RFQ Attachment IV - Evaluation - Basis for Award - Revised.pdf

Attachment IV

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

1. CONTENT AND FORMAT OF SUBMISSION OF QUOTE

Submit one (1) original complete response to this solicitation. The offerors response shall consist of two (2) volumes. The submissions shall be sent electronically to Robyn Moore at Robyn.Moore@exim.gov and Thu Vo at Thu.Vo@exim.gov.

The offeror’s response shall be submitted in two volumes, as follows:

1. Technical Submittal;

2. Past Performance, which includes references and descriptions of work performed.

Note: The information provided should be precise, factual, and responsive.

Resource information such as data concerning level of effort and labor categories, materials, subcontracts, etc. shall be included in the technical submittal so that the contractor's understanding of the Performance Work Statement may be evaluated.

A cover sheet shall accompany the Offeror’s submission, clearly marked with the solicitation #, title, date of submittal, acknowledgement of any amendments, Offeror’s name, address, taxpayer ID number, DUNs number, CAGE code, and the Offeror’s POC name, phone number and email address. The cover sheet shall not count against any page limitation.

All files shall be compatible with Microsoft office product(s) and/or Adobe software.

The estimated date of award announcement and the Period of Performance Beginning Dates are subject to change.

Clarity and completeness is paramount. Responses should not merely restate the requirements stated in the PWS without describing the Offeror’s plan, approach, experience, examples, etc.

2. PAGE RESTRICTIONS

Responses must be legible, in a type size not smaller than 12 point font with a one-inch margin on all sides, on paper not larger than eight and a half by eleven inches and not exceeding the page limits established in this solicitation.

The Technical Submittal shall not exceed 50 pages in length. The offeror’s cover page(s), executive summary and table of contents; labor categories/resumes and other business information are excluded from the page limit.

Pages shall be numbered consecutively; a page printed on both sides shall be counted as two pages. Pages submitted in excess of the page limitations stated above will be removed and not evaluated.

mailto:Robyn.Moore@exim.gov mailto:

3. DATA SET REQUEST

Per request, and after receipt of a signed non-disclosure agreement (NDA), EXIM can furnish a dataset to aid in the creation of risk sharing proposals. It is incumbent upon the Contractor to request the sample documents with enough lead time to effectively review them. Requests shall be sent electronically to Robyn Moore at Robyn.Moore@exim.gov and Thu Vo at Thu.Vo@exim.gov

4. COSTS INCURRED IN SUBMISSION OF QUOTE

This solicitation does not commit the Government to pay any cost incurred in the preparation and submission of a Quote, to include any studies or designs for the preparation thereof, nor to contract for services or supplies described in the solicitation.

Incorporation of Quotes:

As a practice, the Government does not incorporate contractor quotes into the resultant contract, unless specifically stated. In the instant procurement the Government may incorporate some or all of the contractor’s technical quote into the resulting contract award. The Contractor SHALL meet all stated contractual requirements as stated in the solicitation.

5. TECHNICAL SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS

Technical submittal shall be comprised of

1. Technical Approach

2. Management Approach

The technical submittal will be evaluated to determine whether the submittal meets the Government’s requirements outlined in the PWS. The technical submittal must reflect a thorough understanding of the requirements; as well as a detailed description of the techniques and procedures for achieving the objectives of the PWS.

At a minimum, the technical submittal must clearly provide the following:

Clearly mark each volume/approach section and subdivisions for information contained/cited for that section.

Include with the submittal any documentation that is referenced in the submittal with page and paragraph numbers included with the reference.

Offerors are required to submit, as part of their submittal, a table of contents referencing the page and paragraph numbers that contain their response/methodology/narrative, on an item-by-item basis to all of the requirements and evaluation criteria listed in the following paragraphs and sub-paragraphs.

mailto:Thu.Vo@exim.gov

Executive Summary and Table of Contents

A summary of the technical submittal shall be provided, highlighting the salient features of the submittal and the work to be achieved. A description of the approach and plans for satisfying the requirement shall be included. A clear Table of Contents with cross-reference page number references must be included.

Technical Approach:

The Offeror shall make a clear and concise presentation of the technical approaches or solution features to accomplish each area outlined in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). The submittal shall reflect a substantive understanding of the scope, complexity and requirements in the PWS. In addition, the Offeror shall provide a sufficiently detailed plan to indicate its technical understanding of, and capability for, performing all aspects of the PWS, including responsiveness to all instructions and requirements as specified and described in the RFQ.

The technical approach shall be organized to show, at a minimum, information addressing the following:

Risk Sharing Structure Proposal

• Utilizes analytics when developing risk sharing structure option(s)

• Demonstrates an understanding of what types of structures will generate demand in the market

• Includes an estimated pricing and range of all potential costs (e.g., risk-sharing costs, broker costs, seeding fee, structuring fee, etc.) associated with structure(s)

• Includes structures associated with transferring risk for new transactions or existing portfolio

• Demonstrates a strategy to successfully place these types of structure(s)

Risk Sharing Structure Pricing

The resulting contract between EXIM and the successful Offer shall be a no cost contract;

however, the Offeror should submit a clear and concise presentation of the risk sharing structure pricing that will be used:

• To determine price reasonableness, as well as price realism, for all potential costs (e.g., risk-sharing costs, broker cost, seeding fees, structuring fees, etc.) that are forecast to result from the risk sharing/reinsurance structure entered into by EXIM and the third party risk sharing/reinsurance commercial entity. A price realism assessment will include the placement fee that the Offeror anticipates will be paid to it by the third party risk sharing/reinsurance entity in the event of a successful placement..

• The intent of the evaluation is to determine whether the price is realistic for the work to be performed; reflecting a clear understanding of the requirements; and is consistent and transparent with the approach described in the technical quotation.

Managment Approach:

The offeror shall demonstrate the ability to manage all aspects of the proposed effort including technical performance, time and delivery constraints, cost, status reporting, and subcontractor(s). The Offeror shall demonstrate that they possess appropriate and sufficient management oversight for the overall organization that addresses the planning, initiation, implementation, conduct, monitoring and quality control to achieve the objectives outlined in the PWS to include the Offeror’s management, coordination, and oversite of the work to be performed by any consultants and/or subcontractor(s).

• A table showing the availability of personnel.

• Resumes of Key personnel proposed to perform the tasks outlined in the PWS; and

The Offeror (including subcontractors) must demonstrate appropriate and sufficient procedures, facilities and staff to meet the performance requirement outlined in the PWS.

The Offeror shall submit a management plan for the requirements (tasks, subtasks, deliverables, etc.) on each of the areas outlined in the PWS. This plan shall provide a clear chain of responsibility, contract administration, adequate, qualified staff resources, and any risks the Offeror forsees and its mitigating factors. The managment approach shall be organized to show, at a minimum, information addressing the following:

Management Approach

• Demonstrates having a strong management team and key personnel assigned to this effort

• Demonstrates a logical, transparent, and easily understood approach to providing a quality end result

• Demonstrates a strategy to successfully execute their risk sharing proposal.

• Demonstrates their approach to handling EXIM data and support the risk sharing structure.

• Considers interacting with others assisting EXIM in pursuit of risk sharing outside the offeror’s area of expertise (Capital Markets, Reinsurance Markets, Insurance Markets, etc.) and shows how to develop and maintain these partnerships.

Corporate Experience

• EXIM will evaluate the extent to which the proposal demonstrates relevant corporate experience and depth of experience in performing work that is similar to the size, scope and complexity of tasks anticipated under this solicitation.

• Note: Corporate Experience presented for a key subcontractor or an affiliate will not be evaluated unless a letter of commitment or similar documentation is provided for said subcontractor and affiliate, respectively.

Volume Two: Past Performance:

The Contractor shall provide a description of past performance, which contains three (3) relevant past performance experiences. The past performance experiences shall be similar to the size, scope and complexity of the types of risk sharing structures EXIM Bank defines in the

PWS.

Past performance references must include the following information:

• Contract number

• Value

• Description

• Technical/contracting points of contact (POC’s), including the designated POC’s name, telephone number, agency and e-mail address

Past Performance shall be organized to show, at a minimum, information addressing the following:

• How well the firm performed its goals

• The responsiveness of the firm

• The effectiveness of the firm at accomplishing staffing goals within budget and on schedule.

The Offeror shall send a copy of the Past Performance Questionnaire (see Attachment) to one contact person from the three (3) references described above for them to complete. After the POC completes the Past Performance Questionnaire, they shall submit it directly to Robyn Moore at Robyn.Moore@exim.gov and Thu Vo at Thu.Vo@exim.gov. The Government is not responsible if one or more references fail to provide a completed Performance Questionnaire. Alternatively, the Offeror may submit a CPARS assessment for past performance references used in this RFQ. A combined total of at least 3 Past Performance Questionnaires and CPARS must be received by EXIM prior to the closing date for this solicitation.

Offerors are advised that the Government reserves the right to obtain information for use in the evaluation of past performance from any sources, including Government sources within and outside of EXIM Bank and sources outside of the Government.

The evaluation of past performance on completed projects will be a subjective assessment considering all relevant facts and circumstances, including ratings and references from past and/or current customers. Past performance will be evaluated as a measure of the Government’s confidence in the Offerors’s ability to meet the technical requirements, deliver quality products, and meet the cost and schedule requirements of this project.

mailto:Thu.Vo@exim.gov

BASIS OF AWARD/EVALUATION CRITERIA

Basis of award:

Award shall be made to not more than three (3)responsive, responsible Offerors whose Quotes, conforming to this RFQ, provide the overall best value to the Government, technical evaluation factors, and price considered. The Government’s objective is to obtain the highest technical quality considered necessary to achieve the project’s objectives.

The resulting award will be based upon the Government’s determination of the Best Value to the Government of the quotes received.

The contract awarded pursuant to this Solicitation shall be a no cost contract to the Government.

The contractor shall not receive any compensation or reimbursement of costs from EXIM. The contractor shall look only to the third party risk sharing/reinsurance entities proposed by it that result in an executed agreement with EXIM for payment of any monetoary compensation or reimbursement. The Offeror agrees that the opportunity for it to obtain compensation from the said third party risk sharing/reinsurance entities constitutes adequate, legal consideration to support the formation of the no cost contract between itself and EXIM.. Compensation to be paid to the successful Offeror shall be a matter of contract between the successful Offeror and the said third party risk sharing/reinsurance entity, and may consist of a percentage of the premium paid by EXIM to the said third party, a percentage of the premium paid to the successful Offeror by an insurer/reinsurer, or a fixed amount paid by the said third party to the successful Offeror for the Contractor’s effort, etc. The successful Offeror shall not look to EXIM for the payment of any compensation or reimbursement of expenses.

The successful offerors shall present a clear and concisely written quotation that gives the Government the greatest confidence in the offeror’s ability to meet the Government’s requirement.

The solicitation will be evaluated using the following Criteria:

Evaluation Criteria:

Criteria 1 – Technical Approach Criteria 2 – Management Approach Criteria 3 - Past Performance

The Technical Approach, Management Approach and Past Performance evaluation criteria shall , when combined, are more equal in importance.

(a) However, for a offeror to be considered for award, it must:

1. Meet all minimum standards (rated as “Acceptable”) on all evaluation criteria.

- Offers not meeting minimum standards, not providing all required documentation, including acknowlegement of all RFQ Amendments, will be rated as “Un-Acceptable”.

2.

The non-price criteria are listed in decending order of importance (i.e. Technical Approach is more important than Management Approach, both of which are more important than Past Performance)

EXIM will conduct a 2-stage review of the Quotes received in response to this RFQ.

1. Stage 1 will be a review to determine whether the Quote is responsive to all mandatory criteria stated in the RFQ.

2. Stage 2 - Contractor Quotes found to be responsive will be required to give an oral presentation. To be found responsive, Contractors must provide all required documentation per the Submission of Quote Instructions and acknowlege all RFQ Amendments.

- The oral presentations will be either in-person at EXIM HQ or via live e-presentation

(Example – Skype).

- The oral presentations will be no longer than 1 hour in which the Contractor will demonstrate its proposed solution to EXIM.

