Architect-Engineer (A-E) Title I & II Services
NOTICE TO OFFERORS
REQUEST FOR SF330 PACKAGES
1. CONTRACT INFORMATION
This solicitation notice is for multi-discipline Architect-Engineer (A-E) design services for Nellis AFB, Nevada; Creech AFB, Nevada, and portions of the Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR) in accordance with PL 92-582 (Brooks A-E Act) and FAR Part 36. The Government anticipates the award of two (2), not-to-exceed multi-discipline, Firm-Fixed Price, A-E IDIQ contracts for Title I and Title II services with 50% set-aside for small business under NAICS code 541330 – Engineering Services; size standard is $16.5M. One (1) IDIQ contract will be awarded to one (1) small business and one (1) IDIQ contract will be awarded unrestricted. The anticipated performance period will be a base period of one (1) year with four (4), 1-year ordering periods. The Government guarantees a minimum of $1,000.00 under each contract’s base year. Cumulative amount of all task order fees will not exceed $4,500,000.00 over the life of the contract.
2. SERVICE DESCRIPTION
The 99th Contracting Squadron will be soliciting for two (2) Firm-Fixed Price, Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) multi-discipline Architect-Engineer (A-E) contracts for Title I, Design Services and Title II, Inspection Services. Selected firms must be able to provide both Title I and Title II services. Title I design services shall consist of architectural, civil, structural, mechanical, electrical, environmental, landscape, fire protection, communications, and topographical cadastral, and geotechnical surveys of existing conditions or facilities and field surveys for topographic or locative purposes; development of documentation and reports for conceptual solutions, design criteria, environmental assessments, and impact analysis; producing economic analysis, detailed cost estimates, construction drawings and specifications, bid schedules, color boards and renderings, and any other documentation necessary to execute a maintenance, repair, alteration, and/or construction project. The area of work shall include, but not be limited to, Nellis and Creech Air Force Bases and portions of the NTTR.
The architect performing/providing services shall be licensed in the state of Nevada and final drawings shall be stamped by the designer of record.
The A-E shall perform other A-E services that are not Title I Services as ordered by the Contracting Officer. Such services may include, but not be limited to, review of contract submittals, review of shop drawings, and preparation of change orders, fact-finding studies, surveys, investigations, developing design criteria, interior design, and preparing base comprehensive plans (BCP), and other professional A-E services not necessarily connected with a specific construction project. Environmental work may include remediation projects and hazardous, toxic, and radioactive waste (HTRW) studies. Testing to determine environmental work needed for a project may be included in scope of work.
Work may include developing Requests for Proposals for design-build projects or developing more extensive designs to be used in design-bid-build contracts. In a design-build project, A-E would provide a 15% or 35% design package along with a detailed project Scope of Work for bidding by design-build contractors. In a design-bid-build project, A-E would provide a 65%, 90%, or 100% design package along with a detailed Scope of Work for bidding.
Title II services would require one (1) to four (4) full-time inspectors to provide supervision of construction, review of contractor submittals and shop drawings, and as-built drawings as well as prepare change order documents. The primary responsibility of the inspector is to provide the Government with documentation whether or not the construction conforms to the design drawings and specifications.
Please refer to the Statement of Work (Attachment 1), and request SOW attachments, if desired, by emailing nina.young@us.af.mil.
3. INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS
Qualified firms desiring consideration shall submit their SF330 package via DoD Safe. The current version of the SF330 is also available on the GSA website at https://www.gsa.gov/reference/forms.
Fax submissions are not accepted.
Please submit a request for a DoD Safe drop-off code by emailing nina.young@us.af.mil in sufficient time to upload electronic files by the deadline. Note that request codes are valid for 14 days.
Submission packages for each firm is limited to 75 single-sided pages exclusive of cover letter. Font shall be no less than 10 point font, single-line spacing, margins no less than ¾”, and page size of 8.5” x 11” when printed.
All firms should verify that their firm’s information contained at https://sam.gov/ is current. Additionally, registration in the System for Award Management (SAM) database is required prior to award of a contract. Failure to register in the SAM database may render your firm ineligible for award. For more information, visit the SAM website: https://sam.gov/.
Do not submit pricing information at this time.
Discussions will be held with the top three (3), most highly qualified firms from rounds 1 and 2 (IAW FAR 36.602-3) and pricing information be will be requested at that time.
Nonresponsive/incomplete submissions will not be considered by the A-E selection board.
4. EVALUATION CRITERIA
Submissions received in response to this notice will be evaluated by a board of professional engineers and others in accordance with FAR Subpart 36.6 and PL 92-582 (Brooks A-E Act). The evaluation board will hold discussions with the top three (3), most highly qualified firms from each round during the final selection process.
Round 1, SB IDIQ – From the pool of all small business offerors, discussions will be held with the top three (3) most highly qualified small business firms. The most highly qualified firm will be selected.
Firms must submit a copy of their current SAM registration (reps and certs) showing small business size for NAICS 541330 in order to qualify as a small business for this effort (Round 1, SB IDIQ).
Round 2, UNRESTRICTED IDIQ – From the pool of all offerors not selected to receive an award in Round 1, discussions will be held with the top three (3) most highly qualified firms. The most highly qualified firm (large or small) will be selected.
The following adjectival ratings will be used to evaluate the documentation submitted:
Outstanding: Submittal meets requirements, and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Submittal contains multiple strengths and no deficiencies.
Good: Submittal meets requirements, and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Submittal contains at least one strength and no deficiencies.
Acceptable: Submittal meets requirements, and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Submittal has no strengths or deficiencies.
Marginal: Submittal does not clearly meet requirements, and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.
Unacceptable: Submittal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies.
Firms will be ranked in order of the most highly qualified according to the following selection criteria listed in descending order of importance in accordance with FAR 36.602-1(a)(1) through (6).
(A) Professional qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of required services.
All technical disciplines listed in Section 2 of this advertisement shall be represented in order to obtain the most favorable rating.
Identify Professional Engineer licenses and certifications and state where licensed.
Basis of Evaluation:
The evaluation of professional qualifications will include, but is not limited to, the subjective assessment of the firm’s individual resumes as required in the solicitation, and architect licensed in the state of Nevada.
Firms unable to demonstrate required qualifications necessary to perform these kinds of designs may be considered non-responsive. Failure to provide requested data may negatively impact a firm’s rating.
Higher ratings for this may be given when the firm’s specific personnel demonstrate excellent or very good credentials and relevant to the solicitation.
(B) Specialized experience and technical competence in the type of work required herein, including, where appropriate, experience in energy conservation, pollution prevention, waste reduction, and the use of recovered materials.
Specialized experience pertains to the types and volume of work previously or currently being performed by a firm that are comparable to the types of work covered by this requirement. Such services consist of architectural, civil, structural, mechanical, electrical, environmental, landscape, fire protection, communications, and topographical cadastral, and geotechnical surveys of existing conditions or facilities and field surveys for topographic or locative purposes; development of documentation and reports for conceptual solutions, design criteria, environmental assessments, and impact analysis; producing economic analysis, detailed cost estimates, construction drawings and specifications, bid schedules, color boards and renderings, and any other documentation necessary to execute a maintenance, repair, alteration, and/or construction project.
Definitions:
Experience measures the degree to which a firm has completed projects relevant to subject solicitation.
Specialized work means design projects similar in scope, size, construction features, dollar value, and complexity as on an Air Force Base. This includes the ability to analyze existing facilities and building systems, and develop economical solutions for upgrading and repair to meet new requirements. Also work experience with Department of Defense and Air Force construction standards such as the Unified Facilities Criteria, Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities, Special Access Program Facilities, and antiterrorism/force protection standards. Projects submitted outside these parameters will be assigned lower ratings.
Similar dollar value is considered construction projects of $100,000 and greater.
Similar complexity is considered projects of an operational likeness and similarity to this solicitation.
“Within the past five (5) years” shall mean from date of package submission to five (5) years prior.
Submission requirements:
Submit up to three (3) relevant projects, accomplished within the past five (5) years that best demonstrate your relevant experience to the solicitation requirements. A firm is at risk of receiving a lower rating if fewer than three (3) relevant projects are submitted. Projects submitted for this section may also be used for those required in Section D of the solicitation. If so, please identify as such.
Complete and submit a data summary sheet for each project (SF330, Part F). Each project data package may not be longer than two (2) pages in length and may include verbiage, graphics and photos.
Projects may include Federal, State, or local Government, as well as private industry projects. Firms are responsible for providing project description and applicable experience in sufficient detail to permit evaluation of project relevancy.
Basis of Evaluation:
The evaluation of specialized experience will include, but is not limited to the subjective solicitation of the firm’s resume of the type of work required in the solicitation.
Firms unable to demonstrate proven competence to perform these kinds of projects may be considered non-responsive. Failure to provide requested data may negatively impact a firm’s rating.
Demonstration of design-build experience most closely related to the requirements of this solicitation.
Demonstration of sustainable design experience.
Higher ratings for this may be given when a proposal demonstrates a high degree of relevancy to the solicitation’s service descriptions to include experience in developing Request For Proposal (RFP) documents for design-build projects where firm developed a 15% or 35% design package along with a detailed project Scope of Work for bidding by design-build contractors.
(C) Capacity to accomplish multiple task orders up to $1,000,000.00 per task order within the required time.
