TOP OF THE ROCKIES CONTRACT

Contract was evaluated and awarded based on the evaluation criteria specified in the solicitation and Best Value to the Government (USDA Forest Service). Evaluation Criteria/Technical Factors Technical evaluation factors were: (1) Qualifications and Experience - 20% (a) Qualifications and experience of firm and key personnel, including project manager, interpretive planner, landscape architect, graphic designers and any subcontractors that would be assigned to the project. (b) Information should include, be is not limited to: -Corridor management and interpretive management plans completed -Other work completed for Scenic Byways or other designations related to interpretation. Resume's and qualifications of key personnel who will develop this plan -Knowledge and understanding of the various aspects of corridor and interpretive management planning, interpretation of larger sites with varying interpretive themes. -Include information about the company, including primary focus (i.e., a full service operation or designers or fabricators). If a subcontractor will be used to complete portions of this contract, please include information about the subcontractor, their primary focus and the working relationship you have had with them in the past. (2) Past Performance - 30% (a) Projects completed within the last five years that demonstrate experience in the corridor management and interpretive planning projects of a comparable size. (b) Three references or three letters of recommendation may be provided, from previous customers that highlight products and services (c) A summary of no less than three, and no more than six, similar projects performed. Review provided drawings and examples of interpretive plans, corridor management plans, site plans and design guidelines or subcontracted work for each project that clearly demonstrate the Offeror's ability to update the Top of the Rockies National Scenic Byway Corridor Management Plan and Interpretive Management Plan and develop an Independence Pass Master Site Plan. (d) Examples that demonstrate the contracts were completed at or below budget. -Summaries that demonstrate effective management, ability to manage projects involving subcontractors, working relationships with Contracting Officers Representatives and Project Managers with reasonable/cooperative behavior, flexibility, and effective Contractor recommended solutions, and businesslike concern for the Government's interests. -Summaries demonstrate compliance with delivery schedules, reliability, responsiveness to technical direction, and no assessment of liquidated damages. (3) Pricing - 20% Analyze price breakout out by individual cost elements, per schedule B. (4) Capability to Accomplish and Manage This Project - 20% -Included summaries that clearly explain how the Offeror shall manage this project and any subcontractors. Review the areas of cost control, customer service, schedule adherence, and quality control of work. (5) Knowledge of Area and Resources - 10% -Include information that demonstrates knowledge of project management tools and techniques, project-specific plans/data, and familiarity with USDA Forest Service, mission, and objectives. The technical evaluation factors when combined are slightly more important than cost or price in the award decision. The Government reserves the right to make technical/cost trade-offs that are in the best interest and advantageous to the Government. The critical factor in making any cost/technical trade-off is not the difference between the technical evaluations but the significance of the difference. The significance of the difference between the technical evaluations will be determined on the basis of what the difference might mean in terms of performance and what it would cost the Government to take advantage of that difference.