S150042_IROC_Prop_Instruc_and_Tech_Eval_Criteria_Draft_09172015.docx

[Type text] [Type text] [Type text]

U.S. Forest Service AG-024B-S-15-0042 IROC Proposal Instructions and Evaluation Criteria

PART I: PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.0 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

Offerors must comply with the detailed instructions for the format and content of the proposal; if the proposal does not comply with the detailed instructions for the format and content, the proposal may be considered non-responsive and may render the Offeror ineligible for award.

All questions must be submitted to the contracting officer, Ivory Carr, electronically via email to icarr@fs.fed.usby the due date above. Please reference the RFQ number/name in the subject line.

Offers must be submitted electronically via email to Ivory Carr, icarr@fs.fed.us, by the offer due date identified in the solicitation. Proposals may be submitted in either Microsoft Word or PDF.

1.1 PROPOSAL FORMAT:

In order to maximize efficiency and minimize the time for proposal evaluation, it is required that the Offeror submit the proposal in accordance with the format and content specified herein.

8.5 x 11 inch paper · Single-spaced typed lines · 1 inch margins · Times New Roman 12-point Font in text · Fonts for graphics can be smaller, but must be legible. No hyperlinks with the exception of the past performance product examples.

Page Numbering: The Offeror must use a standard page numbering system to facilitate proposal references. Charts, graphs and other insert materials must be page-numbered as part of the page numbering system.

Cover Page/Table of Contents: Each proposal volume must include a Cover Page and a Table of Contents. The Cover Page must identify the solicitation number, project name, proposal volume/date and title, and the Offeror’s name, contact information, and DUNS number.

Page Limitations: Page limitations are identified for each volume/section of the proposal below and should be treated as maximums. If exceeded, excess pages will not be read or considered in proposal evaluation.

· Included in the page count is the body, graphics, charts, illustrations and pictures.

· Not included are Cover Pages, Cover Letter, Tables of Content and resumes.

1.2 VOLUME 1: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL STRUCTURE

The Offeror’s Volume 1: Technical Proposal must be organized as described below. PRICE INFORMATION MUST NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL.

VOLUME 1: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL STRUCTURE (20 Page Limit)

Cover Page (CP) – not counted in page limit, but limited to 1 page

Table of Contents (TOC) – not counted in page limit

Technical Proposal Executive Summary – limited to 2 pages

Factor 1: Technical Capabilities

· Technical Approach

· Detailed Timeline and proposed Travel

· Performance Work Statement (PWS) – not counted in page limit, but limited to 12 pages

· Quality Control Plan (QCP) – not counted in page limit

Factor 2: Management Approach

· Management Approach Narrative

· Resumes – not counted in page limit, but limited to 5 pages per resume

Factor 3: Past Performance

· Past Performance Summaries – not counted in page limit, but limited to 2 pages per summary

· Past Performance Product Examples – not counted in page limit; hyperlinks may be used

· Past Performance Questionnaire – not counted in page limit

1.3 VOLUME 2: PRICE PROPOSAL STRUCTURE

The Offeror’s Volume 2: Price Proposal must be submitted as described below.

VOLUME 2: PRICE PROPOSAL STRUCTURE (No Overall Page Limit)

Cover Page (CP) limited to 1 page

Table of Content (TOC)

Cover Letter/Executive Summary – limited to 1 page

Pricing Tables in accordance with Schedule B

Price Proposal Assumptions

PART II: EVALUATION CRITERIA

1.0 METHOD OF AWARD

The Government anticipates awarding one contract to the Offeror whose quote is the most advantageous to the Government, technical and price factors considered. The Government will evaluate proposals based on the evaluation plan detailed in Sections 2.0, 3.0 and 4.0. The Government reserves the right to hold discussions; however it may make an award based on initial offers received without discussions of such offers.

2.0 EVALUATION FACTORS

The Offeror’s Proposal will be evaluated using both Price and Non-Price Evaluation Factors. The Non-Price Evaluation Factors in descending order of importance include, Technical Capabilities, Management Approach and Past Performance.

When combined these Non-Price Evaluation Factors are Significantly More Important than the Price Evaluation Factor in the award decision. However, as Non-Price factors become more equal, Price will become substantially more important in the best value trade-off analysis.

2.1 TECHNICAL AND MANAGEMENT FACTORS

The following adjectives will be used in assessing both Technical and Management factors.

TABLE 1 - TECHNICAL AND MANAGEMENT FACTORS

EVALUATION RATINGS

2.1.1 TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES EVALUATION

The Technical Capabilities Factor will be evaluated on the basis of the following elements:

1. The Offeror’s demonstrated understanding of the SOO and of agile software development.

2. The comprehensiveness and feasibility of the Offeror’s technical approach, and the extent to which it incorporates innovative techniques or processes, including quantifiable advantages to the Government, such as time-savings, cost-savings, increased user acceptance, etc. Quantifiable advantages should be in the form of proven, verifiable results that the techniques and processes have produced for other organizations. The Offeror will be evaluated on the use of and feasibility of proposed off-the-shelf solutions.

3. The feasibility of the timeline, including travel, for development of the IROC.

4. The Offeror’s Performance Work Statement (PWS) and Quality Control Plan (QCP) align with the technical approach, achieve the requirements and comply with the constraints in the SOO, and provide meaningful, challenging and results-driven performance standards. Note: As indicated in the proposal instructions, only non-financial incentives can be included. Non-financial and/or financial disincentives can be included.

2.1.2 MANAGEMENT APPROACH EVALUATION

The Management Approach Factor will be evaluated on the basis of the following elements:

· The Offeror’s organizational structure and management approach displays a comprehensive understanding of the Government’s requirement, aligns with the Offeror’s approach and poses very low performance risk through its proposed organizational structure and management approach.

· The Offeror’s organization is focused on defined/mature processes and continuous improvement. Evidence of CMMI Level 3, or similar industry standard certification or mature quality control processes will be highly rated and must be held by the Prime. Additionally, the completeness and accuracy of the proposal, including being free of typographical and grammatical errors, will be assessed as part of the organization’s quality control processes.

· Proposed Key Personnel and staff resumes reflect the relevant skills, experience, expertise and qualifications to ensure achievement of the Government’s requirements.

2.2 PAST PERFORMANCE FACTOR

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Past Performance supporting various clients, across relevant project types, and under varying conditions by evaluating the quality and client satisfaction levels of Offeror performance in execution of contracts of similar size, scope, complexity, and currency to this scope.

The information provided by the Offeror is only one of the means used by the Government to obtain relevant Past Performance information. The Government reserves the right to obtain information from other sources (e.g., CPARS, PPIRS) to assess Offeror’s performance risk. The Government may consider positive and negative information not mentioned by the Offeror, but found during the course of assessing relevant Past Performance.

Evaluation of Past Performance will use the following adjectival ratings to assess confidence. In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the Offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. A neutral rating or “Unknown Confidence” will be utilized if no relevant past performance is available for evaluation.

TABLE 2- PAST PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS

Limited Confidence Based on the Offeror’s performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the Offeror’s performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

The Past Performance Factor will be evaluated on the basis of the following elements:

1. The quality of corporate experience and client satisfaction for the Offeror, including those of its Teaming Partners/Subcontractors, in supporting the SOO purpose and objectives.

2. The Offeror’s past performance, including:

a. Similarity in size, scope and complexity to the SOO requirements, as well as the currency of the past performance references.

b. The direct relevance of the past performance references to the SOO. Experience with the fire community or similar communities and experience using agile approaches will be rated as highly relevant.

c. Quality of Services: The Offeror’s (1) compliance with contract requirements, (2) standards of good workmanship, (3) accuracy of reports, (4) performance of key individuals, and (5) technical excellence to include quality awards/certificates received during the period of performance.

d. Schedule: The Offeror’s (1) timeliness against contract/Task Orders, (2) timeliness against contract milestones, (3) timeliness against contract delivery schedules, (4) responsiveness to technical direction, and (5) timeliness against administrative requirements.

e. Cost Control: The Offeror’s (1) ability to perform within or below budget, (2) use of cost efficiencies, (3) relationship of negotiated costs to actuals, (4) submission of reasonably priced change proposals, (5) forecasting accuracy and timeliness, and (6) ability to provide timely, current, complete, and accurate billings.

f. Business Relations: The Offeror’s (1) timeliness of interactions, (2) problem identification completeness and quality, (3) corrective action plans, (4) history of reasonable and cooperative behavior, (5) customer satisfaction, and (6) timely award and management of subcontracts.

g. Management of Personnel: The Offeror’s quality and effectiveness of (1) selecting, (2) retaining, (3) supporting and (4) replacing Key Personnel and staff.

h. Reports found in PPIRS for the Offeror and any Partners/SubContractors’ referenced in the proposal.

2.2.1 PAST PERFORMANCE SUMMARIES

All provided Past Performance summaries must:

1. Consider that the term “contract” refers to a Contract, Task Order, Delivery Order, or BPA Call.

2. Be for the prime Contractor, Teaming Partner, or Subcontractor (provided the Contractor, a Teaming Partner, or SubContractor is identified in Volume 1: Technical Proposal).

3. Reference Past Performance where the Contractor performed a substantially similar service to that which the Contractor will perform under the respective contract.

4. Be of similar size, scope, complexity, and currency where:

a. “Size” of a contract relates to the contract value of services including all subcontracts and option periods.

b. “Scope” relates to the range of services provided to any Federal, State, or Local Government entity or commercial entity as compared to the scope of this requirement.

c. “Complexity” refers to the range of technical challenges that must be addressed in addition the ability to provide multiple services in multiple locations in parallel while meeting or exceeding performance objectives.

d. “Currency” is defined as being performed within the last three (3) years of the date of this solicitation.

5. Demonstrate the Offeror’s Past Performance in providing support services directly related to the SOO.

Each Past Performance summary submitted by the Offeror should include the following information:

1. Indicate whether the Past Performance reference is for the Prime Contractor, Teaming Partner, or SubContractor

2. Customer organization (agency, firm, etc.)

3. Contract name

4. Contract number

5. Contract type (firm fixed price, cost reimbursable, time-and-materials, etc.)

6. Contract value:

a. Including all subcontracts and option periods with a clear indication of whether the options were exercised

b. The contract value must reflect the revenue realized by the Offeror for services actually performed by the Offeror. For example, if the Offeror was a subContractor, the dollar value must only reflect the Offeror’s portion of the work as subContractor, not the value of the entire contract as realized by the Prime Contractor

7. Performance-based Contract (Yes/No/Partial)

8. Start and completion date (or projected completion date)

9. Provide contact information for two (2) points-of-contact including:

a. Name and role/job of the points-of-contact, while associated with the project

b. Telephone number

c. Email address

10. Brief description of the Contract scope and tasking

11. Description of performance standards met and unmet, and any corrective actions required

12. Description of how the Offeror’s efforts resulted in:

a. Quality Service

b. Timeliness (Schedule Control)

c. Cost Control

d. Positive and Effective Business Relations

2.2.2 PAST PERFORMANCE PRODUCT EXAMPLES

The product examples provided align with the requirements, demonstrating the capability of the Offeror. They demonstrate high quality workmanship, design and functionality as well as adhere to best practices in usability and 508-compliance.

2.2.3 PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

For references that do not have past performance information available through PPIRS/CPARS, Offerors are required to provide the Past Performance Questionnaire provided in Attachment XXX.

References should submit completed questionnaires directly to the Government via email to ***Insert email address*** no later than the closing date and time for this solicitation.

3.0 PRICE

The Government will evaluate the competitiveness, realism and reasonableness of the pricing, including any discounts offered. The Government reserves the right to reject any quote that includes any assumption that adversely impacts the Government’s requirements.

4.0 EVALUATION OF ORAL PRESENTATIONS

In addition to the review of written proposals, the Government may request oral presentations from the highest rated Offerors. However, the Offeror may not introduce any new materials that are not part of their written submitted Technical Proposal volume.

If oral presentations are deemed necessary, the order in which Offerors will make their presentations will be determined by a drawing of names by the Contracting Officer after receipt of proposals. The Government will provide notice of the specific day/time at least three (3) business days in advance of the oral presentation.

The oral presentations will take place in Boise, Idaho, Conference Room location to be determined. The Offeror shall have at least one of the proposed Key Personnel travel to Boise, Idaho for the oral presentations and the rest of the participants may attend virtually.

If requested, each oral presentation will be one and one half (1.5) hours in duration, broken into the following segments: Approximately 15 minutes for introductions by the Offeror and the Government, 45 minutes for oral presentations and 30 minutes for a question and answer period.

The Key Personnel proposed must actively participate on behalf of the Offeror in the oral presentation process. Price information shall not be stated during any part of the oral presentation.

The Government will not reimburse any Offeror’s for travel expenses related to making oral presentations as these costs would be considered a general cost of doing business.

After completion of the oral presentation, the Contracting Officer and/or Evaluation Panel may request clarification/elaboration on any of the points addressed by the Offeror which remain unclear. Any such interchange between the Offeror and the Government will be for clarification only, and will not constitute discussions.

5.0 EVALUATION OF OPTIONS

The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the base period requirements. Evaluations of options does not obligate the Government to exercise the options.