Amendment 2 W912EE21R0008.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

Refrence Solicitation no. W912EE21R0008 for The Dam and Levee Safety Toolbox Maintenance and Enhancements. The purpose of Amendment 0002 is to 1) incorporate Attachment C, Small Business Participation Plan; and 2) replace the text of Sections L.1 - L.6 (pages 58-63) and Section M in its entirety (pages 68-72) and replace w ith attached pages containing the revised Sections L.1 - L.6 and Section M.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 2

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 23-Apr-2021

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

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street , County, State and Zip Code) X W912EE21R0008

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

01-Apr-2021

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, X is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

23-Apr-2021

CODE

VICKSBURG CONTRACTING OFFICE

4155 CLAY ST

VICKSBURG MS 39183-3435

W912EE 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912EE21R0008

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

(End of Summary of Changes)

REVISION

Section L – Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

L.1. Introduction – Preparation of Proposals. It is the intent of the Government to award up to three IDIQ contracts from this solicitation without discussions. Awards shall be made utilizing the best value continuum using the tradeoff process prescribed by Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15.101-1, as supplemented. This section provides all proposal submission requirements necessary in order to be considered for award of the resultant contract. Offerors shall refer to Section M, Evaluation Factors for

Award, for the process by which the Government will evaluate proposals and make its award decision as a result of this solicitation.

Offeror’s proposal shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail to enable the Government to fully evaluate the proposal. Information shall be formatted as instructed so that the information may be easily located, extracted, and analyzed by the Government.

All Offerors shall submit a proposal with content as specified herein. Proposals submitted without the specified content may be determined non-compliant and removed from further consideration. Proposals must be received no later than the date and time indicated on block 8 of Standard Form 1449.

All Offerors are required to submit one (1) digital PDF copy of Volume I, Volume II, and Volume III.

The digital copy must be submitted via the Department of Defense (DoD) Secure Access File Exchange

(SAFE) before the due date and time. In order to submit through DoD SAFE, each Offeror must send an email to Molly O’Keefe at molly.okeefe@usace.army.mil by 22 April 2021 with two individual points of contact (POC) to include first and last name and email address. A drop-off request will be sent to the

POCs with a request code in order to upload the proposal documents.

Each volume of each proposal shall contain a cover sheet as the first page which identifies the following:

(1) the Offeror’s name, (2) the Offeror’s address, (3) the Offeror’s phone number and e-mail address, (4) the Offeror’s point(s) of contact including contact information, (5) the Offeror’s authorized signer(s)/negotiator(s) including their contact information, (6) the Offeror’s Cage code and DUNS number, (7) the volume number, (8) the requirement’s Solicitation number, (9) the proposal’s period of validity. The second sheet shall be an index/table of contents.

NOTE: All proposals must be valid for 180 days.

All proposals shall include a title page for each of the evaluation factors. Information contained in the proposals shall be printable on 8-1/2 x 11-in. paper with a minimum of a 1-in. left margin to allow for binding perforations. An Offeror’s response to Volume I only of this Solicitation is limited to fifty (50)

8.5” x 11” pages excluding tabs, Table of Contents, resumes, title sheets, and indices with the font size no smaller than 12pt. Drawings or other graphics shall be reduced only to the extent legibility is not lost.

Pages shall be consecutively numbered.

Do not submit any materials not required by this solicitation (such as company brochures and marketing material). The Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) will utilize the required data listed below for evaluation and in accordance with the Evaluation Factors. In order to effectively and equitably evaluate proposals, the SSEB must receive information sufficiently detailed to clearly describe the Offeror's capabilities to successfully perform this project.

L.1.1 Proposal Format & Submittal Requirements. Proposals shall be submitted in three (3) volumes as listed below, as well as with an electronic version of the entire submission to be included in PDF format via DoD SAFE. Each volume should be labeled with the Volume number in the title. Price and technical volumes must be fully separated and technical volumes should not include any price information.

a) Volume I – Technical

Tab 1 – Factor 1 – Technical Experience

Tab 2 – Factor 2 – Management Plan

- Subfactor 2A – Project Management Structure

- Subfactor 2B – Staffing Plan and Qualifications

b) Volume II – Past Performance and Small Business Participation Plan

- Factor 3 - Past Performance

- Factor 4 – Small Business Participation Plan

c) Volume III – Factor 5 – Price

L.2. Technical Proposal Content – Volume I

L.2.1. Offerors shall submit the following information with their proposal:

L.2.2. Tab 1 – Technical Experience (Volume I – Factor 1)

Discuss your technical experience providing relevant services described in Section C to commercial/industrial clients and/or federal, state, municipal Government agency clients. Offerors should provide a detailed description of the work their firm completed and their role and length of time spent on the work.

L.2.3 Tab 2 Management Plan (Volume I, Factor 2)

The management plan shall discuss your approach, methodology, and depth of understanding of the contract performance requirements to execute tasks of maintaining and updating existing dam and levee safety applications as well as creating and managing new systems and tools. Offerors shall demonstrate plan to successfully manage complex programming and web development tasks. Offerors shall demonstrate how they will lead a team for front-end development, back-end development, system architecture, visual design and testing and demonstrate knowledge of leading a team using an agile development processes, managing sprints and reporting on iterative progress. This shall be established in the project management structure and staffing plan and qualifications as follows:

a. Tab 2A – Subfactor 1 – Project Management Structure. Provide your Project Management organization structure, including organization chart, reflecting home office, on-site, and any proposed subcontracting. Discuss the management plan for control and integration of the contract performance requirement to include but not limited to work plans, personnel management policies and procedures.

b. Tab 2B – Subfactor 2 - Staffing Plan and Qualifications. Discuss personnel and job classifications to be provided for performance for this contract, using the labor categories described in

Section C8. If additional labor categories are proposed, full descriptions are required. Offeror shall furnish, the following information:

List the key personnel that will be committed to this contract and their level of experience, and any applicable licensing/certifications and/or training, in the fields of web design, system architecture, flood inundation modeling and mapping, user experience design, geospatial/web mapping, data science and documentation. Offerors shall include management or key personnel resumes.

L.3. Past Performance Proposal Content (Volume II – Factor 3).

L.3.1. Past Performance Proposal. Offerors shall submit the following information with their proposal:

a. Offeror shall submit a description of contracts performed or awarded in the past five (5) years (of the solicitation issue date) as a prime contractor, which are relevant to web application design, development, maintenance and operations similar to the National Inventory of Dams and the National

Levee Database or other related services required by this solicitation.

b. Offerors shall submit at least three (3) and no more than five (5) past contracts for this factor.

c. Offerors are cautioned to take care in selecting relevant contracts for review that accurately reflect the Offeror’s past performance capabilities. Please note that if the Offeror chooses to provide more than five (5) contracts, the Government will evaluate only the first FIVE (5) contracts submitted under this evaluation factor. Any additional contracts submitted beyond the FIVE (5) requested will NOT be evaluated.

d. Offerors shall include relevant past performance history that demonstrates a record of providing web application design, development, maintenance and operations services similar to those required in this Solicitation to commercial/industrial clients and/or federal, state, municipal Government agency clients, to include point of contact name, telephone number, and email address for each contract/project reference included in the proposal.

e. Offerors shall provide contracts that are recent and relevant. Relevant contracts are those that have similar requirements to the Statement of Work (SOW). Contracts that are recent are defined as those that have been completed within the last five (5) years of the solicitation issue date.

NOTE: Past Performance contract descriptions shall be contracts held by the prime Offeror or major

Subcontractors. A major Subcontractor is defined as a Subcontractor responsible for 25% of more of the performance required.

L.3.2. Past Performance Questionnaire or Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS).

The offeror may submit CPARS in lieu of the PPQ. If CPARS are submitted the offeror shall include the

CPARS with their proposal submission. If a PPQ(s) is submitted, it is the offeror’s responsibility to coordinate with the client to have the questionnaire completed. The offeror shall include the PPQ in their proposal submission. The Government may verify all past performance submitted as part of an offer and failure to include valid contact information will prevent that verification.

L.3.3. New Corporate Entities. New corporate entities may submit data on prior relevant and recent

Contracts (within the last five (5) calendar years) involving its officers and employees. However, in addition to the other requirements in this section, the Offeror shall discuss in detail the role performed by such persons in the prior Contracts cited. Offeror may submit information on key personnel, joint venture and other previous reincarnation of its current organization.

L.3.4. If an Offeror has no relevant past performance history, the Offeror shall affirmatively state that it possesses no relevant, directly related, or similar past performance. Refer to Section M – Evaluation

Factors for Award on evaluation of Offeror’s with no relevant past performance.

L.4 Small Business Participation (Volume II – Factor 4).

L.4.1 Instructions to Offerors:

The Offeror shall use Attachment C1 as a form to provide the following required information in a clear, concise manner. The Small Business Participation Plan is a separate requirement and is different than the

Small Business Subcontracting Plan. The Small Business Participation Plan is based on Total Contract

Value. For the purposes of evaluation of the Small Business Participation Plan, Total Contract Value is defined as the value of all work to be performed on this project.

All Offerors, both large and small businesses, shall identify the extent to which Small Businesses (SBs), Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDBs), Woman-Owned Small Businesses (WOSBs), Historically

Underutilized Business Zone Small Businesses (HubZone) Small Business, Veteran-Owned Small

Businesses (VOSBs), and Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Businesses (SDVOSBs) shall be utilized in the performance of the resulting contract. Small businesses, as defined by the North American

Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code applicable to this solicitation, are Offerors who identify their own participation as a SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZONE SB, VOSB, or SDVOSB. These shall be considered in evaluating the Small Business Participation Plan factor.

All Offerors shall address the following information in detail. Provide the names of SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZONE SB, VOSB, or SDVOSB that will participate in the proposed contract, identifying specific types of supplies and/or services to be subcontracted by small businesses including estimated dollar value(s) of subcontracts planned for.

Complete the Small Business Participation Plan (Attachment CA) and provide letters of commitment of

Key Subcontractor(s) on Subcontractor letterhead.

Offerors (both large and small businesses) will be evaluated on the level of small business commitment that they propose to demonstrate under this proposed contract, and the Offeror’s prior level of commitment to the participation of small businesses in performance of prior contracts. A small business

Offeror will receive credit for their small business participation as a Prime Contractor and can apply their dollar value and calculate percentages in all the applicable small business categories.

Offerors shall provide evidence of small business participation by addressing the following:

(a) The extent to which such firms, as defined in FAR Part 19, are specifically identified in proposals;

(b) The complexity and variety of the work small business firms are to perform during this project;

(c) Past performance of the Offeror in complying with the requirements of FAR clause FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns and for large business Offerors, FAR 52.219-9, Small Business

Subcontracting Plan, based on the Offeror's presentation of facts, details of efforts and successes in complying with this clause on Federal Government contracts. An Acceptable rating will only be given to

Offerors that clearly shows by documentation a reasonable effort in complying with this FAR clause.

(d) The extent of participation of such firms in terms of the total acquisition value.

(e) The Offeror shall provide a detailed explanation and documentation supporting the proposed small business participation percentages, or the lack thereof.

(f) For Other than Small Businesses ONLY. Compliance with terms and conditions of FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (if required on recent contracts). The Other than Small Business

Offeror shall provide three Individual Subcontracting Reports (ISRs) for recent contracts (within the past three years from the closing date of this solicitation) that required a subcontracting plan. If not required in any recent contracts, the Offeror shall so state. If the Offeror has less than three recent contracts, the

Offeror shall provide the most recent ISR for each contract it has, and state that the Offeror does not have three recent contracts.

L.4.2 Past Small Business Participation Information:

Provide a description of the Offeror's performance over the past THREE (3) calendar years, in complying with the requirements of FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns, including description and available documentation of the methods employed to promote small business participation and the internal methods used to monitor such participation. Provide any information substantiating the

Offeror's track record of participating with small business on past contracts.

For Large and Small Businesses: Provide descriptive information for all small business categories. Any information concerning long term relationships with Small Business subcontractors, such as mentor-protégé relationships, should be provided.

For Large Businesses: Department of Defense (DOD) began using the Electronic Subcontracting

Reporting System (eSRS) in October 2008. For contracts with DOD, Offerors should submit a copy of their Summary Subcontracting Report (SSR) (SF295). For contracts with non-DoD agencies, Offerors may submit an SSR and/or hard copy Summary Subcontracting Report. Small business utilization for each of the projects submitted under Factor 3, Past Performance, shall be included in this section.

Information to be provided includes:

a. Extent and Type of Work Offeror Subcontracted Out:

b. Type of firm subcontracted to: SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZONE SB, VOSB, SDVOSB

c. Company Subcontracted to:

d. Subcontracted Company's Address:

e. Subcontracted Company's DUNS:

f. Subcontracted Company's NAICS:

g. Amount Subcontracted to Small Business:

h. Details of efforts and successes in complying with the c1auses(s) of Federal contracts:

i. Explanation for no prior performance information

L.4.3 Both large and small businesses shall be required to submit Small Business Participation Plans to identify the extent to which small businesses will participate in the performance of the proposed acquisition.

- Large businesses primes may achieve the small business participation goals through subcontracting to small businesses.

- Small business primes may achieve small business participation goals through their own performance/participation as a prime and also through subcontracting to other small businesses.

The Offeror shall provide detailed explanations/documentation supporting the proposed participation percentages or lack thereof:

1. Explain the methods used to develop the small business participation goals for SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZONE SB, VOSB, or SDVOSB.

2. Explain how the products and/or services areas to be subcontracted to SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZONE

SB, VOSB, or SDVOSB were determined.

3. Explain how the capabilities of SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZONE SB, VOSB, or SDVOSB were determined. Alaskan Native Corporation and Indian Tribes are considered small businesses and small disadvantaged businesses. Identify all source lists used in the determination process. Examples may consist of:

1. Small and small business disadvantaged business source lists (System for Award

Management (SAM), SBA Sub-Net or Small Business Dynamic Search, etc.),

2. efforts to identify and award subcontracts to small and small disadvantaged firms,

3. organization's contact with small and small disadvantaged sources,

4. contacts with business development organizations,

5. attendance at small and small disadvantaged business procurement conferences and trade fairs,

6. records to support internal activities to guide buyers including workshops, seminars, and training programs,

7. monitoring activities to evaluate compliance,

8. reason for the failure of incorporating small businesses into small business utilization.

L.5. Price Proposal Content (Volume III - Factor 5). Offerors shall submit the following information in their proposal:

a. Cover letter containing:

1. Solicitation number.

2. Name, address, email address and telephone number of the Offeror.

3. Names, title, email and telephone number of persons authorized to sign the proposal/contract (and negotiate) on the Offeror’s behalf, on company letterhead.

b. Proposal submittal:

1. SF 1449, completed and signed by an authorized person from the company. Include acknowledgement of all Amendment(s) issued for this solicitation.

2. Fully completed Attachment B. The Attachment B Pricing Spreadsheet shall be included with the

Offeror’s proposal as an unlocked Excel file.

a. Tab 1, Labor Category Descriptions: Estimated labor categories and descriptions are provided. If the

Offeror proposes other labor categories, the title and description shall be included.

b. Tab 2, Labor Rate Table: The Offeror shall provide fully burdened hourly rates for all FFP labor categories required. Regular labor rates shall be based on an 8 hour workday, 40 hour workweek and

1880 hour productive work year. Overtime labor category rates shall be based on any time other than the regular 8 hour workday, 40 hour workweek and 1880 hour productive work year.

c. Tab 2, Other Direct Costs (ODC): The Offeror shall propose a maximum percentage to be applied to

ODCs. The percentage may be negotiated to a lower rate for subsequent task orders, but may not exceed rate proposed for duration of the ordering period.

3. Copies of Joint Venture (JV) Agreements, Subcontract, and/or Teaming Agreements, if applicable.

NOTE: A prime contractor can have subcontractors; however their experience will not be evaluated. A teaming agreement is an arrangement in which a potential prime contractor agrees with one or more companies to have them act as its subcontractors (only the Prime contractor’s experience will be considered), or a teaming agreement may be a JV agreement. If the relationship is a JV, SBA must have approved the resulting JV agreement for an 8(a) contract at the time of award to be JV certified and approved for a contract award. These documents MUST be available at the time of award.

L.6. Solicitation Inquiries.

All inquiries regarding this solicitation are to be submitted via ProjNet. Telephone and email inquiries will not be accepted. ProjNet is a web-based program that allows offerors to post questions regarding the solicitation and view all questions by other offerors and responses by the government. Offerors shall check ProjNet regularly for responses to inquiries.

1. Offerors shall only submit one question per inquiry. All inquiries containing multiple questions will be rejected.

2. Offerors will receive an acknowledgement of their question(s) via email, followed by an answer to their question(s) after it has been processed. Offerors may view all inquiries through ProjNet.

3. Inquiries must be submitted not later than five (5) calendar days prior to the proposal due date. Any inquiries submitted within seven calendar days of the proposal due date may not be answered.

4. To submit and review inquiries, offerors will need to use the inquiry key presented below and follow the instructions listed below the key for access.

5. The Inquiry Key is: TBD at time of Solicitation Issuance

a. From the ProjNet home page link: https://www.projnet.org/projnet/ click on Quick Add on the upper right side of the screen.

b. Identify the Agency: This should be marked as USACE.

c. Key: Enter the Inquiry Key listed above.

d. Email: Enter the email address you would like to use for communication.

e. Click Continue. A page will then open saying that a user account was not found, and it will ask you to create one using the provided form.

f. Enter your first name, last name, company, city, state, phone, email, secret question, secret answer, and time zone. Make sure to remember your secret question and answer, as they will be used from this point on to access the ProjNet system.

g. Click Add User. Once this is completed you are now registered within ProjNet and are currently logged into the system.

h. Submit questions or review questions and answers. An offeror who submits a question will receive an automated email notification that its question has been received. When an answer is posted to a question, the question and answer are then available for all other offerors to review.

Section M – Evaluation Factors

M.1. Introduction. This section provides information on the evaluation of proposals received from this

Solicitation. It is the intent of the Government to award up to three (3) IDIQ Contracts from this solicitation without discussions for technical support and web application services for the USACE Dam and Levee Safety Program. Award shall be made utilizing the Best Value Continuum using the Tradeoff process prescribed by Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15.101-1, as supplemented. This section provides for the process by which the Government will evaluate proposals and make its award decision as a result of this solicitation.

M.1.1. Basis for Contract Award. For a proposal to be considered for award, the proposal must meet all submission requirements, Performance Work Statement Requirements, and all other terms and conditions as provided in the solicitation. An assessment will be made of each offeror’s proposal based upon the non-cost and cost evaluation factors listed herein and discussed below:

Factor 1 – Technical Experience

Factor 2 – Management Plan

Subfactor 2A – Project Management Structure

Subfactor 2B – Staffing Plan and Qualifications

Factor 3 - Past Performance

Factor 4 – Small Business Participation Plan

Factor 5 – Price

Factors 1, 2, 3 and 4 are listed in descending order of importance. Relative Importance of Evaluation

Criteria: The non-price factors (1, 2, 3, and 4), when combined, are approximately equal to the price evaluation factor (5). The subfactors for factor 2 are equal in importance.

M.1.2. Source Selection – Evaluations will be made utilizing the Best Value Continuum – Tradeoff process prescribed by Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15.101-1, as supplemented. The

Government intends to select for award, without discussions, the responsible Offeror whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements and is determined to be the Best Value to the Government.

Subjective judgment is implicit throughout this process. As a part of the Government’s evaluation of each

Offeror’s proposal, each non-cost evaluation factor will be rated using the adjectival descriptions in the tables that follow. Government evaluators will apply the appropriate adjectival rating to each factor rated.

M.2. Evaluation of Technical Proposals (Volume I).

The term “technical” as used herein, refers to non-price factors other than past performance. The purpose of these factors is to assess whether the Offeror’s proposal will satisfy the Government’s requirements.

The technical aspects of the proposal will be evaluated based upon the following technical factors:

Technical Experience, Management Plan, and Past Performance.

M.2.1. Factor 1 – Technical Experience

The Government will not award to an Offeror that receives an unacceptable rating in this factor.

Thorough, detailed and complete narratives will be rated more highly than those not providing sufficient detail or discussion of the Offeror’s proposed approachtechnical experience. Omission of requested information will result in a lower rating than those which provide all the information identified.

The offeror’s proposal for Factor 1, Technical Experience, shall include all required submittal data relating to the sub-areas as described in Section C3.

Submittal data under this factor will be evaluated in accordance with Table 1: Combined Technical/Risk

Evaluation Ratings (Volume I, Factors 1 – 2).

M.2.2. Factor 2 – Management Plan

Management Plan consists of the project management structure and staffing plan and qualifications.

The Government will not award to an Offeror that receives an unacceptable rating in this factor.

Thorough, detailed and complete narratives will be rated more highly than those not providing sufficient detail or discussion of the Offeror’s proposed approach. Omission of requested information will result in a lower rating than those which provide all the information identified.

M.2.1.A. Subfactor 1 – Project Management Structure

The offeror’s proposal for Subfactor 1, Project Management Structure, shall include all required submittal data and will be evaluated in accordance with Table 1: Combined Technical/Risk Evaluation Ratings

(Volume I, Factors 1 – 2).

M.2.1.B. Subfactor 2 – Staffing Plan and Qualifications

The offeror’s proposal for Subfactor 2, Staffing Plan and Qualifications, shall include all required submittal data and will be evaluated in accordance with Table 1: Combined Technical/Risk Evaluation

Ratings (Volume I, Factors 1 – 2). Proposed personnel should align with the labor categories as described in Section C8.

M.2.2. Technical Factors Evaluation Ratings Table 1: Combined Technical/Risk Evaluation Ratings

(Volume I, Factors 1 – 2)

Proposals shall be evaluated and assigned a rating based upon table 1, below.

M.3. FACTOR 3 Evaluation of Past Performance (Volume II).

M.3.1. The Offeror’s past performance record will be evaluated to determine the Offeror’s probability of successfully performing the Contract requirements. This assessment is based upon the Offeror’s record of relevant and recent past performance information regarding technical support services to maintain and update dam and levee safety applications.

The past performance evaluation considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in meeting the contract requirements. In accordance with FAR 15.305, the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor’s performance shall be considered. These are combined to establish one performance confidence assessment rating for each offeror.

There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation considered when determining the confidence assessment rating: recency, relevancy and quality:

i. Recency – Recency, for this requirement, is defined as government and/or commercial contracts completed during the past five (5) years from issue of the RFP.

ii. Relevance – A relevancy determination of the offeror’s present and past performance, including joint venture partners and/or significant subcontractors will be made (significant subcontractor meaning a subcontractor responsible for 25% or more of the performance required). Relevance is defined as government and /or commercial contracts of same or similar scope, complexity and magnitude to the work to be performed. Present efforts must be at least 70% completed to be determined relevant. The relevancy table below will be used in determining the relevancy rating for each offeror.

iii. Quality Assessment – Overall quality of the past performance submitted will be assessed on those recent efforts that were determined relevant by determining how well the contractor performed on the contracts. Documented results from PPQs, interviews, CPARS, and other sources form the support and basis for this assessment.

Confidence Assessment – Each offeror will be evaluated and given a confidence rating based upon the assessed quality of the relevant/recent efforts gathered using the table below:

M.3.2. New Corporate Entities. New corporate entities may submit data on prior relevant and recent

Contracts (within the last six (6) calendar years) involving its officers and employees. However, in addition to the other requirements in this section, the Offeror shall discuss in detail the role performed by such persons in the prior Contracts cited. Offeror may submit information on key personnel, joint venture and other previous reincarnation of its current organization.

M.3.3. Past Performance – Other. The Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance and determining the resulting confidence assessment rating. 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), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), 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.

The Government may also use other tools to gather information regarding an Offeror's qualifications and past performance. The Offeror shall provide information on any problems encountered on the identified contracts and the corrective actions taken. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of proof rests with the Offerors to provide past performance information that is accurate, detailed, current, and complete.

NOTE: In the case of offerors for which there is no information on past contract performance or where past contract performance information is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past contract performance (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv).) In this case, the offeror's past performance is unknown and assigned a performance confidence rating of "neutral."

Although an offeror that lacks recent, relevant past performance favorably or unfavorably with regard to past performance, the Source Selection Authority may determine, that a "Substantial Confidence" or

"Satisfactory Confidence" past performance rating is worth more than a "Neutral Confidence" past performance rating.

M.4 Small Business Participation Factor. IAW Defense FAR Supplement (DFARS) 215.304(c)(i), the extent to which Offerors identify and commit to small business performance of the contract shall be evaluated. Offerors shall submit a Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD) which specifies the offeror’s level and degree of commitment to small business utilization/participation in performance of this requirement. An SBPCD is required from all offerors, including companies with commercial plans and comprehensive subcontracting plans. The Government will evaluate the following:

a. The extent to which such firms, as defined in FAR Part 19, are specifically identified in proposals;

b. The extent of commitment to use such firms (and enforceable commitments will be considered more favorably than non-enforceable ones);

c. Identification of the complexity and variety of the work small firms are to perform;

d. The extent of participation of small business prime Offerors and small business subcontractorssuch firms in terms of the percentage of the value of the total acquisition; or alternatively may consider the percentage of ‘planned subcontracting’ dollars.

e. The extent to which the Offeror meets or exceeds the goals. The Small Business Participation Plan will be evaluated for compliance with FAR Part 19 and the Department of Defense goals presented below.

f. Past performance of the offerors in complying with requirements of the clauses at FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns, and 52.219-9 Small Business Subcontracting Plan

All prime offerors, including small businesses, submitting a proposal are required to meet or exceed the

Minimum Quantitative Requirement(s) (MQRs) relative to the total contract value as follows:

Small Business (SB) __23___%

Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) __5___%

Women Owned Small Business (WOSB) __5__%

HUBZone-Certified Small Business (HUBZone) __3__%

Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB) _No goal established

Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) __3__%

For purposes of this requirement, total contract value is defined as the cumulative value of task order awards received that have opportunities to utilize small business concerns throughout the life of the contract. Small business prime offerors may achieve small business participation (meet or exceed MQR) through their own performance/participation as a prime and also through subcontracting to other small businesses. All offerors are required to submit Small Business Participation Commitment Documents

(letters of commitment) in accordance with the instructions in Section L. Small business participation commitments will become requirements and be incorporated into the resulting contract.

The contractor shall report actual achievement of small business participation results on a quarterly basis and shall discuss performance in achieving the small business commitments/requirements.

M.5. Evaluation of Price Proposals.

M.5.1 Price analysis will be accomplished in accordance with FAR 15.404-1 and will encompass the following:

a. SF 1449 completed and signed, including acknowledgement of all amendments.

b. Fully completed Attachment B. The purpose of the price analysis will be to ensure fair and reasonable rates.

(i) Year Six Rates: The purpose of evaluating Year Six rates is to include FAR Clause 52.217-8 only. If the option is exercised, Year Six rates will be utilized.

(ii) ODC Cost Rate: The purpose of this cost analysis is to insure a fair and reasonable rate to be applied to other direct costs.

c. Verification and acceptance of legal documents outlining joint ventures or partnering arrangements, if applicable.

M.6. Responsiveness.

It is the Offeror's responsibility to ensure the completeness and accuracy of his or her proposal.

Excepting any apparent clerical or arithmetic mistakes found in the bidding schedule (Section B), corrections will not be made by the Government. Any proposal that modifies or fails to conform to the requirements of this Solicitation will be considered unacceptable.

Table 1: Combined Technical/Risk Evaluation Ratings (Volume I, Factors 1 – 2)

Color

Rating

Adjectival Rating

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 unawardable.

Table 2: Past Performance Relevancy Ratings (Volume II, Factor 3)

Adjectival Rating Description

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

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

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

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

Table 3: Past Performance Confidence Assessments (Volume II, Factor 3)

Adjectival Rating Description

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.

Neutral Confidence 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. The Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the facto of past performance.

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.

Table 4: Small Business Ratings (Volume II, Factor 4)

Color

Rating

Adjectival Rating

Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Green Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet small business objectives.