20170618_-_2017-N-66799_-_Evaluation_Factors.pdf

EVALUATION FACTORS

This attachment contains the evaluation factors as described in Section E.2 52.212–2 Evaluation—Commercial Items (October 2014).

1. Technical Evaluation:

Criteria Value of Criteria

1. Understanding the purpose and objectives 10

2. Technical Approach 40

3. Past Performance, Capability and Facilities 20

4. Management Approach 15

5. Personnel Qualifications 15 Total Points 100

Criterion 1: Understanding the purpose and objectives Maximum Points: 10 Soundness, relevance, and completeness of performance and services offered.

Provide a narrative summary of the purpose and objectives of the contract.

Criterion 2: Technical Approach Maximum Points: 40 Soundness, relevance, responsiveness, quality, completeness and efficiency of proposed technical approach.

1) Provide a detailed discussion on the approach to be utilized to accomplish the task for each activity outlined in the Statement of Work (SOW). Include a discussion of anticipated major difficulties and problem areas, together with recommended approaches for their resolution. In addition, provide a budget as an appendix in an Excel spreadsheet, with an itemized budget per task, including itemized budgets for any subcontracted work.

2) Budgets, staff hours, and other direct costs for this contract should be organized around the tasks and related deliverables described herein. Budgets for any additional or alternative proposals by the Contractor should be presented as optional budget spreadsheets. For tasks with multiple deliverables the Government requests the Contractor to provide budgets for each major activity by phase.

Criterion 3: Past Performance, Capability and Facilities Maximum Points: 20 Soundness, relevance, credibility, responsiveness, and completeness of tasks.

Provide a detailed discussion which demonstrates the Offeror’s organizational experience, capability, and facilities in performing the type of work as outlined in the SOW. This criterion shall address the following topics, at a minimum:

1) Describe past and current directly relevant technical and substantive experience, including an annotated list of pertinent publications, projects, and reports.

2) Provide information reflecting recent (within the past 3 years) experience that is directly relevant in complexity and size to the proposed task order project.

3) Describe capabilities relevant to the SOW. Indicate ability to begin work immediately, citing previous successful projects launched within a short timeframe.

4) List/describe all facilities and resources available for this project, including any equipment, software and hardware resources (e.g., computers, word processing/graphics/statistical capability).

Criterion 4: Management Approach Maximum Points: 15 Soundness, relevance, credibility, responsiveness, and completeness of performance and services offered.

1) Provide a management plan describing the Offeror’s approach for managing the work, including its on-site management organization, supervisory responsibility, lines of authority, assigned responsibilities, management of consultants, and procedures for tracking project progress, risks, problems, project-related costs and time.

2) If the Offeror proposes to use consultants or a Subcontractor to complete projects under this contract, the management plan should specify how the Contractor, consultants, and/or Subcontractors will work in tandem, how tasks will be divided, how decision making will occur and be communicated, how activities will be coordinated, and how quality assurance measures will be determined. The Offeror shall include their experience working with the consultants and Subcontractors and submit letters of support from selected consultants/Subcontractors.

3) Provide a Subcontracting Plan as well as narrative summary of management practices utilized to select and award subcontracts, evaluation of Subcontractor performance, and quality control procedures.

Criterion 5: Personnel Qualifications Maximum Points: 15 Depth and breadth of relevant experience of proposed personnel.

Adequacy and feasibility of the proposed staffing for the conduct of the project, including the appropriateness of the time commitments for proposed staff, the clarity and appropriateness of assigned roles, responsibilities, lines of authority, plans for back-up staffing as the need arises, and the logistical adequacy of the proposed staffing plan.

The proposal shall identify all professional persons, including Subcontractors and consultants who will spend significant time on the contract (availability, qualifications, education and competence, and explanation of previous efforts and experience). Describe staff proposed for carrying out the project, including, designation of the person(s) who will serve as the day-to-day project manager. Describe competence of the managerial and other staff and their experience in the skills required in the SOW including their ability to achieve delivery or performance requirements as demonstrated by the proposed use of management and other personnel resources, and to successfully manage the project, including Subcontractors and consultants. Include proposed staff time or labor hours, propriety of personnel classification, (professional, technical, others) necessity for type and quantity of material and facilities proposed, validity of proposed subcontracting, and necessity of proposed travel.

Resumes/CVs Personnel Resumes/Curriculum Vitae: Resumes or Curriculum Vitae shall be provided for each individual proposed to perform twenty percent (20%) or more of the work under the contract. No salary information shall be included in this section of the proposal, as salary information is to be provided in the business proposal.

2. Price Evaluation:

Technical and past performance, when combined, are more important when compared to price. The Government will not pay a higher price for slightly better performance.

A price analysis of the proposal may be conducted to determine the reasonableness of the Offeror’s price proposal. Only proposals that are rated technically acceptable will be reviewed.

A price realism analysis of the proposal may be conducted for such purposes as determining an Offeror’s understanding of the solicitation’s requirements or assessing risk associated with an Offeror’s proposal.

(End of Provision)