Addendum 52.212-2- Evaluation_2 Nov 26.pdf

Addendum to Evaluation – Commercial Product and Commercial Services

ADDENDUM TO CLAUSE 52.212-2 Evaluations

The Government will utilize a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) evaluation method for this requirement. The Government will award one (1) Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) to the offeror whose proposal is technically acceptable, to the lowest price, and is deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), Part 12 Acquisition of Commercial Items, in conjunction with FAR 19, Small Business Program, as supplemented, by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), and the Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFARS), and whose offer conforms to the solicitation’s requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, and all other information required by the solicitation.

Offers that fail to address all the requirements set forth in the Solicitation will be rejected. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award an Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) without discussion. Therefore, the Offeror’s submission should contain their best terms from a cost and technical standpoint.

However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if later determined by the Contracting Officer to be necessary. The Government reserves the right to reject an offer upon initial submission and not consider it for contract award if any required data is absent or the data received conveys a misunderstanding of the requirement.

BASIS FOR AWARD:

The Government will award one (1) Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) to the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) Offeror who is experienced, trained, certified, and possess the knowledge and skills pertinent to this requirement. The Government will evaluate the contractor’s Technical Approach (to include capabilities statement), Past Performance and Price Proposal to ensure that it reflects a sound understanding of this requirement and complies with the requirements in the solicitation. A determination of a fair and reasonable price will be conducted. The Federal Acquisition regulation (FAR), as supplemented by the DFARS and AFARS, will be used to evaluate the offer and award this requirement.

The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

EVALUATION CRITERIA. Evaluation criteria consist of factors and elements. The proposals will be evaluated under three evaluation factors:

Factor 1: Technical

Element 1: Technical Experience

Element 2: Technical Capability

Factor 2: Past Performance

Factor 3: Price

Factor 1 – Technical:

The Technical factor evaluation provides an assessment of the offeror’s capability to satisfy the Government’s minimum requirements. The Technical factor has two elements. The Government will evaluate the technical experience and capability related to providing Generator Monitoring Services. The following provides a general breakdown for evaluation the Technical Acceptability elements:

Element 1: Technical Experience. Offerors shall provide detailed previous work experience (contracts) meeting the requirements of this solicitation. The Contractor shall include the following:

i. Demonstrate that Generator Monitoring has been a part of your firm’s business objective for the past three (3) years.

ii. Listing of not more than five (5) complete or ongoing contracts within the previous three (3) years that represents the Offeror’s work experience required on this solicitation. If more than five (5) contracts are submitted, only the first five (5) will be evaluated.

Element 2: Technical Capability. The offeror shall demonstrate existing capability, licenses, and certifications necessary to perform the work outlined in PWS and the ability to possess sufficient equipment, personnel, and knowledge to execute the tasks in PWS.

The Technical Factor will receive one of the adjectival ratings defined below:

ADJECTIVAL RATING DEFINITION

Acceptable Technical proposal meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation Unacceptable Technical proposal does not meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation

Factor 2 – Past Performance:

The Past Performance Evaluation will assess the offeror’s probability of successfully meeting solicitation requirements based on their historical performance record. This evaluation is conducted at the factor level, focusing on recent and relevant performance closely aligned with the scope of services being procured.

Past performance information is not a mandatory submission requirement for this solicitation. If an offeror chooses not to provide past performance information, this omission will not be counted against them, and they will not be penalized or rated unfavorably. However, all offerors are highly encouraged to submit past performance information to assist the Government in its evaluation. In conducting its assessment, the Government may utilize past performance data provided directly within the offeror’s proposal, as well as information obtained from independent external sources, such as the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (CPRAS.gov) or similar federal databases. Offerors lacking a record of relevant past performance, or for whom information is not available, will receive a neutral rating and will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on this factor.

Assigned Ratings. The Past Performance Factor will be assigned one of the ratings defined below.

Past Performance Evaluation Ratings 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 unknown

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.

Neutral In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a “neutral” rating shall be considered “acceptable”.

Factor 3 – Price: Proposed pricing will be evaluated for fairness and reasonableness in accordance with FAR Part 12 commercial pricing procedures. The Government will rank all technically acceptable proposals by their total evaluated price from lowest to highest.

To be eligible for award, the offeror must submit a technically acceptable proposal, with the award being made to the responsible offeror presenting the lowest evaluated price among those deemed technically acceptable.

The Government will determine the total evaluated price by aggregating the total proposed price for the base period and all option periods. Offerors are cautioned that a proposal may be determined unacceptable if the proposed pricing for the base year and subsequent option periods is significantly unbalanced.

Additionally, pursuant to FAR Clause 52.217-8 (Option to Extend Services), the Government will evaluate the potential six-month extension by adding one-half of the offeror’s final option period price to the overall total evaluated price. Consequently, the total evaluated price calculated for the evaluation purposes will consist of the base year, Option Year 1, Option Year 2, Option Year 3, Option Year 4, Option Year 5, Option Year 6, Option Year 7, Option Year 8, Option Year 9, and one-half (1/2) of the Option Year 9 price. Offerors are not required to input a separate price for this potential six-month extension period.