W9128A-15-R-0008_Am-0001.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)

30-105-04 EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Project Management Automated Information System (P2) Operations & Maintenance

(see continued pages)

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 63

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 15C. DATE SIGNED 15B. 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 W9128A-15-R-0008

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

21-Sep-2015

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

CODE

CECT - CONTRACTING DIVISION

USACE, HONOLULU DISTRICT

BLDG 252 (CECT-POH)

FT. SHAFTER HI 96858-5440

W9128A 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODE CODE

EMAIL: TEL:

15 OCT 2015

Am-0001

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

1. CHANGES TO SOLICITATION. Attached hereto are revised and new pages to the solicitation. The revision mark “Am-0001” is shown on each revised and new page. Revisions are indicated in bold print.

a. REVISED SECTION/PAGES:

Appendix A: Past Performance Questionnaire Letter

Submission Requirements and Evaluation Factors Paragraph A, 4.0 Paragraph B (Proposal Location Column deleted) Paragraph C, 2.1.2 Paragraph 3.2.3 Paragraph 5.1.1 Paragraph 6.1.2

Performance Work Statement, paragraph 3(e)(xi).

b. NEW PAGES. The following item has been added to the solicitation.

Requests for Information (RFI)

2. The proposal due date has been extended to 29 October 2015, 12:00 pm, Hawaiian Standard Time.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

Honolulu District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Fort Shafter, Hawaii 96858-5440

October 15, 2015

CECT-POH-E

SUBJECT: Offeror Past Performance Assessment in Support of Request for Proposal (RFP) No. W9128A-15-R-0008, Project Management Automated Information System (P2) Operations Maintenance (O&M)

Dear Sir/Ma’am;

The US Army Corps of Engineers is currently conducting a competitive source selection to evaluate offerors on subject RFP. As part of this evaluation, we have requested that the offerors provide information about their past performance on same or similar federal, state or local government or commercial contracts as compared to North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 541512. You have been identified as the point of contact cited in their proposal.

Your assessment of their performance is extremely valuable to our evaluation.

Please follow submission requirement in paragraph 5.1.3 of Submission Requirements and Evaluation Factors. Your questionnaire may be submitted electronically to W9128A-15-R-0008@usace.army.mil.

Your cooperation is greatly appreciated. Questions may be directed to Jennifer Ko, Contract Specialist, at (808) 835-4378 or the undersigned at (808) 835-4376.

Sincerely, Joan F. Kaimikaua Contracting Officer

W9128A-15-R-0008

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

AND

EVALUATION FACTORS

A. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

1.0 The offeror’s proposal shall be submitted electronically to

W9128A-15-R-0008@usace.army.mil . The subject line in the email should state “PROPOSAL for Solicitation No. W9128A-15-R-0008, Project Management Automated Information System

(P2) Operations Maintenance.”

2.0 The offeror’s proposal shall be submitted electronically, in one email with attached pdf files labeled Factor 1, Factor 2, Factor 3, Factor 4, and PRICE. Each file name shall contain the

Offeror’s name. The PRICE file shall consist of factor 5 and Solicitation, Offer and Award

Documents and Certifications/Representations. Files shall not contain classified data. The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited.

3.0 Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the Technical requirements or the PWS with a statement of intent to perform does not reflect an understanding of the requirement or capability to perform. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

4.0 Proposal Submission Requirements.

4.1 Any changes (as a result of negotiations or proposal revisions) should be highlighted in a different color, or captured as “track changes” and have changed information clearly marked by a vertical line in the left margin of the page. The revision pages shall be dated.

4.2 Documents shall be formatted as single spaced. Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line. Text shall be 12-point minimum font size. Arial or New Times Roman fonts are required. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size no less than 8-point and may be landscape. Other required formatting is as follows:

Margins – Top, Bottom, Left, Right = 1”

From Edge – Header, Footer 0.5”

Page Size, Width – 8.5”

Page Size, Height – 11”

The following is a summary of the page limitation for each factor:

(Note: Page and submission limits shall be strictly adhered to. Any information exceeding limits will not be evaluated or considered)

Title Maximum Pages

Factor 1 (Technical Approach) Ten (10) pages

Factor 2 (Key Personnel and Staffing) One (1) page for the list of key personnel

One (1) page for each key personnel’s letter of commitment

Two (2) pages for each resume for key personnel

Four (4) pages total for the organization chart, staffing plan and narrative.

