Attachment_0004_GEN VI HRS RMAS_Self-Scoring_Matrix.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 19 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- W519TC-26-R-AHRS
About this file
This is a self-scoring matrix template designed to assist vendors in evaluating their own compliance with the Recruiting Management Administrative Support (RMAS) GEN VI IDIQ contract evaluation criteria. The matrix provides a checklist format that allows prospective contractors to assess whether they meet the minimum qualification standards outlined in the draft RFP's Technical Subfactor 1 (Corporate Experience) and Section M evaluation criteria.
The matrix requires vendors to verify compliance across eight key evaluation areas: (1) whether each submitted Qualifying Contract (QC) meets the government's QC definition per PWS Section 2.2.2.3; (2) submission of at least one QC demonstrating "Recruiting and Retention" experience; (3) identification and selection of two additional elective RMAS task categories; (4) provision of at least one QC for the first additional task category selected; (5) confirmation that each QC's project summary adequately addresses all required criteria (a-e) and identifies the customer; (6) documentation of technical relevancy through NAICS codes or 1-to-1 task mapping; (7) demonstration of multi-location performance across the portfolio; and (8) verification that at least one submitted QC meets the minimum $1 million financial scale requirement. The matrix directs vendors to reference specific PWS sections and provide supporting documentation, contractual references, and clarifying notes for each evaluation area, enabling them to self-assess readiness before formal proposal submission.
View the file
Other files
Show all 37
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| PWS/Section L/Section M Reference | Evaluation Area | Section M Requirement | Self Scoring Question | Yes/ No/ NA | Work sample Identifier | Contractual Document Reference | Location Proof (Document(s) and Page(s)) | Clarifying Notes |
| Section L.2.1.4.1 | Overall QC | Each submitted contract must meet the QC definition in L.2.1.4.1. | Does each referenced contract qualify as a "QC"? | |||||
| PWS 2.2.2.3 | QC: Recruiting & Retention | M.3.1.1.1: Minimum of one (1) QC demonstrating experience in "Recruiting and Retention" (PWS 2.2.2.3 | Have we provided at least one QC for Recruiting and Retention? | |||||
| PWS Section 2.2 | Additional QCs | M.3.1.1.1: Identify the minimum required elective RMAS Task Categories in accordance with Section L.2.1.4.1 | Have we selected and identified two additional task categories? | |||||
| PWS Section 2.2 | Additional QC #1 | M.3.1.1.1: Provided a minimum of one (1) QC for the first additional Task Category selected. | Have we provided at least one QC for the first additional category? | |||||
| Section L.2.1.4.1.3 | All QCs: Project Summary | M.3.1.1.1: Summary of Project: Each QC adequately discusses L.2.1.4.1.3 criteria a) – e) and identifies the customer. | Does each QC's summary cover criteria a-e and name the customer? | |||||
| Section L.2.1.5 | All QCs: Relevancy | M.3.1.1.1: Technical Relevancy Narrative: Each QC demonstrates an adequate understanding of the technical requirements and skills. | Have we provided the required NAICS code, or completed the 1 to 1 task mapping in the notes column for any non 541612 contract? | |||||
| Section L.2.1.4.1.3 | Portfolio: Locations | M.3.1.1.1: Portfolio must demonstrate performance across multiple distinct locations in accordance with Section L. | Does our submitted portfolio meet the multi location requirement? | |||||
| Section L.2.1.4.1.3 | Portfolio: Financial | M.3.1.1.1: Portfolio must meet the financial scale requirement in accordance with Section L. | Does at least one of our submitted QC's meet the $1M Financial scale requirement? |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .