Evaluation Criteria.pdf
PDF 112 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Sandia Mountains Snow Removal Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 127EAV25Q0004
- Issued by
- Department of Agriculture Forest Service
About this file
This document is an Evaluation Criteria file for a snow removal solicitation detailing the government's approach to evaluating and awarding a contract for snow plowing services. The evaluation will utilize a trade-off process, with past performance/experience given more importance than price. Proposals will be assessed on two primary factors: (1) Price Proposal, which requires furnishing prices for all listed items, and (2) Technical Proposal, which evaluates the firm's prior experience with snow plowing and qualifications including location, ability to meet work timeframes, available equipment and personnel, and financial capability.
Offerors will be rated on a six-tier past performance scale ranging from "Exceptional/high confidence" to "Unsatisfactory/no confidence", with the contracting officer making the final determination. Key stipulations include that the contract will be awarded to only one offeror, the government is not obligated to select the lowest-priced offer, and references beyond those listed may be contacted. The solicitation is specific to snow removal services for parking facilities along the Sandia Crest Scenic Byway in the Cibola National Forest, issued by the Department of Agriculture Forest Service.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Snow Removal SOW.pdf | ||
| 127EAV25Q0004 FINAL.pdf | ||
| WD2015-5449.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Evaluation - Commercial Items (OCT 2014)
AWARD DETERMINATION
All proposals submitted will be evaluated based solely 011 the factors and sub factors as stated below. The Government may award without further discussions. Submit a clearly written proposal with your best price. The Government may, after evaluation of proposals, conduct oral or written discussions with O erors as appropriate. Award will be made, using a trade-o process, to that O eror (I) whose proposal is technically acceptable and, (2) whose technical/price relationship o ers the best value to the Government. Award may not necessarily be made to that o eror submitting the lowest o er. The Government reserves the right to make cost/technical trad-o s that are in the best interest and to the advantage of the Government.
EVALUATION FACTORS
Proposals will be evaluated based on the following evaluation factors.
a. Price Proposal
Furnish prices for all items listed under the Schedule of Items. No additional information will be necessary to determine reasonableness of price.
b. Technical Proposal
The following non-cost evaluation factors are of equal importance:
I. Prior Experience of the firm/company.
a. List of experience performing this type (Snow Plowing) or similar type of work.
II. 2. Qualifications of the firm,
a. Address the location of the firm with respect to the project location.
b. Address how your firm will meet the time frames indicated in the statement of work.
c. List all equipment and personnel you intend to use to complete the work described in this solicitation. Include a narrative discussing your financial capability.
Evaluation of Options. (JUL 1990)
Except when it is determined in accordance with FAR 17.206(6) not to be in the Government's best interests, the Government will evaluate o ers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).
(End of Provision)
Past performance/Experience: Past performance/Experience assessments shall be accomplished for all o erors in the competitive range (expanded if needed). Each o eror shall be assigned one of the following ratings:
Rating Definition Exceptional/high confidence Based on the o eror's performance record, essentially no doubt exists that the o eror will successfully perform the required e ort.
Very good/significant Based on the o eror's performance record, little doubt exists that the o eror will successfully perform the required e ort.
Satisfactory/confidence Based on the o eror’s performance record, some doubt exists that the o eror will successfully perform the required e ort.
Neutral/unknown confidence No performance record identifiable (see FAR 15.305{a)(2) (iii) and (iv)).
Marginal/little confidence Based on the o eror's performance record, substantial doubt exists that the o eror will successfully perform the required e ort.
Changes to the o eror's existing processes may be necessary in order to achieve contract requirements.
Unsatisfactory/no confidence Based on the o eror's performance record, extreme doubt exists that the o eror will successfully perform the required e ort.
(I) A number of past performance references provided by o erors may be selected and investigated. The final determination of past performance ratings shall rest with the contracting o icer.
(2) An o eror with limited or no recent or relevant past performance will receive a rating of Neutral/unknown confidence and will not be rated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.
(4) Past performance/Experience is of more importance than price.
(5) The contract will be awarded to only one o eror. The Government reserves the right to award the contract to other than the lowest priced o eror.
Note: The O ice of Management and Budget (OMB) has authorized Federal agencies to collect past performance information under 0MB clearance number 9000-0142. Both this information provided in the proposal, and Government records will be used to evaluate the O eror's past performance; howe er, references other than those listed may also be contacted.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .