.gif)
Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'evaluation factors'.
Found 7 results
-
All, Was wondering what you'll have been seeing as the currently trending evaluation factors in solicitations? I know sometimes people get really creative. I know FAR 15 gives us some very general ones: "FAR 15.304 (c): (1) Price or cost to the Government shall be evaluated in every source selection (10 U.S.C.2305(a)(3)(A)(ii) and 41 U.S.C.3306(c)(1)(B)) (also see part 36 for architect-engineer contracts); (2) The quality of the product or service shall be addressed in every source selection through consideration of one or more non-cost evaluation factors such as past performance, compliance with solicitation requirements, technical excellence, management capability, personnel qualifications, and prior experience (10 U.S.C.2305(a)(3)(A)(i) and 41 U.S.C.3306(c)(1)(A)); and (3) (i) Past performance, except as set forth in paragraph (c)(3)(iii) of this section, shall be evaluated in all source selections for negotiated competitive acquisitions expected to exceed the simplified acquisition threshold." (EA) Any and all examples will be greatly appreciated. Trying to put together a list of what our fellow professionals are using. Thanks in advance/CO
-
Is anyone aware of the existence of any studies connecting the adjustment of key variables in the source selection process to improvements in acquisition outcomes? After digging around, so far the only one I was able to find was a DEC2015 NPS report entitled, "RELATIONSHIP OF SOURCE SELECTION METHODS TO CONTRACT OUTCOMES: AN ANALYSIS OF AIR FORCE SOURCE SELECTION." It is actually very good and useful; but it would be great if there was any more out there. Also- is anything like this being pursued as a research topic at any traditional universities? In other words, are there any non-DoD/Agency schools out there pursuing this in a traditional economics department? Operations Research? If done properly and comprehensively I could see the results of research such as this saving a lot of money and time- while improving performance. -
I am a contracting officer assisting in the planning of a source selection for an ACAT system. As part of the source selection process, the customer is adamant about including significant field testing as part of the evaluation process. The system is highly sensitive in that just about everything could affect its performance including weather, time of day, harsh language, etc. As to be expected, everyone on my end, especially legal, is worried about risk of a protest from the losing offeror. Any ideas, useful guidance, prior examples... anything would be helpful and appreciated.
-
Hello My agency is putting together a SOW for commercial items consisting of Solar Panels and Batteries along with installation for two remote National Parks, however they do not know what will best work best for the two visitor centers so they are leaving the Mfg, Make, and Model specifications for everything up to the contractors to recommend what will work best? Frankly I have no idea how to evaluate this if under price and if several different makes and models of solar panels and batteries are suggested by the vendors. Under FAR 52.212-2 Evaluation of Commercial Items how would I list the Evaluation Factors for such an award and then how do you evaluate this kind of procurement? Any suggestions would be appreciated Thanks everyone Lonnie -
I am in the process of drafting a solicitation for services, and I intend to solicit under FAR 8.4. The estimated value is $8 million over 5 years. My agency handbook requires the use of "strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies" in the evaluation plan. I have always been taught that if it looks and smells like FAR 15, you will be held to FAR 15 standards, so I am hesitant to follow the handbook. It also states that the KO must make a statement regarding the relative importance of price to non-price factors (again, a requirement of FAR 15). Lastly, it states that the KO must state the relative importance of the evaluation factors. I realize that this is an $8 million requirement, and I do intent to award best value through trade offs. Am I wrong in my belief that acquisitions under FAR 8.4 are not supposed to require formal source selection? Am I trying to over simplify the process?
-
I am in the process of drafting a solicitation for services, and I intend to solicit under FAR 8.4. The estimated value is $8 million over 5 years. My agency handbook requires the use of "strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies" in the evaluation plan. I have always been taught that if it looks and smells like FAR 15, you will be held to FAR 15 standards, so I am hesitant to follow the handbook. It also states that the KO must make a statement regarding the relative importance of price to non-price factors (again, a requirement of FAR 15). Lastly, it states that the KO must state the relative importance of the evaluation factors. I realize that this is an $8 million requirement, and I do intent to award best value through trade offs. Am I wrong in my belief that acquisitions under FAR 8.4 are not supposed to require formal source selection? Am I trying to over simplify the process?
-
Say there is a solicitation that had a lengthy, complex Section C, SOW/PWS. But in Section M, the Evaluation Criteria, for Technical Approach Evaluation Factor, simply says something like, "We will evaluate for the proposal's compliance with the Capabilities requirement." If the Capabilities requirement was only a portion of the SOW, is it reasonable to interpret that the agency must only evaluate IAW the solicitation's weird Section M statement limiting evaluation only to the Capabilities requirement, so therefore, if the agency evaluates for compliance with the entire SOW, that is wrong? Assume that the solicitation due date for receipt of proposals has closed, so one cannot engage the CO in Q&A.
