Evaluation_Factors_TARGET_SHOOTING_(1)_0001.docx
DOCX document 20 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 140L2221Q0011
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Sol_140L2221Q0011_Amd_0002.pdf | ||
| Recreational_Target_Shooting_EA_Q_A_0001.docx | DOCX document | |
| Sol_140L2221Q0011_Amd_0001.pdf | ||
| SOW_-_Recreational_Target_Shooting_Project_NEPA.docx | DOCX document | |
| Evaluation_Factors_TARGET_SHOOTING__8_3_2021.docx | DOCX document | |
| Sol_140L2221Q0011.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
EVALUATION FACTORS
TAOS FIELD OFFICE
RECREATIONAL TARGET SHOOTING PROJECT
NEPA
The evaluation factors listed below will be used to select the contractor that offers the BLM the best value offer: The Government anticipates issuing a single Firm Fixed Price (FFP) BPA Order resulting from this competitive request for quote (RFQ) to the most responsible firm whose quote conforms to the RFQ and will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate quotes. Provide your bid in two separate volumes:
Volume 1-Pricing.
Volume 2 – Non-pricing, which includes information that addresses the evaluation factors.
Offerors are encouraged to review BLM Manual Supplement H-8100-1 for all requirements of permitting, field work, and reporting prior to submitting a proposal
1. Key Personnel
2. Past Performance/Experience
3. Schedule
4. Price
Non-price factors (Factors 1-3) are of equal importance. When combined, the non-price factors are of equal importance when compared to price. Price is not an adjectivally rated factor. However, the Price factor will become the more dominant factor as technical quotes reach technical equality. In such cases, where all non-priced factors being evaluated are virtually the same, best value may be represented by the lowest-priced quote.
Optional tasks: The BLM will evaluate quotes for award purposes by adding the total price for all optional tasks to the total price for the basic task requirements. The BLM may determine that a quote is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the BLM to exercise the option(s).
FACTOR 1 - Key Personnel
· Provide the names and resumes of staff which will be assigned to this project throughout the duration of this requirement.
Ratings for Factor 1
| Rating |
| Definition |
| Acceptable |
| Quote meets or exceeds qualifications necessary for completing all respective tasks listed in the SOW. |
| Unacceptable |
| Quote does not meet basic qualifications necessary for completing all respective tasks listed in the SOW. Quote is not awardable. |
FACTOR 2 – Past Performance/Experience:
· The Contractor shall have successfully completed a minimum of two similar or comparable projects within the last five years. Provide the information listed below for the two most recent projects.
· In addition to the information submitted in accordance with the Solicitation, the BLM will seek out and consider other information obtained from both commercial and government systems (i.e. PPIRS, BBB, etc.). The Offeror shall submit the following past performance information which shall include a list of these projects identifying:
· Name of the project (to include address)
· Project leader
· Issuing agency or company
· Contract/Identification number
· Start and completion dates
· Brief description of the scope of work
· Award amount (in whole dollars)
· How the work is substantially similar or comparable to the proposed project
· No less than two valid references that includes:
· Agency/company’s name, point of contact, phone number, and email address Ratings for Factor 2:
| Rating |
| Definition |
| Outstanding |
| Quote indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and risk of unsuccessful performance is low. |
| Good |
| Quote indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate. |
| Acceptable |
| Quote meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate. |
| Marginal |
| Quote has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high. |
| Unacceptable |
| Quote does not meet requirements of the order, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Quote is un-awardable. |
FACTOR 3 – Schedule
· The proposal shall include a narrative explaining the project schedule that demonstrates your company’s ability to meet or exceed the completion of the order in less than one year. Provide a schedule that identifies all project milestones and the critical path.
Ratings for Factor 3
| Rating |
| Definition |
| Outstanding |
| Quote indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and risk of unsuccessful performance is low. |
| Good |
| Quote indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate. |
| Acceptable |
| Quote meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate. |
| Marginal |
| Quote has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high. |
| Unacceptable |
| Quote does not meet requirements of the order, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Quote is un-awardable. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .