6. Workers_Compensation_Claims_Investigation_Evaluation_Factors.pdf

WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIMS INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES

Federal Bureau of Prisons

EVALUATION FACTORS

Workers' Compensation Claims Investigative Services Purpose. This section establishes the factors and subfactors the Government will use to evaluate proposals for lawful administrative investigative services involving active workers' compensation claims.

Price and Past Performance are identified in the evaluation-factor list but their detailed evaluation narratives and subfactors are intentionally omitted from this document.

Acquisition-team note: Insert the agency-approved Price and Past Performance evaluation language before solicitation issuance, as appropriate.

M.1 Basis for Award Award methodology. The Government intends to award a contract to the responsible offeror whose proposal conforms to the solicitation and represents the best value to the Government, considering the stated evaluation factors and price. The final solicitation shall specify the applicable source-selection method and the relative importance of all factors.

Minimum requirements. Failure to demonstrate compliance with a material solicitation requirement, required investigator licensing, legal restrictions, information-protection requirements, or mandatory submission requirement may render a proposal ineligible for award.

Evaluation Factors . Factor Evaluation Focus

Technical Approach and Understanding

Investigation methodology; social media/OSINT; surveillance; evidence handling; reporting; quality control.

Relevant Corporate Experience Experience with workers' compensation and comparable administrative investigations.

Nationwide Capability and Responsiveness

Geographic coverage, mobilization, after-hours support, travel, and continuity.

Legal, Ethical, Privacy, and Security Compliance

Applicable laws; privacy; surveillance restrictions; evidence admissibility;

protected information.

Management, Staffing, and Investigator Qualifications

Project management, key personnel, licensing, training, staffing depth, an continuity.

Quality of Reporting and Evidentiary Documentation

Objective, timely, complete, accessible, and legally defensible work products.

Past Performance Included as an evaluation factor; detailed narrative and subfactors intentionally omitted.

Price Included as an evaluation factor; detailed narrative and subfactors intentionally omitted.

Factor 1 - Technical Approach and Understanding Evaluation standard. The Government will evaluate the extent to which the proposal demonstrates a sound, lawful, unbiased, repeatable, and efficient approach to accomplishing the SOW. The approach should show a clear understanding of the distinction between gathering factual evidence and making medical, legal, or entitlement determinations reserved to the Government.

1.1 Case Intake and Investigation Planning

• Method for reviewing case-specific medical restrictions, Government objectives, authorized scope, known identifiers, aliases, locations, and investigative leads.

• Process for developing an investigation plan with monitoring parameters, surveillance windows, staffing assignments, equipment, safety considerations, and escalation criteria.

• Controls that prevent unauthorized expansion of scope and require Government approval for material changes.

1.2 Public-Source Research, Social Media Monitoring, and OSINT

• Methods for identifying and validating publicly accessible accounts, aliases, platforms, posts, photographs, videos, tags, check-ins, public groups, and related content.

• Use of documented search terms, date ranges, filters, and repeatable procedures.

• Procedures for verifying identity, context, dates, locations, authenticity, and relevance before reporting information.

• Approach to capturing source links, screenshots, media, metadata, and an audit trail without circumventing privacy settings or using unauthorized access.

1.3 Lawful Surveillance and Observation

• Approach to selecting lawful public observation locations and productive dates and times.

• Methods for objective note-taking and lawful photo or video capture, including timestamps, device identification, observer identification, and storage location.

• Procedures prohibiting trespass, entry into private property without permission, hidden recording in private spaces, harassment, entrapment, or other unlawful activity.

• Contingency procedures for weather, loss of visual contact, safety concerns, equipment failure, and situations requiring immediate Government notification.

1.4 Evidence Handling and Chain of Custody

• End-to-end process for collection, labeling, preservation, storage, access control, transfer, retention, and authorized destruction of evidence.

• Ability to document who collected each item, when and where it was collected, how it was created or obtained, and every subsequent transfer or access.

• Measures to preserve original files, metadata, integrity, and reproducibility.

1.5 Quality Control, Timeliness, and Communication

• Independent quality review for factual accuracy, completeness, neutrality, legal compliance, and consistency with case objectives.

• Procedures for interim updates, post-shift observation logs, urgent notifications, progress reporting, and resolution of technical problems.

• Ability to meet normal and nonstandard working hours, including weekends and holidays when required.

Factor 2 - Relevant Corporate Experience Evaluation standard. The Government will evaluate the breadth, depth, relevance, and recency of the offeror's experience performing workers' compensation investigations and comparable administrative, disability, fraud, integrity, or employee-misconduct investigations.

• Experience conducting investigations focused on whether observed or publicly reported activities are consistent with documented functional restrictions.

• Experience integrating social media or OSINT research with in-person surveillance and producing a unified factual record.

• Experience supporting federal, state, tribal, or other public-sector clients and operating under privacy, records-management, security, and evidentiary requirements.

• Similarity of prior efforts in scope, complexity, geographic reach, volume, dollar value, period of performance, and required turnaround times.

• Demonstrated outcomes, lessons learned, quality controls, and methods used to address performance challenges.

Factor 3 - Nationwide Capability and Responsiveness Evaluation standard. The Government will evaluate the offeror's ability to provide consistent, timely, and legally compliant services wherever cases arise within the anticipated geographic scope.

• Coverage model, including owned offices, employees, approved subcontractors, affiliate networks, and remote investigative capabilities.

• Ability to verify and maintain state and local licensing, registration, insurance, and other authorization requirements before assigning personnel.

• Mobilization timelines for routine, urgent, rural, remote, and high-travel-cost locations.

• Ability to provide services outside normal business hours and to sustain operations during emergencies or disruptions.

• Quality-assurance controls that ensure consistent procedures and reporting across investigators and jurisdictions.

• Travel planning, cost controls, advance-approval procedures, and communication with the

Contracting Officer's Representative.

Factor 4 - Legal, Ethical, Privacy, and Security Compliance Evaluation standard. The Government will evaluate the adequacy of the offeror's controls for lawful and ethical investigations, protection of Government and claimant information, and production of evidence suitable for administrative use.

• Understanding of applicable federal, state, territorial, tribal, and local privacy, surveillance, recording, investigator-licensing, workers' compensation, and evidentiary requirements.

• Procedures for legal review when jurisdictional rules are uncertain or when an investigative method may create heightened privacy or admissibility risk.

• Policies governing conflicts of interest, impartiality, professional conduct, misrepresentation, and prohibited investigative practices.

• Safeguards for Privacy Act information, personally identifiable information, security-sensitive information, Government-furnished information, and investigative media.

• Role-based access, encryption, secure transmission, incident reporting, breach response, record retention, and authorized destruction.

• Ability to meet applicable Section 508 accessibility requirements for electronic reports and deliverables.

Factor 5 - Management, Staffing, and Investigator Qualifications Evaluation standard. The Government will evaluate whether the proposed organization and personnel provide sufficient qualifications, capacity, supervision, and continuity to perform all requirements.

• Qualifications and relevant experience of the proposed Project Manager and alternate, including authority to act for the contractor and responsiveness to Government requests.

• Qualifications of investigators, analysts, quality reviewers, evidence custodians, and other key personnel.

• Current and applicable investigator licenses, certifications, background checks, training, and continuing education.

• Training in lawful surveillance, OSINT and social media research, objective observation, evidence preservation, report writing, privacy, cybersecurity, safety, and professional ethics.

• Staffing plan, labor mix, workload assumptions, surge capacity, backup coverage, subcontractor management, and continuity of support.

• Procedures for replacing key personnel with individuals of equal or superior qualifications and obtaining required Government approval.

Factor 6 - Quality of Reporting and Evidentiary Documentation Evaluation standard. The Government will evaluate the offeror's ability to produce timely, objective, accurate, complete, organized, and legally defensible reports and supporting records.

• Clarity, organization, grammar, factual neutrality, and separation of observed facts from assumptions, analysis, or unverified information.

• Ability to tie each reported fact to the relevant restriction, investigative objective, date, time, location, source, observer, or supporting exhibit.

• Completeness of observation logs, social media or OSINT logs, media indexes, source links, screenshots, metadata, and chain-of-custody records.

• Methods for identifying limitations, gaps, conflicting information, unsuccessful surveillance, and facts that do not support the suspected inconsistency.

• Quality-review and correction processes, version control, secure delivery, and conformance with

Government-compatible electronic formats.

• Quality of proposed report samples or templates, when requested by the solicitation.