HUD Technology Transformation Next Generation Draft Evaluation Factors

Section M – Evaluation Factors for Award

M.1 Basis for Award

This is a competitive best value tradeoff source selection. The evaluation process will be conducted in two phases. Phase I will consist of the evaluation of the written proposals.

Phase II will consist of Oral Presentations for those offerors determined to be in the competitive range. The final evaluation will incorporate the results of both phases.

The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate proposals. Factors are listed in descending order of importance:

• Factor 1: Technical o Subfactor 1.1: Written Technical Approach o Subfactor 1.2: Oral Presentation

• Factor 2: Past Performance

• Factor 3: Cost/Price

Factor 1 (Technical) is significantly more important than Factor 2 (Past Performance).

Factors 1 and 2, when combined, are significantly more important than Factor 3 (Cost/Price). As the non-cost/price factors become more equal among offerors, the importance of Cost/Price will increase.

M.2 Evaluation of Factors

• Factor 1: Technical o Subfactor 1.1: Written Technical Approach: The Government will evaluate the offeror’s written proposal to assess the degree to which it demonstrates a clear understanding of the PWS requirements and presents a sound, feasible, and comprehensive approach. For Track 2 offerors, this evaluation will be limited to the PWS sections they have proposed.

o Subfactor 1.2: Oral Presentation: For offerors in the competitive range, the Government will evaluate the Key Personnel’s performance during the scenario-based challenges. The evaluation will assess:

▪ The team’s ability to quickly comprehend complex problems.

▪ The quality, creativity, and viability of the proposed solution.

▪ The team’s collaborative process and communication skills.

HUD Technology Transformation Next Generation Draft Evaluation Factors

▪ The demonstrated expertise of the Key Personnel.

▪ Effective use of any Government-provided tools (such as USAi) to enhance their solution. The results of the Oral Presentation will be used to validate or revise the initial rating of the Written Technical Approach, resulting in a single, consolidated rating for the Technical factor where innovation, commitment to extreme ownership, and effective use of artificial intelligence, are plus factors.

• Factor 2: Past Performance The Government will evaluate the offeror’s demonstrated record of performance on recent and relevant contracts. The evaluation will focus on the quality and relevance of the work performed. The Government will assess its level of confidence that the offeror will successfully perform the requirements of this solicitation. For Track 2 offerors, the relevance assessment will be based on the PWS sections they have proposed.

• Factor 3: Cost/Price The Cost/Price proposal will be evaluated for reasonableness and realism but will not be assigned an adjectival rating. The Total Evaluated Price (TEP) will be used for the best value tradeoff decision.

M.3 Award Decision

The Government will make awards to the offerors representing the best value within each track.

• Track 1 (Unrestricted): The Government will rank the proposals based on the evaluation factors. The Source Selection Authority (SSA) will select the top-ranked proposals that represent the best value to the Government.

• Track 2 (Small Business Set-Aside): The Government will separately rank the proposals within this track. The SSA will select the top-ranked proposals that represent the best value to the Government.