Attachment 6 - Proposed Evaluation Criteria.docx

DOCX document 26 KB Posted

Attached to
USDA Forest Service Region 13 Zone 5 Law Enforcement Vehicle Upfitting
Solicitation number
12318725Q0023
Issued by

About this file

This document is an attachment titled "Attachment 6 - Proposed Evaluation Criteria" that outlines the evaluation factors and criteria for a federal contract opportunity.

The submission will be evaluated based on two main factors: 1) Technical Proposal, which includes Past Performance and Technical Capability, and 2) Price. The Technical Proposal will be rated as Acceptable or Unacceptable, while Past Performance will be rated as Acceptable, Neutral, or Unacceptable. The contract will be awarded to the vendor capable of successfully fulfilling the requirements to the Government's approval and acceptance, based on the evaluation of Past Performance, Technical Capability, and Price.

The related federal contract opportunity is for USDA Forest Service Region 13 Zone 5 Law Enforcement Vehicle Upfitting, solicitation number 12318725Q0023. The Forest Service is seeking to upfit various types of duty vehicles in accordance with Forest Service Law Enforcement National Standards and Specifications. The contractor will be responsible for providing all parts and materials, picking up the vehicles from various National Forest locations, upfitting the vehicles at the contractor's location, and returning the vehicles to the specified delivery addresses by a predetermined date.

View the file

Other files

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

EVALUATION FACTORS/CRITERIA

Evaluation Factors The submission will be evaluated based on list below: Factor 1: Technical Proposal I. Past Performance II. Technical Capability Factor 2: Price Evaluation Criteria ADJECTIVAL RATINGS The following adjectival rating tables shall be used to rate proposals. The evaluator will use the appropriate table and select one of the adjectival ratings that most clearly reflect the assessment of the proposal’s based on the established evaluation criteria.

Factor 1: Technical Proposal I. Past Performance ACCEPTABLE (A) The past performance record represents that the Offeror is capable of adequately performing the requirement. This rating indicates a low level of performance risk to the Government.

NEUTRAL (N)

Indicates that the Offerors references could not be verified or that the Offeror lacks relevant past performance experience.

UNACCEPTABLE (U)

Indicates that the Offeror has historically failed to perform in a satisfactory manner in the fulfillment of like or similar requirements. This rating indicates an unacceptable level of performance risk.

II. Technical Capability ACCEPTABLE (A) The proposal meets the stated requirements. The response is considered complete in terms of the basic content and level of information the Government seeks for evaluation. There is a reasonable probability of success to meet the quantity, quality, and schedule requirements and little risk that this Offeror would fail.

There are no deficiencies, and minor weaknesses. Minor weaknesses need not be corrected to make award.

UNACCEPTABLE (U)

The proposal fails to meet the stated requirements. The response is considered deficient in terms of basic content and support the Government seeks for evaluation. The degree of risk is so high that there is little or no likelihood of success. Deficiencies are so major or extensive that a major revision or complete rewrite of the proposal would be necessary.

Factor 2 – Price 12318725Q0023- USDA FS R13-LEI Emergency Vehicle Up-fitting

All vendors shall complete the table in FS Schedule of Items (Schedule of Items) with their offered prices. Vendor should submit quote with Firm Fixed Pricing to include pickup from and delivery back to the specified locations listed.

Award will be made to the vendor that is capable of successfully fulfilling requirements to the Government’s approval and acceptance; and its evaluation of Past Performance, Technical Capability, and Price based on the criteria listed above.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .