A23 RFQ Attach 1-Instructions-Eval Factors.docx

Custodial Services DFAS-LIMESTONE HQ0423-25-Q-E017 - Attachment 1

Instructions to Vendors Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) is issuing a Request for Quotation (RFQ) for the services specified in the attached Performance Work Statement (PWS). This requirement is a 100% Small Business Set-Aside. Quotation evaluation will be conducted in accordance with FAR 13.5, with the intention to award a firm fixed price (FFP) contract to one vendor for custodial services.

“Quotations” must be received by email to Laura B. Price at Laura.B.Price7.civ@mail.mil by 3 p.m. ET, March 12, 2025.

Any inquiries/questions shall be addressed in writing and directed to the point of contact listed above by 3 p.m. ET, February 27, 2025.

Questions will be answered at the discretion of the Contracting Officer and will be posted to Sam.gov by 3 p.m. ET February 28, 2025.

**Please forward past performance questionnaires to current contractors as soon as possible to allow time for completion. **

1. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS:

1.1. Quotations shall include two attachments and shall be submitted in one email. The first attachment represents the vendor’s response to Non-Priced Factors 1 and 2. The second attachment represents the vendor’s Price Quote, Factor 3. The first page of each attachment shall include the RFQ number, date of submittal, the vendor’s name, address, CAGE code, POC name, phone, and email. Vendors may use the body of their email as a cover letter. Limit the cover letter to 600 words.

1.2. Text shall be single-spaced, on 8 1/2 x 11 inch paper, with minimum one-inch margins on all sides and minimum 12-point font. Text and graphics shall be in a format readable by Adobe PDF, Microsoft Word, PowerPoint or Excel. Note: There is a 15MB limit for email submissions.

1.3. Page Limitations. Any pages in excess of the page limitations below will not be considered.

2. SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS:

Factor 1 – Technical Approach Describe your technical approach for meeting PWS requirements. Include a description of the following:

1. Contractor shows a clear understanding of what is required of the PWS. Define in detail how the workload will be handled. (daily, routine and periodic services along with supply acquisition)

2. It may take a minimum of 2-4 weeks to have an employee candidate receive a waiver to work in this location and a further, more in-depth security background check is conducted on all candidates to achieve full adjudication. Explain how the company will handle the hurdle of hiring custodial workers in a remote location with this type of security background check. Include an example, if possible, of similar past hiring practices.

Factor 2 – Past Performance

(A) Provide a list of no more than five (5) of your most recent and relevant contracts. Only recent and relevant contracts will be evaluated. Recent means contracts performed or completed within three years from the quotation due date. For contracts that are currently being performed, the vendor must have performed at least six months of service for the contract to be evaluated. Relevant means similar in scope and complexity to the solicited work. Furnish the following information for each contract referenced:

(1) Company/Division name

(2) Description of Service

(3) Contracting Agency/Customer

(4) Contract Number

(5) Contract Dollar Value

(6) Period of Performance

(7) Verified, up-to-date name, address, email and phone number of the contracting officer/POC

(8) Comments regarding compliance with contract terms and conditions

(9) Comments regarding any known performance deemed unacceptable to the customer, or not in accordance with the contract terms and conditions.

(10) Explanation of why their contract is relevant to the solicited work.

(B) Questionnaires. Attached to the solicitation is a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) (RFQ Attach 3 – PPQ). Vendors are required to send the Questionnaire to each contracting officer or point of contact (POC) with knowledge of the vendor’s performance for each contract referenced (unless a past performance record is already available in CPARS for the reference contract). The contracting officer/POC should be instructed to send the Questionnaire directly to the person identified on the first page of the Instructions no later than the quotation due date specified. The vendor is solely responsible for ensuring that Questionnaires are received by the Government no later than the quotation due date. Questionnaires received after the quotation due date may not be considered in the evaluation.

(C) Subcontractor Consent: Past performance information pertaining to a subcontractor cannot be disclosed to the prime contractor or the Government without the subcontractor’s consent. Provide a letter, as an additional Attachment, from each subcontractor that will perform significant aspects of this requirement, consenting to the release of their past performance information to the prime contractor and the Government. Consent letters do not count toward page limitations.

Factor 3 Price:

Provide a firm fixed price for the base year and option periods. The vendor’s price quote shall identify the number of hours and fully burdened hourly rates for each labor category, and any materials or supplies required to perform the PWS. Significant discounts are strongly encouraged and shall be identified in the vendor’s price quote.

3. EVALUATION:

The Government intends to evaluate quotations and award a Firm fixed Price contract based upon the vendor’s proposed technical approach, the vendor’s past performance and price based on initial quotation. Therefore, the vendor’s initial quotation should contain the best terms from a pricing and technical standpoint.

The award shall be made to the responsible vendor whose quotation represents the best value tradeoff to the Government. The Government may reject any or all quotations if such action is in the public interest; accept a quotation other than the lowest priced quotation; and waive informalities and minor irregularities in quotations received.

3.1. Order of Importance

Factor 1 – Technical Approach is equal to Factor 2 – Past Performance. Combined, Factors 1 and 2 are more important than Factor 3 – Price. However, the importance of price will increase if quotations are rated and considered essentially equal in terms of non-price factors.

3.2. Definitions

The following evaluation definitions are provided to assist the evaluator(s):

Deficiency: A material failure of a quotation to meet a government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a quotation that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

Weakness: A flaw in the quotation that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. A significant weakness in the quotation is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Strength: A proposed method or technique in the quotation that exceeds the solicitation requirements.

3.3. Ratings

Factor 1 – Technical Approach will be evaluated through an assessment of any strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies, and will receive one rating described in the table below.

TECHNICAL RATINGS/RISK

Factor 2 – Past Performance will be evaluated in the following manner:

The Government shall evaluate recent and relevant performance information on vendors based on the contracts provided by the vendor and Questionnaires received. The Government may seek, and consider in the evaluation, data independently obtained from other government and commercial sources, including databases such as CPARS. Recent means contracts performed or completed within three years from the quotation due date. For contracts that are currently being performed, the contractor must have performed at least six months of service for the contract to be considered. Relevant means similar in scope and complexity to the solicited work.

Projects performed by subcontractors or joint venture partners may be considered relevant provided the information submitted by the contractor demonstrates that the subcontractor or joint venture partner played a major role and critical role in successfully performing the project. Relevant projects performed by the contractor as a prime contractor will be weighed more heavily in the overall evaluation. Contracts performed for the Department of Defense, depending on relevancy, may be considered more significant in the evaluation.

The government reserves the right to give greater consideration to information on those contracts deemed most relevant to the effort described in this solicitation, see Table below:

The purpose of the past performance evaluation is to allow the government to assess the contractor’s ability to perform the effort described in the solicitation, based on recency, relevancy, and quality of performance on the quoter’s past performance efforts. The assessment process will result in an overall performance confidence rating in accordance with Table 2. For quotes where past performance history is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment can reasonably be assigned, their confidence assessment shall receive the rating of “Neutral Confidence.” A rating of “Neutral Confidence” may have less merit than a rating of high, substantial, or satisfactory confidence.

Table 2 High Confidence: Based on the contractor’s performance record, the government has high confidence the contractor will successfully perform the required effort.

Substantial Confidence: Based on the contractor’s performance record, the government has substantial confidence the contractor will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence: Based on the contractor’s performance record, the government has confidence the contractor will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence: Performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

Limited Confidence: Based on the contractor’s performance record, substantial doubt exists that the contractor will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence: Based on the contractor’s performance record, extreme doubt exists that the contractor will successfully perform the required effort.

3.4. Factor 3 – Price

Price reasonableness determinations will be in accordance with FAR 8.405-2(d). The government will evaluate whether the proposed level of effort and labor mix are appropriate for the requirements of the PWS to ensure successful performance; and whether the proposed rates per hour are reasonable.

The government has included 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services. For evaluation purposes, the Government will consider the price for the six-month Option to Extend Services as equal to half the price of the last option period quote. The total evaluated price will include the base period and all options including the Option to Extend Services. Evaluation of options will not obligate the government to exercise the options.

• Use template to request past and present performance questionnaire.