B05_Amendment_01_SF30.pdf

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended. is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15C. DATE SIGNED

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

Previous edition unusable

The reason for this amendment is to:

1. Correct the NAICS size standard from $7.5 million to $15 million.

2. Modify the Evaluation Factors to clarify the requirement for Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing design services.

3. Clarify the requirement for Indian Owned firm preferences.

4. Add Historical Preservation Services to the Statement of Work.

Indian Health Service Dept. of Engineering Services - Seattle 701 Fifth Ave #1650 Seattle, WA 98104

18-102-SOL-00028

PAGE OF PAGES

1 4

05/16/2018

05/04/2018

Solicitation #: 18-102-SOL-00028 Amendment 0001

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

1. In Section 2 of the RFQ, change the NAICS Code size standard from $7.5 million to $15 million.

2. Answer the following vendor questions:

Q1: Will the IHS "BUY INDIAN ACT" POLICY be implemented for this opportunity? If not, why not?

A1: The IHS “Buy Indian Act” policy has not been implemented as of the date of this amendment.

Q2: Will scoring points or greater magnitude of preference be given to American Indian / Alaskan Native owned firms? If not, why not?

A2: See modified language in Section 4, Factor 2.c, “For purposes of this evaluation sub-criterion, firms qualified as “Indian Owned” (i.e. 51% of ownership can demonstrate proof of Indian blood, as defined by the Buy Indian Act) shall be evaluated more favorably.”

Q3: Seeing as this is nationwide, a team may wish to select more than one consultant to cover different regions, which would cause the SF330 responses to be bigger than 50 or 60 pages. Will you all consider a great amount of pages in the response as result?

A3: The 60-page limitation shall remain in effect at this time.

Q4: Can you clarify what your definition of "IN-HOUSE" means in this context?

A4: “In-house” means personnel that are employed directly by the prime contractor.

Q5: Do you anticipate needing cultural resources/historic preservation (i.e., Section 106/110) services under this award?

A5: See revised Statement of Work (Section C.2.2) that incorporates historic preservation services.

3. Replace the Evaluation Criteria of the RFQ with the following (changes are marked in tracked changes):

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 eight to twelve (8-12) most highly qualified firms during the final selection process.

The evaluation factors listed below shall be tabbed/bookmarked accordingly and addressed in Part H of the SF-330.

Offerors responding are requested to clearly indicate those required services it intends to self-perform and those it intends to subcontract. IHS shall evaluate each potential offeror in accordance with the following evaluation criteria.

Each submission will undergo a technical evaluation and will be assigned an adjectival rating utilizing the evaluation factors below. The importance of factors are in descending order:

Factor 1. Professional Qualifications and Experience

a. The offeror shall describe its professional qualifications and those of its proposed subcontractors and key personnel anticipated to provide services under this contract, as related to health facilities and associated structures: Assessment, Evaluation and Planning Services, Design Services, Construction Contract Administration Support Services, Integration of Sustainability into Design of Construction and Renovation Projects completed within the last seven (7) years.

b. The offeror shall identify the roles of its key personnel by providing resumes for its proposed key personnel that include credentials, education, registrations, relevant experience, and the role to perform IHS’s requirements.

c. Offerors shall submit a management plan and demonstrate the degree to which the management plan and team organization, including degree of principle participation, coordination, division of work, quality assurance, cost control, and prior experience of the project team as a unit, will meet the overall requirements of this contract.

d. In accordance with FAR Clause 52.219-14, “Limitations on Subcontracting”, small business prime contractors must self-perform services equivalent to 50% or more of the contract value in personnel costs throughout the life of the contract. Offerors shall demonstrate and clearly describe their ability to meet the 50% requirement of this contract in-house (use of prime’s own employees).

e. Offerors shall demonstrate and clearly describe their ability to provide Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing (MEP) design services. Offerors that successfully demonstrate in-house MEP design services as a direct function of the prime contractor throughout the life of this contract will be rated more favorably than prime contractors that subcontract MEP design services. Offerors indicating that MEP design services will be subcontracted shall provide demonstrated Quality Control measures for successfully coordinating MEP subcontracting efforts.

Factor 2. Specialized Experience and Technical Competence.

a. The offeror shall describe its proposed experience and subcontractor(‘s’) experience performing engineering and architectural assessment of health facilities and the planning, design, construction contract administrative support, and facility maintenance support services relating to small facility renovations, expansions, maintenance, improvement and environmental projects at rural health centers within the past seven (7) years.

Experience serving American Indians and Alaska Natives and/or working in a federal context within the past seven (7) years will be rated more favorably. This includes experience in energy conservation, pollution prevention, waste reduction, and the use of recovered materials.

b. The offeror shall describe its experience working with its proposed subcontractors and key personnel.

c. The offeror shall indicate which projects and describe experience and/or interaction with any tribal nations or groups, federal agencies, and/or commercial entities. The offeror is encouraged to describe problems/issues/concerns encountered on projects and describe the corrective action taken to resolve them. For purposes of this evaluation sub-criterion, firms qualified as “Indian Owned” (i.e. 51% of ownership can demonstrate proof of Indian blood, as defined by the Buy Indian Act) shall be evaluated more favorably.

Factor 3. Management Plan & Limitations on Subcontracting.

Factor 3. Past Performance.

a. While submission under this factor is not required, if a firm so chooses, firms shall have clients complete Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment 2). The completed Past Performance Questionnaires are to be submitted with the firm's SF330 package or the client may submit directly to Matt Sanders via email to matt.sanders@ihs.gov if the client so chooses. Clients should be knowledgeable of the firm's past performance and be willing to be interviewed by the Government.

b. While the exact format of the attached Past Performance Questionnaires is not required, a submitted past performance questionnaire shall include the minimum specifics for each project submitted including, but not limited to, the following information:

Project description, total contract amount, dates, and client information;

Initial award date and amount and final completed contract date and amount and description for differences, if applicable;

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?"

c. Firms shall have previous clients submit Past Performance Questionnaires for design and construction projects 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.

d. The offeror shall submit a minimum of three (3) with a maximum of five (5) past performance questionnaires submitted by their clients.

e. 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 may 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.

mailto:matt.sanders@ihs.gov

f. 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.

g. 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.

Factor 4. Capacity to Accomplish the Work.

a. Current and planned workload - The offeror shall describe its internal and subcontractors’ current and planned one (1) year workload and how the firm plans to ensure that they have the capacity to accomplish IHS requirements as they arise.

Factor 5. Geographic Capability.

a. The proposed IDIQ contract shall be for nationwide services. Offeror shall demonstrate that it can perform all required services as stated in the SOW within any of the twelve (12) IHS geographic Areas nationwide.

b. The offeror shall provide which geographic areas they are best prepared to provide A/E services, and any areas they would prefer not to provide services, or areas they do not believe they would be able to provide cost competitive services.