6640--Urinalysis Chemistry and Automated Microscopic cost per test.

VA242-17-Q-0730

Page 1 of 38

Page 37 of 37

Page 1 of 38

ADDENDUM to FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES

1. Submission of Offer.

The point of contact for this requirement is the Contracting Officer Morgan Weeks. Address all written questions or concerns you may have to the Contracting Officer. Any questions submitted will need to identify the pertinent document, Statement of Work (SOW), Solicitation Attachment, Solicitation Technical Exhibit, etc.) and include the applicable page number, paragraph number, and/or reference with each question. Questions regarding specific verbiage or content in the solicitation package shall include excerpts or examples from the subject matter to ensure the question is clearly conveyed. The deadline for the submittal of all questions is February 3, 2023, 4:00PM Eastern Standard Time.

2. General Instructions.

a. The selection of a source for award purposes will be conducted utilizing best value, in accordance with FAR 8.405-3. Offers will be evaluated using the criteria under ADDENDUM TO FAR Clause 52.212-2, Evaluation Commercial Items. Noncompliance with the Solicitation requirements will hamper the Government s ability to properly evaluate the proposal and will result in elimination of the proposal from further consideration for contract award.

b. The Offer. The submission of the documentation specified below will constitute the Offeror s acceptance of the terms and conditions of the Solicitation, concurrence with the Statement of Work, and Awarded Contract Type.

c. It is the Government s intention to award without discussions. Offerors are encouraged to present their best technical proposal and prices in their initial proposal submission. However, should discussions become necessary, the Government reserves the right to hold discussions. If this occurs, a competitive range will be determined and Offerors notified. The competitive range may be limited for purposes of efficiency.

d. Instructions outlined in this solicitation prescribe the format for proposals and describe the approach for the development and presentation of the Offeror s data. These instructions are designed to ensure the submission of necessary information to provide for the understanding and comprehensive evaluation of the proposals.

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

f. If an Offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, an ambiguity, omission, or are otherwise deemed unsound, the Offeror shall immediately notify the Contracting Officer 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 discussions.

3. Proposal Submission

The Offeror s proposal shall consist of their Technical Approach and Capabilities, Past Performance, Price, Solicitation, and their Offer Documents.

(1) Format. Proposals shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled. Proposals shall be appropriately numbered and clearly identified with the date and solicitation number in the header and/or footer and shall begin at the top of each page. The offeror is required to provide one copy of their proposal by email to Morgan.Weeks@va.gov.

4. Proposal Contents and Due Date. In response to this Solicitation for Proposals, submit proposals with cover letter no later than Wednesday February 8, 2023; 3:00 PM Eastern Standard Time. Proposals shall be submitted as indicated in paragraph 1.

a. Technical Approach and Capabilities. The Offeror shall provide supporting documents that they possess adequate resources, capability, experience, responsibility and integrity to meet the technical capabilities to comply with the requirements of the resulting awarded contract.

b. Past Performance. This factor involves the Offeror s ability to demonstrate the quality of the Offeror s past performance for services similar in scope, complexity and magnitude to this requirement with the specified scope of work clearly detailed in the SOW.

The Offeror shall submit the following performance data:

(1) Offerors shall submit a description of a minimum of three contract references in direct support of Federal, State, Local, or Commercial entities. Performance of these efforts shall be current and relevant. Current is defined as work performed not more than three years prior to the date of the Solicitation issue and relevant work is the same or similar in scope, complexity, and magnitude as the work identified in the SOW.

(2) Include the following information for each contract:

Name and Address of the Contracting Activity (Medical Center or Company)

Name and Telephone Number of Point of Contact (Contracting Officer, Lab(s) Contracting Officer Representatives or Lab Managers) who would have firsthand knowledge on contract performance and/or satisfaction.

Contract Number and Dates of Contract Performance.

(3) Price Proposal. The contract type for the awarded contract is Firm Fixed Price. The Offeror shall complete Attachment A to provide their pricing information for all five years.

(4) Solicitation Documents. Each Offeror shall complete the fill-in sections on page one of the solicitation. An authorized official of the Contractor shall sign page one of the Standard Form 1449 and all certifications requiring an original signature.

Each proposal shall contain a cover letter and Introduction identifying the following: Offeror Name, address, telephone, fax number, email address, DUNS Number, and the solicitation number.

5. Delivery of Offers

The Solicitation due date is listed in block 8 on page one of the Standard Form 1449 and in paragraph four Proposal Contents and Due Date . Offerors shall email proposals to Morgan Weeks at Morgan.Weeks@va.gov.

52.212 2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (NOV 2021)

The Government shall award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation shall be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

In accordance with FAR 8.405-3, Ordering Activities shall establish the BPA with the schedule Contractor that can provide the supply or service that represents the best value. The Government intends to make a single award for this requirement. In order to be considered for an award the Government s requirements must be met and must also meet (defined as products that most support) the applicable regulatory Standards and Provisions identified in the Statement of Work (SOW).

The Government will award a contract from this solicitation to the responsible Offeror that represents the best value to the Government.

Technical Approach and Capabilities is more important than Past Performance and Price. All sub-factors under Technical Approach and Capabilities are of equal importance. Past Performance is more important than Price.

The Contracting Specialist shall conduct a price evaluation in accordance with FAR 12.209. Offerors are cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest price Offeror.

Options. The Government shall evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise any of the options.

To receive consideration for award, proposals must receive an overall rating of no less than:

Acceptable for the overall rating under Factor I, Technical Approach and Capabilities.

Price must be determined to be Fair and Reasonable in accordance with FAR 12.209.

Offerors will be required to submit their technical approach and capabilities, past performance, and price with their proposal. Offerors will be evaluated against these three evaluation factors. To determine which Offeror represents the best value to the Government, the offeror s proposal will be evaluated as outlined below in paragraphs two, three, and four.

Factor I Technical Approach and Capabilities: The Offeror shall provide supporting documents that they possess adequate resources, capability, experience, responsibility, and integrity to meet the technical capabilities to comply with the requirements of the awarded BPA. This shall include, in accordance with the SOW, but is not limited to the following:

Data Management And Middleware Capabilities: The ability to provide Middleware that are able to provide services such as but not limited to: interface with Laboratory computer system, advanced quality control that can be used to determine method precision and accuracy including Levy Jennings graphs, and storage of patient results with the ability to retransmit and print results in the event of an LIS problem or barcode read error. Each of the three sites requires its own Middleware Server.

A fully automated analysis system that is FDA approved and has been on the market for at least one year that is capable of Urinalysis Chemistry and Automated Microscopic Testing.

Reagent stability sufficient to accommodate both high and low volume use. The Contractor shall provide expiration dates of at least one year for reagents. New lots of reagents and controls shall be supplied one month in advance to allow for complete cross over studies.

The technical features of the proposed instrumentation shall be available for detecting interfering substances with detection of adequate reagents and strips.

The technical features of the proposed instrumentation shall be good high end linearity for specific gravity, able to read urine color and clarity, and able to flag abnormal results.

The technical features of the proposed instrumentation shall have detector systems for bubbles, clots, and incomplete sample aspirations.

The Contractor shall perform method validation to include correlation study, crossover studies, sensitivity, linearity, reproducibility, and any additional test workup required to demonstrate satisfactory instrument performance consistent with CLSI Standards.

The Contractor shall provide an instrument training program, as well as onsite training, that is coordinated with and timely to the equipment installation, sufficient to the size and scope of each of the three Sites services, and minimally equivalent to the terms and conditions for training defined in the Contractor s Federal Supply Schedule FSC Group 66, Part III, Cost Per Test Clinical Urinalysis Analyzers Contract. This shall include training on the operation of the system, data manipulation, and basic trouble shooting and repair. Thereafter, the Contractor shall provide training for minimally two operators per Site per year at the discretion of the Government for each model of instrumentation placed. Utilization of the training slots shall be mutually agreed upon between the three Sites and the Contractor. A training program that involves off site travel shall include the cost of airfare and room and board for each participant.

The Contractor shall provide with their proposal an implementation plan for installation of their new equipment. The Contractor s submitted plan shall not exceed ninety days for the transition of all services under the awarded BPA including installation and training of personnel, transition of all testing materials, reagents, and supplies, etc., and performance of all correlations and validations. Failure of the Contractor to conform to the transition period shall be considered as sufficient cause to terminate the awarded BPA for cause under the Termination for Cause clause of the awarded BPA.

NOTE: The Offeror s response to the nine Technical Approach and Capabilities Factors must be separately provided (e.g., placed behind the proposal submitted or independently included in a binder or folder).

Factor II - Past Performance: The Offeror shall provide a minimum of three references of current contracts or completed contracts within the past three years of similar size, scope, and complexity. References may include Federal, State, and Local Government as well as private customers. All references shall include the following information:

Name and Address of the Contracting Activity (Medical Center or Company).

Name and Telephone Number of Point of Contact (Contracting Officer, Lab Contracting Officer Representative, or Lab Manager) who would have firsthand knowledge of the contract performance.

Contract type, scope of work, and contract total dollar value.

Contract Number, and the beginning date and ending date of the contract period of performance.

The Past Performance Factor evaluation factor will assess the relevance and breadth of the Offeror s experience and the quality of the Offeror s past performance. The Government is seeking to determine whether the Offeror has experience that will enhance its technical capabilities to perform and whether the Offeror consistently delivers quality services in a timely and cost effective manner. In evaluating past performance, the Government will only take into consideration the relevant experiences from the Offeror s customers.

Information obtained from the Offerors through the PPIRS database and any other sources deemed appropriate, will be used by the Government in conducting past performance evaluations. The Government will analyze the historical facts of the Offerors past performance provided by its customers, and make qualitative judgements about the facts and observations. Offeror s may provide information on problems encountered on identified contracts and the Offeror s corrective action. The Government shall determine the relevance of similar past performance information.

In accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv) Offeror s with no relevant past performance history shall not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.

Factor III - Price: Pricing provided in Attachment A is to be inclusive of all necessary and appropriate labor, supervision, materials, equipment, and supplies to provide Clinical Urinalysis Cost Per Testing Services in accordance with the terms, conditions, specifications, and requirements of the resulting awarded BPA.

Pricing shall be evaluated for the entire contract period, including the base period and all option years and optional items for purchase. No adjectival rating score will be applied to the price evaluation. Price evaluation will be undertaken concurrently with the technical evaluation. Price analysis of the Offeror s price will be conducted in accordance with FAR 8.404(d). The Government shall not pay any costs incurred in the preparation and submission of an Offeror s proposal.

The Government may award to an Offeror whose proposal is sufficiently more advantageous than lower priced proposals as to justify payment of the higher price. Prospective Offerors are reminded to address each of the factors in writing, in detail. Any Offeror not meeting these requirements, in the determination of the Contracting Officer, shall be rejected.

Relative Order of Importance of Factors: Each proposal shall be evaluated with respect to A) Price, B) Past Performance, and C) Technical Approach and Capabilities. These three factors shall be used to establish an overall rating for each proposal. The Evaluation Factors are listed in order of importance: Technical Approach and Capabilities, Past Performance, and Price.

TECHNICAL AND PAST PERFORMANCE WHEN COMBINED, ARE SIGNIFANTLY MORE IMPORTANT THAN PRICE.

Evaluation Ratings: Proposals will be rated using adjectival ratings against each of the three evaluation factors set forth in this solicitation. Ratings for Factor I, Technical Approach and Capabilities is below under Table 1. Ratings for Sub-Factors i through ix is below under Table 2. Ratings for Factor II, Past Performance is below under Table 3. Factor III Price will not be evaluated with an adjectival rating.

The following ratings will be used for the evaluation of Overall Technical Approach and Capabilities:

Table 1

RATING

DEFINITIONS

Outstanding

A proposal that satisfies all of the Government s requirements with extensive detail to indicate feasibility of the approach and shows a thorough understanding of the problems and offers numerous significant strengths, which are not offset by weaknesses, with an overall low degree of risk in meeting the Government s requirements.

Good

A proposal that satisfies all of the Government s requirements with adequate detail to indicate feasibility of the approach and shows an understanding of the problems and offers some significant strengths or numerous minor strengths, which are not offset by weaknesses, with an overall low to moderate degree of risk in meeting the Government s requirements.

Acceptable

A proposal that satisfies all of the Government s requirements with minimal detail to indicate feasibility of the approach and shows a minimal understanding of the problems, with an overall moderate to high degree of risk in meeting the Government s requirements.

Unacceptable

A proposal that contains a major error(s), omission(s) or deficiency(ies) that indicates a lack of understanding of the problems or an approach that cannot be expected to meet requirements or involves a very high risk; and none of these conditions can be corrected without a major rewrite or revision of the proposal.

The following ratings will be used for the evaluation of Sub-Factors i through ix as identified above:

Table 2

RATING

DEFINITIONS

Outstanding

A sub-factor that satisfies all of the Government s requirements with extensive detail to indicate feasibility of the approach and shows a thorough understanding of the problems and offers numerous significant strengths, which are not offset by weaknesses, with an overall low degree of risk in meeting the Government s requirements.

Good

A proposal that satisfies all of the Government s requirements with adequate detail to indicate feasibility of the approach and shows an understanding of the problems and offers some significant strengths or numerous minor strengths, which are not offset by weaknesses, with an overall low to moderate degree of risk in meeting the Government s requirements.

Acceptable

A sub-factor that satisfies all of the Government s requirements with minimal detail to indicate feasibility of the approach and shows a minimal understanding of the problems, with an overall moderate to high degree of risk in meeting the Government s requirements.

Unacceptable

A sub-factor that contains a major error(s), omission(s) or deficiency(ies) that indicates a lack of understanding of the problems or an approach that cannot be expected to meet requirements or involves a very high risk; and none of these conditions can be corrected without a major rewrite or revision of the proposal.

The following ratings will be used for the evaluation of Past Performance:

Table 3

RATING

DEFINITIONS

Low Risk

Little doubt exists, based on the Offeror s performance record, that the Offeror can perform the proposed effort.

Medium Risk

Some doubt exists, based on the Offeror s performance record, that the Offeror can perform the proposed effort.

Unknown Risk

Little or no relevant performance record identifiable; equates to an unknown risk rating having no favorable or unfavorable evaluation significance.

High Risk

Significant doubt exists, based on the Offeror s performance record, that the Offeror can perform the proposed effort.

Options. The Government shall evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise any of the option years.

Written notice of award or acceptance of an offer mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful Offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer's specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

(End of Provision)