Amendment_01_17R0071_53018.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment (01) is to incorporate changes as a result of questions and answ ers (Projnet inquiries-attached).

Added or Revised attachments include: Price w orksheet, DD254, and Projnet Questions & Answ ers.

The Offeror is responsible for review ing the solicitation is its entirety (see conformed copy).

NEW POC: Contract Specialist, Rachel Sanders Rachel.S.Sanders@usace.army.mil

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 84

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street , County, State and Zip Code) X W912DY17R0071

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

17-May-2018

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.

U0001

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

30-May-2018

CODE

US ARMY ENGINEERING & SUPPORT CENTER

4820 UNIVERSITY SQUARE

HUNTSVILLE AL 35816-1822

W912DY 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

x 1 a0ctbktj Typewritten Text a0ctbktj Typewritten Text

W912DY17R0071

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

CONTINUATION SHEET SOLICITATION/

CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 05-Jun-2018 02:00 PM to 07-Jun-2018 12:00 PM.

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

CLIN 0034

The CLIN description has changed from Transition (Phase-In) to Transition (Phase-In & Out).

The CLIN extended description has changed from:

The Contractor shall provide and implement a Phase-In Transition Plan to effect a low-risk and orderly transition for the start of this task order for the HPCMP. Duration 30 days.

To:

The Contractor shall provide and implement a Phase-In and Phase Out Transition Plan to effect a low-risk and orderly transition for the start of this task order for the HPCMP. Duration 30 days.

The following have been added by reference:

52.222-41

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION FACTORS

SECTION M

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

The requirement will be a competitive negotiation using the best value approach to source selection. FAR Part 15 best value tradeoff method. Awards will be made on the basis of technical approach, past performance, and price. The Government intends to make awards(s) without discussions; however, the Government reserves the right to hold discussions if necessary in accordance with FAR 15.306. One C-type contract is anticipated to be awarded to an offeror whose proposal is found to be responsible in accordance with FAR 9.1 and are rated at least “Acceptable” in the evaluation criteria as described in section B below.

If a competitive range is established, the Government may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range for purposes of efficiency.

All evaluation factors other than price/cost, when combined, are significantly more important than price/cost (Factor 3). Factor 1: Technical is the most important factor.

Factor 2: Past Performance is slightly less important than Factor 1. All factors will be considered in the tradeoff to determine Best Value. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for the Technical Factor (Factor 1). A rating of no less than “Satisfactory Confidence” or “Unknown Confidence” must be achieved for Factor 2 Past Performance. The proposed prices in Factor 3 will be evaluated as follows: The FFP proposal will be evaluated for fairness and reasonableness.

All offerors should draw attention to the limitations on subcontracting clause found in FAR 52.219-14 when addressing factors in their proposals.

After the Government individually evaluates and rates each proposal, the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO), who is the Source Selection Authority (SSA) will determine which proposal represents the best value. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer, or to reject all offers. The Government will not award a contract to an Offeror whose proposal contains a deficiency, as defined in FAR 15.001. If there is/are lower priced, conforming offer(s), the source selection official must determine that the added value of a more expensive proposal would justify award to that Offeror.

B. FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

VOLUME I, FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL

Element 1 – Technical and Management Approach Element 2 –Technical Qualifications Element 3 – Transition/Phase-In

VOLUME II, FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

Past Performance Questionnaires

VOLUME 3, FACTOR 3: PRICE AND OTHER PRICE RELATED INFORMATION

SECTION I: General Information Tab 1 – SIGNED PROPOSAL Tab 2 - Representations and Certifications Tab 3 - Joint Venture / Mentor-Protégé Agreements and approvals (if applicable)

SECTION II: Price//Price Related Information Tab 1 - CLIN Schedule/ Prices / Rates attachment/ Financial capability

C. EVALUATION APPROACH

FACTOR 1, TECHNICAL

a0ctbktj Highlight

Technical shall be rated using the combined technical/risk ratings listed in Table in Section IV. If an offeror's proposal demonstrates a material failure to meet a Government requirement, this is a deficiency in the offeror's proposal resulting in a Red/Unacceptable rating and the proposal is not awardable.

All elements within Factor1, Technical are not individually rated. Factor 1 will be evaluated holistically based on the strengths, weaknesses and deficiencies of each offeror’s proposal as it relates to the combination of the elements and the value that they can add to the HPCMP. Any aspect of the offeror’s proposal which is unclear or inconsistent will be treated as an uncertainty, and not a deficiency. A material failure in the proposal is constituted as a deficiency, and will result in a proposal that is not awardable. The Offeror's proposed approach demonstrates a clear understanding of how to provide program office professional administrative services to support program and project management in the HPCMP's overall mission to deliver of IT Support Services, tools and expert support to the computational science and supercomputing community.

The proposal includes a sound plan to support all HPCMP business areas in all phases of planning and execution of the HPCMP mission. Areas of focus include marketing, and website development and content management, program analysis, high-level professional briefing and design, business analysis to support program office financial management in a joint environment using the Financial Management Regulation in accordance with appropriations law, data analysis to support high performance computing continual utilization analysis and high performance computing resource allocation process execution, management and maintenance, facilities support, logistical support for high-level meetings, daily high-level administrative support ensuring all necessary functions of the office are well-supported. Overall, the offeror's proposal effectively delivers proactive and sustained excellence in a manner that will allow the HPCMP to execute their mission and increase their value to the nation and to their customers. The Government evaluation team has been instructed to evaluate on the basis of the information provided in the proposal. The Government shall not assume that an offeror possesses any capability unless specified in the proposal. Additional credit will be given if procedures and processes described to execute the contract support creation of their CDRLs. The government will determine feasibility in each offerors proposal and provide additional credit for innovative solutions to problems in for example, financial management that is typically experienced in a joint program office.

Element 1: Technical and Management Approach:

The proposal (element) demonstrates an effective technical and management approach for accomplishing of the Government's objectives and requirements identified in the PWS.

Technical Approach: The Offeror's proposed approach demonstrates a clear understanding of how to provide program office professional administrative services to support the HPCMP's overall mission to deliver of IT Support Services, tools and expert support to the computational science and supercomputing community. The proposal includes a sound plan to support all HPCMP business areas in all phases of planning and execution of the HPCMP mission. Areas of focus include marketing, and website development and content management, program analysis, high-level professional briefing and design, business analysis to support program office financial management, data analysis to support high performance computing continual utilization analysis and high performance computing resource allocation process execution, management and maintenance, facilities support, logistical support for high-level meetings, daily high-level administrative support ensuring all necessary functions of the office are well-supported. Overall, the offeror's proposal effectively delivers proactive and sustained excellence in a manner that will allow the HPCMP to execute their mission and increase their value to the nation and to their customers.

Organizational Structure and Teaming/Subcontract Arrangements: The offeror proposes an organizational structure and staffing concept that demonstrates an effective approach to staff, lead, plan, coordinate, and provide resources to meet the requirements of the PWS. The organizational structure includes effective lines of communication and interface between management/supervisory and technical staffs, Government personnel, and other support contractors and customers. The offeror’s proposed organizational structure and management execution clearly delineates interfaces with subcontractors and lines of responsibility. The offeror demonstrates a competitive methodology to effectively attract, retain and motivate a highly qualified workforce, employ key subcontractors, and provides an effective management plan to accommodate shortfalls.

Key Personnel: The offeror has provided applicable information that establishes that the proposed key personnel possess the correct qualification to effectively manage the requirements of the PWS. The proposal substantiates the Program Manager has expertise required to direct successful performance of a program as complex as the HPCMP.

Available Facilities/Assets: The offeror’s proposal provides a well-defined strategy that demonstrates a complete understanding of the facilities/asset utilization required to successfully accomplish the HPCMP mission.

Element 2: Technical Qualifications The proposal demonstrates that the offeror's proposed technical personnel possess the technical qualifications, experience and capabilities to deliver the expert assistance called for in the PWS.

The proposal demonstrates that the offeror's proposed key management personnel possess the management qualifications, experience and contract execution abilities to deliver the expert assistance called for in the PWS. The proposal demonstrates that the offeror’s total team includes not only key personnel but a reach back capability to augment the day-to-day staff with a broader skills based that can be tasked to provided short-term specialized support as needed by DoD customers. The proposal demonstrates an appreciation of on-site support and placement of key personnel into on-site assignments.

Element 3: Transition/Phase-In The proposal demonstrates the offeror's ability to effectively and efficiently transition/phase-in resources and personnel onto this –Contract and ensure full continuity of HPCMPO support on the required performance start date of the Contract. The offeror proposes a sound plan to address the needs of the work force caused change, innovation and efficiency initiatives. The transition will take 30 days.

Factor 1 “Technical“will be evaluated using the following adjectival rating methodology:

Combined Technical/Risk Ratings Color Adjective Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. 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 weaknesses. 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 un-awardable.

FACTOR 2, PAST PERFORMANCE

The Government will conduct a performance confidence assessment with respect to Past Performance of the prime contractor and its Subcontractor’s. The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor performance. If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, the Government will only evaluate past performance of the division or unit submitting the offer. Past performance of parent companies, affiliates, or subsidiaries that are not proposed to perform work on this requirement will not be evaluated. Owners/references may be asked to comment on items such as quality of work, timeliness, management of the work subcontractor management, including timely payment to subs or suppliers, safety, relationships, warranty work, etc. The Government will not release the Past Performance Evaluation – Telephone Interview Forms to the Offeror at any time, in order for the Government to solicit candid, unbiased interview comments. If the information received is adverse and results in an “Unacceptable” Past Performance rating, the offeror will be given an opportunity to respond. The Government also places a higher value on performance, which document successful outcomes and are supported by outside source confirmation, for example, but not limited to telephone interviews with points of contact identified in the proposal.

PPIRS/CCASS/ACASS/CPARS or other agency performance databases, Offeror furnished references, or personal knowledge. The Government also places a higher value on performance, which provided particularly difficult or unique challenges and the innovative methods the contractor used to resolve problems successfully. The Government’s evaluation is not limited to past performance information on the cited example projects. Each entity (firm) will be rated on its own performance or that of its predecessor, if relevant. If the Government does not obtain past performance information and cannot establish a past performance record for the Offeror through other sources, past performance will be rated neither favorably nor unfavorably. The performance risk will be considered “unknown”.

As a result of an analysis of those risks and strengths identified, each offeror will receive an integrated Performance Confidence Assessment, which is the rating for the Past Performance factor. In conducting a performance confidence assessment, each offeror shall be assigned one of the ratings in accordance with DoD Source Selection Ratings. (Reference FAR 15.305(2) for information on assigning an unknown/neutral confidence rating.)

Past Performance references will first be reviewed to determine the relevancy of the past performance information. Past performance must have occurred within the five years prior to the closing date of this solicitation and be similar in scope and complexity to be considered relevant. The evaluation will use two levels of relevancy as shown in the bullets below.

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Rating Description

Relevant Past/present effort involved much of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

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

When determining the overall Performance Confidence Assessment for an Offeror, the Government will take into consideration the following areas: demonstrated record of successful performance in relevant projects; demonstrated ability to select, retain, support and, when necessary, replace subcontractors; demonstrated implementation of corrective measures that have been implemented to resolve performance issues; demonstrated record of reasonable and cooperative behavior and commitment to customer satisfaction; demonstrated record of cost and schedule management; and the degree of relevancy of all of the considered efforts. The Government will evaluate performance ratings by the customer (e.g. Past Performance Questionnaires). If the Government does not receive past performance information for the project(s) identified by the Offeror and cannot establish a past performance record for the Offeror through other sources, or if the Offeror has no past performance record, the Offeror will be given an “Unknown Confidence” assessment rating.

The Offeror is cautioned that in conducting the performance risk assessment, the Government may use data provided in the Offeror's proposal in addition to data obtained from other sources.

Since the Government may not necessarily obtain information on all of the listed contract references and may not contact all of the identified points of contact (POCs) provided by the Offeror, it is incumbent upon the Offeror to explain the relevance of the data provided. The Government may elect to consider data obtained from sources other than those identified by the Offeror.

Factor 2 - “Past Performance” will be evaluated using the following adjectival rating methodology:

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 be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Unknown Confidence (Neutral)

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

FACTOR 3, PRICE/COST AND OTHER PRICE RELATED INFORMATION

The Government will evaluate all aspects of the price proposal for fairness and reasonableness IAW FAR 15.404-1. Price will not be an adjectivally rated criterion.

RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATION. In accordance with FAR Subpart 9.1, no award will be made unless the Contracting Officer makes an affirmative determination of contractor responsibility. As a result, Offerors may be required to furnish additional information in order for the Government to make a determination regarding the Offeror’s responsibility.

Financial Capability.

(1) In accordance with FAR 9.103(a) “…contracts shall be awarded to, responsible prospective contractors only.” To be determined responsible, a prospective contractor must meet the standards at FAR 9.104. FAR 9.104-1(a) requires that a prospective contractor must have adequate financial resources to perform the contract, or the ability to obtain them.

(2) Financial capability audits are performed by DCAA when requested by the Contracting Officer. The Government may evaluate the Offeror’s annual financial statements, current credit report(s), and plan to obtain sufficient financial resources to perform the contract requirements in order to determine if the prospective contractor has adequate financial resources to perform the contract or the ability to obtain them.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

**PREVIOUS PAGES OMITTED INTENTIONALLY

This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in Subpart 12.6, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. This announcement constitutes the only solicitation; proposals are being requested and a written solicitation will not be issued.

This is a Request for Proposal (RFP), W912DY-17-R-0071

Point of Contact: Rachel Sanders Rachel.S.Sanders@usace.army.mil (256) 895-1547

Issued by: USACE Huntsville Center

4820 University Sq

Huntsville, AL 35816

A.1 Objective. The High Performance Computing Modernization Program (HPCMP) Office requires skilled business management and administrative support to provide the Program Office with the resources necessary to execute mission. The contractor shall supply the business management and operational resources necessary for efficient and effective administration, operations, and control of all duties as required by the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

These duties include: Records management and file maintenance, including protection of sensitive information; Database maintenance and management; HPC systems data analysis, requirements gathering and support; Maintain HPCMP access control points to ensure authorized entry for all employees and visitors, and Program Office Budgeting and Accounting.

Funding is subject to the Availability of Funds (Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) 52.232- 18 and Limitation of Government’s Obligation Department of Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations (DFARS) 252.232-7007).

A.2 The contract type and outcome(s) to be satisfied:

a. This Commercial, Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) contract with travel, materials, and ODCs, will provide up to five years of administrative support for HPCMP in all phases of planning and execution of its mission, including administrative support, business and financial analysis, and logistical support.

b. This contract has been determined to be 100% service therefore the Service Contract Labor Standards (formerly known as Service Contract Act) apply. The Service Contract Labor Standards Requirement for this effort is Wage Determination Numbers:

2015-5173, Revision 9, dated 01/10/2018 2015-4281, Revision 9, dated 01/10/2018 2015-4269, Revision 5, dated 01/10/2018

All three copies of applicable Wage Determinations are enclosed and can be located at:

http://www.wdol.gov/.”

c. 100% of this requirement is set-aide for 8(a) Small Business concerns, per FAR 19.5.

The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code for this acquisition is 541611, Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services Estimated which has a Small Business Size Standard of $15M.

A.3 Contract Term. This Contract will have a 12 month base with four-12 month options, for an ordering period of five years. The government will evaluate the options at the time of award.

There is no guarantee the options will be exercised on the awarded contract and the period of performance shall be set at time of award. The government may extend the contract in accordance with (IAW) FAR 52.217-9, Option to Extend the Term of the Contract and FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services (not to exceed six months). The evaluated rate of the last exercised option year remains the same during the six month extension.

A.4 All questions must be submitted in writing no later than Monday, 21 May 2018, 2:00 P.M Central Time (see Instructions to Offerors).

A.5 Proposal Due Date. Proposal submission shall arrive no later than Thursday, 07 June 2018, 12:00 P.M. Central Time and must be signed.

SECTION B

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

SECTION L PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

Copies of the solicitation are available by INTERNET ACCESS ONLY. All solicitation and amendment documents will be posted to the FedBizOpps (FBO) website. It shall be the contractor’s responsibility to check the websites for any amendments. The Offeror shall submit in the proposal all requested information specified in the solicitation.

The proposal shall be prepared clearly and concisely to demonstrate the Offeror has a complete understanding of the requirements. Offerors shall prepare proposals on the presumption that the Government has no previous knowledge of the Offeror’s capabilities. Proposals will be evaluated only on the information specifically presented in respective submittals, with the exception of the past performance evaluations. See FAR 52.212-1 for rules concerning submission of offers and late proposals. Proposals will be retained by the Government for official record purposes. When applicable, the Offeror should cross reference to the solicitation by annotating solicitation reference in parenthesis, (i.e. Sec C, para 4.0).

ELECTRONIC PROPOSAL SUBMISSION IS REQUIRED. ELECTRONIC

SUBMISSION SENT VIA EMAIL OR FACSIMILE WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

DIRECTIONS FOR SUBMITTING PROPOSALS

In an effort to reduce paperwork, reduce cost and streamline this acquisition, all proposals shall be submitted electronically. All submissions shall be in Adobe PDF format, with exception of labor rates sheets that shall be submitted in Excel format.

Offerors may use compressions utility software such as WinZip or PKZip to reduce file size and facilitate transmission.

Title the file(s) in the following format:

W912DY17R0071_COMPANY NAME_ VOLUME I

W912DY17R0071_COMPANY NAME_ VOLUME II

W912DY17R0071_COMPANY NAME_ VOLUME III

SUBMIT PROPOSALS ELECTRONICALLY VIA CD AND THE AMRDEC SAFE

WEBSITE.

The CD proposal is to be submitted to:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Huntsville Center ATTN: Ms. Rachel Sanders - CT PreAward 5021 Bradford Drive NW, Suite B Huntsville AL 35805

Hand carried submissions shall be dropped off at the aforementioned location for this acquisition. The mailroom entrance is located at the back of the building and is clearly marked from the outside. The mailroom personnel will receive the packages, date stamp, x-ray as appropriate and call the person identified on the package. The mailroom hours for proposal package deliveries are 0800-1500 Central Daylight Time, Monday-Friday, excluding federal holidays. Hand carried submissions must be date stamped by the mailroom personnel by the specified proposal due date and time.

At the AMRDEC SAFE website, https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/SAFE/Welcome.aspx, select the link: I do not have a CAC or this machine is not configured to read my CAC and I would like to access SAFE as a Guest User, to register, access the site and submit your proposal(s).

When your proposal is submitted via the AMRDEC SAFE website, the website will provide notification of the submittal to the Government recipients. When completing the information for transmittal at the AMRDEC SAFE website, you will be required to enter e-mail addresses for the recipients. For this solicitation, the recipients will be the Contracting Officer Kijafa.T.Johnson-Cooper@usace.army.mil and Contract Specialist Ms. Rachel Sanders at Rachel.S.Sanders@usace.army.mil.

After uploading your documents, you will be required to verify your email address before AMRDEC will send notification to the Government recipients. Follow the instructions on the AMRDEC website and save the confirmation emails you receive from AMRDEC.

The date and time of delivery will be established by the time of receipt of the e-mail notification to the Contract Specialist and Contracting Officer by the AMRDEC SAFE website, not by the date and time of uploading of the proposal into the AMRDEC SAFE website. Please make allowances for delays in transmittal. If an electronic submission is uploaded minutes before the deadline but notification is not actually received in the recipients’ e-mail inboxes until after the deadline, the submission will be considered late.

Proposal is due 07 June 2018 at 12:00 PM CST

The Government will not be responsible for proposals delivered to any location or to anyone other than those designated to receive proposals on its behalf. Offerors are responsible for allowing sufficient time for the proposal to be received in accordance with the instructions provided.

Proposals submitted AMRDEC take precedence over the CD.

OFFEROR'S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

Questions and/or comments relative to these documents shall be submitted no later than 2:00 PM CT, 21 May 2018, in order that they may be given adequate consideration or appropriate actions taken prior to receipt of offers. All questions and/or comments must be submitted via Bidder Inquiry.

BIDDER INQUIRY

Technical inquiries and questions relating to proposal procedures are to be submitted via Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet at http://www.projnet.org/projnet. To submit and review bid inquiry items, bidders will need to be a current registered user or self-register into system. Bidders will receive an acknowledgement of their question via email, followed by an answer to their question after it has been processed by our technical team.

The Solicitation Number is W912DY-17-R-0071 The Bidder Inquiry Key is JGVNU3-WJN7XH

The Bidder Inquiry System will be closed for new inquiries effective 2:00 PM CT, 21 May 2018, in order to ensure adequate time is allotted to form an appropriate response and amend the solicitation, if necessary. Offerors are requested to review the solicitation in its entirety, review the Bidder Inquiry System for answers to questions prior to submission of a new inquiry. The call center is available for help and is on U.S. Central Time Zone.

Offers will NOT be publicly opened. Information concerning the status of the evaluation and/or award will NOT be available after receipt of proposals.

SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARD/NAICS CODE

a. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code for this acquisition is 541611, Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services

b. The small business size standard is less than $15M

c. It is the Offerors responsibility to ensure that its classification data on the System for Award Management (SAM) website is correct and current.

JOINT VENTURE /MENTOR-PROTÉGÉ PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

When proposing as a joint venture, all members of the joint venture shall sign the SF 1449 unless a written agreement by the joint venture is furnished with the proposal designating one firm with the authority to bind the other member(s) of the joint venture. In addition, a copy of the joint venture agreement shall be submitted with the proposal in Volume III. Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements may eliminate the proposal from further consideration.

If this is an 8(a), HUBZone, or Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned joint venture, the Offeror should ensure that it complies with the applicable requirements of 13 CFR Part 124, 13 CFR Part 125, and 13 CFR Part 126 respectively.

When proposing as part of a Mentor-Protégé Agreement, include a copy of the agreement and the Small Business Administration approval of the agreement in Volume III

PROPOSAL FORMAT

Title Page. Include the title of the solicitation, solicitation number, Offeror name, and date of the submittal.

Table of Contents. Each volume of the proposal shall contain a detailed table of contents. Any materials submitted but not required by this solicitation (such as company brochures) shall be relegated to appendices.

Electronic Matter Submissions. Written material shall be on 8 ½ x 11 size pages in no less than a 10 pitch or 10 font. Page limitations, where specified in the RFP, shall be considered a maximum. Pages in excess of any specified limitation shall not be evaluated.

Number of Electronic Files. Offerors SHALL submit an electronic version (PDF Format) of the original Volume I, Volume II, and Volume III. Offerors SHALL submit only three files in PDF format (i.e. Volume I, Volume II, and Volume III). These three files should be named in a specific format: Solicitation Number, Offerors Company and the volume (e.g.

W912DY17R0071_USACE_Volume I.pdf). Offerors shall propose rate and pricing information using the attachment EXCEL model. All EXCEL file cells must be visible and all calculations must be visible. Submission of the EXCEL pricing model to the Government shall not be in pdf format. Presentation and page limitations for the proposal shall be as follows:

Page Limitation Table of Contents 2

VOLUME I – Factor 1: Technical 50 pages comprised of the page limitations stated for each element

Element 1 – Technical and Management Approach

Element 2 – Technical Qualifications 20 Element 3 – Transition/Phase-In 10 VOLUME II – Factor 2: Past Performance See Below

Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ’S) 2-5 PPQs

VOLUME III – Factor 3: Cost/Price No Limit

Each volume shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled and include the following:

Volume number on proposal cover.

Table of contents.

List of tables/figures.

RFP Number, complete company name, and date shall appear on each page (header or footer).

Volume number and page number shall appear in the bottom right corner of each page

(along with the proposal revision number for the amended page, if necessary).

PDF or compatible files shall use the following page setup parameters:

Margins – Top, Bottom, Left, Right - 1” Gutter – 0” From Edge – Header, Footer - 0.5” Page Size, – 8.5” x 10” Page Size spreadsheets, table, charts, etc. may be 11” x 17” but counts as 2 pages per side.

The following additional restrictions apply:

Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line.

Font type: Times New Roman; font size: 10, font size for headers and footers may be increased to 14 or reduced to 10 Font size for spreadsheets, tables, charts, etc. may be reduced to font size 8.

The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited.

Page Limitation – Only pages within the respective page limits as follows will be evaluated:

Volume I: Technical - 50 Pages Volume II: Past Performance – Minimum two (2) –maximum five (5) Projects within the past five (5) years using attached past performance questionnaire (PPQ).

Volume III: Cost/Price.

Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

NOTE: The proposal cover, cover letter, glossaries or indices, title page; the list of tables/figures, acronyms, separator tabs, cross-reference to the solicitation paragraphs, past performance reference sheets, resumes, subcontractor commitment letters (if required), questionnaires and supporting past performance documents, and cost or pricing data in support of the price proposal, are excluded from the page limitation count. Pages that exceed the required page limitations will not be evaluated. Additional pages will be removed from back to front of the proposal, and will not be evaluated by the Government.

For proposal preparation purposes only, the total hours for this acquisition is estimated to be 345,600 (for five year period) when 69,120 hours are alloted for each year. The anticipated allocation of these hours among the PWS functional areas are as shown in Section 5.1 of the

PWS.

