FA487724QA263 Parachute Rigger and Instructor Training 52.212-2_Evaluation.docx

Addendum to 52.212-2, Evaluation – Commercial Items

FAR 52.212-2 IS TAILORED AS FOLLOWS: Evaluation – Commercial Items

Parachute Rigger & Instructor Training Services

Indefinite-Delivery Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ)

Davis Monthan AFB Tucon, AZ

SECTION 1: GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 Basis for Award

This is a best value source selection conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)

13.106. In this procurement, the Government will determine best value based on an objective assessment and validation of the Highest Technically Rated Offerors (HTRO) with a fair and reasonable price.

1.1.1 Number of Contracts to be Awarded. The Government intends to award one contract to the highest technically rated offeror whose price is found fair and reasonable, who is also determined responsible IAW FAR Part 9. Quotes shall be validated one at a time followed by finding price fair and reasonable and not evaluating all offerors.

1.1.2 IDIQ Ceiling. The overall ceiling of the IDIQ is estimated at $2M for two years. The total value of all task orders awarded under the IDIQ will not exceed this amount. Funding will be determined at the individual task order level.

1.2 Proposal Compliance and Offeror Responsibility

1.2.1 Proposal Substantiation. Unsubstantiated or misleading claims for any Prior Technical Experience evaluation element could result in the Government determining that the Offeror’s proposed self-rated score is artificially inflated. If this were to occur, the Government will unilaterally downward adjust the Offeror’s score, potentially down to zero points.

1.2.2 Proposal Compliance. Offerors must meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, submission requirements, representations and certifications, and other instructions identified within the solicitation. Offerors must comply with content required within each of the proposal sections. Failure to comply with any requirement of the solicitation may result in the Government determining the Offeror to be inacceptable and ineligible for award.

The Government will review each Offeror’s proposal documentation to ensure all required documentation was provided in response to the solicitation. The Government will rely on the documentation provided by the Offeror to facilitate the Contracting Officer’s determination of proposal compliance.

1.2.3 Offeror Responsibility. No award will be made to an Offeror unless the Contracting Officer determines them to be responsible. To be determined responsible, an Offeror must meet the general standards described in FAR 9.104-1. The Contracting Officer may consider information provided within any section of the proposal, and other information, not limited to proposal information, when making the determination of responsibility.

SECTION 2: EVALUATION FACTORS AND METHODOLOGY

The Government will evaluate quality as a factor in this source selection through consideration of the Offeror’s Prior Technical Experience (PTE). A two-step process will be used to determine which Offeror’s proposals are responsive and qualified to receive an award.

FA487724QA263

52.212-2

2.1 Business Section – Step One

The Government will review the proposal for compliance with 52.212-1, Section 3.1. Once the Government has determined the proposal to be responsive, the Government will then evaluate the Offeror’s Prior Technical Experience (PTE).

2.2 HTRO Methodology – Step Two

The Highest Technically Rated Offeror (HTRO) methodology requires the Offeror to submit a self-rated score based on the objective criteria described in the addendum to 52.212-1 Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Bidders. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s PTE (Section 3.2) by validating the proposed Self-Rated Scoring Matrix (Appendix B). The Government will validate the Offeror’s self-rated scores using the Offeror’s Cross Reference Matrix (Appendix C) and the work samples provided. If the Government is unable to find the substantiating information within the referenced page, paragraph, table, etc., the Government will not search further for the substantiating information. If the Government is unable to validate that Offeror’s self-rated score based on the work samples and Cross Reference Matrix, the Government will unilaterally downward adjust the Offeror’s self-rated score, potentially down to zero points. The Government will only adjust the Offeror’s self-rated score downward, not upward. Such adjustments are within the sole discretion of the Government and are based upon the substantiation of the self-rated score provided by the Offeror.

Section 3: Selecting Awardee

The government will start by evaluating the offeror with the highest score on their Self-Rated Scoring Matrix. After validation of the score, if that offeror remains the highest rated score the government will evaluate that offerors pricing to determine the price to be fair and reasonable. If the offerors validated score is either lower than the next highest offerors self-rated score or the price is determined to be not fair and reasonable, the next highest self-rated score will be evaluated. This process will continue until the offeror with a fair and reasonable price is also the highest validated score. If at anytime two offerors have the same validated score with fair and reasonable pricing the lowest price will be selected as the offeror for the contract.