Attachment 2 - Evaluation Criteria.pdf

VISIBLE ACCESSIBLE UNDERSTANDABLE LINKED TRUSTED (VAULT)

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-2 EVALUTION – COMMERCIAL ITEMS

ATTACHMENT 2

1.0 Basis for Contract Award

This source selection will be conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation

(FAR) Part 12, Acquisition of Commercial Items and FAR Part 15, Contracting by Negotiation, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), and the

Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFFARS). These regulations are available electronically at https://www.acquisition.gov/content/regulations.

Awards will be made to the Highest Technically Rated Offerors with an Acceptable Small

Business Commitment Document, with a fair, reasonable, and balanced price, and a realistic

Professional Employee Compensation Plan. Contract terms and conditions consistent with customary commercial practices are specified in the solicitation, with otherwise tailored terms and conditions specified in the Addendum to the solicitation.

This requirement is a competitive full and open acquisition and the Government reserves the right to award up to five (5) contracts. The evaluation criteria is broken into multiple submissions/steps to streamline the source selection process and each step has multiple factors and rating criteria. If an Offeror’s submission is determined to be non-compliant during step 1 then that Offeror's proposal will not move onto the following step and will not be further considered. The definition of each rating criteria is defined in each applicable subsection of this attachment:

Volume/Step 1

Submission Rating Criteria

Advisory Multi-step Process Compliant/Non-compliant

Representations & Certification Compliant/Non-compliant

Facility Clearance Compliant/Non-compliant

DD 254 Compliant/Non-compliant

Small Business Subcontracting

Plan

Compliant/Non-compliant

Volume/Step 2

Submission Rating Criteria

Factor I: ID/IQ Pricing Worksheet Fair/Reasonable/Balanced

Factor I: Professional Employee

Compensation Plan

Realistic/Unrealistic

Factor II: Small Business

Commitment Document

Acceptable/Unacceptable

Factor III: Written Approach to PWS

Tasks

Adjectival

Factor III: Written Approach/Solution to Scenario

Adjectival

Factor III: Oral Presentation to

Scenario

Adjectival

ATTACHMENT 2

This source selection will be utilizing the tradeoff process as defined in FAR 15.101 where

Technical is significantly more important than cost or price.

All Offerors will be evaluated for compliance with the solicitation requirements.

While the Government source selection evaluation team and the Source Selection Authority will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature, is subjective; and therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process.

2.0 Evaluation Steps

2.1 Volume/Step 1: “ Compliant/Non-Compliant ” Gate: Advisory Multi-step (AMS) Process, Representation & Certifications, Facility Clearance Validation, DD Form 254, and Small

Business Subcontracting Plan Compliance Review.

2.1.1 - Participation in Advisory Multi-Step Process: This aspect is compliant when the CO confirms the offeror’s participation in the Advisory Multi-Step process.

2.1.2 – Representations & Certifications: This aspect is compliant when the Offeror submits a completed SF1449. The CO shall confirm that the Offeror’s representations and certifications are current.

2.1.3 - Facility Clearance: This aspect is compliant when the locations stated on the DD254 are validated at the TS/SCI level by the CO that the Facility Clearance (FCL) via the Defense

Information Security System (DISS) and DD254.

2.1.4 – DD Form 254 Contract Security Classification Specifications: This aspect is compliant when the Offeror submits a complete and accurate DD254 that lists all the contractor performance locations. The CO shall confirm that the DD Form 254 is complete and accurate.

2.1.5 - Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Required for Large Businesses Only): This aspect will be met when the Offeror submits a Small Business Subcontracting Plan that meets all of the requirements of FAR 19.7, as supplemented, as well as the conditions below. The Government will assess the subcontracting plan in accordance with the FAR 19.7 and its supplements, FAR

52.219-8 and FAR 52.219-9. To be determined acceptable, the company shall demonstrate a progressive small business subcontract approach that complies with the requirements of FAR

Part 19.7 and its supplements, FAR 52.219-8 and FAR 52.219-9, while maximizing these subcontract opportunities. The plan should capture statutory minimum goal percentages for the specific small business concerns as stated in the table below:

ATTACHMENT 2

Business Category Minimum Subcontracting

Percentage

Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) 5%

Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business

(SDVOSB)

3%

Women Owned Small Business (WOSB) 5%

Historically Underutilized Business Zone Small

Business (HUBZone)

3%

Small Business 32%

While offerors are invited to propose a higher overall small business subcontracting goal, the minimum percentages of total contract dollars, at the IDIQ contract level, to small business subcontractors is contractually binding post-award.

2.2 Volume/Step 2: Evaluate Factor One: IDIQ Pricing Worksheet, Professional Employee

Compensation Plan, Factor Two: Small Business Commitment Document (SBCD), and

Factor Three: Technical

2.2.1 Factor 1: IDIQ Pricing and Professional Employee Compensation Plan

2.2.1.1 IDIQ Pricing – The CO shall evaluate the IDIQ Pricing worksheet to determine that the prices submitted are fair and reasonable and balanced in accordance with FAR 15.404. If the price for one or more labor category rates are determined not fair, reasonable and balanced, the

Offeror’s proposal shall be deemed ineligible for award.

Total Evaluated Price: The Total Evaluated Price (TEP) for this requirement shall be the summation of the fully burdened base year rates plus each ordering period rates for every labor category.

2.2.1.2 Professional Employee Compensation Plan (PECP): The professional employee compensation plan and supporting information will be evaluated per FAR 52.222-46 to assure it reflects a sound management approach and understanding of the contract requirements.

2.2.2 Factor 2: Small Business Commitment Document (SBCD) – (Applicable to all Offerors when a Small Business Subcontracting Plan is required). The Government will evaluate the extent of the

Offerors commitment stated in the SBCD to use small business concerns, veteran-owned small business concerns, service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns, HUBZone small business concerns, small disadvantaged business concerns, women-owned small business concerns (as defined in the clause at FAR 52.219-8), and non-traditional small businesses as subcontractors. The Government will also evaluate the SBCD for the following:

(1) The Small Business goals are identified in its proposal and how it will meet the goals,

(2) How it will utilize Small Businesses and Non-traditional Small Businesses (NTSB), The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s detailed plan to incorporate the use of

NTSBs and its plan to assist the NTSBs to become Government contractors (SAM

ATTACHMENT 2

registration, RFP process, intricacies of Government contracting, applicable regulations, points of contact, etc.)

How it will allocate tasks to SBs and NTSBs; and

(3)The realism of the proposal meeting the minimum Small Business subcontracting goals referenced in paragraph 2.1.5.

The Factor is met when the SBCD demonstrates an adequate approach to achieving the Small

Business goals, has a sound approach for utilizing SB and NTSB and adequately addresses a realistic approach to meeting the minimum Small Business subcontracting goals. Factor 2 will be rated as Acceptable/Unacceptable based upon the table below:

Adjectival Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of small business objectives.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet small business objectives.

2.3 Factor 3 - Technical Approach Submission, Technical/Scenario Solution/Oral Presentation

2.3.1 Technical includes Approach and Scenario Solution

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s written technical approach to the PWS tasks and scenario. Offerors’ proposals shall demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of the nature and scope of work required. Offeror’s written technical approach is broken into two parts.

2.3.2 Technical Approach: Offeror’s written submission shall adequately detail the technical approach to meet all the PWS tasks. This aspect is met when the Offeror’s proposal demonstrates a comprehensive technical approach that meets or exceeds the PWS tasks.

2.3.3 Technical Scenario: Offeror’s proposal shall detail an adequate approach to its proposed strategy, methodology, findings, and recommendations to the technical scenario.

This aspect is met when the Offeror’s proposal adequately addresses scenario objectives and demonstrates ability to successfully perform scenario objectives.

2.3.4 Oral Presentations: Offeror’s oral presentation shall cover the proposed strategic approach, methodology, and understanding of the PWS tasks and scenario as well as any significant findings and recommendations. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s use of industry best practices as well as the Offeror’s proposed outcomes, challenges, assumptions, and alignment (if any) to DoD Enterprise Standards. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s ability to demonstrate and defend its strategy and the strategy’s realism based on the data provided to support its outcomes and recommendation(s). Technical

Capability will be evaluated in accordance with Table 3 based on the Offeror’s solution to the Government provided technical scenario. Offerors shall provide an oral presentation provided by the key personnel that developed the solution and the program manager which shall be employed on any contract awarded. This presentation shall be used to explicate the scenario solution. The Government may ask questions to better understand the scenario

ATTACHMENT 2

solution. The oral presentation is not an opportunity for the offeror to change its proposal.

This aspect is met when the Offeror’s proposal/oral presentation adequately addresses scenario objectives and demonstrates ability to successfully perform scenario objectives.

Factor 3 will receive one of the Technical/Risk ratings described Table 3 below.

– Technical/Risk Rating (Table 3)

Color Adjectival Rating Description

Blue

Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.