Proposal Instructions and Evaluation Criteria PWS 25-5E2.pdf

Proposal Instructions and Evaluation Criteria, PWS 25-5E2

Section I. Instructions to Offerors

1. Offerors are required to be registered in System for Award Management (SAM) at the time an offer is submitted.

2. The Government will not reimburse any proposal preparation costs or other expenses incurred to respond to this notice.

3. The Government may reject any or all proposals/quotations. The Government reserves the right to cancel this solicitation at any time.

4. The Government intends to make multiple BPA awards without discussions. However, the Government reserves the right to limit the number of BPA awards for economy and efficiency purposes, and estimates (but is not limited to) a maximum of three (3) awards, and may do so based on any of the three factors below. Proposals should be submitted on the most accurate terms from the technical standpoint. Offerors should not assume they will be contacted or afforded an opportunity to clarify, discuss, or revise their proposals

5. File Format: Offerors should submit all proposal files in Microsoft Office product or Adobe PDF formats

6. Restrictive or Proprietary Data: Offerors that include in their proposals data that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes, shall –

a. Mark the title page with the following legend: “This proposal includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the Government and shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed -- in whole or in part -- for any purpose other than to evaluate this proposal. If, however, a contract is awarded to this Offeror as a result of -- or in connection with -- the submission of this data, the Government shall have the right to duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the extent provided in the resulting contract. This restriction does not limit the Government’s right to use information contained in this data if it is obtained from another source without restriction. The data subject to this restriction are contained in sheets [insert numbers or other identification of sheets].” and,

b. Mark each sheet of data it wishes to restrict with the following legend: “Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal

7. The Government will evaluate if the offerors is technically capable to meet the requirements in

Factor 1 (1-27), then Factor 2 past performance, and Factor 3 price.

8. Offerors shall provide the following:

Factor 1. Technical

Each offeror is to provide sufficient detail (not to exceed 5 pages) to demonstrate their capabilities to perform the requirements in the Performance Work Statement (PWS), 25-5E2, in order to perform and deliver individual BPA orders, specifically demonstrating the offeror’s own (in-house) established capability in:

(a) performing at least eight (8) of the twenty-seven (27) Microelectronics test services included in PWS 25-5E2Test services not performed in house could be included by way of sub-contracting to other local area laboratories, though this may be less preferred. If subcontracted, test services should be located within 120 miles of DMEA, see (b) below.

(b) Located within 120 miles of DMEA, McClellan CA, is highly preferred.

Factor 2. Past Performance

Each offeror may provide Government or commercial contracts that have been completed (or have been awarded with substantial accomplishment to date and are still in progress) within the last three years and were for projects similar to the scope described in the PWS (limited to a combined total of 3 pages). Information for each contract shall include current point of contact (POC) information (name, telephone numbers, and email address for each POC), and (for Government contracts) contract number, value, duration, and how the contract ended. For commercial contracts, please provide a unique identification for the effort/task being referenced.

Contracts that are listed without providing a work scope description may be disregarded in the past performance evaluation, at the discretion of the Government. See past performance evaluation below.

Factor 3. Pricing

The Government will evaluate the competitiveness of your pricing for environmental testing of electronic assemblies. Please provide pricing information, preferably in the following two forms:

a. Pricing Tables:

• Labor Rates: Fully burdened hourly rates per labor category (with brief descriptions)

• Equipment/Software Usage: Hourly/daily rates for specialized items, with justification

• Materials/Consumables: List of frequently used items and unit prices

b. Pricing Narrative (Very Brief):

Justify your pricing, emphasizing cost-effectiveness and efficiency. As appropriate, briefly address:

• How labor, equipment, and material costs were determined

• Rationale for labor category mix and efficient utilization

• Cost control measures you employ

• Key assumptions impacting pricing

Section II. Evaluation

In accordance with the simplified acquisition procedures of FAR 13, DMEA will evaluate all responses received using the evaluation criteria listed below:

(a) The Government will award BPAs resulting from this solicitation to a maximum of three (3) responsible Offerors whose proposal, conforming to the solicitation, represents a qualified and capable environmental testing firm that can provide value to the Government and demonstrates the ability to deliver environmental testing of electronic assemblies.

