Attachment II - Addendum to 52.212-2.docx

Attachment II: Addendum to 52.212-2

EVALUATION CRITERIA

(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the Offeror conforming to the solicitation when technical capability, past performance, and price are considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate the offer:

Order of Importance:

(i) Technical Capability

(ii) Past Performance

(iii) Price

Basis for Award: Award of this requirement will be made on a best value basis, technical capability, past performance, and price considered. The Government intends to award without discussions. The Government reserves the right to hold discussions if deemed necessary. The Offeror MUST provide their best complete proposal upon initial submission.

The Government evaluator(s) will not assume that the Offeror possess any capability or knowledge unless it is specified in the proposal. If Technical Capability received an individual rating of “unacceptable” the collective overall rating will also be “unacceptable.” Only a proposal receiving an overall rating of “acceptable” will be further considered for award.

Factor 1: Technical Capability Technical Capability will be evaluated to the degree to which Offeror demonstrates overall ability to perform the services and their understanding of the requirements set forth in the performance work statement (PWS).

Factor 2: Past Performance Past Performance evaluation considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet this contract’s requirements. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information).

Recency: The first aspect to be evaluated is recency. To be considered recent, the offeror’s past performance references must have been completed not more than 5 years prior to the posting of this combined synopses/solicitation. Past performance will be assigned a value of Recent or Not Recent. If an offeror’s past performance reference has been assigned a value of Not Recent, it will not be further evaluated.

Relevancy: The second aspect to be evaluated is relevancy. To be considered relevant, the offeror’s past performance references must be for intraoperative laser support services. Past performance will be assigned a value of Relevant or Not Relevant. If an offeror’s past performance reference has been assigned a value of Not Relevant, it will not be further evaluated.

Quality of Performance: The third aspect to be evaluated is the overall quality of the offeror’s past performance. During this evaluation, information will be collected regarding the level of performance provided for each past performance reference. The Government reserves the right to use information obtained from any sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, CPARS, Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and commercial sources and/or non-Government sources.

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant past performance record, the Government will assign an overall Performance Confidence Assessment rating as described in the below table.

PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS

In the case of offerors for which there is no information on past contract performance or where past contract performance information is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past contract performance. In this case, the offeror’s past performance is unknown and assigned a performance confidence rating of “Neutral.”

Factor 3: Price Price will be evaluated/analyzed separately from Technical Capability. Price will be evaluated in accordance with FAR 12.209 and 13.106-3 for fair and reasonableness in terms of:

- pricing is proposed based on level of effort within the solicitation

- pricing is proposed for all CLINs

(b) Price will be evaluated for: