15R4240_-_IA_Support_-_Source_Selection_Factors_incl_Tech_Eval_Factors_-_Attachment.doc

SOURCE SELECTION/EVALUATION FACTORS

(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. The requirement will be evaluated based on technical capability, past performance, and price. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

Factor 1: Technical Capability Technical evaluation factors contractor must possess and discriminators with which to judge contractor proposals (Limited to no more than 10 pages):

1. Understand the Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) computing asset Information Technology (IT) system inclusion criteria (and exclusion from Navy Marine Corps Intranet [NMCI] services).

2. Have Navy-approved Certification and Accreditation (C&A) validators on staff to complete DoD Information Assurance Certification and Accreditation Process (DIACAP) C&A packages and Platform Information (PIT)/PIT Risk Assessments (PRAs) for transmission to the appropriate Designed Accrediting Authority (DAA).

3. Have at least two years of experience operating, interpreting, and integrating data from approved C&A tools including Host-Based Security System (HBSS), Retina, and the Gold Disk.

4. Possess the tools, methods, and processes to execute all scans, Defense Information Systems Agency (mSA) Security Technical Information Guides (STIGs) checklists, and C&A artifacts for IT systems as part of C&A package development.

5. Have at least two years of experience with Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) Information Assurance (IA), C&A review, and DAA personnel.

6. Have at least two years of experience with Naval Network Warfare Command (NNWC) and Space and Naval Warfare (SPAWAR) Information Assurance (IA), C&A review, and DAA personnel.

7. Have recent experience developing, validating, and submitting C&A packages to the Operational DAA (ODAA -NNWC) and RDT&E DAA (RDAA -NAVSEA).

8. Have recent experience achieving Authority to Operate (ATO) for C&A packages the contractor's staff has prepared, validated, and delivered to the ODAA and RDAA.

9. As a number of C&A packages at Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren Division (NSWCDD) will be classified GENSER Secret and below, the contractor must have qualified personnel that already hold Secret Clearances to execute C&A functions.

10. Must have a working knowledge and experience of DISA SnGs; must have the ability to apply and demonstrate compliance with SnGs at the Information Technology (IT) system and computing asset level for all computing operating system.

11. Must have a working knowledge of Ports, Protocols, and Service Management (PPSM) program and the DISA Category Assurance List (CAL).

12. Must know the PPS allowed for RDT&E networks and IT systems (UNR -Unclassified Navy RDT&E and CTNPP -Classified Trusted Network Protect Policy).

The following adjectival ratings/definitions shall be used for the Technical Capabilities. The combined technical risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. Combined technical risk evaluations shall utilize the combined technical risk ratings listed below.

Factor 2: Past Performance This factor focuses on relevance of corporate experience to this task and the quality of relevant experience. Experience relative to this task will be assessed by considering aspects such as the following (these do not constitute separately evaluated subfactors): quality of products and services; timeliness of performance; cost control, cost monitoring and reporting; business relations; and overall customer satisfaction.

In addition to the sources identified by the offeror, the Government may review Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and/or DOD Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) ratings and other existing past performance ratings on relevant contracts. The Government may also review other relevant past performance information contained in local files and other sources, including Federal, State, and local Government agencies, Better Business Bureaus, published media and electronic databases. General trends in a contractor's past performance will also be considered.

The following adjectival ratings/definitions shall be used for the Past Performance. The past performance relevancy rating, as defined in the table below, is the assessment of the offeror's demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract's requirements.

Factor 3: Price

The firm fixed price shall include any volume or spot discounts. Since the Government intends to award a contract without discussions with respective offerors, you are encouraged to offer your most advantageous pricing in the initial response.

The evaluation factors are listed in descending or equal order of importance. Technical Capability is the most important factor and is slightly more important than Past Performance and is significantly more important than Price. Past Performance is more important than Price.

(b) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(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.