36C78623Q50041 Alabama NC - Source Selection Plan.pdf

Procurement Sensitive Do not Disclose----See FAR Subparts 2.101 and 3.104-4 Page

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – NATIONAL CEMETERY ADMINISTRATION (NCA)

SIMPLIFIED SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION PLAN

Project Name: Grounds Maintenance Services for Alabama National Cemetery

Solicitation Number: 36C78623Q50041.

Prepared By:

Department of Veterans Affairs

National Cemetery Administration (NCA) Centralized Contracting Services (CCS)

18434 Joplin Road Triangle, VA 22172

This document contains proprietary or source selection information related to the conduct of a Federal Agency Procurement. The disclosure and receipt of this information is restricted by Section 27 of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C.423). The unauthorized disclosure of this information may subject both the discloser and the recipient to the contractual, civil, and/or criminal penalties as provided by law.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 1 - INSTRUCTIONS TO EVALUATIORS………………………………………3

SECTION 2 – EVALUATION PROCESS……………………………………………………5

EXHIBIT I – CONFIDENTIALITY CERTIFICATE………………………………………...7

EXHIBIT II – INDIVIDUAL MEMBER TECINAL EVALUATION RATING SHEET……9

EXHIBIT III - INDIVIDUAL MEMBER TECHNICAL EVALUATION RATING SHEET……….10

SECTION 1: INSTRUCTIONS TO EVALUATORS

This Evaluation Plan sets forth the process by which NCA will evaluate the quotations received in response to Solicitation Number 36C78623Q50041.

Evaluation procedures shall be conducted in accordance with FAR Part 13, Simplified Acquisition Procedures for commercial items. In accordance with FAR 13.106-1(a)(2), a best value determination will be made utilizing Technical Capabilities, Past Performance, and Price.

The proposed acquisition provides for a basic contract effort of one (1) base period and four (4) additional 12-month option periods, if exercised. Options will be priced and evaluated for award purposes as a part of the offeror's proposal in accordance with FAR 52.217-5.

1. Instructions to Technical Evaluators – Required Documentation

a. Exhibit I: Confidentiality Certificate: Sign, date, and return the document on page 8 from each Board member.

b. Exhibit II: Individual Member Technical Evaluation Rating Sheet, starting on page 9, must be completed for each vendor that submitted an offer. Completed sheets are to be sent via email directly to the Contracting Officer (CO).

c. All questions or requests for clarification about information in the quotation/proposals must be sent directly to the CO via email. Evaluators are not to contact any offerors.

2. Membership

Each member has the following responsibilities:

a. Independently evaluating each Quotation/Proposal in accordance with the evaluation criteria documented in the solicitation document, using the detailed evaluation guidelines contained herein.

b. Preparing all forms relating to detailed evaluation procedures.

c. Participation in the preparation of the summary reports for each Quotation/Proposal.

d. Maintaining a record of all notes taken to facilitate the evaluation.

e. Participating in debriefing of contractors when necessary.

http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/af_afmc/far/FAR52.215.doc#b522175

SECTION 2: EVALUATION PROCESS

1. Background and Purpose of Evaluation Criteria

The evaluation criteria developed for this solicitation is utilized in order to develop a comparison of Quotation/Proposals. The evaluation criteria are published in accordance with the Solicitation and are provided as follows.

The Government intends to award an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract resulting from this Solicitation to the responsible Offeror whose Offer/Quote provides the best benefit to the Government, price and other factors considered. Quotations/Offers will be evaluated by performing a comparative evaluation in accordance with FAR 13.106-2(b)(3) to determine which response represents the “best” as a whole.

2. Quotations/Offerors will be evaluated by performing a direct comparison of one Quotation/Offer with another in a uniform manner to determine which Quotation/Offer provides the government with its needs, as identified in the RFQ. The government reserves the right to consider a response that Quotes or Offers more than the minimum and select that response if it provides a benefit to the government. The government has the discretion to accept other than the lowest priced Quoter/Offer that provides additional benefits. The government also has the discretion to make an award based on whether the lowest priced of the Quotation/Offer having the highest past performance rating possible represents the best benefit to the government.

3. Quotation/Proposals Review

a. The CO shall perform the Initial Screening after receipt of quotes/proposals.

Quotes/proposals will be reviewed to determine if the quotes/proposal meet the minimum submittal instructions as provided in the solicitation. If the CO finds that the quotes/proposal does not meet the basic intent of the solicitation ̧a determination to reject the quotes/proposal or to accept it will be made. If the quotes/proposal is rejected without further evaluation, the CO will notify the Offeror of the decision.

b. Each Technical Evaluation Board member will independently validate each technical Quotation/Proposal and complete the Individual Member Technical Evaluation Rating Sheet illustrated in Exhibit II.

4. Confidentiality of Information

a. Information submitted by an offeror is submitted in confidence. Offerors submit this information with the understanding that it will not be disclosed to any other offerors or other government personnel except those who need the information in order to conduct the evaluation or negotiation process.

b. Government personnel should be careful to safeguard the contents of Quotation/Proposals from disclosures to persons other than the government personnel who must have access in order to carry out the acquisition process. Competing companies are anxious to win government business, knowledge of the content of a competitor’s Quotation/Proposal is of great value, the more they know what their competitor is doing; they can improve their Quotation/Proposal to increase their chances of winning.

c. Safeguard the contents of each Quotation/Proposal by making sure they are not left unattended, do not perform your evaluation in front of other government employees, and safeguard your notes so they are not left out for others to view. Guard them as if you were an eager competitor.

5. Instructions for Evaluation of Quotes/Proposals

a. Make a log of all the Quotes you receive and what submittals if any the Contractors turned in with their proposals.

b. Technical Capability and Evaluation Criteria:

Technical Capability: Quotes will be evaluated by performing a direct comparison of one offer with another in a uniform manner to determine which quote provides the government with its needs, as identified in the RFQ or RFP. The government reserves the right to consider a response that offers more than the minimum and select that response if it provides a benefit to the government. The government has the discretion to accept offerors other than the lowest priced offeror that provides additional benefits. The government also has the discretion to make an award based on whether the lowest priced of the quotations having the highest past performance rating possible represents the best benefit to the government.

6. Evaluation Criteria: The technical evaluation will be based on the following factors:

Technical Requirements:

1. Demonstrated experience in performing this requirement.

2. Demonstrated Key Personal have the managerial and technical qualifications in performing this requirement.

3. Demonstrated Work Plan/Staffing Plan is suitable in performing this service. Plan must include man hours, methodology, list of equipment/vehicles to be used, licenses, permits and insurance information.

4. Provided a GANTT Chart

7. Evaluators are to evaluate all technical Offers by conducting a comparative evaluation. A comparative evaluation means that the evaluator shall compare offerors’ technical submissions to one another and determine the best overall technical offer.

8. Evaluators shall utilize the evaluation document (Individual Member Technical Evaluation Rating Sheet) illustrated in Exhibit II. Please see below.

9. Upon completing each individual technical evaluation, the evaluator shall utilize Exhibit II -

Individual Member Technical Evaluation Rating Sheet in order to identify compliance on the various factors and subfactors.

10. Upon Board members completing Exhibit II, a consensus, Exhibit III – Board’s Overall

Consensus, will be provided by the technical board. This form shall contain the Board’s concurrence on how each contractor is compared to each other from overall best to least best offeror.

11. Past Performance and Price will be evaluated by the Contracting Officer.

EXHIBIT I - CONFIDENTIALITY CERTIFICATE

ISSUED BY:

Larry Curtis, Contracting Officer Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) National Cemetery Administration (NCA) Centralized Contracting Service (CCS) 18434 Joplin Road Triangle, VA 22172

TO:

EVALUATOR

SUBJECT:

TECHNICAL EVALUATION:

In anticipation of my participation as a member of the Technical Evaluation Board formed to evaluate Quotation/Proposals in response to the Request for Proposaal, 36C78623Q50041, I certify that I will not disclose, except pursuant to the court of competent jurisdiction, any information either during proceedings of the source evaluation or any subsequent time, concerning the evaluation, to anyone who is not also authorized access to the information by the Technical Evaluation Board Guidelines, law or regulation, and then only to the extent that such information is required in connection with such person's responsibilities.

Furthermore, I will report to the Contracting Officer any communication concerning the procurement or The Board's composition and activities directed to me from any source outside The Board.

I understand that all information in this acquisition will be identified “FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY” and will be available only to authorized Government personnel. I shall not reveal information to anyone who is not also participating in the same proceedings, and then only to the extent that such information is required about such proceedings.

I understand my obligation not to divulge information received in confidence from offerors in connection with proposals, trade secrets, inventions, discoveries, and reports of financial, technical, and scientific nature, except on a need-to-know basis during the conduct of official business.

I will not divulge to other personnel, except on a need-to-know basis during the conduct of official business, any information concerning either the contents of proposals or the evaluation of the proposals which may come to my attention.

I further understand my responsibility not to disclose the identity or number of offers, or source selection related information, to which I have access, to personnel outside the evaluation process except as specifically approved by the Contracting Officer.

I will not reveal the ratings used during the evaluation process or remove proposals or source selection documents from their authorized locations during the evaluation process without the express approval of the Contracting Officer.

I will not identify the names of any person involved in the evaluation process to persons not directly engaged in the evaluation, except where necessary in official government communications.

I certify that if I, or any member of my family, have direct or indirect interest in any firm which might result in a real, apparent, or possible conflict of interest on any acquisition in which I am participating, I will so advise the Contracting Officer.

I certify that if I negotiate for or make arrangements concerning future employment with any firm that has been solicited or has submitted an offer on an acquisition in which I am participating, I will so advise the Contracting Officer.

I have read, understand and will abide by the requirements of Section 27 of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 USC 423) as implemented in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) §3.104 and unauthorized disclosure of such information may subject me to administrative, civil, and criminal penalties, including fines, imprisonment, and loss of employment.

The Contracting Officer made a copy of FAR §3.104 available to me.

https://www.acquisition.gov/far/current/html/Subpart%203_1.html#wp1139280

I certify that if I report to the Contracting Officer on any of the above matters, I will abide by the instructions he/she may give me.

Evaluator’s Printed Name

Evaluator’s Signature

Date

EXHIBIT II - INDIVIDUAL MEMBER TECHNICAL EVALUATION RATING SHEET

SOLICITATION: 36C78623Q50041

https://www.acquisition.gov/far/current/html/Subpart%203_1.html#wp1139280

DESCRIPTION: Grounds Maintenance Services for Alabama National Cemetery

Technical Evaluation:

Offerors shall be evaluated in accordance with the criteria contained in the solicitation and how well the Offer addressed the following:

1. Demonstrate experience in performing this requirement.

2. Demonstrate Key Personal have the managerial and technical qualifications in performing this requirement.

3. Demonstrate Work Plan/Staffing Plan is suitable in performing this service. Plan must include man hours, methodology, list of equipment/vehicles to be used, licenses, permits, and insurance information.

4. Provide a GANTT Chart.

Contractor: (Name of contractor) Evaluator’s Comments:

1. Demonstrated experience in performing this requirement.

2. Demonstrated Key Personal have the managerial and technical qualifications in performing this requirement.

3. Demonstrated Work Plan/Staffing Plan is suitable in performing this service. Plan must include man hours, methodology, list of equipment/vehicles to be used, licenses, permits and insurance information.

4. Provided a GANTT Chart

(Printed Evaluator’s Name) (Signature of Evaluator)

End of Document

This form may be duplicated. The form shall be utilized to evaluate each individual offeror

EXHIBIT III - INDIVIDUAL MEMBER TECHNICAL EVALUATION RATING SHEET

SOLICITATION: 36C78623Q50041

DESCRIPTION: Grounds Maintenance Services for Alabama National Cemetery

Board Consensus:

In accordance with FAR 13.106-2(b)(3) Board Members shall collectively provide comments as to why a technical offeror is the overall best among its competitors. Once a comparative analysis has been completed, the Board shall than state who is the overall best followed by the next best until all offerors have been compared. Each Board Members must sign the technical evaluation documents for it to be considered viable.

In conducting a comparative analysis, the Technical Board has concluded the following:

Name of 1st place Contractor’s technical is the best overall. Name of 1st place Contractor’s technical in comparison to Name of 2nd place Contractor is considered to be the best because its technical demonstrates …………………, Name of 2nd place Contractor is better than (if equal to state so) Name of 3rd Contractor because

Name of 3rd Contractor is better than Name of 4th Contractor because ……………., Name of 4th Contractor is considered to be the least best because ……………………., Technical Board’s Comparison of Quotes/Proposals from Overall Best to Least Best:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

End of Document