W912DR-17-T-0079.pdf

SEE ADDENDUM

(No Collect Calls)

W912DR-17-T-0079 21-Jun-2017

b. TELEPHONE NUMBER

410-962-4978

8. OFFER DUE DATE/LOCAL TIME

02:00 PM 21 Jul 2017

5. SOLICITATION NUMBER 6. SOLICITATION ISSUE DATE

AUTHORIZED FOR LOCAL REPRODUCTION

PREVIOUS EDITION IS NOT USABLE

STANDARD FORM 1449 (REV. 2/2012)

Prescribed by GSA – FAR (48 CFR) 53.212

(TYPE OR PRINT)

(SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER)

ADDENDA ARE

26. TOTAL AWARD AMOUNT (For Gov t. Use Only )

23.

CODE 10. THIS ACQUISITION IS

SUCH ADDRESS IN OFFER

17b. CHECK IF REMITTANCE IS DIFFERENT AND PUT

BELOW IS CHECKED

TELEPHONE NO.

W912DR9. ISSUED BY

18b. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN BLOCK 18a. UNLESS BLOCK

7. FOR SOLICITATION

INFORMATION CALL:

a. NAME

IAN WEISS

2. CONTRACT NO. 3. AWARD/EFFECTIVE DATE 4. ORDER NUMBER

(TYPE OR PRINT)

30b. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER 30c. DATE SIGNED 31b. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

30a. SIGNATURE OF OFFEROR/CONTRACTOR 31a.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

0 27a. SOLICITATION INCORPORATES BY REFERENCE FAR 52.212-1. 52.212-4. FAR 52.212-3. 52.212-5 ARE ATTACHED.

25. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

1. REQUISITION NUMBER

20.

ADDITIONAL SHEETS SUBJECT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS SPECIFIED.

OFFEROR TO COMPLETE BLOCKS 12, 17, 23, 24, AND 30

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT/ORDER FOR COMMERCIAL ITEMS

ARE NOT ATTACHED

27b. CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER INCORPORATES BY REFERENCE FAR 52.212-4. FAR 52.212-5 IS ATTACHED. ADDENDA ARE ARE NOT ATTACHED

(BLOCK 5), INCLUDING ANY ADDITIONS OR CHANGES WHICH ARE

SET FORTH HEREIN, IS ACCEPTED AS TO ITEMS:

. YOUR OFFER ON SOLICITATION

28. CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO SIGN THIS DOCUMENT AND RETURN

% FOR:SET ASIDE:UNRESTRICTED ORX

SMALL BUSINESS

17a.CONTRACTOR/ CODE FACILITY

OFFEROR CODE

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, BALTIMORE

10 S. HOWARD STREET

ROOM 7000

BALTIMORE MD 21201

18a. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY CODE

RATED ORDER UNDER

DPAS (15 CFR 700)

13a. THIS CONTRACT IS A

13b. RATING

CODE15. DELIVER TO CODE 16. ADMINISTERED BY

SEE SCHEDULE

12. DISCOUNT TERMS11. DELIVERY FOR FOB DESTINA-

TION UNLESS BLOCK IS

MARKED

SEE SCHEDULE

14. METHOD OF SOLICITATION

RFQ IFB RFPX

FAX:

TEL: 410-962-2196 SERVICE-DISABLED

VETERAN-OWNED

SMALL BUSINESS

8(A)

HUBZONE SMALL

BUSINESS

SIZE STANDARD:

$32,500,000.00

NAICS:

518210

X

OFFER DATED

29. AWARD OF CONTRACT: REF.

DELIVER ALL ITEMS SET FORTH OR OTHERWISE IDENTIFIED ABOVE AND ON ANY

COPIES TO ISSUING OFFICE. CONTRACTOR AGREES TO FURNISH AND

EMAIL:

TEL:

31c. DATE SIGNED

SEE SCHEDULE

SCHEDULE OF SUPPLIES/ SERVICESITEM NO. QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

24.22.21.19.

WOMEN-OWNED SMALL BUSINESS (WOSB)

ELIGIBLE UNDER THE WOMEN-OWNED

SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAM

EDWOSB

32g. E-MAIL OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT/ORDER FOR COMMERCIAL ITEMS

(CONTINUED)

PAGE 2 OF68

ACCEPTED, AND CONFORMS TO THE CONTRACT, EXCEPT AS NOTED: ______________________________________________________

32a. QUANTITY IN COLUMN 21 HAS BEEN

RECEIVED INSPECTED

32b. SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT

REPRESENTATIVE

32c. DATE 32d. PRINTED NAME AND TITLE OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT

REPRESENTATIVE

32e. MAILING ADDRESS OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE 32f . TELEPHONE NUMBER OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE

37. CHECK NUMBER

FINALPARTIALCOMPLETE

36. PAYMENT35. AMOUNT VERIFIED

CORRECT FOR

34. VOUCHER NUMBER

FINAL

33. SHIP NUMBER

PARTIAL

38. S/R ACCOUNT NUMBER 39. S/R VOUCHER NUMBER 40. PAID BY

41a. I CERTIFY THIS ACCOUNT IS CORRECT AND PROPER FOR PAYMENT

41b. SIGNATURE AND TITLE OF CERTIFYING OFFICER 41c. DATE

42a. RECEIVED BY (Print)

42b. RECEIVED AT (Location)

42c. DATE REC'D (YY/MM/DD) 42d. TOTAL CONTAINERS

STANDARD FORM 1449 (REV. 2/2012) BACK

Prescribed by GSA – FAR (48 CFR) 53.212

AUTHORIZED FOR LOCAL REPRODUCTION

PREVIOUS EDITION IS NOT USABLE

SEE SCHEDULE

20.

SCHEDULE OF SUPPLIES/ SERVICES

21.

QUANTITY UNIT

22. 23.

UNIT PRICE

24.

AMOUNT

19.

ITEM NO.

W912DR-17-T-0079

Section SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

Offers can be submitted via e-mail to Ian.Weiss@usace.army.mil or fax at (410)-962-2001, ATTN: Ian Weiss or via mail to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Contracting Division, Simplified Acquisition Team, ATTN: Ian Weiss, 10 South Howard Street, 7th floor, Room 7000, Baltimore, MD 21201-2530.

Contractors must complete all line items to be considered for award. All line items must be priced. Quotes providing partial pricing shall be considered non-responsive.

Questions concerning this solicitation must be submitted by email no later than 07 July 2017 at 3:00 PM EST. This will allow responses to be posted on FBO prior to the solicitation closing date.

Email questions to Ian.Weiss@usace.army.mil.

OFFEROR SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

1. The Offeror’s Proposal shall be submitted via Email to Ian.Weiss@usace.army.mil is preferred.

1.1 Each Offeror is required to submit a Proposal consisting of four volumes. The Volumes are I - Technical; II – Management Approach; III - Past Performance, and IV- Price and Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations. Files shall not contain classified data. The use of hyperlinks is prohibited.

2. Offeror Submission Requirements

a. Each volume shall be separated. Any pages that are changed (as a result of negotiations or offer revisions) should have changed information clearly marked. The revised pages shall be dated. Each Volume shall be clearly labeled with its Title, Submission Date, and Solicitation Number.

b. Text should be single spaced. Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line. A standard, 11-point minimum font size with one inch margin on all sides applies. 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 landscaped.

c. Electronic Requirement - Offerors must provide an electronic copy of their technical offer in .pdf format via email and/or on a compact disc(s) (CD). Flash drives WILL NOT be accepted. The cost/price offer shall be submitted with a narrative cover sheet. The cost/price offer MUST be submitted electronically the format provided in this solicitation by close of business on the offeror due date to Ian.Weiss@usace.army.mil.

d. Offeror proposals shall be marked with the RFQ Closing Time and Date and the Solicitation Number.

(See SF1449, Block 8)

e. Specific Requirements: An Offeror’s proposal will consist of all information and material submitted in writing for evaluation in response to this RFQ. The submission of false or misleading information will be grounds for disqualification of the offeror. Offerors must organize their offers as described. The Offeror’s name, RFQ number, and date must be included in each volume. Each volume must have a table of contents. Pages in each Volume MUST be numbered sequentially.

f. Offerors shall submit their offers to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Attn: Ian Weiss, Ian.Weiss@usace.army.mil , 10 South Howard Street, Suite 7000, Baltimore, MD 21201, no later than the time and date specified on Standard Form 1449, Block8. Offeror proposals received after the required time and date deadline will not be evaluated.

DISCUSSIONS

1. Offerors are advised that it is the intent of the Government that an award will be made without discussions. However, the Government reserves the right to hold discussions if it determines that discussions are necessary. Therefore, offerors should be submitted on the most favorable terms that the Offeror can submit to the Government. If discussions are necessary, the Contracting Officer will limit the number of offerors in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated offerors.

2. Determination of Competitive Range refers to the range of offerors that are identified as the most highly rated, unless the range is further reduced for purposes of efficiency. Competitive range will be determined on the basis of the ratings of each offeror against all evaluation factors. The Government must then indicate to, or discuss with, each Offeror still being considered for award, significant weaknesses, deficiencies, and other aspects of its offer. The Contracting Officer will notify all contractors eliminated from the competitive range.

3. Miscellaneous: The Government reserves the right to reject any or all offerors at any time prior to award, to negotiate with Offerors in a competitive range, if one is established, and to award a contract to the Offeror with the most advantageous offeror to the Government.

BASIS FOR AWARD

The award will be made based on the best value to the government, with tradeoffs as described below.

The offer that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the four (4) evaluation factors : Technical, Management Approach, Past Performance and Price.

To receive consideration for award, offeror must meet the criteria stated in the Request for Proposal (RFQ), to include responsiveness, acceptability and responsibility. Technical acceptability will be determined by a comparative assessment of offer against all source selection criteria in the RFQ.

FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

Award will be made to the responsible Offeror whose offer is the best value to the Government. 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 four (4) evaluation factors:

Technical, Management, Past Performance and Price. The overall relative importance of the factors is as follows:

• The Management factor is more important than the Past Performance and Technical factors.

• The Past Performance and Technical factors are of equal importance.

• The non-price factors (Management, Past Performance and Technical), when combined, are more important than Price

• EVALUATION APPROACH

All offerors shall be subject to evaluation by the Source Selection Team (SST).

1. The evaluation approach for all factors is as follows:

a. Adequacy of Response: The offeror will be evaluated to determine whether the Offeror’s methods and approach have adequately and completely considered, defined, and satisfied the requirements specified in the RFQ. The offeror will be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement has been addressed in the offeror in accordance with the offeror submission section of the

RFQ.

b. Feasibility of Approach: The offeror will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The offeror will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven devices and techniques. The offeror will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the Offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule.

a) Factor 1 - Technical Factor Evaluation of the offer shall address each element listed as it applies to the Statement of Work (SOW).

Project Management

Transferring HVX prototype system to vendor’s servers Testing HVX At Scale Continual Verification of Input Data Sources System Control, Monitoring & Recovery OpenAM for user authentication OpenStreetMaps server/configuration Rating Description

Rating Adjectival Description

Blue Exceptional Greatly exceeds all minimum requirements of the criteria; has a high probability of success; contains no weaknesses or deficiencies.

Green Good Exceeds all the minimum requirements of the criteria; has an above average probability of success; contains no significant weaknesses and only minor, correctable weaknesses exist.

Yellow Acceptable Meets all the minimum requirements of the criteria; has an average probability of success; no significant weaknesses and any deficiencies can be readily corrected.

Orange Marginal Fails to meet one or more of the minimum requirements of the criteria;

low probability of success; major weaknesses and/or significant number of deficiencies exist.

Red Unacceptable Fails to meet any of the minimum requirements of the criteria;

proposal needs major revisions; very low probability of success.

In Addition:

The support services sought under this solicitation are critical to the mission of the Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and other Federal agencies. The operation and maintenance of existing systems and the programming and additional functionality that will be added to the next generation Hurricane Evacuation Decision Support Platform, currently referred to as the HVX prototype system during the period of performance of this contract must (1) be transparent in design and practice to the Government oversight personnel; (2) be capable of being seamlessly handed over to a successor contractor skilled in the art of computer programming, maintenance, and upgrading, including documentation and licensing of any third party software components or modules; and (3) assure that the ability of the system is contemporaneously archived to assure stability and the ability to survive outages.

The offeror’s proposal must present a plan to assure these characteristics and will be evaluated as to the Government’s assessment of the completeness and viability of the plan.

Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the Technical requirements of 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 offer.

Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

b) Factor 2 - Management Factor

A person or combination of persons with the following years of experience shall be designated key personnel:

A Project Manager with no less than five years on similar size and scope projects. This PM will be the primary contact for the Government.

Five years of experience with operating and maintaining software or web based systems that includes real time data feeds.

Five years of experience for providing tropical cyclone and/or hurricane decision support.

Five years of experience with applying tropical cyclone and/or hurricane forecast products.

Five years of experience with applying public evacuation planning information.

Successful execution of the requirement is largely dependent upon the technical capabilities of the contractor performing the work. The contractor’s range of experience and the technical qualifications of his personnel are important elements in determining the ability of the contractor to execute the requirements with a low level of risk.

Resumes for these key personnel will be required with the solicitation response.

These are the minimum required standards. Companies with personnel that exceed these minimum standards will be given higher ratings.

Rating Description

Rating Adjectival Description

Blue Exceptional Greatly exceeds all minimum requirements of the criteria; has a high probability of success; contains no weaknesses or deficiencies.

Green Good Exceeds all the minimum requirements of the criteria; has an above average probability of success; contains no significant weaknesses and only minor, correctable weaknesses exist.

Yellow Acceptable Meets all the minimum requirements of the criteria; has an average probability of success; no significant weaknesses and any deficiencies can be readily corrected.

Red Unacceptable

c) Factor 3 - Past Performance

There are two aspects to the Past Performance evaluation. The first is to evaluate each Offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the Offeror is to the effort to be acquired. The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts; Performance Confidence Assessment will be evaluated.

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s record of past and current performance to ascertain the probability of successfully performing the required efforts of the PWS.

Evaluation of past performance shall be in accordance with this plan utilizing the forms and questionnaires set forth in the instructions to offerors.

Past Performance Relevancy Rating:

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.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little to none of the scope and magnitude of

Performance Confidence Assessment: The final step is for the team to arrive a single consensus performance confidence assessment for the Offeror, selecting the most appropriate rating from the chart below. This rating considers the assessed quality of the relevant/recent efforts gathered.

