Attachment 1 FAR 52.212-2, EVALUATION FACTORS.pdf

II. EVALUATION FACTORS (Based on FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation—Commercial Products and Commercial Services):

A. Evaluation Factors and Their Relative Importance:

The Government will evaluate offers based on the following factors:

1. Technical Acceptability

2. Past Performance

3. Price

Technical Acceptability is Equal to Past Performance. When combined, Technical Acceptability and Past Performance are Equal to Price.

Exchanges: The Government may conduct exchanges with offerors when necessary, however, the Government reserves the right to award a contract without exchanges.

B. Description of Evaluation Factors:

1. Technical Acceptability:

o Subfactor 1: Understanding of Requirements: The degree to which the offeror demonstrates a clear and thorough understanding of the Government's requirements as outlined in the SOW.

o Subfactor 2: Technical Approach: The feasibility, effectiveness, and innovation of the offeror's proposed technical approach, methodology, and processes.

o Subfactor 3: Key Personnel: The qualifications, experience, and availability of key personnel to perform the required work.

o Rating Scale: Acceptable/Unacceptable: Offer meets/does not meet the minimum requirements.

2. Past Performance:

o The Government will evaluate the offeror's past performance to assess the offeror's ability to successfully perform the required work based on demonstrated past performance of similar efforts.

o The Government will consider the relevance of past performance information (similarity in scope, complexity, and dollar value) and the quality of past performance (based on performance ratings, customer feedback, and other available information).

o Rating Scale: Confidence Assessment: (e.g., Substantial Confidence, Satisfactory Confidence, Limited Confidence, No Confidence, Neutral Confidence)

Substantial Confidence: Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence: Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Limited Confidence: Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence: Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence: No recent/relevant performance record is available, or the offeror's performance record is so mixed that the Government has neither a positive nor negative expectation of successful performance.

3. Price:

o The Government will evaluate price to determine whether it is fair and reasonable.

o The Government may use various price analysis techniques to assess price reasonableness, including comparison to independent government estimates, comparison to prices paid on previous contracts, and analysis of the offeror's proposed prices.

o An unrealistically low price may be considered indicative of a lack of understanding of the requirements or an unacceptable level of risk.

o Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purpose by adding the total price of all options to the total priced of the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the options are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

4. The Government will perform the following procedures, in order, while evaluating the quotations:

o The Government will organize the offerors from lowest to highest.

o The Government will determine if the lowest three offerors are conforming to the SOW. If the lowest three offerors are determined nonconforming, the Government will proceed to the next lowest price offeror until an offer is conforming. All offers that are nonconforming will be determined unacceptable and marked as ineligible for award.

o The Government will determine Technical Acceptability and Past Performance on the lowest three conforming offers. If the lowest three conforming offerors are determined either as “Unacceptable” on Technical Acceptability or “Limited Confidence” or lower on Past Performance, the Government will proceed to the next lowest price offer until an offer is Acceptable on Technical Acceptability or marked as Satisfactory Confidence or higher.

o The Government will evaluate the lowest three offerors using the tradeoff process to determine the best value to the Government. The Government may award to other than the lowest priced offeror or other than the highest technically rated offeror if the perceived benefits of doing so warrant the additional cost. The Government will consider the relative importance of the evaluation factors as described above in making the tradeoff decision.

III. Award

A. Basis of Award: The Government intends to award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer is conforming to the solicitation will be the most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.