HQ072723R0002 Evaluation Criteria _20221226.pdf

Instructions to Offerors

1. Offerors are required to be registered in System for Award Management (SAM) at the time an offer is submitted.

2. The Government will not reimburse any proposal preparation costs or other expenses incurred to respond to this notice.

3. The Government intends to make award without discussions. Proposals should be submitted initially on the most accurate and favorable terms from a price and technical standpoint. Offerors should not assume they will be contacted or afforded an opportunity to clarify, discuss, or revise their proposals.

4. File Format: Offerors should submit all proposal files in Microsoft Office product or Adobe

PDF formats.

5. Restrictive or Proprietary Data: Offerors that include in their proposals data that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes, shall –

a. Mark the title page with the following legend: “This proposal includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the Government and shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed -- in whole or in part -- for any purpose other than to evaluate this proposal. If, however, a contract is awarded to this Offeror as a result of -- or in connection with -- the submission of this data, the Government shall have the right to duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the extent provided in the resulting contract. This restriction does not limit the Government’s right to use information contained in this data if it is obtained from another source without restriction. The data subject to this restriction are contained in sheets

[insert numbers or other identification of sheets].” and,

b. Mark each sheet of data it wishes to restrict with the following legend: “Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal

6. Offerors shall provide the following:

Factor 1. Technical

Each offeror is to provide sufficient detail (limited to 10 pages) addressing each work area in

Section 3.3 to demonstrate a clear understanding of the performance work statement. The Offeror should provide evidence of sufficient planning to show that work will be accomplished as required and on schedule, utilizing all available resources and mitigation strategies when Government dependencies are delayed or unavailable. Each offeror shall have and propose key personnel with isexperience with Financial Improvement & Audit Readiness (FIAR and/or Defense Agencies

Initiative (DAI) and provide sufficient detail of this experience. Personnel with 3-5 years of experience with (FIAR and DAI, depending on which system(s) they support) is highly preferred.

Factor 2. Past Performance

Each offeror shall provide Government or commercial contracts that have been completed within the last five years and were for projects similar to the scope described in the Performance

Work Statement (PWS) (limited to a combined total of 10 pages). Information for each contract shall include current point of contact (POC) information (name, telephone numbers, and email address for each POC), and (for Government contracts) contract number, value, duration, and how the contract ended. For commercial contracts, please provide a unique identification for the effort/task being referenced. Contracts that are listed without providing a work scope description may be disregarded in the past performance evaluation, at the discretion of the

Government.

Factor 3: Price/Cost

Each offeror shall provide proposed labor rates/hours/mix for the base year and all options that address the following:

a. Rates: provide fully–burdened labor rates, including labor titles. Include all direct and indirect costs, overheads, general and administrative expenses, allocated other direct costs and profit for a base year and four option years;

b. Hours: provide estimated hours for each occupation. A standard full-time contractor works

40 hours a week for 2080 hours a year.

c. Travel: provide estimated travel cost for up to two (2) trips per year, Contractor travel and travel-related costs shall be governed by Federal Join Travel Regulations (JTR) for per diem rates (lodging and meals/incidentals (M&I) in effect at the time of travel

d. Provide any other price-related information required for performance including subcontractor quotes, if any. Contractor travel costs shall be governed by FAR 31.205-46.

A Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) award shall be made to the responsible offeror whose offer, conforming to the solicitation, that represents the best value to the Government based on factors specified herein.

Evaluation

In accordance with FAR 13, DMEA will evaluate all responses received using the evaluation criteria listed below:

(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible Offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation that represents the best value to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

Factor 1 will be evaluated based on the combined technical and risk ratings, as follows:

Each offeror’s proposal needs to address the requirements from the PWS with its technical approach to meeting the requirement. As addressed above, as part of the ratings addressed below, key personnel having 3-5 years of FIAR and/or DAI experience is highly preferred, and the proposal should provide sufficient detail of this experience. Unclear or insufficiently described technical volumes may be rated poorly in this factor.

Color Rating Description Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable.

Factor 2 will be evaluated based on the past performance relevance rating and confidence assessment, as follows:

Past Performance information provided within the proposal will be evaluated along with other information available to the Government, including but not limited to information available in

Government information systems (e.g. CPARS, EDA, PIEE/WAWF modules, etc.), whether documented in CPARS or not. This includes Contracting Officers and Program Managers internal

Government (DMEA) experience. Past performance from Government contracts, including as significant subcontractors/partners, is preferred.

The Government, at its discretion, may send out past performance questionnaires for past performance experiences listed. In addition to the information to evaluation above, the Government may evaluate all past performance information received from any returned past performance questionnaires.

Offeror’s past performance experiences will be given a relevancy rating and a single confidence assessment will be given to the Offeror’s proposal, as described below.

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Adjectival Rating Description

Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

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

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the 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.

Performance Confidence Assessments Ratings

Adjectival Rating Description

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.

Factor 3: Price

Offers shall demonstrate the ability to provide commercial rates for contract use. Proposed labor hours, labor mix, and overall price proposed, along with other cost/price information will be evaluated against the government’s estimates for completing the technical objectives of the PWS as well as competing offers, in order to reach a fair and reasonable determination of price.

Evaluation Factor Order of Importance

(a) The best value criteria listed above are in the following descending order of importance;

Factor 2, Past Performance

Factor 1, Technical

Factor 3, Price

All evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price.

(b) 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).

(c) 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 provision)