Performance Confidence Assessments:

Very Confident 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

d) Factor 4 - Price

The resulting award will be a contract consisting of Firm-Fixed-Priced (FFP) contract line items. Price will be evaluated in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(b), Price Analysis.

APPENDIX D – PAST PERFORMANCE ON EXPERIENCE IN RELEVANT PROJECTS

ENCL 1

NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Form PPQ‐0)

CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1‐4)

1. Contractor Information Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: DUNs Number:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:

2. Work Performed as: Prime Contractor Sub Contractor Joint Venture Other (Explain) Percent of project work performed:

If subcontractor, who was the prime (Name/Phone #):

3. Contract Information Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):

Contract Type: Firm‐Fixed‐Price Cost Reimbursement Other (Please specify):

Contract Title:

Contract Location:

Award Date (mm/dd/yy):

Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Explain Differences:

Original Contract Price (Award Amount):

Final Contract Price (to include all modifications, if applicable):

Explain Differences:

4. Project Description:

Complexity of Work High Med Routine How is this project relevant to project of submission? (Please provide details such as similar equipment, requirements, conditions, etc.)

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5‐8)

5. Client Information Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

6. Describe the client’s role in the project:

7. Date Questionnaire was completed (mm/dd/yy):

8. Client’s Signature:

NOTE: NAVFAC/USACE REQUESTS THAT THE CLIENT COMPLETES THIS QUESTIONNAIRE AND SUBMITS DIRECTLY BACK TO THE OFFEROR. THE OFFEROR WILL SUBMIT THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO USACE WITH THEIR OFFEROR, AND MAY DUPLICATE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FUTURE SUBMISSION ON USACE SOLICITATIONS. CLIENTS ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT QUESTIONNAIRES DIRECTLY TO THE OFFEROR. HOWEVER, QUESTIONNAIRES MAY BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO USACE. PLEASE CONTACT THE OFFEROR FOR USACE POC INFORMATION. THE GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO

VERIFY ANY AND ALL INFORMATION ON THIS FORM.

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(E) Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub‐element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

(VG) Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub‐element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

A Very Good rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the Government/Owner. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

(S) Satisfactory Performance meets minimum contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub‐ element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract.

There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

Per DoD policy, a fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractor will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.

(M) Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub‐ element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

A Marginal is appropriate when a significant event occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming which impacted the Government/Owner.

(U) Unsatisfactory

Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub‐element contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

An Unsatisfactory rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming and which impacted the Government/Owner. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating.

(N) Not Applicable

No information or did not apply to your contract

Rating will be neither positive nor negative.

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT

PLEASE CIRCLE THE ADJECTIVE RATING WHICH BEST REFLECTS

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE.

1. QUALITY:

a) Quality of technical data/report preparation efforts E VG S M U N

b) Ability to meet quality standards specified for technical performance E VG S M U N

c) Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance

E VG S M U N

d) Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements (without adverse effect on performance)

E VG S M U N

2. SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:

a) Compliance with contract delivery/completion schedules including any significant intermediate milestones. (If liquidated damages were assessed or the schedule was not met, please address below)

E VG S M U N

b) Rate the contractor’s use of available resources to accomplish tasks identified in the contract

E VG S M U N

3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

a) To what extent were the end users satisfied with the project? E VG S M U N

b) Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes; responsiveness to administrative reports, businesslike and communication)

E VG S M U N

c) To what extent was the contractor cooperative, businesslike, and concerned with the interests of the customer?

E VG S M U N

d) Overall customer satisfaction E VG S M U N

4. MANAGEMENT/ PERSONNEL/LABOR

a) Effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractor, suppliers, materials, and/or labor force?

E VG S M U N

b) Ability to hire, apply, and retain a qualified workforce to this effort

E VG S M U N

c) Government Property Control E VG S M U N

d) Knowledge/expertise demonstrated by contractor personnel E VG S M U N

e) Utilization of Small Business concerns E VG S M U N

f) Ability to simultaneously manage multiple projects with multiple disciplines

E VG S M U N

g) Ability to assimilate and incorporate changes in requirements and/or priority, including planning, execution and response to Government changes

E VG S M U N

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

E VG S M U N

5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

a) Ability to meet the terms and conditions within the contractually agreed price(s)?

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor proposed innovative alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the client

E VG S M U N

c) If this is/was a Government cost type contract, please rate the Contractor’s timeliness and accuracy in submitting monthly invoices with appropriate back‐up documentation, monthly status reports/budget variance reports, compliance with established budgets and avoidance of significant and/or unexplained variances (under runs or overruns)

E VG S M U N

d) Is the Contractor’s accounting system adequate for management and tracking of costs? If no, please explain in Remarks section.

Yes No

e) If this is/was a Government contract, has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations? Indicate if show cause or cure notices were issued, or any default action in comment section below.

Yes No

f) Have there been any indications that the contractor has had any financial problems? If yes, please explain below.

Yes No

6. SAFETY/SECURITY

a) To what extent was the contractor able to maintain an environment of safety, adhere to its approved safety plan, and respond to safety issues? (Includes: following the users rules, regulations, and requirements regarding housekeeping, safety, correction of noted deficiencies, etc.)

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor complied with all security requirements for the project and personnel security requirements.

E VG S M U N

7. GENERAL

a) Ability to successfully respond to emergency and/or surge situations (including notifying COR, PM or Contracting Officer in a timely manner regarding urgent contractual issues).

E VG S M U N

b) Compliance with contractual terms/provisions (explain if specific issues)

E VG S M U N

c) Would you hire or work with this firm again? (If no, please explain below)

Yes No

d) In summary, provide an overall rating for the work performed by this contractor.

E VG S M U N

Please provide responses to the questions above (if applicable) and/or additional remarks.

Furthermore, please provide a brief narrative addressing specific strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, or other comments which may assist our office in evaluating performance risk (please attach additional pages if necessary):

BID SCHEDULE

Price Schedule Next Generation Hurricane Decision Support Platform

BASE PERIOD

Tasks 1 2

Prototype and Transition

Production of Operations & Maintenance

Manual

Labor Categories

Hours Hours Total Hrs Hourly Rate

Total Cost

Project Manager

Senior Programmer

Junior Programmer

Senior GIS Tech

Clerical/ Administrative

Hours by Task

Materials

Travel

Total Cost – BASE PERIOD

Line Item 0001 (Task 1: BASE PERIOD) Total: ________________________

Line Item 0002 (Task 2: Optional Item) Total: ________________________

Estimated Total Amount BASE PERIOD for Line Items 0001 & 0002: ‐

OPTION PERIOD 1

Task 3

Annual Systems

Operation and

Hours Total Hrs Hourly Rate Total Cost

Project Manager

Senior Programmer

Junior Programmer

Total Cost – OPTION

PERIOD 1

Line Item 1001 (Task 3: OPTION PERIOD 1) Total: ________________________

OPTION PERIOD 2

Task 4

Systems

Project Manager

Senior Programmer

Junior Programmer

PERIOD 2

Line Item 2001 (Task 4: OPTION PERIOD 2) Total: ________________________

OPTION PERIOD 3

Task 5

Systems

Project Manager

Senior Programmer

Junior Programmer

PERIOD 3

Line Item 3001 (Task 5: OPTION PERIOD 3) Total: ________________________

OPTION PERIOD 4

Task 6

Systems

Project Manager

Senior Programmer

Junior Programmer

PERIOD 4

Line Item 4001 (Task 6: OPTION PERIOD 4) Total: ________________________

Grand Total All Line Items _________________

SCOPE OF WORK (SOW)

Scope of Work (SOW) Next Generation Web-Based Hurricane Evacuation Decision Support Platform

April 2017

I. PURPOSE:

The next generation Hurricane Evacuation Decision Support Platform, currently referred to as the Hurrevac Extended (HVX) prototype, is a restricted-use web-based software program funded by the Department of Homeland Security Science and Directorate, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for government emergency managers to plan, train and execute tropical cyclone decisions and evacuations. The software, access to which is available free of charge to government emergency managers, supports the ability to view and interpret tropical cyclone observations and forecasts, track hurricanes, support evacuation decision making, and provides data and information to support hurricane emergency management planning, training, and decision making. This real-time data analysis tool allows state and local emergency management officials to make prudent and informed decisions based on information developed during the National Hurricane Program (NHP) Hurricane Evacuation Studies (HES) process and real-time forecast data distributed by the National Weather Service (NWS) National Hurricane Center (NHC), the Central Pacific Hurricane Center (CPHC) and the Joint Typhoon Warning Center (JTWC).

HVX was developed starting in 2013 as an improvement and expansion of the previous decision support tool, HURREVAC, which is owned by the Federal Government through the USACE and FEMA and operated/maintained via a private contractor. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Lincoln Labs (MIT-LL) was the prototype developer. The NHP technological gap analysis (2013) formed the basis of the technological upgrades and the expansion included in the new web based version, to cover not only the real-time evacuation decision process but also embedding both the HES process itself and the training on the tools and decision-making skills.

At the core of the planning are the detailed HES developed for state, local and tribal communities. The purpose of the HES is to assist government emergency managers in understanding risk and vulnerability to hurricanes, defining potential evacuation zones, and determining the length of time it will take to evacuate the public in various scenarios (called the “clearance time”). The clearance time is combined with the forecasted movement, growth, and potential severity of hazards associated with an approaching storm to help determine when an emergency manager may need to start an evacuation in order to complete it prior to the arrival of hazardous conditions.

The legacy HURREVAC system has over 18,000 registered government users at all levels and serves as the primary evacuation decision support tool for Emergency Managers threatened by tropical systems. It is expected that next generation web-based platform, because it will be web-accessible and covers a wider breadth of emergency manager services, will exceed the current user levels.

II. HVX Platform Overview:

The goal of the NHP Technology Modernization effort with respect to the integrated HVX prototype platform is to create a flexible system with new and updated technology that enables Emergency Managers (EMs) to make timely and accurate evacuation related decisions. The new system will be applicable in a variety of contexts, including evacuation studies, planning, training, and operational response and evacuation decision support. The ability to utilize HVX as a multi-purpose tool allows users to become more familiar with the interface, reducing the need for training on multiple tools and processes. Here are some of the key architecture and programmatic features of the HVX prototype:

Utilization of a Web-based thin client architecture built with open-source software components;

increasing ease of use, data collaboration and deployment and allowing for operation on mobile devices.

Offline capabilities that enable the EM to utilize some decision support capabilities when the system does not have connectivity to the internet. Features that will be available include:

o The last downloaded set of hurricane tracks and forecasts (and related products such as wind rings, wind swath, watches/warnings, etc.)

o The ability to display storm surge Maximum of Maximums (MOM)/ Maximum Envelope of Water (MEOW) risk mapping products/data o The ability to see the most recent downloaded data for their base location that allows the EM to see the potential storm surge (if produced by NHC), radar, satellite, flood outlook, rain/river/tide gages, etc.

Creation of open-source geospatial data sharing services to maximize the available data sources and minimize the overhead of integrating new data.

Utilization of open-source third party applications for common GUI and algorithmic processes (Ext.js, D3.js, etc.). A sample listing is given at the end of this document.

Institution of a series of navigation aids that assist the user in seamlessly accessing, analyzing and viewing data temporally and spatially.

Incorporation of decision analytics to enable users to better assess impacts and uncertainty.

Creation of a storm surge explorer for viewing both planning and operational storm surge flood risk data, including the ability to view storm surge risk areas for applicable combinations of Maximum Envelopes of Water, which allows for improved understanding of storm surge risk from an approaching hurricane prior to the availability of probabilistic storm surge data and products.

Integration with a modular HES process that will allow not only integration of the HES components, but also the ability to utilize sub-modules of HES within the decision-making and training processes.

Integration of serious gaming capabilities into the HVX platform, including automated simulation capabilities, decision-focused training modules and feedback mechanisms for improved decision-making.

Creation of a simplified storm track simulation and advisory generator to enable EMs to create new training and scenarios on their desktop.

A repository of HES Reports and other NHP Documents and a file sharing system to enable collaboration between users.

III. TASKS:

In executing these tasks, the Contractor shall not depart from, nor perform beyond, the tasks described in this scope of work and its referenced criteria without the written approval of the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR).

TASK DESCRIPTIONS:

TASK 1: HVX Prototype and Transition (To be completed 12 months after contract award):

a. Project Management The Contractor is responsible for providing the project management oversight, up to and including contractual deliverables and financial controls. The Contractor’s Project Manager is one of the primary points of contact with USACE. The Contractor’s Project Manager shall establish and maintain close coordination with the USACE points of contact for this SOW.

Coordination may be in the form of in-person meetings, written correspondence, webinars, or telephone calls. Coordination will include a monthly In Progress Review (IPR) teleconference meeting to discuss the status of all tasks. A kickoff meeting will be held between the USACE and the Contractor within 2 weeks of the Date of Award. The Contractor shall maintain a record of all project coordination actions and shall provide copies of this record to the USACE POCs, upon request.

b. Transferring HVX prototype system to vendor’s servers The Contractor shall obtain the HVX code-base provided by FEMA and stand-up that software on a new set of hardware in the Contractor’s environment. The government reserves the right to inspect the contractor’s data center and workspace. The contractor shall verify that the embedded unit tests pass and that external Selenium-based test procedures also pass. Once all tests pass, this verifies that the USACE HVX prototype functions as-is.

c. Testing HVX At Scale

The HVX prototype operated in an environment of up to 50 concurrent users with limited lag or database issues. However, as noted in the introduction the total user base is expected to exceed 18,000 users. The Contractor shall ensure that the operational HVX platform is able to handle a potential user base in excess of 25,000 and a concurrent user experience of at least 5,000 users.

While the HVX prototype did not have the full user base, the software has been integrated with Amazon Web Services, which should allow the system to be scaled readily. The Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program, or FedRAMP, is a government-wide program that provides a standardized approach to security assessment, authorization, and continuous monitoring for cloud products and services. The contractor will meet and must submit proof of compliance with FedRAMP requirements regarding use of cloud based services. More information is available at: https://www.fedramp.gov/participate/csps/. During the initial transition year, the contractor will be required to add beta users (names to be provided by

USACE) who will test the system and functionality, and provide feedback for the contractor and USACE to address. The contractor will also be required to provide technical user support to these beta testers. Nine months after the award of the base tasks, the contractor will be required to have an operational HVX platform that can support 5,000 concurrent users.

d. Continual Verification of Input Data Sources HVX utilizes a wide variety of input data streams. The nature of real-time streaming data and the rapidly changing dissemination techniques, formats and accessibility is such that the sources of specific data may need to be modified over time. In this initial transfer phase, the Contractor will be responsible for verifying that any web-based input data is still providing the expected service and that the data is injecting properly into HVX. If services or products have changed or are unavailable the Contractor will be required to find alternatives.

e. System Control, Monitoring & Recovery The HVX prototype is outfitted with limited capabilities to monitor and recover instantaneously from server, algorithmic or other unexpected errors. The contractor shall build a monitoring system that allows USACE and the O&M operator to detect, alert, and recover from unexpected failures. This includes monitoring of all data feeds to ensure that the injected data is being received and processed in a timely manner. The system requirement for uptime during hurricane season is 99% with a recovery buffer of 5 minutes.

f. OpenAM for user authentication OpenAM is an open source access management, entitlements and federation server platform. It is sponsored by ForgeRock (https://forgerock.org/openam/ ). HVX has a current set of credentials for existing users, including levels of authorization to allow restricted access to some portions of HVX. The Contractor will be provided the current database of users that are managed in OpenAM and be expected to transition the current user database into their HVX operational system. While the Contractor is strongly recommended to continue OpenAM, it may propose an alternative that USACE would have to evaluate and approve.

g. Terms and Conditions The contractor will be responsible for developing terms and conditions that users will need to accept to access HVX. These terms and conditions should include, but are not limited to :user rights and responsibilities, proper or expected usage, potential misuse, accountability for online actions, behavior, and conduct, and a Disclaimer/Limitation of Liability clarifying the site's legal liability for damages incurred by users. Terms and conditions will need to be approved by USACE and FEMA counsel.

h. OpenStreetMaps server/configuration OpenStreetMaps (OSM) is an open-source effort that builds editable maps and an API to access map tiles for display (https://www.openstreetmap.org/about ). The HVX prototype utilized the OSM server as a way to provide highly detailed and modern maps as a base layer for the HVX map.

However, the operational HVX platform will require a dedicated server in order to allow HVX to have control over the reliability, stability and customization of the maps provided. The Contractor shall stand-up an OSM dedicated server for HVX and configure the map options to meet the requirements specified by USACE/FEMA.

i. Readiness for Transition to Operational Status

By June 1, 2018, the contractor must demonstrate that the HVX prototype has been successfully transitioned from MIT-LL (the developer) to the contractor, that Task 1 has been successfully completed, and that the system is ready to be fully operational and made available to the full user base of 18,000 users. This task includes a requirement that the contractor will develop a plan, approved by USACE, to efficiently provide access to registered HURREVAC users who do already have access through the beta system. MIT-LL will be available to provide technical guidance and support to assist the contractor with the execution of tasks and will assist the USACE in the evaluation of whether Task 1 can be considered complete. The contractor must ensure full functionality within the following internet browsers: Microsoft Internet Explorer, Microsoft Edge, Apple Safari, Google Chrome, and Mozilla Firefox.

TASK 2 (Optional): Integration planning for new National Hurricane Center, FEMA, and other hurricane decision support products The NHC is the primary provider of archived, current and forecast products that support hurricane evacuation decision-making and most of the weather products utilized by NHP and HVX. The NHC is steadily analyzing, piloting, and transitioning new products and updates to existing products relative to hurricanes. The Contractor will meet with NHC and others, as directed by USACE to analyze potential new products and provide recommendations on how and whether they might be transitioned to the system and the user interface. USACE reserves the right to accept/request algorithm development from other sources to provide updates to HVX components or product integration. Known products that are already in the development with NHC, but will not have been integrated into the HVX prototype, but will be required to be integrated once available, are:

Storm surge watch and warning graphics High resolution storm surge risk area grids for MOMs and MEOWs, to be used in the surge viewer and the MEOW blender.

Wind-timing graphic

The Contractor shall be required to integrate these products into in preparation for real-time operations (provided that the products become available from NHC).

TASK 3 (Option Year 1): Annual Systems Operation and Maintenance Base Period

a. Continual Verification of Input Data Sources

The web based platform utilizes a wide variety of input data streams. The nature of real-time streaming data and the often rapidly changing dissemination techniques, formats and accessibility is such that the sources of specific data may need to be modified over time. Each year and during operations, the Contractor will be responsible for verifying that any web-based input data is still providing the expected service and that the data is injecting properly. The Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program, or FedRAMP, is a government-wide program that provides a standardized approach to security assessment, authorization, and continuous monitoring for cloud products and services. The contractor will meet and must submit proof of compliance with FedRAMP requirements regarding use of cloud based services.

More information is available at: https://www.fedramp.gov/participate/csps/

b. System Control, Monitoring, Reporting & Recovery The Contractor shall monitor system performance through the contractor-built monitoring system and be responsible for real-time recovery of the system to normal operations. The system requirement for uptime during hurricane season is 99% with a recovery buffer of five minutes.

The system will also be required to be up during training courses outside of hurricane season, the dates and times of which will be provided to the contractor. The contractor must ensure full functionality within the following internet browsers, for the most recently released version and versions released within the last three years: Microsoft Internet Explorer, Microsoft Edge, Apple Safari, Google Chrome, and Mozilla Firefox.

c. Updates to Database Files Prior to the start of hurricane season, the contractor shall be required to update parameters and files that are critical to HVX operations. A table of the required updates is shown below:

Description Producing agency Location within HVX Hurricane tracking error values NHC, CPHC, JTWC

<tbp>

Hurricane Evacuation Study Update – PDF document

USACE <tbp> (HES Library)

Hurricane Evacuation Study Update – Clearance time tables

USACE (must be extracted from the PDF document)

<tbp>

Hurricane Evacuation Study – Evacuation zone updates

USACE (GIS files) <tbp>

Analysis and recommendations for integration of NHC products

NHC NA

User database for OpenAM credentialing

MIT-LL initially and then maintenance

<tbp>

User database of configuration settings

MIT-LL initially and then maintenance

<tbp>

d. Operations and Maintenance of user authentication

The Contractor will be responsible for ensuring that new users are pre-approved by USACE for access to the system and at what level of authorization the user will be given. OpenAM is currently HVX’s credentialing service. All users will be required to accept terms and conditions developed by the contractor and approved by the federal government to access HVX.

e. Real-time monitoring operations

During the hurricane/typhoon season in the northern hemisphere and the cyclone season in southern hemisphere, the Contractor is responsible for ensuring continuous operation of HVX input and output products, including training, simulation, gaming, and HES components. When errors directly related to tropical cyclone impacts (forecast tack, intensity, storm history, discussions, wind probability fields, etc.) occur, the Contractor must provide alternatives and/or capabilities within 5 hours during an active threat, and 24 hours when there is not an active threat.

Hurricane/Typhoon Seasons requiring heightened response:

The NHC in Miami is responsible for Atlantic, Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico and the Eastern Pacific east of 140 degrees west.

o Hurricane season in the Atlantic and Central Pacific (140W to 180W) runs from June 1st to November 30th.

o Hurricane season in the Eastern Pacific (E of 140W) runs from May 15 to Nov 30th.

The CPHC in Honolulu is responsible for Pacific from 140 W to 180 W.

o Typhoon season in the Western Pacific is essentially year round but usually active only from March through December.

The JTWC is responsible for Northwest Pacific west of 180 W (dateline), South Pacific and Indian Ocean.

o Cyclone season in the South Pacific is generally from October through March (reverse of North hemisphere).

Products under the “Conditions” tab in HVX are generally less critical to real-time operations but they are used throughout the year and should be restored as soon as practically possible.

f. User Technical Support During active tropical systems that are a threat to the United States and its Territories (within 120 hours of a potential impact), the contractor will be required to staff a 24 hour technical support system that will respond to technical assistance requests submitted to the contractor by users via email, phone, or through the system itself within one hour.

When no active tropical systems exist that are a threat to the United States and its Territories, the contractor will provide technical support during normal business hours to resolve to support requests submitted by users via email, phone, or through the system itself within 48 hours. This includes technical support to ongoing exercises and training as needed.

Any technical issues raised by users, the USACE, or discovered by the contractor that will require changes to the system should be enabled via the web immediately as they are completed as to appear seamless to the end user. If the incident isn’t resolved in the specified amount of time the contractor must submit a plan for how to resolve the request, an explanation for why the incident is not resolved, and an expected timeline for resolution.

g. Production of HVX Operations & Maintenance Manual The O&M Vendor shall provide an electronic PDF document detailing the operations and maintenance procedures that have been established for the operational hurricane decision support system and updated annually by the end of the calendar year. This document will be property of the federal government and should be based off the general content of the legacy HURREVAC operations and maintenance manual and will include, but is not limited to the following detailed sub-sections:

a) Overview of the program and role of this platform in evacuation decision support

b) Key Operational contacts, web sites relative to hurricane forecasts and advisories

c) Description of operational support for users

d) Details of the data ingest types and sources

e) User configuration settings and management

TASK 4 (Option Year 2): Annual Systems Operation and Maintenance

The same requirements as outlined in Task 3.

TASK 5 (Option Year 3): Annual Systems Operation and Maintenance

The same requirements as outlined in Task 3.

TASK 6 (Option Year 4): Annual Systems Operation and Maintenance

The same requirements as outlined in Task 3.

IV. ASSUMPTIONS:

To support development of proposals, potential bidders may request technical information on the HVX code and architecture, which would be responded to as…