Attachment 0005_- Evaluation Factors and Basis for Award.pdf

W31P4Q-21-R-0073 Attachment 0005

EVALUATION FACTORS AND BASIS FOR AWARD

BASIS FOR AWARD

1. The Government intends to award to the offeror whose proposal represents the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) offer in accordance with FAR 15.101-2, as supplemented. Technical tradeoffs will not be made and no additional credit will be given for exceeding acceptability.

2. The resulting award will be a Firm Fixed Price Contract to a single offeror. By submission of its offer, the Offeror accedes to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale.

3. In accordance with FAR 9.103, the contract will be placed only with an offeror that the Contracting Officer determines to be responsible. Offerors, in order to qualify as sources for this acquisition, must be able to demonstrate that they meet standards of responsibility set forth in FAR 9.104. The Government reserves the right to conduct a pre-award survey on any or all offerors to aid in the evaluation of each offeror's proposal and ensure that a selected offeror is responsible. No award can be made to an offeror who has been determined non-responsible by the Contracting Officer.

4. The Contracting Officer has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition. Upon examination of the initial offers, the Contracting Officer will review this determination and if, in the Contracting Officer's opinion, adequate price competition exists no additional price information will be necessary.

However, if at any time during this competition, the Contracting Officer determines adequate price competition no longer exists; or, price reasonableness cannot be determined, offerors may be required to submit certified cost or pricing data or additional data other than certified cost or pricing data, as appropriate, for the Contracting Officer to support a determination of price reasonableness.

5. Initially, offers shall be ranked according to price. Proposal prices will be determined to be fair and reasonable by adequate price competition among offers unless the Contracting Officer has requested the offeror to submit information other than pricing data.

6. Next, the Government technical evaluation team shall evaluate the technical proposals submitted by the lowest price ranked offeror on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis:

These are the definitions for the Evaluations Ratings:

Acceptable - Meets all solicitation requirements.

Unacceptable - Does not meet all solicitation requirements.

EVALUATION FACTORS AND BASIS FOR AWARD

7. If the lowest priced evaluated offer proposal is judged to be "Acceptable" on ALL factors and the offeror is determined to be responsible, that offer will be deemed the most advantageous to the Government and the evaluation process stops at this point.

Award shall be made to that offeror without further consideration of any other offers.

8. The Government intends to award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)(1)). Therefore, the offerors proposal should contain the offerors best terms from a price and technical standpoint.

The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary IAW FAR 15.306(a)(3).

9. The Government intends to select 1 offeror for the POP Boxes contract.

FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

1. PRICE

The total evaluated price will be determined by adding together the total proposed extended prices for CLIN 0001AA and CLIN 0001AB as listed in the offerors proposal.

The offerors price proposal will be evaluated using one or more of the techniques described in FAR 15.404-1(b).

Unbalanced Pricing: The offerors price proposal will be evaluated for unbalanced pricing as defined in FAR 15.404-1(g). Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly over- or understated as indicated by the application of cost and price analysis techniques.

Offerors are cautioned that a proposal the Government assesses to be unbalanced as to price, may either be rejected or determined unacceptable for award. See FAR 15.404-1(g) for information on unbalanced pricing.

Reasonableness: Price will not be scored or rated. The Government will evaluate the reasonableness of the offered prices. Normally, adequate price competition establishes a fair and reasonable price. Analytical techniques and procedures described in FAR 15.404-1 may be used, singly or in combination with others, to ensure that the final price is fair and reasonable.

2. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Technical proposals must include:

a) Vendor quotes for raw materials: Quote material and quantities will be evaluated to ensure appropriate sources are available to support production capacity.

EVALUATION FACTORS AND BASIS FOR AWARD

b) POP certificate or quotes for POP certification testing: Current or previous POP certification or quotes for POP certification testing will be evaluated to determine the vendors ability to obtain and maintain POP certification IAW Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) and American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), D4919, Testing of Hazardous Materials Packaging.

c) Quality Management System Plan: Plan will be evaluated based on compliance with or equivalent to ISO9001/AS9100 standards.

d) Milestone schedule: Schedule will be evaluated based on ability to conduct certification testing within the required lead-time to support end item deliveries.

An evaluation rating of acceptable or unacceptable will be assigned upon completion of the technical proposal evaluation. If an offeror receives a technical rating of unacceptable, it will not be considered for contract award.