Attachment 4 FAR 52.212-2 Evaluation - Commercial Items.pdf

SP3300-12-R-0023

FAR 52.212-2 EVALUATION FACTORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION – SEE FAR 2.101 & 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

The Government intends to award one contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforms to the solicitation using the lowest price technically acceptable source selection procedures in accordance with FAR 15.101-2, as supplemented. Technical tradeoffs will not be made and no additional credit will be given for exceeding acceptability. Award will be made to the acceptable offeror with the lowest evaluated price, inclusive of options, which is deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), and which has submitted a proposal conforming to the solicitation requirements. The requirements include all stated terms, conditions, completion of representations and certifications, and all other requirements of this solicitation. The Government intends to award without discussions; therefore, the initial offer should contain the offeror’s best terms from a cost and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined necessary by the Contracting Officer.

Proposals shall be evaluated for acceptability or unacceptability only and shall not be rated. Award will be based on the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for the non-price factors. Any offeror who has submitted a technically acceptable proposal and who has been found to have an acceptable past performance will then have the proposal evaluated for lowest price.

The following non-price factors shall be used to determine acceptability of a proposal:

Factor 1: Technical Capability

Factor 2: Past Performance

Factors 1 through 2 shall be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. 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 15.305(a)(2)(iv), Past Performance Evaluation). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance.

In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

To be considered acceptable and eligible for award, an Offeror must address separately all the factors set forth in accordance with the instructions of this solicitation. A major item and/or gross omission which precludes meeting solicitation objectives that cannot be corrected prior to or during discussions without major revision or complete resubmission of the proposal will cause a proposal to be found technically unacceptable.

An “Unacceptable” determination on Factor 1, Technical Capability, shall render the proposal ineligible for award, or if discussions are held, a proposal found to be “unacceptable for award” (as defined above) may be excluded from the competitive range. An initial proposal evaluation of "Unacceptable" in the Past Performance Factor (Factor 2) will not automatically eliminate an offeror from the competitive range, but may be considered in making the competitive range determination if communications have been conducted pursuant to FAR 15.306(b)(1)(i). Communications shall be held with offerors whose past performance information is the determining factor keeping them from being placed within the competitive

FAR 52.212-2 EVALUATION FACTORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS

range if the communications are necessary to allow them to address adverse past performance information to which the offeror(s) had not had a prior opportunity to respond.

It is the intention of the Government to award without discussions. However, if it is determined that discussions are required, then the determination of the competitive range will include all proposals which are considered to be technically acceptable and may include those that are considered to have a reasonable chance of being selected for award, unless the competitive range is further limited in accordance with FAR 15.306(c)(2).

Those offerors whose proposals do not fall into the competitive range will be notified as required by FAR 15.503(a)(1). Offerors will be notified in writing with a concise explanation of their proposal deficiencies without jeopardizing the competitive range.

Those offerors whose proposals are determined by the Contracting Officer to be in the competitive range will be contacted by the Contract Specialist for discussions. Discussions will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.306(d). If verbal discussions are held they will be followed by a written reiteration of the discussion.

Written discussions may also be held, whereby the Government will provide a written list of discussion questions to each offeror, as appropriate. In the case of both verbal and written discussions, the offeror will provide a written response to the discussion question and revision to the proposal as required. This response and revision (if required) will be marked accordingly to distinguish it as a supplement to their original proposal. More than one round of discussions may be held. At the conclusion of final discussions, the Government will request each offeror in the competitive range to submit a Final Proposal Revision (FPR).

The FPR will be evaluated as to its revised technical, past performance, and/or pricing approach in response to the issues identified during discussions. The Government then intends, in accordance with the evaluation factors for award set forth below, to award a contract to the offeror who has submitted the lowest price technically acceptable proposal.

If discussions are held, a proposal will be determined “unacceptable” for award if any of the non-price (Factors 1and 2) are rated as “Unacceptable” following evaluation of FPRs.

Factor 1, Technical Capability: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Technical Capability to determine acceptability of the offeror/proposal. Technical acceptability will be evaluated on an acceptable/unacceptable basis.

A. To be technically acceptable, the Offeror’s proposal must comply with the requirements of law, regulation, and all conditions set forth in this solicitation. The Offeror must demonstrate a clear understanding of the requirements of the Statement of Work and discuss their ability to meet all stated technical requirements.

B. To be technically acceptable, the Offeror must clearly demonstrate its ability to meet the

Government’s required contract delivery date.

C. To be technically acceptable, the Offeror must clearly demonstrate its ability to provide the required warranty as discussed in the statement of work.

Failure to provide a complete, detailed, realistic, and reasonable proposal may reflect a lack of understanding of the requirements and may result in a determination that the Offeror’s proposal is unacceptable. The Government does not assume a duty to search for clarification data to cure problems or inconsistencies with an Offeror’s proposal.

FAR 52.212-2 EVALUATION FACTORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS

Factor 2, Past Performance Record: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Past Performance Record to determine acceptability of a proposal as follows:

Past Performance shall be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. 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 15.305(a)(2)(iv), Past Performance Evaluation). Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance.

In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

The Government may utilize the Federal Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), data submitted by the Offeror as part of the Past Performance Proposal, and any other information available to determine the quality and relevance of the Offeror’s past performance.

Each proposal will be evaluated to the extent to which the Offeror has demonstrated an ability and willingness to perform: 1) A quality product or service (i.e. the conformance to contract requirements, specifications, and standards of good workmanship); 2) Timeliness of the contract with regard to completion of contract, task orders, milestones, delivery schedules and administrative requirements (e.g., effort that contributes to or affects the schedule variance); 3) Acceptable cost control with regard to the Offeror’s effectiveness in forecasting, managing, and controlling contract cost; 4) Good business relationships with regard to the timeliness, completeness and quality of problem identification and resolution, Offeror’s history of reasonable and cooperative behavior, customer satisfaction, timely award and management of subcontracts, and whether the contractor met their small/small disadvantaged and women owned business participation goals; and 5) Management of personnel with regard to demonstration of a commitment to the management of personnel with regard to the Offeror’s performance in selecting, retaining, supporting, and replacing when necessary, personnel.

The Government will only consider relevant past performance data of the Offeror and its major subcontractors. A major subcontractor is defined as those providing twenty percent (20%) of total dollar threshold AND/OR twenty-five percent (25%) of total man-hour effort. Subcontractors not meeting the definition of a “major subcontractor” will not be evaluated. To be considered relevant, the Offeror must demonstrate past execution of similar contracts in terms of complexity, technology, magnitude of effort, schedule, and scope. Additionally, the performance must have occurred during the last five (5) years.

Offerors shall be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. 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 15.305(a)(2)(iv), Past Performance Evaluation). Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable”. Should the Government discover adverse past performance information to which the Offeror(s) had not had a prior opportunity to respond, the KO will conduct communications if deemed appropriate.

PRICE PROPOSAL

If a proposal has been determined acceptable for the non-price factors listed above, the Government will then evaluate the proposal for the lowest price. The proposal total price-the sum of the total amount for all CLINS-between offers that are determined to be technically acceptable will be the determining factor

FAR 52.212-2 EVALUATION FACTORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS

in the selection of a quotation for award. The Government will assess the offeror’s price to determine if it is reasonable for the work to be performed.

PRICE

The Government will perform a price analysis to determine the reasonableness of proposed price in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(B)(2). The Government will utilize a comparison of proposed prices received in response to the solicitation. Normally, adequate price competition establishes price reasonableness (see FAR 15.403-1 <http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/ fardfars/far/15.htm> (c)(1)). In addition the Government may utilize a comparison of previously proposed prices and previous Government and commercial contract prices with current proposed prices for the same or similar items, if both the validity of the comparison and the reasonableness of the previous price(s) can be established. The Government may conduct reverse auctioning in order to achieve greater savings once price analysis has been completed and it is determined in the best interest of the Government to do so. At that time, those offerors who have met all solicitation terms and conditions and were determined to be technically acceptable will be invited to participate in the reverse auction. The Government intends to make one award as a result of this solicitation.

(b) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer’s specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.