Exhibit 4-Addendum to 52.212-2 -- Evaluation Criteria.docx

ATTACHMENT 2: ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2

EXHIBIT 4

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2

ADDENDUM-1 TO: 52.212-2 - EVALUATION CRITERIA:

(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this Request for Quotation (RFQ) to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the RFQ will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

Factor 1 – Technical Capability Factor 2 – Price

(b) Basis for Award: Award of this will be made on a competitive best value basis, using “best value tradeoff” among price and non-price factors. A best value tradeoff process will be used; thus, the Government may elect to award to other than the lowest priced offeror, or other than the offeror with the highest rated non-price offer. The non-price evaluation factors numbered in descending order of importance, are as follows:

(1) Technical Capability,

(2) Price

Government evaluators will not assume that the offeror possesses any capability or knowledge unless it is specified in the offer.

After the above non-price factor and price are evaluated, an overall rating will be assigned collectively to the factor. If the above non-price evaluation factor receives an individual rating of “Unacceptable”, the collective overall rating will also be “Unacceptable”. In addition, price offers that are not found fair and/or reasonable will be rated "Unacceptable". Only offers receiving an overall rating of “Acceptable” will be considered for award.

The non-price factors are more important than price. As the non-price factors begin to reach equality in the evaluation, price becomes a more important factor in the tradeoff analysis.

(c) Evaluation Criteria: Offers for this requirement will be evaluated using the following criteria:

Factor 1 - Technical Capability:

An evaluation for technical acceptability will be made to ensure satisfactory responsiveness to the requirements set forth in this RFQ. The non-price factor will be rated “Acceptable”, or “Unacceptable” using the following rating standards:

The degree to which the Offeror’s technical quotation demonstrates that the offeror can provide the requested designation certification described in the RFQ and can meet the delivery schedule. The vendor should clearly list out if they meet or do not meet requirements listed in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Lack of a response to a task listed in the PWS will be assumed to have not met that requirement. The Offeror shall provide a written quotation that clearly reflects the technical capability of performing the services, and their understanding of the requirements set forth in the PWS. Quotations shall be clear, coherent, and prepared in sufficient detail for effective evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal against the evaluation criteria. The Government will evaluate only one (1) quotation from the prime Offeror and maximum page limit for Technical Capability is three (3) pages. The Government will not accept alternative quotations.

Factor 2 – Price:

The Offeror is responsible for ensuring that the calculations submitted are complete and correct. The Offeror’s proposed price shall be evaluated separately from the non-price evaluation factor. Price evaluation is to determine whether the Offeror’s proposed price is fair and reasonable in accordance with FAR 12.201-1. Price analysis will be used to determine the total evaluated price to support the selection of the best value offered to the Government.

(d) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(End of provision)