EVAL_Criteria_EVS_Final_8_10_21_(2).pdf

Division of Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation (DEEOIC)

Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP)

Employment Verification Services (EVS) Support and Maintenance

Solicitation Evaluation Text

1. Proposal Volumes

A. Format. The submission shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled. Each volume shall be appropriately numbered and clearly identified with the date and solicitation number in the header and/or footer and shall begin at the top of each page. A Table of Contents should be created using the Table of Contents feature in MS Word. Documents shall use the following page setup parameters.

Margins – Top, Bottom, Left, Right – 1”

Gutter – 0”

From Edge – Header, Footer – 0.5”

Page Size, Width – 8.5”

Page Size, Height – 11”

The following additional restrictions apply: Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line. A standard, 12-point minimum font size applies. Times New Roman or other legible font is required. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size not less than 8-point and may be landscape.

B. File Packaging. Proposals shall be submitted in two volumes: Volume I. Technical Proposal, and Volume II. Price Proposal.

Submission. Contractors shall clearly identify each volume by its volume number and volume name, PWS title, and date of submission.

C. Page Count. The page count is as follows:

Quote Part Page Count

Executive Summary This high-level overview of the Quote shall not exceed 3 pages.

Volume I – Technical

Approach

Not To Exceed 30 pages. Covers, title pages, executive summary, table of contents, and charts are not counted toward the 30 page limit.

Volume II – Past Performance No Page Limitation

Volume III – Price No Page Limitation

Those pages that exceed the page counts for each volume or attachment will not be evaluated. If there are more than forty-five (45) printed lines of text on any page, the sum of the additional lines will be removed from back to front of the particular volume or attachment and will not be evaluated.

D. Content Requirements. All information shall be confined to the appropriate volume. The applicant shall confine submissions to essential matters, sufficient to define the Quote details, in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each Proposal. Each volume shall consist of a Table of Contents, Summary Section and the Narrative discussion. The

Summary Section shall contain a brief abstract of the volume. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked. The following shall be included in the Narrative discussion:

The proposal volumes are as follows:

VOLUME 1 – Technical Approach

Sub-Factor 1 – Understanding of Requirement

Sub-Factor 2 – Research and Interpretation of Department of Energy (DOE) Records

Sub-Factor 3 – Access to Union records, Pension Funds, Health Records

Sub-Factor 4 – Personnel with Knowledge of DOE history of Atomic Weapons Program

Sub-Factor 5 – Public Access to EVS Database

VOLUME 2 – Past Performance

VOLUME 3 – Price

Offerors shall format the electronic file name for submitted proposal volumes as follows:

Vendor name - RFQ Number – EVS - V1 - .doc

Vendor name - RFQ Number – EVS - V2 - .doc

Vendor name - RFQ Number - EVS - V3 - .doc

2. Proposal Content

The Offeror’s proposal shall be formatted as set forth above and shall contain its proposal response to the requirements herein. The proposal shall be clear, concise and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal shall not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements but rather should provide convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet these requirements. The

Government will base its evaluation exclusively on the information presented in the Offeror’s proposal, with the exception of the Past Performance volume where the Government reserves the right to base the evaluation on information obtained from other sources.

i. Volume 1 – Technical Approach

SPECIAL NOTE CONCERNING VOLUME I – TECHNICAL APPROACH:

Offerors shall provide a matrix or cross reference of all proposal information to the appropriate area of the solicitation and /or PWS. Offerors are free to use any format for the proposal information matrix such as tables, charts, or embedding the cross references within the proposal text.

Technical Approach (Sub-Factor One (1) through Sub-Factor Five (5))

The Offeror shall address all requirements for the Technical Approach Factor (Sub-Factor 1 through Sub-Factor 5) and demonstrate the ability to meet or exceed the requirements of the solicitation including any requirement for expertise or specialized skills.

The Offeror should provide a complete and detailed description of its ability to deliver all the services described in the PWS. The Offeror must demonstrate a clear understanding of the scope of work and requirements including the quality, feasibility, practicability, innovativeness, and appropriateness in accomplishing tasks and deliverables of this contract from a technical perspective.

The Offeror should provide a complete and detailed description of its ability to provide a public version of the database, including an estimated timeline / schedule for when the database will be available to the public.

Unfounded assertions and general marketing statements will not contribute to a favorable evaluation.

The Offeror should include the staffing strategy, the experience, skill, and qualifications of proposed personnel, as well as the ability of the overall project team to adequately minimize risk and successfully complete requirements of the PWS.

The technical proposal may include any metrics and incentives or disincentives proposed by the

Offeror.

The Offeror’s proposal shall include resumes for Key Personnel and also provide a matrix to include the background / experience of the company’s proposed Key and Non-Key Personnel mapped to the appropriate PWS tasking.

There is no page limit for resume submissions.

All personnel shall be ready to begin performing services under the contract on the date of contract award. The Offeror shall provide a Letter of Intent for Key Personnel who are not currently employed by the Offeror or its proposed Subcontractors. The Offeror shall include a chart with proposed personnel assignments for the tasks identified in the PWS.

ii. Volume 2 – Past Performance

NOTE: The submission of Past Performance Questionnaires is not required.

Offerors without relevant past performance experience, or for whom information on past performance is not available, shall not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.

Offerors should provide a minimum of three (3) Past Performance contract reference descriptions to include the following: name of reference; person’s title; agency; telephone / cell phone number; e-mail address; contract / order number; contract type; description of work performed;

whether or not the contract was performed as a Prime or Subcontractor; and total dollar value.

The three (3) contract references should be recent and relevant. A recent contract is one which is currently being performed, or which was performed, for a minimum of twelve (12) months within the last three (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Relevant contracts are defined as efforts that are the same as, or similar to, the scope of the efforts required by this solicitation.

The contracts identified should demonstrate the Offeror’s performance, or responsibility for performance, of work of similar size and scope to the work outlined in the Performance Work

Statement (PWS).

The Government may also utilize the Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPAR) contained in the Government’s Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) to evaluate Past Performance.

iii. Volume 3 – Price Proposal

Offerors shall provide the Firm Fixed Price (FFP) total for the Base Year and each Option Period separately.

Offerors shall also provide the Grand Total amount proposed for the entire contract (Base Period plus all Option Period).

Offerors are free to use a variety of formats (tables, spreadsheets, charts, etc.) to submit the Price

Proposal as long as one (1) version of the Price Proposal is submitted in an editable format (such as Microsoft Word, Excel, or other editable format).

Prices and pricing information must not be included in any part of the non-price proposal.

(8.) The evaluation procedures to be used are as follows:

BASIS FOR AWARD

(a) The Government will use a Best Value Tradeoff process to make the award decision. The

Government intends to award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible

Offeror whose proposal represents the Best Value after evaluation in accordance with the following Factors:

Factor I – Technical Approach

Sub-Factor 1 – Understanding of Requirement

Sub-Factor 2 – Research and Interpretation of Department of Energy (DOE) Records

Sub-Factor 3 – Access to Union records, Pension Funds, Health Records

Sub-Factor 4 – Personnel with Knowledge of DOE history of Atomic Weapons Program

Sub-Factor 5 – Public Access to EVS Database

Factor II - Past Performance

Factor III - Price

(b) NOTE: To receive consideration for award, the Technical Approach Sub-Factors must ALL be determined at least to be Technically Acceptable to be rated Technically Acceptable under

Factor I – Technical Approach. A rating below “Acceptable” in any one Sub-Factor will render an overall Technically Unacceptable rating for Factor 1 - Technical Approach.

(c) Offerors are cautioned that an award may not necessarily be made to the lowest price

Offeror; or, if non-price Factors are evaluated as comparatively equal between two or more

Offerors, price may become a determinative Factor.

FACTORS AND THEIR RELATIVE IMPORTANCE

(a) RELATIVE ORDER OF IMPORTANCE TERMINOLOGY. An evaluation of all offers will be made in accordance with the criteria set forth below. The evaluation criterion consists of

Factors. In order to provide the Offeror with an understanding of the significance assigned by the Government, the Factors are assigned a relative order of importance. The following terminology is used:

(1) Significantly More Important. The Factor or Sub-factor is substantially more important than another Factor or Sub-factor. The Factor or Sub-factor is given far more consideration than another factor or sub-factor.

(2) More Important. The factor or sub-factor is greater in value than another factor, but not as much as a significantly more important factor or sub-factor. The factor or sub-factor is given more consideration than another factor or sub-factor.

(3) Equal. The factor or sub-factor is the same in value as another factor or sub-factor.

(b) RELATIVE ORDER OF IMPORTANCE OF FACTORS.

(1) Factor Order of Importance

a) The Technical Approach Factor is significantly more important than the Past

Performance Factor.

b) The Past Performance Factor is More Important than the Price Factor.

c) All non-Price evaluation factors, when combined, are Significantly More Important than the Price Factor.

EVALUATION APPROACH

All proposals shall be subject to evaluation by a team of Government personnel.

EVALUATION CRITERIA

FACTOR I – Technical Approach

Sub-Factor 1 through Sub-Factor 5

Sub-Factor 1: Understanding of the Requirement

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed ability to conduct research into the DOE records, interpret those records for contractual agreements with the DOE facilities, and to maintain a database of information linking the Contractor/Subcontractor to a DOE facility. The

Offeror shall submit a proposal that demonstrates its understanding of the work described in Part

Five (5) of the PWS.

Sub-Factor 2: Research and Interpretation of Department of Energy Records

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed expertise in researching and interpreting

DOE contractual agreements and other various forms of documentation to identify those

Contractors/Subcontractor contractual agreements with covered DOE facilities.

Sub-Factor 3: Access to Union records, Pension Funds, Health Records

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed ability to access union records, pension funds, health records, and former worker program records.

Sub-Factor 4: Personnel with Knowledge of DOE history of Atomic Weapons Program

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed experience and qualifications of all

Contractor Key and Non-Key Personnel.

Sub-Factor 5: Public Access to EVS Database

The Government will evaluate the quality, feasibility, practicability, innovativeness, and appropriateness of the Offeror’s proposed ability to provide a public version of the database, including an estimated timeline / schedule for when the database will be available to the public.

FACTOR II - Past Performance

Past Performance shall be evaluated in accordance with FAR 13.106-2 (3).

The offer will be evaluated on the currency, size, scope, and responsibilities of the Offeror in engagements relevant to the requirements of this contract. Offerors without relevant Past

Performance experience, or for whom information on Past Performance is not available, shall not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on Past Performance.

The Government will evaluate Past Performance information submitted by the Offeror. The

Government may also use references and other sources such as the Past Performance Information

Retrieval System (PPIRS) when evaluating Past Performance.

Offerors will be evaluated on the extent and quality of their own corporate Past Performance

(including that of established affiliates, subsidiaries, units or divisions of the Offeror’s own company or parent company that are being proposed to support this effort).

FACTOR III – Price

The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by evaluating prices for the Base Period and Option Period. Offers that do not include prices for the Option Period may be rejected and may not be considered further for award. Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the options.

The Price/Cost proposed will be evaluated, but not scored. The Contracting Officer and the

Price Evaluation Team will use all methods available to evaluate the proposed prices. Price evaluation will commence upon final consensus ratings of the technical evaluation. The

Contracting Officer (CO) and the Price Evaluation Team will review and evaluate the price proposals. The prices proposed will not be scored. Each Offeror’s price/cost proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the proposal observes reasonableness and realism.

As part of its evaluation, the Government will consider the Firm Fixed Price totals for the Base

Year and Option Years.

Prices will be evaluated for fairness and reasonableness using the techniques in FAR 13.106-2

(3).

No adjectival ratings will be used to evaluate Price.