Attachment 2 EVALUATION FACTORS AND BASIS FOR AWARD.pdf

EVALUATION CRITERIA

U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Prisons FCI Three Rivers, Texas Project No. 24Z5AU6 Replace Generators 1 & 2, Electrical Infrastructure, and Transformer

M.1 Basis for Award

The Government intends to award a single firm-fixed-price contract to the responsible offeror whose proposal represents the Best Value to the Government using a tradeoff source selection process in accordance with FAR 15.101-1.

Award will be based on an integrated assessment of the offeror's technical approach, relevant experience, past performance, and price.

The Government may award to other than the lowest-priced offeror when the benefits associated with a higher-rated technical proposal justify the additional cost.

The non-price evaluation factors, when combined, are significantly more important than price. However, price will become increasingly important as competing proposals become more technically equal.

M.2 Evaluation Factors

Proposals will be evaluated using the following factors, listed in descending order of importance:

Factor 1 – Technical Approach and Project Execution

The Government will evaluate the offeror's understanding of the Statement of Work, construction drawings, and project specifications, and the proposed approach to replacing the two existing backup generators, transformers, and associated electrical infrastructure.

The evaluation will consider the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed installation methodology, equipment integration, testing, commissioning, and construction phasing.

Particular consideration will be given to the offeror's approach to minimizing electrical outages, maintaining institutional operations, coordinating planned disruptions, and providing temporary electrical power when outages exceed 24 hours.

Factor 2 – Relevant Experience and Technical Capability

The Government will evaluate the extent to which the offeror demonstrates successful experience performing projects similar in size, scope, and complexity.

Consideration will include experience with generator replacement, transformer installation, electrical distribution systems, and construction within operational facilities.

The Government will also evaluate the offeror's demonstrated capability to provide qualified personnel, specialized equipment, and necessary resources to successfully complete the project.

Factor 3 – Project Management, Safety, and Security

The Government will evaluate the effectiveness of the offeror's proposed project management approach, including scheduling, coordination, quality control, and compliance with institutional security requirements.

Consideration will include the offeror's approach to personnel access, security clearances, tool accountability, material storage, construction safety, electrical safety procedures, and coordination with institutional personnel.

The Government will assess whether the proposed approach adequately addresses the unique challenges of performing construction within an operational federal correctional institution.

Factor 4 – Past Performance

The Government will evaluate the offeror's record of performance on recent and relevant contracts involving similar construction or electrical infrastructure projects.

Consideration will include quality of work, schedule adherence, cost control, management effectiveness, safety, and customer satisfaction.

The Government may consider information provided by the offeror and information obtained from other available sources, including the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS).

Offerors without a record of relevant past performance, or for whom past performance information is unavailable, will receive a Neutral rating and will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on that basis.

Factor 5 – Price

The Government will evaluate the total proposed firm-fixed-price for completing all work required under the solicitation.

Price will be evaluated for reasonableness and completeness, including the costs associated with labor, materials, equipment, installation, testing, commissioning, training, and all other required services.

Price will not receive an adjectival technical rating but will be considered in the overall Best Value determination.

M.3 Technical Evaluation Methodology

The Government will evaluate technical proposals based on their demonstrated strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, deficiencies, and associated performance risks.

The evaluation will consider the extent to which each proposal meets or exceeds the solicitation requirements and provides meaningful benefits to the Government.

Technical ratings will be assigned using the following scale:

Rating Description

Outstanding Proposal demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements, with multiple strengths and low risk of unsuccessful performance.

Good Proposal demonstrates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements, with at least one strength and low to moderate risk of unsuccessful performance.

Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements and demonstrates an adequate approach with no material deficiencies.

Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements or presents high performance risk.

Unacceptable Proposal fails to meet material solicitation requirements and is not awardable without revision.

Past Performance will be evaluated separately using the ratings of Substantial Confidence, Satisfactory Confidence, Neutral Confidence, Limited Confidence, or No Confidence.

M.4 Best Value Tradeoff Determination

The Government will conduct a comparative assessment of proposals based on the evaluation factors identified above.

The Government reserves the right to select a higher-priced proposal when the technical advantages, relevant experience, and past performance provide sufficient benefit to justify the additional cost.

Conversely, the Government may select a lower-priced proposal when the technical differences between competing proposals do not warrant payment of a price premium.

The final award decision will be based on the proposal offering the most advantageous combination of technical merit, performance confidence, and price to the Government.

M.5 Award Determination

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and make award without discussions. Offerors are therefore encouraged to submit their best technical and price proposals initially.

The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined necessary by the Contracting Officer.

Award will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements and represents the Best Value to the Government, considering all stated evaluation factors.

The Government is not obligated to award to the lowest-priced offeror or the offeror receiving the highest technical rating.