FAR_52.212-2_Evaluation_of_Offers.pdf

52.212-2 Evaluation - Commercial Items OCT 2014

ADDENDA TO 52.212-2

EVALUATION OF OFFERS

A. General

1. An award will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal represents the best value to the Government in accordance with the evaluation criteria and factors set forth in this section considering price and non-price factors as described below.

2. This acquisition will utilize Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) source selection procedures. This is a competitive LPTA source selection. By submission of its offer, the Offeror accepts all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements. All technically acceptable offers with acceptable past performance, and price and cost reasonableness shall be treated equally except for their prices. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being determined unacceptable. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale.

B. Basis of Award

To be eligible for award, Offerors shall meet the following criteria:

1) Obtain a technical proposal rating of Acceptable

2) Obtain a past performance rating of Acceptable

3) Offer a price determined fair and reasonable by the Contracting Officer

4) Be determined responsible under FAR Part 9.104

An unacceptable rating in the technical or past performance factors listed above renders an offeror’s proposal ineligible for award. If a technical proposal receives an unacceptable rating, then the Government may not evaluate the corresponding past performance or price proposal.

C. Evaluation Factors

The purpose of the proposal evaluations is to ensure impartial and comprehensive examination of competitive proposals. Statements and representations made in the Offeror’s proposal may be subject to verification by proposal evaluators. The evaluation factors are set forth below:

Description Adjectival Rating

Factor 1 Technical Capabilities Acceptable / Unacceptable Factor 2 Past Performance Acceptable / Unacceptable Factor 3 Price with Cost Breakdown Not Adjectivally Rated

The proposal will be evaluated in accordance with the criteria set forth below:

a. RATINGS FOR FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES (Acceptable/Unacceptable)

RATING DESCRIPTION

ACCEPTABLE An affirmative statement was provided that the contractor and proposed personnel have successfully performed requirements equivalent or similar to that 1isted in attachment 1, the Performance Work Statement (PWS); AND that such has been verified by at least two but no more than three recent and relevant contracts.

UNACCEPTABLE An affirmative statement was NOT provided that the contractor and proposed personnel have successfully performed requirements equivalent or similar to that listed in attachment 1, the Performance Work Statement (PWS);

OR that such has NOT been verified by at least two but no more than three recent and relevant contracts.

Note: Offerors will need to include a definitive statement acknowledging how they will accommodate the special requirements listed in Paragraph 4.0 of the Performance Work Statement (Attachment 1).

b. RATINGS FOR FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE (Acceptable/Unacceptable)

RATING DESCRIPTION

ACCEPTABLE A fully completed Previous Contracting Efforts Narrative

Form found in Attachment 2 was submitted; AND at least 2 but not more than 3 verifiable contract actions with recent and relevant experience that are similar in scope, magnitude and complexity to this procurement were provided.

UNACCEPTABLE A fully completed Previous Contracting Efforts Narrative Form found in Attachment 2 was NOT submitted; OR at least 2 but not more than 3 verifiable contracts with recent and relevant experience that are similar in scope, magnitude and complexity to this procurement were NOT provided.

Note: An offeror without relevant past performance, or for whom information on past performance is not available, will be given a neutral rating for past performance. A neutral rating will be rated as “acceptable” for past performance in the context of this evaluation.

c. FACTOR 3: Price/Cost (Price/Cost Reasonableness)

The Government will not evaluate price adjectivally or assign strengths or weaknesses to the price proposal. The Government will analyze the proposed price using the information contained in attachment 4 to determine fair and reasonable pricing for the notional package. Attachment 4 must be completed in its entirety.

Award will be made on the basis of the lowest priced proposal that meets or exceeds the acceptability standards for the non-price factors. If the Government determines an offeror’s price to be inexplicably low or otherwise not fair and reasonable, that offeror may be eliminated from the competition without further discussion.

1. Rejection of Unrealistic Offers:

The Government may reject any proposal that is evaluated to be unrealistic in terms of program commitments, including contract terms and conditions, or unrealistically high or low cost or price.

Such unrealistic offers may be deemed to reflect an inherent lack of competence or failure to comprehend the complexity and risks of the program.

2. Source Selection Decision:

The Government shall select the source based upon an evaluation of the offeror’s technical acceptability, past performance and price/cost. The Government intends to choose the lowest realistically priced, technically acceptable, offer by a responsible offeror with acceptable past performance for award.