Source selection process
Download
1 / 30

Proposal Preparation - Source Selection - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 1157 Views
  • Updated On :

SOURCE SELECTION PROCESS. Fran Gomes and Sally Merritt NAVFAC Midwest. PURPOSE OF SOURCE SELECTIONS. Used for “best value” procurements When the Navy wants to evaluate price and other factors “low bid” contracts (Sealed Bid/Invitation for Bid process) are now rarely used by our office.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Proposal Preparation - Source Selection' - MartaAdara


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Source selection process l.jpg

SOURCE SELECTION PROCESS

Fran Gomes and Sally Merritt

NAVFAC Midwest


Purpose of source selections l.jpg
PURPOSE OF SOURCE SELECTIONS

  • Used for “best value” procurements

  • When the Navy wants to evaluate price and other factors

  • “low bid” contracts (Sealed Bid/Invitation for Bid process) are now rarely used by our office


Procurement regulations l.jpg
Procurement Regulations

  • Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)

  • Department of Defense FAR Supplement (DFARs)

  • Navy/Marine Corps Acquisition Regulation Supplement (NMCARs)

  • Naval Facilities Engineering Command Supplement (NFAS)

  • Web site – www.arnet.gov/far

  • Key chapters:

    • Part 12 – Commercial Items

    • Part 13 – Simplified Acquisition Procedures (under $100,000)

    • Part 15 – Contracting by Negotiation (over $100,000)

    • Part 36 – Construction and Architect/Engineer Contracts

    • Part 37 – Service Contracting


Trade off analysis l.jpg
Trade-off Analysis

  • Best value: Selection can be made to other than the lowest priced or highest technically rated proposal

  • Technical evaluation factors and sub-factors are established by relative order of importance

  • Relative importance of cost/price and other factors is specified in the Request for Proposals

  • Trade-offs are permitted


Evaluation factors l.jpg
EVALUATION FACTORS

  • Represent key areas of importance

  • Create proper filters to select the best value offeror

  • Support comparison and discrimination between and among proposals

  • The Request for Proposals (RFP) will indicate their relative order of importance

  • For example - “technical evaluation factors are significantly more important than cost or price” or “technical evaluation factors are approximately equal to cost or price”


Technical evaluation factors l.jpg
Technical Evaluation Factors

Historical information on proposer

- financial capability

- past performance

- relevant experience

- key personnel

Quality of proposed product or service

- facility

- equipment

- project organization

- work procedures – safety and quality control

- schedule


Price evaluation criteria l.jpg
Price Evaluation Criteria

  • Must be objective (the technical evaluation is subjective)

  • One “bottom line” price to objectively compare to other proposal prices

  • May include estimated cost of changed work

  • May include completion schedule credit

  • May include adds/deducts for alternate technical solutions


Rating system l.jpg
Rating System

  • NAVFAC uses an adjectival rating system for rating technical evaluation factors

  • Other agencies use numerical or point scoring rating systems

  • Ratings are “exceptional,” “highly acceptable”, “acceptable,” “marginal,” “unacceptable”, or “not rated” to evaluate each technical factor and establish an overall rating

  • Proposals are objectively compared to the requirements in the RFP – proposal of one firm is not compared to the proposals of the other firms


Evaluation of proposals roles l.jpg
Evaluation of Proposals - Roles

  • Source Selection Authority:

    • makes the final selection decision

    • Warranted Contracting Officer

  • Source Selection Board:

    • objectively reviews the reports from the Technical and Price Evaluation Boards and performs trade-off analysis

    • Chairman is a warranted Contracting Officer with customer membership

  • Technical Evaluation Board:

    • evaluates the technical proposals and recommends the overall adjectival ratings

    • does not have access to any price information to maximize technical objectivity

    • Chairman has a high level of technical expertise

  • Price Evaluation Board:

    • evaluates the price proposals

    • Contract Specialist


Slide10 l.jpg

TechnicalPriceCompany A exceptional $1,000,000Company B acceptable $ 900,000Company C marginal $ 800,000Who do you award the contract to?

Evaluation Example:


Past performance evaluation factor l.jpg
Past Performance Evaluation Factor

  • Past performance is a required rating factor in all of our procurements

  • Normally we are looking for contractors who have previously performed contracts of similar size, scope, and complexity to the current project

  • Most current projects – work performed in the past three years – will be given the most weight


Past performance evaluation factor12 l.jpg
Past Performance Evaluation Factor

  • Past performance is the best indicator of future performance

  • Navy can better predict how a contractor will perform with regard to quality of work and customer satisfaction

  • Contractors are incentivized to strive for excellence

  • Navy and Army Corps of Engineers enter performance data for construction contracts over $100,000 in the Construction Contract Appraisal Support System (CCASS) program

  • Navy and Army Corps of Engineers enter performance data for A/E contracts over $25,000 in the Architect/Engineer Contract Appraisal Support System (ACASS) program

  • Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARs) is the data base for service contracts


Past performance evaluation factor13 l.jpg
Past Performance Evaluation Factor

Offerors without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information is not available may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.

Government considers past performance information provided by the proposer as well as information obtained from any other sources available.


Technical qualifications evaluation factor l.jpg
Technical Qualifications Evaluation Factor

  • Key personnel resumes – normally the project superintendent, quality control manager, safety manager etc.

  • Specialized experience

    • Relevant

    • Recent

    • Registrations (if applicable)


Technical solution evaluation factor l.jpg
Technical Solution Evaluation Factor

  • Might include:

    - design solution narrative

    - conceptual building design

    - sustainable design features

    - schedule and phasing plan

    - equipment schedule

    - durability/quality of materials


Safety evaluation l.jpg
Safety Evaluation

  • It has been NAVFAC’s experience that safe contractors are good contractors

  • As part of the technical evaluation we may ask for the offeror to provide their experience modifier rate (EMR) for the past three years.

  • Ratings lower than 1.0 are good

  • Provide explanation if there are extenuating circumstances

  • Contractors with no EMR will be rated neutrally


Small business subcontracting effort evaluation factor l.jpg
Small Business Subcontracting Effort Evaluation Factor

  • Evaluation factor used in unrestricted procurements

  • Procurements over $1,000,000 for construction

  • Provide maximum opportunity to small, small disadvantaged, woman owned, HUBZone, and service disabled veteran businesses

  • Contractors who exceed the NAVFAC goals will be rated most highly



Review of proposals l.jpg
Review of Proposals

  • After review of initial proposals, the government:

    - may request clarifications – either to correct minor or clerical errors, or to resolve adverse past performance information

    - may make an award based upon initial proposals

    - may make a competitive range determination and open discussions with all contractors in the competitive range


Discussions l.jpg
Discussions

  • Offerors eliminated from the competitive range will be notified

  • Discussions are tailored to each offeror’s proposal

  • Offerors will be notified when the discussion phase has ended and final proposal revisions are due


Debriefings l.jpg
Debriefings

  • Contractor’s can request a pre-award (exclusion from competitive range) or post award debriefing

  • Contractors must request a debriefing in writing within 3 days from notification of their exclusion from the competitive range or from notification of award of the contract


Pre award debriefing l.jpg
Pre-award debriefing

  • Reason contractor was not included in the competitive range

  • Pre-award debriefings will NOT disclose:

    the number of offerors

    the identify of other offerors

    the ranking/evaluation of the other offerors


Post award debriefings l.jpg
Post-award debriefings

  • Significant weaknesses of the offeror’s proposal

  • Overall price and technical rating of the successful offeror and the offeror being debriefed

  • Award rationale

  • Source selection procedures


Two phase design build selection procedures l.jpg
Two-phase Design-Build selection procedures

  • When do we use these procedures?

  • FAR 36.3

  • Applicable to construction only

  • When design work must be performed by offerors before developing price or cost proposals, and

  • When offerors will incur a substantial amount of expense in preparing offers


Two phase design build selection procedures25 l.jpg
Two-phase Design-Build Selection Procedures

  • Phase I factors

    • Past performance

    • Key personnel

    • Past performance in utilizing small business, small disadvantaged business, woman owned small business, service disabled veteran owned small business, and HUBZone contractors

    • Management approach


Two phase design build selection procedures26 l.jpg
Two-phase Design-Build Selection Procedures

  • Phase II

  • Based upon the phase I submittals, government decides how many firms will advance to the second phase

  • No more than 5 firms advance to the second phase

  • Phase II Request for Proposals normally includes a factor to evaluate the offeror’s technical solution and small business subcontracting plan


Important web sites l.jpg
Important Web Sites

  • www.fedbizopps.gov – federal government site for posting solicitations

  • www.ccr.gov - Central contractor registration; prime contractors use this site to search for subcontractors

  • www.esol.navfac.navy.mil – NAVFAC site for posting solicitations

  • www.arnet.gov - acquisition regulations


Procurement technical assistance centers l.jpg
Procurement Technical Assistance Centers

  • Procurement Technical Assistance Centers (PTAC) provide assistance to contractors in obtaining information about upcoming projects and making proposals

  • http://www.aptac-us.org/new

  • College of DuPage PTAChttp://www.wingovcon.comPhone: 630-942-4611Contact: James Kleckner ([email protected])Address: 425 Fawell Blvd.Glen Ellyn, IL 60137-6599

  • College of Lake County PTACPhone: 847-543-2580Contact: Marc N. Violante ([email protected])Address: 19351 West Washington StreetGrayslake, IL 60030

  • Moraine Valley Community College PTACPhone: 708-974-5452Contact: Alvin Meroz ([email protected])Address: 10900 S. 88th AvenuePalos Hills, IL 60465-0937


Points of contact l.jpg
Points of Contact

  • You can contact Sally or Fran as follows:

    • Sally Merritt

    • NAVFAC Midwest Acquisition Support Line Coordinator

    • (847) 688-2600 ext. 102

    • [email protected]

    • Fran Gomes

    • NAVFAC Midwest Capital Improvements Business Line Coordinator

    • (847) 688-4766 ext. 300

    • [email protected]



ad