Attachment 4 - Addendum 52-212-2.pdf

Attachment 4

FA486126R0022

21 Jul 2026 Addendum 52.212-2 Evaluation Factors for Award

52.212-2, Evaluation – Commercial Items (NOV 2021)

1. Purpose: The solicitation requirements include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by this solicitation. Unless specifically identified in your proposal, by submission of its offer the Offeror accedes to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in a proposal being determined ineligible for award.

This contract will be awarded as Firm Fixed Price (FFP). It is the Government's intent to evaluate proposals and award a contract in accordance with (IAW) FAR 13.106. FAR Part 15 based evaluations will NOT be used for this acquisition. The initial proposal should contain your best terms; however, the Government reserves the right to conduct interchanges if determined necessary by the Contracting Officer to resolve issues such as technical or price, or deal with contract documentation including any other matter in the evaluation process. The Government reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity to revise proposals. 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.

2. PRICE EVALUATION

a. Price proposals will be evaluated for (1) completeness, (2) unbalanced pricing, (3) fair and reasonableness, and (4) Total Evaluated Price (TEP). Offerors whose price is determined to be incomplete, significantly unbalanced of contains otherwise unbalanced pricing that poses an unacceptable risk to the Government, or unreasonable will not be considered for award.

i. Completeness: The Government will review the pricing submissions for completeness and compliance with solicitation clause FAR 52.212-1 and Attachment 4 - Instructions to Offerors.

ii. Unbalanced Pricing: The Government will analyze each proposal to determine whether they are unbalanced with respect to prices proposed on different Contract Line Items Numbers (CLINs) 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 the option prices are significantly unbalanced or otherwise unbalanced pricing poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

iii. Fair and Reasonableness: IAW FAR 13.106-2(b)(1), the offeror’s Price proposal will be evaluated using one or more of the techniques defined in FAR 15.404, Proposal Analysis, in order to determine if it is reasonable. For a price to be reasonable, it must represent a price to the Government that a prudent person would pay in the conduct of competitive business. Normally, price reasonableness is established through price analysis techniques as described in FAR 15.404-1(b), Price analysis for commercial and non-commercial items. For additional information, reference FAR 31.201-3, Determining Reasonableness.

iv. Total Evaluated Price (TEP): The Government will add the total price for all ordering periods, as outlined in Attachment 2 – Custodial Services Price Sheet to arrive at a total evaluated price (TEP). The TEP will be calculated as:

1. The sum of the extended prices (unit quantity multiplied by unit price) for CLINs 0001 through 0004 for all five ordering periods and/or option years; and

21 Jul 2026

2. To account for the maximum six (6) month extension possible under the clause at FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services, the Government will use the sum of the proposed prices of the final ordering period (CLINs 0001 through 0004), prorate it to a six (6) month value, and add that amount to the sum of all CLINs (Ordering Periods 1 - 5).

a. Please note that this calculation is used for evaluation purposes only. After award, the Government reserves the right to exercise the Option to Extend Services at any time allowed by 52.217-8.

b. Should the Government utilize 52.217-8 prior to the final ordering period, the prices will be determined by the next ordering period. For example, should 52.217-8 be utilized after the second ordering period, the third ordering periods prices shall be utilized.

3. TECHNICAL EVALUATION

a. Technical acceptability will be determined on an Acceptable or Unacceptable basis.

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

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

b. The offeror must show evidence of the capability to provide the mandatory requirements set forth in the Performance Work Statement (PWS)/Statement of Objective (SOO) and elsewhere in the is solicitation. A technical review team composed of key Government personnel will use their technical skills, knowledge and experience to thoroughly review the adequacy of the proposals. In evaluating the Technical Proposal, the Government will use the following evaluation criteria:

i. Compliance with the requirements of the Performance Work Statement (PWS)/Statement of Objective (SOO) and this entire solicitation.

ii. Understanding of the requirement of the PWS and this entire solicitation.

iii. Compliance and understanding of the requirement of the PWS applied specifically to each subfactor listed below.

c. The following specific subfactors will be evaluated in the Technical Proposal for technical acceptability:

i. SUBFACTOR 1: Quality Control Plan (QCP) (PWS/SOO)

Standard: The offeror shall submit a quality control plan that addresses Performance Work Statement/Statement of Objective (Attachment 1) at both the Service Summary area identified in Section 2 and the Air Force Standards identified by Appendix A. At a minimum, the plan shall specifically address the processes and procedures the contractor will use to:

(1) track compliance with the Safety and Health Plan, (2) correct violations, and (3) monitor and control the inspection system; deficiency prevention; and inspection record.

The standard has been met when: the QCP addresses the offeror’s

21 Jul 2026 strategy for meeting the requirements of the PWS/SOO and aforementioned appendix.

ii. SUBFACTOR 2: Scheduling

Standard: The contractor shall submit an annual schedule for services identifying facilities by building number in numerical order. This schedule shall demonstrate an understanding of services identified in the PWS, including an appropriate staffing plan in relation to the required services.

The standard has been met when: the offeror provides a work schedule ensuring timely performance of required services reflecting building numbers, level of service, and completion time, with a sufficient number of employees to meet all requirements outlined in the PWS/SOO.

iii. SUBFACTOR 3: Equipment and Supplies

Standard: The offeror shall provide a detailed list of all equipment and supplies used to fulfill contract requirements listed in the PWS/SOO.

The standard has been met when: the offeror submits a proposal including a complete list of the size, number, and type of equipment and supplies demonstrating an adequate understanding of the scope and size of service required in the PWS/SOO.

d. The above-mentioned technical subfactors will be evaluated in the Technical Proposal. Any subfactor judged unacceptable may render the entire Technical Capability Proposal unacceptable.

4. EVALUATION PROCESS

a. The Government intends to award one contract for this competitive, definitive type acquisition. Award will be made to the offeror who is deemed responsible IAW FAR 9.104 and who submits a proposal that (1) conforms to the requirements of the solicitation; (2) submits the proposal with the lowest Total Evaluated Price (TEP), provided that the TEP is not unbalanced and is fair and reasonable; and (3) receives a rating of “Acceptable” on the Technical Evaluation Factor.

b. The Government will 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.

c. The Government will first perform the price evaluation on all submitted offers and determine their TEP. The Government will then rank all proposals by the TEP, from lowest to highest.

d. Once the price evaluation is completed, the Government will begin the technical evaluation. If the government receives three or less initial proposals, all proposals will be evaluated for Technical Acceptability. If the Government receives more than three

21 Jul 2026 proposals, the Government will begin its technical evaluation with the offeror who has provided the lowest TEP. For the sake of efficiency, once a technically acceptable offer is identified, evaluations will cease. The Government reserves the right to evaluate additional proposals for Technical Acceptability if in the Government's best interest. If additional proposals are evaluated for Technical Acceptability, they will be selected in the order of their TEP, lowest to highest.

i. 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 will be rated “Unacceptable,” the initial evaluation will be the final evaluation, and no further consideration will be given to that proposal for award.

ii. 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.

iii. 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 will 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 will be considered final. The entire proposal will be rated “Unacceptable” and no further consideration will be given to that proposal for award.

e. The Government reserves the right to create a competitive range if it is in the best interest of the Government.