HTP-APP_RFP_Attach 5_Evaluation Criteria.pdf

RFP 843396

Attachment 5

Evaluation Criteria

General Information:

Selection of the successful Offeror will be based on “Best Value.” A Best Value source selection is a process used to select the most advantageous offer by evaluating and comparing technical factors, in addition to price, in order to determine the greatest overall benefit in response to the requirement.

For this acquisition, technical merit is significantly more important than the price and the successful Offeror shall provide a fully operational HTP-APP to the stated award price of

$47,000,000.00. Given this and to ensure the highest quality proposals and system, a Two-

Step best value source selection process for the selection and award of the HTP-APP system will be used.

Step 1 will involve ensuring mandatory Qualification Standards (Go/No-Go criteria) are met followed by evaluating initial technical proposals based on pre-determined technical evaluation criteria and determining which Offerors will be down-selected to participate in

Step 2 (Battelle anticipates down-selecting to the top three (3) Offerors based on Step 1 evaluation criteria).

In Step 2, the down-selected Offerors will be requested to submit technical, price, and business proposals responsive to the RFP and performance specification and be invited for an oral presentation/interview. Proposals will be evaluated against the stated Step 2 evaluation factors and sub-factors.

The Offeror with the highest evaluated proposal for Step 2 will be awarded the contract based on a Best Value selection (following the Best Value Analysis by the Source Selection

Evaluation Panel, with or without discussions, including tradeoffs (if necessary), as determined by the Source Selection Authority).

Step 1 – Overview:

Step 1 Technical Proposals (Volume 1) shall consist of the Offeror’s discussion that addresses the Mandatory Go/No-Go Requirements and technical evaluation criteria, the

Offeror’s capabilities, and what the Offeror will do to satisfy the requirements of the solicitation.

Step 1 – Technical Proposal (Volume 1)

Battelle must make a determination as to the responsiveness of each proposal to the solicitation requirements. To do so, Battelle will first evaluate each Offeror’s proposal to determine whether the information provided meets the Mandatory Go/No-Go

Requirements. The Offeror’s proposal must meet all the mandatory requirements to be determined responsive and considered for further evaluation. Only those proposals considered to meet the mandatory requirements will be given further consideration and evaluated against the technical evaluation criteria.

Proposals considered as meeting the mandatory go/no-go requirements will be evaluated against the established technical evaluation criteria. Offeror’s technical proposal shall be evaluated to verify they meet all requirements and intents described in the Performance

Specification (Attachment 1) and General Requirements (Attachment 2) and the evaluation will be based upon the technical evaluation criteria established below.

➢ Mandatory Go/No-Go Requirements:

1. Attendance of the Mandatory Pre-Proposal Conference.

2. Prior Automation Experience – Offeror (Prime/General Contractor) must have and provide demonstrated experience in developing automated research systems in life science, pharmaceutical, chemistry or similar related fields within the least five (5) years.

3. Intellectual Escrow – Offeror must provide acknowledgement of the

Intellectual Escrow clause contained in the Draft Contract of the RFP as well as a statement of acceptance of the clause.

4. Financial Strength - Offeror (Prime/General Contractor) shall have adequate financial strength and responsibility to manage a $47,000,000 contract by having a current ratio score of 1.5:1, or greater. This shall be demonstrated by providing financial statements including Balance Sheet and Profit and

Loss/Income Statement for review and evaluation. Current Ratio is calculated using the following formula:

Current Ratio = Current Assets/Current Liabilities

➢ Technical Evaluation Criteria:

Battelle will use the technical evaluation criteria to determine the Offeror’s understanding of the work, the Offeror’s qualifications to perform the work, and the acceptability of the Offeror’s proposed capabilities and technical approach. For Step 1 technical proposals, the following technical evaluation criteria are all of equal significance and importance:

1. Past Performance/Project Experience –

The Offeror will be evaluated for its past performance and project experience within the last five (5) years in the following areas (in descending order of importance):

• Developing automated research systems in life science, pharmaceutical, chemistry or similar related fields

• Systems/projects of greater than $30 million

• Research laboratory system design and implementation experience

• Federal Government or Federal Contractor experience

Offeror shall demonstrate that they have performed similar work/services for projects commensurate in size and complexity and shall provide the following information for at least one (1) but up to three (3) different references:

• Contact information (including: firm/reference name, Point of Contact name, phone number, email address, and physical address);

• Project information (description of similar/related work performed and services provided).

2. Design Concept and Technical Approach –

The Offeror will be evaluated on its design concept and technical approach for providing a fully functional HTP-APP system. Offeror shall provide a high-level conceptual rendering of the general overarching technical solution/approach as well as a written discussion describing their anticipated approach to planning, designing, and providing an operational system that meets the requirements of the performance specification.

3. Management Systems –

The Offeror will be evaluated on its established management systems including: project management, team organization, oversight/supervision, processes, and ability to deliver high-quality projects on schedule and within budget. Special attention will be focused on the following:

a. Organizational structure and overall teaming approach and relationships.

b. Management approach to teaming with Battelle and the M2PC Design-

Build (D/B) Facility contractor during design, construction, and installation (i.e., final connection) of the HTP-APP equipment.

c. Project administration and processes including the management of submittals, Requests for Information (RFIs), transmittals, change control, procurement/supply chain logistics, equipment storage/housing, and equipment/system testing.

d. Safety program (supervision, training, qualifications, culture).

e. Quality program (quality assurance/quality control, both design and system implementation).

f. Approach to implementing industry standard project management and project controls capabilities including the application of risk management, life cycle planning, scheduling, estimating, performance measurement, and baseline control techniques to ensure delivery of project objectives on time and within budget. Actual cost/schedule performance on past projects shall be submitted for evaluation.

4. Key Personnel –

The Offeror will be evaluated on the professional qualifications of their key personnel including: Overall project manager, engineering technical lead who can design, qualification, testing, and deployment of large-scale laboratory automation systems, fabrication lead, scientific applications lead with experience in automation system design and applications, quality assurance manager, and project integrator. For each key personnel, the Offeror shall include education, training, professional registration, project leadership, and relevant experience required for various phases of the work, as demonstrated in:

• Research laboratory experience.

• Automation system design experience

• Technical qualifications, experience and abilities in managing, planning, organizing, executing, and controlling.

• Experience in working together with members of the proposed team.

• Federal project experience

5. Teaming Approach –

The Offeror will be evaluated on their teaming approach. The Offeror shall provide a high-level discussion describing their approach to engaging with

Battelle, the M2PC D/B Facility contractor, and key lower-tier subcontractors/suppliers. Additionally, the Offeror shall address what aspects of the work and key activities will be self-performed or self-produced as well as identify what equipment and/or work will be performed or provided by lower-tier subcontractors/suppliers.

Step 2 – Overview:

Step 2 shall consist of Offeror’s Technical Proposal and Conceptual Design (Volume 2), Price

Proposal (Volume 3), and Business Proposal (Volume 4). Step 2 proposals will be requested from the top three (3) short-listed Offerors only. The short-listed Offerors will also be invited to participate in oral presentation/interview and software demonstration with

Battelle.

Step 2 – Technical Proposal and Conceptual Design (Volume 2)

Offeror’s technical proposal shall be evaluated to verify they meet all requirements and intents described in the Performance Specification (Attachment 1) and General

Requirements (Attachment 2) and the evaluation will be based upon the technical evaluation criteria established below.

Battelle will use the technical evaluation criteria to determine the depth of the Offeror’s understanding of the work and the acceptability of the Offeror’s proposed capabilities and design concept. Step 2 technical proposal evaluation criteria factors includes Offeror team experience and qualifications, engineering and technical experience, which thoroughly demonstrates and consists of:

• Demonstrated understanding and ability to meet and achieve Key

Performance Parameters (KPPs) and any Stretch Goals,

• Meeting all the general system requirements listed in the Performance

Specification with valid explanations and supporting evidence along with associated ES&H approach,

• Approach to the needed designs to accommodate flexibility, modularity, expandability, customizability, and limited down-times.

• Demonstrated Software Design capabilities and ability to meet system requirements

• Ability to provide Science Core Functions including: Media Dispensing, Cultivation, Strain Build, and Analytical Capabilities

➢ Technical Evaluation Criteria:

To ensure Offeror possesses the necessary capabilities to meet the HTP-APP requirements specified in the Performance Specification, Battelle will evaluate Step 2 technical proposals against the following technical evaluation criteria and sub-factors which are listed in order of significance with Conceptual Design Approach having significantly more importance than Project Management, Interview and Software

Demonstration, and Team Experience & Qualifications:

1. Conceptual Design Approach

1A. Science Core Functions Design Quality –

➢ Offeror will be evaluated based on their conceptual design which provides confidence that the system will include 5 science core functions and that the concept equipment list meets or exceeds the expectations identified in the performance specification.

1B. Modularity, Flexibility, Expandability, Customizability, Redundancy –

➢ Offeror will be evaluated based on the proposed design concept 1) demonstrates modularity, flexibility, customizability, and redundancy, 2) the duration to modify the platform results in downtimes, 3) allows for integration of new equipment into the workflows, 4) allows for removal or modification of a single system component that minimizes or prevents impact to other portions of the system operation, and 5) includes minimal non-flexible back-bones.

1C. Software Design –

➢ Offeror will be evaluated based on their software conceptual approach that provides confidence and demonstrates that the software will meet or exceed the requirements and expectations identified in the Performance

Specification.

➢ Additionally, Offeror must provide a copy of their software development and control program along with manuals and procedures that implement the defined requirements and evidence of implementation (reference

Software Clause QA-197 in the Draft Contract and Section 5.1.C of the

General Requirements).

1D. ES&H (robotics, BSL-2 approach, NRTL, ergonomics, serviceability) –

➢ Offeror will be evaluated based on the concept system and proposal which indicates/demonstrates that the robotics are designed to meet intrinsically safe standards, the BSL-2 concept captures the requirements defined in the performance specification, the systems will meet NRTL requirements, the system has ergonomics, and the system is serviceable.

1E. Stretch Goals –

➢ Offeror will be evaluated based on their proposal which includes a commitment to provide the desired Stretch Goals within the set contract price. Offeror’s proposal shall clearly indicate which, if any, of the stretch goals will be met/achieved within the set contract price of $47,000,000.

Note: In the price proposal worksheet, fixed price amounts shall be proposed to achieve the stretch goals that are in excess of the stated contract price for Battelle’s consideration.

2. Project Management

2A. Project Management Experience –

➢ Offeror will be evaluated based on their overall Project Management Plan with clear and ambitious but attainable schedule, staffing, project execution plans, and the schedule of deliverables.

2B. Schedule –

➢ Offeror will be evaluated based on a proposed conceptual schedule that indicates an understanding of the funding profile implications, major project milestones, and coordination with the facility contractor.

2C. Partnering Approach –

➢ Offeror will be evaluated based on the commitment to partnering with

Battelle and the D/B facility contractor throughout the project. The proposal identifies methods to achieve a partnering approach with

Battelle during design reviews and coordination with the D/B facility contractor during design development.

3. Interview and Software Demonstration

3. Offeror Interview and Software Demonstration –

➢ Offeror will be evaluated based on the interview and software demonstration and Offeror’s ability to demonstrate an understanding of the project requirements and the ability to provide software that meets the system operation and integration requirements. At minimum, Offeror shall provide discussion of their 1) conceptual design and approach, 2) project schedule and milestones, 3) project team makeup and key personnel, and

4) provide a software demonstration.

4. Team Experience & Qualifications

4A. Offeror team’s collective R&D automated platforms technical experience –

➢ Offeror will be evaluated based on the collective experience of the Offeror and key members in designing, building and deploying R&D automation platforms, including an assessment of each proposed team member and the historical experience of the proposal team successfully working on projects.

4B. Offeror team’s R&D automated platforms scientific qualifications –

➢ Offeror will be evaluated based on the combined experience of the offeror and key members in R&D automation involving prokaryotic systems with integrated scientific applications team.

Step 2 – Price Proposal (Volume 3)

Offeror’s Price Proposal (Volume 3) shall be evaluated to determine Offeror’s ability to deliver a fully operational HTP-APP system that meets the Performance Specification and

General Requirements for the set Firm Fixed Price of $47,000,000.00.

➢ Price Proposal Evaluation Criteria:

Offeror shall complete the Price Proposal Worksheet (Attachment 7) and must fully allocate the sum of $47,000,000.00 in the Offeror’s proposal. Offeror must have the ability to deliver the entire required scope in the Performance Specification and

General Requirements, including as many of the stated Stretch Goals as possible, for the set firm fixed price amount.

Price proposals will be evaluated based on the following which are listed in order of significance:

1) Offers with higher number of stretch goals committed to within the set firm fixed price of $47,000,000.00 will be evaluated more favorably (for example: a proposal offering stretch goals 1, 2, 3, & 4 at the set price of $47,000,000.00 will be evaluated higher than a proposal offering only stretch goals 1, 2, & 3 {or fewer} at the set price.)

AND

2) Stretch goals in excess of the set firm fixed price of $47,000,000.00 shall be considered as priced options and will be evaluated as part of the Offeror’s overall proposed price as calculated in the Price Proposal Worksheet (Attachment 7). The lowest overall evaluated proposed price with the fewest priced option stretch goals in excess of the set firm fixed price will be considered most favorable based upon a calculation derived from the Offeror’s proposed price. The proposed price to

Battelle for each offer will be compared to the lowest evaluated proposed price received and considered less favorable by an amount proportionate to the ratio derived from that comparison.

Step 2 – Business Proposal (Volume 4)

Offeror’s Business Proposal (Volume 4) will be reviewed and evaluated to ensure Offeror’s ability to comply with Battelle’s business and contractual requirements and shall include all of the specified forms and documents listed in the Proposal Submission Requirements

(Attachment 4).

➢ Business Proposal Evaluation Criteria:

Offeror’s Business Proposal will be reviewed and evaluated for compliance purposes, it will not be scored nor will it impact the final basis of award and selection. However, incomplete or partial responses in any material respect, affecting the acceptability of the proposal, will not be accepted and may result in the Offeror’s proposal being considered deficient or nonresponsive.