SOURCE SELECTION PROCESS

1
SOURCE SELECTION PROCESS

• Fran Gomes and Sally Merritt
• NAVFAC Midwest

2
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

3
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

4
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

5
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

6
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

7
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

8
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

9
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

10
Technical Price Com
pany A exceptional
1,000,000Company B acceptable
900,000Company C marginal
800,000Who do you award the contract to?
Evaluation Example
11
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

12
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

13
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.

14
Technical Qualifications Evaluation Factor

• Key personnel resumes normally the project
  superintendent, quality control manager, safety
  manager etc.
• Specialized experience
• Relevant
• Recent
• Registrations (if applicable)

15
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

16
Safety Evaluation

• It has been NAVFACs 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

17
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

18
Small Business Subcontracting NAVFACs FY 06
Goals
19
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

20
Discussions

• Offerors eliminated from the competitive range
  will be notified
• Discussions are tailored to each offerors
  proposal
• Offerors will be notified when the discussion
  phase has ended and final proposal revisions are
  due

21
Debriefings

• Contractors 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

22
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

23
Post-award debriefings

• Significant weaknesses of the offerors proposal
• Overall price and technical rating of the
  successful offeror and the offeror being
  debriefed
• Award rationale
• Source selection procedures

24
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

25
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

26
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 offerors technical
  solution and small business subcontracting plan

27
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

28
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.comP
  hone 630-942-4611Contact James Kleckner
  (kleckner_at_cdnet.cod.edu)Address 425 Fawell
  Blvd.Glen Ellyn, IL 60137-6599
• College of Lake County PTACPhone
  847-543-2580Contact Marc N. Violante
  (clcptac_at_clcillinois.edu)Address 19351 West
  Washington StreetGrayslake, IL 60030
• Moraine Valley Community College PTACPhone
  708-974-5452Contact Alvin Meroz
  (meroz_at_morainevalley.edu)Address 10900 S. 88th
  AvenuePalos Hills, IL 60465-0937

29
Points of Contact

• You can contact Sally or Fran as follows
• Sally Merritt
• NAVFAC Midwest Acquisition Support Line
  Coordinator
• [phone] ext. 102
• sally.merritt_at_navy.mil
• Fran Gomes
• NAVFAC Midwest Capital Improvements Business Line
  Coordinator
• [phone] ext. 300
• francine.gomes_at_navy.mil

30
QUESTIONS??