Attachment 4 - Technical Evaluation Criteria.pdf

Technical Evaluation Criteria

Tradeoffs The evaluation factors for this solicitation include technical factors (which encompass technical capability, relevant experience, project management, and past performance) and price.

Although technical factors are of paramount consideration, price is also important to the award decision. All evaluation factors other than price, when combined, are significantly more important than price.

The Government will issue an award to the respondent whose quote represents the best overall value. The Government is more concerned with obtaining superior technical performance than lowest price. However, the Government will not make an award at a significantly higher price to the Government to achieve only slightly superior performance. Price may become the most significant factor for award as quotes become more equal based on other factors.

The evaluation will be based on the demonstrated capabilities of each Quoter in relation to the Government’s requirement as described in the Statement of Work (SOW) and Request for Quotes (RFQ). The merits of each quote will be evaluated carefully. Quoters must submit information sufficient to evaluate their quotes based on the criteria described below.

Technical Factors

The technical factors below are listed in the relative order of importance.

Relative Order of Importance

Technical Factor

1 Factor 1: Technical Capability 2 Factor 2: Relevant Experience 3 Factor 3: Project Management 4 Factor 4: Past Performance

1. Technical Capability The appropriateness of the Quoter’s technical approach for performing the SOW requirements, including its facility’s specifications and location, personnel qualifications, equipment and materials, pickup/delivery capabilities, and off-hours accessibility in the event of an emergency

2. Relevant Experience The Quoter’s organizational experience with pick up, delivery, and storage of goods, including the percentage of its business comprised by warehouse storage and the number of years it has provided these services

3. Project Management The Quoter’s organizational structure and warehouse management, including security, property/casualty/liability insurance, inventory control, HVAC, lighting, fire protection, electrical and pest control

4. Past Performance Quoter shall identify at least three awards with the Federal Government and/or commercial customers that demonstrate recent and relevant past performance. Relevant is defined as work similar in complexity and magnitude to the work described in the

SOW.

Quoter shall include the following information in their past performance examples:

• Project title

• Description of the project

• Contract number

• Contract amount

• Government Agency/Organization

• Point of contact name, address, and phone number

• Current status, e.g., completed and/or if in progress, start and estimated completion dates

• A brief narrative of why you deem the reference to be relevant to this effort

Adjectival Ratings

The Government will evaluate quotes against the above Technical Factors using the following adjectival ratings:

Rating

Adjectival

Description

Blue

Exceptional

Greatly exceeds all minimum requirements of the criteria; has a high probability of success; contains no weaknesses or deficiencies.

Green

Good

Exceeds all the minimum requirements of the criteria; has an above average probability of success; contains no significant weaknesses and only minor, correctable weaknesses exist.

Yellow

Acceptable

Meets all the minimum requirements of the criteria; has an average probability of success; no significant weaknesses and any deficiencies can be readily corrected.

Orange

Marginal

Fails to meet one or more of the minimum requirements of the criteria; low probability of success; major weaknesses and/or significant number of deficiencies exist.

Red

Unacceptable

Fails to meet any of the minimum requirements of the criteria;

quote needs major revisions; very low probability of success.

Price Factor

Each Quoter’s price will be evaluated for reasonableness. For a price to be reasonable, it must represent a price to the government that a prudent person would pay when consideration is given to prices in the market. Normally, price reasonableness is established through adequate price competition, but may also be determined through price analysis techniques as described in FAR 13.106-3. Quoters must provide a total firm-fixed-price (inclusive of all options) for completion of the work described in the SOW to be considered for award.

Evaluation of Options

It is anticipated that any contract awarded from this solicitation will contain option periods. The Government will evaluate quotes for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that a quote is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

Award Selection

All timely and responsive quotes that fully comply with the solicitation instructions will be evaluated by the Government’s Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP).The business evaluation will be conducted by the Contracting Officer with the assistance of the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR). Afterwards, a “best value analysis” will be conducted, with award being made to the responsible Contractor whose quote is determined to be most advantageous to the Government, price and technical factors considered.