Relevancy. The first aspect of the past performance is to evaluate how relevant the Past Performance being evaluated is to the requirements of this solicitation. The Government will use the following aspects to determine relevancy for this evaluation:
a) The government will evaluate the offeror’s “Relevancy Information of the Past Performance Contract Reference Worksheet,” Attachment L-5, to determine the information is complete and accurate in accordance with
Relevancy. The work performed for OCP demonstrates the Team's ability to support and perform all aspects of the ECOE's Scope of Services; from providing in depth analysis to run procurements, to portfolio management and analysis to assure that cost avoidance savings are realized over the life of the contract. It also demonstrates the Team's ability to effectively perform all tasks quickly and successfully. Prior to engaging the Team, OCP had been unsuccessful in two previous procurements, receiving only one bid from one supplier each time. The Team was able to increase supplier participation by 250% and assisted in decreasing the City Council's approval process from two weeks to less than 24 hours. WORLD ENERGY SOLUTIONS PROPRIETARY INFORMATIONS WORLD ENERGY SOLUTIONS MASSACHUSETTS ENERGY MANAGEMENT SERVICES CONTRACT NAME DELIVERY ORDER NAME AWARD DATE - COMPLETION DATE ------------- ------------------- ---------------------------- Energy Management Services n/a 4/2005 - Ongoing CONTRACT NUMBER, AGENCY DELIVERY ORDER NUMBER DOLLAR AMOUNT ----------------------- --------------------- ------------- ENE25; The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Operational Services Division n/a $0 CUSTOMER TECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE CUSTOMER CONTRACTUAL REPRESENTATIVE --------------------------------- ----------------------------------- Xx. Xxxxx Xxxxx Xx. Xxxxx Xxxxx Procurement Team Leader, Energy Procurement Team Leader, Energy Room 1017 Room 1017 One Ashburton Place Xxx Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxx, XX, 00000 Xxxxxx, XX, 00000 (000) 000-0000 (Phone) (000) 000-0000 (Phone) (000) 000-0000 (Fax) (000) 000-0000 (Fax) xxxxx.xxxxx@xxx.xxxxx.xx.xx xxxxx.xxxxx@xxx.xxxxx.xx.xx Customer Type: State Government Contract Type: Performance Based SUMMARY OF WORK PERFORMED The Massachusetts Operational Services Division (OSD) solicited energy procurement and contract management services through a competitive Request for Proposal Process. The team of World Energy Solutions, Inc. (WE) and Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) won the competition based on past performance and price. The team has actively been working with OSD since April to provide expertise and solutions regarding the Commonwealth's upcoming electricity procurement, which is the first of its kind for the State. To date, the team has primarily focused on the following areas of pre-auction support: - Providing market assessments and guidance on cost-avoidance savings opportunities by utility - Assisting OSD with marketing over 100 s...
Relevancy. The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all recent performance information obtained. The scope and magnitude of Task Order 1 shall be used for relevancy comparison. For each recent past performance reference reviewed, the relevance of the work performed will generally be assessed for the task areas in Section 6 and dollar value. A relevancy determination of the Offeror’s past performance will be made based upon the aforementioned considerations. The past performance information forms and information obtained from other sources will be used to establish the degree of relevancy of past performance. Past performance efforts with higher relevance may be accorded greater weight than those with lower relevance. The Government will use the following degrees of relevancy when assessing recent, relevant contracts (DoD Source Selection Procedures, paragraph 3.1.
Relevancy. For each past performance contract submitted with performance within the period stated in Section L.5.1(a), the Government will evaluate the past performance contract to determine how relevant itis to this solicitation’s effort. Any past performance contract deemed to be Not Relevant will receive no further consideration, with no opportunity to submit a replacement, even if the Government enters into discussions and requests revised proposals. In determining relevancy, the Government will evaluate scope, magnitude, and complexity of the past performance effort, which includes the similarity of the service/support effort, the contract dollar value, the dollar amount of the effort the contractor actually performed under the contract, the contract type, length of the period of performance. Another aspect of relevancy is how recently the performance occurred. Generally, more recent performance is more relevant than less recent performance, all things being equal. More relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the Past Performance Confidence Assessment than past performance of lesser relevance.
Relevancy. As it pertains to Past Performance information, is a measure of the extent of similarity between the service/support effort, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and subcontract/teaming or other comparable attributes of past performance examples and the source solicitation requirements; and a measure of the likelihood that the past performance is an indicator of future performance.
Relevancy. You may only submit search terms and descriptions to Network Solutions and the Advertising Services that are relevant to your Website(s) or to those web page(s) contained in your
Relevancy. The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all recent performance information obtained. The scope and magnitude of task order 1 and 2 shall be used for relevancy comparison. For each recent past performance reference reviewed, the relevance of the work performed will generally be assessed for the task areas in Section 6 and dollar value. A relevancy determination of the Offeror’s past performance will be made based upon the aforementioned considerations. The past performance information forms and information obtained from other sources will be used to establish the degree of relevancy of past performance. Past performance efforts with higher relevance may be accorded greater weight than those with lower relevance. The Government will use the following degrees of relevancy when assessing recent, relevant contracts (DoD Source Selection Procedures, paragraph 3.1.3.1). Efforts assessed as Not Relevant will not be further evaluated VERY RELEVANT Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. RELEVANT Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. SOMEWHAT RELEVANT Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. NOT RELEVANT Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.
Relevancy. The second aspect is to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. Relevancy is not separately rated; however, the following criteria (see Table 2) will be used to establish what is relevant which shall include similarity of service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and degree of subcontract/teaming. Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.
Relevancy. For the purposes of evaluation, the Government will first evaluate the past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort is to the effort to be acquired. Recent is defined as current work or work completed within the past six years from date of solicitation issuance. To be considered relevant, past performance shall be similar in scope. Similar in scope is defined as contracts with substantial efforts for self-performed tasks involving managing 100 or more employees (under a single contract). For the purpose of this solicitation “self-performed” is defined as tasks that the Offeror performed by their own personnel (as a prime, subcontractor, or within a partnership). Projects that involve managing 100 or more employees (under a single contract) that also include Aviation Instruction experience will be evaluated more relevant than all other experience. Projects that involve managing 200 or more employees (under a single contract) will be evaluated more relevant than projects managing less than 200 employees (under a single contract).
Relevancy. For each past performance contract submitted, the government will evaluate the past performance contract to determine how relevant it is to this solicitation’s effort. Any past performance contract deemed to be Not Relevant will receive no further consideration, with no opportunity to submit a replacement, even if the government requests revised proposals. In determining relevancy, the government will compare the contract types, total dollar amounts, dollar amounts of the effort actually performed, the location and divisions of the company that performed the effort, the period of performance of the past performance contract, and the scope, magnitude, and complexity of the past performance effort to the effort proposed to be performed under this solicitation. The government will assign each past performance contract one of the following relevancy ratings:
