P09 - SSEP - Clinical Portal of Medical Info.docx

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

COMPETITION SENSITIVE

Clinical Portal of Medical Information

Source Selection Evaluation Plan for the

Clinical Portal of Medical Information Subscription

Coordination Page

Concurrence

Name Source Selection Evaluation Board Chairperson

Adeitra Jimmison Contracting Officer

John Tangalos Office of General Counsel

Approval:

Source Selection Authority

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION I OVERVIEW

SECTION II SOLICITATION PROVISIONS

APPENDICES

A - MEMBERS OF AND ADVISORS TO SOURCE SELECTION

EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)/SOURCE SELECTION ADVISORY

COUNCIL (SSAC)

B - SOURCE SELECTION PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT

C - ITEM FOR NEGOTIATION (IFN) FORM

D - IFN EVALUATION FORM

E - SAMPLE REPORT FORMAT

Clinical Portal of Medical Information

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

COMPETITION SENSITIVE

Clinical Portal of Medical Information

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

SSEP LPTA Template_APR_18_2013

COMPETITION SENSITIVE

SECTION I

OVERVIEW

A. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROGRAM

The VA requires subscription-based access to a comprehensive core collection of knowledge-based information (clinical journals, databases, medical information, and textbooks) that facilitates the practice of evidence-based medicine to ensure the highest quality of patient care. The specific title to be acquired is The Clinical Portal of Medical Information of Medical Information.

The scope of work shall consist of providing subscription services needs for two Office of Health Informatics (OHI) offices; LNO and VA Central Office (VACO) Library. Subscriptions for LNO consist of online books, journals and databases with access being provided to all department employees. The VACO Library online and print subscriptions are made available to central office staff.

This effort falls in line with VA’s mission, goals, and objectives in support of providing Veterans’ care.

B. ACQUISITION APPROACH

This is a competitive acquisition for the award of a firm fixed price stand alone contract for The Clinical Portal of Medical Information. Award will be made to the lowest price, technically acceptable proposal.

SECTION II

SOLICITATION PROVISIONS

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

Award will be made to the lowest priced, responsive, responsible Offeror whose proposal conforms with the Government’s requirements as set forth in this Solicitation.

The award methodology shall be Lowest Price Technically Acceptable and the factors will not be weighted. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than "Acceptable" must be achieved for the Technical Factor. Offerors are advised that the award will be made to the lowest priced offer that is found technically acceptable.

All Offerors must submit a proposal on an “All or None” basis. Multiple proposals are not permitted and will not be considered for award.

B. FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

1. Technical

2. Price

C. EVALUATION APPROACH

All proposals shall be subject to evaluation by a team of Government personnel. The Government intends to award without discussions based upon the initial evaluation of proposals.

All Offerors are advised that, in the interest of efficiency, the Government reserves the right to conduct the evaluation in the most effective manner. Specifically, the Government may first evaluate the total proposed price of all Offerors. Thereafter, the Government will evaluate the technical proposal of the lowest priced Offeror only. If the lowest priced Offeror’s technical proposal is determined to be rated as Acceptable, the Government may make award to that Offeror without further evaluation of the remaining Offerors’ technical proposals. If the lowest priced Offeror’s technical proposal is determined to be rated as Unacceptable, then the Government may evaluate the next lowest priced technical proposal, and so forth and so on, until the Government reaches the lowest priced technical proposal that is determined to be rated as Acceptable. However, the Government reserves the right to evaluate all Offerors’ technical proposals should it desire to conduct discussions, or otherwise determine it to be in the Government’s best interest.

The proposal will be evaluated strictly in accordance with its written content. Proposals which merely restate the requirement or state that the requirement will be met, without providing supporting rationale, are not sufficient. Offerors who fail to meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation will be rated “Unacceptable” and thus, ineligible for award.

Please be advised that any Offeror-imposed terms and conditions which deviate from the Government’s material terms and conditions established by this solicitation may render the Offeror’s proposal Unacceptable and thus, ineligible for award.

1. TECHNICAL EVALUATION APPROACH. The technical evaluation process will consider the following:

(a) The evaluation process will consider whether the proposal demonstrates a clear understanding of the technical features involved in meeting the solicitation requirements and whether the Offeror’s methods and approach have adequately and completely considered, defined and satisfied the requirements in the Solicitation.

