Section M.pdf

EVALUATION FACTORS

SECTION M

EVALUATION FACTORS

Evaluation Factors and LPTA Evaluation Methodology: Technical acceptability will be evaluated on all offers.

Only those offerors determined to be technically acceptable will be considered for award. Offerors with evaluated technical and past performance acceptable proposals will be considered in determining the lowest price based on the total evaluated price. However, the Contracting Officer will make a responsibility determination of the technical acceptable offerors in accordance with FAR 9.1.

M.1

Evaluation Criteria. The Government will use the criteria set forth below in the evaluation and selection of offers for award. Each offeror must submit a proposal that completely addresses all of the requirements listed in the RFP and must demonstrate how each requirement will be satisfied.

Factor 1 – Mission Capability. The Government technical evaluation team will evaluate the technical proposals on a Yes and NO basis, assigning ratings of “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable.” A failure in any factor will render the offeror’s proposal as unacceptable. Any unacceptable proposal will be removed from any further consideration for award. The offeror’s Mission Capability proposal will be rated utilizing the adjectival ratings defined below.

MISSION CAPABILITY RATINGS Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation

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

Factor 1 – Resources. – The offeror will provide recent and relevant documentation that demonstrates the requirements of paragraphs (1)-(2)-(3):

(1) Contractor Furnished Items and Responsibilities: The contractor shall furnish all supplies, equipment, facilities and services required to perform work in accordance with section 4 of the PWS.

(2) Specific Tasks: Offeror shall provide Mobile CARC Paint Facility (MCPF) support services on Government

Owned equipment in accordance paragraph 5 of the PWS.

(3) Workload: Offeror shall provide and maintain labor force to support the acceptance base workload in accordance with 5.2.1 of the PWS.

Factor 2 - Past Performance. The Government will use Past Performance information as an indicator of the offeror’s ability to perform successfully. The Government will consider the recent and relevance of the past performance information provided. Each offeror shall provide at least two completed Past Performance

Questionnaires (PPQ) (Attachment 9) as part of their proposal. Offeror shall forward a copy of the Past Performance

Questionnaire (PPQ) (Attachment 9) for each of the contracts identified on Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ)

Points of Contact (Attachment 3) responsible for monitoring performance to provide information on previous or existing contracts that are similar in scope, magnitude, and complexity within the last six (6) years from the date of the solicitation for the submitted data. Previous contracts should be not more than six (6) years old and shall show successful history of the past contract performance. The Points of Contact shall return the questionnaires directly to the Contracting Officer via email to the Contracting Specialist, Mary Frances Roldan, at email address, maryfrances.a.roldan.civ@army.mil no later than the proposal due date. Questionnaires not submitted directly to the

Contracting Specialist will not be reviewed and evaluated. The information contained in the properly executed and returned questionnaires will be used to evaluate the offeror’s past performance. New entities that have no past customers shall annotate on the Summary Page that they have no previous clients and that the minimum number of questionnaires cannot be provided.

The Government reserves the right to use both the information provided in the offeror’s proposal and from the Past

Performance Questionnaires (PPQs), and information obtained from any other Government sources, but not limited to, (e.g., CPARs, PPIR, FAPIIS, etc.,) when evaluating the offeror’s past performance. Offerors are authorized to provide information on problems encountered on previous contracts and their corrective actions. The Government mailto:maryfrances.a.roldan.civ@army.mil will determine whether the offerors’ performance was satisfactory, unsatisfactory or neutral using the definitions below.

Satisfactory - Contractor’s performance was in accordance with the PWS and no major performance discrepancies were noted

Unsatisfactory - Contractor did not perform in accordance with the PWS or major performance discrepancies were noted

Neutral- There is no record of relevant past performance or information of past performance is not available

In order to be found technically acceptable, the offeror’s overall past performance must be rated Satisfactory or

Neutral.

PAST PERFORMANCE RATINGS

Rating Description

Acceptable Contractor performance was in accordance with the PWS and no major performance discrepancies noted. No record of relevant past performance or information is not available.

Unacceptable Contractor did not perform in accordance with the PWS and major performance discrepancies were noted

Factor 3 – Price. Each offeror must propose a price for each Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) of the Schedule of

Contract Line Items. Prices submitted on the CLINs shall be the offeror’s price on each CLIN price in the Schedule of Supplies/Service of the Solicitation. Offerors’ pricing will be evaluated as well as the individual CLIN prices in order to ascertain the offeror’s understanding of the requirement as well as demonstrating balance and price reasonableness.

Total Evaluated Price (TEP):

The TEP for award purposes will be calculated as follows from the Schedule of Supplies/Services of the

Solicitation:

The total price of the option to extend services as described in below

(a) Option to Extend Services. As part of price evaluation, the Government will evaluate its option to extend services (FAR Clause 52.217-8) by adding one-half (six (6) months) of the offeror’s final option/ordering year price to the offeror’s total price. Thus, the offeror’s total price for the purpose of evaluations will include the base year, first option, second option, third option, fourth option, and one-half of the fourth option. Offerors are required only to price the base and the four options.

(b) Offerors are not required to enter a price for the six month extension period.