W9124J20R0015 0003 6.17.20.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 solicitation amendment is to:

1. Extend the proposal due time/date from 12:00 (noon)(Central), Wednesday, 24 Jun 20, to 12:00 (noon)(Central), Tuesday, 7 Jul 20,

2. Incorporate revised Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors-Commercial Items, Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation-Commercial Item, Performance Work Statement, Schedule Pricing Matrix, Atch 1: CME Workload Estimate, Atch 13: ACES DOL Wage Determinations, and Atch 14: IMCOM ACES Responses to Q&As into the solicitation, and

3. Provide Attachment 15, DOL Wage Determination 2015-0034 (Revision 14), w hich provides labor rates for the Education Counselor (22i01) at multiple service locations.

POC: Michael T. Bilicki, Contract Specialist, 210-466-2267, e-mail: michael.t.bilicki.civ@mail.mil

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

S 1 63

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 17-Jun-2020

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 W9124J20R0015

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

08-May-2020

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 X is extended, 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

17-Jun-2020

CODE

MICC - FSH

ATTN: MICC - FSH

2205 INFANTRY POST RD

210-466-2145

FORT SAM HOUSTON TX 78234-1361

W9124J 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W9124J20R0015

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been added by full text:

ADDENDUM 52.212-1 REVISED

SOLICITATION/PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS – Instructions, Conditions, and Notice to Offerors

(ADDENDUM TO FAR CLAUSE 52.212-1, INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS-COMMERICAL ITEM)

A. Proposal Submittal and Inquiries

1. Proposals shall be submitted prior to the closing date and time identified on SF 1449, which is NOT LATER THAN 12:00 P.M. (noon) CENTRAL DAYLIGHT TIME on Tuesday, 7 July 2020.

2. All proposals shall be submitted electronically via the DOD SAFE file exchange website (safe.apps.mil).

3. Offerors shall review the solicitation and its amendments (if applicable) and submit only written questions and/or comments with the Subject Line Reference: Questions/Comments/Exceptions for ACES Education Support Services, W9124J-20-R-0015. All inquiries, questions and or comments shall be directed to the attention of both the following:

CONTRACT SPECIALIST: Michael T. Bilicki, e-mail: michael.t.bilicki.civ@mail.mil and Madeline M.

Allison, e-mail: madeline.m.allison.civ@mail.mil.

CONTRACTING OFFICER: Angelic Hatcher, e-mail: angelic.m.hatcher.civ@mail.mil

The deadline for the submittal of all Questions/Comments/Exceptions is Monday, 18 May 2020 at 12:00 P.M.

(noon) CDT. Questions shall be submitted on and in the format delineated in Technical Exhibit C, Questions and Answers Matrix.

4. Time for Acceptance: Unless the Offeror inserts a different period of time on the SF 1449, the proposal shall remain valid for 180 days after the date annotated in Block 8 of the solicitation SF 1449.

5. Site Visit: N/A

B. General Instructions

1. The selection of a source for award purposes will be conducted utilizing Best Value Subjective Trade off source selection in accordance with FAR Part 12, “Acquisition of Commercial Items,” with procedures as delineated in FAR Part 15.3, “Source Selection” as authorized in FAR 12.203 and supplemented by Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), and the Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFARS).

This acquisition is a 100% WOSB Set Aside under NAICS 611710, Educational Support Services. Only Firms not exceeding the revenue size standard of $16.5M are eligible to submit an offer. Offers will be evaluated using the criteria under Addendum to FAR Clause 52.212-2, “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, the Performance Work Statement and the contract type.

3. Instructions outlined in paragraph C 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.

4. If an Offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, an ambiguity, omission, or are otherwise deemed unsound, the Offeror shall immediately notify the Contracting Officer in writing with supporting rationale. The Offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussion.

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. All referenced documents for this solicitation are available on the Contract Opportunities Website (Previously known as FBO) at https://beta.sam.gov. Potential Offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time email notifications when information has been posted to the website for this solicitation.

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 Offerors who were in the competitive range of the source but were not selected for award in accordance with FAR 15.503(b). The Contracting Officer will notify Offerors who are not selected for award in writing. Upon such notification, unsuccessful Offerors may request to receive a debriefing in accordance with the requirements of FAR 15.505 (pre-award) and FAR 15.506 (post-award).

C. Proposal Preparation Instructions

1. The Offeror’s proposal shall consist of four (4) volumes:

Volume I - General

Volume II- Technical Approach

Volume III- Past Performance

Volume IV – Cost/Price

2. Proposal Format

(a) NEITHER MAILED, HAND-DELIVERED, FAXED NOR E-MAIL PROPOSALS OR AMENDMENT ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS WILL BE ACCEPTED. Offerors shall submit their proposals electronically via the DOD SAFE file exchange website (safe.apps.mil) ONLY. Offerors must provide an e-mail to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist by 4:00 p.m. (Central), Monday, 22 Jun 2020, which states their intention to propose. Passwords/links to the DOD SAFE website will then be sent to those Offerors NLT 4:00 p.m. (Central), Friday, 26 June 2020. DOD SAFE file exchange website passwords/links will not be provided prior to 26 June 2020. Proposals can be uploaded to the DOD SAFE file exchange website at any time after the Offeror receives their password/link, up to the proposal submission deadline.

Subcontractors/teaming partners, etc., submitting proprietary documentation must follow the same procedures as delineated above, as proposal documentation will ONLY be received through the DOD SAFE website. Separate passwords/links will be provided to the subcontractor/teaming partner, etc. Offerors are responsible for verifying that any subcontractor or partner submitting additional information has complied with these instructions, and the Government has received the files electronically before the proposal due date and time. NOTE: No DOD SAFE file exchange website passwords/links will be provided to any Offeror who does not provide an e-mail to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist by 4:00 p.m. (Central), Monday, 22 June 2020, stating their intent to propose. The Government strongly encourages Offerors to ensure they can access the DOD SAFE website as soon as possible. Failure to follow the proposal submission instructions may deem an Offeror non-compliant with the RFP.

(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 found in Section M, Addendum to FAR Clause 52.212-2 Evaluation Factors for Award. Failure to meet any requirement in this solicitation may result in an offer being ineligible for award. Any assumption, exceptions, or deviations must be addressed and communicated to the Contracting Officer prior to the closing date of this solicitation which is Tuesday, 7 July 2020 12:00 P.M. (noon) (CDT). 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 exception(s) 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, price, 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 without prior approval from the Contracting Officer may render the offer ineligible for award. All exception(s) shall be submitted electronically 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 proposal shall be organized into four (4) volumes. All text shall be single spaced and black font on white background. Black and white requirement does not apply to graphics, photos, Company stationary and logos. Times New Roman or Arial font required. Text shall be a minimum font size of 12. Cross-references should be utilized to preclude unnecessary duplication of data between sections. Page numbers, headers and footers may be outside the page margins and are not bound by the 12 font size, but shall be no smaller than 8-point. Additionally, fonts as small as 8-point can also be used in tables, charts, graphs, and figures as well as used in callout boxes and figure captions. Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line. All text pages shall be oriented in portrait. Landscape orientation is acceptable for tables and/or charts if required to properly present the information.

Margins shall be at least 1 inch on the top and bottom and ¾ inch on the sides. The Offeror shall number each page.

In the event the Offeror creates an ambiguity in their numbering, the Government may exercise its own discretion in counting pages. The proposal shall not exceed the following page limits:

Volume I General: No Page Limit

Volume II - Technical Capability: 75 pages (excluding resumes and signed contingent offer letters)

Volume III- Past Performance: 25 pages

Volume IV – Cost/Price: No Page Limit

(d) Proposal Limitation. If the page limits are exceeded, the pages in excess of the limit shall not be evaluated. The Government will not accept any changes to the Offeror’s proposal after the closing date of the solicitation (see FAR 15.208 for further information regarding late proposals). If discussions are necessary, page limitations may be placed on responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs). The specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the ENs to Offerors.

(e) Page limits includes all appendices, charts, graphs, diagrams, tables, photographs, drawings, and other information provided in the proposal.

(f) Page Limit does not include covers for volumes, table 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. Additionally, resumes and signed contingent offer letters will not be counted. Pages 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. Margins shall be at least 1 inch on the top and bottom and 3/4 inch on the side. The Offeror shall number each page in order to eliminate any confusion. In the event Offeror 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 detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume.

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

3. Proposal Content:

(a) Volume I – General. Offerors are required to submit a completed SF-1449, Solicitation, Contract (including acknowledgment of Amendments), complete Blocks 30 and include all Representation, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors. All final monetary extensions shall be in whole dollars only. Failure to follow the below Contract Proposal preparation instructions may cause your proposal to be deemed unacceptable by the Government. The General Volume shall be organized as follows and contain the identified information.

TAB A, Exceptions/Assumptions (if required) - Identification and explanation of any Contracting Officer approved exceptions or deviations. Additionally, any assumptions used in the proposal preparation must be identified.

TAB B, Solicitation, Offer and Award - The SF 1449 shall be submitted fully completed. The Offeror is cautioned that the SF 1449, must contain an original signature in block 30 of the form. The Offeror shall acknowledge any amendments to the RFP in accordance with the instructions on the SF 1449 and with Section L, FAR 52.212-1, Instruction to Offerors—Commercial Items. The Offeror shall provide the name, title and telephone number of the company/division point of contact regarding decisions made with respect to your proposal and who can obligate your company contractually. Also, identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government.

TAB C, Section B (Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs) - Section B shall be submitted fully completed and error free. It shall contain the Offeror’s prices for the established Contract Line Items Numbers

(CLINS).

TAB D, (Representation, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors) – The Offeror shall ensure each certification/representation is completed truthfully and completely. Complete FAR Provisions 52.212- 3—Offeror Representations and Certification—Commercial Items and 52.222-22—Previous Contract and Compliance Reports. The Offeror shall ensure that these provisions are submitted thoroughly completed with all blocks in each certification/representation completed truthfully and completely.

TAB E, In the event the Offeror is a joint venture, the Offeror shall provide a copy of the JVA signed by all partners. The JVA shall specify the rights and responsibilities of each partner and shall identify the managing partner. In addition, the Offeror shall provide a summary narrative that specifically delineates what each partner will do in regard to performing the contract. The responsibilities of the managing partner are significantly more important than the responsibilities of all other partners combined.

In the event the Offeror will be subcontracting with another or multiple businesses, the Offeror ), shall not pay more than 50 percent of the amount paid by the Government for contract performance to subcontractors that are not similarly situated entities. Any work that a similarly situated entity further subcontracts will count toward the 50 percent subcontract amount that cannot be exceeded IAW FAR 52.219-30 (Deviation 2019-O00008).

TAB F Organizational Conflicts of Interest (If Applicable). The Offeror shall disclose all organizational and/or personal conflicts of interest of this solicitation to the Contracting Officer as soon as possible so that potential conflicts can be analyzed in accordance with FAR Subpart 9.5.

(b) Volume II—Technical Volume:

(1) The Technical Volume shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims in the Offeror’s proposal. Legibility, clarity and coherence are very important. Your responses will be evaluated against the Technical factors defined in Addendum to FAR Clause 52.212-2, “Evaluation Factors for Award.” The 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 facilities and experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Offeror’s proposal. Elaborate brochures or documentation, detailed art work, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

(2) The Technical Volume shall, at a minimum, be prepared in a form consistent with the Performance Work Statement and the evaluation criteria for award set forth in Addendum to FAR Clause 52.212-2, “Evaluation Factors for Award.” 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 Offeror’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 used for accomplishing the PWS tasks. Any assumptions, exceptions or deviations must be addressed and communicated to the Contracting Officer no later than instructed above. The volume shall be organized according to the following general outline:

-Table of Contents

-List of Tables and Drawings

-Cross Reference Matrix (if any)

- Exceptions/Assumptions (Identification and explanation of any exceptions or deviations). Additionally, identify any assumptions used in preparing the proposal

Factor 1: Technical Approach:

Offerors are invited to identify enhancements that may be considered for evaluation benefit in the best value tradeoff. Enhancements that provide performance efficiency should be translated into benefits other than merely cost saving. Cost savings enhancements should be included in the overall proposed price. Enhancements that Offeror desires technical benefit must identify the specific PWS paragraph or PRS through improved Acceptable Level of Quality that the Offeror will commit during performance. The Offeror must include an explanation of why it considers the enhancement a benefit to the Government. The Offeror should provide a cost for implementing the enhancement as that could define its overall value.

a. Subfactor 1: Understanding of the Requirement: Responses to this subfactor must demonstrate understanding of the tasks outlined in the PWS. At a minimum, the proposal must demonstrate and address each of the following specified requirements:

i. The Offeror shall provide a detailed narrative on how the Offeror intends to accomplish all contract tasks and complete high quality deliverables as noted in PWS, Technical Exhibit A, Performance Requirement Summary and Technical Exhibit B, Deliverables Schedule. The narrative must also provide Offeror’s approach and method of dealing with changes in the expected number of Soldiers/Customers due to an increase of troops from deployment or a military drawdown, contingency situations, or other planned or unplanned surge situations that may occur based on the following staffing surge scenarios:

• An increase of Troops at Camp Humphreys, Korea requires an additional 8000 annual hours of Reception and Administration Support Services, for a period of 12 months.

• An increase of Troops at Torii Station, Okinawa requires an additional 8000 annual hours of Counseling Support Services, for a period of 24 months.

• A Military drawdown has necessitated the need for an additional 11200 hours of Test Examiner Support Services in Fort Polk, LA, for a period of 9 months.

• A contingency situation dictates an additional 9600 hours of Instructor Support Services (28,800 hours total) at both Ft Dix NJ, Joint Base Lewis McCord, WA, and Fort Campbell, KY within 21 days of notification, for a period of 6 months at each location.

b. Subfactor 2 - Staffing Plan/Qualifications of Key Personnel. Responses to this subfactor must demonstrate Offeror’s understanding of the necessary qualifications required of personnel to adequately execute the requirements of the PWS 1.6.13. and 1.6.19.

i. Provide Staffing Plan (e.g. skill mix, personnel experience or qualifications, availability and job duty and descriptions) to include resumes, and signed contingent offer letters of employment for all key personnel proposed. The plan shall include the Offeror’s proposed staffing (must depict the total number of Full Time Equivalents (FTE) or combination of part-time and full time equivalents) of each location to include identification of the On-Site Coordinator (OSC). To assist Offeror’s in proposal preparation, the Government is providing Attachment 1, Contractor Manpower Equivalent (CME) Workload Estimate which the Government believes represents the staffing required to satisfactorily accomplish the contract tasks and high quality deliverables outlined in the PWS. Offerors may however propose an alternate Staffing Plan. If an alternate Staffing Plan is proposed, the Offeror’s alternate Staffing Plan shall be submitted in the format outlined is Attachment 1. The plan should also identify the Sub-Contractor arrangement (if one exists) proposed to accomplish the tasks in the PWS. The Offeror must identify the names of the sub-contractors (if any) and the associated responsibilities and skill sets for each in accomplishment of the PWS tasks. If the Offeror proposes using cross utilization of key personnel, the plan must clearly explain how the use of this approach will not compromise the completion of the contract tasks for each cross utilized labor category.

ii. Provide an approach to deal with turnover, and planned and unplanned shortages of personnel to maintain the same level of customer service as well as timely recruitment, training and replacement of personnel.

Offerors shall detail procedures used to document employee training and qualifications, how the training at the entry-level for each labor category will be addressed to include any opportunities for maintaining and increasing job-related skills. Additionally, detail any proposed, proven retention approach that the Offeror proposes to use on this contract. The approach must be clearly supported using current and historical turnover rates/numbers. Clearly describe the benefits from the approach chosen and include any specific changes in requirements document for implementing that approach if perceived as an enhancement.

c. Sub-Factor 3: Transition Approach: Provide transition plan detailing how the Offeror will provide staffing for Phase-In that covers the areas in PWS para's 1.5.1 Phase-In. At a minimum the Transition Plan must address:

• Phase-In Plan to Recruit, hire and train necessary personnel

• Phase-In Implementation plan, milestones, process interfaces, training, orientation of workforce, assessment of potential security risks, anticipated commitments, responsibilities of the contractor;

communication process

• Initiation of staffing requirements, i.e. National Agency Check and Inquiries (NACI), Common Access Cards (CACs), and other activities IAW this PWS

• Initiation of the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) approval process

(c) Volume III - Past Performance (Factor 3): The Government will perform a Confidence Assessment of the Offeror’s past performance to arrive at a confidence rating. The Confidence Assessment represents the evaluation of an Offeror's past work record to assess the Government's confidence in the Offeror's probability of successfully performing as proposed. 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. The Government’s past performance evaluation shall also consider an Offeror’s compliance with requirements under FAR 52.219-8 as required under FAR 15.304(c)(3)(i) and DFARS 215.305(a)(2). Past Performance information described herein is required on the Offeror and all subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners proposed to perform a significant portion 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 (see Technical Exhibit D, Subcontract Teaming Sample 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.

(1) 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.

(2) 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 Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) or similar systems, DCMA and commercial sources.

(3) 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. In the case of an Offeror without any relevant past performance history, Offeror’s without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and, as a result, will receive an “Neutral Confidence” rating for the Past Performance factor. A strong record of relevant present and past performance may be considered more advantageous to the Government than a “Neutral Confidence” rating.

(4) 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. Offerors with no past performance may provide the equivalent information on company officials and/or personnel proposed for this action. If the Offeror has no relevant past performance, they will be rated as “Neutral Confidence” rating.

(5) Submission Requirements. The Offeror shall submit a Past Performance Volume containing the following:

Table of Contents

Summary Page: describe the role of the Offeror, and of each subcontractor, teaming partner, and /or joint venture partner that will perform a significant portion of this requirement.

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 Technical Exhibit D, Subcontract Teaming Sample Letter).

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 within the past three years in the organization of your company and of your proposed partners that will perform a significant portion of this requirement. 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. Note: Offerors without organization structure change history in the past three years should indicate such in this section. A simple phrase such as “No organization structure change history applicable” or something similar will suffice.

Specific Relevant Contracts Format - Sheets in accordance with Technical Exhibit E, Specific Relevant Contract Ref. Sheet. The Offeror shall provide documentation outlining the Offeror’s, and the proposed partners’ that will perform over a significant portion of this requirement, 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. A minimum of three (3) similar contracts and no more than five (5) contracts shall be provided as part of this submission.

d. Volume IV – Cost/Price (Factor 4) The Offeror shall complete the Schedule Pricing Matrix. Failure to complete the Pricing Matrix may deem an Offeror non-compliant with the RFP. A cost breakdown is required for each proposed Fully Burdened Labor Rate (FBLR). The cost breakdown should show how each FBLR was calculated.

1. A narrative should also be provided to substantiate the proposed FBLRs. The following information is required:

a. Base Labor Rates: The cost breakdown shall show base labor rates associated with each labor category. Base rates are the hourly rates that the employees will actually be paid for performance under the contract. In the narrative, explain the basis for the proposed labor rates. Some common basis for proposed rates is the actual rate the employee is currently being paid, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Payscale, etc. The method used to escalate rates for additional periods will need to be explained, to include the basis for the escalation factors used and the date that pay increases are effective.

b. Indirect Rates: Common indirect rates are Labor Overhead, Fringe Benefits, General and Administrative (G&A), etc. In the cost breakdown, show each individual rate and in the narrative describe the allocation base. The allocation base is the cost category that the rate is multiplied by to calculate the indirect dollars. An example is a labor overhead rate applied to direct labor dollars; the latter being the allocation base. In the narrative, provide the base and pool calculations for the fringe benefit rate to include support documentation for common expenses included in the pool, such as Payroll taxes, Paid Time Off, Defense Base Insurance, Medical and Disability Insurance, Retirement benefits, etc. For example, the support documentation for insurance can be in the form of quotes received from insurance companies that identify the premium paid for Defense Base Insurance, Medical and Disability Insurance, etc. Other support documentation can be in the form of the company’s policy for retirement contributions, paid time off, etc. The base and pool calculations are not required for any other indirect rates proposed.

c. Profit: Must be separately identified.

2. All information relating to the proposed price must be included in electronic format. Electronic versions of the cost/price proposal shall be submitted in a format compatible with Microsoft Office (2007 or earlier) as further delineated below, and files should not be read only or password protected. For the cost breakdown ensure that all Excel formulas, lookup tables, and links are intact, and no links exist to files not included with the submission. Excel workbooks should not contain hidden spreadsheets. PDF or flat files will not be considered adequate for pricing. For the support documentation, ensure that a narrative is included in your price proposal that identifies the basis and the support documentation for the direct labor rates and fringe rates proposed. Failure to comply with these formatting requirements may result in rejection of your proposal.

