Evaluation Criteria attachment 5.pdf

Attachment 5

1 | P a g e

United States Department of Energy Southeastern Power Administration

1166 Athens Tech Road Elberton, Georgia 30635

August 10, 2026

EVALUATION CRITERIA

A. BASIS FOR AWARD – EVALUATION PROCESS

The Government intends to award one firm, fixed-price contract under the GSA Federal Supply Schedule (i.e. Professional Services Schedule [PSS] Special Item Numbers [SINs] 874-1 and 874-7), to the responsible Quoter whose quote provides the best value to the Government, price and other factors considered.

Volume I, Other Documents will be reviewed to determine compliance with required documents.

(a) The below Technical Proposal Evaluation Criteria shall be used to evaluate quotes, and are listed in descending order of importance:

• Criterion 1 − Technical Approach is equal in importance to Criterion 2.

• Criterion 2 – Staffing and Key Personnel is equal in importance to Criterion 1.

• Criterion 3 – Corporate Experience is the third most important Criterion.

• Criterion 4 – Past Performance is fourth most important Criterion.

Technical Evaluation Criteria, when combined, are significantly more important than Criterion 5

– Price Proposal.

(b) Options. The Government will evaluate quotes for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that a quote is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(c) A written notice of award or acceptance of a quote, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful Quoter within the time for acceptance specified in the quote, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the quote’s specified expiration time, the Government may accept a quote (or part of a quote), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

In determining the best value to the Government, the Government is more concerned with obtaining a superior technical quote than making an award at the lowest evaluated price. All evaluation factors other than price, when combined, are significantly more important than price.

2 | P a g e

This may result in award to higher-rated, higher-priced Quoter, where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors and the reasonable determination that the technical superiority and/or overall quotes’ approach and/or superior past performance of the higher-priced Quoters outweigh the price differences. However, the Government will not make an award at a price premium it considers disproportionate to the benefits associated with the evaluated superiority of one technical quote over another. Thus, to the extent the technical quotes are evaluated as close or similar in merit, the evaluated price is more likely to be a determining factor.

Responsibility Determination: Prior to award, the Contracting Officer may make a responsibility determination that would include a review of the items specified in RFQ Attachment 4 – Quotation Preparation Instructions for Volume I – Other Documents.

B. EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR AWARD

Criterion 1: Technical Approach

The Quoter’s technical approach submission shall be evaluated based on the extent to which the submission demonstrates an ability to successfully accomplish the requirements described in Attachment 1 – Performance Work Statement (PWS). Quoters will be evaluated on their technical analysis of work areas in the PWS, and on their demonstrated capability to perform the work required in the PWS. Small Business percentage participation shall be stated within the Technical Approach. A minimum of 10% of the yearly value of the contract shall be reserved for small business.

The Quoter should provide a detailed Start-Up Plan that addresses the assumption of responsibilities from the incumbent contractor and ensures a seamless transition with no or limited impact on services, and an efficient transfer of on-going projects. The Quoter should identify potential start-up problems and methods to avoid or mitigate the impact of such problems on the start-up process.

The Start-Up Plan shall be evaluated to determine the potential for a seamless transition and the identified problems for start-up and transition and the adequacy of the proposed resolution and approach to resolve identified problems.

One overall rating will be given for Criterion 1. No subfactors will be evaluated.

Criterion 2: Staffing and Key Personnel

Key Personnel The extent, depth and quality of the Key Personnel's relevant work experience, as well as the quality and applicability of their education, technical experience, and professional development shall be evaluated to determine the extent to which each individual proposed satisfies or exceeds the position qualification requirements of Attachment 3. Letters of commitment for the proposed Key Personnel shall be included.

3 | P a g e

FAILURE TO PROVIDE LETTERS OF COMMITMENT FOR PROPOSED KEY

PERSONNELWILL ADVERSELY AFFECT THE GOVERNMENT’S EVALUATION OF

THE QUOTE AND MAY MAKE THE QUOTE INELIGIBLE FOR AWARD.

Non-Key Personnel Staffing Plan -- The overall quality of the staffing plan and the depth and quality of the Non-Key Personnel’s education and audit experience described in the Position Descriptions shall be evaluated (Attachment 3).

Quoters who are able to demonstrate that they (or their proposed subcontractors or consultants) have all or a large portion of Non-Key Personnel, available at the time of quote submission will be rated more favorably. The Quoter will also be evaluated on the adequacy of its plans to fill vacancies as they arise throughout the contract performance

Quality Assurance Approach – The Government will evaluate the extent to which the Quoter’s Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) demonstrates sound and reasonable business practices for managing the resultant Task Order.

One overall rating will be given for Criterion 2. No sub-factors will be evaluated.

Criterion 3: Corporate Experience

The Government will evaluate the extent to which the Quoter’s Corporate Experience submission (i.e. all items required in Attachment 4 – Quotation Preparation Instructions under Criterion 3) demonstrates possessing previous experience in performing work of a same or similar nature to the requirements in the solicitation. The Government may contact some or all of the references provided by the Quoter.

One overall rating will be given for Criterion 3. No sub-factors will be evaluated.

Criterion 4 – Past Performance

The Government will evaluate the Quoter’s performance under recent and relevant contracts.

Recent past performance is any contract completed within the previous five years from the solicitation closing date. Relevant past performance is defined as a reference that is similar in size (dollar value and duration), scope (substantially similar to the requirements of this PWS) and complexity to this requirement. The Past Performance factor will be evaluated as favorable, unfavorable, or neutral. In the case of a Quoter without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on relevant past performance is not available, the Quoter will be evaluated neither favorably nor unfavorably on past performance and shall receive a neutral rating. During its evaluation, the Government will review and consider all past performance information submitted by the Quoter's references, may contact some or all of the references provided by the Quoter, and may solicit past performance information from any other available sources including the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) and Electronic Subcontract Reporting

4 | P a g e

System (eSRS). References other than those identified by the Offeror may be contacted and their input may be considered by the Government in the evaluation of the Offeror's past performance.

One overall rating shall be assigned to each Offeror after evaluating the Offeror’s past performance.

One overall rating will be given for Criterion 4. No sub-factors will be evaluated.

Price Proposal

The Government will evaluate price to ensure that it is fair and reasonable. For evaluation purposes, the total price is determined by adding the base period plus all option periods.