SOLICITATION NOTICE
R -- N00174-10-Q-0167, National Policy, Joint Chief of Staff,Washington, DC (Please Note: Page 1 of the attached SF 1449 should read 04 Aug 2010 versus 14 Aug 2010.)
- Notice Date
- 7/20/2010
- Notice Type
- Combined Synopsis/Solicitation
- NAICS
- 541990
— All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
- Contracting Office
- N00174 NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER, MARYLAND 4072 North Jackson Road Suite 132 Indian Head, MD
- ZIP Code
- 00000
- Solicitation Number
- N0017410Q0167
- Response Due
- 8/4/2010
- Archive Date
- 8/19/2010
- Point of Contact
- Christine.Owens@navy.mil 301-744-6556
- Small Business Set-Aside
- Total Small Business
- Description
- National Policy This is a combined synopsis solicitation for a commercial product prepared in accordance with the format in Subpart 12.6 as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. This announcement constitutes the only solicitation; quotes are being requested and a written solicitation will not be issued. This acquisition is 100% set aside for small business in accordance with FAR 52.219-1 AND 52.219-6 (THIS MEANS YOU MUST BE A SMALL BUSINESS, QUOTING THE PRODUCT OF A SMALL BUSINESS CONTRACTOR). This request for quote (RFP) N00174-10-Q-0167 is the only written solicitation, which will be issued, unless amended. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code is 541990. The Offeror shall provide a firm fixed price offer for editorial and publication services for a base period of 12 months and two 12-month option periods in support of providing an updated and revised volume of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and National Policy: Vol IX, 1965-68. UNLESS AVAILABLE VIA Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA) THE OFFERORS ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLETE AND INCLUDE A COPY OF THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS WITH THEIR PROPOSALS REFERENCING APPLICABLE NAICS AND SIZE STANDARD STATED ABOVE: FAR 52.219-1 Alt 1 Small Business Program Representative, FAR 52.212-3, Offeror Representation and Certifications - Commercial Items, FAR 52.222-22 Previous Contracts and Compliance Reports, FAR 52.222-25 Affirmative Action Compliance. The following clauses are also applicable to this requirement: FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation - Commercial Items, applies with paragraph (a) completed as follows: Award will be made to the offeror that meets the solicitation's minimum criteria at the lowest price. The following provisions are also applicable to this requirement: FAR 52.212-4 Contract Terms and Conditions - Commercial Items, FAR 52.212-5 Contract Terms and Conditions Required Implementing Statutes or Executive Orders - Commercial Items, with reference to 52.219-4, 52.219-28, 52.222-3, 52.222-19, 52.222-21, 52.222-26, 52.222-35, 52.222-36, 52.222-37, 52.222-39, 52.222-50, 52.223-9, 52.225-1, 52.225-13 and 52.232-33. Addendum to 52.212-4 includes DFARS 252.211-7003 Item Identification and Valuation. 52.212-2, Evaluation-Commercial Items: the evaluation factors are as follows, listed in descending order of importance, unless otherwise stated. NO PRICING IS TO BE PROVIDED IN THE TECHNICAL APPROACH OR RELEVANT EXPERIENCE RESPONSE. Factor 1 - Technical Approach: Limit 5 pages for Factor 1 response. The Offeror shall demonstrate an understanding of the requirements that are specified in the Performance Work Statement (PWS), to include each listed deliverable. The Offeror's technical approach must demonstrate the necessary skills, knowledge, and capabilities to successfully perform all tasks in the PWS. The Offeror shall describe its Quality Control Program which should detail and describe the Contractor's framework and processes for delivering quality products and services as required by the PWS. At a minimum, the Offeror's technical proposal shall demonstrate the following mandatory technical specifications:.An established record of historical publication and/or teaching;.A demonstrated capability to collect, collate, and analyze historical data;.A demonstrated capacity to interpret historically significant national security issues; The Offeror's technical proposal will be evaluated based on its technical approach including detailed deliverables and performance standards as defined in the PWS and the mandatory technical specifications listed in the aforementioned bullets. The Offeror shall respond with a line-by-line response attesting to full compliance to each item listed under the mandatory minimum technical specifications and address the ability to meet the desired delivery requirements defined in the PWS. Factor 2 - Relevant Experience: The Offeror shall submit four copies of the relevant experience written narrative portion of the proposal. The Government will assess each Offeror's relevant experience to determine whether they have performed efforts similar to those required under the PWS. The Government requests the Offeror provide a written narrative detailing their knowledge and experience, as it relates to their ability to reconstruct and analyze the roles of the Chairman of the JCS and JCS in the development of national security policy during the Johnson Administration Era. The narrative shall address the Offeror's familiarity with the topic, research design and execution experience, and writing and editing skills. The Offeror's Technical Approach and Relevant Experience will be evaluated using an adjectival rating of "Outstanding" "Good," "Acceptable," "Marginal," or "Unacceptable." These adjectival ratings are defined in the table below: ADJECTIVAL RATING DEFINITIONOutstandingA 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. GoodA 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. AcceptableA 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. MarginalA proposal that satisfies all of the Government's requirements with minimum detail to indicate feasibility of approach and shows a minimal understanding of the problem with an overall high degree of risk in meeting the Government's requirement. UnacceptableA 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. Factor 3 - Past Performance: The Government will evaluate past performance for current relevancy within the last ten (10) years based on how well the Contractor performed on projects of similar dollar value, size, scope, and complexity. The Contractor shall have a past performance that demonstrates successful execution and delivery of services in scope and type cited in the PWS. The Offeror shall submit the past performance matrix found at the end of the PWS as part of its response. The Offeror will send the questionnaires to those listed on the matrix and request those companies complete and return the questionnaires back to the Contract Specialist via email by the closing date. The Government will evaluate the Offeror's demonstrated past or current effort. Basis of Evaluation: Evaluation will assess the likelihood of success in performing this requirement as indicated by the Offeror's record of past performance. The Government will also evaluate promptness and effectiveness of any necessary corrective action. The Government may also evaluate information gathered independently of the Offeror's submission to assess past performance (i.e., Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARs)). Quality of performance is defined as the level of past performance provided which will be used as an indicator of the Offeror's probable performance as it relates to this acquisition. Offerors that would be eliminated from the competitive range solely based on negative findings in past performance will be given an opportunity to address such findings. A significant achievement, problem, or lack of relevant data in any element of past performance can become an important consideration in the source selection process. Adverse Past Performance may result in an overall High-Risk rating. The Offeror is reminded to include all relevant past efforts, including demonstrated correction actions, in its proposal. In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance, or where past performance information is not available, the Offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. A "Neutral" rating will be given. Past performance evaluation adjectival ratings are described in the table below: ADJECTIVALRATINGDESCRIPTIONExceptionalThe Offeror's performance met contractual requirements and exceeded many to the Government's benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective action(s) taken by the Contractor were highly effective.Very GoodThe Offeror's performance met contractual requirements and exceeded some to the Government's benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective action taken by the Contractor were effective.SatisfactoryThe Offeror's performance met contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor appeared or were satisfactory.MarginalThe Offeror's performance did not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflected a serious problem for which the Contractor had not identified corrective actions. The Contractor's proposed actions appeared only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.UnsatisfactoryThe Offeror's performance did not meet most contractual requirements and recovery was not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed contained a serious problem(s) for which the Contractor's corrective actions appeared or were ineffective. Factor 4 - Price: In determining the overall best value of the proposal, price is less important than the technical approach, management, and past performance. Price will not receive an adjectival rating. The Offeror's proposed payment schedule will be evaluated. When evaluating the price proposal, a determination will be made as to the Offerors' price reasonableness and completeness. The Offerors' proposals must demonstrate reasonable pricing that is aligned with the technical and management approaches. Failure to address any of the instructions within this combined synopsis/solicitation may result in a proposal being considered unacceptable. The Government will make a best value determination based on these factors. Intent is to award based on initial offers. If considered necessary by the Contracting Officer, discussions will be conducted only with those Offerors determined to have a reasonable chance for award. Parties responding to this solicitation may submit their quote in accordance with their standard commercial practices (e.g. on company letterhead, formal quotes form, etc.) but must include the following information: 1.)Company's complete mailing and remittance addresses, discounts for prompt payment, if any (e.g. 1% 10 days), ability to meet delivery requirement and unit cost of product. 2.)The company's CAGE code, DUNS Number, and Taxpayer ID number. 3.)To reiterate, All FAR certifications and representations specified above must also accompany your quote unless available on line. Any and all questions must be submitted 5 days before close of solicitation. No questions will be accepted after than time. ELECTRONIC Responses only! Responses must be received no later than 10:00a.m. EST on 04-August-2010. Provide electronic responses to Christine Owens, Contract Specialist, Code 13O, Naval Sea Systems Command, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Indian Head Division (NSWC IHD), Procurement Division, 4072 North Jackson Road Suite 118, Code C13O, Indian Head, MD 20640-5115. Electronic mail address: Christine.owens@navy.mil. This synopsis is being posted to both the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) page located at http://www.eps.gov and the Navy Electronic Commerce on Line (NECO) site located at http://www.neco.navy.mil. While it is understood that FBO is the single point of entry for posting of synopsis and solicitations to the internet, NECO is the alternative in case FBO is unavailable. Please feel free to use either site to access information posted by the Navy Sea Systems Command.
- Web Link
-
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/DON/NAVSEA/N00174/N0017410Q0167/listing.html)
- Record
- SN02211863-W 20100722/100720235410-50ea66161844f83614a16ad0142c51d9 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |