(4) The establishment of a date for receipt of the technical evaluation report.

[50 FR 23131, May 31, 1985, and 50 FR 38004, Sept. 19, 1985]

315.608-74 Convening the technical evaluation panel.

(a) Normally, the technical evaluation panel will convene to evaluate the proposals. However, there may be situations when the contracting officer determines that it is not feasible for the panel to convene. Whenever this decision is made, care must be taken to assure that the technical review is closely monitored to produce acceptable results.

(b) When a panel is convened, the chairperson is responsible for the control of the technical proposals provided to him/her by the contracting officer for use during the evaluation process. The chairperson will generally distribute the technical proposals at the initial panel meeting and will establish procedures for securing the proposals whenever they are not being evaluated to insure their confidentiality. After the evaluation is complete, all proposals must be returned to the contracting officer, destroyed or filed in an appropriate manner to maintain the confidential nature of the data.

(c) The contracting officer shall address the initial meeting of the panel and state the basic rules for conducting the evaluation. The contracting officer shall provide written guidance to the panel if he/she is unable to attend the initial panel meeting. The guidance should include:

(1) An explanation of conflicts of interest (see 315.608-71(d));

(2) The necessity to read and understand the solicitation, especially the statement of work and evaluation criteria, prior to reading the proposals;

(3) The need for evaluators to restrict the review to only the solicitation and the contents of the technical proposals;

(4) The need for each evaluator to review all the proposals;

(5) The need to watch for ambiguities, inconsistencies, errors, and deficiencies which should be surfaced during the evaluation process;

(6) An explanation of the evaluation process and what will be expected of the evaluators throughout the process;

(7) The need for the evaluators to be aware of the requirement to have complete written documentation of the individual strengths and weaknesses which affect the scoring of the proposals; and

(8) An instruction directing the evaluators that, until the award is made, information concerning the acquisition must not be disclosed to any person not directly involved in the evaluation process.

[50 FR 23131, May 31, 1985, and 50 FR 38004, Sept. 19, 1985]

315.608-75 Rating and ranking of proposals.

The evaluators will individually read each proposal, describe tentative strengths and weaknesses, and develop preliminary scores in relation to each evaluation criterion set forth in the solicitation. The evaluators will use the rating sheets either in the technical evaluation plan or approved by the contracting officer when a technical evaluation plan is not required (see 315.608-70). After this has been accomplished, the evaluators shall discuss in detail the individual strengths and weaknesses described by each evaluator and, if possible, arrive at a common understanding of the major strengths and weaknesses and the potential for correcting each offeror's weakness(es). Each evaluator will score each proposal, and then the technical evaluation panel will collectively rank the proposals. Generally, ranking will be determined by adding the numerical scores assigned to the evaluation criteria and finding the average for each offeror. The evaluators should then identify whether each proposal is acceptable or unacceptable. Predetermined cutoff scores shall not be employed.

[50 FR 23131, May 31, 1985, and 50 FR 38004, Sept. 19, 1985]

315.608-76 Technical evaluation report.

A technical evaluation report shall be prepared and furnished to the contracting officer by the chairperson and maintained as a permanent record in

the contract file. The report must reflect the ranking of the proposals and identify each proposal as acceptable or unacceptable in accordance with 315.608-75. The report must also include a narrative evaluation specifying the strengths and weaknesses of each proposal, a copy of each rating sheet, and any reservations, qualifications, or areas to be addressed that might bear upon the selection of sources for negotiation and award. Concrete technical reasons supporting a determination of unacceptability with regard to any proposal must be included. The report should also include specific points and questions which are to be raised in discussions or negotiations.

[50 FR 23132, May 31, 1985, and 50 FR 38004, Sept. 19, 1985]

315.608-77 Evaluation of business proposals.

(a) The contracting officer shall evaluate the business proposals concurrently with the evaluation of the technical proposals. The contracting officer must adhere to the requirements for cost or price analysis included in FAR 15.805-1 for each business proposal in the competitive range. An audit report may be required in accordance with FAR 15.805-5 and 315.805-5. The contracting officer must determine the extent of analysis in each case depending on the amount of the proposal, the technical complexity and related cost or price, and cost realism. The contracting officer should request the project officer to analyze such items as the number of labor hours proposed for various labor categories; the mix of labor hours and categories of labor in relation to the technical requirements of the project; the kinds and quantities of material, equipment, and supplies; types, numbers, and hours/days of proposed consultants; logic of proposed subcontracting; analysis of the travel proposed including number of trips, locations, purpose, and travelers; and kinds and quantities of data processing. The project officer shall provide his/her opinion as to whether these elements are necessary and reasonable for efficient contract performance. Exceptions to proposed elements shall be supported by adequate rationale to

allow for effective negotiations. The contracting officer should also request the assistance of a cost/price analyst when considered necessary. In all cases, the negotiation memorandum (see 315.672) must include the rationale used in determining that the price or cost is fair and reasonable.

(b) The contracting officer must appraise the management capability of the offeror to perform the required work in a timely manner. In making this appraisal, the contracting officer should consider factors such as the offeror's management organization, past performance, reputation for reliability, availability of the required facilities, and cost controls. This information is to be used by the contracting officer to determine the offeror's responsibility.

[50 FR 23132, May 31, 1975, and 50 FR 38004, Sept. 19, 1985]

315.609 Competitive range.

(a) A proposal must be included in the competitive range unless there is no real possibility that it can be improved to the point where it becomes the most acceptable.

(e) In certain circumstances, when deciding which proposals should be included in the competitive range, the contracting officer may request that the technical evaluation panel review the cost or price data. Typical situations which may necessitate this review include a suspected "buy-in," large differences in cost or price among the proposals, proposals receiving high technical ratings which have relatively high costs, and proposals receiving low technical ratings which have relatively low costs. The resultant comparison of cost or price to technical factors and the determination of cost or price realism should assist the contracting officer in deciding which proposals are to be included in the competitive range.

(f) All determinations regarding the inclusion or exclusion of proposals in the competitive range must be completely documented, including the salient reasons for the determinations, and set forth in the negotiation memorandum.

(g) Some of the factors which the contracting officer should consider in determining the competitive range

are:

(1) The relative importance of cost or price as compared to technical factors in accordance with the solicitation provisions required in 315.406-5(c);

(2) The susceptibility of significantly reducing a proposal with an unreasonable high price or cost without undermining the technical merit if the offeror otherwise has a reasonable chance to receive an award; and

(3) The likelihood of reducing cost or price of a proposal which exceeds the Government's requirements.

(h) The contacting officer shall conduct a thorough review of the technical evaluation report to be assured that:

(1) All determinations of unacceptability are supported by concrete and comprehensive statements that are factual and convincing and are consistent with the evaluation criteria set forth in the solicitation. Every statement should be reviewed carefully to eliminate any doubts as to the unacceptability of a proposal;

(2) All recommendations to exclude proposals from the competitive range are supported by persuasive rationale and sufficient facts to substantiate a judgment that meaningful discussions are not possible or there is no reasonable chance of the proposal being selected for award;

(3) Those cases where only one organization is found to be technically acceptable are fully scrutinized; and

(4) Unacceptable proposals contain "information" deficiencies which are so material as to preclude any possibility of upgrading the proposal to a competitive level except through major revisions and additions which would be tantamount to the submission of another proposal.

(i) The contracting officer and project officer should discuss the uncertainties and/or deficiencies that are included in the technical evaluation report for each proposal in the competitive range. Technical questions should be developed by the project officer and/or the technical evaluation panel and should be included in the technical evaluation report. The man

agement and cost or price questions should be prepared by the contracting officer with assistance from the project officer and/or panel as required. The method of requesting offerors in the competitive range to submit the additional information will vary depending on the complexity of the questions, the extent of additional information requested, the time needed to analyze the responses, and the time frame for making the award. However, to the extent practicable, all questions and answers should be in writing. Each offeror in the competitive range shall be given an equitable period of time for preparation of responses to questions to the extent practicable. The questions should be developed so as to disclose the ambiguities, uncertainties, and deficiencies of the offeror (see FAR 15.610(c)).

315.610

Written or oral discussions.

(b) The contracting officer, with the support of personnel who evaluated the technical proposals, and, if necessary, cost analysts, attorneys, etc., must conduct written or oral discussions with all responsible offerors within the competitive range.

(d) Careful judgment must be exercised in determining the extent of discussions. In some cases, more than one round of discussions with all the offerors within the competitive range may be required. The time available, the expense and administrative limitations, and the complexity, size, and significance of the acquisition should all be considered in deciding on the type, duration, and depth of the discussions.

315.611 Best and final offers.

(b)(5) Notice that confirmation of a prior offer should be specifically stated as a final offer; and

(6) Notice that all revisions to former offers should be submitted on Standard Form 1411, Contract Pricing Proposal Cover Sheet, and should be fully documented.

(c) "Best and final" offers are subject to a final evaluation of price or cost and other salient factors by the contracting officer and project officer with assistance from a cost/price ana

lyst, and an evaluation of technical factors by the technical evaluation panel, as necessary. Proposals may be technically rescored and reranked by the technical evaluation panel and a technical evaluation report prepared. To the extent practicable, the evaluation shall be performed by the same evaluators who reviewed the original proposals (see 315.670—).

(e) Of particular importance in the award of research or development contracts, including those with educational institutions, is the competence of key personnel in the specific field of science or technology involved, as reflected in the proposal. However, awards should not be made for research and development capabilities that exceed those needed for the successful performance of the particular project.

315.670 Negotiation with the selected

source.

(a) After selection of the successful proposal, a limited negotiation with the selected offeror may be conducted if deemed necessary. However, no factor which could have any effect on the selection process may be introduced into the negotiation after the common cutoff date for receipt of best and final offers. The negotiation shall not in any way prejudice the competitive interests or right of the unsuccessful offerors. Negotiations with the selected offeror shall be restricted to definitizing the final agreement on terms and conditions; e.g., assuming none of these factors were involved in the selection process, negotiation could include such topics as payment provisions, patent rights, rights in data, property provisions, labor rates, indirect cost rates, and fees. Prior to conducting the limited negotiation, the contracting officer shall approve a written determination citing both the specific issues to be discussed and the rationale showing that the negotiations shall not have any effect on the selection process.

(b) Caution must be exercised by the contracting officer to insure that the negotiation is not used to change the requirement contained in the solicitation, nor to make any other changes which would impact on the source se

lection decision. Whenever a material change occurs in the requirements as a result of the negotiation, the competition must be reopened and all offerors submitting "best and final" offers must be given an opportunity to resubmit proposals based on the revised requirements. Whenever there is a question as to whether a change is material, the contracting officer should obtain the advice of technical personnel and legal counsel before reopening the competition. Significant changes in the offeror's cost proposal may also necessitate a reopening of competition if such changes alter the factors involved in the original selection proc

ess.

(c) Should negotiations beyond those specified in (a) above be required for any reason, discussions must be reopened with all offerors submitting "best and final" offers.

(d) Upon completion of the negotiation, the contracting officer shall obtain a confirmation letter from the successful offeror which includes any revisions to the technical proposal, the agreed to price or cost, and, as applicable, a certificate of current cost or pricing data.

[49 FR 13979, Apr. 9, 1984, 49 FR 36110, Sept. 14, 1984]

315.671 Post negotiation contract preparation and award.

(a) The contracting officer must perform the following actions after negotiations have been completed:

(1) Prepare the negotiation memorandum in accordance with 315.672;

(2) Prepare the contract containing all agreed to terms and conditions and clauses required by law or regulation;

(3) Include in the contract file the pertinent documents referenced in FAR 4.803; and

(4) Obtain the appropriate approval of proposed contract awards in accordance with Subpart 304.71 and contracting activity procedures.

(b) After receiving the required approvals, the contract should be transmitted to the prospective contractor for signature. The prospective contractor must be informed that the contract is not effective until accepted by the contracting officer.

(c) The contract shall not be issued until the finance office certifies that the funds are available for obligation.

315.672 Preparation of negotiation memo

randum.

The negotiation memorandum or summary of negotiations is a complete record of all actions leading to award of a contract and is prepared by the contract negotiator. It should be in sufficient detail to explain and support the rationale judgments, and authorities upon which all actions were predicated. The memorandum will document the negotiation process and reflect the negotiator's actions, skills, and judgments in concluding a satisfactory agreement for the Government. Negotiation memorandums shall contain discussion of the following or a statement of nonapplicability; however, information already contained in the contract file need not be reiterated. A reference to the document which contains the required information is satisfactory.

(a) Description of articles and services and period of performance. A description of articles and services, quantity, unit price, total contract amount, and period of contract performance should be set forth (if Supplemental Agreement-show previous contract amount as revised, as well as information with respect to the period of performance).

(b) Acquisition planning. Summarize any acquisition planning activities that have taken place. Include items such as meetings with program and staff personnel and the development of acquisition planning schedules.

(c) Synopsis of proposed acquisition. A statement as to whether the acquisition has or has not been publicized in accordance with FAR Subpart 5.2. A brief statement of explanation should be included with reference to the specific basis for exemption under the FAR, if applicable.

(d) Contract type. Provide sufficient detail to support the type of contractural instrument recommended for the acquisition and cite any required D & F. If the contract is a cost-sharing type, explain the essential cost-sharing features.

(e) Extent of competition. The extent to which full and open competition was solicited and obtained must be discussed. The discussion shall inIclude the date of solicitation, sources solicited, and solicitation results. If a late proposal was received, discuss whether or not the late proposal was evaluated and the rationale for the decision. If the acquisition is to be awarded without full and open competition, discuss the rationale for the decision.

(f) Technical evaluation. Summarize the results presented in the technical evaluation report and delineate the basis of acceptability or unacceptability of the proposals from a technical standpoint. Discussion should be in nontechnical terms.

(g) Business evaluation. Summarize the results presented in the business report and delineate the basis for the determination of acceptability or unacceptability of the buinsess propos

als.

(h) Competitive range. If full and open competition, describe how the zone of consideration or competitive range was determined and state the offerors who were included in the competitive range and the ones who were not. Explain why any offeror who submitted a technically acceptable proposal was not included in further discussions. Comment on any changes made in the offeror's proposal as a result of the discussions.

(i) Cost breakdown and analysis. Include a complete cost breakdown together with the negotiator's analysis of the estimated cost by individual cost elements. The negotiator's analysis should contain such information as:

(1) A comparison of cost factors proposed in the instant case with actual cost factors used in earlier contracts, using the same cost centers of the same supplier or cost centers or other sources having recent contracts for the same or similar item.

(2) Any pertinent Government-conducted audit of the proposed contractor's records of any pertinent cost advisory report (see FAR 15.805).

(3) Any pertinent technical evaluation inputs as to necessity, allocability and reasonableness of labor, material and other direct expenses.