Pg_202-203_Corrected_M.3_and_M.2.5.pdf

M. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M.1. Evaluation Factors

52.212-2 Evaluation—Commercial Items (Oct 2014).

(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, lowest price technically acceptable.

The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

Experience Past Performance

Management & Staffing Approach Price

(b) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(c) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party.

Before the offer’s specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

(End of provision)

M.2 Standard for Evaluation

Definition of Similar Work. Operations and Mechanical maintenance and related services in a single multi-tenant building consisting of commercial office, executive and public meeting spaces with a gross square footage of 500,000 square feet or more and a minimum of 10 stores.

(a) Experience. The standard is met when the Offeror demonstrates that it has performed Similar Work in the 3 projects submitted within the past five (5) years with 2 of the 3 submitted contracts having a square footage of 500,000 SF or more and a minimum of 10 stories within the past 5 years.

(b) Past Performance. The Standard is met when the Offeror receives an acceptable rating from each client reference.

(c) Management & Staffing Approach. The standard is met when the Offeror provides a chart showing complete organizational hierarchy and proposed staffing considerations for the project that will address all the requirements of the contact.

M.3 Additional Evaluation Considerations

Addendum to 52.212-2 Evaluation—Commercial Items (Oct 2014).

The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if prices are significantly unbalanced. Prices shall be evaluated at estimated quantities multiplied times their respective unit price.

Price evaluation will address the items below.

M.2.1 Unrealistically Low Prices or Unrealistically High Prices Prices quoted may be reviewed to determine whether they reflect a lack of technical understanding of the requirement and to assess the risk inherent in an offeror’s quoted prices. Unrealistically low or high quoted prices, initially or subsequently, may be grounds for rejection for this solicitation.

M.2.2 Unbalanced Pricing

Offeror is cautioned against submitting an offer that contains unbalanced pricing. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly over- or understated as indicated by the application of price analysis techniques. The Government will analyze the offer to determine whether it is unbalanced with respect to separately priced line items or subline items. An offer that is determined to be unbalanced may be rejected if the CO determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

M.2.3 Contract Extension As part of the price evaluation, the Government will evaluate its option to extend services (FAR Clause 52.217- 8) by adding six (6) months of the Offeror’s final option period price to the Offeror’s total price. The Offeror is required only to price the base and four (4) option periods. Offeror shall not submit a price for the potential six-month extension of services period. The Government may choose to exercise the “Extension of Services” at the end of any performance period (base or option periods), utilizing the rates of the prior performance period.

M.2.4 Cost/Price Realism The Government will evaluate the realism of proposed cost/price by assessing the compatibility of proposed cost/price with proposal scope and effort. For the cost/price to be realistic, it must reflect what it would cost the offeror to perform the effort, if performed with reasonable economy and efficiency. Cost/price realism evaluation includes a review of the overall costs in the offeror's proposal to determine:

If costs are realistic for the work proposed;

If costs reflect a clear understanding of the requirements; and If costs are consistent with the various other elements of the offeror's proposal

M.2.5 Cost/Price Reasonableness The Government will evaluate the reasonableness of proposed cost/price for the option periods by assessing the acceptability of the offeror's methodology used in developing the cost/price estimates. For the cost to be reasonable in its nature and amount, it should not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of a competitive business. Reasonableness takes into account the current market conditions and other factors that affect the ability of an offeror to perform the contract requirements. Reasonableness depends upon a variety of considerations and circumstances, including:

Whether it is the type of cost/price generally recognized as ordinary and necessary for the conduct of the offeror's business or of the contract performance;

Generally accepted sound business practices, Federal and State laws and regulations, etc.;

Any significant deviations from the offeror's established practices.

The existing contract GS-09P-08-KS-D-0044 has a current annual cost/price of $3,284,665.32. For evaluation purposes, the proposed price for the new requirement will be compared to the current contract price and the Independent Government Estimate for price reasonableness, as well as compared to other locations similar in size and scope.

M.2.6 Cost/Price Completeness Cost/price proposals shall be evaluated for completeness by assessing the responsiveness of the proposed cost/price, by assessing the level of detail of the offeror-provided cost data for all requirements in SOW, and assessing the traceability of estimates. For the cost/price data to be complete, the offeror, or its subcontractors, must provide all the data necessary to support the offer. The amount of data needed may vary depending on the requirements.

(End of Instructions)