Attach 7 Evaluation of Offerors.docx

Attachment 7- Evaluation of Offerors Patient Transport Services

RFQ FA8501-23-Q-0002

52.212-2 ADDENDUM

52.212-2 Addendum

BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD: The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation using Price and Other Factors IAW FAR 13.106, 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:

Factor 1 – Price Factor 2 – Technical Subfactors:

1. Emergency Medical Technician (EMT)

2. EMT – Paramedic Licenses

3. Emergency Ambulance Licenses / Ambulance Endorsement

4. Required Response Times

5. Call Tracking Methodology

6. EMT – Paramedic Skills Maintenance Plan

7. Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan

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.

The offeror accedes to the terms of this model contract and all such offers shall be treated equally except for their prices and technical acceptability. An “Unacceptable” rating in any factor or sub-factor will result in the overall technical proposal being rated “Unacceptable” and the proposal will therefore be ineligible for award. The evaluation process shall proceed as follows:

Please refer to the instructions in 52.212-1 Addendum. Incomplete items may be a basis for rejection.

The following factors will be evaluated for completeness and compliance with the requirements of the RFQ FA8501-23-Q-0002.

Factor 1- Price. Price Proposals will be ranked from lowest to highest Total Price (TP). The Technical Proposal of the lowest TP offeror will be evaluated for technical acceptability for the Factor 2 and its subfactors. If the lowest TP offeror is determined” Acceptable,” then the evaluation shall conclude without further evaluation of higher ranking/priced offers, and no other offerors shall be evaluated. The Government reserves the right to evaluate the next lowest TP offer for technically acceptability if the Government determines it necessary in order to establish fair and reasonable pricing based on adequate price competition.

1. Price Proposal.

(a) Signed copies of the SF 1449 Solicitation / Contract / Order for Commercial Items document. (Blocks 12, 17a, 26, 30a, 30b, 30c)

(b) Completed Section B, Price Schedule, SF1449 and attachment 5 Pricing Table. (Unit price and extended amount for all CLINs 0001-3002)

(c) Solicitation Amendments (if applicable)

(d) System for Award Management (SAM) Registration. (Government will validate via SAM website)

Total Price. The TP will be determined by totaling the extended amount for all CLINs 0001 – 3002. Table below is for reference only. Complete Attachment 5 Pricing Table.

The extended amount must equal the quantity multiplied by the unit price. To prevent rounding issues, unit prices are limited to two (2) decimal places and no rounding of the extended amount is allowed.

Note: It is the responsibility of each offeror to verify their calculations.

Period of Performance

CLIN

Description

Qty

Unit Price x Qty

Option Year 1 1 Apr 24 – 31 Mar 25

Option Year 2 1 Apr 25 - 31 Mar 26

Option Year 3 1 Apr 26 – 30 Sep 26

2. Price Evaluation. All technically acceptable proposals will be evaluated for price reasonableness and balance.

a. Price Reasonableness. It is expected that the competitive nature of this acquisition will drive price reasonableness; however, the Government reserves the right to make this determination by means of one or more price analysis techniques as described in FAR 13.106-3 as deemed necessary.

b. Price Balance. Offerors are cautioned against submitting an offer that contains unbalanced pricing. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable TEP, the price of one or more contract line items (including the Basic and Option periods) is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of price analysis techniques. An overstated or understated CLIN price may be due to (a) illogical progression of rates, factors or unit prices between program years, (b) unit prices that do not take into account quantity variations, or (c) the “front-loading” of CLINs; any of these situations would reflect an inaccurate “true” cost for that CLIN. Front-loading occurs when a larger than normal amount of costs are concentrated in an early contract period. The Government will consider any “front-loaded” CLIN as unbalanced, since acceptance of the proposal would result in advance payment. The Government will analyze offers to determine whether there are unbalanced, separately priced line items or sub-line items. Prices submitted will be compared and evaluated to ensure that a logical progression exists as related to price and quantity changes within each offeror’s response to the pricing structure in RFP Attachment 5. Offers that are determined to be unbalanced may be rejected if the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

3. Proposal Clarifications. Offerors are cautioned to submit sufficient information and, in the format, specified in 52.212-1 Addendum. Offeror’s may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal. Exchanges conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute discussions and the Contracting Officer reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for proposal revision. The Government intends to award a contract without discussions with respective offerors. The Government, however, reserves the right to conduct discussions if deemed in its best interest.

Factor 2. Technical Proposal: The offeror’s technical proposal must address each of the following items listed below:

1. Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) – Paramedic Certifications

2. EMT – Paramedic Licenses

3. Emergency Ambulance Licenses / Ambulance Endorsement

4. Required Response Times

5. Call Tracking Methodology

6. EMT – Paramedic Skills Maintenance Plan

7. Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan

TECHNICAL ACCEPTABILITY.

1. The technical evaluations will begin with technical evaluation of the lowest priced responsive proposal. If the lowest priced responsive proposal is determined to be technically unacceptable, then the next lowest priced responsive proposal will be evaluated. Technical evaluations will continue until the lowest priced offeror whose proposal is found technically acceptable is identified. The Government, at its discretion, may continue technical evaluations until the Contracting Officer determines that a sufficient number of technically acceptable proposals have been identified to permit determination of a fair and reasonable price based on adequate price competition. The definition of “responsive” for the purpose of this solicitation is compliance with all material aspects of the RFQ.

2. The Government’s technical evaluation team shall evaluate the technical proposal(s) on a pass/fail basis, assigning a rating of “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable.” An offer must be rated “Acceptable” in all subfactors in order to be “Acceptable” for Factor 2 thus making it eligible for award. An “Unacceptable” rating in any subfactor will result in the overall technical proposal being rated “Unacceptable” and the proposal will therefore be ineligible for award.

The Government will utilize the information provided by the offeror, along with information collected from other sources (i.e., other Government offices, commercial sources, etc.), in making a technical acceptability determination. If an offeror’s technical proposal is determined to be technically unacceptable, no further evaluation will be conducted. Offerors determined to be technically unacceptable shall be eliminated from consideration for contract award.

3. The technical evaluation subfactors upon which an offeror’s technical proposal will be evaluated and the respective “Standard of Acceptability” for each of the technical evaluation subfactors are set forth below. The following definitions will be used to assign a rating for each technical subfactor and an overall rating to each technical proposal.

Technical Criteria Ratings

4. Overall technical acceptability will be evaluated against each the following technical subfactors:

1. Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) – Paramedic Certifications. Offeror to provide documentation of current State of Georgia certified EMT-Paramedics with Basic Life Support (BLS) and Pediatric Advanced Life Support (PALS) certifications for all employees to provide all certifications prior to the required contract start date. Reference Performance Work Statement (PWS), Paragraphs 1.4, 1.4.4, 1.4.6, 1.4.8 Standard Of Acceptability: The offeror’s response provides sufficient information for the Government to determine whether or not the offeror’s employees have current State of Georgia certified EMT-Paramedics with Basic Life Support (BLS) and Pediatric Advanced Life Support (PALS) certifications.

2. EMT-Paramedic Licenses. Offeror to provide documentation of current licenses to perform EMT-Paramedic services in the State of Georgia, to include certification by Georgia Department of Public Health Emergency Management Services (EMS), for all employees to provide all licenses / certifications prior to the required contract start date. Reference PWS, Paragraphs 1.4, 1.4.4, 1.4.6, 1.4.8 All EMS providers must follow Georgia Department of Public Health Emergency Management Services (EMS) Agency Policy and Procedures listed at the following web address: https://dph.georgia.gov/ems-personnel-licensure

Standard Of Acceptability: The offeror’s response provides sufficient information for the Government to determine whether or not the offeror’s employees have current licenses to perform EMT-Paramedic services in the State of Georgia, to include certification by Georgia Department of Public Health Emergency Management Services (EMS), for all employees.

3. Emergency Ambulance Licenses / Ambulance Endorsement. Offeror to provide documentation of current employees’ licenses to operate an emergency ambulance in the State of Georgia, to include ambulance endorsement. Provide the required licenses with endorsements before the required contract start date. Reference PWS, Paragraph 1.4.2.

Standard Of Acceptability: The offeror’s response provides sufficient information for the Government to determine whether or not the offeror’s employees have current licenses to operate an emergency ambulance in the State of Georgia, to include ambulance endorsement,

4. Required Response Times. Offeror to provide documentation demonstrating the ability to successfully meet the required timeline in the Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 6055.06 for on-scene arrival of twelve (12) minutes 90% of the time for emergency calls. Reference Performance Work Statement, Paragraph 1.2.

Standard Of Acceptability: The offeror’s response provides sufficient information for the Government to determine whether or not the offeror has the ability to successfully meet the required timeline in the Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 6055.06 for on-scene arrival of twelve (12) minutes 90% of the time for emergency calls.

5. Call Tracking Methodology. Offeror to provide methodology for tracking the time when calls are received, the time arrived on scene, and the total travel time for each call. Reference PWS, Paragraph 1.2.

Standard Of Acceptability: The offeror’s response provides sufficient information for the Government to determine whether or not the offeror’s call tracking methodology is sufficient to accurately track response times.

6. EMT-Paramedic Skills Maintenance Plan. Offeror to provide plan for preventing degradation of EMT-Paramedic skills due to low call volume experienced at Robins AFB. Reference PWS, Paragraph 1.1, 1.4.4, 1.7 to 1.7.1.4.1, & 4.1.

Standard Of Acceptability: The offeror’s response provides sufficient information for the Government to determine whether or not the offeror’s EMT-Paramedic Skills Maintenance Plan will prevent degradation of EMT-Paramedic skills when low call volume is experienced on Robins AFB.

7. Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan. The Government has identified all of the contractor services performed under this contract as essential contractor services in support of mission-essential functions. Therefore, in accordance with Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) provision 252.237-7024, Notice of Continuation of Essential Contractor Services, offerors shall provide with their offer a written plan describing how the offeror will continue to perform the essential contractor services listed in the PWS Paragraphs 4.10, 4.10.1, 4.10.2.

Standard Of Acceptability: The offeror’s response provides sufficient information for the Government to determine whether or not the offeror’s Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan meets the requirements of DFARS 252.237-7024.

Continuation of Services. Per DFARS 252.237-7024 and PWS Para 4.10.2, provide CDRL A003; this document will be incorporated into the contract at time of award:

Identify provisions made for the acquisition of essential personnel and resources, if necessary, for continuity of operations for up to 30 days or until normal operations can be resumed:

Address in the plan, at a minimum—

(i) Challenges associated with maintaining essential contractor services during an extended event, such as a pandemic that occurs in repeated waves;

(ii) The time lapse associated with the initiation of the acquisition of essential personnel and resources and their actual availability on site;

(iii) The components, processes, and requirements for the identification, training, and preparedness of personnel who are capable of relocating to alternate facilities or performing work from home;

(iv) Any established alert and notification procedures for mobilizing identified “essential contractor service” personnel; and

(v) The approach for communicating expectations to contractor employees regarding their roles and responsibilities during a crisis.

CONTRACT AWARD. The Government intends to award, without discussion, to offeror whose proposal represents the best value to the Government. The Government, however, reserves the right to conduct discussions if deemed in its best interest. Offerors are cautioned to submit sufficient information and, in the format, specified in 52.212-1 Addendum. Offerors may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal. Exchanges conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute discussions and the Contracting Officer reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for proposal revision.

CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITY. Prior to an award, an offeror may be requested to provide business information for the purpose of a responsibility determination in accordance with FAR Part 9. Failure to provide requested information may result in a determination of non-responsibility, and the offeror would then be considered ineligible for award.

(End of 52.212-2 Addendum)

ATTACHMENT 7: FA8501-23-Q-0002