Evaluation_Factors_WV_-_FINAL.pdf

1 | P a g e

EVALUATION FACTORS

BASIS FOR AWARD

(a) Establishment of a BPA will be based upon overall best value to the Government.

(b) In order to establish a qualified pool of BPA holders, potential BPA holders must demonstrate they meet all of the minimum requirements outlined in the evaluation factors below in order to be considered for establishment of Blanket Purchase Agreement or award of a contract.

(c) Award will be made to the lowest priced quoter that meet all of the minimum technical requirements below.

EVALUATION FACTORS

(a) The Performance Work Statement (PWS) serves as the Government’s baseline requirements. All quotations will be evaluated against these requirements.

(b) Evaluation of factors other than price may be based on the Contracting Officer’s knowledge of and previous experience with the supply or service being acquired or any other reasonable basis.

FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL FACTOR

a. Capabilities & Organizational Experience

b. Key Personnel

c. Relevant Past Performance

Factor 1.a Capabilities & Organizational Experience

(The Government will evaluate the extent to which the quoter’s technical capabilities and organizational experience addresses and demonstrates a high probability of successfully performing with minimal risk. The Government will evaluate the extent to which the quoter demonstrates substantial experience in performing the same or similar services in type, scope and complexity as those required by this solicitation, including the Performance Work Statement. Rural Development is interested only in quotations that demonstrate the Quoter’s requisite expertise in performing engagements of this type as illustrated by the Quoter’s description of how it proposes to perform the requirements set forth in the PWS. Therefore, a Quoter’s technical capabilities and organizational experience should not merely state that the “Quoter will perform in accordance with the PWS” or similar verbiage. Quoter should be able to demonstrate how they will provide competent and cost-effective representation for Rural Development; is fully cognizant of the scope of this requirement;

and has the capability to complete all Performance Work Statement (PWS) requirements. The

Contractor shall provide the skilled personnel necessary to successfully meet the government’s requirements.

Minimum Qualifications:

1. Contractor must be duly licensed to practice law and be in good standing with the State

Bar Association in the State of West Virginia.

2. By submitting a quote in response to the RFQ, quoter is representing, as of the time of submission of its quote, that none of the quoted key personnel have:

a. Been held in contempt of any court for any reason during the five years preceding the closing date of the solicitation;

b. Been sanctioned by any court for any reason during the five years preceding the closing date of the solicitation;

c. Been disciplined in any way for any reason by the State Bar Association in the

State of West Virginia during the five years preceding the closing date of the solicitation;

36 | P a g e

d. Been disciplined in any way for any reason by the State Bar Association of any of the other fifty U.S. states, the District of Columbia, or any U.S. territory during the five years preceding the closing date of the solicitation.

If the quoter is a law firm, LLC, LLP, or any other type of multi-attorney law operation the required minimum qualification criteria of 2.a through 2.d shall be read to apply to both the quoted key personnel and the quoting organization. If any of the quoted key personnel or the quoting organization have been held in contempt, sanctioned, or disciplined, as set forth in 2.a. through 2.d. the quote will fail to meet the minimum qualification requirements, the quote will be considered technically unacceptable, and the quote will be excluded from further consideration for award.

3. Contractor must be able to represent Rural Development in West Virginia U.S. Bankruptcy Court(s).

4. Contractor must have access to Public Court Electronic Records (PACER)

5.Contractor must have demonstrated experience in foreclosures. Contractor must have “relevant” experience in providing Legal Foreclosure Services within the last three (3) years. Quoter who has more “relevant” experience in size, scope, coverage and complexity will be rated higher than those with less “relevant” experience. In addition to considering size, scope, coverage, and complexity in determining whether Quoter’s experience is “Relevant,” the government will consider place of performance. To be considered “Relevant”, Quoter’s experience must be for the provision of Legal

Foreclosure Services in the State of West Virginia.

Organizational Capabilities & Experience Rating Method: “Critical” that unless the proposal documents all elements listed in Factor 1.a, it will receive an “Acceptable/Unacceptable” rating per Table

1 listed below: Those submission that are Unacceptable will receive no further consideration and be excluded from the competition.

Table 1 – Organizational Capabilities & Experience Rating Method

Adjective Rating Description

Acceptable Quoter meets the requirements listed in Factor 1 of the solicitation Unacceptable Quoter does not meet the requirements listed in Factor 1 of the solicitation.

Factor 1.b: Key Personnel

1. Quoters shall submit resumes of Key Personnel. The government will evaluate whether the resume demonstrate the technical expertise, experience and ability necessary to perform the services as outlined in the PWS.

Staff designated as “Key Personnel” are:

1. Attorney(s)

NOTE: The USDA recognizes that there will be times when work under a contract will be performed by other experienced personnel that are not listed as key staff in Quoters response to this RFQ. The Contractor is expected to provide the USDA the name of that experienced

37 | P a g e personnel who will be performing the task, and the proposed person’s relevant experience

(qualifications) for performing the particular task request.

Key Personnel Rating Method: “Critical” that unless the proposal documents all elements listed in

Factor 1.b it will receive a “Acceptable/Unacceptable” rating per Table 2 listed below: Those submission that are Unacceptable will receive no further consideration and be excluded from the competition.

Table 2 – Key Personnel Rating Method

Adjective Rating Description

Acceptable Quoter demonstrate the technical expertise, experience and ability necessary to perform the services as outlined in the PWS.

Unacceptable Quoter does not demonstrate the technical expertise, experience and ability necessary to perform the services as outlined in the PWS.

Factor 1.c: Relevant Past Performance

Quoters must either provide past performance information or affirmatively state that it possesses no relevant directly related or similar past performance.

(a) The Government will evaluate the offeror’s record of past and current performance to ascertain the probability of successfully performing the required efforts as outlined in the

Performance Work Statement (PWS).

(b) The Government will focus its inquiries on the Quoter’s (and major subcontractor’s) record of performance as it relates to all PWS requirements, including cost, schedule, performance and management of subcontractors. Quoters shall submit no more than three (3) projects to demonstrate their past performance history, as either the Prime or Sub-Contractor and/or;

major Sub-Contractors during the past three (3) years; or actively being performed and at least

50% complete, which are similar in size, content and complexity and that demonstrate a performance to the level as outlined in the PWS.

Information shall include:

1. Contract Number (if any);

2. Name and address of the government agency or commercialentity;

3. Brief description of work/services provided and the relevance to the requirements herein.

Please ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact.

A Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) will be submitted to the clients you identified, in accordance with the RFQ to assess the likelihood that the quoter will perform the contract successfully.

Additionally, the Government will review records contained in the Past Performance Information

38 | P a g e

Retrieval System (PPIRS) and/or the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System

(CPARS) and other sources, to assess the likelihood that the quoter will perform the contract successfully. The Government will seek to determine whether the Quoter has consistently demonstrated a commitment to customer satisfaction and timely delivery of quality goods and services at fair and reasonable prices. This is a matter of subjective judgment.

Past performance is considered less “Critical” factor therefore ratings listed on Table 2 and 3 will be used to rate these two areas.

In the event an offeror doesn’t have relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered “acceptable.”

Table 3 – Past Performance Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method

Adjectival Rating Description

Acceptable Based on Past Performance in Foreclosure Legal

Services the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Quoter will successfully perform the required effort IAW the PWS, or the quoter’s Past Performance record is unknown.

Unacceptable Based on the Quoter’s Past Performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the Quoter will be able to successfully perform the required effort IAW the

PWS

Neutral No relevant past performance; information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered “acceptable.”

For Determination of weighted scores, the following methodology for weight scores will be used:

Factor 1a: Acceptable/Unacceptable

Factor 1b: Acceptable/Unacceptable

Factor 1c: Acceptable/Unacceptable

Price: Vendors are encouraged to submit competitive industry pricing. The Government uses

39 | P a g e

"allowable foreclosure attorney fees" published by Fannie Mae as an indicator of price reasonableness. In addition, the Government uses foreclosure timeframes published byHUD as an indicator of reasonable diligence.

The Government reserves the right to find a vendor unacceptable if their prices are found to be unreasonable.

FAR 52.217-5 EVALUATION OF OPTIONS (JUL 1990)

FAR 52.212-2 EVALUATION – COMMERCIAL ITEMS

EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS

Evaluation and selection are made under FAR Part 13 procedures; therefore, FAR Part 12 and

FAR Part 15 evaluation and selection procedures are not applicable. The quoters shall be evaluated in an impartial manner and will be evaluated on the basis established in the solicitation. The process is purposefully streamlined, and USDA, Rural Development (RD) has broad discretion in the evaluation procedures, by considering positive attributes, negative attributes, and potential risk of the overall quotation.