- The Contractors and EXIM personnel may ask questions of the other party

- The Contractor must present examples of challenges it has faced in the past in performance of similar requirements, and explain ‘how’ it overcame such challenges

Following the oral presentations, Contractors will be given a minimum of one week following the presentation to revise Quotes. Once all Quote revisions have been received, the Quotes will be evaluated by EXIM – to include both the written Quote and the information provided during the oral presentation.

EXIM will evaluate the extent to which the offeror is able to demonstrate their proposed Solution in written/oral presentation formats based on the Evaluation Criteria.

Criteria 1 - Technical Approach:

The Government will evaluate the Contractor’s technical approach and methodology to determine whether it demonstrates a substantive understanding of the scope, complexity and requirements associated with the requirements described in the Performance Work Statements (PWS).

Evaluation will determine whether the Contractor has articulated a clear plan to achieve all requirements outlined in the PWS, including responsiveness to all instructions and requirements as specified and described in the RFQ. The Government will evaluate the Contractor’s quote to determine whether the Contractor’s approach demonstrates a clear understanding of all objectives and requirements outlined in the Performance Work Statements (PWS).

Criteria 2 – Management Approach:

The Contractor will be evaluated to determine whether the Contractor demonstrates the ability to manage all aspects of the proposed effort including technical performance, time and delivery constraints, cost, status reporting, and subcontractor(s). The Contractor will be evaluated to determine whether the Contractor demonstrated that they possess appropriate and sufficient management oversight for the Contractor’s overall organization addressing the planning, initiation, implementation, conduct, monitoring and quality control to achieve the objectives outlined in the PWS, to include Contractor’s management, coordination and oversite of the work performed by consultants and/or subcontractor(s).

The Contractor will be evaluated to determine whether the Contractor demonstrates that its resources (including subcontractors, consultants, teaming arrangements) will be available to perform the requirements to meet the objectives outlined in the PWS.

The Contractor will be evaluated to determine whether the management plan provides a clear chain of responsibility, quality control plan, cost control method, contract administration, and adequate, qualified staff resources. The Contractor’s management plan shall demonstrate the Contractor’s ability to achieve all requirements outlined in the Performance Work Statements (PWSs), as well as responding to all instructions and requirements specified and described in the RFQ.

The Government will also evaluate the following management plan documents submitted by the Contractor:

Resumes of key personnel proposed to perform, as applicable;

Criteria 3 - Past Performance:

The Government will evaluate each past performance references to determine whether it is relevant in terms of size, scope and complexity to the requirement stated in the PWS.

The Government will evaluate and rate relevant past performance references by reviewing the corresponding past performance questionnaire submitted according to the Instructions to Offerors and any corresponding or additional CPARs past performance assessments. The Government will also consider subjective information such as relevant facts, circumstances and its knowledge of the vendor.

The Government is seeking to determine whether the vendor has consistently demonstrated a commitment to customer satisfaction and timely delivery of high quality products and services.

Vendors shall be evaluated to determine whether the vendor adheres to delivery schedules, including those for administrative reporting. Vendors shall be evaluated to determine their experience in achieving reasonable and cooperative behavior and commitment to customer satisfaction.

Past performance will be evaluated as a measure of the Government’s confidence in the Vendor’s ability to meet technical requirements, deliver quality products, and meet schedule requirements of this project.

Exceptional (E) Confidence

Exceptionally Confident. Based on the offeror’s performance record, no doubt exists that the successful offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Little or no Government oversight is expected to be required in achieving the proposed level of performance.

Very Good (G)

Confidence. Based on the offeror’s performance record, there is essentially no doubt that the successful offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Little or no Government oversight is expected to be required in achieving the proposed level of performance.

Satisfactory (S) Confidence

Confidence. Based on the offeror’s performance record, little doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Little Government oversight is expected to be required in achieving the proposed level of performance.

Marginal (M)

Confidence. Based on the offeror’s performance record, doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Significant Government oversight will be expected in achieving the proposed level of performance.

Unacceptable (U)

No Confidence. Based on the offeror’s performance record, significant doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. No amount of Government oversight will achieve the proposed level of performance.

Neutral (N) Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.