Attachment 6 - Section L and M_Phase II Instructions to Offerors and Evaluation Criteria.pdf

ATTACHMENT J.6

SECTION L – PHASE II INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

L.1 FAR 52.252-1 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (FEB

1998)

The following solicitation provisions pertinent to this section are hereby incorporated by reference (by Citation Number, Title, and Date) in accordance with the FAR provision at FAR "52.252-1 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE”. Also, the full text of a solicitation provisions may be accessed electronically at this address (https://www.acquisition.gov/far/).

FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION (48 CFR Chapter 1)

Provision No: Provision Title and Date 52.204-6 Data Universal Numbering System Number (OCT 2016) 52.204-7 System for Award Management (OCT 2018) 52.204-18 Commercial and Government Entity Code Maintenance. (JUL 2016) 52.214-34 Submission of Offers in the English Language. (APR 1991) 52.214-35 Submission of Offers in U.S. Currency. (APR 1991) 52.215-1 Instructions to Offerors - Competitive Acquisition. (JAN 2017) 52.215-22 Limitations on Pass-Through Charges-Identification of Subcontract Effort. (OCT 2009)

L.2 PHASE II GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

a) Single Award: The U. S. Government anticipates awarding one Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee, Completion-Type

Contract under the full and open competition as a result of this Solicitation. The Government reserves the right to award one or none awards than the anticipated number of contracts stated above. The Government may award a contract without discussions with Offerors in accordance with FAR 52.215-1.

b) Statement of Objectives (SOO): The Offerors must use the SOO of this solicitation, (see Attachment 1 in Section J of the RFP), to develop a Statement of Work (SOW). The successful offeror’s SOW will become Section C of the resulting contract.

c) RFP Instructions: If an Offeror does not follow the instructions set forth herein including Section L for Phase II, the Offeror's proposal may be eliminated from further consideration. Proposals must respond directly to the terms, conditions, specifications and provisions of this RFP. Proposals not conforming to this RFP will be determined as non-responsive, thereby eliminating them from further consideration.

d) Pre-award Survey: USAID reserves the right to perform a pre-award survey which may include, but is not limited to: (1) Offeror’s ability to perform the Contract duties under the program conditions; (2) a review of the Offeror’s’ financial condition, business and personnel procedures, etc.; and (3) site visits to the Offeror’s facilities.

e) Offer Acceptability: The Government may determine an offer to be unacceptable if the offer does not comply with all of the terms and conditions of the RFP and prospective Contract:

(1) Completion of Standard Form 33, Blocks 12 through 18;

https://www.acquisition.gov/far/

SOL No. 72016721R00002 Property Governance Activity

(2) Submission of proposed costs/prices and indirect cost information as required by Section B and L.6 (Phase II) of this RFP;

(3) Completion of electronic annual representations and certifications at SAM accessed via https://www.acquisition.gov as well as any other "Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors" in Section K; and

(4) Submission of information required by Section L (Phase II) or any other section of this RFP. The submission of these items in accordance with these instructions will, if the Government accepts the offer, contractually bind the Government and the successful Offeror to the terms and conditions of the prospective Contract. Offerors will follow the instructions contained in this RFP and supply all information and signature/certifications, as required.

f) Accurate and Complete Information: An Offeror must set forth full, accurate and complete information as required by this RFP. The penalty for making false statements to the Government is prescribed in 18 U.S.C. 1001.

g) Proposal Preparation Costs: The U.S. Government will not pay for any proposal preparation costs.

h) Offer Validity: Offerors are required to indicate the duration of the validity of their offer in box 12 of the submitted SF 33 Form. USAID recommends at least 8 months of validity from the date the offer is submitted to allow sufficient time to evaluate proposals and complete negotiations.

i) Phase II Solicitation Conditions: At Phase II, offerors must submit the remaining Technical and Cost

Volumes as described in herein by the date/time in the cover letter of the RFP.

L.3 FAR 52.233-2 SERVICE OF PROTEST (SEP 2006)

a. Protests, as defined in section 33.101 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, that are filed directly with an agency, and copies of any protests that are filed with the Government Accountability Office (GAO), shall be served on the Contracting Officer (addressed as follows) by obtaining written and dated acknowledgment of receipt from:

Mr. Nadeem Shah Contracting Officer Email: nshah@usaid.gov USAID/Kosovo

b. The copy of any protest shall be received in the office designated above within one day of filing a protest with the GAO. Protests must also be submitted to USAID’s Assistant General Counsel, at the following address:

Mr. William Buckhold Assistant General Counsel US Agency for International Development Office of General Counsel Email: wbuckhold@usaid.gov mailto:nshah@usaid.gov about:blank

L.4 PHASE II SUBMISSION/DELIVERY INSTRUCTIONS

(a) Offerors must submit their questions and proposals via email to Fiolla Radoniqi at fradoniqi@usaid.gov and Dukagjin Hasani at dhasani@usaid.gov no later than submission due dates as specified on the advisory notification. Receipt time is when the proposal is received by the USAID Internet server. If a proposal is received on time by at least one of the email addresses above, it will be considered timely. A proposal must be received by the Government by the due date for it to be considered. Late proposals will not be considered. The proposal must be accompanied by a cover letter typed on official organizational letterhead and signed by a person who has signatory authority for the organization. The cover letter shall be in Adobe PDF format. Total email size cannot exceed 10 MB. OFFERORS MUST NOT SUBMIT

ZIPPED FILES.

(b) Closing Date and Time: All submissions in response to this RFP are due as stated in the RFP cover letter and as communicated via the Notification letter.

(c) The information requested below must be clearly marked on the subject line with the following information:

(email # of #) RFP No.:72016721R00002, Property Governance Activity (Phase II)

(d) Electronic Submission:

● All submissions must be sent to the email address identified on the cover page. Electronic submission must be prepared in two distinct parts and kept seperate:

o In Adobe Acrobat PDF for Volume I - Technical Proposal addressing evaluation Factor 2 only.

• The Past Performance information shall provide performance history and be included as part of the Technical Proposal. Proposals must be signed by an official who is authorized to bind the entire organization. Technical Proposals must not make reference to pricing data in order that the technical evaluation may be made strictly on the basis of technical merit.

o In Adobe Acrobat PDF, Microsoft Excel and Word (2003 version or newer) for Volume II – Cost/Business Proposal

• Cost/Business Proposal will only be submitted during Phase II. Microsoft Excel only applies to the budget and USAID requires a word version of the budget narrative. All calculations and formulas must be visible and unlocked. Furthermore, there will be no password protected cells or spreadsheets.

• While there is no page limit, the Offerors are encouraged to be as concise as possible, but still provide the necessary detail to address the solicitation requirement.

● All attachments/electronic contents must be formatted to print on 8.5 by 11 inch or A4 size paper, single spaced, with 12-point font, Times New Roman with one inch margins on all sides. Number mailto:fradoniqi@usaid.gov mailto:dhasani@usaid.gov each page consecutively. Those pages that exceed the page limitation will not be evaluated. If proposals contain graphics, tables and charts or text boxes must be in no less than 10-point font, as to not unduly interfere with readability.

● The Contracting Officer reserves the right to request any submission material in MS Word/Excel (software versions 2003 or newer), if applicable.

● For Section K, offerors shall comply with FAR provision 52.204-7, System for Award Management and complete the annual representations and certifications electronically via the Online Representations and Certifications and other Statements of Offerors website via the System for Award Management, www.sam.gov.

Questions: All questions and requests for clarification must be sent in writing by the date and time to the contacts indicated on the cover page of the RFP. The written requests for clarifications/questions must contain a subject line, sample: “RFP No.:72016721R00002, Property Governance Activity (Phase II)”

Any information given to an Offeror concerning the RFP will also be furnished to all other Offerors as an Amendment to the RFP, if that information is necessary in submitting proposals or if the lack of it would be prejudicial to any other Offerors.

Offerors must retain for their records one copy of the proposal and all enclosures that accompany their proposal. Erasures or other changes must be initiated by the person signing the proposal. To facilitate the competitive review of the proposals, USAID will consider only proposals conforming to the format prescribed below.

L.5 INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF PHASE II – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Phase II – Submission Format (not to exceed 15 pages)

Technical Proposal, Management Approach and Capabilities must be organized in the following manner:

● Cover Letter (not included in the page limit)

● Table of Contents (not included in the page limit)

● Acronym list (not included in the page limit)

● Executive Summary (maximum 2 pages)

● Phase II Technical Proposal - Factor 2 Management Approach and Capability (not to exceed 15 pages)

● Annexes (not included in the page limit) o Annex I: Key Personnel Position Description o Annex II: CVs/Resumes of Named Key Personnel and References o Annex III: Signed Letters of Commitment from Each Key Personnel Candidate o Annex IV: Organization chart for Property Governance Activity o Annex V: Mobilization Plan

Format and Page Limitations: The written Technical Proposal must be written in English and is limited to 15 pages, excluding required documents listed below. While a suggested page length per Technical Proposal section is given below, offerors may allocate the page count differently, provided the overall Technical http://www.sam.gov/

Proposal page limit is not exceeded. USAID will not evaluate information submitted above this page limit.

Note: A page in the technical proposal that contains a table, chart, graph, etc., not otherwise excluded below, is subject to the page limitation.

L.5.1 PHASE II TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Phase II – Submission Format (not to exceed 15 pages)

In Phase II, the offeror must submit the following component of technical proposal in response to the remaining evaluation Factors 2.

L.5.1(a) Management Approach and Capability (not to exceed 15 pages)

The offeror must include the components listed below, which collectively make up the Management Approach and Capability. The components included in the 15-page limit must be submitted in Adobe Acrobat (PDF) format, along with a Microsoft Word copy.

a. Management Capability

The Offeror must describe its organizational knowledge and capability to effectively implement the proposed approach, including home office support, organizational experience in the relevant sectors, project management capabilities, internal controls, ability to mobilize and retain staff, and capability to execute in activity implementation. This section must be included in the 15-page limit.

b. Management and Staffing Plan

The Offeror must describe plans to set up its organizational structure and office(s) with clear lines of authority and responsibilities (including home office support) to implement the activities, accomplish the results, and meet the targets proposed in the SOO. This includes the approach to recruiting local and regional short-term technical assistance (STTA) personnel and the method to strategically use resources, local professionals, local organizations, and sub-contracts. The Offeror must describe how the proposed Key Personnel’s qualifications and experience will assist the Offeror in achieving the Property Governance Activity objectives, including the estimated time each of these staff members will devote to the activity. The proposed management structure should be feasible, efficient, and should utilize Kosovo expertise while demonstrating commitment to the building of local capacity and enhancing gender equality. It must also present a vision and strategy for program management that allows adaptation of program approaches based on program learning, experience, and inputs from both internal and external researchers and evaluators. If the Offeror anticipates using sub-awards, include the roles and responsibilities of each sub-awardee, and the lines of authority and communication. This section must be included in the 15-page limit.

c. Key Personnel

Offerors must propose a Chief of Party (COP) and Deputy COP (DCOP). Offerors may propose up to three additional key personnel roles. For each proposed key personnel, the Offeror must identify the position title and provide position descriptions, including roles and responsibilities and minimum qualifications (experience, education, skills, etc.). The position descriptions will be provided as an annex and does not count against the page limit.

The skill set for the proposed key personnel collectively must include at a minimum the following:

● Demonstrated experience managing and implementing property governance projects.

● Demonstrated experience in working effectively with institutions, including municipalities, to develop, implement and manage organizational property governance processes both centrally and locally engaging institutions, civil society and communities and private sector partners.

● Experience with innovative and adaptive management approaches.

● Effective approaches to local capacity development.

Offerors must submit individual names, CVs, and references for the COP, the DCOP, and other proposed Key Personnel positions, as an annex and does not count against the page limit. The page limit for each CV including references is three (3) pages. Each individual proposed must also provide three (3) recent references with name, position title, valid email address and telephone number, and the relationship to the proposed candidate.

For each proposed Key Personnel candidate the offeror must provide a signed letter of commitment indicating his/her: (a) availability to serve in the stated position; (b) intention to serve in the proposed position for the stated period of the service; and (c) prior work experience with the Offeror, if applicable. Letters of commitment of proposed key personnel must not exceed one (1) page, as an annex and does not count against the 15-page limit.

The Offeror should provide an organization chart showing the overall staffing plan as part of the management approach and capability, as an annex and does not count against the 15-page limit.

d. Mobilization Plan

The Contractor must submit a Mobilization Plan, with a plan for the start-up of activities, including municipalities selected as per the criterias set in the proposal, covering the first 90 calendar days of the contract. The Mobilization Plan does count against the 15-page limit.

L.6 INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF COST/BUSINESS PROPOSAL

There is no limit on the number of pages in the cost proposal, except as otherwise stated below. The Cost Proposal must contain the following components in the order set forth below:

(a) Part 1 – Standard Form (SF) 33

The Offeror must submit the cover page (Section A) of this Solicitation [Standard Form (SF) 33, "Solicitation, Offer, and Award"], with blocks 12 through 18 completed, with an original signature of a person authorized on behalf of the Offeror to sign the offer.

(b) Part 2 – Proposed Costs

1. General

i. The Offeror must provide a complete budget, including the budgets for each subcontractor, by cost element utilizing the provided budget template in (See Section J Attachment 4). All formulas must be displayed, and the budget must not be locked. The Offeror must propose costs that it believes are realistic and reasonable for the work in accordance with the Offeror’s technical approach.

ii. The Offeror must submit a detailed budget narrative that supports item for item the cost estimates proposed in its detailed budget. The detailed budget narrative must specifically explain the link between the estimated costs and proposed technical approach. The narrative explanation of the link between the estimated costs and technical approach will be used by the Government to inform its cost realism analysis. Insufficient detail explaining assumptions and links between estimated costs and the proposed technical approach may result in probable cost adjustments. The budget narrative should describe the nature of individual cost items proposed and include a description of the source of that particular cost estimate (historical experience with the cost item, catalogue price, vendor price quotes, etc.). Narratives for the individual cost items must provide a discussion of any estimated escalation rates where applicable. Estimated costs proposed to exceed ceilings imposed by USAID or Federal procurement policy must be fully explained and justified.

iii. Fee Schedule - The Offeror must submit a table with proposed deliverables, aligned with the offeror’s proposed statement of work/technical approach, tied to proposed fee payments. Pending negotiation of the final deliverables based on the offeror’s approach, this table will be included in B.8 Payment of Fixed Fee of the contract.

The Government encourages Offerors to prepare their detailed budget narrative in a clear and succinct format.

The budget narrative must explain the cost element breakdown for the proposed interventions and program activities under each objective of SOW.

In preparing the detailed budget narrative, Offerors should consider questions such as:

● Do the overall costs realistically account for the proposed work as articulated in the technical approach?

● Do the proposed costs reflect an understanding of the requirements?

● What is the link between proposed subcontractors’ work and cost?

● How will costs be monitored and managed during implementation?

1. Offerors Compensation plan for Property Governance Activity

Contractor shall submit a compensation plan which reflects its proposed staffing plan covering all planned positions and the corresponding salary rates. The compensation plan shall state the salary ranges for all proposed positions with the proposed/negotiated rate.The proposed salary ranges for CCNs/TCNs must not exceed the maximum range of the USAID Local Compensation Plan (LCP). For offerors’ reference, the range of the current Local Compensation Plan for USAID/Kosovo starts from minimum range of €13,307 to maximum of €52,727 (gross).

2. Indirect Cost Information

i. The Offeror must submit indirect cost rates information as required by Section B.5 of this RFP.

Also, the offeror shall propose ceilings on their final indirect cost rates which will be included in Section B.6 at the time of contract award.

ii. The Offeror shall include a complete copy of its most current Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate

Agreement (NICRA) or other documentation from its cognizant Government Audit Agency, if any, stating the most recent final indirect cost rates. The proposal shall also include the name and address of the Government Audit Agency, and the name and telephone number of the auditor.

iii. If the Offeror does not have a NICRA, audited balance sheets and profit and loss statements for the last three complete years, and the current year-to-date statements (or such lesser period of time if the Offeror is a newly formed organization), must be included in the proposal. The profit and loss statements should detail the total cost of goods and services sold, including a listing of the various indirect administrative costs, and be supplemented with information on the Offeror’s customary indirect cost allocation method together with supporting computations of the basis for the indirect cost rate(s) proposed.

EXEMPTIONS FOR SMALL BUSINESS OFFERORS ONLY

All the above instructions apply to small business offerors. However, if the small business offeror does not have a NICRA, the proposal must include either Audited Financial Statements or Reviewed Financial Statements as defined below:

1. Audited Financial Statements provide the auditor’s opinion that the financial statements are presented fairly, in all material respects, in conformity with the applicable financial reporting framework. In an audit, the auditor is required by auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAS) to obtain an understanding of the entity’s internal control and assess fraud risk. The auditor also corroborates the amounts and disclosures included in the financial statements by obtaining audit evidence through inquiry, physical inspection, observation, third-party confirmations, examination, analytical procedures and other procedures. The auditor issues a report that states that the audit was conducted in accordance with GAAS, the financial statements are the responsibility of management, provides an opinion that the financial statements present fairly in all material respects the financial position of the company and the results of operations are in conformity with the applicable financial reporting framework (or issues a qualified opinion if the financial statements are not in conformity with the applicable financial reporting framework. The auditor may also issue a disclaimer of opinion or an adverse opinion if appropriate).

2. Reviewed Financial Statements provide a certified CPA accountant’s (referred to as “Accountant” or “CPA” herein) review; the accountant is not aware of any material modifications that should be made to the financial statements for the statements to be in conformity with the applicable federal financial reporting framework. During a review engagement, the Accountant obtains limited assurance that there are no material modifications that should be made to the financial statements. Therefore, the objective of a review of the financial statements is to obtain limited assurance that there are no material modifications that should be made to the financial statements. A review does not include obtaining an understanding of the entity’s internal control; assessing fraud risk; testing accounting records; or other procedures ordinarily performed in an audit. The CPA issues a report stating the review was performed in accordance with Statements on Standards for Accounting and Review Services; that management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in accordance with the applicable financial reporting framework and for designing, implementing and maintaining internal control relevant to the preparation.

The proposal must not include compiled financial statements. Compiled financial statements will not be accepted because the Accountant does not obtain or provide any assurance that there are no material modifications that should be made to the financial statements. That is, there is no assurance that the organization is misrepresenting costs on compiled financial statements that puts the agency at risk. The objective of compiled financial statements is to assist management in presenting financial information in the form of financial statements without undertaking to provide any assurance that there are no material modifications that should be made to the financial statements.

If the small business offeror receives an award based on the submission of Reviewed Financial Statements, within six months after the end of the small business offeror’s fiscal year, they must submit an adequate final incurred cost proposal to the to the Contracting Officer (or cognizant Federal agency official) and auditor within the 6-month period following the expiration of each of its fiscal years in accordance with the Allowable Cost and Payment Clause FAR 52.216-7. The receipt of an adequate proposal by the audit office starts the audit process. This audit will establish the final indirect cost rate(s) for the audited year. Provisional rates will be updated as needed based on current information. USAID auditors will work with the small business to issue a NICRA establishing the proposed provisional indirect cost rates after award based upon acceptable information submitted above.

iv. The indirect cost information requirements of (i), (ii) and (iii) above are required for each cost-reimbursement or time-and-materials type subcontracts.

3. Fixed Fee (if any):

The Offerors may propose the fixed fee, but not to exceed 10% of the total estimated cost.

FAR 15.404‐4 provides for establishing the profit or fee portion of the Government pre‐negotiation objective and provides profit‐analysis factors for analyzing profit or fee. For the contract awarded under this solicitation the contractor and Government will negotiate the fixed fee and the payment schedule.

(c) Part 3 – Evidence of Responsibility

Limited to 3 pages, the Offeror must submit sufficient evidence of responsibility for the contracting officer to make an affirmative determination of responsibility pursuant to the requirements of FAR Subsection 9.104-

1. However, in the case of a small business Offeror, the Contracting Officer will comply with FAR 19.6. The Offeror must address each element of responsibility below. To be determined responsible, a prospective Contractor must:

1. Have adequate financial resources to perform the contract, or the ability to obtain them (see FAR 9.104-3(a));

2. Be able to comply with the required or proposed delivery or performance schedule, taking into consideration all existing commercial and governmental commitments;

3. Have a satisfactory performance record (See FAR 9.104-3(b) and Subpart 42.15). A prospective Contractor shall not be determined responsible or non-responsible solely based on a lack of relevant performance history, except as provided in FAR 9.104-2;

4. Have a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics;

5. Have the necessary organization, experience, accounting and operational controls, and technical skills, or the ability to obtain them (including, as appropriate, such elements as production control procedures, property control systems, quality assurance measures, and safety programs applicable to materials to be produced or services to be performed by the prospective Contractor and subcontractors).(See FAR 9.104-3(a));

6. Have the necessary production, construction, and technical equipment and facilities, or the ability to obtain them (See FAR 9.104-3(a)); and

7. Be otherwise qualified and eligible to receive an award under applicable laws and regulations (e.g., Equal Opportunity, Clean Air and Water, etc.).

(d) Part 4 – Past Performance

1. For contracts not in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), offerors (including all partners of a joint venture) must use the “Past Performance Information Sheet” (included as Attachment 3) to list past performance information of the contracts involving similar size and work as in Section C of this RFTOP, for itself and each major subcontractor (one whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the Offeror’s total proposed cost), with a period of performance falling within the last five years. All applicable fields in Attachment 3 must be completed. Offerors must not submit past performance information for contracts in CPARS.

2. If extraordinary problems impacted any of the referenced contracts, provide a short explanation and the corrective action taken (FAR 15.305(a)(2)).

3. Describe any quality awards or certifications that indicate exceptional capacity to provide the service or product described in the statement of work. This information is not included in the page limitation.

(e) Part 5 – Letters of Commitment (Subcontractors)

The Cost Proposal must include a letter, on subcontractor letterhead, and signed by an authorized representative of each subcontractor, which specifically indicates the subcontractor's agreement to be included in the Offeror’s proposed teaming arrangement. USAID discourages the use of exclusive agreements as this limits USAID’s and Kosovo’s ability to receive the best services.

(f) Part 6 – Branding and Marking Plan

In ADS 320, Branding and Marking, offeror(s) are requested to prepare concurrently a Branding Implementation Plan (BIP) and Marking Plan (MP). Offeror(s) must submit a BIP and MP separately only upon the explicit written request of the Contracting Officer. The BIP and MP will not be a part of the technical evaluation. Offeror(s) will be required to submit formal and detailed Branding and Marking plans for final review before award or in the competitive range.

(g) Part 7 – Portions of Section K not Available Online

Offerors must submit those portions of Section K not available online in this section.

(h) Part 8 – Employee Biographical Data Sheets for Key Personnel

Offerors must provide Biographical Data Sheets (see Section J Attachment 3) for all key personnel.

[END OF SECTION L]

SECTION M – PHASE II EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M.1 GENERAL INFORMATION

a. The Government intends to evaluate Offerors in accordance with Section M – PHASE II EVALUATION

FACTORS of this RFP and make an award to the responsible Offeror whose proposal represents the best value to the U.S. Government. “Best value” is defined as the offer that results in the most advantageous solution for the Government, in consideration of technical, cost, and other factors.

b. The Government may award a contract without discussions with Offerors in accordance with FAR 52.215-1. Therefore, Offerors are to submit their best technical and cost proposals with their initial submissions. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer determines it to be necessary.

c. The submitted technical information will be rated by a technical evaluation committee using the technical criteria as shown below. The evaluation committee may include experts who are not employees of the Federal Government. When evaluating the competing Offerors, the Government will consider the written qualifications and capability information provided by the Offerors, and any other information obtained by the Government through its own research.

d. For overall evaluation purposes of this RFP non-cost criteria (technical approach, management approach and capability and past performance), when combined, are considered significantly more important than cost factors.

M.2 TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

The technical proposal will be rated by a technical evaluation committee using the factors shown below for each phase. These factors serve as a standard against which all proposals will be evaluated, and serve to identify the significant matters which offerors must address in their proposals.

M.2.1 Phase II Rating Methodology and Evaluation Criteria

USAID will be utilizing an adjectival rating system to evaluate the technical proposals, as presented in the table below.

The below chart details the rating scheme and the definitions that apply to technical factors, as well as past performance evaluation factors.

Adjective Technical Approach/Management Structure Plan Definition

Exceptional

An Exceptional proposal has the following characteristics:

● A comprehensive and thorough proposal of exceptional merit.

● Proposal meets and fully exceeds the Government expectations or exceeds

RFP requirements and presents very low risk or no overall degree of risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

● Strengths significantly outweigh any weaknesses that may exist.

Very Good

A Very Good proposal has the following characteristics:

● A proposal demonstrating a strong grasp of the requirements.

● Proposal meets RFP requirements and presents a low overall degree of risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

● Strengths significantly outweigh any weaknesses that exist.

Satisfactory

A Satisfactory proposal has the following characteristics:

● A proposal demonstrating a reasonably sound response and a good grasp of the requirements.

● Proposal meets RFP requirements and presents a moderate overall degree of risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

● Strengths outweigh weaknesses.

Marginal

A Marginal proposal has the following characteristics:

● The proposal shows a limited understanding of the requirements.

● Proposal meets some or most of the RFP requirements, but presents a significant overall degree of risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

● Weaknesses equal or outweigh any strength that exists.

Unsatisfactory

An Unsatisfactory proposal has the following characteristics:

● The Proposal does not meet the RFP requirements or requires a major rewrite of the proposal.

● Presents an unacceptable degree of risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

● Deficiencies and significant weaknesses demonstrate a lack of understanding of the Government’s needs.

● Weaknesses and or deficiencies significantly outweigh any strength that exists.

M.2.2 Phase II Evaluation Factors

Evaluation Factor 2-Management Approach and Capability

The extent to which the proposed management capability, management/staffing plans and mobilization plan convincingly demonstrates the institutional experience of the prime and major subcontractors, if any, in implementing the proposed interventions, and how this experience will ensure successful implementation of the activity. Further, the extent to which the proposed Key Personnel will ensure successful implementation of the proposed SOW and the achievement of the activity objectives and expected results.

M.3 EVALUATION OF PAST PERFORMANCE:

Past performance will be evaluated in accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2).

1. Performance information will be used for both the responsibility determination and best value decision. USAID may use performance information obtained from other than the sources identified by the offeror/subcontractor. USAID will utilize existing databases of contractor performance information and solicit additional information from other sources if and when the Contracting Officer finds the existing databases to be insufficient for evaluating an Offeror’s performance.

2. Adverse past performance information to which the offeror previously has not had an opportunity to respond will be addressed in accordance with the policies and procedures set forth in FAR 15.3.

3. USAID will initially determine the relevance of similar performance information as a predictor of probable performance under the subject requirement. Relevant past performance means, performance of the contracts involving similar size and work as in Section C of this RFP.

4. The contractor performance information determined to be relevant will be evaluated in accordance with the elements below:

● Quality of product or service, including consistency in meeting goals and targets.

● Cost control, including forecasting costs as well as accuracy in financial reporting.

● Schedule, including the timeliness against the completion of the contract, task orders, milestones, delivery schedules, and administrative requirements (e.g., efforts that contribute to or affect the schedule variance).

● Business relations, addressing the history of professional behavior and overall business-like concern for the interests of the customer, including the Offeror’s history of reasonable and cooperative behavior (to include timely identification of issues in controversy), customer satisfaction, timely award and management of subcontracts, cooperative attitude in remedying problems, and timely completion of all administrative requirements.

● Management of key personnel, including appropriateness of personnel for the job and prompt and satisfactory changes in personnel when problems with clients were identified.

● For prime Offerors who are not small business concerns, their utilization of Small Business concerns as subcontractors, including efforts in achieving small business participation goals.

5. USAID will be utilizing an adjectival rating system to evaluate the offeror’s past performance, as presented in the table below. Offerors determined to have unsatisfactory past performance will be ineligible for award.

Adjective Past Performance Definition

Satisfactory

The offeror’s past performance of previously awarded relevant contracts at the minimum met contractual requirements. The company performed with some problems, for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. Performance of completed contracts was consistently of adequate or better quality or exhibited a trend toward becoming so. The offeror’s past performance record leads to an expectation of successful performance.

Unsatisfactory

The offeror’s performance of previously awarded relevant contracts did not meet most contractual requirements and recovery, if any, did not occur within the stated period of performance. The contractor’s performance reflected serious problems for which the offeror either failed to identify or implement corrective actions were mostly ineffective. Performance of completed contracts was consistently of poor quality or a trend toward becoming so. The offeror’s past performance record leads to a strong expectation that successful performance would not be achieved or that it can occur only with greatly increased levels of government management and oversight.

Neutral

The offeror lacks a record of relevant or available past performance history. Based on this, there is no expectation of either successful or unsuccessful performance.

A “Neutral” rating will be given to Offerors when:

● The Offeror lacks relevant performance history,

● Information on performance is not available, or

● The Offeror is a member of a class of Offerors where there is provision not to rate the class against a sub factor.

When this occurs, an Offeror lacking relevant performance history is assigned a "neutral" rating. An exception to this “Neutral” rating provision is when a non-small business prime has no history of subcontracting with small business concerns.

Prior to assigning a "Neutral" past performance rating, the Contracting Officer may consider a broad range of information related to an Offeror's performance.

M.4 EVALUATION OF COST PROPOSAL:

The Government will evaluate cost proposals in accordance with FAR 15.404. Evaluation of the cost proposal will include a price analysis to establish reasonableness of the Offeror’s price (including the competitiveness of the fee proposed); and a cost realism analysis to determine what the Government should realistically expect to pay for the proposed effort, the Offeror’s understanding of the work, and the Offeror’s ability to perform the contract.

M.5 DETERMINATION OF COMPETITIVE RANGE

If the Contracting Officer determines that discussions are necessary, he/she will establish a Competitive Range composed of only the most highly rated proposals in Phase II. In certain circumstances, the Contracting Officer may determine that the number of most highly rated proposals that might otherwise be included in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted; should that be the case, the Contracting Officer may then limit offers in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated offers.

M.6 SOURCE SELECTION

a. In accordance with FAR 52.215-1(f), the Government intends to award a Contract from this solicitation to the responsible Offeror whose proposal represents the best value to the U.S.

Government after evaluation in accordance with the criteria as set forth in this solicitation.

b. Tradeoff: This procurement utilizes a down-select process. The Government will first determine the eligibility of the technical proposal in Phase I. In Phase II, the Government will utilize the tradeoff process set forth in FAR 15.101-1. The contracting officer will award the contract to the Offeror in Phase II whose proposal represents the best value to the U.S. Government. The contracting officer may award to a higher priced Offeror in Phase II if a determination is made that the higher technical evaluation of that Offeror merits the additional cost/price, and therefore represents the best value to the Government

[END OF SECTION M]

[END OF ATTACHMENT J.6]