FORT_BELVOIR_BASE_OPERATIONS_SECTIONS_L_AND_M_ATTACHMENT.docx

SECTION L

1.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS AND INFORMATION

1.0.1 This section provides general guidance, as well as specific instructions on format and content, for preparing proposals. The Offeror’s proposal must include all information requested and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. Compliance with these instructions is mandatory and failure to furnish a complete proposal, at the time of proposal submission, may result in the proposal being unacceptable to the Government and may eliminate the Offeror from further consideration for award. It is the Offeror's responsibility to ensure the completeness of the proposal submitted. With respect to price proposals, the burden of proof for credibility rests with each Offeror. Evaluation of a proposal will be conducted solely on the basis of the information contained within it and the Government will not assume that an Offeror possesses any capabilities not specified. Inconsistencies among the parts of each proposal shall be explained. Any unexplained inconsistency may raise a fundamental question of the Offeror's understanding of the requirement and/or ability to perform. Offerors are advised that their proposals are presumed to represent their best efforts and must complete responses to this Request for Proposal (RFP). Proposals that simply reiterate the contents of this RFP, or contain only superficial responses, may be considered unacceptable. Evidence of experience, capability, and qualifications that clearly demonstrate and support the Offeror’s claims are essential. The absence of such evidence will adversely influence the evaluation of the proposal. Instructions contained herein, prescribe the format for the proposal and describe the approach for the development and presentation of proposal data. These instructions are designed to ensure the submission of necessary information to provide for the understanding and comprehensive evaluation of proposals.

1.1 POINT OF CONTACT

All questions, concerns, or clarifications shall be addressed to the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) listed below as the sole point of contact for this acquisition. All inquiries must be made in writing and submitted electronically to the Contract Specialist with a copy to the PCO. The SUBJECT LINE shall be “W91QV1-18-R-0015, Question. . . ATTN: Nekia Williams.” Offerors will receive a notice of receipt, but if they do not, it is their responsibility to follow-up electronically with the points of contact listed below:

Contract Specialist:

Nekia L. Williams Email: ESTABLISH CENTRAL EMAIL ADDRESS

Procuring Contracting Officer:

Daniel M. Quinn Email: ESTABLISH CENTRAL EMAIL ADDRESS

1.2 PROPOSAL CLARITY

The proposal shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail enabling effective evaluation to substantiate the validity of stated claims. The proposal shall not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but shall provide convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet the requirements. The Government will consider statements and phrases such as “standard procedures will be employed” or “well known techniques will be used", etc. unacceptable. The Offeror shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of the Offeror’s capabilities or experience; and as such, the Government will base its evaluation solely on the information presented in its proposal and information obtained through sources identified in past performance. As set forth in FAR 52.215-1 Alternate I (f)(4), the Government intends on conducting discussions with offerors whose proposals have been determined to be in the competitive range.

1.3 RESTRICTIONS ON DISCLOSURE AND USE OF PROPOSAL

A proposal may include data, such as technical designs or concepts, financial data, or management plans that the Offeror does not want disclosed to the public for any reason, or used by the Government for any purpose other than proposal evaluation and contract award. If the Offeror wishes to restrict the proposal, the Offeror shall mark it in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(e).

1.4 DISPOSITION OF PROPOSALS

In accordance with FAR Subpart 4.8, Government Contract Files, the Government will retain the “original” copy of all proposals and supplemental documents provided. Unless the Offeror requests otherwise, at the completion of this acquisition the Government will destroy all extra copies of proposals and additional documents submitted.

1.5 POST AWARD NOTICES & DEBRIEFINGS

Post-award notices and debriefings will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.506. The PCO will notify unsuccessful Offerors in accordance with FAR 15.503. Upon such notification, unsuccessful Offerors may request and receive a debriefing in accordance with FAR 15.505 or 15.506. Offerors desiring debriefings must make their requests in accordance with the requirements of FAR 15.505 or 15.506 as applicable.

1.6 RESTRICTIONS OF CONTACTS

Concurrent with the release of this RFP, appropriate offices will be advised that a source selection action is in progress for the proposed award and that contact by participating Offerors on the subject of this RFP is inappropriate. Recipients of this RFP shall not attempt contact with other parties apart from the PCO and Contract Specialist identified in paragraph 1.1 during this period.

1.7 PRE-AWARD SURVEY

A pre-award survey may be accomplished on all Offerors submitting proposals to supplement the determination of contractor responsibility as defined in FAR 9.1. The Offeror shall be required to participate in a pre-award survey for the purpose of determining its financial and technical ability to perform. The pre-award survey is conducted with the assistance of the Offeror’s cognizant Government Contract Administration Office to determine its eligibility and ability to perform. Refusal to participate in a pre-award survey and failure to provide all requested information may be cause for rejection of the offer.

The pre-award survey may include performance of a formal financial capability risk assessment or an audit by the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) or other personnel assigned by the PCO to perform the task. This effort would be performed in accordance with DFARS 232.072-1 and the information required for an audit would include, but not be limited to, the information identified in DFARS 232.072-2. The contractor agrees to provide the financial information for such financial capability effort in a timely manner. The Offeror shall provide information regarding its cognizant DCAA office, to include point of contact, telephone number, and email address. Failure to provide the requested data could cause the Offeror to be determined financially irresponsible as discussed in FAR 9.103(b).

1.8 DISCREPANCIES

If an Offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the Offeror shall immediately notify the PCO in writing with supporting rationale. The Offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussion.

1.09 EVALUATION NOTICE (EN)

If any additional exchanges are required, a written EN will be sent to the Offeror. Offerors will be allowed sufficient time to submit written responses.

1.10 EVALUATION

The selection of a source for award purposes will be conducted using source selection (negotiated) procedures as delineated in FAR Part 15.3. Proposals will be evaluated IAW Section M of the RFP, Evaluation Factors for Award. The Offeror’s responses to this RFP will be used as a validation tool for the Offeror’s capabilities in reference to, and understanding of, the mission capability factors. Failure to comply with the RFP will render the proposal unacceptable, and may eliminate the proposal from consideration for contract award.

1.11 NOTICE OF PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE/SITE VISIT

1.11.1 A site visit will be held at 9410 Jackson Loop, Fort Belvoir, VA on TBD beginning 10:00 am local time in XX. There will be a tour of facilities and short briefing conducted during the site visit. The purpose of the site visit is to allow Offerors to see the site and to allow Offerors to make notes of questions for submission to the Contracting Officer at a later date. Prospective Offerors are highly encouraged to attend the site visit. Remarks and explanations provided during the site visit shall not change the terms of the RFP. Any change to the RFP terms will be conveyed through an amendment to the RFP. Failure to attend the site visit will not disqualify the Offeror; however, the Offeror acts at its own risk and will not be relieved from complying with the terms and conditions of any resultant contract by reason of such failure. In no event will a failure to inspect the site constitute grounds for a claim after award of a contract.

1.11.2 Offerors are limited to two (2) attendees per firm due to room space limitations. Offerors must notify Nekia L. Williams, Contract Specialist, by electronic mail (ESTABLISH CENTRAL EMAIL ADDRESS) not later than 12:00 pm EDT on TBD, if attending the site visit. Include in the Subject Line: “W91QV1-18-R-0015, Site Visit.” Notification shall include full name, company, email address and phone number. If no response is received, the conference may be cancelled. No other pre-proposal conference will be scheduled. Attendance is at the expense of the Offerors. The Government cannot guarantee access to Fort Belvoir at any other time.

1.11.3 Attendees must arrive on time to be included in the site visit. The visit will start promptly at 10:00 a.m. EDT and anyone arriving after that time will be denied admission. Be advised that Fort Belvoir is a limited access installation, and people entering its gates are subject to entrance requirements and possible search. Attendees must arrange their travel to accommodate for these procedures. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to gain access to the Government installation. Unless some form of Department of Defense identification is provided, all drivers must provide a valid photo driver’s license, current vehicle registration, proof of vehicle insurance and enter through Tulley Gate.

1.11.4 Comments and/or questions are prohibited to be asked during the site visit. Offerors shall submit all comments and/or questions in writing to be answered at a later date. This will ensure all Offerors have the same opportunity to receive a correct and accurate answer. This also removes any risk of an incorrect answer being provided verbally without first verifying its accuracy. All comments and/or questions must be submitted via a SINGLE email per Offeror, preferably in a Microsoft Word document attached to the e-mail. Submit to the point of contact in paragraph 1.11.2 above no later than 4:00 p.m. EDT on TBD.

1.11.5 At the site visit, there will be no cameras, audio recordings, or videotaping or other recordings allowed except that done by the Government. Cellular phones with cameras are allowed but no pictures are permitted to be taken.

2.0 PROPOSAL FORMAT AND PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

2.1 PROPOSAL FORMAT

In order to maximize efficiency and minimize the time for proposal evaluation, the electronic and paper proposal submissions shall meet format requirements. The proposal shall be limited to the submission of the volumes specified in Table 3.1.1 below. Each volume shall be separately bound in three-ring loose-leaf binders, within the required page limits, and with the specified number of copies.

2.1.1 TEXT

Text type shall be Times New Roman. Except for the reproduced sections of the RFP document, the text size (font) shall be no less than 12-point with normal proportional spacing. Text lines shall have 1.5 line spacing. Tracking, kerning, and leading values shall not be changed from the default values of the word processing or page layout software.

