LPTA Evaluation Criteria 1164894.doc
DOC document 80 KB Posted
- Attached to
- FY-26 Network Hardware supplies
- Solicitation number
- 1232SA26Q0199
About this file
This is an evaluation criteria document for a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) solicitation for FY-26 Network Hardware supplies issued by the Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service under solicitation number 1232SA26Q0199. The evaluation will follow FAR 12.203 and 12.204 criteria, with award made to the offeror providing the best value to the Government. This is an unrestricted acquisition open to all responsible sources, with a small business size standard of 750 employees and North American Industry Classification Standard Code 334419.
Quotations will be evaluated using three criteria: Price (evaluated for fair and reasonableness of the base period total price, with failure to propose pricing resulting in exclusion), Technical Acceptability (requiring products to meet or exceed all salient characteristics of specified brand name items with adequate supporting documentation such as product specifications, datasheets, or brochures; quotations lacking sufficient documentation will be deemed technically unacceptable), and Past Performance (rated as Acceptable, Neutral, or Unacceptable based on demonstrated ability to meet contract requirements, lack of prior record, or documented failure respectively). The evaluation method applies lowest price technically acceptable criteria, with the Government evaluating only the lowest priced offer for technical acceptability first; if that offer is deemed technically or past-performance unacceptable, evaluation proceeds to the next lowest priced offer until identifying the lowest price offer that is both technically acceptable and possesses acceptable or neutral past performance.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| USNPRC Network Hardware FY26 SOW .pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sample Evaluation Criteria when using LPTA
Evaluation Criteria
The provision at FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation—Commercial Products and Commercial Services is not applicable to this solicitation. In lieu of this provision, quotes will be evaluated in accordance with FAR 12.203 based on the criteria listed below. Award will be made to the offeror representing the best value to the Government.
Price: Total price evaluation will be for the base period. Failure to propose pricing for the base period may result in a quotation being excluded from further consideration. The offeror’s quotation will be evaluated in accordance with FAR 12.204, to determine if it is fair and reasonable.
Technical Acceptability:
Offeror’s providing “or equal” items shall include in their quotation descriptive literature such as illustrations, drawings, or a clear reference, such as a web site to information readily available to the Contracting Officer showing that the items being quoted meets all salient characteristics. Merely stating that the items meet is not acceptable. The Contracting Officer is not responsible for locating or obtaining any information not identified in the offer.
The Technical capability will be evaluated to determine an overall rating of “acceptable” or “unacceptable”. To be considered technically acceptable, the quoted product must:
1. Meet or exceed all salient characteristics of the brand name product as specified in the solicitation.
2. Include sufficient descriptive literature or documentation (e.g., product specifications, datasheets, or brochures) to demonstrate how the proposed product meets or exceeds the required salient characteristics.
Failure to provide adequate documentation or to meet the required salient characteristics will result in a determination of technical unacceptability, and the quotation will not be considered for award.
Past Performance:
The Government may utilize any references provided by the Contractor, along with information available from past contracts/orders with the USDA and any information found using sources such as Federal Government sources or the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) to determine if the Contractor has acceptable or neutral Past Performance. Past Performance will be evaluated using the following rating system:
· Acceptable: The contractor shows a demonstrated ability to meet contract requirements in prior or current contracts, including quality of work, timeliness, cost control, business relations, and adherence to contract terms.
· Neutral: Offeror does not have a past performance record.
· Unacceptable: The contractor has a documented history of failing to meet contract requirements, including poor quality, missed deadlines, cost overruns, lack of responsiveness, or unethical behavior.
Evaluation Method:
The Government will evaluate quotations based on the lowest price technically acceptable criteria. Only the lowest priced offer will be evaluated for Technical Acceptability. Should the lowest priced offer not receive an acceptable technical or past performance rating, the process will continue in order of lowest priced offer until the lowest price, technically acceptable offer with acceptable or neutral past performance is identified.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .