Attachment_1_Rock_Creek_AE_Eval_factors.doc

ARCHITECT – ENGINEER

EVALUATION FACTORS

Submission of completed Standard Form 330 (SF330) received in response to this notice will be evaluated by a government evaluation board in accordance with the Brooks Act, Public Law 92-582, and the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 36, to determine the most highly qualified firms. In addition, recent and relevant performance in designing similar facilities may result in a higher rating and should be addressed accordingly. Evaluations of past performance and experience may include information provided by the offeror, customer inquiries, government databases and publically available sources. Failure to provide requested data, accessible points of contact, or valid phone numbers could result in a firm being considered less qualified.

Selection Criteria: Each firm must demonstrate their (including subcontractors) qualifications with respect to the selection criteria listed below. Evaluation criteria (a), (b) and (d) are of equal importance; criterion (e) is of lesser importance than criteria (a), (b) and (d) and criterion (c) is of least importance and will be used as a tiebreaker among technically equal firms. SF-330s will be evaluated to determine the most highly qualified firm/team based on submitted SF-330 responses. Failure to provide requested data or comply with the instructions in this synopsis and SF-330 instructions could result in a firm being considered less qualified or eliminated from consideration. Specific evaluation criteria include:

a. Professional qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of required services;

b. Specialized experience and technical competence in the type of work required, including where appropriated, experience in energy conservation, pollution prevention, waste reduction, and use of recovered materials;

c. Capacity to accomplish the work in the required time.

d. Past performance on contracts with Government agencies and private industry in terms of cost control, quality of work, and compliance with performance schedules.

e. Location in the general geographical area of the project and knowledge of the locality of the project; provided that this criterion leaves an appropriate number of qualified firms, given the nature and size of the project.

Selection Criteria Evaluation Factors:

a. Professional Qualifications: SF-330, Part I, Block E. The Inyo National Forest will consider any information, which may be pertinent to this criterion, including the following: proposed key personnel, professional registration, and competence, related experiences to accomplish this work, education, and years with the company. Professional licensure in the State of California to undertake the type of design work required by the project (Engineer’s/Architect’s certificate number to appear on construction contract design documents). The combination of criteria below will be used to determine the ability of the staff to contribute to the successful completion of the project.

b. In addition, offerors shall demonstrated their qualifications for the following:

· Project/Program Manager

· Capacity to accomplish the work in the required time.

· Energy conservation, pollution prevention, waste reduction and the use of recovered material.

· Cost Estimator.

Specialized Experience and Technical Competence: SF-330, Part I, Section F.

The Inyo National Forest will consider any information which may be pertinent to this criterion, including the following: specialized experience and technical competence in the performance of services similar to those anticipated under this contract in terms of recent and relevant experience with regard to the project examples described below.

a. The evaluation board will be placing emphasis on the following items when evaluating this factor: Subcontracting with certified 8a firms or other small disadvantaged businesses. Example projects may be from the private or public sector. However, the Forest Service and the Department of Boating and Waterways projects may be rated higher. Projects completed more recently will be evaluated more advantageously. The design of all example projects must have been completed within the past five (5) years (prior to the SF-330 due date of this solicitation. The evaluation board will consider the relevancy (design and construction scope, size and location) of projects identified.

b. Failure to provide requested data, accessible points of contact or valid phone numbers could result in a firm being considered less qualified and eliminated from further consideration. Identify any key personnel in SF-330, Part I, Section G that worked on the project and their role. Specialize experience and technical competency will be evaluated for ability to support the range of work required for this contract, as demonstrated by the firm’s submitted projects.

Capacity: SF-330, Part I, Block H. Demonstrate how the firm(s) will manage, coordinate and administer the work within the prime and among any teaming partners. Teaming partners to be included by the prime firm in their response should be clearly identified as such for evaluation purposes and will later be agreed to during negotiations of any resultant contract. SF-330, Part II, Block 11 will also be evaluated to assist in determining this factor. SF-330 Part I Blocks C, D, F and SF-330, Part II will also be evaluated to support this criterion. The Inyo National Forest will consider any information which may be pertinent to this criterion, including the following:

a. Capacity to perform work in-house and with teaming members:

b. Demonstrate active on-going Federal and Non-Federal work (Address current dollar value of work, number of current projects, management approach to your on-going work, and how the team will support the work requirements outlined in this synopsis in addition to current work). Quantify the A-E teams reserve capacity (percent of available capacity or man hours available).

Past Performance: SF-330, Block H. For the example projects, provided under Specialized Experience and Technical Competence, in a single page narrative form provide past performance in terms of cost control, quality of work, and compliance with performance schedules for each example project submitted under Specialized Experience and Technical Competence. In addition to past performance information provided, the evaluation will include information available within the federal, state, private industry or other sources. Firms may include any ratings, letters of appreciation or performance, awards etc.., for relevant experience; however, federal database content will be evaluated more advantageously. Responses will be evaluated to determine firms’ ability to maintain cost, schedule, quality, and customer satisfaction.

Geographic Proximity: geographic proximity to the general area of the requiring activity as well as knowledge of the Rock Creek area. SF-330, Part I, Block H. In a single page narrative form demonstrate the firm’s familiarity with local conditions to include knowledge of, and experience dealing with, the regulatory agencies, geological features, logistics, climatic conditions or local design and construction methods.

Once the selection board has evaluated firms against the selection criteria, the board will hold discussions with at least the top three (3) firms determined to be the most qualified. After the discussions are complete, the board will rank the top firms and a pricing proposal from only the highest ranked firm. If pricing from the most highly qualified firm is determined to be fair and reasonable, a contract will be awarded to the firm. The CO reserves the right to initiate negotiations with firms in order to negotiate specific terms. Under no circumstances will the CO award a contract to any offeror that has received a Marginal or Unacceptable integrated assessment rating.