Draft_M917A3_HDT_Section_M.pdf

M.3 Evaluation Factors

The Government will assess each Offeror in three (3) factors:

a. Technical (M.3.1)

b. Total Evaluated Cost/Price (TEC/P) (M.3.2)

c. Small Business Participation (M.3.3)

Of the evaluation factors, Technical is more important than Price, which is more important than Small Business Participation. The Technical Factor is further divided into Subfactors as described in M.3.1

M.3.1 Volume I - Technical Factor

The Offerors Technical Volume will be evaluated in three (3) Subfactors:

1) Payload – Performance Specification Requirement HDT PSPEC-145, 409, 2748

2) Armor Solution Integration– Performance Specification Requirement PSPEC-27, 49, 52, 1040, 1379, 1675, 2779, 2780

3) Mobility (VCI) – Performance Specification Requirement PSPEC-1567

Of the Technical Subfactors, Subfactor 1 - Payload is approximately equal to Subfactor 2 - Armor Solution Integration, which is more important than Subfactor 3 - Mobility (VCI).

The Government will determine the technical merit of the Offeror’s proposal by considering the proposed performance in relation to the three Technical Subfactors described in the Performance Requirements Matrix (Attachment 0002). The proposed performance provided in response to the Performance Requirements Matrix (Attachment 0002) will be incorporated into any resultant contract and the proposed levels of performance will become contract requirements.

M.3.1.1 The Government will evaluate the following information to assess the Offeror’s proposed approach in response to paragraph L.3:

a. The Offeror’s proposed level of performance in the Performance Requirements Matrix (Attachment 0002), for each Technical Subfactor (L.3.1).

b. The Offeror’s data and information that substantiates their proposed level of performance for each Technical Subfactor identified in the Performance Requirements Matrix (Attachment 0002).

c. The Offeror’s narrative explaining the extent of variation, if any, of the Offeror’s design from an existing design and the impact such variances have on the total design (L.3.1.6).

M.3.1.2 The Government will assess the Offeror’s proposed Performance Level relative to the three subfactors listed in M.3.1 as follows:

a. The risk associated with the Offeror achieving the proposed performance levels, to include achieving proposed performance at the threshold level, or above threshold up to the objective level of performance when offered.

M.3.1.3 Evaluation of Above Threshold Performance. When offered, the Government will evaluate the extent to which the Offeror credibly proposes to achieve performance above threshold performance levels, as identified in the Performance Requirements Matrix (Attachment 0002).

M.3.1.3.1 If the Government evaluation shows that an Offeror has demonstrated, in accordance with Section M evaluation criteria, that an Offeror is likely to achieve a performance level above threshold, at moderate risk or lower (to the benefit of the Government), it may be noted as a Subfactor and Factor strength. For proposed performance between the threshold and objective level of performance, greater strengths may be given to the extent that the proposed level of performance is achievable at moderate risk or lower, and benefits the Government. Strengths may also result in an increase in the assigned rating for the Subfactor and Factor. If the proposed above threshold performance is evaluated as having higher than moderate risk for achieving the proposed performance, no proposal strength will be given and the proposed performance will not be considered to have any benefit to the Government.

No additional strengths will be given for performance above the objective level for each Subfactor.

M.3.1.3.2 If Government evaluation of the proposal indicates achievement of the proposed above threshold performance level is likely, at moderate risk or lower, the proposed level of performance will be included in any resulting contract. In the event an Offeror does not agree to incorporate the proposed above threshold level of performance into the resulting contract, the Offeror will not be credited, in whole or in part, with their achievement of the above threshold performance level.

M.3.1.3.3 In assessing the risk of meeting the technical considerations, the Government will evaluate the substantiating data submitted by the Offeror, combined with the extent the offered design varies from the design configuration the substantiating data was generated for. The more the offered system varies from the design the substantiating data was generated for, the greater the risk. In general, testing shall be considered more credible than other forms of substantiating data. Government testing shall be considered more credible than third party testing, which is more credible than Contractor testing.

M.3.1.4 For Payload, the Government will review the substantiating data to evaluate the risk of meeting the threshold payload requirements and any proposed performance between threshold and objective or at the objective level requirements.

M.3.1.5 For Armor Solution Integration, the Government will review the substantiating data provided to evaluate the risk of meeting the armor solution integration requirements, combined with the extent the offered design varies from the requirements. Inclusive to the Armor Solution Integration subfactor, the Government will evaluate the risk of meeting the threshold or objective “Operate Separately” requirement(s).

M.3.1.6 For Mobility, the Government will review the substantiating data provided to evaluate the risk of meeting the threshold Mobility requirements and any proposed performance between threshold and objective or at the objective level requirements.

The Government will assemble a mobility model of the Offeror’s proposed design to be used in the evaluation. Offeror must provide data from Attachment 004, VCI Data Requirement Matrix, to provide data necessary for the model.