Section M GEO 7.pdf

M-1 | P a g e S c r e e n i n g I n f o r m a t i o n R e q u e s t ( S I R ) S e c t i o n M

DTFAWA-17-R-00028

“This contract may contain information considered sensitive unclassified information (SUI) and would merit protection from unauthorized disclosure under 5 U.S.C, Section 552(b)(4). No information shall be released except as authorized by the Contracting Officer.”

SECTION M

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M.1 3.1-1 CLAUSES AND PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (July 2011)

This Screening Information Request (SIR) or contract, as applicable, incorporates by reference the provisions or clauses listed below with the same force and effect as if they were given in full text. Upon request, the Contracting Officer will make the full text available, or Offerors and contractors may obtain the full text via Internet at: http://conwrite.faa.gov.

Clause Number Clause Title 3.2.2.3-34 Evaluating Offers for Multiple Awards (July 2004) 3.2.4-29 Evaluation Exclusive of Options (Apr 1996) 3.2.4-31 Evaluation of Options (Apr 1996) 3.6.1-10 Evaluation of Contractor Participation in the FAA Mentor Protégé Program (Jan

1999) 3.11-47 Evaluation - F.O.B. Origin (Apr 1999)

M.2 GENERAL

Each proposal submitted in response to this solicitation will be reviewed by a board of qualified personnel who will reviewed all information furnished by the Offerors; including proposals, responses to questions (written), and revised proposals, if any. This evaluation will address the following:

1) Technical Capability (Volume I)

2) Administrative Requirements (Volume II)

Proposals that fail to meet the requirements of the solicitation or are unrealistic in terms of technical content or schedule commitments may be deemed reflective of an inherent lack of technical competence or indicative of a failure to comprehend the technical complexity and risks of the contract requirements; the Government therefore reserves the right to determine such proposals to be ineligible for further evaluation and for contract award. The Government also reserves the right to (i) reject any and all offers, (ii) waive any requirement, and (iii) accept minor irregularities and discrepancies if doing so is determined to be in the best interest of the FAA.

If at any time during the evaluation process the FAA concludes that an Offeror is not likely to receive award, the FAA may reserve the right to eliminate the Offeror from further consideration for award. Any Offeror eliminated from further consideration will be notified in writing by the CO prior to final award decsions.

In evaluating the proposals, the FAA may conduct written or oral communications with any or all Offerors.

The FAA reserves the right to conduct communications and negotiations with any individual Offeror or all http://conwrite.faa.gov/

M-2 | P a g e S c r e e n i n g I n f o r m a t i o n R e q u e s t ( S I R ) S e c t i o n M

“This contract may contain information considered sensitive unclassified information (SUI) and would merit protection from unauthorized disclosure under 5 U.S.C, Section 552(b)(4). No information shall be released except as authorized by the Contracting Officer.”

competing Offerors. Communications with one or more Offerors do not require discussions with other Offerors.

Alternate proposals are not authorized to be submitted in response to this SIR and will not be reviewed.

The FAA anticipates making a multiple award resulting from this Screening Information Request (SIR).

Based on the results of the SIR response, evaluation and review, the Government reserves the following rights with respect to this solicitation:

1. to make only one award as a result of this solicitation;

2. to make an award of up to three contracts as a result of this solicitation but reserves the right to make more awards if determined to be in the FAA’s best interest;

3. to not make an award; and,

4. to enter into discussion with one or more Offerors without entering into discussion with others or all

Offerors.

M.3 BASIS FOR AWARD

a) The Offeror(s) whose offer meets the Technical and Administrative requirements of the SIR will be selected for award.

b) The FAA anticipates making multiple awards resulting from this SIR.

c) Prior to the award of any contract, the Government must determine that the prospective Contractor(s) must also be determined to be responsible in accordance with AMS 3.2.2.7. To assist in this determination, the Government reserves the right to conduct a pre-award survey of any Offeror, or Offeror’s subcontractor(s) if deemed necessary by the CO. If the Government conducts a pre-award survey is conducted, it does not necessarily mean that an Offeror has been selected for award.

d) Offerors must submit their offers in accordance with Section L. Failure to comply with all requirements and instructions of the Screening Information Request (SIR) may result in the Offeror being removed from consideration for award.