(b) The Required Features and Functions Checklist will be reviewed for technical acceptability. Offerors must meet each of the requirements listed in order for their proposal to be considered Acceptable. Failure to meet any of the listed requirements will result in an Offeror’s proposal being deemed Unacceptable, and thus, ineligible for award.

2. PRICE EVALUATION APPROACH. Firm Fixed Price: The Government will evaluate offers by adding the total of all line item prices, including all options.

In addition, FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services applies to this solicitation. As such, evaluation of options under FAR 52.217-8 will also include using the prices offered for the last option period to determine the price for an additional 6-month option period in the event an extension is issued under FAR 52.217-8. The Offeror’s proposed total base year price, total option period prices, and the additional 6-month option period price will then be added together to arrive at the Offeror’s Total Evaluated Price. The Total Evaluated Price will be that sum.

Evaluation of any options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

Offerors are further advised that the Firm Fixed unit prices proposed by the Offeror for each CLIN shall be incorporated into the basic contract and used as applicable pricing under same.

D. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

1. INTRODUCTION. Offers shall be submitted in accordance with the Instructions to Offerors included in the solicitation. Contractors are permitted to provide ONLY ONE (1) offer for consideration.

There is a 10-page limitation for the Technical Volume. In the Technical Volume, the Offerors shall propose a detailed technical approach that addresses the following:

(a) Offerors are required to complete the “Required Features and Functions Checklist” Attachment. The response to each of the requirements in the attachment should be written as per the instructions at the beginning of the checklist.

This is a Firm-Fixed Price type order. The contractor is required to submit the Government provided Price/Cost Schedule (section B.2) of the solicitation.

Any technical questions regarding this Evaluation Plan should be directed to the Contract Specialist (CS) in writing by e-mail to Benjamin Niznik at Benjamin.Niznik@va.gov and Adeitra Jimmison at Adeitra.Jimmison@va.gov.

The due date for questions concerning this Evaluation Plan will be 7/22/2022 at 12:00 pm EST. Questions received after this time will not be accepted.

As soon as an Offeror is aware of any problems or ambiguities in interpreting the specifications, terms or conditions, instructions or evaluation criteria of this solicitation, the CS shall be immediately notified. Pertinent questions will be answered via amendment and provided to all Offerors via posting on Contracting Opportunities.

2. PROPOSAL FILES. Offeror’s responses shall be submitted in accordance with the following instructions:

(a) Format. The submission shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled. Each volume shall be clearly identified and shall begin at the top of a page. All pages of each volume shall be appropriately numbered and identified by the complete company name, date, and solicitation number in the header and/or footer. Proposal page limitations are applicable to this procurement. The Table below indicates the maximum page count (when applicable) for each volume of the Offeror’s proposal.

(b) All files shall be submitted as either a Microsoft Excel (.XLS) file or Acrobat (PDF) file or compatible as indicated in the table. Page size shall be no greater than 8 1/2" x 11". The top, bottom, left and right margins shall be a minimum of one inch (1”) each. Font size shall be no smaller than 12-point. Arial or Times New Roman fonts are preferred. Characters shall be set at no less than normal spacing and 100% scale. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size not less than 8-point and may be landscape. Line spacing shall be set at no less than single space. Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line. Page numbers, company logos, and headers and footers may be within the page margins ONLY and are not bound by the 12-point font requirement. Footnotes to text shall not be used. All proprietary information shall be clearly and properly marked. If the Offeror submits annexes, documentation, attachments, or the like, not specifically required by this solicitation, such will count against the Offeror’s page limitations unless otherwise indicated in the specific volume instructions below. Pages in violation of these instructions, either by exceeding the margin, font, printing, or spacing restrictions or by exceeding the total page limit for a particular volume may not be evaluated. Pages not evaluated due to violation of the margin, font or spacing restrictions will not count against the page limitations. The page count will be determined by counting the pages in the order they come up in the print layout view.

(c) File Packaging. All of the proposal files may be compressed (zipped) into one file entitled “proposal.zip” using WinZip version 6.2 or later version or the proposal files may be submitted individually.

3. CONTENT REQUIREMENTS. All information shall be confined to the appropriate volume. The titles and file type requirements for each volume are shown in the table below:

Tech.pdf 10 Page Limit

*Note page limitations: A Cover Page, Table of Contents and/or a glossary of abbreviations or acronyms will not be included in the page count of the technical Volume. However, be advised that any and all information contained within any Table of Contents and/or glossary of abbreviations or acronyms submitted with an Offeror’s proposal will not be evaluated by the Government.

(i) VOLUME I – TECHNICAL FACTOR

Offerors shall propose a detailed approach that addresses the following:

Proposals shall clearly and completely address the appropriate technical areas of consideration described below in a format that follows the Performance Work Statement (PWS) deliverables. Responses to these items will form the basis for the technical merits of each proposal. Respondents shall complete and submit the Required Features and Functions Checklist.

(ii) VOLUME II – PRICE FACTOR

The Offeror shall complete the Schedule of Supplies/Services of the solicitation.

The Offeror shall submit a firm-fixed price proposal for all items described within the PWS. The Government will evaluate the price by adding the total of all line item prices, including all options and an estimated cost to exercise FAR 52.217-8. The Total Evaluated Price will be that sum.

(iii) VOLUME III - SOLICITATION, OFFER AND AWARD

DOCUMENTS AND CERTIFICATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS

Certifications and Representations - An authorized official of the firm shall sign the SF 1449 and all certifications requiring original signature. An Acrobat PDF file shall be created to capture the signatures for submission. This Volume shall contain the following:

a. Solicitation Section A – Standard Form SF1449 and Acknowledgement of Amendments, if any.

b. Any proposed terms and conditions and/or assumptions upon which the proposal is predicated.

Offerors are hereby advised that any Offeror-imposed terms and conditions and/or assumptions which deviate from the Government’s material terms and conditions established by the Solicitation, may render the Offeror’s proposal Unacceptable, and thus ineligible for award.

SECTION III

EVALUATION ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES

a. EVALUATION ORGANIZATION: The evaluation and selection of the successful Offeror will be performed by the following organizational elements:

* The composition of the SSEB is shown in Appendix A and is discussed below.

b. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE ORGANIZATIONAL ELEMENTS

i. Source Selection Authority - The SSA is responsible for the proper conduct of the source selection process and for making the final source selection decision. The SSA shall ensure that:

a. The SSEP and evaluation criteria are consistent with the requirements of the solicitation and applicable regulations.

b. Personnel with the requisite skills and experience to execute the SSEP are appointed to the SSEB.

c. The Contracting Officer's determination to exclude Offerors from the competitive range is approved.

d. Conflicts of interest, or the appearance thereof, are avoided.

e. Premature or unauthorized disclosure of source selection information is avoided.

f. The source selection process is conducted in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.

g. Supporting rationale is documented before contract award is announced.

ii. Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) - The SSEB will:

a. Conduct a comprehensive review and evaluation of proposals against the solicitation requirements and the approved evaluation criteria.

b. Prepare and submit the SSEB evaluation reports to the SSA.

c. Brief the SSA, as requested.

d. Respond to special instructions from the SSA.

e. Prepare the necessary items for negotiation.

f. Provide for debriefings of unsuccessful Offerors.

iii. Contracting Officer (CO) - The CO will:

a. Act as the advisor to the SSEB.

b. Act as a point of contact between the Government and the Offerors. Conduct such negotiations as necessary to discuss shortcomings so as to enhance proposals received from Offerors.

c. Determine, with the SSA's approval, which Offerors are within the competitive range.

d. Chair all required debriefings.

SECTION IV

EVALUATION PROCEDURES

A. AGENDA

The source selection process will follow the sequence outlined below:

· Issue Solicitation

· Receive Proposals

· Conduct Initial Evaluation

· Present Findings to SSAC/SSA

· SSA Decision

B. DEFINITIONS

1. Acceptable - A proposal that demonstrates the Offeror’s ability to meet all of the Government’s minimum requirements as identified in the solicitation.

2. Deficiency - A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement

4. Unacceptable - A proposal that fails to demonstrate the Offeror’s ability to meet all of the Government’s minimum requirements as identified in the solicitation and cannot be corrected without a major rewrite or revision of the proposal. A proposal that fails to meet the Government’s requirements after the final evaluation shall be ineligible for award regardless of whether it can be corrected without a major rewrite or revision of the proposal.

C. RATING METHOD

1. Rating Package - Each individual evaluating a factor of the Offeror's proposal will receive a rating package containing the following:

· Evaluation Procedures and Policies (Sections IV and V of this Plan)

· Basis for Award, Evaluation Factors and Evaluation Approach (Section E of the RFP and Section II of this Plan)

· Proposal Instructions (Section E of the RFP and Section II of this Plan)

· Item for Negotiation Form and Item for Negotiation Evaluation Form (Appendix C and D)

· Sample Evaluation Report Format (Appendix E)

· Request for Proposals (RFP)

2. Rating Structure - The non-price factors will be evaluated and rated based upon the general and specific instructions supplied in Section IV of this Plan. The Price or Cost Factor will not have an adjectival rating assigned. The rating definitions above will be used for initial and interim evaluations. The ratings, with the exception of Susceptible to Being Made Acceptable, will be used for the final evaluation.

3. Rating – The Factor and or Subfactor Chairpersons’ conclusions based upon the evaluation criteria and the deficiencies of an evaluation factor or subfactor (qualitative not quantitative). When subfactors are used, adjectival rating definitions will be applied at the subfactor level only. The subfactor ratings will then be rolled up to determine the overall Factor rating. The adjectival rating definitions will not be applied at the Factor level.

D. PROPOSAL EVALUATION

The titles of “SSEB Chairperson”, “Factor Chairperson” and “Subfactor Chairperson” used below apply both to personnel formally assigned to such positions or personnel engaged in the source selection performing those functions.

1. The SSEB will control all copies of the Offerors’ proposals and other associated data.

2. Upon receipt of proposals, evaluators will read their applicable section to gain an understanding of the level of the information and determine if errors, omissions or deficiencies exist. Major problems will be reported to the respective Factor Chairperson and the SSEB Chairperson. The SSEB Chairperson will notify the Contracting Officer of any major problems.

3. The Factor and/or Subfactor Chairpersons will assign the appropriate rating to each factor as set forth above. Each SSEB Factor Chairperson will prepare an overall narrative summary for his/her respective factor s along with recommended factor ratings and forward them to the SSEB Chairperson.

4. The SSEB Chairperson will review the narrative summary and recommended factor ratings and provide an overall summary report (Initial Evaluation Report).

E. SOURCE SELECTION - The SSA will make the final determination of the Offeror(s) selected for award. The SSA in making a selection is not bound by the findings of the SSEB. The SSA is only limited in that his/her selection must have a rational basis consistent with the terms of the evaluation factors in the solicitation and must meet all legal and procedural requirements of the evaluation process. The final decision, which will be an integrated assessment based on the entire evaluation process, will be executed by the SSA. The Contracting Officer, after appropriate legal review, will then make the award and debrief the unsuccessful Offeror(s), if requested and required.

F. ANNOUNCEMENT OF SELECTION - The Contracting Officer will make the announcement of the selection of a successful Offeror(s) directly or through his/her designee.

G. DEBRIEFING OF UNSUCCESSFUL OFFERORS - Debriefing will be done at the request of any Offeror wishing to understand the reasons for the Government’s selection (when debriefings are required by regulation). The discussion should not include point-by-point comparisons with the other proposals, but should be confined to the specific strengths and weaknesses of the individual proposal being considered. The debriefing should include an explanation of the evaluation method and a summary of the rationale for the award decision to assure the Offeror that its proposal was treated fairly, impartially and objectively. Debriefing will be conducted by the SSEB Chairperson, in concert with the Contracting Officer, in a manner that will be prescribed by the Contracting Officer.

SECTION V

POLICIES, INSTRUCTIONS AND STANDARDS OF CONDUCT

1. GENERAL

The impartial, equitable, and comprehensive evaluation of Offerors’ proposals is dependent on the capability of the Government to provide each Offeror the same information and to evaluate each proposal independently.

a. SAFEGUARDING PROCUREMENT INFORMATION

The sensitivity of the proceedings and documentation require stringent and special safeguards throughout the evaluation process.

i. Inadvertent release of information could be a source of considerable misunderstanding and embarrassment to the Government. It is incumbent, therefore, upon all members of the team not to make any unauthorized disclosures of information pertaining to this evaluation. All evaluation participants will observe the following rules:

· Do not permit members of your organization to divulge your membership to casual callers.

· Refer all attempted communications by Offerors’ representatives to the Contracting Officer.

· Do not accept any invitation from personnel of an Offeror for participation in any functions, regardless of how remote they may be from the evaluation process.

· Do not assume that a non-participating contractor can be told anything pertaining to the evaluation and source selection.

· Do not assume that it is safe to speak about the evaluation because you are among Government employees or in Government buildings.

· Do not discuss any aspect of the evaluation with other board members outside the area designated for deliberations.

· Do not discuss the substantive issues of the evaluation with any unauthorized individual even after the announcement of the winning Offeror.

ii. Care must be exercised to ensure that copies of the evaluation records and information relating thereto are adequately marked and safeguarded throughout the entire proceedings.

iii. Removal of proposals or evaluation documents from the evaluation work site is not authorized except as specifically approved by the SSEB Chairperson.

iv. To the degree feasible, all proposals and working papers will be kept in a locked container except when being used in conjunction with evaluation and source selection.

v. All participating personnel will sign the Agreement set forth at Appendix B to the effect that they are familiar with the regulations and other guidance pertaining to security measures.

b. EVALUATION POLICIES

i. The principal purpose of the evaluation procedure is to provide a sound basis for the SSA to make an informed judgment. The evaluation methodology and techniques employed should enhance the quality, credibility and confidence levels in the adequacy of the evaluation results. The evaluation process, therefore, must be consistent, well-thought out, adequately staffed, managed, and carried out in a professional, comprehensive and objective manner. It must frame the elements for the selection decision with sufficient clarity and visibility so that the SSA will be able to make a sound decision within a short time period.

ii. Proposal evaluation requires a mixture of fact-finding and reporting and the application of professional judgment to provide a comprehensive picture of the adequacy of each proposal. This requires:

· Examination and judgment of the merits of each proposal as compared to the criteria established for evaluation.

· Validation of the information, estimates and projections of each Offeror as presented in their proposal.

· Successive summarization of the detailed evaluation results accompanied by analysis in sufficient depth to give visibility to any significant findings or reservations.

APPENDIX A

MEMBERS OF THE SOURCE SELECTION ADVISORY COUNCIL (SSAC)

SSAC Chairperson {insert names}

SSAC Members {insert names}

MEMBERS OF AND ADVISORS TO THE SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

SSEB Chairperson {insert name}

SSEB Members {Identify next to name if they are a Factor Chair} {insert names}

APPENDIX B

SOURCE SELECTION PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT

Important! This Agreement concerns a matter within the jurisdiction of a United States Government agency. This Agreement prohibits you from making false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements and/or certifications. If you do so, you may be subject to prosecution under 18 U.S.C. §1001.

AGREEMENT

· This Agreement applies to individuals involved in Solicitation 36C77622R0133, also known as the Clinical Portal of Medical Information.

· This Agreement contains the rules of conduct relating to this acquisition. It includes rules of conduct regarding conflicts of interest as well as rules of conduct regarding the safeguarding of confidential information.

· Your signature on this Agreement indicates that you have read this Agreement and agree to be bound by its terms.

TERMS

· I have read, understand and will abide by the requirements of Section 27 of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 USC 423) as implemented in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) §3.104. The Contracting Officer has made a copy of FAR §3.104 available to me.

· * To the best of my knowledge, neither I, my spouse, my dependent child (ren), nor members of my household:

(1) Have any direct or indirect financial interest:

(2) In any firm on the list of potential offerors or which has otherwise expressed an interest in the acquisition (if this certification is made prior to receipt/opening of proposals).

(3) In any of the firms submitting proposals in response to this Solicitation or their proposed team members/subcontractors (if this certification is made subsequent to receipt/opening of proposals).

· Have any other beneficial interest in such firms except:

· * To the best of my knowledge, no person related to me by blood or marriage or any business associate is employed by or has a direct or indirect financial interest or any other beneficial interest in the firms referenced in paragraph 5.a, above, except:

* The listing of interests or activities under paragraphs 5 and 6 above does not mean that the employee cannot participate in the acquisition/source selection process. The effect of the interests/activities will be determined by the Chairperson of the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB), as set out in the Source Selection Evaluation Plan (or the Contracting Officer for acquisitions at his/her level), after consultation with legal counsel.

· I understand that Public Law 100-679 and provisions of the FAR govern the release of proprietary and source selection information. I will not knowingly disclose any proprietary or source selection information regarding this acquisition directly or indirectly to any person other than a person authorized by the head of the agency or the Contracting Officer to receive such information.

· I will observe the following rules during the conduct of the acquisition:

(1) I will not solicit or accept, directly or indirectly, any promise of future employment or business opportunity from, or engage, directly or indirectly, in any discussion of future employment or business opportunity with, any officer, employee, representative, agent, or consultant of a competing contractor.

(2) I will not ask for, demand, exact, solicit, seek, accept, receive, or agree to receive, directly or indirectly, any money, gratuity, or other thing of value from any officer, employee, representative, agent, or consultant of any competing contractor for this acquisition. I will advise my family that the acceptance of a gratuity from those who are engaged in or seek to do business with the Department of Defense may be imputed to me and must therefore be avoided.

(3) I will instruct members of my parent or home organization not to divulge my participation in the evaluation and source selection process or my physical location while participating in the evaluation and source selection process to unauthorized persons.

(4) I understand that all communications with offerors or their team members/subcontractors concerning this acquisition must be made by/through the Contracting Officer or his or her designee. I will divert all attempted communications by offerors’ representatives or any other unauthorized person to the Contracting Officer, and advise the Chairperson of the SSEB and legal counsel.

(5) I will not discuss evaluation or source selection matters, including proprietary proposal information, with any unauthorized individuals (including Government personnel), even after the announcement of the successful contractor, unless authorized by proper authority. All discussions of evaluation/source selection matters with other SSEB members shall be conducted solely in those areas designated for deliberations.

· I realize that my actions in connection with my participation in this source selection are subject to intense scrutiny and I will conduct myself in a way that will not adversely affect the confidence of the public in the source selection process. I will avoid any action, whether or not prohibited, that could result in or create the appearance of my losing independence or impartiality. I will not use my public office for private gain, and I agree not to engage in any personal business or professional activity, or enter into any financial transaction, that involves or appears to involve the direct or indirect use of “inside information” to further a private gain for myself or others.

· I understand that my obligations under this certification are of a continuing nature, and if anything takes place which would cause a change to any statement, or create a violation of any representation or rule of conduct herein, I will immediately bring such matter to the attention of the Chairperson of the SSEB, or the Contracting Officer.

CERTIFICATION

I agree to the Terms of this Agreement and certify that I have read and understand the above Agreement. I further certify that the statements made herein are true and correct.

Signature

Name (Printed)

Organization

Date

APPENDIX C - ITEM FOR NEGOTIATION (IFN) FORM

OFFEROR: ________________________________________________

IFN NUMBER: _____________________________________________

DATE: _____________________________________

RFP AND PROPOSAL REFERENCES

· RFP:

· PROPOSAL:

REASON FOR SUBMISSION:

__ DEFICIENCY

(a material failure of a proposal to meet the Government’s requirements or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.)

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM:

{This is the issue with the proposal and it usually ends with an impact statement.}

ITEM FOR NEGOTIATION:

{The statement of problem is now turned into the form of a question or a request that the contractor address the issue; you may need to repeat part of the problem statement preceding the question/request}

APPENDIX D - ITEM FOR NEGOTIATION (IFN) EVALUATION FORM

OFFEROR: ________________________________________________

IFN NUMBER: _____________________________________________

DATE: _____________________________________

RFP AND PROPOSAL REFERENCES:

RFP:

PROPOSAL:

ITEM FOR NEGOTIATION:

{Repeat IFN as released}

OFFEROR RESPONSE:

{If response is lengthy it may be attached}

EVALUATION OF RESPONSE:

{The discussion should include whether or not the deficiency was resolved or if it remained; classify it again}

APPENDIX E – SAMPLE REPORT FORMAT

INITIAL/INTERIM/FINAL {only cite current version} EVALUATION REPORT

FACTOR:

SUBFACTOR:

OFFEROR {identify by letter designation}:

Brief Summary of Proposal: {this section of the report should not contain any assessments of what was proposed; just a factual discussion of the approach}

Deficiencies {if any, otherwise cite “None”}:

1.

2.

Rationale for Rating:

{The discussion will address whether or not the proposal demonstrates a clear understanding of the technical features involved in meeting the solicitation requirements and whether the Offeror’s methods and approach have adequately and completely considered, defined and satisfied the requirements in the Solicitation.}

SSEP LPTA Template_AUG_2_2011