ATCH 06 Evaluation Factors - LPTA 2 Nov 2026.pdf

ATCH 06 – Evaluation Factors

Public Accountant Contract Audit Program Installation Audits – USAFE Region

2 Nov 2026

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1. BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD

This acquisition will utilize Firm Fixed Pricing based on Lowest Price Technically Acceptable

(LPTA) procedures conducted on a regional basis. The NAFI intends to award one (1)

Nonappropriated Fund Purchasing Agreement (NPA) for Region 2 (USAFE). This is a competitive regional LPTA Request for Quote (RFQ) in which price is the most important factor among those contractors deemed technically acceptable and rated 'Acceptable' in past performance. By submission of its quote, the Contractor agrees to all solicitation requirements

(including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements) in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or sub-factors. All technically acceptable offers will be treated equally except for their prices and performance records. Failure to meet a requirement will result in an offer being determined technically “Unacceptable.” If a quote is deemed technically unacceptable, no further evaluation of that quote will be completed.

The NAFI may determine that a quote is “Unacceptable” if the prices proposed are materially unbalanced between line items or sub-line items. A quote 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 quote 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 low evaluated quote, or it is so unbalanced as to be equivalent to allowing an advance payment.

If the lowest priced technically acceptable offer evaluated is determined to have an “Acceptable”

Past Performance assessment, that offer represents the best value for the NAFI and the evaluation process stops at this point. Award will be made to that Contractor without further consideration of any other offers.

If the lowest priced technically acceptable Contractor is not determined to have “Acceptable”

Past Performance, the next lowest priced technically acceptable Contractor will be evaluated, and the process will continue (in order by price) until a Contractor is determined to have

“Acceptable” past performance or until all Contractors are evaluated

A written award or acceptance of a quote mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful

Contractor within the time for acceptance specified in the quote 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 quote do not constitute a rejection or counteroffer by the NAFI.

2. CONTRACT AWARD

Quotes are intended to be evaluated and awarded without discussion. However, the NAFI reserves the right to conduct clarifications and/or discussions as determined to be in the

Government’s best interest. Therefore, each initial quote should contain the Contractor’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. The NAFI will award “up to” a single (1)

Nonappropriated Fund Purchasing Agreement (NPA), with a one (1) year base period and four

(4) one (1) year is option years, not to exceed a total of five (5) years.

3. PRICE EVALUATION

Price will be evaluated for fairness and reasonableness. The price must represent a price to the

NAFI that a prudent person would pay when consideration is given to the prices in the market.

Reasonable includes an evaluation for completeness and accuracy to ensure that the Contractor is responsive and accurate in providing all price information outlined in ATCH 01, Instructions to

Contractors.

Contractor will submit firm fixed deliverable-based pricing for each region they wish to be considered for, in accordance with the contract pricing schedule (ATCH 05). Separate deliverable pricing must be submitted for Financial Statement Audits (Section A) and

Performance Audits (Section B). The NAFI will evaluate pricing based on the total price for each region.

4. TECHNICAL ACCEPTABILITY

The Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentality (NAFI) technical evaluation team will evaluate the technical quotes on a pass/fail basis, assigning ratings of Acceptable or Unacceptable (Reference

Table M-1: Technical Ratings). A Contractor’s quote is deemed technically acceptable when:

(1) The Contractor’s narrative and technical solution clearly outlines an understanding of the requirement, presents an acceptable technical solution to the Statement of Objectives (SOO); (2) presents a viable Contractor Technical Solution Statement (CTSS) that is a clear, comprehensive, and detailed document for implementation and (3) The Contractor provides all requested documentation.

The contractor’s response will be evaluated for content, thoroughness, and understanding of the solicitation requirements/documents. The Contractor Technical Solution Statement (CTSS) will be incorporated at contract award as detailed in ATCH 01, Instructions to Contractors. Each factor and/or sub-factor under the Technical Performance factor will be evaluated independently.

See the Statement of Objectives (SOO) for the technical aspects of the quote.

