Evaluation Criteria - Comparative.docx

Evaluation Criteria (Comparative Evaluation)

The specific evaluation is to be used as follows:

In accordance with FAR 13.106-2(b)(3), comparative evaluation procedures will be utilized. Comparative evaluation is the comparison of all offers received in response to this solicitation against each other. An item-by-item comparison of each offer to one another will be performed to determine which offer provides the most benefit to the government. Award will be made to the offer that is most advantageous to the Government. The Government may award to the lowest priced offeror that meets the Government’s minimum requirements; however, the Government reserves the right to award to a higher priced offeror exceeding the minimum requirements if it is most advantageous to the Government. To be considered for award, an offer must meet the Government’s minimum technical requirement contained in this solicitation.

The following evaluation factors will be utilized during evaluation (in no order of relative importance): Technical, Past Performance and Price.

1. Price:

Price will be evaluated based on the proposed total price, including options, (if any). The Government reserves the right and discretion to perform price realism analysis on any offer that appears to be so low as to pose a risk to the Government in understanding the requirements of the solicitation.

2. Technical Acceptability:

The Technical element of the evaluation shall be based solely on information furnished by the vendor. The Government is not responsible for locating or securing any information which is not identified in the proposal. To ensure sufficient information is available, vendors must furnish as part of their proposal all descriptive material (such as cuts, illustrations, drawings, processes or other information) necessary for the Government to determine whether the proposed effort meets or exceeds the performance characteristics and/or objectives of the requirement. In particular, the Government is willing to trade-off on price for offerors that exceed the following performance work characteristics/objectives and/or period of performance:

*Thorough understanding of the operations on a U.S. Military Installation to include applicable Federal, State, and Local Safety Regulations

* Ability for all contractor employees to complete a National Agency Check (NAC) on the first day of performance (C.13.2)

3. Past Performance:

Past performance will be evaluated on an acceptable/unacceptable rating basis. An “Acceptable” rating is defined as the Government having reasonable confidence that the offeror can complete all requirements under the contract and meet stated delivery dates. An “Unacceptable” rating is defined as the Government having minimal confidence that the offeror can complete all requirements under the contract and meet stated delivery dates. The ratings will be based upon past performance information submitted and past performance information the Government obtains. Only offerors rated “Acceptable” will be eligible for award. Award will be made to the lowest price technically acceptable offer out of all offers rated “Acceptable”.

Offerors shall include three (3) records of past performance, each record shall contain the following information:

Corporate Name or Government Customer Point of Contact Name, telephone number and email address Period(s) of Performance Brief Summary of services provided

NOTE: Technical and past performance are of equal importance and when combined are significantly more important than price.