated for the degree to which it details and fully describes the Offeror’s management strategies as well as its management structure and lines of authority. The Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated for the degree to which it explains how the Offeror’s chain of command practices will contribute in a positive manner to ensuring completion of all tasks (particularly emphasizing communications, accounting, crosschecks on schedule early enough to take necessary corrective actions, and flexibility in allocating resources based on Government established priorities).

The Program Management Plan (PMP) will be evaluated for the degree to which the Offeror documents how it will meet and comply with the requirements to control, coordinate and direct performance, and organize and manage resources that will achieve the technical/scientific requirements as established in the PWS. The PMP will be evaluated for the degree to which it consists of control policies and procedures IAW standard industry practices for project administration, execution and tracking. The PMP will be evaluated for the degree to which the Offeror identifies milestones where Government information/activity is required and timeline dependencies for subsequent

Contractor activities. The PMP will be evaluated for the degree to which it describes the Offeror’s overall management approaches, policies and procedures including suggested project metrics, as well as the use of onsite

Contractor leads. The PMP will be evaluated for the degree to which it describes the Offeror’s detailed staffing plan which describes the Offeror’s approach to ensuring continuity of services, coordination, direction, management of all subcontractors, and meeting all security requirements. The staffing plan will be evaluated for the degree to which it addresses recruitment and retention with an emphasis on filling vacancies with qualified individuals who are able to obtain security clearances as described in the PWS in a timely manner continuously throughout the term of the contract.

The Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated for the degree to which the Offeror’s Quality Control Plan (QCP) documents how the Contractor will meet and comply with the quality standards established in the PWS. The proposal will be evaluated for the degree to which the QCP includes, at a minimum, a self-inspection plan, an internal approval routing plan, and an outline of the procedures that the Contractor shall use to maintain quality, timeliness, responsiveness, and customer satisfaction.

The Offeror’s transition in plan will be evaluated as part of the Management Approach for the degree to which it describes how the Contractor will maintain continuity of services upon the first day of full performance. The

Offeror’s transition in plan will be evaluated for the degree to which the following minimum tasks are described:

Obtaining a Fort Detrick Identification (ID) and Common Access Card (CAC);

Scheduling and completing Government required training;

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 Provided Equipment and Government Furnished Information (GFI), Equipment inventory management assistance; and

Transfer of accountability for Government keys and security codes.

2b. Experience

The Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated for the degree to which it demonstrates the amount of relevant corporate experience the Offeror possesses, as well as the amount of relevant experience possessed by proposed subcontractors and Key Personnel which is identical to, similar to, or related to performing all services contained within the PWS and in performing proposed processes and procedures. The Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated for the degree to which it demonstrates an appropriate mix and balance of education and training of Key Personnel.

The proposal will be evaluated for the degree to which the Offeror demonstrates corporate experience in all aspects of DoD lifecycle management, acquisition processes, the DoD 5000 regulations, and advanced development methodologies, processes and capabilities.

For all Key Personnel positions, the Government will evaluate to ensure individuals are named along with a description of the portion of the solicitation’s Performance Work Statement that each individual is being proposed to perform and that the required resumes and letters of intent have been provided.

2c. Past Performance

The Government will conduct a Past Performance evaluation of the Offeror’s Past Performance as well as that of its subcontractors. Past Performance consists of two aspects for evaluation, past performance relevancy and performance confidence; thus, the Offeror will be assigned two ratings for past performance. First, the Government will evaluate the Offeror’s past performance references to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the Offeror is to the requirement to be acquired through this source selection. Common aspects of relevance include similarity of service/support, complexity, magnitude of effort, dollar value, and contract type. Second, the

Government will evaluate the Offeror’s past performance references to determine the quality of work performed and assess the level of expectation that the Offeror can successfully perform the required effort. In this context, “Offeror” refers to the proposed Prime Contractor and all major subcontractors proposed. Major subcontractors are defined as those performing 20% or more of the overall effort. The Prime Contractor and major subcontractors proposed will first be assessed individually. The results will then be assessed in their totality to derive the Offeror’s

Past Performance rating.

2d. Small Business Participation Plan and Subcontracting Plan

All Offerors (both large and small businesses) are required to submit a Small Business Participation Plan that will be evaluated for the level of small business commitment that they are demonstrating for the proposed acquisition and level of commitment utilizing small business in performance of prior contracts for similar services. Large businesses are required to submit a small business sub-contracting plan. The small business participation plan will be evaluated for the degree to which it demonstrates evidence of the following:

The extent to which such firms, as defined in FAR Part 19, are specifically identified in the proposal;

The extent of commitment to use such firms (enforceable commitments will be weighted more heavily than non-enforceable ones);

The complexity and variety of the work small firms are to perform;

The realism of the proposal;

Past performance of the Offeror in complying with the requirements of the clauses at FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of

Small Business Concerns, and, for all large business Offerors, FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

The extent of participation of such firms in terms of the value of the total acquisition, consistency between the small business sub-contracting plan and the small business participation plan;

The extent to which the offeror provides detailed explanations/documentation supporting the proposed participation percentages.

Total contract value is the cumulative dollars obligated on the contract. Progress will be assessed by the contracting officer at the end of the base period, each option period, and at completion of the contract. Small Business

Participation Goal mandatory minimum shall be no less than 16%.

3. COST FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The Offeror’s Cost Proposal will be evaluated separately from past performance and other non-cost evaluation factors. It will be evaluated in terms of fairness, reasonableness, completeness, and realism for the base period and all option years.

The Government will evaluate offers by establishing a Total Evaluated Cost (TEC) which will consist of the total cost proposed for all base contract line items, option contract line items, and the amount associated with FAR

52.217-8. The amount evaluated under this clause will be calculated using the rates proposed for the last option period, prorated six months. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the base contract period or Option period costs are significantly unbalanced or not considered to be fair and reasonable or realistic.

Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the options.

The TEC will be evaluated for fairness, reasonableness and completeness in terms of (a) Proposed labor rates and assumptions, (b) Proposed other direct costs (ODCs) and assumptions, and (c) Proposed escalation and assumptions.

Cost Realism will be evaluated in terms of (a) the proposed level of effort being consistent with the proposed approach, (b) the proposed level of effort being adequate for the entire period of performance, and (c) the proposed level of effort is based on accurate assumptions.

An Offeror’s accounting system shall be adequate for determining costs applicable to the contract. If necessary, the

Contracting Officer may request support from the Defense Contract Audit Agency in accordance with FAR 15.4 and the applicable cost principles in FAR Part 31.

4. OTHER ITEMS REVIEWED (Non-Evaluation Factors)

Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI): The Government will review the OCI certifications provided to ensure it is they are properly completed, to include the required comparative analysis (required for prime and major subcontractors), certification (required for prime and all subcontractors), and signature (required for prime and all subcontractors). If an OCI concern is present, the Offeror’s/subcontractor’s mitigation plan will be reviewed for the degree to which the mitigation plan reasonably addressed the OCI concern. Failure to submit a properly completed

OCI certification and a comparative analysis or mitigation plan when required may render an Offeror ineligible for award.

5. RATING STANDARDS:

Rating Standards for the Non-Cost Proposal (excluding Past Performance and Small Business Participation and

Subcontracting Plan) are as follows:

Rating Standards for Past Performance are as follows:

Table 2 - Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Rating Definition

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.

Table 3 – Past Performance Confidence Assessments

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.

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.

Rating Standards for the Small Business Participation Plan and Subcontracting Plan are as follows:

Small Business Participation Plan and Subcontracting Plan Ratings

Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of small business objectives.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet small business objectives.

Best Value Tradeoff Evaluation Standard Definitions:

Standard Definition

Rating

The adjective descriptor assigned by the evaluators to the non-Cost Factors. It represents their conclusions as to the quality of the proposal, supported by narrative write-ups identifying the associated findings (strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, risks, and uncertainties).

Significant

Strength

An aspect of an Offeror’s 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.

Risk

As it pertains to source selection, is the potential for unsuccessful contract performance.

The consideration of risk assesses the degree to which an Offeror’s proposed approach to achieving the technical factor may involve risk of disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

Relevancy

As it pertains to past performance information, is a measure of the extent of similarity between the service/support effort, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and subcontract or other comparable attributes of past performance examples and the source solicitation requirements; and a measure of the likelihood that the past performance is an indicator of future performance.

Uncertainty

Any aspect of a non-cost 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 on any evaluation. Adverse past performance that must be addressed with Offerors includes unfavorable comments received from sources such as those received from respondents from past performance questionnaires or interviews that have not been finalized within a formal rating system.

Best Value The expected outcome of an acquisition that, in the Government’s estimation, provides the greatest overall benefit in response to the requirement.

(End of Summary of Changes)