AMENDMENT 0212 AMEND 5

Section M. 2 - Basis for Award (Best Value) is hereby deleted in its entirety and is replaced with the attached.

BASIS FOR AWARD (BEST VALUE)

The Government intends to evaluate proposals using a two-step methodology. The first step will involve the evaluation of the offeror's INDIVIDUAL STAFF EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS, CONTRACTOR'S TECHNICAL APPROACH, AND PRICE, evaluation factors B, D, and E listed below). Based on these evaluations, a Competitive Range (FAR Part 15) consisting of the most highly rated proposals from the set-aside (HubZone and Small Business) and the non-set-aside (Full and Open) portions will be established. For instance: Offerors that are among the most highly rated in the set-aside (HubZones and Small Businesses) portion, and are not among the most highly rated in the non-set-aside (Full and Open) portion, would still make the competitive range based on their ranking in the set-aside portions of this RFP.

The second step will involve evaluation of CONTRACTOR'S PAST PERFORMANCE (evaluation factor C) and an offeror's ORAL PRESENTATION, for the offerors within the Competitive Range. Evaluation of oral presentations will consist of the offeror's CAPABILITY TO PERFORM THE CONTRACT (evaluation factor A listed below). The Government anticipates having Oral Presentations May 20 - June 14, 2002. Therefore, each offer should contain the best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint.

A cost realism analysis will be performed for all technically acceptable offerors. Contract award will be based on the combined evaluations of Contractor's Capability to Perform the Contract, Individual Staff Experience and Qualifications, Past Performance, Contractor's Experience with Related Work, and Price. Contracts resulting from this solicitation will be awarded to the responsible offerors, whose offers, conforming to the solicitation, are determined to provide the "best value" to the Government, which may not necessarily be the proposals offering the lowest cost nor receiving the highest technical score. Please Note: Based on the set-aside (HubZones and Small Businesses) and non-set-aside) portions, the Government intends to award up to 15 contracts (9 to small businesses inclusive of a HubZone certified contractor, and six to large businesses). Therefore, the most highly rated HubZone offeror in the HubZone set-aside portion will receive an award irregardless of their overall ranking in the non-set-aside portion. The eight most highly rated small businesses in the set-aside portion will receive awards irregardless of their overall ranking in the non-set-aside portion. Please be advised that the Government reserves the right to increase the total amount of contracts awarded beyond fifteen. It should be noted that cost is not a numerically weighted factor.

Although non-cost factors are significantly more important than cost, cost is an important factor and should be considered when preparing responsive offers (proposals). The importance of cost as an evaluation factor will increase with the degree of equality of the proposals in relation to the remaining evaluation factors.

When the offerors within the competitive range are considered essentially equal in terms of technical, past performance and other no-cost factors (if any), or when cost is so significantly high as to diminish the value of the technical superiority to the Government, cost may become the determining factor for award. In summary, cost/no-cost trade offs will be made, and the extent to which one may be sacrificed for the other if governed only by the tests of rationality and consistency with the established factors.

Prospective contractors are advised that the selection of a contractor for contract award is to be made, after a careful evaluation of the offers (proposals) received, by a panel of specialists chosen by DOL/ETA. Each panelist will evaluate the proposals for technical acceptability using a range of scores assigned to each factor. The factors are presented in the order of emphasis that they will receive (i.e., Factor A has the greatest weight, Factor B the second greatest weight, etc.). The scores will then be averaged to select a contractor for award on the basis of their proposal being the most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

PAGE OF PAGES
1	\|	2

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION. NO.

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

April 12, 2002

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. cam

PAR 02-570

5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

CODE

U.S. Department of Labor, ETA/OGCM

Division of Contract Services

200 Constitution Avenue, NW

Room C-4310

Washington DC 20210

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6)

CODE

U.S. Department of Labor, ETA

Divsion of Contract Services

200 Constitution Avenue, NW

Room C-4310

Washington DC 20210

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code)



To all Offerors/Bidders






CODE		FACILITY CODE

(X)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

RFP-DCS-02-12

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

03-01-2002

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 12)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATION

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers

is extended,

is not extended. Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior

to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods: (a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 0 copies of the amendment;(b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment of each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

N/A

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

(X)

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in payng office, appropriation date, etc.)

SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103 (b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor

is not,

is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

(See Attachment)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)
KEITH A. BOND
Contracting Officer

15B. CONTACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE

SIGNED

04-12-2002

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

CONTINUATION PAGE
DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT (continued)

Section M.2 is hereby deleted in its entirety and is replaced with the following:

M.2 BASIS FOR AWARD (BEST VALUE)

The second step will involve evaluation of CONTRACTOR’S PAST PERFORMANCE (evaluation factor C) and an offeror’s ORAL PRESENTATION, for the offerors within the Competitive Range.Evaluation of oral presentations will consist of the offeror's CAPABILITY TO PERFORM THE CONTRACT (evaluation factor A listed below). Therefore, each offer should contain the best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint

A cost realism analysis will be performed for all technically acceptable offerors. Contract award will be based on the combined evaluations of Contractor's Capability to Perform the Contract, Individual Staff Experience and Qualifications, Past Performance, Contractor's Experience with Related Work, and Price. The contract resulting from this solicitation will be awarded to the responsible offeror whose offer, conforming to the solicitation, is determined to provide the "best value" to the Government, which may not necessarily be the proposals offering the lowest cost nor receiving the highest technical score. It should be noted that cost is not a numerically weighted factor. Although non-cost factors are significantly more important than cost, cost is an important factor and should be considered when preparing responsive offers (proposals). The importance of cost as an evaluation factor will increase with the degree of equality of the proposals in relation to the remaining evaluation factors.