W9124V-17-T-0002_LPTA_evaluation_criteria.pdf

NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU

OFFICE OF THE US PROPERTY AND FISCAL OFFICER FOR MONTANA

1956 Mt Majo Street, P.O. Box 4789 Fort Harrison, Montana 59636-4789

1 | P a g e

NGMT-JFQ-CTR 14 September 2016

MEOMORANDUM FOR W9124V-17-T-0002

SUBJECT: Evaluation criteria for Missoula Lodging Blanket Purchase Agreement

1.0. INTRODUCTION

1.1. The Government will evaluate all quotes in accordance with the factors and criteria established in the Request for Quote (RFQ). The criteria provide the basis upon which each evaluation will be based, are established before receipt of the quotes, and are intended to ensure that the evaluation will be a structured process employing equitable measures. Quotes will be evaluated and a contract awarded under the Best Value Continuum approach, to the lowest price, technically acceptable offer that meets or exceeds the technical acceptability standards established in the factors below.

1.1.1 In order for an Offeror to be considered for award, the quote must receive an “Acceptable” rating in every non-price factor. Any quote receiving a rating of “Unacceptable” in any non-price factor will not be further evaluated.

1.2. The Government intends to evaluate quotes and make award without discussions. The

Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines discussions to be necessary.

2.0. EVALUATION FACTORS

2.1. Technical.

2.1.1. The purpose of the technical factor is to assess the offeror’s proposed approach, as detailed in its quote, to satisfy the Government’s minimum requirements.

2.1.2. Risk assesses the degree to which the offeror’s proposed technical approach for the requirements of the solicitation may cause disruption of schedule, increased costs, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. Risk will be assessed as one aspect of the technical factor rating.

2.2. Past Performance.

2.2.1. The Past Performance Evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements, based on past performance information as a prime contractor. This assessment is based on the Offeror’s record of relevant and recent past performance information that pertain to the products and/or services outlined in the solicitation requirements.

2.2.2. Recency refers to the state or quality of being current. The more recent the contract, the greater the likelihood that the offeror has the capacity to perform in a like manner. Information regarding contract performance that is recent and has a logical connection with the matter under consideration indicates relevancy.

NGMT-JFQ-CTR

2 | P a g e

2.3 Price. The purpose of the price factor is to determine if the proposed price is fair and reasonable.

In no event will the Government make an award against an offer that the Government does not find to be fair and reasonably priced.

3.0. EVALUATION FACTOR CRITERIA

3.1. Criteria for Technical Factor.

Element A: Meet or exceed minimum requirements of the RFQ.

Quotes shall address and provide enough information to identify that all requirements are met or exceeded.

3.1.1 A total number of available rooms shall be provided. The number should reflect the total number of double, single and other rooms. A brief note on the ability and/or willingness to convert single rooms into double rooms should also be provided. This will assist, if necessary, on the Governments solution to limited availability issues due to sporting events or popular social activities in the area.

3.1.2 Cage code and DUNS number are required as part of the quote.

3.2. Criteria for Past Performance Factor Confidence Assessment. The Government will conduct a performance evaluation based upon the past performance of the offerors performing major or critical aspects of the requirement as it relates to the probability of successfully performing the solicitation requirements.

3.2.1. The Government will consider each offeror’s demonstrated, current, relevant record of performance in supplying products and services as a prime contractor that meet the contract’s requirement. Contracts completed within the last three (3) years are generally considered recent.

3.2.2. In conducting the past performance evaluation, the Government may use data provided by the offeror and data obtained from other sources it considers current and accurate, including the Past

Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS).

3.2.3. A minimum of two (2) references will be required. References must list the contract award or event number (event should either be a government award or large event requiring coordination with a large group of people), dollar amount or rooms provided, current contact information of

Government/Buyer POC to include phone number, email address and agency information (if applicable.)

3.2.3.1 Example format

W9124V-15-P-00XX or Willis Wedding Event

$25,000 or 84 hotel rooms provided

SFC Joe Soldier or Ted Willis

Joe.t.soldier.mil@mail.mil (406) 324 -3001 or weddingmaker@hotmail.com (406) 999-

Montana Army National Guard.

3.3. Criteria for Price Factor. The Government anticipates that adequate price competition will establish a fair and reasonable price. However, if the Government does not receive adequate price mailto:Joe.t.soldier.mil@mail.mil mailto:weddingmaker@hotmail.com

3 | P a g e competition, it will evaluate price quotes to ensure price reasonableness of the services being provided to the Government, considering the specific terms and conditions and relevant commercial practices.

4.0. RATING METHODS

4.1. Technical Factor: One of the following ratings will be assigned:

TECHNICAL RATINGS

Rating Definition Acceptable The quote clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable The quote does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

4.2. Past Performance Factor: Relevancy and Performance Assessment:

4.2.1. One of the following Relevancy ratings will be assigned:

PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY RATINGS

Rating Definition Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved much of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort did not involve any of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

4.2.2. The combination of relevancy and recency, and performance documented by the information collected by the Government, will result in one of the following ratings:

PAST PERFORMANCE RATINGS

Rating Description 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 (See note below.).

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Note: In the case of an offeror 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, the offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.

Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance and in the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

4.3. Price Factor: Price quotes will not receive an adjectival rating.

4 | P a g e

4.3.1 Contractors shall provide a per room rate inclusive of all costs (fees,taxes) below for each Item

No. If contractor needs to provide alternative Item No. (such as a rate increase for the month of June) they may do so by adding additional Item No. (0005, 0006 ….) with the rates for single and double rooms for that month or months.

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES UNIT PRICE

0001 Single-Occupancy Room: 1 or 2 beds, 1 person $

Period of Performance: 1 Jan 2016 – 31 June 2016 & September

0002 Double-Occupancy Room: 2 beds, 2 persons $

Period of Performance: 1 Jan 2016 – 31 June 2016 & September

0003 Single-Occupancy Room: 1 or 2 beds, 1 person $

Period of Performance: 1 July 2016 – 31 August 2016

0004 Double-Occupancy Room: 2 beds, 2 persons $

Period of Performance: 1 July 2016 – 31 August 2016

4.3.2 For all quotes that are determined to be technically sufficient, the Government will compare prices using a quantity of 100 double rooms per month and 8 single rooms per month to compare quoted prices from each vendor. This will be used to capture the summertime rate increase (if applicable) in evaluating prices and determining which hotel offers the best value.

4.3.3 **BPA holders may offer rates below the quoted price during a solicitation to increase their competitiveness during RFQ’s by the Call Officer. Rates provided are agreed to be the maximum rate charged for each Call for that period of time.