ID07180031-Appendix_A_Evaluation_Criteria-revised_11.13.18.pdf

Revised 13 Nov18

APPENDIX A

EVALUATION CRITERIA

52.212-2 Evaluation—Commercial Items (October 2014)

(a) The Government will award a task order contract 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. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers in their order of importance:

Past Experience (PE)

Technical/Management Approach (TMA)

Past Performance (PP)

PE, TMA and PP when combined are more important than price. PE and TMA are more important than PP.

Non-price factors, when combined, are more important than Price. As the difference in non-price factors becomes closer, Price may become more important. Non-price factors will be evaluated first, then 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 task order 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.

A1.0. Evaluation Information

NOTE: Failure to comply with any of the requirements identified in the PWS may render the contractor's quote unacceptable.

GSA will evaluate all quotes to determine the best value to the Government. GSA will make that determination based on each vendor’s quote using the following evaluation criteria, listed in their order of importance:

PE is what specific work executed and/or completed within the past 5 years with comparable (same or similar scope, size, duration) requirements to the solicited task.

TMA is evaluated by its feasibility, practicability and appropriateness in accomplishing

PWS requirements. The technical approach shall also include a Staffing Plan and

Transition Plan.

PP is evaluated by the relevancy and recency history of the offeror’s past performance as a measure of the Government’s confidence in the offeror’s ability to perform successfully, this project based on demonstrated past performance. The Government will conduct a performance risk assessment based upon the quality of the offeror’s PP and any proposed subcontractor, as it relates to the probability of successful accomplishment of the required effort.

Price: Evaluated to determine that the price is fair and reasonable.

The evaluation will be conducted in accordance with FAR Part 12 and 13 as the contract will be a competitive 8(a) requirement. A debriefing may be requested by the vendor, and will be conducted by GSA in accordance with the requirements of FAR 15.506.

If any of the evaluation factors (PP/PE/TMA) receives a rating of less than acceptable, the

Response package may not be reviewed any further and therefore may not be considered for award.

A1.1. Past Experience (PE)

This factor considers the extent of the offeror’s past experience in carrying out similar work. The government must have confidence in the offeror's ability to complete a project with similar scope, size, and duration with minimal risk. PE is what specific work was performed and its relevancy to the scope, size, and duration of requirements identified in the PWS. The performance of the relevant PEs submitted must have begun within the past 5 years. This is to ensure the PEs being submitted demonstrate current and relevant experience. Using the Past

Experience Information Sheet (Appendix C) provide the recent and relevant PE information for three (3) past or current contracts/task orders executed and/or completed within the past 3 to 5 years with comparable (same or similar scope, size, duration) requirements to the solicited task. See Appendix C for Past Experience Information Sheet.

Similar in Scope is defined as a measurable range of operations such as the major requirement areas of a PWS. The following are the critical areas of the PWS that will be evaluated:

Hazardous Waste Program – Experience managing facility programs, experience at DoD

Installations, experience working with regulator’s, experience with EESO-MIS and DLA systems

Air Program – Experience managing facility programs, experience in permit application preparations, experience working with regulator’s and APIMS experience

Hazardous Materials Program – Experience managing site programs

Cultural Resource Management – Experience managing site programs

Water Quality – Experience in permit application preparation and experience working with regulator’s

Sampling – experience and proper training

Similar in Size is defined as dollar value and number of personnel in similar skill sets as this requirement.

Similar in Duration is identified as requirement in duration from three (3) to five (5) years.

The offeror may use subcontractor experience as well as prime contractor past experience, as long as it is recent and relevant and of similar size and scope to the work described in the PWS.

A1.2. Technical/Management Approach (TMA)

This factor TMA, considers the feasibility, practicability and appropriateness in accomplishing

PWS requirements. The technical approach shall also include a Staffing Plan and Transition

Plan. In support of the evaluation of the TMA each offeror must submit the following:

Description/Narrative of the vendor’s knowledge and understanding of the requirements as stated below. The vendor shall provide the methodologies and techniques used to fulfill the PWS requirements

PWS Section 4.2 Hazardous Waste Management

PWS Section 4.3 Hazardous Material Management

PWS Section 4.4 Sampling, Testing, Analysis, and Monitoring

PWS Section 4.5 Air Quality

PWS Section 4.6 Wastewater & Storm-water

PWS Section 4.7 Cultural Resources Management

Staffing Plan - Demonstrate that the offeror’s quote meets the specific requirements of the PWS through the identification of labor categories, contractor matrix of proposed labor category, whether the staff is from the Prime Contractor, Teaming Contractor or subcontractor, Section of the PWS and labor hours. The contractor shall use the following matrix to submit the staffing plan. Adjust the rows as needed.

Staffing Plan Template

Onsite:

Contractor

Proposed

Labor

Category

Prime, Teaming

Partner or

Subcontrac tor

Section of

PWS

Labor

Hours

Offsite:

Contractor

Proposed

Labor

Category

Prime, Teaming

Partner or

Subcontrac tor

Section of

PWS

Labor

Hours

Management Approach - The contractor shall also describe its ability for oversight, meetings, task tracking and proposed scheduling

A1.3. Past Performance (PP)

This factor considers the history of the offeror’s past performance as a measure of the

Government’s confidence in the offeror’s ability to perform successfully, this project based on demonstrated past performance. The Government will conduct a performance risk assessment based upon the quality of the offeror’s PP and any proposed subcontractor, as it relates to the probability of successful accomplishment of the required effort.

The offeror SHALL send Past Performance questionnaires to each of their references. The offeror shall not see the completed questionnaires; therefore, the references shall submit PP questionnaires directly to the Contracting Officer: latasha.goines@gsa.gov . Any past performance questionnaire (Appendix D) submitted directly from the offeror to the

Contracting Officer will not be evaluated. To be considered responsive to the solicitation, the Offeror shall submit a Volume III Past Performance Package through the Information

Technology Solution Shop (ITSS), via the Request for Quote Web page. The format shall be

Times New Roman font, no smaller than 11 10 point, and single spaced. Volume III shall be limited to past performance information only. * Please note that past performance is defined as “how” well (i.e., to what level of quality/performance level) work was performed. The

Volume III shall be limited to 21 pages. The Government will only consider and evaluate the first 21 pages of the Volume III. The following items are requested in the Volume III submission without a page limit:

Since past performance is an official evaluation factor for award, past performance references and all PP reference questionnaires (Appendix D) are required to be submitted by the due date/closing date of this solicitation. Using the Past Performance Reference form (Appendix D) provide information for a minimum of three (3), and a maximum of ten (10) references, as instructed in the Appendix 1 D. The offeror shall not see the completed questionnaires;

therefore, the documents shall be submitted directly to the Contracting Officer (Latasha M.

Goines) at Latasha.goines@gsa.gov, Any complete past performance questionnaire (Appendix

D) submitted directly from the vendor to the Government will not be evaluated.

PP will be considered for the prime and its subcontractors. PP must be received from the prime, as the Government will not accept PP from subcontract partners only. The PP must reflect that the prime contractor has demonstrated PP that is recent and relevant to this solicitation.

mailto:latasha.goines@gsa.gov mailto:Latasha.goines@gsa.gov

** PP submissions must be considered recent and relevant.

Relevancy is defined as work that has been/is being performed for prior or current customer contracts/task orders/projects that are of comparable scope, size, and duration which is similar to the requirement described herein.

Recency is defined as current/former task orders/contracts/projects executed and/or completed within the past 5 years from the closing date of the solicitation. The work can be in progress at the time of solicitation submission; however, the project must be far enough along to create a performance record with the client.

Each reference provided by the offeror shall indicate whether or not a finalized CPARS record can be found in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS). If finalized, provide a copy of the finalized PPIRS record with the Appendix D submission for each reference.

Projects submitted in support of this evaluation factor should be from different clients or organizations, if possible. The Contracting Officer may contact each reference directly to obtain performance feedback from the references provided. If there is no finalized CPARS in PPIRS, the offeror SHALL submit Appendix D to those PP references provided to the Government

(in Appendix D). The past performance reference shall submit the completed questionnaire (Appendix D) directly to the Government, per the instructions on the form.

If the completed questionnaire is sent to the offeror, it will not be eligible for evaluation in response to this solicitation.

Additionally, the contracting office may obtain information in support of the PP evaluation factor from other sources regarding an offerors’ past performance to include:

(a) The Federal Awardee Performance Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) - The Government will access this system, which is intended to significantly enhance the scope of information available to Contracting Officers as they evaluate the integrity and performance of prospective awardees. Contracting officials input applicable information into the FAPIIS module of the

Contractor Performance Assessment Review System (CPARS).

(b) Other Sources: The Government reserves the right to use past performance information obtained from sources other than those identified by the offeror, to include internal and individual knowledge on specific projects performed by the offeror (or one its subcontracting or partners) from Contracting Officer’s Representatives (CORs), Contracting Officers (CO), Project

Managers (PMs) or other technical points of contact that have objective. This knowledge will be first-hand knowledge of a project performed by the contractor that aligns with the submission requirements for PP defined herein, before it is evaluated in support of this evaluation factor.

(c) The Government reserves the right to download additional finalized CPARS records from

PPIRS not provided by the offeror, but is still found by the CO to align with the submission requirements for PP as defined in this solicitation (i.e., recent/relevant).

The Government does not assume the duty to search for data to cure the problems it finds in the information provided by the Offeror. The burden of providing thorough and complete past performance information remains with the Offeror.

The Government shall determine any potential awardee “responsible” in accordance with FAR

9.104 prior to award.

PP Evaluation Standard

In evaluating PP, the Government will review how well the offeror has performed on other relevant comparable projects with respect to scope. This factor will be rated as “pass or fail”. In making this determination, the Government will review the following elements:

Quality of Services: Compliance with contract requirements, technical excellence, and accuracy of reports.

Schedule Compliance: Timeliness compared to the schedule of activities, milestones, and/or deliverables.

Cost Control: Management of the contract/task budget and cost control.

Management Controls: Responsiveness, staffing, project management.

Regulatory: Level of compliance with regulations and laws, as applicable.

NOTE: An offeror must not simply state that it is willing to perform the PWS requirements. Contractors must show they are capable of performing the work described in the PWS.

A1.4. Price

Price will be evaluated to determine the fairness and reasonableness of proposed pricing, using all means at the contracting officer’s. Price will be evaluated separate from all non-price elements of the response package. A rating will not be assigned to the evaluation of price.

The offeror shall quote FFP fully funded labor hours and labor rates. The offeror will provide the rates for each labor category for each year.

A1.5. Organizational Conflict of Interest Plan: The offeror’s Organizational Conflict of

Interest Plan will be evaluated as acceptable or unacceptable based on meeting the requirements identified in this PWS. An offeror with an unacceptable Organizational Conflict of Interest Plan will have until time of award to submit an acceptable plan or that offeror will be removed from consideration.

The plan should consist of the following sections:

A Table of Contents

Part 1 – Disclosure of existing or potential OCI’s

Part 2 – Detailed descriptions of the specific measures that are proposed to avoid, mitigate, or neutralize each one of the OCI’s described in Part 1 of the plan.