36C10F19R0065 0002 CM Sev.pdf

5. PROJECT NUMBER (if applicable)

CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER

CODE

6. ISSUED BY

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED

PAGE OF PAGES

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED

BPA NO. 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

FACILITY CODE CODE

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:

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers

E. IMPORTANT:

is extended,

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning __________ copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; 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 is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

(REV. 11/2016)

is required to sign this document and return ___________ copies to the issuing office. is not, A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

15C. DATE SIGNED

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

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.

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

D. OTHER

Contractor

16C. DATE SIGNED

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

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.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

STANDARD FORM 30 PREVIOUS EDITION NOT USABLE

(Type or print) (Type or print)

(Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

(Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code)

(If other than Item 6)

(Specify type of modification and authority)

(such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.)

(If required)

(SEE ITEM 11)

(SEE ITEM 13)

(X)

CHECK

ONE

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

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

1 21

0002 08-11-2020

None

003C4

Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Construction and Facilities Management (003C4C) 425 I Street NW Washington DC 20001

101F

Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Construction and Facilities Management 425 I Street NW Washington DC 20001

To all Offerors/Bidders

36C10F19R0065

07-09-2020

X

X X

25 August 2020 2:00 PM EST

Revised date for receipt of offers from 8/10/2020 to 8/25/2020 at 2:00 PM EST.

Furnish and incorporate the Government's response(s) to RFI's.

Furnish and incorporate changes as outlined on Continuation Pages.

36C10F19R0065-0002 CONTINUATION PAGE

CHANGES ARE AS FOLLOWS:

STATEMENT OF WORK: Section 1.2, the following language has been added. The objective of this contract is to provide the Government with support for healthcare, leasing construction, seismic corrections, cemeteries, and other agency needs.

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERS: Section 2.2, para. (b) (ii) Volume II Past Performance, the Offeror’s responses to evaluation submission of Volume II has been deleted.

BASIS FOR AWARD: Section 1.1.3 Subfactor 2, Submission Requirements number 1 (e), and Section B, 3, the language “along with letters of commitment” has been deleted.

Section 1.1.4. Subfactor 3, Submission Requirements number 3, the language “Major” has been deleted.

Section 2.1. Factor 2 Past Performance, Basis of Evaluation b, the language has been changed from three (3) years to seven (7) years.

To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past seven (7) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation.

Section (c ) (1) the reference to the Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Table 3” has been deleted. The language has been revised as shown:

(1) There are four levels of relevancy, the more relevant past performance is a stronger predictor of future success and will have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance.

RFI- Request for information Questions and VA Responses

1. Question: In reference to Solicitation number 36C10F19R0065. The solicitation is noted on the USACE website for Northwest region; however, places of performance is noted as nationwide on the pre-solicitation notice. Can you please clarify the region the work will take place?

Response: Specified place of performance to be determined at the task order level.

2. Question: Is there an incumbent performing these services? who is the incumbent?

Response: There is no incumbent.

3. Question: Who is considered key personnel? A related question: we need to know who is considered key personnel in order to furnish the appropriate number of resumes.

Response: Personnel listed in Attachment A, Professional Disciplines.

4. Question: Can a SDVOSB firm be both an Offeror and a subconsultant on another Offeror’s team.

Response: No.

5. Question: Under 1.2.4 the IDIQ scope is described under Task 1 (Pre-design) and Task 2 (Construction Period Services). Under Evaluation Subfactor 3 experience related to Task 1 would not be evaluated. Will CFM consider Offeror’s experience related to Task 1 as meeting the requirements of Subfactor 3.

Response: The government will evaluate the offeror’s experience in performing relevant CM services as defined in the solicitation requirement

6. RFI Question: Are Offeror’s allowed to submit multiple resumes for each key position.

Response: Yes, provided page limits are not exceeded.

7. RFI Question: Will the majority of work performed under Task 2 of this contract require the Offeror’s personnel to be physically located at a construction site.

Response: This is task order dependent. Typically, the majority of work will be physically on-site.

8. RFI Question: With regards to Subfactor 3: Relevant Experience, can the Proposer’s project experience exceed $4M and $15M in construction value? Or would you like the Proposer to keep to project experience to the $4M-$15M range? Also, can you please confirm what the average construction value will be for the projects procured under this contract?

Response: Projects do not have to be immediately within this range but should be of similar magnitude. As an IDIQ, no average construction value can be provided at this time.

9. Question: We are interested in learning more about the above subject opportunity so we can submit our proposal. Can you provide further information on the above solicitation?

Response: All information referencing the subject contracting opportunity can be found on beta.sam.gov. Please see web link.

https://beta.sam.gov/opp/e77a382722ce4745aa5e51306b6de4ea/view?keywords=%22CM%20 Services%22&sort=-relevance&index=opp&is_active=true&page=1

10. Question: Will there be any limitations to Task Order periods of Performance beyond the IDIQ Period of Performance? As an example, can VA award a Task Order with a Period of Performance including (1) 12-month base period and (4) 12 month- Options Periods in Option 4 of the IDIQ?

Response: The VA will not issue Task Orders beyond the IDIQ Period of Performance.

11. Question: Please confirm that the Government will consider experience and past performance of the Offeror for both the Protégé and Mentor for SBA approved Mentor Protégé Joint Ventures under the ASMPP, in accordance with small business rules.

Response: All of the Federal Government have to abide by the terms of the ASMPP. VA has additional stipulations if doing a set-aside to have firms in VIP.

12. Question: The Solicitation states: “Each potential task order will utilize the source selection process and source selection criteria outlined in the RFP package”. Will there be no variance at the TO level for unique, project-specific requirements? All TOs will match source selection process and criteria stated within the IDIQ solicitation? As unique projects will require considerations for source selection criteria, this grossly limits VA users at the TO-level from defining the most applicable criteria. Will the Government please validate?

Response: There will be slight variances at the task order level.

13. Question: Please confirm VA will provide the required TRIRIGA training?

Response: Confirmed.

14. Question: Section 4.0 provides a list of anticipated disciplines to support the SOW;

however, VA states this list "is not meant to limit other professional duties required to complete any task order requirements" and that "coordination between the VA and CM contractor shall take place to solidify roles and responsibilities". Does this mean that at the Task Order level https://beta.sam.gov/opp/e77a382722ce4745aa5e51306b6de4ea/view?keywords=%22CM%20Services%22&sort=-relevance&index=opp&is_active=true&page=1 https://beta.sam.gov/opp/e77a382722ce4745aa5e51306b6de4ea/view?keywords=%22CM%20Services%22&sort=-relevance&index=opp&is_active=true&page=1 additional LCATs and labor rates may be established outside of the IDIQ LCATs and ceiling labor rates? Or will additional LCATs and rates identif ied at the Task Order level be incorporated via modification into the IDIQ? Please clarify.

Response: Yes, additional labor categories maybe required at the Task Order level.

15. Question: Because of the importance of timeliness in Offerors receiving answers to questions, will VA consider combining/answering questions and publishing on beta.SAM as soon as an adequate number of questions are answered? Having critical questions answered as quickly as possible will minimize the need for a submission extension.

Response: All responses to questions will be published in an amendment posted on bate.sam.gov. in a timely manner.

16. Question: Section 1.3 states that the Offeror must identify the major critical aspects of the requirement to be performed by those identified in the Contractor Team Arrangement (any company other than the Offeror). As this solicitation is for an IDIQ, project or task-specific requirements that a subcontractor member may perform may not yet be defined. How can an Offeror meet this requirement when scope requirements at the IDIQ level are general in nature?

Response: Firm could describe teaming arrangements, anticipated sub-contracts by disciplines, org charts, etc.

17. Question: Pg. 21 states that "Information about subcontractors may not be given much weight unless the proposal contains evidence that the subcontractor is committed to perform the work." Please confirm that if a subcontractor is on more than one Team their experience/past performance would be excluded from consideration as that subcontractor cannot adequately "commit" to performing the same work to multiple Offerors. .

Response: The past performance would be excluded.

18. Question: The basis of evaluation states that the Government will evaluate the Offeror's Key Personnel. Is the Government seeking resumes for all 14 LCATs in Attachment A? Has VA considered that it may not be reasonable to require a resume for each IDIQ LCAT listed in Attachment A as there is no projection as to when these personnel would be needed, for what specific project/TO support requirements, or in what geographic region. Key Personnel will be specific to the individual Task Order. Evaluating Offerors on proposed Key Personnel now is artif icial a as they would not necessarily be the personnel supporting any number of projects and awardees would not be required to place them on a particular task order.

Response: This has been considered and determined to be a needed requirement for this selection/evaluation process.

19. Question: Please confirm that the following will be excluded from, and not considered within, the page limitations for Volume I: cover page, cover letter, table of contents, Key Personnel resumes and project reference material listed in position descriptions, and Key Personnel letters of commitment.

Response: Confirmed, the cover page, cover letter and table of contents will not be included in the page limitations. Letters of commitment are no longer required at this level.

20. Question: Please confirm that the following will be excluded from, and not considered within, the page limitations for each volume: cover page, cover letter, table of contents.

Response: Confirmed, the cover page, cover letter and table of contents will not be included in the page limitations.

21. Question: Please confirm that Key Personnel resumes will be excluded from the Volume I page count. Considering the potential volume of resumes required, this would consist of a large component of the entire Technical Volume, especially when paired with letters of commitment.

Response: Key Personnel resumes are not excluded from volume I. Letters of commitment are no longer required at this level.

22. Question: Please confirm that for Volume III, the Offeror's Reps & Certs are excluded from the 20-page limitation given the length of that SAM.gov extraction.

Response: Confirmed, the Offeror's Reps & Certs are excluded from the 20-page limitation.

23. Question: Solicitation states "page limitations for responding to the evaluation factors and subfactors are stated within the individual evaluation factor or subfactor"; however, these limitations are not listed - the Solicitation only lists the page limitations per Volume. Please define any specific page limitations for each factor/subfactor.

Response: The page limitations for volume I has been changed from 40 to a maximum of 65.

The The limitations for each factor/subfactor are up to the discretion of the offeror. It is anticipated that no more than 100 pages is necessary for the entire package.

24. Question: The submission requirements state that to be relevant experience projects must be "completed construction projects". As this IDIQ is for Construction Management (CM) services and not Construction, limiting CM support in this fashion unnecessarily restricts competition. There are several VA major construction projects that extend beyond a 7-year construction period and are under active construction. As a CM contractor, this ongoing, multi-year experience is highly relevant. We request that VA consider CM support on ongoing construction projects if they meet the other Relevant Experience criteria.

Response: Active relevant projects will be considered.

25. Question: The submission requirements state that to be relevant experience projects must be "completed construction projects". This is in conflict with Section 2.1.b.(b) where under Factor 2: Past Performance, which is tied to (3) of the Offeror's Experience projects, the "recency" assessment states that "to be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past three (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. As ongoing CM services projects may be highly relevant, request that VA amend the Subfactor 3 criteria to allow for ongoing construction projects.

Response: Active relevant projects will be considered.

26. Question: The submission requirements state that to be relevant experience projects be within the last seven (7) years. This is in conflict with Section 2.1.b.(b) where under Factor 2:

Past Performance, which is tied to (3) of the Offeror's Experience projects, the "recency" assessment states that "to be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past three (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Request the Government please deconflict. VA requests that Offerors provide Major Subcontractors and points of contact. How does VA define a Major Subcontractor in this capacity?

Response: Recency will be considered within the last seven (7) years. The word "major" has been removed.

27. Question: Solicitation states that VA has defined four levels of relevancy as shown in the Past Performance Relevancy Rating Table 3. Table 3 is not provided - please reconcile.

Response: Page 28 section (c ), Item (1) the language has been revised.

28. Question: VA states the basis of evaluation for Factor 2 is review of PPQs for no less than three (3) projects submitted under Factor 1, Subfactor 3 and information from other sources to measure the likelihood of success. As PPQs will be submitted to VA directly from the Offeror's references, what information does VA require in Volume II (maximum of 12 pages), as each Past Performance reference will be tied to information provided in the Offeror's response to Factor 1, Subfactor 3.

Response: Firm could describe CPARS ratings, evaluations from other similar projects, etc.

29. Question: The solicitation states: "Should a contract be issued to the Offeror, the proposed labor rates provided on this Pricing Worksheet shall become the maximum rate allowable for that labor category when pricing Task Orders issued against the resultant contract"; however, on Page 25, the government states: profit will be negotiated at the task order level". Additionally, the instructions on Attachment C state that the offeror's fully burdened hourly rates shall include "all applicable direct and indirect costs such as overhead, general and administrative, and profit.

If the IDIQ is to establish firm-fixed price ceiling labor rates, this should include profit (as stated in the Attachment C directions) at the IDIQ contract rates, not to be negotiated at the Task Order level to include profit. Recommend replacing "overhead" in the pricing tables with "Indirect Rate", which will include fringe, overhead, G&A, and profit to establish fully burdened rates.

Response: Offerors pricing shall provide fully burdened rates excluding profit.

30. Question: Evaluation section 3.1 Please confirm that the tabs identif ied in the table refer to the tabs in the excel f ile of Attachment C. If so, does VA want the Offeror's Reps & Certs pasted into excel? To ensure compliance, how will VA determine page count across the excel document and the .pdf, if VA desires certain information in the excel document?

Response: No, VA does not require the Reps & Certs to be pasted into the excel document.

31. Question: Evaluation section 3.1 states that the information in the Pricing Worksheets of Attachment C shall be incorporated into the Pricing Schedule of Section B.2 Please provide clarif ication as to whether the offeror shall complete Section B.2 and submit it as part of its proposal in Attachment C or otherwise.

Response: Yes, please submit Section B.2 along with Attachment C.

32 Question: If defined by the solicitation (Attachment A), recommend not requiring Key Personnel resumes at this stage (IDIQ) for personnel that may not be provided to support at a Task Order level. Proposed Key Personnel are based on unique project requirements and geographic location, among other things. Please confirm that substitution of Key Personnel requirement only applies at the Task Order level. Key Personnel proposed at IDIQ are not proposed/tailored to a specific requirement/location.

Response: This has been considered and determined to be a needed requirement for this selection/evaluation process.

33. RFI Question: The requirement states that the individual must have a minimum of 6 years' experience in both design and construction with a focus on medical facilities. Request that VA state the focus on medical facilities as a preference as depending on the geographic location, this minimum requirement may be overly limiting.

Response: This has been considered and determined to be a needed requirement for this selection/evaluation process.

34. Question: The distinguishing difference between the Senior and Staff Architect is that the Senior Architect be a licensed profession, but both only require a minimum of 6 years' experience. Request that VA consider removing the minimum requirement for a license and instead state it as a preference and increase the Senior Architect's minimum experience to 10 years. Maintaining this requirement would result in many current incumbent staff not meeting this requirement and being ineligible for consideration.

Response: The Licensure for the Senior Architect/Engineer remains a requirement. The licensure for staff architects/engineers will be considered preferable, but not required.

35. Question: VA requires specialization requirements for education for most key personnel LCATs. Request that VA state this as a preference or allow for experience substitution. There are many expert CMs/engineers, include those currently supporting VA, that may have a general degree (without specialization at that time); however, all their operational experience may be within that discipline. This requirement would be overly restrictive and eliminate desirable personnel from consideration.

Response: This has been considered and determined to be a needed requirement for this selection/evaluation process.

36. Question: Attachment A lists the acronym as CM-A and Attachment C lists the acronym as CM-SA. Please reconcile for consistency.

Response: Attachment A number 2 should read Staff Architect (CM-SA) Qualif ications.

37. Question: Attachment A requires (as a substitution) a bachelor’s degree in safety and health and three (3) years' construction industry safety program management experience. Many safety and health professionals have ample and specialized experience but do not have a specialty/focus in their bachelor's degree (health and safety). Request that VA consider requiring a bachelor's degree, but without the specialty and increasing the minimum experience to five (5) years for the substitution.

Response: This has been considered and determined to be a needed requirement for this selection/evaluation process.

38. Question: Requirement states that CM-IEM must have requisite federal, state, and local environmental qualif ications; however, there is not a geographic requirement at the IDIQ level.

Please confirm this requirement will be specific to the task order level.

Response: This has been considered and determined to be a needed requirement for this selection/evaluation process.

39. Question: Request that VA replace the professional license requirements for Architect/Engineers and state this as a preference. This is overly restrictive as a minimum requirement, especially in certain geographic areas. As this is a nationwide IDIQ, we want to ensure the broadest flexibility to support at the task order level. As an example, we currently have several highly skilled engineers and architects currently supporting VA on CM efforts for major construction and none of those VA position descriptions require a professional license -this requirement would significantly limit exceptional staff on recompeting existing contracts.

Response: See the response in number 34.

40. Question: Requirement states that the Offeror shall present three projects of the scale and diff iculty at which the estimator held a similar position and a sample of work equivalent to this project. Please confirm this would be presented at the Task Order level, once a project scope has been defined and that there is no requirement to provide this in response to the IDIQ.

Response: Projects do not have to be immediately within this IDIQ-level range but should be of similar magnitude.

41. Question: Requirement states that CM-SCH shall possess a current professional credentialing; however, VA does not define which credentialing meets this requirement. As this requirement may be overly restrictive in some geographic areas, request that VA consider an additional experience substitution for the professional credentialing as this is not as common within the scheduling discipline.

Response: This has been considered and determined to be a needed requirement for this selection/evaluation process.

42. Question: Is delivery of Construction services on Architecture and Engineering projects considered to be relevant experience for the purpose of responding to this PPQ?

Response: No.

43. Question: In each period of performance, the Government has established a baseline of 2080 hours, which does not account for the typical (10) Federal Holidays, and PTO.

Establishing pricing ceiling rates with an assumed fully burdened revenue for 2080 annual hours is likely not realistic with what will be priced/considered at the task order level (e.g. 1920 hours).

For parity in pricing, recommend VA change estimated hours to 1920 for all periods of performance.

Response: The baseline will be changed from 2080 annual hours to 1920 annual hours.

44. Question: The Pricing Volume has a max of 20 pages. Please confirm our understanding that the pages of Attachment C (both excel and pdf files) are excluded from the page limit.

Response: No, Attachment C is not excluded.

45. Question: We desire to submit proposal for IDIQ below. We need to estimate when the due date will be. If you know are you able to tell me?

Response: The closing date has been extended to 25 August 2020.

46. Question: 1.1.4 Subfactor 3 – It states that the experiences must be similar size, scope, complexity, and magnitude to project value ranging from $4m to $15m. Please confirm that value range correct.

Response: Projects do not have to be immediately within this range but should be of similar magnitude. As an IDIQ, no average construction value can be provided at this time.

