§ 215.605 - Evaluation factors and subfactors.

(b)(2)(A) In acquisitions which require use of the clause at FAR 52.219-9, Small, Small Disadvantaged and Women-Owned Small Business Subcontracting Plan, the extent of participation of small and small disadvantaged business in performance of the contact shall be addressed in source selection.

(1) For acquisitions other than those based only on cost or price competition, the contracting officer shall evaluate the extent to which offerors identify and commit to small business and to small disadvantaged business, historically black college and university, or minority institution performance of the contract, whether as a joint venture, teaming arrangement, or subcontractor.

(2) Criteria for evaluation may include—

(i) The extent which such firms are specifically identified in proposals;

(ii) The extent of commitment to use such firms (for example, enforceable commitments are to be weighted more heavily than non-enforceable ones);

(iii) The complexity and variety of the work small firms are to perform;

(iv) The realism of the proposal;

(v) When not otherwise required by 215.608(a)(2), past performance of the offerors in complying with requirements of the clauses at FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small, Small Disadvantaged and Women-Owned Small Business Concerns, and 52.219-9, Small, Small Disadvantaged and Women-Owned Small Business Subcontracting Plan; and

(vi) The extent of participation of such firms in terms of the value of the total acquisition.

(3) Proposals addressing the extent of small and small disadvantaged business performance may be separate from subcontracting plans submitted pursuant to the clause at FAR 52.219-9 and should be structured to allow for consideration of offers from small businesses.

(4) When an evaluation includes the criterion in paragraph (b)(2)(A)(2)(i) of this section, the small, small disadvantaged, or women-owned small businesses considered in the evaluation shall be listed in any subcontracting plan submitted pursuant to FAR 52.219-9 to facilitate compliance with 252.219-7003(g).

(B) The costs or savings related to contract administration and audit may be considered when the offeror's past performance or performance risk is likely to result in significant costs or savings.

(c) In competitive acquisitions of services—

(i) Evaluation and award should be based, to the maximum extent practicable, on best overall value to the Government in terms of quality and other factors.

(ii) The weighting of costs must be commensurate with the nature of the services being acquired.

(A) It may be appropriate to award to an offeror, based on technical and quality considerations, at other than the lowest price when—

(1) The effort being contracted for departs from clearly defined efforts; or

(2) Highly skilled personnel are required.

(B) It may be appropriate to award to the technically acceptable offeror with the lowest price when—

(1) Services being acquired are of a routine or simple nature;

(2) Highly skilled personnel are not required; or

(3) The product to be delivered is clearly defined at the outset of the acquisition.