1.6.3 Evaluation Factors.pdf

Evaluation Factors and Basis of Award

The Government will award one or more fixed-price contracts resulting from this solicitation to the

Offeror(s) whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. This procurement is being conducted in accordance with the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 13.5. The acquisition will be a best value contract. Offerors are cautioned that award(s) may not necessarily be made to the lowest priced proposal.

Evaluation Factors

The Government will evaluate proposal submissions based on the following evaluation factors, listed in descending order of importance:

Factor 1 – Technical Approach

Factor 2 – Quality Control Plan

Factor 3 – Past Performance

Factor 4 – Price

All non-price factors, when combined, are slightly more important than price.

Naval Weapons Station Earle (NWSE) Power Pole/Receptacles Electrical Work Evaluation Factors

Factor 1: Technical Approach

Vendors will be evaluated on their ability to demonstrate technical sufficiency in their proposed technical and management approach to perform and support the Statement of Work (SOW) requirements. This section of the vendor’s proposal shall address information regarding how the proposal logistical support task areas will be performed, the various resources that will be used to facilitate performance, and the identification of potential difficulties in conducting the work with practical suggestions for overcoming these difficulties.

Vendors will be evaluated on their ability to develop a work plan in response to the SOW. Vendors must demonstrate an understanding of the following:

- Scope of technical requirements

- Complexity of technical requirements

- Performance requirements & objectives

- Pertinent work tasks & deliverables

- Compliance with local code regulations and electrical industry standards

Factor 2: Quality Control Plan

The technical evaluation will consider the merits of the proposed quality control plan. Consideration will be given to how well the quality control plan demonstrates the offeror’s ability to present and execute a quality control plan, whereby the contractor manages and monitors the process and takes the appropriate corrective action to correct performance to meet program objectives. Consideration will be given to how well the plan demonstrates that the offeror will provide adequate quality control for all requirements of the Statement of Work (SOW).

Consideration will be given to how well the quality control plan discusses the offeror’s policies and procedures to ensure compliance with the contract requirements and its methods of documenting and enforcing quality control procedures of both the prime contractor and subcontractors.

Factor 3: Past Performance

Offerors shall provide maximum of three (3) past performance examples on recent and relevant contracts for the same or similar requirements to the services under the SOW. Past performance must be from contracts completed within the last three (3) years or from contracts that are currently in progress.

The provided past performance examples should demonstrate performance in delivering similar products. Include three references consisting of the following:

- Project title/description

- Role (Prime/Subcontractor)

- Contract number

- Dollar value & contract type

- Period of performance

- Agency or company for which the work was performed

- Summary of the work products/services

- Name/contact information of the client’s point of contact

FEMA reserves the right to utilize past performance information other than the information submitted with the quotations received in conducting the evaluation. This may be a favorable CPARS or PPIRS rating. However, if these are utilized, and a Vendor does not have any ratings since they have not done business with the government, they will receive a neutral rating in the evaluation later that cannot be used against them, so it may make more sense to ask for Corporate Experience or leave this requirement out of the Past Performance Evaluation Factor.

Factor 4: Price

The price proposal will be evaluated for price reasonableness through comparison with other proposed prices and may include other price analysis techniques.

The price proposal will not be given a confidence rating, but unit prices and discounts will be evaluated to ensure prices are fair and reasonable.

Ratings

Confidence Rating Definition

High Confidence The government has high confidence that the Offeror understands the requirement, proposes a sound approach, and will be successful in performing the contract with little or no Government intervention.

Some Confidence The government has some confidence that the Offeror understands the requirement, proposes a sound approach, and will be successful in performing the contract with some Government intervention.

Low Confidence The government has low confidence that the Offeror understands the requirement, proposes a sound approach, or will be successful in performing the contract with even with Government intervention