104267-21-A-0002-Amendment No.A01-Technical Evaluation Factors.pdf

Technical Evaluation Factors – Commissioning

TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

The remainder of this page left blank intentionally.

GENERAL

The Postal Service will use technical evaluation criteria to evaluate the offeror’s Technical Proposal. Each supplier is required to submit a proposal that addresses Supplier Capability Factors and Past Performance Factors.

The technical evaluation will focus on Factor No. 1 and Factor No. 2, and their sub-factors.

a. Technical Factors

Each factor and sub-factor will be assigned a weight based on the order of importance. The technical factors are as listed in the following table:

1.0 Supplier Capability

1.1 Program Management Plan | Subcontract Management

1.2 Key Personnel and Staffing

1.3 Quality Assurance Framework

1.4 Safety Culture | Job Site Safety

2.0 Past Performance

2.1 Comparable Commissioning Program Management Initiatives

b. Importance of Technical Factors

(1) Factor 1 - Supplier Capability is significantly more important than Factor 2 - Past Performance.

(2) Sub factors 1.3 and 1.4 are of equal importance relative to each other

(3) Sub factors 1.1 is slightly more important than 1.2

(4) Sub factors 1.1 and 1.2 are more important relative to sub factors 1.3 and 1.4

Members of the Technical Evaluation Team (TET) will evaluate each offer independently. The TET will then convene and reach a consensus score for each factor, which will ultimately result in an overall technical score for each offer.

c. Financial Condition and Capability

Offeror's financial condition and capability will be evaluated to determine if adequate resources are available and committed for performance. During the evaluation, financial references may be requested and contacted to determine the Offeror's financial stability during past years (how many years? 5?. The adequacy of available working capital to facilitate performance under the contract will be evaluated.

The evaluation of this information will be to determine, on a “go, no go” basis, the financial health of an offering supplier, and to determine if there are foreseeable and knowable financial issues that would threaten or undermine the success of a given supplier should it be awarded a contract resulting from this solicitation, and ultimately to minimize the overall risk to the Postal Service.

Demonstrated proof of financial stability will be determined by a review of the following documentation:

(1) Offeror’s credit rating report obtained from one of the credit monitoring bureaus, e.g., Equifax, Experian, TransUnion, or Dun & Bradstreet; and

(2) Offeror shall provide a copy of a letter from its bank stating the following:

(a) Length of time the supplier has been doing business with the bank.

(b) Average monthly account balance (in general terms).

(c) Extent of credit available and terms of availability.

(d) The bank’s rating of the supplier as a business customer.

(e) Name and telephone number and/or email address of individuals at the bank who can be contacted by Postal Service personnel for additional information.

The adjectival scoring matrix depicted below will be employed to rate all technical evaluation scores.

Technical Evaluation Factor Rating Definitions:

Assigned Numerical

Score

Adjectival Rating

Rating Definition

0 Unacceptable Proposal does not address the evaluation factor(s) or sub-factor(s) and poses an extremely high performance risk

6.00 or below Poor

Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach or indicated an understanding of the requirements of the factor(s)/sub-factor(s). The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths and pose a high or extremely high performance risk.

6.1 – 7.00 Fair

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and minimal understanding of the requirements of the factor(s)/sub-factor(s).

Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting and may pose a moderate to high performance risk.

7.1 – 8.00 Good

Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and complete understanding of the requirements of the factor(s)/sub-factor(s).

Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses and pose low to moderate performance risk.

8.1 – 9.00 Very Good

Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and complete understanding of the requirements of the factor(s)/sub-factor(s) on a level that exceeds that which would be scored at as “Good”. Strengths outweigh any weaknesses and pose a low performance risk.

9.1 to 10 Excellent

Proposal meets or exceeds requirements and indicates in extensive detail an exceptional approach and superior understanding of the requirements of the factor(s)/sub-factor(s). Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses and pose low performance risk.

FACTOR DESCRIPTIONS

The remainder of this page left blank intentionally.

SUPPLIER CAPABILITY

COMMISSIONING PROGRAM MANAGEMENT PLAN

a. Provide an overview of how the basic contract will be managed and from what location, or locations.

b. Provide a corporate organization chart indicating specific elements and/or member companies along with locations of each. Identify reporting relationships and functions of each unit, key executives with overall management responsibility, and other management personnel to be assigned to the contract.

c. Describe the approach to managing and supporting facilities-related commissioning programs of varying degrees of scale and complexity, with an emphasis on regional or national programs involving multiple facilities at multiple sites, potentially with a diversity of building sizes and types.

d. The plan should discuss the method of coordination between the Postal Service, subcontractor(s) (if any), and the offering supplier.

e. Offerors shall provide information in sufficient detail to explain how subcontractors might be leveraged in order to meet the stated requirements. Examples of past programs are encouraged.

f. Provide an overview of how subcontracts will be managed and from what location, as applicable.

g. Describe systems and procedures to ensure compliance with the contract subcontracting requirements, continuity and overall control of quality, costs, and schedule throughout the life of the program.

KEY PERSONNEL AND STAFFING

a. Offerors will be evaluated based on the strength and level of expertise proposed to meet staffing requirements.

b. Provide a description of the organizational elements that will actively participate in the program, reporting relationships, and functions performed by each unit.

c. Describe systems and procedures used to provide continuity and overall control of quality, costs, schedule throughout the life of the contract, and current financials.

d. Provide resumes of key individuals associated with managing the organizational elements, systems and procedures as a separate attachment. Key personnel include, but are not limited to, the following:

(1) Principal(s) in Charge

(2) Program Managers

(3) Project Managers

(4) Architects

(5) Engineers of varying disciplines

(6) Other Personnel that the Offerors Determine is Key to Fulfilling the Requirements

e. If specialty consultants are required, include their proposed roles.

f. Provide a table that identifies the specific staff that will be assigned to this contract, where the proposed key personnel will be located, and the timeframes the individual will work on the contract.

g. Key personnel will be evaluated to determine if personnel utilized in the performance of the required services are qualified and the relative strength of such qualifications.

h. Offerors shall also describe its organizational structure and explain how its organization is prepared to be responsive to the requirements of this solicitation.

QUALITY ASSURANCE FRAMEWORK

a. Offerors shall describe in detail their Quality Assurance Framework that will apply to the performance of this contract.

b. The QCF shall contain the offeror’s methodology for ensuring quality during the commissioning service and the reporting of its results. Briefly discuss systems/procedures used to provide assurance of quality commissioning and reporting for self-performed and subcontractor-performed work (including quality control, quality assurance procedures, and reporting standards). Include the controls that are incorporated to ensure:

(1) Quality i.e. the standard used to measure the degree of excellence

(2) Performance i.e. the standard used to measure how well the deliverables/objectives of the project were met

(3) Adherence to USPS Building Design Standards and Standard Design Criteria

(4) Deliverables and Reporting examples

c. The QCF shall also demonstrate the offeror’s understanding of the high level of quality expected due to the nature of the building, equipment and systems, and the means by which the offeror will maintain quality throughout performance of the work.

SAFETY CULTURE | JOB SITE SAFETY

a. Describe in detail the corporate safety culture within and across the overall organization;

b. Describe how that cultural framework benefits the offering organization and the offering organization’s employees, and;

c. Describe how that culture will benefit the Postal Service throughout the performance of this requirement.

d. Describe in detail how safety is managed by the Supplier while on client project/building sites.

e. Describe any differentiation in how safety is managed when the offering organization is serving in different capacities and roles.

f. Describe how safety is managed when safety has been breached or violated by the Supplier. What is the procedure for recovering?

PAST PERFORMANCE

COMPARABLE COMMISSIONING PROGRAM MANAGEMENT INITIATIVES

a. Offerors, and/or their primary subcontractors and/or partnering suppliers, should demonstrate their technical capability including their depth and breadth of knowledge and experience in providing solutions to meet the needs of its current and past clients with similar requirements.

b. Offerors should provide references that can attest to their level of involvement and the success realized by those clients.

c. Offerors should demonstrate their experience as follows:

(1) Recent experience comprised of at least three (3) projects completed in the past five (5) years with similar commissioning scope of work as outlined in the Statement of Work;

(2) Eligibility by indicating team members holding Professional Engineering licenses and States that are applicable.

(3) Eligibility by way of possessing appropriate Firm level commissioning licenses and certifications from recognized professional organizations such as Certified Commissioning Firm from the Building Commissioning Certification Board (BCCB); firm Building Systems Commissioning Certification (BSCC) from NEBB, or other equivalent firm level certification.

(4) Eligibility by way of properly certifying that the firm has not been involved in criminal or fraudulent activity.

d. Offerors should indicate whether their past performance is related to the Postal Service or with other federal, state, local municipality or private-sector clients, and should be specific with regard to the timeframe within which that experience was gained.

e. The response should include the following information for each client:

(1) Contract Title

(2) Contract Number

(3) Date of Award

(4) Contract Type

(5) Contact Amount

(6) Period of Performance

(7) Client’s Name and Address

(8) Contract Amount and Modification Amount(s)

(9) Name of Client’s Contact(s) regarding performance evaluation

(10) Telephone numbers and email addresses for Client Contact(s)

f. Offerors are responsible for ensuring the contact information is correct and that the individuals are available for contact by Postal Service personnel.

Additional qualifications

• Acted as the principal commissioning authority previously at federal facilities on a variety of projects including industrial warehouse facilities and office spaces

• Extensive experience in the operation and troubleshooting of HVAC and HVAC controls systems, building management and energy management control systems, fire life safety systems, and security systems.

• Extensive design and construction field experience is required. A minimum of five (5) full years in this type of building work is required. Knowledgeable in building operation and maintenance and operations and maintenance training.

• Knowledgeable in testing and balancing (TAB) of both air and water systems (chilled, condenser and hot).

• Excellent verbal and writing communication skills. Highly organized and able to work with management, architects, design engineers, general contractor and subcontractors.

• Experienced in writing integrated commissioning specifications and protocols as well as factory acceptance testing, site acceptance testing, pre-functional testing and functional performance testing.