LPTA Evaluation Criteria for a Service Contract 1162890.docx

DOCX document 25 KB Posted

Attached to
Fire Suppression System Repair
Solicitation number
1232SA26Q0080
Issued by

About this file

This document details the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) Evaluation Criteria for a service contract issued by the Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service. The solicitation (Number 1232SA26Q0080) is for Fire Suppression System Repair, an unrestricted requirement with a $25 million small business size standard. The anticipated contract is a firm-fixed price award to be completed within 90 days, with the government intending to make a single award.

Evaluation criteria include three primary components: Price, Technical Acceptability, and Past Performance. Quotations will be assessed on pricing, the contractor's ability to meet Statement of Work requirements, and prior performance history. Technical evaluation will result in an "acceptable" or "unacceptable" rating, with only the lowest-priced offer being evaluated for technical and performance acceptability. Contractors must provide detailed explanations of service capabilities, potential limitations, and performance history to be considered responsive.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
SOW Emergency Fire Suppression System Repair DBNRRC.docx DOCX document
Wage Rates.pdf 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 for a Service Contract

Evaluation-Commercial Items The provision at Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.212-2 Evaluation of Commercial Items 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:

Any quantity price discounts and discounts for prompt payment should be included in this section. Total price evaluation will for the total period of performance. Failure to propose pricing for the total period. The offeror’s quotation will be evaluated in accordance with FAR 12.204, to determine if it is fair and reasonable.

Technical Acceptability:

Technical Acceptability will be evaluated to receive an overall rating of "acceptable" or "unacceptable." This will be based on the offeror's ability to provide a sound and compliant approach that meets all requirements and shows a thorough understanding of them. It is the contractor's responsibility to ensure their quotation clearly demonstrates their capability to meet these requirements. All offerors must provide the following minimum information and documentation with their quotations to be considered responsive and have their offers evaluated:

· Detailed explanation of the offeror’s ability to perform the required services. A simple statement of capabilities will not suffice. The offeror must address how they will accomplish the requirements of the Statement of Work (SOW).

· Detailed explanation of any requirement listed in the SOW that cannot be successfully accomplished by the offeror. Offerors are advised that the USDA intends to award without discussions so any exceptions may cause the quotation to be found technically unacceptable.

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 .