Atch_05,_Evaluation_Plan.pdf

EVALUATION PLAN

for

FA9101-18-R-2002

Basis for Award

a. The Government will award a single IDIQ contract and follow on task orders 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 made to the offeror who represents the best value to the Government based on the information below.

b. The Government reserves the right to evaluate offers and make award without seeking additional information from offeror’s through discussions. Therefore, the offeror’s initial offer should contain the offeror’s best terms from a price and past performance standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions, if the

Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary.

c. Failure to provide offers that comply with any requirements of the solicitation may render the offer non-compliant and be grounds for rejection.

Evaluation Information:

a. The Contracting Officer will begin the evaluation process by conducting a compliance review for determination of basic quotation adequacy prior to conducting evaluations. The Government reserves the right to obtain additional information from offerors solely for the purpose of making a responsibility determination after receipt of offers.

Requests for responsibility information do not constitute discussions. By submission of the offer, offerors agree that all items proposed will be utilized for the duration of the contract and any substitutions shall require prior

Contracting Officer's approval

b. Offerors shall propose a “per cubic foot” unit price for CLINs 0001 and 0002 in of the solicitation. This price should be all-inclusive including the most current New Mexico Gross Receipts Tax (NMGRT) applicable to Otero

County- Holloman AFB NM and the Contractor Manpower Reporting requirement. Any offer that fails to cite a price for each CLIN or fails to make an entry may be rejected as nonconforming to this solicitation.

c. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. Failure to meet a requirement risks rejection. Alternate proposals will not be accepted.

d. Only firm-fixed price (FFP) offers will be evaluated for FFP Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs). An offer using a sliding price scale or pricing subject to escalation based on any contingency for a FFP designated CLINs will not be accepted.

Evaluation Factors:

a. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

Price

Past Performance

Past performance is more important when compared to the price.

b. Price:

Initially, offers will be ranked according to their TEP which will be calculated per the following:

1. CLIN 0001 price per cubic foot x 12,000 cubic feet = $x

2. CLIN 0002 price per cubic foot x 40,000 cubic feet = $x

TEP = Sum of 1 and 2.

Once the Contracting Officer has determined that competitive offers exists, the offeror’s TEP will be evaluated based on the comparison of the offeror's overall TEP with all other competitive offerors’ overall TEPs received in response to the solicitation. In the event competitive offers are not received, the Contracting Officer will attempt to determine the offeror’s CLIN and TEP price fair and reasonable utilizing the methods established at FAR 13.106-3.

While Task Order 01 is included with the solicitation, it will not be used to determine the overall TEP. The first task order shall be evaluated after selection of awardee for the basic contract. Only the awardee for the basic IDIQ contract will have Task Order 01 evaluated for the purposes of recording an obligation at award.

c. Past Performance:

c.1. The Government will evaluate the quality and extent of the offeror’s performance deemed recent (defined in paragraph c.2. below) and relevant (defined in paragraph c.3. below) to the requirements of this solicitation. The

Government will use information submitted by the offeror on the Attachment 6, Past Performance Questionnaire form. Past performance may be Government sources or commercial sources; the same weight will be given to all sources. The evaluation of past performance information will take into account past performance information regarding predecessor companies when such information is relevant to the current acquisition. Offeror’s shall submit no more than three (3) of their most relevant/recent Past Performance Questionnaires.

c.2. Recent is defined as completed or ongoing contracts with a performance history within the last four (4) years from the issue date of this solicitation.

c.3. Relevant is defined as performance of demolition work which is similar in scope as described in the performance work statement, including the safety requirements, contract type, contract environment, subcontractor interaction, and price. Relevant contracts include experience and expertise in the area of demolition activities with a main focus on demolition facilities, but also could include concrete, towers, antennas, sidewalks, pavements, buildings, and other structures. Offeror’s past performance may address experience in excavating and grading.

Relevancy will be evaluated on the basis of Table 1:

Table 1 – Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Rating Definition

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

c.4. Performance Confidence Assessment: The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the offeror performed under the contract scope by reviewing information provided by the offeror and other information available to the Government.

Table 2 – Performance Confidence Assessment

Rating Definition

Substantial Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Limited Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

c.5. Teaming Arrangement or Joint Venture: If the offeror intends to fulfill the requirements of this solicitation in a teaming arrangement or joint venture, the offeror must provide complete information as to the arrangement, including a list of any relevant and recent past/present performance information on previous teaming arrangements or joint ventures with the same teaming or joint venture partner. If this is a first time joint effort, each party to the arrangement must provide a list of past and present contracts.

Subcontractor Consent: Past performance information pertaining to a subcontractor cannot be disclosed by the prime offeror without the subcontractor's consent. Provide with the proposal, a letter from all subcontractors that will perform on the contract, consenting to the release of their past performance information to the prime contractor.

c.6. Offerors are advised that while an offeror will not be evaluated either favorably or unfavorably for having

Neutral Confidence, sources of existing information available to the Government including, but not limited to, the

Contractor Performance Assessment Reports System, Past Performance Information Retrieval System, Federal

Performance and Integrity Information System, and Electronic Subcontract Reporting System, may be utilized. The

Government may use past performance information obtained from sources other than those identified by the offeror.

The Government reserves the right to use or not use past performance information submitted by the offeror based on whether or not adequate recorded past performance information is available in its Federal databases.

Evaluation Process:

a. The Contracting Officer will make award to the offeror who, being responsible, represents the best value to the

Government when weighing past performance as a more important factor than the TEP. Past performance and the

TEP will be evaluated in accordance with the sections above.