Eval Factors.docx

HYDROPONIC BOXES

EVALUATION CRITERIA

The offeror’s quote will be evaluated in three areas: Technical, Past Performance, and Price. This acquisition will be conducted in accordance with FAR Part 12, Commercial Products and Commercial Services and the provision 52.212-2. The Government will award to the responsible offeror whose quote, conforming to the solicitation, will be most advantageous to the Government. A comparative analysis evaluation of all quotes will be carried out to determine the best value, which will include a tradeoff among price and non-price factors. Technical and past performance when combined are significantly more important than price. In the non-price areas, technical is more important than past performance. Interested parties should recognize that price, although of lesser importance than non-price factors, might contribute substantially to the contract award decision. As the evaluation of competing quotes in the technical and past performance areas become more equal in rating, the more important price will become in selecting the best value for the Government. The BOP desires to make an award to the offeror who can provide the best value, considering the evaluation criteria specified herein. The Government is more concerned with obtaining superior technical excellence and low risk than in making an award at the lowest price to the Government. This will involve an overall assessment of each quote judged in terms of an offeror's potential for successfully completing anticipated requirements at a reasonable cost.

Mere restatement of the requirements and/or generic assertions that a quote is compliant with the solicitation without containing an appropriate description of the offeror's capabilities may be viewed less favorably than quotes with detailed descriptions. The evaluation will be based on clarity, depth, and information provided in an offeror’s quote. The Government will only evaluate what is provided by the offeror. For the Past Performance factor the Government reserves the right to use data obtained from other sources. The solicitation consists of the RFQ 1449 document, Statement of Work, and the Evaluation Factors herein.

Technical Evaluation Factors

0. Project Management Plan and Key Personnel: The Government will assess each offeror’s understanding and ability to manage a production schedule with various deliveries of (8) hydroponic boxes in an efficient and effective manner. The evaluation will consider the offeror's proposed Project Manager qualifications and experience.

0. Equipment Specifications: The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed container farm design to determine the quality of materials, overall durability, and performance of the integrated systems. The evaluation will assess the grade and type of materials used for internal and external construction, the structural integrity, and the insulated R-values to ensure suitability for diverse climates. Additionally, the Government will evaluate the sophistication of automated control systems in monitoring and maintaining optimal growth environments, compliance with egress and safety standards, and the offeror’s demonstrated ability to meet or exceed the mandatory production yields of 6,000 pounds of leafy greens annually and 650 heads of lettuce weekly.

0. Regulatory Compliance/Adherence: The Government will evaluate the offeror’s approach/demonstrated ability to comply with all applicable Federal, State, and local law, regulations, and standards, including but not limited to: 508, FISMA, NIST, TAA, FIPS, FedRamp, PGD 15-03, HSPD-12.

0. Training and Implementation: The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed training program, including the methodology for delivering up to (8) hours of onsite training per location/box delivered within the 30 days of delivered. Quotes will be assessed on their training capacity to prepare staff to set-up, maintain, troubleshoot, harvest, and clean a complete system. To include but not limited to food safety, nutrient management and the quality of guides/resources.

0. Experience: The Government will assess the extent and relevance of each offeror’s direct experience in the design, fabrication, and deployment of a fully integrated hydroponic system. The offeror must demonstrate a history of relevant delivered all-inclusive turnkey units where the internal grow environment was pre-installed within a container. Offerors shall provide (3) three relevant examples of past hydroponic systems that were delivered/ installed.

The offeror must show relevant experience in curriculum development and technical instruction, having trained end-users on the maintenance of the hardware/box and the requirements of crop production. Experience for the curriculum must be for direct hydroponic instruction. Offerors shall provide (3) three relevant examples of past hydroponic system curriculum/training/resources provided to past hydroponic customers.

0. Innovative and Value-Added Enhancements: The offeror is invited to propose innovative enhancements that exceed the base requirements of the Statement of Work (SOW). State and define the enhancements. The enhancement must be relevant, measurable, or an economic benefit to the requirement and benefit the Bureau of Prisons. Enhancements that offer substantial improvements will hold a much higher value than incidental improvements. Offerors must provide a rationale for each enhancement. Offerors shall state whether proposed enhancements are included in their base price or are an additional cost to the Government.

Past Performance

Past Performance is a measure of the degree to which the offeror, as an organization, has performed previous contracts and satisfied its customers. Offerors will submit Past performance information with their quote, to include recent and relevant contracts for the same or similar items and other references (including contract numbers, points of contact with telephone numbers and other relevant information). The Government will check, to the extent it deems necessary, each offeror's past performance information and reserves the right contact references to inquire about: the quality and timeliness of the offeror's work; ability to stay within budget; reasonableness of its business behavior; and technical and management capabilities. The Government may expand the evaluation to include references or information not contained in the offeror's submission including, but not limited to, past evaluations and other available information. The actual number of references checked is at the discretion of the Government.

Pricing Evaluation To be considered for award, the offeror must submit prices that are deemed to be fair and reasonable. The Government may evaluate the reasonableness of each offeror's unit prices and multipliers by comparing them to each other and, where necessary, other contracts for similar items. Prices that represent a probable loss position for the offeror may be judged unrealistic. Prices which are extreme or excessive may be judged unreasonable.