Amendment 0001 W9124J-22-R-0004 RFP MED CDID Support.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 pupose of this amendment is to provide Government Responses to Questions received and extend the RFP due date to 20 Jan 2022.

Revised Pricing Matrix, Attachment D and Task Order PWS are also provided.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

S 1 44

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 05-Jan-2022

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 W9124J22R0004

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

14-Dec-2021

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

05-Jan-2022

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:

W9124J22R0004

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 14-Jan-2022 01:00 PM to 20-Jan-2022 01:00 PM.

DELIVERIES AND PERFORMANCE

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0001 has been changed from:

DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

POP 15-FEB-2022 TO

14-FEB-2023

N/A US ARMY FUTURES AND CONCEPTS

CENTER

US ARMY FUTURES AND CONCEPTS

CENTER

BLDG 950 JEFFERSON AVENUE

FORT EUSTIS VA 23604-5000

512-726-4153 FOB: Destination

W91CNY

To:

DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

POP 15-MAR-2022 TO

14-FEB-2023

N/A US ARMY FUTURES AND CONCEPTS

CENTER

US ARMY FUTURES AND CONCEPTS

CENTER

BLDG 950 JEFFERSON AVENUE

FORT EUSTIS VA 23604-5000

512-726-4153

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0002 has been changed from:

CAGE

POP 15-FEB-2022 TO

14-FEB-2023

N/A US ARMY FUTURES AND CONCEPTS

CENTER

US ARMY FUTURES AND CONCEPTS

CENTER

BLDG 950 JEFFERSON AVENUE

FORT EUSTIS VA 23604-5000

512-726-4153

CAGE

POP 15-MAR-2022 TO

14-FEB-2023

N/A US ARMY FUTURES AND CONCEPTS

CENTER

US ARMY FUTURES AND CONCEPTS

CENTER

BLDG 950 JEFFERSON AVENUE

FORT EUSTIS VA 23604-5000

512-726-4153

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0004 has been changed from:

CAGE

POP 15-FEB-2022 TO

14-APR-2022

N/A US ARMY FUTURES AND CONCEPTS

CENTER

US ARMY FUTURES AND CONCEPTS

CENTER

BLDG 950 JEFFERSON AVENUE

FORT EUSTIS VA 23604-5000

512-726-4153

CAGE

POP 15-FEB-2022 TO

14-MAR-2022

N/A US ARMY FUTURES AND CONCEPTS

CENTER

US ARMY FUTURES AND CONCEPTS

CENTER

BLDG 950 JEFFERSON AVENUE

FORT EUSTIS VA 23604-5000

512-726-4153

The following have been modified:

ADDENDUM FAR CLAUSE 52.212-1

ADDENDUM TO FAR CLAUSE 52.212-1, INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS--COMMERCIAL

ITEMS

A. Proposal Submittal and Inquiries

1. Proposals shall be submitted prior to the closing date and time which is NOT LATER THAN 01:00 P.M.

CENTRAL STANDARD TIME on Thursday, 20 January 2022.

2. All proposals shall be submitted electronically via email to the attention of both the following:

CONTRACT SPECIALIST: Colleen Rye, e-mail: colleen.m.rye.civ@army.mil

CONTRACTING OFFICER Sylvia Farmer, e-mail: sylvia.farmer.civ@army.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 Concept and Capabilities Specialist Services, W9124J-22-R-0004. All inquiries, questions and or comments shall be directed to the attention of both the following:

CONTRACT SPECIALIST: Colleen Rye, e-mail: colleen.m.rye.civ@army.mil

CONTRACTING OFFICER Sylvia Farmer , e-mail: sylvia.farmer.civ@mail.mil

The deadline for the submittal of all Questions/Comments/Exceptions is Friday 17 Dec 2021 at 12:00 P.M. (noon) CST. Questions shall be submitted on and in the format delineated in Attachment B, Questions_Answers Matrix.

4. Time for Acceptance: Unless the offeror annotates a different period of time within the proposal, the proposal shall remain valid for 180 days after the receipt date of the solicitation.

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,” in conjunction with FAR Part 15.3, “Source Selection” as authorized in FAR 12.203 and supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), and the Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFARS). This acquisition is a 100% 8(a) Set-Aside under NAICS 541611, Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services. The Assigned SBA Requirements Number is CI1638536525C. 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. It is the Government's intention to award without discussions. Offerors are encouraged to present their best technical proposal and price in their initial proposal submission. However, in accordance with FAR Part 15.306, should discussions become necessary, the Government reserves the right to hold them. If this occurs, 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).

4. 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.

5. 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.

6. 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.

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

8. 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 Capability

Volume III- Past Performance

Volume IV – Cost/Price

2. Proposal Format

(a) Offerors shall submit a sanitized electronic copy of their proposal via e-mail. The email capacity of the Government server is 10MB per attachment. Larger files can be sent through the DoD SAFE (Secure Access File Exchange) for files up to 8.0 GB that can't be sent through email: https://safe.apps.mil/. A timely request for a DoD SAFE Password must be sent to the Contracting POCs (within 3 business days of RFP close date). Once request is received, an email will be sent allowing access to upload documents to the DoD SAFE site.

(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 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 Thrusday, 20 January 2022, 01:00 P.M. (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)

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. 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 solicitation (including acknowledgment of Amendments), and complete 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 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 Item Numbers (CLINs) for Labor support only (CLINs 0001, 0003, 0004, 1001, 1003, 2001, 2003, 3001, 3003, 4001 and 4003. No pricing is needed on Travel 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 Joint Venture Agreement (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.

Work must be in accordance with FAR 52.219-14 Limitations on Subcontracting.

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 Capability:

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. Provide detailed narrative on how the Offeror intends to accomplish all contract tasks and complete high quality deliverables as noted in the PWS Technical Exhibits 2 and 3.

ii. Provide narrative on offeror’s ability to develop and deliver Army Health System (AHS) concepts in accordance with the Army Concept Framework methodology that support the requirements determination process, enables conceptual and constructive experimentation including data entry and collaborate integration and planning with other Capability Development and Integration Directorates (CDID).

iii. Provide clear understanding and possess the subject matter expertise and ability to:

• Develop future medical concepts designed to enable and sustain calibrated forces during the competition continuum and conflict.

• Develop strategic, operational and tactical level operational and organizational (O&O) concepts to inform force development update efforts.

• Identify required medical capabilities needed to support multi-domain operations as described in the Army Operating Concept.

• Contribute AHS technical and operational input to support the requirements document development process.

• Develop knowledge needs and learning demands to support conceptual examination of operations and organizations.

• Integrate medical functions into Sustainment and Protection functional concepts and other concepts as required.

• Participate in Joint and Army conceptual and constructive experimentation.

Attend Joint and Army conceptual and constructive experimentation.

• Update and maintain FORGE Database to support information requirements for internal and external organizations.

b. Subfactor 2 - Staffing Plan/Key Personnel Qualifications and Experience. Responses to this subfactor must demonstrate Offeror’s understanding of the necessary qualifications required of personnel to adequately execute the requirements of the PWS 1.6.8. and 1.6.11.

i. Provide Staffing Plan (e.g., skill mix, personnel experience or qualifications, availability and job duty and descriptions) to include resumes, certifications, and signed contingent offer letters of employment for all key personnel proposed. The plan shall 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 the cross utilized labor category.

ii. Provide offeror's approach and method to deal with turnover, planned and unplanned shortages of personnel.

iii. Provide the methods of training and procedures used to document employee training and qualifications. Provide explanation of how the training at the entry-level for each labor category will be addressed to include any opportunities for maintaining and increased job related skills. Training approach must include all mandatory training outlined in the PWS.

c. Subfactor 3: Innovation. Provide the offeror’s approach to propose, develop, and deliver innovative methods, procedures, techniques or products that contribute to the development of AHS concepts and identification of required capabilities that enable Army forces to conduct Unified Land Operations as described in the Army Operating Concept against near peer competitors in the future operational environment.

d. Subfactor 4: Management Controls/Quality Control Plan (QCP). Responses to this subfactor must outline the Offeror’s Quality Control Approach. Quality control is observation techniques and activities the Offeror expects to execute to fulfill requirements for quality. The approach must provide the following:

i. Details on how the Offeror will ensure an effective and appropriate quality control program for timely and continuous delivery of products and services outlined in the PWS Paragraph 1.6.4, 1.6.5, Part 5, Part 5,

5.2 Concept Development through 5.6 Contractor Manpower Reporting (CMR), Part 7 Attachment 1 Technical Exhibit 1 – Performance Requirements Summary, and Attachment 2 Technical Exhibit 2 – Deliverables Schedule.

ii. Details on how the Offeror will address the frequency and method of monitoring the qualitative/quantitative (collection and reporting) metrics of measurement to be used and the AQL for the services outlined in Part 5 of the PWS.

iii. Delineate and explain who has decision-making authority for this requirement, how the Program Manager fits into the decision-making process, and how management will mitigate conflicts between the program manager and employees.

iv. Provide explanation of the expected flow of information from upper management to the program manager, and down to the contract employee level.

Sub-Factor 5: Transition Approach: Provide transition plan on how the Offeror will provide staffing.

The Contractor shall have Key Personnel on staff on the 1st day of performance IAW PWS para 1.5 and 1.6.18.

(c) Volume III – Past Performance: 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 Addendum to FAR Clause 52.212-2, “Evaluation Factors for Award.” The Government’s past performance evaluation shall also consider an offeror’s compliance with requirements under FAR 52.219-8 and 52.219-9 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 (greater than 25% of the work) 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 any farther than 5 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 offeror.

Proposals that do not contain the information requested by this paragraph risk rejection or a less than acceptable performance rating by the Government. An Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance will receive a “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. See Attachment C 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. 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.

Specific Relevant Contracts Format - 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. See Attachment D or Contractor similar format.

(d) Volume IV—Price: The Offeror shall complete the Schedule Pricing Matrix (Attachment A) TEP Tab and Task Order Tab. Failure to complete the Pricing Matrix may deem an Offeror non-compliant with the RFP. In addition, a cost breakdown is required for each proposed Fully Burdened Labor Rate (FBLR). The cost breakdown should show how each FBLR was calculated.

(1) All information relating to the proposed price must be included in electronic format. Electronic versions of the price proposal shall be submitted in a format compatible with Microsoft Office (2016 or earlier) and files should not be read only or password protected. All Excel formulas, lookup tables, and links should be intact, and no links should 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. Failure to comply with these formatting requirements may result in rejection of your proposal.

(2) Certified Cost or Pricing data is not anticipated for the award of this contract due to expected competition; however, the Government reserves the right to request such information should it become necessary for the Offeror to submit. The Government also reserves the right to require the submission of Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data as is deemed necessary to arrive at a fair and reasonable price.

(3) FAR clause 52.217-8 will be included in the resulting contract. In order to evaluate this option price, the Government will include in the total evaluated price an amount equal to half, or six months, of the price proposed by offerors for the last ordering period. The actual price paid for performance of services and for supplies will be in accordance with FAR 52.217-8. Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(5) Fair Market Price requirement. IAW with FAR 19.806(b) award cannot be made to an 8(a) unless the contract is for a fair market price. To ensure compliance with this requirement, we will also be evaluating the proposals to determine if the price is a fair market price.

(END OF ADDENDUM TO FAR CLAUSE 52.212-1)

ADDENDUM FAR CLAUSE 52.212-2

ADDENDUM TO FAR CLAUSE 52.212-2, EVALUATION-COMMERICAL ITEM

a. Basis for Award

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,” in conjunction with procedures as delineated in FAR Part 15.3, “Source Selection” as authorized in FAR 12.203 and 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 FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors—Commercial Item), 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 CLIN Schedule B will be considered ineligible for award.

c. Discussions/Competitive Range Information. As set forth in FAR 52.212-1, the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a), Clarifications and award without discussions). Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. In the event that discussions are held, a competitive range determination will be made. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

d. Evaluation Criteria:

1. Evaluation criteria consist of factors and subfactors. The proposals will be evaluated under three (3) factors and five (5) subfactors:

Factor 1: Technical Capability:

Subfactor 1: Understanding of the Requirement Subfactor 2: Staffing Plan/Key Personnel Qualifications and Experience Subfactor 3: Innovation Subfactor 4: Management Controls/Quality Control Plan (QCP) Subfactor 5: 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. An unacceptable rating in any sub-factor will automatically carry forward to the factor rating. In evaluating the five sub-factors within the Technical Capability factor, all subfactors are considered equal (1 - Understanding of Requirement; 2 - Staffing Plan/Key Personnel Qualifications and Experience; 3 – Innovation; 4 - Management Controls/Quality Control Plan (QCP);

and 5 – 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.

Factor 1 – Technical Capability. The proposal will be evaluated on the clarity and reasonableness of the technical approach to accomplish the complexity and magnitude of the Government’s requirement. The offeror shall demonstrate a technical approach that successfully accomplishes the PWS requirements.

a. Subfactor 1: Understanding the Requirement. This subfactor will evaluate the Offeror’s ability to perform and satisfy all contractual requirements of this solicitation. The proposal must demonstrate a high level of understanding of the tasks outlined in the PWS. To be considered acceptable, the Offeror must be able to:

i. Explain in detail how the Offeror intends to accomplish all contract tasks and complete high quality deliverables as noted in the PWS Technical Exhibits 1 and 2.

ii. Demonstrate ability to provide concepts and capability developers with subject matter expertise in the Army Health System (AHS). Services include concept development, requirements determination, analysis planning, data entry and capabilities integration.

iii. Demonstrate a clear understanding and ability to:

• Develop future medical supporting concepts designed to enable and sustain calibrated forces during the competition continuum and conflict.

