VA SSG Sample Source Selection Decision Document AS.pdf 02.docx

Source Selection Decision Document

Name:_____________________ Date:______________

1. Decision Statement. As Source Selection Authority for this acquisition, I have determined that the Orthopedics product/service proposed by Offeror Name ________ provides an acceptable value to satisfy VHA needs. The selection was made based upon the factors and subfactors established in the solicitation and my integrated assessment and comparison of the strengths, weaknesses, and risks of the proposals submitted in response to the solicitation. This memorandum documents the basis for my decision.

2. Brief description of the product and/or service being procured.

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) provides prosthetic limbs and related services to Veterans (also referred to as “VA patients”) who are eligible for these VA health care services. This acquisition will allow the VA medical centers (VAMC) with the Veterans Integrated Services Network (VISN) 1 of New England to provide comprehensive prosthetic care and support to the VA customers in need. Comment by Kenyon, Tyler M.: I added this from the SOW. Feel free to tailor if needed.

3. Brief description of the basis for award (as set forth in the RFQ), including the factors and subfactors against which proposals were measured and their relative order of importance.

Factor 1 – Technical Acceptability Comment by Kenyon, Tyler M.: Added Eval factors from Section M.

In order to be deemed technically acceptable the quoter must include:

a. A technical capabilities statement that reflects the quoter’s capability to provide artificial limbs and associated products in accordance with the solicitation.

b. ABC/BOC Certification(s) and Accreditations.

c. Not take exception to any aspect of the SOW. (Needs to be answered).

d. Submit completely filled out Attachment 2793 (located in Section J).

Factor 2 – Price

Price shall be evaluated to ensure compliance with HCPCS starting A-Code and L-Code schedule with (if any) discounts.

Factor 3 – Past Performance

Offerors shall be evaluated on performance of past contracts/orders and how well the identified performance relates to the product/work being procured under the Statement of Work/Requirements for this procurement. To be relevant, the effort must be similar in nature of work, size, magnitude, complexity and scope of this procurement. The Government will review available past performance data in the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) and Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS); however, the Government reserves the right to obtain past performance information from any available source and may contact customers when evaluating past performance. Include names in the submission.

4. Rational for business judgments and tradeoffs. Include the following: • Succinct comparison of each proposal, focusing on key proposal differences (strengths, weaknesses, and risks) that surfaced in the evaluation and their impact on the acquisition.

· Explanation of specific tradeoffs that led to the decision.

· Is there a unique process that you use to fabricate orthotics (please explain) and or do you use central fabrication from and outside source.

· Explanation of specific benefits of the technically superior offeror(s) and why they are or are not significant enough to warrant any additional cost.

5. Summary. In summary, based on my integrated assessment of all proposals in accordance with the specified evaluation factors and subfactors, it is my decision that Offeror Name’s_______________ proposal offers the best overall value.

Technical Review Panel Member

Effective Date: 02/01/2022