PROPOSAL CONTENT

Proposals must be responsive to and comply with the terms of the solicitation in order to be eligible to receive an award. The Government will reject any proposal determined to be materially non-responsive or that does not conform to the terms of the RFP. To be eligible to receive an award, proposals submitted in response to this RFP shall consist of the contents required in the sub-paragraphs described below:

VOLUME I – Factor 1 –TECHNICAL:

This volume will cover your Technical proposal to accomplish the tasks identified in the attached PWS. Your proposal must describe the technical capability of your organization to perform this requirement and accomplish the tasks for HPCMPO. Your proposal must address the following elements and show the correlation to your firm’s capability to meet the requirements of the PWS.

Evaluation Criteria: All elements within Factor1, Technical are not individually rated. Factor 1 will be evaluated based on the strengths, weaknesses and deficiencies of each offeror’s proposal as it relates to the combination of the elements. Any aspect of the offeror’s proposal which is unclear or inconsistent will be treated as an uncertainty, and not a deficiency. A material failure in the proposal is constituted as a deficiency, and will result in a proposal that is not awardable.

The Government evaluation team has been instructed to evaluate on the basis of the information provided in the proposal. The Government shall not assume that an offeror possesses any capability unless specified in the proposal.

Submission Requirement Element 1 – Technical and Management Approach (LIMIT 20 PAGES):

This volume will cover your Technical proposal to accomplish the tasks identified in the attached PWS. The Offeror’s proposal must describe the technical capability of your organization to perform this requirement and accomplish the tasks for HPCMPO. The proposal must address the following elements and show the correlation to your firm’s capability to meet the requirements of the PWS.

Technical Approach. The contractor will provide details of their technical approach to support each element of the contract as depicted in the PWS sections:

o 4.1 Program and Project Management Support o 4.2 Program Management Support o 4.3 Requirements Analysis, Data Analysis and Resource Allocation Management o 4.4 Business Analysis Support o 4.6 Security Support o 4.7 Administrative and Meeting Support.

Organizational Structure and Teaming/Subcontract Arrangements. Fully describe the structure of the proposed organization/team (including major subcontractors/team members) that will be utilized to accomplish the tasks identified in the PWS. The Government will also want to see how this proposed team fits into its overall corporate structure and the reporting and review relationship with corporate management. Delineate responsibilities (of the prime and subcontractors), management of key subcontractors, lines of authority, and spans of control as well, as how the offeror will control the flow of information and communications among team members, customers, CORs/COTRs, and the Contracting Officer. For any key subcontractors (defined as any subcontractor used to substitute or supplement the Offeror’s capabilities and experience or subcontract which equals 20% or more of the total cost of the prime contract or performing more than 10% of the work), provide a detailed description of all teaming/subcontracting arrangements. Any key subcontractor identified must complete the Letter of Commitment. Letters of Commitment do not count against the page limitation for this section.

Also, describe how the key subcontractors will be managed and how risk will be mitigated to ensure successful performance of the tasks detailed in the PWS. The discussion shall include the processes that will be employed to maintain privity of contract restrictions while, at the same time, efficiently conveying Government technical requirements to team members/subcontractors, implementing changes in technical direction, monitoring/measuring their performance, and ensuring that all task objectives are achieved. Discuss any unique organizational business practices or management of subcontractors that will be implemented to facilitate the successful execution of the HPCMP program.

Key Personnel. Identify the prime offeror and major subcontractor/team key personnel as described in the PWS, Section 1.5.2. For this submittal, the offeror shall provide the following information for key personnel:

o Name o Security Clearance and Date Granted o Education o Colleges Attended, Major, Dates Of Attendance, And Degree Attained and/or

Hours Completed o Special Training o Experience (In Reverse Chronological Order, List the Inclusive Dates, Employer, and a Brief Description of the Task Performed and Job Title.);

o Related Experience: (Specify The Experience That Meets Or Exceeds The

Minimum Qualifications Necessary To Perform the Requirement. Include The Relevant Data/Information that Establishes “Why” This Person is the Best Choice for HPCMP) o The Most Significant Managerial Accomplishment in the Last Five Years Related to this Effort;

o The Most Significant Technical Accomplishment In The Last Five Years Related to this Effort o The Most Significant Skill That Relates To The Proposed Effort o Planned Percentage of Time to this Effort o Date Of Availability o Letter of Commitment from Key Personnel

Discuss the qualifications of the overall Program Manager, specifically addressing his/her experience in managing programs similar to HPCMP in terms of technical and contractual complexity and magnitude. The discussion shall include the following information: Describe their qualifications (education and experience) as it relates to the functional area requirements of the PWS and demonstrate how these qualifications meet or exceed the applicable minimum qualifications established elsewhere in this solicitation.

Element 2 – Technical Qualification (LIMIT 20 PAGES):

The offeror shall provide a comprehensive description of each member’s significant capabilities and corporate experience relate to performing the PWS requirements and shall clearly delineate how team member strengths will be aligned to ensure accomplishment of all functional area requirements. Each description shall clearly delineate the correlation between the identified capability and corporate experience, and shall identify the specific PWS functional area requirement(s) to which the capability/experience applies. Descriptions of corporate experience shall clearly specify the following; (i) contract/task order number, (ii) title of effort, (iii) total potential dollar value; (iv) performance period; (v) contractor role (prime or subcontractor); and brief description of the effort. Any identified corporate experience performed within the past three years must be traceable to the information provided in Volume II, Past Performance.

Offeror’s shall further indicate whether each subcontractor/team member is considered “major”,as defined by this solicitation, and whether the subcontractor/team member will serve either in a “lead” or “support” role. Identify the planned level of support that each member will provide, in total and for each functional area requirement of the PWS, as indicated by a percentage of the Government’s total estimated labor hours for the total effort and for each functional area.This identification shall be presented in a summary matrix depicting the planned level of support by prime and subcontractor/team member. The planned level of support must be consistent with the allocation of labor hours in Volume III, Cost/Price

Element 3 – Transition/Phase-in (LIMIT 10 PAGES):

The transition/phase in submittal shall address the offeror’s approach to ramping up the program;

hiring or assigning personnel to fully staff the program shall be presented. The plan should address the Offeror’s approach to ensure a seamless transition with outgoing contractors on task order efforts requiring continued support under this acquisition. This transition plan shall include transition period length and key activities. A transition period of 30 calendar days is intended to provide an orderly transfer of support responsibilities from the incumbent contractor to the contractor selected for this effort.

All aspect of the transition planning phase should be addressed to include, but not limited to:

o How incoming contractor will be organized structurally during the transition period o What personnel specialties will be required during the transition period.

o What the incoming contractor identifies as their critical learning and action processes.

o Equipment, documentation, records and information technology systems the incoming contractor will need to coordinate with the incumbent during the transition period.

o Physical infrastructure.

o How the incoming contractor intends to comply with HPCMPO entrance/exit and information technology security procedures during the transition period.

o Schedule for transition and integration.

VOLUME II – FACTOR 2 PAST PERFORMANCE:

Evaluation Criteria: The Government will evaluate past performance of prime contractor or subcontractor . The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor performance.

Each prime contractor will be rated on its own performance or that of its predecessor, if relevant.

If the Government does not obtain past performance information and cannot establish a past performance record for the offeror through other sources, past performance will be rated neither favorably nor unfavorably. The performance risk will be considered “unknown”.

Submission Requirement: Offerors shall submit a minimum of two (2) and maximum of five (5) client completed Past Performance Questionnaires - PPQs. In this volume, provide correct and current phone numbers and email addresses for the client point of contact that your firm distributed PPQs to. Completed Past Performance Questionnaires shall be submitted to the Government by the client. Clients shall provide the complete PPQ (ONLY) to Gosia Thompson via e-mail to gosia.m.thompson@usace.army.mil. If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before the solicitation closing date, the Offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s).

Past Performance is limited to projects that are relevant to the type of work being solicited and were performed within the last five (5) years prior to the RFP release date. For Federal Government projects, a complete project is one in which a final report has been accepted by the Government. For non-Federal Government projects, a completed project are ones in which there is no work remaining to be performed by the Offeror.

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), including Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all

CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the Offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), and any other known sources not provided by the Offeror. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror Volume III: Cost/Price.

The contractor is to complete the price worksheet provided by the government as an attachment.

FINANCIAL CAPABILITY ( inlcude in Volume III, Factor 3, Section II)

This information will be used to establish responsibility in accordance with FAR Part 9.1.

Financial capability audits are performed by DCAA when requested by the Contracting Officer.

DFARS 232.072 requires the Contracting Officer to make a determination of financial responsibility.