SPECIAL NOTICE
C -- A-E Services Public Anouncement Renovate Surgical Suite Phase II Project 652-19-103
- Notice Date
- 7/22/2019
- Notice Type
- Synopsis
- NAICS
- 541330
— Engineering Services
- Contracting Office
- Department of Veterans Affairs;Network Contracting Office 6;100 Emancipation Drive;Hampton VA 23667
- ZIP Code
- 23667
- Solicitation Number
- 36C24619Q0880
- Archive Date
- 10/29/2019
- Point of Contact
- blake.grier@va.gov
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT FOR PROCUREMENT OF ARCHITECT-ENGINEERING (A/E) SERVICES: This is a request for Standard Form 330, Architect-Engineer Qualifications only. A-E Services are being procured in accordance with the Selection of Architects and Engineers Statute (Public Law 92-582), formerly known as the Brooks Act, and implemented in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 36.6. All submissions will be evaluated in accordance with the below selection criteria. The Government will not pay, nor reimburse, any costs associated with responding to this request. The Government is under no obligation to award a contract as a result of this announcement. Firms will be selected based on demonstrated competence and qualifications for the required work. Any resulting award for the proposed A/E services will be procured under a negotiated Firm-Fixed Price contract. The NAICS Code for this acquisition is 541330, Engineering Services, and the applicable Small Business Size Standard is $15 million annual revenue. During performance, the selected A/E firm will be required to attend meetings in person, on site, at the Salem VA Medical Center, Salem, VA. Therefore, the area of consideration is RESTRICTED to a maximum 500-mile radius of the Salem VA Medical Center, 1970 Roanoke Boulevard, Salem, Virginia 24153 in which either the A/E firm s Primary or established Auxiliary/Satellite office must be located. NOTE: The 500-mile radius will be measured by one or more of the nationally recognized commercial free on-line mapping services from the Primary or established Auxiliary/Satellite Office Address to the above VA address (shortest driving distance option). Proximity of the firms assigned office, to the project site, including within the 500-mile radius, is one of the criteria on which selection of the most highly qualified firms will be based. Interested parties shall ensure current licensing to provide real property design services (Engineer Services) in accordance with the State regulations of which the firms assigned office is located, and shall have a current registration in: (1.) the System for Award Management (SAM) database at https://www.sam.gov, (2.) and the Vendor Information Pages database at http://www.va.gov/osdbu, if applicable, and (3.) have submitted the current cycle VETS-4212 Report at http://www.dol.gov/vets/programs/fcp/main.htm (for contracts in the amount of $150,000.00 or more). Failure of a proposed SDVOSB to be certified by the CVE at the time the SF 330 is submitted shall result in elimination from further consideration. PROJECT INFORMATION: Project No. 658-19-109 Renovate Surgical Suite Phase II Salem VA Medical Center 1970 Roanoke Boulevard Salem, Virginia 24153 **SEE ATTACHED STATEMENT OF WORK. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The A/E shall provide design services for Non-Recurring Maintenance (NRM) construction project 658-19-109, Renovate Surgical Suite Phase II. This project will include an investigation by the A/E to determine the condition of various buildings and identify deficiencies. Proposed work is located at Salem VA Medical Center. DESIGN COSTS: All offerors are advised that in accordance with VAAR 836.606-73(a) the total cost of the architect or engineer services contracted for must not exceed six percent (6%) of the estimated cost of the construction project plus any fees for related services and activities. Additionally, FAR 52.236-22 Design Within Funding Limitations, will be applicable to this procurement action. Design limitation costs will be provided to the most highly rated AE firm(s) selected in accordance with the process outlined below. SDVOSB SET-ASIDE: This request for A-E firm qualifications packages is 100% set-aside for Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) concerns under VAAR 852.219-10, VA Notice of Total Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Set-Aside (Dec 2009). LIMITATIONS ON SUBCONTRACTING: In accordance with VAAR 852.219-10, VA Notice of Total Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Set-Aside and 13 CFR 125.6, a service disabled veteran-owned small business concern (SDVOSB) agrees that, in the performance of the contract, it will not pay more than 50% of the amount paid by the government to it, to firms that are not similarly situated. Firms that are similarly situated are those that are also CVE-registered SDVOSBs. SELECTION PROCESS: The agency has convened an evaluation board for the evaluation of responses to this notice. Responses will be evaluated in accordance with the Selection of Architects and Engineers Statute (Public Law 92-582), formerly known as the Brooks Act, and implemented in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 36.6. Specifically, SF 330 submissions will be evaluated to identify the most highly qualified firms, using the selection criteria identified below. Discussions will be held with at least three (3) of the most highly qualified firms. Interviews may be conducted. The processes at FAR 36.602-4 and FAR 36.606 will then be followed. SELECTION CRITERIA: The submitted SF330s will be evaluated in accordance with the following eight criteria from the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 36.602-1 and Veteran Administration Acquisition Regulation (VAAR) 836.602. Therefore, information provided by interested parties, on the SF330, shall address the following criteria. Instructions are provided. (1) Professional qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of required services; Key personnel shall, at a minimum, include the project managers and designers of record who would be assigned to perform the work. (See SF330 Part I Sections E, F and G, but not excluding other information provided on the SF330 and supporting documentation.) Weight: 15% (2) Specialized experience and technical competence in the type of work required; (See SF330 Part I Sections E, F and G, but not excluding other information provided on the SF330 and supporting documentation.) Weight: 15% (3) Capacity to accomplish the work in the required time; Weight: 15%; Respond as follows, as an addendum to the SF330: (i.) Provide a list of current projects with a design fee of greater than $20,000 currently being designed in the firm s office. Indicate the availability of the proposed project team (including sub-consultants) for the specified contract performance period in terms of: (1.) both the average and maximum number of projects being worked simultaneously for the previous twelve (12) month period, for each key personnel member, (2.) the number of projects currently being worked by each key personnel member identified in the SF330, and (3.) the number of projects that could be added to workload, given size and complexity; (4) Past performance on contracts with Government agencies and private industry in terms of cost control, quality of work, and compliance with performance schedules (three (3) references required); Weight: 15%; Respond as follows, as an addendum to the SF330: (i.) Submit no less than three (3) and no more than five (5) past performance references for recent and relevant projects identified on SF330 Part I Section F. Any of the following evaluations are acceptable: (a.) A-E Contractor Appraisal Support System (ACASS), (b.) Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS), or (c.) Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) evaluation. The required PPQ template is provided as an attachment to this announcement (Attachment C). A-Es should follow-up with references to ensure timely submittal of PPQ s, if used. Completed PPQs shall be submitted ONLY by the company/agency providing the reference, directly to the Contracting Officer, prior to the due date. If a completed ACASS/CPARS evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the completed SF330 package, in lieu of completing the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ). (ii.) Project Recency: A project will be considered recent only if performance was completed within five (5) years of the date of issuance of this public announcement. Ongoing projects will not be considered as no accurate performance record can exist for work not yet completed. (iii.) Project Relevance: The past performance references must be similar in scope to the design project described in the attached Statement of Work. (5) Location in the general geographical area of the project and knowledge of the locality of the project (maximum allowable distance of 500 miles from the project location, measured as previously stated); Weight: 10% (6) Reputation and standing of the firm and its principal officials with respect to professional performance, general management, and cooperativeness. (See SF330 Part I Sections E, F and G, but not excluding other information provided on the SF330 and supporting documentation, or otherwise identified in Federal and/or State Government databases.) Weight: 10% (7) Record of significant claims against the firm because of improper or incomplete architectural and engineering services. Weight: 10% (8) Specific experience and qualifications of personnel proposed for assignment to the project and their record of working together as a team. (See SF330 Part I Section G, but not excluding other information provided on the SF330 and supporting documentation.) Weight: 10% DUE DATE FOR SF330 QUALIFICATIONS SUBMISSIONS: Firms that meet the requirements listed in this announcement are invited to electronically submit the completed Standard Form (SF) 330 (Parts I and II) packages to blake.grier@va.gov no later than 11:00am EST, Thursday 22 August 2019. Submissions should be encrypted and may require multiple emails. The single email limit for file attachments is 10MB per email. Late proposal rules found in FAR 15.208 will be followed for late submittals. Acknowledgement of receipt will be provided, which will include the number of emails and number of attachments received. Thirty (31) calendar days are being provided from date of issuance to respond to this notice. All SF 330 submissions shall be clearly marked with the subject line displaying the Solicitation Number 36C24619Q0880 Salem VAMC. The SF 330 form may be downloaded from https://www.gsa.gov/reference/forms, and is also provided as an attachment to this notice. Completed SF 330 shall include the primary firms, subcontractor firms, and any consultants expected to be used on the project. Interested firms shall address each of the Eight (8) Selection Criteria in their SF 330 s and additional documents/submittals. THIS IS NOT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL. THERE ARE NO SOLICITATION DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE. This is a request for SF 330, Architect/Engineer Qualifications packages only. Any requests for a solicitation will not receive a response. EVALUATION METHOD: Identification of the most highly qualified firms will occur by using the following rating methodology and the above selection criteria. The number of firms identified by the evaluation board as the most highly qualified will be determined based on the responses received. Where three (3) or more responses are received from qualified firms, a minimum of three (3) firms will be identified as the most highly qualified. If less than three (3) responses are received, then only those firms that are qualified will be considered, or the requirement may be re-advertised. SF330 packages rated as marginal or unacceptable (see below) for any one criteria, or more than one criteria, may be removed from consideration as that firm may not represent a qualified firm for the purposes of this procurement. The excluded firm(s) will not be counted towards the tally of three (3) responses, or three (3) qualified firms, described above. Each of the eight (8) criteria will be assigned one of the ratings shown below, based on a consensus rating of the board s evaluation of the response. The weights for each of the criteria are identified above. A total weighted score will be calculated by multiplying the individual criterion ratings by the criteria weights, and then summing the individual criteria scores. The highest possible total score is 300. Outstanding: Criterion response suggests the firm has a high level of demonstrated competence and/or qualifications relevant to the requirement, and/or the capacity to perform the work. Rating Value: 3 Good: Criterion response suggests the firm has a moderate level of demonstrated competence and/or qualifications relevant to the requirement, and/or the capacity to perform the work. Rating Value: 2 Marginal: Criterion response suggests the firm has limited demonstrated competence and/or qualifications relevant to the requirement, and/or limited capacity to perform the work. Rating Value: 1 Unacceptable: Criterion response suggests the firm is unqualified for this requirement, and/or lacks the capacity to perform the work. Rating Value: 0 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS FOR PROPOSAL PREPARATION THIS SECTION IS FOR SOLICITATION PURPOSES ONLY. THIS SECTION WILL BE PHYSICALLY REMOVED FROM ANY RESULTANT AWARD, BUT WILL BE DEEMED INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE. (a) GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS: 1. All proposal preparation cost will be the sole responsibility of the Offeror. The Government will not reimburse any firm for their proposal preparation cost. Technical proposals of each offeror will be evaluated independently. All copies shall therefore be labeled with the offerors name, business address, and VA Solicitation Number. To assure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, Offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. A firm will not be considered if its SF 330 Part I is not signed, unless the SF 330 Part I is accompanied with a signed cover letter or a current signed SF 330 Part II. If a firm does not submit a SF 330 Part II with its SF 330 Part I, or have one on file, it will not be considered (FAR 36.603(b)). The offer shall consist of two separate parts: Part I - TECHNICAL CAPABILITY Part II PAST PERFORMANCE (b) SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS 1. PART I - TECHNICAL PROPOSAL - Submit original and two (2) copies and 1 CD. Professional Qualifications, Design Schedule & Experience shall be limited to no more than 15 pages total. The Design Quality Control plan shall be limited to no more than 10 pages total. Format as follows: TAB A: General Information Cover page with Solicitation Number and Project Title Table of Contents Company information to include: DUNS Number, Cage Code, Tax ID Number, Principle points of contact with addresses, phone numbers and email addresses. TAB B: TECHNICAL CAPABILITY (Evaluation Factor 1) Specialized Experience and Technical Competence Sub Factor 1 Professional Qualifications Sub Factor 2 Capacity - Sub Factor 3 Knowledge of the Locality Sub Factor 4 Design Quality Control Plan Sub Factor 5 Experience in Construction Period Services Sub Factor 6 PART II PAST PERFORMANCE - Submit questionnaires to references. Past Performance Questionnaires: The contractor shall send out the enclosed past performance questionnaires to each of their references listed under the Experience technical factor or any other references that the offeror deems necessary. The Government will evaluate the quality and extent of offeror s performance deemed relevant and recent to the requirements of this solicitation. The references must return the survey directly to the Government Contract Specialist listed on the survey via email. (c) GENERAL INFORMATION Pages exceeding the page limitations set forth will not be evaluated and will be removed from the proposal. Format for proposal Part I & II shall be as follows: A page is defined as one face of an 8 ½ x 11 sheet of paper containing information. Typing shall not be less than 12-point font. The Offeror, separately (but included in the same sealed envelope) shall submit an original, TWO IDENTICAL COPIES (including any colored images, tabs, etc.) of a detailed technical proposal in a format that clearly addresses the technical evaluation factors below. You shall also submit your technical proposal on a CD. Each response shall address each factor in the sequence listed and clearly identify which factor is being addressed. There shall be no mention of costs in the Technical Proposal. Proposals shall be submitted in a sealed envelope and delivered to the address below by or on the set forth due date: Salem VA Medical Center Attn: Bryant Guerrant 1970 Roanoke Boulevard Building 74, Contracting Salem, Virginia 24153 FEDERAL HOLIDAYS: The following Federal Legal Holidays are observed by this Medical Facility: New Year s Day 1 January Martin Luther King s Birthday Third Monday in January Presidents Day Third Monday in February Memorial Day Last Monday in May Independence Day 4 July Labor Day First Monday in September Columbus Day Second Monday in October Veterans Day 11 November Thanksgiving Day Fourth Thursday in November Christmas Day 25 December Any other Federal Holiday granted by the President of the United States EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD THIS SECTION IS FOR SOLICITATION PURPOSES ONLY. THIS SECTION WILL BE PHYSICALLY REMOVED FROM ANY RESULTANT AWARD, BUT WILL BE DEEMED INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE. The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible Offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, and other factors considered. Boards will evaluate firms' qualifications strictly on the basis of the announced selection criteria and their stated order of importance. The criteria will be applied as follows: PART I TECHNICAL CAPABILITY The following criteria will be used to by a selection board to determine the most highly qualified firms in respect to their technical capability. Technical capability will be evaluated based on the following factors: Specialized Experience and Technical Competence (FAR 36.602-1(a)(2)). Offerors will be evaluated based on the specialized experience of a firm on similar projects and the technical capabilities (such as design quality management procedures, CADD/BIM, and equipment resources,) of the prime firm and any subcontractors. Evaluation will be based on the information presented in the Architect-Engineer Qualifications - Standard Form 330 (SF330). A maximum of ten (10) example projects may be submitted for consideration under SF330, Part I, Section F. Example projects should be designs completed within six (6) years of solicitation closing date. Professional Qualifications (FAR 36.602-1(a)(1)). A board will evaluate, as appropriate, the education, training, registration, certifications (see paragraph 3-4.d(4)), overall and relevant experience, and longevity with the firm of the key management and technical personnel. This criterion is primarily concerned with the qualifications of the key personnel and not the number of personnel, which is addressed under the capacity criterion. The lead designer in each discipline must be registered as required by FAR 36.609-4 and 52.236-25 but does not have to be registered in the particular state where the project is located. Capacity (FAR 36.602-1(a)(3)). A firm s capacity will be evaluated based on their experience with similar size projects, the available capacity of key disciplines to perform the work in the required time, and a primary design schedule. The volume of work awarded during the previous 12 months, based on data extracted from the Federal Procurement Data System, will be considered when evaluating capacity. Additionally, the full potential value of any current indefinite delivery contracts that a firm has been awarded will be considered when evaluating capacity. Knowledge of the Locality (FAR 36.602-1(a)(5)). Firms will be evaluated on their knowledge of the locality such as knowledge of local historical features, climatic conditions, and local construction methods that are unusual or unique to the area. Design Quality Control Plan. Firms will be evaluated on their approach to ensure technical quality and accuracy of work products. A firm's approach to resolve issues of quality will be analyzed to determine its ability to provide quality design products. Describe and define the processes of the firm's quality control plan and list, by name and position, all key personnel responsible for its execution. Quality control information shall also address safety measures particularly with respect to field work and site investigations. Information describing Quality Management may be presented in SF330, Part I, Section H. A design quality control plan shall be submitted as part of the proposal. Experience in Construction Period Services. Firms will be evaluated on their experience in providing construction period services to include professional field inspections during construction, review of construction submittals, support in answering request for information, and support of construction contract changes to include drafting statements of work and preparing cost estimates. Evaluation will be based on responses provided to the attached questionnaire. PART II PAST PERFORMANCE The following criteria will be used to by a selection board to determine the most highly qualified firms based on a firm s past performance. Past Performance (FAR 36.602-1(a)(4)). Firms will be evaluated based on their responses to the attached questionnaire. The contractor shall send out the enclosed past performance questionnaires to each of their references listed under the Experience technical factor or any other references that the offeror deems necessary. The Government will evaluate the quality and extent of offeror s performance deemed relevant and recent to the requirements of this solicitation. NOTE: References must return the survey directly to the Government Contract Specialist listed on the survey via email. PART I TECHNICAL CAPABILITY First, the technical capability of all offers will be evaluated on an adjectival basis. Sub-factors will be weighted equally, and all areas must have at least a satisfactory rating. Evaluators shall assign a rating from the following table based on the minimum requirements stated in each sub-factor section. Adjectival Rating Definitions Exceptional Meets all requirements and exceed majority of requirements. Overall the proposal meets and significantly exceeds, in all aspects, the standards for evaluation: very high probability of success: no significant weaknesses. Very Good Meets all requirements and exceed some requirements. The proposal meets and, in some cases, exceeds the standards for evaluation; high probability of success; no significant weaknesses and only minor correctable deficiencies. Satisfactory The proposal meets the standard for evaluation; good probability of success; only minor weaknesses and correctable deficiencies. Marginal Lacks material information. The proposal fails to meet some of the standards for evaluation; low probability of success; major weaknesses and/or uncorrectable. Unacceptable Lacks material information. The proposal fails to meet some or all of the standards for evaluation; need major revision to a new submission to make if acceptable or may contain uncorrectable deficiencies. Sub-Factor 1 Specialized Experience and Technical Competence CRITERIA: This factor will evaluate the Offeror s technical competence, based on successful completion of projects, in the design of fire protection systems in a hospital environment. MINIMUM STANDARD OF ACCEPTABILITY: The minimum standard of acceptability is met when the Offeror provides a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) examples of their choice of completed projects or in progress of similar contracts in size and scope (hospital remodel/renovation; minimum threshold value of $5,000,000). In describing the experience, provide the following information: Project title, location and brief description including the building use (Medical Facility, etc) and contracting method (design build, design bid construct, CM at risk, Turnkey, etc). Project owner and name and telephone number of owner s contact person. Indicate your firm s role as a prime contractor or subcontractor, etc. Project Prime Contractor and Major Subcontractors and name and telephone number of contact person(s). Project Statistics including start and completion dates (original vs. actual) for design; cost (with brief explanation of what is included in the cost); square footage; and any awards (prizes) received. Please use the Corporate Experience Form (Exhibit B) included with the solicitation to provide the requested information for Experience. Sub-Factor 2 Professional Qualifications CRITERIA: This factor evaluates the Offerors specific experience and qualifications of personnel proposed for assignment to the project and their record of working together as a team. MINIMUM STANDARD OF ACCEPTABILITY: The Offeror must provide the resumes for the following Key Personnel purposed for assignment to the project: Project/Design Manager: Must have a minimum of five (5) years experience successfully managing design projects that meet the criteria for similar projects as defined in evaluation factor 3 above. Electrical Engineer: Must have a minimum five (5) years experience designing electrical systems within a hospital environment. Projects shall meet the criteria for similar projects as defined in evaluation factor 3 above. Mechanical Engineer: Must have a minimum of five (5) years experience designing HVAC systems within a hospital environment. Projects shall meet the criteria for similar projects as defined in evaluation factor 3 above. Civil Engineer: Must have a minimum of five (3) years experience designing HVAC systems within a hospital environment. Projects shall meet the criteria for similar projects as defined in evaluation factor 3 above. Architect: Must have a minimum of five (5) years experience designing projects that meet the criteria for similar projects as defined in evaluation factor 3 above BIM Manager: Must have a minimum three (3) years experience managing the design of projects using Building Information Modeling Software. Other Disciplines proposed by the Offeror: Must have a minimum of three (3) years experience successfully designing projects that meet the criteria for similar projects as defined in evaluation factor 3 above. All Resumes must include the following information and may not exceed two (2) pages per Resume, and must explain how the proposed key personnel s experience meets the minimum qualification requirements for this contract, as described above: Name and title Project assignment Name of firm with which associated Sub-Factor 3 Capacity CRITERIA: This factor will evaluate the Offeror s ability to perform both the design and construction period services. The Offeror shall demonstrate that is has the capacity to accomplish the work in the required time. Additionally, the Offeror shall show that it can perform the required site investigations, design services, and construction period services without adversely affecting the project schedule. MINIMUM STANDARD OF ACCEPTABILITY: The minimum standard of acceptability is met when the Offeror provides: Offeror must specify the total volume of work awarded to the firm within twelve (12) months of solicitation closing and provide a proposed design schedule not to exceed 250 calendar days. Prepare and submit a practicable design schedule laying out all necessary performance elements needed to complete this project identified in the solicitation in the proposed period of performance. The schedule must be in the form of a progress chart of suitable scale to indicate appropriately the percentage of work scheduled for completion by any given date during the performance period. In addition, the schedule must be submitted in the Microsoft Project format. Offerors should only include the work elements necessary to complete the required work. It is the Offeror s responsibility to identify all necessary project/work elements and the proposal adequately identifies acceptable critical path elements. Sub-Factor 4 Knowledge of the Locality CRITERIA: Identify example projects that demonstrate the firms knowledge of the locality (i.e. Salem VA Medical Center). MINIMUM STANDARD OF ACCEPTABILITY: The minimum standard of acceptability is met when the Offeror provides: Firms shall demonstrate knowledge of localities per example projects. Knowledge of the VA VISN 6 service area will hold much higher weight and evaluated more favorably than projects outside the VISN 6 service area. General understanding of the local conditions, including physical environment, local engineering criteria, and construction methods will be evaluated. The following key personnel resumes shall also be evaluated for knowledge of localities: Project Manager, Architectural, Mechanical, and Electrical. The basis of evaluation for this criterion will focus on the information provided in SF330, Part I, Section E (Resume of Key Personnel), Section F (Example Projects), and Section H (Additional Information) that provides additional information describing same/similar qualifications as deemed relevant to performance at the Salem VA Medical Center Sub-Factor 5 Design Quality Control Plan CRITERIA: The plan shall identify personnel, design review procedures, site investigation/confirmation of existing conditions plan, tests proposed, and forms to be used. A finalized, more detailed Design Quality Control Plan (QCP) will be required to be submitted and approved after contract award. MINIMUM STANDARD OF ACCEPTABILITY: The minimum standards of acceptability are met when the Offeror provides: A description of the quality control system, including a chart showing lines of authority and acknowledgement that the Design Manager shall implement control measures for verification of all design activities. The names, qualifications (in resume format), duties, responsibilities, and authorities of each person assigned as Design Quality Control (QC) manager. Any replacements must have similar qualifications in dealing with projects of similar size and scope. Sub-Factor 7 - Experience in Construction Period Services CRITERIA: Identify example projects that demonstrate the firms experience providing construction period services. will be evaluated on their experience in providing construction period services to include professional field inspections during construction, review of construction submittals, support in answering request for information, and support of construction contract changes to include drafting statements of work and preparing cost estimates. Evaluation will be based on responses provided to the attached questionnaire. MINIMUM STANDARD OF ACCEPTABILITY: The minimum standard of acceptability is met when the Offeror provides a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) examples of their choice of completed projects of similar contracts in size and scope (hospital remodel/renovation; minimum threshold value of $5,000,000) for which construction period services were provided. The contractor shall send out the enclosed past performance questionnaires to the applicable party for each example project. The Government will evaluate the quality and extent of offeror s performance deemed relevant and recent to the requirements of this solicitation. The references must return the survey directly to the Government Contract Specialist listed on the survey via email. PART II PAST PERFORMANCE Next, the Government will evaluate the offeror s demonstrated past performance of projects in order to determine the offeror s ability to perform the contract successfully and help determine responsibility. As with technical capabilities, the firms will be evaluated with an adjectival rating system. Adjectival Rating Definitions Exceptional Meets all requirements and exceed majority of requirements. Overall the proposal meets and significantly exceeds, in all aspects, the standards for evaluation: very high probability of success: no significant weaknesses. Very Good Meets all requirements and exceed some requirements. The proposal meets and, in some cases, exceeds the standards for evaluation; high probability of success; no significant weaknesses and only minor correctable deficiencies. Satisfactory The proposal meets the standard for evaluation; good probability of success; only minor weaknesses and correctable deficiencies. Marginal Lacks material information. The proposal fails to meet some of the standards for evaluation; low probability of success; major weaknesses and/or uncorrectable. Unacceptable Lacks material information. The proposal fails to meet some or all of the standards for evaluation; need major revision to a new submission to make if acceptable or may contain uncorrectable deficiencies. NOTE: Offerors with no relevant past performance history will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and will be given a neutral rating. CRITERIA: Offerors must provide a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) references of their choice of projects of similar contracts in size and scope (hospital building remodel/renovation; minimum construction threshold value of $500,000). The Offeror must provide for each reference the reference's company name, POCs, address, contact information to include phone number and e-mail address, project description, dollar value and period of performance. The questionnaire included in Attachment A must be completed for all references. The Government will consider and evaluate Offeror's past performance information, to include the references, which are deemed recent and relevant for the requirements of this RFP. Recency Assessment: An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past 6 years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated. Relevancy Assessment: An evaluation of all recent performance information obtained to determine whether the provided design performed under those contracts relate to a similar size and scope as those required by this solicitation. In determining the relevancy of effort performed under individual past performance contracts, the Government will consider the specific effort or portion consistent with that proposed by the prime contractor and/or subcontractors. The past performance information obtained from sources will be used to establish the relevancy of past performance. MINIMUM STANDARD OF ACCEPTABILITY: The minimum standard of acceptability is met when the Offeror provides minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) references of their choice of projects of similar contracts in size and scope (hospital building remodel/renovation; minimum threshold value of $500,000) in which the Offeror adhered to period of performances. The Offeror must provide for each reference the reference's company name, POCs, address, contact information to include phone number and e-mail address, project description, dollar value and period of performance. The Government will consider and evaluate Offeror's past performance information, to include the references, which are deemed recent and relevant for the requirements of this RFP. NOTE: THIS NOTICE WAS NOT POSTED TO FEDBIZOPPS ON THE DATE INDICATED IN THE NOTICE ITSELF (22-JUL-2019); HOWEVER, IT DID APPEAR IN THE FEDBIZOPPS FTP FEED ON THIS DATE. PLEASE CONTACT 877-472-3779 or fbo.support@gsa.gov REGARDING THIS ISSUE.
- Web Link
-
Link To Document
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/VA/HaVAMC/VAMCCO80220/36C24619Q0880/listing.html)
- Record
- SN05376924-F 20190724/190722230018 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |