Attachment V- Evaluation-Basis of Award.pdf

Attachment V

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

1. CONTENT AND FORMAT OF SUBMISSION OF QUOTE

Submit one (1) original complete response to this solicitation. The offerors response shall consist of two (2) volumes. The submissions shall be sent electronically to Robyn Moore at Robyn.Moore@exim.gov and Thu Vo at Thu.Vo@exim.gov The offeror’s response shall comprise the following two volumes:

1. Volume I: Technical Submittal;

2. Volume II: Pricing

A cover sheet shall accompany each Volume, clearly marked with the solicitation #, Volume title, date of submittal, acknowledgement of any amendments, Offeror’s name, address, taxpayer ID number, DUNs number, CAGE code, and the Offeror’s POC name, phone number and email address. The cover sheet shall not count against any page limitation.

Clarity and completeness is paramount. Responses should not merely restate the requirements without describing the plan, approach, experience, examples, etc.

2. PAGE RESTRICTIONS

Responses must be legible, double spaced in a type size not smaller than 12 point font with a one-inch margin on all sides, on paper not larger than eight and a half by eleven inches and not exceeding the page limits established in this solicitation.

The Technical Submittal shall not exceed 20 pages in length; the quality control plan; cover page(s), executive summary and table of contents; past performance references and questionnaires; labor categories/resumes and other business information are excluded from the page limit.

Pages shall be numbered consecutively; a page printed on both sides shall be counted as two pages. Pages submitted in excess of the page limitations stated above will be removed and not evaluated.

3. COSTS INCURRED IN SUBMISSION OF QUOTE

This solicitation does not commit the Government to pay any cost incurred in the submission of the quote or in making necessary studies of designs for the preparation thereof, nor to contract for services or supplies.

4. TECHNICAL SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS (VOLUME 1)

Technical submittal shall be comprised of

1. Technical Approach

2. Management Approach

3. Past Performance

The technical submittal will be evaluated to determine whether the submittal meets the Government’s requirements outlined in the PWS. The technical submittal must reflect a thorough understanding of the requirements; as well as a detailed description of the techniques and procedures for achieving the objectives of the PWS.

Technical Approach:

The Offeror shall make a clear and concise presentation of the technical approaches to accomplish each task outlined in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). The submittal shall reflect a substantive understanding of the scope and complexity of the tasks and requirements associated with the project described in the PWS. In addition, the offeror shall provide sufficient detail to indicate a technical understanding of, and capability for, performing all aspects of the PWS including responsiveness to all instructions and requirements as specified and described in the RFQ.

Managment Approach:

The offeror shall demonstrate the ability to manage all aspects of the proposed efforts including technical performance, time and delivery constraints, cost, status reporting, and subcontractor(s). The Offeror shall demonstrate that it possesses appropriate and sufficient management oversight for the overall organization that addresses the planning, initiation, implementation, conduct, monitoring and quality control to achieve the objectives outlined in the PWS to include the Offeror’s management, coordination, and oversite of the work to be performed by consultants and/or subcontractor(s).

• Resumes of Key personnel proposed to perform the tasks outlined in the PWS;

• The Contractor shall submit the Quality Control Plan (QCP). The offeror (including subcontractors) must demonstrate appropriate and sufficient procedures, facilities and staff to meet the performance requirement outlined in the task order PWS; and

The offeror (including any applicable subcontractors known to the offeror at the date of its response) must demonstrate appropriate and sufficient procedures, facilities and staff to meet the performance requirement outlined in the PWS.

The contractor shall provide information for the following:

-The performance risks foreseen by the contractor and the contractor’s response to each risk.

-Experience of offeror in performing requirements of Government agencies under similar contracts.

- Information that shows proposed staff have the education, training, knowledge, and experience to successfully carry out the project. Specifically, requisite qualifications, experience, and time commitment of the project director and proposed staff that show:

• Demonstrated ability of proposed staff to perform work assignments accurately and in a timely manner.

• Staff assigned to the project possess the requisite knowledge, skills and abilities to perform the work. This includes:

i. Significant experience and understanding of the tasks and requirements outlined in the PWS;

ii. Significant experience providing financial advisory guidance on impaired and restructured project finance wind energy transactions;

iii. Significant understanding of finanecial institution risk management evaluation and strategies, particularly with regard towind energy project finance.; and

iv. Significant experience working at or for a financial institution.

• An effective management plan that ensures allocation of staff and resources to accomplish project goals.

Past Performance:

The Contractor shall provide a description of past performance, which contains three (3) relevant past performance experiences. The past performance experiences shall be broadly similar to the size, scope and complexity of the work tasks and requirements that EXIM Bank defines in the PWS.

Past performance must include the following information:

• Contract number (if applicable)

• Value

• Description

• Technical/contracting points of contact (POC’s), including the designated POC’s name, telephone number, agency and e-mail address

The Offeror shall send a copy of the Past Performance Questionnaire (see Attachment) to one contact person (POC) from the three (3) references described above for them to complete. After the POC completes the Past Performance Questionnaire, they shall submit it directly to Robyn Moore at Robyn.Moore@exim.gov and Thu Vo at Thu.Vo@exim.gov. The Government is not responsible if one or more references fail to provide a completed Performance Questionnaire. Alternatively, the Offeror may submit a CPARS assessment for past performance references used in this RFQ. A combined total of at least 3 Past Performance Questionnaires and CPARS must be received by EXIM prior to the closing date for this solicitation.

Offerors are advised that the Government reserves the right to obtain information for use in the evaluation of past performance from any sources, including Government sources within and outside of EXIM Bank and sources outside of the Government.

mailto:Robyn.Moore@exim.gov mailto:Thu.Vo@exim.gov

The evaluation of past performance on completed projects will be a subjective assessment considering all relevant facts and circumstances, including ratings and references from past and/or current customers. Past performance will be evaluated as a measure of the Government’s confidence in the Offerors’s ability to meet the technical requirements, deliver quality products, and meet the cost and schedule requirements of this project.

5. PRICE QUOTE INSTRUTIONS (VOLUME II)

Pricing will be evaluated based on the overall total price reasonableness of the Quote.

BASIS OF AWARD/EVALUATION CRITERIA

Basis of award:

Award shall be made to responsive, responsible offerors whose Quotes, conforming to this RFQ, provide the overall best value to the Government, technical evaluation factors, and price considered. The Government’s objective is to obtain the highest technical quality considered necessary to achieve the project’s objectives, with a reasonable price. The Government intends to issue a Single Award under this solicitation.

The Technical Approach, Management Approach and Past Performance evaluation criteria, when combined, are more important than price.

Criteria 1 - Technical Approach:

The Government will evaluate the Contractor’s technical approach and methodology to determine whether it demonstrates a substantive understanding of the scope, complexity and requirements associated with the requirements described in the Performance Work Statements (PWS).

Evaluation will determine whether the Contractor has articulated a clear plan to achieve all requirements outlined in the PWS, including responsiveness to all instructions and requirements as specified and described in the RFQ. The Government will evaluate the Contractor’s Quote to determine whether the Contractor’s approach demonstrates a clear understanding of all objectives and requirements outlined in the Performance Work Statements (PWS).

Criteria 2 – Management Approach:

The Contractor will be evaluated to determine whether the Contractor demonstrates the ability to manage all aspects of the proposed effort including technical performance, time and delivery constraints, cost, status reporting, and (if applicable) subcontractor(s). The Contractor will also be evaluated to determine whether the Contractor demonstrated that they possess appropriate and sufficient management oversight for the Contractor’s overall organization addressing the planning, initiation, implementation, conduct, monitoring and quality control to achieve the objectives outlined in the PWS, to include Contractor’s management, coordination and oversite of the work performed by consultants and/or subcontractor(s).

The Contractor will be evaluated to determine whether the Contractor demonstrates that its resources (including subcontractors, consultants, teaming arrangements) will be available to perform the requirements to meet the objectives outlined in the PWS.

The Contractor will be evaluated to determine whether the management plan provides a clear chain of responsibility, quality control plan, cost control method, contract administration, and adequate, qualified staff resources. The Contractor’s management plan shall demonstrate the Contractor’s ability to achieve all requirements outlined in the Performance Work Statements (PWSs), as well as responding to all instructions and requirements specified and described in the RFQ.

The Government will also evaluate the following management plan documents submitted by the Contractor:

Resumes of Key personnel proposed to perform as applicable

The Quality Control Plan (QCP).

Criteria 3 - Past Performance:

The Government will evaluate each past performance references to determine whether it is relevant in terms of size, scope and complexity to the requirement(s) stated in the PWS.

The Government will evaluate and rate relevant past performance references by reviewing the corresponding past performance questionnaire submitted according to the Instructions to Offerors and/or, if applicable, any CPARs past performance assessments. The Government will also consider subjective information such as relevant facts, circumstances and its knowledge of the contractor.

The Government is seeking to determine whether the contractor has consistently demonstrated a commitment to customer satisfaction and timely delivery of high quality products and services.

Contractors shall be evaluated to determine whether they adhere to delivery schedules, including those for administrative reporting. Contractors shall be evaluated to determine their experience in achieving reasonable results, deomonstrate cooperative behavior with the client and or other consultants/subcontractors/teaming arrangement partners, as the case may be, and commitment to customer satisfaction.

Past performance will be evaluated as a measure of the Government’s confidence in the Contractor’s ability to meet technical requirements, deliver quality products, and meet schedule and price requirements of this project and create/foster positive business relationships with the Contractor’s clients.

Exceptional (E) Confidence

Exceptionally Confident. Based on the offeror’s performance record, no doubt exists that the successful offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Little or no Government oversight is expected to be required in achieving the proposed level of performance.

Very Good (G) Confidence

Confidence. Based on the offeror’s performance record, there is essentially no doubt that the successful offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Little or no Government oversight is expected to be required in achieving the proposed level of performance.

Satisfactory (S) Confidence

Confidence. Based on the offeror’s performance record, little doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Little Government oversight is expected to be required in achieving the proposed level of performance.

Marginal (M)

Confidence. Based on the offeror’s performance record, doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Significant Government oversight will be expected in achieving the proposed level of performance.

Unacceptable (U)

No Confidence. Based on the offeror’s performance record, significant doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. No amount of Government oversight will achieve the proposed level of performance.

Neutral (N) Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.

Criteria 4 - Price

The Government will evaluate price to determine whether the price offered is consistent with and based upon the data provided in the Contractor’s Quote. In addition, price must be fair and reasonable as compared to the scope of this requirement.

The Government may use various price analysis techniques and procedures to determine fair and reasonableness as follows:

- Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the solicitation.

- Comparison of previously proposed prices and contract prices with current proposed prices for the same or similar end items or services, if both the validity of the comparison and the reasonableness of the previous prices can be established.

- Comparison of proposed prices with the independent Government cost estimate.

- Comparison of proposed prices with prices obtained through market research for the same or similar items or services.

Options. The Government will evaluate Contractors for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that a Contractor is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).