1. Source Selection and Contract Award
Competency Area 2.5

2. Overview Simplified or small purchase acquisition Sealed Bidding
Negotiated Source Selection
Typical Evaluation Factors
Proposal Evaluation Techniques
Evaluation Rating Scales
Contract Award

3. Simplified or Small Purchases
Usually at or below Simplified Acquisition Threshold (150k)
Competition tends to ensure fair and reasonable price
Technical requirements are typically straight forward as for commercial or commodity items
Usually a matter of low price or low price technically acceptable.
Best value may also be used

4. Sealed Bid
Generally awarded on low price based on cost factor(s) in IFB
Bid must be “Timely”
Bid must be “Responsive”
Bidder must be “Responsible”

5. Timeliness
Bid must be received at the stated location on or before the time stated in the IFB
Late bids may be accepted if
Received prior to award
Doing so is advantageous to the government
Evidence shows it was received and under government control

6. Responsiveness
Bids that fail to conform to the essential requirements of the IFB SHALL be rejected
Bid Guarantees
Bids that do not conform to the specifications SHALL be rejected
Bids that fails to conform to the delivery schedule SHALL be rejected
Bids that are “conditioned” shall be rejected
Bids that are unreasonably priced MAY be rejected
Materially unbalanced prices for line items MAY be rejected.

7. Responsible Bidder Adequate financial resources
Satisfactory performance record
Not debarred or otherwise sanctioned
Managerial capability
Has necessary facilities, equipment, and workforce

8. Negotiated Source Selection
All FAR solicitations NOT accomplished by sealed bids are “Negotiated”
Competitive proposals are the normal solicitation method
Proposals may be oral or written or both.
Source selection is accomplished by evaluation and ranking proposals
Evaluation must be in accordance with the Solicitation
Typical solicitation lists evaluation factors in section M
Evaluation factors also should be documented and explained in detail in the Source Selection plan

9. Price Price is ALWAYS a factor in the evaluation process
It may not be the ONLY factor but cost should always be considered.
The weight assigned to price varies with the selection criteria
Low Cost Technically Acceptable
Tradeoff (i.e., “Best Value)

10. Technical Considerations
Requirements usually stated in SOW or other section of proposal
Evaluation goes to how well offeror understands the requirements and is able to meet them

11. Management How the offeror intends to manage the proposed effort
Organizational structure
Self performed vs. Subcontractors
Management controls
Cost controls
Risk may be a considerable factor in the evaluation
Schedule Risk
Cost Risk

12. Past Performance Usually a strong indicator of future performance
Lack of past performance may be weighted neutrally
Performance references usually requested and vetted
Performance database (CPARS etc.)

13. Weighting of Factors
Solicitation (and Source Selection plan) must identify relative weights of the various factors
A is more important than B; C is more important than D; B and C are equally important etc.

14. Basis of Award Low Price, Technically Acceptable Tradeoff
Proposals are deemed technically “acceptable or unacceptable” with respect to technical requirements
Lowest price “acceptable” proposal wins.
Tradeoff
Proposals are rank ordered or categorized based on technical merit
Price is considered
Source Selection team able to trade off price if it results in a better, more valuable (to the government) solution
Relative weight of cost to non-cost factors must be clearly stated in solicitation.

15. Proposal Evaluation Techniques
All proposals must be treated equally and evaluated using the same criteria and methods.
Independent evaluation by each member of the evaluation team
Technical volumes usually evaluated separately from cost
Did proposal adequately address all evaluation factors and subfactors
Compliance matrix commonly used

16. Rating Scales Numeric (1 to 10 points etc.)
Color Scales (Green, Red, Yellow, etc.)
Adjectival (Excellent, Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, Unsatisfactory etc.)
Regardless of method used the solicitation (and especially the source selection plan) must identify how these rating will be awarded
Failure to follow this guidance is a significant cause of protests.

17. Adjectival Evaluation Rating System
Rating Scale
Adjectival Evaluation Rating System
Outstanding
A proposal that satisfies all of the government’s requirements, with extensive detail indicating the feasibility of the approach and a thorough understanding of the problems. The proposal has numerous significant strengths that are not offset by weaknesses. The proposal has an overall low degree of risk.
Good
A proposal that satisfies all of the government’s requirements, with adequate detail indicating a feasible approach and an understanding of the problems. The proposal has some significant strengths or numerous minor strengths that are not offset by weaknesses. The proposal has an overall moderate degree of risk.
Acceptable
A proposal that satisfies all of the government’s requirements, with minimal detail indicating a feasible approach and an understanding of the problems. The proposal has an overall moderate to high degree of risk.
Marginal
A proposal that satisfies all of the government’s requirements, with minimal detail indicating a feasible approach and a minimal understanding of the problems. The proposal has an overall high degree of risk.
Unacceptable
A proposal that contains at least one major error, omission, or deficiency that indicates a lack of understanding of the problems. The approach can not be expected to meet requirements or involves a very high risk. None of these conditions can be corrected without a major rewrite or proposal revision.

18. Compare Results and Reach Consensus
Compare individual evaluations and discuss areas of agreement/disagreement
Ideally team comes to a consensus opinion of rating for each proposal
Recommendations are summarized in memo to Source Selection Authority (SSA)
SSA is final authority but usually accepts recommendations of evaluation team.

19. Discussions Award may be made with or without discussions
Discussions, if accomplished, must be conducted with all offerors
May be a down select into a competitive range prior to discussions to limit number of offerors.
Discussions may include direction to revise proposal so as to include or exclude certain requirements
Discussions may be held to resolve uncertainties or doubts
Revised proposal usually submitted following discussions – sometimes called Best and Final Offer (BAFO) although that terminology is not officially recognized.

20. Contract Award Prepare the contract (Federal)
Federal contracts remove sections L&M
Section J (Reps and Certs removed and filed)
Section A (the Schedule) and B (Items and Prices) are populated with award value, contractor’s name etc.
Prepare the Contract (Commercial)
Form Contracts
Special contracts/language
Terms and conditions reached through negotiation/discussion must be documented in the resulting contract to be enforceable
Draft contract (including all appendices) is sent to offeror for review and signature.
Edits may be requested to make resulting contract acceptable
Certain language or provisions (clauses) may not be edited or changed due to underlying law

21. Notification
Successful offeror usually notified by receipt of model contract
Unsuccessful offerors notified when
Eliminated from competitive range or
When award is made to successful offeror

22. Notification (FAR) Notification provides
Number of offerors solicited
Number of proposals
Name & address of successful offeror
List of items and prices or total dollar value of the award
Reason(s) why offeror’s proposal was not accepted unless it was solely on price.
CO must take care so as to not divulge proprietary information during this process

23. Debriefing (FAR) Unsuccessful offeror may request a debriefing.
May either receive debriefing when
Eliminated from competitive range
Following award
Debriefing is to inform offeror:
Why their proposal was not selected
What they can do in the future to make their proposal more competitive