36C24220R0072-005.pdf

PROPOSAL EVALUATION/SELECTION CRITERIA

Two-Phase Design-Build Selection and Evaluation Procedures I. General Information for Proposal Evaluation/Selection Criteria:

A. This will be a two-phased evaluation process utilizing the TRADE OFF PROCESS. A tradeoff process is appropriate when it may be in the best interest of the Government to consider award to other than the lowest priced offeror or other than the highest technically rated Offeror. FAR 15.101-1

B. All evaluation factors, other than cost or price, when combined, will be considered approximately equal to cost or price. Evaluations are subjective based on the information provided in response to the information requested in the evaluation factors. Each evaluation factor, other than cost or price will be weighted approximately equal.

C. For Phase I: Proposals consisting of Phase 1 Criteria will be accepted from all SBA-verified Small

Business offerors. Phase I proposals will be evaluated to determine which offerors will submit proposals in Phase II. Phase II will require offerors to address how 15% of the cost of personnel for contract performance will be spent for employees of the concern or employees of other eligible small business concerns.

D. For Phase II: Only a maximum of the three most highly rated Phase I proposals will be invited to submit a Phase II Proposal consisting of Phase II Criteria.

E. Phase I and Phase II: The Contracting Officer, with the assistance of qualified Technical Evaluators, will evaluate Technical Sections of each proposal to determine the offeror’s ability to accomplish the work as set forth in this solicitation. Technical evaluations will be based solely on the evaluation factors and criteria detailed below in PHASE I and PHASE II Criteria Sections.

II. Award A. This procurement will be a single award on a Best Value basis resulting from this solicitation to the responsible Offeror, whose technical/cost relationship represents the best value to the Government.

Therefore, all offerors are advised that their best terms and conditions should be presented in their initial proposals and that offerors should not assume they will have an opportunity to participate in discussions or be asked to submit a revised offer. Each Contractor’s proposal shall address the evaluation factors as incorporated under the Proposal Criteria header in this solicitation. Failure to provide the information needed for each factor will result in the proposal being considered non-responsive.

B. Award of a conforming proposal may be made without discussions, except for minor clarifications, if deemed to be within the best interests of the Government. However, offerors are advised that discussions/negotiations may occur if deemed necessary.

C. The Government will award a firm fixed-price Design-Build contract to that responsible Offeror whose proposal, conforming to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable, and has been determined to be most advantageous to the Government, considering quality, price and other factors. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer. The Government reserves the right to make cost/technical tradeoffs that are in the best interest and to the advantage of the Government. The right is also reserved to reject any and all offers.

III. Proposal submittal:

A. Offers shall be based on this solicitation. Offers will be in the format stipulated elsewhere in this section.

B. All proposals must be labeled with the Offeror’s name, business address, and with the solicitation number clearly marked.

C. Carefully follow “Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors.” Offerors shall affix their names and return addresses in the upper left corner of the Offeror’s envelope. Envelopes containing offers must be sealed. Offerors shall include all required Representations and Certifications.

D. Failure to provide all information requested will adversely affect the evaluation of an offer. A proposal that merely reiterates or promises to accomplish the requirements of the solicitation will be considered less than fully acceptable. The information submitted should be complete and concise, but not overly elaborate. Reliance on promotional brochures, except where specifically required, is discouraged. If information is applicable to more than one evaluation criterion, it must be repeated for each criterion where it is applicable.

E. All commitments made in the proposal, if accepted by the Government, will become part of the resultant contract.

F. Offerors that include in their proposals data that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes, shall—

Mark the title page with the following legend:

“This proposal includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the Government and shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed—in whole or in part—for any purpose other than to evaluate this proposal. If, however, a contract is awarded to this offeror as a result of—or in connection with—the submission of this data, the Government shall have the right to duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the extent provided in the resulting contract. This restriction does not limit the Government's right to use information contained in this data if it is obtained from another source without restriction. The data subject to this restriction are contained in sheets [insert numbers or other identification of sheets].”

Mark each sheet of data it wishes to restrict with the following legend:

“Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal.”

G. Offers shall submit proposals electronically (via email). Proposals shall be in Times New

Roman no smaller than point 12 font size. Further, margins shall be no less than one (1) inch on all sides. The font size and margins prepared by the government on the SF 1442 shall remain as formatted by the government. In the page limits discussion, one (1) page refers to one (1) side of a typed page.

Additional addenda and/or supplements beyond the descriptions below are not to be provided and will not be considered. NO FAXED PROPOSALS WILL BE ACCEPTED.

Electronic copies (PDF only) should be sent to: Tony.Clemente@va.gov. The overall size of the electronic file shall not exceed 8MB; if additional space is required, divide the file into segments with each file size less than 8MB and email each file attachment separately.

mailto:Tony.Clemente@va.gov.

IV. PHASE I Proposal Format & Criteria

Offerors are to submit one (1) electronic copy (via email) of their proposal. Offerors shall prepare Technical Proposals with the Selection Criteria and Evaluation Factors, in terms of both content and organization, to facilitate evaluation.

Offerors shall follow Solicitation instructions and proposal organization, appearance, & completeness.

A. COVER PAGE: Include: solicitation number, project title, company to include DUNS number, Tax ID Number (TIN), principle points of contact, email address, mailing address, phone numbers, etc.

B. TAB 1: SF 1442, acknowledgement of any amendments

C. TAB 2: Technical Approach (5 pages max):

Technical Approach - Evaluation Criteria

Low Risk Offeror exceeds objectives, for both design and construction. Contains significant strengths and no significant weaknesses.

Moderate Risk Offeror satisfies objectives for both design and construction. There is an overall moderate degree of risk in meeting objectives.

High Risk Offeror does not satisfy the objectives, for both design and construction.

There is a very high and unacceptable risk in meeting the VA’s requirements.

D. TAB 3: Technical Qualifications (5 pages max):

• Briefly identify 3 to 5 MRI projects showing specialized experience and technical competence for projects which are similar in scope and cost. At least 1 MRI project must be associated with a Philips MRI, preferably 1.5T.

Describe how the experience and competence is related to this project.

• Demonstrate experience with MRI Upgrade renovation(s) including the replacement of specialized equipment (space coordination and electrical work), renovation(s) to rf shielding, coordinating the replacement of existing MRI chiller – this will require phasing, HVAC and other mechanical work.

• Explain ability to obtain the necessary resources, to include specialized experience and technical competence, to perform this project (include prime and subcontractor(s)).

Technical Qualifications - Evaluation Criteria

Low Risk

Offeror exceeds requirements; identified projects are very similar in size and scope. Experience and competence are clearly defined and is closely related to this project. Offeror has clearly described how they will obtain the necessary resources, to include specialized experience and competence, for performing this project. Contains significant strengths and no significant weaknesses. There is an overall low degree of risk in meeting the VA’s requirements.

Moderate Risk

Offeror satisfies requirement; identified projects that are somewhat similar in size and scope. Experience and competence are not closely related to this project. Offeror has described how they will obtain the necessary resources, to include specialized experience and competence, for performing this project. Contains a few significant strengths and few significant weaknesses.

There is an overall moderate degree of risk in meeting the VA’s

High Risk Offeror does not satisfy requirement of the project; has not identified and described projects that are similar in size and scope. Experience and competence lack relevance to this project. Offeror has not clearly described how they will obtain the necessary resources, to include specialized experience and competence, for performing this project. There is a very high and unacceptable risk in meeting the VA’s requirements.

E. TAB 4: Past Performance and Experience (5 pages max):

• Identify and describe relevant and recent past performance of the offeror’s team (including the architect-engineer and construction members). Relevant performance means projects involving design build projects of a similar type for a medical center work and similar price range, and the offeror served as the Prime Contractor. Recent is defined as performance within the last five (5) years through the solicitation release date. Identify a minimum of 3, but no more than 5 projects.

i. Each past performance shall include the following:

a) Description of project and dollar value

b) Identify all major subcontractors

c) Project completion compared to initial period of performance

ii. Each may be from the following Experience categories:

a) Team Experience: Identify any projects that the designer and prime contractor have previously contractually teamed together to accomplish a project.

b) Constructor/Key Subs and/or Designer: Include examples, within the last 3 years (5 years for design firms), of design/build projects, in which the designer and/or constructor or key trade subcontractors have been involved, if any.

c) Joint Ventures: If Offeror represents the combining of two or more companies for the purpose of this RFP, then each company must list project examples, related to its role for this project.

d) Prime Contractor Experience: Provide examples of projects, within the last 3 years, in which the prime contractor has been involved, which are similar to this project in scope and magnitude

e) Design Firm(s) Experience: Provide examples of projects, within the last 5 years, in which each design firm has been involved, which are similar in scope and magnitude to their role on this project.

Past Performance and Experience - Evaluation Criteria

Offeror exceeds requirements; identified and described in detail (addressing a-c of section i), design-build projects that are similar in size and scope.

Offeror design-build team has previous experience working together on design-build projects. Contains significant strengths and no significant

Offeror has identified and described in detail (addressing a-c of section i), design-build projects, but lack similarities in size or scope. Offeror design-build team does not have previous experience working together, but each has participated in design-build projects individually. Contains a few significant strengths and few significant weaknesses. There is an overall moderate degree in meeting the VA’s requirements

Offeror has identified and described in some detail (addressing a-c of section i), design-build projects, but are not similar in size or scope. Offeror design-build team does not have previous experience working together, and lack experience in design-build projects. There is a very high and unacceptable risk in meeting the VA’s requirements.

V. PHASE II Proposal Format & Criteria

Offerors from Phase I, will be notified by the Contracting Officer if they are selected to submit a Phase II Proposal.

Offerors are to submit one (1) electronic copy (via email). Offerors shall prepare Technical Proposals with the Selection Criteria and Evaluation Factors in mind, in terms of both content and organization, to facilitate evaluation.

BID GUARANTEES ARE REQUIRED FOR PHASE II. See 52.228-1 BID GUARANTEE.

Offerors shall follow Solicitation instructions and proposal organization, appearance, & completeness.

A. COVER PAGE: Include solicitation number, project title, company particulars to include

Duns number, Tax ID Number, principle points of contact, email address, mailing address, phone numbers, etc.

B. TAB 1: Design Concepts (10 pages max. drawings are not included in page count.):

• Offeror shall include proposed design solution (including a 60% drawing(s)) for the MRI

Upgrade since the information the VA provided serves the basis of a 30% design. Package shall include a general site layout, a general utility layout, expected demolition work, and a detailed description of the proposed solution.

• Since the rest of the Radiology department will remain active throughout construction, the

Offeror shall describe the plan for mitigating interruption to the facility’s normal operation. The narrative will also detail how the contractor intends to prepare the site, disassemble, relocate, reassemble, and reactivate utility services to the facility within any specified time limits. The Offeror will need to describe the plan for phasing the utility renovations (e.g. MRI chiller replacement to prevent the loss of helium).

• Describe any technical difficulties that may be encountered in a project of this type.

Provide a risk management plant that address preventative measures or solutions to overcome these issues.

Design Concept - Evaluation Criteria

Offeror exceeds requirements of this project; provided design solution, based on the 60% drawing, addresses all items in scope of work/General Requirements. The proposed solution clearly addresses a feasible general site layout, general utility layout, and expected demolition. Phasing plan is practical. Risk management plan identifies potential technical difficulties and comprehensively addresses mitigation. Contains significant strengths and no significant weaknesses. There is an overall low degree of risk in meeting the VA’s requirements.

Offeror satisfies requirement of this project; provided design solution, based on the 60% drawing, addresses most items in scope of work/General Requirements. The proposed solution addresses a general site layout, general utility layout, and expected demolition, but potential issues are seen. Phasing plan is practical. Risk management plan identifies potential technical difficulties, but does not clearly or accurately addresses mitigation. Contains a few significant strengths and few significant weaknesses. There is an overall moderate degree in meeting the VA’s requirements.

Offeror does not satisfy requirements of the project; provided design solution lacks relevance to the 60% drawing and does not address all criteria in scope of work/General Requirements. The proposed solution does not address a general site layout, general utility layout, and expected demolition. Phasing plan is not provided. Risk management plan is not provided or lacks clear definition of potential technical difficulties and/or solutions. There is a very high and unacceptable risk in meeting the VA’s requirements

C. TAB 2 Management Approach (10 pages max):

Describe how 15% of the cost of personnel for contract performance will be spent for employees of the concern or employees of other eligible small business concerns (i.e.

supervision, specific trade, design, etc.).

The team’s planning, team organization and responsibilities and capability to perform, technical and management approach to include project delivery philosophy and quality planning.

Provided Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan (approach to safety and compliance with infection control, projects plans and specifications). Demonstrate knowledge of and experience complying with OSHA, NFPA and VA requirements for safety during construction. Describe methods to be used to ensure that an OSHA certified Competent Person will maintain a presence at the work site whenever work is being done. Describe methods to be used to ensure all workers shall have received the required minimum 10- hour OSHA training.

Project Organizational Chart and Narrative - Include team members submitted under Project

Personnel Experience below. Clearly describe the prime responsible firm (or firms if a J/V) and individuals as well as the roles and responsibilities of individuals proposed as consultants and sub-contractors. Provide a list all consultants and all proposed major subcontractors, including telephone number, address, and name of contact.

Provide a progress schedule which should be scaled for time beginning with the Notice to

Proceed and concluding with contract completion. Include the milestones and major portions of the contract work. All schedule items will show a start date and a completion date. The detailed schedule, will indicate specific tasks with dates for each step of the process including:

i. Design Period: The design period sub periods (i.e., first and second reviews, other meetings, internal QUALITY ASSURANCE /QUALITY CONTROL plan reviews, etc.).

ii. Construction Period: Mobilization; Demolition method and sequencing; rigging;

Procurement and installation of equipment – include phasing of specialized equipment; rf shield renovation;

Interior installations; Provisions for overtime or shift work; Site utilities, Tests, Balancing and final inspection.

iii. General Project Delivery Schedule and Narrative - Show relationships between construction document development/completion (including required review activities) and construction activities for (at a minimum, demolition, equipment relocation and installation, rf shield repair, interior finishes, building systems, and site development.

iv. The Offeror shall specify how much allowance has been made for bad weather in the schedule, the days of the week and the hours of construction operations, and the percentage of contract completion that will be achieved at the end of every two weeks of the contract.

Management Approach - Evaluation Criteria

Offeror exceeds requirements of this project; management approach is well defined and addresses all factors. Project schedule is comprehensive of all work involved. Contains significant strengths and no significant

Offeror satisfies requirement of this project; management approach addresses all factors, but not in significant detail. Project schedule is comprehensive of all work involved. Contains a few significant strengths and few significant weaknesses. There is an overall moderate degree in meeting the VA’s requirements.

Offeror does not satisfy requirements of the project; management approach does not address all factors. Project schedule is vague and lacks detail. There is a very high and unacceptable risk in meeting the VA’s requirements

D. Tab 3 Proposed Team (10 pages max):

• Project Personnel Experience (Specialized experience and technical competence). The Offeror shall demonstrate the relevant experience of key project personnel. Supply this biographical data for key personnel for at least the following:

Overall Project Manager Design Project Manager Construction Project Manager Architect/Engineer Safety Manager Quality Control Manager Superintendent

• Biographical data shall include the following:

Name of individual.

Company employed by.

Company position title.

Years with the company.

Describe work experience with projects that were completed by the design build process, were medical facilities and/or work of similar nature

An indication of which (if any) projects submitted under Relevant Experience the individual participated in and what the individual’s responsibility was for that project

Position that the individual will hold in regard to this contract/project team, description of duties and what percentage of the individual’s time would be committed to the project during both the design and construction phases.

E. Tab 4: Offer Guarantee/Bid Bond

F. Tab 5: Price /Price Breakdown

Pricing shall be formatted in a section that can be easily removed from the rest of the Offeror’s Proposal so it can be independently evaluated. Pricing shall be broken down by trade, profit, overhead, and contain a total cost for the entire project.

Proposed Team - Evaluation Criteria

Offeror exceeds requirements; all key personnel have relevant experience.

Contains significant strengths and no significant weaknesses. There is an overall low degree of risk in meeting the VA’s requirements.

Offeror satisfies requirements; some key personnel have relevant experience.

Contains a few significant strengths and few significant weaknesses. There is an overall moderate degree of risk in meeting the VA’s requirements.

Offeror does not satisfy requirements; key personnel factors are not addressed and/or key personnel lack relevant experience. There is a very high and unacceptable risk in meeting the VA’s requirements