Amend 8 Evaluation Factors.pdf

Road, Bridge and Structure Work RFP AG-05G1-S-09-0010

Colville National Forest Amendment 8 Page 1

Section M is Replaced with the following:

SECTION M--EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

FAR 52.252-1 Solicitation Provisions Incorporated by Reference (FEB 1998)

This solicitation incorporates one or more solicitation provisions by reference, with the same force and effect as if they were given in full text. Upon request, the Contracting Officer will make their full text available. The offeror is cautioned that the listed provisions may include blocks that must be completed by the offeror and submitted with its quotation or offer. In lieu of submitting the full text of those provisions, the offeror may identify the provision by paragraph identifier and provide the appropriate information with its quotation or offer. Also, the full text of a solicitation provision may be accessed electronically at this/these address(es):

www.arnet.gov/far/ www.usda.gov/procurement/policy/agar.html

FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION (48 CFR CHAPTER 1)

52.217-5 Evaluation Exclusive of Options (APR 1984)

HUBZone Set-Aside

This procurement is a total HUBZone Set-Aside as described in Section I, FAR Clause 52.219-

3, Notice of Total HUBZone Set-Aside. By submission of your offer in accordance with the instructions provided in Section L, the offeror accedes to the terms of this solicitation/contract.

For information regarding HUBZone certification and registration go to the Small Business

Administration website at http://www.sba.gov/hubzone.

Basis of Award and Evaluation of Offers

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award multiple contracts without discussions with Offerors (except for clarification as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Proposals should be submitted initially on the most favorable terms, from a business and technical standpoint.

The intent of the solicitation is to be able to provide sufficient contracts that can accommodate the full array of projects that could develop within the scope. The Government is currently estimating three to five awards.

Award will be made to offerors (1) whose proposal meets the technical requirements of the solicitation and (2) whose technical/cost relationship is the most advantageous to the Government.

Technical and Past Performance are equal in importance, and when combined, they are more important to the Business Proposal provided the price is deemed reasonable.

Colville National Forest Amendment 8 Page 2

In conjunction with the basic contract awards, the Government intends to award Projects A and

B contained within the solicitation package.

The critical factor in making any cost/technical trade-off is not the spread between the technical ratings but, rather, the significance of that difference. The significance of the spread of the ratings will be determined on the basis of what the difference might mean in terms of performance and technical factors and what it would cost the Government to take advantage of it.

Award may not necessarily be made for technical capabilities that would appear to exceed those needed for the successful performance of the work. The Government reserves the right to make cost/technical trade-offs that are in the best interest and advantageous to the Government.

The Government may reject any or all offer(s), issue orders to other than the lowest offer, and waive minor informalities or irregularities in offers received, or elect to not award at all. If necessary, the Government may conduct discussions with offerors in the competitive range. The

Government may also award the contract on the basis of offerors received, without entering into discussions with any offeror(s). Therefore, each initial offer should contain the offeror's best terms and must speak directly to the evaluation factors listed.

Each proposal received will be carefully considered and all information submitted will be kept in strict confidence within legal constraints.

This request for proposals does not commit the Government to pay any costs incurred in the preparation of the submission of proposals.

If two or more offerors are considered equal after both technical and business proposals are evaluated and the Government is not able to award to all who are equal based on the limited number of awards, award will be made by a drawing limited to those offerors. If time permits, the offerors involved shall be give an opportunity to attend the drawing. The drawing shall be witnessed by at least three persons and the contract file shall contain the names and addresses of the witnesses and the person supervising the drawing.

Unbalanced Offer: An offer is materially unbalanced when it is based on prices significantly less than the cost for some work and prices which are significantly overstated in relation to cost for other work, and if there is reasonable doubt that the offer will result in the lowest overall cost to the Government even though it may be the lowest evaluated offer, or it is so unbalanced as to be tantamount to allowing an advance payment. An offer that has been determined to be unbalanced shall be less favorable to the Government than a balanced offer.

Past Performance and Technical Proposal Evaluation Factors. Each offeror’s past performance and technical proposal will be evaluated and assigned a color rating for each factor and subfactor. The technical factors include project management, technical approach, quality control plan and safety plan (references Amendment 4, Section L, pages 2 through 5). Each factor and subfactor will be given a color rating for blue, green, yellow, or red, as described below for each of the required evaluation areas:

(a) Rating & Description:

Colville National Forest Amendment 8 Page 3

BLUE (Exceeds) – The proposal is very comprehensive, in-depth, clear and uniformly outstanding in quality. Consistently high quality performance can be expected. The proposal, as written, exceeds requirements and demonstrates an exceptional understanding of goals and objectives of the acquisition. One or more major strengths exist. No significant weaknesses exist.

GREEN (Acceptable) – The proposal meets all minimum requirements and generally is of high quality. Proposal demonstrates an acceptable understanding of goals and objectives of the acquisition. There may be both strengths and weaknesses, but the strengths outweigh the weaknesses. Deficiencies are minor and easily corrected. Proposal is acceptable as written.

Satisfactory performance can be expected.

YELLOW (Marginal) – The proposal fails to meet minimum requirements. Proposal demonstrates a fair understanding of the goals and objectives of the acquisition. Weaknesses outbalance any strengths that exist. Weaknesses will be difficult to correct and would require negotiations.

RED (Unacceptable) – The proposal fails to meet minimum requirements. Proposal fails to meet an understanding of the goals and objectives of the acquisition. The proposal has one or more significant weaknesses that will be very difficult or impossible to correct. Major proposal revision(s) are required for minimum acceptability.

(b) Past Performance and Technical Evaluation Factors:

Factor 1 – Past Performance: The offeror will be evaluated on performance over the past three years relative to experience on similar projects and types of work. In accordance with FAR

15.305, 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 either favorably or unfavorably in this area, but instead will receive a neutral rating in the area of past performance. Past performance sub-criteria include:

• Experience on projects similar in scope and complexity to the proposed project;

• Efficiency and effectiveness on past projects;

• Whether the firm’s performance conformed to the terms and conditions of their contract;

• How reasonable and cooperative the firm was during performance; and,

• Firm’s commitment to customer satisfaction.

All sub-factors are of equal importance.

Factor 2 – Technical: The offeror will be evaluated on project management criteria. The technical submittal shall be incorporated by reference and become a binding part of the resulting contract. This criteria is comprises of the offeror’s:

• Project Management

Personnel

Colville National Forest Amendment 8 Page 4

Equipment

Potential Subcontracts and material suppliers

Organization Structure and Contract Management

Knowledge and Understanding of Geographical Area.

• Technical Approach on Project A and Project B

For Project A:

Technical approach

Blasting Methods for this project

Expected Schedule including sequence of work and approximate time to complete the project. Government may give more weight on proposals state they will complete the job by June 12, 2009.

For Project B:

Technical approach.

Expected Schedule including sequence of work and approximate time to complete the project. Government may give more weight to proposals who state they will complete the project early in the working season. The latest delivery date the Government will accept is October 31, 2009.

• Quality control plan and how it will be maintained to ensure a quality product is delivered.

• Safety plan and how it will be implemented throughout the life of the project.

Sub-factors Quality Control and Safety Plan are of equal importance. Sub-factor Project

Management and Technical Approach are of equal importance. Project Management and

Technical Approach are more important than Quality Control and Safety Plan sub-factors when combined.

Note: Technical approach includes Evidence of understanding the project requirements:

understanding the resources needed to carry out the project; Project coordination including plans for communication between Forest Service, Contractor, and Subcontractors, management of working relationships, and effectiveness of communication plan; Proposed construction schedule and its realism and Other resources planned for use on the project.

Business Proposal evaluation: The offeror will be evaluated based on his/her response to the

Business Proposals along with bonding capacities. Business Proposal sub-criteria include:

• Pricing for Project A

• Pricing for Project B

• Pricing for Project C

• Bonding for Project B (Go and No Go Factor for this task order)

• Bonding Capacity

Colville National Forest Amendment 8 Page 5

Pricing: It is the Government intent to determine reasonableness and the offeror’s understanding of the work and the ability to perform the contract.

All subfactors are of equal importance. However, if the Contractor does not provide a bid guarantee for Project B, a task order will not be place to that firm for that project.