Evaluation Criteria and Methodology.pdf

EVALUATION CRITERIA

1) Technical Approach

The Contractor’s proposal shall address each area of the Statement of Work (SOW) in sufficient detail to demonstrate a clear understanding of the requirement and the technical capability to meet the needs of the requirement.

2) Past Performance

The Contractor shall provide at least two (2) past performance references with knowledge of the contractor’s relevant skills and experiences. References shall include the following information:

a) Name of Organization

b) Description of Contractor’s Responsibilities

c) Contact Name, Title, and Telephone Number

Past Performance shall be evaluated for relevance to the current requirement in subject area.

EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

The technical volume of the response will be evaluated using a technically acceptable or technically unacceptable (pass/fail) basis using the below definitions:

Technically acceptable. A technically acceptable proposal shows that the offeror understands and appears to be capable of meeting all essential requirements of the solicitation and clearly documents that the offeror can successfully perform or provide all the essential required elements as described in the SOW/PD. A technically acceptable proposal may require only minor clarifications and is reasonably complete so that additional information or substantial rewrites are not required to make the proposal acceptable.

Technically unacceptable. A technically unacceptable proposal does not meet the SOW requirements and cannot be made technically acceptable without major revisions or a complete rewrite. Technically unacceptable proposals have little or no technical merit and contain major deficiencies and inadequacies.

A single contract award will be made to the best valued vendor who offers the government a technically acceptable offer at the lowest price.

Cost/Price Evaluation

Offeror(s) cost/price proposal will be evaluated for reasonableness. For a price to be reasonable, it must represent a price to the government that a prudent person would pay when consideration is given to prices in the market. Normally, price reasonableness is established through adequate price competition, but in the event of only one proposal using the guidelines set forth in FAR

13.106-3, Award and Documentation. The Offeror shall submit firm fixed prices for all items and/or services required in RFQ 95332A20Q0029 (including option periods).

Evaluation of Options

It is anticipated that any firm fixed price contract awarded from RFQ 95332A20Q0029 will contain option provision(s) and periods(s). In accordance with FAR clause 52.217-5 Evaluation of Options, (July 1990) the Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options quantities to the total price of the base period requirement, except when it is determined in accordance with FAR 17.206(b) not to be in the Government’s best interests.

Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise an available option(s).