Mandatory_and_Evaluation_Criteria.pdf

TITLE: Audio Conferencing

EVALUATION FACTORS

A. Mandatory Qualifications Criteria

Listed below are mandatory qualification criteria. The offeror shall include all information which documents and/or supports the qualification criteria in one clearly marked section of its technical proposal. The qualification criteria establish conditions that must be met at the time of receipt of the initial proposal by the Contracting Officer in order for your proposal to be considered any further for award.

1. The offeror shall have Unique Identifiers. CSR requires the capability to issue

PIN numbers or passwords to participants that must be used to access the specified teleconference. This will limit attendance and provide CSR with the ability to run reports after the meeting detailing all of the participants who dialed into the meeting (based on a lookup associated with the pin).

2. The Offeror shall have the ability to provide audio-conferencing services and support for clients both domestically throughout the United States and internationally, at any time during the calendar year.

3. The Offeror shall have Web interface for managing calls; Users shall have the ability to develop and manage a phonebook in the system in order to simultaneously dial multiple contacts in the directory (Call List). Users shall also have the ability to monitor and manage in real-time participants attending the meetings.

4. The Offeror shall not use a Cloud or Unified Communications based solution.

B. Evaluation Criteria and Total Points Possible:

1. The major evaluation factors for this solicitation include technical capability, experience, past performance factors, and cost/price factors. Although technical factors are of paramount consideration in the award, cost/price is also important to the overall contract award decision. All evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. The Government intends to make an award to that offeror whose proposal provides the best overall value to the Government.

2. The evaluation will be based on the demonstrated capabilities of the Prospective

Contractors in relation to the needs of the project as set forth in the solicitation.

The merits of each proposal will be evaluated carefully. Each proposal must document the feasibility of successful implementation of the requirements of the solicitation. Offerors must submit information sufficient to evaluate their proposals based on the detailed factors listed below.

1. Technical Approach – up to 60 points

The proposal demonstrated a thorough understanding of the Statement of Work requirements and described an approach for each requirement that demonstrates the achievement of timely and acceptable performance. The proposal provided evidence of the Offeror’s ability to provide the requirements in the Statement of Work.

The proposal demonstrated the Offeror’s ability to provide the level of Technical Support required by the Statement of Work.

The proposal contained a Business Continuity Plan that describes the Offeror’s plan for notification, recovery, and reconstitution in the event of system failure in compliance with the Maximum Tolerable Downtime provided in the Statement of Work.

The proposal demonstrated the Offeror’s ability to manage the requirements expressed in the Statement of Work. The timely delivery of quality services is thoroughly demonstrated and evidence of specific methods and techniques for completing each requirement was provided.

2. Past Performance Factor – up to 40 points

Offeror's past performance information will be evaluated subsequent to the technical evaluation. However, the evaluation will not be conducted on any offeror whose proposal is determined to be technically unacceptable.

The evaluation will be based on information obtained from references provided by the offeror and other relevant past performance information obtained from other sources known to the Government.

The Government will assess the relative risks associated with each offeror.

Performance risks are those associated with an offeror's likelihood of success in performing the acquisition requirements as indicated by that offeror's record of past performance.

The assessment of performance risk is not intended to be the product of a mechanical or mathematical analysis of an offeror's performance on a list of contracts but rather the product of subjective judgment by the Government after it considers all available and relevant information.

When assessing performance risks, the Government will focus on the past performance of the offeror as it relates to all acquisition requirements, such as the offeror's record of performing according to specifications, including standards of good workmanship; the offeror's record of controlling and forecasting costs; the offeror's

Criterion Number

Description

Total Points

Possible 1 Technical Approach 60 2 Past Performance 40 Total Points Possible 100 adherence to contract schedules, including the administrative aspects of performance;

the offeror's reputation for reasonable and cooperative behavior and commitment to customer satisfaction; and generally, the offeror's business-like concern for the interest of the customer.

The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in the offeror's performance.

The lack of a relevant performance record may result in an unknown performance risk assessment, which will neither be used to the advantage nor disadvantage of the offeror.

To assist with the determination of relevancy the Offeror must provide the number of meetings supported per year for each past performance reference.

Non-Cost Evaluation Factors:

1. Section 508 Compliance -- Evaluation of Electronic and Information Technology

Accessibility Factor

(a) The offeror's proposal must demonstrate compliance with the "Electronic and

Information Technology Accessibility Provisions" set forth by the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (also referred to as the "Access Board") in 36 CFR part 1194 for all electronic and information technology (EIT) products and services developed, acquired, maintained, or used under this contract/order, including EIT deliverables such as electronic documents and reports.

(b) If your proposal does not include a completed HHS "Section 508 Product

Assessment Template" (hereafter referred to as the "Template") which demonstrates that EIT products and services proposed support applicable Section 508 accessibility standards, or, if the completed "Template" included in your proposal is considered "noncompliant," and the Government includes your proposal in the competitive range (for competitive proposals), or if the Government holds discussions with the selected source (for sole source acquisitions), you will be afforded the opportunity to further discuss, clarify or modify the "Template" during discussions and in your Final Proposal Revision (FPR). If your "Template" is still considered "noncompliant" by the Government after discussions, your proposal may not be considered further for award.

2. Information Systems Security Plan

The offeror must include in its proposal an Information Systems Security Plan that is in compliance with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Cyber Security Program and in accordance with the statement of work that requires the contractor to

(1) develop a federal information system at the contractor or subcontractor’s facility; (2) have access to a federal information system (e.g. e-mail); or (3) host and/or maintain a federal information system at the contractor or subcontractor’s facility (e.g., when data is kept off-site). The ISSP must ensure that the contractor is taking precautions to keep the government’s information safe. The evaluation of the ISSP will not be conducted on any offeror whose proposal is determined to be technically unacceptable.

3. Cost / Price Evaluation

a) The Offeror(s) cost/price proposal will be evaluated for reasonableness. For a price to be reasonable, it must represent a price to the government that a prudent person would pay when consideration is given to prices in the market.

b) Although technical factors are of paramount consideration in the award, cost/price is also important to the overall contract award decision. All evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. The Government intends to make an award(s) to that offeror whose proposal provides the best overall value to the Government.

4. Evaluation of Options

a) It is anticipated the award from this solicitation will contain option provisions and periods. It is anticipated that the award will contain two 12 month option periods executable under FAR 52.217-9, Option to Extend the Term of the Contract, (Mar 2000). In addition, it is anticipated that the award will contain one 6 month option executable under FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services (Nov 1999).

b) In accordance with FAR Clause 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options, (Jul 1990), the

Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the options.

TITLE: Audio Conferencing