Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award.pdf

SECTION M

Evaluation Factors for Award Selection

1. Basis for Contract Award

The award is based on the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors (Technical and Past Performance). This is a competitive Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) Request for Proposal (RFP) in which Price is the most significant factor, with Technical Solution having the second highest weight, and Past Performance having the lowest weight. If a proposal is deemed technically unacceptable, no further evaluation of that proposal will be completed. Past Performance must demonstrate the ability to meet end customer needs and the satisfactory completion of recent requirements similar in scope for a firm to be considered for evaluation. The Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentality (NAFI) will select the offer of the responsible vendor in accordance with the factors indicated in evaluation factor paragraphs below.

2. Number of Contracts to be Awarded

The NAFI intends to award one contract, for fulfillment of all requirements within the scope of the paper specifications, for the performance of this requirement.

Proposals are intended to be evaluated, and award made, without discussions with the Offerors, unless discussions are determined to be necessary. Therefore, each initial proposal should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. The NAFI reserves the right to make no award. If the Offeror with the lowest price is found technically acceptable, no other review will be completed on the other proposals. If award cannot be made to the lowest Offeror, then the next lowest Offeror will be evaluated.

A written award or acceptance of a proposal mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful Offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the proposal must result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offers specified expiration time, the NAFI may accept an offer, whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award. Negotiations conducted after receipt of a proposal do not constitute a rejection or counteroffer by the NAFI.

3. Solicitation Requirements, Terms and Conditions

Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements. Proposal validity period shall be at least 180 calendar days from the closing date of this solicitation. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the Offeror being ineligible for award.

4. Evaluation Factors

The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each offer.

A. Technical Proposal This factor is rated acceptable or unacceptable. A proposal which clearly meets the requirements of the solicitation is rated as “Technically Acceptable”. If the lowest priced offer is rated technically acceptable with acceptable past performance, the evaluation process stops at this point. Award shall

M-1

M-2 be made to that Offeror without further consideration of any other offers.

An Offeror’s proposal is deemed technically acceptable when: (1) The Offeror’s narrative and technical solution clearly outline an understanding of the requirement, presents an acceptable technical solution to the Paper Product Specification (Section C); (2) presents a viable Contractor Technical Solution Statement (CTSS) that is a clear, comprehensive, and detailed document for implementation and; (3) The Offeror provides all requested documentation as outlined in Section L.

The Contractor Technical Solution Statement (CTSS) will be incorporated at contract award. Each factor and/or sub-factor under the Technical Performance factor will be evaluated independently. See Section C, Paper Product Specifications, for the technical aspects of the proposal.

If the lowest priced technically acceptable Offeror is not determined to have “Acceptable” past performance, the next lowest priced technically acceptable Offeror will be evaluated, and the process will continue (in order by price) until an Offeror is determined to have “Acceptable” past performance or until all Offerors are evaluated.

B. Price Proposal

Proposal will be evaluated for price realism, balance, and reasonableness. Unreasonable and/or unrealistic prices are grounds for eliminating a proposal from the competition unless Offeror can verify price realism.

Offeror shall submit firmed fixed unit pricing. Offeror must label pricing IAW Section B. The unit price shall be firmed fixed pricing. The NAFI will evaluate pricing based on the total price.

The NAFI may determine that a proposal is “Unacceptable” if the prices proposed are materially unbalanced between line items or sub-line items. A proposal is materially unbalanced when it is based on prices significantly less than cost for some work and prices which are significantly overstated in relation to cost for other work. Additionally, a proposal may be determined to be “Unacceptable” if there is a reasonable doubt that the offer will result in the lowest overall cost to the NAFI, even though it may be the lowest evaluated proposal, or it is so unbalanced as to be equivalent to allowing an advance payment.

C. Past Performance

This factor is rated acceptable or unacceptable. This factor evaluates Offeror's Past Performance Information (PPI) as well as Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) with the same work/trade and scale as this requirement. This is a matter of judgment and will be a subjective assessment based on findings. This factor is acceptable when the Offeror includes PPI evidence and PPQ references of at least three (3) similar requirements successfully performed within specification, standard, contract price and schedule in the last five (5) years from the date of offer where the Offeror was responsible for the requirement performance that involved substantially the same work and principal trades, magnitude, and scale as the instant requirement.

M-2