Tech_Eval_Criteria_NIHLM2015484.pdf

Article Level Historical Journal Scanning and XML Preparation for PubMed Central National Library of Medicine Public Services Division

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

GENERAL

Selection of an Offeror for contract award will be based on an evaluation of proposals against the factors outlined below. The factors in order of importance are:

1. Understanding the Requirement & Technical Approach

2. Management Approach

3. Past Performance & Corporate Capability

4. Personnel

5. Section 508

6. Price/Cost

TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

The evaluation factors are used by the technical evaluation committee when reviewing the technical proposals. The factors below are listed in the order of relative importance with weights assigned for evaluation purposes. Subfactors are listed in order of relative importance.

Technical factors are of paramount consideration in the award of the task order; however, cost is also important to the overall award decision. All evaluation factors other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost. The Government can make tradeoffs between cost and technical factors in determining which Offeror proposes the best value by awarding to other than the lowest cost Offeror or other than the highest technically rated Offeror.

Offerors are advised that award will be made to that Offeror whose quote provides the best overall value to the Government.

Offerors are advised that each quotation may be subjected to a price analysis, as determined to be appropriate by the Government.

In determining which quote represents the best value and results in the lowest overall price alternative (considering price, special features, administrative costs, etc.) to meet the Government's needs, the Government shall evaluate quotes using the following technical evaluation criteria, which are listed in the order of relative importance with weights assigned for evaluation purposes:

FACTOR WEIGHT

1. Understanding the Requirement & Technical Approach (35%)

The Offeror must demonstrate a thorough knowledge and understanding of the work requirements as outlined in the SOW and its appendices. This includes the methodologies, processes and techniques used to successfully complete the requirements described in the Statement of Work and appendices. Specifically, the Offeror must demonstrate the ability to use high-quality, industry standard scanners to convert NLM collection materials into article level PDF files, and to produce full page images of each page (TIFF) and create all derivative files and XML documents, in accordance with the SOW and appendices.

The Offeror must demonstrate a thorough understanding of the customer’s requirement to create article-level scanned TIFF and derivative files.

The Offeror must demonstrate how to correctly utilize the customer’s hierarchy of instructions in order to proceed in the event of what may appear to be a conflict in the instructions.

The Offeror must demonstrate how they will work to prevent damage to NLM’s already fragile collection materials.

The Offeror must demonstrate a logical approach to how the tasks will be successfully completed with the identified resources. The Offeror shall describe an approach that demonstrates the achievement of timely and acceptable performance of tasks.

The Offeror must address how they will conform to the quality control and quality assurance methods that will be implemented in the performance of this project.

2. Management Approach (25%)

The Offeror shall provide sufficient detail to demonstrate how they will accomplish the tasks outlined it the Statement of Work and appendices, including a management plan. The management plan must include an effective communications plan with the NLM project officer and technical staff as needed.

The Offeror’s management approach will be evaluated based on the methods proposed for organizing and administering work flow in order to successfully accomplish tasks described in the Statement of Work and appendices. Offerors will be evaluated based on the approach to supervising staff, managing work distribution, ensuring efficient collection material pick-up from and delivery back to NLM, providing appropriate physical and environmental controls for collection storage space at their facility, ensuring quality control, and the ability to provide timely and accurate deliverables.

The Offerors will be evaluated on their description of how the company will assume responsibility for the tasks identified in the Statement of Work and appendices with minimal disruption of existing processes and services.

3. Past Performance & Corporate Capability (20%)

The Offeror must demonstrate a history of successful performance providing similar services. The past performance shall demonstrate the contractor’s background and experience with projects of a similar size and similar technical requirements.

The Offeror’s corporate past performance will be evaluated on the relevance of performance documented, submitted project summaries relating to the type of work, complexity, and technical applicability of experience.

The Government will conduct reference checks in order to determine the Offeror’s corporate past performance. The Offeror shall provide a point of contact (name and telephone number), for each key personnel proposed and for each contracted project listed, who can attest to past performance. Relevant contracts and projects referenced must have been completed within the past five (5) years or currently in progress for services and support similar to the requirements of the statement of work.

The Offeror’s corporate capabilities will be evaluated based on the Offeror’s description and discussion of its corporation (and any proposed subcontractors) demonstrating corporate resources and capabilities to perform the tasks contained in the statement of work.

4. Personnel (20%)

The Offeror shall include a detailed description of the experience for all staff proposed, including the proposed key personnel which clearly identifies the ability to meet the requirements of the SOW and appendices.

Staffing plans should include proposed staff, their roles and responsibilities as they pertain to requirements of the SOW and appendices.

Resumes of staff should be included and should reflect the length and variety of experience working on similar size projects with similar technical requirements and clearly demonstrate relevant training and experience. The resumes of Project Supervisor and Project Manager shall reflect their experience and ability to coordinate and manage the contract requirements.

5. Section 508 Evaluation Factor (not scored)

Responses to this solicitation will only be considered for award after it has been determined that the proposal adequately addresses the requirements for Section 508.

Only proposals which contain adequate information to document their responsiveness to the Section 508 requirements (e.g. a completed GPAT) will be eligible for any additional merit consideration.

Section 508 Acceptance Criteria o The “Article Level Historical Journal Scanning XML Preparation for Pub

Med Central” delivered as a result of this solicitation will be accepted based in part on satisfaction of identified Section 508 requirements for accessibility.

The “Article Level Historical Journal Scanning XML Preparation for Pub Med Central” delivered must include a completed GPAT, a sample of which is included as a part of this solicitation and will be evaluated as acceptable or unacceptable but will not be scored.

6. Price/Cost (not scored) Technical Factors are more important than cost or price. Selection of the firm to perform this task order will be based on the Government’s assessment of the best overall value.