Evaluation_Factors.pdf

EVALUATION FACTORS

The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

Award will be based on a Best Value Determination by the Contracting Officer in accordance with FAR

13.3. All proposals timely received will be evaluated using the following three (3) factors .

1) Technical Capability

2) Past Performance

3) Price

When combined, Technical Capability and Past Performance is approximately equal to price.

The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The factors that will be used to evaluate proposals are Technical and Price, as expounded below. The Technical factor will be rated either “Acceptable,” “Unacceptable with Correction Potential” or “Unacceptable” using the rating and descriptions in the table below:

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable with

Correction Potential

Based on the information provided in the proposal, the Technical factor, or one or more of its subfactors, cannot be determined to be “Acceptable.” However, in the Government’s estimation, with additional information, the Technical factor or subfactors could potentially be rated “Acceptable.”

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirement of the solicitation.

1) TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

A decision of the technical acceptability of each offeror's Technical Capability Proposal shall be made. Each proposal will be assigned a rating of:

(1) Acceptable: Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

(2) Unacceptable with Correction Potential: Based on the information provided in the proposal, the Technical factor, or one or more of its subfactors, cannot be determined to be “Acceptable.” However, in the Government’s estimation, with additional information, the Technical factor or subfactors could potentially be rated “Acceptable.”

(3) Unacceptable: Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirement of the solicitation.

Technical Capability Proposals with an Unacceptable rating will not be considered for award.

Each offeror must show evidence of a capability to provide the mandatory requirements set forth in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and elsewhere in this solicitation.

The following specific factors and subfactors will be evaluated in the Technical Capability Proposal. Any factor or subfactor determined unacceptable will render the entire Technical Capability Proposal as unacceptable.

Technical Capability Evaluation Sub-Factors are as follows:

(1) Sub-factor a: Technical Approach: The offeror's proposal shall present evidence of their understanding and technical approach to meet the requirements of this solicitation. The offeror shall:

• Provide an overview of your methodology guiding your performance of the technical requirements identified in the PWS, and a general description of how your technical approach will be applied to accomplishing the requirement.

• Outline the logical sequence of tasks that you will perform to accomplish the requirements.

Identify and describe the specific techniques and steps that will be applied during the accomplishment of all tasks of this project.

• Describe your qualifications and corporate capabilities specifically related to perform the work required in the PWS.

• Describe your plan for transition.

(2) Sub-factor b: Management Approach: The offeror’s proposal shall demonstrate their ability to effectively manage personnel, provide experienced and qualified key personnel and respond rapidly to staffing requirements. The offeror shall:

• Explain their staffing approach to hire, retain and train qualified technical personnel.

• Describe their ability to temporarily and effectively surge the workforce to support short-term efforts.

• Describe their ability to transition this effort with minimal impact on workload.

• Describe their ability to develop procedures that support all the activities needed to effectively accomplish the day-to-day operations.

• Describe their ability to assist with analysis of requirements, technical documents, systems and workload schedules.

• Describe the offeror's ability to provide sound management procedures, resulting in the completion of work on schedule and at or below the original cost.

2) PAST PERFORMANCE

Past Performance will be rated on an “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” basis using the ratings and descriptions in the table below:

Rating Description

Acceptable

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. (See note below.)

Unacceptable

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.

NOTE: 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 may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable”.

There are two aspects of the past performance evaluation. The first is to evaluate whether the offeror’s present/past performance is relevant to the effort to be acquired. The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on relevant contracts.

3) PRICE

The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement to arrive at a total evaluated price (TEP). The TEP will be calculated as:

(i) The sum of the extended prices (unit quantity multiplied by unit price) for Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) 0001 through 1013 for the base performance period and option periods I.

Technical Capability and past performance when combined are approximately equal to price; however, a proposal is unawardable at any price if the Technical factor receives a rating of “Unacceptable.” The evaluation does not permit tradeoffs between price and non-price factors. The Government will initiate concurrent evaluation of all evaluation factors on all proposals. A rating of “Unacceptable for any Technical subfactor or element may result in an overall rating of “Unacceptable” for the Technical factor. 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 the Government cannot determine if a proposal’s Technical factor is “Acceptable” pursuant to initial evaluation and, in the Government’s judgment, the Technical factor is considered correctable; the Contracting Officer (CO) may open discussions and may continue discussions as long as, in the Government’s judgment, a proposal still has correction potential. For the purpose of conducting discussions, if a proposal’s Technical Factor has correction potential, it will receive an interim rating of “Unacceptable with Correction Potential.” Pursuant to discussions, the Government will rate the Technical factor as “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable.” For the purpose of award without discussions, if due to any proposal uncertainty, the Government cannot determine that the Technical factor is “Acceptable” upon initial evaluation or pursuant to clarifications IAW FAR 15.306(a); Technical will receive a rating of “Unacceptable.” If a proposal’s Technical factor is rated “Unacceptable” either initially or pursuant to discussions, the proposal is unawardable and no further consideration will be given to that proposal for award.

(a) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(b) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer's specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

(End of clause)