Section_M_-_MACC_-_10_Feb_2013-FBO.docx

FA4801-11-R-0003

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

SECTION M

*****DRAFT*****

SECTION M -- EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

A. BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD

1. Award will be made on the basis of “best value” utilizing LOWEST PRICE/TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE source selection procedures with technical sub factors and past performance. It is the intent of the Government to award contracts to contractors that provide the “best value” to the Government over the entire period of performance.

2. Contracts shall be awarded to the offerors who are deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 9, as supplemented, whose proposals conform to the solicitation requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by evaluation factors attached to this request for proposal) and are judged, based on the evaluation factors, to represent the Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable offers to the Government.

3. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being determined technically unacceptable. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale.

4. While the Government source selection evaluation team and the SSA will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature, is subjective and, therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process. The Government reserves the right to award without discussions. Offerors should not assume they will be contacted or afforded an opportunity to qualify, discuss or revise their proposals. Therefore, each initial offer should contain the offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if later determined by the Contracting Officer to be necessary.

B. NUMBER OF CONTRACTS TO BE AWARDED

The Government intends to award between 3 and 5 contracts for the Holloman Multiple Award Construction Contract (MACC).

C. REJECTION OF UNREALISTIC OFFERS

The Government will evaluate the individual line items of the Demonstration Project price proposal to determine whether costs are realistic for the work to be performed, reflect a clear understanding of the requirements and are consistent with the various elements of the offeror’s technical proposal. The Government may reject any proposal that is evaluated to be unrealistic in terms of program commitments, including contract terms and conditions, or unrealistically high or low in cost when compared to Government estimates, such that the proposal is deemed to reflect an inherent lack of competence or failure to comprehend the complexity and risks of the program, as “technically unacceptable” for both the basic IDIQ and the Demonstration Project.

D. CORRECTION POTENTIAL OF PROPOSALS

The Government will consider, throughout the evaluation, the “correction potential” of any deficiency or proposal inadequacy. The judgment of such “correction potential” is within the sole discretion of the Government. If an aspect of an offeror's proposal not meeting the Government's requirements is not considered correctable, the offeror may be eliminated from the competitive range.

E. GOVERNMENT FURNISHED PROPERTY (GFP)/EQUIPMENT (GFE)

Government Furnished Property (GFP) or Equipment (GFE) to be provided will be specified in each individual Delivery Order (D.O.). For proposal purposes, no GFP or GFE will be provided as part of the Demonstration Project.

F. EVALUATION

There will be two evaluations: one to select awardees for the basic IDIQ contract, and another to select the awardee for the Demonstration Project, if funded.

BASIC IDIQ CONTRACT SELECTION:

All evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined, are approximately equal to cost or price.

2. Sequence of Evaluation: The Government shall evaluate offers as follows:

a. Lowest Priced: Initially, the Government shall rank offers from lowest to highest according to their Total Evaluated Price (TEP). The TEP consists of each offeror’s Fixed Element Pricing (FEP) rate for each contract year multiplied by the total direct costs for the demonstration project for that year to arrive at a price for each contract year, and then summing the prices for each contract year.

b. Technically Acceptable: The evaluation team will evaluate the lowest priced proposals on a pass/fail basis using on the criteria below until at least three (3) technically acceptable proposals are found.

c. Past Performance: The evaluation team will evaluate the lowest priced, technically acceptable proposals on a pass/fail basis using the criteria below until at least three (3) technically acceptable proposals with acceptable past performance are found.

3. Factor 1 - Price:

a. The FEP rate will determine the “Lowest Price” portion of the LPTA evaluation, (The Demonstration Project proposal will be evaluated under the “Technically Acceptable” portion of the evaluation.) The offer with the lowest average FEP for all contract years will be the “Lowest Price” offer. The offer with the next lowest average FEP for all contract years will be the “2nd Lowest Price” offer, and so on. The “Lowest Price” offer will be the first offer evaluated for “Technically Acceptable.”

4. Factor 2 – Technical Acceptability:

a. The government technical evaluation team will evaluate technical proposals on a pass/fail basis, and assign one of the ratings described below based on the criteria listed.

Table A-1. Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings

requirements of the solicitation.

requirements of the solicitation.

b. In assigning the ratings above, the government technical evaluation team will evaluate the following technical sub factors:

Construction Management & Capability Demonstration Project Proposal

i. Construction Management & Capability. To clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation, the proposal must demonstrate that the offeror possesses all of the following:

- financial capacity, bonding, and business relationships to successfully perform two simultaneous construction projects with a combined value of $15M. The proposal must demonstrate access to cash and/or lines of credit totaling at least “low six figures,” a minimum bonding capacity of $7.5M per project/$15M aggregate, and an established relationship with a design (A-E) firm, a construction equipment supplier, a construction material supplier and an independent testing lab;

- capability to perform at least two or more construction disciplines under NAICS code 236220;

- qualified program management, engineering, skilled labor and other necessary expertise to successfully perform two or more simultaneous construction projects on Holloman AFB;

- access to construction equipment, materials and supplies;

- an established, systematic approach for managing the contract to include cost, schedule and quality management, procurement management, safety management, environmental management, and logistics management.

-capability to perform construction on or near a U.S. Air Force airfield, including airfield access requirements and airfield operations; or, the proposal must clearly state the offeror’s acknowledgement of the critical nature of this criteria and include a risk mitigation plan that identifies a senior company official, by name, who will be responsible for implementation and oversight of this risk area.

- an established, systematic approach for mobilizing and managing a project schedule to minimize delays, including knowledge of Holloman AFB visitor access requirements and background investigations to ensure timely availability of contractor personnel, craftsmen and laborers; or, the proposal must clearly state the offeror’s acknowledgement of the critical nature of this criteria and include a risk mitigation plan that identifies a senior company official , by name, as responsible for implementation and oversight of this risk area.

- an established, systematic approach to project estimating/bidding that identifies areas of cost risk and effectively manages or mitigates that risk to minimize requirements creep and scope/cost growth resulting from change orders, requests for equitable adjustment, and claims.

- a two-page (maximum) narrative describing the contractor’s overall Quality Control approach to the basic IDIQ MACC and how it will be applied to individual projects; narrative includes the method and frequency of inspections, names, qualifications and experience of QA personnel, scope of their responsibilities and authority, and clearly states that QA personnel are separate and distinct from, and are not supervised by, on site project management or superintendent personnel.

ii. Demonstration Project Proposal. To clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation, the proposal must include the following:

- proposed costs reflect a clear understanding of the requirements

- proposed costs account for all major elements of work

- proposed costs are consistent with the offeror’s technical approach

- the labor categories proposed are appropriate

- the labor rates proposed comply with minimum Davis-Bacon/DoL wage determination rates

- the contractor understands the requirement and the scope of work and possesses the estimating, engineering, and construction capabilities to successfully complete the project on schedule and within his proposed price. To be found “realistic”, the Government evaluation team must be able to affirm each of the above statements. Unrealistic proposals will resulting in a rating of “technically unacceptable” and will be eliminated from the competition.

Note: the offeror is responsible for obtaining any forms required for evaluation, whether or not they are provided as an attachment to the solicitation.

5. Factor 3 – Past Performance :

Table A-2. Past Performance Evaluation Ratings

Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown. (See note below.)

Government has no reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

In the case of an offeror 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 offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

DEMONSTRATION PROJECT SELECTION:

After the Government has selected between 3 and 5 awardees for the basic IDIQ contract, and subject to availability of funds, the Demonstration Project will be awarded to the lowest priced offer from among the basic IDIQ. The selection will be made upon the basis of price, since the technical acceptability of the proposal will already have been established by award of the basic IDIQ contracts.

G. TRADEOFFS: Tradeoffs will not be considered. This is a “Lowest Priced - Technically Acceptable” evaluation.

3. Replacement contractors. The Government reserves the right not to exercise an option period if determined to be in the best interest of the Government. In the event that one of the awardees’ options is not exercised for any reason, including but not limited to, an awardee’s inability or unwillingness to bid on projects, or, if during the period of performance, including options, the Government determines a need to add additional awardees in addition to or in substitution of the original awardees, the Government may select another offeror for contract award based on the original solicitation and proposals, or may re-solicit for additional proposals.

4. Performance Incentives. Individual projects may or may not include a separate CLIN for performance incentives. If included, they will be identified at the time the Delivery Order Request for Proposal is issued.

5. Subsequent projects will be competed among the awarded IDIQ contract holders and awarded based on a “best value” LPTA approach, unless otherwise noted in the Delivery Order Proposal Request.

(End of Provision)