212-1_&_212-2_Addendums_DDE_2nd_Year_1.docx

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1

INSTRUCTIONS TO QUOTERS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2015)

A. Instructions to Quoters.

1. Quotes shall be submitted via email to Contract Specialist Bethany Flynn, bethany.l.flynn.civ@mail.mil and Contracting Officer Larry Brown, larry.l.brown9.civ@mail.mil prior to 22 April 2019 at 7:00 a.m. EDT. Contractors shall confirm receipt of all quote submittals. Upon receipt of electronic submissions, the Contract Specialist will acknowledge the quotes were received with a confirmation email; however, time is based on actual quote receipt not on confirmation email. It is the responsibility of the quoter to ensure electronic submissions were properly sent and a confirmation email is received.

1. Electronic submissions via email is the only acceptable form of quote submission.

Faxed submissions will not be accepted.

2. The sole point of contact responsible for supplying additional information and answering all inquiries is the Contract Specialist. Address all questions or concerns the quoter may have to the Contract Specialist Bethany Flynn, bethany.l.flynn.civ@mail.mil and Contracting Officer Larry Brown, larry.l.brown9.civ@mail.mil. All questions regarding this solicitation shall be submitted in writing via email no later than 08 April 2019, 7:30 a.m. EDT. Questions received after this time may not receive responses.

B. General Instructions

1. The selection of a source for award purposes will be conducted utilizing source selection procedures as delineated in FAR Part 12 (Acquisition of Commercial Items) and FAR Part 13 (Simplified Acquisition Procedures). Quotes will be evaluated using the criteria under FAR Clause 52.212-2 (Evaluation-Commercial Items) with Addendum.

2. The Quote. The submission of the documentation specified below will constitute the quoter’s acceptance of the terms and conditions of the RFQ, concurrence with the Performance Work Statement (PWS), and contract type. Non-concurrence with any portion of the terms and conditions, PWS, or contract type must be clearly stated in the submission package.

3. Instructions outlined in the Quote Preparation Instructions below prescribe the format for the quote and describe the approach for the development and presentation of quote data. These instructions are designed to ensure the submission of necessary information to provide for the understanding and comprehensive evaluation of quotes. It is the Government’s intention to award without discussions. Quoters are encouraged to present their best Technical, Past Performance, and prices in their initial quote submission.

4. If a quoter believes the requirements in these instructions contain an error, an ambiguity, omission, or are otherwise deemed unsound, the quoter shall immediately notify the Contract Specialist and Contracting Officer in writing with supporting rationale.

5. In accordance with FAR Subpart 4.8 (Government Contract Files), the Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful quotes. Unless the quoter requests otherwise, the Government will destroy extra copies of such unsuccessful quotes.

C. Quote Preparation Instructions

Quoters are required to submit a completed solicitation (including acknowledgment of Amendments). All final monetary extensions shall be in whole dollars only. Failure to follow the Quote Preparation Instructions may cause your quote to be deemed unacceptable by the Government.

1. Quotes shall consist of three (3) separately tabbed volumes:

Volume 1: General (see description of Volume 1 contents below).

Volume 2 Tab 1: Technical and Volume 2 Tab 2: Past Performance.

Volume 3: Price.

Quoters shall submit their quote IAW the below.

D. Quote Submission Format and Content

Volume 1:

General

The General section shall include all other information to include acknowledgement(s) and signed Amendment(s), Representation & Certifications, Exceptions, and any other information not applicable to Volume 2 or 3.

Volume 2, Tab 1 Factor 1: Technical

(1) The Technical Volume shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims in the Quote. Legibility, clarity and coherence are very important. Quoters shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities and experience, and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the quotation.

(2) The Technical submission will be evaluated against the Technical Factors of this solicitation. The Government will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Technical submission. Contractors shall detail all of their experience and capabilities.

(3) The Technical submission should be prepared in a format consistent with the PWS and the evaluation criteria set forth in this solicitation. The Technical submission should be sufficiently specific, detailed, and complete to clearly and fully demonstrate understanding of the proposed work and the goals of the DDE 2nd Year Studies Instructor Services at the U.S. Army War College (USAWC) Carlisle Barracks, PA.

Technical volume shall address all of the following factors and shall follow this general outline:

Factor 1: Technical: Relevance to the DDE 2nd Year Studies Instructor Services at the U.S. Army War College (USAWC) Carlisle Barracks, PA.

Subfactor 1: A Senior Level College education from a Senior Service College, or have successfully completed a minimum of one graduate level course from each major field of study listed in 4.2.2 (be sure to include how and when you received this equivalency). A candidate that has completed a curriculum equivalent to Joint Professional Military Education Phase II qualification is a plus; the highest qualified candidate will be a Joint Qualified officer (3L).

Subfactor 2: A master’s degree from an accredited graduate degree granting institution in a discipline relevant to a major field of study within the U.S. Army War College as found below.

The highly qualified candidate will have a PhD in a national security related discipline, as cited above, multiple years of teaching experience at a Senior Service College, or other accredited, degree-granting institution of higher learning. In addition to the foregoing, the highest qualified candidate will have other teaching experience, teaching awards, teaching citations, service awards and/or academic promotion.

Subfactor 3: Minimum of one year experience as a faculty instructor at either a Senior Service College or an accredited graduate degree granting institution teaching graduate level courses. Faculty experience shall be in one of the major fields of studies listed in Subfactor 2 above. Experience must have occurred within the previous three years as reflected on a curriculum vitae, professional resume, and/or similar documents.

Subfactor 4: Relevant Skills/Expertise- The preferred candidate will possess the following experiences/skills.

a. Experienced in the use of Microsoft Office® (i.e. Word, Outlook, Power Point, SharePoint Portal).

b. Experienced in the use of a Learning Content Management System (LCMS) recognized in the academic community; see paragraph 4.2.3. Examples include, but are not limited to, the current version of the U.S. Army War College OASIS or Blackboard®. The highest qualified candidate will have over ten years of experience teaching in a SSC distance learning program using Blackboard, collaboration tools, and leading forum as well as experience in course development of a core course or elective and the ability to effectively conduct graduate-level inquiry-driven seminar learning using concepts of adult learning. Bloom’s taxonomy, seminar discourage, seminar team building and reflective learning.

c. Experienced in the use of a Learning Management System (LMS) recognized in the academic community; see paragraph 2.3. Examples include, but are not limited to, the current version of the U.S. Army War College OASIS, Desire2Learn®, or Blackboard®. The highest qualified candidate will have over ten years of experience teaching in a SSC distance learning program using Blackboard, collaboration tools, and leading forums as well as experience in course development of a core course or elective and the ability to effectively conduct graduate-level inquiry-driven seminar learning using concepts of adult learning. The Contractor must be knowledgeable in concepts of adult learning, Bloom’s Taxonomy, Seminar Discourse, Seminar Team Building, and Reflective Learning.

d. Experienced in the use of a LMS recognized in the academic community; see paragraph 2.3. Examples include, but are not limited to, the current version of the USAWC Compass, Desire2Learn®, or Moodle™.

e. Able to perform word processing and data entry tasks associated with evaluating and electronically annotating student submissions and recording correspondence and conversations in the LMS database, and experienced (or able to be trained on site) in the use of visual and information technology in the individual seminar rooms at Carlisle Barracks (at no additional cost to the government).

f. Able to meet all requirements to be issued a Common Access Card (CAC) and to be granted access to a U.S. Government Information System (the USAWC local area network).

Subfactor 5: Required only if quoting for the Battlefield Staff Guide on CLIN’s XX11 of solicitation) Requires General American Civil War history for context; specific knowledge of Antietam and Gettysburg; detailed knowledge of the campaign, leaders and the battlefield; and the ability to relate strategic leader competencies and course materials studied by U.S. Army War College students to events that occurred on the respective battlefield.

The following should also be included in the Technical submission:

a. Resume/Curriculum Vitae is required and shall include education, academic experience, field experience (if appropriate), and scholarly accomplishments.

Volume 2, Tab 2.

Factor 2: Past Performance:

Contractors shall submit recent and relevant information, e.g. contracts and/or subcontract work performed for the same or similar requirement. To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past three (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Contractors shall include the source of information, e.g. three points of contact, addresses and telephone numbers, type of contract, contract amount, period of performance, and comments on any performance problems encountered and the contractor’s corrective actions.

Contractors with no prior Government contracts or subcontracts may submit similar information for contract and/or other work performance with State and local Governments, private industries, educational institutions and/or past Government service if applicable. The submittal shall include rationale on how it was determined that the work performed previously was the same or similar in nature, size, and complexity to the work specified by this solicitation. A minimum of (3) three past performance references are requested. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy (including context of data), and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information).

Volume 3

Factor 3: Price Price shall be evaluated using price analysis techniques in accordance with FAR 13- 106-3. Price will not be evaluated for quoters with a technically unacceptable rating.

Contractors shall populate the CLIN structure listed in the solicitation to provide pricing. In case of conflict, the Unit of Purchase price shall be considered the contractor’s final quote.

(End of Addendum)

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2

EVALUATION – COMMERCIAL ITEMS (Oct 2014)

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

a. Basis for Purchase Order Award. The Government intends to award up to five (5) Purchase Orders resulting from this solicitation to responsible quoters whose quote conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered, conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 13, Simplified Acquisition Procedures, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), and the Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFARS). Awards will be made to quoters deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), whose quote conforms to the solicitation requirements, and whose quote, judged by an overall assessment of the evaluation criteria and other considerations specified in this solicitation, representing trade-offs most advantageous to the Government.

The two (2) quotes deemed to be the most advantageous to the government will be awarded as Base+4 Option Year (OY) Purchase Order(s). The next two (2) will be awarded as Base+3 OY Purchase Order(s). The next will be awarded a Base + 2 OY Purchase Order. Quoters that are awarded positions for multiple candidates within the same solicitation will be awarded one combined Purchase Order for all positions awarded.

b. The Government intends to an award using a trade-off analysis as a result of this solicitation. The Government intends to evaluate quotes and award Purchase Order(s) without discussions with quoters. The Government may request additional oral or written information from one or more quoters, but not necessarily from all quoters. Therefore, the quoters initial quote should contain the quoters best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint.

c. Evaluation Criteria. This procurement is being conducted under FAR Part 13 Simplified Acquisition Procedures.

The Evaluation criteria consists of 3 factors (Technical, Past Performance, and Price). The quote submission will be evaluated under these three (3) evaluation factors. Technical and Past Performance Factors are approximately of equal importance. All five Technical Subfactors are approximately of equal importance. All evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price.

Each Quote/Technical submission will receive a Combined Technical/Risk Rating below. The Technical subfactor ratings will be used to determine an overall rating for the Technical factor.

Factor 1: Technical

(1) The Technical Volume shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims in the Quote. Legibility, clarity and coherence are very important. Quoters shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities and experience, and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the quotation.

(2) The Technical submission will be evaluated against the Technical Factors of this solicitation. The Government will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Technical submission. Contractors shall detail all of their experience and capabilities.

(3) The Technical submission should be prepared in a format consistent with the PWS and the evaluation criteria set forth in this solicitation. The Technical submission should be sufficiently specific, detailed, and complete to clearly and fully demonstrate understanding of the proposed work and the goals of the DDE 2nd Year Studies Instructor Services at the U.S. Army War College (USAWC) Carlisle Barracks, PA.

Technical volume shall address all of the following factors and shall follow this general outline:

Factor 1: Technical: Relevance to the DDE 2nd Year Studies Instructor Services at the U.S. Army War College (USAWC) Carlisle Barracks, PA.

Subfactor 1: A Senior Level College education from a Senior Service College, or have successfully completed a minimum of one graduate level course from each major field of study listed in 4.2.2 (be sure to include how and when you received this equivalency). A candidate that has completed a curriculum equivalent to Joint Professional Military Education Phase II qualification is a plus; the highest qualified candidate will be a Joint Qualified officer (3L).

Subfactor 2: A master’s degree from an accredited graduate degree granting institution in a discipline relevant to a major field of study within the U.S. Army War College as found below.

The highly qualified candidate will have a PhD in a national security related discipline, as cited above, multiple years of teaching experience at a Senior Service College, or other accredited, degree-granting institution of higher learning. In addition to the foregoing, the highest qualified candidate will have other teaching experience, teaching awards, teaching citations, service awards and/or academic promotion.

Subfactor 3: Minimum of one year experience as a faculty instructor at either a Senior Service College or an accredited graduate degree granting institution teaching graduate level courses. Faculty experience shall be in one of the major fields of studies listed in Subfactor 2 above. Experience must have occurred within the previous three years as reflected on a curriculum vitae, professional resume, and/or similar documents.

Subfactor 4: Relevant Skills/Expertise- The preferred candidate will possess the following experiences/skills.

a. Experienced in the use of Microsoft Office® (i.e. Word, Outlook, Power Point, SharePoint Portal).

b. Experienced in the use of a Learning Content Management System (LCMS) recognized in the academic community; see paragraph 4.2.3. Examples include, but are not limited to, the current version of the U.S. Army War College OASIS or Blackboard®. The highest qualified candidate will have over ten years of experience teaching in a SSC distance learning program using Blackboard, collaboration tools, and leading forum as well as experience in course development of a core course or elective and the ability to effectively conduct graduate-level inquiry-driven seminar learning using concepts of adult learning. Bloom’s taxonomy, seminar discourage, seminar team building and reflective learning.

c. Experienced in the use of a Learning Management System (LMS) recognized in the academic community; see paragraph 2.3. Examples include, but are not limited to, the current version of the U.S. Army War College OASIS, Desire2Learn®, or Blackboard®. The highest qualified candidate will have over ten years of experience teaching in a SSC distance learning program using Blackboard, collaboration tools, and leading forums as well as experience in course development of a core course or elective and the ability to effectively conduct graduate-level inquiry-driven seminar learning using concepts of adult learning. The Contractor must be knowledgeable in concepts of adult learning, Bloom’s Taxonomy, Seminar Discourse, Seminar Team Building, and Reflective Learning.

d. Experienced in the use of a LMS recognized in the academic community; see paragraph 2.3. Examples include, but are not limited to, the current version of the USAWC Compass, Desire2Learn®, or Moodle™.

e. Able to perform word processing and data entry tasks associated with evaluating and electronically annotating student submissions and recording correspondence and conversations in the LMS database, and experienced (or able to be trained on site) in the use of visual and information technology in the individual seminar rooms at Carlisle Barracks (at no additional cost to the government).

f. Able to meet all requirements to be issued a Common Access Card (CAC) and to be granted access to a U.S. Government Information System (the USAWC local area network).

Subfactor 5: Required only if quoting for the Battlefield Staff Guide on CLIN’s XX11 of solicitation) Requires General American Civil War history for context; specific knowledge of Antietam and Gettysburg; detailed knowledge of the campaign, leaders and the battlefield; and the ability to relate strategic leader competencies and course materials studied by U.S. Army War College students to events that occurred on the respective battlefield.

The following should also be included in the Technical submission:

a. Resume/Curriculum Vitae is required and shall include education, academic experience, field experience (if appropriate), and scholarly accomplishments.

Adjectival Rating

Description

Definitions:

Strength: An aspect of a quote that appreciably decreases the risk of unsuccessful award performance or that represents a significant benefit to the Government. Some examples of strengths include PhD, teaching citations, service awards and/or academic promotions. The included examples is not an exhaustive list and in no way limits the Governments rights to consider any and all Strengths it determines are of significant benefit or appreciably decrease risk.

Weakness: A flaw in the quote that increases the risk of unsuccessful award performance. A “significant weakness” in the quote is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful award performance.

Deficiency: A material failure of a quote to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a quote that increases the risk of unsuccessful award performance to an unacceptable level. Examples of deficiencies include a statement by the quoter that “I cannot or will not” meet a requirement, an approach that clearly does not meet a requirement, or omission of data required to assess compliance with the requirement.

Uncertainty: Any aspect of the quote for which the intent of the quoter is unclear because there may be more than one way to interpret the quote or because inconsistencies in the quote indicate that there may be an error, omission or mistake. There is a direct correlation between risk and uncertainty. Examples include a mistake in calculation or measurement and contradictory statements.

Reasonableness: A price is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of competitive business.

Completeness/Accuracy: The quote submission is in compliance with the instructions in the solicitation.

FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

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

Recency. The first is to evaluate the recency of the quoter’s past performance. Recency is generally expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant, and is critical to establishing the relevancy of past performance information. Recency Assessment. An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past three (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated.

Relevancy. The second is to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the quoter is to the effort to be acquired through this solicitation. Common aspects of relevancy include, but are not limited to, the following: similarity of product/service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, use of key personnel, and extent of subcontracting/teaming. A relevancy determination of the quoter’s (including joint venture partner(s) and major and critical subcontractor(s)) past performance will be made. In determining relevancy for individual awards, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being submitted by the quoter, teaming partner, or subcontractor whose award is being reviewed and evaluated. The past performance information provided in the quote submittal and information obtained from any other sources available to the Government (e.g. PPIRS, FAPIIS, eSRS, DCMA) may be used to establish the degree of relevancy of past performance. Quoters without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and, as a result, will receive a "Neutral" rating for the Past Performance factor.

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. The past performance evaluation conducted in support of the solicitation does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the offeror’s past performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers to determine how well the offeror performed those past contracts.

The Past Performance evaluation will assess the quoter’s probability of meeting the solicitation’s requirements as indicated by that quoter’s record of past performance. Past Performance is assessed at the factor level after evaluating aspects of the quoter’s recent past performance and focusing on performance that is relevant to the item being procured under this solicitation.

Past contract performance should demonstrate the selected quoter’s ability to meet project goals as specified in the Performance Work Statement and the Instructions to Quoters. The quoter must demonstrate that he/she has performed work of a similar scope and magnitude of effort.

There are four levels of relevancy. The quoter will receive one of the four relevancy ratings identified below. With respect to relevancy, past performance of greater relevancy will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance.

Past Performance Relevancy Rating:

The Past Performance Factor will be assigned one of the Confidence Assessment ratings defined below. A quoter whose submittal demonstrates no past performance will be rated “Neutral.” An award will not be made to any quoter who receives a “Limited Confidence” or “No Confidence” past performance rating. All past performance information collected will be reviewed to determine the quality of the quoter’s past performance, general trends, and usefulness of the information to establish the performance confidence assessment rating below:

Performance Confidence Assessment Rating:

The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

FACTOR 3: PRICE

Price will not be scored or rated. Evaluation of price will be performed using one or more of the price analysis techniques in FAR 13.106-3. Through these techniques the Government will determine whether prices are reasonable, complete and balanced. In as much as the best value quote will be determined through tradeoff analysis, the Government is not bound to award to the lowest evaluated price. On the other hand, if the Government determines that a higher rated quote provides value-added features but at an unreasonable/unjustifiable amount, it is not bound to award to a higher technically rated quote.

The price must be appropriate for the benefit provided to the U.S. Army, the USAWC, and the DDE. The goal of this solicitation is to obtain a firm-fixed price award per Faculty Instructor. Quoters will submit the total price for completing required work inclusive of all costs associated with this requirement.

Price will be evaluated on a total price basis and will include base year and all options.

(End of addendum)