• Develop strategic, operational and tactical level operational and organizational (O&O) concepts to inform force development update efforts.

• Identify required medical capabilities needed to support multi-domain operations as described in the Army Operating Concept.

• Contribute AHS technical and operational input to support the requirements document development process.

• Develop knowledge needs and learning demands to support conceptual examination of operations and organizations.

• Integrate medical functions into Sustainment and Protection functional concepts as required.

• Attend Joint and Army conceptual and constructive experimentation.

• Update and maintain FORGE Database to support information requirements for internal and external organizations.

b. Subfactor 2 - Staffing Plan/Key Personnel Qualifications and Experience. This subfactor will evaluate the Offeror’s understanding of the necessary qualifications required of personnel to adequately execute the requirements of the PWS 1.6.8. and 1.6.11. To be considered acceptable, the Offeror must:

i. Provide a proposed Staffing Plan (e.g., skill mix personnel experience or qualifications and their personnel availability) to include resumes, certifications, and signed contingent offer letters of employment for all key personnel proposed. The plan shall also clearly 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 the cross utilized labor category.

ii. Clearly explain the approach and method to deal with turnover, planned and unplanned shortages of personnel.

iii. Provide the methods of training and procedures used to document employee training and qualifications. Provide explanation of how the training at the entry-level for each labor category will be addressed to include any opportunities for maintaining and increased job related skills. Training approach must include all mandatory training outlined in the PWS.

c. Subfactor 3: Innovation. This subfactor will evaluate the offeror’s ability to propose, develop, and deliver innovative methods, procedures, techniques or products that contribute to the development of AHS concepts and identification of required capabilities that enable Army forces to conduct Unified Land Operations as described in the Army Operating Concept against near peer competitors in the future operational environment.

d. Subfactor 4: Management Controls/Quality Control Plan (QCP). The proposal must outline the Offeror’s Quality Control Approach. Quality control is observation techniques and activities the Offeror expects to execute to fulfill requirements for quality. To be considered acceptable, the Offeror must be able to explain in detail:

i. How the Offeror will ensure an effective and appropriate quality control program for timely and continuous delivery of products and services outlined in the PWS Paragraph 1.6.4, 1.6.5, Part 5, 5.2 Concept Development through 5.6 Contractor Manpower Reporting (CMR), Part 7 Attachment 1 Technical Exhibit 1 – Performance Requirements Summary, and Attachment 2 Technical Exhibit 2 – Deliverables Schedule.

ii. How the Offeror will address the frequency and method of monitoring qualitative/quantitative (collection and reporting) metrics of measurement to be used and the AQL for the services outlined in Part 5 of the PWS.

iii. Who has decision-making authority for this requirement, how the Program Manager fits into the decision-making process, and how management will mitigate conflicts between the program manager and employees.

iv. Provide explanation of the expected flow of information from upper management to the program manager, and down to the contract employee level.

e. Sub-Factor 5: Transition Approach: Clearly explain how the Offeror will provide staffing on the 1st day of performance IAW PWS para 1.5 and 1.6.18.

f. 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. In this consideration of risk, weaknesses may offset strengths. Combined technical/risk evaluations shall utilize the combined technical/risk rating listed in Table 1. Each factor will receive one of the adjectival ratings defined below.

The sub-factor ratings will be used to determine an overall rating for the factor. 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.

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. The evaluation will focus on the past performance of the offeror (to include that of any joint venture partner or subcontractor that will perform significant portions of the work (25% or more of the requirement), how the proposal describes that past performance so to demonstrate the depth and breadth necessary to satisfactorily perform the requirement, and how the overall experience proposed by the offeror mitigates risk and enhances the likelihood of successful performance. Performance risk 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. In each case, the prime contractor and proposed subcontractors that will perform significant portions of the work (25% or more of the requirement), will be assessed individually and the results will then be assessed in their totality to derive the offeror’s Past Performance Rating. Offerors are cautioned that in conducting the performance risk assessment, the Government may use data obtained from other sources. Past Performance areas of evaluation (not all inclusive):

Quality of Service Level of complexity of Services Schedule Cost Control Business Relations Customer Satisfaction

a. Each offeror will receive a performance confidence assessment rating based on the offeror’s recent Past Performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the contract requirements. There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation. The first is to evaluate recency; the second is to evaluate the offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection.

b.…