section M.amend 3.pdf

RFP-PCC-0016

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M.1 52.252-1 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

(FEB 1998)

This solicitation incorporates one or more solicitation provisions by reference, with the same force and effect as if they were given in full text. Upon request, the Contracting Officer will make their full text available.

The offeror is cautioned that the listed provisions may include blocks that must be completed by the offeror and submitted with its quotation or offer. In lieu of submitting the full text of those provisions, the offeror may identify the provision by paragraph identifier and provide the appropriate information with its quotation or offer. Also, the full text of a solicitation provision may be accessed electronically at this/these address(es):

http://www.arnet.gov/far/

I. FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION (48 CFR CHAPTER 1)

PROVISIONS

NUMBER DATE TITLE

52.217-5 JUL 1990 EVALUATION OF OPTIONS

[End of Provision]

M.2 DECISIONAL RULE CRITERION

Unless otherwise stated, proposals must clearly demonstrate at the time of submission that offerors meet the following decisional rule criterion. Proposals will be reviewed on a go/no-go basis for the decisional rule criterion. Offerors whose proposals do not meet the decisional rule criterion shall be advised of their elimination from the procurement.

Only those proposals which meet the decisional rule criterion shall be evaluated for award.

1. Geographic Location Offerors must clearly demonstrate at the time of proposal submission that the proposed facility is located within a 500 mile radius of the United States Capitol, Washington DC.

RFP-PCC-0016, Section M, Page 1 of 4 http://www.arnet.gov/far/.

2. Corporate Experience Offerors must clearly demonstrate at the time of proposal submission they have corporate experience operating secure corrections/detention facilities for a continuous three-year period as of the date the solicitation was issued.

M.3 EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

Award will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal, conforming to this solicitation, is the most advantageous to the Government.

M.4 OVERALL RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF OTHER (NON-PRICE) EVALUATION

CRITERIA AND PRICE

NON-PRICE EVALUATION CRITERIA

The non-price evaluation criteria are listed below in descending order of importance:

1. Technical Proposal

2. Past Performance

3. Small Disadvantaged Business Utilization

4. Environmental

The combined non-price evaluation criteria are significantly more important than price. Price becomes a major factor in award selection when other criteria are substantially equal.

The Government reserves the right to award a contract to an offeror other than the offeror proposing the lowest price when the Government’s evaluation determines a proposal is significantly superior from a non-price standpoint and warrants payment by the Government of a premium.

1. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Technical proposals will be evaluated to determine the soundness and anticipated effectiveness of the offeror’s approach to perform the requirements identified in the Performance Work Statement and in Section L. Available points will be distributed equally among the following technical elements identified within the proposal instructions:

• Administration and Management

• Institution Operations

• Institution Services

RFP-PCC-0016, Section M, Page 2 of 4

• Inmate Programs

• Activation and Staffing

• Physical Plant

2. PAST PERFORMANCE

Each offeror will be evaluated on its performance under existing and prior contracts for similar services.

Performance information will be used for evaluating proposals and responsibility determinations. The evaluation will focus on information which demonstrates quality of performance relative to the size and complexity of the procurement under consideration.

References other than those identified by the offeror may be contacted.

Information utilized may be obtained from the references listed in the proposal, other customers known to the Government or of whom it becomes aware, consumer protection organizations and any others who may have useful and relevant information. Information may also be considered regarding significant subcontractors, corporate personnel and essential personnel.

Past performance will be examined to ensure corrective measures have been implemented where problems in performance have occurred. Prompt corrective action in isolated instances may not outweigh overall negative trends.

Past performance will be evaluated to determine the quality control, business relations and customer satisfaction in the areas of security, personnel, health services, facility maintenance, inmate programs and institution services the offeror has delivered during its performance of prior and existing contracts for similar services. All factors are of equal importance.

Assessment of the offeror's experience will be one means of evaluating the viability of the offeror's proposal and its relative capability to meet the solicitation’s performance requirements.

3. SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS (SDB) UTILIZATION

The offeror proposing the highest SDB participation, expressed as dollars and percentages of total contract value, shall receive the most points for this category.

RFP-PCC-0016, Section M, Page 3 of 4

A proportionate amount of points will be awarded to each offeror below the highest ranked offeror in this category.

4. ENVIRONMENT

Information will be requested of offerors regarding past environmental activities and the environmental condition of proposed sites and institutions.

Environmental documentation and other information will be required in order to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 prior to contract award.

The Government will independently evaluate and verify the accuracy of the environmental documentation submitted in accordance with Sections J and L. Greater consideration will be given to the proposal which represents the “environmentally preferable” alternative. Environmentally preferable alternative means the proposal that has lesser or reduced environmental impacts or adverse environmental effects when compared with competing proposals.

The Government reserves the right to eliminate proposals based on the adequacy of the documentation provided by the offeror or the potential impact to the quality of the human environment. For example, the Government reserves the right to eliminate proposals if, in the opinion of the Government, environmental permits or other similar requirements under NEPA and outside the direct control of the Federal Bureau of Prisons would place in jeopardy the timely award of a contract under this solicitation.

The Government reserves the right to disclose or make public any environmental documentation or other information provided under this section. Such disclosures would typically occur in Environmental Impact Statements, Environmental Assessments, public hearings, comment periods and other public forums.

PRICE

Prices proposed for each year of the base period and option periods will be evaluated in total. Award is based on best value. Although non-price factors are more important than price, as non-price factors become more equal, price becomes more important and may be the deciding factor for award.

[End of Section]

RFP-PCC-0016, Section M, Page 4 of 4