Attachment_3.__MRA_Evaluation_Factors.pdf

FA8601-14-R-0038

Addendum 2

EVALUATION FACTORS

22 April 2014

1. The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose proposal conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the

Government, price and other factors considered. The factors that shall be used to evaluate proposals are Technical, Prior Experience, and Price, as expounded below.

FACTOR 1 - Technical: Pursuant to evaluation of all subfactors and elements hereunder, the

Technical factor will receive and overall rating of 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.

Subfactor 1 – Prior Experience

Description: This element will evaluate the offeror’s relevant experience in the fields needed to be regarded as a SME in Production, Quality, and Manufacturing and Engineering.

Measure of Merit: This element is met when the offeror provides evidence of successfully assessing manufacturing readiness and quality assurance for DoD or

AF programs. Indicators of successful performance include:

1. A Master’s or higher level degree in manufacturing, quality assurance, systems engineering, or related discipline;

2. At least 3 years of program management experience in the last 5 years, with at least 1 of those years involving the management of projects regarding the development and execution of educational courses for adult learners;

3. At least 1 year experience in the last 5 years involving assessing manufacturing readiness and its interaction with the Air Force’s systems engineering process;

4. At least 1 year experience in the last 5 years working with DoD and Air Force policies, processes, and applications regarding assessing manufacturing readiness;

5. At least 1 year experience in the last 5 years developing live and web-based courses for adult learners using the Air Force Instructional System Design process and standards;

6. Experience within the past 3 years working in Department of Defense facilities, with Department of Defense personnel (civilian and active duty);

7. Experience within the past 2 years speaking with technical authority in the manufacturing readiness discipline;

8. Experience within the past 2 years working with the DoD Manufacturing

Readiness Level Working Group;

Subfactor 2: Documentation

Description: This element will evaluate the offeror’s fit into the academic role of administering academic courses/materials.

Measure of Merit: This element is met when the offeror provides evidence of at least 1 year experience within the last 5 years creating, vetting, validating, and controlling academic courseware; and at least 1 year experience within the last 5 years experience providing management reports on course development, class conduct and curriculum/class reviews.

FACTOR 2 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 for all Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) for the base performance period and option period I.

The spreadsheet below illustrates calculation of a proposal’s TEP using the methodology described above. The spreadsheet is provided for illustration purposes only. Prices reflected in the spreadsheet are notional and in no way reflect the actual value of the requirement or an actual evaluation of proposed prices submitted in response to this solicitation or any other solicitation for the same or similar requirements.

EXAMPLE Pricing Exhibit

Period of

Performance

POP Length CLINs Notional

Propose Price

Base 12 Months 0001-0002 $100,000.00

Option 1 12 Months 1001-1002 $104,000.00

Total Proposed Price for Base and Option I $204,000.00

52.217-8 6 months NA $52,000.00

(Max)

TOTAL EVALUATED PRICE $256,000.00

2. Technical is 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. 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 or Past Performance factor is “Acceptable” pursuant to initial evaluation and, in the Government’s judgment, the proposal relative to these factors 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, these evaluation factors will receive an interim rating of “Unacceptable with

Correction Potential.” Pursuant to discussions, the Government will rate these factors 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. If discussions were opened and a proposal was previously included in the competitive range, and pursuant to discussions the proposal’s Technical factor is rated “Unacceptable,” the proposal will be eliminated from the competitive range and no further consideration will be given to that proposal for award.

3. 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.