12443926Q0208 EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD CODY CADY.docx

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS AND EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

Each Offeror shall provide the Government with a project work plan and firm fixed price quotation for the tasks in the statement of work and a unit price for proposed personnel for each task. Each work plan and pricing will be submitted to the CO. The cost elements for each task shall be presented using the attached schedule.

These instructions are designed to provide general guidance for preparing proposals and instructions on proposal organization, format and content. The offeror’s Quotation should include all documents and information requested and should be submitted in accordance with these instructions. The Government reserves the right to consider only those Quotations submitted in accordance with the instructions set forth in this solicitation. A proposal that omits material elements required by this RFQ may be eliminated from further consideration. The Government intends to make awards based on initial offers received without discussions.

Quotations should be clear, concise, and include adequate detail for effective evaluation by the Government. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but rather provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet the requirements of the solicitation. The Government will evaluate Quotations based on the information presented in the offeror’s Quotations. Past Performance may be evaluated by using information obtained from Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) or any other sources available to the Government to include, but not limited to: CPARS or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and other Government Representatives.

Evaluation Factors This requirement is being evaluated using the Best Value-Tradeoff process as it was determined that factors other than price are significantly more important than price alone. The criteria listed below are presented by major category so offerors will know which areas require emphasis in the preparation of their offer. Offerors should note that these criteria serve as the standard against which their Quotations will be evaluated, and they serve to identify the significant matters which offerors should address.

Offerors should address not only their capability, but also their intended means, of executing the tasks specified in the Statement of Work. As these are detailed efforts that require significant subject matter expert input, the Offeror’s description of their proposed methods to produce high quality work will be of significant interest to the selection board in the Technical Evaluation of the Offeror’s Quotation.

Each Factor is listed in descending order of importance with the “Experience and Qualifications of Key Personnel” Factor being more important than the “Past Performance” factor, and the “Past Performance” Factor being more important than the “Technical Approach and Project Work Plan” Factor. The foregoing Factors, when combined, are significantly more important than the “Geographic Location” Factor, and all Evaluation Factors other than Price are significantly more important than the Price Factor.

TECHNICAL FACTORS: The Offeror’s Quotation will be evaluated to determine whether the offeror’s technical knowledge, and depth and breadth of experience are technically adequate, sufficient, and acceptable to fulfill the contract obligation.

Factor 1: EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS OF KEY PERSONNEL

Key Personnel will be defined as those individuals that will be affirmatively assigned to work this particular Contract. Each Offeror will be evaluated on the qualifications and experience of Key Personnel (both prime contractor and subcontractors) considered integral to optimal Contract performance. To assure project success, Offerors identifying suitable contingency plan Key Personnel to ensure performance in the absence of identified Key Personnel may receive a higher rating for this factor.

The technical proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the Offeror’s knowledge, depth, and breadth of experience are adequate to fulfill the contract obligation. The technical proposal will be reviewed for the adequacy and completeness of the resumes provided, and the demonstrated depth and breadth of knowledge and experience of Key Personnel. The technical proposal will also be evaluated to determine the extent to which Key Personnel demonstrate a clear understanding of, knowledge of, and ability to apply regulations, processes and guidance as necessary to execute this Auditing requirement.

· The Offeror must include the name, resume and location of the individual that will complete the project including the records research, interviews, and development of the report.

· The Offeror must include the Name, experience and qualifications of support staff and an explanation of their anticipated role in the project.

Factor 2: PAST PERFORMANCE:

The Past Performance Factor evaluates the quality of Past Performance of the Offeror, and the Government will evaluate quality of performance relative to the similarities in size and complexity of the procurement under consideration. The Past Performance Questionnaire referenced in FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation – Commercial Items, is provided below for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 2 - Past Performance. The evaluation of past performance will include the Offeror’s history of commitment to:

0. customer satisfaction;

0. conforming not only to immediate requirements but also to applicable law

0. recommending and/or implementing innovative approaches and/or technologies; and

0. adherence to schedules.

The Government's sources of information for evaluating past performance may include but are not limited to: any and all information provided by the Offeror; inquiries of Government Source Selection representative(s); and all other known sources not provided by the Offeror. While the Government may elect to consider data from all other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate, and complete past performance information nevertheless rests with the Offeror.

Offerors may also submit past performance as a Subcontractor, to include the name and POC for the Prime Contractor. Past performance information submitted by Offerors for efforts completed as a Subcontractor may be favorably considered by the Government in its Past Performance evaluation of the Offeror, in particular in the case of an Offeror without an established record of relevant past performance as a Prime Contractor.

In the case of an Offeror with no established record of relevant past performance as a Prime Contractor or as a Subcontractor, or for an Offeror from whom information on past performance is not currently available, the Offeror will not be evaluated either favorably or unfavorably on past performance.

Offerors shall provide past performance on three to five relevant or similar contracts performed within the last five (5) years. This will be used to provide the government with a level of confidence in the offeror’s experience in providing technical and other support in the area of work required by this solicitation, as well as the ability to meet the solicitation requirements. Past performance will be evaluated on the following factors:

0. The Past Performance evaluation will assess the relative risks associated with an offeror’s likelihood of successfully performing this preliminary assessment and site inspections as indicated by that offeror’s record of past performance. In this context, “offeror” refers to the proposed prime contractor and all proposed major subcontractors. A major subcontractor will be defined as a subcontractor whose subcontract is for more than 15% of the total proposal price.

0. The Government will conduct a performance risk assessment based on the quality, relevancy, and recentness of the offeror's past performance, as well as that of its major subcontractors, as it relates to the probability of successful accomplishment of the required effort. When assessing past performance, the Government will focus its inquiry on the past performance of the offeror and its proposed team members/major subcontractors as it relates to all solicitation requirements. Past performance of Offeror’s or team members/major subcontractors whose firms are divided into severable segments (i.e. division, group, unit, etc.) will only be evaluated as it relates to those segments of the firm(s) that will actually perform the work.

0. The offeror is cautioned that in conducting the performance risk assessment, the Government may use data provided in the offeror's proposal and data obtained from other sources. Since the Government may not necessarily obtain information on all of the listed contract references and/or may not contact all of the identified POCs provided by the offeror, it is incumbent upon the offeror to explain the relevance of the data provided. The Government may elect to consider data obtained from sources other than those identified by the offeror.

0. Contract references will first be reviewed to determine the relevancy of the past performance information. Past performance must have occurred within the last 5 years to be considered relevant. Each contract reference determined to be relevant and recent will be assessed as to the quality of the offeror’s past performance. The Government may use personal knowledge or information from other sources in its evaluation of an offeror’s past performance, provided such information is consistent with the established evaluation criteria of this RFQ.

Factor 3: TECHNICAL APPROACH AND PROJECT WORK PLAN

All offerors will be evaluated on the ability of the organization and procedures in the Project Work Plan to increase the probability that the offeror will successfully perform this requirement. The Technical Approach and Project Work Plan will be evaluated on the ability to identify the roles and responsibilities of the primary individuals, and how the subcontractors (if any) fit into the organization in an organizational chart. The Project Work Plan will be evaluated on the discussion of quality control and delivering a professional work product.

· Offerors shall provide a written outline or narrative describing their method of approach for this project. Documentation should also indicate how offeror’s completion of the individual tasks for this project aligns with the deliverables schedule included in the statement of work.

Factor 4: GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION

After the qualitative Evaluation of the Technical factors defined above, the Government will consider the location and proximity of the Offeror to the National Forest proposed for the project. The Government may in its discretion assign a positive rating to Offerors based on their relative proximity to the respective National Forest under this Geographic Location Factor. A positive rating for Geographic Location is discretionary and of the least weight of all the non-Price Evaluation Factors. Under no circumstances will a positive rating for Geographic Location overcome any deficiencies or weaknesses found in other aspects of the offeror’s Technical Proposal.

· Provide a description of your experience in the local project area. Ideally the projects listed in Factor 2 will assist in demonstrating this knowledge.

Factor 5: PRICE

The total price for all required actions and options will be evaluated and price consideration will be based upon the best overall value to the Government. This factor will be evaluated for price reasonableness and consistency with the market/labor conditions for work to be performed.

BASIS FOR AWARD

This requirement is being evaluated using the Best Value-Tradeoff process as it was determined that factors other than price are equal to or more important than price alone. The Government reserves the right to consider only those Quotations submitted in accordance with all instructions set forth or referenced in this solicitation. A Quotation that omits material elements required by this solicitation may be eliminated from further consideration. The Government may reject any or all offers if such action is determined to be in the Government’s best interests and in accordance with the criteria set forth in this solicitation.

The Government will award a Task Order resulting from this Solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to this Solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government. Offers will be evaluated on factors other than price and price considered as weighted and described above.

One electronic copy of each project work plan and pricing will be submitted to the CO. The cost elements for each site shall be presented using the attached schedule (Attachment A).

6.1. The project work plan shall include the following:

· Description of how the work will be performed.

· List of all personnel assigned to each task and qualifications of each, if not previously provided (including any subcontractors). Specifically address experience that personnel have had in the state identified in the scope of work.

· Work schedule.

· Firm fixed price for the project to be performed

· Unit Price/Cost for proposed personnel

6.2. Award of this Task Order will be based on “Best Value” to the Government. Evaluation of proposals will be based on the following:

· Proposed Team Members (specify team members for each task)

· Experience performing CERCLA Preliminary Assessments.

· Experience performing CERCLA Site inspections.

· Overall qualifications to perform environmental services including certifications

· Content of the Contractor’s Project Work Plan

· Overall Price to the Government for Completion of the Task Order