Evaluation_Factors_for_Award_Cody_Security_System_Repairs_20260622.pdf

Evaluation Factors for Award Basis for Award – Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) The Government intends to award a single firm-fixed-price contract to the responsible Offeror whose quotation/proposal is Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA).

To be considered for award, an Offeror must:

A. Be technically acceptable in all non-price factors; and

B. Submit the lowest total evaluated price among those technically acceptable Offerors.

Technical acceptability will be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. Only proposals receiving an “Acceptable” rating for all technical factors will be eligible for award.

Evaluation Factors The following non-price factors will be evaluated for technical acceptability:

Factor 1 – Relevant Technical Experience The Offeror shall demonstrate experience performing work directly involving:

A. Installation, programming, or integration of Identiv Velocity access-control systems;

B. Installation or replacement of SNIB, SNIB3, RREB, or similar Identiv controller components;

C. Integration and testing of FICAM-compliant card readers;

D. System troubleshooting, wiring verification, RS-485 communication path verification, and functional testing.

Acceptable

1. Proposal clearly demonstrates experience with the Identiv Velocity platform and associated hardware.

2. Experience examples show successful performance on similar access-control system repair, upgrade, or integration work.

Unacceptable

1. No demonstrated experience with Identiv Velocity; or

2. Examples reflect only generic access-control work or unrelated systems.

Factor 2 – Past Performance (Prime or Subcontractor) The Government will assess past performance information submitted by the Offeror and available from Government databases or references.

Acceptable

1. Past performance records show satisfactory performance in similar security system installation or repair efforts, including schedule adherence and quality of deliverables.

2. Subcontractor past performance may be considered if they are performing key portions of the work.

Unacceptable

1. Record of poor performance in areas relevant to this requirement; or

2. Lack of verifiable past performance combined with no supporting information provided.

Factor 3 – Ability to Complete the Work within the Required Timeframe

The Offeror shall submit a project schedule outlining the major tasks necessary to complete the security system repairs, including equipment procurement, installation, programming, testing, and submission of required deliverables.

Because field work is expected to be short in duration and overall schedule risk depends heavily on hardware availability, the level of schedule detail required is modest. However, the following must be clearly stated:

A. The Offeror can complete all work within the 90-day Period of Performance, and the submitted schedule supports this;

OR

B. The Offeror cannot complete all work within 90 days and must therefore provide a proposed completion schedule showing when all work can be accomplished.

Acceptable

1. A schedule is submitted; AND

2. The schedule is logical, feasible, and shows either:

a. completion within the required 90-day period; OR

b. a clear, realistic alternate completion timeline.

Unacceptable

1. No schedule is submitted;

2. The Offeror does not state whether they can meet the 90-day period;

3. The schedule lacks sufficient detail to determine feasibility;

4. The Offeror cannot meet the 90-day period and does not provide an alternate timeline.

Special Evaluation Rule – If No Offeror Can Meet 90 Days If all Offerors are found “Unacceptable” solely because they cannot meet the 90-day Period of Performance, the Government will:

1. Re-evaluate only those Offerors who submitted alternate completion schedules, and

2. Make award to the Lowest-Priced Technically Acceptable Offeror among that group.

Price Price will be evaluated for reasonableness, completeness, and compliance with all solicitation instructions.

Only those proposals rated Acceptable under all technical factors will be evaluated for award based on price.

Award Determination Award will be made to the Lowest-Priced Technically Acceptable Offeror.