W9133L-18-R-0001_amendment_1.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

1) The purpose of this modif ication is to answ er questions posed in response to the initial solicitation.

2) All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

S 1 23

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 09-Mar-2018

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 W9133L-18-R-0001

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

23-Feb-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 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

09-Mar-2018

CODE

NGB-AQ - W9133L

111 SOUTH GEORGE MASON DR

BLDG. 2, 4TH FLOOR

ARLINGTON VA 22204-1373

W9133L 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W9133L-18-R-0001

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

L. INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

L.1 INTRODUCTION. The offeror’s proposal shall be submitted electronically as outlined below.

L.1.1 These instructions are a guide for preparing the proposal response to W9133L-18-R-0001, CYPC Services. These instructions describe the type and extent of information required and emphasize the significant areas to be addressed in the proposal. Review the Performance Work Statement (PWS) contained in this Request for Proposal (RFP) for further insight into the areas that must be addressed within the proposal. Include detailed information sufficient to enable the Government evaluators to conduct a meaningful review and make a determination relative to the Offeror's understanding of the requirements in each of the evaluated areas. It is the Government's intent to award one Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contract with some non-fee bearing cost elements (e.g. Travel) which are ancillary to the services provided.

L.1.1.1 In accordance with FAR Subpart 19.502-2, this solicitation is set-aside 100% for Small Business concerns. This will be a Small business set-aside acquisition authorized by FAR subpart 19.502-2. It is open to all Small businesses that meet the size standard of $11 million, as stated in NAICS 624110.

L.1.2 The offeror’s proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for evaluation and substantiation of the validity of stated claims. The Government may consider the offeror’s assertions or merely restating or paraphrasing the Governments requirements without further explanation, clarification, or context to be weaknesses or deficiencies. Therefore, the offeror should not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements, but shall provide a rationale or explanation to convince the Government that the offeror’s approach will meet the Government requirements. Likewise, the Government will not consider assertions or representations without substantiation and context to be convincing or explanatory.

L.1.3 In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Clause 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors - Competitive Acquisition (Jan 2004), the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors, but reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. In accordance with FAR 15.306(c)(2), if the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may make a competitive range determination for purposes of efficiency, consisting of only those proposals that have a reasonable chance of award without a major rewrite. Any Offeror eliminated from further consideration will be notified in writing.

Therefore, the offeror's initial proposal should contain the offeror's best terms from a price and technical standpoint. Offerors are cautioned to examine this RFP in its entirety, inclusive of clauses and provisions incorporated by reference, and to ensure that proposals contain all necessary information, provide all required documentation, and are complete in all respects. The Government is not obligated to make another request for the required information nor does the Government assume the duty to search for data to cure problems it finds in proposals.

During the evaluation process, the Government may request clarifications as needed.

Clarifications do not constitute discussions and an Offeror is not permitted to change its proposal in response to a request for clarification.

L.1.4 Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of the company's capability and experience. The basis of the Government’s evaluation is the information offerors present in their proposals.

L.1.5 A proposal is presumed to represent the Offeror's best efforts in response to this RFP. Any inconsistency, whether real or apparent, between promised performance and the price shall be explained in the proposal.

L.1.6 The proposal shall be valid for 180 days from the required submission date.

L.1.7 Offers, modifications, revisions, or withdrawals of Offers received after the date established in this RFP for receipt of proposals will be handled in accordance with FAR Clause 52.215-1. Offerors are advised that they must notify the Contracting Officer immediately if there is any change to their proposal after submission (e.g. a proposed employee departs the company or is no longer available).

L.1.8 A single Firm Fixed Price contract is contemplated to be awarded based on a competition between Small Businesses where the offeror’s proposal demonstrates the best value to the Government.

L.2 FORMAL COMMUNICATION, OFFEROR EXPLANATIONS

L.2.1 The Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist are the sole points of contact for this acquisition. Any explanation desired by an offeror regarding the meaning or interpretation of the solicitation, RFP, PWS, etc., must be requested in writing and with sufficient time allowed for a reply to reach offerors before the submission of their offer. A cut-off date for receiving questions concerning the RFP has been established as 1300 hrs (1:00 pm, EST), 07 March 2018.

Questions received after this time may not be responded to by the Government.

