GEOSCOUT RFP SECTIONS L&M JANUARY 15-3, 2003 (AMENDMENT 24) INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

• Document Type: FOIA
• Collection: FOIA Collection
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 0005521401
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 51
• Document Creation Date: June 24, 2015
• Document Release Date: April 16, 2010
• Case Number: F-2009-01001
• Publication Date: January 15, 2003

UNCLASSIFIED
GeoScout
RFP
Sections L&M
January 153, 2003
24}
(Amendment
Instructions, Conditions, and
Notices to Offerors
APPROVED FOR RELEASED
DATE: 15-Apr-2010
01/03/03 (Amendment 1)
ige
 UNCLASSHUD
Table of Contents
L.1 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (FEB 1998) ......................................................446
L.2 52.211-14 NOTICE OF PRIORITY RATING FOR NATIONAL DEFENSE USE (SEP 1990) .......................................446
L.3 ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST .............................................................................................................446
L.4 52.216-1 TYPE OF CONTRACT (APR 1984) .......................................................................................................................446
L.5 52.233-2 SERVICE OF PROTEST (AUG 1996) ...................................................................................................................657
L.6 152.215-1 AGENCY ALTERNATE TO FAR CLAUSE 52.215-1 (JAN 1998) ...................................................................668
L.7 NOTICE OF EARNED VALUE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (JULY 2002) ......................................................................668
L.8 52.215-20 REQUIREMENTS FOR COST OR PRICING DATA OR INFORMATION OTHER THAN COST OR
PRICING DATA. (OCT 1997) ...........................................................................................................................................................7-79
L.9 INFORMATION TO OFFERORS
88-1.4
L.9.2
L
3
9
PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS .............................................................................................8$:10
POINT OF CONTACT ...........................................................................................................................................................99-11
PARTICIPATION BY AC
TER OF EXCELLENCE (ACE) IN THE EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS
U
SITI
N CE
9944
.
.
L.9.4
.........................
Q
I
O
N
PARTICIPATION OF SUPPORT CONTRACTORS IN THE EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS .......................................................101-04
T.10
PROPOSAL FORMAT AND SPECIFIC CONTENT ................................................................................................101012
L.10.1
L.10.2
GENERAL GuIDANCE ....................................................................................................................................................10-1$1-2
DISCREPANCIES .................................................................... 11443
........................................................................................
L.10.3
152.215-723 PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS (JAN 2001) .............................................................................11.13
L.11
VOLUME I - COVER LETTER/OFFER ...................................................................................................................141446
L. 11. 1
COVER LETTER ....................................... ...................... .......14141: 6
L.11.2
OFFERS .........................................................................................................................................................................151=t
L.11.3
CLASSIFIED ADDENDUM ...............................................................................................................................................16441--
L.12
VOLUME II - TECHNICAIJMANAGEMENT (ORAL PRESENTATION) ................................ 161618
L.12.1
REQUIREMENTS .............................................................................................................................................................164?1-S
L.12.2
VOLUME IIA - ORAL PRESENTATION ADDENDUM 161-64-9
L.12.3
ORAL PRESENTATION GUIDELINES ...............................................................................................................................17.11
L.13
VOLUME III - PAST PERFORMANCE ....................................................................................................................191921
L.14
VOLUME IV - COST VOLUME ................................................................................................................................201924
L.14.1 ESTIMATING METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................................................202022
L.14.1.1
Estimating System ................................................................................................................................................202-op-
L. 14.1.2
Purchasing System ........................................................................................202922
L.14.1.3
Accounting System 202-02-2
L
14
1
4
Past Ex
erience-Based Estimate
20
.
.
.
s .........................................................................................................................
p
L.14.2 SUBCONTRACTORS .............................. .......2121.22
L.14.3 SCHEDULE OF RATES .............................. .212123
L.14.4 ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION OF COST/PRICE DATA ......................................................................................................212123
L.14.4.1 PPAS Instructions ...............................................................................................................................................2121-23
L.14.4.2 Basis of Estimate Sheets by Contractor Work Breakdown Structure ..................................................................280
'T'ape 2
01/03/03 (Amendment 1)
 L.14.4.3 DCAA Submission ........... .................................................................................................................................. 2828-.30.
L.14.5 SUBCONTRACTING PLAN ...............................................................................................................................................2828303
L.14.6 EVALUATION OF OPTIONS .............................................................................................................................................282830
L.14.7 CHANGES AFTER CONTRACT AWARD ...........................................................................................................................282830
L.15 VOLUME V - SECURITY ...........................................................................................................................................2929-3:1
APPENDIX A OF SECTION L - ACRONYM LIST ..................................................................................................................303932
SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD ......................................................................................................3232-34
M.1 52.217-4 EVALUATION OF OPTIONS EXERCISED AT TIME OF CONTRACT AWARD. (JUN 1988) ...............323234
M.2 52.217-5 EVALUATION OF OPTIONS. (JUL 1990) ........................................................................................................323234
M.3 52.252-2 CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE. (FEB 1998) ........................................................................323234
M.4152.215-725 EVALUATION PROCEDURES AND FACTORS FOR AWARD (JAN 1998) .........................................323234
TABLE 1 EVALUATION CRITERIA WEIGHTS ...................................................................................................................343436
M.5 PROPOSAL EVALUATION ...............................................................................................................................................363638
BASIS FOR AWARD .......................................................................................................................................................................363638
FIGURE 1: OVERALL AWARD CRITERIA ............................................................................................................................37339
TECHNICAL AREA ............................................ .37 34)
............................................................................................................................
MANAGEMENT AREA ....................................................................................................................................................................3737343
PAST PERFORMANCE AREA ...........................................................................................................................................................3737:
SECURITY AREA ............................................................................................................................................................................383840
M.6 ASSESSMENT CRITERION ...............................................................................................................................................383840
TABLE 2 -- PROPOSAL RISK ASSESSMENT RATING SCALE ..........................................................................................393941
SPECIFIC CRITERIA .......................................................................................................................................................................40 42
Area I: Technical Evaluation ....................................................................................................................................................40404?
Area II Management Approach... .......................................444446
......................................................................................................
Area III Past Performance ........................................................................................................................................................464643
Area IV Cost ............................................................................................................................................................................464649
Area V Security ........................................................................................................................................................................474749
APPENDIX I PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE ...........................................................................................484850
01/03/03 (Amendment 1)
 UNCLASSIFIED
2003-K-0001
'ECTION L: INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS
L.1 Solicitation Provisions Incorporated by Reference (Feb 1998)
Pursuant to FAR 52.252-1 "Solicitation Provisions Incorporated by Reference" the following provisions are
incorporated herein by reference
Number Title
52.204-6 Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number (Jun 1999)
52.215-16 Facilities Capital Cost of Money (Oct 1997)
52.222-24 Pre-Award On Site Equal Opportunity Compliance Review (Feb 1999)
52-232-38 Submission of Electronic Funds Transfer Information with Offer. (MAY 1999)
52.237-1 Site Visit (Apr 1984)
52.237-10 Identification of Uncompensated Overtime (OCT 1997)
252.227-7028 Technical Data or Computer Software Previously Delivered to the Government (Jun 1995)
L.2 52.211-14 Notice of Priority Rating for National Defense Use (Sep 1990
Any contract awarded as a result of this solicitation will be a DO rated order certified for national defense use
under the Defense Priorities and Allocations System (DPAS) (15 CFR 700), and the Contractor will be required
to follow all of the requirements of this regulation.
.3 Organizational Conflict of Interest
The prime contractor for the GeoScout effort is prohibited from performing as the prime contractor for the
Enterprise Engineering effort. Furthermore, the GeoScout prime contractor is restricted to performing
substantially less than 50% of the Enterprise Engineering subcontracting effort. Contractors will be required to
submit Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) plans to mitigate the potential conflict caused by any contract
team overlap.
L.4 52.216-1 Type of Contract (Apr 1984)
It is the Governments intent to award a contract for the first two (2) blocks (Base Period) of work under the
SOW, as implemented by Task Orders, for a period of performance of not to exceed four (4) years. Authority
to Proceed will be for Block 1 initially. A Task Order for Block 2 will be awarded after completion of the
Business Case and Implementation Plan for Block 2. Prior to the end of Block 2 in accordance with the Award
Term Plan (ATP), the GeoScout contractor will have earned the right to proceed with Block three (3) or the
Government will re-compete the contract. The selected GeoScout contractor may earn the right to each
successive Block via the Award Term evaluation process. The Government may exercise yearly options at the
end of the contract to allow for a period of transition and re-competition.
The Government contemplates awarding a mixed contract type with Task Orders that could be either Firm
Fixed Price or Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF)/Award Term resulting from this solicitation.
The Award Fee portion of the contract will be used primarily to motivate the desired level of GeoScout
1teraction and cooperation with other elements within and external to NIMA (i.e. Enterprise Engineering,
.DES, etc.).
 UNCLASSIFIED
he Award Term portion of the contract will be used to motivate the GeoScout contractor's progress in
achieving the overall goals of the GeoScout Statement of Work (SOW). The final Award Term plan will
identify the criteria and timing the Government will use to determine Award Term extensions to the GeoScout
contract.
ad
Award
Term 1
Award
Term 2
Award
Term 3
0 tion 1
....................
........................ .....
11
0 Lion 2
a Lion. 3
?tion.4...
*The information displayed by this chart is notional
? Immediate authorization to proceed will be granted for Block 1 at contract award. Block 2 will be
authorized after delivery and acceptance of the Block 2 Business Case and Implementation Plan, with
authorization tentatively scheduled for early FY 04.
? The contractor shall have its preliminary Business Case and Implementation Plan for Block II available
to the Government for review 90 days following contract award, and the final Business Case and
Implementation Plan for Block II available for Government approval and authorization to proceed 180
days following contract award.
? The Block II Implementation Plan shall demonstrate support for all FIA interoperability-testing
activities to ensure that NIMA has the requisite Information Management (IM) capability to support the
FIA schedule. The contractor shall propose demonstration, prototype, modeling and simulation
activities necessary to support and validate Block II preparation, planning and design efforts.
? Portions of Blocks 1 and 2 may be performed in parallel, and for proposal Purposes, must be completed
by the end of FYO6.no later- than '9 ; after ntract award.
? The offeror shall bid Blocks 1 & 2 within the budget profile provided and shall not factor in possible
cost savings or cost avoidance trades as a means to stay within the provided budget profile.
? The contractor is not required to deliver a Business Case for Block 1 since the Government will make
the Block 1 feasibility determination. A detailed Implementation Plan submitted with the proposal is
required for Block 1. A Business Case and Implementation Plan are required for all subsequent Blocks
prior to the award of Task Orders.
? The contractor must earn the right to proceed with Blocks 3, 4 and 5 etc. The period of performance for
subsequent Blocks (post Block 2) is tentative, dependent on the offeror's specific approach.
? The Government may exercise options annually beginning approximately FY2010.
? The number of and duration of Blocks is dependent on the offeror's specific approach.
 .5 52.233-2 Service of Protest (Aug 1996)
(A) Protests, as defined in section 33.101 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, that are filed directly
with an agency, and copies of any protests that are filed with the General Accounting Office (GAO),
shall be served on the Contracting Officer (addressed as follows) by obtaining written and dated
acknowledgement of receipt from Diane Alcott, ACA, National Imagery and Mapping Agency, MS
P-11, 12310 Sunrise Valley Drive, Reston, VA 22091-3449 and, OGC, National Imagery and
Mapping Agency.
(b) The copy of any protest shall be received in the office designated above within one day of filing a
protest with GAO.
L.6 152.215-1 Agency Alternate to FAR Clause 52.215-1 (JAN 1998)
FAR Clause 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors - Competitive Acquisition, is modified only as
indicated below:
(f) Contract Award:
The Government intends to select for final negotiations a contractor(s) resulting from this
solicitation whose proposal represents the best value after evaluation in accordance with the factors
and sub-factors in the solicitation.
(2) The Government may reject any or all proposals if such action is in the Government's interest.
(3) The Government may waive informalities and minor irregularities in proposals received.
(4) The Government intends to evaluate proposals and select, without discussions, an offeror(s) for
final negotiations. Therefore, the offeror's initial proposal should contain the offeror's best terms
from a cost or price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct
discussions 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.
Paragraph (f) 5 - 11, and all other parts of FAR clause 52.215-1 remain unchanged.
L.7 Notice of Earned Value Management System (July 2002)
(a) The offeror selected for award shall provide documentation that the proposed earned value
management system (EVMS) complies with the intent of American National Standards Institutes
(ANSI)/Electronic Industries Association (EIA) 748-1998, Industry Standard Guidelines for Earned
Value Management (EVM), hereinafter referred to as "Guidelines".
(b) If the offeror proposes an EVMS that does not meet the requirements of paragraph (a) of this
provision, the offeror shall submit a comprehensive plan for compliance with the EVMS guidelines.
 UNCLASSIFIED
(1) The plan shall:
i. Describe the EVMS the offeror intends to use in performance of
the contract.
ii. Distinguish between the offeror's existing management system and
modifications proposed to meet the guidelines.
iii. Describe the management system and its application in terms of
the guidelines.
iv. Describe the proposed procedure for administration of the
guidelines as applied to subcontractors.
v. Provide documentation describing the process and results of any
third-party or self-evaluation of the system's compliance with
EVMS guidelines.
(2) The offeror shall provide information and assistance as required by the contracting
officer to support review of the plan.
(3) The Government will review the offeror's plan for EVMS before contract award.
(c) Offerors shall identify the major subcontractors (or major subcontracted effort if subcontractors have
not been selected) planned for the application of the EVMS guidelines. The prime contractor and the
Government shall agree to subcontractors selected for application of the EVMS guidelines.
(d) Upon contract award and during contract performance, the offeror is hereby notified that submitted
EVMS information may be shared with properly protected (fully executed non-disclosure agreements)
government support contractors for the purpose of analyzing the information and providing
recommendations to the government.
L.8 52.215-20 Requirements for Cost or Pricing Data or Information Other Than Cost or Pricing Data.
(OCT 1997)
(a) Exceptions from cost or pricing data.
(1) In lieu of submitting cost or pricing data, offerors may submit a written request for exception by
submitting the information described in the following subparagraphs. The Contracting Officer
may require additional supporting information, but only to the extent necessary to determine
whether an exception should be granted, and whether the price is fair and reasonable.
i. Identification of the law or regulation establishing the price offered. If the price is
controlled under law by periodic rulings, reviews, or similar actions of a government
body, attach a copy of the controlling document, unless it was previously submitted to the
contracting office.
ii. Commercial item exception. For a commercial item exception, the offeror shall submit,
at a minimum, information on prices at which the same item or similar items have
previously been sold in the commercial market that is adequate for evaluating the
reasonableness of the price for this acquisition. Such information may include -
1. For catalog items, a copy of or identification of the catalog and its date, or the
appropriate pages for the offered items, or a statement that the catalog is on file in
the buying office to which the proposal is being submitted. Provide a copy or
describe current discount policies and price lists (published or unpublished), e.g.,
SS:II
 UNCLASSIFIED
wholesale, original equipment manufacturer, or reseller. Also explain the basis of
each offered price and its relationship to the established catalog price, including
how the proposed price relates to the price of recent sales in quantities similar to
the proposed quantities;
2. For market-priced items, the source and date or period of the market quotation or
other basis for market price, the base amount, and applicable discounts. In
addition, describe the nature of the market;
3. For items included on an active Federal Supply Service Multiple Award Schedule
contract, proof that an exception has been granted for the schedule item.
(2) The offeror grants the Contracting Officer or an authorized representative the right to examine, at
any time before award, books, records, documents, or other directly pertinent records to verify
any request for an exception under this provision, and the reasonableness of price. For items
priced using catalog or prices, or law or regulation, access does not extend to cost or profit
information or other data relevant solely to the offeror's determination of the prices to be offered
in the catalog or marketplace.
b. Requirements for- cost or pricing data. If the offeror is not granted an exception from the
requirement to submit cost or pricing data, the following applies:
1. The offeror shall prepare and submit cost or pricing data and supporting
attachments in accordance with Table 15-2 of FAR 15.408.
2. As soon as practicable after agreement on price, but before contract award (except
for un-priced actions such as letter contracts), the offeror shall submit a
Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data, as prescribed by FAR 15.406-2.
L.9 Information to Offerors
L.9.1 Proposal Submission Instructions
All volumes of the proposal, with the exception of Volume III shall be received at the location specified below:
By NLT 03 February 2003,1400 EST.
The Past Performance Volume III (including a classified addendum if applicable) shall be received by NLT 1.5
January 2003, 1400 EST at the location specified below:
The contractor shall submit one copy of the proposal (hardcopy and softcopy) to the cognizant Administrative
Contracting Officer, and one copy to the cognizant Contract Auditor no later than 04 February 2003.
The. following wording shall be placed in a conspicuous location on the outside of all packages or envelopes
containing offer material.
TICOM, Inc.
ATTN: Diane Alcott, CO / John O'Connor, AC
RFP No. 2003-K-0001, "GeoScout"
14520 Avion Parkway, Suite 100
Chantilly, VA 20151
 UNCLASSIFIED
Additional Packing Instructions: Proposal binders shall be packed in boxes. The boxes shall be sequentially
numbered and shall indicate the total number of boxes (i.e., Box 1 of 4). Box numbers shall be placed on all
sides of the box itself. Box one (1) shall include the disks with the softcopy submission and a master packing
list. The master packing list shall list the contents (i.e., Volume Number, Copy Number, and Name) of each
box, by box number.
Classified information: Where classified information is required in your response, it shall be provided as a
classified supplement and bound in a single addendum to Volume I "Cover Letter/Offer." Classified Past
Performance information shall be submitted early with the Past Performance Volume III. Each entry in the
classified addendum shall be referenced to the proposal volume, page number, and paragraph number to which
it applies. Similarly, a reference shall be placed in the unclassified volume where the classified insert applies,
giving the page and paragraph numbers within the addendum where it can be found. Binding and labeling of
the addendum as well as submission shall conform to the same directions as those given in this instruction to
offerors for unclassified portions. The classified addendum shall be separately bound with an applicable
security designation color cover, conforming to the CDCG/DD Form 254 of this RFP. Pages in classified
addenda will be included in the page count for the applicable volume.
All cost or pricing information shall be UNCLASSIFIED.
L.9.2 Point of Contact
The Procurement Contracting Officer (PCO), Diane Alcott, is the sole point of contact for the GeoScout
vquisition. Any and all questions regarding any aspect of this RFP must be addressed only to the
i;ontracting Officer. The PCO will use the Acquisition Center of Excellence (ACE) Acquisition Research
Center (ARC) web site (http://arc.npa.gov) on the classified CWAN as the primary means of communication.
The offeror will be given the appropriate web site instructions, user log-ins, and passwords.
It is the offeror's sole responsibility to access the web site routinely to obtain current information relevant to
this acquisition (i.e., announcements, updates to the technical data package, technical and contractual Q&A,
amendments to RFP, etc.).
L.9.3 Participation by Acquisition Center of Excellence (ACE) in the Evaluation of Proposals
NIMA intends to utilize a Government organization, the NRO's Acquisition Center of Excellence (ACE),
relative to this acquisition. The ACE provides both acquisition and facility support through a number of
contracts with various contractors. The companies providing support to the ACE are identified as follows:
Companies Providing
ACE Acquisition Support
TICOM, INC.
Welkin Associates, Ltd.
Scitor Corporation
Telcolote Research, Inc.
TASC
Companies Providing
ACE Facility Support
Booz, Allen, & Hamilton
MRJ
IDS
Dmpanies providing support through ACE will NOT participate as evaluators, but will provide assistance to
government acquisition personnel. The exclusive responsibility for source selection remains with the
 UNCLASSIFIED
overnment. Non-Disclosure and Organizational Conflict of Interest Certificates for all ACE contractor
.,upport personnel participating in this source selection are on file with the NRO Office of Contracts ACE.
L.9.4 Participation of Support Contractors in the Evaluation of Proposals
NIMA has contracted with The MITRE Corporation, Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute (SEI),
RAND, and the GC Group for advisory assistance during the GeoScout source selection. NIMA's contract
with MITRE, SEI, RAND and the GC Group as well as the employment contracts between MITRE, the SEI,
RAND and their personnel, prohibit the unauthorized dissemination of data to which it or its employees have
access. It is the Government's intent to use the services of these personnel in a purely advisory role in the
evaluation of offers. The exclusive responsibility for source selection remains with the Government. Non-
Disclosure and Organizational Conflict of Interest Certificates are on file with the Contracting Officer.
L.10 PROPOSAL FORMAT AND SPECIFIC CONTENT
L.10.1 General Guidance
This section of the instructions to offerors provides general guidance for preparing the proposal as well as
specific instructions on the format and content of the proposal. The offeror shall be compliant with the
requirements as stated in the GeoScout Statement of Work (SOW). Furthermore, the offeror's proposal shall
be submitted in accordance with the instructions to offerors. Non-conformance with the instructions to offerors
may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation.
_ie proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for
substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the
Government's requirements, but rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to
meet these requirements. The offeror shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their
facilities and experience, and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offeror's proposal.
If an offeror does not understand these instructions, then it should write to the Contracting Officer for
clarification sufficiently in advance of the deadline for receipt of the offer to get an answer in time to meet that
leadline.
The Government intends to award to one contractor who is deemed responsible IAW with the Federal
Acquisition Regulation, as supplemented and whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements. In
iddition, the Government reserves the right to award no contract at all, depending on the quality of the proposal,
he availability of funding, and the continued existence of the requirement.
n order to award a contract the Government must have received an acceptable offer. An offer is acceptable
when it manifests assent to all of the terms and conditions of Sections A through K of this RFP, which includes
he solicitation provisions, contract clauses, specification, and documents, exhibits, and attachments. The
Jovernment will declare an offer to be unacceptable if it does not manifest the offeror's assent to all such terms
ind conditions.
['he Government may reject the proposal if it is evaluated to be unrealistically high or low in cost when
-Tnpared to Government estimates, such that the proposal is deemed to reflect an inherent lack of competence
Failure to comprehend the complexity and risks of the program.
01/03/03 (Amendment 1)
 UNCLASSIFIED
2003-K-0001
.x.,.10.2 Discrepancies
If the 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.
L.10.3 152.215-723 Proposal Preparation Instructions (.TAN 2001
This section is provided to assist the Offeror in preparing a proposal in response to this solicitation and to assist
the Government in determining the Offeror's relative ability to satisfy the solicitation requirements. These
instructions are not intended to unduly restrict the Offeror's proposal effort. Questions concerning these
instructions should be directed to the Contracting Officer.
(a) Separate volumes for the elements of your proposal shall be prepared according to the following table. All
proposal volumes shall be UNCLASSIFIED to the greatest extent possible. Every submission, whether
hardcopy or softcopy, must be properly identified, and marked with the proper classification. Each volume
shall be written or presented on a stand-alone basis. Information required for proposal evaluation that is not
found in its designated volume or presentation will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal.
Volume
Title
Page Limit
Hardcopy
Softeopy
I
Cover Letter/Offer
No limit
Original plus 3
1
II
Oral Presentation scenes
slides)
200 scenes
Original plus 30
1
IIa
Oral Presentation Addendum
1.50
Original plus 30
1
III
Past Performance Volume
50
Original plus 6
1
IV
Cost Volume
No limit
Original plus 6
4
V
Security Volume
No limit
Original plus 4
1
*Each scene shall consist of no more than two (2) images
Cross-Reference Matrix
The offer shall provide a cross-reference matrix indicating by CLIN, Section L, and SOW the corresponding
proposal paragraph(s) in that volume. The Cross-Reference Matrix shall contain at a minimum the data shown
in the table below:
CLIN Section L SOW Proposal
0003 L.8.4 4.18 Vol II, xx
(b) Proposal Volumes Format.
To aid in evaluation, each proposal volume shall follow the same general format. All Proposal Volumes shall
contain a Title Page, a Table of Contents, a List of Acronyms, Glossary of Terms, and a Cross-Reference
Matrix of the Proposal Volume by CLIN, Section L, & SOW.
 UNCLASSIFIED
gage limitations for each volume are identified in paragraph (a). Page limitations include charts and graphic
material. The title page, table of contents, a list of acronyms, glossary of terms, and cross-reference matrix do
not count toward the total page count of each volume and will not be evaluated. Classified information for a
particular volume that is included in Addendum 1 to the Cover Letter/Offer shall count towards the page
limitations for the volume it references. Pages not in the page count shall be numbered with Roman numerals
(i.e., iv).
(d) Proposal Page Format.
(d-1) Format: A "page" will consist of print on one length of 8 1/2 inch by 11-inch paper. Paper printed on two
sides will count as two pages. In accordance with the clause at 52.204-4, NIMA encourages the use of two
sided printing and reproduction. Foldouts shall not exceed 10% of the total volume page count for any single
volume. Each 11X17 foldout page shall count as two pages single sided and four pages double sided, against
the page limitations. Page margins will be a minimum of 1 inch on top, bottom and each side. Volumes I and
IV (Cover Letter/Cost Volume) are exempt from the 1-inch margin rule for mandatory forms, boilerplate, and
exhibits that are pre-formatted and do not conform to the 1-inch margin requirement, but will be considered in
the page count as specified. Partial pages count as a full page for page limitation purposes. All pages within a
page-limited section shall be consecutively numbered, starting at page one, and shall not exceed the page
limitation.
(d-2) Text Type Size.
Text Type Size shall be 12 point Times New Roman font. Typesetting or other techniques to reduce character
size or spacing are not permitted and are considered a deliberate attempt to circumvent the page limitations. No
nen and ink changes are allowed. Two column presentation and use of bold face type for paragraph headings is
;ceptable. Text lines shall be spaced at a minimum of 14.0 points (i.e., single spaced) and text lines shall not
exceed 45 lines per column per page, including heading.
(d-3) Illustrations and Tables: Slides, Tables, or Diagrams shall not exceed 8-1/2 X 11 inches. Color is
permitted. The Master Program Schedule shall be submitted as part of the NSGI System Transition Plan of the
Oral Presentation Addendum, Volume Ha in the following matter: One original plotted on 44X32 sheets
showing all dependencies and links. One original plus 29 printed on 11 X17 paper containing all necessary data
columns. All information (except for document numbers, classification markings, page numbers, etc.) shall be
provided within the page margins identified in paragraph (d)(1). Figure callouts may be single-spaced. The
font size for illustrations and tables shall be no less than:
Art: 8 point Times New Roman or Sans Serif
Tables: 8 point Times New Roman or Sans Serif
Titles: 10 point Times New Roman, bold, initial cap
(d-4) Binding.
Each volume shall be complete in itself and shall contain sufficient information to permit a detailed evaluation.
Each volume shall be contained in a separate, loose-leaf, three-ring binder. The volume title, copy number, and
the company's name shall be placed on the spine, on the front cover, and on the title page of the binder. The
pages for the title page, table of contents, and cross-reference matrix will not be numbered. Page 1 of the
volume is defined as the first page after the title page, table of contents and cross-reference matrix. All pages
shall be numbered sequentially from the first to the last page using only Arabic numerals. Attachments and
-)endices may be separately page numbered. Pages printed on both sides shall be numbered on both sides.
01/03/03 (Amendment 1)
 UNCLASSIFIED
~,ach volume will contain a matrix that identifies those pages within the main volume, attachments and
appendices which contribute towards the page count and are subject to evaluation.
(e) Any proposal pages submitted which exceed the page limitations set forth in paragraph (a) or proposal pages
failing to meet the format in paragraph (d) will not be read or evaluated, and hardcopy pages of the original and
all copies will be returned to the offeror.
(f) Electronic Format
(f-1) This section is intended to provide information to the offeror on the electronic format and application
software to be used for submitting softcopy proposals. Use of the software and procedures described in this
section reduces the amount of time and effort needed by the Government to receive and install proposals onto
the electronic evaluation system and will help to ensure that proposals are suitable for reading electronically.
The information regarding electronic products listed below should not be construed as Government
endorsement for such products. In the event of inconsistencies between the hardcopy and softcopy versions of
the proposal, the hardcopy version shall take precedence. Efforts by the Government to clarify and install
electronic proposal submissions in accordance with FAR 15.207(c) will not be considered discussions. The
offeror is encouraged to load and use their softcopy submission on a system equivalent to the Government's to
ensure that the Government will be able to load the softcopy submission.
Note: Electronic submission does not satisfy delivery of proposal. Hard copies must be received to meet the
delivery requirements.
(f-2) Evaluation Hardware
he Government will use the hardware listed in Table A:
Item
Equipment
Server
DEC Alpha running Windows NT 4.0
Data Input Disk Drive (Server)
Iomega Zip 100 Drive (FAT Format)
Workstations
IBM-compatible Pentium PCs running
Windows NT Workstation 4.0
Printer
Laser printers: DELN17ps (B/W) and
Tektronix Phaser 350 (color)
Tae Backup (Server)
Digital DLT-ta e IV
(f-3) Evaluation Software
The Government will access the softcopy versions using a network running Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0
and Workstation 4.0, Microsoft Office 97, Microsoft Project 98, Microsoft PowerPoint, and Adobe Acrobat 4.0.
Except as identified below, all proposal volumes shall be submitted in Adobe Acrobat, Portable Document
Format (PDF), version 4.0. The Acrobat Bookmark feature may be used for document navigation; however, use
of the Acrobat Notes feature is prohibited.
 UNCLASSIFIED
The Government will use Mainstay Software Corporation's Proposal Pricing and Analysis System (PPAS)
product for evaluation and analysis of the cost volume. Detailed instructions for submitting the cost volume are
included at L. 14.
(f-4) Electronic Media
The offeror shall submit its proposal on 100 Megabyte, Iomega Zip Drive-compatible, disk cartridges or CD-
ROM formatted to operate on the Government's proposal evaluation system as described in paragraphs (f-2) and
(f-3) above. The softcopy Oral Presentation (Volume II) shall be submitted on a separate CD-ROM or Zip
Drive. There is no limit to the number of Zip disk cartridges that may be submitted as long as the page
limitations of each proposal volume are met. The offeror shall virus scan and write protect the Zip disks prior
to submittal.
(f-5) File Naming Conventions
The offeror shall name files using standard naming conventions that clearly identify. the file. Valid extensions
for files using the above applications are ".pdf 'for Adobe Acrobat 4.0 files, ".xls" for Microsoft Excel 97,
".mpp" for Microsoft Project 98, and ".ppt" for Microsoft PowerPoint. Each file shall be stored in a folder that
corresponds to the proposal volume it represents. The files within the folder shall be named in an unambiguous
manner, using plain text language, which facilitates the evaluator's ease of accessing the files for evaluation.
The offeror shall insert the file name in the header of each document.
(f-6) Links
The offeror shall hyperlink information in its proposal when possible and prudent (i.e., cross-references made to
other sections, tables, or figures within that document). The offeror shall make the existence of hyperlinks
,)vious through the use of an outline box, different font color, underlining, or other highlight method.
(f-7) Multimedia
Sound or video files shall not be embedded into proposal documents.
(f-8) Graphics
Graphics, which are embedded into documents, shall be kept as simple as possible. Complex graphics require
longer periods for the computers used in the evaluation system to draw and redraw these figures, and scrolling
through the document is slowed significantly.
a. Limit colors to 256 colors at 1024 x 768 resolution; avoid color gradients.
b. Simplify the color palette used in creating figures.
c. Be aware of size for graphics files. Large files are discouraged.
d. Avoid scanned images.
L.11 VOLUME I - COVER LETTER/OFFER
L.11.1 Cover Letter
A cover letter, signed by an official authorized to legally bind the offeror is to be attached to offers. The first
page of the proposal's cover letter must show:
The solicitation number.
The name, address, and telephone and facsimile numbers of the offeror.
 UNCLASSIFIED
Names, titles, and telephone and facsimile numbers of persons authorized to negotiate on the offeror's
behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation.
d. Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal. Proposals signed by an agent shall be
accompanied by evidence of that agent's authority, unless that evidence has been previously furnished to
the issuing office.
e. Names and telephone numbers of persons to be contacted for clarification or questions to this proposal
(No more than two (2) people may be listed).
f. Provide the mailing address, telephone, and fax numbers for the cognizant Contract Administration
Office, DCAA, and Government Paying Office.
g. Statement that the proposal is firm for a period of not less than one hundred twenty (120) days from the
proposal due date.
h. Statement as to the acceptance of the anticipated contract provisions and proposed contract schedule or
specific exceptions taken to any of the terms and conditions specified herein.
L.11.2 Offers
The completion and submission to the Government of the items listed below shall constitute an offer and shall
indicate the offeror's unconditional consent to the terms and conditions of the RFP. Objections to any of the
terms and conditions of this RFP may be considered by the Government to be unacceptable.
Standard Form 33, "Solicitation, Offer, and Award," with blocks 12 through 18 completed by the offeror.
RFP Section B, "Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs," with the offeror proposed contract line item prices
iserted in the appropriate spaces.
RFP Section H, "Special Contract Requirements", the offeror's proposed names of Key Personnel inserted in
the appropriate space.
RFP Section I, "Contract Clauses," with the offeror's proposed Subcontracting Plan and a Mitigation Plan JAW
the Organizational Conflict of Interest clause.
RFP Section K, "Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors," completed by the offeror.
01/03/03 (Amendment 1)
 UNCLASSIFIED
,..113 Classified Addendum
Where classified information is required in your response, it shall be provided as a classified supplement and
bound in a single addendum to Volume I "Cover Letter/Offer." Classified Past Performance information shall
be submitted early as a separate addendum to the Past Performance Volume. Each entry in the classified
addendum shall be referenced to the proposal volume, page number, and paragraph number to which it applies.
Similarly, a reference shall be placed in the unclassified volume where the classified insert applies, giving the
page and paragraph numbers within the addendum where it can be found. Binding and labeling of the
addendum as well as submission shall conform to the same directions as those given in this instruction to
offerors for unclassified portions. The classified addendum shall be separately bound with an applicable
security designation color cover, conforming to the CDCG/DD Form 254 of this RFP. Pages in classified
addenda will be included in the page count for the applicable volume.
L.12 VOLUME II - TECHNICAL/MANAGEMENT (Oral Presentation)
L.12.1 Requirements
The Technical/Management Oral presentation will address each of the nine Technical and Management
evaluation Items and their associated Factors identified in Section M as a minimum:
Item
action 1 - Enterprise Architecture
Section 2 - Integrated Geospatial Intelligence (GI) Analytical Environment
Section 3 -- NSGI System Transition Plan
Section 4 -- Business Process Re-engineering
Section 5 - Enterprise Responsiveness
Section 6 -- Management Approach
Section 7 -- Partnerships
Section 8 - Staffing Plan
Section 9 - Subcontractor Management
L.12.2 Volume Ila - Oral Presentation Addendum
A written Addendum to the Oral Presentation shall be submitted with the offeror's proposal containing the
Following documents: 1) Engineering Analysis to Support Scaleability; 2) NSGI System Transition Plan (with
.ster Program Schedule and };} Implementation Plan for Block 1). Even though this information might be
page
01/03/03 (Amendment 1)
 UNCLASSIFIED
--eferenced and presented in the offeror's Oral Presentation, enough detail must be included in the Addendum to
_acilitate a thorough evaluation and allow for the immediate incorporation of these documents into the resultant
contract.
The NSGI System Transition Plan shall be updated, using the NEA CDRL 020, to be consistent with the
Government's prioritized technical capabilities and Block priority sequencing as provided in Appendix D to the
SOW, and the system integration and program management responsibilities contained in SOW Sections 3 and 4.
The NSGI System Transition Plan contained in the Oral Presentation Addendum may also provide an
alternative that represents the Contractor's preferred approach for the engineering and delivery of capabilities
tailored to the Contractor's proposed NSGI Architecture. This preferred approach shall provide detailed
justification for differences and trades, and shall provide trace ability between the Government's prioritized
technical capabilities and Block priority sequencing to the Contractor's preferred approach.
L.12.3 Oral Presentation Guidelines
Each offeror must make an oral presentation to the Government's evaluation team. The Evaluation Team will
evaluate the oral presentation in accordance with the 19 factors listed under the Technical and Management
Areas in Section M of this RFP. The offeror's representatives must show by the presentation and by their
answers to the Government's clarification questions that they understand the Government's requirements; that
they are familiar with the kinds of problems that may develop during performance; and that they are capable of
developing practicable and effective solutions to those problems.
The Government will conduct a drawing to determine the order in which the contractors are assigned their oral
-esentation day. The Contracting Officer will schedule the oral presentations and notify each offeror of the
scheduled date, time and location of its presentation within 7 days of the final proposal submission. release f
the RFPI The Government will hold oral presentations in mid to late February 2003. The offeror must
make its oral presentation in accordance with these instructions and any additional instructions the Contracting
Officer may provide. The Contracting Officer may reschedule an offeror's oral presentation at the Contracting
Officer's sole discretion. Oral presentations are limited to six hours. The offeror will return the following day
to answer any clarification questions the Government might have. Breaks will be scheduled by the offeror of at
least 10 minutes per hour. Breaks will not be counted as part of the six-hour presentation time. The offeror will
indicate to the Government when it has reached a break point, at which time the Government time-keeper will
stop the clock. The Contracting officer will tell the offeror when to start its presentation, keep time, and stop
the presentation at the end of the allotted time period whether or not the offeror has finished. The offeror is
limited to submitting and presenting no more than 200 scenes slides during their Oral Presentation and assumes
full responsibility for delivering a clear and complete presentation during the six (6) hour time period. Each
scene shall consist of no more than two (2) images. My Scenes-slides not presented due to time limitations will
not be evaluated by the Government.
The offeror's presenter(s) must be chosen from among the offeror's proposed key personnel or proposed key
subcontractor personnel. The offeror may not use a professional speaker or consultant to make its presentation.
The offeror may have sad no more than ten LLO)_representatives in to the oral presentation room at any giv
thyme. Up to an additional five (S) representatives may wait in a nearby breakout room.. Equipment operators
do not count against these limitations. A senior executive, representing the offeror's corporate management
team. may be one of the 10 representatives present in the presentation room. Consultants to the offeror may not
'tend the presentation.
U.' CLt v.1' x
Page
01/03/03' (A nand i
 UNCLASSIFIED
-)uring the presentation the Government's attendees will not interrupt the offeror to ask questions (except to
.equest repetition of inaudible words or statements or the explanation of terms that are unknown to them) or
otherwise engage the offeror in any dialogue. The Government will conduct a question and answer session the
following day during which the offeror's representatives must answer questions from the Contracting Officer.
The Government may include the offeror's presentation, or portions thereof, and its answers to questions in any
prospective contract. The Government will not permit an offeror to change its proposal during the oral
presentation or the question and answer session.
During the question and answer session, offeror(s) will be given an opportunity to address unfavorable
assessments of past performance through communications pursuant to FAR 15.306(b), provided that the offeror
has not had a previous opportunity to review the unfavorable assessments. This exchange of information is not
considered Discussions, and is unique to the discovery of adverse past performance information. The offerors
will be notified of any unfavorable assessments of past performance prior to their oral presentation and as stated
earlier, may address these assessments during the question and answer session following their presentation.
Neither the oral presentation nor the question and answer session will constitute discussions, as that term is
defined and used in FAR subpart 15.306(d). If the Government decides that discussions are necessary,
notwithstanding the intention to award a contract without discussions, then the Government may discuss the
offeror's oral presentation or the answers that it gave during the question and answer session that followed.
The presentation team may also expound on any other topics that they consider to be pertinent to a
demonstration of their knowledge, competence, and capability to produce/perform so long as that information is
presented within the specified time limit. The presentation will not encompass price or cost and fee in any
.anner for the proposed contract.
(1) To ensure offerors do not spend an inordinate amount of time and money in preparing presentation slides
the following specification has been developed. Presentation media are limited to overhead transparencies
(slides) or softcopy if unclassified. The softcopy presentation may be presented in Adobe Acrobat 4.0 or
Microsoft PowerPoint.
(2) The offeror must submit its overhead slides -- and 30 sets of full-scale paper copies of its slides in addition
to one softcopy version -- with its proposal submission. The offeror must number the pages of the paper copies
and bind each set. In order to ensure the integrity of the source selection process, the offeror must use the
overhead slides or softcopy submitted to the Government with its offer when making its oral presentation,
without alteration. The evaluation team may review copies of the slides prior to and after the presentation. The
offeror may submit no other written documentation for its oral presentation. When evaluating an offeror's oral
presentation the Government will consider only those slides that were actually projected and addressed by the
offeror during the presentation. The Contracting Officer will not permit the offeror to use slides during the
question and answer session that were not projected and discussed during the presentation.
The Government will process overhead slides and copies that are received after the deadline for the submission
of offers in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(c)(3). If the slides and copies are late, and are not accepted for
consideration on the basis of FAR 52.215-1(c)(3) then the Government will consider the offeror to be ineligible
- award and will not permit that offeror to make an oral presentation and will reject its offer without further
aluation.
0 i 03%03 (Arbendment 1)
 UNCLASSIFIED
Offeror's are not required to utilize the existing Government projector and computer during their presentation.
If an offeror chooses to utilize their own projector(s) or other equipment. they assume responsibility for setup
and proper functioning. The offeror may not audio or video-record its own presentation. However, the
Government may record each offeror's presentation and the question and answer session. If any portion of the
oral presentation or the question and answer session is incorporated into the resultant contract, the offeror will
be provided a copy of the record.
L.13 VOLUME III - PAST PERFORMANCE
The Past Performance Panel (PP) evaluation will include an assessment of the Offeror's Past Performance
Volume and Past Performance Questionnaire data (Appendix 1) collected by Offeror references or other
sources- The Past Performance evaluation consists of three factors identified below. Each offeror and major
subcontractor is limited to no more than five references each, and is responsible for forwarding the attached Past
Performance Questionnaire (Appendix 1) to the appropriate Government official who can attest to contractor
performance for that specific reference. The offeror is responsible for having the Past Performance
Questionnaire (Appendix 1) returned to the NIMA Contracting Officer prior to 15 January 2003. The Past
Performance evaluation will include an assessment of each offeror, including past performance of all proposed
major subcontractors (as defined at L. 14.4). Offeror(s) will be given an opportunity to address unfavorable
assessments of past performance through communications pursuant to FAR 15.306(b), provided that the offeror
has not had a previous opportunity to review the unfavorable assessments. This exchange of information is not
considered Discussions as defined in FAR 15.306(a)(2), and is unique to the discovery of adverse past
=~rformance information. The Government provided analysis and scoring of the Thin Line Operational System
(TLOS) demonstration assessment will be a significant element of the overall Past Performance score. If
additional data is needed from any of the sources, the Past Performance Panel may conduct interviews or obtain
information from other sources (CPAR Database) in order to obtain sufficient information to complete the panel
evaluation.
The Past Performance Volume III will address each of the three (3) Past Performance evaluation Factors
identified in Section M as a minimum:
Factors
Section 1 - The extent to which the offeror's Thin Line Operational System (TLOS) solution
demonstrated their understanding and implementation of an all-digital, data-centric analytic
environment.
Section 2 - The extent to which the offeror has a proven record of success in program management of
multiple concurrent, interdependent development spirals.
Section 3 -- The extent to which the offeror has a proven record of success at leading subcontractors as an
integrated team toward a common goal.
 UNCLASSIFIED
,.14 VOLUME IV - COST VOLUME
This volume consists of a presentation of cost or pricing data substantiating the proposed cost of work to be
accomplished in completion of the SOW to include segregation by Blocks for Task Order purposes. The
Offeror's cost proposal shall contain sufficient factual information to establish the reasonableness, realism, and
completeness of the proposed cost. The cost of the offeror's entire proposed effort will be evaluated for award
purposes. Detailed certified cost information in accordance with the following instructions is required for all
work proposed during the Base Period, specifically Block 1. Block 2 should contain enough specific
uncertified cost detail to make the appropriate complete, reasonable, and realistic determinations. Subsequent
Blocks to include the option years will be proposed with as much detailed uncertified cost as possible, with at
least annual Not to Exceed (NTE) dollars. The total cost of the proposed effort, including options, will be
evaluated for award purposes. For those Legacy/Heritage efforts that are transitioning in FY2003, the offeror
should plan for 70 FTE. Beyond FY2003, the offeror should assume a full transition of these efforts. It is the
Governments intent to use the negotiated cost to set the contract value. Block 1 will be negotiated for
immediate authorization to proceed (ATP) after contract award. The Business Case, Implementation Plan, and
cost proposal for each successive Block will be negotiated by Task Order. Four one-year options to allow for
transition shall be separately priced for evaluation. All information relating to the proposed price, including all
required supporting documentation, must be included in the section of the proposal designated as the cost
volume. Under no circumstances shall this information and documentation be included elsewhere in the
proposal. All cost or pricing information shall be UNCLASSIFIED.
L.14.1 Estimating Methodology
,.14.1.1 Estimating System
Provide a summary description of your standard estimating system or methods. The summary description shall
cover separately each major cost element (i.e., Direct Material, Engineering Labor, Manufacturing Labor,
Indirect Costs, ODCs, Overhead, G&A, etc.). Also, identify any deviations from your standard estimating
procedures in preparing this proposal volume. Indicate whether you have Government approval of your system
and if so, provide evidence of such approval.
L.14.1.2 Purchasing System
Provide a summary description of your purchasing system or methods (i.e., how material requirements are
determined, how sources are selected, when firm quotes are obtained, what provision is made to ensure quantity
and other discounts). Also, identify any deviations from your standard procedures in preparing this proposal.
Indicate whether you have Government approval of your system and if so, provide evidence of such approval.
L.14.1.3 Accounting System
Indicate whether you have Government approval of your accounting system and if so, provide evidence of such
approval. Also, identify any deviations from your standard procedures in preparing this proposal.
L.14.1.4 Past Experience-Based Estimates
Where cost estimates are based upon past experience, identify the past experience, explain how the past
experience relates to the current effort, including similarities and differences, and how cost data available from
past experiences was adapted to the current effort.
 UNCLASSIFIED
'..14.2 Subcontractors
Submit a listing of the proposed subcontractors and inter-divisional transfers (including vendors) showing (a)
the supplier, (b) description of effort, (c) type of contract, (d) price and hours proposed by each, and (e) price
and hours included in prime's proposal to the Government.
L.14.3 Schedule of Rates
Submit a schedule showing proposed direct and indirect rates by year. This schedule is to include (but
separately identify) prime contractor, subcontractor, and inter-divisional transfer rates. Where this information
is company proprietary, it may be submitted directly to the Government via the subcontractor sealed package
submittal.
L.14.4 Electronic Submission of Cost/Price Data
The Government will use Mainstay Software Corporation's Proposal Pricing and Analysis System (PPAS)
product for evaluation and analysis of the cost volume. Offerors shall submit the cost volume in a PPAS
proposal database, Version 6.9.7 or later. Each major subcontractor, interdivisional transfer, and vendor,
regardless of tier, whose proposed price exceeds $75,000,000 for the period of the contract (including options),
shall also submit its cost proposal in a PPAS proposal database using the same release. Any reference to major
subcontractor shall be assumed to include interdivisional transfers, vendors and subcontractors who exceed the
$75,000,000 threshold. The sub-contractor submissions may be made directly to the Government to avoid
providing proprietary pricing data to the prime. If variation in content between the paper copy and the electronic
copy is noted and that variation is not resolved with the Offeror, the paper copy shall be considered the
submitted proposal.
i'he Government expects to reconcile the prime's proposal, net of adjustments to the proposals of each major
subcontractor and major inter-divisional transfer, to the respective subcontractor/inter-divisional transfer PPAS
proposal submissions. The prime contractor is responsible for consistency of the cost data between the prime
contractor's PPAS submission and the subcontractor/interdivisional PPAS submission
The PPAS proposal database shall reflect the entire bid price against Government specified functional cost
elements and Summary Contract Work Breakdown Structure (CWBS) tied to the CLIN structure.
L.14.4.1 PPAS Instructions
The offeror is required to submit an electronically encoded cost model in accordance with the PPAS format in
support of the proposed price for subject acquisition. The PPAS cost model submitted must be consistent with
offeror's approved estimating system. The PPAS submission should comply with the following format
requirements:
? Data files should be submitted on CD-ROM.
? Data files/CD-ROM's should be accessible by an IBM compatible computer running Windows 95 or later.
? All data files and electronic media delivered to the Government must be reviewed to ensure that they
are virus-free.
? If the data files are delivered in compressed format, the offeror shall ensure that the files are either self-
extracting or that the software program(s) required to extract the files to their original format is included.
? For each proposal/scenario submitted, include two (2) PPAS files, each with the same proposal/scenario
name created in PPAS followed by the number "I". One file will conclude with a.ddb suffix and the other
01/03/03 (Amendment 1)
 UNCLASSIFIED
2003-K-0001
with a mdb suffix. For example, for a proposal/scenario named DEMO, submit DEMO I.ddb and
DEMO1.mdb. Do not change the names of the files from those created in PPAS.
? Arithmetic division operations shall not be used in the PPAS logic file. Instead, invert a custom factor to be
divided and then multiply by the inverted custom factor in the logic file. This does not adversely affect the
pricing of the proposal.
? Data shall be submitted by month and according to GeoScout SOW Appendix E, Contract Work Breakdown
Structure (CWBS). This structure shall be adhered to by the Offerors in developing their proposed CWBS.
Beyond this summary CWBS, Offerors have complete flexibility based on the proposed implementation
approach.
? Offerors shall ensure that the RCE Cost by WBS report for total proposal, which is included in the Primary
Source Selection Reports category, functions and is consistent with other PPAS reports. Offerors shall also
ensure that the PPAS templates defining the Cost Summary and the Cost Element Summary reports are
completed using the offeror's standard methodology and structure and that the reports that are produced
using these templates are consistent with other PPAS reports.
? Offerors shall use the Reporting Period component of PPAS to identify' each of Blocks 1-n. Base Period,
each Award Tern and each Option Year unless the Offeror's proposal includes overlaps in any of these
hases (Blocks). If the Offeror's proposal. includes any overlapping Blocks. Offeror's shall. instead use the
Secondary WBS component of PPAS to separate each of Blocks 1-n and Options 1-4.
? For all years beyond the Base Period, where annual NTE estimates are sufficient., offerors may enter data
into PPAS into any single month for each year or into individual months.
? Offerors shall ensure that all costs are properly segregated into recurring and non-recurring within the PPAS
proposal database using Cost Types within PPAS.
? Offerors shall ensure that all costs are properly segregated by appropriation type within the PPAS proposal
database using Cost Types. Each expected appropriation type with its associated description and definition
is shown below:
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E)
Used for expenses necessary for basic and applied scientific research, development, test and
evaluation, including maintenance and operation of facilities and equipment. The only hardware
that should be charged to RDT&E is that bought for prototype development.
Procurement
Used for production and modification of aircraft, missiles, weapons, vehicles, ammunition,
shipbuilding and conversion, and other items. Hardware can either be charged here or to O&M,
but once the O&M phase begins, hardware cannot be bought under procurement.
Used for day-to-day expenses such as training exercises, deployments, civilian salaries, and
operating and maintaining installations.
Cost Types shall be named as follows:
Name Description
1 RDT and E-Rec
2 RDT and E-NonRec
3 Procurement-Rec
4 Procurement-NonRec
5 Ops and Maint-Rec
'age 22
01/03/03 (Amendment 1)
 UNCLASSIFIED
6 Ops and Maint-NonRec
? The Government requires visibility into the labor/skills mix inherent in the proposal in order to make a
complete evaluation. Offerors shall provide data in accordance with their typical labor/skills mix categories.
Labor grades shall not be combined into a single labor resource in PPAS.
? The prime's proposal shall uniquely identify for each major subcontractor and each major interdivisional
transfer, detailed by each WBS and time period, total labor hours, total labor dollars, total travel costs, total
material costs, total other costs, total burdened costs exclusive of fee, and price.
? The prime's proposal shall uniquely identify for the total of all other subcontractors and all other
interdivisional transfers, detailed by each WBS and time period, total labor hours, total labor dollars, total
travel costs, total material costs, total other costs, total burdened costs exclusive of fee, and price.
? When proposing more than 40 hours of work per week at a standard 40-hour workweek rate, the hours in
excess of 40 should be entered in PPAS using a separate but related Resource that has a zero rate.
? Any adjustments to total labor hours or price in the major subcontractor's and interdivisional transfer's
submissions that are defined in the prime's proposal submission shall be identified, for each subcontractor
and interdivisional transfer, as a Cost Element in PPAS. Basis of Estimate shall be used to describe the
breakdown of adjustments, including adjustments due to negotiation, adjustments due to redistribution of
work, and other.
? For the Base Period, the prime and each major subcontractor and interdivisional transfer shall, within its
own proposal, itemize each element of travel using the Travel module of PPAS. Within the Travel module,
identify each class of trip, the specific elements of that trip, and an estimate of the number of trips of each
class, all delineated by WBS and month. For all periods beyond the Base Period, detailed travel estimates
are unnecessary. An aggregate estimate of travel for each year is sufficient and shall be identified in a
PPAS Resource. The prime contractor shall include in its PPAS proposal only total travel dollars by WBS
and time for each major subcontractor and interdivisional transfer in its proposal.
? For the Base Period, the prime and each major subcontractor and interdivisional transfer shall, within its
own proposal, use the Material module in PPAS to itemize each proposed major material item with an
extended value exceeding $100,000. For each such item, offerors shall show name, description, vendor,
part number, quantity required, and unit price. The total of all material items not exceeding $100,000 shall
be aggregated within one or more line items in the Material module. For all periods beyond the base period,
detailed material estimates are unnecessary. An aggregate estimate for materials for each year is sufficient.
The prime contractor shall include in its PPAS proposal only total material dollars by WBS and time for
each major subcontractor and interdivisional transfer in its proposal.
? Include in the PPAS proposal the capability to present costs in base-year FY03 dollars by using the
Required Cost Element RCE.BYPRICE. To achieve this, create one or more separate PPAS custom
factor(s) to capture a deflation index that will be applied to then-year price (RCE.PRICE) to approximate
base-year price (RCE.BYPRICE). These same indices may be used by proposal evaluators to appropriately
deflate any individual element of the proposal.
? The prime's proposal shall specify total indirect burden for the sum of all subcontractor and interdivisional
transfer costs.
The following required cost elements (RCE) shall be included in the proposal database:
Name
Description
Print Order
RCE.DIRLAB
RCE Direct Labor
9500
RCE.OTLABOR
RCE Overtime Labor
9510
 UNCLASSIFIED
RCE.SUMLABOR
RCE Labor + Overtime Labor
9520
RCE. LABOVH D
RCE Labor Overhead
9530
RCE.TOTLABOR
RCE Labor plus Overhead
9540
RCE. MAJSHRS
RCE Major Subcontractor Hours
9550
RCE.OTHSHRS
RCE Other Subcontractor Hours
9560
RCE.TOTSHRS
RCE Major + Other Subs Hours
9570
RCE.TOTHOURS
RCE Total Hours
9580
RCE.MAJSLAB
RCE Major Subcontractor Labor ($)
9590
RCE.OTHSLAB
RCE Other Subcontractor Labor ($)
9600
RCE.TOTSLAB
RCE Major + Other Subs Labor ($)
9610
RCE.MAJSMAT
RCE Major Subs Material ($)
9620
RCE. MAJSTVL
RCE Major Subs Travel ($)
9630
RCE. MAJSCOST
RCE Major Sub Other Costs
9640
RCE.MAJSXFEE
RCE Major Sub Total Cost exc Fee
9650
RCE.MAJSPRCE
RCE Major Sub Total Price
9660
RCE.OTHSMAT
RCE Other Subs Material ($)
9670
RCE.0THSTVL
RCE Other Subs Travel ($)
9680
RCE.OTHSCOST
RCE Other Subs Other Costs
9690
RCE.OTHSXFEE
RCE Other Sub Total Cost exc Fee
9700
RCE.OTHSPRCE
RCE Other Sub Total Price
9710
RCE.SUBBURN
RCE Total Subcontractor Burden
9720
RCE.ALLSUBS
RCE Total Subs + Burden ($)
9730
RCE. MATERIAL
RCE Material
9740
RCE.MATBURN
RCE Material Burden
9750
RCE.TOTMATL
RCE Total Material + Burden
9760
RCE.MATLSUM
RCE Material Summary
9770
RCE.TVL
RCE Travel
9780
RCE.TVLSUM
RCE Travel Summary
9790
RCE.ODC
RCE Other Direct Costs
9800
RCE.ODCSUM
RCE Other Direct Costs Summary
9810
RCE.COST
RCE Cost less G and A
9820
RCE.GA
RCE G and A ($)
9830
RCE.CSTINCGA
RCE Cost Including G and A
9840
RCE.COM
RCE Cost of Money
9850
RCE.FEEBASE
RCE Cost Basis for Fee
9860
RCE.FEE
RCE Fee
9870
RCE.MISC
RCE Miscellaneous
9880
RCE.PRICE
RCE Price
9890
RCE.BYPRICE
RCE Base Year Price
9900
RCE.DIRLAB (RCE Direct Labor)
Unburdened hours and dollars resulting from only the prime contractor's regular time (not overtime) direct
labor hours.
RCE.OTLABOR (RCE Overtime Labor)
Unburdened hours and dollars resulting from only the prime contractor's overtime (not regular time) direct
labor hours.
34
01/03/03 (Arnendnien
 UNCLASSIFIED
2003-K-0001
RCE.SUMLABOR (RCE Labor + Overtime Labor)
Total of unburdened hours and dollars resulting from only the prime contractor's regular time direct labor hours
and overtime direct labor hours.
RCE.LABOVHD (RCE Labor Overhead)
All overhead dollars applied to the total of only the prime contractor's regular time direct labor hours and
overtime direct labor hours.
RCE.TOTLABOR (RCE Labor plus Overhead)
Total of unburdened dollars from only the prime contractor's regular time direct hours, overtime direct labor
hours, and overhead on these dollars.
RCE.MAJSHRS (RCE Major Subcontractor Hours)
Total of regular time direct labor hours and overtime direct labor hours from each subcontractor and
interdivisional transfer that exceeds the threshold defined in paragraph L. 14.4.
RCE.OTHSHRS (RCE Other Subcontractor Hours)
Total of regular time direct labor hours and overtime direct labor hours from the sum of all subcontractors and
interdivisional transfers that do not exceed the threshold defined in paragraph L.14.4.
RCE.TOTSHRS (RCE Major + Other Subs Hours)
Total of regular time direct labor hours and overtime direct labor hours from all subcontractors and
interdivisional transfers regardless of whether they exceed the threshold defined in paragraph L. 14.4.
RCE.TOTHOURS (RCE Total Hours)
Total of all direct labor hours (regular and overtime) from prime, all subcontractors and interdivisional
transfers.
RCE.MAJSLAB (RCE Major Subcontractor Labor ($))
Total dollars, including subcontractor burden but not prime burden, from regular time direct labor hours and
overtime direct labor hours from each subcontractor and interdivisional transfer that exceeds the threshold
defined in paragraph L. 14.4.
RCE.OTHSLAB (RCE Other Subcontractor Labor ($))
Total dollars, including subcontractor burden but not prime burden, from regular time direct labor hours and
overtime direct labor hours from the sum of all subcontractors and interdivisional transfers that do not exceed
the threshold defined in paragraph L.14.4.
RCE.TOTSLAB (RCE Major + Other Subs Labor ($))
Total dollars, including subcontractor burden but not prime burden, from regular time direct labor hours and
overtime direct labor hours from all subcontractors and interdivisional transfers regardless of whether they
exceed the threshold defined in paragraph L. 14.4.
RCE.MAJSMAT (RCE Major Subs Material ($))
Total material dollars, including subcontractor material burden, from each subcontractor and interdivisional
*ransfer that exceeds the threshold defined in paragraph L. 14.4.
UN-C SS 5-i '11
 UNCLASSIFIED
'CE.MAJSTVL (RCE Major Subs Travel ($))
Total travel dollars from each subcontractor and interdivisional transfer that exceeds the threshold defined in
paragraph L. 14.4.
RCE.MAJSCOST (RCE Major Sub Other Costs)
The total of all other costs (excluding labor, labor burden, material, material burden, travel, and fee) from all
subcontractors and interdivisional transfers that exceed the threshold defined in paragraph L. 14.4.
RCE.MAJSXFEE (RCE Major Sub Total Cost excluding Fee)
The total of all costs (excluding fee) from each subcontractor and interdivisional transfer that exceeds the
threshold defined in paragraph L. 14.4.
RCE.MAJSPRCE (RCE Major Sub Total Price)
The total of all costs from each subcontractor and interdivisional transfer that exceeds the threshold defined in
paragraph L. 14.4.
RCE.OTHSMAT (RCE Other Subs Material ($))
Total material dollars, including subcontractor material burden, from all subcontractors and interdivisional
transfers that do not exceed the threshold defined in paragraph L.14.4.
RCE.OTHSTVL (RCE Other Subs Travel ($))
Total travel dollars from all subcontractor and interdivisional transfers that do not exceed the threshold defined
in paragraph L.14.4.
RCE.OTHSCOST (RCE Other Subs Other Costs)
The total of all other costs (except for labor, labor burden dollars, and fee) from all subcontractors and
interdivisional transfers that do not exceed the threshold defined in paragraph L. 14.4.
RCE.OTHSXFEE (RCE Other Sub Total Cost excluding Fee)
The total of all costs (excluding fee) from all subcontractors and interdivisional transfers that do not exceed the
threshold defined in paragraph L.14.4.
RCE.OTHSPRCE (RCE Other Sub Total Price)
The sum of all costs from all subcontractors and interdivisional transfers that do not exceed the threshold
defined in paragraph L. 14.4.
RCE.SUBBURN (RCE Subcontractor Burden)
Total burden applied by the prime to the sum of all subcontractor and interdivisional transfer dollars regardless
of the threshold defined in paragraph L.14.4.
RCE.ALLSUBS (RCE Total Subs + Burden ($))
Total of all subcontractor and interdivisional dollars plus all burden applied by the prime to the sum of all
subcontractor and interdivisional dollars.
RCE.MATERIAL (RCE Material)
Total material dollars from only the prime contractor.
 -'CE.MATBURN (RCE Material Burden)
Total burden from only the prime contractor.
RCE.TOTMATL (RCE Total Material + Burden)
Total of prime contractor's material dollars plus prime contractor's burden on material.
RCE.MATLSUM (RCE Material Summary)
Total material dollars from prime, all subcontractors, and all interdivisional transfers.
RCE.TVL (RCE Travel)
Total of prime contractor's travel dollars.
RCE.TVLSUM (RCE Travel Summary)
Total travel dollars from prime, all subcontractors and interdivisional transfers.
RCE.ODC (RCE Other Direct Costs)
Total of prime contractor's other direct costs (excluding the prime contractor's travel and material).
RCE.ODCSUM (RCE Other Direct Costs Summary)
Total other direct costs (excluding travel and material) from prime, all subcontractors and interdivisional
transfers.
