Addendum to 52.212-2 Teleradiology VHSO_4-30-26.docx
DOCX document 17 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 00007
About this file
This is an Addendum to FAR Clause 52.212-2 that establishes the evaluation criteria and award methodology for a Teleradiology Services solicitation issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs Veterans Health Administration Veterans Integrated Service Network 16. The solicitation (36C25626Q0022, Amendment Q522) seeks teleradiology services for the Fayetteville VA facility (station 564). Award will be made to the responsible offeror whose offer is most advantageous to the Government using a comparative evaluation process, with the Contracting Officer reserving the right to make award without exchanges.
Offers will be evaluated using three equally-weighted factors: Technical Capabilities, Past Performance, and Price. Technical Capability evaluation will assess the offeror's Quality Control Plan to ensure adequate staffing meets quantity estimates and required turnaround times (routine reports within 24 hours, STAT reports within 60 minutes, all reports within seven days maximum), as well as a Contingency Plan demonstrating ability to maintain staffing if contract physicians depart. Key Personnel licensing and certification will be verified, with vendors demonstrating superior understanding of the Performance Work Statement and greater readiness to perform rated more favorably. Past Performance evaluation will consider delivery record, quality metrics, malpractice history, and subcontractor capability, with preference given to offerors with relevant recent experience, utilizing sources including CPARS and VA internal files. Price reasonableness will be evaluated; however, offerors determined incapable based on Past Performance or Technical Capability factors are ineligible for award regardless of price.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| RFQ Amendment -36C25626Q0022 0007- rv 4 30 .pdf | ||
| PWS Teleradiology VHSO_4-30-26 Rev.docx | DOCX document | |
| SCHEDULE- FAYETTEVILLE TELERADIOLOGY rev 4 30 upd.pdf | ||
| QASP Teleradiology VHSO_4-30-26 Rev.docx | DOCX document | |
| ADDENDUM to 52.212-1 Teleradiology VHSO_4-30-26.docx | DOCX document |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
?.## ADDENDUM to 52.212-2 EVALUATION—COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS AND
COMMERCIAL SERVICES
(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. Quotes shall be evaluated in accordance with FAR Part 12.203 - Evaluation of Quotations or Offers.
The Government will evaluate offers using the comparative evaluation process, where offers will be compared to one another to determine which provides the best benefit to the Government. The Contracting Officer reserves the right to award without exchanges. Each initial quote should contain the offeror’s best terms regarding Technical Capability, Past Performance, and Price. Award will be made as a result of a comparative evaluation to the Offeror that provides the offer that is most advantageous to the Government. Failure to conform with solicitation requirements could result in the quote not being considered.
The solicitation will be evaluated to determine if the offeror has complied with all requirements of the solicitation and the Addendum to 52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors. Only those Offers determined capable of meeting the requirements of the PWS, either after initial compliance review, or as a result of exchanges, will be eligible for award. The Contracting Officer reserves the right to award without exchanges.
The following evaluation factors will be used in evaluating the offeror’s capability to provide Teleradiology Services:
Factor 1: Technical Capabilities
Factor 2: Past Performance
Factor 3: Price
Factor 1: Technical Capabilities.
The Government will evaluate your organization's ability to fulfill the requirement as described in the Performance Work Statement. The Quality Control Plan will be evaluated to determine if the Offeror shows sufficient staffing to meet the quantity estimates identified in the Price Schedule, and the capability to meet or exceed the required turnaround times in the PWS, items 4.3.6.1., 4.3.6.2., 4.7.3.1. (e.g., routine – 24 hours; STAT – 60 minutes; no reports exceed seven (7) days turnaround).
The Government will evaluate the Contingency Plan to determine the Offeror’s capability to maintain adequate staffing to support the requirement in the event of contract physician(s) departure or inability to perform under the contract.
The Government will consider the Key Personnel submitted to determine appropriate licensing/certification.
Vendors who demonstrate greater understanding of the effort to be performed under the PWS/QASP and demonstrate greater ability and readiness to perform it, will be considered more advantageous to the government.
Factor 2: Past Performance.
The Government will consider the Offeror’s record for delivery, quality, and past or present malpractice judgments, any proposed major subcontractors as it relates to the probability of successfully performing the solicitation requirements. VA may also use information available in its own files; from electronic databases such as the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) or from any other source it deems appropriate. While the Government may elect to consider data obtained from other sources, the burden of providing current and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror. Offerors with more relevant and recent experience to this solicitation's requirement will be rated more highly in the Past Performance evaluation factor.
Factor 3: Price.
Price quotations will be evaluated to determine price reasonableness. Offerors that are determined not capable based on Past Performance or Technical Capability cannot be selected regardless of price.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .