LPTA Evaluation Criteria - OpenFOAM_9-4-20.docx

Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) Evaluation Criteria for Technical Support and Maintenance of Open FOAM Software

1.0 Basis for Award

The Government’s selection for an awardee will be made on the basis of the lowest priced quote meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for the non-cost factors in accordance with FAR 13.106-2(b) and FAR 15.101-2, lowest price technically acceptable source selection process. The purchase order will be awarded to the offeror who is deemed responsible by the Contracting Officer, in accordance with the General Standards for contractor responsibility at FAR 9.104-1, and whose proposal conforms to all of the solicitation’s requirements (including stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information) and is assessed, based on the evaluation factors below, to represent the lowest price technically acceptable.

2.0 Evaluation Factors & Evaluation Approach

All proposals will be evaluated in a fair and consistent manner. All proposals will be subject to evaluation by a team of Government personnel. The offeror whose proposal is determined to provide the lowest priced proposal meeting the acceptability standards for non-cost factors will be awarded the purchase order.

The Government may reject any proposal evaluated to be unrealistic in terms of program commitments, including contract terms and conditions, or unrealistically high or low priced when compared to Government estimates, such that the proposal is deemed to reflect an inherent lack of competence or failure to comprehend the complexity and risks of the program.

The Government reserves the right to award based on initial proposals. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award the purchase order without discussions with the offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306). However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions and request proposal revisions if it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government.

Factor 1 – Technical

In order to achieve an Acceptable rating in the Technical Factor, the offeror’s proposal must clearly meet the following minimum requirements:

a. Technical Approach: The offeror’s proposal shall demonstrate a thorough understanding of the minimum requirements as defined in the Performance Work Statement (PWS), specifically PWS Section 4.0. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which it demonstrates a clear and complete understanding of all requirements involved including offeror’s existing capabilities, knowledge and expertise in providing the requested items and meeting the requirements presented by the PWS.

Factor 2 - Price

1. The Total Evaluated Price will be determined by summing the price proposed on the Line Item CLIN. This Total Evaluated Price will then be evaluated for reasonableness in accordance with price analysis techniques at FAR 15.404-1(b). Price will not be scored.

2. An offeror must propose on the Line Item to be considered for award.

3. Adequate competition is anticipated for this purchase order. However, in the event only one offer is received, the Government reserves the right to perform a cost analysis IAW FAR 15.404-1(c). If the Government determines adequate price competition was not obtained and/or if the total evaluated price cannot be deemed fair and reasonable, the Government reserves the right to request cost or pricing data and to evaluate such data utilizing the proposal analysis techniques delineated in the FAR 15.404-1 as deemed appropriate. Therefore, in instances when only one offer is received and the quote is $2,000,000.00 or more, the Contracting Officer shall obtain Certified Cost or Pricing Data. Offers under $2,000,000.00 require cost or pricing data, but such cost or pricing data is not required to be certified by the offeror. Cost or Pricing Data or Other than certified cost or pricing data shall be provided upon request IAW FAR 15.403. This information will be evaluated for magnitude and reasonableness and may be adjusted from a technical and cost perspective using cost analysis to determine the most probable cost to the Government. Offerors shall utilize a Microsoft Excel file format with formulas intact when submitting their Price/Cost quote FAR 15.403-5(b) (1).

4. Price/Cost Inconsistencies: A proposal is presumed to represent an offeror’s best effort to respond to the solicitation. Each initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms for award for this purchase order. Any inconsistencies in performance or price should be explained in the proposal. Any significant inconsistencies, if unexplained, raise a fundamental issue of the offeror’s understanding of the nature and scope of work required and its financial ability to perform the contract, and may be grounds for rejection of the proposal.

5. Unbalanced Pricing: The Government may determine a proposal is unacceptable if the prices proposed are materially unbalanced. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, one or more contract line items is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the applicable of price analysis techniques. In accordance with FAR 15.404-1(g), a proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

Source Selection Sensitive – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104