M - Evaluation Factors for Award.docx

M- Evaluation Factors for Award

The Government intends on awarding a Fixed Price contract to the offeror whose quotation represents the best value to the Government. Evaluations will be based solely on the information included in the quotation. Therefore, the Offeror's initial quotation should contain the Offeror's best terms. At any time before selection, including upon receipt of quotations, the Government may exclude a quote from further consideration for any material failure to follow instructions, including the omission of required information. FEMA may negotiate and request revised quotes from only the apparent successful vendor or those that are determined to be only the highest rated. One (1) factor with a “Low Confidence” rating will remove the Offeror from further consideration for award.

In evaluating proposals, the government will make appropriate trade-offs when required and select the proposal that’s most advantageous to the government. Offerors are cautioned that an award may not necessarily be made to the lowest-price offeror.

EVALUATION FACTORS:

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s quotation submissions based on the following evaluation factors, in levels of importance in descending order: (1) Technical Approach; (2) Management and Staffing Approach; (3) Past Performance and demonstrated experience; and (4) Price.

1. Technical Approach Description: The technical approach evaluation will assess the offeror's methodology and plan for executing the project. This factor will evaluate the offeror's understanding of the project requirements and their ability to deliver the required services effectively. Vendors will be evaluated on their ability to demonstrate technical sufficiency in their proposed technical and management approach to perform and support the requirements of the Statement of Work (SOW). Vendors will be evaluated on their ability to develop a work plan in response to the SOW. Vendors must demonstrate an understanding of:

· Scope of technical requirements

· Complexity of technical requirements

· Performance requirements & objectives

· Pertinent work tasks & deliverables

· Ability to complete the project within shortest feasible timeframe Criteria:

· Job completion timeframe.

· Detailed project plan and methodology.

· Understanding of project requirements and objectives.

· Proposed techniques and technologies to be used.

· Feasibility and innovation of the technical approach.

· Compliance with applicable codes, standards, and specifications.

· Ability to demonstrate technical sufficiency in the proposed approach.

· Identification of potential difficulties and practical suggestions for overcoming them.

2. Management and Staffing Approach Description: The management and staffing approach evaluation will assess the offeror’s plan for managing the project, including resource allocation, project oversight, staffing, and risk management. This factor will evaluate the offeror’s ability to ensure successful project execution and coordination through effective management and appropriate staffing. The offeror is encouraged to use local subcontractors to the maximum extent possible.

Criteria:

· Organizational structure and key personnel/subconsultants.

· Project management plan, including timelines and milestones.

· Resource allocation and staffing plan.

· Qualifications and experience of proposed staff and subconsultants.

3. Past Performance and demonstrated experience Description: The past performance evaluation will assess the offeror’s history of successfully completing similar projects. This factor will help determine the offeror’s reliability, quality of work, and ability to meet deadlines. Provide past performance information for services directly related and relevant to the services to be performed under the SOW. To be considered relevant, the services must have been performed within the past three years. Include at least three references but no more than five including:

· Project title/description

· Role (Prime/Subcontractor)

· Contract number

· Dollar value & contract type

· Period of performance

· Agency or company for which the work was performed

· Summary of the work products/services

· Name/contact information of client point of contact Criteria:

· Relevant experience in similar excavation projects.

· Quality of work on previous contracts.

· Performance ratings from previous clients, if available.

4. Price Description: The price evaluation will consider the total cost proposed by the offeror for the completion of the project. The evaluation will ensure that the proposed price is fair, reasonable, and within the budget allocated for the project. The total evaluated price will be evaluated for reasonableness and completeness. Offerors are cautioned to avoid “Unbalanced Pricing” in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(g). The Contracting Officer may reject a proposal if the pricing is determined to be unbalanced if it poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

Criteria:

· Total cost of the proposal.

· Breakdown of costs by labor, materials, equipment, and other expenses.

· Cost realism and reasonableness.

· Evaluation for unbalanced pricing in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(g).

The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. Although all non-price factors combined are considered significantly more important than price, price is still an important factor. Cost/price may become a critical factor if two or more offerors are determined to be essentially equal following the evaluation of all factors other than cost or price. In any event the Government reserves the right to make an award to the Offeror(s) whose proposal provides the best overall value to the Government.