47. Question: Pricing sheets ask for direct rate, overhead numbers. The VA usually requires one all-inclusive bill rate. Please advise if the final billable rate is all that needs to be submitted.

Response: Yes, along with Attachment C and Section B.2.

48. Question: It states that there may be up to 10 awards. Is that 10 awards per task order or 10 single awards?

Response: The Government intends to make multiple awards up to a maximum of ten (10) IDIQ contract awards.

49. Question: We are submitting bill rates for this effort. Will each task order have to be rebid?

And will we have to adjust rates for individual task orders?

Response: Yes, each task order will be individually priced. Rates will be based on the offeror's labor rates for the base and four option periods.

50. Question: With questions due July 22nd, can the August 10th deadline be extended by another 1-2 weeks, so proposers have enough time to accurately formulate a response based on the answers provided by the VA?

Response: The closing date has been extended to 25 August 2020.

51. Question: Can the VA please provide a job description and the position requirements for each staff position listed in the cost/schedule rate table?

Response: Please see Attachment A Professional Disciplines Qualif ications document.

52. Question: Will award of this IDIQ preclude the contractor from bidding or conducting work under other AE, Due Diligence, and/or Broker contracts, if the contractor is not conducting VA CMS services and non-CMS services at the same location?

Response: Yes.

53. Question: Is there an incumbent?

Response: See response to question number 2.

54. Question: With regards to Subfactor 3: Relevant Experience below, does the Proposer’s project experience have to be from the Prime or can the Prime use subconsultant experience to fulf ill the requirement?

Response: Yes.

55. Question: Paragraph 1.11 of Section B.3 Statement of Work states travel outside of assigned project location is not anticipated or will be limited. At times when travel is required, does the Government intend to include a travel CLIN with a not-to-exceed (NTE) amount in the task order?

Response: Yes, the Government will include a not-to-exceed (NTE) amount in the task order.

All Travel will be in accordance to applicable VA and other Government Travel Regulations.

56. Question: Paragraph 1.18 of Section B.3. Statement of Work states the CM Contractor shall work with the construction contractor to establish and maintain a Quality Control Program Plan. Has the construction contractor been determined? If so, please provide the name of this contractor. If not, when will the contract for the construction contractor be awarded and the awardee be made known to the CM services IDIQ holders?

Response: This is task order dependent. Task orders are issued as they are needed on an Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity basis.

57. Question: Paragraph 5.1 of Section B.3 Statement of Work states the CM Contractor may also be called upon to help negotiate disagreements between the construction contractor and the Government, or to provide support to the Government in defending a position on an issue affecting construction quality, time, or cost. This requirement is a “closely associated with inherently governmental function” in accordance with 10 U.S. Code 2383 and normally accomplished by the COR and/or Contracting Officer. Will this requirement be removed from the Statement of Work? If not, how will the potential conflict of one vendor negotiating against another vendor on behalf of the Government be mitigated to ensure either vendor’s contractor performance assessment is not adversely affected due to the result of the negotiation?

Response: CM contractors will assist Government personnel. They will not be performing any inherently governmental responsibilities.

58. Question: Is this a first-time requirement or are there incumbents for this contract? If there are incumbents, please provide the names of these vendors. Is this a first-time requirement or are there incumbents for this contract? If there are incumbents, please provide the names of these vendors.

Response: Please see the response to question number 2.

59. Question: Paragraph 1.1.4 Subfactor 3 Relevant Experience of the Instruction to Offerors Section states THREE (3) and a maximum of FIVE (5) completed construction projects within the last seven (7) years demonstrating Construction Management Support Services. The experiences must be of similar size, scope, complexity and magnitude to project value ranging between $4M and $15M over a minimum of a twelve (12) month period with complete interaction. At least one of the projects must be related to healthcare facilities. The healthcare facilities requirement is unduly restrictive. In comparison to the solicitation notice this relevant experience requirement does not serve as a clear connection between the agency’s needs and the limitations imposed. Will the Government consider removing and/or revising the restrictive requirement?

Response: This has been considered and determined to be a needed requirement for this selection/evaluation process.

60. Question: Will the Government consider a proposal due date extension to provide adequate time for Q&A/Clarif ication response review?

Response: The closing date has been extended to 25 August 2020.

61. Question: Will the Government consider the removal and/or reduction of Key Personnel identif ied in Attachment A? This requirement is restrictive at the IDIQ level as the individual Task Order requirements including locations are not defined.

Response: The scope of work at the task order level will determine the required Key Personnel and place of performance.

62. Question: 3.1 Factor 3: Price includes the requirement for a Price Proposal Binder Submission. Will the Government amend the solicitation to remove this requirement to maintain consistency with the electronic proposal submission instructions?

Response: All proposal submissions are to be electronically submitted by email to the contracting Officer.

63. Question: If we have a project that is applicable but exceeds the $5-14 million value, would it be acceptable to use this project under relevant experience?

Response: Projects do not have to be immediately within this IDIQ-level range but should be of similar magnitude.

64. Question: Do tabs and covers count in the maximum page count? (Volume I – 40 pages, Volume II – 12 pages, Volume III – 20 pages)?

Response: No.

65. Question: 1.1.4. states to submit 3-5 projects completed within the last 7 years. However, under 2.1 past performance, it states “to be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been completed during the past 3 years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated.”

Response: Recency will be considered within the last seven (7) years.

66. Question: Section 2.2 states that the offerors will be required to submit a proposal by email to the contracting officer(s). But Factor 3: Price states that the Price Proposal should be submitted in one original and two copies. Please clarify these requirements.

Response: Offerors shall electronically submit one (1) proposal package by email to the contracting Officer.

67. Question: Please confirm our fully burdened rates for the Price/Rate Schedule should not include profit and we are only to include direct labor and overhead rate for the requested fully burdened rate. Per the solicitation, profit will be added/negotiated at the individual task order level.

Response: Confirmed, profit will be negotiated at the individual task order level.

68. Question: Please confirm this is the offeror’s project/contract value and not that of the construction value. If so, can you confirm that this could include a compilation of Task Order values under an IDIQ/BPA contract that had multiple task orders?

Response: Both statements are confirmed.

69. Question: If an Offeror has a single project with outside of an IDIQ of this value, would it be deemed more relevant and provide a greater level of confidence than a combination of Task Order values?

Response: : Projects do not have to be immediately within this IDIQ-level range but should be of similar magnitude.

70. Question: Page 13, Task 2 VII details commissioning oversight requirements. Should teams present a Commissioning Agent (CXa) to fulf ill this service?

Response: Not at this time.

71. Question: Statement of Work item 1.2.1 (page 10) states “No design services may be contracted for or performed under this contract.” Please confirm that no drawings or other engineering activities requiring the official engineering/architecture approval of Contractor’s personnel will be required or permitted under this contract.

Response: Confirmed.

72. Question: Regarding the roles and responsibilities of the Construction Safety and Health Professional (CM-CSHT), please confirm if this individual will be responsible for direct execution of day-to-day safety monitoring and GC compliance checks, or instead will they only oversee quality assurance plans and practices of other safety professionals?

Response: This is task order dependent. Some of both scenarios may be required.

73. Question: Volume I-Technical Proposal, Submission Requirements; : Given the 40-page limit for Volume I, will the VA permit inclusion of CVs and/or Letters of Commitment in a separate appendix? Or, alternatively, will the VA consider a page limit increase?

Response: The page limitations for volume I has been changed from 40 to a maximum of 65.

It is anticipated that no more than 100 pages is necessary for the entire proposal package. The Letters of Commitment are no longer required at this level.

74. Question: Volume- Past Performance, Submission Requirements; As Past Performance questionnaires (PPQ) are to be submitted to the VA directly (per “2.1. Factor 2: Past Performance, Page 27), please advise what contents are expected within Volume II – Past Performance.

Response: Offeror’s submission for Volume II has been deleted. Past Performance information is obtained from PPQs and sources other than those provided by the Offeror.

75. Question: Cost/Price Rate(s) Schedule: Given the nationwide nature of this contract, can we submit rate schedules for respective geographic regions?

Response: Pricing submission is at the offeror’s discretion. Awards will not be made region bases.

76. Question: Based on the years of experience required in the SOW, many of the rate categories fit into Junior or Professional level staff. Is there intent on using Senior level staff for this contract outside of the Senior Architect, Claims Analyst II and Claims Analyst II? If so, can we add a rate category for them?

Response: No.

77. Question: Given the uncertain timeframe of when answers to questions will be provided, will the VA consider a due date extension to allow for proper consideration of the answers?

Response: Please see the response in question number # 45.

78. Question: Considering the breadth of potential future opportunities/scopes during the IDIQ's 5-year period of performance, has the VA considered establishing one or multiple "Project Manager" LCATs to help support CFM programmatic initiatives and other support areas that may fall outside the narrow scope of the currently defined LCATs? This will maximize CFM's future flexibility. It is recommended that a Project Manager position be added to the list of disciplines, Attachment A, and Pricing Worksheet.

Response: This has been considered and determined not to be a needed requirement for this selection/evaluation process.

79. Question: Section 1.4 states that if applicable, the Offeror must submit evidence from the SBA's Servicing Agency that the Offeror notified the SBA of the Joint Venture's intent for this project. The SBA, under its All-Small Mentor Protege Program (ASMPP) does not require, nor does the SBA want notif ication of a Joint Venture formation or that a Joint Venture is pursuing a specific opportunity, until a Joint Venture is awarded a contract. Once a Joint Venture receives an award, it then sends the SBA a Certif ication of Compliance; however, this is not sent prior to award. Per the SBA, it will it provide evidence of receiving this information prior to a Joint Venture receiving an award. Please confirm the VA's requirement is for awardees to provide the Contracting Officer this evidence after award. If VA requires evidence in an Offeror's proposal response, please define what this evidence is and please confirm which volume this evidence should be submitted and if it is excluded from the page limitations.

Response: These documents would be needed to be counted in the VIP, so the answer is once verif ied the Contracting Officer accepts the firm as a small business.

80. Question: Relevant experience is defined as project value ranging between $4M and $15M.

Please confirm that this value is the Offeror's CM contract value and not construction value of the projects supported.

Response: Confirmed.

81. Question: Would you consider not including in the page count the Letters of Commitment for each person we provide a resume for?

Response: Letters of Commitment are no longer required at this level in the submission.

82. Question: For Volume I, please confirm that the 40-page requirements include CV’s/Letter of Commitment. Also, please advise what the Letter of Commitment should be compromised of?

Response: The page limitations for volume I has been changed from 40 to a maximum of 65. It is anticipated that no more than 100 pages is necessary for the entire proposal package. The Letters of Commitment are no longer required at this level.

83. Question: Volume II Past Performance, in addition to the Past Performance Questionnaires (which I understand are sent directly to VA) can you please provide direction as to criteria we should use to respond to Evaluation Factor 11 per the following: Volume II shall be the Past Performance and shall include the offeror’s responses to Evaluation Factor II. (maximum 12 pages)?

Response: Offeror’s submission for Volume II has been deleted. Past Performance information is obtained from PPQs and sources other than those provided by the Offeror.

84. Question: Appendix A , Senior Architect/Engineer, it states that the CM-SA/E "shall be a licensed professional and hold a Bachelor of Architecture..." However, an Engineer would not have a degree in Architecture. Can the CM-SA/E position be filled by an Engineer, or does it have to be an Architect?

Response: Either license is acceptable.

85. Question: On page 27 of this solicitation it states to provide the following information:

Project Prime Contractor and Major Subcontractors and name and telephone number of contact person(s). Does this statement intend for information on the construction project's prime general contractor, or the prime contractor of the construction management contract? For older projects these POCs may no longer be available.

Response: Construction Management.

86. Question: Appendix A Paragraph 8, Estimator: states" Scheduler shall present three projects of the scale and diff iculty at which he/she held a similar position. A sample of work equivalent to this project shall also be presented for review prepared by the SCH".

1. Should this say Estimator Instead of Scheduler?

2. Is a Sample Estimate (or Schedule) to be provided as part of the Proposal?

3. Will it count towards page limits?

Response: Appendix A paragraph 8, Estimator, 4th bullet should read "Estimator" rather than "Scheduler" or "SCH". Sample estimate is required which will not count against page count.

87. Question: In the solicitation para 4.3.2, it states that "The Non-Architectural/Engineering Positions including the Construction Administrators, Estimators, Schedulers and Safety/Environmental professionals may substitute extensive construction experience and other credentials for consideration. Expertise in the requested discipline must be evidenced by extensive experience and qualif ications." However, in Appendix A Para 8 & 11, it states that the Estimator and Scheduler must hold respective professional credentialing.

1.Is this to be understood that significant experience can be used in place of the professional credentialing for the Estimator and Scheduler?

Response: Experience may substitute extensive construction experience and other credentials for consideration.

88. Question: Can CPARS be provided in lieu of PPQs?

Response: No.

89. Question: Attachment C Pricing Worksheet states (emphasis added) “Fully burdened includes all applicable direct and indirect costs such as overhead, general and administrative, and profit…”. The RFP Page 25 states under 1. Evaluation Factors states “Profit will be negotiated at the individual task order level.” Please clarify if proposed rates are to be fully burdened including profit or not. If proposed rates should be fully burdened with profit, should Attachment C be modified to reflect that?

Response: Proposed rated should be fully burdened excluding profit. Profit is to be negotiated at the task order level.

90. Question: Paragraph 1.19.1 states "CM Contractor Supervisor shall provide time sheet information on employees within 24 hours of end of pay period.” Please explain why this is necessary. Is the intent to issue Time and Materials task orders? Timesheets in a private firm are reviewed and approved by that firm’s management, not the Government, and in a Firm Fixed Price contract the firm invoices based on accepted deliverables required in the contract documents, not hours.

Response: Information should be made available upon request for labor compliance reviews and audits.

91. Question: The RFP requires Volume II (Past Performance) to be limited to 12 pages and submitted by the offeror to the VA, however further instructions dictate the PPQs to be submitted by the owner’s representatives directly to the Contracting Officer. Please confirm that the offeror is only responsible for requesting PPQs from the owner’s representatives and not submitting Volume II to the Contracting Officer ourselves.

Response: Offeror are responsible for requesting PPQs from the owner’s representatives which are to be submitted directly to the Contracting Officer.

92. Question: Please consider removing the 12-page limit for Volume II as the required format of 6 pages per PPQ times a minimum of 3 PPQs is at least 18 pages long, and even longer if 5 PPQs are allowed.

Response: The page limitations has been changed. It is anticipated that no more than 100 pages is necessary for the submittal package.

93. Question: Are interim or final CPARs submitted by the offeror acceptable in lieu of the PPQ requirement for Volume II?

Response: No.

94. Question: Please clarify if the Title Page and Table of Contents count against the total page limitations for each Volume.

Response: Please see response to question number 20.

95. Question: Is Volume III the correct volume to include the Statement of Compliance?

Response: Offerors are required to complete the statement and submit it with their technical proposal.

96. Question: Please consider increasing consider increasing the page limitation for Volume I as there are insufficient pages allowed for a detailed management approach, 14 resumes, 14 letters of commitment, and 5 projects that contain all details required in the RFP.

Response: The page limitations for volume I has been changed from 40 to a maximum of 65. It is anticipated that no more than 100 pages is necessary.

97. Question: Please clarify the requirements for Letters of Commitment to accompany the Curriculum Vitae (CV). Are you requesting a letter of commitment from each proposed Key Personnel? If so, what are they committing to? This is a 5-year nationwide IDIQ where the location, nature, and duration of requirements are unknown. Please consider removing this requirement or replacing it with a letter of commitment from the firms comprising the proposed team. If required, , please consider making all letters of commitment an appendix that does not count against the page limitations for Volume I.

Response: The letters of commitment are no longer required at this level.

98. Question: What specifically is considered sufficient evidence that a proposed subcontractor “is committed to perform the work” as required in paragraph 1.5? Typically, inclusion of a subcontractor in a proposal with a defined role is evidence they are committed to being on our team. Does the Government require more evidence such as letters of commitment from the proposed subcontractor?

Response: The inclusion of a subcontractor in a proposal with a defined role is sufficient.

99. Question: 1.1.4 Subfactor 3 Relevant Experience requires projects with “similar size, scope, complexity and magnitude to project value ranging from range between $4M and $15M.” The most relevant VA CFM project experience we could include are Major Construction that by law exceed $20M each, with some projects exceeding $1B. Are relevant projects with construction value in excess of $15M allowed?

Response: Values are for Construction Management contracts.

100. Question: Paragraph 1.1.4 requires "The offeror demonstrates the number of CM support services contracts the contractor has completed as a prime and/or subcontractor.” Is information being requested on all contracts the offeror has performed as a prime or subcontractor in addition to the 3-5 project descriptions? If so, what information over how many years of history is required?

Response: Paragraph 1.1.4 asks for a "number" only. Include as many years of history as required to demonstrate firm's relevant experience.

101. Question: Will offers be considered non-responsive if owner’s representatives we request to complete PPQs fail to deliver PPQs to the Contracting Officer because they are too busy, retired, or non-responsive?

Response: Offeror should submit that which best meets the criteria published in the solicitation.

102. Question: Paragraphs 2.1 b (b) states “To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past three (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation.” Paragraph 1.1.4 a. states “The Offerors shall submit no less than THREE (3) and a maximum of FIVE (5) completed construction projects within the last seven (7) years demonstrating Construction Management Support Services.” Please clarify if the requirement is 3 or 7 years and if ongoing work is acceptable.

Response: Recency will be considered within the last seven (7) years.

103. Question: Paragraphs 2.1 B (c) 1 states “There are four levels of relevancy as shown in the Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Table 3.” Table 3 appears to have been omitted.

Please clarify.

Response: The language has been revised.

104. Question: What escalation factor would the VA prefer Proposers to include?

Response: It’s the Offeror’s discretions on the escalation.

105. Question: Does the VA know what percentage they will be using for this contract?

Response: To be determined by the number of requirements.

106. Question: Given this is an ID/IQ contract and there may be multiple tasks orders at one time, would you like us to submit multiple resumes for each Key Personnel?

Response: No.

107. Question: With a 40-page limit, it will be hard to respond to all the Factors in the Volume 1 if multiple resumes are desired. Would the VA consider omitting resumes from the 40-page count limit?

Response: See the response for question number 82.

108. Question: The RFP states that only one overhead rate should be supplied. However, our subconsultants have different overhead rates. Is it acceptable to use a blended overhead rate?

Response: Offeror should utilize a blended rate.

109. Question: Will there be a provision for travel? If so, how will it paid?

Response: All Travel will be in accordance to applicable VA and other Government Travel Regulations.

110. Question: Is the primary work location in the mid-Atlantic region?

Response: The…