FAR_Clause_52_212-2_Addendum_Evaluation--Commercial_Items.pdf

FAR CLAUSE 52.212-2 ADDENDUM: EVALUATION – Commercial Items

1.0. Basis for Contract Award

1.1. This is a best value source selection conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 12.6, Streamlined Procedures for Evaluation and Soliciation for Commercial Items, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), and the Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFARS). Award will be made to a single offeror deemed responsible whose offer conforms to the solicitation requirements, IAW the FAR, and represents the Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable offer as judged by an overall assessment of the evaluation criteria and other considerations specified in this solicitation.

1.2. Trade-off between cost/price and non-cost/price factors is not permitted. The Government will evaluate proposed prices for reasonableness, in accordance with FAR 13.106-3, using price analysis techniques. Unreasonably high, unrealistically low, unbalanced, inaccurate or incomplete prices proposed, may be grounds for eliminating an offer from competition either on the basis that the Offeror does not understand the requirement or has made an unreasonable proposal.

1.3. Award for All of the Work. The Government intends to award one (1) contract as a result of this solicitation. Offers received for less than the stated number of items listed in the Supply/Services Schedule will be considered ineligible for award. As set forth in FAR 52.212- 1(g), the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with Offerors except clarifications, if needed. Therefore, the Offeror’s proposal should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoints. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary.

1.4. Evaluation Criteria

Evaluation criteria consists of the following evaluation factors:

Factor 1: Technical Capability Factor 2: Past Performance Factor 3: Price

In accordance with FAR 52.212-2(a), all evaluation factors other than price, when combined are approximately equal to price.

2.1. Factor 1 – Technical Capability. The Technical Capability factor evaluation provides an assessment of the Offeror’s capability to satisfy the Government’s minimum requirements.

The Offeror shall provide a detailed narrative on its management approach to include discussions on the management aspects specific to the solicited work, such as the roles and responsibilities of dedicated management staff assigned (e.g. Project Manager). Approach shall demonstrate Offeror’s ability to be responsive to the requirements of the contract.

Offeror shall explain how it will respond to surveillance of work, acceptance, rejection, documentation, resolution of deficiencies, trend analysis and shall include corrective actions and interface with Governm-ent inspectors and representatives and present a Staffing Plan.

Additionally, the Offeror shall demonstrate a minimum of five (5) years of experience in the related industry, as well as experience for any proposed sub-contractor(s). Experience is separate and distinct from the past performance evaluation, which measures probability of successful future performance.

2.1.1. The Government’s technical evaluation team will evaluate the technical proposals on an acceptable/unacceptable basis. The Government will consider for award only those proposals determined to be technically acceptable.

TECHNICAL RATINGS

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum standards and requirements of the technical factor as stipulated within the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum standards and requirements of the technical factor within the solicitation.

2.2. Factor 2 - Past Performance. The Past Performance evaluation will assess the Offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation’s requirements as indicated by that Offeror’s record of past performance. Past Performance is assessed at the factor level after evaluating aspects of the offeror’s recent past performance and focusing on performance that is relevant to the services being procured under this solicitation. Offerors are cautioned that in conducting the performance assessment, the Government may use data provided in the Offeror’s proposal and data obtained from other sources, such as the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) or similar systems and State Department Watch Lists. Past performance areas of evaluation include:

Business Relations Quality of Service Schedule Customer Satisfaction

a) Each offeror will receive a performance confidence assessment rating based on the

Offeror’s recent past performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the contract requirements.

b) Recency Assessment. An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past three (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation.

Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated.

c) Relevancy Assessment. To be relevant, the effort must be similar in scope of the work, size, and complexity. The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all recent performance information obtained to determine if it is the same or similar in scope, size, and complexity to the services being procured under this solicitation. A relevancy determination of the Offeror’s (including joint venture partner(s) and major and critical sub-contractor(s)) past performance will be made. In determining relevancy for individual contracts, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the Offeror, teaming partner, or sub-contractor whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated. In establishing what is relevant for the acquisition, consideration should be given to what aspects of an Offeror’s contract history would give the most confidence that the Offeror will satisfy the current procurement. The past performance information provided in the proposal and obtained from other sources will be used to establish the relevancy of past performance.

d) The Past Performance evaluation team will review this past performance information and determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to the performance confidence assessment.

2.2.1. Assigning Ratings. The Past Performance factor will be assigned one of the ratings defined below.

PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RATINGS

Rating Definition

Acceptable

Based on the Offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the Offeror’s performance record is neutral.

Unacceptable

Based on the Offeror’s performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the Offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

2.2.2. Offerors without a record of relevant past performance, or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse, that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have neutral past performance.

In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, neutral shall be considered acceptable.

3. Factor 3 – Price. Price will not be scored or rated. Evaluation of price will be performed using one or more of the price analysis techniques in FAR 13.106-3. Through these techniques the Government will determine whether prices are reasonable, complete and balanced.

3.1. Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are mathematically and materially unbalanced.

Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). As part of price evaluation, the Government will evaluate its option to extend services (see FAR Clause 52.217-8) by adding one-half of the offeror's final option period price to the offeror's total price.

Thus, the offeror's total price for the purpose of evaluation will include the base period, 1st option, 2nd option, 3rd option, 4th option, and 1/2 of the 4th option. Offerors are not required to enter a price for the six-month period.

3.2. Definitions.

Reasonableness. A price is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of competitive business.

Completeness/Accuracy. The offeror’s proposal is in compliance with the Price Volume instructions in the solicitation.

Total Price is the sum of the prices for the contract line item numbers of the solicitation.