Enclosure 2-Best Value Evaluation Criteria Mobile Shoe Service.pdf

-Page 1 of 4-

Argonne National Laboratory 9700 South Cass Avenue Lemont, IL 60439

Enclosure 2 EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR Onsite Mobile Safety Shoe Service Contract

October 18, 2023

The Offeror’s 3-part proposal will be evaluated on the response to each of the Evaluation Criteria, in the order prescribed below, and in conformance to the RFP instructions (Enclosure No. 1):

SCOPE

The scope of this offer is to facilitate an Onsite Mobile Safety Shoe Service for Argonne National Laboratory as detailed in the Statement of Work.

The Laboratory will use the evaluation criteria enumerated below and will utilize the following “relative importance” hierarchy during the evaluation process. The Laboratory will use the following technical evaluation criteria, listed in descending order of importance, to evaluate the merit of the requirements.

I. TECHNICAL CRITERIA

Evaluation Criteria 1 – Understanding Technical Requirements ANL will evaluate the degree to which the Offeror’s proposal, including the Offeror’s technical ability and procedures proposed, to ensure successful delivery and compliance of ANL’s requirements. ANL will evaluate the Offeror’s ability to meet all aspects of the factors in the technical documents as follows:

1. The proposal meets all technical obligations as detailed in the SOW

2. The Offeror has made an adequate case to justify their ability to meet the Onsite Mobile

Safety Shoe Service requirements outlined in the SOW

Provide the following for Evaluation Criteria 1:

The Offeror shall complete a compliance matrix to demonstrate their ability to meet each factor described. The matrix shall describe the factor being reviewed, and the Offeror’s proof that this factor is adhered to, concentrating on the below:

A. Footwear Requirements

a. An assortment of protective footwear should be available that include a variety of toe protection materials, slip-resistant, dielectric, conductive, cold environment, heat resistant, chemical-resistant, etc. All protective footwear must meet the current requirements of both ASTM F-2412 and ASTM F-2413 Standards

b. Must be available in both Men & Women sizes (including half sizes) and sufficient widths to fit 95% of the Argonne's population. Sizes offered must include narrow, medium, and wide widths, minimally

c. Several styles of protective footwear with removable innersoles must be available to accommodate individuals requiring orthotics

B. Service Requirements:

a. The contractor must provide a service on-site one day (preferred same day) each week

-Page 2 of 4-

b. The contractor must provide an attendant on the mobile unit who is trained in the classification of footwear and its design to provide protection against various workplace hazards

C. Other Requirements:

a. Protective footwear must be guaranteed for 6 months under normal working conditions

b. Protective footwear must be guaranteed to fit if fitted by the mobile unit attendant

c. Outdoor safety boots for winter weather should also be available as needed

d. Protective footwear requests in sizes not carried on the mobile unit and need to be ordered must be delivered within 7 days. If the contractor cannot supply the ordered protective footwear, the customer must be notified within 48 hours of the date of ordering

e. The contractor must submit monthly electronic billing that includes an invoice summarizing individual purchases. The electronic invoice must be compatible with the Argonne financial system

Evaluation Criteria 2 – Site Suitability This section should clearly describe the mobile facility where the Offeror intends to perform the work. The Offeror may propose to utilize an existing mobile facility to perform the work or it may propose a detailed plan to acquire such a mobile facility in a way that supports the schedule for delivery.

Provide the following for Evaluation Criteria 2:

At a minimum, the Offeror must provide the following information in this section:

A. Proof of availability of a mobile shoe service B. Ownership of the facility (i.e., Is the facility owned by the Offeror, is it leased by the

Offeror , or does the Offeror intend to purchase or lease the facility if awarded a contract) C. Safety D. Material storage capacity (how many pairs of shoes will be available on the mobile facility each week) E. Size of labor pool, to include skilled technicians trained in the classification of footwear and its design to provide protection against various workplace hazards F. Cleanliness

Evaluation Criteria 3 – Organizational and Management Approach This section should clearly describe the management approach and details to ensure success of contract award.

Provide the following for Evaluation Criteria 3:

The Offeror shall include a narrative discussion of their organization. The proposal should discuss the specific management approach that will be used to ensure successful performance. The Offeror shall describe management strategies such as the following:

A. Plans to obtain and/or retain necessary resources to perform the required services B. Controls and monitoring procedures for maintaining quality control, and project schedules C. Plans for communication and timely response to program and project directions D. Communication strategies shall be included as follows:

E. Singular point of contact for customer service requests

a. Expected frequency of communications between Offeror and Company

-Page 3 of 4-

II. BUSINESS/MANAGEMENT CRITERIA

Offerors will be evaluated on the Pass-Fail factors identified in Enclosure No. 1, Part II - Business/Management Proposal, and additional evaluation will be conducted on the following:

1. Financial Capability: The offeror's financial condition and adequacy of working capital will be evaluated to determine if adequate resources are available and committed to allow for successful performance.

2. Other Information:

a. Any other clarification information in offeror’s Business/Management Proposal such as assumptions made, contingencies used, etc.

b. Explanation on any aspect of the proposal that is inconsistent with the offeror's disclosed practices or applicable cost accounting standards.

III. PRICE CRITERIA

The Price Proposal will not be point scored but will be evaluated on the most advantageous probable cost to the Laboratory, all factors considered. While the Price Proposal may not be the controlling factor for the award, it will be a significant part of the Laboratory’s selection decision.

The proposal price will be evaluated for reasonableness in light of the statement of work requirements and instructions, including completeness/conciseness and clarity of the material presented.

A comparison shall be made of the competitive prices received under this solicitation. The computed total prices of each offer will be compared to determine the lowest price proposal received.

Selection and Award

1. Proposal may be eliminated from consideration if the proposal is so grossly and obviously deficient as to be totally unacceptable. For example, if it does not represent a reasonable initial effort to address itself to the essential requirements of the RFP, or clearly demonstrates that the offeror does not understand the requirements of the RFP.

2. The Laboratory may determine that a proposal is unacceptable if the prices proposed are materially unbalanced between line items or subline items. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. A proposal may be rejected if the Laboratory Procurement Official determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Laboratory.

3. Offerors should be prepared to respond to requests by the Laboratory Procurement Official for oral presentations or written discussions, or both, facility surveys, and other information as may be necessary to assist in the detailed evaluation process. The Laboratory reserves the right, however, to 1) make a selection without discussion with any of the offerors; 2) reject any and all offers; and 3) waive informalities and minor

-Page 4 of 4-irregularities in offers received. It is, therefore, emphasized that each initial offer should be submitted on the most favorable terms to the Laboratory that the offeror can submit.

4. The Laboratory may solicit, from available sources, experience data concerning an offeror’s past performance and will consider such information in its evaluation.

5. The Laboratory intends to award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose proposal conforms to this RFP and represents the best value after evaluation in accordance with the evaluation criteria stated above.

6. If the Laboratory Procurement Official determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Laboratory Procurement Official may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

7. Exchanges with offerors after receipt of a proposal do not constitute a rejection or counteroffer by the Laboratory.

8. Proposals will not be returned (except for timely withdrawals).