Attachment 8 Section M.pdf

ATTACHMENT 8

Provisions incorporated by reference:

FAR 52.217-5 Evaluation of Options (July 1990)

Section M. Evaluation Factors for Award

1.0 SOURCE SELECTION

1.1. Basis for Contract Award

This is a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) source selection conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15, Contracting by Negotiation, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), the Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFFARS), and DoD Source Selection Procedures. These regulations are available electronically at https://www.acquisition.gov/browse/index/far. The solicitation requirements include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by this solicitation. Unless specifically identified in your proposal, by submission of its offer, the Offeror accedes to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in a proposal being determined ineligible for award.

1.2. Number of Contracts to be Awarded

The Government intends to award one contract for this competitive acquisition. Award will be made to the technically acceptable Offeror with lowest evaluated price who is deemed responsible in accordance with FAR 9.104 and whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements. The Government reserves the right to award all, some or none of the Contract Line Items Numbers (CLINs) in Section B.

The Government may fund and award all, some or none of the CLIN groupings (CLINs 0001, 0002 and 0003 for Lewis Valley Road) (CLINs 0004, 0005 and 0006 for Lewis Valley Trail) associated with each project site. The Government may also award but not fund a CLIN grouping associated with a project site and hold as optional CLINs to fund within 90 days after contract award in accordance with the special contract requirement in Section H entitled Option for Separately Priced Contract Line Item Number(s).

1.3. Discussions

The Government intends to award without discussions; therefore, offerors should submit proposals that represent their best efforts. If, during the evaluation period, it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to hold discussions, offeror responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs) and the Final Proposal Revision (FPR) will be considered in making the source selection decision.

If discussions are to be conducted, the Government will establish a competitive range based on the ratings of each proposal against all evaluation criteria in the solicitation. The competitive range will consist of the most highly rated offerors based on evaluation of all offers against all factors. The Government reserves the right to further limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals. Prior to the establishment of the competitive range, and after the decision to conduct discussions has been made, the Government may enter into limited communications with offerors whose inclusion or exclusion from the competitive range is uncertain. These communications are limited in accordance with FAR 15.306(b)(1)(ii).

The Government will only enter discussions with those offerors determined to be in the competitive range. At the conclusion of discussions, each offeror still within the competitive range shall be given an opportunity to submit a Final Proposal Revision (FPR) by a common cutoff date and time as established by the Contracting Officer. If, after discussions have begun the Government determines that an offeror’s proposal should no longer be included in the competitive range, the proposal will be eliminated from consideration for award. This may occur at any time even if all material issues have not been discussed or if the offeror has not yet been afforded the opportunity to submit a proposal revision. Written notice of exclusion from the competitive range will be provided to unsuccessful offerors.

1.4. Solicitation Requirements, Terms and Conditions

Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as factors. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the offeror being ineligible for award.

Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and must provide complete supporting rationale. The Government reserves the right to determine any such exceptions unacceptable.

1.5. Evaluation Process

The Lewis Valley Road Project and the Lewis Valley Trail project are separate projects that have been combined and will be evaluated together on this solicitation. CLINs 0001, 0002 and 0003 are associated with Lewis Valley Road. CLINs 0004, 0005 and 0006 are associated with Lewis Valley Trail. Proposals will be evaluated initially for technical acceptability based on the proposed project schedule and work breakdown structure (WBS) and sanitized cost estimate breakdown. After determination of technical acceptability, all technically acceptable proposals will be ranked from lowest to highest based on an assessment of Total Evaluated Price (TEP). TEP is total aggregate price for all CLINs. CLINs that may be awarded as options shall be included in the TEP and evaluated in accordance with the provision at FAR 52.217-5 Evaluation of Options as contained in this Section M. The government intends to award a contract to the contractor that provides a proposal that is determined technically acceptable based on an understanding of required elements of work and is the lowest price. A price analysis will be conducted on the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal to determine price reasonableness. Award will be made to the lowest TEP proposal meeting the technical acceptability standards. If award is to be made without discussion the evaluation factors and process to be used is listed below. The Government will conduct a Price Analysis on the lowest priced technically acceptable offer using one or more of the techniques defined in FAR 15.404-1, to determine if it is reasonable and balanced. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable TEP, the price of one or more contract line items or sub line items appears to be significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of price analysis techniques. An offeror's proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

2.0 EVALUATION FACTORS

2.1 Evaluation Factors.

In evaluating proposals, the Government will select the proposal that is the lowest-priced, technically acceptable offer to the Government. The Government will evaluate proposals for technical acceptability, but will not rank the proposals by the non-price factors. To arrive at an award decision, each offer will be assessed in accordance with the following evaluation factors for the contract:

Factor 1: Technical Factor 2: Price

Offerors are advised that their initial submission should be their best effort. Only technically acceptable proposals, either initially or as a result of discussions, are eligible for award. If award is made without discussions; proposal revisions will not be permitted. The Government will evaluate the proposals for technical acceptability on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. For the technical proposal to be rated as "Acceptable", the contractor must demonstrate an understanding of the requirement by submitting a proposed project schedule and a WBS that identifies the elements of work, labor mixes, materials, equipment and labor hours to complete project.

Factor 1: Technical Subfactor 1 – Proposed Project Schedule Subfactor 2 – Work Breakdown Structure Subfactor 3 – Sanitized Cost Estimate Breakdown

Factor 2: Price Subfactor 1 – Basis of Estimate

2.2 Factor 1– Technical

The Government's technical evaluation team shall evaluate the technical proposals on an acceptable or unacceptable basis, assigning one of the ratings described below. A technical evaluation will be conducted for each technical volume for each site. For the technical proposal to be rated as "Acceptable", the contractor must demonstrate an understanding of the requirement by submitting a proposed project schedule and WBS that identifies the elements of work, labor mixes, materials, equipment and labor hours to complete project. If any portion of the technical factor is "Unacceptable" the overall proposal will be rated as "Unacceptable”.

TECHNICAL RATINGS

Rating Description Acceptable The proposal meets specified minimum requirements necessary for acceptable contract performance.

Unacceptable The proposal fails to meet specified minimum requirements necessary for contract performance.

2.2.1 Subfactor 1 – Proposed Project Schedule

Description: Provide a proposed schedule that captures the major elements of work described in the statement of work, deliverables, and specifications to meet any other scheduled timelines for deliverables and complete the project at minimum within the allotted period of performance (or sooner).

The standard has been met when: The offeror demonstrates a sound, comprehensive, realistic, effective, and efficient project schedule that captures all SOW requirements and execution timelines. The offeror must provide a schedule that illustrates and displays project completion of all major elements of work and timelines for each element of work using a graphical or tabular representation (e.g. MS Project, AF Form

3064, or Gantt chart). The project schedule shall be redacted to remove all company names, logos, and personnel names.

2.2.2 Subfactor 2 – Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)

Description: Provide a WBS that demonstrates and describes the proposed solution activities, tasks, and elements required to complete all requirements IAW the SOW. The WBS shall provide the major elements of work, labor, materials, and equipment for each activity.

2.2.3 Subfactor 3 –Sanitized Cost Estimate Breakdown

A sanitized copy of the Cost Estimate Breakdown showing no prices will be evaluated to determine the types and quantities of labor, materials, equipment and other direct costs are appropriate to successfully complete the project.

The standard has been met when: The offeror provides a WBS and sanitized Cost Estimate Breakdown that demonstrate an understanding of the requirement by proposing the appropriate materials, labor mix, equipment, other direct costs ,and manpower to complete all tasks in SOW.

2.3 Factor 2 – Pricing

Description: Provide a complete independent basis of estimate for each project site. Each project site basis of estimate shall identify the elements of work, labor mixes, materials, equipment and labor hours to complete the project. The estimate should show detailed listing of RS Means line item numbers, description of items, units of measure, quantity of units required, and unit costs. Additionally, the basis of estimate shall provide actual rates (i.e. profit, overhead, labor burden, bonding, City Cost Index) and the proper application of these rates to derive at the proposal grand total. The aggregate for these independent basis of estimates will be used to evaluate the Total Evaluated Price (TEP).