4. Attachment C - Proposal Instructions and Evaluation Criteria.pdf

RFP CR-308027

Attachment C

Proposal Instructions and Evaluation Criteria

Security Department Communication Recording Logger

May 29, 2020

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

Fermi Research Alliance, LLC (FRA) is interested in awarding one Firm-Fixed-Price subcontract for FRA’s Statement of Work (SOW) for a Communication Recording Logger. The information provided in the Proposal Package will be the basis by which FRA will evaluate the company and its product.

To ensure the Proposal Package is given full consideration, offerors must do the following:

• Read these instructions carefully to understand the requirements;

• Provide a complete Proposal Package in accordance with the format and instructions herein;

• Provide information satisfying all criteria in Parts I and II; and

• Provide the name of and contact information for the company’s proposed lead/point of contact.

PROPOSAL PACKAGE FORMAT

In furtherance of FL-15 Request for Proposal – Instructions to Offerors (Rev. 1/07), the offeror’s Proposal Package shall be in two (2) parts:

1. Part I – Technical Proposal; and

2. Part II – Cost Proposal.

The Technical Proposal and Cost Proposal must be separate documents. Each separate document must be complete in itself so that evaluation of one proposal may be accomplished independent of and concurrent with the other. Unnecessarily elaborate brochures, artwork, and expensive visual and other presentation aids beyond those sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal are not desired and may be construed as an indication of the offeror’s lack of cost consciousness. Proposals should be prepared with maximum economy, consistent with this particular procurement, to ensure that the resources of the offeror and FRA evaluators are used efficiently.

EVALUATION CRITERIA

BASIS FOR SUBCONTRACT AWARD

This is a best value source selection. Award shall be made to the Offeror whose proposal conforms to the solicitation’s requirements and who is judged to represent best value for FRA.

FRA will use the Tradeoff source selection method. The best value is represented by the most advantageous offer, cost, and other factors considered by FRA. FRA may make an award based on a proposal that may not necessarily be the proposal offering the lowest cost or receiving the highest technical rating. Prospective offerors are advised that a proposal meeting the solicitation requirements with the lowest evaluated cost may not be selected if award to a higher evaluated cost proposal is determined to be most advantageous for FRA. FRA will not, however, make an award to a higher cost proposal that provides only marginal additional technical value. As technical scores become closer, then cost becomes more important.

FRA reserves the right to award without discussions with the Offerors.

PART I – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Each Technical Proposal must address the following:

1. Overview of the proposed solution

2. List and description of the required solution components.

3. Formal response to the functional and technical requirements and desirable features in

Attachment B – Technical Requirements. Each requirement must be addressed with a written response or a reference to technical documentation that satisfies the requirement.

See Attachment C – Proposal Instructions and Evaluation Criteria for further information.

4. Formal response to the questions in Attachment D – Vendor Response Template. Each question must have a written response.

5. Description of the activities required to design, configure, install, and support a system that complies with the stated objectives and requirements.

6. Description of the training plan and methodology.

7. Description of the Organizational Change Management (OCM) and communications plans and supporting materials.

8. A schedule to complete the activities defined in (5), along with information for a kick-off meeting, periodic progress meetings, training of FRA employees, and final closeout.

Offerors are requested to use the format described hereafter to simplify the review process and minimize repetitive material. The Technical Proposal must not contain any reference to cost.

It must disclose the Offeror’s project approach in as much detail as possible including, but not limited to, the requirements of the Technical Proposal Criteria. Offerors are encouraged to focus on a detailed technical approach specific to this effort rather than standard marketing language.

FRA will use the following factors to evaluate and rate the Technical Proposal. They are listed in order of importance:

Factor 1 – Solution Capability

Factor 2 – Ability to meet Functional and Technical Requirements

Factor 3 – Supplier Capability

3.1 Management approach

3.2 Technical approach

Factor 4 – Past Performance and Experience

4.1 Past performance will be evaluated for relevance.

Table 1. Technical Proposal Evaluation Criteria

Factor # Criteria 1 Solution Capability (Attachment C, Part 1) Provide a proposal that includes all Business and Technical deliverables defined in Attachment C, Part I.

2 Ability to meet Functional and Technical Requirements (Attachment B) Provide a copy of Attachment B with columns F and G filled out.

3 Supplier Capability

3.1 Management approach (Attachment D, Section 1.1)

Describe the management approach to accomplishing the objectives in Attachment A – SOW, Communication Recording Logger. Provide answers to the questions in Attachment D – Vendor Response Template, Section 1.1. The management approach will be evaluated based on understanding of the requirements in the attachments and the necessary tasks, how the work with be accomplished, and allowance for communication to and from FRA.

3.2 Technical Approach (Attachment D, Section 1.2)

Describe the technical approach to accomplishing the requirements outlined in Attachment B – Communication Recording Logger. Provide answers to the questions in Attachment D, Section 1.2. The technical approach will be evaluated based on understanding of the requirements in the attachments, definition of necessary tasks, identification of milestones and complicating factors, and the feasibility and quality of the proposed solution.

4 Past Performance (Attachment D, Section 2)

Offerors must demonstrate their technical capability including necessary resources, their depth and breadth of knowledge, and experience in providing and implementing a Communication Recording Logger in accordance with Attachments A and B. Provide answers to the questions in Attachment D, Section

2. Proposal must include a statement of qualifications of the company and any team to be assigned to this project. FRA will evaluate the information to determine the company’s experience and knowledge of Communication Recording Loggers.

Offerors shall provide references to clearly demonstrate the management of similar projects as they relate to the attachments.

FRA will score each of the aforementioned factors using the scoring matrix listed in Table 2.

Evaluations of these factors, when combined, are significantly more important than cost.

Table 2. Proposal Evaluation Ratings

Color Rating Score Description

Blue Outstanding 10

Proposal meets or exceeds requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Purple Good 7

Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Green Acceptable 5

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Poor 2

Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable 0 Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is un-awardable.

PART II – COST PROPOSAL CRITERIA

The Offeror must submit a Cost Proposal, along with any of its attachments, as a separate document marked: Confidential – Cost Proposal. The Cost Proposal must reflect the Offeror’s proposed cost and pricing structure in accordance with Attachment E – Cost Proposal Worksheet, Communication Recording Logger. FRA will evaluate the Cost Proposal based on the estimated cost in the worksheet and whether those estimates are realistic. The term and all option pricing shall be evaluated. The Cost Proposal will be evaluated separately from the Technical Proposal.

FRA is seeking firm fixed costs for the next five years. Vendors shall include costs for the base term and each of the four options years in its cost proposal.

Period of Performance:

Base Term: September 1, 2020 to August 31, 2021 Option Year 1: September 1, 2021 to August 31, 2022

Option Year 2: September 1, 2022 to August 31, 2023 Option Year 3: September 1, 2023 to August 31, 2024 Option Year 4: September 1, 2024 to August 31, 2025

FRA has option(s) to unilateral exercise any or all of the Option Years 1, 2, 3 and 4 as described above.

If FRA exercises its unilateral right to exercise any or all of the Option Years 1, 2, 3 and 4, they shall be exercised by the first day of the option term.

Offerors must also submit documentation as an attachment to the Cost Proposal to support the following Go/No Go factor:

Financial Condition and Capability:

Offeror's financial condition and capability will be evaluated to determine if adequate resources are available and committed for performance. During the evaluation, financial references may be requested and contacted to determine the offeror's financial stability during past years. The adequacy of available working capital to facilitate performance under the subcontract will be evaluated.

The evaluation of this information will be to determine, on a “go, no go” basis, the financial health of an offering supplier, and to determine if there are foreseeable and knowable financial issues that would threaten or undermine the success of a given supplier should they be awarded a subcontract resulting from this solicitation, and ultimately to minimize the overall risk to FRA.

Demonstrated proof of financial stability will be determined by a review of the following documentation:

Offeror’s credit rating report obtained from one of the credit monitoring bureaus (e.g., Equifax, Experian, TransUnion).

This financial information and documentation will NOT be reviewed, evaluated, or scored by the technical evaluation team, but rather by experienced Procurement personnel knowledgeable about such documentation. Should additional resources be required to make a determination, the Procurement personnel will access those resources as required.

EVALUATION TIMELINE

Table 3 shows the planned timeline for proposal preparations and evaluations. Based on scoring results from the initial proposal evaluation, up to three offerors will be asked to present on-site demos of its proposed solutions. The duration of each demo will be two hours or less.

To accommodate scheduling, the time period of (Jul 20 – Jul 29) has been set aside for the demo sessions. Once the demos are complete, a final scoring evaluation will occur and will be evaluated with cost proposal information to make the final determination.

Table 3. Proposal Evaluation Timeline

Activity Due Date(s)

RFP released Jun 2

Offeror proposals due Jun 24

Initial proposal evaluations complete Jul 10

Candidate offeror down-select complete Jul 15

Schedule on-site offeror solution demos Jul 17

Provide offerors with on-site demo use cases Jul 17

Conduct on-site offeror demos Jul 20 - Jul 29

Final solution evaluations complete Aug 3

Contract awarded Aug 14

Target implementation start date Sep 1