Evaluation_Criteria.docx

TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

GENERAL

The major evaluation factors for this solicitation include technical (which encompasses instructor experience, technical approach, corporate and human resources, quality control and past performance factors) and cost/price factors. Although technical factors are of paramount consideration in the award of the contract, 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. In any case, the Government reserves the right to make award(s) to that offeror whose proposal provides the best overall value to the Government.

Offerors are advised that award will be made to that offeror whose proposal provides the combination of features that offers the best or greatest overall value to the Government including transport of and disposition of teaching materials. The Government is more concerned with obtaining performance capability superiority rather than lowest overall cost. However, the Government will not make an award at a significantly higher overall cost to the Government to achieve only slightly superior performance. Overall cost to the Government may become the ultimate factor for award of a contract as proposals become more equal based on other factors.

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 RFP. The merits of each proposal will be evaluated carefully. Each proposal must document the feasibility of successful implementation of requirements of the RFP. Offerors must submit information enough to evaluate their proposals based on the detailed criteria below:

MANDATORY CRITERIA

The below are mandatory criteria and must be met prior to award of the contract:

Instructors must have a minimum of 5 years of experience teaching Dangerous Goods Shipping classes as called for in this SOW.

TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

The below criteria are listed in the relative order of importance:

Summary of Factors

1. Key Personnel: Instructor personnel will be evaluated on experience in teaching adults; packaging; and shipping dangerous goods.

2. General Technical Approach: General teaching approach will be evaluated for auditory, visual and kinesthetic use. Manner of reinforcing learning will be evaluated as will methods of transport and disposition of teaching materials.

3. Corporate Experience and Capabilities: The corporate experience as well as experience of personnel of the offeror will be evaluated for evidence of capabilities to perform the services described in this SOW.

4. Quality Assurance: Offeror will provide the manner of quality assessment and assurance for student learning.

PAST PERFORMANCE

The Past Performance Factor evaluation will assess the relevance and breadth of the Offeror’s experience and the quality of the Offeror’s past performance. The Government is seeking to determine whether the Offeror has experience that will enhance its technical capability to perform and whether the Offeror consistently delivers quality services in a timely and cost effective manner. In evaluating past performance, HHS/NIH will only take into consideration the relevant experience and past performance assessments from the Offeror's customers. However, the HHS/NIH reserves the right to use other relevant past performance information it obtains through other sources including other agency databases and information contained in trade literature.

Relevance of Experience: The Offeror’s experience will be evaluated on the degree of relevance to the requirement based on similarity in size, scope, complexity, technical difficulty, contract type, and period of performance. Only recent experience will be evaluated. Evaluations may include interviews with previous clients of the prime contractor and subcontractors and may include interviews with previous clients of proposed personnel. The Offeror’s experience with and knowledge of issues and problems of large organizations will be evaluated.

Past Performance Assessments: The Offeror’s past performance will be evaluated based on information contained in the Offeror's proposal and the information that the Government obtains through other means. The past performance evaluation will assess the Offeror’s record of providing high quality services of a similar nature in a manner that ensures maximum accuracy, productivity, cost effectiveness and overall client satisfaction.

If some of the Offeror’s experience is relevant and the rest is not, only the relevant experience will be evaluated for purposes of past performance. If no experience is relevant or the experience that is relevant cannot be evaluated due to a reference’s failure to respond, a rating of neutral will be assigned for past performance as defined below.

The Government will evaluate the Past Performance Factor using the following adjectival ratings.

COST/PRICE FACTORS

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. Normally, price reasonableness is established through adequate price competition, but may also be determined through cost and price analysis techniques as described in FAR 15.404. The Offeror shall submit firm fixed prices for all requirements in the SOW.

SELECTION FOR AWARD

Offeror should be aware that the Government shall perform a “best value analysis” and the selection for award shall be made to the Offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the Government; taking into consideration the technical factors listed above and the total proposed price across all contract periods.