W911S024R0005 Amendment 0005.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

The purpose of this amendment is to post an additional Q&A w ith the solicitation, "Questions and Answ ers 2 08162024", a revised PWS, "Attachment 1 - Performance Work Statement 08162024", a revised RFP, "W911S024R0005 Amendment 0005/W911S024R0005 Amendment

0005 CONFORMED", and a revised Pricing Matrix, "Attachment - 3 Pricing Matrix 08162024". All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

S 1 24

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 16-Aug-2024

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 W911S024R0005

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

11-Jul-2024

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

16-Aug-2024

CODE

MICC - FORT EUSTIS

705 WASHINGTON BLVD

FORT EUSTIS VA 23604

W911S0 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W911S024R0005

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been modified:

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1

A) PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS (Addendum to 52.212-1) Offerors are cautioned to submit sufficient information in the format specified in the Instruction to Offerors of the solicitation. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the RFP may result in the offeror being removed from consideration for award. Any exception to the RFP’s terms and conditions must be fully explained and justified.

Offerors are cautioned that taking an exception may render the offer ineligible for award.

All questions related to the RFP are due back on 17 July 2024 at 10AM ET. Questions will be sent to the following individuals:

Mrs. Emily Cicolini, Contract Specialist, emily.s.cicolini.civ@army.mil

Mr. Benjamin Cady, Contracting Officer, benjamin.m.cady.civ@army.mil

All proposals are due back on 26 August 2024 at 10AM ET. Proposals will be sent to the following individuals:

Mrs. Emily Cicolini, Contract Specialist, emily.s.cicolini.civ@army.mil

Mr. Benjamin Cady, Contracting Officer, benjamin.m.cady.civ@army.mil

1) PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

a. Electronic submission via email is the only acceptable submission method. Facsimile and/or paper submissions will not be accepted. Offerors are encouraged to add Delivery and Read receipts to emails, and/or follow up with the individuals below to ensure the Government’s receipt of proposals. The Government will not automatically respond. Confirming receipt and confirmation shall be responsibility of the offeror. For purposes of time stamps, the Government email system time stamp serves as the official receipt time.

Subject line of emailed proposals shall include the solicitation number and company name. Proposals may be submitted in more than one email but shall be titled appropriately (e.g., Email 1 of 2, Email 2 of 2, etc). It is the offeror’s responsibility to ensure submissions are received in a timely manner. Attachments included in emails should not contain a period (.) in its title as the document may be stripped during transmittal. The maximum size of any email shall not exceed 20 megabytes. The Government will not accept proposals via Zip file format. Offerors shall perform a virus check prior to proposal submitted to ensure offerors’ submittals shall be free of viruses, Trojans, spyware, and other malicious code for which appropriate detection and removal/ quarantine software exists.

Submissions shall be sent to the points of contacts listed below. The points of contact responsible for receiving proposal submissions, supplying additional information, and answering all inquiries are the Contract Specialist and Contracting Officer. Submit your proposal and address questions or concerns regarding this solicitation, including the attachments, to:

Contracting Officer, Mr. Benjamin Cady at benjamin.m.cady.civ@army.mil

Contracting Specialist, Mrs. Emily Cicolini at emily.s.cicolini.civ@army.mil

Any portion of the proposal that is changed (as a result of negotiations or proposal revisions) shall be annotated and dated. Each volume shall be clearly labeled with its title.

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

c. The following volumes of material shall be submitted:

Volume Title Digital Copies Maximum Pages

I Technical Approach- Knowledge Based Scenarios

1 15 (PDF)

II Management and Staffing Approach 1 15 (PDF)

III Past Performance 1 30 (PDF)

IV Price 1 No Page Limit

V Solicitation, Offer, and Award Documents, and Certifications/Representations

1 No Page Limit

NOTE: Pages that exceed the required page limitations will not be evaluated.

Additional pages over the maximum allowed will be removed or not read and will not be evaluated by the Government.

d. The following page content does not count towards a Volume’s page limit: covers for Volumes; tables of contents; glossary of abbreviations and acronyms; indices; title pages; lists of drawings; cross-reference matrices; signed teaming agreements;

Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARS); Consent Letters; and Client Authorization Letters. Pages marked “This page intentionally left blank” will not count towards page limits.

2) PROPOSAL FILES

a) 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. Portable Document Format (PDF) files shall use the following page setup parameters:

Margins – Top, Bottom, Left, Right – 1” Gutter – 0” From Edge – Header, Footer 0.5” Page Size, Width – 8.5” Page Size, Height – 11”

The following additional restrictions apply:

b) File Packaging: Files shall be in read-only format, using PDF files. All price breakdown information to aide in the price evaluation shall be submitted in Microsoft Office Excel Read/Write format. Each file shall be labeled with the volume number, date, and the offeror’s name. **Please note – Self extracting exe files are not acceptable.

c) Content Requirements: All information shall be confined to the appropriate volume. All price information shall be addressed ONLY in Volume IV and Volume V. References may be addressed in other volumes only as appropriate for justification purposes. 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.

(i) VOLUME I: Technical Approach – Knowledge Based Scenarios (Factor

1).

Factor 1 of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents and the Narrative Discussion. The Table of Contents shall break down Factor 1 into sections and includes a list of acronyms and abbreviations, and a list of tables and drawings used in the proposal.

The Narrative Discussion shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation of each answer to the stated questions in each scenario. Legibility, clarity, and coherence are very important. Your responses will be evaluated with regards to Factor 1 as defined in the Evaluation section of the solicitation. Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the technical requirements or the PWS with a statement of intent to perform does not reflect an understanding of the requirement or the capability to perform.

Statements that the offeror understands, can, or will comply with the PWS and phrases such as, “standard procedures will be employed” or “well known techniques will be used” etc., will be considered unacceptable. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their technical capabilities and past experience, and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offeror’s proposal.

Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed artwork, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

The volume shall be organized into the following sections:

Table of Contents

Narrative

Scenario 1 – PWS 5.2, 5.15.3, 5.15.7 thru .11, 5.15.13, 5.15.22 – 23, 5.15.24 o Answer to Question 1 o Answer to Question 2 o Answer to Question 3 o Answer to Question 4 o Answer to Question 5

Scenario 2 - PWS 1.6.8.3, 5.15.3, 5.15.8, 5.15.10, 5.15.29.1, 5.15.29.2, 5.15.29.3, 5.15.29.4, 5.15.29.5, 5.14.30 o Answer to Question 1 o Answer to Question 2 o Answer to Question 3 o Answer to Question 4

Scenario 3 - PWS 2.1.21, 5.6, 5.15.5, 5.15.25, 5.15.25.1 o Answer to Question 1 o Answer to Question 2 o Answer to Question 3

See Attachment 2 for the Scenarios. The offer shall thoroughly describe and explain its understanding of each Scenario and the associated questions.

(ii) VOLUME II – Management and Staffing Approach (Factor 2).

The volume shall be organized into the following sections:

(1) Management Approach, PWS 5.2 – 5.15: The offer shall provide their proposed management approach to monitor and manage a workforce capable to accomplishing all requirements set forth in the SAIDIQ PWS efficiently and effectively to ensure timely quality work. The approach shall include:

(a) An organizational structure delineating lines of management authority, supervision, span of control, and accountability for the management and oversight of the SAIDIQ. The structure shall include subcontractors and/or teaming partners, if applicable.

(b) The offeror’s approach to managing multiple task orders requirements covering a wide variety of tasking areas, utilizing multiple skill sets, in multiple locations simultaneously. PWS 5.1.1, 5.15.7, 5.15.31.2, TE 5,

(c) The offeror’s Quality Control Approach as to how they will manage contract / task order performance and ensure quality services are provided; including services provided by teaming partners. PWS 1.6.1

– 2.1.20, 5.15.22

(2) Staffing Approach, TE 7.6: The offeror shall provide a detailed Staffing, Recruitment, and Retention Plan demonstrating the offeror’s ability to maintain an efficient staff, recruit and retain qualified/trained personnel throughout the course of the ordering period to provide services. The plan shall include the following:

(a) Approach in hiring, training, and replacement of personnel during performance of the base contract and all task orders, and demonstrate a logical ability to ramp up (surge) staffing to meet scheduled delivery dates and quality of the finished products.

(b) Resumes for the Key Personnel (can be provided by the Prime and/or Subcontractor, should be a minimum of 4 resumes): Program Manager(s), Project Manager(s), Engineer(s), and Programmer(s) (Repository). PWS 1.6.11.1 - 2

(c) The offeror shall provide resumes for key personnel. Resumes are not included in the page count and shall be included as an appendix to Volume 2. Resumes must conform to the following format:

Resume Contents

Name

Education (Degree/discipline/year attained, accredited educational institution)

Certification(s) and License(s) (certification member ID; expiration date)

Clearance (List clearance(s) currently held)

Proposed Labor Category

Experience

Present Position:

Company and title of position

Dates of employment (month/year to month/year or to “present”

Brief description of duties and responsibilities, including supervisory experience

Number and type of personnel supervised

Prior Experience

(iii) VOLUME III – Past Performance (Factor 3)

The offeror’s Past Performance Volume shall contain the following and be within the specified page constraints.

SECTION PAGE LIMIT

(Total of 30 pages)

EXCLUSIONS FROM

PAGE LIMITATION

Contract Descriptions No page limit Excluded from page limit

Performance Summary Page:

Describe the role of the offeror and each subcontractor, teaming partner, joint venture partner, and/or affiliate.

Five (5) pages None

Partner Consent/Client Authorization

No page limit Excluded from limit

Specific Relevant Contract Reference Sheets

Five (5) pages each (not to exceed 25 pages)

None

Past Performance Questionnaire No page limit Excluded from Page Count

Past Performance information described herein is required on the offeror and all subcontractors, teaming partners, joint venture partners and/or affiliates that provide a meaningful participation in the performance of this requirement.

Offerors shall define the relationship of the company whose past performance they submit for evaluation to the offeror’s response in Block 12 - Relevancy Rationale of Attachment 4 – Specific Relevant Contracts Reference Sheet.

Recent and relevant projects performed by proposed subcontractor(s) and/or teaming partner(s) may be submitted provided the proposal identifies the proposed subcontractor(s) and/or teaming partner(s) and details the type and percentage of work the proposed subcontractor(s) or teaming partner(s) will perform on the current requirement. The Government will not consider experience of subcontractors and/or subordinate or affiliated offices of the offeror, unless the offeror clearly demonstrates the proposed involvement of the subcontractors and/or the offeror’s subordinate or affiliated offices in this requirement. The offeror shall submit, along with the information required in this paragraph, a consent letter, executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner, joint venture partner, and/or affiliates, authorizing release of adverse past performance information to the offeror, so the offeror can respond to such information. For each identified effort for a commercial customer, the offeror shall also submit a Client Authorization Letter (Attachment 5), authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the offeror's performance.

For purposes of this solicitation, a contract is defined as a single contract or a single task order placed under an Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) contract, a Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA), or a Federal Supply Schedule. Offerors shall not submit the IDIQ contract, FSS contract, or BPA itself as a reference. Offerors may submit a combination of no more than five

(5) (three for a prime contractor and two for or as a subcontractor) delivery orders (DOs), task orders (TOs), technical direction letters (TDLs), and/or technical area tasks (TATs) placed under an ID/IQ or BPA as one of the three examples of past performance. Such a combination must also meet the requirements stated above: each individual example in the combination must have been performed within three (3) years of the solicitation issuance date and demonstrate at least one (1) year of completed performance by the closing date of the solicitation. If a combination of DOs, TOs, TDLs and/or TATs are used as a past performance example, the offerors shall state the specific experience claimed, period of performance, and dollar value of each.

A Past Performance example that does not provide the level of detail required may not be evaluated. No more than one combination of DOs, TOs, TDLs and or TATs is permitted in the past performance submittal.

The offeror shall include documentation regarding their relevant past performance as it directly relates to the work being procured under this solicitation. The offeror SHALL NOT go back any farther than three (3) years for the submitted data from the date in Block 6 of the SF1449. The past performance data shall document a successful history of past contract performance.

This volume shall be organized into the following sections:

(1) Section 1 – Contract Descriptions.

This section shall include the following information in the following format.

(a) Contractor/Subcontractor place of performance, CAGE Code and

Unique Entity Identification (UEI) Number. If the work was performed as a subcontractor, also provide the name of the prime contractor and 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 (KO) name, e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers.

(c) Government’s technical representative/Contracting Officer’s

Representative and current email address, telephone and fax numbers.

(d) Contract Number and, in the case of Indefinite Delivery type contracts, GSA contracts, and Blanket Purchase Agreements, include Delivery Order Numbers.

(e) 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.).

(f) Final or projected final price/cost.

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

(2) Section 2 – Performance Summary Page. Offerors shall describe the role of the offeror and each subcontractor, teaming partner, joint venture partner, and/or affiliates for each contract listed in Section 1, Contract Description. There is not a required template for the Performance Summary Page. Please note that specific narrative explanation of each, describing the objectives achieved and detailing how the effort is relevant to the requirement of this RFP will be provided in the Specific Relevant Contract Reference Sheet (see (5) below) not in the Performance Summary Page.

(3) Section 3 – Partner Consent / Client Authorization Letters. Partner Consent Letters will be executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner, joint venture partner, and/or affiliates authorizing the release of past performance information so the offeror can respond to such information. A sample partner consent letter is included as Attachment 6 of this

Solicitation. Client Authorization Letters (Attachment 5) will be submitted for each identified effort of a customer, authorizing release of requested information on the offeror’s performance to the Government.

(4) Section 4 – Specific Relevant Contract Reference Sheet. Sheets shall be

IAW the format provided in Attachment 4 and are limited to five (5) pages per reference. The offeror shall provide documentation outlining the offeror’s past performance with contracts, as a prime or major subcontractor, which is the same or similar in nature of work, size, scope, and complexity to the services being procured under this Solicitation. The submittal shall include, in Block 12, rationale supporting your assertion of relevance and how it was determined that the work performed previously was the same or similar in nature, size, scope and complexity to the work specified by this solicitation. Offerors are required to explain what aspects of the contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort, and to what aspects of the proposed effort they relate. This rational shall also demonstrate the relationship between the offeror and of the company whose past performance has been submitted for consideration;

specifically, how said company will provide meaningful performance on this requirement. The offeror shall submit a minimum of three (3) but no more than a total of five (5) Specific Relevant Contract References identifying active or completed contracts, either Government or commercial. Limits on Specific Relevant Contract Reference Sheets are as follows:

Three (3) sheets identifying active or completed contracts, either Government or commercial, for the prime, team, and/or joint venture.

Two (2) sheets from each subcontractor who will be completing 20% or more of the technical work.

New corporate entities may submit data on prior contracts involving its offices and employees. However, in addition to the other requirements in this section, the offeror shall discuss in detail the role performed by such persons in the prior contracts cited. Information should be included in the files described in the sections above. Letters of Commitment shall be included in the proposal for these employees in order to be considered.

(5) Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ). For all contracts identified in Section 1, Contract Descriptions, a PPQ (Attachment 7) is requested if a CPARS is not available or in addition to a completed CPARS. The offeror shall complete Part I of the PPQ 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 benjamin.m.cady.civ@army.mil and emily.s.cicolini.civ@army.mil. The offeror shall e-mail to the KO / Contract Specialist (CS) a list of all the POCs 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.

Any questionnaires not returned directly to the CS will not be reviewed and evaluated. The information contained in the questionnaires will be used to evaluate the offeror’s past performance. The offeror is responsible for ensuring that the KO/CS has received all PPQs prior to that date/time.

(iv) VOLUME IV – Pricing (Factor 4)

(1) Electronic Copy. Electronic links are not permissible. The Pricing Matrix

(Attachment 3) shall be submitted in excel format. The offeror shall not include pivot tables in Excel spreadsheets.

(2) Compliance. Failure to comply with the RFP requirements for Price information may result in an adverse assessment of an offeror’s proposal and reduce or eliminate its chance of being selected for award. Offerors shall ensure that the information presented in this volume is consistent and correlates with the information contained in the other proposal volumes.

(3) General Instructions. A request for Certified Cost or Pricing Data is not anticipated for the award of this contract since adequate competition is expected; however, the Government reserves the right to request such information should it become necessary consistent with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 15.4 - Contract Pricing. Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data is required to determine the proposed price fair, reasonable, balanced, and in compliance with established Labor Category rates. Therefore, the offeror shall complete and submit the Pricing Matrix. There are no page limitations for this volume. Proposal information included in this volume which is not directly related to Price will be disregarded.

(4) Pricing Volume Content: The format of the Price Volume shall be as follows:

(a) Pricing Narrative. The offeror shall identify any information necessary to facilitate the Government’s evaluation of its pricing submission.

(b) Pricing Matrix (attachment 3). The offeror shall input their fixed price for each Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) for the base year and each option year. A complete Pricing Matrix is required for the entire performance period (supported by rationale) to include all cell formulas. PDF or flat files will not be considered acceptable. Failure to comply with these formatting requirements may result in rejection of your proposal. Provide a complete Pricing Matrix for all prices proposed for the performance of all work. Formulas used to calculate all prices must be reflected in the Pricing Matrix. Excel workbooks shall not contain hidden tabs, spreadsheets or hidden cells. No links should exist to files not included with the submission.

(v) VOLUME V – SOLICITATIONS, OFFER, AWARD DOCUMENTS, AND

CERTIFICATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS.

Offerors are required to submit a completed SF1449 (Solicitation, Contract, Order for Commercial Items) including acknowledgment of all Amendments, CLIN Structure, Representation, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors, and Contract Clauses. All final monetary extensions by CLIN shall be in whole dollars only. Unit prices can be rounded to the nearest dollar. The Volume V shall be organized as follows and contain the identified information.

Signature by the offeror constitutes an offer the Government may accept. The Volume shall also include the acceptance period of no less than 180 days after the date specified for receipt of offers during which the Government may accept the offer to create a binding contract. Offerors providing less than 180 days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due will not be considered and will be rejected.

The offeror shall provide the company/division's street address, county and facility code; CAGE code; UIC; size of business (large or small); and labor surplus area designation, if applicable. This same information must be provided if the work for this contract will be performed at any other location(s).

Solicitation, Contract, Order for Commercial Items - The SF1449 shall be submitted fully completed. The offeror is cautioned that the SF1449 must contain an original signature in Block 30a. of the form. The offeror shall acknowledge any amendments to the RFP IAW the instructions on the SF1449 and FAR 52.212-1. The offeror shall provide the name, title and telephone number of the company/division POC regarding decisions made with respect to the offeror’s proposal and who can obligate the offeror’s company contractually. Also, identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government.

The Pricing of the CLINs on the SF1449 shall be submitted fully completed and error free. Offerors shall propose a FFP for each CLIN. The offeror shall ensure that the prices are supported by the Pricing Matrix. As part of its proposal, the offeror will provide the price (if any) incurred to comply with the enterprise Service Contract Reporting (SCR) requirement. Offeror will determine whether to price or not-separately price the SCR requirement. The SCR CLIN shall be the line items under which the contractor shall bill for the price of the SCR requirement. The offeror shall price the SCR CLIN as a FFP

CLIN.

Representation, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors – The offeror shall ensure that this section of the SF1449 is submitted thoroughly completed with all blocks in each certification/representation completed truthfully and completely.

Contract Clauses – The offeror shall ensure that all applicable clauses/provisions in the SF1449 that require the offeror to complete fill-in information are submitted and thoroughly completed with all blocks filled in with accurate and complete information.

Exceptions/Assumptions (if required): Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. Offerors are advised that taking exception to any of the requirements specified in this solicitation may result in the proposal being found unacceptable without clarification. Clarification of any requirements or notice of any contractor exceptions or assumptions should be handled by submitting a question/recommended change prior to question submittal due date and proposal submittal. All assumptions/clarifications must be finalized prior to Final Proposal Revisions, if discussions are conducted. If the offeror still finds it necessary to take exception to any of the requirements specified in this solicitation, clearly indicate each exception in the appropriate volume along with a complete explanation of why the exception was taken and what benefit accrues to the Government. All exceptions to the solicitation requirements (SF1449, all attachments, and supporting rationale) shall be identified as such and consolidated into an overview section of the subject volume using the format and content below. An overview section is only required if the offeror takes exception to any requirement in the solicitation.

SOLICITATION

DOCUMENT

PAGE/

PARAGRAPH

REQUIREMENT/

PORTION

RATIONALE &

IMPACT

PWS, SF 1449,

etc

Applicable Page and Paragraph Numbers

Identify the requirement or portion to which exception is taken.

Describe the rationale and the impact of the exception.

Describe why the requirement can/will not be met.

Solicitations, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations shall not be addressed separately from that submitted in VOLUME V – SOLICITATIONS, OFFER

AND AWARD DOCUMENTS AND CERTIFICATIONS /REPRESENTATIONS.

Army Contract Writing System (ACWS) Transition Information for Offerors

a. The Army Contracting Enterprise (ACE) is in the process of deploying new solicitation and contract writing software to Army contracting offices worldwide.

Known as the Army Contract Writing System (ACWS), this modern software suite will soon replace most existing Army contract writing systems, including the system used to create and release this Solicitation.

b. During this transition period, Offerors are hereby advised:

1. The Contracting Office may use any combination of contract writing systems to create and release documents related to this solicitation (e.g. solicitation amendments and awards, if any). Due to this:

i. This solicitation may contain different offer submission instructions than other solicitations released by the same Contracting Office (e.g. requiring offer submission via the PIEE Solicitation Module vs. e-mail). Offerors should review all offer submission instructions contained in the solicitation documents and direct any questions or concerns to the Contract Specialist or Contracting Officer.

ii. If the Contracting Office switches contract writing systems prior to award, documents you receive from the Contracting Officer or view on SAM.gov or other forums may appear noticeably different than the initial solicitation or previous solicitations or awards from the same Contracting Office. This is normal and expected.

iii. A change between contract writing systems may cause important information concerning solicitation response (amendments) or accepted terms (awards) to take on different formatting or appear in different parts of later documents issued. Offerors shall review all documents carefully to locate this important information and direct any questions or concerns to the Contract Specialist or Contracting Officer.

2. The Government does not intend to use the transition between contract writing systems to effect any changes to solicitation or award terms and conditions without accompanying document narratives explicitly stating such changes are deliberate and desired. While the Contract Specialist and Contracting Officer will take care to minimize or eliminate any inadvertent changes when adapting to the new contract writing software, you, as the Offeror, may still be the first to spot such errors. Therefore, Offerors shall:

i. Notify the Contracting Officer immediately if any observed changes, removals, or additions affect your award eligibility, violate or alter existing quote/proposal terms, or could affect Contract performance post-award.

ii. Take special care to ensure all fill-in Clauses are populated and remain populated across documents received from the Contracting Office throughout the Solicitation and Award process.

iii. Contact the Contracting Officer listed on the first page of the solicitation or solicitation amendment for guidance if you notice or suspect any inadvertent change has occurred between document issuances.

3. The Contracting Officer will correct problems affecting award documents (if any) via bilateral modification, at no cost to the Contractor. Any such modification will reconcile the award with the latest version of this solicitation reflecting deliberate action by the Contracting Officer (e.g. the first issuance if no amendments, or the latest amendment with accompanying narratives), inclusive of any documented pre-award negotiations or accepted supplemental offer terms.

4. In the unlikely event a network disruption, contract writing system error, or financial system error threatens timely award of the requirement set forth in this solicitation, the Contracting Officer:

i. May elect to use alternative mechanisms to obligate funds and allow work or deliveries to legally begin to the benefit of, and with legal protection for, both parties.

ii. Will incorporate the latest version of this Solicitation into such mechanisms to serve as a framework for contract execution until any such system problems are resolved.

iii. Will ensure any action taken does not conflict with the stated offer evaluation and award methodology of this requirement.

iv. Will issue a complete, properly-formatted award accurately reflecting this requirement and all applicable terms and conditions once systems return to normal.

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2

A) BASIS FOR AWARD AND EVALUATION CRITERIA (Addendum 52.212-2)

This is a best value subjective trade-off source selection conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.3, Source Selection, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), and the Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFARS). The Government intends to award a single award Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (SAIDIQ) contract to the Offeror deemed responsible in accordance with FAR Subpart 9.1, as supplemented, whose proposal conforms to the RFP requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by Provision 52.212-1 and Addendum of the solicitation), and whose proposal represents the Best Value to the Government, as determined by the Subjective Trade-Off evaluation criteria described herein, in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15. The award will be made based on the best value proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the four (4) evaluation factors: Technical Approach—Knowledge-Based Scenarios (Factor 1); Management and Staffing Approach (Factor 2); Past Performance (Factor 3); Price (Factor 4). When making the Best Value determination, Factor 1 and 2 are of equal importance and are significantly more important than Factor 3. Factors 1 through 3 (all nonprice factors) combined are significantly more important than Factor 4 (Price). An offeror shall be ineligible for award if it receives an “Unacceptable” rating on either Factor 1 – Technical Approach – Knowledge-Based Scenarios or Factor 2 – Management and Staffing Approach. Offerors will be cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest cost offered. The Government reserves the right to make award based upon the Price Factor in the event that the Technical, Past Performance, and staffing and management evaluation results of all the offerors’ proposals are substantially the same.

B) FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each proposal:

Factor 1: Technical Approach – Knowledge-Based Scenarios Factor 2: Management and Staffing Approach Factor 3: Past Performance Factor 4: Price

Price becomes more important as proposals approach technical equality.

C) EVALUATION APPROACH

All proposals shall be evaluated by the Government in accordance with the evaluation criteria stated below.

(1) The overarching evaluation approach for all factors is as follows:

(a) Adequacy of Response. The proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the offeror’s methods and approach have adequately and completely considered, defined, and satisfied the requirements specified in the RFP. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement has been addressed in the proposal IAW the proposal submission section of the RFP.

(b) Feasibility of Approach. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven devices and techniques.

The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule.

(2) Technical Approach - Knowledge-Based Scenarios (Factor 1):

The technical approach shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The Technical Proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements, but rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet these requirements. Statements that the Offeror understands, can, or will comply with the PWS (including referenced publications, technical data, etc.); statements paraphrasing the PWS or parts thereof (including applicable publications, technical data, etc.), and phrases such as “standard procedures will be employed” or “well known techniques will be used,” etc., will be considered unacceptable. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Offeror’s Technical Proposal.

The Offeror’s responses to the knowledge based questions shall demonstrate its knowledge and understanding of the magnitude and complexity of this requirement and its capability to perform all tasks in the PWS.

The evaluation provides an assessment of the offeror’s methodology to satisfy the Government’s requirements. This will be evaluated with individual questions from the scenarios that gauge the offeror’s knowledge of virtual learning systems for the base year and all option years.

IAW the Defense FAR (DFARS) PGI 215.3 and Department of Defense Source Selection Procedures, Section 3.1.2.1, the Army methodology for evaluating Factor 1 and Related Risk is the Combined Technical/Risk Rating, (see Table below). This methodology considers risk, in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.

Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method

Rating Description

Outstanding Proposal demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains

Scenario Type PWS Sections

1 Technology Refresh/Upgrade 5.2; 5.15.3; 5.15.7 thru .11;

5.15.13; 5.15.22 – 23; 5.15.24

2 Sustainment 1.6.8.3; 5.15.3; 5.15.8; 5.15.10;

5.15.29.1; 5.15.29.2; 5.15.29.3;

5.15.29.4; 5.15.29.5; 5.14.30

3 Data Repository 2.1.21; 5.6; 5.15.5; 5.15.25;

5.15.25.1 multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength or significant 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 is unawardable, and/or risk of performance is unacceptably high.

**Note: Marginal and Unacceptable answers could indicate a lack of understanding concerning mission requirements and may result in the entire proposal receiving an unfavorable rating and/or being eliminated from the competitive range.

(3) Management and Staffing Approach (Factor 2). The Government will evaluate the management and staffing approach for accomplishing all the tasks in the PWS. Evaluation will ensure the proposed Key Personnel possess sufficient experience and capabilities to successfully execute their assigned duties and responsibilities. The evaluation of the offeror’s staffing plan will determine whether the offeror demonstrates the ability to manage team members, workforce, and workload with regards to the requirements of the PWS.

PWS Sections for Factor 2 – Management and Staffing Approach

Management 5.2-5.15, TE6, 5.15.1, 5.15.7, 5.15.31.2, TE5, TE for Management Timelines, 1.6.1-2, 2.1.20, 5.15.22

Staffing TE 7.6, 1.6.11.1-2

The evaluation will also see if the offeror demonstrates how it will recruit, hire, retain (to reduce employee turnover), and manage personnel with the required knowledge, skills, education, experience, and applicable position descriptions, certifications, training (to include refresher training), and licenses required to support specific positions (including unique and emerging technology used in specialty areas) identified in the base line staffing data.

The following rating method will be followed for evaluating the Management and Staffing Approach.

Management and Staffing Approach Rating Method

Rating Description

Outstanding Proposal demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength or significant 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 is unawardable, and/or risk of performance is unacceptably high.

(4) Past Performance (Factor 3). The Government will evaluate the offeror’s record of past and current performance to ascertain the probability of successfully performing the required efforts of the PWS.

(a) Evaluation of past performance will be IAW this plan utilizing the forms and questionnaires set forth in Appendix D and supplied as Attachments.

(b) The Government will focus its evaluation on the offeror’s (and major subcontractor’s) record of performance as it relates to all solicitation requirements, including cost, schedule, performance, and management of subcontractors. Major subcontractors are defined as members of an offeror’s overall team who are expected to perform 20% percent or more of the proposed effort. A significant achievement, problem, or lack of relevant data in any element of the work can become an important consideration in the evaluation process. Absent any recent and relevant past performance history or when the performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror will be assigned a “neutral confidence rating” and its proposal will not be evaluated either favorably or unfavorably on past performance. The Government may use data provided by the offeror in its proposal and data obtained from other sources, including data in Government files or data obtained through interviews with personnel familiar with the contractor and their current and past performance under Federal, State or Local government or commercial contracts for same or similar services as compared to the NAICS 541512.

(c) The Government may consider a wide array of information from a variety of sources, but is not compelled to rely on all of the information available.

(d) The Government’s evaluation of the past performance factor considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract requirements.

There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy (including context of data), and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information). All three aspects must be considered for each of the contracts or requirements evaluated.

(i) RECENCY: The first aspect is to evaluate the recency of the offeror’s past performance. Recency is generally expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant, and is critical to establishing the relevancy of past performance information. The Government will evaluate each past performance reference to determine recency. Recency is expressed as a time period during which the past performance references are considered relevant, and is critical to establishing the relevancy of past performance information. To be recent, the effort must be ongoing and have completed at least one (1) year of performance, and maximum of three (3) years from closing date of the solicitation. Evaluation will focus only on work experience already performed. Yet- to-be performed work and experience prior to the last three (3) years will not be considered.

(ii) RELEVANCY: The second aspect is to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all recent performance information obtained to determine how closely the services performed under those projects relate to this acquisition. For each recent past performance citation reviewed, the relevance of the work performed and the meaningful participation in performance of this requirement will be assessed. Consideration will be given to criteria such as similarity, complexity, and diversity of tasks, type of effort, scope, value, and performance period. With respect to relevancy, more relevant past performance of companies providing meaningful participation in performance of this requirement is a stronger predictor of future success and will have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance. A relevancy determination of the offeror’s (including subcontractor(s), joint venture partner(s), and affiliate(s)) past performance will be made. In determining relevancy for individual contracts, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, or degree of meaningful participation in the performance of this requirement being proposed by the offeror, teaming partner, subcontractor, and/or affiliates whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated. The past performance information provided in the proposal and obtained from other sources will be used to establish the degree of relevancy of past performance. The Government will use the definitions in Table 2 when assessing relevant contracts.