Attach 5 - Clause 52.212-2.pdf

Attachment 5

FA300221R0017

52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014)

(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

(i) Basis for Contract Award. The subject acquisition is being competed under FAR 13.5 Simplified Procedures for Certain Commercial Items, utilizing the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) procedures. The Government intends to award one Firm Fixed Price contract for this competitive Small Business Set-Aside service acquisition. Award will be made to the technically acceptable Offeror with lowest evaluated price who is deemed responsible in accordance with FAR 9.104 and whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements. The solicitation requirements include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by this solicitation. Unless specifically identified in your proposal, by submission of its offer, the Offeror accedes to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or sub factors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in a proposal being determined ineligible for award. Technical tradeoffs will not be made and no additional credit will be given for exceeding acceptability. The solicitation requirements include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by this solicitation. It is the Government’s intent to evaluate proposals and award contracts without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the offeror's initial proposal should contain the offeror's best terms from a price, and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer (CO) later determines them to be necessary.

(b) The government intends to award one contract for this requirement.

(c) If any aspect of an offeror’s proposal does not meet the government’s requirements and is not considered correctable, the offer may be eliminated. All technically acceptable proposals shall be treated equally except for their price record. Offers will be ranked based on initial assessment of overall total evaluated prices, followed by a full evaluation of Technical Acceptability, then Price Reasonableness of the low priced technically acceptable proposal.

Only proposals rated technically acceptable are eligible to receive an award.

(d) It is the Government’s intent to evaluate proposals and award contracts without discussions with Offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the Offeror's initial proposal should contain the Offeror's best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary.

1.0 Evaluation Process. Offers will be ranked from lowest to highest based on initial assessment of Total Evaluated Price (TEP), followed by a full evaluation of technical acceptability of the lowest three TEP proposals. If the Government deems it necessary, evaluations of additional proposals, in order of TEP, may be conducted in order to determine price fair and reasonable. A price analysis will be conducted to determine if the lowest price technically acceptable offer is fair and reasonable. Award will be made to the lowest TEP proposal meeting the technical acceptability standards and deemed responsibility in accordance with FAR 9.104-1.

1.1 Price Evaluation. Offers will be ranked from lowest to highest based on initial assessment of Total Evaluated Price (TEP), followed by a full evaluation of technical acceptability of the lowest three TEP proposals. If the Government deems it necessary, evaluations of additional proposals, in order of TEP, may be conducted in order to determine price fair and reasonable. A price analysis will be conducted to determine if the lowest priced, technically acceptable offer is fair and reasonable. In accordance with FAR 9.104-1, award will be made to the responsible offeror with the lowest TEP, and whose technical proposal meets the technical acceptability standards.

1.2 Technical Evaluation. If the Government receives three (3) or fewer proposals all proposals will be evaluated for Technical Acceptability. If the Government receives three (3) or more proposals the Government will only select the three (3) lowest priced proposals and then evaluate them for Technical Acceptability. The Government reserves the right to evaluate additional proposals for technical acceptability if in the Government’s best interest. If additional proposals are evaluated for technical acceptability they will be selected in the order of TEP.

1.2.1 The Technical Factor has three (3) subfactors: (1) Technical Expertise in SAS/R, (2) Digital Image Collection and Organization, (3) Psychometric Expertise. Each subfactor will receive a rating that will then support an overall rating for the Technical factor.

1.3 Acceptability Ratings. The evaluation factors listed below will be evaluated and receive one of the following ratings:

(i) Acceptable – The proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

(ii) Unacceptable – The proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

1.4 Evaluation of Factors. Offerors are advised that their submission should be their best effort. Only technically acceptable proposals, either initially or as a result of discussions, are eligible for award. If award is made without discussions, proposal revisions will not be permitted. The Government will evaluate the proposals selected above for technical acceptability on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. For the technical proposal to be rated as “Acceptable”, all technical subfactors must be rated acceptable. If any technical subfactor is rated “Unacceptable” the overall proposal will be rated as “Unacceptable”. The technical proposal will be evaluated for the following technical subfactors:

Subfactor # 1 – Technical Expertise in SAS/R (emphasis on tasks 2 and 3)

Standard: The Offeror shall provide documentation of required technical expertise in SAS/R as follows:

i. Evidence that the Offeror has technical expertise in database management and processing experience.

ii. Describe a methodology sued for text analysis/extraction from typed documents (PDF/Word)

The standard has been met when: The Offeror adequately demonstrates a comprehensive and realistic plan that demonstrates technical expertise in SAS/R IAW the PWS.

Subfactor # 2 -- Digital Image Collection and Organization (emphasis on task 1):

Standard: The Offeror shall provide documentation of required digital image collection and organization IAW the PWS. The written documentation shall specifically addresses contract requirements and at a minimum, provide the following:

i. Evidence that the Offeror has Image manipulation and processing skills.

ii. A plan to ensure Offeror can access existing access to DoD image repositories.

iii. Evidence that the Offeror has Photography experience.

The standard has been met when: The Offeror adequately demonstrates comprehensive and realistic documentation that addresses all of the elements (i. thru iii.), and meets the requirements of the PWS.

Subfactor # 3 Psychometric Expertise (emphasis on task 1):

Standard: The Offeror shall provide a plan that illustrates psychometric expertise IAW the PWS. The written plan shall specifically addresses contract requirements and, at a minimum, provide the following:

i. A plan to test/survey item development.

ii. A plan for image-based item development.

The standard has been met when: The Offeror adequately demonstrates a comprehensive and realistic plan which clearly demonstrates pychometric expertise IAW PWS.

2.0 The Government will conduct a complete Price Analysis using one or more of the techniques defined in FAR 15.404-1, to determine if the lowest price technically acceptable offer is reasonable and balanced. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable TEP, the price of one or more contract line items or sub line items appears to be significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of price analysis techniques. An offeror’s proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

2.1 If discussions are to be conducted, the Government will establish a competitive range based on the ratings of each proposal against all evaluation criteria in the solicitation. The competitive range will consist of the most highly rated offerors based on evaluation of all offers against all factors. The Government reserves the right to further limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals. Prior to the establishment of the competitive range, and after the decision to conduct discussions has been made, the Government may enter into limited communications with offerors whose inclusion or exclusion from the competitive range is uncertain. These communications are limited in accordance with FAR 15.306(b)(1). The Government will only enter discussions with those offerors determined to be in the competitive range.

At the conclusion of discussions, each offeror still within the competitive range shall be given an opportunity to submit a Final Proposal Revision (FPR) by a common cutoff date and time as established by the contracting officer. If, after discussions have begun, the Government determines that an offeror’s proposal should no longer be included in the competitive range, the proposal will be eliminated from consideration for award. This may occur at any time even if all material issues have not been discussed or if the offeror has not yet been afforded the opportunity to submit a proposal revision. Written notice of exclusion from the competitive range will be provided to unsuccessful offerors.

(b) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(c) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer's specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

(End of provision)