Attachment 0016 - SECTION M.pdf

SECTION M – Evaluation Factors for Award

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

The Government intends to award one contract as a result of this competition. Offers will be evaluated against the criteria set forth below. The Technical Evaluation Team will prepare a detailed written evaluation of each offeror’s Technical Proposal, Volume I, addressing whether the offeror includes the information and supporting data required for each of the four sub-factors. The Technical Evaluation Team shall then assign a consensus rating (acceptable or unacceptable) to each Volume I sub-factor based on the information and supporting data provided. Any areas of the offer requiring clarification will be referred to the Contracting Officer for resolution.

The Government intends to award without discussions, however in the event it is determined discussions are required, the SSA shall make the final determination of technical acceptability/unacceptability of each proposal and establish a competitive range among the offerors’ proposals that were deemed acceptable. The SSA shall then select the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal from the competitive range.

Price (Volume II) will be considered for award only for those offerors whose Technical Proposal (Volume I) is deemed to be technically acceptable.

Each initial offer should contain the offerors best terms for award of a contract under the solicitation. The Procuring Contracting Officer reserves the right to contact offerors for clarification, without opening discussions. The Government intends to award a contract without opening discussions (except for clarification as described in FAR 15.306(a) and FAR 52.215-1). However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions and permit offerors to revise their proposal.

The Government reserves the right to make no award as a result of this solicitation if, upon evaluation, none of the proposal are deemed technically acceptable, and there is no reasonable expectation that opening discussions would result in technically acceptable proposals, or if the prices cannot be determined fair and reasonable.

TECHNICAL FACTOR EVALUATIONS:

An offeror’s proposal must fully address each of the subfactors delineated below and must provide specified documentation with respect to each subfactor. In order for an offeror’s technical proposal to be rated as acceptable, each subfactor identified below must receive an acceptable rating. An acceptable and unacceptable rating are defined as follows:

ACCEPTABLE: Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

UNACCEPTABLE: Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

Subfactor 1: Experience

a. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Experience to determine the capability of the Offeror to perform the work required, specifically with manufacturing Propelling Charge(s) for similar mortar rounds or handling 1.1 materials.

Subfactor 2: Manufacturing Plan

a. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed manufacturing plan to determine the adequacy and level of understanding of the pull strap requirements per the solicitation requirements. The Government will evaluate the planned sources of supply for the explosives, whether the Propelling Charges will be procured from a third party or manufactured in house. If manufacturing in-house, a Process Map showing each step, including Quality Checks and rework processes shall be provided.

Subfactor 3: Quality Control/Assurance Plan:

a. The Government will evaluate the adequacy of the Offeror’s Quality Control/Assurance Plan Quality Control/Assurance Plan to ensure it includes sufficient detail to assure the government that the Propelling Charges will meet the quality requirements set forth in the solicitation. The Government will evaluate if the Offeror provided the makes and models of the proposed test equipment and certifications, if applicable, of the Quality Control/Assurance personnel performing the testing.

Subfactor 4: Delivery Schedule

a. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Delivery Schedule plan to determine if the Offeror can successfully meet the proposed delivery schedule.

PRICE EVALUATION

a. The Government shall evaluate offers based on prices proposed for all CLINs and FAT required by the solicitation.

b. The proposal shall include prices for CLINs 0001-0006 for both Base and the Option Qty.

c. The total evaluated price (TEP) is calculated by multiplying the unit price by the Quantity, and adding FAT, for both the base and option CLINs. (Sum of all CLINs).

d. If an offeror fails to propose prices for all CLINs and/or FAT in all quantity, the Government may reject that offer as unacceptable.

e. Price analysis shall be used to determine price reasonableness. In the event that a price analysis cannot determine the proposed prices fair and reasonable, cost and pricing data may be required. Additional analysis techniques may be used as determined necessary by the Contracting Officer.

These methods of evaluations may include the use of information/input from sources such as (but not limited to) other Government agencies and personnel.

f. As part of the cost/price evaluation, proposals may be reviewed to identify any significant unbalanced pricing. In accordance with FAR 15.404-1(g), Unbalanced Pricing, a proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.