Attachment 5-Evaluation Factors Section L-M CSC-21501 Evaluation Factors.pdf

A. STANDARD FORM 1449. Submit the SF 1449 issued under this solicitation, with Blocks 10 (DUNS Number) and Blocks 14 through 20 properly filled-out by the Offeror. Include acknowledgment of any and all Amendments that may have been issued, either by: (1) listing them in Block 19 of the SF 1449, or (2) including copies of the Amendment document(s) (Standard Form 30) with Blocks 8 and 15 filled in and signed, or (3) including signed acknowledgment in the form of a separate letter that includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers.

NOTE: Failure to acknowledge any and all Amendments issued pursuant to this solicitation may be cause for rejection of your offer.

B. DOCUMENTATION OF TECHNICAL ACCEPTABILITY. Proposals received in response to this solicitation will be evaluated in accordance with procedures outlined in Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) Part 15.101-2 for the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) Offer. The following significant Evaluation Factors will be used as the basis for determining Factor 1: Technical Acceptability, Factor 2: Technical Qualifications of Proposed Staffing and Factor 3: Past Performance Acceptability.

NOTE: There is a realistic possibility that some offerors may choose to submit the same project as a qualifying example for both the past performance and the technical experience evaluation factors. This is not prohibited, but the supporting documentation must demonstrate that the submitted projects absolutely do comply with the specific minimal requirements, identified below, for each separate evaluation factor.

a. Evaluation factors and subfactors represent those specific characteristics that are tied to significant RFP requirements and objectives having an impact on the source selection decision and which are expected to be discriminators or are required by statute/ regulation. They are the uniform baseline against which each offeror’s proposal is evaluated, allowing the Government to make a best value determination. The evaluation factors and subfactors will be set forth in the solicitation in enough depth to communicate how requirements will be evaluated. The evaluation factors and subfactors will be the primary determinant of the detailed information requested in the solicitation’s instructions to offerors. If subfactors are used, they will be evaluated separately. The SSEB will establish the factors and subfactors to be evaluated on an “acceptable” or “unacceptable” basis. These factors and subfactors will identify the minimum requirements that are key to successful contract performance. In accordance with the referenced Source Selection Procedures, cost or price and the acceptability of the product or service described herein will be evaluated. In this LPTA acquisition, the following three factors will be evaluated.

Factor 1: Technical Capability Factor 2: Technical Qualifications of Proposed Staffing Factor 3: Past Performance

b. The SSEB will evaluate the Technical Capability (non-cost) factors on an acceptable/unacceptable basis. The solicitation will identify the minimum requirements that are key to successful contract performance. The Contractor must be rated Acceptable in all factors in order to be eligible for award. Details of the criteria to be evaluated under each factor are as follows:

Factor 1: Technical Capability: The term “technical,” as used herein, refers to non-price factors other than past performance. More than one “technical” factor can be used and titled to match the specific evaluation criteria appropriate for the RFP. The purpose of the technical factor is to assess whether the offeror’s proposal will satisfy the Government’s minimum requirements. The evaluation team will evaluate the offeror’s proposal against the minimum requirements established by the RFP to determine whether the proposal is acceptable or unacceptable, using the ratings in the table below.

Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method Adjectival Rating Description Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation

Factor 1: Technical Capability: To be Technically Acceptable the Contractor shall submit with its offer a Service Plan. The Service Plan shall clearly establish the scope of services to be conducted on the generators, HVAC and plumbing equipment located at DSCC Columbus. At a minimum, the contract management plan shall include all personnel to conduct services, the licenses and certifications for each individual, the methods and tools to be used, and a schedule identifying the days for each scheduled service.

The contractor shall identify all subcontractors that provide any services required under this contract.

Factor 2: Technical Qualifications of Proposed Staffing: To be Technically Acceptable, the Contractor shall submit the following with its offer:

The contractor shall provide sufficient documentation of the certifications, licenses, and specific experience of all technicians to work on the project. These qualifications shall demonstrate the ability of the technicians to manage, operate, and execute the quality assurance requirements for the services to be provided on the equipment identified in the PWS.

DOCUMENTS TO SUBMIT

The original and photocopied documents to be included in the envelope identified above consist of:

(A) The contractor shall provide all licenses required by the Local, State, and Federal Government for the work being conducted. Qualified technicians shall be factory certified.

(B) The contractor shall submit copies of any contingent contracts or subcontracts that provide any services required under this contract.

(C) The contractor shall provide sufficient documentation of the certifications, licenses, and specific experience for all Program Managers (Safety Manager, Project Manager, Quality Control Manager, etc.). All Program Managers are required to have a minimum of three years of experience executing the designated program requirements. Safety Manager(s) shall have an OSHA 30 hour course certification. Key personnel designated for these assignments must be designated by the principle in writing. Designees may perform multiple responsibilities.

The contractor and his/or his sub-contractor shall possess all licenses required by the Local, State, and Federal Government for the work being conducted within a specific trade. Failure to submit sufficient supporting documentation, in the contractor provided bid package, is grounds for not accepting an offer. These qualifications shall demonstrate the ability of the Contract Project Manager to manage, operate, and execute the quality assurance requirements for the maintenance of HVAC and plumbing systems for contracts.

(D) Administrative Assistant: These qualifications shall demonstrate the ability of the project Administrative Assistant to organize, schedule, and manage all routine & preventative maintenance services, Level 1 services, and Level 2 service requests to assure that a sufficient number of experienced, trained, and qualified personnel are available to perform all the services and tasks required by this Contract.

(E) HVAC Technician: Contractor shall provide sufficient documentation of the certifications, license, and specific experience of the project HVAC Technicians. These qualifications shall demonstrate the ability of the project HVAC Technician to manage, operate, and maintain the buildings and systems identified in this contract properly, safely, and economically.

(F) Maintenance Plumber: These qualifications shall demonstrate the ability of the project Maintenance Plumber to manage, operate, and maintain the buildings and systems identified in this contract properly, safely, and economically.

Factor 3: Past Performance: The past performance evaluation is an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the minimum past performance solicitation requirements. This assessment is based on the offeror’s record of relevant and recent past performance information that pertain to the products and/or services outlined in the solicitation requirements. Past performance shall be used as an evaluation factor within the LPTA process, unless waived by the PCO in accordance with FAR 15.304(c)(3)(iii). It shall be evaluated in accordance with FAR 15.305 and DFARS 215.305. However, the comparative assessment in FAR 15.305(a)(2)(i) does not apply. Therefore, past performance will be rated on an “acceptable” or “unacceptable” basis using the “Past Performance Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method” in the table at (c) below. In rating the past performance, the following will be considered:

(A) Recency & Relevancy: Past performance will be initially evaluated to determine whether the offeror’s present/past performance is recent, and relevant or not relevant to the effort to be acquired.

(B) Quality of Historical Contracts: Second, the past performance evaluation will determine how well the offeror performed on the prior contracts.

(C) Past Performance Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method:

Past Performance Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method Adjectival Rating Description Acceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown. (See note below)

Unacceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

NOTE: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)).

Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered “acceptable.”

(D) To be rated Acceptable, the Contractor shall submit at least one (1) but no more than five (5) previously awarded and completed contracts of similar size and scope that are deemed to meet recency, relevancy and quality requirements. For this acquisition, recency refers to contracts awarded and completed within the last three (3) years. Relevancy refers to contracts of similar size to this acquisition for HVAC, plumbing and generator preventative maintenance, repair, and

Written qualifications statements shall be certified and signed by a principle of the offeror. Offerors need only submit a brief resume of each key individual.

This will be evaluated to determine if they have the appropriate technical training, certifications, if required, and previous construction experience to meet the technical requirements of a project of this nature. If any of the submitted individuals will perform more than one of the listed functions, this is acceptable as long as the submitted documentation identifies any and all functions the given individual will be performing.

service. Quality refers to contracts that were satisfactorily completed within the designated PoP. All submissions shall include the following information:

1. The date of the service contract award, and the contract award amount in dollars.

2. The date of the construction contract completion, and the final contract amount, in dollars.

3. A brief description of the construction contract scope of work.

4. Identification of the agency/entity/company for which work was performed and at least one point-of-contact (POC) at the organization that awarded the submitted contract, to include POC’s name, e-mail address and telephone number.

Price:

(a) Lowest Price: Proposals not technically acceptable will be removed from consideration, and award will be made to the lowest priced technically acceptable responsible contractor. The LPTA procedure is applied to known, firm requirements, usually readily available in the commercial marketplace where a fair and reasonable price determination is based on adequate price competition. A price analysis will be conducted to determine the total evaluated price to support the selection of the lowest priced technically acceptable offeror. When contracting on a firm-fixed-price basis, comparison of the proposed prices will usually satisfy the requirement to perform a price analysis since competition normally establishes price reasonableness, and a cost analysis need not be performed.

(b) Requested Price Information: All pricing shall be commensurate with established labor hour rates as contained within Davis Bacon Department of Labor Wage rate determination for the Construction Wage Rate Requirement Statute. The offeror’s proposed labor categories and labor rates will be evaluated. The submission of a completed Construction Cost Estimate form will be requested with each proposal. The submission of certified cost or pricing data will not be required for this acquisition since it is expected to be under the TINA threshold of $750,000.00 and there is expected to be adequate price competition.

(c) Fair Market Price: This acquisition is intended to be a 100% small business set-aside. In accordance with FAR 19.202-6 and FAR 19.501(g), a contract may not be awarded as a result of a small business set-aside if the cost to the awarding agency exceeds the fair market price.

Basis for Award and Summary of Evaluation Factors and Subfactors:

(1) Proposals will first be evaluated on the basis of technical acceptability, which will be determined by evaluating both the Technical Acceptability and Past Performance Acceptability factors and associated subfactors on an acceptable/unacceptable basis.

(2) The evaluation factors include Technical Acceptability, Past Performance Acceptability and Price.

The Technical Acceptability Subfactors include Subfactor 1.1 – Technical Capability and Subfactor 1.2 - Technical Qualifications of Proposed Staffing.

(3) Past Performance information will be provided by the offerors to show their history of successfully performing contracts of similar size and scope to the currently required effort and to determine the quality of their relevant, recent past performance. Past Performance evaluations will investigate information furnished by the offerors to ensure they have consistently demonstrated a commitment to administration, customer satisfaction, timely delivery, and quality goods and services in prior contracts of similar scope and complexity. This is a matter of judgment and will be a subjective assessment based on investigative findings.

(4) Only the proposals found to be technically acceptable will be further evaluated for award. This means a proposal is “acceptable” for all factors.

(5) Price will be evaluated for reasonableness and completeness.

(6) Contract Award will be made to the responsible vendor that offers the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal.

C. PRICE PROPOSAL.

Price is to be submitted in Attachment 1. Offerors must provide a price for each bid item. In addition, offerors shall include a breakdown of material and labor costs, by specification division for each bid item. Overhead, profit and bond costs shall be added after a subtotal of materials and labor costs has been calculated.

D. BASIS OF AWARD.

The Government will make the award based on the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the nacceptability standards for non-cost factors. Note that offers that are not technically acceptable cannot be selected, regardless of price.

(END OF PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS)

SECTION M – EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

Basis for Award and Summary Evaluation Factors.

(1) Proposals will first be evaluated on the basis of technical acceptability, which will be determined by evaluating both the Technical and Past Performance factors. The evaluation factors are: Technical Capability; and Technical Qualifications of Proposed Staffing, Past Performance, and Price.

(2) The technical non-price factors are Technical Capability; and Technical Qualifications of Proposed Staffing. These factors address the contractor’s capability and provide evidence that they can perform the requirements described in the PWS.

(3) Past Performance information will be provided by the Contractors to show their history of successfully accomplishing PWS tasks and to determine the quality of their relevant past performance. Assessment for this area will be subjective based on consideration of all relevant facts and circumstances. Evaluation will investigate information furnished by the contractor to ensure they have consistently demonstrated a commitment to administration, customer satisfaction, timely delivery, and quality goods and services in prior contracts of similar scope and complexity. This is a matter of judgment and will be a subjective assessment based on investigative findings.

(4) Only the proposals found to be technically acceptable will be further evaluated for award. This means a proposal is “acceptable” for all factors.

(5) Price will be evaluated for reasonableness and completeness.

(6) Contract Award will be made to the responsible vendor that offers the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal.

Evaluation factors represent those specific characteristics that are tied to significant RFP requirements. They are the uniform baseline against which each offeror’s proposal is evaluated allowing the Government to make a determination of acceptability. The THREE (3) evaluation factors for determination of technical acceptability consist of:

Factor 1: Technical Capability Factor 2: Technical Qualifications of Proposed Staffing Factor 3: Past Performance