Evaluation criterias CHR.pdf

Evaluation Criteria and Evaluation Factors

Community Health Representatives (CHR) Home Visiting Program

The contractor will be evaluated for suitability for this contract based upon the following evaluation factors.

Technical Capability/Processes

Relevant Past Performance

Price

A. Technical Capability/Processes

Information shall be precise, factual, detailed, and complete. Offerors should not assume that the evaluation team is aware of company abilities, capabilities, plans, facilities, organization, or any other pertinent fact that is important to accomplishment of work. Technical acceptability will be determined by review of information submitted acceptable offeror which must provide a description in sufficient detail to show that the proposed solution meets the Government’s requirement in accordance with the Performance Work Statement (PWS). The offeror shall propose its plan/methodology with a focus on the below areas:

1. Provide an evidenced-based curriculum with documented program outcomes for a culturally tailored home-visiting intervention appropriate for American Indian and Alaska

Native communities, focusing on the physical, cognitive, and social/emotional development of preschool-aged children delivered by paraprofessionals;

2. Processes/capability to establish a virtual training workshop for 15 slots from Family

Spirit affiliate sites that meets all PWS requirements for base and option years;

3. Develop training materials, technical assistance, and program training evaluations for the

Community of Practice (total of 2) Learning Collaboratives that meet PWS specifications for features, capabilities and course content;

4. Demonstrate capability and processes to successfully provide an “alumni” group for continued peer sharing and learning upon completion of the Learning Collaborative;

5. Provide Key Personnel’s title roles and responsibilities.

The submission of Technical Capability/Processes Factor shall indicate the offeror’s quality and capability of the work to be performed. The government will evaluate the offeror’s overall understanding and approach to accomplish the requirements of the PWS.

This submission shall be limited to 10 pages

B. Relevant Past Performance

Offeror will be evaluated on performance under existing contracts and performance on prior contracts. Offeror should note the difference between past performance and past experience. Past performance relates to quality and how well a Contractor performed, while past experience is about the type and amount of work previously performed by a Contractor. The Government may supplement the information offeror provide with performance information it may obtain from any source including its own experience with the offeror.

Element 1. The Offeror’s relevant past performance information -- The Offeror will be evaluated to assess the demonstrated quality of performance on similar work, to include the ability to control the quality and cost of work, timeliness of performance, and effectiveness at accomplishing the goals of previous work. Offeror is required to provide the evidences and corporate resume of two (2) relevant contracts performed during the past three years or currently performing. Relevant contracts are those contracts that are of similar scope, magnitude, nature, and work. A representative of IHS may contact the offeror’s previous customer(s) for a phone interview to help rate the offeror’s performance.

The submission under Element 1 shall include the following information for each contract:

1. Points of contact (Contracting Officer, Contracting Officer’s Representative and any other pertinent officials that can verify performance) - name, agency/company, address, phone number and email address

2. Contract title & number (and task order number(s) when applicable)

3. Relevancy to the PWS for the subject solicitation in terms of project description and magnitude of the work performed. The relevancy information must be delineated to the level that allows the evaluating officials to make a proper relevancy determination.

4. Total original, present and/or final contract dollar value

5. Explanation of problems, delays, cost overruns and corrective actions taken

6. Contract holder status (prime or sub-contractor)

Element 2. All Concerns shall submit a short narrative that describes their experience in working with communities and organizations that represent a broad range of American Indian and Alaska

Native People. In addition, offeror shall demonstrate their understanding of IHS mission, goals and customers.

Element 3. The Federal Government uses the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting

System (CPARS) to document contractor performance information that is required by Federal

Regulations. Past performance information entered to CPARS is available to federal agencies through a separate system called the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) for source selection purposes. Contracting Officer will assess the offeror’s PPIRS records as part of the evaluation of this factor.

This submission shall be limited to 10 pages

C. Price

The offeror shall complete the attached pricing matrix ensuring that the per-month pricing and total pricing is included for the base year, and each option year period, and that the total price accurately reflects all periods of performances.

The Government will evaluate the potential six-month extension of services under FAR 52.217-8 by adding ½ the total quoted price for option year one to the overall price. The total of the base period, option year one, and the extension under FAR 52.217-8 will be the evaluated price for each offeror.