5. PAST PERFORMANCE

5.1. The Past Performance Confidence Assessment (PCA) represents the degree of confidence the NAFI has in a Contractor’s ability to provide the required services based upon the Contractor’s past work record. Each Contractor will receive an integrated PCA, which is the rating for the Past Performance Factor. Although the past performance evaluation focuses on performance that is relevant to the Technical Performance, the resulting PCA is made at the factor level and represents the NAFI’s confidence that the

Contractors can successfully execute AF PACA Installation Audit requirements, considering recent, relevant, and quality performance. Subcontracting is strictly prohibited; past performance of subcontractors or teaming partners will not be evaluated and will result in a rating of Unacceptable if utilized in proposals.

5.2. The Past Performance Evaluation will be accomplished by reviewing the Past

Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) submitted by the Contractor’s references, as well as the Past Performance Information (PPI) narratives submitted by the Contractor. The

NAFI will consider the performance quality of recent past performance, focusing on efforts that are relevant to the requirements in the Statement of Objectives (SOO), ATCH

04. This information may include data on efforts performed by other divisions or critical sub-contractors, if such resources significantly influence the performance of the proposed effort.

5.3. The NAFI reserves the right to use both data provided by the Contractor and data obtained from other sources in conducting this assessment. A Contractor’s past performance is deemed “Acceptable” based on its performance record when the NAFI has a reasonable expectation that the Contractor will successfully perform the required effort based on recent, relevant, and quality of work performed within the last three (3) years as determined by the PPI narratives and PPQ submitted; or the Contractor’s performance record is unknown.

TABLE M-1: TECHNICAL RATINGS

Rating Description

ACCEPTABLE Quote clearly meets the requirements of the solicitation.

UNACCEPTABLE Quote DOES NOT clearly meet the requirements of the solicitation.

5.4. The PCA rating is based on recent, relevant, and quality of performance as measured in the PPI and PPQ based on the following:

5.4.1. Recent: As stated in ATCH 01, Instructions to Contractors, the NAFI will not consider performance on a contractor submission that occurred more than three (3) years prior to the date of this solicitation. This will be determined using the Contractor’s PPI and PPQ.

5.4.2. Relevant: The NAFI will review the available information to determine how closely the work performed under previous efforts relates to the AF PACA

AUDIT requirement. A relevancy determination of the Contractor’s past performance, including joint ventures, and/or team members will be made.

Consideration will be given to each project, or portion of the effort proposed by the Contractor or team member whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated.

Consideration will also be given to similar service, similar complexity of the project, breadth and depth of skills, similar contract scope and type, and schedule.

Relevancy of each project will be determined using the Contractor’s PPI and

PPQ.

5.4.3. Quality of Performance: Each Contractor’s PPI and PPQ will be assessed to determine the quality of performance regarding projects submitted.

5.5. Contractors are cautioned to submit sufficient information and, in the format, specified in the Instructions to Contractors, ATCH 01. Contractors may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their quote (i.e. the relevance of PPI) or respond to adverse

PPI/PPQ to which the Contractor has not previously had an opportunity to respond.

Adverse Past Performance is defined as PPI that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation element or any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system. Communication conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute discussions and the Contracting Officer reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for quote revision.

5.6. The assessment process will result in an overall performance confidence assessment of Acceptable or Unacceptable. A Contractor will not be evaluated “Acceptable” or

“Unacceptable” on past performance if they are without a record of relevant past performance, information on past performance is not available, or the information provided is so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned. Therefore, the Contractor will be determined to have “Unknown” past performance. In the context of Acceptability/Unacceptability, Unknown will be considered “Acceptable.”

PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RATINGS

Rating Description

Acceptable

Based on the Contractor’s performance record, the NAFI has a reasonable expectation that the Contractor will successfully perform the required effort based on recent, relevant, and quality of work performed within the last three (3) years as determined by the PPI and PPQ submitted; or the Contractor’s performance record is unknown. (See note below)

Unacceptable

Based on the Contractor’s performance record, the NAFI has no reasonable expectation that the Contractor will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Note: A Contractor may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance if they are without a record of relevant past performance, information on past performance is not available, or the information provided is so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned. Therefore, the Contractor will be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “Unknown” will be considered

“Acceptable.”