Attachment 2 - Evaluation Criteria and Submission Instructions.pdf

EVALUATION CRITERIA AND SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

FOR EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT NEEDS ASSESSMENT

SOLICITATION #93310023Q0018

EVALUATION FACTORS AND BASIS FOR AWARD

The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) intends to award a firm fixed priced purchase order resulting from this solicitation to the responsible quoter whose quote, conforming to this solicitation, is deemed to be the best value to the Government. Evaluation factors include Technical Acceptability, Past Performance, and Price. Technical Acceptability is more important than Past Performance. Non-price factors, when combined, are more important than Price. In addition, for Technical Acceptability, subfactors are as follows and are listed from most important to least important:

Technical Approach, Key Personnel, Interview/Focus Group Protocol, and Survey/Questionnaire Samples.

Technical Acceptability: Technical information will be evaluated using the following ratings to determine if the quoter’s submission meets the criteria listed in Attachment 1 – Statement of Work

(SOW).

TECHNICAL ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS

Rating Standard Exceptional Quote contains significant strengths and no weaknesses. The quote exceeds the performance and technical capability requirements defined in the SOW and offers value-added methodologies for improving service that benefit the Government. The evaluator has no doubt that the quoter can successfully achieve the requirements in the SOW. The quoter acknowledges risks and develops an approach that proactively identifies and mitigates risks and looks to reduce or eliminate future risks. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Acceptable Quote contains strengths that outweigh any existing weaknesses. The quote meets the performance and technical capability requirements defined in the SOW. The evaluator is confident that the quoter can successfully achieve the requirements in the SOW. Risk of unsuccessful performance is moderate.

Marginal Quote contains one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. The quote does not meet all the performance and technical capability requirements defined in the SOW. The evaluator has some doubt that the quoter can successfully achieve the requirements in the SOW. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable An unacceptable quote contains one or more significant weaknesses and deficiencies.

Quote fails to meet specified minimum performance and technical capability requirements defined in the SOW. The evaluator is confident that the quoter will be unable to successfully complete the required tasking. The quote does not adequately acknowledge or address risk, mitigate risk, or may introduce risk. Quote is unawardable.

Past Performance: Past performance information will be evaluated to determine the quoter’s ability to perform the contract successfully and the degree of performance risk associated with a quoter. FMCS will use its discretion to determine the sources of past performance information. The information may be obtained from references provided, FMCS’ knowledge of contractor performance, other Government agencies or commercial entities, or past performance databases. There are two elements of past performance. The first is to evaluate the quoter’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the quoter is to the effort stipulated in the SOW. The four levels of relevance are:

Very Relevant, Relevant, Somewhat Relevant, and Not Relevant. The second element of past performance is to rate the past performance information using the adjectival ratings below.

Price: Evaluated price will be total price quoted.

SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

In addition to the referenced provision 52.212-1, Instructions to Offeror – Commercial Items, quoters shall provide the following information:

1. Technical Acceptability

a. Technical Approach – Provide a narrative demonstrating technical understanding and approach to meeting the requirements of the SOW. The narrative shall demonstrate comprehensive and feasible methods and plans to accomplish general requirements as well as specific tasks. The narrative should also include a general timeline for completing the effort. This narrative shall not exceed seven (7) typed pages.

PAST PERFORMANCE RATINGS

Rating Standard Exceptional An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses

Acceptable A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

Marginal A Marginal rating is appropriate when a significant event occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming which impacted the Government/Owner.

Unacceptable An Unacceptable rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred that the Contractor had trouble overcoming and which impacted the Government/Owner. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating.

Neutral No information or references provided are not relevant. Rating will be neither positive nor negative.

b. Key Personnel – Provide resume of all key personnel to be assigned work resulting from this solicitation. Years of experience must be clearly demonstrated and technical competence in each task area must also be demonstrated. Resumes must be sufficiently detailed to permit an assessment of the capability to perform the work described in the SOW. Each resume shall not exceed three (3) typed pages.

c. Interview/Focus Group Protocol – Provide a narrative explaining the approach for conducting interviews and focus groups. This narrative shall not exceed two (2) typed pages.

d. Sample Surveys/Questionnaires – Provide no more than two (2) sample surveys/questionnaires, similar in nature to what would be used to meet the requirements specified in the SOW.

2. Past Performance - Complete Sections 1-4 of Attachment 3 – Past Performance Questionnaire document for three (3) references under which work similar to the requirements described in the SOW has been performed and send to references so they can complete the remainder of the document. The experience must be within the timeframe of 2021 – 2024. Please instruct references to return completed questionnaires to eletourneau@fmcs.gov no later than September 3, 2024.

3. Price – Provide a single fixed price to accomplish all the tasks specified in the SOW.

The Government plans to evaluate quotes and make award without conducting discussions. As such, quoters are advised to submit their pricing quotes on the most favorable basis since the Government reserves the right to make an award on initial quotes. However, the Government reserves the right to establish a competitive range and conduct discussions with quoters deemed to have the most highly rated quotes.

Questions must be submitted to Erika Faith LeTourneau, eletourneau@fmcs.gov, no later than 12:00PM EDT, Thursday, August 15, 2024. Quotes should be submitted to Erika Faith LeTourneau, eletourneau@fmcs.gov, no later than 5:00PM EDT, Tuesday, September 3, 2024. No faxed or mailed quotes will be accepted. Please reference the solicitation number on your quote. NOTE: LATE

QUOTES MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED FOR EVALUATION.

mailto:eletourneau@fmcs.gov mailto:eletourneau@fmcs.gov mailto:eletourneau@fmcs.gov