2. Basis for Selection - Proposal Prep Instructions.pdf

BASIS FOR SELECTION: This is a competitive best value/merit source selection. As such, a lease shall be entered into with the charter organization whose offer is conforming to the requirements of the solicitation and is determined to represent the overall Best Value to the Government based on an optimal combination of Technical Factors and the Financial Capability. Financial Capability will be evaluated on a Pass/Fail basis. By submission of its offer, the charter organization accedes to all solicitation requirements. Failure to meet a requirement may result in a qualification submission being determined technically unacceptable. Charter organizations must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. While charter organizations may propose exceptions to the solicitation requirements, the government is not obligated to accept such offers.

The technical evaluation factors are listed below:

Factor 1: Instructional Effectiveness

- Quality and Satisfaction Rating of Charter School in the Past Three Years: The charter will provide a history of “Performing” Achievement Profiles as evaluated by the Nevada Department of Education covering the past three (3) years. In addition, the charter will explain corrective actions taken in the past, if any, for substandard performance and any current performance problems. The charter may also provide letters, metrics, customer surveys, awards, independent surveys, etc., which demonstrates overall job performance and quality.

- Qualification submission offers curriculum electives meeting the basic requirements of the Statement of Objectives (SOO) and complements the educational program. Examples include: orchestra, band, foreign language classes, drama, art, etc.

- Qualification submission will outline how placement examinations will be used to access students in accordance with local, state, and federal laws and regulations.

- Qualification will outline use of Computer and Science Labs in accordance with the SOO.

Factor 2: Personnel

- Detailed plan for hiring staff demonstrates ability to staff school appropriately.

- Teacher qualification requirements indicate the level of instructional quality being required.

- Demonstrated ability to attract and retain experienced and high quality instructional personnel at all levels.

- Pupil/teacher data including but not limited to: a) number of classroom teachers, b) number of non-classroom teachers (specialists), and student/teacher ratios indicate charter demonstrates capability to meet or exceed the minimum state requirements.

Factor 3: Special Needs

- Qualification submission details program delivery for special needs students, regardless of type or severity of disabling condition. If capabilities to serve all types and degrees of handicapping conditions are outside the charter’s current capabilities, detailed contingency plans for obtaining services in a timely manner that comply with local, state, and federal laws and regulations are included.

- Qualification submission includes plans for providing appropriate and challenging programs to serve gifted students.

Factor 4: General Management Plan

- Operational/Support Technology: Plan for maintaining and modernizing technology to ensure hardware and software are up-to-date and provide maximum use of technology in support of the educational program and operations.

- Curriculum Planning: Proposal ensures curriculum uses up-to-date information and incorporates current best practices in education.

Factor 5: Non-Instructional Effectiveness

- Qualification submission shall provide plan for ensuring positive and consistent two-way communications with parents, the Installation Leadership, and community leaders regarding student performance (academically and socially), school activities, meetings/conferences, etc.

- Qualification submission includes Guidance Counselor(s) who provide on-site counseling assistance to students during school hours. Counselor(s) must have at least a Bachelors degree and counseling experience that complies with local, state, and federal laws and regulations.

- Qualification submission shall provide plan for provisioning and staffing the school to ensure school starts on a schedule similar to other local public schools and services comply with the requirements of the SOO.

- Qualification submission offers a student food service program for students, which is comparable to that provided in local public schools and complies with local, state, and federal laws and regulations.

The school may offer a subsidized free lunch/reduced lunch program so long as it complies with local, state, and federal laws and regulations.

Factor 6: Construction of Facilities Plan

- Qualification submission notes whether charter has received pre-approval to fund construction of school facilities.

- Qualification submission includes plan for building a school facility capable of holding at least 500 students.

- Qualification submission illustrates that school facilities will accommodate grades 9 through 12 without overcrowding.

Proposals will be evaluated against the following criteria for the Technical Factors:

FACTOR 1: Instructional Effectiveness

Exceptional: The proposal clearly demonstrates an understanding of all aspects of the areas listed and exhibits exceptional strengths that represent significant benefit to the Government in performance or qualifications. A rating of this magnitude indicates high probability of successful completion of all work and tasks with no stated weaknesses. Evidence will include:

- The government has a high expectation that the charter will successfully perform the required effort based on the charter's performance record of Performing Achievement as evaluated by the Nevada Department of Education

- Program offers extensive electives beyond basic requirements of the SOO and complements the educational program

- Proposal details use of placement examinations to include inclusion in gifted programs or special needs

- Proposal includes computer and science labs which exceed requirements of the SOO

Acceptable: The proposal demonstrates an understanding of the factor although there may be minor omissions or misunderstandings. This rating indicates minor deficiencies in one of the areas or that the charter minimally meets, but does not exceed, the requirements. Minor deficiencies would require correction before the charter would be permitted to begin work. This rating indicates that the charter could probably complete all work and tasks, however, should services be even slightly reduced or problems develop, there would be significant chance of non-compliance with the stated requirements.

Evidence would include:

- The government has an expectation that the charter will successfully perform the required effort based on the charter's performance record of Performing Achievement as evaluated by the Nevada Department of Education

- Proposal meets the minimum elective requirement as outlined in the SOO

- Proposal includes an average cycle of review which neither encourages or discourages implementation of best education practices

- Proposal mentions use of placement examinations to balance classroom abilities

- Proposal meets minimum requirements computer and science labs as outlined in the SOO

Unacceptable: The proposal has major omissions and fails to meet the minimum requirements of the SOO. The charter would have to completely revise major portions of the proposal to be acceptable.

There is little probability of successful completion. Evidence would include:

- The government has no expectation that the charter will be able to successfully perform the required effort based on the charter's performance record of "Underperforming" or lower as evaluated by the Nevada Department of Education

- Proposal does not meet minimum requirements for electives, curriculum improvement, o r c omputer and science labs as outlined in the SOO

- Proposal does not offer a placement examination

FACTOR 2: Personnel

Exceptional: The proposal clearly demonstrates an understanding of all aspects of the areas listed and exhibits exceptional strengths that represent significant benefit to the Government in performance or qualifications. A rating of this magnitude indicates high probability of successful completion of all work and tasks with no stated weaknesses. Evidence will include:

- History of effective staffing plan that addresses hiring and retaining high quality personnel

Pupil/Teacher data indicates ability to exceed the minimum state and SOO requirements

- Percentages of teachers with advanced degrees and more experience exceed those of other local schools

- Percentages of teachers licensed in teaching exceed those of other charters

Acceptable: The proposal demonstrates an understanding of the factor although there may be minor omissions or misunderstandings. This rating indicates minor deficiencies in one of the areas or that the charter minimally meets, but does not exceed, the requirements. Minor deficiencies would require correction before the charter would be permitted to begin work. This rating indicates that the charter could probably complete all work and tasks, however, should services be even slightly reduced or problems develop, there would be significant chance of non-compliance with the stated requirements. Evidence would include:

- Evidence of staffing plan that addresses hiring and retaining personnel Pupil/Teacher data indicates ability to meet minimum state and SOO requirements

- Percentage of teachers with advanced degrees and experience are equal to other charters Percentage of teachers licensed in teaching are equal to other charters

Unacceptable: The proposal has major omissions and fails to meet the minimum requirements of the SOO.

The charter would have to completely revise major portions of the proposal to be acceptable. There is little probability of successful completion. Evidence would include:

- No evidence of adequate staffing plan

- Pupil/Teacher data does not meet the minimum state or SOO requirements

- Percentage of teachers with advanced degrees and experience are below other charters

Percentage of teachers licensed in teaching are below other charters

FACTOR 3: Special Needs

Exceptional: The proposal clearly demonstrates an understanding of all aspects of the areas listed and exhibits exceptional strengths that represent significant benefit to the Government in performance or qualifications. A rating of this magnitude indicates high probability of successful completion of all work

- Proposal offers programs which are individually developed and designed specifically to meet the different needs of the special needs population

- Proposal includes a variety of delivery methods normally expected in special education programs and consistent with current research and educational practices

- Proposal addresses provision of all related services required and/or detailed plans for provision of these services in a timely manner within appropriate educational venues

- Proposal offers extensive enrichment programs; program offerings include extensive higher level classes; a wide variety of programs are offered to provide gifted students with challenges appropriate to their abilities.

omissions or misunderstandings. This rating indicates minor deficiencies in one of the areas or that the charter minimally meets, but does not exceed, the requirements. Minor deficiencies would require correction before the charter would be permitted to begin work. This rating indicates that the charter could probably complete all work and tasks, however, should services be even slightly reduced or problems develop, there would be significant chance of non-compliance with the stated requirements. Evidence would

- Proposal meets statutory requirements for special needs programs

- Basic gifted program is in place but does not exceed requirements

Unacceptable: The proposal has major omissions and fails to meet the minimum requirements of the SOO.