ADDENDUM 52.212-2 REVISED

BASIS FOR AWARD AND EVALUATION CRITERIA (ADDENDUM TO FAR CLAUSE 52.212-2,

EVALUATION-COMMERICAL ITEM)

a. Basis for Award

1. This is a best value subjective tradeoff 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 make a single award as a result of the solicitation to the Offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the FAR, as supplemented, whose proposal conforms to the solicitation’s requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by Section L of this solicitation) and is judged the best value to the Government using a subjective trade-off process. Award will be based upon an integrated assessment of all non-Cost (Technical Capability, and Past Performance) and Cost/Price Factors. As part of this assessment, the Government will determine whether exceeding the minimum requirements at an associated price provides the best value to the Government.

2. This process permits subjective trade-offs among cost/price and non-cost/price factors, and allows the

Government to award to other than the lowest priced proposal or other than the highest technically rated proposal to obtain objective performance (versus threshold), lower risk, or innovative and technologically superior solutions.

However, the degree of importance of cost/price as a factor in determining award could become greater depending upon the equality of the proposals evaluated in the non-cost/price factors. The greater the equality of proposals within the non-cost/price factors, the more important cost/price becomes in selecting the best value to the Government.

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

4. Unrealistically low costs/prices may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition on the basis that the Offeror has demonstrated a lack of understanding of the requirement.

5. The Government is looking for the Offeror that demonstrates superior technical expertise and offers the best possible qualified personnel in order to mitigate the risk inherent in the performance of this requirement. A proposal that demonstrates superior processes, plans, and ability to provide better qualified personnel may be worth more to the Government than a proposal that just meets the minimum needs.

b. Award for All of the Work: The Government intends to award a Firm Fixed Price contract as a result of this Request for Proposal. Offers received for less than the stated number of items listed in the Schedule B will be considered ineligible for award.

c. Discussions/Competitive Range Information. The Government intends to evaluate offers and hold discussions with Offerors. However, the Offeror’s initial offer should contain its optimal solution from a price and technical standpoint because the Government reserves the right to award without discussions. Prior to discussions, a competitive range will be determined and Offerors notified. 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 pursuant to FAR Subpart 15.306(c).

d. Evaluation Criteria:

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

Factor 1: Technical Capability:

Subfactor 1: Understanding of the Requirement Subfactor 2: Staffing Plan/Key Personnel Qualifications and Experience Subfactor 3: Transition Approach

Factor 2: Past Performance

Factor 3: Price

2. Relative Importance of Factors/Subfactors: The importance of the Non-Price Evaluation Factors is in the following descending order with the most important factor listed first: Factor 1 - Technical Capability and Factor 2- Past Performance. All sub-factors are determined to be critical. In evaluating the three sub-factors within the Technical Capability factor, all subfactors are considered equal (1 - Understanding of Requirement; 2 - Staffing Plan/Key Personnel Qualifications and Experience; and 3 – Transition Approach). In accordance with FAR 15.304(e), all evaluation factors other than Price, when combined are significantly more important than cost or price.

3. Factor 1 – Technical Approach.

The Offeror's Technical Proposal will be evaluated using the criteria below. Enhancements offered in accordance with the Addendum to 52.212-1, Factor 1 may be assessed as a Strength or Significant Strength for best value tradeoff. Any enhancement must provide a measurable benefit during performance and be incorporated into the PWS or PRS. The Government will consider the Offeror's suggested enhancements yet reserves the right to determine if an enhancement is a Strength or Significant Strength. The Contracting Officer may identify if the cost to implement the enhancement exceeds the perceived benefit and thus might negatively affect the best value tradeoff decision.

a. Subfactor 1: Understanding the Requirement. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s ability to perform and satisfy all contractual requirements of this solicitation. The proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the Offeror’s methods and approach are feasible and adequately and completely satisfied the magnitude and complexity of the Government’s requirement as specified in the Solicitation.

i.. The Government will evaluate the Offeror's approach for accomplishing all contract tasks and high quality deliverables outlined in PWS, Technical Exhibits A, Performance Requirement Summary and Technical Exhibit B, Deliverables Schedule while meeting or exceeding AQLs. The Government will evaluate the Offeror's approach and method of dealing with changes in the expected number of Soldiers/Customers due to an increase of troops from deployment or a military drawdown, contingency situations, or other planned or unplanned surge situations that may occur based on the surge scenarios outlined in the Addendum to 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors, Factor 1 Subfactor 1i. The requirement standard is met when the Offeror proposes a realistic approach for each scenario, covering: 1) timelines, 2) employee orientation/training (contractor-specific and government-specific requirements), 3) background checks, and 4) SOFA approval process, to facilitate an orderly phase-in of staffing completed within 60 days of notification, or within 21 days of notification for the contingency scenario at NJ, WA and KY.

b. Subfactor 2 - Staffing Plan/Qualifications of Key Personnel. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s understanding of the necessary qualifications required of personnel to adequately execute the requirements of the PWS 1.6.13. and 1.6.19.

i. The Government will evaluate the Offerors proposed Staffing Plan to ensure: 1) the staffing plan contains proper skill mix and proposed hours to fulfill PWS requirements based on Offeror's approach,

2) the key personnel resumes describe the minimum qualifications IAW PWS para 1.6.13, 3) there are signed contingent offer letters of employment for all key personnel proposed, 4) the staffing plan outlines how all functions will be covered by the prime/subcontractor, and 5) the Offeror’s approach ensures minimal interruption of services and management of contractual functions over CONUS and OCONUS operation with emphasis given to the management of a dispersed workforce.

If the Offeror's proposed staffing plan deviates from Attachment 1, the Government will evaluate whether the proposed deviation demonstrates a realistic approach to meeting the Government’s requirement in providing services in accordance with the PWS, PRS, Technical Exhibit A and the Deliverables Schedule, Technical Exhibit B

ii. The will Government will evaluate the Offerors proposed approach to mitigating contract schedule and performance risk in providing services in accordance with the PRS, Technical Exhibit A and the Deliverables Schedule, Technical Exhibit B, while handling routine turnover and shortages of personnel. The requirement standard may be exceeded if the Offeror proposes a retention approach that has been proven effective over a minimum of a three year time span on previous contracts at a reasonable cost. The Offeror’s proposal must be supported through reasonable analysis and rationale, clearly demonstrating a retention rate improvement of at least 10% between the pre- and post-incentive use on contracts by the Offeror. Additionally, the associated cost of the enhanced retention approach must be included in detail in the Cost/Price Volume.

c. Sub-Factor 3: Transition Approach: The Government will evaluate the Offeror's approach for having Key Personnel on staff on the 1st day of phase-in, at least 60% staffing by the 45th day of phase in, and full staffing by day 60 of Phase-in. The Government will evaluate the Offerors Transition plan to ensure it adheres to the minimum requirements outlined in 52.212-1, Factor 1, Subfactor 3.

d. Rating Schemes: Combined Technical/Risk Rating. The Offeror’s technical solution will receive a combined technical/risk rating that includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. Combined technical/risk evaluations shall utilize the combined technical/risk rating listed in Table 1. Each factor and subfactor will receive one of the adjectival ratings defined below. Any sub-factor that receives a marginal or unacceptable rating will result in an overall marginal or unacceptable rating for the factor and are not eligible for award.

Table 1. Combined Technical/Risk Ratings Color Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.

e. Findings Definitions:

Deficiency. A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. See

FAR 15.001.

Strength. An aspect of an Offerors’ proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Significant Strength. An aspect of an Offerors’ proposal that has appreciable merit or appreciably exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be appreciably advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

Significant Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

Uncertainty. Any aspect of a non-cost/price factor proposal for which the intent of the Offeror is unclear (e.g., more than one way to interpret the offer or inconsistencies in the proposal indicating that there may have been an error, omission or mistake).

4. Factor 2 - Past Performance. Past Performance evaluation will assess the relative risks associated with an Offeror’s likelihood of success in performing the solicitation’s requirements as indicated by that Offeror’s record of past performance.