Evaluation_Criteria_051519_1.pdf

Attachment III 15BNAS19RCA0126

Evaluation Criteria

National Acquisitions Section

The Bureau will evaluate each offer based on the best value, trade-off process as outlined in the Federal Acquisition

Regulations, part 15.101-1- Tradeoff Process. All evaluation factors and sub-factors other than price, when combined, are significantly more important than price. Evaluations will note the strengths, deficiencies, weaknesses (to include significant weaknesses) and risks of each proposal, in a summary format with supporting narrative

Definitions:

Strength is an aspect of the proposal that increases the likelihood of successful contract performance.

Deficiency is a material failure of a proposal to meet a

Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

A weakness is a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. A “significant weakness” in the proposal is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

A Risk is a potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance.

NON-PRICED FACTORS:

Factor 1: Technical

This factor shall contain the following:

A. Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) audit cycle

Offeror shall demonstrate ability to provide multiple BOP audits simultaneously.

Offeror shall demonstrate 3 years’ experience providing timely correctional system audit reports (submit two (2) examples)

B. Receipt of PREA Documents

Offeror shall demonstrate experience with handling large amounts of correctional system data/information.

C. Communication with Institutions

Offeror shall demonstrate experience of communicating with administrative contracting staff and institution staff during the audit process.

D. Corrective action process

Offeror shall provide a sample of preliminary reports.

E. Final Report Process

Offeror shall provide a sample of final reports.

F. Academic and Special Qualification of the auditor

All auditors shall be certified by the

Department of Justice.

An audit shall be conducted by:

o A member of a correctional monitoring body that is not part of, or under the authority of, the agency (but may be part of, or authorized by, the relevant State or local government);

o A member of an auditing entity such as an inspector general’s or ombudsperson’s office that is external to the agency; or o Other outside individuals with relevant experience.

Offeror shall demonstrate academic experience and qualifications of auditors that illustrates compliance with PREA law. (submit a list of auditor names with Department of Justice certification date and a 1 page resume of each auditor who will be conducting audits)

G. The Offeror shall have the number of DOJ certified staff required to conduct up to 3 BOP PREA audits a week.

Offeror shall demonstrate three (3) years’ experience with correctional system audits.

Offeror demonstrates experience with handling large amounts of correctional system data/information (submit two (2) examples)

H. Offeror shall demonstrate experience with the requirements of Freedom of Information Act (5 USC

552) regarding disclosure of records and information furnished or created in an audit process and Privacy

Act (5 USC 552s) regarding sampling of inmate records or similar experience.

Factor 2: Past Performance

Recent and relevant past performance will be evaluated on its performance under existing and prior contracts for similar services, with an emphasis on the similarity of the Offeror’s experience to the Request for Proposal (RFP). The purpose of

Past Performance is to allow the government to review the

Offerors recent and historical probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to provide the questionnaire to the contractors to complete and return to the offeror for submittal along with their proposal.

A Offeror’s past performance information shall include three

(3)of the contractor’s most recent contracts occurring during the past five years that are similar and relevant in nature to the services required in the Statement of Work. Contracts listed may include those entered into with the Federal Government, agencies of state and local government, and commercial entities.

Offerors shall address any instances of past performance problems in the referenced contracts and explain how these problems were resolved. The Government may consider efforts performed by the offeror for agencies of the federal, state, or local governments and commercial customers as potentially relevant to the Past Performance evaluation.

Offerors should not provide general information on their performance on the identified contracts. General performance information MUST be obtained from the references on the Past

Performance Questionnaire and submitted along with the contractor’s proposal. Offeror’s without a record of relevant company past performance or for whom information on Past

Performance is not available will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on Past Performance. References other than those identified by the offeror may be contacted. Information utilized may be obtained from the references listed in the proposal, other customers known to the Government or of whom it becomes aware, and any others who may have useful and relevant information (i.e. Past Performance Information Retrieval System

(PPIRS), System for Award Management (SAM), Federal Awardee

Performance & Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), and internet).

Factor 3: Price

Price is defined as the offerors’s price proposal. The

Contracting Officer will evaluate price independently. Pursuant to FAR 17.203(b), the Government’s evaluation of offers shall be inclusive of options. Price proposal in Schedule of Items

(Attachment I) will be evaluated on the base period and options periods in total.