Section M 70LCHS25RPFB00001.pdf

Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers Charleston SC

70LCHS25RPFB00001/70LCHS25RPFB00002

M-1

SECTION M – EVALUATION FACTOR FOR AWARD

TABLE OF CONTENTS

No. Title Page No.

M.1 NOTICE TO PROPOSERS………………………………………………………….. M-1

M.2 BASIS OF AWARD……………………………………………………………………. M-1

M.1 NOTICE TO PROPOSERS

The Government intends to award two (2) stand-alone Single Award, Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts to include Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) and Other than Firm Fixed Price (OTFFP) CLINS resulting from this solicitation. The Government reserves the right to reject any or all proposals at any time prior to award; to negotiate with any or all proposers; and to award to the proposer submitting the proposal determined by the Government to be the most advantageous to the Government. Proposals should be submitted initially on the most favorable price and technical terms. Offeror should not assume they will be contracted or afforded an opportunity to qualify, discuss, or revise their proposals.

M.2 BASIS OF AWARD

Basis upon which selection will be made:

PHASE I: Demonstrated Prior Experience and Sample Meal Plan

Factor 1: Demonstrated Prior Experience and Sample Meal Plan

Advisory Down Selection

PHASE II: Oral Presentation, Past Performance and Price Proposal

Factor 2: Oral Presentation

Factor 3: Capability of Proposed Key Personnel

Factor 4: Past Performance

Factor 5: Price Proposal

The resulting contract will be awarded using the Best Value methodology with tradeoffs conducted in accordance with the policies and procedures in FAR 16.505 and the solicitation. The Government intends to award an Order to the responsible Offeror whose proposal, conforming to the solicitation, offers the best value to the Government, considering both price and non-price factors.

The Government will determine which Offeror is the best suited in terms of the evaluation factors stated below and will use the evaluation process described below to arrive at this determination.

Award may be made to other than the Offeror with the lowest priced proposal, if the Government determines that a price premium is warranted due to nonprice factors merit (Factor 1 and Factor

2). The Government may also award to other than the highest rated proposal, if it determines that a price premium is not warranted.

For this solicitation, the evaluation factors are:

Factor 1 (Non-Price/Cost): Demonstrated Prior Experience

M-2

Factor 2 (Non-Price/Cost): Oral Presentation

Factor 3 (Non-Price/Cost): Capability of Key Personnel

Factor 4 (Non-Price/Cost): Past Performance

Factor 5 (Price): Price Proposal

All "Non-Price/Cost" factors when combined, are significantly more important than Cost/Price. Factors 1, 2, 3 and 4 are of equal importance.

The Government will not make an award at a significantly higher overall price to achieve only slightly better performance capabilities. In the event that two or more proposals are determined not to have any substantial technical differences (i.e., approaching technically equivalency), price may become the determining factor and award may be made to the lower priced Offeror. The Government also reserves the right to award without exchanges or discussions or to make no award at all.

Factor 1: Demonstrated Prior Experience and Written Meal Plan

The Government will assess its level of confidence that the contractor will successfully perform the requirements based on the Offeror’s submission of Demonstrated Prior Experience and Sample Meal Plan (Student Services

Solicitation# 70LCHS25RPFB00001 only) in accordance with the instructions listed in Factor 1 of this solicitation.

Factor 2: Oral Presentation

The Government will evaluate each Offerors Technical and Management Approach based upon the content presented during the Oral Presentations. The government will also evaluate its level of confidence that the Offeror will successfully perform the requirement based on the Offeror's Technical and Management Approach as it aligns to the requirements of the SOW. The evaluation will be based on the Oral Presentation Rules of Engagement as outlined in the solicitation.

Factor 3: Capability of Proposed Key Personnel

The Offeror shall submit resumes that describe the specific, relevant experience and availability of key personnel in providing services described in Section C.6 of each PWS. The Offeror will be evaluated on the strength of the key personnel proposed both individually and collectively. The resumes shall demonstrate the technical competency of each proposed Key Personnel to support the requirements of the scope and contractual obligations contained within the solicitation. Critical evaluation elements shall be assessed as follows:

• Demonstration of educational qualifications of proposed Key Personnel;

• Demonstration of relevant experience as required by the PWS;

• Demonstration of both commercial and federal expertise, with more weight

• given to expertise in emergency management and disaster assistance;

• Demonstration of recognition as respected leaders in their field.

Factor 4: Past Performance

The evaluation of this factor is based on the past performance presented by the offeror, and how well it aligns with the requirements in the PWS. Offerors are encouraged to submit experience performed as a prime, through teaming agreements, or as the sole sub-contractor on the relevant projects. Offers are to provide up to four (4) projects and two (2) additional projects per each teaming partner. More weight may be given to experience serving as the prime contractor, depending on the circumstances. Recent is defined as within the last three (3) years, and relevant is

M-3 defined as being of a similar scope and complexity.

If the offeror proposed teaming partner(s) or subcontractor(s) in response to this RFP, the offeror shall provide two additional past performance referencs for each teaming partner(s) and/or subcontractor(s) for contracts entered into by the federal government, agencies of state and local governments, and/or commercial customers. The offeror shall include the following information on each submission: 1) Name of Agency; 2) Primary Point of Contact (name, title, phone, and email); 3) Prime or Subcontractor; 4) Contract Number; 5) Contract Type; 6) Period of Performance; 7)

Total Contract Dollar Value; and 8) Brief Description of the Work completed within the Scope of the Contract.

Information submitted shall not exceed seven (7) pages (front and back no smaller than times new roman font 11 and Microsoft Office compatible).

Factor 5: Price Proposal

The Government will evaluate the reasonableness of the proposed price for the Base and Option Periods. The

Government will evaluate the total price, inclusive of all option periods with respect to accuracy, reasonableness and completeness based on information submitted in the Offeror’s price submission. Price Proposals failing to meet or comply with price submission instructions may be deemed noncompliant. The Government will also evaluate compliance with the applicable Wage Determinations.

The Price Factor will not receive a confidence rating.

Accuracy/Completeness. The Government will evaluate the accuracy/completeness of the proposal, by verifying that:

• All required pricing information was contained in the offer

• Prices and/or discounts are clearly defined

• Figures are correctly calculated

• Prices are presented in the adequate format

Reasonableness. The Government will evaluate the reasonableness of the proposal price. To do this, the

Government may compare other Offeror prices to:

• Other proposals received,

• the Independent Government Cost Estimate and/or historical pricing;

Note: The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. To account for the option periods possible under FAR 52.217-8 (maximum of six months), Options to Extend Services, the Government will evaluate the option to extend services by adding six months of the Offeror’s final option period price to the offeror’s total price. This amount will be the total evaluated price. The Government may choose to exercise the Option to Extend Services at the end of any performance period

(base or option periods). Prices for the base and option periods, including the 6-month option available under FAR

52.217-8, will be evaluated to ensure that they are fair and reasonable for performance of the requirements established in the solicitation and as proposed in the technical submission. The price for the effort associated with

FAR 52.217-8 will not be included in the total awarded value at contract award. If, at the end of the contract’s/order’s period of performance (the end of the base period or any option period) and within the time period established in the clause, the Government chooses to exercise this option, the pricing will be pursuant to the rates specified in the contract for the preceding performance period.

52.217-5 EVALUATION OF OPTIONS (JUL 1990)

Except when it is determined in accordance with FAR 17.206(b) not to be in the Government's best interests, the

Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

M-4

Non-Price Factors

The table below shows the ratings the Government will assign in its evaluation of offers when evaluating Factors 1-4.

A combined confidence rating will also be assessed for each proposal.

Incorporation of Aspects of Offer into the Contract

One or more aspects of an offering contractor’s offer may be incorporated into the award resulting from this solicitation.

End of Solicitation Section M

High Confidence The Government has high confidence that the offeror understands the requirement, proposes a sound approach, and will be successful in performing the work.

Some Confidence The Government has some confidence that the offeror understands the requirement, proposes a sound approach, and will be successful in performing the work.

Low Confidence The Government has low confidence that the offeror understands the requirement, proposes a sound approach, or will be successful in performing the work.