N3904026R3065 Attachment 4_Addendum to 52.212-2 Evaluation.pdf

Addendum to 52.212-2 Evaluation—Commercial Products and Commercial Services (Deviation 2026-O0038)

The following provision is tailored IAW FAR Part 12.205 and supplements the provision, FAR 52.212-2:

The evaluation procedures will be in accordance with FAR 12.201-2 and FAR 15.202, which grants the Contracting Officer broad discretion in fashioning suitable evaluation procedures. The Government intends to award one Firm Fixed Price contract resulting from this solicitation. Moreover, the Government reserves the right to award no contract at all, depending on the quality of quotes submitted and availability of funds. The Government reserves the right to only evaluate non-price factors of the quoters most likely to receive an award based on total price. The Government shall select the vendor whose quotation is determined to be the best value to the Government considering technical, past performance, and price. The Government reserves the right to make multiple awards if, after considering the additional administrative costs versus the cost savings, it is in the Government’s best interest to do so. Evaluation factors other than price when combined are significantly more important than price than price.

The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible quoter whose quote conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. For a contractor to be considered a responsible quoter, the Government will ensure that the quoter is in compliance with the general standards set forth in FAR 9.104-1. This will include reviewing and ensuring quoters are eligible to receive an award under applicable laws and regulations.

The following factors shall be used to evaluate quotes:

Factor I – Technical: The Government will evaluate the degree to which the technical approach demonstrates a thorough understanding of the requirements and the methods and techniques for accomplishing the PWS tasks and deliverables are demonstrated in accordance with 52.212-1 Factor 1 – Technical Capability. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s technical approach using a combined technical/risk rating, as described in the table below. The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. Quotes rated Marginal or Unacceptable for Factor I – Technical will not be eligible for award and will not be further evaluated.

The government will evaluate whether the offeror has demonstrated that they have a detailed, specific plan for accomplishing the PWS tasks and deliverables.

The government will evaluate whether the offeror has demonstrated that they have the availability and readiness of its facilities, equipment, personnel, or other resources required to successfully perform the requirement.

The government will evaluate whether the offeror has demonstrated that they have the proper management controls in place to assure quality and schedule accountability.

The government will evaluate whether the offeror has demonstrated that they have the proper resources to successfully meet the full scale of this requirement while acknowledging and complying with FAR 52.219-14.

The government will evaluate whether the offeror has demonstrated that it possesses adequate financial resources to successfully source and provide the full scale of this requirement.

Rating Definition Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contain multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal Proposal does not demonstrate an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high. Proposal is unawardable.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.

Factor II – Past Performance: In evaluating a quoter’s past performance, the Government may consider information from sources outside the quoter’s proposal. These considered sources will be held to the same parameters of evaluation as the quoter’s provided past performance information. The Government may review Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) rating on other relevant contracts, regulatory agency databases, past performance questionnaires, information submitted by each Quoter with its proposal, and other existing past performance information contained in either local or other databases, or from other Government sources or non-Government sources. General trends in a contractor’s performance may also be considered. The Government reserves the right to contact references provided by the quoter, and otherwise verify statements and representations made in the quoter’s proposal but also reserves the right not to contact all references.

A performance rating will be established for each of those relevant efforts utilizing same performance rating definitions contained in the table below:

Rating Description Acceptable Based on the quoter’s performance records, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the quoter will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Quoter’s performance record is unknown.

Unacceptable Based on the quoter’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the quoter will successfully perform the required effort.

Once all data has been gathered, the Government will assign an Acceptable or Unacceptable rating considering the Quoter’s performance. In the case of a quoter without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the quoter may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the quoter shall be determined to have unknown (or "neutral") past performance. However, acceptable past performance will be considered more favorable than neutral past performance.

Factor III- Price: Price will be evaluated for reasonableness in accordance with FAR 12.203 and FAR 15.202. The total evaluated price will be calculated by multiplying the unit price by quantity, resulting in the total CLIN price.

At minimum, offeror(s) must be able to quote the full quantity specified under at least one or more full Contract Line Item(s)(CLINs) for units meeting or exceeding all PWS specifications.

Vendors responding to this solicitation are advised that, prior to award, the Government may request vendors to submit additional information/data to support price reasonableness such as copies of paid invoices for the same or similar items, sales history for the same or similar items, price list with effective date and/or copies of catalog pages along with any applicable discounts. Failure to submit the requested information may result in disqualification of the submitted quote.