Enclosure No. 4 - Evaluation Criteria.docx

ANL-830 March 10, 2025 Enclosure No. 4 Evaluation Criteria RFP No. 6-JV79-P-00084-00 (01/29/2026) I. Evaluation will be conducted in accordance with the Argonne National Laboratory approved Procurement policies based on the Evaluation Criteria set forth below for the Technical, Business/Management, and Price Proposals:

II. Overall Relative Importance of Proposal Parts

The Technical Proposal is of greater importance to the Price Proposal and Business/Management Proposal. While the Price Proposal and Business Management Proposal may not be the controlling factor for the award, they will be a significant part of the Laboratory’s selection decision. The Laboratory shall select for an award based on the principles of best value tradeoffs. The best value is expected to result from selection of the highest technical acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated proposed cost. It may be in the best interest of the Laboratory to consider award to other than the offeror with the lowest evaluated proposed cost if the perceived technical advantages of a higher evaluated proposed price proposal merit the additional higher proposed price.

The Technical Proposal will be scored in accordance with the criteria described in section III below, as follows:

1. Technical Proposal will be adjectivally scored of either Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal or Unacceptable.

2. Proposal Risk criterion will be adjectivally scored of Low Risk, Moderate Risk, or High Risk.

The Price Proposal and the Business/Management Proposal will not be adjectivally scored. The Price Proposal will be evaluated based on realistic costs and the evaluated cost to the Laboratory. The Business/Management Proposal will be evaluated to determine responsiveness to the Pass-Fail Non-Technical Factors.

III. Evaluation Criteria A. Technical Proposal Criteria

The Laboratory will use the following technical evaluation criteria, listed in Descending order of importance, to evaluate the merit of the Desired Requirements:

CRITERION 1 – Technical Approach Basis of Evaluation:

The extent and quality of the Offeror’s detailed approach to performing the work described in Appendix “B,” Statement of Work, including the design and planning of a solution that integrates with systems such as enterprise data warehouses, document management systems, and records management systems.

Offeror to Provide for Evaluation:

Discuss the firm’s approach to conduct the work listed in Appendix “B” –Statement of Work. In particular, a detailed description of the following:

a) Describe the proposed methodology and approach for each task area, including the tools, templates, frameworks, and processes to be used to meet the requirements of the Statement of Work, including enterprise compliance management, governance, risk, and compliance (GRC), requirements management, and regulatory traceability.

b) Describe the proposed approach to selecting, approach to configuring, and leveraging enterprise compliance management system (ECMS) and GRC software solutions, including how market knowledge and any platform relationships will be used to support successful performance of the work.

CRITERION 2 – Experience Performing Similar Work Basis of Evaluation:

The amount, relevance, and quality of experience the firm has in conducting work similar to that listed in Appendix “B”, Statement of Work. Offerors shall also be evaluated on their past performance in providing similar scope and complexity to those solicited in this RFP. This criterion evaluates organizational experience and past performance, separate from individual personnel qualifications.

Offeror to Provide for Evaluation:

a) Discuss the amount, relevance, and quality of experience the firm has in conducting work similar to that listed in Appendix “B”, Statement of Work and of similar complexity.

b) Describe relevant experience with the Department of Energy and/or other federal agencies, or comparable environments, involving complex regulatory and compliance requirements, including the scope of work performed and outcomes achieved.

c) In addition to any other information that the Offeror shall provide to allow Argonne to evaluate past performance, furnish the following information:

References from at least three (3) clients for whom your firm has provided services within the previous two (2) years, preferably clients with whom you have contracted personnel with similar experience as specified in Appendix “B”, Statement of Work.

Include for each reference:

1. the company name,

2. address,

3. telephone number,

4. point of contact, and

5. contract number.

References may be commercial or government customers, provided the work performed is comparable in scope and complexity. The Laboratory reserves the right to request additional information or obtain other relevant documentation, as necessary, to adequately evaluate the Offeror’s capability to successfully perform the requirements of this RFP.

CRITERION 3 – Qualifications of Personnel Basis of Evaluation:

The amount, relevance, and quality of experience, and any relevant certifications, of proposed project personnel who will be assigned to this project that possess the required skills and experience to conduct the work listed in Appendix “B”, Statement of Work.

Offeror to Provide for Evaluation:

a) Discuss your firm’s ability to supply qualified personnel in response to the requirements specified in Appendix “B,” Statement of Work, and provide resumes for proposed project team members. Describe the amount, relevance, and quality of their experience, including any applicable professional certifications (e.g., GRC Professional, Certified Compliance & Ethics Professional, PMP, ITIL, Microsoft Certified).

b) Describe the extent and quality of the project team members familiarity with relevant control frameworks and standards, including NIST, ISO 31000, ISO 9001, and COSO, as demonstrated by the proposed personnel.

c) Describe the extent, relevance, and quality of experience of the proposed project team members with FedRAMP-certified cloud solutions, applicable federal security requirements, and software-as-a-service (SaaS) platforms.

d) Describe the extent, relevance, and quality of experience of the proposed project team members with leading commercial products such as OpenText, IBM FileNet, Microsoft Purview, SharePoint, Nintex, and Appian.

CRITERION 4 – Timely Response Basis of Evaluation:

The extent and quality of the Offeror’s approach to timely response and delivery, as demonstrated by a realistic project timeline with defined milestones and deliverable dates, and the proposed methods for completing deliverables on schedule, including under compressed timeframes.

Offeror to Provide for Evaluation:

Discuss approach to timely response as follows:

a) The proposed project timeline with milestones and deliverable dates in a comprehensive and detailed format of the milestone schedule of the key activities.

b) The approach to completing deliverables on time and on a compressed schedule.

CRITERION 5 – Sample Report Template Basis of Evaluation:

The extent and quality of the Offeror’s ability to present clear, well-organized, and analytically sound information, as demonstrated by the submitted sample report. The sample will be evaluated for assessment purposes only and will not be used to satisfy the requirements of the Appendix “B” Statement of Work.

Offeror to Provide for Evaluation:

Submit one representative sample report relevant to the scope and complexity of the Statement of Work. The sample may be redacted.

A.1. PROPOSAL RISK EVALUATION

Basis of Evaluation:

Proposal Risk shall be considered with respect to all other factors. Evaluation of Proposal Risk includes consideration of: Offeror’s demonstration of understanding of scope; risk of successful performance of the contract; and ability and commitment to service. Proposal Risk is an assessment of the level to which the Proposal demonstrates a thorough understanding of the scope, and how well the proposal addresses the needs of the project.

Offeror to Provide for Evaluation:

To assist in our assessment of Proposal Risk, as defined in Enclosure No. 4, offerors shall provide a risk matrix and mitigation plan detailing what your firm perceives to be the biggest risks for delivering on the project, and how such risks will be handled.

B. Business/Management Criteria Basis of Evaluation:

Offerors will be evaluated on the Pass-Fail factors identified in the Instructions for Preparation of Proposals and Notices to Offerors (see Enclosure No. 1, Part II - Business/Management Proposal), and additional evaluation will be conducted on the following:

· Financial Condition and Capability. The offeror’s financial condition and capability will be evaluated to determine if adequate resources are available and committed for performance. During the evaluation, financial references may be requested and contacted in order to determine the offeror’s financial stability during the past years. The adequacy of available working capital to permit performance under the agreement will be evaluated.

C. Price Criteria Basis of Evaluation:

· 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 award, it will be a significant part of the Laboratory’s selection decision.

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

· The computed total prices of each offer will be compared to determine the lowest priced proposal received. Rates shall not be specified by individual personnel, nor shall a range of rates for any category be specified.

· The computed total prices will be weighed against the apparent advantages of individual technical proposals to determine if technically superior proposals warrant payment of any additional price.

Offeror to Provide for Evaluation:

Each offeror shall submit a firm fixed price proposal as detailed in Enclosure No. 3 – Contract Pricing Proposal Form.

Provide a fixed price for the tasks and sub-tasks outlined in Appendix B – Statement of Work. Please include as an exhibit to your pricing proposal a breakdown of each task’s price, including fully loaded direct labor rates and the number of hours proposed for each labor category along with any other direct costs included in your proposed price. Rates shall not be specified by named personnel, nor shall a range of rates for any category be specified. Failure to adhere to this pricing requirement may result in rejection of your offer.

image1.png