COMBO ADDENDUM - RFO 52.212-2 - Evaluation v9Jun2026.pdf

Evaluation—Commercial Products and Commercial Services (Nov 2021)

ADDENDUM TO RFO PROVISION 52.212-2: Paragraph (a) is tailored as follows:

Evaluation:

IAW RFO 52.212-2, Evaluation—Commercial Products and Commercial Services, the Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible Quoter whose quote conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors will be used to evaluate quotes:

1. Price

2. Technical

3. Past Performance

BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD: This is a competitive, best value continuum using a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) with a Past Performance evaluation as a source selection process. Technical elements will be evaluated as acceptable or unacceptable for each solicitation response. Past Performance will be evaluated as acceptable or unacceptable. Qualifications will be clear, and objectives will be outlined in the RFQ. The evaluation process shall proceed as indicated below:

Evaluation Approach:

Step 1: All contractors will be evaluated for responsiveness. Responsiveness is determined by verifying compliance with RFO 52.212-1 and its addendum.

Step 2: All responsive contractors will be ordered, by price, from the lowest to the highest Total Evaluated Price (TEP). A contractor's TEP is depicted in attachment “COMBO ATTCH 1 - Quote Schedule” Worksheet, under the Zone 11 and 12 tabs. The TEP is comprised of the total contract value for a 5-year ordering period, plus the 6-month option available at RFO 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services. The 5-year ordering period value is calculated by adding together the TEP values for Zones 11 and 12 in the light blue cells at the bottom of each tab in "COMBO ATTCH 1 - Quote Schedule". Pricing for RFO 52.217-8 is determined by taking the "total amount" of the 5-year ordering period and dividing it by ten (10). Pricing for RFO 52.217-8 will be calculated by the Contracting Officer and will NOT be submitted by the quoter in “COMBO ATTCH 1 - Quote Schedule”.

Step 3: Technical evaluations will start with the lowest TEP quote and continue until three (3) solicitation responses are determined to be technically acceptable, or until all solicitation responses have been evaluated, whichever comes first.

Step 4. The solicitation responses determined to be technically acceptable will then be evaluated for past performance until three (3) technically acceptable solicitation responses have been determined to have acceptable past performance or until all solicitation responses have been evaluated, whichever comes first. Steps three (3) and four (4) will continue until at least three (3) solicitation responses have been determined acceptable in technical and have acceptable past performance, or until all solicitation responses have been evaluated.

Step 5. The Government will make a determination of price fair and reasonable.

Evaluation Factors for Award:

Price Foreword: The government will evaluate quotes for award purposes based on their TEP.

The government may determine that a solicitation response is unacceptable if the ordering prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the government to exercise the option(s).

Volume I Price:

a.) Initially, solicitation responses shall be ordered from lowest to highest TEP, as previously defined.

b.) To evaluate the impact of clause RFO 52.217-8, the "total amount" of the 5-year ordering period will be divided by ten (10) and added to the “total amount”. Evaluation of options will not obligate the government to exercise the option(s).

c.) The TEP will be evaluated to determine whether it is reasonable. A reasonable price/cost represents a price/cost that provides best value to the government, considering market prices, the technical and functional capabilities of the contractor, and risk. Additionally, the government reserves the right to, but is not required to, conduct a price realism analysis on offers that appear to be exceptionally low and not supported by the contractor's technical approach. In instances where a contractor's proposed price(s) appears exceptionally low, contractors may be requested to address this disparity by providing evidence of their capability and/or performance at similar price(s). The burden of proof as to price credibility rests with the contractor. An exceptionally or unrealistically low offer that's left unexplained may pose an unacceptable risk to the government and may be a reason to reject a contractor's solicitation response.

d.) The government anticipates adequate price competition and intends to award a contract without exchanges with respective contractors. The Government, however, reserves the right to conduct exchanges if deemed in its best interest.

Volume II Technical:

a.) The technical volume will be evaluated as either acceptable or unacceptable for each subfactor.

i. Acceptable is defined as: "Required documents clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation".

ii. Unacceptable is defined as: "Required documents do not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation".

b.) The technical volume is comprised of 5 subfactors, as listed below. An overall technical rating will be assigned; failure to be assigned an acceptable in any technical subfactor will render the enter factor unacceptable and, therefore, ineligible for award. Only those responses determined to be technically acceptable, either initially or as a result of exchanges, will be considered for award. However, the contractor is reminded that the government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial solicitation response, as received, without exchanges, and may conduct exchanges will all, some, or none of the contractors.

Instructions to Offerors Evaluation Criteria Subfactor 1: Technical Approach – Shall clearly explain how the quoter intends to ensure successful contract performance IAW the PWS. Technical Approach shall not simply rephrase or restate PWS or contain general statements such as "Standard procedures will be employed". Quotes shall provide convincing rationale addressing how the technical portion of the Quote meets solicitation requirements.

Subfactor 2: Staffing Plan - The Staffing Plan shall summarize all the assessments and analyses conducted, outline the decision-making process, and include concrete numbers of required personnel in accordance with part III, paragraph 2 of the PWS, identify factors impacting personnel availability and conduct a gap analysis. The Staffing Plan shall also include a transition phase. The transition phase will outline the phase-in/phase-out periods of contractor personnel during the performance of the contract, and it is essential that attention be given to minimize interruptions or delays to work in progress that would impact the mission. The Contractor must plan for the transfer of work control, delineating the method for processing and assigning tasks during the phase-in/phase-out periods of contractor personnel during the performance of the contract.

Subfactor 3: Resourcing Plan – Quoters shall submit a Resourcing Plan that demonstrates the quoter has adequate resources to support services across Zones 11 and 12. The plan should address quantities and methods for transporting packaged goods, any major

1. Effective and sufficient details and summarizes the quoter’s technical approach in ensuring performance per the PWS and solicitation requirements. The standard is met when the conditions accurately describe performance in accordance with the PWS.

2. A clear and effective summary of how assessments and analyses are conducted, the decision-making process, an unambiguous number of required personnel, quoter’s gap analysis, and identification of factors that can impact personnel availability. Also, sufficiently outlines the quoter’s transition phase that most effectively minimizes interruptions or delays during the performance of the contract.

3. An effective and detailed plan which outlines the quoter’s current assets, and demonstrates that these resources are sufficient to accomplish services in the

PWS.

facilities quoters may use in the performance of this requirement, and what materials quoters will use to accomplish services in accordance with part III, paragraph 3 of the

PWS.

Subfactor 4: Proof of Insurance – Quoters shall submit proof of all insurances and certifications required by part I, paragraph 11-12 of the PWS. Quoters will furnish evidence of the kinds and minimum amounts of insurance coverage required, to include Workmen’s Compensation Insurance, Comprehensive General Liability Insurance, Automobile Liability Insurance, and Cargo Insurance. Each policy will contain an endorsement that cancellation or material change in the policy will not be effective until after a 30-day written notice is furnished to the contracting officer.

Subfactor 5: Quality Control Plan - Quoters shall submit a Quality Control Plan that addresses all requirements of part III, paragraph 5 of the PWS. The plan must address methods to be used for identifying and preventing deficiencies before the performance becomes unacceptable. The plan shall also include procedures to identify unfavorable performance trends, problem areas, and the corrective actions that would be taken.

4. Clear and convincing evidence to demonstrate the contractor has and will maintain the necessary insurance policies and amounts provided in the

PWS.

5. Effective and logical processes for Quality Control to identify and prevent deficiencies during contract performance.

Functional procedures for identifying unfavorable performance trends, problem areas, and corrective actions.

Volume III Past Performance

Recent and relevant past performance is defined as past performance occurring within the last 5 years preceding the date of solicitation issuance. Relevant past performance is defined as past performance providing candidates for services similar in scope to this requirement and complexity. The Government will consider relevancy, recency, extent of the past performance and the size and complexity of the past performance relative to this solicitation’s requirement submitted by quoters as well as any information gathered by the Contracting Officer. Quoters that have no relevant past performance history will be assigned a neutral past performance evaluation rating; unknown will be rated as acceptable.

a.) An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent.

Recent contracts are contracts which have been performed for at least 6 months and within the last 5 years from the date of the issuance of this solicitation. Contract performance that does not meet these criteria will not be considered or evaluated.

b.) Relevant performance includes performance efforts involving Packing and Crating services that involved similar scope ranging from Packing and Crating services (such as preparing packaging, shipping, drayaging, storing household or other goods, and other requirements outlined in the PWS), magnitude of effort, Complexity (zone scale for Government or commercial contracts), contract type (Firm-fixed price), this solicitation requires, as identified in the table of Relevancy Definitions below:

Relevancy Definition Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Definition Rating Based on the Offeror's performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the Offeror's performance record is unknown.

Acceptable

Based on the Offeror's performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the Offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Unacceptable

In the case of a contractor without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the contractor may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the Quoter shall be determined to have unknown past performance. Unknown or neutral past performance, in the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered acceptable.

(End of provision)