RCE.COST (RCE Cost less G and A)
otal dollars resulting from all direct labor, all subcontractors, all interdivisional transfers, all material, all
travel, all other direct costs, , and all burden but excluding general and administrative costs, cost of money and
fee.
RCE.GA (RCE G and A ($))
Total of general and administrative dollars applied by the prime contractor.
RCE.CSTINCGA (RCE Cost including G and A)
Sum of RCE.COST + RCE.GA.
RCE.COM (RCE Cost of Money)
Total cost of money dollars applied by the prime contractor.
RCE.FEEBASE (RCE Cost Basis for Fee)
Total dollars on which fee is applied by the prime contractor.
RCE.FEE (RCE Fee)
Total fee dollars applied by prime contractor.
RCE.MISC (RCE Miscellaneous)
Total of all dollars not applicable to other required cost elements (Provide description of components in
proposal textual information.)
.t.CE.PRICE (RCE Price)
UIM/03 ("Amendment 1)
 UNCLASSIFIED
total proposal price.
RCE.BYPRICE (RCE Base Year Price)
Total proposed price in base year dollars.
Offerors may use whatever unique names they wish for all other cost elements, but must calculate these cost
elements in order that the Government may use PPAS's Cost Summary reports without having to interpret
Offerors' pricing logic. For purposes of completing the PPAS submission regarding RCE elements, major
subcontractors are those that exceed the dollar threshold for requiring submission of PPAS. Other
subcontractors are those below that threshold. Interdivisional work shall follow the same instructions as for
subcontractors.
L.14.4.2 Basis of Estimate Sheets by Contractor Work Breakdown Structure
In a separate appendix to the Cost Volume, using MS Word, MS Excel or PDF, include a Basis of Estimate in
contractor format that is a summary of the total proposed requirements to level 3 of the CWBS. Following the
summary, provide estimating rationale that describes in general terms how the hour, material, travel, and ODC
estimates for each element were developed. Also provide a description of type of data used to develop the
estimate, i.e. historical experience from the XYZ program, why that program was relevant, engineering
judgement, technical parameters and cost estimating relationships, Source Line of Code (SLOC) counts, etc.
Also, as the prime contractor, provide a discussion of the adjustments made to each major subcontractor's,
.ndor's, and major interdivisional transfer's proposal, by type of adjustment (e.g. expected reduction due to
negotiation, re-distribution of work, etc.) as summarized, for each subcontractor, in a Cost Element in the PPAS
Logic File.
L.14.4.3 DCAA Submission
Offerors shall provide a copy of their cost proposal, including the electronic PPAS, PPAS Composite, and Excel
files, to their cognizant Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) in conjunction with the submission to the
GeoScout program office for audit/verification purposes. Subcontractors who meet the threshold for PPAS
submittal shall also submit PPAS files to their cognizant DCAA office.
L.14.5 Subcontracting Plan
Include a Subcontracting Plan in accordance with FAR 52.219-9, Alt H. The plan must be approved by the
PCO before contract award.
L.14.6 Evaluation of Options
In accordance with FAR 52.217-5 (Jul 1990), except when it is determined in accordance with FAR 17.206 (b)
not to be in the Government's best interests, the Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding
the total price for all options and potential award term extensions to the total price for the basic requirement.
Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the options.
T 14.7 Changes After Contract Award
 UNCLASSIFIED
`,fter contract award, PPAS will be used on an ongoing basis for capturing actual data and for estimating
modifications to the program. The prime and each major subcontractor, IDT, and vendor shall submit actual
hours and dollars in PPAS. Submissions of actual data will occur on the same time schedule as is applicable for
EVMS data. The prime contractor is responsible for consistency of data between PPAS and the EVMS system
and between the prime's PPAS submission and the PPAS submissions of each applicable subcontractor, IDT
and vendor.
PPAS will be used as the pricing tool to be used in conjunction with Engineering Change Proposals (ECP).
Program modifications will be estimated in PPAS and will include actual data for work already complete, an
updated estimate-to-complete, and an updated estimate-at-completion. The Change Order Module of PPAS will
be used for this purpose, and separate breakdowns shall be provided for Work Deleted, Work Added, and Work
Deleted but Already Performed.
EVMS will be used to monitor performance, manage rates, and assist management in decision making on
technical, schedule, and cost issues.
L.15 VOLUME V - SECURITY
The Security volume describes the offeror's policies and procedures to ensure compliance with the security
guidance of this RFP, the Contract Data Classification Guide (CDCG), and the DD Form 254. Security Volume
information consists of a Security Plan that describes how the Offeror proposes to comply with the security
requirements of the proposed contract. If the personnel involved in this contract will require TOP SECRET
clearances, the Offeror must take into account the extended period of time that may be required to process
earances. The security plan must include an affirmative statement indicating a corporate commitment to
gaffing this effort with personnel having the appropriate clearances.
 UNCLASSIFIED
APPENDIX A OF SECTION L, - ACRONYM LIST
ACE
ARC
CDR
CLIN
CM
CMP
CONUS
COR
COTS
CPAF/AT
CWAN
CWBS
DCAA
DCMA
DDS
DE
DMB
DoDIIS
DUNS
EE
IT
EST
FAR
FOC
G&A
GAO
GFP
GGI
GI
GIAT
GOTS
HBCU
I.A.
ICD
IDS
IDS-D
IOC
ITF
JPO l
JPO2
LOE
MI
. S
iNCCB
Acquisition Center of Excellence
Acquisition Research Center
Critical Design Review
Contract Line Item Number
Configuration Management
Configuration Management Plan
Continental United States
Contracting Officer Representative
Commercial-off-the-shelf
Cost Plus Award Fee/Award Term
Contractor Wide Area Network
Contract Work Breakdown Structure
Defense Contract Audit Agency
Defense Contract Management Agency
Defense Dissemination System
Dissemination Element
DoDIIS Management Board
Department of Defense Intelligence Information System
Data Universal Numbering System
Enterprise Engineer
Early Interface Test
Eastern Standard Time
Federal Acquisition Regulation
Full Operational Capability
General and Administrative
Government Accounting Office
Government Furnished Property
Global Geospatial Intelligence
Geospatial Intelligence
Geospatial Intelligence Advancement Testbed
Government-Off-The-Shelf
Historically Black Colleges and Universities
Imagery Analyst
Interface Control Document
Information Dissemination Services
Information Dissemination Services - Direct Delivery
Initial Operational Capability
Integrated Test Facility
Joint Program Office effectivity 1
Joint Program Office effectivity 2
Level of Effort
Minority Institutions
Microsoft
NIMA Confwration Control Board
 UNCLASSIFIED
NIMA
NLT
NPE
NRO
NSES
NSGI
O&M
O&S
OCONUS
ODCs
PCO
PDF
PDR
PDW
POC
PP
PPP
Q&A
QA
R&D
RCE
RFC
RFP
:IC
SB
SCI
SCIF
SDB
SIC
S?O
SOR
SOW
SRR
TEM
TIC
TLOS
UIP
USIGS
National Imagery and Mapping Agency
No Later Than
NIMA Prototyping Environment
National Reconnaissance Office
NIMA System Engineering Services
National System for Geospace Intelligence
Operations and Maintenance
Operations and Support
Overseas Continental United States
Other Direct.Costs
Procurement Contracting Officer
Portable Document Format
Preliminary Design Review
Procurement Defense Wide
Point of Contact
Past Performance
Program Protection Plan
Questions and Answers
Quality Assurance
Research and Development
Required Cost Element
Request for Change
Request for Proposal
Requirement to Image Correlation
Small Business
Sensitive Compartmented Information
Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility
Small Disadvantaged Business
Standard Industrial Classification
Statement of Objectives
Statement of Requirements
Statement of Work
System Requirements Review
Technical Exchange Meeting
Target to Image Correlation
Thin Line Operational System
USIGS Interoperability Profile
United States Imagery and Geospatial Information Service
 UNCLASSIFIED
7ECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD
M.1 52.217-4 Evaluation of Options Exercised at Time of Contract Award. (JUN 1988)
M.2 52.217-5 Evaluation of Options. (JUL 1990)
M.3 52.252-2 Clauses Incorporated by Reference. (FEB 1998)
This solicitation incorporates one or more solicitation provisions by reference, with the same force and effect as
if they were given in full text. Upon request, the Contracting Officer will make their full text available. The
offeror is cautioned that the listed provisions may include blocks that must be completed by the offeror and
submitted with its quotation or offer. Identify the provision by paragraph identifier and provide the appropriate
information with its quotation or offer. Also, the full text of a solicitation provision may be accessed
electronically at this/these address(es):
http://www.amet/far.gov
M.4152.215-725 Evaluation Procedures and Factors for Award (JAN 1998)
1. Introduction:
The objective of the evaluation process is to select and recommend Contractors to the Source Selection
Authority for final negotiation and award of a contract. Proposals and oral presentations received in response to
its Request for Proposal shall be evaluated in accordance with the procedures set forth below.
II. Competitive Range Determination:
In accordance with FAR 15.306(c), the competitive range shall be determined on the basis of an initial
evaluation of the offeror's written proposal and oral presentation submitted in response to the GeoScout
Request for Proposal. The competitive range shall include only those proposals most highly rated after initial
evaluation. The initial evaluation of proposals and the initial determination of the competitive range will be
made upon a review of the written proposal and oral presentation (to include Addendum) along with
consideration of any information exchanged during communications as defined in FAR 15.306. The
Government evaluators at their discretion may review CDRLs submitted as part of the NSGI Enterprise
Architecture (NEA) contracts to enhance and clarify their understanding of the oral and written proposal
submissions. The Government shall discontinue the evaluation of any proposal, which is not considered in the
competition range after initial evaluation
Written or oral discussions shall be held with all Offerors within the competitive range if discussions are
required to make the final selection. The intent of these discussions is to obtain the best value based upon the
requirements and evaluation factors set forth in Section M. The scope, extent and format of discussions are at
the discretion of the Contracting Officer and will be tailored to each Offeror's proposal. During these
discussions the government will resolve all material issues to select the best offers for final negotiations. The
vernment may remove an Offeror from the competitive range at any point during discussions, whether or not
ail material aspects of the proposal have been discussed, if the Offeror is no longer considered to be one of the
'age i i
01/03103 (Amend
 UNCLASSIFIED
'lost highly rated. Revisions to an Offeror's written proposal during discussions are at the discretion of the
Contracting Officer. When discussions are concluded, all Offerors within the competitive range will be given
the opportunity to submit a final revised proposal within the time constraints identified by the Contracting
Officer.
Final revised proposals will be evaluated for the purpose of selecting one Offeror for final negotiations. The
evaluation criteria used in this evaluation shall be the same as those used in the initial evaluation.
V. Final Negotiations
Final negotiations is the process of bringing into contractually binding form the most favorable terms and
conditions possible, including technical and scientific approaches, support arrangements, and contract pricing.
Final negotiations will be conducted only with the offeror offering the best value, cost/price and other factors
considered and shall not involve material changes in either the Government's requirements or the Offeror's
proposal which affect the basis for source selection. In the event that such changes are desired by the
Government, the competition will be reopened. In the event that a definitive contract cannot be consummated
on a timely basis, negotiations will be terminated and a new source selection for final negotiations shall be
made.
VI. Notice and Debriefing:
lebriefings will be conducted in accordance with FAR Subpart 15.5. As noted above, this solicitation does not
provide for the submission of revised proposals unless justified. Therefore, Offerors who remain in the
competitive range, but which are not ultimately selected for award, shall be notified after final revised proposals
have been evaluated and a contract has been successfully negotiated and signed with the successful Offeror.
Requests for debriefings must be in writing and must be received by the Government Contracting Officer within
three days after the date on which the Offeror receives notification of the Government's source selection
decision.
VII. Evaluation Factors and Criteria:
(a) In determining the award of contract(s), primary consideration shall be given to the offeror(s),
that can perform the contract(s) in a manner most advantageous to the Government, cost/price and other
factors considered. Evaluation shall be conducted by comparing an Offeror's proposal against the
requirements contained in this solicitation, including all compliance documents. An Offeror's proposal
must accurately demonstrate an understanding of the objectives and scope of the project.
(b) The major categories, which shall be evaluated, are, as depicted in Table 1 below:
 UNCLASSIFIED
fable 1 Evaluation Criteria Weights
The table below summarizes the evaluation areas, items, and factors and their relative weights.
Aar......... 1~ ~ ~..a .. , :J~' . ,::......:
I: Technical Evaluation
(40%)
1.1 Enterprise Architecture
(30%)
1.1.1 The extent to which the proposed Enterprise
Architecture is adaptive and scale-able. (30%)
1.1.2 The extent to which the proposed Enterprise
Architecture is complete in terms of processes and
interoperable capabilities to meet mission and
corporate requirements and supports TPPU
constructs. (20%)
1.1.3 The extent to which the proposed Enterprise
Architecture provides effective data quality of
geospatial intelligence and corporate data,
information and products. (20%)
1.1.4 The extent to which the proposed Enterprise
Architecture establishes efficient approaches that
address multiple users at multiple security levels.
1.1.5 The extent to which the proposed Enterprise
Architecture ensures continuity of operations of
mission-critical systems systems and leverages
value-added heritage/legacy system capabilities.
(15%)
1.2 Integrated Geospatial
Intelligence Analytical
Environment (25%)
1.2.1 The extent to which the proposed Geospatial
Intelligence environment addresses the need for
seamless access to data and information. (35%)
1.2.2 The extent to which the proposed Geospatial
Intelligence environment integrates Imagery Analyst
(IA) and geospatial analyst (GA) tradecraft and
functionality into a single interoperable softcopy
environment. (35%)
1.2.3 The extent to which the proposed Geospatial
Intelligence environment provides effective,
comprehensive and improved information and
workflow management across the enterprise. (30%)
1.3 NSGI System Transition
Plan (15%)
1.3.1 The extent to which the proposed NSGI
System Transition Plan provides an aggressive and
thorough, yet risk-aware, time-phased plan for
achieving the proposed system architecture. (100%)
1.4 Business Process Re-
engineering (15%)
 UNCLASSIFIED
.04
MR3
1.4.1 The extent to which the offeror provides an
effective approach for conducting Business Process
Re-engineering. (70%)
1.4.2 The extent to which the proposed Business
Process Re-engineering documents logical, new
business processes/rules and best commercial
practices to successfully facilitate the proposed
transformation of NIMA and the NSGI architecture.
(30%)
1.5 Enterprise
Responsiveness (15%)
1.5.1 The extent to which the proposed architecture
improves NSGI enterprise throughput, timelines and
responsiveness. (60%)
1.5.2 The extent to which the proposed architecture
improves throughput, responsiveness and timelines
of the end-end multi-INT TCPED stream. (40%)
H: Management
Approach (40%)
2.1 Management Approach
(45%)
2.1.1 The extent to which the proposal provides a
credible approach for technical management during
block/spiral definition and implementation, allowing
for government insight and defined approval gates
supporting the evolutionary acquisition
methodology. (50%)
2.1.2 The extent to which the proposal promotes
efficient and effective program management of the
GeoScout contract effort. (25%)
2.1.3 The extent to which the proposal provides a
sound management approach for assuming systems
integration responsibility over heritage/legacy
efforts. (25%)
2.2 Partnerships (25%)
2.2.1 The extent to which the offeror clearly
identifies how they intend to support relationships
with other significant partners in the Transformation
of NIMA. (100%)
2.3 Staffing Plan (15%)
2.3.1 The extent to which the offeror provides an
appropriate mix of qualified, highly capable subject
matter experts adequate to manage, develop and
implement a large-scale system integration effort
over the life of the effort. (100%)
2.4 Subcontractor
Management (15%)
2.4.1 The extent to which the proposal identifies an
effective process for evaluating, selecting, managing
and incentivizing subcontractors. (100%)
III: Past Performance
_
 UNCLASSIFIED
3.1.1 The extent to which the offeror's Thin Line
Operational System (TLOS) solution demonstrated
their understanding and implementation of an all-
digital, ital, data-centric analytic environment. (50%)
3.1.2 The extent to which the offeror has a proven
record of success in program management of
multiple concurrent, interdependent development
spirals. (30%)
3.1.3 The extent to which the offeror has a proven
record of success at leading subcontractors as an
integrate d team toward a common goal. (20%)
IV: Cost Evaluation
V: Security (Pass/Fail)
M.5 Proposal Evaluation
The Government intends to award one contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose
offer conforming to this solicitation is judged to be most advantageous and of best value to the Government,
cost and other factors considered. The Government reserves the right to award no contract at all, depending on
e quality of the proposals, the availability of funding, and the continued existence of the requirement.
Each offeror's proposal will be evaluated for the combined non-cost factors and cost, as shown in Figure 1.
Non-cost factors are significantly more important than cost. Offerors are warned that the Government may
select other than the lowest proposed cost/ priced, acceptable offer. The Government may select a superior
technical/ management/past performance offer if it is determined that the additional merit offered is worth the
additional cost in relation to the other proposals received. Non-cost consists of four areas, technical,
management, past performance, and security. The Security Area will be evaluated on a pass/fail basis. If an
offeror's proposal fails to meet the security criteria, the offer will be rejected.
 UNCLASSIFIED
figure 1: Overall Award Criteria
"Most Advantageous,
Greatest Value"
Past
Performance
Security
(Pass/Fail)
Technical Area
The non-cost Technical Area consists of four items, as shown in Table 1 in their order of relative importance.
Specific criteria shall be used to evaluate the offeror's Technical proposal, which will be in the form of an oral
'resentation and Addendum. Each item in the Technical Area is evaluated with the specific factors identified
.or that item. These factors, as shown in Table 1, are assigned a specific weight to represent the relative order of
importance of each factor compared to any other factor in the Technical Area.
Management Area
The non-cost Management Area. consists of four items, as shown in Table 1 in their order of relative
importance. Specific criteria shall be used to evaluate the offeror's Management proposal, which will be in the
form of an oral presentation and Addendum. Each item in the Management Area is evaluated with the specific
factors identified for that item. These factors, as shown in Table 1, are assigned a specific weight to represent
the relative order of importance of each factor compared to any other factor in the Management Area.
Past Performance Area
The non-cost Past Performance Area consists of three factors, as shown in Table 1 in their relative order of
importance. Evaluation of Past Performance shall be based on a consideration of the past performance
information obtained in accordance with clause 152.215-723, Proposal Preparation Instructions, of this
solicitation. The Government shall document the basis for conclusions. The contractor will receive neither a
favorable nor an unfavorable rating if it does not have a performance history similar to the effort described in
this solicitation.
 UNCLASSIFIED
security Area
Security shall be evaluated on a pass or fail scale basis and will be based on the Security Plan each offeror
submits as part of their Security Volume.
M.6 Assessment Criterion
The non-cost areas will be evaluated and rated using the specific criterion listed below and the standards
described for each of the factors. A risk assessment, reflecting the Government's degree of confidence in the
offeror's ability to accomplish the GeoScout effort as described by the relevant experience, technical approach,
operations/ supportability and program management support as described in their proposal, will also be
performed and rated for each individual factor (Table 2). Offerors are cautioned that proposals which the
Government considers unrealistic in terms of technical, management or schedule commitments will be deemed
indicative of an inherent lack of comprehension of the complexity and risks of the requirements and may be
rejected.
Page 38
01101103 (Ameridmt.nt 11
 UNCLASSIFIED
Table 2 - Proposal Risk Assessment Rating Scale
 UNCLASSIFIED
Specific Criteria
The specific criteria listed below will be evaluated.
The technical evaluation area consists of five items, Enterprise Architecture, Integrated GI Analytical
Environment, NSGI System Transition Plan, Business Process Re-engineering, and Enterprise Responsiveness
Item 1.1 Enterprise Architecture.
Factor 1.1.1 The extent to which the proposed Enterprise Architecture is adaptive and scale-able.
Standards
a. Architecture scales in terms of data storage capability, bandwidth, and processing power in order to
adequately accommodate all NSGI data types/sources.
b. Architecture addresses the entire NSGI enterprise to include external users and customers and
mission and corporate applications.
c. Architecture can adapt to a dynamically-changing environment (new requirements, new technology,
crisis situations, additional users, new sources, new data types, databases and data dictionaries) with
minimal impact to design, cost and schedule.
d. Architecture and technology insertion processes accommodate the rapid insertion of successful
Advanced Research and Development efforts as well as other research and development efforts,
through the NPE configuration controlled environment, to provide real solutions for real users.
e. Architecture maximizes use of SCOTS solutions while fully leveraging SCOTS products across the
commercial marketplace.
Factor 1.1.2 The extent to which the proposed Enterprise Architecture is complete in terms of processes
and interoperable capabilities to meet mission and corporate requirements and supports TPPU
constructs.
Standards
a. Architecture incorporates geospatial intelligence and business data types and sources that satisfy
end-to-end mission and corporate requirements, enabling and facilitating the integration and fusion
of Geospatial and intelligence sources and of non-literal sources.
b. Architecture incorporates tools, processes, and infrastructure to provide for a collaborative
environment, multi-source exploitation, multi-INT exploitation, business process re-engineering,
and development of a Common Operational Picture (COP) supporting TTPU constructs.
c. Architecture design minimizes interface complexity and enables enhancements, with minimal
difficulty, across interfaces with mission partners, collaborates, suppliers, contractors, customers and
IC entities.
d. Architecture enables the realization of multi-TNT tasking, exploitation, collaboration and information
sharing.
0103/03 (A neztdmert 1)
 '' actor 1.1.3 The extent to which the proposed Enterprise Architecture-provides effective data quality of
geospatial intelligence and corporate data, information and products.
Standards
a. Architecture demonstrates an effective data integrity management approach, to include use of
authorative data sources, accuracy, completeness, and timeliness.
Architecture provides dynamic update of data bases and web sites.
c. Architecture provides a dynamic data model for easy capture and attribution of complex data,
facilitating the shift from Geospatial production to Geospatial data maintance.
d. Architecture enables continued enhancement to the fidelity, resolution and accuracy of NIMA data
holdings and supports multiple mission utilization and product tailoring, as information is
maintained over time.
Factor 1.1.4 The extent to which the proposed Enterprise Architecture establishes efficient approaches
that address multiple users at multiple security levels.
Standards
a. Architecture provides processes and technical solutions to accommodate easy storage, retrieval, and
sharing of information across multiple security domains.
b. Architecture protects sensitive and compartmented data.
'actor 1.1.5 The extent to which the proposed Enterprise Architecture ensures continuity of operations of
mission-critical systems and leverages value-added heritage/legacy system capabilities.
Standards
a. Architecture eliminates single-points of failure in the data, system, and infrastructure to survive and
recover from disruption of service.
b. Architecture leverages value-added heritage/legacy system capabilities while eliminating redundant
or outmoded features.
Item 1.2 Integrated Geospatial Intelligence (GI) Analytical Environment
Factor 1.2.1 The extent to which the proposed GI environment addresses the need for seamless access to
data and information.
Standards
a. Architecture allows analysts to query and access using an intuitive interface that provides "one-stop"
access to all geospatial intelligence holdings.
b. Architecture provides for the virtual or physical integration of geospatial intelligence databases that
eliminates unnecessary, duplicative data stores.
c. Architecture enables tailored, customer and user-created views of NIMA data and information.
Page 41
3103 (Amendment
 UNCLASSIFIED
'actor 1.2.2 The extent to which the proposed GI environment integrates imagery analyst (IA) and
geospatial analyst (GA) tradecraft and functionality into a single interoperable softcopy environment.
Standards
a. Architecture provides analysts with a comprehensive tool set in a single workstation environment
that incorporates all functionality needed to produce geospatial intelligence.
b. Architecture provides for collaboration processes and capabilities allowing exchange of multi-INT
information between collaborators internal and external to NIMA.
c. Architecture enables softcopy functionality and capability to replace current hardcopy functionalities
of search, research and negation.
Factor 1.2.3 The extent to which the proposed GI environment provides effective, comprehensive and
improved information and workflow management across the enterprise.
Standards
a. Architecture provides an integrated, improved capability to efficiently plan, monitor, and control
geospatial intelligence, tasking, collection, processing, exploitation, and dissemination activities
across the enterprise.
Item 1.3 NSGI System Transition Plan
actor 1.3.1 The extent to which the proposed NSGI System Transition Plan provides an aggressive and
thorough, yet risk-aware, time-phased plan for achieving the proposed system architecture.
Standards
a. NSGI System Transition Plan provides a well-defined approach for the migration of data associated
with heritage and legacy system migration and/or retirement.
b. NSGI System Transition Plan addresses risk-reward trades that offer breakthrough technologies and
processes with the potential to provide for acceleration in achieving transformation goals.
c. NSGI System Transition Plan addresses a prioritized, time-phased approach for modernizing
NIMA's network infrastructure, segments, systems, and projects consistent with the offeror's
proposed architecture.
d. NSGI System Transition Plan facilitates well-managed insertion of new technology with a balance
between stability and change.
e. NSGI System Transition Plan includes a detailed Implementation Plan of the proposed Block 1
capabilities.
f. NSGI System Transition Plan provides a credible approach for limiting disruptions to operations
while improving overall responsiveness as new capabilities, processes, and technologies are
introduced.
age 4?
(Amendment
 UNCLASSIFIED
-tem 1.4 Business Process Re-engineering (BPR)
Factor 1.4.1 The extent to which the offeror provides an effective approach for conducting Business
Process Reengineering.
Standards
a. The BPR approach demonstrates an approach to BPR implementation that includes a well-defined
approach to analyzing current processes, identifying shortfalls, developing new processes, and
implementing these changes across a diverse spectrum of internal and external users.
b. The BPR approach provides capability to measure and continuously improve process performance.
c. The BPR approach accounts for BPR for both Corporate and Mission environments.
d. The BPR approach demonstrates an on-going process to engage stakeholders in a rapid spiral
development environment, incorporate stakeholder comments and feedback, measure progress to
achieve stakeholder buy-in, and champion that strategy both within and outside of NIMA to achieve
buy-in and funding of the steps necessary for the transformation of NIMA.
Factor 1.4.2 The extent to which Business Process Re-engineering documents logical, new business
processes/rules and best commercial practices to successfully facilitate the proposed transformation of
NIMA and the NSGI architecture.
Standards
a. The BPR approach identifies critical business processes across the enterprise.
b. The BPR approach demonstrates an understanding of key processes today, identifies shortfalls
within these processes, and defines how the processes will be reengineered to enable the proposed
architecture.
c. The BPR approach embraces commercial best practices and e-business practices.
Item 1.5 Enterprise Responsiveness
Factor 1.5.1 The extent to which the proposed architecture improves NSGI enterprise throughput,
timelines and responsiveness.
Standards
a. The proposed architecture improves throughput of the end-end NSGI enterprise.
b. The proposed architecture improves timelines of the end-end NSGI enterprise.
c. The proposed architecture accommodates process improvements across the NSGI enterprise.
d. The proposed analytical environment reduces the amount of time analysts spend on non-analytical
work, such as routine interfacing and waiting for data.
e. The proposed architecture facilitates continued improvements in throughput, timelines and
responsiveness.
 UNCLASSIFIED
''actor 1.5.2 The extent to which the proposed architecture improves throughput, responsiveness and
timelines of the end-end multi-INT TCPED stream.
Standards
a. The proposed architecture improves throughput of the end-end multi-INT TCPED stream, from
sensor to exploiter to shooter.
b. The proposed architecture improves timelines of the end-end TCPED stream, from sensor to
exploiter to shooter.
c. The proposed architecture facilitates continued improvements in throughput, timelines and
responsiveness of the end-end multi-INT TCPED stream, from sensor to exploiter to shooter.
Area II Management Approach
The management evaluation area consists of four items: Management Approach, Partnerships, Staffing Plan,
and Subcontractor Approach.
Item 2.1 Management Approach
Factor 2.1.1 The extent to which the proposal provides a credible approach for technical management
during block/spiral definition and implementation, allowing for Government insight and defined
approval gates supporting the evolutionary acquisition methodology.
`,andards
a. The offeror's proposal describes an effective and efficient change management (priorities,
requirements, technology) process/strategy.
b. The offeror's proposal provides a sound approach for the conduct and frequency of technical and
program management reviews that support the evolutionary acquisition and spiral development
methodology.
c. The offeror's proposal provides an acceptable plan and process for streamlined contract management
and execution during evolutionary development that can react quickly and efficiently to change
while minimizing timelines for implementing pre-planned changes.
Factor 2.1.2 The extent to which the offeror's proposal promotes efficient and effective program
management of the GeoScout contract effort.
Standards
a. The offeror proposes an integrated approach for electronic access to business (e.g., schedules, cost
data) and technical (e.g., plans, designs) documentation responsive to the Government's needs.
b. The offeror proposes proven management processes consistent with industry best practices.
c. The offeror's proposal describes how to measure, control and report performance against cost and
schedule, to include earned value management system, in an evolutionary acquisition and spiral
development environment.
d. The offeror proposes a sound cost/benefit methodology that drives investment decisions based on
enterprise requirements and balances cost, schedule and performance.
t33/O3 (A .admen
 UNCLASSIFIED
factor 2.1.3 The extent to which the proposal provides a sound management approach for assuming
systems integration responsibility over heritage/legacy efforts.
Standards
a. The offeror's transition approach clearly articulates the project aspects of system integration.
b. The offeror's business case realistically addresses heritage/legacy migration/retirements, the phased
assumption of integration responsibilities for existing systems and new capabilities, and overall
system integration strategy over the life of the contract.
Item 2.2 Partnerships
Factor 2.2.1 The extent to which the offeror clearly identifies how they intend to support relationships
with other significant partners in the Transformation of NIMA.
Standards
a. The offeror's proposal outlines an approach for how the GeoScout contractor will operate to fulfill
mission objectives partnering with the EE contractors.
b. The offeror's proposal outlines an approach for how the GeoScout contractor will operate to fulfill
mission objectives partnering with the O&S contractors.
c. The offeror's proposal outlines an approach for how the GeoScout contractor will operate to fulfill
mission objectives partnering with the heritage/legacy contractors.
Item 2.3 Staffing Plan
Factor 2.3.1 The extent to which the offeror provides an appropriate mix of qualified, highly capable
subject matter experts adequate to manage, develop and implement a large-scale system integration
effort over the life of the contract.
Standards
a. The offeror's staffing plan recruits and retains a diverse team of experienced, technologists, systems
engineers and domain experts throughout the program life cycle.
b. The offeror's staffing plan provides a realistic ramp up schedule to support the initial program
execution.
c. The offeror's proposed management plan provides a strategy to sustain a cleared, capable work force
in the face of turnover, attrition, and competing contract needs.
Item 2.4 Subcontract Management
Factor 2.4.1 The extent to which the proposal identifies an effective process for evaluating, selecting,
managing and incentivizing subcontractors.
Standards
a. The offeror's proposal delineates a subcontractor incentive strategy.
 b. The offeror's proposal describes a process to evaluate, select, manage, and allocate work to
subcontractors.
c. The offeror's proposal provides a management approach that fully reflects an integrated team
concept (i.e. an integrated set of processes applied across all team members).
Factor 3.1.1 The extent to which the offeror's Thin Line Operational System (TLOS) solution
demonstrated their understanding and implementation of an all-digital, data-centric analytic
environment.
Standards
a. The offeror's TLOS satisfied the assessment criteria for Softcopy Access to Data.
b. The offeror's TLOS satisfied the assessment criteria for a Geospatial Intelligence Database(s).
c. The offeror's TLOS satisfied the assessment criteria for an Integrated Analytical Environment.
d. The offeror's TLOS satisfied the assessment criteria for Production-Customer Interaction.
e. The offeror's TLOS satisfied the assessment criteria for a Business Plan.
Factor 3.1.2 The extent to which the offeror has a proven record of success in program management of
multiple concurrent, interdependent development spirals.
tandards
a. Offeror has demonstrated success in program management of multiple concurrent, interdependent
development spirals.
Factor 3.1.3 The extent to which the offeror has a proven record of success at leading subcontractors as
an integrated team toward a common goal.
Standards
a. Offeror has demonstrated success in leading subcontractors as an integrated team.
Area IV Cost
Evaluating cost in this acquisition involves reviewing an offeror's proposals for cost realism. A cost basis for
best value determination will then be prepared. The cost proposals shall be analyzed to determine the offeror's
understanding of the solicitation requirements as well as the validity of the offeror's approach to performing the
required tasks. An assessment of the Government's confidence in the offeror's ability to perform within their
submitted cost proposal will be made. Cost, while being an important factor, is not the single determining
factor in the selection of the successful offeror(s) for contract award. Although the cost proposals will not be
scored separately, cost will be used as a factor in determining best value.
Cost proposals shall be assessed to determine the Offeror's understanding of the solicitation requirements, as
Jll as to assess the validity of the Offeror's approach to performing the work (i.e., the degree of the
iovemment's confidence in the Offeror's ability to perform at or within the estimated cost). The Government
ge 4
 shall develop a Most Probable Cost (MPC} taking into account the above considerations, all proposal risk
assessments, and associated costs, as a basis for assessing the realism of proposed cost and price. The MPC will
include adjustments to the proposed cost and price for additional cost to the Government for the Offeror unique
use of Government resources and facilities. The Government will evaluate the realism of proposed cost/price by
assessing the compatibility of proposed cost/price with proposal scope and effort. For the cost to be realistic, it
must reflect what it would cost the Offeror to perform the effort, if performed with reasonable economy and
efficiency. The cost realism evaluation relies on the developed MPC and the associated resource, risk and error
analyses that lead to that MPC. Cost realism evaluation includes a review of the overall costs in an Offeror's
proposal to determine realism, reasonableness, and completeness.
Area V Security
Security shall be evaluated on a pass or fail scale basis and will be based on the Security Plan each offeror
submits as part of their proposal.
 UNCLASSIFIED
CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE REPORT
[ ] Re ort: From To
I I Final or Interim - Period
1. Contractor Name and Address:
2. Contract Number:
Task Order Number:
3. Value: $
4. Award Date:
Completion Date:
5. Type of Contract:(Check all that apply)-[ ]FP [ ]FP-EPA [ ]CPFF - Completion [ ]CPFF-Term [ ]CPIF
[ ICPAF [ ]ID/IQ [ ]BOA [ ]Requirements [ ]Labor Hour [ ]T&M [ ]CR [ ]Other
6. Description of Requirement:
7. Ratings. After commenting, score, in column on the right, using 1 for unsatisfactory, 2 for marginal, 3 for
satisfactory, 4 for very good, and 5 for exceptional.
Quality - Comments
Cost Control - Comments
Timeliness - Comments
Business Relations - Comments
Total Score (sum of scores from each area)
Mean Score (sum of scores divided by number of areas evaluated):
Appendix 1 Past Performance Questionnaire
Purge
 UNCLASSIFIED
s
Subcontractors and Teaming and Joint Venture Partners
List major subcontractors, team, joint venture partners, by name with brief description of
Work and names of key personnel.
A.
B.
C.
9. List Key Personnel of Prime Contractor
Name/Title
Employment Dates
Comments:
Name/Title
Employment Dates
Comments:
Name/Title
Employment Dates
Comments:
10. Would you select the firm again? Yes No
Is/Was the contractor committed to customer satisfaction? Yes No _
I--
11. Assessing Officers Name/Org. ID Signature: Phone/Fax Number:
Date Sent to Contractor:
CO's Initials:
12. Contractor's Review. Were comments, rebuttals, or additional information provided?
[ ] No [ ]Yes. Please attach comments.
13. Returned by (type name):
Signature
Phone/Fax/Internet Address
Date
14. Agency Review. Were contractor comments reviewed at a level above the Contracting Officer?
[ ] No [ ]Yes. Please attach comments. Number of pages
15. Final Ratings. Re-assess the Block 7 ratings based on contractor comments and agency review.
Validate or revise as appropriate.
Quality
Cost Control
Timeliness
Business Relation
Mean Score (Add the ratings above and divide by the number of areas rated) 0.00
16. CO's Name
Signature
"hone/Fax/Internet Address
Date
 UNCLASSIFIED
.release of Information: This Contractor Performance Report may be used to support future award decisions, and will be treated as
source selection information in accordance with FAR 3.104-4(k)(1)(x) and 42.1503(b). The completed report shall not be released to
other than Government personnel and the contractor whose performance is being evaluated during the period the information is being
used to provide source selection information.
50,
 UNCLASSIFIED
Source Selection Information - See FAR 3.104
DRAFT
APPENDIX I (Continued)
CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE REPORT INSTRUCTIONS
Block 1: Contractor Name and Address. Identify the specific division being evaluated if there is more than one.
Block 2: Contract number/task order number being evaluated.
Block 3: Contract value, including options.
Block 4: Contract award date and (anticipated) contract completion date.
Block 5: Type of Contract: Check all that apply.
Block 6: Provide a brief description of the work being done under the contract and identify the key performance
indicators.
Block 7: Indicate rating in far right column. In the comment area, provide rationale for the rating. Indicate the
contract requirements that were exceeded or were not met by the contractor and by how much.
Block 8: Identify major Subcontractors, and Team Partners, and their work responsibilities. List the key personnel
employed during the rating period that played a major role in the performance rating. Do not list key personnel not
employed long enough to affect performance. In some cases, more than one individual may have served in a key
position. List persons that had an affect on the ratings.
Block 9: Identify prime contractor key personnel. See Block 8 above for instructions.
Block 10: Explain why you would or would not select this contractor again.
ck 11: Provide information indicated.
Blocks 12-13: The contractor may provide comments but must sign block 13 to indicate it has reviewed the rating.
Block 14: If the contractor and Contracting Officer are unable to agree on a final rating, the contractor may seek
review at a level above the Contracting Officer, as required. Provide information indicated.
Block 15: Adjust the ratings assigned in block 7, if appropriate, based on any comments, rebuttals, or additional
information provided by the contractor and, if necessary, by agency review. Calculate a mean score.
Block 16: The Contracting Officer's signature indicates concurrence with the initial and final ratings.
c'
I 31i
Source .A'S'S let: tit 1-k ,ter rio
DRS?.