SECTION M AMEND 1.pdf

Solicitation No. AG-82B1-S-09-0041/AMENDMENT 1

SECTION M - Evaluation Factors for Award

AWARD DETERMINATION

(a) Proposals will be evaluated and rated to determine those Offerors, which are within the competitive range, price and other factors considered. Proposals should be submitted initially on the most favorable terms, which the Offeror can make to the Government. The Government reserves the right to reject any or all proposals or to make award without conducting discussions/negotiations.

(b) Discussions/Exchanges/Negotiations (oral or written) may be conducted as appropriate with all Offerors considered to be within the competitive range. For the purpose of this solicitation, discussions shall not be considered to have been initiated where the Government requests additional information supplementing or clarifying a proposal without materially changing it. Discussions shall be considered to be open negotiations with an Offeror for the purpose of revising or materially changing the proposal as submitted. Where discussions are held, they will be concluded by the Contracting Officer by issuing a request for a Final Proposal Revision. The Final Proposal Revision must reflect the appropriate clarifications and revision in response to discussions. A firm date will be provided for submission of the

Final Proposal Revision.

(c) Following final evaluation of proposals, the Contracting Officer will award a contract to that

Offeror: (1) whose proposal is technically acceptable and (2) whose technical /cost relationship is the most advantageous to the Government. The critical factor in making any cost/technical trade-offs is not the spread between the technical ratings, but rather the significance of that difference. The significance of the difference in ratings will be determined on the basis of what that difference is and what it would cost the

Government to take advantage of it. Award may not necessarily be made to that Offeror submitting the lowest offer. Also, 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 to the advantage of the Government.

(d) Award may be made without further negotiations. Proposals should be submitted initially on the most favorable terms, from a price and technical standpoint, which the Offeror can submit to the

Government. However, the Government may, after evaluation of proposals, conduct further oral or written discussions as appropriate, with all Offerors whose proposals are within a competitive range.

(e) Each evaluation criterion will be assigned an adjective rated of excellent, good, neutral, fair or poor.

EXCELLENT: The proposal complies with all instructions for submission and includes additional information that indicates consistent high quality performance can be expected from the contractor. One or more items of service or evidence of past experience in this criterion exceeds the

“good” criteria or minimum requirement.

GOOD: The proposal complies with all instructions for submission and meets all minimum requirements of service under the proposed contract.

NEUTRAL: To be used when the contractor provides no Past Performance information.

FAIR: The proposal complies with most instructions for submission and/or fails to meet all minimum requirements of services under the contract so as to appear weak in regards to meeting the stated minimum.

POOR: The proposal does not provide minimum requirements of service and/or fails to comply with instructions regarding submission of the proposal. Proposal is extremely weak in regards to meeting the stated minimum requirements of service so as to have major weaknesses.

Solicitation No. AG-82B1-S-09-0041/AMENDMENT 1

If the determination is that the proposal fails to comply with the basic RFP instructions, or is weak and lacking in clarity concerning ability to meet the basic requirements, it will be rejected from the competitive range, since it could not be made acceptable without major revisions. The CO may limit the competitive range for purposes of efficiency.

EVALUATION CRITERIA: Proposals will be evaluated according to the technical criteria stated below.

The criteria are essentially equal. Proposals shall be prepared in accordance with instructions shown in

Section L, Instructions for Preparation of Proposals.

EXPERIENCE AND PAST PERFORMANCE: Experience is the opportunity to learn by doing. Experience is relevant when the offeror has been confronted with the challenges that will be present under the contract contemplated by the RFP. Past Performance is a measure of the degree to which the offerors have satisfied their performance factors with customers in the past, and complied with Federal, State and Local laws and regulations. The offer will be assessed by relevant experience and past performance on the basis of its breadth and its depth. Each offeror shall provide a written description of their recent experience in similar efforts, the Agency/company and contact information (include federal projects if applicable), the dollar amount of the contract and the performance period. The past five years experience will take precedence in evaluations. Each offeror shall provide written references from previous customer’s project representatives for projects that confirm revelant experience in regard to the work outlined in the specifications and drawings of this RFP. Each written reference shall include a completed

“OWNER/CLIENT PAST PERFORMANCE SURVEY” form (attached in Section J). When assessing past performance we may contact other sources of information, including, but not limited to the following:

Federal, State and Local government agencies, Better Business Bureaus, published media, and electronic databases.

KEY PERSONNEL: Provide the names and qualifications of key individuals you will use on this project.

QUALITY CONTROL PLAN: Submit a quality control plan with the name of the person responsible for quality control. The plan shall include all measures that are to be exercised by the contractor in daily operations that will insure a consistent quality product that is in compliance with the drawings and specifications included in this RFP. A testing schedule will be submitted for all of the required quality control lab tests that will be performed and the name of any laboratories that may be used to perform the required testing with a list of the key testing personnel, their experience and and testing certifications they have been issued.

PRICE

Evaluation criteria are listed in descending order of importance.