M.4 EVALUATION ORDER OF IMPORTANCE

The Government’s source selection decision will be based on the following two evaluation factors:

1) Factor 1: Technical Capability (Volume I)

a. Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor Experience and Capability

b. Key Subcontractor Commitment and Authorization Letters

c. Approved WAAS GEO Test Reports

d. Baseline Schedule

e. Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor Past Performance

M-3 | P a g e S c r e e n i n g I n f o r m a t i o n R e q u e s t ( S I R ) S e c t i o n M

“This contract may contain information considered sensitive unclassified information (SUI) and would merit protection from unauthorized disclosure under 5 U.S.C, Section 552(b)(4). No information shall be released except as authorized by the Contracting Officer.”

2) Factor 2: Administrative Requirements (Volume II)

a. SIR Section A/Contract Form

b. Financial Condition and Capability

c. Section K Representations and Certifications

d. Organizational Conflict of Interest Plan

e. Small Business Subcontracting Plan

f. Mentor Protégé

Offerors must submit their offers in accordance with Section L. Failure to comply with all requirements and instructions of the Screening Information Request (SIR) may result in the Offeror being removed from consideration for award. Offers will be reviewed on technical capability and administrative requirements and must be found ACCEPTABLE for all sub factors under each FACTOR.

M.5 EVALUATION APPROACH

Volumes I and II will be reviewed as being ACCEPTABLE or UNACCEPTABLE based on the factor definitions.

M.6 EVALUATION FACTORS

M.6.1 Factor 1: Technical Capability

In order to receive an Acceptable rating for Volume I, all sub factors need to receive an Acceptable rating.

M.6.1.1 Subfactor 1: Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor* Experience and

Capability

The Government will review the recent relevant experience of the offeror’s proposed team (prime and key subcontractor(s)) on “example” projects demonstrating:

M.6.1.1.1 Prime Contractor’s project management capability;

M.6.1.1.2 Prime Contractor or Subcontractor design, development and testing of GSP and

GUS pair capability;

M.6.1.1.3 The more similarities an example project has with the prospective contract, the more relevant it will be considered. Relevance is defined as projects similar in project type/scope, physical size, complexity, dollar value, schedule constraints, contract type, and degree of subcontract/teaming. Failure of the offeror to demonstrate relevant experience for itself or for any proposed key subcontractor will result in an “Unacceptable” rating.

M.6.1.1.4 The Government will review the corporate resumes to substantiate that the prime 1and key subcontractor firms to which the work will be subcontracted have

1 Key subcontractor: Subcontractors involved in development or operation of key elements of the GEO 7 system (e.g. the RFU, GSP and GUS sites).

M-4 | P a g e S c r e e n i n g I n f o r m a t i o n R e q u e s t ( S I R ) S e c t i o n M

“This contract may contain information considered sensitive unclassified information (SUI) and would merit protection from unauthorized disclosure under 5 U.S.C, Section 552(b)(4). No information shall be released except as authorized by the Contracting Officer.”

the resources necessary and available for successful performance in the area they are proposed to perform.

M.6.1.2 Subfactor 2: Key Subcontractor Commitment and Authorization Letters

M.6.1.2.1 The Government will review if the commitment and authorization letters included and contain the statements regarding the business concern’s intent to work on this project in the proposed specified capacity if the Offeror is awarded the contract.

Failure to provide the letters and the specific intent work statement will result in an “Unacceptable” rating.

M.6.1.3 Subfactor 3: Approved WAAS GEO Test Report

M.6.1.3.1 The Government will review the complete WAAS GEO test reports approved by the FAA. Failure to provide the approved WAAS GEO test report will result in an “Unacceptable” rating.

M.6.1.4 Subfactor 4: Baseline Schedule

M.6.1.4.1 The Government will review the ability of the Offeror to realistically meet proposed delivery schedule. The review will include how the proposed sequences of activities are defined. The proposed timeline and work plan for developing the critical path schedule will also be reviewed.

M.6.1.5 Subfactor 5: Prime Contractor/Key Subcontract Past Performance

M.6.1.5.1 The Government will review past performance information to assess the level of performance confidence associated with the Offeror’s likelihood of success in performing the requirements stated in the solicitation. The recency and relevancy of the information (as determined by the Government), the source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in the contractor’s performance may be considered.

M.6.1.5.2 The Government reserves the right to contact directly the customer points of contact.

In addition, the Government reserves the right to obtain additional past performance information for the Offeror (prime and any proposed subcontractors) from the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Dun & Bradstreet reports, Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA), previous contracts, and other sources as required. Information from any or all of these sources may be considered in the evaluation of the Offeror’s past performance.

M-5 | P a g e S c r e e n i n g I n f o r m a t i o n R e q u e s t ( S I R ) S e c t i o n M

“This contract may contain information considered sensitive unclassified information (SUI) and would merit protection from unauthorized disclosure under 5 U.S.C, Section 552(b)(4). No information shall be released except as authorized by the Contracting Officer.”

M.6.2 Factor 2: Administrative Requirements

In order to receive an Acceptable rating for Volume II, the Offeror must be determined responsible in accordance with FAA Acquisition Management System (AMS) T.3.2.2.7, receive an Acceptable rating in the applicable subfactors, and comply with Section L proposal requirements.

M.6.2.1 Subfactor 1: SIR Section A, Solicitation/Contract Form

The FAA will review SIR Section A, Solicitation/Contract Form for compliance to Section L. This review is for informational purposes only and will not be an evaluation factor in the award decisions.

M.6.2.2 Subfactor 2: Financial Condition and Capability

Prior to award of any contract, the Offeror must also be determined to be a responsible contractor. The FAA intends to review the financial statements requested in Section L.6.1(d) as part of the responsibility determination by performing various financial ratios to ensure the financial capability of the Offeror.

M.6.2.3 Subfactor 3: Section K Representations and Certifications

The FAA will review SIR Section A, Solicitation/Contract Form for compliance to Section L. This review is for informational purposes only and will not be an evaluation factor in the award decisions.

M.6.2.4 Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI)

The OCI information provided will be reviewed to determine if the Offeror (including subcontractors) has any OCI and, if so, whether the Offeror has presented an acceptable plan for mitigating the OCIs. Offerors determined to have an OCI that is not adequately addressed in the proposal mitigation plan may not be eligible for award will not be eligible for award.

M.6.2.5 Small Business Subcontracting Plan

The FAA will review the Small Business Subcontracting Plan as either Acceptable or Unacceptable using Table M-4; it will not be numerically scored. The FAA will review whether the Offeror’s Small Business Subcontracting Plan is fully compliant with FAA AMS clause 3.6.1-4 as well as the goals set forth in Section L.6.1(g). The FAA will review whether the Offeror’s Small Business Subcontracting Plan demonstrates that the subcontracting goals apply over the full life of the contract, including the base period and each exercised option period. The submission of a Small Business Subcontracting Plan is not applicable to small businesses; therefore, any prime Offerors who are small or small disadvantaged businesses will receive an Acceptable rating for this area.

M.6.2.6 Mentor Protégé Program Participation

M-6 | P a g e S c r e e n i n g I n f o r m a t i o n R e q u e s t ( S I R ) S e c t i o n M

“This contract may contain information considered sensitive unclassified information (SUI) and would merit protection from unauthorized disclosure under 5 U.S.C, Section 552(b)(4). No information shall be released except as authorized by the Contracting Officer.”

The FAA will review participation in the FAA Mentor Protégé Program for compliance to AMS Guidance T 3.6.1. This review is for informational purposes only and will not be an evaluation factor in the award decisions.

M.6 EVALUATION FACTORS

Table M-1 Technical Capability Factor and Subfactors

Rating Definition

Acceptable The proposal meets the stated requirements. The response is considered complete in terms of the basic content and level of information the Government seeks for evaluation.

Unacceptable

The proposal fails to meet the stated requirements. The response is considered deficient in terms of basic content and support the Government seeks for evaluation.

Table M-2 – Factor 2 – Administrative Requirements

The proposal meets the stated requirements. The response is considered complete in terms of the basic content and level of information the Government seeks for evaluation.

The proposal fails to meet the stated requirements. The response is considered deficient in terms of basic content and support the Government seeks for evaluation.

Table M-4 Adjectival Ratings for Small Business Subcontracting Plan Evaluation

The Offeror’s response demonstrates a viable small business subcontracting plan that meets the specified subcontracting goals and the AMS content requirements.

The Offeror’s response does not demonstrate a viable small business subcontracting plan and does not meet the specified subcontracting goals or the AMS content requirements.