W91CRB-21-R-0018 Amendment 2.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

This amendment is for the follow ing:

1. The proposal due date is extended to 30 Aug 2021, 5:00 P.M. Eastern Time.

2. Section H Clause added.

3. Revised attachments per Section J, including responses to questions ask by Offeror(s).

4. Revised Section L and M.

Your POC is Jerry Simmons, gerald.a.simmons2.civ@mail.mil

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

Y 1 19

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 16-Aug-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 W91CRB21R0018

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

22-Jun-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 X is extended, is not extended.

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 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

16-Aug-2021

CODE

ACC - APG - W91CRB

BLDG 4310

6515 INTEGRITY COURT

ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND MD 21005-3013

W91CRB 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W91CRB21R0018

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 16-Aug-2021 12:00 PM to 30-Aug-2021 05:00 PM.

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

CLIN 0013

The CLIN description has changed from Electronic Data and Documentation Acq to Database Creation.

CLIN 0014

The CLIN description has changed from Database Creation to Database Utilization.

SECTION H - SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

The following have been added by full text:

REQUEST FOR TO PROPOSAL

Post Award Instruction for Request for Task Order Proposal (RTOP)

1) This is a single award Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) type contract. The Contracting Officer reserves to right to tailor procedures and requirements to each RTOP, and will state those (RTOP).

As applicable to a single award (ID/IQ) contract, the procedure in FAR 16.5 will be followed.

2) Only the Contracting Officer (KO) has the authority to award task orders against this contract. Only the

Contracting Officer may request proposals from the contractor for new Task Order(s).

3) The contractor shall propose to each RTOP using sufficient detail as required by the Contracting Officer to allow an analysis to determine the price to be fair and reasonable in-accordance-with FAR 15.404 and 15.403-3. This may also include but not limited to a basis of estimate for labor, materials, travel, etc.

4) As additional Task Orders are request, the Offeror shall submit resumes for each of the positions designated as Key Personnel, and any position as requested by the Contracting Officer. As subsequent Task Orders are requested and issued, the Personnel Matrix shall be updated and provided to the Government.

5) The contractor (prime) shall provide a price analysis as requested by the Contracting Officer when deemed necessary to determine the reasonableness of intercompany or subcontractor proposals in accordance with all the provisions of FAR 15.404-3.

SECTION J - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

The following have been modified:

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

The following documents are attached hereto and incorporated by reference:

Attachment 1 - Base Quality Assurance Survielance Plan (QASP) (3 Aug 2021) Attachment 2 - Contract Data Requirements List Items Attachment 3 - Department of Defense Contract Security Classification Specification (DD254) (4 Aug 2021) Attachment 4 - Key Personnel Resume Template (30 Jul 2021) Attachment 5 - Performance Risk Assesment Questionnaire (27 Jul 2021) Attachment 6 - Price Proposal Model (3 Aug 2021) Attachment 7 - Question and Answer FLASH (3 Aug 2021) Attachment 8 - Base PWS FLASH (3 Aug 2021) Attachment 9 - TO1 PWS FLASH (3 Aug 2021) Attachment 10 - TO1 Quality Assurance Survielance Plan (QASP) FLASH (3 Aug 2021)

Red revision date indicates an updated document.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

SECTOIN L

Section L Change Table

Paragraph No. Change Location

A. Proposal Instructions Bullet #5

Bullet #7

Bullet #8

Bullet #9 Table

Volume 1 Bullet #1

Bullet #2

Volume 2 Sub-factor 1, bullet 14

Sub-factor 1, bullet 22

Sub-factor 1, bullet 24

Sub-factor 2, 1st paragraph

Sub-factor 2, #2

Sub-factor 3, #1

Sub-factor 3, #2

Sub-factor 3, #4

Sub-factor 3, #5

Volume 4 Paragraph 1

Paragraph 3

Volume 5 Paragraph 1

Letter d)

Letter e)

Letter f)

Letter i)

A. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION (Section L)

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS:

1. The Offeror shall describe its proposal, with graphs, charts, diagrams and narrative, in sufficient detail for the Government to understand and evaluate the nature of the approach. The Offeror shall submit documentation illustrating their approach for satisfying the requirements of this solicitation. Proposals shall be clear, coherent, and prepared in sufficient detail for effective evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal against the evaluation criteria. The Offeror shall not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but rather provide rationale that addresses how the Offeror intends to meet the requirements. The Offeror shall assume the Government has no prior knowledge of its capabilities and experience. The Government will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Offeror’s proposal unless stated otherwise. Proposals shall clearly demonstrate how the Offeror intends to accomplish the performance of work and shall include convincing rationale and substantiation of all claims. The introductory sections/volume shall not be used to supplement other areas of the proposal which carry page limits.

2. Proposal Submission. Proposals shall remain valid for a period of at least 180 days from the date of

Government receipt. Offerors shall submit their proposals electronically to both the Contracting Officer, Peter Buckless, peter.p.buckless.civ@mail.mil, and the Contract Specialist, Gerald Simmons, via e-mail to gerald.a.simmons2.civ@mail.mil. Offerors are advised to ask the PCO for clarification of any part of these instructions that they do not understand. Portions of proposals received may be incorporated into any resulting contract, as determined appropriate by the Government.

3. Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed art work, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired. Proposals containing assumptions, exceptions or disclaimers will result in a finding of material noncompliance or solicitation non-responsiveness, which may make a proposal unawardable.

Therefore, Offerors should ask questions for clarification on any ambiguities in the solicitation. The government will only respond to questions submitted in writing. Attachment 7 shall be used for submitting all solicitation questions. There will be a deadline for submitting initial questions approximately ten (10) calendar days after the solicitation is posted (monitor betaSAM.gov). After the initial questions have been provided a response by the government, any additional questions will be responded to as soon as possible.

The deadline and dates for questions will be posted on betaSAM.gov. Please do not call or email the Contracting Officer or Contract Specialist about general status or updates for the solicitation, as this type of information will be provided through betaSAM.gov when available to all Offerors at the same time. Please monitor betaSAM.gov for solicitation information and updates by “following” this solicitation.

4. The Government may evaluate offers and award a contract without discussions. Therefore, the Offeror’s initial offer should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if later determined by the Contracting Officer to be necessary. The Government may reject any or all offers if such action is in the public interest, and waive informalities and minor irregularities in the offers received.

5. No pricing information shall be included in the technical volume. Proposals received that fail to separate Non-Price Volume data from Price Volume data may be determined nonresponsive and may not be considered for award.

6. If the Offeror wishes to restrict the disclosure or use of its proposal, the Offeror shall use the appropriate Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)-defined restriction legend. Individual subcontractor/vendor proprietary information may be submitted via separate emails to the Contract Specialist listed above. The information contained in these emails shall be referenced (title, page and section number as appropriate) within the main proposal where the information would have been included if it were not subcontractor/vendor proprietary. The information in these submissions is subject to all other applicable requirements of the RFP.

7. Format. The submission shall be legible, clearly indexed and logically assembled. Proposals shall have a minimum 12-point font size (Arial or Times New Roman font) with one (1) inch page margins. 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 or footer. Graphic presentations, including tables, while not subject to the same font size and spacing requirements, shall have spacing and text that is legible.

Pages that exceed the required page limitations will not be evaluated. Additional pages over the maximum allowed will be removed or not read and will not be evaluated by the Government. Any portions of proposal volumes that exceed the page limitations in the table will not be evaluated. E.g. If the Technical Factor volume totaled 12 pages and the page limitation for this factor is 10 pages, only pages 1-10 will be evaluated, while pages 11 and 12 will not be considered/ evaluated.

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 – 12 point Arial or Times New Roman required.

Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size no less than 8-point and may be landscape. All volumes and plans shall include pagination with the exception of any excluded pages.

Each volume in the proposal shall include a title page, table of contents, and glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used.

Each volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its content may be evaluated without cross-referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Self-contained internal cross-referencing within a proposal volume is permitted where its use would conserve space without impairing clarity. Hyper-linking of internal cross-references is permissible. Information required for proposal evaluation, which is not found in its designated volume is assumed omitted from the proposal.

File Packaging. Proposals shall be submitted electronically in five (5) volumes, as outlined below. The title page of each volume shall clearly identify each volume, by volume number and volume name, (i.e., Volume 1, Introductory Volume), RFP number, and date of submission. Use indexing table of contents to identify all sections within a particular proposal volume.

Page Limitations. The cover letter, title page, table of contents, table of figures, list of tables and glossary of abbreviations and acronyms do not count against page count limitations. Proposal contents that exceed the stated page limitations will be removed from the proposal by the PCO, prior to turning the proposal over to the Government evaluation teams, and will not be considered in the evaluation. Each factor shall be submitted as a separate volume.

8. Pricing information may only be included in Volume 1 – Introductory Volume, and Volume 5 - Price.

Proposals that fail to separate the price factor may be determined unacceptable and may not be considered for award.

9. The following volumes of material shall be submitted, and shall adhere to the below-referenced page count limitations:

Volume Volume Title Section Titles Page Count* Volume 1 Introductory Volume 1) Proposal Summary

2) OCI

3) Subcontractor/Team Members

No limit

Volume 2 Factor 1 – Technical Capability

Sub-factor 1: Understanding the Requirements

25 pages

Sub-factor 2: Corporate Experience 15 pages

Sub-factor 3: Staffing Plan 15 pages Volume 3 Factor 2 – Past Performance Past Performance POCs Matrix

Dissemination of Performance Risk Assessment Questionnaires

No Limit

Volume 4 Factor 3 – Small Business Utilization

SB Participation Plan, and SB subcontracting

No Limit

Volume 5 Factor 4 – Price Proposal and Pricing Information No Limit

*NOTE: Offerors shall not circumvent or extend the stated page limitations in any given volume by referencing or relying upon information found in other separate volumes of their proposal.

10. The proposal shall be submitted in five (5) volumes. Each file name submitted shall written as follows:

Volume number 1st, then the Volume Title, then FLASH, and lastly the company name which may be abbreviated. E.g. Volume 2_Technical Capability_FLASH_XYZ Company. Each Volume shall be independent. Information relating to a specific factor shall not include references to other volumes or information contained to support other factors. The Title Page and Table of Contents do not count towards page limitation for each volume.

Volume 1 – Introductory Volume.

1. Proposal Summary. Offerors shall provide a Title Page, a Table of Contents (covering the entire proposal), and a narrative summary of the proposal. The narrative summary shall include a brief overview of the Offeror’s ability to meet the requirements of the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Additionally this volume shall include the following: (a) Request for Proposal number; (b) Company’s Name, Cage Code, and Tax ID No.; (c) proposal title; (d) Contractual, proposal and technical points of contact and alternate, including last name, first name, street address, city, state, zip code, telephone, and electronic mail; (e) administrative point of contact, including last name, first name, street address, city, state, zip code, telephone, and electronic mail; (f) date proposal submitted; (g) proposal expiration date (valid minimum 180 calendar days); (h) signed solicitation form; (i) Organizational Conflict of Interest Identification and

Risk Mitigation Plan (j) System for Award Management (SAM) record print out of the company/Offeror ’s “Core Data.” (k) Complete Section K Representations and Certification. (l) Provide a matrix of all proposed “major” subcontractors/team member, as defined in the Past Performance Volume 3, that includes information from items b, c, and d of this paragraph. (m) Include a statement attesting that your organization has a current SECRET level Facility Clearance. (n) A Proposal Compliance Matrix that cross-references the content of proposal volumes with Section L requirements.

2. Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI) Identification and Risk Mitigation Plan. The Offeror shall conduct due diligence and submit with their proposal an "Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Identification and Mitigation Plan". This plan shall identify all facts that a reasonably prudent person would consider relevant in determining whether a potential conflict of interest might arise in the award or performance of this contract. The OCI Plan shall identify at a minimum all current contracts involving legal support services, systems design, or consulting work that may impact Army or otherwise creates the appearance of an OCI as anticipated by the FAR.

In the context of OCI, involvement is defined as any participation or connection to a project, contract, program, or product which may create actual or perceived OCI. As part of a responsibility determination, the PCO will review statements provided by each Offeror, evaluate the submittals considering in-house knowledge as to the company’s program support, and determine whether or not there is an OCI. The submission shall include all subcontractors and affiliates. Subcontractor and affiliate OCI is equivalent to a prime contractor OCI.

For any potential conflicts of interest, the Offeror shall provide a mitigation plan to be reviewed and approved by the PCO. The mitigation plan shall provide verifiable means of eliminating any significant conflict of interest in the performance of this contract. The mitigation plan shall also describe the contractor's current policies for identifying, reporting, and preventing future organizational and personal conflicts of interest that might arise in the performance of this contract.

In addition, within the submitted OCI plan, the Offeror shall identify any contractor personnel to be employed under the terms of the submitted proposal who were previously employed, within the last two years, by the Government organization(s) to receive service under this contemplated contract.

3. Evidence of Commitments from Subcontractors/Team Members/Affiliates. Offerors proposing subcontractors/team members/affiliates or other organizational elements not part of the entity submitting the proposal shall provide evidence of the commitment from these organizations to perform as presented in the proposal. Examples might include completed and signed teaming agreements, subcontracts, joint venture agreements, or other similar commitments. If the Offeror is a division or subsidiary of another company, provide an organizational chart depicting all parent and affiliated companies of the Offeror.

Volume 2 – Factor 1 – Technical Capability.