2.1.2 PAGE LIMITATIONS

Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal and (for paper copies) will not be returned to the Offeror. For electronic CD-ROM submission, no hidden fields, macros, comments will be read. All information shall be written clearly and be easily accessible. Page limitations may also be placed on ENs, if required. The page limitations for ENs, if any, will be identified in the correspondence forwarding the ENs to the Offerors. When both sides of a sheet of paper display printed material, it shall be counted as two pages. Each volume shall contain a detailed table of contents to delineate what is in the respective volume, which will not be counted in the page limits. In addition, the following will also not be counted in the maximum page limits: cover pages, tabs, cross-reference matrix, and glossaries. The page limitations specified in Table 3.1.1 shall be treated as maximum limits to assist in the evaluation of each proposal.

2.1.3 PAGE SIZE

A page is defined as each face of an 8 ½ x 11-inch sheet of paper containing information (excludes such things as blank pages, title pages, table of contents, tabs, dividers, glossaries, and indices). Page margins shall be a minimum of 1-inch each for the top, bottom and sides. All material must be contained within the page limits identified for each volume or appendix. The background color of each page of the proposal submission shall be white or ivory paper only. If Final Proposal Revisions (FPR) are required, the same initial proposal page limitations apply for each volume or appendix. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume. These page format restrictions shall apply to responses to ENs, and to both electronic and hard copy proposals.

2.1.4 TABLES, CHARTS, GRAPHS, AND FIGURES

Legible tables, charts, graphs, and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and/or task layout, schedules, plans. These displays shall be uncomplicated, legible, and shall not exceed 11 x 17 inches in size when printed. Foldout pages shall fold entirely within the volume and count as two (2) pages. For tables, charts, graphs and figures, the text shall be no smaller than Times New Roman 10 point. Text lines in all tables, charts, graphs, and figures shall have single (1) line spacing. All tables, charts, graphs and figures will be included in the page count. Any tables, charts, graphs and/or figures containing smaller than Times New Roman 10 point font will be disregarded. This restriction applies to both electronic and hard copy proposals. Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed artwork, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

2.1.5 TAB INDEXING

Each volume shall contain a more detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections. Tabs/indexes will not count against the page limitations for the respective volume.

2.1.6 GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations, acronyms and/or terms used, with explanation corresponding definition for each. Glossaries do not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes.

2.1.7 BINDING AND LABELING

Each volume shall be separately bound and labeled in standard three-ring, loose leaf binders, and clearly identified on the front and side. The binders should permit the volume to lie flat when open, and allow for easy removal and replacement of pages. Staples shall not be used. A cover sheet should be bound in each book, clearly marked as to volume number, title, copy number, RFP number and the Offeror's name. The same identifying data should be placed on the spine of each binder. Be sure to apply all appropriate markings including those prescribed in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on Disclosure and Use of Data, and 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Offeror Bid or Proposal Information and Source Selection Information.

2.1.8 ELECTRONIC MEDIA OFFERS AND SUBMISSION

2.1.8.1 To enable the Government to successfully view the proposals electronically, the Offerors shall submit their proposals in Microsoft Office, i.e. Microsoft Word or Microsoft Excel format. These file formats shall be exact duplicates of the paper copies. The Government will use the electronic copies in the evaluation process. The Government may use the electronic/CD proposal for all purposes; however, there is no requirement for the Government to compare or verify the consistency of the electronic proposal to the paper proposal. In the case of an identified dispute or variation in content, the electronic submitted proposal shall be deemed and treated as the official version for all purposes. Each CD-ROM case and the CD-ROM itself must be labeled as to the Offeror and numbered sequentially in the required number of copies.

2.1.8.2 File Preparation. All text, including table and figure identifiers, shall be indexed and 100% searchable text using Microsoft Word. All text shall be displayed as a font and not displayed as a bitmap in any proposal volume or appendix to facilitate the ability to copy and paste to another document.

2.1.8.3 Font and Page Setup. Text font and layout shall be as stated for paper copies.

2.1.8.4 Other Requirements. The Offeror shall not embed sound or video files into the proposal files. Minimize the use of scanned images and keep embedded graphics as simple as possible.

2.1.8.5 Proposal Format and Structure. Each volume of the electronic proposal shall be in its own subdirectory on the CD-ROM, sequentially labeled Volume I through Volume III. Volume IV, Price, shall be submitted on a separate CD-ROM.

2.1.8.6 Proposal Table of Contents file. This file serves as a table of contents for the proposal information. Also, include the list of key terms used in the proposal with their definitions, and a list of acronyms and abbreviations used in the proposal.

2.1.8.7 Viewing Environment. The Government anticipates viewing the electronic submittals with the following computer software and hardware: 1) IBM-compatible systems, 4.0 GB of RAM, nominal 19 inch color monitors, and standard CD ROM readers, 2) Windows 10 operating system, 3) Microsoft Office 2013, and Internet Explorer 8.0.

2.1.9 ELECTRONIC REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

All referenced documents for this RFP are available at the Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) website at http://www.fbo.gov. Potential Offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications when information has been posted to the website for this solicitation.

2.1.10 PRICE INFORMATION

All price information shall be addressed ONLY in the Price and/or the Contract Documentation Volumes. References to work hour estimates and material may be addressed in other volumes only as appropriate for justifying labor hours and material.

2.1.11 CLASSIFIED INFORMATION

Proposals shall not contain classified information.

3.0 PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

3.1 VOLUMES

Offers will consist of four (4) separate proposal volumes: General and Contract Documentation, Mission Capability, Past Performance, and Price.

3.1.1 PROPOSAL VOLUMES ORGRANIZATION, NUMBER OF COPIES, AND PAGE LIMITS

The Offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in Table 3.1.1 and these instructions. The titles and contents of the volumes shall be in accordance with Table 3.1.1. “Original” designates paper/printed submission. In the event that Final Proposal Revisions are required, the Offer shall clearly indicate the revision number within the Volume Name. (Revision X with X indicating the number of the revision.)

Table 3.1.1 – Proposal Organization

· Key Personnel

· Workflow Execution

· Organization and Staffing

4.0 RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS

4.1 Proposals are due 2:00 p.m. EDT on TBD, and shall be submitted in accordance with the instructions herein. Late proposals may be rejected from consideration IAW FAR 15.208. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to confirm the Government has received the proposal.

4.2 All proposals delivered in response to this RFP shall reflect the following in the address label:

· RFP Number: W91QV1-18-R-0015

· The Legend. “TO BE DELIVERED UNOPENED TO THE CONTRACTING OFFICER,” and

· The volume copy numbers contained in the each box.

4.3 Proposals shall be submitted prior to the closing date and time identified on SF1449 to the following address:

Regular mail/Express Carrier/Hand Carried:

Mission and Installation Command (MICC) ATTN: Nekia L. Williams 9410 Jackson Loop, Building 1425 Fort Belvoir, VA 22060

4.4 Electronic submissions via email or facsimile will not be accepted. Offers shall be mailed through a commercial/Government carrier or hand carried.

5.0 VOLUME I – GENERAL & CONTRACT DOCUMENTATION

5.1 Volume I must be clearly marked “VOLUME I - GENERAL & CONTRACT DOCUMENTATION, RFP W91QV1-18-R-0015.” Offerors are required to submit a completed SF 1449 (Solicitation, Offer and Award) (including acknowledgment of all Amendments), Section B, Section K, and Section I. All final monetary extensions shall be in whole dollars only (to include unit prices). The General Volume shall be organized as follows and contain the identified information.

5.1.1 TAB A EXCEPTIONS OR ASSUMPTIONS TO TERMS AND CONDITIONS (IF REQUIRED)

Exceptions/Assumptions (if required) - Identification and explanation of any exceptions or deviations. Additionally, any assumptions used in the proposal preparation must be identified. Also, include any other data the Offeror chooses to bring to the attention of the PCO. See paragraph 10.0 of Section L – Instruction, Conditions and Notices to Offerors.

5.1.2 TAB B, Solicitation, Offer and Award - The SF1449 shall be submitted fully completed. The Offeror is cautioned that the SF1449 must contain an original signature in block 17 of the form. The Offeror shall acknowledge any amendments to the RFP in accordance with the instructions on the SF1449 and with Section L, FAR 52.215-1(b), Instruction to Offerors—Competitive Acquisition. The Offeror shall provide the name, title and telephone number of the company/division point of contact regarding decisions made with respect to the Offeror’s proposal and who can obligate the Offeror’s company contractually. Also, identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government.

5.1.3 TAB C, RFP Section B (Supplies or Services and Prices) - Section B of the RFP shall be submitted fully completed and error free. Offerors shall propose a firm fixed price for each FFP CLIN in Section B. For CLIN X004, Maintenance Support Services, the offeror shall price this CLIN utilizing sub-CLIN X004 contained in the pricing matrix.

5.1.5 TAB D, RFP Section K (Representation, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors) – The Offeror shall ensure that Section K of the RFP is submitted thoroughly completed with all blocks in each certification/representation completed truthfully and completely.

6.0 VOLUME II – MISSION CAPABILITY

6.1 GENERAL

Volume II must be clearly marked “VOLUME II – MISSION CAPABILITY, RFP W91QV1-18-R-0015.” The Mission Capability Volume shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims in the offeror’s proposal. Your responses will be evaluated against the Mission Capability Factor and Subfactors defined in Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award. Offeror’s are cautioned that “parroting” of the technical requirements or the PWS with a statement of intent to perform does not reflect an understanding of the requirement or the capability to perform. Statements that the offeror understands, can, or will comply with the PWS and phrases such as, “standard procedures will be employed” or “well know techniques will be used” etc, will be considered unacceptable. Offeror’s are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their technical capabilities and past experience, and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Offeror’s proposal.

