Attachment_2_-_Evaluation_Criteria_3Aug18.pdf

RFQ FA8003-18-R-0004

Attachment 2 – Evaluation Criteria

EVALUATION CRITERIA

1. General Information

1.1. The AF Office Seating Program will be a total 100% small business set-aside with up to

10 BPA awards as a result of this Request for Quote (RFQ). Quotes will be evaluated for lowest price first then technical acceptability. The table below represents the anticipated mixture based off of historical procurements. Contractors must be able to produce a minimum of 3,000 chairs per month for this BPA and meet the minimum capacity requirements below. Historically most of our chairs are bought in the Government’s 4th quarter FY (July – September).

Table 1.1

Chair Description

Category

Minimum Capacity

Requirement Executive – Leather Back Leather Seat EX.LL 78 Executive - Upholstered Back Upholstered Seat EX.UU 48 Task - Mesh Back Upholstered Seat T.MU 1267 Task - Upholstered Back Upholstered Seat T.UU 279 Conference Room - Mesh Back Upholstered Seat CR.MU 623 Conference Room - Upholstered Back Upholstered Seat CR.UU 248 Guest/Side - Mesh Back Upholstered Seat GS.MU 275 Guest/Side - Upholstered Back Upholstered Seat GS.UU 182 Total 3000

In accordance with FAR 8.405-3(d)(3), contractors may be awarded BPAs that extend beyond the current term of their GSA Schedule contract, so long as there are option periods in their GSA Schedule contract that, if exercised, will cover the BPA's 5-year ordering period. Offerors must provide certification at time of award that their GSA schedule contracts will extend, or include options that will extend, for the entire 5-year ordering period to submit quotes under an awarded BPA. The Government reserves the right to request confirmation of this information from GSA.

If determined to be in the Government’s best interest, the AF reserves the right to award more or fewer BPAs.

1.2. Basis for Award. Award will be made to the lowest priced then technically acceptable responsible Contractor whose quote conforms to all requirements of the solicitation. By submission of its quote, Contractor accepts all RFQ requirements, including Attachment 8

- Model BPA, all clauses/provision and Attachment 3 – BPA Terms and Conditions, technical requirements, representations, and certifications. Failure to meet RFQ requirements will result in an unacceptable quote. Evaluation factors (see below) represent the uniform baseline against which each Contractor’s quote will be evaluated, allowing the Government to make a determination of acceptability. Technical acceptability will be evaluated on an “acceptable” or “unacceptable” basis. Price will be evaluated for reasonableness, completeness, and balance. Lowest price quotes deemed technically acceptable will be considered for BPA award.

1.3. Award Without Exchanges. The Government reserves the right to award without exchanges that correct quote deficiencies. Those exchanges that correct minor administrative errors or to clarify matters may be used at the Government’s discretion, and do not constitute permission for the contractors to make changes to the quotes. Therefore, each offer should contain Contractor’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint.

However, the Government reserves the right to conduct any kind of exchanges if determined to be in the best interest of the Government. If any kind of exchanges occur, the Government reserves the right to use the method of exchanges (i.e., oral, telephonic, written, electronic, etc.) that best suits the subject of the exchange with a given contractor.

It should be noted there is no obligation on the part of the Government to establish BPA(s) with any Contractor in response to this request.

2. Evaluation Methodology. The following three-step methodology will be used to evaluate quotes:

2.1. Step 1: Initial Assessment.

2.1.1. The Government will perform a preliminary assessment of the quote packages received. The Government will open each quote package to ensure all required documentation is included and completely filled out. Contractor shall submit a signed Cover Letter, Attachment 5 – Pricing Matrix, and Attachment 4 – Requirements Matrix with substantiating documentation in accordance with Section 1.4 of Attachment 1 – Instructions to Offerors.

2.2. Step 2: Price Evaluation.

2.2.1. Price quotes will be evaluated for completeness, reasonableness, and balance. The quotes will be ranked from lowest to highest price based on the Total Evaluated Price (TEP) as defined in Section 3.1.4 below. The government will then rank the Total Overall TEP from lowest to highest. At that point, the 10 lowest offerors will be evaluated for technical acceptance.

2.3. Step 3: Technical Evaluation.

2.3.1. Attachment 4 – Requirements Matrix with substantiating documentation is the technical response package. This package will be evaluated based on meeting the technical requirements. Meeting the technical requirements will be evaluated as either acceptable or unacceptable. A technical response package will be rated technically acceptable when it meets all requirements identified in this RFQ. If any technical response package receives an unacceptable rating for any technical reason, that Contractor’s technical response package will be ineligible for contract award. If any of the lowest ten price quotes fail to meet technical acceptability, the next lowest price quote will be evaluated for technical acceptability. The Government will continue in technical evaluations of the next lowest priced Total Overall TEP until it concludes that an appropriate number of awardable offers, up to 10, have been determined, or the Government determines it is in the best interest of the Government to use exchanges to correct quote deficiencies. In that case, the Government will hold exchanges with all offerors among the original list of lowest priced Total Overall TEP, and continue in exchanges moving up in price until it concludes that an appropriate number of awardable offers up to 10 have been determined.

3. Evaluation Factors. The following two evaluation factors will be used to evaluate quotes submitted in response to this RFQ.

3.1. Price (Factor 1). NTE Prices entered into Attachment 5 – Pricing Matrix will be evaluated for completeness, reasonableness, and balanced pricing. Contractors shall honor NTE prices entered into Attachment 5 – Pricing Matrix for the duration of the BPA. Attachment 5 – Pricing Matrix shall become an attachment to Contractor’s awarded BPA under this effort.

3.1.1. Completeness. Contractors will be evaluated on completeness of pricing.

Completeness is defined as filling out Attachment 5 – Pricing Matrix in its entirety, leaving no empty sections. Any omissions will render a Contractor’s quote unacceptable.

3.1.2. Reasonableness. The Government will review the prices submitted in the Contractor’s submission of Attachment 5 – Pricing Matrix and the Total Overall TEP for price reasonableness. The Government anticipates that fair and reasonable price determination will be established through adequate price competition. If additional price analysis is required, the price will be determined fair and reasonable using the techniques described in FAR 15.404-1(b).

3.1.3. Unbalanced Pricing. All pricing will be evaluated for unbalanced pricing.

Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable TEP, the price of one or more chairs are significantly over or under stated as indicated by the application of price analysis techniques. Contractors are cautioned against submitting an offer that contains unbalanced pricing. Unbalanced pricing may increase performance risk and could result in unreasonably high prices. Offers deemed to be unbalanced will likely be found unacceptable.

3.1.4. The following calculation is the basis for ranking Contractors by price:

Total Evaluated Price (TEP): The TEP is the basis for ranking Contractors by price.

The Government anticipates your best NTE price for each chair type. The TEP is calculated in the following steps:

(1) The Government will multiply the Contractor’s proposed “BPA NTE price/chair” (column G in Attachment 5 – Pricing Matrix) for each chair type by the corresponding Estimated Units Purchased by FY number found in Attachment 5 – Pricing Matrix tab “TEP Calculations.” The result will become the TEP for that particular chair type.

All six chair types will have a TEP number for each year of the ordering period (Years 1-5). This means Contractors will enter a total of 30 NTE prices (8 chair types x 5 years = 40).

(3) For each year of the ordering period (Years 1-5) we will sum up the six TEP numbers to make an Overall TEP number for that specific year;

(4) Finally, the Government will calculate a Contractor’s Total Overall TEP by summing each TEP total for each year of the contract period (Years 1-5). The Total Overall TEP number will appear in Attachment 5 – Pricing Matrix on the “Year 5” Tab, cell H10. Contractors will then be ranked according to their Total Overall TEP, with the lowest priced Total Overall TEP ranked #1 and moving up in price for #2, #3, etc.

Practical example: The most popular chair type for the AF is T.MU. In FY 19, the AF estimates we will purchase 10,558 of these chairs. If Contractor X proposed a NTE price of $500 for this chair type then TEP would be calculated by multiplying $500 by 10,558 ($500 x 10,558 = $5,279,000). $5,279,000 is what would be added to Contractor X’s Total Overall TEP. If Contractor Y proposed a NTE price of $250 for the same chair type ($250 x 10,558 = $2,639,500), then $2,639,500 would be added to Contractor Y’s Total Overall TEP. Again, the Total Overall TEP will be used for price evaluation purposes and for ranking Contractor’s proposals against one another as described in Section 3.1.4. In this example, Contractor X’s $500 NTE price would be the highest possible price paid by the AF for this particular chair type from Contractor X. Contractor Y’s $250 NTE price would be the highest possible price paid by the AF for this particular chair type from Contractor Y.

3.2. Technical Requirements (Factor 2): Each quote will be evaluated for the purpose of establishing technical acceptability. Ratings will be in accordance with the following:

Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings

Rating Description

Acceptable Quote meets the technical requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Quote does not meet the technical requirements of the solicitation.

Those rated “Unacceptable” shall not be eligible for award. To be rated “Acceptable,” each quote must meet all seating requirements per Attachment 4 – Requirements Matrix and provide the appropriate supporting technical documentation for each requirement in order to demonstrate Contractor’s technical capabilities. Supporting documentation shall be submitted in accordance with Attachment 1 – Instructions to Offerors.

3.2.1. Place of manufacture: Place of manufacture provided in Attachment 4 spreadsheet will be reviewed for compliance with the Buy America program along with the certification required in 252.225-7000. A quote with a certification, not meeting the requirements of Buy America shall not be eligible for award.