Attachment 7 - Evaluation of Offerors.pdf

Attachment 7 – FA441720Q0018

Addendum to 52.212-2 Evaluation-Commercial Items

1. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

Award will be made based on a Price Performance Tradeoff (PPT) of technically acceptable offerors where Past Performance is more important than Price. The Technical Evaluation will be rated on an acceptable/unacceptable basis.

2. SYNOPSIS OF EVALUATION

The first step of the evaluation process is to rank each offeror by price from lowest to highest. The Government will then ensure the three lowest priced quotes adhered to all submission requirements, IAW Addendum to 52.212-1. These three quotes will then be evaluated for technical acceptability. The lowest priced quote that is deemed to be technically acceptable will be evaluated for Past Performance.

If the lowest priced offeror is deemed technically acceptable, receives a Past Performance rating of Substantial Confidence, is determined responsible, and the price is determined fair and reasonable, then the Government will proceed to award to this offeror and no further evaluations will be conducted.

If the lowest offeror receives a Past Performance rating other than substantial, the Government will follow the same evaluation method for the next lowest offeror until an offer is found with a Past Performance rating of substantial or until all quotes have been evaluated. The Contracting Officer shall then make an integrated assessment to render the best value award decision.

During all stages of the evaluations, the Government reserves the right to engage with one or multiple offerors, but is not required to do so. Therefore, offerors should provide their best available pricing in their initial quote.

3. PRICE EVALUATION

The offeror’s price must 1) adhere to all requirements of 52.212-1 and accompanying addendum and 2) be determined fair and reasonable. Prices will be rounded off to two decimal points. Total price will be evaluated for price reasonableness IAW at least one of the methods indicated in FAR 13.106-3(a).

4. TECHNICAL EVALUATION

The Government’s technical evaluation team will evaluate the technical proposal based on an acceptable or unacceptable basis. Offerors must receive a rating of “Acceptable” in all subfactors to receive an over rating of Technically Acceptable. The subfactors are as follows:

Subfactor 1: Project Schedule

Criteria: IAW Attachment 6 – Instructions to Offerors, the offeror shall submit a project schedule that identifies: the separate work elements; order of work elements to include project phasing; number of days for each work element; and the specific work elements in the critical path.

Technical Merit: To receive an Acceptable rating for this subfactor, the offeror must adequately demonstrate their understanding of the requirement and their ability to successfully complete the demolition IAW the Statement of Work by addressing each Subfactor 1 element listed above in their technical submission.

Subfactor 2: Management Plan

Criteria: The offeror shall demonstrate how they will successfully manage the contract.

Technical Merit: To receive an Acceptable rating for this subfactor, the offeror must demonstrate their ability to successfully furnish the manpower and equipment necessary to perform and manage the multiple disciplines of this requirement. This shall include supervisory experience of key personnel.

Subfactor 3: Qualifications

Criteria: The offeror shall demonstrate ability to successfully complete the demolition by illustrating the qualifications of key personnel who will be involved in the day-to-day accomplishment of the work.

Technical Merit: To receive an Acceptable rating for this subfactor, the offeror must provide the key personnel who will be involved in the project. Additionally, the offeror must provide a program manager and superintendent with the following qualifications:

I. Program manager with at least 5 years of experience.

II. Superintendent with at least 5 years of experience in construction with 2 of those years as a superintendent on projects similar in relevancy to this requirement. This subfactor element must demonstrate familiarity with the requirements of EM 385-1-1 and the experience in the areas of hazard identification and safety compliance. This includes successful completion of the OSHA 10-hour training course within the last three years.

Subfactor 4: Safety Plan

Criteria: The offeror shall submit a Safety Plan detailing measures taken to protect personnel, structures, and vegetation in the vicinity of the work site.

Technical Merit: To receive an Acceptable rating for this subfactor, the offeror must demonstrate reasonable precautionary measures that adequately address safety concerns relating to the demolition of multiple level buildings within close proximity to other buildings and personnel.

5. PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

Past Performance will be evaluated on recency, relevancy, and quality of performance. Past Performance will be evaluated as a measure of the Government’s confidence in the offeror’s ability to successfully perform based on previous and current contract efforts. Performance confidence ratings assess the probability of the offeror successfully accomplishing the proposed effort based on the offerors Past Performance. The Government may seek recent and relevant performance information on all offerors based on the use of Past Performance questionnaires, Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS)/Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARS), or private and commercial sources.

Past Performance will be considered relevant if the past/present effort is similar in scope and complexity to this requirement. Relevancy ratings are shown below.

Very Relevant: Present/Past Performance involved essentially the same or exceeded the scope and complexity of this requirement.

Relevant: Present/Past Performance involved similar scope and complexity of this requirement.

Somewhat Relevant: Present/Past Performance effort involved some of the scope and complexity of this requirement.

Not Relevant: Present/Past Performance involved little or none of the scope and complexity of this requirement.

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

Quality of Performance: Recent Past Performance that is determined to be relevant and recent will be reviewed to determine the quality of the offerors performance and general trends of the performance.

This information will be used by the evaluation team to determine overall performance confidence assessment rating. One of the following ratings will be assigned to each offeror who Past Performance is evaluated:

Substantial Confidence: Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence: Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence: No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of Past Performance.

Limited Confidence: Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence: Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Past Performance regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirements may not be considered as highly as Past Performance information for the principal offeror. Past Performance regarding minor members of Joint Ventures will be considered in accordance with the member’s share of the prospective contract.

Adverse Past Performance: Offerors will be given an opportunity to address adverse Past Performance information if the offeror, joint venture member and/or critical subcontractors has not had a previous opportunity to respond to the information.

(End of Addendum to FAR 52.212-2)