TECHNICAL_EVALUATION_CRITERIA_new0424.docx

TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

Performance Plan 40 points

This factor shall be scored on the offeror’s demonstrated understanding of the requirement and the ability to meet the requirements of the Statement of Work. Standard Operating Procedures, describing the offeror’s methods of analyses are requested as part of their technical proposal submission. Specifically, offeror’s must describe the procedures to be used for sampling the diet samples prior to analyses, methods to be used for analyses, compliance with the 10-day assay completion requirement, etc. Failure to comply with these requirements will result in an offeror’s proposal being deemed non-responsive.

Corporate Experience and Key Personnel 20 points

This factor shall be scored on the offeror’s experience in providing similar services to other organizations. Offeror’s must include a list of three current or past (within 5 years) customers, including contact information (name, title, phone number, e-mail address).

A brief biography and resumes of Key Personnel must be provided, to include the responsible laboratory manager and quality control manager. Bios and resumes shall clearly demonstrate the degree to which the qualifications and experience of Key Personnel are able to fulfill their assigned roles on this project with a high level of customer service.

Failure to comply with these requirements will result in an offeror’s proposal being deemed non-responsive.

Quality Assurance Program 40 points

This factor shall be scored on the offeror’s quality assurance program, overseeing the work on this project, to assure that the facilities, equipment, personnel, methods, practices, records, and controls are in compliance with NIH Standard 5. The offeror shall participate in an official Independent check-sample program (i.e. AAFCO or AOAC) and must provide documentation of Such. Standard Operating Procedures, describing the offeror’s QA methods and programs are requested as part of their technical proposal submission.

Quotes received will first be evaluated from a technical standpoint without regard to a proposed price. Those proposals considered to be technically acceptable will then be evaluated from a financial and management standpoint.

Technical factors and past performance are significantly more important than cost or price. It is pointed out, however, that should technical competence between offerors be considered approximately the same, then cost or price could be primary.

Failure to comply with these requirements will result in an offeror’s proposal being deemed non-responsive.

Total 100 points