Attachment_0010_-_Solicitation_Tables__12_Jul_2019.pdf
PDF 444 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Joint Tactical Terminal - Next Generation
- Solicitation number
- W56KGY19R0006
About this file
This document contains evaluation tables and proposal submission requirements for a solicitation seeking a Joint Tactical Terminal - Next Generation solution. Offerors must submit proposals by 16 July 2019 addressing technical, price, past performance, and small business factors. Proposals will be evaluated based on the degree to which they meet requirements, demonstrate an understanding of the work, establish a sound technical approach, offer a fair and reasonable price, and exhibit a successful performance history of delivering similar solutions on previous government contracts. The Army Materiel Command will assess proposals and select the offeror presenting the best overall value based on the ratings assigned across each evaluation factor.
Attachment 0010 - Solicitation Tables_12 July 2019
View the file
Other files
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
Attachment 0010 - Solicitation Tables
Table 1 - Phase I and II
Phase I: Go/No Go Requirements Evaluation
Factor I: Technical, Subfactor 1:
Product Capability Demonstration, Task #1.1
Pass/Fail
Factor I: Technical, Subfactor 2:
Testing and Certification (proof of successful NSA certification experience)
Pass/Fail
Phase II: Passed Go/No Go Requirements Evaluation
Factor I: Technical , Subfactor 1:
Product Capability Demonstration, Task #1, #2, #3, and #4
Adjectival
Factor I: Technical, Subfactor 2: Testing and Certification Adjectival
Factor I: Technical, Subfactor 3: Technical Approach Adjectival
Factor I: Technical, Subfactor 4: Production & Sustainment Adjectival
Factor II: Price Adjectival
Factor III: Past Performance Adjectival
Factor IV: Small Business Participation Plan Adjectival
Table 2 - Combined Technical/Risk Ratings
COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS
Color Rating Description
Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.
Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.
Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.
Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.
Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.
Table 3 - Past Performance Relevancy Ratings
Past Performance Relevancy Ratings
Rating Definition
Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.
Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.
Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.
Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.
Table 4 - Performance Confidence Assessments
Performance Confidence Assessments
Adjectival Rating Description
Substantial Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.
Satisfactory Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.
Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available or the Offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.
The Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.
Limited Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.
No Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the Offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.
Table 5 - Small Business Participation Factor Rating Definitions
Rating Description
Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of small business objectives.
Unacceptable Proposal does not meet small business objectives.
Table 6 - Proposal Files
Title Filename Page Limit
I. Technical Technical Proposal
{OfferorName}Tech.pdf 75
PWS
Compliance Matrix
{OfferorName}COMPMAT.xlsx No limit
System Product
Specification {OfferorName}ProdSpec.doc, docx, or
No limit
II. Price Pricing
Workbook Price.xlsx No limit
CPFF Workbook Cost.xlsx No limit
Cost Narrative CostNarr.doc, docx, or pdf No limit
III. Past Performance
Past Performance
Proposal {OfferorName}PP.pdf 25
Past
Performance Questionnaires
{OfferorName}PPquestionnaires.PDF
Subcontractor
Past Performance
{OfferorName}SubPP.pdf 5 per subcontractor
IV. Small Business
Participation
(SBP)
SBP Factor {OfferorName}SBP.doc, docx or PDF 25
SBP Plan (for
Large Business Primes only)
{OfferorName} SBPP.doc, docx or pdf No Limit
V. Executive Summary
Proposal Synopsis
{OfferorName}PROPSYN.docx or PDF 10
Glossary of
Abbreviations and Acronyms
{OfferorName}Glossary.docx or PDF No limit
Supporting
Documentation {OfferorName}filename.doc, docx or
Solicitation
Documentation {OfferorName}SolDoc.PDF No limit
SAM record {OfferorName}SAM.PDF No limit
Organizational Conflict of Interest
Mitigation Plan
{OfferorName}OCIMIT.doc or docx or
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .