ETT_eval_&_instructions.pdf

Attachment 4 1 | P a g e

INSTRUCTIONS:

The following section defines specific functional requirements that the enterprise system must satisfy.

For each requirement, offerors should indicate whether the offered products will:

1) satisfy the requirement “out of the box”

2) satisfy the requirement after specialized configuration of the installed system

3) satisfy the requirement after deployment of customized code

4) not satisfy the requirement (vendor must explain how the business needs could be supported without satisfying the functional requirement)

Vendor shall deploy a solution that satisfies all functional requirements within six months of award. If the proposed software does not meet all requirements out of the box, then offerors must provide a plan for configuration and/or customization of the software that will meet this deadline.

The government also expects that the business needs of the NIH technology transfer community will continue to evolve over time. Offerors shall provide an explanation of the degree to which future needs could be addressed by changing configuration settings within the system rather than by custom software development.

Offerors shall provide proposed transition plans for the implementation of their proposed solution – and identify potential problems and possible solutions. Data from ten different legacy systems will need to be migrated to the enterprise system. Offerors shall describe their proposed methodologies and available system capabilities to support these migrations.

VOLUME I: TECHNICAL

TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS:

The evaluation factors are used by the technical evaluation committee when reviewing the technical proposals. Adjectival ratings will be assigned for each criterion. The factors and sub-factors below are listed in descending order of relative importance unless identified otherwise.

1. Factor 1 – Technical Factors

2. Factor 2 – Corporate Experience

3. Factor 3 - Past Performance

The Offeror shall demonstrate the ability, resources, and experience required to perform the requirements in the SOW, including the detailed procedures and methods to be used. All information must be presented in sufficient depth for the Government to make a comprehensive evaluation of the Offeror’s understanding of the SOW and their capability for successful performance.

Pricing Information shall not appear anywhere in the Technical Volume (I), which shall address only the technical requirements.

Offerors shall provide a technical proposal that includes the areas listed below.

Attachment 4 2 | P a g e

Factor 1 – Technical Factors

Technical approach - NIAID will evaluate the offeror's technical approach based on the information contained in the proposal to determine the extent of its understanding of the requirements, including the soundness of the offeror's proposed methodology(s) to effectively meet and comply with the tasks and requirements outlined in the SOW.

Sub-factor 1 - Functional Requirements – The offeror shall demonstrate their ability to address functional requirements listed in SOW/Solicitation.

Sub-factor 2 - Customize Software – The offeror shall clearly demonstrate their ability to customize software within 6 months of award.

Factor 2 – Corporate Experience

NIAID will evaluate the offeror's corporate experience examples submitted to determine the extent to which the offeror's general background, experience, and qualifications demonstrates its ability to perform similar services for biomedical research facility(s).

Sub-factor 1 - Corporate Experience - The offeror shall demonstrate at least 5 (five) years of experience performing similar services as the requirements in the SOW.

These technical factors will be evaluated using the following rating scheme:

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 - Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Unacceptable - Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is un-awardable.

Factor 3 - Past Performance

The Offeror shall provide examples of past performance conducted within the last three (3) years for similar work of a similar type and scope as the current requirements for federal, state, or local government agencies and/or commercial customers. Three (3) examples are suggested. If offeror has no similar past

Attachment 4 3 | P a g e performance it should include a statement to that effect in its offer. The government reserves the right to consider past performance data obtained from sources other than those provided by the offeror in its proposal. For each of the contracts, the offeror shall provide the following information:

Contract number

Client’s name, address, and point of contact, including telephone number and email address

Dollar value

Period of Performance

Narrative describing the requirement and its relevance to the current requirement

Name of contracting officer or point of contact, telephone number, and email address

Key Personnel (please highlight those individuals who worked on the similar project(s) and are also being proposed for this effort).

The past performance evaluation results are an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the minimum past performance solicitation requirements. This assessment is based on the offeror’s record of similar and recent past performance information that pertains to the services outlined in the solicitation/SOW requirements.

The past performance criteria will be evaluated using the following rating scheme:

Very Similar - Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation.

Similar - Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Similar - Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Similar - Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

VOLUME II: PRICING

Your price proposal shall be a separate volume from your technical proposal. All costs must be included in the proposal.

The price evaluation will include price completeness and accuracy, price realism, price reasonableness, and total price of the Government. The Government will consider all costs associated with each proposal as part of our best value analysis.

Technical and price/cost factors will be evaluated separately and applied in the determination of best value. NIAID will look at the totality of the offeror's proposal for understanding of the work. Technical factors are significantly more important than price.

Attachment 4 4 | P a g e

FAILURE TO PROPOSE PRICING FOR EACH LINE ITEM MAY RESULT IN ELIMINATION

FROM CONSIDERATION OF THE AWARD.

INVOICES

Invoices shall be submitted MONTHLY or QUARTERLY in arrears upon completion of service.

PAGE LIMITS

Thirty (15) pages for Volume I.

No page limit for Volume II: Pricing.

FORMATTING

Each page shall by Letter size of 8.5 x 11 inches with 1-inch margins. Paragraphs single spaced.

Minimum font size and style of 10-point Times New Roman for Text, 9-point font in the Arial family for

CLIN Item Base

Period

Cost

Option

Period 1

Cost

Option

Period 2

Cost

Option

Period 3

Cost

Option

Period 4

Cost

Total

Software

License Fees

User License

Fees

Support Fees

Hosting Fees

Initial implementation and configuration

Customization 1

– [list specific activity proposed]

Customization 2

– [list specific activity proposed]

Total:

Attachment 4 5 | P a g e

Tables, and 8-point font in the Arial family for Graphics. Tables and graphics may be landscape formal;

all other text must be portrait format.

If the offeror uses a different format (font size, margin, etc.), the government reserves the right to adjust the proposal to fit the parameters of the format as stated in the solicitation; and if this results in the proposal exceeding the page limitations in any one area, the government will not consider those excess pages.

The proposal shall utilize the Microsoft word, excel, or PDF.