3. Section 2.1, Continuation of SF-1449.pdf

2.1 SCHEDULE OF SUPPLIES/SERVICES, CONTINUATION OF SF-1449

The contractor must be capable of providing community-based outpatient substance use, mental health, and sex offender treatment services for male and female Adults in Custody (AICs) in community placement residing in a Residential Reentry Center (RRC), on home confinement, or on Federal Location Monitoring or, if applicable, reporting to a Day Reporting Center, in Philadelphia, PA.

The performance period for the resulting contract will be a one-year base period (to begin upon the effective date of contract award) and four additional one-year option periods. The anticipated total contract period is five years. The anticipated performance start date is November 1, 2025.

Community Treatment Services Decisional Rule Criteria – Best Value

Each proposal will be initially reviewed to determine that all document submission requirements listed under Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors-Commercial Items, are met. By using the documentation submitted with each proposal, an initial review will also be conducted to determine whether or not it meets the minimum requirements contained in the Decisional Rule Criteria below. Any proposal not meeting these criteria may not receive any further consideration for award.

Proposals must clearly demonstrate at the time of submission, unless otherwise stated, the capability to meet the Decisional Rule Criteria below. Proposals will be rated on a best value basis based on the Decisional Rule Criteria. In addition, offerors may be eliminated from the competition based on a competitive range determination if the proposal submitted does not represent the best value to the Government.

Based on the Decisional Rule Criteria below the Government will award the contract to the proposal that offers the best value to the Government. Technical and Past Performance when combined (Non-Price), are significantly more important than Price. In the Non-Price areas, Technical is more important than past performance.

CRITERIA PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

STAFFING EVALUATION AREA

1. Factor: Key Personnel - Licensure

This factor evaluates Offeror’s key personnel proposed to meet the solicitation requirements. This includes evaluating all personnel providing clinical services meet the appropriate licensure/certification as required by the state authority where the services will be rendered, to practice independently, without supervision. [SOW 5.4]

The following information shall be submitted in the Proposal and will be evaluated as meeting the minimum requirements below:

a. The Offeror shall submit the Technical Personnel document that identifies the position and responsibility of all personnel proposed to meet or exceed the minimum staffing requirements of key personnel in table 1a below. All key personnel and administrative positions must be identified on this document.

b. The Offeror shall submit copies of current and valid professional licenses for key personnel who will provide direct clinical services to Adults in Custody (AICs) while in community placement. Clinical licenses submitted must be listed in table 1b below and must correspond to the respective clinical duties performed.

i. Staff licenses for medical staff (e.g., medical doctor, physician assistant, nurse practitioner) must meet the standards of practice established by the applicable state’s professional regulatory board in the state where services will be rendered.

ii. If submitting a non-medical license that is not listed in table 1b, complete the Mental Health/Behavioral Health Professionals Scope of Practice Summary.

Any licenses other than those listed below will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.

iii. If unable to produce an original license, provide a license verification sheet with a copy of a government-issued photo identification card for the staff member.

c. Psychiatric/Medication Monitoring: The Offeror shall submit a Drug Enforcement Agency Controlled Substance Registration Certificate for a qualified practitioner with prescriptive authority who meets the standards of practice established by the state’s professional regulatory board to provide psychiatric evaluations, medication monitoring, and if applicable, MAT services. [SOW 5.4.5)

STAFFING EVALUATION AREA

2. Factor: Key Personnel – Experience

This factor evaluates Offeror’s key personnel and their experience.

Clinical staff should have documented experience providing substance use disorder treatment and/or mental health services to a criminal justice population. For sex offender treatment, The following information shall be submitted in the Proposal and will be evaluated on the degree to which the Offeror meets the solicitation requirements and provides a benefit to the Government:

a. The Offeror shall submit resumes for key personnel listed on the Technical Personnel document 1a. Resumes must show documented experience working with a criminal justice population providing substance use disorder, mental health, or sex offender treatment clinical staff must have experience working with a sex offender population. [SOW 5.3] services and must correspond to their respective clinical duties as noted on the Technical Personnel document.

b. Documented experience on a resume must include descriptions of the type of clinical services provided and show prior clinical experience working with AICs providing treatment services or with programs of a similar type or complexity.

Resumes shall not exceed three pages.

OPERATIONAL EVALUATION AREA

. Factor: Clinical Treatment Standards and Practices

This factor evaluates the quality, comprehensiveness, and innovativeness of the Offeror’s plan to implement and follow expectations for treatment services, which include elements of the following standards. [SOW 3.2]

1. Treatment Services

2. Assessments

3. Clinician Engagement

4. Frequency of Sessions

5. Standard Session Length

6. Session Breaks

7. Schedules

8. Individual

9. Group Counseling

10. Group Size Limitations

11. Agency Rules

The following information shall be submitted in the Proposal and will be evaluated on the degree to which the Offeror meets the solicitation requirements and provides a benefit to the Government:

a. The Offeror shall provide a plan which describes their approach for delivering Community Treatment Services. The Offeror shall describe the procedures and practices they will employ to meet the solicitation requirements.

b. The Offeror shall ensure the plan is relevant to the requirements but must not merely restate or paraphrase the Statement of Work requirements, as this will be found unacceptable.

c. The intent of this requirement is to evaluate Offeror’s delivery of services to AICs in the community according to elements of the standards in the SOW.

d. It provides an opportunity for Offeror to describe the capabilities of their organization in performance of the contract to offer a more comprehensive and supportive environment in the delivery of treatment services for AICs in the community.

The plan shall not exceed seven pages.

12. Cell Phones

13. Disruptive Behavior

14. Favors and Items of Value

15. Immediate Crisis Intervention Plan

16. Continuing Contract Performance During a Government Shutdown, Pandemic, Influenza, or Other Nation Emergency

FACILITY EVALUATION AREA

4. Factor: Proposed Location(s)

The factor evaluates the Offeror’s performance site(s) meet the specified restrictions, space requirements, ADA compliance guidelines, and do not present safety risks to the community. [SOW 7.1 & 7.2.1]

The following information shall be submitted in the Proposal and will be evaluated as meeting the minimum requirements below:

a. List addresses for all proposed performance sites, including subcontractors, where the following services will be provided: Substance Use Disorder, Mental Health, and Sex Offender Treatment Services, Within 8 miles from Philadelphia City Hall, located at 1401 John F.

Kennedy Blvd., Philadelphia, PA 19102 and within city limits. Provider must be within a half mile from a Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) bus or subway stop. This requirement ensures that the vendor is located within walking distance of public transportation.

b. Submit a deed, lease, bill of sale, option or intent to lease, or option to buy in the name of the Offeror, or subcontractor, if applicable, for all addresses listed in 4a.

i. Acceptable proof of intent to lease must address, at a minimum, the following provisions: names of the parties (landlord and prospective tenant), property details, including location, proposed terms of lease, desired start and end dates, condition of premises, i.e., space is being leased in “AS IS” condition or will require either party to build out the space, and signature of both parties.

c. Describe how individual and group rooms at the proposed performance site(s) will be private and allow for confidentiality during treatment sessions. [SOW 7.1.1]

d. Submit an office diagram (see attached example) for each proposed performance site listed in 4a. The diagram must identify all rooms that will be used for counseling space and services, i.e., individual, group, or psychiatric treatment rooms, as well as space used for a waiting, lobby or reception area. The location of the restroom facilities should also be identified. [SOW 7.1.1]

i. Specify on the office diagram the number of individuals each group room can comfortably accommodate. Therapeutic group rooms must be primarily dedicated to treatment or reserved for outpatient community treatment services.

e. Complete and submit the attached Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Checklist for each proposed performance site listed in 4a. [SOW 7.1.1]

f. Complete and submit the attached Local Areas of Concern document for each proposed performance site listed in 4a.

This document must identify the following areas of concern that are within: 500 feet. This must include the same space and/or same building, of each proposed performance site, and include a plan to mitigate risk to children and other vulnerable populations:

i. Schools, day-care centers, playgrounds, developed or improved parks, athletic fields, churches, school bus stops, and any facilities/businesses that primarily care for/educate/entertain minors or other vulnerable populations. [SOW 7.2.1]

1a. Minimum Staffing Requirements of Key Personnel 1b. Professional Licensing Requirements for Clinical Staff

Identify the following on the Technical Personnel Document:

Authorized Negotiator

Key Personnel for Substance Use Disorder Services

Key Personnel for Mental Health Services

Key Personnel for Crisis Intervention Services

Key Personnel for Psychiatric Services

Key Personnel for Sex Offender Treatment Services

All clinicians must be licensed or certified in the state of Pennsylvania and must be able to practice independently, without supervision, in the state of Pennsylvania

Mental Health/Sex Offender/Substance Use Substance Use

Licensed Clinical Social Worker (LCSW)

Licensed Mental Health Counselor

Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist (LMFT)

Licensed Professional Counselor

Credentialed Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Counselor

(CASAC)

Certified Clinical Supervisor

Evaluation Factors for Award

Award will be made to the offeror whose proposal, conforming to this solicitation is determined to be in the best interests of the Government, price and other factors considered. Other factors include:

(A) The offeror's compliance with those minimum standards to an affirmative determination of responsibility as defined by Section 9.104-1 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation.

(B) The offeror's compliance with technical requirements to the extent specified in the Terms and Conditions and/or specifications contained in this solicitation.

(C) All factors as identified below, upon which a comparative rating of proposals will be based, in accordance with the relative order of importance accorded each respectively.

Evaluation Criteria and their Relative Importance Offeror proposals will be evaluated in three areas: Technical, Past Performance, and Price. Technical and Past Performance (Non-Price), when combined, are significantly more important than Price. In the Non-Price areas, Past Performance and Technical are of equal value. The Technical areas are composed of two factors. Offerors should recognize that Price, although of lesser importance than Technical and Past Performance, might contribute substantially to the Source Selection Official's (SSO's) contract award decision. As the evaluation of competing offers in the Technical and Past Performance areas become more equal in rating, the more important Price will become in selecting the best value for the Government.

Technical Evaluation Panel The evaluation criteria identified will be utilized by the Technical Evaluation Panel in analyzing each Technical Proposal submitted in response to this solicitation. The Technical Evaluation Panel will rate each element, giving the highest rating to the best overall approach outlined in the proposal. All elements will be considered when determining the overall rating.

Technical Evaluation Factors

The Government will assign an adjectival rating to each of the factors/sub factors as identified as well as assigning an overall adjectival rating to each of the evaluation areas. The adjectival rating depicts how well the offer meets the evaluation areas/factors/subfactors and solicitation requirements. The adjectival definitions are defined below:

Exceptional: Offeror’s proposal exceeds the requirements of the solicitation. Their proposal shows they have an exceptional solution for meeting the needs and objectives of the program. Two or more significant strengths exist. No weakness or deficiencies exist.

Very Good: Offeror's proposal meets and exceeds the requirements of the solicitation. Their proposal shows they have a very good solution for meeting the needs and objectives of the program. One or more significant strengths exist. No deficiencies exist. Weaknesses may exist, but none are considered significant and are easily correctable.

Satisfactory: Offeror's proposal meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation. Their proposal shows they have a satisfactory solution for meeting the needs and objectives of the program. No deficiencies exist. Strengths and may exist. The weaknesses are correctable.

Marginal: Offeror's proposal does not meet some of the requirements of the solicitation. Their proposal shows they have a marginal solution for meeting the needs and objectives of the program. Weaknesses/deficiencies outweigh any strength that may exist. The weaknesses/deficiencies are difficult to correct.

Unsatisfactory: Offeror's proposal fails to meet the requirements of the solicitation. Their proposal shows they have an unsatisfactory solution for meeting the needs and objectives of the program. There are numerous weaknesses/deficiencies. The weaknesses/deficiencies will be very difficult to correct or are not correctable.

Past Performance Evaluation Factors The past performance area addresses the Government’s confidence in the offeror’s probability of successfully performing the effort as proposed based on their record of performance in current and past relevant contract efforts. The Past Performance evaluation will be accomplished by reviewing aspects of the offeror’s relevant present and recent past performance, focusing on and targeting performance that is relevant to the Past Performance factors outlined below.

The Past Performance information is critical to the Government’s evaluation. More recent, more relevant Performance information will have a greater positive impact on the Past Performance evaluation than less recent, less relevant performance. The Contractor Officer will be responsible for making final evaluation decisions regarding past performance. See attachment: Past Performance Questionnaire.

The Government may consider efforts performed by the offeror for agencies of the federal, state, or local governments and commercial customers as potentially relevant to the Past Performance evaluation. Where relevant performance record indicates performance problems, the Government will consider the number and severity of the problems and the appropriateness and effectiveness of any corrective actions taken (not just planned or promised). The Government may review more recent contracts or performance evaluations to ensure corrective actions have been implemented and to evaluate their effectiveness. Offerors without a record of relevant company past performance or for whom information on Past Performance is not available will not be evaluated favorable or unfavorable on Past Performance and will be considered Neutral.

The Government will assign an adjectival rating to each of the past performance factors, as well as assign an overall adjectival rating to past performance. The adjectival rating depicts how well the offeror meets the solicitation requirements. Technical and Past Performance when combined are significantly more important than price. In the Non-Price areas, Technical is more important than Past Performance.

