ATTACHMENT 0005 - ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-2.pdf

UNCLASSIFIED

ATTACHMENT 0005:

ADDENDUM TO FAR PROVISION 52.212-2

EVALUATION - COMMERCIAL ITEMS

1. The USG will evaluate responses to this solicitation in accordance with FAR 52.212-2 and the procedures described within this addendum.

2. Basis for Contract Award: The Government (USG) intends to award a single, Not-to- Exceed / Firm-Fixed Price hybrid, contract, utilizing procedures from FAR parts 12 and

13. The USG intends to issue one contract award to the lowest priced, technically acceptable, responsible Offeror. The USG intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions. Therefore, an Offeror’s initial proposal should contain the best terms for price and technical. However, the USG reserves the right to conduct Discussions if determined necessary by the Contracting Officer.

3. The Evaluation Factors for this solicitation are as follows:

a. FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL Technical Sub-factor 1: Staffing Plan Technical Sub-factor 2: Quality Control Plan

b. FACTOR 2: PRICE

4. In order to be rated “Acceptable” for the Technical Factor, all Technical Sub-factors shall be rated “Acceptable”. An “Unacceptable” rating in one or more Technical Sub-factors will render the entire Technical Factor “Unacceptable”. Only offers that have an “Acceptable” Technical Factor will then move forward to the Price Factor evaluation phase. The USG will not rate or rank proposals, but will select the proposal that provides the best overall value to the USG based on the lowest total evaluated price of those proposals deemed technically acceptable.

5. TECHNICAL FACTOR EVALUATION CRITERIA

FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL

In order to be rated “Acceptable” for the Technical Factor, all Technical Sub-factors shall be rated “Acceptable”. An “Unacceptable” rating in one or more Technical Sub-factors will render the entire Technical Factor “Unacceptable”. Only offers that have an “Acceptable” Technical Factor will then move forward to the Price Factor evaluation phase. The USG will not rate or rank proposals, but will select the proposal that provides the best overall value to the USG based on the lowest total evaluated price of those proposals deemed technically acceptable.

a. Technical Sub-factor 1: Staffing Plan (SP)

“Acceptable” Criteria: The SP details the project organizational structure. The SP has identified the number of employees and/or subcontractor employees it proposes to accomplish all tasks, and the respective position title of each proposed employee and/or subcontractor employee. The SP has provided a realistic schedule to ensure successful accomplishment of all tasks in accordance with the PWS and associated annexes. The SP accounts for employee illness, employee turnover, as well as retention and hiring practices to ensure continued services throughout the life of the contract. The SP has provided sufficient detail to demonstrate the Offeror’s plan to successfully accomplish the requirements in the PWS and associated annex(es).

“Unacceptable” Criteria: The SP fails to detail the project organizational structure. The SP has failed to identify the number of employees and/or subcontractor employees it proposes to accomplish all tasks, and the respective position title of each proposed employee and/or subcontractor employee. The SP has failed to provide a realistic schedule to ensure successful accomplishment of all tasks in accordance with the PWS and associated annexes. The SP fails to account for employee illness, employee turnover, as well as retention and hiring practices to ensure continued services throughout the life of the contract. The SP fails to provide sufficient detail to demonstrate the Offeror’s plan to successfully accomplish the requirements in the PWS and associated annex(es).

b. Technical Sub-factor 2: Quality Control Plan (QCP)

“Acceptable” Criteria: In accordance with PWS Annex A, paragraph 4.2, the QCP clearly and thoroughly describes how the Contractor will develop, implement, and maintain an effective quality control program to ensure the solicited services are successfully performed. Additionally, the QCP clearly and thoroughly describes in accordance with PWS Annex A, paragraph 4.2: 1) procedures to prevent and identify the recurrence of defective services; 2) the Contractor’s proposed method of managing quality of work; 3) procedures to identify and prevent defects in the quality of services performed; 4) the inspection system (to include specifics as to areas to be inspected on a scheduled and unscheduled basis, frequency of inspections, and the title and organizational placement of the Contractor’s inspectors). The QCP also includes a comprehensive list of equipment to be used.

“Unacceptable” Criteria: The QCP fails to clearly and thoroughly describe how the Contractor will develop, implement, and maintain an effective quality control program to ensure the solicited services are successfully performed in accordance with the PWS and annex, paragraph 4.2. The Contractor’s QCP will be determined “Unacceptable” if the proposed QCP fails to clearly and thoroughly describe in accordance with PWS Annex A, paragraph 4.2: 1) procedures to prevent and identify the recurrence of defective services; 2) the Contractor’s proposed method of managing quality of work; 3) procedures to identify and prevent defects in the quality of services performed; 4) the inspection system (to include specifics as to areas to be inspected on a scheduled and unscheduled basis, frequency of inspections, and the title and organizational placement of the Contractor’s inspectors). if applicable. The QCP will be determined “Unacceptable” if the QCP fails includes a comprehensive list of equipment to be used.

c. Technical Sub-factor 3: Licenses and Certifications

“Acceptable” Criteria: Offeror provides copies of valid licenses and certifications applicable to the grounds maintenance/landscaping industry for each employee and/or subcontractor employee proposed to perform the requirements of this solicitation. Copies of the applicable licenses and/or certifications shall show the name of the employee and/or subcontractor employee, date of certification issuance, type of license/certification, and name of the organization issuing the license/certification.

“Unacceptable” Criteria: Offeror fails to provide copies of valid licenses and certifications applicable to the grounds maintenance/landscaping industry for each employee and/or subcontractor employee proposed to perform the requirements of this solicitation. Offeror fails to provide copies of the applicable licenses and/or certifications that show the name of the employee and/or subcontractor employee, date of certification issuance, type of license/certification, and name of the organization issuing the license/certification.

FACTOR 2: PRICE

As stated above, only offers rated TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE will have the Price Factor evaluated. Offers that are evaluated on Price will be evaluated as described below.

The Price Factor will be evaluated by calculating the Total Evaluated Price for Grounds Maintenance services. Total Evaluated Price is calculated by adding the following: 1) the Routine Maintenance Total for each year and 2) the Special Services Total for each year, including option years.

Calculation of Routine Maintenance Total for Each Year

Base Year:

For each of the respective CLINs 0001-0011, the Fixed Unit Price will be multiplied by the respective frequency to arrive at the Total Cost Base Year.

The Total Cost Base Year for each of the respective CLINs will then be added to reach the Routine Maintenance Total for the base year.

Option Year 1:

For each of the respective CLINs 0001-0011, the Option Year 1 Unit Cost will be multiplied by the respective frequency to arrive at the Option Year 1 Estimated Cost. The Option Year 1 Estimated Cost for each of the respective CLINs, will then be summed to reach the Routine Maintenance Total for Option Year 1.

Option Year 2:

For each of the respective CLINs 0001-0011, the Option Year 2 Unit Cost will be multiplied by the respective frequency to arrive at the Option Year 2 Estimated Cost. The Option Year 2 Estimated Cost for each of the respective CLINs, will then be summed to reach the Routine Maintenance Total for Option Year 2.

Option Year 3:

For each of the respective CLINs 0001-0011, the Option Year 3 Unit Cost will be multiplied by the respective frequency to arrive at the Option Year 3 Estimated Cost. The Option Year 3 Estimated Cost for each of the respective CLINs, will then be summed to reach the Routine Maintenance Total for Option Year 3.

Option Year 4:

For each of the respective CLINs 0001-0011, the Option Year 4 Unit Cost will be multiplied by the respective frequency to arrive at the Option Year 4 Estimated Cost. The Option Year 4 Estimated Cost for each of the respective CLINs, will then be summed to reach the Routine Maintenance Total for Option Year 4.

Calculation of Special Services Total for Each Year

Base Year:

For each of the respective CLINs 0012-0024, the Fixed Unit Price will be multiplied by the respective frequency to arrive at the Total Cost Base Year.

The Total Cost Base Year for each of the respective CLINs will then be added to reach the Special Services Total for the base year.

Option Year 1:

For each of the respective CLINs 0012-0024, the Option Year 1 Unit Cost will be multiplied by the respective frequency to arrive at the Option Year 1 Estimated Cost. The Option Year 1 Estimated Cost for each of the respective CLINs, will then be summed to reach the Special Services Total for Option Year 1.

Option Year 2:

For each of the respective CLINs 0012-0024, the Option Year 2 Unit Cost will be multiplied by the respective frequency to arrive at the Option Year 2 Estimated Cost. The Option Year 2 Estimated Cost for each of the respective CLINs, will then be summed to reach the Special Services Total for Option Year 2.

Option Year 3:

For each of the respective CLINs 0001-0011, the Option Year 3 Unit Cost will be multiplied by the respective frequency to arrive at the Option Year 3 Estimated Cost. The Option Year 3 Estimated Cost for each of the respective CLINs, will then be summed to reach the Special Services Total for Option Year 3.

Option Year 4:

For each of the respective CLINs 0001-0011, the Option Year 4 Unit Cost will be multiplied by the respective frequency to arrive at the Option Year 4 Estimated Cost. The Option Year 4 Estimated Cost for each of the respective CLINs, will then be summed to reach the Special Services Total for Option Year 4.

Calculation of Total Evaluated Price for Grounds Maintenance (CLINs 0001- 0024)

The Routine Maintenance Total for the base year will be added to the Special Services Total for the base year to achieve the “Total” for the base year. The Routine Maintenance Total for Option Year 1 will be added to the Special Services Total for Option Year 1 to achieve the “Total” for Option Year 1. The Routine Maintenance Total for Option Year

2 will be added to the Special Services Total for Option Year 2 to achieve the “Total” for Option Year 2. The Routine Maintenance Total for Option Year 3 will be added to the Special Services Total for Option Year 3. The Routine Maintenance Total for Option Year 4 will be added to the Special Services Total for Option Year 4 to achieve the “Total” for Option Year 4.

The Base Year “Total”, Option Year 1 “Total”, Option Year 2 “Total”, Option Year 3 “Total”, and Option Year 4 “Total” will be summed to generate the Total Evaluated Price.

Price Analysis shall be used to determine price reasonableness. The FAR requires that contracts be awarded at prices that are determined fair and reasonable. The Government will evaluate price reasonableness in accordance with FAR 13.106-3. Additional analysis techniques may be used as determined necessary by the Procuring Contracting Officer. These methods of evaluation may include the use of information/input from sources such as (but not limited

to) other Government agencies and personnel. The Government reserves the right to require the submission of any other than cost or pricing data necessary to validate the reasonableness of a proposal.

As part of the cost/price evaluation, proposals may be reviewed to identify any significant unbalanced pricing. In accordance with FAR 15.404-1(g)(2), i.e.

Unbalanced Pricing, a proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

The Government may determine that a proposal is “Unacceptable” if the Option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the Option(s).

6. Award will be made to the Offeror determined responsible in accordance with FAR

9.104, whose proposal has the lowest evaluated price, and is considered technically “Acceptable”.

7. The USG shall not make assumptions concerning a Contractor’s intent, capabilities, or facilities. Clear identification is the sole responsibility of the Contractor. Proposals shall be evaluated only on their content. Assumptions, preconceived ideas, and personal knowledge or opinions for these factors not supported by material in the proposal shall not be considered or used as a basis for evaluation.

(End of Addendum to FAR Provision 52.212-2)