Attachment_C_-_Evaluation_Criteria.docx

Attachment C - Evaluation Criteria

PROPOSAL EVALUATION PLAN & EVALUATION CRITERIA

HUMAN RELATIONS IN THE WORKPLACE TRAINING

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATON

Evaluation Factors The Department shall award a Task Order resulting from this solicitation to the responsible vendor whose offer, conforming to the solicitation, will be most advantageous to the Department, price and other factors considered. A tradeoff methodology will be employed during the evaluation in order to identify best value. Price will be an important factor, however price shall be less important than the non-price factors when combined. The following is the order of importance for the applicable price and non-price factors:

1) Technical

2) Past Performance

3) Price

The Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) will evaluate the technical proposals.

The proposal will be evaluated by the TEP in accordance with the evaluation criteria as stated in the solicitation.

Vendors’ technical proposal(s) will be reviewed and evaluated for the following strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies:

STRENGTH - A feature, item, technique or methodology that provides more than the minimum requirement and represents a significant benefit to enhance effective contract performance.

WEAKNESS - A flaw in a feature, item, technique or methodology that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance and indicates a low level of confidence in meeting program requirements.

DEFICIENCY - A material failure to meet the Department’s requirements and is unacceptable as proposed.

The evaluation rating assigned to each vendor’s proposal(s) depicts how well the vendor’s technical proposal meets or exceeds the requirements in accordance with the stated evaluation criteria set forth in the solicitation.

The Department shall evaluate the factors against the following ratings (see following page):

Evaluation Factors Technical proposals will be evaluated as meeting the basic curriculum requirements or not meeting the requirements. The approach of the overall Human Relations or similar training is based on the coordinated methodology that focuses on self-awareness, accountability and choice, as well as teamwork, communication, and fostering a trusting environment. The vendor selected must be capable of providing training in any one of the list of services outlined in the PWS. The approach must be clearly framed as a grouping of the non-technical components that impact the effectiveness and efficiency of the work place.

Technical:

The following sub-factors will be considered in reaching a final overall rating:

1. TECHNICAL CAPABLITIES - The vendor’s technical approach provides a sound and proven methodology for providing services and products that are of high quality, innovative and satisfy the Department’s needs, including the following capabilities:

· Proposed program design demonstrates a very high probability that the objectives as outlined in the PWS will be achieved;

· Proposed program design is thorough and includes all of the design features/requirements in the PWS;

· The technical approach substantiates an achievable solution and has a high likelihood of producing and delivering quality products.

2. MANAGEMENT APPROACH- The vendor’s proposed management approach ensures that services/deliverables are of high quality and satisfy the Department’s needs. The proposal demonstrates the vendor’s corporate resources are sufficient to meet the requirements of the Task Order.

3. CORPORATE and PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS- Proposal demonstrates availability and commitment to provide qualified personnel from project initiation through life of project.

Past Performance:

In addition to determining if the declared past performance is relevant, similar in size, scope and complexity, past performance shall be evaluated based on the following evaluation factors:

In assessing Past Performance, the Department shall perform an independent determination of the relevancy of the past performance information. Past performance, including evaluation of the six sub-factors above, shall be evaluated and assigned a final rating based on the following criteria:

· Neutral - No relevant performance record is identifiable upon which to base a meaningful performance rating. A search was unable to identify any relevant past performance information for the vendor or key team members/ subcontractors or their key personnel (if applicable). This is neither a negative or positive assessment.

· Superior - Based on an vendor’s past performance record, essentially no doubt exists that the vendor will successfully perform the required effort.

· Satisfactory - Based on an vendor’s past performance record, some (insignificant) doubt may exist that the vendor will successfully perform the required effort.

· Unsatisfactory - Based on an vendor’s past performance record, significant doubt exists that the vendor will successfully perform the required effort.

The Department may consider information/sources outside of the information received in response to the solicitation.

Price:

Although price will not be evaluated based upon a predetermined evaluation rating scale, price will be analyzed in order to ensure that the proposed price is fair and reasonable.

Options:

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