Draft Evaluation Factors.docx

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1. Contract Award Award will be made to the offeror whose proposal is determined to best meet the needs of the Government after considerations of all factors, that is, the proposal that provides the best value to the Government. Best value is defined as the offer that results in the most advantageous acquisition decision for the Government as determined by an integrated assessment and trade-off analysis among non-price and price factors.

The Government may award a contract to other than the lowest priced offeror, or other than the offeror with the highest non-price rating. The Government reserves the right to award without discussions; however, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if deemed necessary. Further, the Government may reject any or all offers if such action is deemed to be in the Government’s best interests; accept other than the lowest offer; and waive informalities or minor irregularities in offers received. The Government will award a contract resulting from this RFP to the responsible offeror whose proposal offers the most advantageous solution to DHS, considering both price and technical solution.

2. Evaluation Method The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposal to determine the extent to which the proposal demonstrates the Offeror’s understanding of the work to be performed and to what extent the approach to accomplishing the requirements complies with the DHS’s Statement of Objectives (SOW) and the Task Order 01 SOW, in accordance with the evaluation factors set forth below.

The Government will evaluate how well the offeror’s Technical Proposal demonstrates the ability to provide comprehensive services in accordance with the SOW and demonstrates how efficiently these approaches provide for successful completion of the performance objectives. The Government will also evaluate how well the proposal for Task Order 01 proposes to fulfill the requirements and successfully demonstrates an understanding of the program’s goals and objectives.

3. Relative Order of Importance The factors that will be used to evaluate all proposals are as follows:

Factor 1 – Technical Solution and Management Plan Factor 2 - Staffing and Management Plan for Task Order 01 Factor 3 – Past Performance Factor 4 – Price Factor 1 is more important than each of the other non-/price factors. Factor 2 is more important than Factor 3. Factors 1, 2 and 3 will be individually rated on an adjectival scale. When combined, the technical factors are more important than price. Although price will not be rated during the evaluation of the proposals, it may become the determinative factor in the final source selection decision when making the best value “trade-off” determination.

4. Adjectival Ratings Rating System for Evaluation For Technical and Management Factors

Technical: The technical rating evaluation process will include consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.

Rating System for Evaluation of Past Performance Factors

5. Evaluation Factors are comprised of Technical and Price.

1. Factor 1 – Technical Solution and Management Plan The contractor shall provide personnel, materials, and services capable of providing the full range of support services specified above to meet the contract requirements. HSIN also envisions a technical approach that combines appropriate elements of agile process methodologies in order to (1) balance rapid incremental results with the overarching integration goal, and (2) permit addressing programs on a priority basis. The Contractor is expected to assist with the development of an execution framework that achieves effective HSIN-wide integration as rapidly as possible, clearly capitalizing on incremental gains and improvements consistent with HSIN program goals and objectives.

Additionally, the contractor shall demonstrate a successful methodology for the application and completion of the follow areas as defined in the IDIQ SOW (Attachment B):

Note: Areas of technical competence shall be applicable to support all the factors for award of this requirement.

Areas of Technical Competence

As defined in Section 4 of the HSIN SOW (Attachment B)

Requirements Management

The Contractor shall assist with the development of a strategy for transition of HSIN to the government-approved interim and final “To Be” architectures in a phased approach. This planning support shall include transition steps and actions, change management, communications, and resource assessments associated with the recommended strategy for achieving the integrated HSIN business and technical environment identified in the “To Be” architectures. The strategy shall address organizational, system, technology, policy, and human capital dimensions.

The offeror’s management plan shall address the areas of technical competence provided above as applicable, to support their approach to fulfillment of the PMO’s requirement.

The offeror shall discuss transition methods to be used at contract award with the incumbent contractor, and those that will be used at contract expiration.

2. Factor 2 –Staffing and Management Plan for Task Order 01 (Resumes must not exceed one page) The Government shall evaluate the offeror’s proposed team and staffing plan which must adequately demonstrates the resources and capabilities necessary to satisfy all the requirements of the Task Order 01 Statement of Work (Attachment F)The offeror’s methodology and processes to staff the positions proposed will be evaluated for efficiency.

In addition, the offeror’s staffing plan shall demonstrate that the specific staff proposed possesses the requisite qualifications, management and direct experience in successful efforts of comparable complexity and scope to the requirements described in the SOW. The staffing plan shall describe the offeror’s proposed labor mix for this task order. The offeror shall provide resumes and letters of intent for key personnel.

Key criteria for staffing requirements include:

· MS SharePoint knowledge, management and implementation experience;

· Applied Agile Software development methodology (for capturing, tracing requirements, mapping requirements and user stories/use cases)

· Agile SCRUM and Sprint management expertise

· Experience in managing large, complex corporate enterprise projects in a task order/contract environment

· Experience performing the day-to-day management of overall contract/task order support operations involving multiple projects and groups of personnel; experience organizing, directing and coordinating the planning and production of contract/task order support activities;

· Knowledge of the DHS SELC and PMI certification (or demonstrated understanding and experience with the PMBOK).

3. Factor 3 - Past Performance References The Government will evaluate the offeror’s related past performance and will assess the risk as it relates specifically to the scope of work for this solicitation and successful accomplishment of the required effort. The government will solicit from available sources, including references and clients identified by the offeror, past performance data of the offeror; and will consider such information in its evaluation. When assessing performance risk, the Government will focus its inquiry on the past performance of the offeror regarding solicitation requirements. This assessment will include the offeror’s record on cost, schedule, and performance, as well as its history for commitment to customer satisfaction. The Offeror shall identify and provide any current DHS contract performance data.

Past performance information may be obtained through the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting Systems (CPARS), similar systems of other federal (or state) government departments and agencies, questionnaires tailored to the circumstances of this acquisition, Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) channels, interviews with program managers and contracting officers and other sources known to the government, including commercial sources. When assessing the offeror’s past performance, the Government may contact other sources of information, including but not limited to, better business bureaus, previous customers, other contractors who have worked with the offeror (but not bidding with the offeror in this procurement), and published media. In conducting this assessment, the Government reserves the right to use both data provided by each offeror and data obtained from other sources.

If the offeror does not have a record of relevant past performance or if information about the offeror’s past performance is not available, then the government will not evaluate the offeror’s past performance favorably or unfavorably and a neutral rating will be assessed.

4. Factor 4 – Price

Price will be evaluated for reasonableness in accordance with one or more price analysis techniques identified in FAR techniques identified in FAR 15.404 and the factors cited in 12.209. Any proposal that is unreasonable or materially unbalanced as to price for basic and option items including follow-on years may be rejected. An unbalanced proposal is one that incorporates prices that are significantly understated or overstated as indicated by price analysis techniques.

The price will be evaluated on the basis of total estimated price to the Government. The Government will evaluate offers by summing the total estimated price of the base year with the total estimated price of each option period. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the options(s).