Attachment_4_-_TEC.pdf

Technical Evaluation Criteria

The major evaluation factors for this solicitation include mandatory technical and cost/price factors. Prospective contractors must submit information sufficient to allow evaluation based on the following factors and criteria.

Selection of an Offeror for contract award will be based on an evaluation of proposals against the factors outlined below:

A. Quality of Content B. Technical Requirements C. Past Performance D. Section 508 (not scored) E. Price/Cost (not scored)

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 listed under each factor are of equal importance to each other.

Technical factors are of paramount consideration; however, cost is also important to the overall award decision. All evaluation factors other than cost and Section 508, when combined, are significantly more important than cost. The Government can make tradeoffs among cost and technical factors in determining which Offeror provides the best value by awarding to other than the lowest cost Offeror or other than the highest technically rated Offeror. Offeror is advised that award will be made to that Offeror whose quote provides the best overall value to the Government.

In determining which quote represents the best value and results in the lowest overall cost 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:

A. Quality of Content (50 points)

The proposal must provide detailed evidence that the Offeror understands the Statement of Work (SOW) and is able to meet all of the content requirements set forth in the SOW. The quality of the Offeror's proposal will be considered to be representative of the quality of the Offeror's products and services.

The Offeror's must describe how the proposed product will meet all of the content requirements as outlined in the SOW. This includes, but is not limited to, providing the required number of monographs, coverage of both prescription and over-the-counter medications, and written at a consumer reading level.

The Offerors must include the five requested sample English monographs and their Spanish equivalents in both XML format and an example of the final presentation format.

The Offerors shall describe their management methods and processes for the support of this product quality.

B. Technical Requirements (40 points)

The proposal must provide evidence that the Offeror’s understands the technical approach, including the technical and accessibility requirements and methods that would be employed to ensure a seamless experience for the user. General statements that the offeror understands, can, or will comply with the requirements or paraphrasing of the SOW will not be sufficient.

The Offeror must demonstrate an in-depth knowledge and understanding of the requirements outlined in in requirement definitions for this SOW.

The Offeror must describe how the proposed product will meet all the Technical and Accessibility Requirements.

The Offeror shall describe their procedure and turn-around time for content updates and response to emergency fixes required under Deliverables/Delivery Schedule.

The Offeror shall include an effective approach to meet the requirements under the Transition Plan.

C. Past Performance (10 points)

The assessment of the Offeror’s past performance shall be used as a means of evaluating the relative capacity of the Offeror and the other competitors.

The Offeror’s shall identify at least three contracts with the Federal Government and/or commercial customers, with accompanying Web site URLs, that demonstrate recent and relevant past performance of a similar complexity and magnitude to what is described in the Statement of Work. The Government will conduct reference checks in order to determine the Offeror’s past performance.

The past performance must demonstrate a reputation for cooperative behavior and commitment to customer satisfaction, adherence to contract schedules, including reports and performance quality control.

D. Section 508 (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, VPAT or equivalent and supporting documentation) will be eligible for any additional merit consideration.

Section 508 Acceptance Criteria

The “Drug Information Source for MedlinePlus” delivered as a result of this solicitation will be accepted based in part on satisfaction of identified Section 508 requirements for accessibility. The “Drug Information Source for MedlinePlus” 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.

E. 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.