Attch_4__Edwards_CSA_Evaluation_Factors_20_Jul_2018.pdf

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-2

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1.0. Evaluation.

1.1. Basis for Contract Award. Award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of quotes meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for the technical factors stated in the Addendum to FAR Clause 52.212-1. All quotes shall be evaluated for technical acceptability. Failure to meet a requirement may result in a quote being determined technically unacceptable. Technical tradeoffs will not be made, and no additional credit will be given for exceeding acceptability. Award will be made to the offeror who: is rated “Acceptable” in Factor 1 Technical; has the lowest evaluated price; is determined responsible; and whose quoteconforms to the solicitation requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by this solicitation). It is the Government’s intention to award without discussions. However, the Government will consider throughout the evaluation the “correction potential” of any deficiency or uncertainty. Determining such correction potential is the sole discretion of the Government. Offerors may be given an opportunity to explain or correct identified deficiencies.

1.2. Number of Contracts to be Awarded. The Government intends to select one contractor for this acquisition.

However, the Government reserves the right not to award a contract at all, depending on the quality of the proposals and prices submitted and the availability of funds.

1.3. Rejection of Offers. The Government may reject any evaluated proposal that fails to adequately address a significant portion of the requirement or contract terms and conditions.

1.4. Solicitation Requirements (Terms and Conditions). Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements such as: terms and conditions; representations and certifications; PWS requirements; and those identified as factors and subfactors. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the Offeror being ineligible for award.

2.0. Evaluation Factors

2.1. Evaluation Factors Used To Evaluate. Award will be made to the offeror proposing the combination most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors described below:

Factor 1: Technical

Factor 2: Price

2.1.1. Evaluation Methodology. The Government will evaluate all factors concurrently for all proposals. Only those offerors determined to be technically acceptable will be considered for award. Award will be made to the lowest evaluated priced proposal meeting the acceptability standards for Factor 1, who has been determined responsible and whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by this solicitation).

2.2. Factor 1 – Technical

The technical factor will receive one of the ratings described below based on the criteria listed below. A single deficiency within this factor will result in an unacceptable rating. The technical ratings are defined as follows:

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

The Technical Factor is met when the Offeror provides a capabilities statement and presents a sound approach for providing local telecommunication services required in the PWS to include site-specific (Appendix 1), installation, and cutover requirements (PWS para 4.3.1).

2.3. Factor 2 – Price

2.3.1. Price Reasonableness. The proposed prices will be evaluated for reasonableness. Analysis of price proposals will be performed using one or more of the techniques defined in FAR 13.106-3, SAP “Award and Documentation”, in order to determine price reasonableness. Reasonableness must represent a price to the Government a prudent person would pay in the conduct of competitive business. Normally, price reasonableness is based on competitive quotations or offers, but may also be determined through price analysis techniques as described in FAR 13.106-3.

2.3.2. Total Evaluated Price (TEP). Pricing proposals will be reviewed for compliance with FAR 52.212-1 Addendum pricing instructions. Table1 below will demonstrate the TEP calculation methodology.

Proposed pricing evaluated as the TEP is required IAW with the following format:

PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE PRICE

TOTAL PRICE FOR BASE PERIOD

TOTAL PRICE FOR OPTION YEAR (OY) 1

TOTAL PRICE FOR OY 2

TOTAL PRICE FOR OY 3

TOTAL PRICE FOR OY 4

TOTAL PRICE FOR 6 MONTH EXTENSION

TEP = (BASE + 4 OYS + 6 MONTH EXT)

The TEP will be calculated as the sum of the offeror’s proposed prices for 12-month Base Period (to include cut-over), four one-year Option Periods, and an optional six month Extension Period IAW FAR 52.217-8 “Option to Extend the Term of the Contract.” The six month Extension Period unit prices shall be based on the proposed OY 4 unit prices. The six month Extension Period under FAR 52.217-8 will only be utilized if necessary. TEP will be used for evaluation purposes only. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise such options. The six month Extension Period is not to be considered part of OY 4 and will be a separate option exercise if it is utilized.