Attachment 05 - Technical Evaluation Factors.pdf

Attachment 05: Technical Evaluation Factors RFP: 75N91020R00035 Page 1 of 3

ATTACHMENT 5 – TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS

The Offeror is advised that contract award will be based on an evaluation of proposals against three factors. The factors in order of importance are technical, past performance, and price. Although technical factors are of paramount consideration in the award of the task order, both past performance and price are also important to the overall task order award decision. All evaluation factors other than price, when combined, are significantly more important than price. Offerors are advised that award will be made to that offeror whose proposal provides the best overall value to the Government. The Government reserves the right to award a contract or task order without discussions if the Contracting Officer determines that the initial prices are fair and reasonable and that discussions are not necessary.

I. TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS

a. Technical Approach (40 Points): Sub-criteria are of equal weight.

1. Reflects a clear understanding of the requirement including the technical, scientific and operational problems and solutions associated with accomplishing the requirements of all tasks in the Statement of Work.

2. Demonstrates a clear understanding of the technical aspects and challenges of taking over systems from the incumbent contractor and making them operational in their computer environment.

3. Demonstrates innovative yet practical solutions to develop systems that will meet the needs of CISNET consortium.

4. Describes and demonstrates a clear understanding of the offeror’s role in facilitating the work of the CISNET consortium.

5. Demonstrates a clear understanding of the opportunities, challenges, and potential risks in moving toward a more open source environment.

6. Demonstrates a clear understanding of deploying web-based limited and full model interfaces using results from pre-estimated model runs and live executable versions of the models.

7. Demonstrates a clear understanding and innovative approach to managing model documentation at different levels of technical sophistication and detail.

8. Demonstrates a clear understanding of potential problems to be encountered and adequacy of proposed solutions and/or risk mitigation strategies.

9. Suitability and feasibility of the proposed technical approach, methods and procedures for satisfying the requirements of the Statement of Work.

10. The Technical Proposal adequately describes how the project is to be organized, staffed, and managed.

11. The Technical Proposal demonstrates experience and ability in executing the proposed Technical Approach.

12. Suitability of all information technology / software solutions proposed for the work to be performed.

13. Inclusion and feasibility of innovative methods or tools to accomplish this Statement of Work.

14. Adequacy of quality control and quality assurance procedures to ensure the milestones and timely submission of reports and deliverables and technical requirements of the SOW are achieved.

15. Adequacy of proposed Transition-in/Transition Out activities.

16. Adequacy of Technical Proposal in adherence to Information Security & Privacy requirements.

17. Adequacy of Technical Proposal in adherence to IT Accessibility Laws and Polices

RFP: 75N91020R00035 Page 2 of 3

(Section 508).

The offeror's proposal must demonstrate compliance with the "Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Provision" set forth by the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (also referred to as the "Access Board") in 36 CFR part 1194 for all electronic and information technology (EIT) products and services developed, acquired, maintained, or used under this contract/order, including EIT deliverables such as electronic documents and reports.

If your proposal does not include a completed HHS "Section 508 Product Assessment Template" (hereafter referred to as the "Template") which demonstrates that EIT products and services proposed support applicable Section 508 accessibility standards, or, if the completed "Template" included in your proposal is considered "noncompliant," and the Government includes your proposal in the competitive range (for competitive proposals), or if the Government holds discussions with the selected source (for sole source acquisitions), you will be afforded the opportunity to further discuss, clarify or modify the "Template" during discussions and in your Final Proposal Revision (FPR). If your "Template" is still considered "noncompliant" by the Government after discussions, your proposal may not be considered further for award.

https://www.hhs.gov/web/section-508/contracting/technology-products/product-accessibility-template/index.html

b. Organizational Experience, Capabilities, Resources and Facilities (30 Points): Sub-criteria are of equal weight.

1. Organizational experience related to population health, biostatistics, epidemiology, and public health.

2. Organizational experience related to population-based health simulation modeling.

3. Organizational experience in the software and hardware environments that the prior systems were developed in.

4. Organizational experience in developing and managing web-based knowledge management systems.

5. Organizational experience with government security regulations (e.g. FISMA compliance) for data, and requirements for hosting Government web sites.

6. Organizational experience with open source software and open source platforms (e.g.

GitHub).

7. Organizational experience managing the IT aspects of in-person and virtual meetings and call support.

8. Documents availability of adequate facilities, equipment, and databases to perform the

Statement of Work including: all computers, hardware and software, computer equipment and servers and dedicated space for staff and equipment.

9. Demonstrated experience with staffing and retention for this type of work.

c. Personnel (30 points). Sub-criteria are of equal weight.

1. Identification and suitability of Key Personnel (i.e. Principal Investigator (PI)/Program Director) and their unique education, training, expertise, and experience to lead the tasks described in the SOW.

2. The Program Director/Project Manager should have at minimum a master’s degree or equivalent.

https://www.hhs.gov/web/section-508/contracting/technology-products/product-accessibility-template/index.html https://www.hhs.gov/web/section-508/contracting/technology-products/product-accessibility-template/index.html

RFP: 75N91020R00035 Page 3 of 3

3. Key personnel with experience in statistics, health-based simulation modeling, web-based knowledge management systems, web-based interactive graphics, deploying and maintaining government websites, and model documentation at different levels of technical sophistication and detail.

4. Key personnel with experience in the opportunities and challenges of releasing open source software and model executables.

5. Key personnel with demonstrated experience in managing the IT aspects of in-person and virtual meeting and call support.

6. Key personnel with demonstrated experience working with academic researchers.

7. Developers with demonstrated capability in making externally developed systems work in their computer environment.

8. Developers with demonstrated capability to adapt existing systems to the ongoing needs of the users

9. IT administrators with demonstrated capability of maintaining hardware and software environments, including all necessary security measures, and government FISMA compliance

10. Suitability of experience, education and qualifications of all staff proposed in the technical aspects of the Statement of Work

11. Experience, education and qualifications in the specialized areas of population health with knowledge and training in biostatistics, epidemiology, and/or public health

12. Appropriate mix/type of labor for the Technical Approach proposed/Statement of Work to be performed

13. Appropriate level of effort for the Technical Approach proposed/Statement of Work to be performed

II. PAST PERFORMANCE FACTOR

The evaluation will be based on relevant past performance information obtained from sources known to the Government. Past performance considerations shall include, but not be limited to, the Offeror’s performance on similar projects regarding completeness, accuracy, clarity, timeliness, and cost control.

III. PRICE FACTOR

Offeror(s) price proposal will be evaluated for reasonableness. For a price to be reasonable, it must represent a price to the Government that a prudent person would pay when consideration is given to prices in the market. Normally, price reasonableness is established through adequate price competition, but may also be determined through price analysis techniques as described in FAR 15.404.

EVALUATION OF OPTIONS

It is anticipated that Task Orders awarded from this solicitation will contain option provision(s) and period(s). In accordance with FAR Clause 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options, (July 1990), the Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement, except when it is determined in accordance with FAR 17.206(b) not to be in the Government's best interests. Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the options.

14. Adequacy of quality control and quality assurance procedures to ensure the milestones and timely submission of reports and deliverables and technical requirements of the SOW are achieved.