[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 14, Volume 5, Parts 1200 to end]
[Revised as of January 1, 2001]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 14CFR1274.204]

[Page 454-456]
 
                     TITLE 14--AERONAUTICS AND SPACE
 
                          SPACE ADMINISTRATION
 
PART 1274--COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS WITH COMMERCIAL FIRMS--Table of Contents
 
                    Subpart B--Pre-Award Requirements
 
Sec. 1274.204  Evaluation and selection.

    (a) Evaluation factor. A single technical evaluation factor is 
typically used for CANs. That evaluation factor should be one of the 
following: Providing research and development or technology transfer, 
enhancing U.S.

[[Page 455]]

competitiveness, or developing a capability among U.S. firms. Award to 
foreign firms is not precluded if the evaluation factor is satisfied. 
Subfactors could include such things as fostering U.S. leadership, 
potential to advance technologies anticipated to enhance U.S. 
competitiveness, timeliness of proposed accomplishments, private sector 
commitment to commercialization, identification of specific potential 
commercial markets, appropriateness of business risk, potential for 
broad impact on the U.S. technology and knowledge base, level of 
commitment (contribution of private resources to the project), 
appropriateness of team member participation and relationships, (this 
subfactor should include consideration of the participation of an 
appropriate mix of small business, small disadvantaged business, and 
women-owned small business concerns, as well as non-profits and 
educational institutions, including historically black colleges and 
universities and minority institutions) appropriateness of management 
planning, relevant experience, qualifications and depth of management 
and technical staff, quality and appropriateness of resources committed 
to the project, performance bench marks, technical approach, business 
approach/resource sharing, past performance, the articles of 
collaboration, etc.
    (b) Technical evaluation. (1) Competitive technical proposal 
information shall be protected in accordance with 48 CFR (FAR) 15.207, 
Handling Proposals and Information. Unsolicited proposals shall be 
protected in accordance with 48 CFR (FAR) 15.608, Prohibitions, and 48 
CFR (FAR) 15.609, Limited Use of Data.
    (i) Selecting officials and grant/contracting officers are 
responsible for protecting sensitive information on the award of a grant 
or cooperative agreement and for determining who is authorized to 
receive such information. Sensitive information includes: information 
contained in proposals; information prepared for NASA's evaluation of 
proposals; the rankings of proposals for an award; reports and 
evaluations of source selection panels, boards, or advisory councils; 
and other information deemed sensitive by the selecting official or by 
the grant/contracting officer.
    (ii) No sensitive information shall be disclosed unless the 
selecting official or the grant/contracting officer has approved 
disclosure based upon an unequivocal ``need-to-know'' and the individual 
receiving the information has signed a Non-Disclosure Certificate 
(Exhibit E to subpart A of 14 CFR part 1260). All attendees at formal 
source selection presentations and briefings shall be required to sign 
an Attendance Roster. The attendance rosters and certificates shall be 
maintained in official files for a minimum of six months after award.
    (iii) The improper disclosure of sensitive information could result 
in criminal prosecution or an adverse action.
    (2) The technical officer will evaluate proposals in accordance with 
the criteria in the CAN. Proposals selected for award will be supported 
by documentation as described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section. When 
evaluation results in a proposal not being selected, the proposer will 
be notified in accordance with the CAN.
    (3) The technical evaluation of proposals may include peer reviews. 
Since the business sense of a cooperative agreement proposal is critical 
to its success, NASA should reserve the right to utilize appropriate 
outside evaluators to assist in the evaluation of such proposal elements 
as the business base projections, the market for proposed products, and/
or the impact of anticipated product price reductions. The use of 
outside evaluators shall be approved in accordance with 48 CFR (NFS) 
1815.207-70(b). A cover sheet with the following legend shall be affixed 
to data provided to outside evaluators:

                Government Notice for Handling Proposals

    This proposal shall be used and disclosed for evaluation purposes 
only, and a copy of this Government notice shall be applied to any 
reproduction or abstract thereof. Any authorized restrictive notices 
which the submitter places on this proposal shall also be strictly 
complied with.

    (4) Evaluation of unsolicited proposals must consider whether: the 
subject of the proposal is available to

[[Page 456]]

NASA from another source without restriction; the proposal closely 
resembles a pending competitive acquisition; and the research proposed 
demonstrates an innovative and unique method, approach, or concept. 
Organizations submitting unaccepted proposals will be notified in 
writing.
    (c) Documentation requirements. For proposals selected for award, 
the technical officer will prepare and furnish to the grant officer the 
following documentation:
    (1) For a competitively selected proposal, a signed selection 
statement and technical evaluation based on the evaluation criteria 
stated in the solicitation.
    (2) For an unsolicited proposal, a justification for acceptance of 
an unsolicited proposal (JAUP) prepared by the cognizant technical 
office. The JAUP shall be submitted for the approval of the grant 
officer after review and concurrence at a level above the technical 
officer. The evaluator shall consider the following factors, in addition 
to any others appropriate for the particular proposal:
    (i) Unique and innovative methods, approaches or concepts 
demonstrated by the proposal.
    (ii) Overall scientific or technical merits of the proposal.
    (iii) The offeror's capabilities, related experience, facilities, 
techniques, or unique combinations of these which are integral factors 
for achieving the proposal objectives.
    (iv) The qualifications, capabilities, and experience of the 
proposed key personnel who are critical in achieving the proposal 
objectives.
    (v) Current, open solicitations under which the unsolicited proposal 
could be evaluated.
    (d) Cost evaluation. (1) The grant officer and technical team will 
determine whether the overall proposed cost of the project is reasonable 
and that the recipient's contribution is valid, verifiable, and 
available. Commitments should be obtained and verified to the extent 
practical from the offeror or members of the consortia that the proposed 
contributions can and will be made as specified in the proposal or 
statement of work.
    (i) If the recipient's verified share on a cooperative agreement 
equals or exceeds 50 percent of the total cost of the agreement and the 
total value of the agreement is less than $5 million, the cost 
evaluation of the offeror's proposal should focus on the overall 
reasonableness and timing of the proposer's contribution. Cost or 
pricing data should not be required and information other than cost or 
pricing data (defined in 48 CFR (FAR) 15.403-3) should not normally be 
required.
    (ii) If the recipient's share is projected to be less than 50 
percent or the total value of the agreement is more than $5 million, a 
more in-depth analysis of the proposed costs should be undertaken. Only 
information other than cost or pricing data should be required. An 
analysis consistent with 48 CFR (FAR) 15.404-1 through 15.404-2 should 
be performed.
    (2) As part of the evaluation of the cost proposal, the source of 
the recipient's contribution should be determined. Each of the cost 
elements contributed by the recipient and their amounts should be 
identified. If the contribution will consist at least in part of IR&D, 
the extent to which the IR&D may be recoverable from Government awards 
should be established. This will involve using the estimated Government 
participation rate of the recipient's General and Administrative 
indirect cost base for the period of the cooperative agreement. An 
analysis consistent with 48 CFR (FAR) 15.404-1 and 15.404-2 should be 
performed.
    (e) Consortium. If the cooperative agreement is to be awarded to a 
consortium, a completed, formally executed Articles of Collaboration is 
required prior to award.
    (f) Printing, binding, and duplicating. Proposals for effort which 
involve printing, binding, and duplicating in excess of 25,000 pages are 
subject to the regulations of the Congressional Joint Committee on 
Printing. The technical office will refer such proposals to the 
Installation Central Printing Management Officer (ICPMO) to ensure 
compliance with NPD 1490.1. The grant officer will be advised in writing 
of the results of the ICPMO review.

[[Page 457]]