Proposal Evaluation (FAR Subpart 15.305)
The vision for the Federal Acquisition
System is to deliver, on a timely basis, the best value product or
service to the customer. This is accomplished by using contractors
who have a track record of successful past performance or
who demonstrate a current superior ability to perform a contract.
Proposal evaluation is an assessment of
the proposal and the offeror's ability to perform the prospective
contract successfully. DLA evaluates competitive proposals and then
assesses their relative qualities solely on the factors and
subfactors specified in the solicitation. Evaluations may be
conducted using any rating method or combination of methods, and may
include:
-
Cost or
Price evaluation
-
Past
performance evaluation
-
Technical/Quality evaluation
-
Cost
information
-
Small
business subcontracting evaluation
The Government will evaluate all
proposals and, if discussions are to be conducted, will establish
what is called a “competitive range.” The competitive range is
comprised of all of the most highly rated proposals. These
discussions are undertaken with the intent of allowing the offeror
to revise its proposal.
Source Selection (FAR
Subpart 15.3)
The term "source selection" means the
determination of which offer to award in a competitive environment.
The goal of source selection is to award the offer which represents
the best value to the Government through the evaluation of the
differences inherent in the offers or offerors. The specific
differences that will be evaluated are called the evaluation
factors, while the way that these differences will be evaluated is
called the scoring system or evaluation method.
All significant evaluation factors,
including price, will be listed in the solicitation. In addition,
the solicitation will indicate the relative importance of the
factors. This may be accomplished through a listing in descending
order of importance, an adjectival description of importance (factor
A is more important than factor B, factors B and C are equally
important), or through a disclosure of the numerical weights
assigned to the factors. These methods can be combined or factors
can be grouped, e.g., "The following technical factors are listed in
descending order of importance and in total are equal in importance
to factor A."
Automated Best Value System
The Automated Best Value System (ABVS),
formerly called the Automated Best Value Model, is a computerized
system that collects a vendor's existing past performance data and
translates it into a numeric score. The contracting officer then
uses the score as an additional evaluation factor when making best
value award decisions.
DLA assigns an ABVS score to each vendor
based on the vendor's past performance. Vendors receive scores for
performance in each Federal Supply Class (FSC scores). The FSC
scores are based on DLA consolidated performance history. A vendor
may have multiple FSC scores but will have only one DLA score, which
is a compilation of the vendor's FSC scores for all business
conducted with DLA.
The DLA system uses 24 months of past
performance history as the standard rating period. Each monthly
update includes data through the 5th of the month.
The delivery score is a combination of a
vendor's delivery and quality scores and the scores range from zero
to a perfect score of 100. If a vendor's score is less than 100,
DLA provides the negative data that impacts that score. The
delivery score reflects all lines shown as delinquent during the
rating period. For administrative purposes, the delivery rating
period excludes the most recent 60 days. For ABVS, delinquent lines
represent shipments not shipped and/or received in their entirety by
the contract delivery date.
Click Picture for Larger View
The quality score reflects validated
contractor caused product non-conformances/lab test failures and
packaging non-conformances during the rating period. For
administrative purposes, the rating period for quality excludes the
most recent 30 days. The 30 and 60 day offset periods are not grace
periods. Contractor caused discrepancies, regardless of corrective
action, will be reflected in ABVS as an indicator of past
performance. The repair, replacement, or reimbursement of quality
and packaging defects will not provide relief of negative ABVS data.
Buyers use ABVS as an additional
evaluation factor in making best value award decisions. You should
review your data carefully. Negative data affects your company's
ABVS score.
Your negative performance data will be
posted before it is reflected in the ABVS score (preview period), to
give you an opportunity to review and verify data. Negative data
must be challenged within the preview period to assure corrections
are posted before it is included in the calculation of the score.
Check your data regularly! ABVS scoring
is a continuous process, and while you may not have negative data
this month, it could appear next month.
FSC scores are used when offers are
evaluated. If a vendor does not have an FSC score in that
particular federal supply class, a vendor's DLA score is used to
evaluate its offer. The contracting officer may also consider the
volume of business on which the FSC score is based as a measure of
confidence in the score's indication of performance risk. He or she
may choose to use the DLA score if he lacks confidence in the FSC
score. The contracting officer also may use the DLA score if the
FSC scores among offerors are relatively equal.
Past Performance
Past performance information is
relevant information regarding a contractor's actions under
previously awarded contracts. It includes the following:
-
The
contractor's record of conforming to contract requirements
and to standards of good workmanship
-
The
contractor's record of forecasting and controlling costs
-
The contractor's adherence to
contract schedules, including the administrative aspects of
performance
-
The
contractor's history of reasonable and cooperative behavior
and commitment to customer satisfaction
-
The
contractor's business-like concern for the interest of the
customer
|
