Attachment_F_Addendum_to_FAR_Clause_52.212-2__Evaluation__Commercial_Items.docx

EVALUATION

FAR 52.212 EVALUATION – COMMERCIAL ITEMS

(a) The Government will award a 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 listed in descending order of importance shall be used to evaluate offers:

Technical Supportability Past Performance Price Technical, Supportability, and Past Performance, when combined, are significantly more important than price.

(b) Ordering Periods. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all ordering periods to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the prices are significantly unbalanced during those ordering periods. Evaluation of ordering periods shall not obligate the Government to order during those timeframes.

(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 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.

Addendum to FAR Clause 52.212-2

1.0 Evaluation Procedures.

The Business Volume will be evaluated separately from the Technical Volume. Relevant information directly impacting risk in either the technical or business volumes will be exchanged between panels. Technical and Supportability will be evaluated and rated using the criteria established in the Combined Technical /Risk Rating table below that includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical rating.

Combined Technical/Risk Ratings

Table 1

Past Performance Rating. There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation rating. The first (relevancy) will be to evaluate the offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. The second (confidence) past performance evaluation will be to determine how well the offeror performed on those contracts. These Past Performance ratings are listed in the following tables:

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Table 2

In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance, as set forth in FAR 15.306(a) (2) (iv). In the event an offeror does not have past performance available, or if the past performance provided by the offeror is not capable of receiving a relevancy rating based on the table above, that particular past performance will received a relevancy rating of “Neutral.”

Past Performance Information Retrieval Systems will be accessed in accordance with NMCAR Section 5214.305(a) (2).

Performance Confidence Assessments

Table 3

2.0 Evaluation Factors

Technical. Offerors should provide detailed discussion of their ability to address their technical conformance to the requirements of the Performance Specification. At a minimum, the following factors will be assessed: crew protection, CPK weight, CPK interoperability, CPK adaptability, controls and displays, human factors and storage/transport. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s documented ability to meet or exceed the requirements listed in the Performance Specification. An offeror’s failure to meet a requirement will be evaluated as unacceptable.

Supportability. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s documented ability to support, maintain, and sustain their proposed system as discussed in the Statement of Work. The evaluation will consider the extent to which the offeror has proposed to meet or exceed the supportability requirements contained in the solicitation. This factor includes an assessment of the offeror’s proposed training capabilities, publications, and provisioning efforts.

Past Performance. There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation rating. The first (relevancy) will be to evaluate the offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. The second (confidence) past performance evaluation will be to determine how well the offeror performed on those contracts. In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror will receive a “neutral” rating and will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably for past performance.

Price. Price will be evaluated, but not assigned an adjectival rating. The Government will establish a Total Evaluated Price for each Offeror by multiplying the Offeror’s proposed unit price for each CLIN by the maximum quantity for that CLIN; the sum of these amounts will determine the total evaluated price to the Government. For CLINs with proposed stepladder pricing, random evaluation quantities will be used.

3.0 Product & Capabilities Demonstration. The Government reserves the right to witness a technical demonstration of the Offeror’s capabilities. The Offeror is required to describe, at a top level, the scope of their demonstration, which, at a minimum, should include items identified in Table 2.

Table 2. Offeror capabilities demonstration requirements

Note: No standard is established for the Capabilities Demonstration; however, the Government may take the results into consideration during the technical evaluation of final proposals. This will provide an additional comparative basis for establishing overall best value to the Government.