Attachment 2- Evaluation_Factors_for_Award.pdf

ATTACHMENT 2

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1.0 GENERAL

This Combined Synopsis/Solicitation is an Unrestricted Procurement under NAICS 325510. The Government intends to award a Single Award, Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) contract. The Government intends to award a contract based upon a lowest price technically acceptable source selection in which competing offerors' technical proposal will be evaluated on an acceptable/unacceptable basis as described below in paragraph 3.0 EVALUATION FACTORS. All technically acceptable offers shall be treated equally except for their prices.

2.0 OFFER

The following conditions must be met in order to be eligible for award:

(a) The proposal must comply in all material respects with the requirements of the law, regulation and conditions set forth in this solicitation and must meet all material solicitation requirements.

(b) Proposals must manifest the offeror’s assent, without exception or imposition of condition(s), to the terms and conditions of this solicitation, including attachments and documents incorporated by reference, and include material information required by the solicitation. Proposals that take exception to any of the terms and conditions of the solicitation, impose additional conditions, or omit material information required by this solicitation, will be considered unacceptable and therefore ineligible for contract award.

(c) Award will only be made to an offeror that has no organizational conflict of interest (OCI) as defined in FAR 9.5 or that the Government determines has provided a satisfactory mitigation plan in accordance with L-209- H009 herein. Offerors are advised that technical proposals may be evaluated without consideration of any proposed Subcontractor which is deemed to have an OCI and for which an unsatisfactory mitigation plan has been proposed.

An offeror that fails to identify a potential OCI or does not submit an OCI mitigation plan with their proposal shall not be considered for award.

(d) Award will only be made to an offeror determined by the Contracting Officer to be responsible in accordance with the standards contained in FAR 9.104-1.

3.0 EVALUATION FACTORS

The Government will evaluate each offeror’s proposal in accordance with the factors contained in Attachment 1 and listed below to determine the awardee. A proposal receiving an overall rating of Unacceptable in technical approach, no confidence in past performance, or if the price is considered unreasonable, will render it ineligible for award, regardless of the ratings received for the remaining evaluation factors.

FACTORS SUBFACTORS

1. Technical Approach (None)

2. Past Performance (None)

3. Price (None)

3.1 DESCRIPTION OF EVALUATION FACTORS

3.1.1 TECHNICAL APPROACH. (FACTOR 1)

The Government shall evaluate each offeror’s technical approach proposal to meet the minimum requirements to be considered technically acceptable submitted in accordance with Attachment 1, Paragraph 3.0 Technical Approach.

All aspects of the Offeror’s written technical proposal must be technically acceptable. Technical proposals will be rated Acceptable or Unacceptable in accordance with the rating table below entitled “Technical Ratings.”

A finding of Unacceptable for any factor, including but not limited to failure to submit requested documents or information shall render the Technical proposal as well as the entire proposal, as Unacceptable. All Unacceptable proposals will not be further evaluated.

3.1.2 PAST PERFORMANCE. (FACTOR 2)

Past performance is a measure of the degree to which the offeror and its subcontractors satisfied its customers in previous recent and relevant contracts and complied with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. The Government will evaluate past performance by determining recency and relevancy of the offeror’s and subcontractors’ recent past performance and by conducting a performance confidence assessment. “Recent performance” includes efforts within the past three (3) years, from proposal submittal date. “Relevant performance” includes contractual efforts to provide same or similar support services. Similar scope and complexity means having performed most of the types of support efforts identified in the PWS. Past Performance references that reflect projects with a similar scope and complexity to efforts described in this solicitation will be considered to have greater importance in the evaluation of this Factor. “Quality” means how well the offeror performed on past contracts. The Government may contact each offeror’s customers to inquire about overall management efficiency, work quality, and record of forecasting and controlling direct and indirect costs.

The Government’s evaluation will take into account relevant information submitted by each offeror as part of its proposal including the Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment 4), if submitted.

The Government may use other information available from Government sources, to evaluate an offeror’s or subcontractors’ past performance. The Government may also consider past performance information obtained from sources other than those identified by the offeror or subcontractors, including, but not limited to, federal, state, and local Government agencies, Better Business Bureaus, published media and electronic databases, the Government’s Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) data base, and/or personal knowledge. The Government reserves the right to limit or expand the number of references it decides to contact and to contact other references than those provided by the offeror or subcontractors.

In determining the relevancy of past performance data, the following levels of relevancy as shown below in Table 1 will be used:

PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY RATINGS

Table 1

PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY RATING

Rating Definition

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts. The following levels of assessment will be used for each offeror’s past performance as shown below in Table 2:

PAST PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS

Table 2

PAST PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT

Rating Description

Acceptable Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Unacceptable Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Note: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

3.1.3 PRICE. (FACTOR 3)

The Government will evaluate the total proposed price of Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) 0001 and 0002 for reasonableness in accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(1) and FAR Subpart 15.4.

3.2 APPLICATION OF FACTORS

3.2.1 GENERAL

The following conditions must be met in order to be eligible for award:

(a) The Government will evaluate each offeror’s proposal in accordance with the factors contained in Attachment 1 to determine the awardee.

(b) The proposal must comply in all material respects with the requirements of the law, regulation and conditions set forth in this solicitation.

(c) The award decision will be determined based on the Government’s evaluation of each offeror’s complete proposal against the aforementioned evaluation factors.

(d) Offerors proposals shall be valid for 60 days.