The adjectival ratings are defined below:

Exceptional: Offeror's past performance exceeds the requirements of the program. Their past performance shows they have an exceptional record for meeting the needs and objectives of the program.

Very Good: Offeror's past performance exceeds the requirements of the program. Their past performance shows they have a very good record for meeting the needs and objectives of the program.

Satisfactory: Offeror's past performance satisfies the requirements of the program. Their past performance shows they have a satisfactory record for meeting the needs and objectives of the program.

Marginal: Offeror’s past performance does not satisfy some of the requirements of the program. Their past performance shows they have a marginal record of meeting the needs and objectives of the program.

Unsatisfactory: Offeror's past performance fails to meet the requirements of the program. Their past performance shows they have an unsatisfactory record of meeting the needs and objectives of the program.

The Past Performance area addresses the Government’s confidence in the offeror’s ability of successfully performing the effort as proposed based on their record of performance in current and past relevant contract efforts. Specific considerations include the following subfactors which are equal in importance:

Treatment Services, Communication, and Administration.

The source selection authority shall determine the relevance of similar past performance information [FAR 15.305(a)(2)(ii)].

The specific Past Performance Evaluation Factors are described below and are all equal in importance. Each factor considers the offeror’s record of performance and level of success in:

Factor 1: Treatment Services – This factor evaluates the contractor’s timeliness in conducting intake screening and/or assessments, quality of counseling services, quality of treatment related documents (i.e., assessments, treatment plans, monthly progress reports), ability to deliver services that are compatible to the Bureau of Prison’s (Bureau) philosophy and approach, ability to provide counseling space conductive to counseling, and their adherence in providing the type and frequency of counseling services directed by the Bureau.

Factor 2: Communication – This factor evaluates the contractor’s flexibility, pro-activeness, professionalism, and cooperation in their relationships with Community Treatment Services (CTS) staff, RRC’s, the U.S. Probation office, or other companies. This factor also includes an evaluation of the contractor’s compliance in reporting accountability issues, behavior concerns, and staffing difficult cases timely with the CTS or other staff.

Factor 3: Administration – This factor evaluates the contractor’s accuracy and timeliness of bill submissions, maintenance of inmate treatment files, responsiveness to requests, and technical direction as provided by the CTS or other staff. This factor also includes an evaluation of the contractor’s compliance with licensure and certification requirement of all staff providing services to inmates, and participation in Bureau contractor events.

Price Evaluation Area Pricing will be evaluated for price reasonableness and cost realism. The Government will not specifically score or rate the offeror’s price. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s prices to ensure it is reasonable. The offeror’s evaluated price will be assessed against the evaluation results of the Non-Price areas in conducting possible tradeoff analysis and determining the best value to the Government. Technical and Past Performance when combined are significantly more important than price. The offeror’s Price, although of lesser importance than Technical and Past Performance, might contribute substantially to the SSA’s contract award decision. As the offeror’s proposal become more equal in the non-price factors, the overall price of the entire contract will be given greater importance.

Prices offered to the Government shall be as low as or lower than those charges to the supplier’s most favored customer for comparable quantities under similar terms and conditions, in addition to any discounts offered for prompt payment.

Please complete the chart below with total offer price for the base period and each option year.

Year Total Base Period $ Option Year 1 $ Option Year 2 $ Option Year 3 $ Option Year 4 $ Potential Six-Month Extension $ Total of All Years $

Deliveries

In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 16.505, and the clause located in FAR 52.216-18, Ordering any supplies or services to be furnished under this contract shall be ordered by issuance of task orders by a warranted Contracting Officer in the CTS Contracting Office.

Billing Information The Government will make payment monthly via Electronic Fund Transfer. Invoices with the contract number should be submitted electronically to BOP- RSD-PSBCTS-BILL@bop.gov. Contractors that are classified as a small business are required to indicate their small business size status on each invoice submitted for payment.

Award Without Discussions Offerors are advised an award may be made without discussions. The Contracting Officer cannot overemphasize the necessity for the initial proposal of an offeror to provide the Government with sufficient information identifying the offeror's best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint.

Availability of Funds Funds are not presently available for this solicitation. No award will be made under this solicitation until funds are made available and confirmed in writing by the contracting officer. The Government reserves the right to cancel this solicitation at any time, either before or after the closing date. In the event of cancellation, the Government shall have no obligation to reimburse any offeror for any costs incurred in connection with the preparation or submission of its proposal.