Solicitation_Amendment_W911S7-18-R-0016.pdf

0011166641-0001

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 provide government responses to contrcator questions. Also, there has been an update to the PWS, and added the SOP for DOTMLPF-C Assessment and CONOP Development Process..

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 22

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 20-Aug-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 W911S718R0016

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

02-Aug-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 1 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

20-Aug-2018

CODE

MICC - FORT LEONARD WOOD

8112 NEBRASKA AVENUE

FORT LEONARD WOOD MO 65473

W911S7 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W911S718R0016

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION J - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

The Table of Contents has changed from:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE

Attachment 1 Performance Work

Statement

46 20-JUN-2018

Attachment 2 WD 15-5093 11 29-JUN-2018 Attachment 3 DD Form 254 4 02-AUG-2018 Attachment 4 Addendums 3 02-AUG-2018 to:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE

Attachment 2 WD 15-5093 11 29-JUN-2018 Attachment 3 DD Form 254 4 02-AUG-2018 Attachment 4 Addendums 3 02-AUG-2018 Attachment 5 SOP (DOTMLPF-C) 26 20-AUG-2018 Attachment 6 PWS-Updated 46 20-AUG-2018

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

Section L - Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Bidders

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

L.1. PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL AND INQUIRIES

(1) Proposals shall be submitted prior to the closing date and time identified on the SF 1449 to the following address:

MICC-Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri ATTN: Mrs. Lisa M. Bergstrom

8112 Nebraska Ave, Bldg 11400 Fort Leonard Wood, MO 65473-9135

(2) Electronic submissions via email or fax will not be accepted. Offers shall be mailed through a commercial/Government carrier or hand carried.

All technical or contractual questions shall be submitted in writing via e-mail no later than 09:00 am Central Standard Time on 10 August 2018 to Chad Buckley, Contract Specialist, at chad.m.buckley.civ@mail.mil.

Telephone inquiries will not be accepted. If the Government responses to technical questions affect the Performance Work Statement requirements or any other portion of the solicitation, then an Amendment of Solicitation will be issued.

(3) The point of contact responsible for supplying additional information and answering all inquiries is the Contracting Officer via the Contract Specialist. Address all questions or concerns you may have to the Contract Specialist, Chad Buckley. All questions regarding this solicitation shall be submitted in writing via email to the following no later than 09:00 AM Central Standard Time on 10 August 2018:

Email: chad.m.buckley.civ@mail.mil Attn: Chad Buckley Subject: W911S7-18-R-0016

L.2. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

(1) The selection of a source for award will be conducted utilizing source selection (negotiated) procedures as delineated in FAR Part 15.3. Offers will be evaluated using the criteria under Section M, “Evaluation Factors for Award”. Noncompliance with the Request for Proposal (RFP) requirements may hamper the Government's ability to properly evaluate the proposal and may result in elimination of the proposal from further consideration for contract award.

(2) The Offer. The submission of the documentation specified below will constitute the Offeror's acceptance of the terms and conditions of the RFP, concurrence with the PWS, and the proposed contract type.

(3) It is the Government’s intention to award without discussions. Offerors are encouraged to present their best proposal and prices in their initial proposal submission. However, IAW FAR Part 15.306, should discussions become necessary, the Government reserves the right to hold discussions. If this occurs, a competitive range will be determined and Offerors notified. The competitive range may be limited for purposes of efficiency IAW FAR Part 15.306(c)(2).

(4) The Proposal Preparation Instructions (Para. L.3.) as set forth below prescribe the format for the proposal and describe the approach for the development and presentation of proposal data. These instructions are designed to ensure the submission of necessary information to provide for the understanding and comprehensive evaluation of proposals.

(5) In accordance with FAR Subpart 4.8 (Government Contract Files), the Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals. Unless the Offeror requests otherwise, the Government will destroy extra copies of such unsuccessful proposals.

(6) If an Offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, an ambiguity, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the Offeror shall immediately notify the Contracting Officer in writing with supporting rationale.

(7) Debriefings. The Contracting Officer will promptly notify Offerors of any decision to exclude them from the competitive range, whereupon they may request and receive a debriefing in accordance with FAR

15.505. The Contracting Officer will notify unsuccessful Offerors in the competitive range of the source selection decision in accordance with FAR 15.506. Upon such notification, unsuccessful Offerors may request and receive a debriefing. Offerors desiring debriefing must make their request in accordance with the requirements of FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable.