L.2.1.1 The Contracting Officer reserves the right to address questions received after the cutoff date with those offers deemed responsive and/or in the competitive range (if established) after closing. OFFERORS ARE STRONGLY ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT QUESTIONS EARLY IN THIS PROCESS. Any interpretations made will be in the form of an amendment of the solicitation and will be furnished to all prospective offerors via posting to the www.FBO.gov portal under solicitation W9133L-18-R-0001. Explanations or instructions given in a form other than an amendment to the solicitation shall not be binding. As answers to questions shall be furnished to all prospective offerors via the web site, offerors are cautioned to not provide any information within the questions that cannot be released to all offerors. The names of all offerors will be removed from any answers posted.

L.2.2 Submit proposal questions by email to the contracting office at the addresses shown below:

National Guard Bureau Subject Line: Questions W9133L-18-R-0001 Email: scott.a.chander.mil@mail.mil cc: Ellieth.rodriguez.mil@mail.mil

L.2.3 AMENDMENTS PRIOR TO DATE SET FOR RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS: The right is reserved, as the interest of the Government may require, to revise or amend the solicitation prior to and/or after the date set for receipt of proposals as necessary. Such amendments, if any, will be announced by an amendment or amendments to this RFP. All information relating to this RFP, including pertinent changes/amendments and information prior to the date set for receipt of proposals, will be posted on the FBO.gov site under solicitation W9133L-18-R-0001. Offerors are assumed to have access to the FBO.gov portal and have access to the solicitation, any amendments as well as every attachment supporting the solicitation package.

L.3 SUBMISSION OF OFFERS

L.3.1 The proposal shall be prepared in a clear and legible manner. In addition, the Offeror shall write the proposal in English and the proposal must be specific and complete as described in these instructions. Adherence to the prescribed format is required. An official authorized to bind the firm shall sign the Standard Form (SF) 33 all signed amendment coversheets, SF30, and all certifications requiring original signature. Electronic signatures are acceptable.

L.3.2 All information pertaining to a particular volume shall be confined to that volume.

For example, no Price information shall be included in any volume other than the Price Proposal volume. The Government is not required to and will not search other volumes for a missing file.

L.3.3 Offerors shall not include CLASSIFIED material in the proposal. Proprietary data contained in the proposal must be clearly marked as such by the offeror, and shall be handled in accordance with DFARS 252.227-7015.

L.3.4 Each offeror must comply with the detailed instructions for the format and content of the offer in order to be considered for award. When evaluating an offer, the Government will consider how well the offeror complied with both the letter and spirit of these instructions. The government will consider any failure on the part of an offeror to comply with both the letter and spirit of these instructions to be an indication of the type of conduct it can expect during contract performance. Therefore, offerors are encouraged to contact the Contract Specialist by e-mail in order to request an explanation of any aspect of these instructions.

L.3.5 Offerors shall submit their proposals digitally via email to the email addresses specified below:

Contract Specialist: MAJ Scott Chandler (scott.a.chandler.mil@mail.mil) Contracting Officer: MAJ Ellieth Rodriguez (ellieth.rodriguez.mil@mail.mil)

L.3.6 Proposals must be received no later than the below date/time. Any proposal, modification, or revision received by the government after the proposal due date and time will be considered “late” and as a general rule will not be considered unless the government can determine that the delay was caused by the government.

1300 hrs (1:00 p.m.) 16 MAR 2018

L.4 OFFER FORMAT

L.4.1 Offerors shall submit their proposals, Volumes I, II III digitally via one email, and Volume IV in a separate email. The Government considers all proposals as “For Official Use Only" and to contain "Source Selection Information in accordance with FAR 2.101 and FAR 3.104."

The offeror’s proposal shall consist of four (4) volumes. The Volumes are I – Technical Approach, II – Management Approach, III – Past Performance, IV – Price and Contract documents. Files shall not contain classified data. The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited. An Offeror's failure to provide in its proposal the information specified below may result in that proposal not being considered by the Government for award.

L.4.1.1 All supporting data required for development of the proposal shall be included or summarized in each proposal within the stated page limitations. Mere statements that the Offeror understands the requirements and can or will comply with the requirements without supporting information are not acceptable and may be reason for determining a proposal to be unacceptable.

L.4.1.2 The offeror shall deliver proposal softcopies via email (e.g. all proposal volumes and the auxiliary supporting data). Softcopies shall be in Microsoft Office or Adobe Acrobat compatible formats only. Offeror shall ensure that data contained in digital form is virus-free. Offeror shall label each attachment with the volume title, solicitation number, company name, and date. No hard-copy or fax proposal submissions will be accepted.

L.4.1.3 Digital Microsoft (MS) Word files and MS Excel files shall be compatible with MS Office 2013.

L.4.1.4 The files submitted shall not be locked and shall allow word search within the document.

L.4.1.5 The submission shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled. Each volume shall be clearly identified and shall begin at the top of a page. All pages of each volume shall be appropriately numbered and identified by the complete company name, date and RFP number in the header and/or footer. A Table of Contents should be created using the Table of Content which is MS Word compatible. Documents shall use the following page setup parameters:

Margins – Top, Bottom, Left, Right – 1” Gutter 0” From Edge – Header, Footer 0.5” Page Size, Width – 8.5” Page Size, Height – 11” Font Size, 12pt

L.4.2 The below volumes of material shall be submitted. Each volume will have a front page cover letter which indicates solicitation number, proposed prime and any major subcontractors, proposal validity date as well as the full contact information for company personnel.

L.4.2.1 Volume I - Technical Approach 30 pages;

Marketing Plan –20 pages Format: Single MS Word or Adobe .pdf document

L.4.2.2 Volume II - Management Approach 20 pages total limit Quality Control Plan –25 pages limit OCI Mitigation Plan – 15 pages limit Format: Single MS Word or Adobe .pdf document

L.4.2.3 Volume III, Past Performance (at least three but not more than five for prime, up to two for each proposed major subcontractor) Total page limit not to exceed 22 pages.

Single MS Word or Adobe .pdf document

L.4.2.4 Volume IV - Price (including supporting documentation) No page limit.

Format: Single Excel Document (pricing)

L.4.2.5 Attachment 1 Contract Documents No Page Limit Single Adobe .pdf document Includes signed SF33, signed SF30 solicitation modifications, representations and certifications as well as any exceptions taken to the published solicitation, modification or supporting documentations. If there are no exceptions taken a single sheet insertion stating there are no exceptions taken shall be inserted.

L.4.5 The page limits do not apply to the cover letters, solicitation, Amendments, table of contents, cross reference index, resumes, definitions, required representations and certifications.

The Government shall treat page limitations as maximums. If exceeded, the Contracting Officer will remove the excess pages prior to the evaluation. The Government will not read or evaluate removed pages.

L.4.6 As it relates to naming conventions of electronic files, the offeror shall ensure that the naming convention in Table 1 below is adhered to. E-mails with file names utilizing more than one “.” will be treated as a virus and the attached file deleted (i.e. “CompanyABC.CoverLtr.pdf”)

Table 1

VOLUME TITLE Page Limits (Maximums)

File Naming Structure Format

Cover Letter (must include):

• Solicitation Number

• Proposed Team Member Names

• Proposal Validity Date

Authorized Offeror Representatives

2 pages

[Offeror Name] CoverLtr.pdf

Single Adobe PDF File

VOLUME I – Technical Approach (30 pages) Marketing Plan (20 Pages)

30 pages 20 pages

Vol-I [Offeror Name]TECH.pdf

Single Adobe PDF File

VOLUME II – Management Approach (20 pages) Quality Control Plan –(25 pages limit) OCI Mitigation Plan – (15 page limit) (20 Pages)

20 pages 25 pages 15 pages

Vol-II [Offeror Name]TECH.pdf

Single Adobe PDF File

VOLUME III – Past Performance 3 to 5 Prime up to 2 subcontractors

22 pages

Vol-III [Offeror Name] PP.pdf Single Adobe PDF File

VOLUME IV – Cost/Price Page count not applicable

Vol-IV [Offeror Name] Price.xls

Single Microsoft Spreadsheet

Attachment 1- Contract Documents

Page count not applicable

Attachment - 1 [Offeror Name].pdf [Offeror Name].xls

Single Adobe PDF File Single Excel Spreadsheet

Certifications / Representations Page count not applicable

Cert / Reps [Offeror Name] CR.pdf

Single Adobe PDF File

L.5 PROPOSAL CONTENT: The following information shall be provided and will be evaluated to assess proposal risk in accordance with Section M, Evaluation Factors - Basis for Award. Proposals shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation.

L.5.1 VOLUME I – TECHNICAL APPROACH.

L.5.1.1. The offeror shall discuss their proposed process and procedures to plan and perform the work required to achieve all of the tasks specified in the PWS. The proposal should explain child youth processes and procedures and delineate between tasks that are national and state-level in nature.

L.5.1.1.2 The offeror shall demonstrate an understanding of the work within their technical proposal that goes beyond a mere restating of the PWS tasks.

L.5.1.1.3 The offeror shall include a table of contents cross referencing each PWS task to the applicable page number(s) within the proposal which addresses how the performance objectives will be achieved.

L.5.1.1.4 The offeror shall provide a marketing plan that addresses the processes and procedures to plan, implement and monitor the effectiveness of national and state-level marketing. The plan SHOULD BE specific, address both national and state-level marketing and provide processes that meet the marketing objectives outlined in the PWS.

Additional Details of Plan: At a minimum, the plan shall include social media, the CYS APP, Childcare Fee Assistance Program, Teen Panel, and FRG. The objective of the marketing plan is to increase awareness of available CYS programming and resources, increase participation of ARNG dependents and enhance relationships among all CYS shareholders.

L.5.1.1.5 Although the offeror shall not submit pricing in this volume, the offeror shall provide a table reflecting the labor categories and proposed hours to support the technical approach.

L.5.2 VOLUME II – MANAGEMENT APPROACH.

L.5.2.2 Offerors are encouraged to provide personnel and processes that support their ability to provide a low risk solution to accomplishment of the desired end state and their ability to exceed the minimum requirements and qualifications. This section should address the overall general requirements of the PWS. The offeror shall use the PWS, together with other applicable portions of the solicitation, as a basis to prepare a specific and comprehensive proposal.

L.5.2.3 The offeror shall provide an organization chart that shall identify staff and key personnel positions. Resumes for key personnel are required (not included in maximum page count). Each resume for key personnel shall not exceed two pages. A standard resume format shall be utilized that represents the key personnel meet or exceed any minimum requirements for education, experience or qualifications necessary. For the CYS requirement the Program Manager (PM), Regional Assistant Program Managers (RAPM), National Training Coordinator (NTC), and the Child & Youth Program Analyst (CYPA) are key personnel positions. Key personnel identified in this contract must be committed to remain active on the contract for the first 180 days, and any substitutions thereafter must be approved by the Contracting Officer, who will determine whether the substitute has equal or greater qualifications of the key person being replaced.

Resumes for key personnel will be evaluated based on experience, education, and abilities related to position.

L.5.2.4 The offeror shall describe existing policies and procedures that the offeror will use in the operation of the contract, including the management of subcontractors and the process of obtaining Government review and approval for intermediate and final deliverables as they relate to the PWS. The offeror shall address how they will ensure quality control through the life of the contract as well as handle corrective action on non-conforming services or deliverables. The processes and procedures shall reflect the capability to manage a nationwide services contract with over 100 services locations.

L.5.2.5 The offeror shall provide evidence of its corporate stability and competencies with respect to the requirements of the PWS such as length of time in business, both for the corporation and for the organization performing the work.

L.5.2.6 The offeror shall provide a comprehensive staffing plan that demonstrates a corporate ability to both hire and maintain a strong, stable workforce with appropriate qualifications that match the requirements related to the tasks in the PWS. The Staffing plan should indicate tasks to be completed as well as contractor personnel responsible for those tasks. The Offeror shall provide the following information in regards to proposed personnel:

L.5.2.6.1 Individual roles, responsibilities, and lines of authority to include Key Personnel and managers that report directly to any Key Person.

L.5.2.6.2 A description of the structure, composition, duties of the involved organization(s), and any resources available outside of the site to ensure performance under the Contract without loss of efficiency

L.5.2.6.3 How the proposed organizational structure ensures coherent governance.

L.5.2.7 The offeror shall provide a breakout of retention statistics, by labor category, for contracts performed within the past three year. For any attrition rates that exceed 8%, by contract labor category under a single contract, the offeror shall describe what actions were enacted to effectively address turnover.

L.5.2.8 The offeror shall submit proposed processes to execute training of CYS volunteers and community partners. The processes shall reflect an in-depth understanding of the material to be taught, required standards for training as well as how the training is to be conducted.

L.5.2.9 The offeror shall outline how they will meet the reporting requirements within their proposal with a focus on how the accuracy and timeliness of state-level data and the assembly of information will be done on a national level basis.

L.5.2.10 The offeror shall provide a mitigation plan that minimizes any potential conflict to an acceptable risk level. An Offeror that fails to submit an acceptable plan will be ineligible for award. The OCI Risk Mitigation Plan may be submitted as an appendix to this Volume and will not count against the page limitations.

L.6 VOLUME III – PAST PERFORMANCE.

Offerors shall submit past performance references (see attached Past Performance Questionnaire). The prime offeror shall submit at least three but not more than five for prime, up to two for each proposed major subcontractor past performance references. Any Past Performance must be recent within 3 years, any past performance that is not recent will not be considered. The prime offeror may submit past performance references for each subcontractor.

For subcontractors determined to be a major subcontractor, the offeror shall submit evidence of past performance. A subcontractor that performs more than 10% of the effort is considered a major subcontractor.

Offerors are advised that in conducting the past performance assessment the government will use data provided in the offeror's proposal, past performance references, and data obtained independently from other sources. Since the government may not necessarily interview all of the sources provided by the offerors, it is incumbent upon the offerors to explain the relevance of the data provided. Offerors are reminded that while the Government may elect to consider data obtained from other sources, the burden of providing the required information and demonstrating successful past performance rests with the offerors.

This volume shall be organized into the following sections:

L.6.1 Section 1: Contract/Task order Descriptions. This section shall include the following information for each contract reference in the format below. Not to exceed one page in length for each contract/task order.

L.6.1.1 Contractor/subcontractor place of performance, CAGE Code and DUNS Number. If the work was performed as a subcontractor, also provide the name of the prime contractor and point of contact (POC) within the prime contractor organization (name, and current address, email address, and telephone and fax numbers).

L.6.1.2 Government (or industry) contracting activity, and current address, Procuring Contracting Officer's name, e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers.

L.6.1.3 Government technical representative/COR, and current-mail address, telephone and fax numbers.

L.6.1.4 Government contract administration activity and the Administrative Contracting Officer’s name, and current e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers.

L.6.1.5 Contract/task order number and, in the case of indefinite delivery type contracts, GSA contracts, and Blanket Purchase Agreements, include Delivery Order Numbers as well.

L.6.1.6 Contract/task order type (specific type such as fixed price (FP), cost reimbursement (CR), time and materials (T&M), etc.). In the case of Indefinite Delivery contracts/task order, indicate specific type (requirements, definite quantity, and indefinite quantity) and secondary contract type (FP, CR, T&M, etc)). (For indefinite delivery indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contracts, only task orders actually performed can be submitted as a reference, with each counting as a past performance reference.)

L.6.1.7 Awarded price.

L.6.1.8 Final or project final price.

L.6.1.9 Original delivery schedule, including dates of start and completion of work.

L.6.1.10 Final, or projected final, delivery schedule, including dates of start and completion of work.

L.6.1.11 Period of performance of the contract/task order.

L.6.2 Section 2: Performance Narratives. Offerors shall provide a specific narrative explanation of each contract/task order listed in Section 1 describing the objectives achieved and detailing how the effort is relevant to the requirements of this solicitation. Not to exceed two pages in length for each contract/task order.

L.6.2.1 For any contracts that did not/do not meet original schedule or technical performance requirements, provide a brief explanation of the reason(s) for the shortcomings and any corrective action(s) taken to avoid recurrence. The offerors shall list each time the delivery schedule was revised and provide an explanation of why the revision was necessary. All requests for deviation and requests for waiver shall be addressed with respect to causes and corrective actions. The offerors shall also provide a copy of any Cure Notices or Show Cause letters received on each contract listed and a description of any corrective action implemented by the offeror or proposed subcontractor. The offerors shall indicate if any of the contracts/task orders listed were terminated and the type and reasons for the termination.

L.6.2.2 New Corporate Entities may submit data on prior contracts/task orders 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.

Information shall be included in the files described in the sections above.

L.7 VOLUME IV – COST/PRICE. This volume shall consist of all information, required to support proposed pricing.

L.7.1 RFP Documents and Price Proposal shall contain the signed original of all documents requiring signature of the offeror. This would include the Standard Form (SF) 33 All Offerors must complete the Pricing Model and submit to the Points of Contact as listed above. Offerors are cautioned that the SF 33 (original submission) must contain an original signature in Block 17 of the form. Each offeror should complete (fill-ins and signatures) and submit the original as stated below. An authorized official of the firm shall sign the offer and all certifications requiring original signature. PART I should include the following information:

L.7.1.1 (Tab 1) Executive Summary - A summary cover letter to the proposal should provide the following: Identification of the proposal POC and phone number; Cage Code, DUNS Number and Tax Identification Number TIN. Also include a list of the proposal package contents; Name of the offeror’s cognizant DCAA office, if available, DCAA POC and phone number; date of last audit.

L.7.1.2 (Tab 2) Section A – Standard Form 33, Solicitation Offer and Award.

Acknowledgment of Amendments can be made on the face of the SF 33 or signed copies of the amendments can be included in this Section.

L.7.1.3 (Tab 3) Section K – Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors.

Include any Representations and Certifications contained in Section K of this solicitation only.

All potential offerors are required to register in the SAM, https://www.sam.gov/index.html/#1 in order to complete the annual Representations and Certifications requirements of the solicitation.

Note: the SAM site has incorporated the former "ORCA" and "CCR" websites site for completing your business representations and certifications. The SAM site contains a FAQs, user guides and videos for assistance. Ensure your SAM information is up-to-date and does not expire before the solicitation due date. You are not required to provide a copy of the Representations and Certifications with your written proposal. Do include any Representations and Certifications contained in Section K of this solicitation, which are in addition to the annual certifications on SAM. Offerors are reminded that it is their responsibility to ensure that their SAM Representations and Certifications are accurate and current as of the date of their proposal submission.

L.7.1.4 (TAB 4) Price: The Pricing tab will include a comprehensive summary of all pricing information for the proposed services. The offeror shall submit a price proposal describing proposed pricing data for contract performance. The price proposal shall include a basis of estimate describing the rationale, and relating pricing to the Technical and Management Approach proposal. The offeror shall state all ground rules and assumptions used to derive, develop, or calculate prices.

The Government will evaluate the proposed prices of a base year and four (4) one year options under 52.217-9. In addition the Government will evaluate the Option to Extend Services under 52.217-8. The evaluation will consider the possibility that the option can be exercised at any time; however, the Government will evaluate the Option to Extend Services under FAR 52.217-8 by adding 6 months of the offeror’s proposed prices for the last option year to the offeror’s total proposed prices. Thus, the offeror’s total price for the purpose of evaluation will include the base period and all option periods (including the additional 6 months of service).

7.2 Additional guidance is as follows:

7.2.1 The offeror shall clearly explain their approach to deriving and calculating proposal price.

The CLIN for services is to include all labor, resources, etc. The travel CLIN is only travel.

7.2.2 The offeror shall provide basis of estimate information that is consistent with and traceable to the offeror’s Technical/Management approach. All data shall be unlocked and available for government review.

7.2.3 The offeror shall use Microsoft Excel to calculate and produce all pricing tables used in the price proposal. The offeror shall submit supporting pricing data that the offeror used to develop pricing. This data shall include the Excel spreadsheet versions of all tables and formulas of data included in the price proposal. It also includes an Excel version of the basis of estimate that includes all calculations.

7.2.4 As outlined under L.1.9, the services under this requirement are considered to be professional. Accordingly, the offeror shall ensure that their pricing proposal satisifies the requirement of FAR 52.222-46 which is included in this solicitation.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

EVALUATION FACTORS, BASIS FOR AWARD

M.1 BASIS FOR AWARD. Award will be made based on the best overall (i.e., best value) proposal determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the four evaluation factors: Technical Approach, Management Approach, Past Performance, and Cost/Price. The Technical Approach factor is more important than the Management Approach Factor. The Management Approach Factor is more important than the Past Performance Factor. The Past Performance Factors is more import than Cost/Price. All non-price factors, when combined, are more important than Cost/Price.

M.2 EVALUATION FACTORS AND CRITERIA

M.2.1 The following evaluation factors will be use to evaluate each proposal. Award will be made to the offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the Government based on an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors described below.

M.2.1 Factor 1 - Technical Approach.

When evaluating Technical Approach, the Government will evaluate the offeror’s understanding of the complexity of the tasks as well as the nature of the performance of tasks at the state/territory level. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s technical approach in terms of how well the methodology proposed will accomplish the requirements of the PWS and how effectively the proposal describes, in detail, how the offeror intends to meet the requirements therein. The marketing plan will be evaluated to determine the offeror’s ability to implement, execute and measure an effective CYPC Marketing Program.

M.2.2 Factor 2 - Management Approach.

When evaluating management approach the Government will evaluate the offerors management approach to fulfill the objectives of the PWS. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the offeror’s knowledge, capability, and experience regarding the RFP requirements, the offeror’s corporate viability, plan to communicate with the government, handle corrective actions, and implement improvement methods as demonstrated through understanding of the requirement. The Government will also evaluate submitted resumes for all key personnel to determine if they meet or exceed solicitation specific minimum qualifications and the OCI Risk Mitigation Plan.

M.2.3 Factor 3 - Past Performance.

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s record of past and current performance to ascertain the probability of successfully performing the required efforts of the PWS. Past performance will be rated with one overall rating of “Performance Confidence Assessment”. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy and quality. Recent past performance is defined as work performed not more than three years prior to the date of the RFP release date. Relevant past performance is work performed under a single contract or order that is same or similar in scope, complexity and magnitude as the work identified in the PWS.

Vendor shall have held as either a prime or major subcontractor, with performance of at least twelve months. Offerors are cautioned that only single contract actions will be considered. The grouping of multiple contract actions, such as multiple task orders performing the same work, under a single submission will not be considered as a “single” contract and will not be considered relevant based upon the relevancy definition above.

M.2.4 Factor 4 – Cost/Price (VOLUME IV)

The Government will award the contract with a base year and four (4) one year options under 52.217-9. In addition the Government will evaluate the Option to Extend Services under 52.217-

8. The evaluation will consider the possibility that the option can be exercised at any time;

however, the Government will evaluate the Option to Extend Services under FAR 52.217-8 by adding 6 months of the offeror’s proposed prices for the last option year to the offeror’s total proposed prices. Thus, the offeror’s total price for the purpose of evaluation will include the base period and all option periods (including the additional 6 months of service).

M.2.4.1 In terms of “price reasonableness” the Government will focus on whether the price is too high or too low to be considered fair and reasonable. Regarding low pricing, the Government’s concern is that the offeror may not understand the requirement or may be offering such a low price that there may be disruption to the program such as high employee turnover.

M.2.4.2 In terms of “completeness”, the Government will focus on whether the price appears to cover all of the work identified in the PWS.

M.2.4.3 In terms of “balance”, the Government will focus on whether the pricing is consistent throughout the term of the contract to include any options.

M.2.4.4 The pricing evaluation shall include all periods of performance (base and option year) and the Government shall review the overall pricing of all periods.

M.2.4.5 As part of price evaluation, the Government will evaluate its option to extend services (see FAR Clause 52.217-8) by adding six months of the offeror's final option period price to the offeror's total price. Offerors are required only to price the base and option periods. Offerors shall not submit a price for the potential six month extension of services period. The Government may choose to exercise the Extension of Services at the end of any performance period (base or option periods), utilizing the rates of that performance period. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

M.3 EVALUATION APPROACH

M.3.1 Factor 1 (Technical) and Factor 2 (Management) shall be evaluated separately using the combined Technical/Risk Rating Method in Table 2 below.

M.3.2.1 The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.

Table 2. Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method

Color Rating

Adjectival

Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.

M.3.2 Factor 3 (Past Performance) M.2.1 The Government will conduct an overall “Performance Confidence Assessment” rating.

The Performance Confidence Assessment is a consensus rating evaluation of likelihood for Government’s confidence that the offeror will successfully perform solicited requirements.

In this context, “offeror” refers to the proposed prime contractor and all proposed major subcontractors. A major subcontractor is defined as any subcontractor who will perform more than 10% of the expected requirement. In either case, the prime contractor and proposed major subcontractors will be assessed individually and the results will then be assessed in their totality to derive the offeror’s Past Performance confidence assessement rating.

The past performance evaluation will include all aspects of schedule, performance and supportability, including the offeror’s record of: (1) Conforming to specifications and standards of good workmanship; (2) Maintaining program execution within price constraints; (3) Adherence to contract schedules, including the administrative aspects of performance; (4) Ability to resolve technical problems quickly and effectively; (5) Professionalism in its concern for the interest and satisfaction of its customers; (6) Establishing and maintaining adequate management of subcontractors and (7) Quality of services delivered. In its evaluation, the Government will consider information received from the offeror and gathered from other sources such as Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) or Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS).

M.3.2.1 There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy (including context of data), and quality (including general trends in contractor performance).

Recent past performance is defined as work performed not more than three (3) years prior to the date of the RFP proposal due date. Relevant past performance is work performed under a single contract or order that is same or similar in scope, complexity, magnitude as the work identified in the PWS. Quality past performance is how well the contractor has performed based on information gathered about the existing record and history of the offeror’s past performance on past contracts.

M.3.2.2 Recency. The first step is to evaluate the recency of the offeror's past performance. To be considered recent, the past performance reference work will have been performed no later than three years prior to the proposal due date and be of at least twelve months duration. The work may include work performed for federal, state, and local government and commercial firms; and may include work performed as a prime contractor, team member, or subcontractor.

Only work determined to be recent will be evaluated for relevancy and contribute towards the final confidence assessment rating.

M.3.2.3 Relevancy. In establishing what is relevant for the acquisition, consideration will be given to those aspects of an offeror’s history of contract (or subcontract) performance that would provide the most context and give the greatest ability to measure whether the offeror will successfully satisfy the current requirement. Common aspects of relevancy include, but are not limited to the following: similarity of product/service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, use of personnel (for services), and extent of subcontracting/teaming. Relevant contracts/task orders that are more closely aligned with the effort under this procurement will be more favorably evaluated. If the work was as a team member or subcontractor, the offeror shall be responsible for describing how much (%) of the work was performed and what elements of the work the offeror performed. All submissions shall have a total value of no less than $1 million.

M.3.2.4 Quality of Products or Services. The third aspect of the past performance evaluation is to establish the overall quality of the offeror's past performance or determine how well the Contractor performed on the past contract references. The Government will review all past performance information collected and determine the quality of the offeror's performance, general trends, and usefulness of the information and incorporate these into the performance confidence assessment.

M.3.2.5 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."

Table 3. Past Performance Relevancy Rating Method

Table 4. Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Method

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.

EVALUATION FACTORS, BASIS FOR AWARD

M.1 BASIS FOR AWARD. Award will be made based on the best overall (i.e., best value) proposal determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the four evaluation factors: Technical Approach, Management Approach, Past Performance, and Cost/Price. The Technical Approach factor is more important than the Management Approach Factor. The Management Approach Factor is more important than the Past Performance Factor. The Past Performance Factors is more import than Cost/Price. All non-price factors, when combined, are more important than Cost/Price.

M.2 EVALUATION FACTORS AND CRITERIA

M.2.1 The following evaluation factors will be use to evaluate each proposal. Award will be made to the offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the Government based on an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors described below.

M.2.1 Factor 1 - Technical Approach.

When evaluating Technical Approach, the Government will evaluate the offeror’s understanding of the complexity of the tasks as well as the nature of the performance of tasks at the state/territory level. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s technical approach in terms of how well the methodology proposed will accomplish the requirements of the PWS and how effectively the proposal describes, in detail, how the offeror intends to meet the requirements therein. The marketing plan will be evaluated to determine the offeror’s ability to implement, execute and measure an effective CYPC Marketing Program.

M.2.2 Factor 2 - Management Approach.

When evaluating management approach the Government will evaluate the offerors management approach to fulfill the objectives of the PWS. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the offeror’s knowledge, capability, and experience regarding the RFP requirements, the offeror’s corporate viability, plan to communicate with the government, handle corrective actions, and implement improvement methods as demonstrated through understanding of the requirement. The Government will also evaluate submitted resumes for all key personnel to determine if they meet or exceed solicitation specific minimum qualifications and the OCI Risk Mitigation Plan.

M.2.3 Factor 3 - Past Performance.

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s record of past and current performance to ascertain the probability of successfully performing the required efforts of the PWS. Past performance will be rated with one overall rating of “Performance Confidence Assessment”. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy and quality. Recent past performance is defined as work performed not more than three years prior to the date of the RFP release date. Relevant past performance is work performed under a single contract or order that is same or similar in scope, complexity and magnitude as the work identified in the PWS.

Vendor shall have held as either a prime or major subcontractor, with performance of at least twelve months. Offerors are cautioned that only single contract actions will be considered.