Evaluation Criteria-Grant Writing Workshop.pdf

Evaluation Criteria

1. Technical Evaluation Criteria

Item No.

Evaluation

Criteria

Rating Standard

1.

Professional Expertise

The offeror must demonstrate their knowledge and professional experience as it correlates to the experience outlined in the Statement of Work (SOW) under contractor’s experience.

Recent successful experience delivering a series of Grant Proposal Writing Workshops for faculty and trainees/students as described in the SOW. Examples of 2-3 workshops for NIH institutes involving a grant overview or application writing session produced by the Offeror that are applicable to this requirement should be submitted as reference and will not count toward the page limits.

Proposal must include either CVs or resumes that clearly detail offerors relevant experience and knowledge of the grant writing process and accompanying instructional capabilities.

2.

Technical Approach

Ability of the Offeror to understand the SOW and requirements, adequately describe the proposed approach, identify problems and potential challenges, and demonstrate how the contract requirements will be met.

3.

Organizational Experience

The offeror must submit with their proposal a list of the last two contracts completed during the past two years and / or contracts awarded currently in process that are similar in nature to the work scope. Contracts listed may include those entered into by the Federal Government, agencies of state and local governments and commercial concerns. Newly formed entities without prior contracts should list contracts and subcontracts as required above for such key personnel. For each contract, subcontract, or reference include: (i) Name of Contracting Organization; (ii) Contract Number (for subcontracts, provide the prime contract number and the subcontract number); (iii) Contract Type; (iv) Total Contract Value; (v) Description of Requirement; (vi) North American Industry Classification System(NAICS) Code.

4.

Past Performance

Acceptable degree of successful performance in prior contracts. The Government will evaluate the merits of each offeror's past performance based on its reputation with its former customers. Past experience with NIH or comparable agency or company focused on grant writing and science communication preferred. Evidence can include references, testimonials from satisfied clients, letters of recommendation, etc. Provide five (3) references.

ARTICLE 5 - Evaluation of Quotes and Award Determination

1. The Government will evaluate all responses received on using the evaluation criteria set forth in the article titled: “Evaluation Criteria” equally weighted.

2. Each quote will be evaluated in strict conformity with the evaluation factors, utilizing written critiques. The evaluation will be based upon the demonstrated capabilities of the prospective contractor in relation to the needs of the project as set forth in the RFQ and will use an adjectival evaluation scheme based on the following ratings:

_Excellent; _Good; _Acceptable; _Marginal; _Unacceptable; _Neutral

3. The price quoted will also be evaluated taking into consideration any price reductions, the level of effort and the mix of labor proposed to perform the task(s) being ordered. A price reasonable determination will be made and a best value analysis will be performed.

The best value analysis will take into consideration the results of the technical evaluation, price evaluation, and the ability to complete the work within the Government's required schedule. The analysis will document that the award represents the lowest overall cost alternative (considering price, special features, administrative costs, etc.) to meet the Government’s needs. The Government reserves the right to issue an order to the best value of the Government, technical merit, price, and other factors considered.

4. All aspects of a quote are subject to discussion, including price, technical approach and terms and conditions. At the completion of discussions, the contractor will ensure his technical plan and price quote reflects the mutual understandings of the requirement and if requested, submit a revised technical plan and price quote to the Contracting Officer.

The technical plan should consist of the contractor’s intent and approach to this particular effort, any considerations that should be made by the government, as well as any additional information that expresses the Contractor’s position above others for this effort.

5. The Government may request clarifying information from the schedule contractor, as it relates to its quote.

6. If an award will be made without conducting discussions, schedule contractors may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of their quote or to resolve minor or clerical errors.

7. The Government reserves the right to make a single award, multiple awards, or no award at all as a result of the RFQ. In addition, the RFQ may be amended or canceled as necessary to meet the Government’s requirements.