Section M Solicitation 2-14-25.doc

Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers Charleston SC

70LCHS25RPFB00001/70LCHS25RPFB00002

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

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 also be based on the Oral Presentation and subsequent topics 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 I 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 past performance assessment will assess the confidence in the Offeror's ability (which includes, if applicable, the extent of its critical subcontractors’ or teaming partners’ involvement) to successfully accomplish the proposed effort based on the Offeror's demonstrated past work record. The Government will evaluate the Offeror's demonstrated record of contract compliance in supplying services that meet users’ needs, including cost and schedule. The currency and relevancy of the information, the source of the information, context of the data and general trends in the contractor’s performance will be considered. Relevancy is based on projects of similar size, scope and complexity to the project as described herein. The Government will perform an independent determination of relevancy of the data provided or obtained. The Government is not bound by the offeror’s opinion of relevancy.

The offeror must demonstrate that they have satisfactorily performed relevant services to those described in the RFP. The requirement may be satisfied by the combined performance of required services under one or more contracts, or through separate performance of required services under multiple contracts.

Past performance information will be evaluated on the following factors: capable and committed adequate resources to efficiently and effectively perform; performance conformed to the contract terms and conditions; performed on schedule with reasonable costs; and effectively managed the workforce (and subcontractors, if applicable) and maintained good business relations.

The Government will employ several approaches including, but not limited to:

(i) Information utilized may be obtained from the references listed in the proposal, as well as from other sources known to the Government and obtained through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System. Data from previous source selections may be used if the data is recent and relevant. Evaluation of present and past performance will include consideration of overall customer satisfaction and conclusions of informed judgment.

(ii) Offerors may be given an opportunity to address adverse past performance information, if the offeror has not had a previous opportunity to respond to the information. Recent contracts will be examined to ensure that corrective measures have been implemented. The confidence assessment will consider issues including, but not limited to, the number and severity of the problems, the appropriateness and/or effectiveness of any corrective actions taken (not just planned or promised), and the offeror's overall work record. Prompt corrective action in isolated instances may not outweigh overall negative trends.

(iii) Past performance information will also be considered regarding any critical subcontractors and key personnel. Past performance of the prime contractor will receive greater consideration than subcontractors. If an offeror, or the proposed key employees of the offeror, do not have a past performance history deemed relevant to this solicitation, the offeror will receive a neutral rating. However, the proposal of an offeror with no relevant past performance history, while rated neutral in past performance, may not represent the most advantageous proposal to the Government and thus may be an unsuccessful proposal when compared to the proposals of other offers. The offeror must provide the information requested for past performance evaluation or affirmatively state that it possesses no relevant, directly related, or similar past performance.

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).

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.�

M-5