UFC 4-214-02
24 July 2003
POOR: The offeror does not meet the minimum scope of the solicitation for the particular factor or sub-
factor.
The offeror does not include any advantages and does not meet the minimal performance or
capability requirements for this element.
The offeror contains many apparent weakness and requires
improvement.
UNACCEPTABLE: The offeror fails to meet the scope of the solicitation in all aspects of the factor or
sub-factor or has not submitted any information to address this evaluated item. The offeror does not
include any advantages in any areas of the element and does not meet the minimum performance or
capability requirements of this factor or sub-factor. The proposal includes large apparent weaknesses
and the proposal will require extensive modifications to come into compliance with the minimum
requirements of the solicitation.
10-4 PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY EVALUATION
10-4.1 An offeror's management and performance capability may be determined by evaluating design,
construction and management personnel qualifications, experience, financial capability, and
organizational structure for the project. FAR 15.304 (reference 10-4) specifically permits evaluating such
relevant factors. The management review should involve Government representatives experienced in
construction management and design. Complete documentation of strengths and weaknesses of each
proposal for each factor and subfactor is extremely important. A performance capability evaluation format
is provided at Appendix B for information to be provided with the Phase 2 proposals.
It is extremely
important to set up and follow a prescribed evaluation process to avoid possible potential conflicts later
and minimize time consuming protests.
10-5 PRICE EVALUATION
10-5.1 Price Proposal. The Contracting Officer may empower a proposal price evaluation team who will
perform a price analysis, and a complete review of the Price Proposal. It is imperative that the PDT cost
engineer be included on this team. The review of the Price Proposal will normally lead to negotiations
with offerors in the competitive range. Questions resulting from a price analysis and from the technical
analysis will both be addressed in the discussions.
10-5.1.1 Pricing data will be submitted with proposals. This information is administratively "for official use
only" and will be delivered only to the Contracting Officer.
10-5.1.2 The Contract Specialist will also review representations and certifications, sub-contracting
plans, proposal guarantees, SF 1442, the schedule of prices, etc. Proposals will be reviewed to ensure
that proposal guarantees are adequate and valid for the full period for which proposals are to be effective,
in accordance with the RFP.
10-6 TECHNICAL QUALITY EVALUATION PROCEDURES.
10-6.1 Confidentiality and Security. In a competitive negotiations, matters pertaining to the proposals
must be treated with confidentiality prior to award. Security of all proposal material must be maintained at
all times to avoid the possibility of compromising the competitive negotiation process. The number of
proposals received, the names of the offerors, and all other information are source selection information
in accordance with FAR 3.104. (reference 10-1).
10-6.2 Evaluation Room. The PA/PE should schedule access to the evaluation room and ensure
complete setup prior to the arrival of the technical quality evaluation team members. A properly prepared
evaluation room reflects the USACE activity's professionalism and establishes an efficient working
environment for the team. The PA/PE should ensure that the following are available to evaluators:
10-6.2.1 Copies of the technical review comments from Engineering.
10-2
Previous Page
