The development of sub-factors for any evaluation criteria for any program solicitation is very critical in achieving program objectives. The following sub-factors will be considered by the evaluator for the technical solution evaluation criterion during the upcoming solicitation for the program:
- Past experiences: These are the previous competitively won contracts the solicitor executed together with supporting narrative
- Personnel qualification and availability: Measures the availability and qualification of the solicitor in terms of proposed personnel (UN, 2012).
- Best value trade-offs: Same degree comparisons of other available options based on technical provisions (Gansler & Lucyshyn, 2009; Gransberg & Ellicott, 1996).
All the past contracts that the solicitor won through a negotiated yet competitive process must be evaluated to determine the solicitor’s integrity and capacity to execute the contract it is expressing interest in. Such information should include the level of compliance with goals of the project(s), the key personnel and other subcontractors or predecessors, if any, who worked on the projects.
This criterion was chosen as it is vital in determining the relevance of these past performances in relation to the current project as well as the successes and challenges the offerors faced and how they corrected them. This will help the help the evaluator in deciding whether such offerors qualify to be classified within the competitive range to be considered for the project. It will determine the offerors’ weaknesses and strengths in regards to the project under consideration. It will also help in avoiding legal issues that might arise in case offerors had legal issues.
Personnel qualification and availability
The proposed personnel that the offerors intend to employ in accomplishing the project at hand must be well documented. This includes their academic qualifications and past work experiences. Essential information that may be vital for the organization, for example, individuals with criminal records, disbarred or underage should be provided by the offerors. This rank and responsibility within the offerors’ organization and in the project must also be clearly indicated.
Disclosure of such information is very important as it allows the evaluators to assess the risk involved in choosing any of the offerors. It is the first step in avoiding conflicts, especially those of legal nature, which may b costly not only to the project but to the organization at large. Moreover, it offers the evaluators the opportunity to deduce the probability of success and competitiveness of the various offerors. It will also allow the organization to establish a chain of command and communication as it liaises with the winning offeror to ensure overall success of the project.
Best value trade-offs
The evaluation team set out key objectives and goals for any project. Therefore, the solution product proposed by the offerors must be able to capture these goals and objectives effectively and efficient. The offerors must therefore provide a matrix and a narrative form of the quantitative comparisons of the proposed solution with others currently available in the market. Such comparisons must seek to meet the criteria in the technical provisions. Therefore, the comparisons should be either partial or full. However, such degree must be stated in the technical report. In case of additional costs, the offerors must explain the additional benefits that come such additional cost.
This sub-factor will allow the evaluators to make trade-offs. That is, it will enable the evaluators to determine the opportunity cost for choosing any of the various options presented by the offerors.
Gransberg, D. D. & Ellicott, M. A. (1996). Best value contracting: Breaking the low-bid paradigm. Transactions of AACE International: VEC51-VEC56.
Gansler, J. S. & Lucyshyn, W. (2009). Bid Protests Bid Protests: Analysis to Date. School of Public Policy University of Maryland, NPS Acquisition Research Symposium. Retrieved from http://www.acquisitionresearch.net/_files/FY2009/NPS-AM-09-101.pdf
UN. (2012). UN Procurement Practitioner’s Handbook. United Nations, Interagency Procurement Working Group (IAPWG). Retrieved from https://www.ungm.org/Areas/Public/pph/ch03s07.html