The charter would have to completely revise major portions of the proposal to be acceptable. There is little

- Proposal for special needs or gifted students do not meet statutory requirements

FACTOR 4: General Management Plan

Exceptional: The proposal clearly demonstrates an understanding of all aspects of the areas listed and exhibits exceptional strengths that represent significant benefit to the Government in performance or qualifications. A rating of this magnitude indicates high probability of successful completion of all work

- Proposal includes evidence of extensive, positive reviews and implementations of all educational programs curriculum and accompanying textbooks and incorporates best education practices from other education institutions

- Proposal ensures hardware and software is up-to-date and provides maximum use of technology in support of education programs for students and faculty omissions or misunderstandings. This rating indicates minor deficiencies in one of the areas or that the charter minimally meets, but does not exceed, the requirements. Minor deficiencies would require correction before the charter would be permitted to begin work. This rating indicates that the charter could probably complete all work and tasks, however, should services be even slightly reduced or problems develop, there would be significant chance of non-compliance with the stated requirements. Evidence would include:

- Proposal includes an average cycle of review which neither encourages or discourages implementation of best education practices

- Proposal ensures adequate hardware and software upgrades are available in support of education programs for students and faculty

Unacceptable: The proposal has major omissions and fails to meet the minimum requirements of the SOO.

The charter would have to completely revise major portions of the proposal to be acceptable. There is little

- No official curriculum planning cycle is in-place and/or technology is minimal and provides little, if any, support for the education programs.

FACTOR 5 : Non-Instructional Effectiveness

Exceptional: The proposal clearly demonstrates an understanding of all aspects of the areas listed and exhibits exceptional strengths that represent significant benefit to the Government in performance or qualifications. A rating of this magnitude indicates high probability of successful completion of all work and tasks with no stated weaknesses. Evidence will include:

- Proposal includes evidence of extensive, positive communications programs geared to keeping community informed as well as receiving input from all stakeholders

- Proposal includes detailed plans for providing school services beginning when other schools start and outlining when all requirements of the SOO will be achieved.

- Proposal offers student food service program for students which is comparable to that provided in local public schools and complies with federal and state laws and regulations. Additionally, the charter offers a subsidized free lunch/reduced lunch program in accordance with applicable federal and state laws

- Proposal includes plans for a proposed gymnasium, to include a basketball court, locker rooms with showers, and/or expandable bleachers

- Proposal includes requirement of uniforms and/or adherence to strict dress code.

- Proposal includes a plan to install student's lockers omissions or misunderstandings. This rating indicates minor deficiencies in one of the areas or that the charter minimally meets, but does not exceed, the requirements. Minor deficiencies would require correction before the charter would be permitted to begin work. This rating indicates that the charter could probably complete all work and tasks, however, should services be even slightly reduced or problems develop, there would be significant chance of non-compliance with the stated requirements. Evidence would

- Proposal includes evidence of communications programs which neither encourages or discourages input from stakeholders

- Proposal includes a plan for providing school services beginning when other schools start

- Proposal offers student food service program for students which is comparable to that provided in local public schools and complies with federal and state laws and regulations

- Proposal includes instituting school dress code similar to local districts

Unacceptable: The proposal has major omissions and fails to meet the minimum requirements of the SOO.

The charter would have to completely revise major portions of the proposal to be acceptable. There is little

- Proposal offers no official communication plan

- Proposal shows no clear plan to begin school

- Proposal indicates no student food service program

- Proposal indicates no school dress code

FACTOR 6: Construction or Facilities Plan

Exceptional: The proposal clearly demonstrates an understanding of all aspects of the areas listed and exhibits exceptional strengths that represent significant benefit to the Government in performance or qualifications. A rating of this magnitude indicates high probability of successful completion of all work

- Proposal includes evidence of the offeror has received multiple pre-approvals to fund construction of school facilities

- Proposal includes plans for building a school facility capable of holding a minimum of 500 students without the potential for overcrowding omissions or misunderstandings. This rating indicates minor deficiencies in one of the areas or that the charter minimally meets, but does not exceed, the requirements. Minor deficiencies would require correction before the charter would be permitted to begin work. This rating indicates that the charter could probably complete all work and tasks, however, should services be even slightly reduced or problems develop, there would be significant chance of non-compliance with the stated requirements. Evidence would include:

- Proposal includes evidence of the offeror has received a pre-approval to fund construction of school facilities

- Proposal includes plans for building a school facility capable of holding 500 students

Unacceptable: The proposal has major omissions and fails to meet the minimum requirements of the SOO.

The charter would have to completely revise major portions of the proposal to be acceptable. There is little

- Proposal d o e s n o t includes evidence of a pre-approval to fund construction of school facilities

- Proposal does not includes plans for building a school facility capable of holding 500 students

Financial Capability Assessment: The government technical evaluation team shall evaluate the financial capability of those charters with an "Acceptable" or higher Technical Evaluation rating. Financial capability will be evaluated on a Pass/Fail basis. This factor is met when the Charter's Proposal demonstrates that:

- The Charter is financially sound and any adverse information, such as litigation, disputes, claims, etc., has been resolved, or it will not negatively impact this project

- The Charter possesses the financial capability, bonding capacity, and institutional relationships necessary to obtain financing for a project of this size and scope

- The Charter identified sufficient sources of equity to be used for the project

Charter organizations are cautioned to submit sufficient information and in the format specified in the PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS. The Selection Authority will review the evaluation summary for each charter and make a “Best Value” decision based on the above criteria. The government intends to enter into a lease agreement without discussions with a respective charter organization. The government, however, reserves the right to conduct discussions if deemed in its best interest.

PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

A. To assure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, charter organizations must follow the instructions contained herein. Charter organizations are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions and technical requirements. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for consideration. Charter organizations must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide com plete accom panying rationale. The response shall consist of three (3) separate parts: Part I – Technical Proposal; Part II – Financial Capability, Part III – Lease Certification

B. Specific Instructions:

1. PART I - TECHNICAL PROPOSAL (Submit original plus one (1) copy)

Limited to no more than 75 pages. The charter will provide a detailed proposal outlining methodology to ensure all criteria in the Statement of Requirements (SOO). Charters should review the technical evaluation factors when developing their technical proposal.

2. PART II - FINANCIAL CAPABILITY (Submit original plus one (1) copy)

a. Charter organizations shall provide Financial Statements, as defined below, and other documentation as required for all Significant Parties in order to demonstrate the charter’s financial strength. Significant Parties are defined as entities or individuals that meet any one or more of the following criteria: a) the entity or individual is proposed to execute the lease of property; b) the entity or individual will consolidate 50% or more of the financial performance of the charter entity into their financial statements; or c) the entity or individual owns 10% or more of the charter entity and articulates in a written statement a financial responsibility to the charter entity.

NOTE: Financial Statements is defined as the financial statements accompanied by an auditor's assertion of accuracy or the most recent two years. The auditor must be a nationally recognized firm in the accounting industry and the assertion of accuracy must state that the financial statements have been audited in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).

(1) Any Significant Party that is a public company subject to reporting to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) shall submit Financial Statements or provide reference to a publicly available source from which Financial Statements can be reviewed, including the two latest Forms 10-K and all Forms 8-K submitted to the SEC within the last two years.

(2) Any Significant Party that is either not a public company subject to reporting to the SEC or a newly formed public company subject to reporting to the SEC that does not have two Forms I 0-K available shall submit any Forms 10-K and Forms 8-K submitted to the SEC within the last two years along with their Financial Statements.

(3) If Financial Statements are not available, Significant Parties may submit either a) entity financial statements that have been reviewed by a Certified Public Accountant and an assertion of accuracy from the entity's Chief Financial Officer or equivalent;

or b) individual's Internal Revenue Service (IRS) tax filings that have been executed and submitted to the IRS by the individual or a certified preparer.

(4) If any Financial Statements and information submitted note any litigation, disputes, claims, UCC filings or similar circumstances, provide the current status of each matter in full detail.

b. Charter shall demonstrate they have a source of sufficient equity to support a long-term charter school.

c. Charter shall demonstrate an organization structure depicting a relationship of Significant Parties that is financially accountable for performance.

3. PART III - LEASE CERTIFICATION - Submit signed original plus one (1) copy.

The charter shall provide the following statement and signature from a representative authorized to commit the charter to the lease:

“________________________________________________________ (Charter Name) hereby certifies we have reviewed the lease terms and exhibits and agree to all terms and conditions. If selected, the charter will work with the Government to finalize the lease with signatures by authorized representatives. The lease must be approved by HQ USAF and require Congressional Notice prior to beneficial occupancy of the facility/property.”

The charter may submit its plan as to what improvements they may provide to the base as well as a schedule to accomplish such improvements at said school facility. Please provide an itemized list detailing your plan of action in order of your preference. Attached is an excerpt from 10 U .S.C. § 2667, in regards to In-Kind Consideration.

C. Documents submitted in response to this RFP must be fully responsive to and consistent with the following:

1. Requirements of the RFP and government standards and regulations.

2. Evaluation Factors in the section entitled “ BASIS FOR SELECTION” of this RFP

3. Any limitation on the number of proposal pages. Pages exceeding the page limitations set forth in this section will not be read or evaluated, and will be removed from the proposal.

4. Format for proposal:

a. The proposals will be 8 1/2" x 11" paper except for fold-outs used for charts, tables, or diagrams, which may not exceed 11" x 17''.

b. A page is defined as one face of a sheet of paper containing information.

c. Typing shall not be less than 12 pitch.

d. Elaborate formats, bindings or color presentations are not desired or required.

5. Send proposal by both email and postal mail to:

a. Email: april.taylor.7@us.af.mil

b. Mail Address: 99 CONS, Attention: April Taylor, 5865 Swaab Blvd, Bldg. 588, Nellis AFB, NV 89191-7063 mailto:april.taylor.7@us.af.mil