Attachment 2 - Evaluation Criteria PK Testing.pdf

TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

You are advised that an award will be made to the offeror whose proposal provides the best overall value to the Government. The technical factors combined are significantly more important than cost or price, however, the Government will not make an award at a significantly higher price to achieve only slightly superior performance. Price may become the most significant factor for award as quotes become more equal based on other factors.

The offeror’s technical proposal will be evaluated by NIH Program staff using the technical evaluation criteria identified below. You must submit information sufficient to evaluate your proposal based on the factors listed below. You are also advised and cautioned that your proposal will ONLY be evaluated on the information provided in the proposal.

You must provide information on any proposed subcontractors when addressing each of the evaluation factors.

Scored technical evaluation criteria are listed in the order of their relative importance with points assigned for evaluation purposes. The maximum total score possible is 100 points. The Other Evaluation Non-Scored Factor will be rated either acceptable or unacceptable.

1. Scored Technical Evaluation Factors (100 points)

a) Technical Approach (75 points)

• Suitability and feasibility of the proposed technical approach, methods and procedures for satisfying the requirements

• Demonstrated record of successfully performing similar work in the Statement of Work.

• Timelines for deliverables.

b) Management and Staffing Plan (25 points)

• Suitability of experience and ability to effectively conduct, manage, and coordinate the resources to ensure successful operation of the technical plan and carry out the proposed project.

2. Other Evaluation Non-Scored Factor: Live Vertebrate Animals Evaluation

As part of the overall technical evaluation of proposals, the reviewers will consider the acceptability of the offeror's description in the VAS of the technical proposal. The discussion of all criteria will be addressed and evaluated. Based on the evaluation of this Section, the VAS may be rated "unacceptable" (i.e., concerns are identified as to the adequacy of the description addressing each of the criteria, or no discussion can be found regarding the VAS), or "acceptable." If the reviewers find that this Section of the technical proposal is "unacceptable" they will provide a narrative supporting their findings.

3. Price Evaluation

Each Quoter’s price 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 13.106-3.

Quoters must provide a total time and materials price (inclusive of all options) for completion of the work described in the SOW to be considered for award.