W91SMC-15-R-0003-0001.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

The follow ing changes to solicitation W91SMC-15-R-0003 are made in this amendment:

1. Removed clause 52.237-7, Indemnification and Medical Liability Insurance.

2. Removed language in Section H regarding Medical Liability Insurance

3. Edited Section M, paragraph 2.2.1

4. Changed proposal due date to 2:00pm CDT May 26, 2015

5. Changed Periods of Performance for all CLINs to June 8, 20XX to June 7, 20XX

6. Added paragraph 2.3.8 to Section M to explain Travel sub CLIN pricing

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 19

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 13-May-2015

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 W91SMC-15-R-0003

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

08-May-2015

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 4 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

13-May-2015

CODE

USPFO-IL

ATTN.: NGIL-PFO-PC

1301 N. MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2317

W91SMC 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W91SMC-15-R-0003

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 18-May-2015 02:00 PM to 26-May-2015 02:00 PM.

DELIVERIES AND PERFORMANCE

The following Delivery Schedule item for SUBCLIN 0001AA has been changed from:

DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC

POP 01-JUN-2015 TO

31-MAY-2016

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821 FOB: Destination

W90H2P

To:

DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC

POP 08-JUN-2015 TO

07-JUN-2016

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

The following Delivery Schedule item for SUBCLIN 0001AB has been changed from:

POP 01-JUN-2015 TO

31-MAY-2016

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

POP 08-JUN-2015 TO

07-JUN-2016

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

The following Delivery Schedule item for SUBCLIN 0001AC has been changed from:

POP 01-JUN-2015 TO

31-MAY-2016

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

POP 08-JUN-2015 TO

07-JUN-2016

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

The following Delivery Schedule item for SUBCLIN 0002AA has been changed from:

POP 01-JUN-2016 TO

31-MAY-2017

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

POP 08-JUN-2016 TO

07-JUN-2017

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

The following Delivery Schedule item for SUBCLIN 0002AB has been changed from:

POP 01-JUN-2016 TO

31-MAY-2017

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

POP 08-JUN-2016 TO

07-JUN-2017

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

The following Delivery Schedule item for SUBCLIN 0002AC has been changed from:

POP 01-JUN-2016 TO

31-MAY-2017

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

POP 08-JUN-2016 TO

07-JUN-2017

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

The following Delivery Schedule item for SUBCLIN 0003AA has been changed from:

POP 01-JUN-2017 TO

31-MAY-2018

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

POP 08-JUN-2017 TO

07-JUN-2018

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

The following Delivery Schedule item for SUBCLIN 0003AB has been changed from:

POP 01-JUN-2017 TO

31-MAY-2018

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

POP 08-JUN-2017 TO

07-JUN-2018

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

The following Delivery Schedule item for SUBCLIN 0003AC has been changed from:

POP 01-JUN-2017 TO

31-MAY-2018

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

POP 08-JUN-2017 TO

07-JUN-2018

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

The following Delivery Schedule item for SUBCLIN 0004AA has been changed from:

POP 01-JUN-2018 TO

31-MAY-2019

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

POP 08-JUN-2018 TO

07-JUN-2019

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

The following Delivery Schedule item for SUBCLIN 0004AB has been changed from:

POP 01-JUN-2018 TO

31-MAY-2019

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

POP 08-JUN-2018 TO

07-JUN-2019

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

The following Delivery Schedule item for SUBCLIN 0004AC has been changed from:

POP 01-JUN-2018 TO

31-MAY-2019

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

POP 08-JUN-2018 TO

07-JUN-2019

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

The following Delivery Schedule item for SUBCLIN 0005AA has been changed from:

POP 01-JUN-2019 TO

31-MAY-2020

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

POP 08-JUN-2019 TO

07-JUN-2020

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

The following Delivery Schedule item for SUBCLIN 0005AB has been changed from:

POP 01-JUN-2019 TO

31-MAY-2020

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

POP 08-JUN-2019 TO

07-JUN-2020

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

The following Delivery Schedule item for SUBCLIN 0005AC has been changed from:

