Attachment_7_Section_M.docx

Attachment 7

Section M – Evaluation Factors for Award

Dated 2/21/2019

M-1.0 Basis of Award

The Government intends to make award on a best value basis using trade-offs. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

Factor 1 - Technical Approach Factor 2 - Technical Capability Factor 3 - Past Performance Factor 4 – Small Business Participation Factor 5- Price (evaluated but not rated)

Technical Approach and Technical Capability are of equal importance and shall be more important than Past Performance. Past Performance shall be more important than Small Business Participation. The non-price factors when combined are more important than price.

As prescribed by 52.215-1, the Government may award on the basis of initial offers received, without discussions. Therefore, each initial offer should contain the offeror’s best terms from a business and technical standpoint.

The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

M-1.1 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 Approach (Factor 1) and Technical Capability (Factor 2) will be evaluated using the Combined Technical/Risk Rating table below.

The technical rating evaluates the quality of the offeror’s technical solution for meeting the Government's requirement with respect to the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies to determine the technical rating.

Combined Technical/Risk Rating Table

A rating of Unacceptable in any evaluated non-price factor will render the proposal unacceptable. Unacceptable proposals are ineligible for award without discussions.

Past Performance Rating. There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation rating. The first (Past Performance Relevancy Rating) 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 (Past Performance Confidence Assessments) 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

Performance Confidence Assessments

M-2.0 Evaluation Factors

M-2.1 Technical Approach – Factor 1. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s documented approach to meet or exceed the stated requirements in the Statement of Work (SOW) and Performance Specification (PS). The Government will evaluate the extent to which the offeror’s proposal provides a detailed, complete, and logical methodology for performing all tasks required by the SOW/PS. Incomplete, inefficient, or duplicative approaches may be evaluated as having a greater risk of unsuccessful performance.

M-2.2 Technical Capability – Factor 2. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s documented capability to perform all the requirements of the SOW/PS. This will include an evaluation of the offeror’s facilities, equipment, and workforce. The Government will evaluate each offeror’s proposed throughout. An offeror’s ability to exceed the maximum requirement of 3 RTCH SLEP’s per month will be evaluated more favorably. Failure to document the ability to meet the minimum requirement of 1 RTCH SLEP’s per month will be evaluated as a deficiency and make the offeror ineligible for award.

M-2.3 Past Performance – Factor 3. Offerors will be evaluated based upon their ability to substantiate credible examples of past performance and shall be inclusive of delivery schedule compliance, product quality, and overall customer satisfaction. The Government will use the tables above to assign a relevancy rating as well as a confidence assessment. While each contract reference will be assigned a relevancy rating, there will only be a single overall confidence assessment assigned for each offeror.

Past performance will be evaluated for relevancy based on the Offeror’s experience performing tasks similar in size, scope, and/or complexity. Performance within the past three years shall also be evaluated to determine the level of risk posed on the basis of customer satisfaction with the Offeror’s prior performance. The past performance evaluation is separate from the responsibility determination required by FAR Subpart 9.1.

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 15.305(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 confidence rating of “Neutral Confidence.”

Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) will be accessed.

M-2.4 Small Business Participation – Factor 4.

The Government will evaluate each Offeror’s Small Business Participation Plan against the Small Business goals in Section L as follows:

Small Business Participation Plan Ratings

M-2.5 Price – Factor 5. Price will be evaluated, but not rated. The Government will calculate an "Evaluated Price to the Government" for each Offeror's proposal by adding together the following:

The Government will establish a, "Total Evaluated Price to the Government" for each offeror by multiplying the offeror's proposed price for each priced CLIN/SLIN (including any option CLINs) listed in Section B and random evaluation quantities used for each CLIN; the sum of these will determine the total evaluated price to the Government.