Identify the firm’s past and present workload, and convey the understanding of being able to handle several task orders concurrently and within prescribed deadlines/constraints.
Submission Requirements:
Provide a 1-page narrative (SF330, Part H) that discusses the firm’s approach to accomplishing multiple, concurrent task orders with emphasis on meeting prescribed deadlines.
Basis of Evaluation:
Evaluation of this factor will be a subjective assessment of the firm’s ability to clearly demonstrate an understanding of multiple task order project goals and requirements set for the completion of multiple, concurrent task order projects within prescribed deadlines.
Higher ratings may be given for this factor when information is provided by the contractor demonstrating the capability to handle multiple projects concurrently and within prescribed deadlines/constraints.
(D) Past Performance on contracts with Government agencies and private industry in terms of cost control, quality of work, and compliance with performance schedules.
Past performance relates to how well a firm has performed on substantially completed projects, within the past five (5) years.
Definitions:
Past performance is a measure of the degree to which a firm satisfied its customers in the past and complied with applicable laws and regulations.
Government agencies are defined as local, state, and federal entities.
Private industry is defined as non-governmental clients.
“Within the past five (5) years” shall mean from date of package submission to five (5) years prior.
The term “substantially complete” shall mean a fully designed project with construction of the facility/project more than 80% complete.
Requirement:
Firms shall have clients complete Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment 3). The completed Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) are to be submitted with the firm’s SF330 package. Clients should be knowledgeable of the firm’s past performance and be willing to be reviewed by the Government.
Past Performance Questionnaires shall include specifics for each project submitted, but not be limited to the following information:
Project description, contract amount, dates, and client information;
Providing a dialogue and a resulting rating for the areas of Quality, Professionalism, Cooperativeness, Problems, Adherence to Schedule, Cost Control, and Customer Satisfaction;
Question to be answered by client - “Would you award this firm another contract?”
Firms shall have previous clients submit design and construction project PPQs that are the same as the projects included in its proposal for Relevant Experience. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Failure to provide requested data or to provide an accessible point of contact may negatively impact a firm’s rating.
The design firm shall submit a minimum of three (3) with a maximum of five (5) past performance questionnaires submitted by their clients.
Firms are encouraged to describe problems encountered on projects submitted for past performance and describe the corrective action taken to resolve the issue(s). Firms will also submit recognition documents received in the last five (5) years, such as awards from clients, customers or professional organizations received within the last five (5) years.
In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of firm team members (partnership, Joint Venture, or parent company’s subsidiary or affiliate), inquiries of owner representative(s), and any other known sources not provided by the firm.
While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the firm.
Submission requirements:
Submit up to five (5) relevant projects designs complete or substantially completed within five (5) years that best demonstrates your relevant experience to the solicitation requirements. Firm is at risk of receiving a lower rating if fewer than five (5) relevant project are submitted. Firm may receive a higher rating if one (1) of the five (5) projects involved developing a Request for Proposal (RFP) for a government design-build project.
Complete and submit a project data summary sheet for each project. Each project data package may not be longer than two (2) pages in length.
Projects may include Federal, State, or local Government, as well as private industry projects. Firms are responsible for providing project description and applicable experience in sufficient detail to permit evaluation of project relevancy.
Past Performance Questionnaires. The design firm shall submit a minimum of three (3) with a maximum of five (5) PPQs submitted by their clients.
Firm is at risk of receiving a lower rating if fewer than three (3) PPQs are received. Firms are however limited to no more than five (5) PPQs total. Ratings will not be affected by a firm that supplies more questionnaires than another. The number of ratings merely helps to clarify a firm’s true past performance record.
Basis of Evaluation:
Failure to provide requested data or to provide an accessible point of contact (POC) may negatively impact a firm’s rating.
The evaluation of past performance will include but is not limited to the assessment of the firm’s commitment to customer satisfaction, timely delivery of quality work, the firm’s record of conforming to specifications, successful implementation of quality control procedures; adherence to schedules; and history of reasonable and cooperative behavior.
Firms unable to demonstrate proven competence to perform projects similar to the requirements of the solicitation may be considered ineligible for award.
Evaluating past performance may include information provided by the firm, inquiries with previous customers, Government databases [Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS)], and any other publicly available sources.
While the Government may elect to consider data obtained from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance, experience, and safety information rests with the firm.
Higher ratings for this may be given when a proposal demonstrates:
Excellent or very good ratings for past performance and customer satisfaction on projects relevant to the solicitation or;
Demonstration of specific work within the Department of Defense Agencies, with the highest rating given to work with Department of the Air Force.
(E) Location in the general geographical area of Nellis AFB (within 300 miles from Las Vegas, NV) and knowledge of the locality of the base.
Definitions:
300 miles is measured by using the free online web mapping service, www.google.com inputting driving directions criteria from the firm’s physical address to Nellis AFB, NV 89191
Knowledge of the locality is defined as familiarity of applicable codes and regulations in place for the area, as well as the local, southern Nevada climate, conditions, building construction standards, and materials.
Firm’s incorporated offices are applicable to this requirement, satellite offices and geographically separated offices do not meet this requirement unless they are with 300 miles of Las Vegas, NV and are adequately staffed to perform tasks and attend meetings/site visits within 72-hours of notification. No travel costs will be reimbursed for the future IDIQ contract requirements no matter the location of firm’s office/employees.
Submission requirements:
Provide a 1-page narrative that discusses the firm’s location in relation to Nellis AFB and the adequate staffing at this specific location and the ability to attend meetings/site visits within 72 hours’ notice and it is understood that there will be no cost reimbursement for any travel.
Basis of Evaluation:
Firms located more than 300 miles from Nellis AFB, NV will be given the minimum acceptable rating (acceptable).
Firms located within 300 miles of Nellis AFB, NV will be given a higher rating than those firms outside 300 miles from Nellis AFB, NV.
A subjective determination of the firm’s statement of knowledge of the locality and how it was derived relative to the requirements of this solicitation.
Higher ratings for this evaluation criteria may be given as follows:
Firms located within 300 miles of Nellis AFB, NV will be given a higher rating.
Firms located within 50 miles from Nellis AFB, NV will be given the highest rating.
(F) Implementation of the Design Quality Control Program.
Identify the roles and responsibilities of the major personnel of the firm and depict the understanding and implementation of Quality Control procedures for task orders. Firm is at risk of receiving a lower rating if fewer than three (3) relevant projects are submitted.
Submission Requirements:
Provide a 2-page narrative that discusses the firm’s approach to the task orders with emphasis on the envisioned role of the design team with regard to Quality Control.
Basis of Evaluation:
A subjective determination of the firm’s statement of knowledge of Quality Control and how it will implement Quality Control procedures relative to the requirements of this solicitation.
Higher ratings may be given for this factor when information provided exceeds the minimum of three (3) relevant Quality Control procedures for task orders projects requirements.
(G) Program management process/plan for handling Nellis/Creech AFB projects.
Identify the roles and responsibilities of the major personnel of the firm and depict the lines of communications envisioned for the design tasks between the firm and with the Government.
Submission Requirements:
Provide an organizational chart depicting the relationships between the firm and all partners and/or subcontractors/consultants to be associated with this solicitation and identifying each of the firm’s key positions/personnel and their role in managing work for these task orders.
Provide a 1-page narrative that discusses the firm’s program management approach to the task orders.
Basis of Evaluation:
Evaluation of this factor will be a subjective assessment of the firm’s ability to clearly demonstrate an understanding of the task order projects goals and requirements and set forth a realistic approach for the design of the task order projects.
Higher ratings may be given for this factor when information provided exceeds the minimum requirement.
(H) Commitment to Small Business (Only applicable to Round 2 evaluations).
Submission Requirements:
Provide a 1-page narrative explaining the extent of participation of Small Business [specifically small business, certified 8(a), certified HUBZone, and Service-Disabled Veteran- Owned Small Business (SDVOSB)], woman-owned small business (WOSB), and minority institutions in the proposed contract team, measured as a percentage of the total estimated effort, as defined by the Small Business Administration size standard (www.sba.gov).
If the firm is proposing to perform the work as a joint venture or under a mentor-protégé program, this shall be explained in the narrative as well. The mentoring program shall be finalized with the SBA prior to submission of the SF330 package, and the firm shall show documentation (from the SBA) of the finalized arrangement as an attachment to the narrative.
Note: Upon award, the A-E firms that are large businesses shall comply with FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Jan 2020) requirement for all large businesses.
Basis of Evaluation:
Firms that are a small business under NAICS 541330 will be given the highest rating (outstanding).
Firms that are classified as a small business under NAICS 541330 as a joint venture or mentor-protégé program will also be given the highest rating (outstanding).
Firms that are classified as other than small business under NAICS 541330 will be given the rating up to “good.”
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Sample projects submitted may be used for more than one section (A-F) of the SF330 package. Be sure to annotate which section(s).
All RFIs regarding this advertisement must be submitted via email to nina.young@us.af.mil by 2:00 pm (PDT), 6 August 2021.
SF330 packages (ensuring that all information at Section 4, A-H are included with the SF330) are due by 2:00 pm (PDT) on 27 August 2021 via DoD Safe.
Do not provide information on pricing at this time. Pricing information will be requested during discussions with the top three most highly qualified firms from rounds 1 and 2.
Late responses are subject to FAR Provision 52.215-1.
FA486121R1010 Department of the Air Force Air Combat Command
7/28/21, 10:46 AM Architect-Engineer (A-E) Title I & II Services
NOTICE TO OFFERORS
PRE-SOLICITATION NOTICE
REQUEST FOR SF330 PACKAGES
1. CONTRACT INFORMATION
THIS PRE-SOLICITATION NOTICE IS THE FOLLOW-ON TO THE SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE FA486121R100
This pre-solicitation notice is for multi-discipline Architect-Engineer (A-E) design services for Nellis AFB, Nevada; Creech AFB, Nevada, and portions of the Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR) in accordance with PL 92-582 (Brooks A-E Act) and FAR Part 36. The Government anticipates the award of two (2), not-to-exceed multi-discipline, Firm-Fixed Price, A-E IDIQ contracts for Title I and Title II services with 50% set-aside for small business under NAICS code 541330 – Engineering Services; size standard is $16.5M. One (1) IDIQ contract will be awarded to one (1) small business and one (1) IDIQ contract will be awarded unrestricted. The anticipated performance period will be a base period of one (1) year with four (4), 1-year ordering periods. The Government guarantees a minimum of $1,000.00 under each contract’s base year. Cumulative amount of all task order fees will not exceed $4,500,000.00 over the life of the contract.
2. SERVICE DESCRIPTION
The 99th Contracting Squadron will be soliciting for two (2) Firm-Fixed Price, Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) multi-discipline Architect-Engineer (A-E) contracts for Title I, Design Services and Title II, Inspection Services. Selected firms must be able to provide both Title I and Title II services. Title I design services shall consist of architectural, civil, structural, mechanical, electrical, environmental, landscape, fire protection, communications, and topographical cadastral, and geotechnical surveys of existing conditions or facilities and field surveys for topographic or locative purposes; development of documentation and reports for conceptual solutions, design criteria, environmental assessments, and impact analysis; producing economic analysis, detailed cost estimates, construction drawings and specifications, bid schedules, color boards and renderings, and any other documentation necessary to execute a maintenance, repair, alteration, and/or construction project. The area of work shall include, but not be limited to, Nellis and Creech Air Force Bases and portions of the NTTR.
The architect performing/providing services shall be licensed in the state of Nevada and final drawings shall be stamped by the designer of record.
The A-E shall perform other A-E services that are not Title I Services as ordered by the Contracting Officer. Such services may include, but not be limited to, review of contract submittals, review of shop drawings, and preparation of change orders, fact-finding studies, surveys, investigations, developing design criteria, interior design, and preparing base comprehensive plans (BCP), and other professional A-E services not necessarily connected with a specific construction project. Environmental work may include remediation projects and hazardous, toxic, and radioactive waste (HTRW) studies. Testing to determine environmental work needed for a project may be included in scope of work.
Work may include developing Requests for Proposals for design-build projects or developing more extensive designs to be used in design-bid-build contracts. In a design-build project, A-E would provide a 15% or 35% design package along with a detailed project Scope of Work for bidding by design-build contractors. In a design-bid-build project, A-E would provide a 65%, 90%, or 100% design package along with a detailed Scope of Work for bidding.
Title II services would require one (1) to four (4) full-time inspectors to provide supervision of construction, review of contractor submittals and shop drawings, and as-built drawings as well as prepare change order documents. The primary responsibility of the inspector is to provide the Government with documentation whether or not the construction conforms to the design drawings and specifications.
Please refer to the Statement of Work (Attachment 1), and request SOW attachments, if desired, by emailing nina.young@us.af.mil.
3. INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS **TO BE SUBMITTED DURING THE SOLICITATION PHASE**
Qualified firms desiring consideration shall submit their SF330 package via DoD Safe. The current version of the SF330 is also available on the GSA website at https://www.gsa.gov/reference/forms.
Fax submissions are not accepted.
Please submit a request for a DoD Safe drop-off code by emailing nina.young@us.af.mil in sufficient time to upload electronic files by the deadline.
Submission packages for each firm is limited to 75 single-sided pages exclusive of cover letter. Font shall be no less than 10 point font, single-line spacing, margins no less than ¾”, and page size of 8.5” x 11” when printed.
All firms should verify that their firm’s information contained at https://sam.gov/ is current. Additionally, registration in the System for Award Management (SAM) database is required prior to award of a contract. Failure to register in the SAM database may render your firm ineligible for award. For more information, visit the SAM website: https://sam.gov/.
Do not submit pricing information at this time.
Discussions will be held with the top three (3), most highly qualified firms IAW FAR 36.602-3 and pricing information be will be requested at that time.
Nonresponsive/incomplete submissions will not be considered by the A-E selection board.
4. EVALUATION CRITERIA
Submissions received in response to this notice will be evaluated by a board of professional engineers and others in accordance with FAR Subpart 36.6 and PL 92-582 (Brooks A-E Act). The evaluation board will hold discussions with the top three (3), most highly qualified firms from each round during the final selection process.
Round 1, SB IDIQ – From the pool of all small business offerors, discussions will be held with the top three (3) most highly qualified small business firms. The most highly qualified firm will be selected.
Firms must submit a copy of their current SAM registration (reps and certs) showing small business size for NAICS 541330 in order to qualify as a small business for this effort (Round 1, SB IDIQ).
Round 2, UNRESTRICTED IDIQ – From the pool of all offerors not selected to receive an award in Round 1, discussions will be held with the top three (3) most highly qualified firms. The most highly qualified firm (large or small) will be selected.
The following adjectival ratings will be used to evaluate the documentation submitted:
Outstanding: Submittal meets requirements, and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Submittal contains multiple strengths and no deficiencies.
Good: Submittal meets requirements, and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Submittal contains at least one strength and no deficiencies.
Acceptable: Submittal meets requirements, and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Submittal has no strengths or deficiencies.
Marginal: Submittal does not clearly meet requirements, and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.
Unacceptable: Submittal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies.
Firms will be ranked in order of the most highly qualified according to the following selection criteria listed in descending order of importance in accordance with FAR 36.602-1(a)(1) through (6).
(A) Professional qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of required services.
All technical disciplines listed in Section 2 of this advertisement shall be represented in order to obtain the most favorable rating.
Identify Professional Engineer licenses and certifications and state where licensed.
Basis of Evaluation:
The evaluation of professional qualifications will include, but is not limited to, the subjective assessment of the firm’s individual resumes as required in the solicitation, and architect licensed in the state of Nevada.
Firms unable to demonstrate required qualifications necessary to perform these kinds of designs may be considered non-responsive. Failure to provide requested data may negatively impact a firm’s rating.
Higher ratings for this may be given when the firm’s specific personnel demonstrate excellent or very good credentials and relevant to the solicitation.
(B) Specialized experience and technical competence in the type of work required herein, including, where appropriate, experience in energy conservation, pollution prevention, waste reduction, and the use of recovered materials.
Specialized experience pertains to the types and volume of work previously or currently being performed by a firm that are comparable to the types of work covered by this requirement. Such services consist of architectural, civil, structural, mechanical, electrical, environmental, landscape, fire protection, communications, and topographical cadastral, and geotechnical surveys of existing conditions or facilities and field surveys for topographic or locative purposes; development of documentation and reports for conceptual solutions, design criteria, environmental assessments, and impact analysis; producing economic analysis, detailed cost estimates, construction drawings and specifications, bid schedules, color boards and renderings, and any other documentation necessary to execute a maintenance, repair, alteration, and/or construction project.
Definitions:
Experience measures the degree to which a firm has completed projects relevant to subject solicitation.
Specialized work means design projects similar in scope, size, construction features, dollar value, and complexity as on an Air Force Base. This includes the ability to analyze existing facilities and building systems, and develop economical solutions for upgrading and repair to meet new requirements. Also work experience with Department of Defense and Air Force construction standards such as the Unified Facilities Criteria, Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities, Special Access Program Facilities, and antiterrorism/force protection standards. Projects submitted outside these parameters will be assigned lower ratings.
Similar dollar value is considered construction projects of $100,000 and greater.
Similar complexity is considered projects of an operational likeness and similarity to this solicitation.
“Within the past five (5) years” shall mean from date of package submission to five (5) years prior.
Submission requirements:
Submit up to three (3) relevant projects, accomplished within the past five (5) years that best demonstrate your relevant experience to the solicitation requirements. A firm is at risk of receiving a lower rating if fewer than three (3) relevant projects are submitted. Projects submitted for this section may also be used for those required in Section D of the solicitation. If so, please identify as such.
Complete and submit a data summary sheet for each project (SF330, Part F). Each project data package may not be longer than two (2) pages in length and may include verbiage, graphics and photos.
Projects may include Federal, State, or local Government, as well as private industry projects. Firms are responsible for providing project description and applicable experience in sufficient detail to permit evaluation of project relevancy.
Basis of Evaluation:
The evaluation of specialized experience will include, but is not limited to the subjective solicitation of the firm’s resume of the type of work required in the solicitation.
Firms unable to demonstrate proven competence to perform these kinds of projects may be considered non-responsive. Failure to provide requested data may negatively impact a firm’s rating.
Demonstration of design-build experience most closely related to the requirements of this solicitation.
Demonstration of sustainable design experience.
