FAR 45.201(c) states, "The solicitation shall describe the evaluation procedures to be followed, including rnetal charges or equivalents and other costs or savings to be evaluated" and shall require all offerors to submit information with their offers listing all "Government property" that the offeror or its subcontractors propose ot use on "rent-free basis."  FAR 45.202(a) requires the Contracting Officer to "consider any potentially unfair competitive advantage that may result from an offeror or contractor possessing Government property" and "This shall be done by adjusting the offers by applying, for evaluation purposes only, a rental equivalent evaluation factor, as specified in FAR 52.245-9."

QUESTION:

Does anybody have an example of how this "rental equivalent evaluation factor" is evaluated for, where the solicitation involves a requirement for contractor services, where it is possible for the offeror or contractor's employees to be offered to work in the federal agency building - so using government-furnished cubicles, work stations, phones, paper, furniture, electricity, etc. - and where the solicitation also allows for offerors to submit proposals that propose their employees working offsite?  How would an agency evaluate these proposals so it could compare apples-to-apples?

 

The evaluation adjustment contemplated by FAR 45.201(c) is not for the purpose of comparing apples-to-apples, it's for the purpose of removing any unfair competitive advantage one offeror may have over others due to their being in possession of government property that other offerors may not have access to.  If all offerors have equal access to the property, if they choose, then no one has an unfair competitive advantage, so no adjustment is called for.