B.08 Evaluation Criteria - Willapa Sediment Characterization Service.pdf

E. EVALUATION CRITERIA

(1) Technical Factors (Volume 1 Technical Response)

Experience

The Government will evaluate the extent to which the Contractor’s previous experience with projects of similar scope, magnitude, and complexity demonstrates its capability to successfully perform the requirements of this Request for Quotation (RFQ).

Submission Instructions: Submit a detailed descriptive listing for at least two (2) and no more than five (5) projects performed within the past ten (10) years that are similar in nature to the one described in this RFQ. “Similar” is defined as projects comparable in terms of such factors as duration, dollar value, types of services performed or level of Contractor responsibility and authority. Include the following information at a minimum in the detailed description submitted for each project:

(1) Project title and location

(2) Total Dollar Value of the Contractual Instrument

(3) Offeror’s Role (e.g. Prime, JV, Subcontractor, etc.) and responsibility (design work, field sampling, lab analysis, etc.) on the project.

(4) (If applicable) List of subcontracted services and subcontractors used.

(5) Type of contract (e.g., cost reimbursable, incentive fee, award fee, time and materials, fixed price, etc.).

(6) Date of contract start and completion.

(7) Name, title, address, phone number, and email of customer contact. It is incumbent on the offeror to ensure the customer information is current and accurate.

(8) Brief narrative description that demonstrates how the project is relevant to this RFQ and demonstrates one or more of the experience bullets listed below.

The Offeror’s quote submission must demonstrate the following experience:

• Performance of sediment characterization in coastal/marine environments.

• Ability to generate sampling and analysis plans in accordance with the Dredged Material Management

Program (DMMP) User Manual.

• Ability to collect and process sediment grab samples and analyze the sediment samples for chemical and biological laboratory testing in accordance with DMMP guidance.

• Ability to review, interpret and synthesize chemical and biological sediment data succinctly in a comprehensive data report that includes tables and figures.

• Ability to generate, review, and upload electronic data deliverables in the Washington State Environmental

Information Management (EIM) database format for acceptance and publication in the EIM database.

The Government will evaluate experience on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis as follows:

Acceptable: The quote meets the requirements of the RFQ, demonstrates previous experience with projects of a similar, scope, magnitude, and complexity, and demonstrates the capability to successfully perform the requirements of this purchase order. The Offeror submits the required number of relevant project examples, and those projects, when combined, clearly demonstrate experience in all five of the specific areas listed above. Not all experience items must be demonstrated in any one project.

Unacceptable: The quote does not meet the requirements of the RFQ, does not demonstrate previous experience with projects of a similar, scope, magnitude, and complexity, and does not document the capability of the offeror to successfully perform the requirements of this purchase order. The Offeror fails to submit the required number of projects, or the submitted projects, when combined, do not demonstrate experience in all five of the specific areas listed above.

(2) Past Performance

The Government will evaluate the quality of the offeror's past performance deemed relevant to the requirements of this RFQ. The Government will use information submitted by the offeror and any other sources of information available to assess past performance.

Submission Instructions: Provide past performance information for no more than three (3) of the most relevant contracts performed for Federal agencies, state/local governments, and/or commercial customers within the last ten

(10) years from the issue date of this RFQ or currently being performed. Relevant contracts include contracts similar to or greater in scope, magnitude, and complexity than the effort described in this RFQ. Provide a Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR) for the referenced project if one is available. If a CPAR is not available, submit a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) signed by the customer reference (See Attachment 3 to this RFQ).

It is the responsibility of the Offeror to include the completed CPAR and/or PPQ as part of its quote.

The Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in the solicitation is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes in its proposal for Past Performance for the Prime Contractor. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client’s point of contact.

Completed PPQs should be submitted with your quote. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project before the quote closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the quote the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project. Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure the timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Della Overton via email at <Della.S.Overton@usace.army.mil> prior to the quote closing date. Do not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFQs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/UEI numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate)identified in the offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate, and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

The Government will evaluate past performance on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis as follows:

Acceptable: Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown.

Unacceptable: Based upon the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

NOTE: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance.

(3) Price (Volume 2 Quote Schedule)

Pricing shall consist of a quote sheet (Attachment 2) covering all tasks, deliverables, and key and/or non-key personnel requirements.

The offeror’s price quote will be evaluated to ensure that it complies with all requirements provided in this RFQ.

The Contracting Officer will determine the reasonableness of the individual offered rates, consider any discounts offered from the MAS awarded prices, and evaluate the total price. All proposed prices, for the base year and option year(s), if any, shall be given.

Prices that are excessively high, low, or unbalanced may be deemed unrealistic and unreasonable and may receive no further consideration.

F. Evaluation and Basis of Award

The Government reserves the right to make award based on initial quotes; therefore, offerors are encouraged to submit their best quote from both a technical and price aspect, and not assume that the Government will hold discussions.

Award of this purchase order will be made on a competitive basis using the lowest price technically acceptable (LPTA) approach. Evaluation will be made to identify all offerors whose quotes are technically acceptable in accordance with the Government’s requirements and the evaluation criteria. The award will be made to the offeror from the pool of technically acceptable quotes, whose price is the lowest.