Offeror’s technical approach shall be a solution that demonstrates a comprehensive, sound and reasonable technical approach to performing project management and administrative expertise in support of the JAGC’s eDiscovery mission. The Offeror shall have the specific knowledge, skills, and ability to work the professional legal services support programs/functions/activities.

Sub-factor 1. Understanding of the Requirements. Offeror’s proposal shall convey to the Government the ability to perform the professional legal support services as required by the RFP; furthermore, that the Offeror is capable and possesses the technical expertise, has adequate resources, and is able to plan, organize, and use resources in a coordinated and timely manner in order to achieve the technical requirements, and has identified and mitigated potential risks. Offeror’s proposal shall demonstrate subject matter expertise in eDiscovery and litigation support.

At a minimum, the Offeror shall provide evidence of expertise for the following:

Understanding of JAGC organization.

Demonstrate a thorough knowledge of best in-class eDiscovery and litigation support tools and technologies.

Demonstrate a thorough knowledge of the eDiscovery Reference Model (EDRM), eDiscovery workflows, and quality control to provide the following types of professional legal support services on a large scale or urgent need:

o Hardcopy Document and Media Acquisition o Hardcopy Document Preparation and Indexing o Scan to Digital Image / OCR (includes hardcopy and microfiche Scanning) o Blowback o Photocopying o Document Coding o Electronic Files Processing (includes scanned doc/ESI processing and production; audio/video digitization) o Standard Databases o Web Hosting o Other Services (includes Language Translation and Document Storage) o Program and Project Management and Technical Support (resource planning, implementation, and administration o Electronic Data and Document Acquisition (forensic collection) o Database Creation o Database Utilization o Electronic Data Processing o Pre-Trial, Trial, and Post-Trial Support o Specialized Professional Services (includes experts, historians, researchers, legal writing) o Managed Review Services o Facility Space setup (for legal review, SECRET/COLLATERAL space (SIPR room), etc.)

Demonstrate knowledge thorough enough to allow for the development and staffing of experts, historians, researchers, legal writing in various legal disciplines and subject matters.

Knowledge of associated laws, regulations, policies, and guidance (i.e.: FRCP, FAR, FISMA, DoD Impact Levels (IL), FedRAMP, Army eDiscovery Rules and Regulations, etc.).

Knowledge of 2020 policy and procedure changes for identifying, marking, disseminating, and control of Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI).

Sub-factor 2. Corporate Experience. The Offeror shall indicate the amount of previous corporate experience they have with the technical requirements noted in the PWS. The proposal shall identify corporate experience of working with the JAGC, DA, DoD, and/or other U.S. Government agencies. The Government will evaluate past work experience of the company submitted by the contractor of a similar nature, scope, complexity, and/or difficulty to that which will be performed under the prospective contract RFP, by addressing the following:

1. Offeror shall clearly demonstrate the organization has at least 3 years of corporate experience in providing the types of professional legal support services described in the PWS to the JAGC, DA, DoD, and/or other U.S. Government agencies. As part of this discussion, the Offeror shall thoroughly describe the organization’s size, experience in the field, resources available to fulfill requirements and the history of handling large complex litigations and investigations, or those with short suspense’s. The minimum requirements for the Offeror’s proposal shall provide evidence of the following points:

Experience with best in-class eDiscovery and litigation support tools and technologies.

Experience performing the type of aforementioned wide-ranging professional legal support functions in large, complex litigation and investigations, and/or legal matters with short suspense, for any Government agency, including any DoD agency.

Experience performing the type of aforementioned wide-ranging professional legal support functions in CONUS and OCONUS.

Experience identifying, marking, disseminating, and control of Controlled Unclassified Information

(CUI).

Experience handling Classified data (at SECRET level).

Experience in developing strategic planning documents, including but not limited to, include but not limited to: Program Plans, Project Reports, Error Reports, Review Workflows and Statistic Reports, Defined Procedure Plans, and Lessons Learned, as they pertain to the FLASH program.

2. Clearly describe its history of activities which contribute to the development of expertise and capabilities related to this requirement.

Sub-factor 3. Staffing Plan. The Staffing Plan volume shall demonstrate how the Offeror will handle multiple projects at the same time, distribution of workload, provide a logical, thorough understanding of the JAGC staffing process, and be organized in the following format:

1. Personnel Matrix (Table Format). The Offeror shall include a personnel matrix indicating the Key Personnel, as well as indicating that the minimum education and experiences requirements for each labor category of the PWS have been meet. This shall also indicate whether the personnel are the prime or subcontractors, and if the personnel are current employees, or new hires. Identify if full-time (100%) or fractional-time commitment for each candidate. The Offeror shall provide a brief narrative describing the qualifications/experience of their personnel in addition to submitted resumes.

2. Key Personnel Qualifications/Resumes. For each of the positions designated as Key Personnel in the PWS for Task Order No. 1, the Offeror shall submit resumes addressing the education and experience requirements, and also include signed letters of intent. As additional Task Orders are issued, the Offeror shall submit resumes for each of the positions designated as Key Personnel in those respective Task Orders.

Resumes may not exceed two (2) pages each, which may be single spaced. Award of a contract will constitute the Government’s acceptance of initial Key Personnel. Offeror shall use Attachment 4 - Key Personnel Resume Template.

While there are twenty (20) Key Personnel, all personnel shall meet the PWS requirements. In addition to resumes for Key Personnel in the PWS for Task Order No. 1, Offerors shall also provide a Personnel Matrix to include all Key Personnel for Task Order No. 1, and amend the Personnel Matrix as subsequent Task Orders are issued. Offerors shall also provide a plan detailing the availability of current personnel, its ability to recruit new employees and replace those who depart, its ability to provide replacements with equivalent qualifications and how quickly these replacements can be on-boarded.

Note: Resumes and Letters of Intent may be included as an appendix, and do not count towards volume page count.

3. Transition Plan. The Offeror shall present their approach to transitioning personnel to this contract/Task Order No. 1, and begin ongoing operations in-accordance-with the criteria in Section 1.6.19 of the PWS.

4. Offerors shall provide an outline of how the effort required by the RFP will be assigned for performance within the Offeror’s corporate entity and among the proposed subcontractors/team members/affiliates or other organizational elements. The information provided for the prime Offeror and each proposed subcontractors/team members/affiliates or other organizational elements shall include the entire company name, company address, CAGE Code, DUNS Number and type of work to be performed by citing the applicable Government PWS subparagraph number.

5. Offerors shall provide information that thoroughly and sufficiently demonstrates the organizational manpower presently in-house or the ability to acquire the type and kinds of personnel proposed. This should include an explanation indicating the Offeror’s proposed management methodology and ability to manage PWS tasks. The Offeror’s response shall contain sufficient detail to enable the Government to assess the Offeror’s staffing capabilities to support the program goals.

Volume 3 – Factor 2 – Past Performance.

The Offeror shall present three (3) performance narratives of recent and relevant contracts. Additionally, two (2) of the three (3) recent and relevant contracts performed may be from a major subcontractor/team member/affiliate (as applicable). For any efforts previously performed as a subcontractor, the Offeror shall ensure that contact information provided includes contact information for personnel who are familiar with the Offeror’s work as a subcontractor. A “major subcontractor” is defined to be a subcontract that is proposed to provide a minimum of $500,000.00 in effort in any single year during the period of performance. A “recent” contract is defined as one that is either in process or completed within the past 5 years, which are relevant to the efforts required by this RFP. A “relevant” contract is defined as one that has similar dollar value, scope, and/or complexity to the proposed requirement of the PWS, and includes experience within DoD or other U.S. Government agencies for professional legal support services.

Each past performance narrative shall clearly indicate how the contract effort is both recent and relevant, and include the following:

Contractor/company name/division performing the work.

Address.

Program identification/title.

Government Agency being supported.

Contract number.

Contract type.

Contract value.

Prime contractor name (if different from the contractor name cited above).

Contract award date.

Forecasted or actual completion date.

Describe the nature of the contractual effort and skills mix.

Identify any problems encountered during performance and how resolved.

Identify any other constraints similar to those expected to be encountered in performing the FLASH contract.

Identify and explain any contract Terminations for Default, Show Cause Notices, or Cure Notices associated with the submitted contract.

The past performance cited should reflect professional legal support service experience with similar DoD or other U.S. Government agencies’ activities.

Past Performance POCs Matrix.

For each contract reference identified by the Offeror in the Past Performance Narratives section, the Offeror shall identify the Government Points of Contact (POCs) (either PCO, Contracting Officer's Representative (COR), or Technical/Program Manager) who can provide information on the Offeror's contract performance to include the following:

POC name and title Current telephone number for the POC Current e-mail address for the POC

In addition, the Government reserves the right to use alternative resources to gather past performance information.

Dissemination of Performance Risk Assessment Questionnaires.

The Offeror shall provide copies of the Performance Risk Assessment Questionnaire (Attachment 5) provided by the Government in conjunction with this solicitation to the Government POCs identified by the Offeror in the Past Performance POCs Matrix, as detailed below:

1. The Offeror shall complete PART I of the questionnaire.

2. The Offeror shall request that the POC: (A) provide information requested in PART II and (B) submit the completed questionnaire (e-mail only) directly to the Contracting Officer, Peter Buckless at peter.p.buckless.civ@mail.mil, and Contract Specialist, Gerald Simmons at gerald.a.simmons2.civ@mail.mil by the due date specified on Attachment 5.

3. Completed questionnaires shall NOT be collected by the Offeror or included in the Offeror’s Past Performance quote.

Volume 4 – Factor 3 – Small Business Utilization.

This factor evaluates the offeror’s approach to maximizing opportunities for small businesses in the effort, both in terms of the percentage of overall contract value (SB Participation Plan) and in terms of the percentage of the subcontracted portion’s value (SB Subcontracting Plan). The Small Business Utilization Factor volume shall summarize the offeror’s SB Participation goals, and as required the SB Subcontracting Plan for the total five year ordering period, or Total Evaluated Price.

SB Subcontracting Plan:

Only large businesses are required to submit a Small Business (SB) Subcontracting Plan.

The SB Subcontracting Plan is a requirement for award to a large business and will be incorporated into any resultant contract. This plan is only required of an offeror which is itself other than a SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZone, SB, VOSB, SDVOSB, or HBCU/MI. This volume describes the offeror’s approach to maximizing opportunities for small businesses in this effort, relative to the subcontracted portion’s value. The Offeror’s SB Subcontracting Plan percentages are to be presented in terms of the Total Evaluated Price for each SB category, divided by the total value of subcontracts.

The cover page shall summarize the Offeror’s SB Subcontracting percentage based on the Total Evaluated Price as follows:

SB Subcontracting Plan Goals:

Small Business 20% Small Disadvantaged Business 5% Women-Owned Small Business 5% Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business 3% HubZone 3%

The required elements of the SB Subcontracting Plan are set forth by FAR 52.219-9 and DFARS 252.219-7003, and should be organized to address these elements in similar order to clearly demonstrate that each element has been fully addressed. All small businesses and historically black colleges or universities and minority institutions included in the SB Subcontracting Plan shall be specifically identified to facilitate compliance with 252.219- 7003(g). The information in the SB Subcontracting Plan must properly correlate with that of the offeror’s SB Participation Plan.

The plan shall also include, at a minimum:

The name and DUNS number (or CAGE code) of each of the firm(s) included in the plan The specific components to be produced or services to be performed by each firm The NAICS code (appropriate to the planned subcontract) supporting each firm’s size status The estimated total dollar value subcontracted to each firm The estimated total dollar value subcontracted to each SB category

For each category in which the offeror’s SB Subcontracting Plan contains goals below those described above, the offeror shall provide an explanation as to why.

SB Participation Plan:

This plan is required from all offerors, regardless of the offeror’s size status. The offeror’s SB Participation Plan percentages are to be presented in terms of total dollars of work for each SB category, divided by the Total Evaluated Price.

The offeror shall identify the extent and nature of participation of Small Businesses (SB), Small Disadvantage Businesses (SDB), Woman-Owned Small Businesses (WOSBs), HUBZone Small Businesses (HUBZone SBs), and Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Businesses (SDVOSBs) in the performance of the proposed contract. The offeror’s own participation as a SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZone, or SDVOSB shall be identified and included in the percentages.

The offeror shall include evidence of compliance with the requirements of FAR 52.219-8, “Utilization of Small Business Concerns,” and 52.219-9, “Small Business Subcontracting Plan,” in prior contracts containing the clause.

This information shall be provided, at minimum, for each of the contracts discussed in the offeror’s Past Performance volume.

SB Participation Plan Goals:

The Government’s goals for SB Participation for this acquisition are as follows:

Small Business 20% Small Disadvantaged Business 5% Women-Owned Small Business 5% Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business 3% HubZone 3%

Volume 5 – Factor 4 – Price.

The Price proposal volume shall consist of a Table of Contents, a narrative summary section, and the Price Proposal Model (Attachment 6). The narrative summary shall contain a brief abstract of the volume. If necessary subcontractor’s price proposal volume may be submitted directly to the Contracting Officer/Specialist via email.

Any proposed subcontractor that chooses to submit directly to the Contracting Officer/Specialist shall provide their pricing information in the same form, format and all requested information.

The Price Proposal Model (Attachment 6) is presumed to represent the Offeror's best effort response to the solicitation. Any inconsistency between the proposal and other sections of the Offeror's proposal (i.e. technical proposal), whether real or apparent, shall be explained in this volume. Any significant inconsistency, if left unexplained, may raise a fundamental issue of the Offeror's understanding of the nature and scope of the work required and may be grounds for rejection of the proposal, based on a determination of inadequacy.

a) The Offeror shall include pricing on Attachment 6 - Price Proposal Model as a separate file/appendix to this volume. Offeror shall follow all the instructions in this attachment; additionally, the yellow shaded cells in the template are the only places where information needs to be inputted. Unless requested in the pricing model specifically, do not modify, alter the formatting, or formulas of the template. This file shall be submitted in Microsoft Excel format—do not convert to PDF, hide or lock cells, etc.

b) Other Direct Cost: Are notional amounts annually has been specified for proposal purposes. Each Offeror is to include this amount in their proposal. Any material handling and/or G&A shall be inclusive of this normalized amount.

c) Use of uncompensated overtime is not encouraged per FAR 37.115. In accordance with FAR 52.237-10, Identification of Uncompensated Overtime, the Offeror and/or subcontractor shall indicate / detail the existence of any uncompensated overtime within their proposed labor rates and its price impact on the Offeror's or subcontractor's proposal.

d) There is no page limitation on the price proposal. Supporting documentation and schedules necessary to substantiate the fairness and reasonableness of the proposed price is encouraged.

e) As required by FAR 15.404-3, each Offeror shall conduct an appropriate price analysis to establish the price fairness and reasonableness of any proposed subcontract prices and shall include the analysis with results of these analyses in the Offeror's price proposal.

f) The price proposal has already identified quantities for the Firm Fixed Price (FFP) CLINs, and hours for the Time & Material (TM) labor categories. Input your proposed Bill Rate in column G for each Year 1-5.

Do not change the quantities in column H. The quantities in column H for Years 1 – 5 are annualized estimates for proposal purposes. Each Task Order will have specific requirements that will be proposed to and may be negotiated. Offer shall propose burdened labor rates.

g) In support of the Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees, in accordance with FAR 52.222-46, Offeror and its subcontractor(s) shall provide documentation submit a total compensation plan setting forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the contract that assures that it reflects a sound management approach and understanding of the contract requirements. Supporting information will include data such as, but not limited to, recognized national and regional compensation surveys and studies of professional, public and private organizations, used in establishing the total compensation structure. Compensation data, shall include, at a minimum, the following: Source of data; Job title and description; Geographic location; and Range of salary amounts with reference to applicability of amounts. In addition, each Offeror and subcontractor shall complete the Fringe Benefit Worksheet in the Price Proposal Model (Attachment 6). Anything not included is assumed to not be offered.

h) If an Offeror fails to submit the required supporting information, the Offeror's proposal will be considered inadequate, unresponsive, and will be excluded from consideration.

i) Competition is anticipated in response to this solicitation. In the event that adequate competition is not obtained, the PCO may require Offeror to provide information in-accordance-with FAR 15.403-3.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

SECTOIN M

Section M Change Table

Paragraph No. Change Location

B. Basis For Award 2nd paragraph

B. Basis For Award 3rd paragraph

B. Basis For Award Added 4th bullet

B. BASIS FOR AWARD (Section M)

The Government anticipates awarding a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) / Time and Materials (T&M) contract utilizing a Best Value Trade-Off source selection method, with appropriate consideration given to the four (4) evaluation factors: Technical Capability, Past Performance, Small Business Utilization, and Price. The source selection will be conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.3, Source Selection, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), and the Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFARS). Award will be made to a single Offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the FAR, whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements, and whose proposal, judged by an overall assessment of the evaluation criteria, and other considerations specified in the solicitation, and through trade-offs, represents the best value to the Government.

To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for the following non-cost factors: Factor 1 - Technical Capability, Factor 2 - Past Performance, and Factor 3 - Small Business Utilization.

Any Unacceptable rating for a non-cost factor will deem the entire proposal Unacceptable. If any sub-factor of Factor 1 – Technical Capability receives a rating of “Unacceptable”, all of Factor 1 will be deemed “Unacceptable.”

The relative order of importance for evaluation factors is as follows: Factor 1 – Technical Capability is more important than Factor 2 – Past Performance; and Factor 2 is more important than Factor 3 – Small Business Utilization. All non-cost factors when combined are significantly more important than Factor 4 – Price. However, Price will become increasingly more important should the non-Price factors among proposals receive approach equality. Offerors will be cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest cost offered.

This is a best value trade-off procurement. This process allows for a trade-off between non-cost factors and price and allows the Government to select other than the lowest priced proposal or other than the highest technically rated proposal to achieve a best-value contract award. Based upon an evaluation of all factors, the Government seeks to award to the Offeror who gives the Government the greatest confidence that it will best meet or exceed the requirements. The Government will base the decision on an evaluation of proposals against all evaluation criteria in the solicitation with the following guidelines:

To receive consideration for award, Offerors shall have received no less than an “Acceptable” rating in any of the non-cost factors.

Trade-off between non-cost factors and price allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal or other than the highest technically rated proposal to achieve a best-value contract award.

Volume 1 will be evaluated for accuracy and completeness. Failure to provide the required information may deem the Offeror unresponsive and ineligible for award.

To receive consideration for award Factor 4 - Price must be deemed fair and reasonable as stated herein.

The Government intends to make award based on the proposals as submitted in response to this solicitation.

However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions, to include the right to engage in limited discussions with select Offerors. The Government may award without discussion, and may reject any or all proposals if such action is in the public interest; and may waive informalities and minor irregularities in the proposals received.

The OCI Risk Mitigation Plan will be assessed by the PCO as part of a responsibility determination. If the PCO determines that the Offeror has an OCI that cannot be mitigated, then the Offeror may not be eligible for award.

C. FACTORS AND SUB-FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The following factors and sub-factors will be used to evaluate each proposal: Award will be made to the Offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors and sub-factors described below. The Government reserves the right to make award based upon the Price factor in the event that the Technical Capability, Past Performance, and Small Business Utilization evaluation results of all the Offerors’ proposals are substantially the same.

Factor 1 – Technical Capability (Trade-Off) Sub-factor 1 – Understanding the Requirements (Trade-Off) Sub-factor 2 –Corporate Experience (Trade-Off) Sub-factor 3 – Staffing Plan (Acceptable/Unacceptable) Factor 2 – Past Performance (Acceptable/Unacceptable) Factor 3 – Small Business Utilization (Acceptable/Unacceptable) Factor 4 – Price (Trade-Off)

D. EVALUATION APPROACH

The Government is conducting this source selection in accordance with the competitive source selection procedures in FAR Part 15. All proposal submission requirements shall be met, clear, concise, and comprehensive and meet the requirements of the PWS in order to be found technically acceptable. Ambiguities may result in an unacceptable rating. Contents of written proposal and written response to Evaluation Notices (EN), should the Government commence discussions, will be evaluated to determine the degree and extent to which the requirements set forth in the RFP are satisfied. No assumptions will be made by the Government evaluators regarding areas not defined in the Offeror’s written proposal. The Government’s evaluation of Offerors’ proposals will be limited to information provided within proposals submitted, with the exception of Price, Past Performance, and Corporate Experience, where data extrinsic to the Offerors’ proposals may be considered.

The SSEB will evaluate the proposals to determine whether the requirements specified in the RFP have been adequately and completely considered, defined, and satisfied by the Offeror. The evaluators will consider the following criteria when evaluating each Technical sub-factor:

Understanding of the Requirements: The SSEB will evaluate the extent to which the proposal demonstrates a clear understanding of all the technical capabilities and resources involved in supporting the program mission.

Feasibility of Approach: The SSEB will evaluate to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven practices and techniques. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and requirements.

Completeness: The SSEB will evaluate the extent to which the proposal is complete and addresses all aspects of the PWS and performance requirements. The SSEB will also evaluate the extent to which Offeror's performance claims are substantiated and the extent to which the Offeror's plan articulates the proposed effort.

Should discussions be conducted the following finding definitions will be used:

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

STRENGTH: An aspect of an Offeror's proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

WEAKNESS: A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

SIGNIFICANT WEAKNESS: A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Minor or Clerical: A minor non-cost factor informality or irregularity that is merely a matter of form and not of substance or a clerical error apparent on its face in the proposal.

Uncertainty: Any aspect of a non-cost factor proposal for which the intent of the offer is unclear (e.g. more than one way to interpret the offer or inconsistencies in the proposal indicating that there may have been an error, omission, or mistake).

Factor 1 – Technical Approach (Trade-Off). This factor and its sub-factors evaluate the Offeror’s understanding of the requirements, feasibility of approach, and completeness in response to Section L of the RFP. If any sub-factor of Factor 1 – Technical Capability receives a rating of “Unacceptable”, all of Factor 1 will be deemed “Unaccetable”. This factor and Sub-factor - 1 Understanding the Requirements and Sub-factor - 2 Corporate Experience will be evaluated in accordance with the following:

Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method Color

Rating Adjectival

Rating

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,…