PR-25-USSS-5346 Antietam Leadership Battlefield Experience Evaluation Criteria (004).pdf

Evaluation Criteria and List of Evaluators

1. EVALUATION FACTORS & METHODOLOGY

The Government intends to award a single award, firm fixed price based on this RFP, but reserves the right to make no award, if it is determined to be in its best interest. The award will be made based on Best Value Tradeoff, which permits tradeoffs among price and non-price factors. All factors are listed in descending order of importance. The non-price factors, when combined, are significantly more important than Price. Award will be given to the Offeror that provides the best value to the Government.

Factor Identification – This evaluation will evaluate the offerors by the proposals received in response to the Antietam Battlefield Leadership Experience for United States Secret Service (USSS), Office of Training, James J. Rowley Training Center (RTC). Request for Proposals Using the following factors:

Factor 1: Technical Capability

Definition: Assesses the offeror’s ability to fulfill the technical requirements of the scope of work, including the quality of methodologies, tools, and overall approach to service delivery.

Vendors should demonstrate their ability to meet the requirements outlined in the Statement of Work (SOW).

Submissions shall include:

Description of Services Offered: Detailed explanation of how the proposed services align with the scope of work, such as the ability to design curriculum, deliver training in-person, and evaluate training programs & assessments, etc.

Approach to Service Delivery: Methodology or plan for executing the tasks, including tools, technology, and techniques to ensure quality and efficiency. Delivery Modalities & Immersive Methods: Includes dedicated project oversight and mechanisms for feedback, adaptability, and ensuring in-person and virtual training quality.

Innovative Solutions: Any value-added offerings or innovative methods to enhance service delivery. Ability to tailor the curriculum to meet the customer’s specific leadership development needs, organizational context, and goals. Level of collaboration allowed during curriculum design/customization. Assess the vendor’s overall experience and reputation in delivering Staff Rides and leadership development experiences.

Quality and structure of the three-phase model (Pre-work/Read, Field Study, Integration) as applied to the Antietam Battlefield. Ability to deliver the program in person, including all logistical support and on-site coordination.

Factor 2: Management Approach

Definition: Evaluates how the offeror plans to manage the project, staff, communication, and quality control.

The vendor shall provide detail information of how they intend to manage the project, resources, and communication with staff and customer.

Submissions shall include:

A detailed plan with clear team roles and reporting protocols. Includes dedicated project oversight and mechanisms for feedback, adaptability, and ensuring in-person and virtual training quality.

Organizational Structure: Description of the management team and how responsibilities are divided.

Project Coordination: Identify strategies for tracking milestones, and deliverables, and identify a communications plan.

Factor 3: Experience and Qualifications

Definition: Considers the relevant past performance (verifiable record of 10 years of experience providing educational support services) of the organization and qualifications of proposed personnel.

The vendor shall provide past performance and the ability to successfully deliver similar service for this solicitation, and demonstrated history of successful curriculum development, training facilitation, and program evaluation. Submissions should include:

Past performance: List of prior contracts or projects like in scope and complexity (identify three

(3) or more). Include project description, duration, contract value, client name, and outcomes and project references.

Resumes and Experience of Personnel.; Focus on education, certifications, and relevant experience. Any professional or organizational certifications relevant to educational support service (Teaching/Facilitator certifications), or extensive and directly relevant past performance.

Facilitators are professional historians or have 10+ years of experience in leadership development/staff rides (to law enforcement agencies). Evidence of battlefield expertise (specifically Antietam)- Experience in adult education or executive development. Personnel have college degrees.

Factor 4: Price/Cost

For evaluation purposes, the Total Evaluated Price will be the sum of all CLIN amounts and prices proposed to include options. The proposed unit prices and the Total Evaluated Price as previously defined will be evaluated for reasonableness. Also, each offeror’s Price proposal will be evaluated to determine if it is consistent with the offeror’s technical approach and reflects a clear understanding of the solicitation requirements. Inconsistencies between the Technical and Price proposals may be assessed as proposal risk under the technical evaluation.

2. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

The evaluation of Factors (Factor 1, 2, and 3) will be done holistically with a rating scale of "Exceed," "Meet," and "Not Meet," representing the Government’s confidence that the Offeror understands the requirement and will be successful in performing the work.

Evaluation Scoring Rubric

Evaluation Factor Exceed Meet Not Meet

Factor 1: Technical Capability

Assess the vendor’s overall experience and reputation in delivering Staff Rides and leadership development experiences.

The experience demonstrates exceptional planning and execution of technically realistic battlefield scenarios. Use of equipment, terrain, and simulated conditions is highly sophisticated and effectively supports leadership development.

Tools, simulations, and safety protocols are well-integrated and exceed industry standards.

The experience includes adequately designed battlefield scenarios with appropriate use of simulation and terrain.

Safety and technical tools are sufficient and contribute to the objectives but lack advanced or innovative features.

Scenarios lack realism, coherence, or technical soundness. Safety measures or simulation tools are insufficient or poorly implemented, limiting the effectiveness of the training.

Factor 2:

Management Approach

Project coordination, staffing, communication, and quality control;

adapt to host site requirements;

responsiveness to agency timelines and constraints.

The event is managed with clear leadership structure, excellent coordination, and adaptive real-time decision-making. Communication, risk management, and participant engagement are proactive and exemplary throughout the experience. Feedback mechanisms are robust and integrated into the event.

The management structure is clear and functional. Basic logistics, communication, and risk controls are in place. Participants are generally supported, though there may be areas where responsiveness or coordination could be improved.

Poor or unclear management structure.

Logistics, communication, or participant support are inconsistent or missing.

Issues are handled reactively or not at all, undermining the overall experience.

Factor 3:

Experience and

The leadership team includes highly experienced facilitators with 10+ years of documented experience as historians specifically delivering

Resumes reflect some experience in delivering the Antietam staff ride (e.g., less than 10 years)

Resumes do not demonstrate relevant experience with the Antietam staff ride or

Facilitator Qualifications

Background and expertise of the individuals delivering the program.

the Antietam Battlefield Staff Ride.

Resumes demonstrate deep subject-matter expertise, instructional capability, and consistent engagement in battlefield education.

Team members also possess relevant leadership development or military education backgrounds.

or equivalent battlefield experiences. Team has relevant historical and instructional background, but depth or duration of Antietam-specific expertise is moderate.

battlefield leadership education. Team lacks sufficient historical, instructional, or field qualifications to support the program effectively.