BASIS FOR AWARD.docx

BASIS FOR AWARD

I. BASIS OF AWARD

1.1. The Government reserves the right to eliminate from consideration for award any or all offers at any time prior to award of the contract and to award the contract to the Offeror submitting the proposal determined to represent the lowest price technically acceptable (LPTA) proposal.

1.2. As stated in the solicitation, the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with Offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR I5.306(a)). The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary.

1.3. The LPT A process is selected as appropriate for this acquisition because the best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price.

1.4. An overall technical rating must be at least "ACCEPT ABLE" in order to be eligible for award. An "UN ACCEPT ABLE" rating in any factor. or part of a factor, results in the overall technical proposal being rated "UN ACCEPT ABLE" unless corrected through discussions. An overall technical rating of "UN ACCEPT ABLE" makes a proposal ineligible for award.

1.5. Evaluation will be made by selecting the lowest priced offeror first and then determining if it is technically acceptable. This method will be followed until the first lowest priced offeror is determined to also be technically acceptable. All proposals may not be evaluated.

2. EVALUATION FACTORS

Factor I Factor2 Factor 3 Technical Acceptablilty Past Performance Price 2.I. The relative order of importance of the technical evaluation Factors I through 3 are equal in importance to each other.

2.2. Factor 1 -Technical Acceptability

(A) Contractors ability to meet the requirements of the solicitation and perform the required work.

The purpose of the technical factor is to assess whether the offeror's proposal will satisfy the Government's minimum requirements.

(B) Basis of Evaluation:

The offeror's technical capability and ability as addressed in the offer is acceptable and demonstrates the ability to meet the requirements of the contract statement of work.

2.3 Factor 2 - Past Performance

2.3.1. Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

• The Past Performance Questionnaire included in the solicitation (Attachment B) is provided for the Offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the Offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 1,Corporate Experience. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact Completed Past Performance Questionnaires are to be submitted electronically from the client directly to the Government, not be submitted via the Offeror. In order for the client evaluation to be considered, the Past Performance Questionnaires must be submitted no later than 20 September, 2011.

• Include with your proposal submission a copy of the Past Performance Questionnaire Cover Sheet which contains the point of contact information for each client questionnaire.

• In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) or the Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS) using all CAGEJDUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the Offeror's proposal, inquiries of owner representative( s), and any other known sources not provided by the Offeror. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

2.3.2 Basis of Evaluation:

• The proposal is acceptable with demonstration of past performance rated "Satisfactory" or higher.

2.4. Factor 3 - Price

2.4.1. Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

• Price shall be evaluated on the basis of the cumulative price for all the line items, including base

• Item and option items, as shown in the Proposal Schedule.

2.4.2. Basis of Evaluation:

• The Government will evaluate price based on the total price.

• Analysis will be performed by one or more of the following techniques to ensure a fair and reasonable price:

· Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the RFP.

· Comparison of proposed prices to the Independent Government Cost Estimate

· (IGCE).

· Comparison of proposed prices with available historical information.

3. PROPOSAL EVALUATION

a. Acceptability of product or service. The acceptability of product or service shall be addressed in every LPTA source selection through consideration of one or more non- price evaluation factors/subfactors. For LPTAs, this is done through the establishment of minimum requirements to be evaluated on an "acceptable" or "unacceptable" basis.

Proposals are evaluated for acceptability, but not ranked using the non-price factors/subfactors. In order to be considered awardable, there must be an "acceptable" rating in every non-price factor/subfactor. LPT A non-price factors/subfactors may include the following:

(1) Technical. The term "technical," as used herein, refers to non-price factors other than past performance. More than one "technical" factor can be used and titled to match the specific evaluation criteria appropriate for the solicitation. The purpose of the technical factor is to assess whether the offeror's proposal will satisfy the Government's minimum requirements. Some of the aspects affecting an offeror's ability to meet the solicitation requirements may include technical approach, key personnel and qualifications, facilities, and others. Once the minimum requirements are established, the team shall evaluate the offeror's proposal against these requirements to determine whether the proposal is acceptable or unacceptable, using the ratings and descriptions outlined in Table A-1.

Table A-1. Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings

Rating Description

Acceptable - Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

(2) Past Performance. Past performance shall be used as an evaluation factor within the LPT A process, unless waived by the PCO in accordance with FAR 15.101- 2(b). It shall be evaluated in accordance with FAR 15.305 and DFARS 215.305. However, the comparative assessment in FAR 15.305(a)(2)(i) does not apply. Therefore, past performance will be rated on an "acceptable" or "unacceptable" basis using the ratings in Table A-2.

Table A-2. Past Performance Evaluation Ratings Rating Description Acceptable- Based on the offeror' s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror' s performance record is unknown. (See note below.)

Unacceptable Based on the offeror's performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Note: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 1 5.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, "unknown" shall be considered "acceptable."