Attachment_5_-_Evaluation_Tables.docx

EVALUATION PLAN

N4110 -- Early Entry Portal (EEP) Development, Operations, and Maintenance (Defense Spectrum Organization)

Basis of evaluation: Lowest-Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA).

Before completing the Evaluation Plan please review the FAR Part 8/16 Ordering Procedures located at: https://www.ditco.disa.mil/DitcoContractingTemplates/doku.php?id=fa r_part_8-16_procedures_and_attachments

Non-Cost/Price Factors During the evaluation, the attached ratings will be used to determine if the following technical/management factors are Acceptable/Unacceptable (see Table 1).

A. Technical/Management Approach:

The Technical/Management Approach portion of the proposal must be limited to 25 pages. A draft Software Development Plan (SDP) and Task Order Management Plan (TOMP) framework must be submitted alongside the Technical/Management Approach. There is no page limit for the draft SDP or TOMP framework.

In order for a contractor’s proposal/quotation to be rated Technically Acceptable overall, each of the following subfactors must be rated Acceptable.

(a) Subfactor 1: Software Development, Operations, and Maintenance: In order for this subfactor to be rated Acceptable, the offeror must demonstrate an approach that includes adequate processes, tools, infrastructure, resources, risk management, and dependencies associated with fully meeting the requirements for EEP Development, Operations, and Maintenance described within Performance Work Statement Tasks 6.3 and 6.4. The approach shall be supported by a draft Software Development Plan, in accordance with the requirements of PWS Task 6.3.1. An acceptable approach shall include:

· Description of agile methodologies used throughout the lifecycle

· The software development process, from requirements analysis through deployment, demonstrating that new capabilities can be incorporated into EEP, meeting the requirements of PWS Task 6.3.

· The operations and maintenance process – ensuring that EEP is never down for more than two (2) consecutive business days and ensuring the system is available 98% of the time, on an annual basis – meeting the requirements of PWS Task 6.4.

· Approach for operating a help desk, including maintaining appropriate documentation and logs.

· Approach for testing that ensures a high-quality product is delivered/maintained.

· Approach for adding Universal Browser Compatibility, 508 Compliance, and Satellite Coordination Agreement Documents capabilities, including technical details, risks, levels of effort, and changes to EEPAC supporting documentation.

(b) Subfactor 2: Transition and Deployment: In order for this subfactor to be rated Acceptable, the offeror must demonstrate an approach that specifically addresses the processes, tools, infrastructure, resources, risks, and dependencies associated with meeting the requirements for EEP Transition-In and Transition-Out, in accordance with the requirements of PWS Task 6.2. An acceptable approach shall include:

· EEP Transition-in approach that meets the required timelines and requirements in accordance with PWS Task 6.2.1.

a. The offeror’s proposed privately hosted environment(s) and infrastructure, to include the approach to security boundaries.

b. Transition-in timeline (including downtime), dependencies, and risks

c. Testing and verification.

d. Deployment.

· EEP Transition-out.

(c) Subfactor 3: Task Management: In order for this subfactor to be rated Acceptable, the offeror must demonstrate an approach that specifically addresses the management of a software development program and the management of product deliveries in accordance with PWS Tasks 6.1 and 6.6. This subfactor shall be supported by the delivery of a framework for the EEP Task Order Management Plan, in accordance with the requirements of PWS Task 6.1.1.

(d) Subfactor 4: Disaster Mitigation Support: In order for this subfactor to be rated Acceptable, the offeror must demonstrate an approach that specifically addresses the approach for meeting the requirements for EEP Disaster Mitigation described within Performance Work Statement Task 6.5.

B. Past Performance:

The past performance evaluation factor will be rated as acceptable or unacceptable based on the definitions contained in Table 2. There are no subfactors assigned to past performance.

Cost/Price Factor Since this requirement is based on LPTA, award will be made to the contractor that presents the lowest priced technically acceptable approach. The contractor’s price proposal will be evaluated to determine if it is reasonable and complete. Normally, price reasonableness is established through price analysis. The Government will determine completeness of the offeror's proposal by verifying that all solicitation requirements have been priced, figures are correctly calculated, and costs are presented in a clear and useful format. The Government reserves the right to conduct a realism analysis of the proposed price.

In addition, indicate whether or not you want the estimated total dollars available for this requirement to be disclosed to the vendors.

Yes |_| Disclose available funds $ ___________ No |X| Do not disclose available funds.

Although available funds will not be disclosed, offeror’s will be presented with the Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) labor metrics for the predecessor effort. On average, the predecessor effort included labor for 13 FTEs on an annual basis.

Table 1. Technical/Management Ratings

Table 2. Past Performance Ratings

Enclosure 8a, EvalPlan/Ratings for LPTA 3Oct2016/v1