W56KGY24R0002 Attachment 0008 - Solicitation Tables_6 November 2023.pdf
PDF 220 KB Posted
- Attached to
- RFP - Intelligence Application (Intel Apps) Information Collection Management (ICM) - W56KGY24R0002
- Solicitation number
- W56KGY24R0002
About this file
This document contains seven tables outlining the requirements and evaluation criteria for a solicitation seeking an Intelligence Application (Intel Apps) Information Collection Management solution. Offerors must submit proposal materials in Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint, or PDF formats according to file naming conventions and page count limits set in Table 1. Table 2 defines the adjectival ratings of Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal and Unacceptable for the technical factor. Table 3 establishes risk ratings of Low, Moderate, High and Unacceptable. Table 4 provides criteria for rating proposals' inclusion of Project VISTA Innovative Technology. Table 5 defines relevancy ratings for past performance examples. Table 6 outlines Satisfactory Confidence, Neutral, Limited Confidence and No Confidence ratings for past performance assessments. Finally, Table 7 establishes Acceptable and Unacceptable ratings for small business participation plans.
View the file
Other files
Show all 18
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 0009 – Solicitation Tables
Table 1. Requirements for Submission of Proposal Materials
Volume Title File Name
MS
Word Versio n
MS
Excel Versio n
MS
Power Point Versio n
Versio n
Doc Not Requir ed
Maximu m Page Count
I Executive Summary
Proposal Synopsis “PROP_SYN” X* - - X* - 10
Commercial Item Assertions
“COMM_ITEM_ASSERT
” X* - - X* - N/a
Glossary of Abbreviation s and Acronyms
“GLOSSERY” X* - - X* - N/a
Award Documents/ Certifications Representati ons
“AWARDDOC_CERT_R
EP” X* X* - X* - N/a
Commercial Plan or Subcontractin g Plan
“CP” or “SBP” X* - - X* - N/a
Data Assertions “DATA_ASSERT” - X - - - N/a
II
Technical Factor (when applicable
Project
VISTA
Innovative Technology
“PROJ_VISTA”- X* - - X* - 10
III Price Factor
TEP
Worksheet “TOTAL_EVAL_PRICE” - X - - - N/a
IV Past Performa nce
Past Performance Record
“PAST_PERF” X* - - X* - N/a
V Small Business
Small Business Participation Plan
“SMALL_BUS” X* - - X* - 3
* Selection one (1) of the multiple versions offered.
** If the Offeror has both plan types, please submit both.
*** Page Count refers to MS PowerPoint slide count.
NOTE: Pages and slides that exceed the required maximum limitations will not be evaluated. Additional pages and slides over the maximum allowed will be removed or not read and will not be evaluated by the Government.
Table 2. Technical Adjectival Rating
Table 3. Combined Risk Ratings
Color Rating
Adjectival Rating Description
Blue Outstanding Proposal demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements, contains multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength.
Purple Good Proposal demonstrates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength or significant strength.
Green Acceptable Proposal demonstrates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.
Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.
Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation and, thus, contains one or more deficiencies and is unawardable, and/or risk of performance is unacceptably high.
Adjectival Rating Definition
Low Proposal may contain weakness/weaknesses which have low potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost, or degradation of performance. Normal contractor emphasis and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.
Table 4. Project VISTA Innovative Technology Rating
Table 5. Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Adjectival Rating Definition
Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar 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.
Moderate
Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which may have a moderate potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost, or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties
High
Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which is likely to have high potential to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost, or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will unlikely be able to overcome any difficulties.
Unacceptable Proposal contains a deficiency or a combination of significant weaknesses that causes an unacceptable level of risk of unsuccessful performance.
Rating Definition
Meets Proposal contains Project VISTA Innovative Technology
Does Not Meet (Neutral)
Proposal does not contain Project VISTA Innovative Technology.
The Offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the Project VISTA Innovative Technology subfactor.
Table 6. Past Performance Assessment Ratings
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
No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonable assigned.
The offeror may not be evaluation favorable or unfavorable on the factor of past performance.
Limited Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has low expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.
No Confidence Based on the Offerors recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.
Table 7. Small Business Rating
Acceptable Proposal meets submission requirements in accordance with FAR 52.219-9(d) and/or company is a small business
Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements in accordance with FAR 52.219-9(d)
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .