Attachment 2-Technical Evaluation Criteria-20-003939.pdf
PDF 122 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- NIMH-20-003939
About this file
This document summarizes a solicitation for expansion, differentiation, and validation services for neural progenitor cells derived from human induced pluripotent stem cells. The National Institute of Mental Health seeks these services from an established induced pluripotent stem cell laboratory equipped to expand, differentiate, and validate neural progenitor cell lines generated from subject induced pluripotent stem cell samples. Offerors should demonstrate understanding of requirements and outline strategies for database management and integration across platforms to support diverse laboratory information needs. Technical approach and past performance providing similar database services to researchers will be evaluated, with technical approach being the most important factor.
View the file
Other files
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Attachment 2 – Technical Evaluation Criteria
NIMH-20-003939
Evaluation Process
The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. Technical factors together shall be considered more important than price. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:
• Technical Approach
• Past Performance
• Price/Cost
The award will be made on a competitive best value basis, using the “tradeoff’ approach among price-cost and non-price-cost factors. The Government may elect to award to other than the lowest priced offeror, or other than the highest rated non-price proposal. In either case, a tradeoff will be conducted. The government reserves such right of flexibility in conducting the evaluation as necessary to assure an award with the contractor providing the best value to the government.
Technical Evaluation Criteria The factors are listed in the order of relative importance.
Factor 1: Technical Approach
The Contractor shall be evaluated for demonstrating an understanding of the requirements in accomplishing the statement of work. The offeror’s technical approach shall indicate compliance with the requirements as outlined in the statement of work. Proposals shall outline strategies for selecting, installing, troubleshooting, and optimizing database software capable of managing diverse types of laboratory information and integration across platforms.
Factor 2: Past Performance
The Contractor shall provide at least two (2) past performance references with knowledge of the contractor’s relevant skills and experience completed during the past three (3) years similar in size and scope to the requirements outlined in the attached Statement of Work. References shall include the following information:
a) Name and Address of Organization
b) Description of Contractor’s Responsibilities as they relate to this SOW
c) Contract Period of Performance
d) Contact Name and Title
e) Telephone Number
f) E-mail Address
Past Performance shall be evaluated for relevance to the current requirement. Documented successful past performance reflecting knowledge of NIH policies and programs, information security, IT infrastructure, and ability to provide supportive database services to a diverse team of researchers. In evaluating the past performance, the Government reserves the right to use data obtained from other sources as well as that provided in the proposal.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .