Music Dir- Section M.pdf

Evaluation Factors

1. Basis of Contract Award.

The award will be made based on the best overall (i.e., best value) offer that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the three (3) evaluation factors: Technical, Audition, and Price. The Technical factor will be evaluated for acceptability as a pass/fail gate for advancement to the evaluation of Factor 2 - Audition. The Audition factor is more important than the Price factor. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for all the non-price factors. Offerors will be cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest cost offered.

2. Selection Process. Offers will be evaluated using the criteria listed in “Evaluation Approach and Factors/Sub- factors for Award. Failure to include all information requested may adversely affect the evaluation. A quotation that merely reiterates or promises to accomplish the requirements of the RFQ will be considered unresponsive. An offer that is orderly, sufficiently documented, and easy for the Government to understand will enable the Government to perform a thorough and fair evaluation.

The Contracting Officer will begin the evaluation process by conducting a compliance review to determine the basic quotation adequacy prior to providing the offers to the evaluation team. This will determine which quotes are deemed responsive and non- responsive in response to this solicitation. The Government also reserves the right to obtain additional information solely for the purpose of making a responsible determination from the offers’. Requests for responsibility information do not constitute discussions. By submission of the offer, you agree that all items proposed will be utilized for the duration of the contract.

3. Evaluation Approach and Factors for Award. The award will be made based on the best overall (i.e., best value) offer that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the three (3) evaluation factors: Technical, Audition, and Price. The Technical factor will be evaluated for acceptability as a pass/fail gate for advancement to the evaluation of Factor 2 - Audition. The Audition factor is more important than the Price factor. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for all the non-price factors. Offerors will be cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest cost offered.

Factor 1: The government will evaluate this factor for technical acceptability. An offer will be acceptable if it meets the minimum requirements listed below. An offer will be determined “Unacceptable” if it is not rated “Acceptable” in all 3 elements listed below.

*The government will evaluate whether the staffing plan is sufficient to fulfill performance requirements at all 5 chapel services.

*The government will evaluate whether the proposed musicians are capability to read music based on their qualifications, as required in PWS Paragraph 6.

*The government will evaluate whether the offeror meets the capability to develop worship plans.

Factor 2: Auditions

Offerors who are rated Acceptable in Factor 1 will be contacted to schedule an audition for this requirement. Audition will consist of offeror’s ability to read music and play (piano and/or organ); ability to maintain the appropriate music tempo based on the congregation; and display their ability to play a song at random.

Factor 2 - Auditions evaluation combines the Technical rating and the Technical Risk rating into a single assessment for each factor/sub-factor. The Audition factor is a non-price factor other than past performance and is considered a Technical Factor for evaluation purposes. The rating reflects the degree to which the proposed approach meets or does not meet the minimum performance or capability requirements through an assessment of strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, and risks of the proposal. The Technical/Risk factors will utilize the ratings listed below.

Rating Description Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Acceptable Offer submitted documentation and indicates a good approach to this requirement. Offeror strengths outweighed any noted weaknesses.

Unsuccessful performance deemed to be LOW.

Marginal Offer submitted documentation but does not indicate an adequate approach or understanding to this requirement. Offeror has noted weaknesses that outweigh strengths. Unsuccessful performance deemed to be HIGH

Unacceptable Offer submitted documentation that does not indicate a level of understanding for this requirement. Offeror has two or more weaknesses. Unsuccessful performance deemed to be AVOIDABLE.

Factor 3: Price

Each offeror’s price proposal will be evaluated (but not rated) for award purposes. As part of price evaluation, the Government will evaluate its option to extend services (see FAR Clause 52.217-8) by adding one-half of the offeror's final option period price to the offeror's total price.

The total evaluated price is the sum of the base period, first option, second option, third option, fourth option, and one-half of the fourth option. Offerors are required only to price the base and four options. Offerors shall not submit a price for the potential one-half year extension of services period.