52.212-2 Evaluation Factor for Award Mechanical Draftsman_Revised.pdf

52.212-2 – Evaluation Factors for Award (Mechanical Draftsman)

1. BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD:

This acquisition will utilize Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) source selection procedures in accordance with FAR 15.101-2, as supplemented. Technical tradeoffs will not be made, and no additional credit will be given for exceeding acceptability. Award will be given to the technically acceptable offeror with the lowest evaluated price, deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), and whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements. The solicitation requirements include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by Section L of this solicitation.

The Government intends to award without discussions. 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 determined necessary by the Contracting Officer.

1.1 Number of Contracts to be Awarded:

The Government intends to select one contractor to supply a Mechanical Draftsman. However, the Government reserves the right to award no contract at all, depending on the quality of the proposals and prices submitted and the availability of funds.

1.2 Correction Potential of Proposals:

The Government will consider, throughout the evaluation, the "correction potential" of any proposal uncertainty. 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 reasonably correctable, the offeror may be eliminated from the competitive range.

EVALUATION CRITERIA

2. EVALUATION FACTORS AND SUBFACTORS:

The Government will evaluate for acceptability the factors and subfactors described below:

Factor I - Price – Completed RFP and Price Proposal

Factor II - Technical Acceptability – Technical Capability, Personnel Qualifications & Staffing Plan

Subfactor 1 – Technical Capability

Subfactor 2 – Understanding of Personnel Requirements

Subfactor 3 – Recruitment Strategy

Subfactor 4 – Screening and Selection Process

Factor III – Past Performance

2.1 Evaluation Methodology:

2.1.1 A price evaluation will be performed for all offerors in accordance with Section 2.2, and proposals will be ranked from lowest to highest price based on the Total Evaluated Price

(TEP).

2.1.2 Next, a technical evaluation will be performed beginning with the lowest priced offeror.

Evaluations will cease when an adequate number of technically acceptable proposals are identified. Only those Offerors determined to be technically acceptable, either initially or as a result of discussions, will be considered for the award. An acceptable rating for each technical subfactor means that the proposal meets the minimum requirements outlined in the solicitation and demonstrates a reasonable understanding of the PWS requirements

2.1.3 Award will be made to the lowest evaluated priced proposal meeting the acceptability standards for the non-cost factors.

2.2 Price Factor:

2.2.1 The pricing criteria used for evaluation are (1) completeness, (2) reasonableness, and (3) Total Evaluated Price (TEP).

2.2.2 Completeness – The Government will review the pricing submissions for completeness and compliance with 52.212-1 of the RFP. Incomplete price submissions will NOT be evaluated, and the proposal may be eliminated from the competition.

2.2.3 Price Reasonableness – The offeror's price proposal will be evaluated using one or more of the techniques defined in FAR 13. Generally, adequate price competition will satisfy the criteria of price reasonableness.

2.2.4 Total Evaluated Price (TEP) – The TEP will be calculated as the sum of the offeror’s proposed prices for all CLINs. All prices comprising the TEP are contractually binding and must be firm-fixed-price (FFP). Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise such options.

2.3 Technical Factor:

2.3.1 The Offeror’s Technical Proposal must demonstrate the offeror's ability to recruit, hire, and manage a qualified Mechanical Draftsman meeting the requirements outlined in Sections three (3) and four (4) of the PWS. The proposal will be evaluated against the following subfactors:

2.3.2 Subfactor 1: Technical Capability - The offeror shall provide technical capability aligning directly with the requirements outlined in Section 3.1-3.8 of the PWS.

2.3.3 Subfactor 2: Understanding of Personnel Requirements - The offeror shall provide a detailed summary of the skills, experience, and qualifications required for the Mechanical Draftsman position, aligning directly with the requirements outlined in Section 4 of the PWS. The offeror shall provide a contracting management plan focusing on the contractor's ability to effectively manage and support the individual performing the work

2.3.4 Subfactor 3: Recruitment Strategy - The offeror shall detail their plan for recruiting qualified candidates, including sourcing methods, targeted outreach, and addressing geographic considerations.

2.3.5 Subfactor 4: Screening and Selection Process - The offeror shall outline their process for screening resumes, conducting interviews, and evaluating candidates, including any skills assessments or background checks.

2.3.6 Each technical subfactor will be evaluated on an acceptable/unacceptable basis.

2.4 Past Performance Factor:

2.4.1 Experience and Past Performance - The offeror shall provide a list of no more than three

(3) of the most relevant contracts performed for Federal agencies and commercial customers within the last five (5) years. For each contract, the offeror shall include Company/Division name, description of staffing services, Contracting Agency/Customer, Contract Number, Contract Dollar Value (for staffing portion, if applicable), Period of Performance, and verified contact information for the Contracting Officer/Customer representative. The offeror shall also provide information demonstrating the timeliness of staffing, quality of personnel, staff management capabilities, and communication/responsiveness on past contracts.

3. DISCUSSIONS:

It is the Government’s intent to award without discussion; therefore, it is imperative that offerors submit their best terms initially. However, if during the evaluation period it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to hold discussions, offeror responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs) and Final Proposal Revisions (FPRs) will be considered in making the source selection decision.

4. SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS, TERMS AND CONDITIONS:

Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or sub-factors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for an award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale.