Attachment 4 - Technical Evaluation Worksheet.docx

M00264-25-Q-0057 Attachment 4 – Technical Evaluation Worksheet

TECHNICAL EVALUATION WORKSHEET

Selected Instructions from FAR 52.212-1 Addendum- Instructions to Quoters:

Failure to adhere to the page limitations may result in a quoter not being found acceptable. Since the total page limit for Volume II is 40 pages, all pages after the first 40 pages will be discarded and will NOT be reviewed during the evaluation. All documents to make up this volume are included in the page count, to include but not limited to cover pages and index pages.

Quoters shall submit a quote that clearly and concisely describes its response to the requirements of the solicitation. Use of general or vague statements such as “standard procedures will be used” will not satisfy this requirement. Additionally, simply regurgitating the SOW is not sufficient and will not satisfy this requirement. Mere statements that state a quoter will do something without demonstrating how, are insufficient. Quotes shall demonstrate in detail how it will meet the required SOW requirements. Unnecessary elaboration or presentations beyond what is sufficient to present a complete and effective solution are not desired and may be construed as a lack of understanding of the requirement.

The quote must clearly demonstrate understanding of the technical requirements of the SOW.

The quote must describe the COTS solution and how it meets each of the Technical Requirements of identified in the SOW:

o Technical Acceptability Criteria o Dashboard or User Interface Functionality o Discovery and Workflow Functionality o Reports/Reporting o Alert Remediation and Response Time o Service Level Agreement (SLA)

Failure to describe how the COTS solution meets each of the technical requirements within the SOW will result in the quote not being technically acceptable and will not be considered for award.

Evaluation of Factor 1: Technical

The quoter must demonstrate its ability to meet each criteria under the Technical Requirements of the SOW, and how the proposed COTS solution will allow the contractor to meet or exceed all SOW Technical Requirements.

The table below document’s the evaluator’s finding that the quote has (“Yes”) or has not (“No”) demonstrated the quoter’s ability to meet each of the corresponding criteria under the Technical Requirements of the SOW. A “Yes” for every criteria means the quoter has demonstrated that its proposed COTS solution will allow it to meet or exceed all SOW Technical Requirements.

Table 1

Yes/No

1) Technical Acceptability Criteria

a. The capability/solution shall be a fully functional COTS item available by subscription, software as a service or remote license with ready to begin acceptance and enrollment of user profiles and enable required feature/function upon award

b. The capability/solution must have the ability to query at a minimum, but not limited to the social media sites in Table 1 of the SOW. The capability/solution shall be responsible for any agreements with the required social media organizations that will enable the capability to execute and perform successfully.

1(a): _______

1(b): _______

2) Dashboard/User Interface Functionality

a. The capability must have the functionality to view all identified accounts in one location;

b. Filtering functionality of profiles by last name, first name, rank, date, social media venue;

c. The capability must have drill down functionality for individual incident or alert by entity name, date, social media venue, picture, and malicious links;

d. The solution shall be capable of assigning risk ratings of entity records;

e. The solution shall display malicious link or virus attributes data associate to discovered alerts;

f. The capability must provide hash tagging search, trending, and analysis capability (discovery of malicious activity);

g. The capability shall support Discovery that includes name, rank, and picture of discoverable asset; and.

h. Bulk reporting buttons and features.

2(a): _______

2(b): _______

2(c): _______

2(d): _______

2(e): _______

2(f): _______

2(g): _______

2(h): _______

3) Discovery and Workflow Functionality

a. Capability must have functional workflow for removal and remediation, of discovered entities;

b. Capability must have functional whitelisting procedure to convert false positives into whitelisted accounts;

c. Capability must have functional processes/procedures for identifying hashtag trending topics regarding the USMC with malicious intent; and

d. Capability shall have functional ability to individually identify discovered profiles containing malware, malicious links, and redirects.

3(a): _______

3(b): _______

3(c): _______

3(d): _______

4) Reports/Reporting

a. Capability must have a functional, highly flexible customizable reporting feature allowing the manipulation of field data to be excluded or included in each report (e.g., time and date stamps of found alerts, priority, comparable risk rating criteria, malware indication, last name, rank, first name, social media site, status including but not limited to closed, open, whitelist, reported for deletion etc.);

b. Capability shall have functional customizable executive level reports, exportable by the customer in Adobe Acrobat .pdf and Microsoft Excel .xls formats containing desired/required information (e.g., last name, rank, social media site, risk level);

c. Capability must have trending of analytical data available for further analysis by the customer. i.e.: bar charts, graphs, line charts, showing date/site/alert identifying trending and analysis of data; and

d. Capability must have bulk reporting buttons and features automating the submission for identified “impersonators”.

4(a): _______

4(b): _______

4(c): _______

4(d): _______

5) Alert Remediation and Response Time

a. Capability must include functional workflow process(es) to remediate alerts once government personnel complete human review and categorize alert profile as fake, fraudulent, or malicious. Remediation for the purposes of this document means that the alerted profile has been deleted by the social media site;

b. Capability response time for reported accounts is 6 weeks from the first day of discovery or report by customer;

c. Capability provides via the dashboard on demand status of the remediation request and interaction with respective site administrators at any given time between discovery/reporting and complete deletion;

d. Capability must have business agreements, processes, and relationships in place for fictitious account removal from social media sites, including but not limited to those in Table 1; and

5(a): _______

5(b): _______

5(c): _______

5(d): _______

6) Service Level Agreement (SLA)

a. Technical Helpdesk Support must be provided to government users during business hours of 0800 - 1700 (ET) Monday – Friday

b. Response to inquiries, requests for reports, and specific data, charts, and graphs provided within four business hours following stamped time of initiator request;

c. Shall have system uptime of 99.97%;

d. Shall provide written notification no less than 2 weeks prior to any scheduled maintenance or planned outages that may degrade or interrupt service or user access to the system; and

e. The capability shall be accessible to the Government user 24 hours per day, every calendar day per year.

6(a): _______

6(b): _______

6(c): _______

6(d): _______

6(e): _______

Technical Factor

Any quote that does not meet every specification/criteria in Table 1 above will be deemed technically “unacceptable,” will not be considered further, and, therefore, will not be included in the comparative analysis.

If the quote is deemed “acceptable” for the review of technical specifications under Table 1 above, the evaluator(s) shall identify added benefits within the quote: