Attachment_4 Section_M Evaluation_Criteria_20261104.docx

36C10F27R0003 Attachment 4

SECTION M

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

for DESIGN-BUILD & CONSTRUCTION (DBnC) for

VETERANS AFFAIRS HEALTHCARE ENTERPRISE

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 Basis of Contract Award. This is a best value source selection conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.2 as supplemented. In this procurement, the Government will select the highest technically rated proposals with fair and reasonable pricing Although this source selection includes an integrated assessment, the Government will not consider tradeoffs between cost or price and non-cost or non-price factors, and that the highest technically rated proposals will be selected for award if it offers a fair and reasonable price.

1.1.1 The Government will only award a contract to an Offeror who is determined responsible in accordance with FAR 9.104-1 and whose proposal conforms to the solicitation’s requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by this solicitation).

1.1.2 The Government will evaluate Relevant Experience, Past Performance, and Small Business Participation (Unrestricted Only) to identify the highest technically rated Offerors. The Government will then evaluate pricing to determine whether proposed prices are fair and reasonable. Award will be made to the highest technically rated Offerors with fair and reasonable pricing. For the Unrestricted portion of the solicitation, other-than-small-business Offerors must also submit an acceptable Small Business Subcontracting Plan..

If an Offeror receives an award under both the SDVOSB set-aside and the Unrestricted, the Government reserves the right to award additional contracts under each to ensure maximum competition.

1.1.3 The Source Selection Authority (SSA) will base the source selection decision on an integrated assessment of all source selection evaluation criteria in this Section M (described below). While the Government source selection evaluation team and the SSA will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature, is subjective; therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process.

1.2 Number of Contracts to be Awarded. To establish the Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC), the Government contemplates the following:

1.2.1 Service-Disabled Veterans Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) Pools –The Government intends to make award to the ten (10) highest technically rated offerors with complete, balanced and reasonable pricing for each pool. In addition, the Government intends to award to one (1) SDVOSB firm with the Woman Owned Small Business (WOSB) designation, and to one (1) SDVOSB firm with the Historical Underutilized Small Business Zone (HUBZone) designation.

1.2.1.1 If all SDVOSB WOSB proposals and all SDVOSB HUBZone proposals fall outside of the top 10 highly technically rated proposals, the Government reserves the right to award to one additional firm that fulfills the SDVOSB WOSB designation and to one additional firm that fulfills the SDVOSB HUBZone designation to meet the reserves identified in 1.2.1.

1.2.1.2 If the SDVOSB WOSB and/or SDVOSB HUBZone proposals are determined un-awardable, no award will be made. If no SDVOSB WOSB and/or SDVOSB HUBZone proposals are awardable in the SDVOSB competition, the SDVOSB WOSB and/or SDVOSB HUBZone category will be unfulfilled. The Government will not solicit additional proposals to fill these categories.

1.2.1.3 The term “SDVOSB Awards” will be used hereafter to refer to the numbers and socio-economic categories of awards specified in paragraphs 1.2.1 and 1.2.1.1, 1.2.1.2.

1.2.2 National Full and Open (Unrestricted) Awards – The Government intends to make ten (10) awards to the firms comprising the highest technically rated proposals with fair and reasonable prices.

1.2.2.1 The term “Unrestricted Awards” will be used to describe the number and types of awards specified in paragraph 1.2.2.

1.2.3 Choice of Competition. The Government will review Appendix L-02, Choice of Competition, to validate how an individual contractor (to include teaming partners) has chosen to compete. If an individual contractor (to include teaming partners) competes more than three times under the SDVOSB Pools or more than once under the Unrestricted portion, the Government may reach out to clarify which proposal that individual contractor (to include teaming partners) wants the Government to consider. If the contractor does not respond within the designated time, they will be removed from the competition. All clarifications regarding competition will be communicated through the (prime) Offeror.

1.2.4 On Ramps. The Government reserves the right to utilize on-ramp and off-ramp procedures as described in Attachment 5, On/Off Ramping, and in accordance with applicable FAR 16.504-4 procedures. The Government may conduct on-ramp actions to award additional contracts during any ordering period, including exercised option ordering periods, to maintain adequate competition and meet mission requirements. Should the Government elect to conduct an on-ramp, the number of contracts awarded may exceed the number initially contemplated under this solicitation. The Government also reserves the right to utilize off-ramp procedures in accordance with Attachment 5 for contractors that no longer satisfy contract requirements, fail to maintain required qualifications, or otherwise meet the conditions identified in the contract's on/off-ramping procedures.

