Amendment (05) W9124J-20-R-0019 FT Lee FFS.pdf

W9124J20R0019

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 Amendment 05 is to update the solicitation, provide updated documents, PWS (25Feb2021), updated Attachement H Staffing Matrix (8 Mar 2021), updated Attachment G Pricing Matrix (2 Mar 2021) and Attachment F Workload Data (2 Mar 2021) .All Technical Questions are due No Later Than (NLT) 17 March 2021, 12:00 PM CST Amendment 05 w ill also extend the Offer Due Date and Time specified in the solicitation from 19 February 2021, 1200PM CT TO: 05 April 2021, 1200 PM CT.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 54

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 09-Mar-2021

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 W9124J20R0019

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

15-Dec-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 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

09-Mar-2021

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:

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 19-Feb-2021 12:00 PM to 05-Apr-2021 12:00 PM.

The following have been modified:

ADDENDUM TO 52-212-1&2

Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

I. Proposal Preparation Instructions

A. Proposal Submittal and Inquiries

1. Due to the situation surrounding COVID-19 and DoD guidance, Offerors will be required to e-mail their proposal documents to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist at the following email addresses:

samuel.j.colton.civ@mail.mil and james.m.davis1.civ@mail.mil. Should the files be too large to e-mail the Offeror will need to e-mail the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist for the Government to submit a “Request a Drop-off” request through the DoD Secure Access File Exchange (SAFE) web-based tool. Once the Government submits the request Offerors will have fourteen (14) days to upload their digital proposal files for “Pick-Up” by the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist before the request expires. The Offerors e-mail submission or submission through the DoD SAFE must be made no later than (NLT) the closing date and time specified in the solicitation.

2. The point of contact responsible for providing additional information and answering all inquiries is the Contracting Officer via the Contract Specialist. All questions or concerns regarding this solicitation shall be submitted in writing to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist at the following email addresses:

samuel.j.colton.civ@mail.mil and james.m.davis1.civ@mail.mil.

3. Due to the situation surrounding COVID-19 and DoD guidance a Site Visit for this requirement will NOT be conducted at Fort Lee, VA. Please refer to the attachments provided to this solicitation for building information.

Any and all technical questions or clarifications will need to be submitted in writing to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist as specified in the instructions below.

All Technical Questions are due No Later Than (NLT) 17 March 2021, 12:00 PM CST. Offerors will submit questions in writing to Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist through samuel.j.colton.civ@mail.mil and james.m.davis1.civ@mail.mil. The Government will answer questions received up until due date listed above and provide responses to interested parties via System for Award Management (SAM) website at http://beta.sam.gov.

Questions received after this date may not be answered.

B. General Instructions

1. To ensure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, offerors must follow the instructions contained herein.

Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements in addition to those identified as evaluation factors and subfactors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award in the absence of discussions. Taking exception to any provision in the solicitation without addressing the exception with the contracting office before the proposal due date specified within the solicitation will render the proposal ineligible for award. The contracting officer has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition. Upon examination of the initial offerors, the contracting officer will review this determination, and if adequate price competition exists, no additional cost information will be requested. However, if at any time during this process the contracting officer determines that adequate price competition no longer exists, offerors may be required to submit information to the extent necessary for the contracting officer to determine the reasonableness of the proposed price.

2. This procurement is subject to the Randolph-Sheppard Act (R-SA), 20 U.S.C. §107, Operation of Vending Facilities and 34 CFR §395.33, Operation of Cafeterias by Blind Vendors, which establishes a priority for blind persons recognized and represented by the State Licensing Agency (SLA), in the award of contracts for the operation of cafeterias on federal facilities. Accordingly, although the solicitation is set-aside 100% for small business, the State Licensing Agency will also be permitted to submit a proposal in accordance with 34 CFR 395.33(b). This notice is not designed to discourage competition rather, it notifies all potential offerors that the priority established by the R-SA for proposals received from SLAs and their blind vendors is applicable to this procurement

3. The selection of a source for award purposes will be conducted utilizing FAR Part 12 (Acquisition of Commercial Items) in conjunction with FAR Part 15 (Contracting by Negotiation). Offers will be evaluated using the criteria under the Addendum to 52.212-2 Evaluation-Commercial Items. Award will be made to a single offeror whose timely offer is deemed responsible IAW 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 (LPTA) offer, or to the SLA under the R-SA priority pursuant to the procedures outline in this solicitation. The source selection steps are delineated in the addendum to 52.212-2.

4. By submission of its offer, the offeror agrees to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements to include those identified specifically as evaluation factors and subfactors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being determined non-responsible.

5. 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.

6. Proposals shall remain valid for 120 days following the date specified for receipt of offers.

7. Instructions outlined in paragraph C below, prescribes the format for the proposal and describes 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.

8. 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 discussions.

9. IAW FAR 4.8, Government Contract Files, the Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals.

10. All referenced documents for this solicitation are available on the System for Award Management (SAM) website at http://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.

11. Debriefings. Upon notification, unsuccessful offerors may request and receive a debriefing IAW the requirements of FAR 15.506.

C. Proposal Preparation Instructions

1. The offeror’s proposal shall consist of four (4) separate volumes: Volume I – RFP Documents, Volume II – Technical, Volume III – Past Performance, and Volume IV – Price.

2. Exception: IAW FAR Part 19.702, the SLA, if submitting a proposal, shall submit Volume V – Subcontracting Plan. Volume V shall be submitted as identified in paragraph 4.e. Instructions for required components for the subcontracting plan can be found at FAR Clause 52.219-9 Alt II (Dev 2018-O0018) and DFARS Clause 252.219- 7003.

3. Proposal Format.

a. Offerors shall submit an original copy, listed in paragraph c. Table 2 below, of their proposal.

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 sub-factors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offeror 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 in Table 1.

Table 1 – Solicitation Exceptions

Solicitation Document

Page/Paragraph Requirement/Portion Rationale & Impact

PWS

Evaluation Factors for Award, 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 the four (4) volumes identified at Table 2. The SLA is required to also submit Volume V. A cover sheet should be provided, clearly marked as to volume number, title, solicitation identification, and offeror’s name. All text shall be single spaced and on white background with black color font (Black and white requirement does not apply to graphics or photos. Company stationary and logos are acceptable).

Documents shall be easily readable (12-pitch type or 10 point proportion spacing). Cross-references should be utilized to preclude unnecessary duplication of data between sections. Digital copies shall be provided in Microsoft Word, PDF, PowerPoint, and/or Excel as outlined in Table 2. The file name shall be “Company Name – Initial” for the first submission. The file name of later submissions (if necessary), shall be “Company Name – Revision X” with X indicating the number of the revision. Page limitations are as follows in Table 2:

Table 2 – Proposal Submittal Instructions and Format

VOLUME TITLE NO. OF DIGITAL &

ELECTRONIC

COPIES

PAGE LIMIT

I RFP Documents 1 EA – MS Word or

PDF

N/A

II Technical 1 EA – MS Word, PDF or Excel

100 Total

III Past Performance 1 EA – MS Word, PDF or Excel

10 pages per reference

IV Price 1 EA – MS Word or Excel

None

V Subcontracting Plan

(SLA ONLY)

1 EA – MS Word, PDF or Excel

d. Proposal Limitations. The proposal shall not exceed the limits stated at Table 2 (above). If the page limits are exceeded, the pages in excess of the limit shall be removed and unread. The Government will not accept any changes to the offeror’s proposal after the closing date of the solicitation (see FAR Provision 52.212-1(f), for further information regarding late proposals). If discussions become 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 the offerors.

e. Page Limit includes all appendices, charts, graphs, diagrams, tables, photographs, or drawings.

f. Page Limit does not include covers for volumes, tables of contents, glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, indices, title pages, cross reference indices, staffing matrix (Attachment H) and section dividers/tables if they are inserted solely to provide ease to the reader in locating parts/sections of the proposal. Pages will be counted if they contain any other information, i.e., diagrams or extraneous data. 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. Letter size and spacing requirements for illustrations and tables can be at the discretion of the offeror but must be easily readable. Margins shall be at least 1 inch on the top and bottom and ¾ inch on the side. The offeror shall number each page in order to eliminate any confusion. In the event an 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. 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 a definition for each.

4. Proposal Content.

a. Volume 1 – RFP Documents. Offerors are required to submit a completed SF 1449 (Solicitation, Offer and Award) (Including Acknowledgment of Amendments). All final monetary extensions shall be in whole dollars only.

Failure to follow the Contract Proposal preparation instructions may cause your proposal to be deemed unacceptable by the Government. Volume I shall be organized as follows and contain the identified information.

TAB A. Exceptions/Assumptions (if required) – Identification and explanation of any exceptions or deviations. Additionally, any assumptions used in the proposal preparation must be identified. See Table 1 – Solicitation Exceptions.

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 30a of the form. The contractor shall acknowledge any amendments to the RFP IAW the instructions on the SF 1449 and with Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors of the Solicitation, FAR 52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors – Commercial Items. The offeror shall provide the name, title and telephone number of the company/division point of contract regarding decisions made with respect to the proposal and who can obligate the company contractually. Also, identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government.

TAB C. Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs – The offeror shall ensure the Schedule of Supplies/Services of the Solicitation is fully completed and error free. It shall contain the offeror’s prices for the established Contract Line Items Numbers (CLINS).

TAB D. Representation, Certification, and Other Statements of Offerors – The offeror shall ensure that corresponding Representation, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors are submitted thoroughly completed with all blocks in each certification/representation completed truthfully and completely.

TAB E. Contingency Plan - Offerors shall submit a Contingency Plan IAW DFARS Clause 252.237-7024, Notice of Continuation of Essential Contractor Services, and PWS paragraph 2.2.1.4. Note: Although the plan is required, it will not be included in the source selection evaluation or be considered in the basis for award.

TAB F. Property Management Plan (PMP) - ‐ Offerors shall submit a PMP IAW FAR Clause 52.245-1, Government Property, and PWS paragraph 5. The Offeror’s property management plans shall include the methods, practices, or procedures for accounting for property that are consistent with the requirements of the solicitation.

Note: Although the plan is required, it will not be included in the source selection evaluation or be considered in the basis for award.

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. The responses will be evaluated against the Technical Capability Factor and Subfactors defined in the Addendum to 52.212-2 Evaluation-Commercial Items.

Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the Technical requirements or the PWS with a statement of intent to perform does not reflect and understanding of the requirement or the capability to perform. Statements that the offeror understands, can, or will comply with the PWS (including referenced publications or technical data); and phrases such as “standard procedures will be employed” or “well known techniques will be used” etc., will be considered unacceptable. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their technical capabilities and past experience, and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offeror’s proposal.

See Table 2 for page limits associated with the proposal.

(2) The Technical proposal will be evaluated against the Technical Capability Factor and Subfactors defined in the Addendum to 52.212-2 Evaluation-Commercial Items. 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.

(3) The volume shall be organized according to the following general outline.

Tab A – Table of Contents Tab B – List of Tables and Drawings Tab C – Cross Reference Matrix Tab D – Factor 1 Technical Capability

(4) Additional information specific to Tab D of the Technical Volume follows:

TAB D. Technical Capability.

Subfactor 1 – Organizational Structure: The Offeror shall submit an organizational diagram with a detailed explanation of their organizational structure that identifies the following:

(a) Key position(s), qualifications for key position(s), and what authority these individuals possess;

(b) Where decision making and problem resolution authority lies within the organization;

(c) Identification of the command and control relationship among the Offeror and all proposed subcontractor(s). The command and control relationship must include identification of leadership positions (e.g., team leads, foremen, supervisors, managers) responsible for performing successful oversight of the PWS.

Subfactor 2 - Staffing Plan. The staffing plan shall include proposed staffing by labor categories to perform the required services in each building listed in the PWS and Solicitation Attachment F – Estimated Workload.

Offerors shall utilize the Solicitation Attachment H - Staffing Matrix, for depicting their staffing. Offerors are only required to complete the Staffing Matrix for CLINs/SubCLINS within the Pricing Matrix that contain estimated quantities.

In addition to completing the Staffing Matrix, offerors shall provide rationale for their staffing for the applicable dining facilities to specifically address the following:

(a) Explain the logic for the staffing (FTEs x labor categories) for not only during serving times, but for hours before and after serving times;

(b) Rationale for staffing to ensure successful continuous operations of all PWS tasks during feeding times (to include as patrons/units rotate through the facility).

Rationale needs to include their methodology for accommodating fluctuating meals within the bands, cross-utilization of personnel and minimizing employee turnover.

c. Volume III – Past Performance. The Past Performance evaluation will be accomplished by reviewing aspects of an offeror’s recent Past Performance, focusing on and targeting performance which is relevant to the effort.

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.

(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 more than 3 years from the date of the solicitation for the submitted data. The past performance data shall show 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 available to the Government to include, but not limited to, the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontractor Reporting System (eSRS) or other databases; and may be obtained from other sources available to the Government, such as the Defense Contract Management Agency; and interviews with program managers, contracting officers, and/or fee determining officials. 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 in this paragraph risk rejection or a less than acceptable performance rating by the Government. All past performance comments received will be taken into consideration and could affect the overall rating. 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 (IAW FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or neutral) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered acceptable.

(3) 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 IAW Attachment L.

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 can be found at Attachment K.

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

Specific Relevant Contracts Format. Complete sheets IAW Attachment L and ensure that the submission is limited to 10 pages per reference. The offeror shall provide documentation outlining the offeror’s past performance with contracts, as a prime or as a 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 assertion of relevance and how it is determined that the work previously performed is 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.

Past Performance Questionnaire – See Attachment M - Past Performance Questionnaire. The offeror shall forward a copy of the Past Performance Questionnaire for each of the contracts identified on the specific relevant contract reference to the points of contact responsible for monitoring performance. The points of contact shall return the questionnaires directly via email to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist at the following email addresses: samuel.j.colton.civ@mail.mil and james.m.davis1.civ@mail.mil no later than the proposal due date.

Questionnaires not submitted directly to the Contracting Officer or Contract Specialist will not be reviewed and evaluated. The information contained in the properly executed and returned 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 no previous clients and that the minimum number of questionnaires cannot be provided.

d. Volume IV – Price. The offeror shall provide a price for each CLIN included in the Schedule of Supplies/Services of the Solicitation. The offer shall complete the pricing matrix, (Attachment G – Pricing Matrix) and shall provide a price for each CLIN/SubCLIN in the pricing matrix. Offerors are required to submit a unit price and extended amount (estimated quantity X Unit Price = Extended Amount) for each Building within the Pricing Matrix (for SubCLINs that do not contain an estimated quantity the offeror shall simply insert a Unit Price only).

The offerors shall utilize the extended CLIN pricing from the pricing matrix to price the applicable CLIN in the Schedule of Supplies/Services of the Solicitation.

The offeror shall ensure prices are represented in whole dollars only. The offeror shall include in their pricing matrix a breakdown by each labor category subject to the SCA WD and/or CBA the basic hourly labor rates being paid. The Government reserves the right to request Certified Cost or Pricing Data or Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data if the Government deems it necessary in order to determine price reasonableness.

(1) Offerors are required to submit prices for Phase-in, Project Management, each dining facility, and CMR in the Schedule of Supplies/Services of the Solicitation and Attachment G - Pricing Matrix. As part of price evaluation, the Government will evaluate its option to extend services (FAR Clause 52.217-8) by adding six (6) months of the offeror’s final ordering year price to the offeror’s total price.

(2) The offeror is informed that Department of Labor Wage Determination is applicable to this requirement, see Solicitation Attachment I – CBA/ Supplement Union Agreement.

e. Volume V – Subcontracting Plan. The priority established by the R-SA applies to this acquisition. This requirement is being set-aside for small business. Therefore, only the SLA is required to submit subcontracting plans and those plans must contain all the elements required in FAR Clause 52.219-9 Alt II (Dev 2018-O0018) and DFARS Clause 252.219-7003. Subcontracting plans shall contain separate percentage goals using Small Business (SB), Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB), HUBZone Small Business, Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB), Veteran Owned Small Business (VOSB), and Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) concerns as subcontractors. Small business concerns are not required to submit a subcontracting plan. Failure to comply with the requirement herein and FAR Clause 52.219-9 Alt II (Dev 2018-O0018) and DFARS Clause 252.219-7003 shall render the offeror ineligible for award.

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2 Evaluation-Commercial Items

I. Evaluation Factors for Award

a. Basis for contract award.

