Attachment 3 - Evaluation Criteria - Updated.docx
DOCX document 23 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- DJA-24-ALAB-PR-0025
About this file
This document outlines the evaluation criteria for a solicitation seeking maintenance services for Oxford Instrument energy spectroscopy equipment. The Department of Justice Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives will award a contract to the lowest priced technically acceptable offeror to provide one annual preventative maintenance visit with priority technical support. Proposals will be evaluated on technical capability of personnel and organizational structure to perform the requirements. Offerors must demonstrate service will be performed by Oxford-certified technicians using factory-certified parts, and provide unlimited remote support and loaner equipment if needed. Past performance will be rated as acceptable or unacceptable based on records. Price will be the determining factor for award between technically acceptable proposals.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment 6 - Brand Name Justification_Redacted.pdf | ||
| Attachment 4 - Clauses.pdf | ||
| Attachment 3 - Evaluation Criteria.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 1 - Statement of Work.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 2 - Quotation Instructions.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 5 - CLINS.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
ATTACHMENT 3 – EVALUATION CRITERIA
Oxford’s Aztec Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy Equipment Maintenance
EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD
The Government will award a Contract resulting from this Request for Proposal (RFP) to the offeror whose Proposal is Lowest Price Technically Acceptable. The ATF will award a contract to the lowest priced contractor whose proposal meets or exceeds the technical capabilities in the Statement of Work (SOW).
Only the lowest priced proposal will be reviewed for technical acceptability. If it’s found to be technically acceptable, award will be made to that offeror without further evaluation of the other proposals received. If the proposal is technically unacceptable, then the next lowest priced proposal will be evaluated for technical acceptability until a technically acceptable proposal is found.
Non-Price Factors:
· Factor 1: Technical Capability (Personnel Requirements)
The Government will evaluate the Technical Capability that demonstrate the offeror’s organizational structure and personnel manage and perform as defined in this solicitation. Additionally, the proposal must demonstrate the offeror ability to meet the following:
· The contract shall include one (1) scheduled annual preventative maintenance visit and priority status for technical support.
· Must show proof that the work will be performed by service technicians certified and authorized by Oxford, and all replacement parts must be factory certified by Oxford.
· The computers purchased from Oxford with the original instrument purchase is required for the operation of the system and is to be included in the support plan. Software and firmware updates as part of preventative or corrective maintenance visits shall be included.
· Must include unlimited remote desktop support and loaner equipment (if applicable)
· Factor 2: Past Performance
· The Government may seek relevant performance information on all responsive and otherwise Technically Acceptable Offerors through sources such as Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), or other government data bases and other sources that are available. The government shall not be limited in its search for performance data. The offeror shall not submit performance data for this factor. When performance is evaluated, the outcome is either Acceptable or Unacceptable. Unacceptable performance will disqualify an offeror from award.
Price Factor:
· Factor 3: Price
The purpose of the price evaluation is to provide an assessment of the reasonableness of the submitted price.
EVALUATION PROCEDURES
Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating
Offeror’s Technical Capability and Past Performance will be rated using an Acceptable/Unacceptable rating system.
Technical Capability
| Adjectival Rating |
| Description |
| Acceptable |
| Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation. |
| Unacceptable |
| Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation. |
Past Performance
| Adjective |
| Definition / Description |
| 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 on 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. |
Price Analysis
If more than one proposal is received, competition will determine price reasonableness.
If only one proposal is received, the price evaluation is to provide an assessment of the reasonableness of the proposed price in relation to the solicitation requirements.
Price Evaluation: The total price will be evaluated by the Contracting Officer.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .