Attachment 04 Draft Sect M Evaluation Criteria 09 Dec 22.pdf

EVALUATION CRITERIA PRE-DECISIONAL FA8806-23-R-0001

Attachment 4

Section M - Evaluation Criteria

Multiple Award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity Contract

For

(U)Data Software Services (DSS)

(U) United States Space Force (USSF)

(U) Space Systems Command (SSC)

(U) Space Domain Awareness & Combat Power (SDACP)/Battle Management Command, Control, &

Communications (BMC3) Program Offices

Contract:

FA8806-23-R-0001

Ordering Period:

1 April 2023 – 31 March 2028

Date:

09 December 2022

M-900: EVALUTION CRITERIA

1. BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD

1.1 SOURCE SELECTION METHODOLOGY

This is a Best Value source selection conducted IAW FAR subpart 15.3, Source Selection, as supplemented by the Defense FAR Supplement (DFARS), the Air Force FAR Supplement (AFFARS). These regulations are available electronically at acquisition.gov. The Government intends to award a multiple award indefinite delivery indefinite quantity (IDIQ) basic contract as a result of this solicitation. A decision on the technical acceptability of each offeror’s proposal will be made. Offerors are reminded that the Government will only evaluate one proposal from each offeror. Award will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal is technically acceptable, conforms to all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, technical requirements, and also provides the best value to the Government based on the results of the evaluation described in Section 2 below. Contract terms and conditions consistent with customary commercial practices are specified in the solicitation/contract, with otherwise tailored terms and conditions specified in the Addendum to the solicitation/contract.

2. PROPOSAL EVALUATION

2.1 GENERAL

2.1.1 To be considered for award, an offeror must:

2.1.1.1 Conform to all solicitation requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information as requirement by section l of this solicitation)

2.1.1.2 Pass the gate criterion by receiving an “acceptable” rating for Factor 1:

Commercial Software Solution; and

2.1.1.3 Receive an "acceptable" rating for Factor 2: Technical Approach criteria;

2.1.1.4 Be deemed responsible IAW FAR subpart 9.1, as supplemented by DFARS and

AFFARS.

2.1.2 DISCUSSIONS

The Government intends to award without discussions but reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined necessary. Any discussions will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.306. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer, with the concurrence of the Source Selection Authority, may 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.

The Government reserves the right to record audio telecommunications with the Offerors during the source selection.

If, during the evaluation period, it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to hold discussions, offerors' responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs) and the Final Proposal Revision (FPR) will be considered in making the source selection decision. If the offeror’s proposal has been determined to be eligible for award at the time discussions are closed, any changes or exceptions in the FPR are subject to evaluation and may increase the risk that the offeror’s proposal is determined to be ineligible for award.

2.1.3 SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS

Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, small business subcontracting plan, organizational conflict of interest analysis results, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as Factors. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation will result in the Offeror being ineligible for award.

Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and must provide complete supporting rationale. The Government reserves the right to determine any such exception unacceptable and the proposal, therefore, ineligible for award. The Government reserves the right to cross-reference between volumes and sections of volumes to support proposal evaluation.

2.1.4 RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATION

The Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) will make a responsibility determination in accordance with (IAW) Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 9.104-1 as supplemented, after the evaluation of proposals to determine whether an Offeror is eligible for contract award.

In accordance with Section 1612 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 (P.L. 115-91) and SSC Instruction (SSCI) 64-101, the PCO will not award a contract to a contractor included on the Space Force Space Contractor Responsibility Watch List (CRWL) without the approval of the SSC Commander.

Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the Offeror’s proposal being deemed deficient. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and must provide complete supporting rationale. The Government reserves the right to determine any such exceptions unacceptable.

2.1.5 DEFINITION OF EVALUATION FACTOR RATINGS

The Government will assign a rating for each Factor in this solicitation. The Government will award contracts based upon the criteria in Section 2.0 above.

Factor 1 and Factor 2 will be evaluated for acceptability based off the following rating definitions.

Vol. I: Factor 1 – Commercial Software Solution Rating Definitions Acceptable: Offeror’s submitted Attachment

5 is IAW solicitation.

Unacceptable: Offeror’s submitted

Attachment 5 is not IAW solicitation.

Vol. II: Factor 2 – Technical Approach Rating Definitions Acceptable: Offeror’s Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable: Offeror’s Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

A proposal will be deemed deficient if it does not represent a reasonable initial effort to address itself to the material requirements of the solicitation, or if it does not substantially and materially comply with the proposal preparation instructions of this solicitation. Cursory responses or responses which merely repeat or reformulate the Master Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Statement of Work (SOW) and/or Delivery Order SOW will not be considered responsive to the requirements of the solicitation.

Offerors must comply with all requirements of this solicitation as defined in Statement of Work (SOW) Multiple Award Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contract for Data Software Services (DSS) and this Evaluation Criteria. Non-compliance with any stated SOW requirement or evaluation criteria will render offeror’s response deficient and evaluation of the offeror’s proposal will cease.

IAW DoD Source Selection Procedures (SSP) Table C-1, the Government will use definitions established in this solicitation to assess the Contractor’s technical acceptability. Each factor will be assigned a rating of “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” based on whether the proposal meets the basic SOW requirements and standards along with meeting the evaluation criteria standards. In assessing the acceptability of each factor, any deficiency will be noted IAW the definitions located in FAR Subpart 15.001, Contracting by Negotiation – Definitions,1 and Chapter 5 of the DoD Source Selection Procedures. Proposals that exceed the evaluation criteria will not receive higher ratings.

1 Deficiency is a material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

At the discretion of the Government, any Offeror receiving a rating of Unacceptable in one or more Factor may be deemed ineligible for award and not further considered for selection.

3. VOLUME I: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

3.1 GENERAL INFORMATION

Volume I: Executive Summary contains Factor 1: Commercial Software Solution which is the only element of this volume that will be evaluated for acceptability. The additional elements (i.e., Narrative Summary, Offeror Team, Master Table of Contents, and Small Business Participation Submission) will be reviewed for completeness in support of the contracting officer’s responsibility determination.

3.1.1 EVALUATION OF FACTOR 1: COMMERCIAL SOFTWARE SOLUTION

Factor 1: Commercial Software Solution is a gate. An offer will be evaluated on an Acceptable, Unacceptable basis. The Government will not evaluate Factor 2:

Technical Approach if the Offeror does not receive an Acceptable rating on Factor 1:

Commercial Software Solution.

Specifically, the Government will evaluate the Offeror's completed Attachment 5, Commercial Questionnaire, in accordance with Section L. In order to be deemed Acceptable, the submitted Questionnaire shall demonstrate that the Offeror has a commercially available solution that satisfies data needs as defined in the SOW.

A proposal will be eliminated from further consideration for award before completing the Government’s evaluation of any subsequent factors if the proposal is rated Unacceptable.

4. VOLUME II: TECHNICAL APPROACH

4.1 GENERAL INFORMATION

Each offeror’s written technical proposal shall be evaluated to determine if the offeror provides a sound, compliant approach that meets the requirements of the SOW and demonstrates a thorough knowledge and understanding of those requirements and their associated risks.

4.1.1 EVALUATION OF FACTOR 2 TECHNICAL APPROACH

For the Factor 2 criteria below, the Government will evaluate whether the Offeror's solution demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of the nature and scope of the requirements stated in this solicitation's SOW.

The Government will evaluate the Offeror's proposed solution and determine if the proposed solution demonstrates the ability to acceptably meet the criteria (i.e., ingest, store, and share) per SOW Section 3.1.1. The standard will be met if the ingest, store, and share solution falls within the past three years.

An Acceptable rating must be achieved for the Offeror’s solution to be considered for award.

The technical rating reflects the evaluation of the acceptability of the offeror’s technical approach for meeting the Government’s requirement. The offeror’s proposal shall be evaluated to determine whether the proposal is acceptable or unacceptable, using the ratings and descriptions outlined in the table below. One technical rating will be assigned to Factor 2 Technical Approach; in order to be considered awardable, there must be an “acceptable” rating.

5. RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF FACTORS

All factors are of equal importance, because all must be satisfied in order for an offeror to be eligible for award. No tradeoff analysis will be conducted by the Government, an Offeror must receive an Acceptable rating for both Factors in order to be eligible for award.

6. NUMBER OF CONTRACTS TO BE AWARDED

The Government intends to make an award as a result of this RFP to each qualifying Offerors up to a maximum of 20. The Government reserves the right to award zero, one, or multiple contracts as a result of this RFP.

7. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

The Government intends to evaluate, IAW this attachment, information the Offeror provides IAW Attachment 5, Instructions to Offerors (ITO), with the exception of the executive summary.