Admin and Tech Writing Factors and Criteria RFP 75H70422Q00IEA.docx
DOCX document 22 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Event Coordination and Technical Writing Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 75H70422Q00IEA
About this file
This request for proposal outlines evaluation criteria and factors for an administrative support and technical writing services contract. The contractor will provide comprehensive support for IHS meetings including logistical planning, note taking, and producing Section 508 compliant reports. Technical capability will be evaluated based on the offeror's ability to meet all requirements in the performance work statement as well as maintain long-term support. Relevant past performance on contracts of similar scope and magnitude performing administrative, technical writing or community engagement work for IHS or other government customers will also be considered. Price proposals should include fixed monthly rates for the base year and option year one. The total evaluated price will include a potential six-month extension under FAR 52.217-8. The solicitation is issued by the Department of Health and Human Services Indian Health Service.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| IEA QA.pdf | ||
| Combo_IEA Admin and Tech Writing.docx | DOCX document | |
| PWS Admin and Tech Writing.docx | DOCX document | |
| Pricing Matrix_Admin and Tech Writing RFP 75H70422Q00IEA.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Evaluation Criteria and Evaluation Factors Administrative Support and Technical Writing Services
The contractor will be evaluated for suitability for this contract based upon the following evaluation factors.
Technical Capability/Processes Relevant Past Performance Price
A. Technical Capability/Processes Information shall be precise, factual, detailed, and complete. Offerors should not assume that the evaluation team is aware of company abilities, capabilities, plans, facilities, organization, or any other pertinent fact that is important to accomplishment of work. Technical acceptability will be determined by review of information submitted acceptable offeror which must provide a description in sufficient detail to show that the proposed solution meets the Government’s requirement in accordance with the Performance Work Statement (PWS). The offeror shall propose its plan/methodology with a focus on the below areas:
1. Provide a comprehensive support package for IHS;
2. Processes/capability to provide support which meets all PWS requirements as well as the capability to maintain support throughout the life of the contract;
3. Demonstrate capability and processes to successfully provide entirety of support
The submission of Technical Capability/Processes Factor shall indicate the offeror’s quality and capability of the work to be performed. The government will evaluate the offeror’s overall understanding and approach to accomplish the requirements of the PWS.
This submission shall be limited to 5 pages
B. Relevant Past Performance Offeror will be evaluated on performance under existing contracts and performance on prior contracts. Offeror should note the difference between past performance and past experience. Past performance relates to quality and how well a Contractor performed, while past experience is about the type and amount of work previously performed by a Contractor. The Government may supplement the information offeror provide with performance information it may obtain from any source including its own experience with the offeror.
Element 1. The Offeror’s relevant past performance information -- The Offeror will be evaluated to assess the demonstrated quality of performance on similar work, to include the ability to control the quality and cost of work, timeliness of performance, and effectiveness at accomplishing the goals of previous work. Offeror is required to provide the evidences and corporate resume of two (2) relevant contracts performed during the past three years or currently performing. Relevant contracts are those contracts that are of similar scope, magnitude, nature, and work. A representative of IHS may contact the offeror’s previous customer(s) for a phone interview to help rate the offeror’s performance.
The submission under Element 1 shall include the following information for each contract:
1. Points of contact (Contracting Officer, Contracting Officer’s Representative and any other pertinent officials that can verify performance) - name, agency/company, address, phone number and email address
2. Contract title & number (and task order number(s) when applicable)
3. Relevancy to the PWS for the subject solicitation in terms of project description and magnitude of the work performed. The relevancy information must be delineated to the level that allows the evaluating officials to make a proper relevancy determination.
4. Total original, present and/or final contract dollar value
5. Explanation of problems, delays, cost overruns and corrective actions taken
6. Contract holder status (prime or sub-contractor)
Element 2. All Concerns shall submit a short narrative that describes their experience in working with communities and organizations that represent a broad range of American Indian and Alaska Native People. In addition, offeror shall demonstrate their understanding of IHS mission, goals and customers.
Element 3. The Federal Government uses the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) to document contractor performance information that is required by Federal Regulations. Past performance information entered to CPARS is available to federal agencies through a separate system called the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) for source selection purposes. Contracting Officer will assess the offeror’s PPIRS records as part of the evaluation of this factor.
This submission shall be limited to 5 pages
C. Price The offeror shall complete the attached pricing matrix ensuring that the per-month pricing and total pricing is included for the base year, option year one, and that the total price accurately reflects the sum of both periods of performance.
The Government will evaluate the potential six-month extension of services under FAR 52.217-8 by adding ½ the total quoted price for option year one to the overall price. The total of the base period, option year one, and the extension under FAR 52.217-8 will be the evaluated price for each offeror.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .