Vehicle_Section_M.docx

Section M, Evaluation Factors For Award Section M – Evaluation Factors for Award

1.0 BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD

This is a competitive, Lowest Price Technically Acceptable source selection that will be conducted IAW Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15.3, Defense Federal Acquisition Supplement (DFARS) Part 215.3, Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFFARS) Part 5315.3, and the Department of Defense Source Selection Procedures. The Offeror’s proposal shall include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by Section L. A proposal that omits information may be excluded from further consideration.

A contract may be awarded to the Offeror: 1) who is deemed responsible IAW the FAR, as supplemented; 2) whose proposal conforms to the solicitation’s requirements, and 3) whose proposal is determined by the SSA to represent the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable to the Government. While the Government source selection evaluation team and the SSA will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature, is subjective, and therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process. The SSA will base the source selection decision on an integrated assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in the solicitation.

1.1 Number of Contracts to be Awarded. The Government intends to award one Firm Fixed-Price contract for the Vehicles Lease Services program.

1.2 Discussions. IAW FAR 52.215-1(f)(4), the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions. Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. Offerors shall submit the required information in the format specified in Section L, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents. Offerors may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their Price, Technical, or Past Performance proposal. Exchanges conducted with regard to adverse past performance or to resolve minor or clerical errors in any of the proposal volumes will not constitute discussions, and the CO reserves the right to award a contract without granting an opportunity to revise the original proposal.

1.2.1. If discussions are held, Offeror responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs) and the Final Proposal Revision (FPR) will be considered in making the source selection decision. If the Offeror’s proposal has been evaluated as acceptable at the time discussions are closed, any changes or exceptions in the Final Proposal Revision are subject to evaluation and may introduce risk that the Offeror’s proposal be determined unacceptable and ineligible for award.

1.3 Competitive Range. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if deemed in its best interest. In order to conduct discussions, a competitive range will be

FA5702-18-R-XXXX, Vehicle Lease Services Attachment 3 established based on FAR 15.306(c) procedures and this solicitation. If the SSA determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the SSA may 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. Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from and price and technical standpoint. If the SSA determines that an Offeror’s proposal should no longer be included in the competitive range, the proposal will be eliminated from consideration for award. Written notice of this decision will be provided to unsuccessful Offeror(s) IAW FAR 15.503(a)(1).

1.4 Site Visits. The Government reserves the right to conduct site visits with Offerors. The site visit team may include subject matter experts (SME) in vehicle lease management, vehicle maintenance, environmental, services, security and/or contracting. Site visits will last approximately one to two days. Offerors will be informed in writing in advance of the time and date the site visit will occur. The intent of the site visit is to allow the technical evaluation team to assess an offeror’s ability to accomplish the technical requirements in the PWS.

1.5 Evaluation Factors for Award

Evaluation of offers will be made IAW the criteria outlined in this section. The proposals will be evaluated against the following four factors:

Volume I: Technical

Subfactor 1: Mobilization Subfactor 2: Vehicle Provisioning Subfactor 3: Vehicle Maintenance Subfactor 4: Staffing Plan

Volume II: Past Performance Volume III: Price

1.6 Relevant Importance of Factors and Subfactors. The relative importance of each factor and subfactor is as follows: All factors and technical subfactors are equal in importance. IAW FAR 15.304(e), all evaluation factors other than price, when combined, is approximately equal in importance to price.

Lowest Price Technically Acceptable, as defined for this acquisition, means that the best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price. Proposals shall be evaluated for acceptability but not ranked using the non-price factors.

2.0 Volume I: Technical

2.1 Technical Site Visits: Site In the event site visits are conducted, the evaluation team will ensure the contractor proposed technical approach equipment, facilities, airfields, etc., meet PWS, federal, and local requirements, and provides a safe/secure environment. The site survey team will assess any current or proposed:

i. Primary and auxiliary fleet vehicles.

ii. Facilities (interior and exterior) for general condition, accessibility, and the environment around the facilities that will affect the safety and security of vehicles provided.

iii. Vehicle Fleet storage/staging area to include: surrounding area, roads traveled between location and base, and parking area integrity.

iv. Equipment to include transportation vehicles for general/working condition, accessibility/ease of use, and proper safety features.

2.2 Technical Subfactors will be evaluated on a pass/fail basis as being rated “acceptable” or “unacceptable.” Any subfactor evaluated as “unacceptable” will render the entire proposal unacceptable and, therefore, unawardable. Only those proposals determined to be technically acceptable, will be considered for award. However, the Offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussion. Explanations of the ratings are in the Technical Ratings Table 1 below.

TECHNICAL RATINGS

2.3 Subfactor 1: Mobilization

This subfactor assesses the Offeror’s ability to successfully mobilize 100% of the Al Udeid AB Vehicle Lease requirements IAW with the PWS to full operations within 180 days of contract award. The evaluation will address the Offerors response as outlined in the right-hand column (the “Instructions to Offerors” column on the left is verbatim from Section L and is provided here for reference only):

Subfactor 1: Mobilization

2.3.1 The Offeror shall describe a mobilization strategy that will lead to full performance. The mobilization plan shall include contractor developed milestones with detailed plans that demonstrate how the Offeror plans to supply 100% of all required vehicles within 180 days of contract award.

2.3.2 The Offeror shall include in the mobilization a contractor developed milestone timeline and details of when and how all the plans and publications listed in Appendix A-4 will be acquired/developed within the mobilization timeframe.

2.3.3 The Offeror shall provide a timeline and methodology that details when and how the process of recruiting, hiring, training, and certifying required personnel will be completed with the mobilization timeframe.

2.3.4 The Offeror shall include an incremental phase in period over the 180 allotted days. Prospective vendors shall not schedule to deliver more than 10% of the vehicle total, of all task orders, per week over the 180 day phase in period.

2.3.5 The Offeror shall provide a plan of when and how vehicles will be delivered to the 379th Expeditionary Logistics Readiness Squadron within the mobilization timeline.

2.3.6 The Offeror shall provide a detailed timeline and the methodology of all required vehicles will be acquired/modified and ready for use within the mobilization timeframe.

The proposal for Mobilization should demonstrate the Offeror’s understanding and ability to plan, coordinate, and implement a program of this magnitude. The contractor developed milestones for mobilization will be evaluated to determine the feasibility of an Offeror’s proposal. The Offeror’s methods of acquiring vehicles, supplies and equipment; hiring and training personnel; and delivering the required vehicles to the customer will be evaluated for practicality, efficiency, and effectiveness.

2.4 Subfactor 2: Vehicle Provisioning

This subfactor assesses the Offeror’s overall plan to provide vehicles for full performance of the Vehicle Lease Services requirement. The evaluation will address the Offeror’s response as outlined in the right-hand column (the “Instructions to Offerors” column on the left is verbatim from Section L and is provided here for reference only):

Subfactor 2: Vehicle Provisioning

2.4.1 The Offeror shall provide a complete list of vehicles conforming to the requirements contained within Attachment 1: Performance Work Statement & Attachment 2: Price List.

2.4.2 The For proposed vehicles that deviate from the list of vehicles provided in Attachment 1: Performance Work Statement & Attachment 2: Price List, the following items shall be included:

- Photos of Proposed Vehicle showing Front, Side, and Rear Profile

- Manufacture Specification Sheet

- Detailed Reason for Substitution

2.4.3 The Offeror shall describe a plan for providing short and long term vehicle requirements. The plan shall also describe how the vendor plans to replace damaged or otherwise un-drivable vehicles. The Offeror shall describe the number of replacement and loaner vehicles on hand as required by Attachment 1: Performance Work Statement.

The proposal for Vehicle Provisioning should demonstrate the Offeror’s ability to provide a complete fleet of vehicles that conforms to the requirements of the PWS. The Government will evaluate whether or not the Offeror’s proposed methods to acquire and provide short and long term lease requirements meet the PWS requirements. The Government will also evaluate the Offeror’s strategy for replacing damaged or otherwise un-drivable vehicles.

2.5 Subfactor 3: Security

This subfactor assesses the Offeror’s overall plan to provide vehicles for full performance of the Vehicle Lease Services requirement. The evaluation will address the Offeror’s response as outlined in the right-hand column (the “Instructions to Offerors” column on the left is verbatim from Section L and is provided here for reference only).

Subfactor 3: Vehicle Maintenance

2.5.1 The Offeror shall provide a detailed Vehicle Maintenance Plan. Maintenance plans shall be specific to each type of vehicle and must adhere to manufacturer recommended standards.

2.5.2 The Vehicle Maintenance Plan shall also demonstrate that vendor has the facilities and capability of performing regular and unscheduled maintenance on a fleet of at least 1500 vehicles.

2.6 Subfactor 4: Staffing Plan

This subfactor assesses the Offeror’s overall staffing plan for full performance of the Vehicle Lease Services requirement. The evaluation will address the Offeror’s response as outlined in the right-hand column (the “Instructions to Offerors” column on the left is verbatim from Section L and is provided here for reference only):

Subfactor 4: Staffing Plan

2.6.1 The Offeror shall provide staffing, training, and retention plans for all personnel needed to meet the PWS requirements. Include with the plans a detailed organizational chart that covers all manpower positions and identifies key personnel positions (program manager, chief financial officer, senior account manager, chief of maintenance, and any other position(s) the Offeror deems key). Describe the proposed level of experience, background, skill levels and training of key personnel. The Offeror shall specifically address how sufficient numbers of qualified key management, supervisory, and maintenance personnel will be encouraged to relocate (if necessary) and remain in the Offeror’s planned area of operations.

2.6.2 The Offeror shall describe the methods and policies that will be used to sustain a work force that will perform the requirements in the PWS. This Staffing Plan shall include a dedicated Program Manager that has no less than three (3) years’ experience in Government or Corporate Vehicle Lease Management.

2.6.3 The Offeror shall describe a plan for surges, back-filling personnel on leave or unforeseen short/long term absences, and provide a plan to back up “one deep” positions. The plan shall also describe any cross utilization of employees.

Quality Control Plan. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s quality control plan (QCP) to assess the Offeror’s ability to identify and prevent deficiencies in the quality of services performed before the level of performance becomes unacceptable. The QCP must clearly identify that it is the contractor and not the Government that is responsible for quality control. The Government will evaluate proposals to ensure Offeror has a clear understanding of the primary areas of importance pertaining to quality control located in the PWS Services Summary section. Key evaluation areas include: areas of inspection, inspection process and frequency; identification, notification and resolution of deficiencies; response to routine, urgent and emergency discrepancy notices; timely response and resolution of corrective action; and follow-up process to ensure non- recurrence. The Government will evaluate the proposed quality control program for Offeror understanding, practicality, efficiency, and effectiveness.

3.0 Volume II: Past Performance

3.1 The Government will evaluate past performance to assess whether or not the Offeror performed work relevant to the requirement described in the solicitation as an indicator of an Offeror’s ability to perform the contract successfully. The Government will use the following procedures in evaluating past performance:

3.1.1 Evaluation Process. The past performance evaluation considers each Offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance for services the solicitation requires and the quality of performance on the past/present efforts. In conducting the Past Performance evaluation, the Government reserves the right to use both the information provided in the Offeror’s Past Performance proposal volume and information obtained from other sources available to the Government. Other sources include are but not limited to: Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers and commercial sources.

3.1.2 The past performance evaluation will take into account past performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel, or subcontractors that are proposed to perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to this acquisition.

3.1.3 The past performance evaluation may consider the past performance of affiliated companies or operating divisions within the parent company or joint ventures of the parent company when it is reasonable to attribute the experience of the past efforts to the proposed effort and when the proposal clearly demonstrates the resources (e.g. financial resources, overall oversight and management, or other resources) of the parent or affiliated division will meaningfully affect performance of the instant acquisition.

3.2 The Offeror’s past performance efforts will be assessed for: Recency and Relevancy. Each proposal will receive an overall rating of either Acceptable or Unacceptable.

PAST PERFORMANCE RATINGS

3.2.1 Recency Assessment. An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. To be considered recent, the effort must have been performed within the five (5) years preceding the date of issuance of this RFP, to include at least six months of documented performance during the (5) five-year period. Contract performance that meets these criteria will be evaluated in their entirety, regardless of the total length of the contract. Contract performance that does not meet these criteria will not be evaluated.

3.2.2 Relevancy Assessment: The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of recent performance information obtained to determine how closely the services performed under those contracts relate to the scope, magnitude and complexity of efforts described in this solicitation.

In determining relevancy, the Government will consider the Offeror’s role in the effort accomplished by the prime, subcontractor, and/or teaming partner on previous/current contracts compared to this solicitation. The submitted combination of contracts will be evaluated as an aggregate and result in one overall relevancy rating for each Offeror’s past performance proposal. The Government anticipates that this combination of contracts would cover all of the Primary Evaluation Areas identified below. Failure to address the Primary Evaluation Area will result in a lower rating.

Primary Evaluation Area

1: Vehicle Provisioning. Past performance shall demonstrate ability to provide a complete fleet of vehicles that conforms to the requirements of the PWS.

3.2.3 The relevancy rating will be integrated in the overall Performance Confidence Assessment Rating. The Government is not bound by the Offeror’s opinion of relevancy. Relevancy will be assigned ratings of Relevant and Not Relevant as defined in Table 4.

TABLE 4 – RELEVANCY ASSESSMENT

4.0 Volume III: Price

4.1 The Government shall evaluate the price proposal and Total Evaluated Price (TEP) of each proposal. The price proposal and TEP will be evaluated for completeness, balanced pricing, and price reasonableness.

4.2 Total Evaluated Price. The TEP will be used for evaluation purposes only and will be a consideration in the best value award decision. The sum total of all CLIN 0001 ordering categories (rates for vehicles to be provided for: Less than 30 days, 30-90 days, 91-180 days, and 181-365 days) will form the Offeror’s total evaluated price (TEP). The individual proposed price for each ELIN will not be evaluated comparatively to other offerors. Each of these ELINs, however, will be evaluated for completeness, balanced pricing, and price reasonableness.

4.3 Completeness. Completeness shall be determined based on the information requested in Section L, paragraph 4.5. Prices that are not properly supported may cause the Government to find an Offeror’s proposal unreasonable, unbalanced or incomplete. Submission of an incomplete Price Model as set forth in Section L, or including pricing information/data elsewhere in the proposal will cause the Offeror’s proposal to be non-compliant with the terms and conditions of this solicitation and may render the proposal ineligible for award.

4.4 Balanced Pricing. The Government will analyze proposals to determine whether they are unbalanced with respect to prices and separately priced line items IAW FAR 15.404- 1(g). An offer may be rejected if the contracting officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

4.5 Reasonableness. The Offeror’s Price proposal will be evaluated to ensure it is fair and reasonable, pursuant to FAR 15.404. Adequate price competition will satisfy reasonableness. If adequate price competition has been determined by the PCO not to be present, a cost analysis may be conducted. For additional information see FAR 31.201-3.

The contract will include FAR Clause 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services, with the potential to extend the contract an additional six months beyond the awarded contract performance period. In the event the Government requires continued performance, the Government’s evaluation of prices proposed for the base period will suffice to be the Government’s evaluation of prices under the extension of services (ref. 52.217-8). Should an extension of services be required, rates will not be adjusted.

FA5702-18-R-XXXX, Vehicle Lease Services Attachment 3