DRAFT pre-RFO tech eval - 9-13-2017 - rudux x DRAFT 1.pdf

DRAFT pre-RFO tech eval - 9-13-2017

SA54 EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD - BEST VALUE/TRADE-OFFS SOURCE SELECTION - CONSTRUCTION

Prospective offerors are required to submit technical and business proposals as discussed herein. The Government will make award to the responsible offeror whose proposal conforms to the solicitation terms and conditions, and represents the best value to the Government. The Government reserves the right to award on initial offers without discussions or to conduct one-on-one discussions, at the option of the Government, with one or more offerors, as determined necessary by the Contracting Officer, to clarify statements, resolve issues and omissions, etc. The Government may reject any and all proposals and waive informalities or irregularities in proposals. The Government reserves the right to use and evaluate any and all available pertinent information. The Government is seeking the best combination of technical attributes and price, evaluated on an equally weighted basis. The award may go to other than the lowest -priced offeror: A contractor with a more highly rated technical proposal and higher price may receive the award over a contractor with a lower rated technical proposal and lower price. An offeror’s low-priced proposal may be considered as reflecting on an offeror's understanding of the project and/or risk associated with their proposal, and proposals may be eliminated from consideration based upon price alone, prior to technical evaluation.

Technical proposals will be evaluated on a scale of 0 to 175 points, with points allocated from five technical evaluation criteria. Those criteria are both listed in the table here and presented with minimum-to-maximum point values in provision SA59 just below. Once an offeror’s proposal has been point-scored against each criteria according to SA59, those point values will be percentage-weighted as follows, yielding a final technical proposal score between 0 and 100 percent.

Technical Evaluation Criteria with weighted percentage-values.

Criteria No. Criteria Name Criteria

Percentage-Weight

1 Prime Contractor's experience and past-performance. 30%

2 Electrical Sub-Contractor's qualifications, experience, and past-performance. 20%

3 Prime-contractor project manager’s qualifications, experience, and past-performance. 15%

4 Prime-contractor on-site superintendent’s qualifications, experience, and past-performance. 15%

5 Proposed work schedule and number of crews to complete work by October1, 2018. 25%

See also price consideration in SA60, below.

(End of Provision)

SA59 TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

Criteria 1. Prime Contractor's Experience and Past-Performance: 0 to 50 points. Proposed Prime Contractor's qualifications and past-performance on FAA airport traffic control tower (ATCT) modernization projects and FAA work on active airfields construction projects, or other modernization projects on building types similar in technical requirements, scope and size to FAA ATCT’s and other active airfield construction of similar type and technical requirements, and number of relevant projects of similar scope and size in the past 5 years. Criteria 1 will be point-scored as follows, based upon proposal information and past-project references contacted.

a. 0 points: Below Average Experience and Past Performance.

b. Up-to 10: Average Experience and Past Performance.

c. Up-to 20: Good Experience and Past Performance.

d. Up-to 30: Excellent Experience and Past Performance and Relevant Projects.

e. Up-to 40: Excellent Experience and Past Performance and Highly Relevant Projects OR Superior Performance and Relevant Projects.

f. Up-to 50: Superior Experience and Past Performance and Highly Relevant Projects.

Criteria 2. Electrical Sub-Contractor's Qualifications, Experience, and Past-Performance: 0 to 25 points. Electrical-Sub Contractor's qualifications and past-performance on FAA airport traffic control tower (ATCT) modernization projects and FAA work on active airfields construction projects, or other modernization projects on building types similar in technical requirements, scope and size to FAA ATCT’s and other active airfield construction of similar type and technical requirements, and number of relevant projects of similar scope and size in the past 5 years. Criteria 2 will be point-scored as follows, based upon proposal information and past-project references contacted.

a. 0 points: Below Average Experience and Past Performance.

b. Up-to 5: Average Experience and Past Performance.

c. Up-to 10: Good Experience and Past Performance.

DRAFT pre-RFO tech eval - 9-13-2017

d. Up-to 15: Excellent Experience and Past Performance.

e. Up-to 25: Excellent Experience and Past Performance and Highly Relevant Projects.

Criteria 3. Prime-Contractor Project Manager’s Qualifications, Experience, and Past-Performance: 0 to 25 points. Proposed project manager’s qualifications, experience and past-performance on FAA airport traffic control tower (ATCT) modernization projects and FAA work on active airfield construction projects, scope and size to FAA ATCT’s and other active airfield construction of similar type and technical requirements. Factors to be considered include extent of experience on FAA or similar projects, years of relevant experience, relevance of experience to this project, education, professional credentials, length of tenure with the proposing firm, demonstrated project management capability and achievements, and any information obtained from project references regarding past performance. Criteria 3 will be point-scored as follows, based upon proposal information and past-project references contacted.

a. 0 points: Below Average Qualifications and Past Performance.

b. Up-to 5: Average Experience and Past Performance.

c. Up-to 10: Good Qualifications and Past Performance.

d. Up-to 15: Excellent Qualifications and Past Performance.

e. Up-to 25: Excellent Qualifications and Past Performance and Highly Relevant Projects.

Criteria 4. Prime-Contractor On-Site Superintendent’s Qualifications, Experience, and Past-Performance: 0 to 25 points.

Criteria 4 Description: Proposed on-site superintendent's qualifications, experience and past-performance on FAA airport traffic control tower (ATCT) modernization projects and FAA work on active airfield construction projects, scope and size to FAA ATCT’s and other active airfield construction of similar type and technical requirements. Factors to be considered include extent of experience on FAA or similar projects, years of relevant experience, relevance of experience to this project, education, professional qualifications, length of tenure with the proposing firm, demonstrated superintendence capability and achievements, and any information obtained from project references regarding past performance. Criteria 4 will be point-scored as follows, based upon proposal information and past-project references contacted.

a. 0 points: Below Average Qualifications and Past Performance.

b. Up-to 5: Average Experience and Past Performance.

c. Up-to 10: Good Qualifications and Past Performance.

d. Up-to 15: Excellent Qualifications and Past Performance.

e. Up-to 25: Excellent Qualifications and Past Performance and Highly Relevant Projects.

Criteria 5. Proposed Work Schedule and Number Of Crews to Complete Work by October 1, 2018: 0 to 50 points.

Criteria 5 Description: Proposed work schedule for completing project by deadline of October 1, 2018. Schedule shall provide a maximum number of crews working at different locations including ATCT and the airfield at a time. Specifications provide information regarding Moratoriums for work at all FAA sites and work on the airport airfield. No work will be approved at these locations during the annual Thanksgiving and Christmas Moratoriums. Dates provided are estimated since the dates are not set at this time. Criteria 5 will be point-scored as follows.

a. 0 points: Schedule detail is not provided in proposed schedule. Only date constraints provided in contract documents are used in schedule.

b. Up-to 10: Schedule detail does not break out schedule for each of the sites.

c. Up-to 20: Schedule detail is provided for all sites but not enough information is provided to determine if the schedule is workable between the various trades.

d. Up-to 35: Schedule detail is provided for all sites and schedule appears to take into account various trades, mobilizations and submittals.

e. Up-to 50: Schedule provides detail for all sites and schedule appears to take into account various trades, mobilizations, submittals, SHPO, Biological Assessments and Operational concerns.

(End of Provision)