Higher ratings for this may be given when a proposal demonstrates a high degree of relevancy to the solicitation’s service descriptions to include experience in developing Request For Proposal (RFP) documents for design-build projects where firm developed a 15% or 35% design package along with a detailed project Scope of Work for bidding by design-build contractors.
(C) Capacity to accomplish multiple task orders up to $1,000,000.00 per task order within the required time.
Identify the firm’s past and present workload, and convey the understanding of being able to handle several task orders concurrently and within prescribed deadlines/constraints.
Submission Requirements:
Provide a 1-page narrative (SF330, Part H) that discusses the firm’s approach to accomplishing multiple, concurrent task orders with emphasis on meeting prescribed deadlines.
Basis of Evaluation:
Evaluation of this factor will be a subjective assessment of the firm’s ability to clearly demonstrate an understanding of multiple task order project goals and requirements set for the completion of multiple, concurrent task order projects within prescribed deadlines.
Higher ratings may be given for this factor when information is provided by the contractor demonstrating the capability to handle multiple projects concurrently and within prescribed deadlines/constraints.
(D) Past Performance on contracts with Government agencies and private industry in terms of cost control, quality of work, and compliance with performance schedules.
Past performance relates to how well a firm has performed on substantially completed projects, within the past five (5) years.
Definitions:
Past performance is a measure of the degree to which a firm satisfied its customers in the past and complied with applicable laws and regulations.
Government agencies are defined as local, state, and federal entities.
Private industry is defined as non-governmental clients.
“Within the past five (5) years” shall mean from date of package submission to five (5) years prior.
The term “substantially complete” shall mean a fully designed project with construction of the facility/project more than 80% complete.
Requirement:
Firms shall have clients complete Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment 3). The completed Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) are to be submitted with the firm’s SF330 package. Clients should be knowledgeable of the firm’s past performance and be willing to be reviewed by the Government.
Past Performance Questionnaires shall include specifics for each project submitted, but not be limited to the following information:
Project description, contract amount, dates, and client information;
Providing a dialogue and a resulting rating for the areas of Quality, Professionalism, Cooperativeness, Problems, Adherence to Schedule, Cost Control, and Customer Satisfaction;
Question to be answered by client - “Would you award this firm another contract?”
Firms shall have previous clients submit design and construction project PPQs that are the same as the projects included in its proposal for Relevant Experience. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Failure to provide requested data or to provide an accessible point of contact may negatively impact a firm’s rating.
The design firm shall submit a minimum of three (3) with a maximum of five (5) past performance questionnaires submitted by their clients.
Firms are encouraged to describe problems encountered on projects submitted for past performance and describe the corrective action taken to resolve the issue(s). Firms will also submit recognition documents received in the last five (5) years, such as awards from clients, customers or professional organizations received within the last five (5) years.
In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of firm team members (partnership, Joint Venture, or parent company’s subsidiary or affiliate), inquiries of owner representative(s), and any other known sources not provided by the firm.
While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the firm.
Submission requirements:
Submit up to five (5) relevant projects designs complete or substantially completed within five (5) years that best demonstrates your relevant experience to the solicitation requirements. Firm is at risk of receiving a lower rating if fewer than five (5) relevant project are submitted. Firm may receive a higher rating if one (1) of the five (5) projects involved developing a Request for Proposal (RFP) for a government design-build project.
Complete and submit a project data summary sheet for each project. Each project data package may not be longer than two (2) pages in length.
Projects may include Federal, State, or local Government, as well as private industry projects. Firms are responsible for providing project description and applicable experience in sufficient detail to permit evaluation of project relevancy.
Past Performance Questionnaires. The design firm shall submit a minimum of three (3) with a maximum of five (5) PPQs submitted by their clients.
Firm is at risk of receiving a lower rating if fewer than three (3) PPQs are received. Firms are however limited to no more than five (5) PPQs total. Ratings will not be affected by a firm that supplies more questionnaires than another. The number of ratings merely helps to clarify a firm’s true past performance record.
Basis of Evaluation:
Failure to provide requested data or to provide an accessible point of contact (POC) may negatively impact a firm’s rating.
The evaluation of past performance will include but is not limited to the assessment of the firm’s commitment to customer satisfaction, timely delivery of quality work, the firm’s record of conforming to specifications, successful implementation of quality control procedures; adherence to schedules; and history of reasonable and cooperative behavior.
Firms unable to demonstrate proven competence to perform projects similar to the requirements of the solicitation may be considered ineligible for award.
Evaluating past performance may include information provided by the firm, inquiries with previous customers, Government databases [Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS)], and any other publicly available sources.
While the Government may elect to consider data obtained from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance, experience, and safety information rests with the firm.
Higher ratings for this may be given when a proposal demonstrates:
Excellent or very good ratings for past performance and customer satisfaction on projects relevant to the solicitation or;
Demonstration of specific work within the Department of Defense Agencies, with the highest rating given to work with Department of the Air Force.
(E) Location in the general geographical area of Nellis AFB (within 300 miles from Las Vegas, NV) and knowledge of the locality of the base.
Definitions:
300 miles is measured by using the free online web mapping service, www.google.com inputting driving directions criteria from the firm’s physical address to Nellis AFB, NV 89191
Knowledge of the locality is defined as familiarity of applicable codes and regulations in place for the area, as well as the local, southern Nevada climate, conditions, building construction standards, and materials.
Firm’s incorporated offices are applicable to this requirement, satellite offices and geographically separated offices do not meet this requirement unless they are with 300 miles of Las Vegas, NV and are adequately staffed to perform tasks and attend meetings/site visits within 72-hours of notification. No travel costs will be reimbursed for the future IDIQ contract requirements no matter the location of firm’s office/employees.
Submission requirements:
Provide a 1-page narrative that discusses the firm’s location in relation to Nellis AFB and the adequate staffing at this specific location and the ability to attend meetings/site visits within 72 hours’ notice and it is understood that there will be no cost reimbursement for any travel.
Basis of Evaluation:
Firms located more than 300 miles from Nellis AFB, NV will be given the minimum acceptable rating (acceptable).
Firms located within 300 miles of Nellis AFB, NV will be given a higher rating than those firms outside 300 miles from Nellis AFB, NV.
A subjective determination of the firm’s statement of knowledge of the locality and how it was derived relative to the requirements of this solicitation.
Higher ratings for this evaluation criteria may be given as follows:
Firms located within 300 miles of Nellis AFB, NV will be given a higher rating.
Firms located within 50 miles from Nellis AFB, NV will be given the highest rating.
(F) Implementation of the Design Quality Control Program.
Identify the roles and responsibilities of the major personnel of the firm and depict the understanding and implementation of Quality Control procedures for task orders. Firm is at risk of receiving a lower rating if fewer than three (3) relevant projects are submitted.
Submission Requirements:
Provide a 2-page narrative that discusses the firm’s approach to the task orders with emphasis on the envisioned role of the design team with regard to Quality Control.
Basis of Evaluation:
A subjective determination of the firm’s statement of knowledge of Quality Control and how it will implement Quality Control procedures relative to the requirements of this solicitation.
Higher ratings may be given for this factor when information provided exceeds the minimum of three (3) relevant Quality Control procedures for task orders projects requirements.
(G) Program management process/plan for handling Nellis/Creech AFB projects.
Identify the roles and responsibilities of the major personnel of the firm and depict the lines of communications envisioned for the design tasks between the firm and with the Government.
Submission Requirements:
Provide an organizational chart depicting the relationships between the firm and all partners and/or subcontractors/consultants to be associated with this solicitation and identifying each of the firm’s key positions/personnel and their role in managing work for these task orders.
Provide a 1-page narrative that discusses the firm’s program management approach to the task orders.
Basis of Evaluation:
Evaluation of this factor will be a subjective assessment of the firm’s ability to clearly demonstrate an understanding of the task order projects goals and requirements and set forth a realistic approach for the design of the task order projects.
Higher ratings may be given for this factor when information provided exceeds the minimum requirement.
(H) Commitment to Small Business (Only applicable to Round 2 evaluations).
Submission Requirements:
Provide a 1-page narrative explaining the extent of participation of Small Business [specifically small business, certified 8(a), certified HUBZone, and Service-Disabled Veteran- Owned Small Business (SDVOSB)], woman-owned small business (WOSB), and minority institutions in the proposed contract team, measured as a percentage of the total estimated effort, as defined by the Small Business Administration size standard (www.sba.gov).
If the firm is proposing to perform the work as a joint venture or under a mentor-protégé program, this shall be explained in the narrative as well. The mentoring program shall be finalized with the SBA prior to submission of the SF330 package, and the firm shall show documentation (from the SBA) of the finalized arrangement as an attachment to the narrative.
Note: Upon award, the A-E firms that are large businesses shall comply with FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Jan 2020) requirement for all large businesses.
Basis of Evaluation:
Firms that are a small business under NAICS 541330 will be given the highest rating (outstanding).
Firms that are classified as a small business under NAICS 541330 as a joint venture or mentor-protégé program will also be given the highest rating (outstanding).
Firms that are classified as other than small business under NAICS 541330 will be given the rating up to “good.”
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Sample projects submitted may be used for more than one section (A-F) of the SF330 package. Be sure to annotate which section(s).
May want to begin gathering PPQ information.
FA486121R1010 Department of the Air Force Air Combat Command
7/13/21, 6:29 PM