Id.Īs relevant here, to assist the contracting officer in making the responsibility determination, the solicitation required offerors to submit a total compensation plan for all professional employees to include a completed total compensation worksheet listing the salaries and fringe benefit package for their professional employees, surveys and studies, and assessment. Offerors whose proposed price was determined to be incomplete, unreasonable, or unbalanced might not be considered for award. Under the cost/price evaluation factor, the solicitation stated that cost/price proposals “should support the proposed technical approach” and would be evaluated for completeness, reasonableness, and unbalanced pricing. Under each technical subfactor, proposals would be evaluated on an acceptable/unacceptable basis, and proposals would then be assigned a risk rating of low, moderate, or high risk for each technical subfactor. The technical evaluation factor had three subfactors: technical capability, management, and technical experience. The solicitation stated that proposals would be evaluated under two evaluation factors, technical and cost/price. at 103-104.Īs amended, the solicitation established that the task order would be issued to the offeror who was deemed responsible and whose technically acceptable proposal represented the best value to the government, defined as “the offer which presents the most advantageous combination of risk and total evaluated price.” FOPR amend. The PWS also included estimated staffing levels, stated in terms of full-time equivalents (FTE) for each labor category, for each geographic location, and by year. In general terms, the performance work statement (PWS) required the contractor to provide qualified professional employees in specified labor categories, for specified geographic locations, to successfully perform all stated PWS tasks. The competition was limited to small business offerors who hold one of the agency’s NETCENTS-II NetOps & Infrastructure multiple-award indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts. The solicitation contemplated the issuance of a fixed-price task order for aġ-year base period with three 1-year options. The FOPR was issued on March 25, 2019, pursuant to the fair opportunity ordering procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) § 16.505, for a contractor to provide network and infrastructure support services at multiple Air Force locations in Europe. The protester argues that the agency unreasonably evaluated the awardee’s technical proposal and failed to assess whether the awardee could perform the task order requirements at its proposed price. FA5641-19-R-A002, which was issued by Department of the Air Force, for network and infrastructure support services. Abacus Technology Corporation (Abacus), of Chevy Chase, Maryland, protests the issuance of a task order to Micro Technologies, LLC (MicroTech), of Vienna, Virginia, under fair opportunity proposal request (FOPR) No.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |