Attachment_4_-_Evaluation_Factors.pdf

DJM-16-A32-R-0002

X-RAY SERVICES FOR RAPISCAN MODELS 620XR/622XR

EVALUATION FACTORS

ATTACHMENT 4

Attachment 4 – Evaluation Factors for Award

Addendum to FAR 52.212-2 EVALUATION—COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014)

(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

1. TECHNICAL APPROACH

2. PAST PERFORMANCE

3. PRICE

When Technical Approach and Past Performance are combined they are approximately equal to price.

Past Performance is approximately equal to one Technical Approach Factor.

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

Government to exercise the option(s).

(c) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer's specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

(End of provision)

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2

BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD: This is a competitive best value source selection in which competing offerors’ past performance history, price, and technical approach will be evaluated. By submission of its offer, the offeror accedes to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations, and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. The Government intends to award to the responsible

Contractor whose offer is the most advantageous to the Government. Offers will be evaluated on these factors:

Technical Approach: Offerors technical quotations will be evaluated to determine if the offeror provides a compliant approach that meets the requirements of the Performance Work Statement requirements and demonstrates a thorough knowledge and understanding of those requirements. An evaluation rating of

Acceptable or Non-Acceptable will be assigned upon completion of the evaluation of each factor. If an

Offeror receives a technical rating of “Non-Acceptable” they will not be considered for contract award.

Failure to respond to a technical evaluation factor will be acknowledged as being a negative response and evaluated as “Not-Acceptable.”

Technical Approach will be evaluated in accordance with the following Table:

TABLE 1 – TECHNICAL APPROACH FACTOR RATINGS

RATING DESCRIPTION

ACCEPTABLE

The Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

NOT ACCEPTABLE

The Government has no reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

The following factors identified in the Performance Work Statement shall be evaluated and determined as

Acceptable or Non-Acceptable. All technical approach factors must be addressed with a written statement detailing how the offeror will meet the technical approach factors. Please note the offeror’s proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet the needs of the Government’s requirements.

1. Technicians: Capability to provide technicians, and sub-contractors if applicable, that have and maintain Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) Certification (Rapiscan) for the units identified

2. Service Footprint: Capability to provide service CONUS and OCONUS

3. Quality Assurance Plan: Comprehensive information on the capacity, capability, and method(s) on how the offer will continually meet the requirements in the Performance Work Statement, to include timeliness of deliverables, personnel resources, parts availability, and accurate reporting requirements

4. Response: Method(s) and ability to meet service response times within the identified restraints

5. Warranties: Method(s) and ability to provide warranties for parts labor and travel describing warranty period for parts, labor and travel associated with a repair performed at or near the end of the contract period of performance

6. Parts: Capability to provide OEM (Rapiscan) parts for the units identified through an OEM

(Rapiscan) verification or business partnership/agreement with the OEM (Rapiscan)

7. Service Number: Method(s) and ability to provide a nationwide technical service toll free telephone number serviced 24 hours per day

8. Deliverables: Capability to provide deliverables described in the Performance Work Statement including service reports, monthly reports, and invoicing

Past Performance: The Contracting Officer shall seek recent and relevant performance information on all offerors based on (1) the references provided by the offeror and (2) data independently obtained from other government and commercial sources. Relevant present/past performance is defined as effort involving a similar scope and similar magnitude of effort and complexity as this solicitation requires.

Offerors with no relevant past or present performance history or the offerors performance record is so limited that no assessment rating can be reasonably assigned shall receive the rating “Neutral”, meaning the rating is treated neither favorably nor unfavorably.

Past Performance will be evaluated in accordance with the following Table:

TABLE 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE FACTOR RATINGS

RATING DESCRIPTION

ACCEPTABLE

The Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

NOT ACCEPTABLE

The Government has no reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

NEUTRAL

No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

Price: The Government shall rank all technically Acceptable offers by price, including option years. An offerors proposed price will be determined by multiplying the quantities identified in Attachment

2_Pricing Schedule by the proposed unit price for each Contract Line Item Number to confirm the extended amount for each. The price evaluation will document the reasonableness of the proposed total evaluated price.

Other Notifications:

The Government intends to award a contract without discussions with respective offerors. The

Government, however, reserves the right to conduct discussions if deemed in its best interest.

An offeror receiving a “Not Acceptable” rating in any factor will not be considered for award regardless of ratings in other factors. Offerors may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal or respond to adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond. Adverse past performance is defined as past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation element or any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system.

Communication conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute discussions and the contracting officer reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for proposal revision.

(end addendum)