Factor 1: Technical will be evaluated based on the combined technical aspects and risks, as follows:

The Government will evaluate each offeror’s proposal to determine if the offeror is technically capable to address the test services (1-27) below, as further described in the PWS 25-5E2 in order to perform and deliver individual BPA orders. Based on the context in PWS 25-5E2, the Government will evaluate the:

(a) offeror’s capability to perform at least eight (8) of the twenty-seven (27) Microelectronics test services included in PWS 25-5E2. Other tests could be omitted from capability proposals or could be included by way of sub-contracting to other local area laboratories. *The tests that are most important and highly preferred are indicated below*.

Technical Acceptability is as shown in Table 1 below

Test/Service Highly Preferred

3.1.1 VIBRATION TESTING X

*Provide capability list detailing testing services.

Identify testing performed in house or sub-contracted.

3.1.2 PHYSICAL SHOCK TESTING X

3.1.3 COMPRESSION TESTING

3.1.4 TENSION TESTING

3.1.5 EXTREME THERMAL TESTING X

3.1.6 ACCELERATION TESTING

3.1.7 THERMAL CYCLING TESTING X

3.1.8 THERMAL SHOCK TESTING X

3.1.9 ALTITUDE TESTING X

3.1.10 HUMIDITY TESTING X

3.1.11 SALT-FOG TESTING

3.1.12 ULTRAVIOLET (UV) EXPOSURE TESTING

3.1.13 SOLAR RADIATION CYCLING TESTING

3.1.14 COMBINED ENVINRONMENT TESTING

3.1.15 SAND AND DUST TESTING X

3.1.16 RAIN TESTING SERVICES

3.1.17 PROOF TESTING SERVICES

3.1.18 ELECTRICAL TESTING SERVICES X

3.1.19 COATING TESTING

3.1.20 TEST FIXTURE DESIGN

3.1.21 TEST FIXTURE FABRICATION

3.1.22 ELECTO MAGNETIC INTERFERENCE X

3.1.23 ELECTRO STATIC DISCHARGE: X

3.1.24 MAGNETIC INTERFERENCE

3.1.25 PACKAGE PERFORMANCE TESTING

3.1.26 SEMI ANECHOIC CHAMBER TESTING

3.1.27 ACOUSTICS CHAMBER TESTING

(b) Distance from DMEA. The Government will use a standard internet mapping service to calculate the driving route and retains the commonsense discretion between using the shortest distance route, the fastest time route, or other equivalent option, as calculated by the mapping service.

Factor 2: Past Performance will be evaluated based on the past performance relevance rating and confidence assessment, as follows:

Any Past Performance information provided within the proposal will be evaluated along with (IAW FAR 13.106-2(b)(3)) DMEA’s knowledge of and/or previous experiences with the Offeror for supplies or services related to the requirements described in PWS 25-5E2.

The Government does not anticipate but may, at its discretion, send out past performance questionnaires or otherwise contact previous customers for/regarding any past performance experiences listed. In addition to the evaluation information above, the Government may evaluate all past performance information received from any returned past performance questionnaires.

Past performance is optional. If past performance is NOT provided, past performance will be rated as neutral. If submitted, each Offeror’s past performance experiences will be given a relevancy rating and a single confidence assessment will be given to the Offeror’s proposal, as described below.

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Adjectival Rating Description Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Performance Confidence Assessments Ratings Adjectival Rating Description Substantial Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available, or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Limited Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Factor 3. Pricing

The Government will evaluate the pricing information and justification submitted to understand how the offeror will be able to be competitive with other awardees and provide fair and reasonable pricing to the Government. Clear, justifiable, and cost-effective pricing, appropriate for the sophistication of the technology, for microelectronic testing services is highly desired.

The Government reserves the right to request additional information to better understand an offeror’s general pricing methodology. The Government reserves the right to not award a BPA for insufficient pricing methodology information alone, apart from the evaluation of Factors 1 and 2.

Award

A written notice of award or acceptance of a proposal emailed or otherwise furnished to a successful Offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding agreement upon bilateral signature. In addition, quotes for BPA order may be immediately requested upon the first bilaterally signed BPA among all offerors; at all times, only BPA holders (those with bilaterally signed agreements) will be sent competitive RFQs and may propose. (See BPA paragraph 12(a).)

(End of provision)