36C24921R0048 0001.pdf

5. PROJECT NUMBER (if applicable)

CODE7. ADMINISTERED BY

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER

CODE

6. ISSUED BY

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NUMBER3. 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 CODECODE

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

Prescribed by GSA - FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

(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)

0001 01-26-2021 614-21-3-950-0001 614-321

Department of Veterans Affairs Network Contracting Office 9 (90C) c/o: Roxie Ann Keese 1639 Medical Center Parkway, Suite 400 Murfreesboro TN 37129

90C

Network Contracting Office 9 Department of Veterans Affairs Network Contracting Office (90C) 1639 Medical Center Parkway Suite 400 Murfreesboro TN 37129

To all Offerors/Bidders

36C24921R0048

01-21-2021

X

X X

614-36X0111-950-854200-3220

Solicitation Number 36C24921R0048 is amended as follows:

The section entitled "INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND OTHER STATEMENTS TO BIDDERS/OFFEORS" is superceded and replaced with the following attachment as revised:

Roxie Ann Keese Contracting Officer

VA-VHA-2020-11BFE0E

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND OTHER STATEMENTS TO

BIDDERS/OFFERORS

This section describes the evaluation process, proposal preparation, the significant factors and sub-factors and criteria to be used in the evaluation process. This procurement action is a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable source selection process in accordance with FAR 15.101-2.

Proposals will be evaluated for acceptability, but not ranked using the non-price factors/sub-factors. In order to be considered for award, an offeror must have an “acceptable” rating in every non-price factor/sub-factor under consideration.

The Government intends to award a single contract to a qualified Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) determined responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), whose proposal conforms to all the requirements in this solicitation, and is further determined to meet or exceed the standards of acceptability at the lowest offered price. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with Offerors. Therefore, the Offeror’s initial proposal should contain the Offeror’s best terms from both a technical and cost standpoint.

The evaluation of offers submitted in response to this Request for Proposal (RFP) solicitation will be conducted utilizing the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) selection process.

Utilization of this source selection process may result in not all offers being evaluated. The Contracting Officer upon receipt of offers, will determine eligibility and compliance to the solicitation requirements. The Vendor Information Pages (vetbiz registry) will be checked to ensure that any offeror submitting a proposal to perform the work is both listed and verified. All proposals received will also be checked for an active registration in the System for Award Management (SAM). Thereafter, the Contracting Officer will review all proposals to ensure that the minimum proposal submission requirements have been met. Once these requirements have been satisfied, the Contracting Officer will select and submit for review to the Technical Evaluation Board (TEB) the technical proposal of the lowest priced offeror for consideration.

Initially, the TEB will not receive any pricing information, only the technical portion of the Offeror’s proposal. The Offeror’s proposal will be rated against each evaluation factor as set forth in this solicitation.

If the selected Offeror’s proposal is determined to be acceptable based on the standards of acceptability, and that Offeror’s price is the lowest of all offers submitted, then no further evaluation of offers shall occur and the Contracting Officer will document these findings, and proceed with the responsibility determination of the offeror. Pricing information will only be provided to the TEB upon notification to the Contracting Officer that the technical proposal as submitted meets or exceeds the acceptability standard necessary to fulfill the objective of the requirement.

Should the initial Offeror’s proposal be determined to be unacceptable according to the standards of acceptability, then the TEB will be required to provide to the Contracting Officer a summary evaluation sheet that documents how the Offeror’s proposal fails to meet the standards of acceptability, and request to the Contracting Officer that another selection be made for consideration of award. This process shall continue until such time that an award is made.

Offerors shall respond in writing to the evaluation factors listed below, in the same order as they appear in this solicitation document. Failure to provide all information will adversely affect the evaluation of an offer. The information contained in the technical proposal should be complete, concise, and address each factor. If information is applicable to more than one evaluation factor, it must be repeated for each factor, unless stated otherwise.

Technical and Price sections of an Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated independently. Offeror shall separately bind each section. All pages containing text shall be consecutively numbered, type-written on 8-1/2x11 inch paper with margins of at least once inch and created using a Times New Roman 12-point font. The submitted package should contain two sections, separately bind:

a.) Technical Proposal b.) Price Proposal. The Offeror’s Technical proposal shall be no more than 50 pages total, which is not inclusive of the solicitation and any amendments issued thereof.

The Offeror’s Price Proposal shall be no more than 25 pages inclusive of the bid bonds required.

The Offeror is hereby advised that the “S02-Price Schedule” attached worksheet shall be considered as one page, regardless of the overall total. Each section must therefore be labeled with the following:

1. Construction Company Name

2. Physical Address of the Company

3. Telephone Number

4. Email address

5. VA Project Number (Project 614-321)

6. VA Project Name (Construct Bldg.7 Spinal Cord Injury/Disorder Addition-North)

7. Solicitation number (36C24921R0048)

The Technical Evaluation Board (TEB) shall evaluate the Offeror’s proposal against all non-price factors/sub-factors to determine whether the proposal is acceptable or unacceptable, using the “ACCEPTABLE” or “UNACCEPTABLE” ratings based upon the standard of acceptability that follows each factor/sub-factor below. In order to obtain a “ACCEPTABLE” rating an offeror must meet the standard of acceptability that is listed for each factor/sub-factor.

The evaluation process and criteria stated in this section will be strictly adhered to. Evaluators will make no assumptions regarding an Offeror’s proposal. Therefore, an Offeror must demonstrate understanding by the thoroughness, soundness, comprehensiveness and price reasonableness of technical approach. There will be no public opening of offers.

The following evaluation factors and sub-factors will apply to this procurement:

Project #614-321, Construct Bldg. 7 Spinal Cord Injury/Disorder (SCI/D) Addition-North

The evaluation factors are:

FACTOR 1 – Hospital/Healthcare Construction Management

The offeror shall provide a narrative that describes the Offeror’s overall organization, organizational chart, as well as number of personnel and the duties of proposed technical staff to determine if offeror has the ability to manage multi-discipline projects without significant difficulty. The proposal narrative must adequately address functions, responsibilities and authorities for performing such duties as overall project management, site superintendence, quality control, safety, administration and in-house trade capabilities.

Sub-Factor 1a – Relevant Experience: The Prime Contractor shall provide demonstrated experience in new construction or the addition of a hospital/medical center and/or health care facility for two (2) completed projects within the past ten (10) years with a contract value equal to or greater than $4,000,000.00. The subject project must have involved multiple trades so as to demonstrate the management and coordination of trades by the Prime Contractor.

Standard for Acceptability: The Prime Contractor must provide complete project title, location, start and completion dates, contract price, and trades involved. Provide written narrative of work and a reference for verification.

Sub-Factor 1b - Key Personnel: Provide the names of the Prime Contractor’s Project Manager and on-Site Superintendent, including name with title, years with prime contractor, and total work experience as it relates to the new construction or the addition of a hospital/medical center and/or health care facility. Both Project Manager and Site Superintendent must demonstrate (by way of professional resume) experience in managing and providing oversight with new hospital construction or construction additions with a project magnitude equal to or greater than $4M or more over the past 5 years.

Standard for Acceptability: Project Manager and the on-Site Superintendent must have a minimum of five (5) or more years of experience managing new hospital construction and/or construction additions in a hospital or medical center environment.

FACTOR 2 - Technical Management Approach: The offeror shall provide a narrative that outlines the proposed technical approach for this project, including assumptions and rationale for choosing the preferred approach.

Sub-Factor 2a-Project & Construction Quality Control: Include a discussion of how the duration of project time was achieved; provide a Gantt chart of contract times broken into schedule of values by trade discipline and by General Wage Decision (formerly Davis-Bacon Act). Offeror must include identification of proposed personnel for project management, site superintendence, and quality control; including role in commissioning, safety during construction, and in-house trade capabilities.

Standard for Acceptability: Gantt chart achieving successful project completion in 480 calendar days, with all requirements met for contract. Technical narrative demonstrates sound logic with minimal disruption to medical center operations at all times.

Sub-Factor 2b-Project Management: Based on your experience in hospital construction of a project of this magnitude and scope, involving multiple trades and the coordination thereof, the commissioning of various systems involved in the new construction of a facility and your review of the project specifications and the proposed work you viewed at the site visit. Discuss potential changes or any unforeseen conditions or work not considered.

Standard for Acceptability: When the offeror proposes a realistic or reasonable view of potential changes or unforeseen conditions or work not considered.

FACTOR 3 - Past Performance: Offeror shall list only three (3) prior clients for completed projects of new construction or new addition of hospital/healthcare facility, medical clinics where the projects dollar magnitude equal to or greater than $4,000,000.00 within the last ten (10) years on the VA Past Performance questionnaire and ask the client to forward directly to the CO via email at Roxie. Keese@ va.gov by 2:00PM, Eastern Time on February 28, 2021.

Standard for Acceptability: This factor is met when up to three (3) past performance questionnaires that the offeror has worked with in the past ten (10) years are submitted and are determined to be relevant relative to the subject procurement, and recent in regard to the timeframe-within the past 10 years. The Government will evaluate the relative merits of each project listed under past performance as well as verify the information provided through direct contact, as well as other government websites.

NOTE: The past performance evaluation results is an assessment of the Offeror’s probability of meeting the minimum past performance solicitation requirements. This assessment is based on the Offeror’s record of relevant and recent past performance information that pertain to the products and/or services outlined in the solicitation requirements. The government may also obtain past performance information through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) other sources known to the Government.

RELEVANT: The government will perform an independent determination of data relevancy, provided or obtained. The main assessment of relevancy shall focus on capability and magnitude. Capability assesses whether the work being performed in the reference is similar to the work in the requirement.

Magnitude defines whether the amount of work in the reference is similar to the amount of work that is to be performed in the requirement.

RECENT Recent past performance shall be defined as successful performance under contracts similar in scope to the subject requirement completed within the last five (5) years through proposal due date

FACTOR 4: Price: The offeror shall provide prices for all offer items provided, as well as the deduct alternates in the schedule. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by the base offer item 1. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the additional offer line items and deduct alternates are significantly unbalanced.

The price proposal is assumed to include the S02-Price Schedule Worksheet (3 pages), the signed SF 1442, with acknowledgment of any amendments, plus the Offeror’s Bid Guarantee documents.

Standard for Acceptability: This standard is met when the Offeror submits a price proposal consistent with the Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE) and when analyzed by each price line item, is determined to be consistent with the work required.

The proposed price will be reviewed for reasonableness. It may also be analyzed for the different divisions of work to be performed, reflects a clear understanding of the requirement;

and is consistent with the Offeror’s Technical Proposal. A detailed price breakdown will be required, and Offerors shall provide a detailed breakout of pricing on the “S02-Price Schedule” worksheet provided with the solicitation.

If a detailed price breakdown is not included in the Offeror’s price proposal, the contractor may be excluded from further consideration of contract award. Pricing will be evaluated in accordance with FAR 15.4 to determine reasonableness and evaluate potential performance risks. In this context, reasonableness will be determined by comparing offered prices with the government estimate. This factor will be evaluated as either reasonable or unreasonable.

The Government reserves the right to cancel subject RFP and re-solicit via another mechanism should a fair and reasonable price not be achieved, or reasonableness of price cannot be determined.