POP 01-JUN-2019 TO

31-MAY-2020

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

POP 08-JUN-2019 TO

07-JUN-2020

N/A JFHHD (W90H2P)

MSG LYLE SMITH

1301 N MACARTHUR BLVD

SPRINGFIELD IL 62702-2399

217-761-3821

The following have been modified:

SECTION H - SPECIAL CONTRACT R

SECTION H – SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

1. INSURANCE - MINIMUM AMOUNTS

1.1. Reference Contract Clause titled, “Insurance -Work on a Government Installation (FAR 52.228-5). Kinds and minimum amounts are as follows:

KIND AMOUNTS (FAR 28.307-2)

Workmen’s Compensation $100,000 (see paragraph 1.2, below)

Comprehensive General Liability $500,000 per occurrence for bodily injury

Comprehensive Automobile Liability $200,000 per person and $500,000 per accident for bodily injury and $20,000 for property damage

(If applicable) $200,000 per person and $500,000 per occurrence Aircraft Public and Passenger for bodily injury, other than passenger Liability liability and $200,000 per occurrence for property damage; coverage for passenger liability bodily injury shall be at least

$200,000 multiplied by the number of seats $200,000 multiplied by the number of seats or passengers, whichever is greater.

1.2. Except in states with exclusive or monopolistic funds that do not permit workers’ compensation to be written by private carriers.

1.3. [REMOVED]

1.4. NOTE: Before commencing work under this contract, the Contractor shall certify to the Contracting

Officer, in writing, that the required insurance has been obtained. The policies referenced in the certification (s) shall contain an endorsement to the effect that any cancellation or any material change adversely affecting the Government’s interest shall not be effective (1) for such period as the laws of the state in which this contract is to be performed prescribe or (2) until 30 days after the insurer or the Contractor gives written notice to the Contracting Officer, whichever period is longer. The Contractor shall maintain a copy of proofs of required insurance, and shall make copies available to the Contracting Officer upon request. The Contractor shall maintain a copy of all subcontractors’ proofs of required insurance, and shall make copies available to the Contracting Officer upon request.

2. INVOICING AND PAYMENT

2.1. Prior to submission of invoices in Wide Area Workflow (WAWF) contractor shall submit for pre-approval properly prepared invoices, bearing the contract number, to the Contracting Office, USPFO-IL 1301 N. MacArthur Blvd. Springfield, IL 62702-2317. Payment will be made by DFAS-Indianapolis VP GFEBS, 8899 E. 56th St., Indianapolis, IN 46229-3800 in accordance with FAR Clause 52.232-33 Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer. All payments will be made by electronic funds transfer (EFT).

To meet compliance with DFARS 252.232-7003, Electronic Submission of Payment Requests and Receiving Reports, you shall submit your request for payment (invoice) through WAWF.

The Government will make payment through WAWF upon satisfactory completion of work AND receipt of a proper certification for payment. Payment may be withheld unless all contractual requirements are met.

3. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION

3.1. The contracting office of the USPFO-IL 1301 N. MacArthur Blvd. Springfield, IL 62702-2317 is the office having administrative jurisdiction over this contract for all matters. A list of the names and telephone numbers of the Government team comprising the contract administrator, Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR), consultant, and any additional points of contact will be provided at the post-award conference.

3.2. All correspondence shall be addressed to the Contracting Officer. A copy of all correspondence shall be furnished to the contracting officer’s representative. Enclosures attached to or transmitted with the correspondence shall also be furnished with an original and one copy, unless transmitted electronically. Each letter shall make reference to the contract name, contract number, project number, and project title, and shall have only one subject.

For tracking purposes, a sequential numbering system should be used for all correspondence.

4. PAPERLESS CONTRACTING

4.1. The National Guard is fully committed to the Federal Government’s electronic commerce and paperless contracting initiatives. As such, it is anticipated that to the maximum extent possible, correspondence, modification distribution, etc., will be issued using electronic methods, i.e., electronic mail (e-mail). Contractors shall have and maintain capability to receive documents in this manner.

4.2. Additionally, it is anticipated that within the life of this contract, other electronic processes will be enacted.

These include, but are not limited to, electronic bidding/offers, change order proposals, and electronic invoicing.

When implemented by the Contracting Officer, contractors shall participate fully in any of these new requirements at no additional cost to the Government.

5. TELEPHONE COMMUNICATIONS SECURITY MONITORING

All communications with DoD organizations are subject to communications security (COMSEC) review.

Contractor personnel must be aware that telephone communications networks are continually subject to intercept by unfriendly intelligence organizations. The DoD has authorized the military departments to conduct COMSEC monitoring and recording of telephone calls originating from, or terminating at, DoD organizations. Therefore, civilian contractor personnel are advised that any time they place a call to, or receive a call from, a DoD organization, they are subject to COMSEC procedures. The contractor shall assume the responsibility for ensuring wide and frequent dissemination of the above information to all employees dealing with DoD information.

6. UTILITY SERVICES

The Government will provide reasonable utility services at Government locations for performance of work under this contract.

7. DESIGNATION OF TECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE

The Contracting Officer will appoint a qualified Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) for the purposes of technically administering the contract; however, all matters concerning this contract or any work ordered or placed against this contract must first be approved by the Contracting Officer. This in no way authorizes anyone other than the Contracting Officer to commit the Government to changes in any terms of the contract.

8. CONTRACTOR STAFF AND EMPLOYEES

8.1. Supervision. The Government shall not exercise any supervision or control over the contractor employees performing services under this contract; such employees shall be accountable not to the Government, but solely to the contractor, who in turn is responsible to the Government.

8.2. Contractor’s Employees. All work under this contract shall be performed in a skillful and professional manner. The Contracting Officer may, in writing, require the contractor to remove from the job site, any employee the Contracting Officer deems incompetent, careless or otherwise objectionable, which request the contractor will not reasonably refuse.

9. SECURITY REQUIREMENTS

9.1. The contractor shall comply with all security regulations imposed by the base/post commander and/or agency occupying the space where work is to be performed. Any necessary security clearances shall be obtained prior to commencement of work.

9.2. The new security requirements to satisfy contractor personal identification requirements in Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD-12), ''Policy for a Common Identification Standard for Federal Employees and Contractors,'' and Federal Information Processing Standards Publication (FIPS PUB) Number 201, ''Personal Identity Verification (PIV) of Federal Employees and Contractors” are in effect. Contractor shall comply with all requirements, at no additional cost to the Government.

10. REGULATIONS

The contractor shall comply with all applicable Federal, State, Local, DOD, National Guard Bureau, Army and Air Force regulations pertaining to safety, traffic control and fire prevention.

11. UNAUTHORIZED PERSONNEL

The contractor shall inform all personnel working under his jurisdiction (including subcontractor and visiting supplier personnel) that access to areas outside of the immediate work area is prohibited. Access of said personnel will be limited to official business only. Persons in violation of the above will be apprehended and appropriately disciplined.

12. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF CONTRACTOR

At a minimum, the contractor’s performance will be evaluated monthly. Any specific requirements for contract quality control and quality assurance by the Government personnel will be defined in the specifications. The contractor will be rated as outstanding, satisfactory or unsatisfactory in the areas of contract quality control, timely performance, effectiveness of management, and compliance with safety standards, laws, and regulations. The contractor will be notified of any unsatisfactory rating, either in an individual element or in the overall rating, prior to completing the evaluation, and all contractor comments will be made a part of the official record. Performance evaluation reports will be available to all DoD Contracting Officers for their future use.

13. SAFETY ASSURANCE

Contractor Responsibility. The contractor shall assume full responsibility and liability for compliance with all applicable regulations pertaining to the health and safety of personnel during the execution of work. The Government shall not be held liable for any actions on the part of the contractor, his employees or subcontractors, which result in illness, injury or death.

14. WORK BY THE GOVERNMENT

The Government reserves the right to undertake performance by Government forces, for the same type or similar work as contracted herein, as the Government deems necessary or desirable, and to do so will not breach or otherwise violate this contract.

15. POST-AWARD CONFERENCE

Before work commences on this contract, the Contracting Officer will conduct a conference to acquaint the contractor with Government policies and procedures that are to be observed during the execution of the work and to develop mutual understanding relative to the administration of the contract. Contractors and/or major subcontractors shall attend this meeting at no additional cost to the Government.

16. WIDE AREA WORKFLOW

Payments are now being made through the Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF). For information on WAWF, go to https://wawf.eb.mil. Follow the prompts to self-register. If you are not familiar with this process and need additional assistance, you may refer to the VENDOR’S USER GUIDE located at:

http://www.dfas.mil/contractorpay/electroniccommerce/EDToolBox/WAWFVendorGuide3.pdf

Use the distribution table below to enter the correct information or codes from your contract/order (SF Form 1449) into the Wide Area Workflow invoicing system. This information is required so that your invoices and additional e-mails will correctly flow through WAWF.

WIDE AREA WORK FLOW DODAAC AND EMAIL DISTRIBUTION TABLE

WAWF Item Your Fill-In Information Remarks

Select Document to Create Choose-“Invoice” only Required for creation of Invoices to allow for receiving reports in WAWF

Contract Number TBA

Delivery Order TBA

Issue Date TBA (Date of Order/Call)

Cage Code TBA Your company cage code as registered in CCR

Issue DODAAC W91SMC Contracting office that issued your task order.

WAWF uses this code to route the document to the correct contracting office.

Admin DODAAC W91SMC Found in Block 7 (Administered By). If needed, this is the office code, other than the issuing office, that will administer the contract actions.

Inspected By DODAAC/Ext. W90H2P This code is used to route documents to the office that will conduct the inspection (service inspector in WAWF).

Service Acceptor/Ext. W90H2P It is used to route documents to receiving service acceptor in WAWF.

Ship from Code Found within the contract if needed (not mandatory)

LPO DODAAC/Ext. W52JUD Funds Certification Office

Pay DODAAC

HQ0670

GFEBS Pay office code is used to route documents to the Defense Finance Accounting office responsible for payment certification. See Note 1

Inspection Destination

Acceptance Destination

Additional E-Mail Notifications:

paul.m.seivert.mil@mail.mil

COR - TBA

ACOR - TBA

List the contracting officer and the COR working with you on your task order. Additional POC’s may also be listed to ensure prompt payment.

Note 1: The accounts payable mailing address can be located in Block 15 of your order. Your purchase order/contract number or invoice number will be required to inquire status of your payment. Go to DFAS on the web at http://www.dfas.mil/. Payments may be expedited electronically via internet through the WAWF system.

The paying office DoDAAC and mailing address can be located on the front of your award. You can easily track your payment information on the DFAS website at https://myinvoice.csd.disa.mil/.

End of Section H

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS

SECTION M EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1. GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1. This solicitation is for a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Contract. The Government intends to award a single contract to a qualified Small Business Offeror deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), whose proposal conforms to all the RFP's requirements and is judged to represent the Best Value to the Government in accordance with the evaluation scheme set out in this solicitation. The Best Value is the most advantageous offer, price and other factors considered, and consistent with the Government's stated importance of evaluation criteria. Please note that the evaluation scheme for this solicitation is unique and is not purely a tradeoff analysis (FAR 15.101-1) or a purely Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable approach (FAR 15.101-2). Rather, the evaluation scheme is a “combination” of these two approaches, which is expressly allowed under FAR 15.101.

Under the evaluation scheme outlined below, it is possible that the award may be made to a higher-rated, higher-priced Offeror; where the Contracting Officer determines that the merits of the non-price factors of the higher-priced offeror is worth the price premium and attains the best value for the Government.

1.2. To arrive at a Best Value decision this acquisition will utilize the FAR Part 15.101-1 tradeoff process unless the lowest priced offeror is also deemed to be the highest rated in terms of non-price evaluation criteria. If the lowest priced offeror is also the highest rated in terms of non-Price Factors, no tradeoff is necessary. Further, there is no tradeoff necessary between any offer that is lower priced and higher rated in terms of non-Price Factors with respect to any other offers that are higher priced and lower rated for the non-Price Factors. While the Government and the Source Selection Authority will strive for maximum objectivity, the evaluation process, by its nature, is subjective and therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire evaluation process.

1.3. The source selection process will be conducted in accordance with FAR Subpart 15.3, Source Selection procedures. Offers will be evaluated using the criteria listed in “Evaluation Factors for Award.”

Noncompliance with the RFP requirements may raise serious questions regarding an offeror’s technical ability, past performance and/or pricing and may be grounds to eliminate the proposal from consideration for contract award.

Failure to include all information requested may adversely affect the evaluation. A proposal that merely reiterates or promises to accomplish the requirements of the RFP will be considered unacceptable. A proposal that is orderly and sufficiently documented will be easy for the Government to understand and will enable the Government to perform a thorough and fair evaluation.

1.4. The Contracting Officer will conduct a proposal compliance review for all timely-received proposals for determination of basic proposal adequacy prior to providing the proposals to the evaluators. Failure to provide a complete proposal, all 2 Volumes, may result in the proposal being removed from further consideration for award.

Failure to address any factor Technical, Past Performance or Price or any technical subfactor shall be grounds for elimination from evaluation and consideration for award.

1.5. Offerors must ensure that no pricing information is displayed in Volume 2, Technical and Past Performance Proposal.

1.6. Although the assessment of Past Performance as a specific evaluation factor is separate and distinct from the Determination of Responsibility required by FAR Part 9, Past Performance information obtained herein will be used during the Government’s responsibility determination. The Government also reserves the right to obtain additional information solely for the purpose of making a responsibility determination from all offerors after receipt of proposals. Requests for responsibility information do not constitute discussions.

1.7. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer, in his/her sole discretion, later determines them to be necessary or appropriate. Further, the Government reserves the right to create or not to create a competitive range. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

1.8. The Government reserves the right to reject any or all offers if such action is in the Government's best interest.

1.9. ENFORCEABILITY OF PROPOSAL: The proposal must set forth full, accurate and complete information as required by this solicitation. By submission of the offer, the Offeror agrees that all items proposed (if applicable e.g., subcontractors, etc.) will be utilized for the duration of the contract and any substitutions shall require prior Contracting Officer's approval.

2. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

2.1. The evaluation factors are Technical Capability, Past/Present Performance and Price. The relative importance of the evaluation factors is as follows: Technical and Past Performance are approximately equal to each other and when combined, are approximately equal to the Price Factor. The evaluation process will follow a sequence in which the Technical will be evaluated first, the Price factor will be evaluated second and the Past Performance Factor will be evaluated third (and last). The Technical Factor will be evaluated first and will result in an offer being rated as “Acceptable” or”Unacceptable.” If an offeror is deemed to be unacceptable, it will be set aside and will not continue further in this competition. If the Price is determined to be reasonable and realistic, the offer will continue in the competition for a Past Performance Factor evaluation. Conversely, if the price proposal is deemed “unreasonable,” or “unrealistic,” it will not continue further in this competition.

2.2. TECHNICAL CAPABILITY: Technical Capability will be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. An offeror shall obtain an “Acceptable” rating to continue further in the competition. Offerors who are deemed to merit an “Unacceptable” rating in the Technical Capability Factor will be removed from further consideration for award.

2.2.1. To be deemed “Acceptable” the proposal must demonstrate the ability to perform the medical case management service requirements in accordance with the Performance Work Statement (Section C) as well as an understanding of the requirements listed therein.

2.2.2. Technical Capability Ratings

ACCEPTABLE: Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

UNACCEPTABLE: Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

2.3. PRICE EVALUATION

2.3.1. The purpose of the price/cost evaluation is to determine whether an offeror's proposed prices/costs for the project are reasonable and realistic in relation to the solicitation requirements and demonstrates the offeror understands the proposal requirements.

2.3.2. The Government reserves the right to obtain additional information concerning the price (cost) as necessary to obtain a better understanding of the price proposed. No proposal revisions will be allowed under these conditions. Request for such information is for clarification purposes only. This does not constitute and shall not be construed as discussions.

2.3.3. The Government may conduct a price/cost evaluation of each offeror's proposal to determine whether or not each proposal complies with the stated criteria: "Reasonableness" and “Realism". Those proposals evaluated as not satisfying all of the price/cost criteria may be eliminated from further consideration unless the Contracting Officer determines:

2.3.3.1. A minor clerical error has occurred, in which case the offeror may be given an opportunity to correct the minor error within the constraints of the "clarifications" process or

2.3.3.2. The Contracting Officer in his/her sole discretion later determines discussions to be necessary or appropriate.

2.3.4. Reasonableness of an offeror's proposal is evaluated through cost or price analysis techniques as described in FAR Subpart 15.305(a)(1) and (4). For cost (Price) to be reasonable, it must represent a cost (Price) that provides value to the Government when consideration is given to prices in the market and functional capabilities of the offeror.

2.3.5. Realism is evaluated by assessing the compatibility of proposed costs with proposal scope and effort. For cost (Price) to be realistic, it must reflect what it would cost the offeror to perform the effort if the offeror operates with reasonable economy and efficiency. Proposals unrealistically low in price, when compared to the Government estimate, and/or market conditions evidenced by other competitive proposals received, may be indicative of an inherent lack of understanding of the solicitation requirements and may result in proposal rejection without discussion. Any inconsistency, whether real or apparent, between proposed performance and price must be clearly explained in the price proposal. For example, if unique and innovative approaches or conditions are the basis for an unbalanced/inconsistently priced proposal, the nature of these approaches and their impact on price must be completely documented. The burden of proof of cost (Price) realism rests solely with the offeror.

2.3.6. Discounts: Prompt payment discounts will not be considered in the evaluation of offers.

However, any offered discount will form part of the award, and will be taken if payment is made within the discount period indicated in the offer by the offeror. As an alternative to offering a prompt payment discount in conjunction with the offer, offerors awarded contracts may include prompt payment discounts on individual invoices.

2.3.7. Prices will be evaluated for affordability. Proposed prices that exceed funding limitations for this project may be deemed unaffordable and removed from consideration for award.

2.3.8. Travel Sub CLINs (i.e. 0001AB, 0002AB, etc.) will be budgeted for by the Government. Prices for these sub CLINs will not be evaluated.

2.4. PAST/PRESENT PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

2.4.1. The Government will evaluate the Past/Present Performance of offers receiving an “Acceptable” Technical Capability rating starting with the lowest reasonable and realistic price offered until an offeror is rated “Substantial Confidence,” which is the best Past/Present Performance rating possible under the terms of the evaluation criteria in this solicitation. If the lowest (reasonable and realistic) price is deemed by the Government to merit a “Substantial Confidence” in Past Performance there will be no tradeoff and that offeror will be selected for award. If the lowest price offeror is not deemed to merit a “Substantial Confidence” the Government will continue to evaluate the Past Performance of offers in price order until an offeror is rated “Substantial Confidence.” By using this method it is possible (and likely) that some offerors’ Past/Present Performance will not be evaluated. At this point, the evaluation is complete and the Source Selection Authority will make an integrated best value assessment using the tradeoff process as described at FAR 15.101-1 of the evaluated offerors. If there are no “Substantial Confidence” ratings assigned for any of the offerors, the Government will then use a standard tradeoff process as described at FAR 15.101-1 to arrive at the offeror representing the best value in this competition.

The Past/Present Performance evaluation will consider such things as an offeror's business practices, customer relationship, ability to successfully perform as proposed, and other considerations as described in Past/Present Performance Sub-factors, elements and other considerations. Past/Present Performance includes current/on-going (present) performance. In assessing performance confidence, the evaluator may: (1) evaluate present and past performance information through the use of questionnaires completed by the offeror's references; (2) use data independently obtained from other Government or commercial sources; from any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System

(eSRS), or other databases; (3) interviews with Program/Project Managers, Contracting Officers or rely upon personal business experience with the offeror; (4) the information provided in the Offeror’s Past Performance Relevancy Questionnaire; and (5) consider any information the offeror submits which explains any problems encountered on the identified contract and the offeror's corrective actions. The Government reserves the rights to obtain and evaluate past performance information from any source it deems appropriate.

2.4.2. The evaluation may take into account Past/Present Performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to this acquisition. The evaluation will also consider information provided relative to corrective actions taken to resolve problems on past or existing, contracts.

2.4.3. An offeror with no relevant Past/Present Performance may receive a rating based on the evaluation of its predecessor companies, key personnel, and/or subcontractors provided the offeror clearly states in the proposal that the information provided about predecessor companies, key personnel, and/or subcontractors is for the purposes of enhancing the offerors past performance proposal. These ratings may have the same weight as the ratings of the proposing company. The weight that will be afforded for this type of past performance is within the sole discretion of the Government. If such information is not applicable (i.e., the offeror does not have a predecessor company, key personnel or subcontractors with relevant experience), the offeror shall be evaluated as “Unknown Confidence” (Neutral). However, the proposal of an offeror with no relevant Past/Present Performance history, while rated “Unknown Confidence” (Neutral) in Past Performance, may not represent the most advantageous proposal to the Government and thus, may be an unsuccessful proposal when compared to the proposal of other offerors.

2.4.4. In accordance with FAR 15.306(a)(2), if award will be made without conducting discussions, offerors may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of their proposals, e.g., the relevance of an offeror's past/present performance information and adverse past/present performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond or to resolve minor clerical errors.

2.5. Currency, Trends and Relevancy: Evaluators will consider the performance information for currency, relevancy as well as trends in the performance as explained further below.

2.5.1. “Current” means performance occurring within the last five (5) years for the period beginning five years prior to the solicitation release date. Within this period, performance occurring later in the period may have greater significance than work occurring earlier in the period.

2.5.2. “Trends” in performance will be considered and may include the following but not limited to:

more current performance having greater weight than older performance; patterns or trends in performance issues as relates to, but not limited to, types of projects, work, personnel and similar elements; and does performance show a pattern of improvement or decline over time?

2.5.3. In assessing “relevancy”, the Government may evaluate an offeror's past performance for similarity of the medical/dental services provided; size; project scope; cost magnitude, and complexity of work performed to those required for the proposed effort. The location at which work was performed to the location(s) at which work will be performed may also be considered. Relevancy will affect an offeror’s overall Past

Performance rating.

2.5.3.1. The Government may consider an offeror’s previous contracts in the aggregate in determining relevancy, should the offeror’s present and past performance lend itself to this approach. For example, an offeror’s performance on three contracts may, by definition, represent only a somewhat relevant effort when each contract is considered as a stand-alone effort. However, when these contracts are performed concurrently (in part or in whole) and are assessed in the aggregate, the work may more accurately reflect a relevant or very relevant effort.

2.5.4. Considering all the elements listed above, the following adjectival ratings and descriptions will be used to evaluate the relevancy weight.

2.5.4.1. VERY RELEVANT - Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

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

2.5.4.3. SOMEWHAT RELEVANT- Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

2.5.4.4. NOT RELEVANT - Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

2.5.4.5. Offerors who otherwise have satisfactory performance on previous medical/dental projects may be rated “Unknown Confidence” (Neutral) if those projects are not considered relevant to the proposed acquisition and relevancy cannot be obtained through the evaluation of key personnel and/or subcontractors. Projects that are not current will not be considered in the evaluation.

2.6. Past Performance Sub-factors. There are six (6) sub-factors. Of these six, quality control, timely performance and management effectiveness are the most significant subfactors and are of equal value and when combined, are significantly more important than the other three subfactors. The other three subfactors are listed in descending order of importance. Evaluation will be at the factor level.

� Quality Control � Timely Performance � Management Effectiveness � Compliance with Safety Standards � Compliance with Federal laws and regulations � Compliance with utilization of small business concerns requirements

2.7. The elements that may be considered under each subfactor are described below:

2.7.1. Quality Control (QC): Evaluators may consider such things as: Quality of case management and customer services provided; Adequacy of the Contractor QC; Identification/correction of deficient work in a timely manner; Suggested solutions and displayed initiative to implement solutions; Adequacy of medical case management services/supplies/personnel provided; Use of specified materials/equipment.

2.7.2. Timely Performance: Evaluators may consider such things as: Met established deadlines and/or time limitations for requested medical case management services; Timely submission of documents/reports/results/etc.; Resolved delays in an expeditious manner; Identification/correction of deficient work in a timely manner; Completed all contract work in a timely manner; Left no major discrepancies; Timely submission of required documents/information, e.g., MEDPROS, DENCLASS.

2.7.3. Management Effectiveness: Evaluators may consider such things as:

2.7.3.1. General Business Practices, including, but not limited to: Contractor provided experienced managers, and supervisors with the ability needed to meet contract requirements; Hired experienced subcontractors; Paid subcontractors/suppliers in a timely manner; The contractor cooperated to resolve problems, attending meetings (as applicable) and maintained communication to assure satisfactory resolution;

2.7.3.2. Pricing, including, but not limited to: The contractor submitted proposals that accurately represented the work required; The contractor's supporting price/cost information for modifications were accurate, complete and reasonable (not over inflated or under estimated); Provided well-substantiated pricing data for task orders;

2.7.3.3. Event Management/Superintendent, including, but not limited to: Event manager ensured compliance to contract requirements & safety regulations; Event manager acted promptly to resolve problems and ensure work quality; Event manager had sufficient authority to make decisions or take actions during project performance; Event manager consistently present on site when work was performed.

2.7.4. Compliance with Safety Standards: Evaluators may consider such things as: Adequacy of implementation of safety plan; Acceptable safety history.

2.7.5. Compliance with Federal laws and regulations: Evaluators may consider such things as:

Compliance with laws and regulations with specific attention to: required licensing/certifications; OSHA; AR 40- 501 Standards of Medical Fitness, dated 4 August 2011; AR 40-35 Dental Readiness & Community Oral Health Protection, dated 2 August 2004; Compliance with the Service Contract Act of 1965; Compliance with applicable local, state, and federal laws.

2.7.6. Compliance with Small Business Concerns Requirements: (Applicable to all offerors) Generally, offeror demonstrated adequate compliance with the requirements of FAR Clause 52.219-8, “Utilization of Small Business Concerns”. Past performance included adequate utilization of small businesses, small disadvantaged businesses, HUBZone small businesses, women-owned small businesses, and veteran owned and service disabled veteran owned small businesses, on prior Government contracts.

2.8. Other Past Performance Considerations: Evaluators may also consider the following issues when evaluating an offeror's Past Performance. These issues may help provide additional guidance in deciding a descriptive performance confidence assessment (e.g., "Substantial Confidence" or "Satisfactory Confidence") for a specific offeror if there is a question as to which adjective is most appropriate.

2.8.1. Professional/Industry Awards

2.8.2. Letters of appreciation, recognition or commendation, etc., received on behalf of a customer may be submitted. The Government will consider up to five (5) such documents.

2.8.3. Unique skills and accomplishments;

2.8.4. Assessment of liquidated damages (frequency, circumstances, severity of problem, etc.)

2.8.5. Contractor Desirability: Based on the contractor's overall performance, how willingly would a customer re-hire the offeror.

2.9. The following ratings and related definitions will be used to define the performance confidence assessment. Based on the evaluation results, the evaluators will assign the Past Performance factor one of the ratings as defined below.

2.9.1. SUBSTANTIAL CONFIDENCE: Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

2.9.2. SATISFACTORY CONFIDENCE: Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

2.9.3. LIMITED CONFIDENCE: Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

2.9.4. NO CONFIDENCE: Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

2.9.5. UNKNOWN CONFIDENCE (NEUTRAL): No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

3. AWARD and DEBRIEFINGS

3.3. Award: A written award or acceptance of offer mailed, or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer shall be deemed to result in a binding contract without further action by either party.

3.4. Debriefings

3.4.1. Offerors excluded from the competitive range or otherwise excluded from the competition before award may submit a written request for a debriefing to the Contracting Officer in accordance with FAR 15.505.

3.4.2. After award, unsuccessful offerors may submit a written request for a debriefing to the Contracting Officer in accordance with FAR 15.506.

3.4.2.1. Written requests for debriefing will be accepted by certified mail only. Submitted means delivered to the Contracting Officer at the location indicated on the SF 1449 for receipt of proposals.

End of Section M

The following have been deleted:

52.237-7 Indemnification and Medical Liability Insurance JAN 1997

(End of Summary of Changes)