Atach 4 Section M - 30 Jan 25.pdf

FAR Provision 52.212-2, Evaluation - Commercial Product and Commercial Services, applies to this acquisition. As prescribed in FAR 12.301(c), the following addendum is provided for this solicitation and herby amends any language therein:

M.1 Basis for Contract Award

a. Using FAR Part 13.5 Simplified Acquisition Procedures the Government intends to award a single, firm-fixed priced contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible Offeror, IAW FAR Part 9.1, whose offer conforming to the solicitation, will be most advantageous (best value) to the Government, price and other factor(s) considered. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being determined unsuccessful. The following factors shall be used to evaluate quotes:

Factor 1. Technical Approach (including Past Experience)

Factor 2. Past Performance

Factor 3. Price

b. FAR Part 15 based evaluations will NOT be used for this acquisition. Parts of FAR Part 13.106-2 will be utilized for the purpose of the Government's evaluation of quotations and resultant award determination. Under this evaluation process, Factor 1. Technical Capability 2.

Past Performance, and Factor 3 Price, will be evaluated on an acceptable or unacceptable basis (pass/fail), Accordingly, under the evaluation approach, offerors who receive an unacceptable rating for any factor may not be considered for award. In the event all offerors have been deemed technically acceptable, the Government reserves the right to further evaluate past experience and assign ratings based on the recency, relevancy, and overall performance as shown on the past experience questionnaires. Note that the Government intends to award a contract without interchanges with respective offerors. The Government, however, reserves the right to conduct interchanges if deemed in its best interest. If the Government elects to award without interchanges, an initial technical rating of unacceptable will render the entire quotations unacceptable.

c. The Government will identify from all evaluated quotes, readily discernible value indicators that fall within the parameters of past performance, technical capability, and price. Therefore, the Government reserves the right to select an awardee that provides benefit to the Government that exceeds the minimum outlined standards but is not obligated to do so. Additionally, the Government is not bound to select an awardee whose quote may exceed the minimum requirement, but whose additional value or benefit is not deemed substantial enough by the Government evaluation team.

d. The Government award decision is not limited to the quote that only meets the minimum described in the technical factor or past performance and provides the lowest price. However, if no quotes received in response to the solicitation exceed the minimum criteria outlined in this provision, as determined by the Government evaluation team; then the Government intends to award a contract to the lowest priced offer that meets the instructions outlined in 52.212-1, and the minimum requirements outlined in this provision. Whose price can be determined both "fair and reasonable" and "realistic" by the Contracting Officer.

M.2 Evaluation Factors:

a. Factor 1 - Technical Capability:

i. Offerors will be evaluated on written documentation provided in accordance with the PWS.

Technical acceptability is based on successfully meeting these requirements. The ratings applied to Technical Capability will be "Acceptable" or "Unacceptable" as defined below:

RATING:

- Acceptable: DEFINITION: Proposal meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation. - Unacceptable: DEFINITION: Proposal does not meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Offerors must have an "Acceptable" rating for TECHNICAL CAPABILITY and favorable Past Experience to be considered for award.

The evaluation process will involve a comparative analysis of all proposals deemed 'Acceptable' to determine which offeror provides the best value to the Government. The best value determination will be based on an assessment of Technical Capability, Past Performance, and Price. The following steps will be used to find the best value:

1. Review all proposals for accuracy and compliance with RFQ instructions

2. Evaluate Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) and provide ratings for experience

3. Rank offers from most favorable past experience to least favorable past experience

4. Evaluate technical approach for all offerors, provide pass/fail ratings

5. If the highest evaluated past experience is technically acceptable, the Government will complete price review for Fairness and Reasonableness (F&R).

6. If price can be deemed F&R for highest rated offeror, evaluations will stop and award will be made

7. If the price for the highest rated proposal cannot be deemed F&R, the Government will evaluate the second highest offeror for price F&R

8. The Government will continue process until an award can be made to offeror with higher past experience rating and technically acceptable that has F&R price

The price evaluation will be conducted by comparing the proposed price to Independent Government Estimates (IGE), market prices, and other proposed prices. This comprehensive evaluation will ensure that the selected proposal represents the best value to the Government.

ii. Technical Capability - Past Experience. This factor is met when the offeror provides proof (Attachment 1 PPQ) of at least one (1) continuous year of contract performance entirely within the previous five (5) years from the issuance date of this solicitation, where the offeror is/was responsible for the performance of relevant Security Guard Services as defined in the PWS.

a) Vendors Technical Approach document adequately demonstrates the offeror's plan to handle and take on the projected workload starting 01 April 2025

b) Vendors Technical Approach document provides an acceptable Quality Control Plan that conforms to the PWS IAW Section 2.1.

c) Vendors Technical Approach document reflects their ability to meet the requirements of the Performance Work Statement.

d) Past Experience will be used as a pass fail of technical experience

e) Technical Approach submissions that do not meet these requirements will be considered unacceptable and therefore under the evaluation process, will not be considered for award.

b. Factor 2 - Past Performance.

i. Factor 2 - Past Performance. Offerors must receive an "Acceptable" rating to receive an award.

This rating is based on recent and relevant present and past performance information. The following ratings will be applied:

RATING:

- Acceptable: DEFINITION: Based on the offeror's performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror's performance record is unknown. (See note below.)

- Unacceptable: DEFINITION: Based on the offeror's performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort. Note: In case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or "neutral") past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered "Acceptable." Past Performance information may be obtained, but not limited to, the following sources: a. Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) b. Past Performance

Information available from other sources such as, but not limited to, the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) rating. When a completed PPQ is inconsistent with the CPARS rating, the CPARS will take precedence. The standard for an "Acceptable" past performance rating is met when recent and relevant past performance information as defined above, submitted by the offeror and/or the information found by the Government is evaluated indicating successful performance history. Exceptional, Good, and Satisfactory performance as indicated on the PPQ, CPARs or obtained from any other source deemed necessary by the Government will receive an "Acceptable" rating.

c. Factor 3. Price

i. The Government will evaluate prices submitted in the CLIN structure, Base year and Ordering Periods 1-2 (Pricing Schedule). Failure to propose on all CLINs will render the quotation non-responsive. Comparisons of proposed pricing by offerors received in response to the solicitation will be evaluated at the CLIN level; the extended prices for each CLIN will then be added together, to create an aggregate total. ii. The Government will utilize the procedures at FAR 13.106-3 to determine price fair and reasonableness. Offerors whose price is determined to be unreasonable or unbalanced may not be considered for award. Unbalanced pricing exists when despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more line items is significantly over or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques.

M.3 Award: A written notice of award, furnished to the successful vendor within 30 days, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the quotes specified expiration time, the Government may accept a quote (or part of a quote), whether or not there are exchanges after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award. End of Addendum.