Attachment 02 Armed Guards Evaluation Factors.pdf

Department of Homeland Security

Federal Emergency Management Agency

PROTECTIVE SERVICES OFFICERS

Evaluation Factors

RFP #: 70FBR224R00000001

Protective Security Officer and Patrolling Services Evaluation Factors

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) requests the procurement of Level II Armed Security Guard Service and Patrolling Services according to the specifications listed below.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), FEMA, Mission Support, Office of the Chief Security Office/Region II Security Office has a requirement of Protective Security Officer (PSO) services as the main Physical Security measure minimizing risks and vulnerabilities while ensuring the security of the Agency’s assets and personnel as stated in the Statement of Work.

This requirement is a small business set-aside for local firms throughout the entire island of Puerto Rico including municipalities of Vieques and Culebra. Local firms are defined as those companies residing or primarily doing business in Puerto Rico in accordance with the Stafford Act – Sec. 307. Use of Local Firms and Individuals 42 U.S.C. 5150 and FAR 26.202-1.

Evaluation Factors and Adjectival Ratings

• The Government intends to establish a multiple award blanket purchase agreement to the Offeror(s) whose offer is most advantageous to the Government, based on the factors contained in the solicitation. This evaluation will be done based on a best value to the Government. Vendors will be evaluated on their ability to demonstrate technical sufficiency in their proposed technical and management approach to perform and support the requirements of the SOW. This section of the vendor’s proposal shall address information regarding how the proposal logistical support task areas will be performed, the various resources that will be used to facilitate performance, and an identification of potential difficulties in conducting the work with practical suggestions for overcoming these difficulties.

• A responsive Offeror means a complete offer was submitted to the Government prior to RFP closing time and date, and all aspects of the offer comply with the instructions and requirements of the solicitation. A responsible Offeror means that the Offeror is registered in SAM.GOV. The Offeror’s information in SAM.GOV is accurate, complete, and up to date as of the time of the Offeror’s response to this RFP. A responsible Offeror means no reason(s) exist(s) for the Government to decide of non-responsibility in accordance with FAR Part 9.

• The offeror’s proposal shall be evaluated on its demonstrated ability to provide staffing throughout all municipalities in Puerto Rico (includes Vieques and Culebra) necessary to accomplish the tasks outlined in the SOW. The work plan shall fully describe the offeror’s proposed solution to achieve the requirements of the SOW and address the offeror’s technical approach and methodology. At a minimum, the offeror shall address the quantity of resources, required certifications, and experience to meet contract tasks. Vendors should indicate their strategy for identifying, recruiting, hiring, screening, and retaining Level II armed guard personnel.

• Offerors will be evaluated on their ability to develop a work plan in response to the SOW. Offerors must demonstrate an understanding of: (i) Scope of technical requirements, (ii) Complexity of technical requirements, (iii) Performance requirements & objectives, and (iv) Pertinent work tasks & deliverables.

Vendor proposals will be evaluated and will be assigned an adjectival rating. For this solicitation, there are three Evaluation Factors:

Factor 1 – Technical Capability (able to meet requirement)

Subfactors:

Subfactor 1 – Description of staffing plan and contingency plan to support 33,120 hours of PSOs to cover 86 posts working 24 hour a day, seven days a week during the first critical 30 days after a disaster declaration.

Subfactor 2 – Compliance with all required protective security services state and federal regulations.

Subfactor 3 - Availability of required PSO equipment included on the SOW (on hand for potential BPA call orders).

Subfactor 4 – Availability of patrol vehicles (on hand for potential BPA call orders).

Subfactor 5 - Capability to provide required reports as requested.

Factor 2 – Past Performance

Factor 3 –Price (Not a Technical Evaluation Factor.)

The following procedures will be used to rate each proposal based upon the Technical Capability Evaluation Criteria:

FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL CAPABILITY – OFFEROR MEETS REQUIREMENTS DEFINED IN THE

SOW

Rating Definition Superior Exceeds the RFP requirements. The proposal yields significant benefits to the Government.

Weaknesses, if any, are of small impact. NO significant weaknesses or deficiencies exist.

Good Exceeds the RFP requirements. The proposal yields some benefits to the Government.

Weaknesses, if any, are of small impact. NO significant weaknesses or deficiencies exist.

Satisfactory Meets all RFP requirements. The proposal offers no significant benefits beyond the stated requirements. NO significant weaknesses or deficiencies exist.

Marginal Minimally meets the minimum RFP requirement(s) or has one or more significant weaknesses.

Significant weaknesses are correctable without major proposal revisions.

Unsatisfactory Fails to meet the minimum RFP requirement(s). The proposal has one or more deficiencies for which correction would require major revisions or a redirection of the proposal.

The Offeror’s proposal and supporting materials will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the Offeror meets the requirements specified in the SOW, such as staffing, patrolling vehicles and meet regulations, providing report etc. Any missing information will deem the technical proposal incomplete.

Rating System for Technical Capability Evaluation Subfactors

Subfactors Rating

1. Offeror’s ability to meet the staffing and contingency plan to support

33,120 hours of PSOs to cover 86 posts working 24 hour a day, seven days a week during the first critical 30 days after a disaster declaration.

2. Offeror’s capability to comply with all required protective security services state and federal regulations.

3. Offeror’s availability of required PSO equipment included on the SOW (on hand for potential BPA call orders.

4. Offeror’s capability to provide patrol vehicles as stated in the SOW (on hand for potential BPA call orders).

5. Offeror’s capability to provide reports as requested in the requirements of the SOW.

Overall

Refer to Appendix 4 SECURITY ARMED GUARDS - Required On-Hand Uniform and Equipment Checklist for 172 PSOs.

-SPACE BELOW INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK-

FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

Past performance will be evaluated as a measure of the Offeror’s ability to successfully perform this project based on demonstrated relevant and/or recent performance for similar contracts. Past performance summaries are for contractual work completed in the last three (3) years or currently in process, which are of similar size, scope, and complexity. Offerors will need to provide historical information showing they have supported Level II armed security guard services, patrolling vehicles and meet regulations, reporting etc. in the past with the Federal Government, agencies of State and local governments, commercial customers, or other sources.

The Offeror’s past performance will be evaluated based on the information received as part of past performance questionnaires and/or phone interviews with identified customers. See Attachment 3 for Past Performance Questionnaire. The Government reserves the right to utilize information obtained from sources other than those identified by the Offeror. Past Performance may also include review of CPARS/PPIRS ratings as a requirement.

The Offeror will have to list three (3) armed security guard services and patrolled services performed. The three (3) projects identified by the Offeror will not serve as the sole basis of evaluation of past performance.

The evaluation will consider the extent of the Offeror’s recent, relevant experience. Offerors with no similar past performance will be rated “neutral” for past performance only.

The offeror will provide a list of any contracts terminated for convenience or terminated for default within the last three (3) years. Evaluation of past performance will be a subjective assessment based on consideration of all relevant facts and circumstances. It will not be based on absolute standards of acceptable performance. The Government is seeking to determine whether the offeror has consistently demonstrated a commitment to customer satisfaction and timely delivery of services at fair and reasonable prices.

Rating Definition Exceptional Exceeds the RFP requirements. The proposal yields significant benefits to the Government.

Weaknesses, if any, are of small impact. NO significant weaknesses or deficiencies exist.

Satisfactory Meets all RFP requirements. The proposal offers no significant benefits beyond the stated requirements. NO significant weaknesses or deficiencies exist.

Unsatisfactory Fails to meet the minimum RFP requirement(s). The proposal has one or more deficiencies for which correction would require major revisions or a redirection of the proposal.

Neutral No relevant past performance record is available, or the Offeror’s record is so sparse that no meaningful assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

RFP 70FBR224R00000001

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

Source Selection Information – See FAR 3.104 and FAR 2.101

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), FEMA, recently released a Request for Proposal for the procurement of supplies or services RFP 70FBR224R00000001. Offerors were asked to provide information on contracts similar in nature, size, and complexity to the present requirement on which they had performed in the past.

An offeror has submitted this to you as a reference for past performance. (See blocks 1 to 3 below).

We need your opinion on how well the contractor performed on your contract(s). Please fill out the attached questionnaire and send it electronically to either the Contracting Officer at stewart.knotts@fema.dhs.gov-or the Contract Specialist at brendaliz.pinero@fema.dhs.gov. To be considered, this form must be filled out and received by the Contracting Officer no later than the closing date and time listed in the request for proposal.

DHS/FEMA may contact you to clarify or verify any information provided. For purposes of confidentiality, only send this completed form to the FEMA Contracting Officer.

Your input will be confidential. Please note your comments will be used to form the basis for evaluation of this offeror. Thank you in advance for your assistance. If you have any questions, please contact the Contracting Officer at stewart.knotts@fema.dhs.gov.

A. CERTIFICATION

By law, the Government will not disclose the names of individuals providing reference information during discussions with the contractor identified in Block 1 below.

Block 1. Contractor Name:

Block 2. Contractor phone number and address:

Block 3. Contract Name and Number: |

I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS QUESTIONNAIRE IS ACCURATE

AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.

Evaluator’s Printed Name Title

Evaluator’s Mailing Address (Agency, Bldg./Room, Street, City, State, Zip) Evaluator’s Signature Date Phone

Fax

B. INSTRUCTIONS

Two forms are provided to document your opinion: 1) Performance Rating Form; and 2) Supplemental Comment Form. Please fill out both forms in accordance with the instructions provided on each. Please use the following standards in arriving at your rating: Superior, Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, Unsatisfactory, or Neutral.

RFP

QUESTIONNAIRE PERFORMANCE RATING FORM (put an X in the appropriate box)

Performance Element Superior Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Neutral

1. STAFFING CAPACITY:

Contractor has demonstrated support capacity that will meet the expected Armed services requirements

2. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

The contractor exhibited a commitment to customer satisfaction and achieved customer satisfaction.

3. RESPONSIVENESS AND

ATTENTIVENESS: The contractor exhibited reasonable and cooperative behavior in response to criticism/rejection of contract deliverables and in immediately correcting errors, poor performance, and other problems.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE:

RFP

QUESTIONNAIRE SUPPLEMENTAL COMMENT FORM

Please provide any additional comments regarding your performance element ratings in the appropriate spaces below. We appreciate your time and valuable comments. Please add additional pages as necessary.

Performance Element 1. STAFFING CAPACITY

Performance Element 2. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

Performance Element 3. RESPONSIVENESS AND ATTENTIVENESS:

FACTOR 3 –PRICE

Adequate price competition is expected for this acquisition. In accordance with FAR 52.217-5 and FAR 52.217-8, the Government will evaluate a price for the Option to Extend Services in case the Government elects to exercise that option. The method for calculating the price for that option will be to take the price [or rates, etc.] of all CLINS for the last option period and extend the estimated price for an additional six months of performance, in accordance with the maximum time available for extension under the clause. This will give the total price for the base period of performance and all options contained in the contract. The offeror shall not propose a price for this six-month option. The Government will add the calculated price for the six- month Option to Extend Services to the contractor’s proposed total price. This will give the total price for the base period of performance and all options contained in the contract.

The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. To account for the option periods possible under 52.217-8 (maximum of six months), Options to Extend Services, the Government will evaluate the option to extend services by adding six months of the offeror’s final option period price to the offeror’s total price. This amount will be the total evaluated price. The Government may choose to exercise the Option to Extend Services at the end of any performance period (base or option periods). Prices for the base and option periods, including the 6-month option available under FAR 52.217-8, will be evaluated to ensure that they are fair and reasonable for performance of the requirements established in the solicitation and as proposed in the technical submission.

The price for the effort associated with FAR 52.217-8 will not be included in the total awarded value at contract award. If, at the end of the contract’s/order’s period of performance (the end of the base period or any option period) and within the time period established in the clause, the Government chooses to exercise this option, the pricing will be pursuant to the rates specified in the contract for the preceding performance period.

The following factors will be used to evaluate vendor proposals, including price:

(1) Complete. The proposal will be evaluated to determine if all business information required by the RFP has been submitted. All price information must be complete to be considered for contract award, including any (Government provided) other direct cost estimates.

(2) Price reasonableness. Adequate competition will be used determine price reasonableness. However, if necessary, the Government may use any or all price analysis techniques and procedures described in FAR 15.404-1(b) to determine price reasonableness.

8.0 Discussions and Award

The CO may ask for discussions, clarifications, or revisions at any time during the evaluation if it is determined to be in the Government’s best interest, and in accordance with the FAR 15.306. The clarification/revision requests may encompass all information submitted or presented in response to the RFP deemed necessary by the CO to explore and evaluate the merits of the proposals submitted.

Appendix

Appendix 4 - Security Armed Guards - Required On-Hand Uniform and Equipment Checklist for 172 PSOs

Appendix 4

SECURITY ARMED GUARDS - Required On-Hand Uniform and Equipment Checklist for 172 PSOs REQUIRED ITEM YES NO Partial #

Shirt: Company standard Issued S/Sleeve or L/Sleeve w/Company Shoulder Patches

Pants: Company standard Issued - All weather

Boots/Shoes: Company Standard

Hat: Company Standard Baseball type with “Security” Imprinted

Duty Belt with belt keepers

Hand Cuffs w/ case: Company Standard/Double lock

Level II Firearm Retention Holster: Company Standard, Slide on Belt Type with

Hammer/slide Safety Strap: Left/Right as Required

Double Magazine Case or Speed Loader Case compatible with Specified Weapon and

Ammunition in accordance with this section

Level II Bulletproof Vest: The Contractor shall provide the PSOs with a Level II bulletproof vest, as a minimum requirement.

Two-Way Radios: The Contractor shall provide PSOs with a two-way radio with a minimum range of 5 miles.

Glove carrier / w latex gloves: Company Standard

Expandable Straight Police Baton w/ holder or Oleoresin Capsicum (OC)

Spray Pattern with appropriate holster for container in 2.0-ounce Non-Flammable Flip Top

Safety Canister with Fog/Cone, Stream, or Foam

Factory (non-modified) Semi-automatic 9mm or .40 caliber pistol

Patrol Vehicles (Include amount in "Partial # column )

GUIDANCE: If the company has a minimum of 172 of the "REQUIRED ITEM" on-hand when submitting this proposal, put an X in the "YES" box. If none are on-hand put an X in the "NO" box. If the company has less than

172 of the "REQUIRED ITEM" on-hand when submitting this proposal, then put the amount on inventory of the

"REQUIRED ITEM" in the "Partial #" box. (All items accounted for shall be in proper condition for use. Meaning the items are not broken, expired, discolored, rusted, or out-of-service).