Evaluation Criteria - Cable Services.docx

Evaluation Criteria:

The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. Although the technical approach, is the most important factor than price, a tradeoff methodology will be used to determine the best value. A tradeoff analysis will determine if the difference in price merits the technical difference between proposed solutions. The following is the order of importance for the applicable non-price and price factors:

1) Technical Approach

2) Price

Panel members will account for the following definitions when evaluating the received quotes. Each evaluator will provide detailed documentation of specific strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies, as defined below, of the quote to substantiate the evaluation.

Strength: An element of the quote which meets or exceeds a requirement of the solicitation in a beneficial way to the Government.

Weakness: A flaw in the quote that increases the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

Significant Weakness: A flaw in the quote that appreciably increases the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

Deficiency: A material failure of the quote to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses that increase the likelihood of unsuccessful performance to an unacceptable level.

Each offeror’s technical quote shall be evaluated based on the factors below, to determine if the offeror provides a sound, compliant approach that meets the requirements of the PWS, and demonstrates a thorough knowledge and understanding of those requirements and their associated risks. Note that Offerors must not simply restate the requirements outlined in the PWS and that the narrative must describe how the proposed solution will satisfy the requirements.

The following technical evaluation factors are listed in descending order of importance.

Factor 1 - Technical Approach:

Overall Technical Solution: The Department will evaluate the extent to which the solution can fulfill the Department’s requirements. The Department will evaluate the extent to which the technical approach demonstrates a clear understanding of goals, objectives, and requirements as well as the technical approach that aligns with the scope, goals, and objectives. The Technical Approach will be evaluated in accordance with the following evaluation rating scale.

EVALUATION SCALE

SUPERIOR

The quote solution is superior and greatly exceeds many of the Government’s requirements. In relation to the evaluation factor, the offeror’s proposed solution is of the highest quality and thoroughly justified or substantiated. In total, the solution does not contain inconsistencies or incompatibilities and presents a consistent solution that is sound. The quoted solution has strength(s) in meeting the solicited requirements which are not offset by a weakness (es), and the solution does not contain any significant weaknesses and/or deficiencies. Overall, the proposed solution presents minimal performance risk to the Government.

SATISFACTORY

The solution quote is satisfactory and meets the Government’s requirements. In relation to the evaluation factor, the offeror’s proposed solution is of satisfactory quality and well justified or substantiated. In total, the solution contains minor or insignificant inconsistencies or incompatibilities and presents a consistent solution that is satisfactory. The quote solution has strength(s) and weakness (es) in meeting the solicited requirements, but the strengths outweigh the weaknesses, and the quote does not contain any deficiencies. Overall, the proposed solution presents moderate to low performance risk for the Government.

MARGINAL

The quote solution is susceptible for improvement and fails to satisfy the Government’s requirements as written. In relation to the evaluation factor, the offeror’s proposed solution contains insufficient evidence demonstrating that it is of a satisfactory level of quality and it cannot be determined if it is justified or substantiated. In total, the solution contains inconsistencies that results in it being marginal. The quoted solution may have a strength(s) in meeting the solicited requirements; however, they are offset by either significant weakness (es) and/or deficiency (ies). Corrections of significant weakness (es) and/or deficiency (ies) could result in an acceptable quote, without a major rewrite of the quote. Overall, the solution represents moderate to high performance risk for the Government.

UNSATISFACTORY

The quote solution is unsatisfactory and fails to satisfy the Government’s requirements. In relation to the evaluation factor, the offeror’s proposed solution is unsatisfactory and is not reasonably justified or substantiated. In total, the solution contains numerous inconsistencies, significant weaknesses, and/or deficiency (ies) and presents an inconsistent solution that is unsatisfactory. The quote solution may contain a strength(s); however, any strength(s) are outweighed by the significant weakness(es) and/or deficiency(ies) The quote solution has little to no chance of success and correction would require extensive revision that amounts to a major rewrite in order to be rated as acceptable. The quote solution represents a high-performance risk for the Government.

Factor 2 - Price:

There are no page limitations governing the business proposal and certified cost and pricing data is not being requested as part of the business proposal.

The Offeror shall provide a complete price buildup for the firm fixed-price contract line-item numbers (CLINs) identified in the solicitation. Price buildup shall reflect the price breakdown by task, complete with the price buildup for each task. Price will be analyzed in order to ensure that it is fair and reasonable, as required by the Contracting Officer (CO). In addition to determining if the proposed price is fair and reasonable, the Department will review the pricing in order to determine if the prices are not in line with the marketplace and are so low that it could present economic hardships on the successful offeror that may translate into performance risks.

The Department will evaluate all the Contract Line-Item Numbers, to include options. Considering the inclusion of 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services, the evaluation will include a 6-month price analysis of each contract period. The 6-month option period will be evaluated for each contract period by dividing the overall contract period amount by 2, which represents 6 months, and adding the amount to the overall contract amount.