6.2 FORMAT AND SPECIFIC CONTENT

The proposal will be evaluated against the Mission Capability Factor and Subfactors defined in Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award. The section will be prepared in an orderly format and in sufficient detail to enable the Government to make the full evaluation of the contractor’s technical competence and ability to comply with the contract task requirements specified in the PWS. In the Mission Capability volume, Offerors shall address their proposed approach to meeting the requirements of each evaluation subfactor.

6.3 VOLUME ORGANIZATION

The Mission Capability volume shall be organized according to the following general outline:

Table of Contents List of Table and Drawings Cross Reference Matrix Glossary

TAB A: Subfactor 1 – Key Personnel TAB B: Subfactor 2 – Workflow Execution TAB C: Subfactor 3 – Organization and Staffing

6.3.1 TAB A, SUBFACTOR 1: KEY PERSONNEL

Offerors shall identify all key personnel and their positions that they will fill (see PWS paragraph 2.1.7.1). At a minimum, key personnel shall include the Project Manager and supervisory personnel.

a. Project Manager (PM): The contractor shall identify the PM by name. The Offeror shall provide the following information for the PM: the duties and responsibilities to be performed, the PM's experience and capabilities that demonstrates their ability to perform assigned duties and responsibilities.

b. GFEBS Manager: The contractor shall identify the GFEBS Manager by name. The Offeror shall provide the following information for the GFEBS Manager: the duties and responsibilities to be performed, the GFEBS Manager's experience and capabilities that demonstrates their ability to perform assigned duties and responsibilities.

c. All supervisory personnel: As offerors may or may not have actual supervisory personnel identified by name yet for the positions identified, offerors shall provide the following:

- If supervisory personnel(s) has/have been identified by name, offerors shall provide the duties and responsibilities to be performed and the individual's experience and capabilities that demonstrates their ability to perform assigned duties and responsibilities.

- If supervisory personnel(s) has/have not been identified by name yet, the offerors shall provide the duties and responsibilities to be performed in that position and what experience and capabilities they will be looking for in filling these positions.

6.3.2 TAB B, SUBFACTOR 2: WORKFLOW EXECTUION. The Contractor shall delineate their specific processes for executing all Maintenance Services Workload. For PMOs, the Contractor shall fully explain how they will develop their preventative maintenance plan (i.e. equipment identification, maintenance task identification, frequencies, etc.) and how their PM Plan will be entered into GFEBS in accordance with Overarching PWS paragraph 2.2.5. Additionally, offeror’s shall provide their workflow process for how they utilize their PM plan in GFEBS to execute all PMO workload (i.e. reports, scheduling, and tracking, closing PMOs etc.). For DMOs, the offerors shall describe their workflow process for how they will execute all DMO workload. Their process shall entail from the time a service order is identified, opened, how it is prioritized, shop assignment, recorded in GFEBS, get the actual work executed and closed out in GFEBS.

6.3.3 TAB C, SUBFACTOR 3: ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING. The Offeror shall submit a detailed organizational chart that depicts its proposed organizational structure. The Contractor’s organizational chart shall include each organizational element (i.e., Management/Division/ Branch/Team). The organizational chart shall include a narrative that identifies what work each element is responsible for managing and accomplishing; where decision making authority lies within the organization; and describe the work performed by teaming partners. The Offeror shall describe and explain its proposed interface (vertical and horizontal communication) between on-site project management and off-site corporate management to accomplish the mission. Additionally, it shall describe and explain its interface with the Government (corporate, project teams, Government project managers, contracting officials, inspectors, and users) to ensure smooth mission accomplishment and cooperation with all team members.

The staffing plan shall include the following: proposed staffing by labor categories to perform the required services in each Common Level of Service (CLS) contained in the PWS. Offerors shall utilize the Staffing Matrix contained in Section J, Staffing Matrix Attachment for depicting their staffing. In addition, offeror's shall clearly identify and explain their methodology for accommodating fluctuating workloads and explain any proposed cross-utilization of personnel.

7.1 VOLUME III – FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

7.2 Volume III must be clearly marked “VOLUME III – PAST PERFORMANCE, RFP W91QV1-18-R-0015.” The Past Performance evaluation will be accomplished by reviewing aspects of an Offeror's recent and relevant Past Performance, focusing on and targeting performance that is relevant to the effort as it directly relates to the work being procured under this solicitation and as defined in Section M.

