Attachment 5 - Addendum to 52.212-2v2.pdf

Attachment 5

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-2: Evaluation—Commercial Products and Commercial Services (Nov 2021)

Best value is expected to result from selection of the lowest evaluated price from a contractor with acceptable past performance. By submission of its quote, the vendor accepts all solicitation requirements, including all technical requirements and terms and conditions. Failure to conform to solicitation requirements may result in a quote being determined not awardable without further evaluation. The evaluation criteria are detailed below:

VOLUME 1 –PRICE

Prices will be evaluated on the Total Evaluated Price (TEP). TEP shall be the total of all years from Attachment 2 –Price Schedule, plus 50% of the final ordering period pricing. The additional 50% represents the total cumulative price of 52.217-8. Should FAR clause 52.217-8 be exercised in the future, the price will be pro-rated to the actual performance required. Before a contract may be awarded, the contracting officer must determine the price fair and reasonable per

FAR 13.106-3.

VOLUME II – PAST PERFORMANCE

The past performance evaluation results is an assessment of the vendor’s probability of meeting the minimum past performance solicitation requirements. This assessment is based on the vendor’s record of relevant and recent past performance information that pertains to the services outlined in the solicitation requirements. Past performance, information will be gathered from PPIRS and any other reasonable source that 97 CONS can obtain (surveys, telephone interview, etc.).

Recency and relevancy –

a) Recent past performance is defined as efforts where performance is ongoing or performed within the past three (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation.

b) Relevant past performance includes performance of efforts involving requirements that are similar or greater in scope and complexity than the effort described in this solicitation. Past performance that fails either of these conditions will be determined not relevant.

Each vendor’s recent and relevant past performance effort will be evaluated and the vendor will be assigned a single overall rating of “acceptable” or “unacceptable” based on the vendors probability of meeting contract performance requirements.

Rating Descriptions –

a) “Acceptable” - Based on the vendor’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the vendor will successfully perform the required effort, or the vendor’s performance record is unknown.

b) “Unacceptable” - Based on the vendor’s performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the vendor will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

(End of addendum)