Attachment 2 - Evaluation Factors.pdf

Attachment 2

FA8601-25-R-0008

ADDENDUM 52.212-2 – EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1. The Government will use FAR Part 12.602 Streamlined Evaluation of Offers vs. FAR 15.3 Source Selection to evaluate offers submitted in response to the solicitation. The factors that shall be used to evaluate proposals are Technical Capability and Price, as expounded below. All evaluation factors are equal in importance; however, a proposal is unawardable at any price if, after final evaluation, the Technical factor receives a rating of “Unacceptable.” The evaluation does not permit tradeoffs between price and non-price factors. Award shall be made to the responsible offeror who submits a proposal that

(1) conforms to the requirements of the solicitation; (2) that receives a rating of “Acceptable” on the Technical evaluation factor; and (3) that submits the proposal with the lowest Total Evaluated Price (TEP), provided that the TEP is not unbalanced and is fair and reasonable. The Government reserves the right to award no contract at all depending upon (1) the quality of proposals received and (2) the fair and reasonableness of the pricing of proposals received

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable

Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirement of the solicitation.

2. TECHNICAL CAPABILITY:

a. A decision on the technical acceptability of each offeror’s Technical Capability Proposal shall be made. Each proposal will be assigned a rating of Acceptable or Unacceptable.

b. Each offeror must show evidence of a capability to provide the mandatory requirements set forth in the Performance Work Statement (PWSs) and elsewhere in this solicitation. A technical review team composed of key Government personnel shall use their technical skills, knowledge and experience to thoroughly review the adequacy of the proposals. In evaluating the Mission Capability Proposal, the Government shall use the following evaluation criteria:

(1) Compliance with the requirements of the PWSs and this entire solicitation.

(2) Understanding of the requirements of the PWSs and this entire solicitation.

(3) Compliance and understanding of the requirements of the PWS as applied specifically to each factor/sub-factor listed below.

c. The following specific factors and sub-factors shall be evaluated in the Technical Capability Proposal. Any factor or sub-factor determined unacceptable shall render the entire Technical Capability Proposal as unacceptable. Upon final determination that a proposal is unacceptable, the Contracting Officer (CO) shall promptly notify the firm submitting the proposal that it shall not be considered for award and shall indicate in general terms the basis for the determination.

d. Technical Capability Evaluation Factors and Sub Factors are as follows:

FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL

Sub-factor 1 – Quality Control Plan (QCP) (PWS Paragraph 8.1)

Description: The Government will evaluate this sub-factor based upon the information contained in the offeror’s quality control plan submitted in accordance with the instructions provided in 52.212-1 and information contained the PWS.

Measure of Merit: The sub-factor is met when the offeror submits a quality control plan that is comprehensive and executable describing a sound approach and detailing all of the following:

1. Identification of personnel responsible for the QCP

2. Identification of your system for inspecting your own performance

3. A description of the types and frequencies of inspections you will conduct and identification of who will be conducting the inspections

4. A description of how you will provide quality workmanship and continual process improvement.

5. A description of how keys will be controlled.

6. A description of the methods, processes, procedures, and safeguards you will use to prevent deficiencies from occurring and how you will prevent recurrences.

7. A description of how inspections will be documented to include a sample inspection record for each type of inspection to be conducted.

Sub-factor 2 – Administration/Office support (PWS Paragraph 1.1)

Description: The Government will evaluate this sub-factor based upon the offeror’s ability to provide administration/office support requirements submitted in accordance with the instructions provided in 52.212-1 and information contained the PWS.

Measure of Merit: The sub-factor is met when the offeror submits a detailed description of how they will provide all administration/office support for the life of this contract to include functions such as invoicing and reporting as mentioned in PWS para 1.1.

Sub-factor 3 – Maintenance Control Plan (MCP) (PWS Paragraph 4.2 and 4.3)

Description: The Government will evaluate this sub-factor based upon the offeror’s ability to provide a detailed MCP in accordance with the instructions provided in 52.212-1 and the requirements of the PWS.

Measure of Merit: The sub-factor is met when the offeror submits a comprehensive draft MCP describing a sound approach and detailing all of the following for the life of this contract:

1. A description of required inspections, timelines for inspections, and maintenance to be performed.

2. A description for creating and maintaining a MCP to ensure reliable and continuous safe operation of all VTE.

3. Sample computer-generated reports of inspections.

Sub-factor 4 – Repair Service calls (PWS Paragraph 5.1 and 5.2)

Description: The Government will evaluate this sub-factor based upon the offeror’s ability to provide service calls (routine and emergency) under the full maintenance service agreement at no additional charge to the government IAW the PWS.

Measure of Merit: This subfactor is met when the offeror provides a detailed description of how you will achieve successful completion of all service calls within the specified time frames in the PWS paragraphs 5.1 and 5.2.

Sub-factor 5 - Prior Experience

Description: The Government will evaluate this sub-factor based upon the offeror clearly demonstrating relative experience performed within five years of the issue date of the solicitation.

Measure of Merit: This sub-factor is met when the offeror clearly demonstrates relative experience for a minimum of two relevant VTE maintenance contracts performed within five years of the issue date of the solicitation, with the following qualifiers for each job:

1. Performing maintenance and repair of VTE systems.

2. Maintaining and following a schedule for routine maintenance

3. Experience responding to emergency service calls for repair

For each relevant contract provided, the offeror provides the following administrative data:

1. Company/Division Name

2. Program Title

3. Contracting Agency

4. Contract Number

5. Type of Contract (Fixed Price)

6. Dates Performed

7. Contract Value (including any option years)

FACTOR 2 - PRICE

Price proposals shall be evaluated for (1) completeness, (2) unbalanced pricing, (3) fair and reasonableness, and (4) Total Evaluated Price (TEP).

(1) Completeness: The Government shall review the pricing submissions for completeness and compliance with solicitation clause FAR 52.212-1 and Appendix 1—Additional Instructions to Offerors.

(2) Unbalanced Pricing: The Government shall analyze each proposal to determine whether they are unbalanced with respect to prices proposed on different Contract Line Items Numbers (CLIN) for the same or similar services and/or supplies in the same or similar quantities and with respect to option pricing. An offer may be rejected if the Contracting Officer (CO) determines that the option prices are significantly unbalanced or that otherwise unbalanced pricing poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

(3) Fair and Reasonableness: The offeror’s Price proposal shall be evaluated using price analysis in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(b) or DFARS 215.371-3 if only one offer is received.

(4) Total Evaluated Price (TEP): The Government shall add the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement to arrive at a total evaluated price (TEP). The TEP will be calculated as: The sum of the extended prices (unit quantity multiplied by unit price) for CLINs 0001 through 0004 for the base performance period and option periods I through IV., The Government shall utilize the offeror’s proposed price for option period IV to evaluate the 6 month extension that may be issued under FAR 52.217-8 Option to Extend Services.

The spreadsheet below illustrates calculation of a proposal’s TEP using the methodology described above. The spreadsheet is provided for illustration purposes only. Prices reflected in the spreadsheet are notional and in no way reflect the actual value of the requirement or an actual evaluation of proposed prices submitted in response to this solicitation or any other solicitation for the same or similar requirements.

Period of Performance POP Length CLIN (Example)

Notional Proposed Price (Example)

Base – Full Service VTE Maintenance and Repair

12 Months 0001 $25,000.00

Base – Over and Above 1 Lot 0002 Not Priced Option I - Full Service VTE Maintenance and Repair

12 Months 1001 $30,000.00

Option I - Over and Above 1 Lot 1002 Not Priced Option II - Full Service VTE Maintenance and Repair

12 Months 2001 $35,000.00

Option II - Over and Above 1 Lot 2002 Not Priced Option III - Full Service VTE Maintenance and Repair

12 Months 3001 $40,000.00

Option III - Over and Above 1 Lot 3002 Not Priced Option IV - Full Service VTE Maintenance and Repair

12 Months 4001 $45,000.00

Option IV - Over and Above 1 Lot 4002 Not Priced Total Proposed Price for Base Period & Options I through IV $350,000.00 Evaluated Value of Maximum 6-Month Option to Extend Services

IAW FAR 52.217-8 $50,000.00

Total Evaluated Price $400,000.00

4. EVALUATION PROCESS

(a) The Government shall initiate concurrent evaluation of all evaluation factors on all proposals. The Government shall consider, throughout the evaluation, the "correction potential" of a proposal including whether any proposal deficiency can be rectified and whether any uncertainty can be resolved. The judgment of such "correction potential" is within the sole discretion of the Government.

(b) If pursuant to initial evaluation, the Government rates the Technical factor as

“Unacceptable” or if the Government determines that there is some other deficiency or uncertainty relative to an offeror’s proposal, and in the Government’s judgment, the deficiency is rectifiable or the uncertainty is resolvable; the Contracting Officer (CO) may open discussions and may continue discussions as long as, in the Government’s judgment, the deficiency is rectifiable or the uncertainty is resolvable.

(c) For the purpose of conducting discussions, if the Government rates the Technical factor as “Unacceptable” or if the Government determines that there is some other deficiency or uncertainty relative to an offeror’s proposal, the entire proposal shall be rated “Unacceptable.” At the conclusion of discussions, if the Technical factor is rated “Unacceptable” or if any deficiency or uncertainty relative to the proposal has not been unresolved, evaluation of that proposal shall be considered final. The entire proposal shall be rated “Unacceptable” and no further consideration shall be given to that proposal for award.

(d) For the purpose of award without discussions, if pursuant to initial evaluation, the

Government rates the Technical factor as “Unacceptable” or if the Government determines that there is some other deficiency or uncertainty relative to an offeror’s proposal, notwithstanding that any deficiency may be rectifiable or any uncertainty may be resolvable, the entire proposal shall be rated “Unacceptable,” the initial evaluation will be the final evaluation, and no further consideration will be given to that proposal for award.

(e) The Government reserves the right to award without discussions.

A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer's specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.