Factor 3 (Company Experience) One (1) page per recent relevant contract and/or task order; eight (8) maximum recent relevant contract and/or task order

Factor 4 (Past Performance) N/A

Factor 5 (Price) N/A

Solicitations, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/ Representations

N/A

4.3 Solicitations, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/ Representations. Each Offeror shall complete (fill-in and signatures) the solicitation sections indicated below using the file (without modification to the file) provided with the RFP. An authorized official of the firm shall sign the SF 1449 and all certifications requiring original signature. An Acrobat PDF file shall be created to capture the signatures for submission.

Standard Form 1449 (SF 1449), Solicitation / Contract / Order for Commercial Items

Representations, Certification and Other Statements of Offeror’s Section

B. BASIS FOR AWARD

The award will be made based on the best overall (i.e. best value) proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the following evaluation factors:

Evaluation Factor Number

Description Relative Importance

Factor 1 Technical Approach 1st Most Important Factor 2 Key Personnel and

Staffing 2nd Most Important Factor (less important than Factor 1 but more important than Factor 3)

Factor 3 Company Experience

3rd Most Important Factor (less important than Factor 2 but more important than Factor 4)

Factor 4 Past Performance 4th Most Important Factor (less important than Factor 3)

Factor 5 Price The non price factors, when combined are significantly more important than price.

Offeror’s will be cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest price offered. NON-PRICE FACTORS (FACTORS 1-4) ARE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE IMPORTANT

THAN PRICE.

C. FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each proposal. Award will be made to the offeror proposing the combination most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors described below.

1.0 FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL APPROACH

1.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

1.1.1 All documents pertaining to this factor shall be submitted electronically as a pdf document labeled “FACTOR 1, Offeror’s name”. The Offeror’s submission for this factor shall not exceed ten (10) pages.

1.1.2 The Offeror shall submit its execution plan depicting its technical approach and processes that will be used in the following four areas:

1) Operation of the Primavera enterprise software and its interfaces in particular with the Corps of Engineers Financial Management System;

2) Management of the Operation and Maintenance team in support of geographically dispersed P2 users;

3) Routine, Preventive and Emergency maintenance; and

4) Resolution of customer issues and complaints

1.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

1.2.1 The Offeror’s technical proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the

Offeror’s technical approach, in the following four areas, will lead to success in meeting the requirements of the PWS:

1) Operation of the Primavera enterprise software and its interfaces in particular with the

Corps of Engineers Financial Management System;

2) Management of the Operation and Maintenance team in support of geographically dispersed P2 users;

3) Routine, Preventive and Emergency maintenance; and

4) Resolution of customer issues and complaints

2.0 FACTOR 2 – KEY PERSONNEL AND STAFFING

2.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Submission requirements

2.1.1 All documents pertaining to this factor shall be submitted electronically in PDF format, in a file labeled “FACTOR 2, Offeror’s name”.

2.1.2 Offeror’s shall identify five (5) specific individuals proposed as Key Personnel. Key personnel identified may have a different title than the following, however, key personnel proposed, must be those that will be responsible for the functions typically associated with these positions:

Technical Project Manager Senior Systems DBA (data base administrator) Senior Java Programmer;

Senior Interface Developer Senior Primavera Architect

Key personnel proposed should provide evidence of the following experience and qualifications based on the criteria in paragraph 2.2.

For each of the five key personnel proposed, provide a resume which shall include at a minimum the quality, extend and length of experience, qualifications and training, in Oracle Software Development, Primavera and/or Java, and other systems as identified in the solicitation. Resumes shall not exceed (2) pages each.

Technical Project Manager – Bachelor's degree in Computer Science, Computer Engineering, Management Information Systems, or equivalent discipline plus 10 or more years of relevant experience; or Master's degree in Computer Science, Computer Engineering, Management Information Systems or relevant discipline plus 5 or more years of relevant experience. Experience in software development and/or IT service delivery and leading O&M activities for enterprise software applications. Experience with implementations and upgrades of COTS tools (specifically Oracle Primavera).

Experience developing project schedules and managing team resources. Experience in Software architecture and software development life cycle.

Senior Systems DBA/Middleware Engineer – Bachelor's or Master’s degree in Computer Science, Engineering, Physics, or Math. 10+ years experience with Oracle database upgrades, cloning, installing, patching, performance tuning, backup/recovery, middleware technologies and troubleshooting in a UNIX environment. Experience implementing/upgrading Primavera Project Portfolio Management P6 version 8 or higher, P6 WebAccess version 8 or higher, Integration API, Web Services, and setup and configuration of P6 Job Services version 8 or higher.

Experience with installation, upgrade and configuration of Oracle Fusion Middleware suite of tools including Oracle Single Sign On (OSSO) authentication, Oracle Identity and Access Management 11g. Experience with P6 Analytics, OBIEE, BI Publisher.

Must have experience with Unix OS.

Senior Software Engineer/Solutions Architect – Bachelor’s or Master’s degree in Computer Science, Engineering, Physics, or Math. 10+ years experience with commercial software development, proficient in developing multi-tiered solutions.

Experience with J2EE technologies (specifically JDBC, Web Services and Web Logic).

Experience with Oracle Application Developer Framework (ADF) and maven desired.

Experience with Spring Framework, Eclipse and Wicket. Experience with Primavera APIs, strong SQL skills with considerable experience with Oracle databases.

Senior Interface Developer – BA/BS from accredited four year college or university with major course work in information management systems, engineering, computer science, math, or related field. 10+ years experience with designing Oracle for batch processing and online transactions, and apply tuning techniques including Indexing, partitioning, and query optimization; and creating materialized views, tables, packages, stored procedures, functions, and triggers, and Unix scripts. Experience with integration and developing interfaces between Oracle products. Experience with IBM Datastage.

Senior Primavera Architect - BA/BS or Masters from accredited four year college or university with major course work in information management systems, engineering, computer science, or related field. 10+ years experience with Primavera implementation/upgrades, Java Primavera Integration APIs and Web Services.

Experience with OBIEE, BI Publisher, and P6 Analytics. In depth experience with Oracle Primavera data structures, setup/configuration, and administration. Must have experience with Unix OS. Experience with Primavera Client in a Citrix environment desired.

2.1.3 Offeror’s shall provide a list of the five individuals, showing their position title (as shown on the organization chart and staffing plan) and indicating the roles and responsibilities they will have for the P2 O&M requirement. This listing with names, position titles, and roles and responsibilities, shall not exceed one (1) page.

2.1.4 Offeror shall submit signed Letters of Commitment from each individual proposed as one of the key personnel. The Letters of Commitment shall not exceed one (1) page each.

2.1.5 The Offeror shall submit its company organizational chart and staffing plan for their P2 O&M team, and submit a list of the every full time position and the associated number of employees, that will be performing under the contract (not limited to the key personnel).

Any part time positions shall be listed as well, clearly indicating the distinction, and explanation for it. In a narrative, identify the roles and responsibilities associated with the positions, and how they will interact. The organization chart shall depict lines of authority.

The organizational chart, staffing plan and narrative shall not exceed a total four (4) pages.

2.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

2.2.1 Resumes of key personnel will be evaluated to determine the extent to which key personnel have relevant experience and qualifications to succeed in the roles for which they are proposed.

2.2.2 Relevant experience is defined as experience similar to the subject Performance Work

Statement that demonstrates the ability to manage and support large Enterprise Oracle Primavera installations for DoD with experience in Interface Development, Database support, Java Primavera/API Development that has relevant vendor software certifications.

2.2.3 Signed Letters of Commitment shall be evaluated to determine the extent to which personnel are committed to work for the Offeror under this contract.

2.2.4 Key personnel shall be evaluated:

a. Against the stated standard stated in paragraph 2.1.2 for key personnel.

b. To determine the extent to which key personnel have relevant experience that will allow them to succeed in the role they are proposed for.

c. Key personnel that present relevant experience involving USACE systems such as P2, CEFMS, RMS CAPCES/ACES and FUDSMIS will be considered a significant strength.

d. Key personnel with a greater amount of relevant experience and qualifications may be given more consideration as it demonstrates a lower risk to the Government.

2.2.5 The proposed staffing plan shall be evaluated to determine the extent to which the number of personnel and their roles and responsibilities, are sufficient to carry out the technical approach described in Factor 1. In addition, the organization chart shall be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed structure, will allow the Offeror to be successful with its proposed approach.

3.0 FACTOR 3 – COMPANY EXPERIENCE

3.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

3.1.1 All documents pertaining to this factor shall be submitted electronically as a PDF file labeled “FACTOR 3, Offeror’s name”.

3.1.2 The Offeror shall submit corporate experience consisting of no more than eight (8) contracts and/or task orders indicating whether the Offeror was the prime or the subcontractor. The information submitted for each contract/task order submitted shall not exceed (1) page (maximum eight (8) pages in total). Information that exceeds the limits noted will not be considered. Each contract/task order submittal shall include the following information:

(a) Short title of the experience (indicating that the experience was as a prime or subcontractor)

(b) Start date and completion date of the contract/task order

(c) Annual dollar value, and the total value, if multiple years were involved

(d) The client, and the specific sub-level organization for which the service was provided, and the size of that organization in terms of number of employees.

