Attachment_4_Evaluation_Factors_for_Award.pdf

SP3300-15-R-0012

ATTACHMENT 4

FAR 52.212-2 EVALUATION FACTORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS

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 and 2 shall be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis.

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.

The determination of the competitive range will include all proposals which are considered to have a reasonable chance of being selected for award. A proposal is considered acceptable if it (i) addresses itself to all the essential requirements of the RFP, (ii) shows the offeror understands all essential requirements of the RFP, and has demonstrated a full capability to perform the prospective requirements, (iii) meets the minimum technical requirements, and (iv) although some discussion of the proposal may be desirable, the proposal is complete to the extent that an award could be made on its present terms.

A proposal will be considered unacceptable if award cannot be made on the present terms of the proposal, and corrective action would require essentially rewriting the proposal or require the submission of an approach which would be new or almost entirely different from that previously proposed. Any proposal which is determined to be unacceptable will not be considered in the competitive range and eliminated from further consideration.

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 determination of "Unacceptable" in the Past Performance Factor (Factor 2) will not automatically eliminate an offeror from award eligibility or if necessary the competitive range, but may as needed be considered in making the competitive range determination if communications have been conducted pursuant to FAR 15.306(b)(1)(i), Communications with Offerors before the Establishment of the Competitive Range. Communications shall be held with offerors whose past performance information is the determining factor keeping them from being placed within the competitive 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 if necessary will include all proposals which are considered technically acceptable and may include proposals determined technically unacceptable that have a reasonable chance of award or are among the most highly rated, unless the competitive range is further limited in accordance with FAR 15.306(c)(2), Competitive Range.

Those offerors whose proposals are determined by the KO to be in the competitive range if necessary will be contacted by the Contract Specialist for discussions. Discussions will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.306(d), Exchanges with Offerors after the Establishment of the Competitive Range. 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 provides 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 (1) 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). A common cut-off-date for submission of FPRs will be established by the KO in accordance with FAR 15.307(b), Proposal Revisions. In the event further discussions are required after receipt of the final proposal revisions, the KO may reopen discussions and offerors will be required to submit another 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 clearly demonstrate its ability to provide each battery required in the Schedule of Supplies/Services. The Offeror must clearly demonstrate how they will comply with the International Standards for Phytosanitary

Measures (ISPM) 15, “Guidelines for Regulating Wood Packaging Material in International Trade” for the shipment of the batteries.

B. To be technically acceptable, the Offeror’s proposal must clearly demonstrate its ability to process Government delivery orders and meet contract delivery timeframes.

C. To be technically acceptable, the Offeror must clearly demonstrate that their quality control approach to consistently provide batteries compliant with all requirements set forth in this solicitation during the performance of the contract.

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.

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 acceptable past performance record with regard to: 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; 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; and regulating compliance.

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, magnitude of effort, 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 inclusive of options-between offers that are determined to be technically acceptable will be the determining factor 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.

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) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(c) 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.