7.2.1 Content of Past Performance Volume.

The Offeror’s Past Performance Volume shall contain the following and be within the specified page constraints. Additional detail for submission requirements is included in para 7.3.2.

Table of Contents Glossary

Summary Page Describe the role of the Offeror and each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner.

7.2.2 Early Proposal Information. In order to expedite evaluations, Offerors are encouraged, but not required, to submit their Past Performance Volumes any time prior to the closing of the RFP, to the Contracting Officer at the address specified in paragraph 4.3.

7.3 Past Performance information described herein is required on the Offeror and all subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners proposed to perform 10% or greater of the proposed effort based on the total proposed price. The Offeror shall submit, along with the information required in this paragraph, a consent letter, executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner, authorizing release of adverse past performance information to the Offeror so the Offeror can respond to such information. For each identified effort for a commercial customer, the Offeror shall also submit a client authorization letter, authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the Offeror's performance.

7.3.1 The Offeror shall include documentation regarding their relevant past performance as it directly relates to the work being procured under this solicitation. The Offeror SHALL NOT go back any farther than three (3) years for the submitted data from the date in Block 6 of the SF1449. The past performance data shall document a successful history of past contract performance.

7.3.2 Submission Requirements. The Offeror shall submit a Past Performance Volume containing the following:

7.3.2.1 Table of Contents

7.3.2.2 Summary Page describing the role of the Offeror and each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner that the Offeror is required to provide Past Performance Specific Relevant Contract Reference Sheets for the past performance experience in accordance with Past Performance Attachment.

7.3.2.3 Consent Letters executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner, authorizing the release of past performance information so the Offeror can respond to such information.

7.3.2.4 Client Authorization Letters for each identified effort for a commercial customer authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the Offeror’s performance.

7.3.2.5 Organization Structure Change History— Organizational Structure Change History. Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of relevant present or past efforts or between conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this acquisition. To facilitate this relevancy determination, include in this proposal volume a "roadmap" describing all such changes in the organization of your company. As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevance of any efforts you identify for past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment. Since the Government intends to consider present and past performance information provided by other sources as well as that provided by the Offeror(s), your "roadmap" should be both specifically applicable to the efforts you identify and general enough to apply to efforts on which the Government receives information from other sources.

7.3.2.6 Specific Relevant Contract Reference Sheet - Sheets shall be in accordance with Past Performance Questionnaire Attachment and are limited to five (5) pages per reference. The Offeror shall provide documentation outlining the Offeror’s past performance with contracts, as a prime or major subcontractor, which is the same or similar in nature of work, size, scope and complexity to the services being procured under this Solicitation. The submittal shall include rationale supporting your assertion of relevance and how it was determined that the work performed previously was the same or similar in nature, size, scope and complexity to the work specified by this solicitation. Offerors are required to explain what aspects of the contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort, and to what aspects of the proposed effort they relate. The Offeror shall submit a minimum of five (5) but no more than a total of eight (8) Specific Relevant Contract Reference Sheets identifying active or completed contracts, either Government or commercial. Limits on Specific Relevant Contract Reference Sheets are as follows:

7.3.2.6.1 Three (3) sheets identifying active or completed contracts, either Government or commercial, for the prime, team, and/or joint venture (within the same division or cost center).

7.3.2.6.2 Two (2) sheets from each subcontractor who will be completing 10% or more of the technical work.

7.3.3 Past Performance Questionnaire - (Past Performance Questionnaire Attachment), Past Performance Questionnaire. For the contracts identified on each Specific Relevant Contract Reference, the Offeror shall forward a copy of the Past Performance Questionnaire to the points of contact responsible for monitoring performance under such contracts. The points of contact shall return the questionnaires directly to Nekia Williams, Contract Specialist, not later than the proposal due date and time. Any questionnaires not returned directly to the Contract Specialist will not be reviewed and evaluated. The information contained in the questionnaires will be used to evaluate the Offeror’s past performance. New entities that have no past customers shall annotate on the Summary Page that they have had no previous clients and that questionnaires cannot be provided.

7.3.3.1 Offerors shall provide a summary list of questionnaire recipients to include POCs and phone numbers.

8.1 VOLUME IV – FACTOR 3: PRICE

8.2 GENERAL

A separate price proposal shall be submitted using the pricing matrix provided (Pricing Matrix Attachment). The offeror shall provide a price for each CLIN/Sub-CLIN in the pricing matrix. The extended CLIN pricing from the pricing matrix shall equal the proposed price for each CLIN in Schedule B of the Standard Form 1449. The offeror shall utilize their proposed price in sub-CLIN X004XX of the pricing matrix for pricing Section B, CLIN X004, Maintenance Services.

8.2.1 PRICE INFORMATION

All information relating to the proposed price including all required supporting documentation must be included in the section of the proposal designated as the Price volume. Under no circumstances shall this information and documentation be included elsewhere in the proposal.

8.2.2 PRICING INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS

8.2.2.1 A request for Certified Cost or Pricing Data is not anticipated for the award of this contract since adequate price competition is expected; however, the Government reserves the right to request such information should it become necessary consistent with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 15.4, Contract Pricing.

8.2.2.2 Only CLIN and Sub-CLIN level pricing information is required for all Firm Fixed Price (FFP) CLINs; however, if reasonableness cannot be established based on price analysis, then other than certified cost and pricing data may be required. Specifically, offerors shall include the following pricing data:

a. Monthly prices for all CLINs and Sub-CLINs identified in the pricing matrix.

b. For the maintenance support CLIN, please ensure that the monthly prices and extended amounts are completed for each stated range of combined PMOs and DMOs.

Offerors shall ensure that all FFP CLIN/sub-CLINs include their material costs (i.e. bench stock, repair parts, etc.), for each range of PMOs and DMOs.

c. For the PWO CLIN, the offeror shall provide proposed markup rates that would be applicable to future PWOs accomplished by subcontract effort. Such markup rates shall be an all-inclusive material handling, G&A and profit rate applicable for the proposed period for negotiated PWOs containing subcontract effort. For Clarity, the proposed rates will be a binding rate captured in the contract award and shall be applied solely to subcontract efforts accomplished as part of a PWO.

8.2.3 Collective Bargaining Agreement

The offeror is informed that Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA)/Department of Labor Wage Determinations is applicable to this requirement, see CAB Attachment, Davis Bacon Building Attachment, Davis Bacon Heavy Attachment, Davis Bacon Highway Attachment, Davis Bacon Residential Attachment and Wage Rate Determination Attachment.

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

52.217-5 Evaluation of Options JUL 1990

SECTION M

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1.0 BASIS FOR AWARD

1.0.1 AWARD FOR ALL OF THE WORK

The Government intends to award one contract as a result of this solicitation. Offers received for less than the stated number of items listed in the Bid Schedule will be considered ineligible for award.

1.0.2 This is a best value source selection 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 deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation, whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements, and whose proposal, judged by an overall assessment of the evaluation criteria, and other considerations specified in this solicitation, and represents the best value to the Government. The best value is defined as 1.) the Offeror who presents a technically acceptable offer in the Mission Capability factor, and 2.) provides the best value to the Government based upon an integrated assessment between past performance and price. In this tradeoff assessment, past performance is approximately equal to price. However, the greater equality of Past Performance ratings amongst Offerors, the more important price becomes.

1.1 COMPLIANCE WITH TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Offerors are cautioned to submit sufficient information in the format specified in the proposal preparation instructions. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the RFP may result in the Offeror being removed from consideration for award. Any exception to the RFP’s terms and conditions must be fully explained and justified. Offerors are cautioned that taking an exception may render the offer ineligible for award.

1.2 REJECTION OF PROPOSALS

The Government may reject any proposal that is evaluated and determined to be unacceptable, fails to comply with the contract terms and conditions, or is excessively high or low in price.

1.3 DISCUSSIONS

As set forth in FAR 52.215-1 Alternate I, (f)(4), the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract after discussions with offerors whose proposals have been determined to be within the competitive range. The competitive range may be limited for purposes of efficiency IAW FAR Part 15.306 (c)(2). Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. Communications may be conducted to enhance the Government’s understanding of proposals; allow reasonable interpretation of the proposal; or facilitate the Government’s evaluation process. Any proposal(s) that the Contracting Officer determines, with Source Selection Authority approval, to not be among the most highly rated proposals will be considered outside the competitive range and will be eliminated from further consideration. Offeror(s) excluded from the competitive range will be informed in writing IAW FAR 15.503(a). Offerors remaining in the competitive range will be issued a final proposal revision request once discussions are completed. The Offeror’s final revised proposal, which shall include responses to evaluation notices, will be considered in making the best value decision.

2.0 EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

Evaluation criteria consists of Factors and Subfactors. The proposals will be evaluated under three evaluation factors: Mission Capability, Past Performance and Price as follows:

Factor 1: Mission Capability Sub-factor 1: Key Personnel Sub-factor 2: Management and Workflow Process Sub-factor 3: Organization and Staffing Factor 2: Past Performance Factor 3: Price

2.1 FACTOR 1 - MISSION CAPABILITY

The Government’s technical evaluation team will evaluate the mission capability sub-factors on an acceptable or unacceptable basis. Any sub-factor that is rated Unacceptable will result in the overall Mission Capability factor being determined Unacceptable. Only those proposals determined to be technically acceptable will be considered for award. Factor 1 and Sub-factors 1-3 will receive one of the adjectival ratings defined in Table 1 below:

Table 1 – MISSION CAPABILITY RATINGS

2.2 SUBFACTOR 1 – KEY PERSONNEL.

Key Personnel. To be considered acceptable, Offeror shall demonstrate the following:

a. The Project Manager (PM) and the GFEBS manager shall be identified by name. They will be evaluated to ensure that the duties and responsibilities to be performed by them are commensurate with their qualifications and experience to ensure successful PWS execution.

b. For supervisory personnel identified by name, they shall perform duties and responsibilities commensurate with successful PWS execution and they shall possess sufficient experience and capabilities to successfully execute their duties and responsibilities. For supervisory personnel not identified by name yet, the duties and responsibilities for the positions being filled by key personnel are commensurate with successful PWS execution and that the capabilities/experience being sought for these key personnel are sufficient for them to perform assigned duties and responsibilities.

2.3 SUBFACTOR 2 – WORKFLOW EXECUTION. To be considered acceptable, the offeror shall demonstrate the following:

1. For PMO workload, the Offeror has a sound and comprehensive approach for developing their PM Plan to ensure that all equipment, maintenance tasks, and frequencies are identified and timely entered into GFEBS. Additionally, the approach for executing their PM plan utilizing GFEBS is effective and will ensure successful execution of all PMOs in accordance with the PWS.

2. For DMO workload, the Offeror has sound and comprehensive workflow process for successfully executing all DMOs from initial receipt to closeout in GFEBS.

2.4 SUBFACTOR 3: Organization and Staffing Plan. To be considered acceptable, the Offeror shall demonstrate that their organization structure is adequate to ensure successful execution and oversight of all functional areas of the PWS and their staffing plan is adequate to successfully perform the PWS requirements.

Adequate organization structure to ensure successful execution of the PWS requirements includes:

1. What parts of the organization are responsible for what work (identifies each organizational element, i.e., Division/ Branch/Team) and what work they are responsible for managing and accomplishing; where decision making authority lies; and describes the work performed by the teaming partners.

2. Lines of communication between the prime and teaming partners that will enable seamless performance.

3. Proposed interface (vertical and horizontal communication) between on-site project management and off-site corporate management to support the PWS requirements.

4. Proposed interface with the Government (corporate, project teams, Government project managers, contracting officials, inspectors, and users) to ensure PWS requirements performance and cooperation with all team members.

Adequate Staffing includes the number of personnel and the appropriate labor mix to successfully perform the PWS requirements. Additionally, the Offeror's staffing plan shall demonstrate that they can accommodate fluctuating workloads and allow for cross-training and cross-utilizing of personnel to perform the requirements of the contract.

3.0 FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

3.1 The Past Performance evaluation will assess the relative risks associated with an Offeror’s likelihood of success in performing the solicitation’s requirements as indicated by that Offeror’s record of past performance. Performance risk is assessed at the factor level after evaluating aspects of the Offeror’s recent past performance and focusing on performance that is relevant to the services being procured under this solicitation. Offerors are cautioned that in conducting the performance risk assessment, the Government may use data provided in the Offeror’s proposal and data obtained from other sources, such as the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) or similar systems and State Department Watch Lists. The areas of Past Performance in PPIRS to be reviewed in the evaluation process include:

· Business Relations

· Quality of Service

· Schedule

· Cost Control

· Customer Satisfaction

3.2 Performance Confidence Assessment Overview. The Government will conduct a Performance Confidence Assessment of the Offeror’s past performance to arrive at a confidence rating. The Performance Confidence Assessment represents the evaluation of an Offeror's past work record to assess the Government's confidence in the Offeror's probability of successfully performing as proposed. The Past Performance evaluation will be accomplished by reviewing aspects of an Offeror's recent and relevant Past Performance, focusing on and targeting performance which is relevant to the effort as it directly relates to the work being procured under this solicitation and as defined as relevant in Section M. The past performance data shall be evaluated based on the demonstration of a successful history of past contract performance based on the requirements outlined in sections 3.2.1 and 3.2.2.

3.2.1 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 substantially complete (80% or more) or must have been performed during the past three years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated.

3.2.2 Relevancy Assessment. The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all recent performance information obtained to determine how closely the services performed under those projects relate to this acquisition. For each recent past performance citation reviewed, the relevance of the work performed will be assessed. Consideration will be given to criteria such as similarity, complexity, and diversity of tasks, type of effort, scope, value, and performance period. With respect to relevancy, more relevant past performance is a stronger predictor of future success and will have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance. A relevancy determination of the Offeror’s (including joint venture partner(s) and major and critical subcontractor(s)) past performance will be made. In determining relevancy for individual contracts, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the Offeror, teaming partner or subcontractor whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated. The past performance information provided in the proposal and obtained from other sources will be used to establish the degree of relevancy of past performance.