Instructions to Offerors.docx
DOCX document 17 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Evaluation Support Services Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- ED-FSA-10-R-0067
About this file
Instructions to Offerors
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Usability RFP Questions.docx | DOCX document | |
| Evaluation Services SOW.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment B Client Reference Form.docx | DOCX document | |
| Solicitation.PDF |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
August 4, 2010
Subject: Request for Quotation (RFP) – Evaluation Services
Dear Potential Offeror:
1. Purpose
The U.S. Department of Education has a need to acquire the commercial evaluation services. These services have successfully been delivered under an existing contract expiring on September 30, 2010 by an incumbent provider that has since become a large business. Federal Student Aid (FSA) shall use the structured process described below, in paragraph 2.b to evaluate proposals and determine which vendors offers FSA the ‘best value’. Unsuccessful offerors will be notified of this determination and, if requested, provided a debriefing. Thereafter, FSA intends to award an Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts and Task Order 1 to the successful offeror.
2. Instructions to Offerors
a. Submit, via e-mail, a proposal prepared in accordance with the guidance contained in the instructions contained within this section.
b. Proposals are due Monday August 30, 2010, 10:00 AM EST and shall include the following factors:
(1) Technical Proposal – Technical approach and management approach. Using a narrative summary each offeror shall discuss the following:
· Provide a description of its overall approach to performing the following requirements: national survey/focus groups/usability testing, quantitative research and analysis, qualitative data analysis and primary and secondary research. The description shall include a discussion of operational concepts and methodology, organizational structure and staffing qualifications.
· Describe the methodology and approach it uses to evaluate and measure the effectiveness of social and communication programs. The description shall include staffing qualifications.
· Provide up to 3 artifacts that demonstrate it has successfully delivered each of the following: survey/focus groups/usability testing, quantitative research and analysis, social or communication program evaluation and qualitative data analysis.
Exclusive of any resumes and artifacts, the technical documentation shall be limited to15 pages. Each named resource resume can be up to 2 pages in length.
(2) Past Performance – Using Attachment B, Client Reference Form, provide up to 3 references to demonstrate experience delivering the requirements described in the statement of work to include scope, size, and complexity.
(3) Pricing information – Each offeror shall complete section B.3 of the solicitation, pricing table, which shall be performed at the contractors’ facility. The Government has provided the anticipated quantities it expects to order within each CLIN. NOTE: The CLINS are equivalent to years of performance. For example, CLIN 1 is the first year of performance. Local travel costs are not reimbursable.
c. By the date and time shown in paragraph b, each competitor shall submit via email, to Jonathan.Santangelo@ed.gov with a cc to Victor.Cairo@ed.gov the three mandatory sections of their proposal. Each submission shall be prepared using Microsoft Office Professional suite software applications and font 12 point (tables and graphic can have 10 point font).
d. All questions about this RFP shall be submitted, via email, prior to 10:00am EST on August 16, 2010. The assigned Contracting Officer is Victor.Cairo@ed.gov , at 202-377-3814. The assigned Contract Specialist is Jonathan.Santangelo@ed.gov, at 202-377-3698.
3. Evaluation Process
Proposals will be evaluated using a structured approach wherein Factor 1 is more important than Factors 2 or 3. Factors 1 and 2 when combined are equal to Factor 3 in terms of importance. However, as Factors 1 and 2 differences decrease, Factor 3 shall become more important. Factor 3 shall be assessed for realism and reasonableness.
Sincerely, Victor Cairo Contracting Officer
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .