Attachment 6 Evaluation.pdf

Addendum to 52.212-2 Evaluation-Commercial Items

1. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

Award will be made based on the evaluation of Price, Past Performance, and Technical where Past Performance and Technical, when combined, are more important than price. The Government will utilize the Price-Performance Trade-off methodology as described below to determine the quote that represents the best value to the government.

2. SYNOPSIS OF EVALUATION

Step 1: Rank each quoter based upon Total Evaluated Price (TEP). Step 2: The lowest quoter will then be evaluated to ensure they adhered to all submission requirements, IAW Addendum to 52.212-1. Step 3:

If the quoter adhered to all submission requirements, evaluate quoter’s technical acceptability based on the evaluation factors. If deemed technically acceptable, move to the next step. Step 4: Evaluate past performance. If the quoter’s past performance confidence rating is deemed to be a ‘Substantial Confidence’, the quoter is determined responsible, and the price is determined fair and reasonable, then the Government will proceed to award to this vendor and no further evaluations will be conducted.

If the lowest priced quoter did not adhere to submission requirements of Addendum to 52.212-1, receives an “Unacceptable” rating for the Technical factor, or receives a past performance rating other than “Substantial Confidence”, the Government will follow the same evaluation method for the next lowest quoter. The process will continue until a quote is found that adheres to Addendum to 52.212-1, has an acceptable rating for the Technical Factor and has a past performance confidence rating of ‘Substantial Confidence’. Contracting officer will then make an integrated assessment to render the best value award decision. The Government reserves the right to award to other than the lowest priced quoter if determined to be in the best interest of the Government, but is not required to do so.

During all stages of the evaluations, the government reserves the right to enter into exchanges with one or multiple quoters, but is not required to do so. Therefore, respondents should provide their best available pricing in their initial quote. While we strive for maximum objectivity, the evaluation process is inherently subjective.

3. PRICE EVALUATION

To receive an acceptable rating for the Price Factor, the quoter’s price must 1) adhere to all requirements of 52.212-1 and accompanying addendum and 2) be determined fair and reasonable in accordance with FAR 13.106-3. Total price will be calculated by totaling all CLINs inclusive of all option years and the option to extend services IAW FAR 52.217-8. FAR 52.217-8 will be included in the price evaluation by adding 50% of the value of each CLIN in option year year (CLIN 3001) to the total price. This amount is for evaluation purposes only and will not be included in the awarded contract value. Prices will be rounded off to two decimal points. Total price will be evaluated for price reasonableness.

4. TECHNICAL EVALUATION

To receive an acceptable rating for the Technical Factor, the quoter’s submission must receive an ‘Acceptable’ rating for Subfactor 1. This Technical Factor will be evaluated on an acceptable/unacceptable basis defined as follows:

Acceptable: Quoter’s technical submission adheres to the requirements in this technical factor, adheres to the requirements of the solicitation, and demonstrates understanding of the requirement.

Unacceptable: Quoter’s technical submission does not adhere to the requirements in this technical factor, or does not adhere to the requirements of the solicitation, or does not demonstrate an understanding of the requirement.

Subfactor 1 - Program Management and Staffing Plan

Quoters shall demonstrates a detailed Program Management and Staffing Plan that adequately describes the approach the offeror will use to successfully perform to the standards detailed in the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

a) A Management and Staffing Plan that explains in detail how the offeror intends to recruit, retain, and replace sufficient personnel who have the knowledge, experience, and skills to perform administration as required in the PWS para 1.2.1, 1.2.1.1, 1.2.1.2, 1.2.1.3, 1.2.1.4, 1.2.2 1.2.2.1, 1.2.2.2, 1.2.2.3, and 1.2.2.4.

b) A Management and Staffing plan that explains the specific number of personnel (skill mix of labor effort).

c) A Management and Staffing plan that explains in detail the process of recruiting, training and replacing personnel to ensure they meet or exceed the skills and knowledge for each identified position as described in the PWS paragraph 4.3 through paragraph 4.3.5.

d) A Management and Staffing plan that explains in detail the process of recruiting, training and replacing personnel to ensure they meet or exceed the qualifications of each employee as described in the PWS in paragraphs 4.4 and 4.4.1.

5. PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

Past performance will be evaluated on recency, relevancy, and quality of performance and be used as a measure of the Government’s confidence in the quoter’s ability to successfully perform based on previous and current contract efforts.

Performance confidence ratings assess the probability of the quoter successfully accomplishing the proposed effort based on the quoters past performance. The government will use past performance information submitted by the quoter’s references, other sources such as other Federal Government offices, Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS)/Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARS), and private and commercial sources.

Past performance will be considered relevant if the scope of work meets the following minimum criteria:

• Provided full-time administrative support for at least 2,000 hours annually with work that consisted of scheduling, utilizing customer support systems, preparing reports, data entry and presentations.

Past performance will be considered recent if the work was within the last three (3) years from the issue month of this solicitation.

Quality of Performance. All recent past performance that is determined to be relevant will be reviewed to determine the quality of the quoter’s performance and general trends of the performance. This information will be used by the evaluation team in addition to Attachment 3, PPQ Information, in determining the overall performance confidence assessment rating.

One of the following confidence ratings will be assigned to the evaluated quote:

a) Substantial Confidence: Based on the quoter’s recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a high expectation that the quoter will successfully perform the required effort.

b) Satisfactory Confidence: Based on the quoter’s recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a reasonable expectation that the quoter will successful perform the required

c) Neutral Confidence: No recent/relevant performance record is available, the quoter’s performance record is not recent or relevant, or the quoter’s record of past performance is so sparse that a meaningful confidence rating cannot be reasonably determined.

d) Limited Confidence: Based on the quoter’s recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a low expectation that the quoter will successfully perform the required

e) No Confidence: Based on the quoter’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the quoter will successfully perform the required effort.

Confidence that the quoter can or cannot successfully perform all required services within the PWS will be based upon the past performance information submitted by the quoter as well as the Government’s independent investigation of the quoter’s past performance. It is recommended that the quoter submit any and all documentation addressing adverse past performance ratings for recent and relevant contracts.

Failure to do so may result in the Government assigning an unfavorable rating for this factor. Quoters that do not have a record of recent and relevant past performance will receive a neutral rating for this factor and will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably.

Past performance regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or sub-contractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirements may not be considered as highly as past performance information for the principal quoter. Past performance regarding minor members of Joint Ventures and/or Teaming Agreements will be considered in accordance with the member’s share of the prospective contract.

(End of Addendum)