LANC Dry Cleaning Instructions Evaluations.docx

Dry-Cleaning Services — LPTA Solicitation Addenda

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS—COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES

The offeror shall submit a clear, concise technical proposal demonstrating its ability to successfully perform dry-cleaning services in accordance with the Performance Work Statement (PWS). The Government does not expect offerors to restate or rewrite the PWS.

General statements of compliance without sufficient supporting information may be evaluated as Unacceptable.

The technical proposal shall address all five subfactors.

Technical Subfactor 1 – Dry-Cleaning Operations Plan Describe the proposed approach for performing dry-cleaning services. Address:

Receipt and identification of garments.

Cleaning procedures and methods.

Pressing and finishing procedures.

Inspection of completed garments.

Packaging and preparation for return.

Demonstrate a workable process for completing services within PWS timeframes.

Technical Subfactor 2 – Quality Control Plan Describe quality control procedures. Identify:

1. Inspection methods and frequency.

Personnel responsible for quality control.

Procedures for identifying deficiencies.

Procedures for correcting deficient services.

Address cleanliness, garment condition, pressing quality, and correction of unacceptable work.

(End of Technical Proposal Instructions)

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-2

EVALUATION—COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES

Tiered Evaluations This solicitation is being issued as tiered evaluation with the following tiers: (1) SDVOSB concerns, (2) VOSB concerns, (3) small business concerns with WOSB small business concerns and 8(a) participants having priority, and (4) other small business concerns. If award cannot be made, the solicitation will be cancelled, and the requirement resolicited.

Offers submitted by SDVOSB concerns will be evaluated. If no offers were submitted by SDVOSB concerns, or if none of the offers would result in award at a fair and reasonable price that offers best value to the United States, the SDVOSB set-aside will be withdrawn, and the evaluation will proceed to the set-aside for VOSB concerns.

Offers submitted by VOSB concerns will be evaluated. If no offers were submitted by VOSB concerns, or if none of the offers would result in award at a fair and reasonable price that offers best value to the United States, the VOSB set-aside will be withdrawn, and the evaluation will proceed to the set-aside for HUBZone small business concerns and 8(a) participants.

Offers submitted by WOSB small business concerns and 8(a) participants will be evaluated. If no offers were submitted by HUBZone small business concerns and 8(a) participants, or if none of the offers would result in award at a fair and reasonable price that offers best value to the United States, the Other Small Business set-aside will be withdrawn, and the evaluation will proceed to set-aside for Other Small Business Concerns.

Offers submitted by Other Small Business concerns will be evaluated. If no offers were submitted by the Other Small Business Tier, or if none of the offers would result in award at a fair and reasonable price that offers best value to the United States, the solicitation will be cancelled.

FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL ACCEPTABILITY (PASS/FAIL)

The Government will evaluate technical proposals to determine whether the offeror demonstrates the ability to perform dry-cleaning services in accordance with the PWS. Each technical subfactor will receive an Acceptable or Unacceptable rating.

Acceptable: The proposal adequately addresses every required element and demonstrates a feasible approach to meeting applicable PWS requirements without material deficiencies.

Unacceptable: The proposal omits one or more material required elements, provides insufficient information to establish required capability, or proposes an approach inconsistent with the PWS.

An Unacceptable rating under any technical subfactor results in an overall Technical rating of Unacceptable and makes the proposal ineligible for award.

FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

Past performance will be evaluated on an Acceptable, Unacceptable, or Neutral basis. The Government will assess available recent and relevant past performance information to determine whether the offeror has a satisfactory record of performing comparable services.

Acceptable: Available record supports a reasonable expectation of successful contract performance.

Unacceptable: Available record establishes unacceptable performance risk based on documented deficiencies or unsuccessful performance to include, but not limited to repeated late deliveries, lost or damaged garments, persistent cleaning deficiencies, failure to correct documented problems, or contract terminations for default or cause.

Neutral: No relevant performance record is available, or information is insufficient to assign Acceptable or Unacceptable.

An offeror without relevant past performance will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on that basis.

FACTOR 3 – PRICE

The Government will evaluate total price for all applicable CLINs and performance periods for reasonableness. The lowest evaluated price will be determined using the solicitation pricing structure and estimated quantities.

BASIS FOR AWARD – LOWEST PRICE TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE

Award will be made using the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) approach within the applicable socioeconomic tier. To be eligible, an offeror must:

1. Receive an overall Technical rating of Acceptable.

2. Receive a Past Performance rating of Acceptable or Neutral.

3. Submit a complete price proposal determined fair and reasonable.

4. Be determined responsible and otherwise eligible for award.

The Government will make award to the responsible offeror submitting the lowest evaluated price among technically acceptable quotations with acceptable or neutral past performance within the highest applicable socioeconomic tier from which award can be made.

The Government will not conduct tradeoffs between price and non-price factors. Technical superiority or stronger past performance will not justify paying a higher price when a lower-priced eligible offeror satisfies all minimum requirements.

(End of ADDENDUM to FAR 52.212-2)