Evaluation Factors for Award

Addenda to Clause 52.212-2

Evaluation – Commercial Items

BASIS FOR AWARD. The Government will award a contract/purchase order resulting from this solicitation to the responsible vendor whose quotation conforming to this solicitation’s requirements is determined to be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The Government will utilize the following evaluation criteria to identify the best value quotation for award: Factor 1 – Technical Approach Factor 2 – Experience
Factor 3 – Price

A trade-off analysis between technical approach, experience, and price will be utilized to determine which quotation represents the best value to the Government. Award may be made to other than the lowest price quotation.

Factor 1 – Technical approach:

The information provided by the offeror is a significant factor in the Government’s determination of technical acceptability as it pertains to the offeror’s ability to operate the Hospital Communications Support as depicted in the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Proprietary information should be clearly marked.

The technical information shall include the company’s name, address, individual names, CAGE Code, and DUNS number on the first page.

EVALUATION STANDARDS TECHNICAL:

Acceptable: Quote clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation and the PWS.

Unacceptable: Quote does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation and the PWS.

Factor 2: Experience:

Recent and relevant past performance information will be considered. The Government will focus its inquiries on the vendor’s record of performance on relevant and recent prior contracts. The Determination of relevancy includes a consideration of recent contracts which are similar in scope, type of work, and price to this solicitation’s requirements. The vendor’s record of performance will be evaluated for quality of services, timeliness of services, business relations, and other considerations.

EVALUATION STANDARDS EXPERIENCE/PAST PERFORMANCE:

Acceptable: Based on the Vendor’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Vendor will successfully perform the required effort, or the vendor’s performance record is unknown.

Unacceptable: Based on the Vendor’s performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the Vendor will successfully perform the required effort, or the vendor’s performance record is unknown.