L.3. PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

(1) Offeror’s proposal shall consist of three (3) separate volumes: Volume 1 - Technical Acceptability, Volume 2 - Past Performance, and Volume 3 - Pricing Proposal.

(2) Proposal Format:

a. Offerors shall submit an original and the number of copies listed in Table 2 - Volume Details.

b. Exceptions. 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 and elements. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. If the offeror finds it necessary to take exception to any of the requirements specified in this solicitation, the offeror shall clearly identify the applicable Volume and exceptions with a complete explanation of why the exception was taken, what benefit accrues to the Government (if any), and its impact, if any, on the performance, schedule, cost, and specific requirements of the solicitation. Each exception shall be specifically related to each paragraph and/or specific part of the solicitation to which the exception is taken. Offerors are cautioned that taking an exception may render the offer ineligible for award. This information shall be provided in the format below.

Table 1 - Solicitation Exceptions

Solicitation Document

Page/ Paragraph

Requirement/ Portion

Rationale & Impact

Section B, PWS/SOO/ SOW, Section L&M, etc.

Applicable Page and Paragraph Numbers

Identify the requirement or portion to which exception is taken

Describe The rationale and impact of the exception

c. The proposals shall be organized into three (3) volumes. Each volume of the proposal should be separately bound in a three-ring loose leaf binder which shall permit the volume to lie flat when open.

A cover sheet should be bound in each book, clearly marked as to volume number, title, copy number, solicitation identification and the Offeror's name. The same identifying data should be placed on the spine of each binder. All text shall be single spaced and printed black on white paper (black and white requirement does not apply to graphics, photos, etc., Company stationary and logo’s are acceptable).

Printing shall be easily readable (12-pitch type or 10 point proportional spacing.) Cross-references should be utilized to preclude unnecessary duplication of data between sections. In addition to submitting hard copies of the proposals, digital copies shall be provided on CD-ROM disk in Microsoft Word, PowerPoint, Excel or Adobe PDF. File names to be “Company Name – Initial” for the first submission. File name of later submissions (if necessary), shall be “Company Name – Revision X’ with X indicating the number of the revision. If files are compressed, they must be self-extracting archives (no software required to decompress). If files contain links, the links must be intact and maintained through all revisions. Additionally, spreadsheets must be easily traceable. None of the files submitted shall have any read/write/password protection. Page limitations are as follows:

Table 2 - Volume Details

VOLUME TITLE

NO. OF

HARD

COPIES

NO. OF

DIGITAL

COPIES (CD

ROM)

PAGE

LIMITS

I Technical

Acceptability Original + 2

50 Pages

II Past Performance Original + 1 N/A

III

RFP Document & Pricing Proposal

Original + 1 N/A

d. Proposal Limitation. The proposal shall not exceed the limits stated above. If the page limits are exceeded, the pages in excess of the limit shall be removed and returned, unread, to the Offeror. The Government will not accept any changes to the contractor’s proposal after the closing date of the solicitation (See FAR 15.208 for further information regarding late proposals). If discussions become necessary, page limitations may be placed on responses to Items for Negotiations (IFNs). The specified page limits for IFN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the IFNs to the Offerors.

e. Page Limit Includes: All appendices, charts, graphs, diagrams, tables, photographs, drawings, etc.

f. Page Limit does not include the Executive Summary, covers for volumes, tables of contents, glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, indices, title pages, cross reference indices, and section dividers/tables if they are inserted solely to provide ease to the reader in locating parts/sections of the proposal. They will be counted if they contain any other information, i.e., diagrams, extraneous data, etc. Pages marked “This page intentionally left blank” will not be counted.

g. What Counts As A Page? A page shall be an 8 ½ X 11” sheet of paper. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two pages. Letter size and spacing requirements for illustrations and tables can be at the discretion of the Offeror but must be easily readable. Fold-outs will be counted as the appropriate number of pages based on an 8 ½ X 11” sheet of paper. Use at least 1 inch margins on the top and bottom and 3/4 inch side margins. The Contractor shall number each page in order to eliminate any confusion. In the event the contractor creates an ambiguity in their numbering of pages, the Government may exercise its own discretion in counting pages.

h. Indexing. Each volume shall contain a more detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections.

i. Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms. Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, with an explanation for each.

(3) Proposal Content

a. VOLUME I – TECHNICAL ACCEPTABILITY: The Technical Acceptability Volume shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. Legibility, clarity and coherence are very important. Your responses will be evaluated against the Technical Acceptability Factor as defined in Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements; the proposal 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 and will negatively impact the Offerors rating under the Technical

Acceptability factor. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities and experience, and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Offeror's proposal. Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed art work, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired. The Technical Acceptability Volume shall be organized according to the following general outline:

TAB A - Table of Contents TAB B - Technical Acceptability:

i. TAB B1 - Technical Approach

ii. TAB B2 - Staffing Approach

iii. TAB B3 – Management Approach

TAB B - Technical Acceptability Content – The Technical Volume shall, at a minimum, be prepared in a form consistent with the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and the evaluation criteria for award set forth in Section M of this solicitation. The section shall be prepared in an orderly format and in sufficient detail to enable the Government to make a thorough evaluation of the contractor’s technical competence and ability to comply with the contract task requirements specified in the PWS. The offeror shall address as specifically as possible the actual methodology you would use for accomplishing the PWS tasks. The volume shall be organized according to the following general outline:

i. TAB B1 – TECHNICAL APPROACH. Explain how Warfighter Forum will be performed IAW PWS

ii. TAB B2 - STAFFING APPROACH. Identify how qualified personnel will be recruited and retained to meet requirements.

iii. TAB B3 – MANAGEMENT APPROACH. Provide an organizational structure with lines of authority, reporting, and tracking that will ensure an orderly flow of work and responsiveness to all PWS requirements.

b. Volume II - Past Performance: The Past Performance evaluation will be accomplished by reviewing aspects of an Offeror's recent and relevant Past Performance, focusing on and targeting performance which is relevant to the effort as it directly relates to the work being procured under this solicitation and as defined in Section M. Past Performance information described herein is required on the offeror and all subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners proposed to perform 25% of the proposed effort based on the total proposed price. The offeror shall submit, along with the information required in this paragraph, a consent letter, executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner, 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, authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the offeror's performance.

i. Proposal Information. The offeror is requested to submit the Past Performance Volume by the due date on the 1449 , to the Contracting Officer at the address specified in L.1(1).

ii. 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 3 years for the submitted data. The past performance data shall document a successful history of past contract performance.

iii. In conducting the Past Performance evaluation, the Government reserves the right to use both the information provided in the offeror’s Past Performance Volume and information obtained from other sources, such as the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) or similar systems, Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) and commercial sources. Offerors are reminded that both independent data and data provided by offerors in their proposals may be used by the Government to evaluate offeror past performance. However, the burden of providing thorough, complete, and current past performance information as requested in this paragraph remains with the offerors.

Proposals that do not contain the information requested by this paragraph risk rejection or a less than acceptable performance rating by the Government. All past performance comments received will be taken into account and could affect the overall rating. The overall past performance evaluation is a subjective decision based on the whole of all data received. In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)).

Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

iv. Submission Requirements. The offeror shall submit a Past Performance Volume containing the following:

Table of Contents Summary Page describing the role of the offeror and each subcontractor, teaming partner, and /or joint venture partner that the offeror is required to provide Past Performance Specific Relevant Contract Reference Sheets for the past performance experience in accordance with Attachment 1.

Consent Letters executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner, authorizing the release of past performance information so the offeror can respond to such information. A sample consent letter is attached as Attachment 1).

Client Authorization Letters for each identified effort for a commercial customer authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the offeror’s performance.

Organization Structure Change History— Organizational Structure Change History. Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of relevant present or past efforts or between conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this acquisition. To facilitate this relevancy determination, include in this proposal volume a "roadmap" describing all such changes in the organization of your company. As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevance of any efforts you identify for past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment. Since the Government intends to consider present and past performance information provided by other sources as well as that provided by the offeror(s), your "roadmap" should be both specifically applicable to the efforts you identify and general enough to apply to efforts on which the Government receives information from other sources.

Specific Relevant Contracts Format - Specific Relevant Contracts Format - Sheets in accordance with Attachment 2 and are limited to 3 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, size, and complexity to the services being procured under this Solicitation.

The submittal shall include rationale supporting your assertion of relevance and how it was determined that the work performed previously was the same or similar in nature, size, 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.

v. Past Performance Questionnaire - See Attachment 3, Past Performance Questionnaire.

For the contracts identified on each Specific Relevant Contract Reference, the offeror shall forward a copy of the Past Performance Questionnaire to the points of contact responsible for monitoring performance under such contracts. The points of contact shall return the questionnaires directly to Contracting Officer at the address specified in L.1 by ???????????. Any questionnaires not returned directly to the KO will not be reviewed and evaluated. The information contained in the questionnaires will be used to evaluate the offeror’s past performance. New entities that have no past customers shall annotate on the Summary Page that they have had no previous clients and that the minimum number of questionnaires cannot be provided.

c. VOLUME III – Price Proposal: Volume III shall consist of the Price Proposal: Volume I must be clearly marked “VOLUME III –PRICE PROPOSAL, W911S7-18-R-0016.” Electronic versions of the Price Proposal should be submitted on a CD in MS Office Excel format, and shall not be read only or password protected. All formulas, lookup tables, and links should be intact, and no links shall exist to files not included with the submission. Spreadsheets shall not contain hidden worksheets. PDF or flat files will not be considered adequate. The hard copy version will take precedence for any differences noted between the hard and electronic versions of the contractor’s proposal. Failure to follow the below Contract Proposal preparation instructions may cause your proposal to be deemed unacceptable by the Government.

Tab A – Price Proposal. The contractor shall submit the following documents as part of the Price Proposal:

a. The offeror shall provide a price for each CLIN included in Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices. The price for each CLIN must included the unit price and the extended amount.

The offeror shall also provide a price element breakdown for each CLIN included at Schedule B of the SF1449. The price element breakdown for each CLIN must include the following cost elements and the sum must equate to the CLIN’s unit price: (1) Materials and Supplies;

(2) Labor (Direct and Indirect); (3) General & Administrative (G&A); (4) Overhead; and (5) Profit. Separate Price breakdowns must be prepared for each contract period (base period and all option periods). The prices shall be consistent with the written portion of the technical proposal.

b. The offeror shall ensure the units prices are represented in whole dollars only.

c. The Government reserves the right to request Certified Cost or Pricing Data and Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data if the Government deems it necessary in order to determine price reasonableness. The offeror may provide background information, other than the pricing data that is required, concerning its pricing methodology. This information might include details of the methodology applicable to your offer. The data, if submitted, would be used by the government to better understand their pricing.

ATTACHMENT 1

SUBCONTRACTOR/TEAMING PARTNER CONSENT FORM FOR THE RELEASE OF PAST

PERFORMANCE INFORMATION TO THE PRIME CONTRACTOR

Past performance information concerning subcontractors and teaming partners cannot be disclosed to a private party without the subcontractor's or teaming partner's consent. Because a prime contractor is a private party, the Government will need that consent before disclosing subcontractor/teaming partner past and present performance information to the prime during exchanges. In an effort to assist the Government's Past Performance Evaluators in assessing your past performance relevancy and confidence, we request that the following consent form be completed by the major subcontractors/teaming partners identified in your proposal. The completed consent forms should be submitted as part of your Past Performance Volume III Proposal.

SAMPLE

Dear (Contracting Officer)

We are currently participating as a (subcontractor/teaming partner) with (prime contractor or name of entity providing proposal) in responding to the Mission and Installation Contracting Command request for Proposal (solicitation number) for the (program title or description of effort).

We understand that the Government is placing increased emphasis on past performance in order to obtain best value in source selections. In order to facilitate the performance confidence assessment process we are signing this consent form to allow you to discuss our past performance information with the prime contractor during the source selection process.

(Signature and Title of individual who has the authority to sign for and legally bind the company)

Company Name:

Address:

Attachment 2

Specific Relevant Contracts Sheet

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, size, and complexity to the services being procured under this Solicitation. The submittal shall include rationale supporting your assertion of relevance and how it was determined that the work performed previously was the same or similar in nature, size, 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.

1. Contract Number, Award Date and Contract type.

2. Price/Cost – original awarded AND final (or projected final, if contract is current).

3. Delivery Schedule – original AND final (or projected final, if the contract is current).

4. Contact Information - Address and telephone number for the Government (or commercial) procuring contracting activity AND contract administrative activity (if applicable).

Name, telephone number, fax number and e-mail address for the following:

5. Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO)

6. Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO)

7. Government or commercial technical representative or COR Identify in specific detail for each contract listed, why or how you consider that effort relevant or similar to the effort required by this solicitation. In determining relevancy, consideration should be given but not limited to such things as product/service similarity, product/service, size and complexity, contract type, contract environment, division of company proposing, and subcontractor interaction.

8. Narrative explanation on each contract listed describing the objectives achieved and the following data: any cost growth or schedule delays encountered. For any Government contracts which did not/do not meet original requirements with regard to cost, schedule, or technical performance, a brief explanation of the reason(s) for such shortcomings and any demonstrated corrective actions taken to avoid recurrence. Offerors may include a discussion of efforts accomplished by the offeror to resolve problems encountered on prior contracts as well as past efforts to identify and manage program risk. Merely having problems does not automatically equate to a Limited or a No Confidence rating, since the problems encountered may have been on a more complex program, or an offeror may have subsequently demonstrated the ability to overcome the problems encountered. The offeror is required to clearly demonstrate management actions employed in overcoming problems and the effects of those actions, in terms of improvements achieved or problems rectified. This may allow the offeror to be considered a Substantial Confidence or Satisfactory Confidence candidate.

9. Negative Performance Documentation. A copy of any cure notices, show cause letters or contract discrepancy reports received on each contract listed and a description of any corrective action by the offeror or proposed subcontractor.

10. Completion Date/Delivery Schedule. The contractor shall list each time the delivery schedule was revised and provide an explanation of why the revision was necessary.

1. Contract Number __________________________ Award Date________________________________ Contract type_______________________________

2. Completion Date/Delivery Schedule.

Original completion/delivery date ______________________________________________ Revised completion/delivery date ______________________________________________

3. Price/Cost – original awarded price__________________________________________

4. Modified Price/Cost - ____________________________________________________

5. Completion Date or Delivery Schedule – original AND final (or projected final, if the contract is current).

6. Changed Dates - ________________________________________________________

7. Contact Information - Address and telephone number for the Government (or commercial) procuring contracting activity AND contract administrative activity (if applicable). Name, telephone number, fax number and e-mail address for the following:

8. Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO).

Address: _____________________________________________________________ Phone Number: _______________________________________________________ Fax Number: _________________________________________________________ E-Mail Address: ______________________________________________________

9. Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO).

Address: _____________________________________________________________ Phone Number: _______________________________________________________ Fax Number: _________________________________________________________ E-Mail Address: ______________________________________________________

10. Government or commercial technical representative or COR.

Address: ____________________________________________________________ Phone Number: _______________________________________________________ Fax Number: _________________________________________________________ E-Mail Address: _______________________________________________________

11. Relevancy Description.__________________________________________________

12. Narrative explanation.__________________________________________________

13. Negative Performance Documentation.______________________________________

ATTACHMENT 3

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

WHEN FILLED IN THIS DOCUMENT IS SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE INFORMATION IAW FAR 3.104

SECTION 1: CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION

A. Contractor: _______________________________________________________________________________

B. Cage Code: _________________________________

C. Contract number: _______________________________________

D. Contract type: ______________________________

E. Was this a competitive contract? Yes _____ No _____

F. Period of performance: _________________________________________________________

G. Initial contract cost: $____________________________

H. Current/final contract cost: $_______________________________

I. Reasons for differences between initial contract cost and final contract costs:

J. Description of service provided: ______________________________________________________________

SECTION 2: CUSTOMER OR AGENCY IDENTIFICATION

A. Customer or agency name:

B. Customer or agency description (if applicable):

C. Geographic description of services under this contract, i.e. local, nationwide, worldwide, other Commands:

SECTION 3: EVALUATOR IDENTIFICATION

A. Evaluator's name:

B. Evaluator's title:

C. Evaluator's phone/fax number:

D. Number of years evaluator worked on subject contract:

SECTION 4: EVALUATION

Please indicate your satisfaction with the contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block using the scale provided to the right of each question. This scale is defined as follows:

CODE PERFORMANCE LEVEL

S SATISFACTORY – The contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

M MARGINAL – Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions or the contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

US UNSATISFACTORY – Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

NA NOT APPLICABLE - Unable to provide a score.

The questions shown below should be tailored to the Factors/Subfactors of the instant acquisition.

Technical Performance S M US NA

T1. Quality & repeatability of operations & maintenance.

T2. Quality of technical system testing and certification efforts

T3. Quality/integrity of technical data/report preparation efforts

T4. Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements

T5. Ability to implement current standard practices for computer hardware design, operation, maintenance, upgrades and configuration control

T6. Ability to implement current standard practices for computer software design, operation, maintenance, upgrades and configuration control

T7. Adequacy/effectiveness of environmental safety procedures

Program Management S M US NA

P1. Effectiveness of overall contract management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the program)

Program Management S M US NA

P2. Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes)

P3. Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance

P4. Understand/complied with customer objectives and technical requirements

P5. Successfully responded to emergency and/or surge situations

P6. Quality/effectiveness of sub-contracted efforts

P7. Effectiveness of material management (including Government Furnished Property or Material)

P8. Effectiveness of acquisition management

P9. Contractor proposed alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the customer

P10. Contractor implemented responsive/flexible processes to improve quality and timeliness of support.

Transition/phase-in S M US NA

T1. Contractor ability to smoothly transition resources and personnel.

T2. Contractor effectiveness on maintaining continuity of mission support while transitioning/phasing in resources and personnel to support other efforts.

Employee Retention/Attraction S M US NA

E1. Ability to hire/apply a qualified workforce to this effort.

E2. Ability to retain a qualified workforce on this effort.

E3. Effectiveness of employee compensation towards quality of work.

Small and Small Disadvantaged Business Participation S M US NA

S1. Ability to meet or exceed small business and small disadvantaged business goals set forth in the approved subcontracting plan

S2. Ability to effectively manage small business participation to meet technical performance.

Cost Performance S M US NA

C1. Accuracy in forecasting contract costs

C2. Ability to meet forecasted costs and perform within contract costs

C3. Ability to alert Government of unforeseen costs before they occur

C4. Sufficiency and timeliness of cost reporting

1. Please discuss each and every response for which you indicated M (Marginal) or US (Unsatisfactory) in response to the questions above (use additional sheets, if necessary).

2. Government Contracts Only: Has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations?

Yes____ Default____ Convenience____ Pending Terminations____ No ____

If yes, please explain (e.g., inability to meet cost, performance, or delivery schedules, etc).

SECTION 5: NARRATIVE SUMMARY

Would you have any reservations about soliciting this contractor in the future or having them perform one of your critical and demanding programs?

Please provide any additional comments concerning this contractor’s performance, as desired.

Evaluator’s Signature Date

Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!

Please return this completed questionnaire to:

Mailing Address:

Or FAX/E-mail to:

SAMPLE QUESTIONNAIRE COVER LETTER

LETTERHEAD

(Date)

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

The (Name of Installation Contracting Office (ICO) of the Mission and Installation Contracting Command (MICC) is in the process of selecting a contractor for a (name of program) program. (Describe in general terms the nature of the effort).

One of the considerations in proposal evaluation is the verification of the offerors' past and present performance on contracts, which reflect the offeror's ability to perform on the proposed effort. We depend on information received from agencies such as yours, which have had firsthand experience with an offeror, for the evaluation of the offeror's performance on those contracts.

Our areas of interest in the offeror are summarized in the enclosed questionnaire. As discussed in our initial phone contact with your office, our schedule is extremely tight and we need your written response no later than (NLT) _______ calendar days (Recommend incorporating the date the solicitation/RFP closes) after your receipt of this letter. This schedule will allow us sufficient time to analyze the data prior to the start of negotiations.

To assist you in preparing your response and expediting your reply, the questionnaire may be filled out by hand and "faxed/emailed" to XXXXX-XXXX (Attention: ______________). Please call _______________at (XXX) XXX-XXXX prior to transmission or if you have any questions. Your completed questionnaire will become a part of the official Source Selection records.

Your help is greatly appreciated and your prompt response will be one of the keys to the successful and timely completion of this Source Selection.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

TEMPLATE

SECTION M

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M-1. SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

NOTICE: Pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.252-1, "Solicitation Provisions Incorporated by Reference," the following provisions are incorporated herein by reference:

A. SOLICITATION PROVISIONS:

PARAGRAPH TITLE DATE

M-II. SOLICITATION PROVISION IN FULL TEXT

NOTICE: The following provisions are hereby incorporated in full text:

M-III. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

a. Basis for Contract Award

(1) This is a best value 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). Award will be made to a single offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements, and whose proposal, judged by an overall assessment of the evaluation criteria and other considerations specified in this solicitation, represents the Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable offer.

(2) Trade-offs between cost/price and non-cost/price factors are not permitted. Unreasonably high/unrealistically low, unbalanced, inaccurate or incomplete price proposals, may be the grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition.

The Government will evaluate proposed prices for reasonableness using price analysis techniques. Proposed prices evaluated as unreasonable may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition.

b. Award for All of the Work. The Government intends to award W911S7-18-R-0016 as a result of this solicitation. Offers received for less than the stated number of items listed in the Bid Schedule will be considered ineligible for award. As set forth in FAR 52.215-1 (f)(4), the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a), Clarifications and award without discussions). Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. In the event that discussions are held, a competitive range determination will be made. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

c. Evaluation Criteria

(1) Evaluation criteria consist of factors and subfactors. The proposals will be evaluated under 3 evaluation factors:

Factor 1: TECHNICAL ACCEPTABILITY Subfactor 1: Technical Approach Subfactor 2: Staffing Approach Subfactor 3: Management Approach

Factor 2: PAST PERFORMANCE Factor 3: PRICE CRITERIA

(2) Factor 1 -

Technical Approach- The Technical Factor evaluation provides an assessment of the offeror’s capability to satisfy the Government’s minimum requirements.

a. Discuss anticipated methodology to meet performance objectives as related to the specific tasks identified in Paragraph 3.0, and sub-paragraphs, of the performance work statement

(PWS).

Staffing Approach-

a. Identify proposed labor categories (to include skill levels) and estimated labor hours of performance for each category.

b. Disclose the level of experience, education, and technical qualifications of proposed personnel as relates to the required deliverables of the PWS.

Management Approach-a.Explain organizational hierarchy and lines of authority so as to depict theflow of communications, control, reporting, and tracking that will ensurean orderly flow of work and responsiveness to all PWS requirements.

b.Demonstrate how personnel shortages, turnover, leaves of absence andother personnel issues will be addressed to ensure mission success andcontinuity in performance

The Technical Factors will receive one of the adjectival ratings defined below. The subfactor ratings will be used to determine an overall rating for the factor.

Table A-1. Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings Rating Description Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

(3) Factor 2 - Past Performance. The Past Performance evaluation will assess the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation’s requirements as indicated by that offeror’s record of past performance. Past Performance is assessed at the factor level after evaluating aspects of the offeror’s recent past performance and focusing on performance that is relevant to the services being procured under this solicitation. Offerors are cautioned that in conducting the performance risk assessment, the Government may use data provided in the offeror’s proposal and data obtained from other sources, such as the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) or similar systems and State Department Watch Lists. Past performance areas of evaluation include:

- Business Relations

- Quality of Service

- Schedule

(a) Each offeror will receive a performance confidence assessment rating based on the

Offeror’s recent past performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the Contract requirements.

(b) Recency Assessment. An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past 3 years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated.

(c) Relevancy Assessment. To be relevant, the effort must be similar in nature of work, size, and complexity. The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all recent performance information obtained to determine if it is the same or similar in nature of work, size, and complexity to the services/products being procured under this solicitation.

Recent past performance is defined as not more than 3 years from the RFP release date; relevant in terms of similar nature of work, size and complexity.

A relevancy determination of the offeror’s (including joint venture partner(s) and major and critical subcontractor(s)) past performance will be made. In determining relevancy for individual contracts, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the offeror, teaming partner, or subcontractor whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated. In establishing what is relevant for the acquisition, consideration should be given to what aspects of an offeror’s contract history would give the most confidence that the offeror will satisfy the current procurement. The past performance information provided in the proposal and obtained from other sources will be used to establish the relevancy of past performance.

(d) The Past Performance Evaluation Team will review this past performance information and determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to performance confidence assessment.

(e) Assigning Ratings. The Past Performance Factor will be assigned one of the ratings defined below.

Table 2. Past Performance Evaluation Ratings

Rating Description Acceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the

Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown.

Unacceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

(f) Offerors without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

(4) Factor 3 – Price. Price will not be scored or rated. Evaluation of price will be performed using one or more of the price analysis techniques in FAR 15.404-1(b). Through these techniques the Government will determine whether prices are reasonable, complete and balanced.

Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). As part of price evaluation, the government will evaluate its option to extend services (see FAR Clause 52.217-8) by adding one-half of the offeror's final option period price to the offeror's total price. Thus, the offeror's total price for the purpose of evaluation will include the base period, 1st option, 2nd option, 3rd option, 4th option, and 1/2 of the 4th option. Offerors are not required to enter a price for the six-month period.

Unbalanced Pricing may be evaluated in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(g), as applicable, to assess potential performance risk which could result in unreasonably high prices

Definitions.

Reasonableness. A price is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of…