(1) Award will be made to a single offeror whose timely offer is deemed responsible IAW 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 (LPTA) offer, or to the SLA under the R-SA priority pursuant to the procedures outlined below in the provision.

(2) This procurement will be conducted pursuant to the Randolph-Sheppard Act (R-SA), 20 U.S.C. 107 § Operation of Vending Facilities and 34 CFR § 395.33 Operation of Cafeterias by Blind which establishes priority for blind persons recognized and represented by the State Licensing Agency (SLA), in the award of contracts for the operation of cafeterias on federal facilities. Accordingly, although the solicitation is set-aside 100% for small business, the State Licensing Agency will also be permitted to submit a proposal in accordance with 34 CFR § 395.33(b).

(3) The source selection will be conducted in the following steps:

STEP 1. After initial evaluation of timely received proposals in accordance with (IAW) the evaluation criteria specified in this solicitation and based on those initial evaluations, to include the total evaluated price (TEP), a Competitive Range (CR) will be established from proposals evaluated as “Acceptable”. If the contracting officer determines that a proposal should be excluded from the CR, the contracting officer will provide written notice of the exclusion to that offeror. If the SLA’s proposal is excluded from the CR, the SLA may file a complaint with the Secretary of Education under the provisions of 34 CFR § 395.37.

STEP 2. In accordance with Army Directive 2020-05 (Vending Facility Program for the Blind on Federal Property), the Government shall enter into discussions/negotiations with all offerors whose proposals have been determined to be in the CR established in Step 1,above. If, after discussions have begun, the Government determines that an offeror’s proposal should no longer be included in the CR, the proposal will be eliminated from consideration for award. Written notice of the exclusion from the CR will be provided to unsuccessful offerors. If the SLA is removed from the CR at this time, the SLA may file a complaint with the Secretary of Education under the provisions of 34 CFR § 395.37.

STEP 3. The Government will request Final Proposal Revisions (FPRs) at the conclusion of discussions with the offerors remaining within the CR. The FPRs will be evaluated IAW the evaluation criteria specified in this solicitation. The Government does not intend to conduct further discussions after receipt of the FPRs. As such, offerors in the CR are cautioned to submit its best offer for the FPR. However, if the contracting officer determines it necessary, the Government may establish a revised CR, re-open and conduct discussions again after receipt of FPRs, and then call for new FPRs.

STEP 4. After evaluation of the FPRs has been completed, the offeror with a technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated reasonable price and acceptable past performance will be the offer that represents the LPTA offer for the Government. The LPTA evaluation process stops at this point. Subject to a determination of contractor responsibility, that offeror will receive award unless preempted by application of the SLA priority in accordance with SLA Priority (STEP 5), below.

STEP 5. If the LPTA offer, as determined under STEP 4 above, is not the SLA, the Government will determine if award to the SLA shall preempt the LPTA offeror using the following criteria in accordance with the R-SA:

(i) If the SLA’s proposal was included in the CR, found to be technically acceptable with acceptable past performance and the SLA demonstrates through its proposal that it can provide such an operation at a fair and reasonable price as determined by the Government after applying the source selection criteria contained in the solicitation and provide food of high quality comparable to what is currently provided to service members, then priority/award will be given/made to the SLA subject to a determination of contractor responsibility and consultation with the Secretary of Education (IAW 34.CFR § 395.33(b).

(ii) If the SLA proposal does not meet all criteria listed in the RFP and in paragraph (i) above, the SLA priority will not apply and award will be made to the LPTA offeror subject to a determination of contractor responsibility. If the SLA is dissatisfied with an action taken relative to its proposal, it may file a complaint with the Secretary of Education under the provisions of 34

CFR § 395.37.

(4) Trade-offs between cost/price and non-cost/price factors are not permitted.

(5) The Government will evaluate proposed prices for reasonableness using price analysis techniques. Proposed prices evaluated as unreasonable (includes unbalanced, inaccurate or incomplete price proposals) may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition.

b. The Government intends to award one single contract as a result of this solicitation. Offers received for less than the stated number of items listed in the pricing schedule, Schedule of Supplies/Services of the Solicitation, will be considered ineligible for award.

c. Evaluation Criteria.

(1) Evaluation criteria consists of factors and subfactors. The proposals will be evaluated under three (3) evaluation factors: Technical Capability, Past Performance, and Price.

Factor 1: Technical Capability Factor Subfactor 1: Organizational Structure Subfactor 2: Staffing Plan Factor 2: Past Performance Factor Factor 3: Price Factor

Evaluation of the offeror's proposal shall address each subfactor as it applies to the PWS. During evaluations of each proposal, the Government will assign each subfactor an adjectival rating and write a narrative evaluation reflecting the identified findings.

(2) Factor 1 – Technical Capability. The Technical Capability Factor evaluation provides an assessment of the offeror’s capability to satisfy the Government’s minimum requirements. This factor has two sub-factors that will be used to determine the overall technical capability: Organizational Structure and Staffing Plan.

Subfactor 1 – Organizational Structure.

To be considered Acceptable, Offeror shall clearly demonstrate the organizational structure will be successful and effective in ensuring all requirements in the PWS are met IAW the acceptable quality levels identified in the PWS, paragraph 4.0.

Subfactor 2 – Staffing Plan. To be considered acceptable, the Offeror shall clearly demonstrate that their staffing is appropriate to successfully perform the PWS requirements. Appropriate staffing includes the number of personnel and the labor mix to successfully perform the PWS requirements. The offeror’s staffing and rationale shall clearly demonstrate (1) that the number of staff and the associated labor type outside of serving times is appropriate to clearly demonstrate successful completion of the PWS requirements; and (2) the staffing will ensure successful continuous operations of all PWS tasks during the feeding times (to include as patrons/units rotate through the facility). Additionally, the Offeror’s staffing shall clearly demonstrate they can accommodate fluctuating workloads within a band of meals, minimize personnel turnover, and allow for cross-training and cross-utilizing of personnel to perform the requirements of the PWS.

Adjectival Ratings: Acceptability of the proposed service. Technical capability will be evaluated on an acceptable or unacceptable basis using the ratings below. Proposals are evaluated for acceptability, but not ranked.

Each Technical Capability Subfactor will receive one of the ratings defined below and then there will be an overall roll-up rating at the Factor level. An Unacceptable rating in any Sub-factor renders the Technical Rating unacceptable. In order to be considered awardable, there must be an acceptable rating in every non-price factor/subfactor.

Table 1 - Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method

Adjectival Rating Description Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the 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 available to the Government to include, but not limited to the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases, and may be obtained from other sources available to the Government, such as Defense Contract Management Agency, and interviews with program managers, contractors, or fee determining officials. Past performance areas of evaluation include:

Quality

Schedule Management Small Business Subcontracting (Only applies to the SLA) Regulatory Compliance

(a) Each offeror will receive a past performance assessment rating based on the offeror’s record of recent and relevant past performance information that pertains to solicitation requirements.

(b) Recent 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 three (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 to the services/products being procured with this solicitation. 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 with this solicitation. 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 the aspects of an offeror’s contract history that 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 the past performance information and determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to the performance assessment.

(e) Assigned Ratings. The Past Performance Factor will be rated on an acceptable or unacceptable basis using the ratings defined below:

Table 2 - Past Performance Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method

Adjectival 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. See note below.

Unacceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Note: 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 (FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or neutral) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating 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 proposal analysis techniques in FAR 15.404-1(b). Unbalanced pricing may be evaluated IAW FAR 15.404- 1(g), as applicable, to assess potential performance risk which could result in unreasonably high prices. Through these techniques, the Government will determine whether prices are reasonable, complete, and balanced (to include all prices contained in the Schedule of Supplies/Services of the Solicitation and Attachment G - Pricing Matrix).

Total Evaluated Price (TEP) – The TEP for award purposes will be calculated as follows from the Schedule of Supplies/Services of the Solicitation:

- The total price of Phase-in CLIN;

- The total price of Project Management for all years;

- The total price of each of the Dining Facility CLINs for all years (to include remote site feeding and opening/closing of DFACs);

- The total price of the option to extend services as described in (4)(a) below; and

- The total price of CMR.

(a) Option to Extend Services. As part of price evaluation, the Government will evaluate its option to extend services (FAR Clause 52.217-8) by adding six (6) months of the offeror’s final ordering year price to the offeror’s total price. Offerors are not required to enter a price for the six month extension period.

(b) Any CLIN or SubCLINs provided in Attachment G, Pricing Matrix, without an estimated quantity will not be included in the TEP for award purposes. However, the Unit Prices provided for these CLINs/SubCLINS will be evaluated for reasonableness and balance.

(c) The Government will review the contractor’s proposed basic labor rates by labor category to ensure they meet the minimum hourly wage rate delineated in the SCA WD and/or CBA

ATTACHMENT LIST

ATTACHMENT LIST

Attachment A: Dining Facility Location Map

Attachment B: AFMIS data, dated 01 Feb 21 Attachment C 1-5: Dining Facility Building Plans Attachment D-1:FLVA GFP Attachment D-2 FLVA REAL PROPERTY Attachment D-3 FLVA Durable PROPERTY Attachment E: Sample Materials List Attachment F: Estimated Workload Data, dated 2 Mar 21 Attachment G: Pricing Matrix, dated 2 Mar 21 Attachment H: Staffing Matrix, dated 8 Mar 21 Attachment I: CBA/Supplemental Union Agreement, dated 01 Sep 20 Attachment J: Facility Photos Attachment K: Consent Forms for Release of Past Performance Information Attachment L: Specific Relevant Contracts Reference Sheets Attachment M: Past Performance Questionnaire Attachment N: DoD SAFE FAQ Attachment O: Q&A, dated 11 Feb 21

PWS

Fort Lee Performance Work Statement (PWS)

Full Food Service

25 FEBRUARY 2021

1 Introduction This PWS is developed to support Fort Lee, Virginia food service requirements to meet Full Food Service (FFS) needs at designated Dining Facilities. The Contractor shall provide quality services in support of the installation food service program that supports the Warfighter with flexible, efficient and cost effective service. The service outlined in this requirement encompasses Dining Facility Management functions, to include food receiving and storage, food preparation, food serving, remote site feeding, and facility sanitation duties. Performance criteria for overall duties fall under Contractor responsibilities.

1.1 Background

The Army in its acquisition pursuit of quality food service has improved its method of contracting. To capitalize on new approaches; e.g., proven commercial practices, management innovations, and best value contracting, the Army will award its food service contracts as a Performance Based Service Acquisition. This idea will foster partnering arrangements between Government and Industry. This approach is in keeping with the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition initiative to convert federal service contracts to performance-based on Installation Approach.

1.2 Objectives

To provide a quality food program that supports the warfighter with flexible, efficient and cost effective contract food service support.

2 Requirements This section describes the general requirements for this effort.

2.1 General

2.1.1 Scope

The Contractor shall provide the appropriate amounts of qualified labor and management necessary to perform quality FFS ordered under this Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity contract in a cost effective, safe and environmentally sound manner while abiding by DoD nutritional policies and Army Feeding standards. This support will focus primarily on the following areas: dining facility management functions, food receiving and storage, food preparation, food serving, and facility sanitation and janitorial duties, and the associated logistics analysis and management functions in support of the Fort Lee, Virginia FFS mission.

2.1.2 Description of Services

The Contractor shall provide all supervision, labor, personnel, equipment, materials, and supplies, with the exception of property identified in Attachment D (3) as incidental to the place of performance and property identified in Attachment D (1) as Government Furnished Property (GFP), addressed in Section 5, to perform activities that comprise the full operation of an Army Dining Facility. This includes, but is not limited to, requisitioning, receiving, storing, preparing, and serving of food. Also, included is the performance of related administrative, custodial and sanitation functions in the Dining Facilities.

2.1.3 General Information

The Period of Performance (PoP) is a five (5) year ordering period and includes FAR Clause 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services.

2.1.4 Place of Performance and Hours of Operation

This PWS is developed to support Fort Lee, Virginia installation FFS and remote site feeding requirements. Attachment A, Dining Facility Location Map, details the physical location of each facility. Attachment B, AFMIS/Historical Headcount Summary and Attachment F, Workload Data/Capabilities, outline workload requirements for each facility listed in this contract. Requirements may fluctuate during performance of the contract.

Hours of Operation: The meal service hours for the dining facilities are listed in Attachment F, Workload Data/Capabilities. These hours are subject to change based upon supported unit requirements. Usually this change occurs on short notice.