(e) Description of the services provided. Include the various aspects of the service that was provided.

3.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

3.2.1 Contract(s) and/or task order(s) submitted by the Offeror will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the Offeror has recent and relevant experience.

3.2.2 Recent is defined as completed within the last five (5) years prior to the issue date of the RFP.

3.2.3 Relevant contracts and/or task orders are defined as contracts and/or task orders similar in magnitude and complexity to the subject Performance Work Statement and that demonstrate the Offerer’s ability to conduct Operations and Maintenance of large enterprise Oracle-based Primavera Project Management software.

3.2.4 A greater amount of recent, relevant experience will be given more consideration as it demonstrates a lower risk to the Government. Recent, relevant experience with DoD will be considered strength. Recent, relevant experience with USACE systems will be considered a significant strength.

4.0 RATINGS FOR FACTORS 1 THROUGH 3

4.1 Factors 1-3 will be assigned a rating based on significant strengths, strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses and deficiencies identified in the Offeror’s proposal.

4.1.1 Significant Strength. A significant strength appreciably enhances the merit of a proposal or appreciably enhances the probability of successful contract performance.

4.1.2 Strength. Any aspect of a proposal that, when judged against a stated evaluation criteria, enhances the merit of the proposal or increases the probability of successful performance of the contract.

4.1.3 Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

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

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

4.2 Factors 1-3 will be assigned a rating from the following table based on the evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal in accordance with the requirements of the solicitation.

TABLE 1 – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Color Rating Description Blue Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weakness. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Purple Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weakness. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is unawardable.

5.0 FACTOR 4 – PAST PERFORMANCE

5.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5.1.1 All documents pertaining to this factor shall be submitted electronically in pdf format, in a file labeled “FACTOR 4, Offeror’s name”.

5.1.2 Past performance refers to the quality of performance on recent, relevant (as defined in paragraphs 3.2.2 and 3.2.3) contracts and/or task order(s) from the customer/client perspective.

5.1.3 The Offeror shall submit a completed Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) form for each relevant contract and/or task order submitted under Evaluation Factor 3. Refer to Appendix A for PPQ form. The Offeror shall complete blocks 1-4 and forward to the customer/client to complete. The customer/client completes the PPQ form and submits it directly back to the Offeror. The Offeror will submit the completed questionnaire to USACE with their proposal. Customers/Clients are highly encouraged to submit PPQ’s directly to the Offeror. However, PPQ’s may be submitted directly to USACE. The government reserves the right to verify any and all information submitted.

5.1.4 The Offeror is encouraged to provide information on problems encountered on identified contracts and/or task orders and the corrective action taken.

5.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

5.2.1 Each Offeror’s past performance will be reviewed to determine a relevancy rating and confidence assessment.

5.2.2 The first aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine if the Offeror’s past performance is recent and relevant (as defined in paragraph 3.2.2 and 3.2.3). The following criteria will be used to establish level of relevancy:

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings:

Rating Definition Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

5.2.3 The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts. In conducting the performance confidence assessment, each Offeror shall be assigned one of the ratings identified below:

Performance Confidence Assessments:

Rating Definition Substantial Confidence

Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence

Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Limited Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Unknown Confidence (Neutral)

No recent/relevant performance record is available or the Offeror’s performance record is available or the Offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

5.2.4 Absent any relevant past performance history, the Offeror will be assigned an “unknown confidence rating” and its proposal will not be evaluated either favorably or unfavorably on past performance.

5.2.5 In evaluating Factor 4, the Government will only evaluate past performance that is considered recent as defined in paragraph 3.2.2.

5.2.6 In addition to the information provided in 5.1.3, the Government may contact and interview the Client, and reserves the right to interview other individuals acting for the listed owners or owners representative listed as a reference, if the listed reference is not available.

Also in addition to the information provided in 5.1.3, the Government may obtain and evaluate additional past performance information about the offeror, from the following sources, the offeror's clients on other recent, relevant projects, Government personnel's personal knowledge regarding the offeror's performance, Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), if it is within 3 years of the completion of performance of the evaluated contract or order, Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System

(FAPIIS).

6.0 FACTOR 5 – PRICE

6.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

6.1.1 All documents pertaining to this factor shall be submitted electronically, as a PDF file labeled “PRICE, Offeror’s name”.

6.1.2 This volume shall consist of all information, required to support proposed costs and prices. Certified cost and pricing data are not currently required; however, the Government reserves the right to request other than certified cost and pricing data prior to award. There are no page limitations for this volume.

6.1.3 Each Offeror shall submit its price proposal by completing the solicitation “Price Schedule”.

6.1.4 The Offeror shall ensure that the information submitted in this volume is consistent with and fully supports the amounts set forth in the SF1449 and continuation sheets.

6.1.5 Offeror’s are reminded of the requirements of Section 39 of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) Act (41 U.S.C. 435), as amended, which limits allowable costs for senior executive personnel compensation to $693,951 per year.

6.1.6 For proposal preparation purposes, the expected or approximate Month for initiation of contract performance is December 2015

6.1.7 The resulting award will be a Firm-Fixed Price Commercial Service contract.

6.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

6.2.1 The offeror's “total evaluated price” will be evaluated using price analysis, to make a selection, and to determine the price to be fair and reasonable. “Total evaluated price,” for the purpose of this evaluation is defined in paragraph 6.2.3. The Contract Line Items (CLINs) will be evaluated to ensure that unbalanced pricing between CLINs is not occurring.

6.2.2 If the Government determines a price realism analysis is necessary, the Government will require other than certified and pricing data to determine whether an Offeror’s approach demonstrates an understanding of the requirements to be fulfilled under this PWS and whether any of the prices are unrealistically low.

6.2.3 “Total evaluated price” is defined as the sum of the price of Contract Line Items (CLINs) 0001 - 0010 plus one-half the price of Option Year 4. As FAR Clause 52.217-8 "Option to Extend Services" provides the potential for a 6 month extension at rates specified in the contract, the Government will evaluate the price of the potential 6 month extension under FAR Clause 52.217-8, by adding one-half of the Offeror's Option Year 4 (Line Item Nos. 0009 and 0010) price to the Offeror's Contract Line Items (CLINs) 0001 - 0010.

Offerors are required only to price the Base and Option Years 1-4 consistent with the information requested on the Proposal Schedule. Offerors shall not submit a price for the potential one-half year extension of services period.

6.2.4 Should the Government determine proposed prices are unrealistically low, this will be considered a performance risk.

C. EVALUATION APPROACH

1.0 GENERAL

1.1 Each proposal will be rated against the evaluation criteria stated above by a Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB). After each proposal has been evaluated, the ratings and advantages and disadvantages of each proposal will be presented to the Source Selection Authority (SSA).

1.2 The SSA, independently exercising prudent business judgment, will select the Offeror with the best overall (best value) proposal.

2.0 DISCUSSION (If Necessary)

2.1 Government intends to award without discussions. A “Competitive Range” is a subjective determination of the most highly rated proposals in the event that discussions with Offeror’s are required. In such an event, the Contracting Officer will establish a competitive range of all the most highly rated proposals.

2.2 If discussions are held, the Government may engage in a broad give and take with each Offeror in the competitive range, in accordance with FAR 15.306 (d). The Government will provide the Offeror an advance agenda for the discussions. During discussions, the Government may ask the Offeror to further explain its proposal and to answer questions about it.

2.3 Upon conclusion of discussions, those Offeror’s still considered the most highly rated, will be afforded an opportunity to submit their proposal revisions for final evaluation and selection.

Performance Work Statement (PWS) For

Project Management Automated Information System (P2)

Operations & Maintenance

S15-0254 13 September 2015

Performance Work Statement 13 Sep 2015 P2 O&M

© 2015 Project Management Business Process U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Am-0001) Page 2

1. Introduction: Operations and Maintenance (O&M) of the P2 System. The Project Management

Information System (P2) provides standard tools for Program and Project Managers and their Project Delivery Teams within the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to facilitate project planning, execution, and management in accordance with the Project Management Business Process (PMBP).

P2 is composed of a commercially available application. The successful offeror, herein referred to as the Service Provider (SP) or Contractor, shall perform all Operations and Maintenance necessary to keep P2 available to the users 24 hours per day/7 days per week/365 days per year.

2. Background: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers developed P2 (currently in version 3.1.4) and is currently responsible for its technical operation and maintenance. Other Functional PMBP groups provide requirements that are used by the SP to modify and/or extend the existing P2 system hardware/software suite. The other PMBP groups also provide the functional testing, users guide modifications, training for new software updates, and the integration of new industry product solutions that compliment P2.

3. General Requirements: The scope of this O&M Plan for P2 is only for the operation and maintenance of the existing application(s), P2 EDW reporting, and corporate reporting. The service provider is responsible for the operation and support required to maintain the existing functionality of P2 and all system interfaces necessary for proper operation. P2 includes the Java software used to initiate and maintain projects, the commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) package, Primavera, that is supported by Oracle and all customized software required to interface P2 with other USACE and Department of Defense (DoD) Automated Information Systems (AIS). Software maintenance of P2 includes modification to the software or components after delivery to correct faults, improve performance, adapt to a changed environment or most importantly in order to integrate new hardware such as Oracle’s T5 servers and iOS & Android based thin client applications.

a. Period of Performance. Performance will be for a base period of twelve (12) months from date of award which includes a 60 day transition period and 10 months of O&M, followed by four (4) option periods of twelve (12) months each, of O&M.

b. Transition. A transition period of 60 calendar days will be commence upon contract award to allow the contractor to reach full staffing and complete all personnel and facility security requirements described in the following paragraphs of this PWS. The Government will also take advantage of the transition period to configure and issue all required equipment to the Service Provider personnel and provide all the requisite system documents necessary to conduct O&M. The SP is not required to conduct system O&M until the conclusion of the transition period; these duties will be carried out by the incumbent under a separate contract.

c. Security Requirements: All personnel working on this project will be required to follow all security and access rules and regulations (i.e., physical access and/or network access requirements) as set forth by the US Government in order to gain access to the USACE offices and/or systems to perform work assignments and/or for the delivery of equipment to include DoD 8570 IT security requirements. This project has been determined to be “Sensitive Unclassified.” All documentation required for security certification (i.e. OPM SF85P) will be the responsibility of the SP.

d. The SP positions required for this contract are in the following two classifications (IT-II or IT-III). Individuals employed on this contract shall have a minimum IT-III current background investigation or have one initiated at the start of employment. The P2 Project

Performance Work Statement 13 Sep 2015

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Am-0001) Page 3

Manager along with the Contracting Officer Representative (COR) will determine the required level of investigation based on responsibilities:

IT-II – Example: Personnel in positions (operating system administration of common applications or enclaves, back-up operators) with limited privileged level access to control, manage, or configure ISs, AISs, and devices. Background Investigation is labeled NACLC, National Agency Check with Law and Credit. The NACLC will be used as the initial investigation for contractors at the Confidential, Secret, and L access levels. It will also be used as the reinvestigation product for both contractors and Federal employees at the same access levels. Secret clearance will be issued.

IT-III: General user. Background Investigation is labeled a NAC (national agency check without clearance).

e. Additional Security Requirements:

i. Antiterrorism (AT) Level I Training: All SP employees, including subcontractor employees, requiring access to Army installation, facilities, or controlled access areas shall complete AT Level I awareness training within 30 calendar days after contract start date or effective date of incorporation of this requirement into the contract, whichever applies. The SP shall submit certificates of completion for each affected SP employee and subcontractor employee to the COR within 10 calendar days after completion of training by all employees and subcontractor personnel. AT Level I training is available at https://atlevel1.dtic.mil/at.

ii. Access and General Protection/Security Policy and Procedures: The SP and all associated subcontractors’ employees shall comply with applicable installation, access and local security policies and procedures. Policies and procedures will be provided by the local Security Office. The SP workforce must comply with all personal identity verification requirements as directed by DoD, Headquarters Department of Army, HQDA, and local policies. In addition to the changes otherwise authorized by the changes clause of this contract, should the Force Protection Condition (FPCON) at any individual facility or installation change, the Government may require changes in SP security matters or processes.

iii. iWATCH Training: The SP and all associated subcontractors shall brief all employees on the USACE iWATCH program. This locally developed training will be used to inform employees of the type of behavior to watch for and instruct employees to report suspicious activity to the COR. The training shall be completed within 30 calendar days of contract award and within 30 days of new employees commencing performance on the contract. The SP shall provide certification of completion to the COR within 10 days of training completion. Training documents will be provided by the Security Office.

iv. Access to Government Information Systems: All SP employees with access to a Government information system must successfully complete the DoD Information

Performance Work Statement 13 Sep 2015

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Am-0001) Page 4

Assurance Awareness training prior to access to the system and then annually thereafter.

v. Operations Security (OPSEC) Standing Operating Procedure/Plan: The SP and all associated subcontractor employees shall comply with applicable installation OPSEC plan and requirements to include initial OPSEC briefing within the period of performance of reporting to duty and annual training.

vi. Operations Security (OPSEC) Training: All new SP employees will complete Level I OPSEC training within the period of performance of their reporting duty. Additionally, all SP employees must complete annual OPSEC awareness training.

vii. Information Assurance (IA)/Information Technology (IT) Training: All SP employees and associated subcontractors’ employees must complete the DoD IA awareness training before issuance of network access and annually thereafter. All SP employees working IA/IT functions must comply with DoD and Army training requirements in DoD 8570.01, DoD 8570.01-M and AR 25-2 within 6 months of employment (http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/857001m.pdf and http://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/pdf/r25_2.pdf)

viii. Information Assurance (IA)/Information Technology (IT) Training Certification:

All SP employees supporting IA/IT functions shall be appropriately certified upon contract in accordance with (IAW) DoD 8570.01-M, DFARS 252.239-7001 and AR 25-

2. The baseline certification as stipulated in DoD 8570.01-M must be completed upon contract award.

ix. Handling/Access to Classified Information: The SP shall comply with AR 380-67 (Personnel Security Program) and Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12 (Policy for a Common Identification Standard for Federal Employees and Contractors) as well as FAR 52.204-2, Security Requirements.

x. Access to classified and/or sensitive materials and/or sensitive or restricted areas:

All SP employees, including subcontractor employees who are not in possession of the appropriate security clearance, will be escorted in areas where they may be exposed to classified and/or sensitive or restricted areas. The SP will coordinate with the COR and/or facility security office for access when required.

xi. Facility Clearance requirements: The SP Company must obtain a Facility Clearance at the appropriate level (IAW the NISPOM DoD 5220.22-M). Please see the following http://www.dss.mil/isp/fac_clear/fac_clear.html. The Facility clearance shall be completed during the 60 day transition period and prior to commencing the work.

f. Location of Work Performance. The work will be performed on the USACE CorpsNet network on location and/or via CorpsNet Virtual Private Network (VPN :

CONUS/OCONUS) at the USACE Central Process Center (CPC) Data Center 1165 Porters Chapel, Rd. Vicksburg Mississippi where the P2 production, development, test, and training environments are hosted. Work on the P2 Continuance of Operations, COOP, located at the Western Processing Center (WPC) Data Center will be performed in Portland Oregon likewise on location on CorpsNet and/or VPN. For functions not performed on location at CPC or WPC, work will be performed via the SP’s facility via the use of CorpsNet VPN connectivity. SP facility must be available for Government inspection within 24 hours notice.

Performance Work Statement 13 Sep 2015

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Am-0001) Page 5

The Government will initiate and require specific attendance by the Contractor, at meetings, conferences and workshops, in support of the PWS requirements. The events will be held in Vicksburg, MS, and the SP will be notified at least one week prior to the event. Prior to attending these events, the Contractor shall provide the names and travel dates to the COR, so that any travel associated, may be tracked against this requirement.

The contractor's time associated with attending Government arranged meetings, conferences and workshops, shall be included in the CLIN prices for Travel. Costs associated with travel shall as described below. Entitlements and amounts related to travel shall be in accordance with the publication "Joint Travel Regulations" (JTR). For example, perdiem limitations are subject to rate limitation described in Ch 4: Temporary Duty Travel Part B: Per Diem.

Costs associated with travel, lodging and perdiem for attendance at meetings, conferences and workshops shall be included in the separately priced subclin entitled “Travel” as follows (yearly occurrences):

4 trips, 5 day duration for 3 individuals at the following location may be at either

Washington, DC, Vicksburg, MS, Nashville, TN, or Fort Worth, TX.

1 trip, 3 day duration for 15 individuals, where meeting location will be at Fort

Worth, TX.

Contract Line Items for travel, shall be priced following the practices and limitations of the Joint Travel Regulation https://www.defensetravel.dod.mil/Docs/perdiem/JTR.pdf. Invoices that include travel costs shall be accompanied by a breakdown of travel costs including transportation, lodging and perdiem, all of which shall be within the limitations of the JTR.

Travel that exceeds the quantities stated above, shall not be included as part of the contract price and shall not be reimbursed by the Government. If additional travel is required, the Government may negotiate additional scope for travel for the Contractors attendance at meetings, conferences or workshops, and add by issuing a modification to the contract. The Government reserves the right to negotiate a deductive modification if the quantity of actual travel is less than the quantities stated above. All terms, conditions and pricing shall be in accordance with the Joint Travel Regulation https://www.defensetravel.dod.mil/Docs/perdiem/JTR.pdf

g. POCs shall inspect all Services performed by the SP under this PWS through the final reports and provide feedback and acknowledgement of acceptance by the customer of the deliverables:

ACE-IT P2 Project Manager:

Peyton Lassiter, 601-634-4597, Peyton.E.Lassiter@usace.army.mil

ACE-IT P2 COR:

Ron Fletcher, 251-690-3405, Ronald.E.Fletcher@usace.army.mil

Contracting Officer:

Joan Kaimikaua, 808-835-4376, Joan.F.Kaimikaua@usace.army.mil

Performance Work Statement 13 Sep 2015

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Am-0001) Page 6

4. Performance Requirements: The ACE-IT Data Center is responsible for the P2 hardware, network, and database/application server hosting infrastructure. The SP will be responsible for operating and maintaining the application and software infrastructure components of the P2 system. This includes but is not limited to: Install, upgrade, and configure database and application software including:

IBM Data Stage, Oracle Portal, Oracle Reports, Oracle Internet Directory, Oracle Single Sign-on, Oracle Access Manager, Oracle Identity Manager, Oracle Databases, Primavera Web Logic Application Server, Primavera Web and Client Software patches, Application Upgrade of Primavera Databases, Primavera Job Services, and Java/Primavera Integration APIs. The P2 production environment (1TB) hosts 500 concurrent users (7,600 registers users).

The system reached its development maturity with the deployment of the latest version of P2 (P2v3.1). It has now transitioned from a “development” phase to a stable “sustainment & integration” phase. The SP will therefore be required to focus on the integration of existing & new COTS products with the Government provided hardware in order to exploit P2 data. In a recent study, Gartner Inc., stated that 90% of device adoption within the next four years will be in smart phones and tablets. In light of these facts and due to DoD-wide initiatives urging subordinate commands to leverage COTS solutions in lieu of Government off-the-shelf solutions (GOTS), the P2 strategic direction was modified to accommodate these new realities. Consequently, COTS software & hardware integration expertise will be a key SP requirement throughout the P2 O&M lifecycle.

Oracle’s P6 Analytics, BI Publisher and Primavera Team Member are example of such solutions in the P2 architecture roadmap. These products will require integration with Common Access Card (CAC) enabled thin clients such as Apple ipads, iphones and/or Android based devices. The SP shall be responsible for obtaining any security clearances required, and obtain P2 Program Management Office (PMO)/functional approval before any changes are migrated to production approval.

NOTE in reference to OFA: Operation and Maintenance of the Oracle Financial Application (OFA) COTS is NOT included in the scope of this PWS and will be performed by others (Subject Matter Experts). However, the successful offerer, or Service Provider, will be responsible for the operations and maintenance of scripts and interfaces that are dedicated to stage “OFA data” for the replacement systems (Oracle Hyperion Planning Plus, HPP, and Oracle Application Express, APEX).

5. P2 O&M Tasks (Refer to figures 1 & 3 for P2 system diagram and Appendix A for a list of acronyms):

a. Project Management: Provide software and project management services to accomplish the activities listed in this PWS and comply with the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP). The ACE-IT Project Manager (Technical PM) is the primary point of contact with the customer and is responsible for all activities listed in section 5 and 7 of this PWS, to include the Project Management Plan (PMP) and all deliverables.

b. Program Management: Provide the necessary services to support the Program Management Office (PMO) in order to implement the P2 roadmap/strategic guidance document, manage the system release plan, develop strategy white papers, develop a strategy to consolidate reporting, and work with user groups to develop Functional Requirements Documents (FRDs) for future enhancements.

c. Maintain Information Assurance Posture and Functionality: Ensures the security of the P2 application by monitoring application audit logs and identifying and mitigating unauthorized application and database access:

Performance Work Statement 13 Sep 2015

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Am-0001) Page 7

1. Ensures all application roles and permissions are properly assigned.

2. Ensures all database accounts have appropriate access levels IAW least privilege best practices.

3. Ensures all system application and database passwords are changed IAW ACE-

IT/UPASS policy.

4. Coordinates with ACE-IT Data Center and performs all actions to maintain

DIACAP/Federal Information Security Management (FISMA) accreditation of P2.

d. Maintain System Documentation: The SP shall prepare and manage the availability of the System Database Architectural Documentation. The SP shall prepare, manage and maintain the DoD Information Assurance Certification and Accreditation Process (DIACAP) documentation required for System Certification and Accreditation (C&A).

1. Maintain currency of the P2 architecture documentation to support compliance with DIACAP and Business Enterprise Architecture (BEA).

2. Maintain currency of custom code documentation.

3. Maintain standard operation procedures (SOPs) and scripts for development, training, production and testing environments.

4. Maintain Functional Requirements Documents, Design & Specifications for all system components including the Fact Sheet Generator, ePMP and all interfaces.

e. Maintain Custom Built Software (PM+ and Staging Area): The SP…