1.3 IDIQ Ceiling. The overall ceiling of the IDIQ is estimated at $7.5B for 5 years if all options are exercised (one-year base ordering period plus four one-year options). The total value of all task orders awarded under the IDIQ will not exceed this amount. Funding will be determined at the individual task order level.

1.4 Minimum Guaranteed Task Order. A Post-Award Conference task order will be awarded to each IDIQ awardee in the amount of $3,000.00 and will satisfy the minimum order requirement. A Contractor that is awarded an IDIQ contract is not guaranteed any task order beyond the Post-Award Conference. The Cost/Price of the Post-Award Conference will not be evaluated.

1.5 Proposals Substantiation. Unsubstantiated and/or misleading claims, for even a single Past Experience evaluation criterion, could result in the Government determining that the Offeror’s proposed self-score is disingenuous and/or artificially inflated and the proposal would be disqualified and not awardable.

1.6 Negotiations. The Government reserves the right to evaluate proposals and award the contracts without negotiations if the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) determines them not to be necessary. In the event negotiations are conducted, they will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.204 and will be limited to those Offerors determined to be a part of the competitive range.

2.0 PROPOSAL COMPLIANCE AND RESPONSIBILITY

2.1 Proposal Compliance. Offerors shall meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and other instructions identified within the solicitation. Offerors shall comply with content required within each of the proposal volumes and sections. Failure to comply with any requirement of the solicitation may result in the Offeror being non-responsive and ineligible for award.

The Government will review the proposal documentation to ensure all required documentation was provided in response to the solicitation. The Government will rely on the provided documentation to facilitate the PCO’s determination of Contractor responsiveness.

2.2 Responsibility. No award shall be made to an Offeror unless the PCO determines them to be responsible. To be determined responsible, an Offeror shall meet the general standards described in FAR 9.104-1.

2.2.1 Financial/Other Resources. Additionally, the Government will reach out to the Financial Institution identified in Appendix L-01, Offeror Company Information, to request a Banking Status Inquiry. The Banking Status Inquiry will not be evaluated as part of the technical and price proposal; however, its evaluation is required to determine contractor responsibility prior to award.

2.3 Construction Bonding. The Government will evaluate the information provided IAW Section L, paragraph 2.3.3.2., to determine whether an Offeror has the bonding capacity to perform under the SDVOSB Pools, if proposing under the SDVOSB Set Aside, or under the unrestricted, if proposing under the unrestricted. Offerors who cannot comply with the requirements set forth in Section L paragraph 2.3.4.3 will not be considered for award and will be removed from the competition.

2.4 Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI). Organizational Conflict of Interest issues are treated in a manner similar to responsibility determinations. An Offeror’s actual or potential OCI concerns must be avoided, mitigated, or neutralized before that Offeror may receive an award of this contract.

3.0 EVALUATION METHODOLOGY AND FACTORS

3.1 Evaluation Methodology. The Government will utilize the Highest technically rated with a fair and reasonable price approach. Under this methodology, the Government will evaluate proposals in accordance with the criteria established in this solicitation to identify the highest technically rated Offerors. Award will be made to the highest technically rated Offerors whose proposed prices are determined to be fair and reasonable. For purposes of this solicitation, Offerors shall complete the self-scoring requirements based on the objective criteria described in Section L, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents.

For each MATOC pool, the Government will rank all submitted Factor 1 self‑scores from highest to lowest. The Government will then validate the self‑scores beginning with the highest‑ranked Offerors and continue in descending order until a reasonable amount of awards are established to fulfill the SDVOSB pools and the Unrestricted pool (estimated at ten (10) IDIQs per pool, see 1.2 of this Section M ). If an Offeror’s self-score is downward adjusted because of Government validation, and the Offeror is no longer among the highest rated Offerors, then the Government will validate the next highest self-rated Offeror, until the SDVOSB awards and the Unrestricted awards are fulfilled with the highest Government-validated scores (see paragraph 4.0 of this Section M). The Government will evaluate for Past Performance Acceptability (see paragraph 5.0 of this Section M), Small Business Participation Acceptability (Unrestricted Only) (see paragraph 6.0 of this Section M), and Price reasonableness, completeness, and balance (see paragraph 7.0 of this Section M). If an offeror is found unacceptable in past performance or small business participation, or is found to have an unreasonable, incomplete or unbalanced price, the Government will validate the next highest self-rated Offeror and then evaluate that offeror for Past Performance Acceptability, Small Business Participation Acceptability, and Price reasonableness, completeness, and balance.

The Government, either without negotiations or after negotiations occur, will award basic contracts as follows:

In accordance with the number of awards in paragraph 1.2, the Government will evaluate the non-price factors identified in this solicitation, including Relevant Experience, Past Performance, and, where applicable, Small Business Participation, to determine the highest technically rated SDVOSB Offerors. The Government will then evaluate the prices of those highest technically rated proposals to determine whether the prices are complete, balanced, and reasonable. Award will be made to the highest technically rated SDVOSB Offerors whose prices are determined to be complete, balanced, and reasonable.

In accordance with the number of awards identified in paragraph 1.2, the Government will evaluate the non-price factors identified in this solicitation, including Relevant Experience, Past Performance, and Small Business Participation, to determine the highest technically rated Unrestricted Offerors. The Government will then evaluate the prices of those highest technically rated proposals to determine whether the prices are complete, balanced, and reasonable. Award will be made to the highest technically rated Unrestricted Offerors whose prices are determined to be complete, balanced, and reasonable.

3.2 Evaluation Factors. The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each proposal:

Factor 4: Price

3.3 Ties and Tie Breakers. Tie (definition): When more than one highest technically rated proposals have the same validated score. If ties exist within either the SDVOSB or the Unrestricted group at the planned maximum number of awards, the Government will award contracts to all of the tied highest technically rated proposals increasing the number of awards.

4.0 Factor 1 – Relevant Experience (Volume II).

4.1 Relevant Experience Evaluation. The Offerors proposals will be ranked based on initial self-scoring provided in Appendix L-05.

a. SDVOSB Set-Aside: Offeror’s self-scores will be validated using the work samples provided. The Government will review the section of the work sample that is listed within the Cross Reference Matrix (Appendix L-04) and any provided statement of facts. If the substantiating information cannot be found within the referenced page, paragraph, table, etc. the Government will not search for the substantiating information. If the Offeror’s score cannot be validated based on the work samples and Cross Reference Matrix, the Government will unilaterally downward adjust the score, potentially all the way down to zero (0) points. The Government will ONLY adjust the Offeror’s self-score downward, not upward. Adjustments are within the sole discretion of the Government.

b. Full & Open: Offeror’s self-scores will be validated using the work samples provided. The Government will review the section of the work sample that is listed within the Cross Reference Matrix (Appendix L-04) and any provided statement of facts. If the substantiating information cannot be found within the referenced page, paragraph, table, etc. the Government will not search for the substantiating information. If the Offeror’s score cannot be validated based on the work samples and Cross Reference Matrix, the Government will unilaterally downward adjust the score, potentially all the way down to zero (0) points. The Government will ONLY adjust the Offeror’s self-score downward, not upward. Adjustments are within the sole discretion of the Government.

5.0 Factor 2 – Past Performance (Volume II)

The Government will evaluate past performance on a strict Pass/Fail basis to assess the contractor’s historical record of operational success, quality of work, and performance trends. Offeror proposals will be initially reviewed and verified based on the qualitative adjectival ratings (e.g., Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, Unsatisfactory) recorded in the Appendix L-05 submission.

The Government will assign an evaluation rating based on the following criteria:

ACCEPTABLE (PASS): Based on the Offeror's performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort. This rating is achieved if the Offeror meets the qualitative standards defined in Section 2.6.2. An Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Such Offerors will not receive an adverse past performance assessment solely because relevant past performance information is unavailable..

UNACCEPTABLE (FAIL): The Government will assign a rating of Unacceptable if the collective past performance record reflects a consistent trend of Marginal or Unsatisfactory performance without sufficient evidence of successful corrective action, or if the record demonstrates a systemic failure to meet contract requirements. A rating of Unacceptable renders the proposal completely ineligible for award.

6.0 Factor 3 – Small Business Participation (Volume III)

This factor will be evaluated for all Offerors proposing for the Full & Open portion of this solicitation. Offerors are advised the proposed Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD) and Small Business Subcontracting Plans will become attachments to any award resulting from this solicitation.

6.1 Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD). All Offerors (to include other than Small Businesses and Small Businesses) competing for an Unrestricted award will be evaluated on the extent of proposed participation/commitment to the use of U.S. small businesses in the performance of this acquisition (as Small Business Prime Offerors or Small Business Subcontractors) relative to the objectives and requirements established herein. The Government will evaluate whether the Offeror’s SBPCD meets the following elements:

6.1.1 The Offeror’s SBPCD demonstrates that all firms as defined in FAR Part 19, are specifically identified.

6.1.2 The Offeror’s SBPCD demonstrates substantive commitment to small business firms by providing thorough and complete evidence of all binding commitments, such as, letters of commitment, Joint Ventures, mentor/protégé agreements, or other demonstrations of commitment (i.e., binding commitments will become enforceable/contractual requirements).

6.1.3 The Offeror’s SBPCD identifies the type and variety of the work small firms are to perform.

6.1.4 The Offeror’s SBPCD is consistent with the Small Business Subcontracting Plan, if applicable.

6.1.5. The Offeror’s SBPCD will be evaluated using the following ratings:

Small Business Participation Commitment Document Ratings

6.2 Small Business Subcontracting Plan. Only other than small business offerors shall provide a Small Business Subcontracting Plan IAW FAR 52.219-9 Alternate II, FAR 52.219-8 Utilization of Small Business Concerns, VAAR 852.219-70 Small Business Subcontracting Plan Minimum Requirements. The Small Business Subcontracting Plan will be assessed and must meet the FAR and VAAR requirements prior to award of a contract. If small business subcontract possibilities do not exist or are limited, the Offeror’s plan must state such and provide rationale supporting the assertion.

The following chart provides the statutory goals for small business subcontracting. Note that the small business dollars are calculated using the total awarded dollars, whereas the small business socioeconomic subcategories are calculated using the total awarded dollars to only small business.

Acceptable subcontracting plans will demonstrate that the Government’s goals are met or exceeded for the following:

· Summary of Base and all Option Periods (using $375,000,000.00)

· Subcontracting Plan for Base period (using $75,000,000.00)

· Individual subcontracting plans for each of the 4 one-year periods (using $75,000,000.00/year)

Small Business Subcontracting Plan Ratings

Unacceptable

Proposal does not meet all evaluation criteria listed in Section M, Paragraph 6.2.

7.0 Factor 4 – Price (Volume IV).

7.1 The Government will evaluate Price for completeness, balance, and reasonableness.

7.2 Fully Burdened Labor Rates. For evaluation purposes only, the Government will evaluate the proposed Fully Burdened Labor Rates in Appendix L-08 Labor Rates Table for reasonableness.

Unless the Government conducts negotiations Unless the Government conducts negotiations in accordance with Paragraph 1.6 of this Section M, the rates proposed by the Offeror will become contractually binding NTE FFP fully burdened labor rates upon contract award. If negotiations are conducted, any revised rates submitted by the Offeror and accepted by the Government will become the contractually binding NTE FFP fully burdened labor rates upon contract award.

The NTE FFP fully burdened labor rates shall constitute contract ceiling rates and represent the maximum rates that may be charged under the contract.

7.3 Evaluation of FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services. The solicitation and subsequent award for this acquisition contains the clause at FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services. This option to extend the contract term will be evaluated as part of the initial evaluation, whereby any resultant exercise of this option is within scope of the pending contract. The option provision may be exercised more than once, but the total extension of performance hereunder shall not exceed six (6) months. Offerors are required to price the base and all option CLINs. Offerors shall not submit additional rates for the potential six-month extension of services period. Instead, the rates from the last one-year option period will be utilized for the FAR 52.217-8 Option.

7.4 Completeness. The Government will evaluate the price proposals for compliance with Section L. The Offeror shall ensure they have provided all pricing information required by the solicitation. The Government will evaluate the completeness of the Offeror’s IDIQ Labor Rate Pricing. A $0.00 bid in a labor category, an omitted rate or other missing price information may result in the Government determining the price proposal to be incomplete.

If the Government determines a price proposal to be incomplete, the Government may not be able to further evaluate the proposal for reasonableness and balance and may not be able to make award to that Offeror.

7.5 Balance. Offerors are cautioned against submitting an unbalanced offer. The Government will analyze offers to determine whether they are unbalanced with respect to Price. Per FAR 52.215-1(f)(7), the Government may determine that a proposal is unacceptable if the Fully Burdened Labor Rates proposed are unbalanced. Unbalanced pricing exists when the price of one or more Fully Burdened Labor Rates is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. The Government may also consider an offer unbalanced if there is a significant difference between proposed Fully Burdened Labor Rates from year to year, including option years, such that they are above or below what would be considered a reasonable adjustment for inflation. A proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

7.6 Reasonableness. The Government will evaluate the proposed Fully Burdened Labor Rates for reasonableness using the techniques described in FAR 15.404. Generally, the Government may rely upon adequate price competition to establish a fair and reasonable price and may use adequate price competition as the basis for the fair and reasonable price determination, provided adequate price competition exists. For the Government to determine a Fully Burdened Labor Rate to be reasonable, the Fully Burdened Labor Rate must represent a price to the Government that does not exceed the price a prudent person would pay in the conduct of competitive business.