47QMCA25Q0009_BASIS OF AWARD - EVALUATION_2025-06-12.pdf
PDF 123 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Vehicle Data Standardization
- Solicitation number
- 47QMCA25Q0009
- Issued by
-
GSA Federal Acquisition Service
About this file
This document is a Basis of Award and Evaluation of Quote for a Vehicle Data Standardization solicitation (RFQ 47QMCA25Q0009) issued by the GSA Federal Acquisition Service. The government intends to establish a single Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA) for a solution that automates VIN decoding through a secure API connection. Quotes are due by June 27, 2025, at 5:00 p.m. Eastern, with questions accepted until June 16, 2025.
The evaluation will be based on three factors: Technical Capability (including 508 Compliance), Past Performance, and Price. Award will be made to the lowest-priced, technically acceptable, responsible offeror. Technical ratings will be either "Acceptable" or "Unacceptable", while Past Performance will be rated as Satisfactory, Neutral, or Unacceptable. The total price, including base and option periods, will be evaluated, with the government reserving the right to determine an offer unacceptable if option prices are significantly unbalanced.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 0002_47QMCA25Q0009_Amendment_2025-06-26.pdf | ||
| 0001_47QMCA25Q0009_Amendment_2025-06-17.pdf | ||
| 47QMCA25Q0009_PRICE QUOTE_2025-06-12.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| 47QMCA25Q0009_FORMAT - SUBMISSION_2025-06-12.pdf | ||
| 47QMCA25Q0009_SOW_2025-06-12.pdf | ||
| 47QMCA25Q0009_BPA TEMPLATE_2025-06-12.docx | DOCX document | |
| 47QMCA25Q0009_QUESTION MATRIX_2025-06-12.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| 47QMCA25Q0009_CLAUSES_2025-06-12.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
III. BASIS OF AWARD AND EVALUATION OF QUOTE
These instructions are an addendum to the FAR clause FAR 52.212-2 Evaluation—Commercial Products and Commercial Services (Nov 2021 tailored)
A. BASIS FOR AWARD
Award will be made to the lowest priced, technically acceptable, responsible offeror who meets the Government’s requirements and whose pricing has been determined to be fair and reasonable by the Contracting Officer.
B. EVALUATION CRITERIA
Factor 1 - TECHNICAL CAPABILITY
The Technical factor comprises an overall rating with 2 sub-factors. Activity critical to successfully complying with the contract requirements will be assessed by the Government within the Technical factor.
The Government will assess the offeror’s overall capabilities in complying with the contract requirements will be assessed by the government within the technical capability. The Government will assess the offeror’s demonstration of a clear understanding of and the ability to meet or exceed all requirements within the Statement of Work (SOW).
Subfactor 1 - Technical Capability The Government will assess the offeror’s demonstration of a clear understanding of and the ability to meet or exceed all requirements within the Statement of Work.
Subfactor 2 - 508 Compliance Prior to acceptance, the Government reserves the right to perform testing on required ICT items to validate the offeror’s Section 508 conformance claims. If the Government determines that Section 508 conformance claims provided by the offeror represent a higher level of conformance than what is actually provided to the agency, the Government shall, at its option, require the offeror to remediate the item to align with the offeror’s original Section 508 conformance claims prior to acceptance.
Factor 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE
The Government will assess the degree of risk associated with awarding this contract to the offeror based upon experience and successful past performance on other relevant and recent contracts. The Government will consider the experience relevancy in terms of size, scope and complexity of the listed work described in the SOW as well as the quality, timeliness, and customer satisfaction for the offeror’s past performance.
Information provided will be verified by contacting references, as deemed necessary by the Government. In evaluating the past performance, the Government reserves the right to use data obtained from other sources as well as that provided in the quote.
Factor 3 - PRICE
The Government will evaluate all responses received using the instructions provided and make an award resulting from the Request for Quote (RFQ) to the lowest price, technically acceptable, responsible offeror whose quote conforms to this RFQ.
For award purposes the Government will evaluate quotes by adding the total price inclusive of the base period and all option periods. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options does not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).
C. EVALUATION RATINGS
Factor 1 - Technical
The following adjectival ratings will be used to rate the Technical Volume.
Acceptable - The quote meets the stated requirements. The response is considered complete in terms of the basic content and level of information the Government seeks for evaluation.
There is a reasonable probability of success to meet the requirements and little risk that the offeror would fail.
Unacceptable - The quote does not meet the stated requirements. The response is considered incomplete in terms of basic content and level of information the Government seeks for evaluation. There is a high probability that the offeror will be unsuccessful in meeting the requirements.
Factor 2 - Past Performance
The following adjectival ratings will be used to rate the Past Performance Volume.
Satisfactory - The past performance record represents that the offeror is capable of adequately performing the requirement. This rating indicates a low level of performance risk to the Government.
Neutral - Indicates that the offeror’s references could not be verified or that the offeror lacks relevant past performance experience.
Unacceptable - Indicates that the offeror has historically failed to perform in a satisfactory manner in the fulfillment of like or similar requirements. This rating indicates an unacceptable level of performance risk.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .