Competitive Proposal Evaluation

Best Value/Tradeoff Process. Best value is a process used in competitive negotiated contracting to select the most advantageous offer by evaluating and comparing factors in addition to cost or price. Technically Acceptable Low Dollar Process. The lowest price technically acceptable source selection process is appropriate when best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price. The Source Selection Plan (SSP) and Proposal Evaluation Plan (PEP) Note for acquisitions > $50M see NAVAIR INST 4200.39B for format Proposal Evaluation Report (PER)    Format    Preparation Guide Proposal Evaluation Standards Oral Presentations Past Performance The Evaluation of Past Performance in Source Selections, The Collection Of Contractor Past Performance Information, Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Responding To Past Performance Questionnaires Recieved From Government Activities, Customer Satisfaction Surveys/Questionnaires. NAVAIR INST 4200.39B Principles and Procedures For Competitive Source Selection      Ratings and Risk Definitions Software Evaluations For Naval Aviation Programs Proposal Evaluation Rooms Multiple Site Proposal Evaluation Acquisition Process Bulletin #3-97 Handling of Contractors Proposals

Competitive Proposal Evaluation Process

Best Value/Tradeoff Process

• Best Value Process Guiding Principles
• Contracting For Best Value A Best Practices Guide To Source Selection. AMC PAMPHLET 715-3
• Defense Supply Center, Best Value Guidebook
• Best Value/Trade Off Continuum
  
• FAR 15.101 Best value continuum. An agency can obtain best value in negotiated acquisitions by using any one or a combination of source selection approaches. In different types of acquisitions, the relative importance of cost or price may vary. For example, in acquisitions where the requirement is clearly definable and the risk of unsuccessful contract performance is minimal, cost or price may play a dominant role in source selection. The less definitive the requirement, the more development work required, or the greater the performance risk, the more technical or past performance considerations may play a dominant role in source selection.
• FAR 15.101-1 Tradeoff process.
  (a) A tradeoff process is appropriate when it may be in the best interest of the Government to consider award to other than the lowest priced offeror or other than the highest technically rated offeror.

  (b) When using a tradeoff process, the following apply:

  1. All evaluation factors and significant subfactors that will affect contract award and their relative importance shall be clearly stated in the solicitation; and
  2. The solicitation shall state whether all evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined, are significantly more important than, approximately equal to, or significantly less important than cost or price.

  (c) This process permits tradeoffs among cost or price and non-cost factors and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal. The perceived benefits of the higher priced proposal shall merit the additional cost, and the rationale for tradeoffs must be documented in the file in accordance with 15.406.

Technically Acceptable Low Dollar Process

FAR 15.101-2 Lowest price technically acceptable source selection process.

(a) The lowest price technically acceptable source selection process is appropriate when best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price.

(b) When using the lowest price technically acceptable process, the following apply:

1. The evaluation factors and significant subfactors that establish the requirements of acceptability shall be set forth in the solicitation. Solicitations shall specify that award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors. If the contracting officer documents the file pursuant to 15.304(c)(3)(iii), past performance need not be an evaluation factor in lowest price technically acceptable source selections. If the contracting officer elects to consider past performance as an evaluation factor, it shall be evaluated in accordance with 15.305. However, the comparative assessment in 15.305(a)(2)(i) does not apply. If the contracting officer determines that a small business' past performance is not acceptable, the matter shall be referred to the Small Business Administration for a Certificate of Competency determination, in accordance with the procedures contained in subpart 19.6 and 15 U.S.C. 637(b)(7)).
2. Tradeoffs are not permitted.
3. Proposals are evaluated for acceptability but not ranked using the non-cost/price factors.
4. Exchanges may occur (see 15.306).

---

NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER TRAINING SYSTEM DIVISION ORLANDO FLORIDA

Last Update: 29 October 2007