Attachment 11 Revised Technical Eval Factors.pdf

Section M Addendum Solicitation #12445224R0029 1

TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS

Source Selection Evaluation Criteria and Procedures

General

Failure to submit any of the information requested by this solicitation may be cause for unfavorable consideration.

Evaluation Methodology – The Source Selections Evaluation Board will evaluate the proposals received in response to the Request for Proposal 12445224R029. The factors will include both non-cost factors and Cost/Price factors.

Non-Cost/Price Factors:

Factor 1 – Key Personnel Factor 2 – Technical Approach Factor 3 – Experience /Past Performance Factor 4 – Price

Factor 1. Key Personnel

Present from one paragraph to no more than one page for each key person identified for this project.

Include relevant certifications, licenses, experience, and skills for the following:

1. Project Manager

2. Site Superintendent

3. Quality Control Supervisor (if applicable)

4. Site Preparation and Landscape Foreman

5. Concrete Foreman

6. Carpentry Foreman

7. Electrical and LV cabling Foreman

8. HVAC Foreman

If these resources are subcontracted, present from one paragraph to no more than one page describing why your firm plans to employ this subcontractor. Include relevant certifications, licenses, experience or past performed projects.

Factor 2: Technical Approach

a. Submission Requirements: The Offeror shall submit the following information:

Provide up to a two-page narrative describing the firm’s approach for meeting the requirements stated in the scope of work including both employees and equipment. Describe the offeror’s approach to managing employees, including subcontractors, to promote quality and timely performance. Describe the Project Management Information System (PMIS) the firm uses. Describe supply chain management strategies.

Present a project schedule in Gannt chart form pdf format 24”x36”.

Present a one-page project organization chart, size and scale for legibility.

Section M Addendum Solicitation #12445224R0029 2

b. Requirement: The Government will subjectively evaluate the technical approach to determine the offeror’s ability to meet the requirements of this RFP. The Government will evaluate the extent to which the offeror is able to perform and complete the project as specified in the SF 1442 solicitation. Proposals that demonstrate the following may be considered more favorably:

A commitment to retain employees/ Key personnel with long tenure at the firm.

The offeror and any proposed subcontractors have previously worked together.

Proposals which demonstrate the ability to save money through technical approach.

Factor 3: Experience / Past Performance

a. Submission Requirements: Submit a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) relevant construction projects in which the Offeror was the Prime Contractor that best demonstrates the Offeror’s experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the Request for Proposal (RFP). Provide the following information about each project:

• Project Title

• Location

• Owner’s representative/Client contact phone number and email address. Provided as a reference that can be contacted regarding the project.

• Dates of performance

• Quality-- Rate your firm’s performance on the project using the Rating Scale below and justify the firm’s answer for each question with a paragraph of supporting information and/or correction measures taken by the firm to improve performance in this area.

• Did products meet customer specifications?

• Did workmanship conform to good standards?

• Was the Quality Control (QC) plan adequate?

• Was the QC plan implemented well?

• Was QC well documented?

• Was deficient work identified and corrected quickly?

• Were the submittals adequate? (complete shop drawings, samples, etc)

• Were materials specified properly installed in accordance with manufacturer's specifications?

• Cost Control-- Rate your firm’s performance on the project using the Rating Scale below and justify the firm’s answer for each question with a paragraph of supporting information and/or correction measures taken by the firm to improve performance in this area.

• Were the contract terms and conditions satisfied with the contractually agreed price?

• Were invoices current accurate and complete?

• Were reasonable price change proposals submitted?

• Were innovative alternative methods, products, and or processes employed to the benefit of the client regarding operation and maintenance or other factors?

• Schedule-- Rate your firm’s performance on the project using the Rating Scale below and justify the firm’s answer for each question with a paragraph of supporting information and/or correction measures taken by the firm to improve performance in this area.

Section M Addendum Solicitation #12445224R0029 3

• Was the initial schedule adequate?

• Was the firm able to adhere to the approved schedule?

• Was there timely resolution of delays?

• Was there timely submission of required documentation?

• Was there timely submission of updated and revised schedules?

To be considered relevant, projects must have been completed within the past five to eight (5-8) years of the proposal issue date for this RFP.

A project is defined as work performed under a single task order or contract. For multiple award and IDIQ type contracts, the contract as a whole shall not be submitted as a project; rather Offerors shall submit the work performed under a single task order as a project.

b. Minimum Requirement: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing relevant construction projects as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements. The assessment of the Offeror’s relevant experience will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the Offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP. The Government will only review the first five (5) projects , in the order they were submitted in the proposal. Any projects submitted in excess of the first five (5) for Experience will not be considered. The Government reserves the right to contact references for verification or additional information. The Government’s inability to contact any of the Offeror’s references or the references unwillingness to provide the information requested may affect the Government’s evaluation of this factor.

Proposals that do not contain any projects that demonstrate experience for the Offeror will not be considered.

Section M Addendum Solicitation #12445224R0029 4

Relevant projects where the Offeror and its proposed subcontractors previously worked together may be considered more favorably than those that have not worked together.

Proposals that contain past performance projects that demonstrate experience in multiple disciplines may be considered more favorably.

Relevant projects where the Offeror performed major or critical aspects of the project may be considered more favorably than major or critical aspects of the project performed by a subcontractor.

Proposals that contain relevant projects completed for the Forest Service may be considered more favorably.

Factor 4: Price

The total prices will be evaluated but not scored. Reasonableness will be determined by comparison to other competitive prices received and to the Independent Government Estimate. If a price is disproportionally lower than other competitive prices, the price may be deemed unrealistic. If necessary, the price break downs may be analyzed to determine whether the price elements are realistic for the work to be performed, reflect a clear understanding of the requirements, and are consistent with the information provided by the Offeror.

A. The degree of importance of the price will increase with the degree of equality of the proposals in relation to the other factors on which selection is to be based, or when the price is so significantly high as to diminish the value of the technical superiority to the Government.

B. The Government may award a contract on the basis of initial offers received, without discussions. Therefore, each initial offer should contain the offeror’s best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint. However, if considered necessary by the Contracting Officer, discussions will be conducted with only those offerors determined to have a reasonable chance for award.

C. The Government reserves the right to make an award to other than the lowest priced offeror or to the offeror with the highest non-price evaluation if the Contracting Officer determines that to do so would result in the greatest value to the Government.

C. The Government reserves the right to make an award to other than the lowest priced offeror if the lowest priced offeror is determined to be not technically acceptable.