Instructions to Offerors 01.20.23.pdf

Construct Inpatient Dialysis for NLR Project Network Contracting Office (NCO) 16 Solicitation No. 36C25622R0140

Offerors shall follow the instructions contained herein. These instructions prescribe the proposal format and describe the approach for development and presentation of the proposal. These instructions are designed to ensure the submission of necessary information. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations, and certifications. The Contracting Officer has determined there is a high probability of adequate competition in this acquisition. Interested offerors shall be solely responsible for all costs associated with this solicitation including but not limited to the preparation of proposals.

The Government plans to make an award without discussions. Therefore, each initial offer shall contain the offeror’s best terms from a technical, schedule and price standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if it is determined to be necessary.

Technical/Past Performance/Schedule, and Price proposals of each offeror will be evaluated independently.

Offerors shall submit as separate attachments titled, “Technical Proposal” and “Price Proposal.” The total number of pages addressing submitted factors shall not exceed (70) seventy. Each attachment must contain a cover sheet with the offerors name, business address, and VA Solicitation Number.

Proposal size will be limited as shown below and font/size shall be no smaller than Times New Roman 11. Page limits are for single sheets of paper and may be double-sided. If these page limits are exceeded, the pages more than the limit will not be read or considered.

VOL TITLE PAGE LIMITS

I TECHNICAL PROPOSAL 30*

II PAST PERFORMANCE 30*

III SCHEDULE 10

IV PRICE Completed SF1442/SF1442 BACK with acknowledgement of amendments and completed Schedule of Offer Items

*EXHIBIT A PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY SURVEY and cover pages do not count against the 30-page limit for Past Performance.

EXHIBIT A “PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY SURVEY,” EXHIBIT B “PAST AND PRESENT

PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE” and Attachment D “SUBCONTRACTOR FORM” does not count against the page limit per factor e.g., Technical, Past Performance, Schedule, and Price proposal. Additionally, contractor is to provide a compact disk with contractor’s entire proposal in pdf format and no passcodes for accessibility.

Proposal shall be (1) submitted on the forms furnished by the Government or on copies of those forms; and

(2) manually signed. The person signing the proposal shall initial each erasure or change appearing on any proposal form. Offerors shall submit proposed prices for ALL priced line items as listed in the schedule. Failure to submit proposed prices for ALL bid items will result in the proposal being rejected as unacceptable without further consideration.

Alternate proposals will NOT be considered. The following documents shall be submitted to the Contract Specialist on the due date and time listed on the SF 1442. Electronic proposals transmitted through an electronic commerce method including but not limited to telegraph, fax, or email are NOT authorized under this solicitation and will NOT be accepted. The offeror shall submit two (2) separate proposals: Technical, Past Performance, Schedule and Price identified accordingly. Technical proposal shall be submitted in one (1) original and one (1) hard copy. The Price proposal shall be submitted in one (1) original and one hard copy. Contractor also to submit one compact disc with entire proposal, not password protected or encrypted for review.

The proposal shall be arranged in the following order:

1. 2-page SF1442 completed and signed by the signatory authority. All blocks under section “OFFER” on page 2 of SF1442 (Item 14 thru 20C) shall be completed. Offerors shall be solely responsible for monitoring Government’s website https://sam.gov for amendments to this solicitation if any and acknowledge them in accordance with the requirements stipulated in this solicitation and amendments.

2. Duly executed Bid Bond/Guarantee: Offerors shall use form SF24 Bid Bond. Bid bonds that are found noncompliant with bid guarantee requirements may result in the rejection of the bid. See clause 52.228-1 Bid Guarantee for additional information on the compliance with bid guarantee requirements.

3. To be eligible for award, Offerors are required to be CVE SDVOSB certified. Offerors must register their businesses at https://www.vetbiz.va.gov/ and https://sam.gov and complete the ORCA. Upon request by the Government, Offerors shall submit a printout of their ORCA.

4. Acknowledgement of ALL Amendments

5. Proof VETS 4212: Title 38, USC Section 4212(d) and Public Law 105-339 requires that federal contractors report, at least annually, the number and category of veterans who are within their workforce. This VETS-4212 report can be submitted per the instructions at https://www.dol.gov/agencies/vets/programs/vets4212. For assistance contact VETS-4212 customer support at 1-866-487-2365 or https://www.dol.gov For procurement awards in excess of $150,000, this report must be completed and accepted prior to any Federal contract award. Therefore, all potential contractors are encouraged to file every year.

6. Experience Modification Rate (EMR)

Proposals shall be submitted in a sealed envelope and delivered to the address below by or on the due date set forth in this solicitation, page 1, form SF1442, block 13:

Department of Veterans Affairs Chief, A&MM (90C / NLR) Attn: Renardo Hollowell, Contracting Officer And/Or Julius Jones, Contracting Specialist 2200 Fort Roots Drive, Bldg. 41, Room 208 North Little Rock, AR 72114-1706

It is solely the responsibility of the offerors to ensure the Government receives their proposal before or on the exact due date and time set forth in this solicitation. Offerors shall provide the Contracting Officer/Contract Specialist confirmation of delivery via email to julius.jones@va.gov prior to the closing date if the offeror uses a https://sam.gov/ https://www.vetbiz.va.gov/ https://sam.gov/ https://www.dol.gov/agencies/vets/programs/vets4212.

https://www.dol.gov/ mailto:julius.jones@va.gov mail carrier, such as FedEx, UPS, or USPS. Tracking number and the name of the person who signed for the package is required.

All inquiries about this solicitation shall be directly submitted in writing via email to the Contract Specialist:

julius.jones@va.gov. Please ensure inquiries are provided prior to the suspense to ensure a timely response. No phone or faxed inquiry will be accepted. Deadline for all inquiries for this solicitation is listed on the SF 1442.

Government’s responses to inquiries will be issued in the form of Amendment(s) to be posted on the same website where this solicitation is posted: SAM.gov (Contract Opportunity). All interested offerors including those submitting inquiries are required to monitor the above website for any posted amendments and acknowledge them in accordance with the instructions provided in the amendments as well as in this solicitation.

Evaluations: - Factor 1 (Technical) is more important than Factor 2 (Past Performance) and Factor 3 (Schedule);

Factor 2 (Past Performance) is more important than Factor 3 (Schedule), and when combined Factor 1, Factor 2, and Factor 3 are significantly more important than Factor 4 (Price).

EVALUATION FACTORS:

Factor 1— Technical: Construction Management Technical Evaluation for Construction Management will be based on the following significant subfactors:

SUBFACTORS:

Subfactor 1. Provide documentation of specific related work

Subfactor 2. Provide Project Construction Experience Subfactor 3. Demonstrate clear understanding of project Subfactor 4. Provide List of Key Personnel Subfactor 5. Provide project implementation details Subfactor 6. Provide contractor’s capabilities to complete the project Subfactor 7. Provide Experience Modification Rate (EMR)

1. Provide documentation of specific projects (minimum of three) relating to constructing inpatient dialysis space or similar projects in a hospital environment; successfully completed or in progress, that was coordinated and performed by the general contractor in the last 5 years of a similar size ($2.0M to $5.0M), in scope and complexity.

2. Contractor shall provide the following information for each contract/project submitted for evaluation:

Company Name/Address Phone number/Email, Project Title, Contracting Office/Government Agency (if applicable), Contract Number, Total Contract Amount, Period of Performance, Contracting Officer (CO) name, Phone number and Email, Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) name, Phone number, Email, Brief Description of the Project /Requirements, and number of personnel assigned to the project.

3. Demonstrate a clear understanding of your company’s experience and means to meet the critical milestones and critical path related to the Statement of Work (SOW), Drawings & Specification related to requirement “Construct Inpatient Dialysis.” Include examples of the company’s management approach addressing time, labor, materials, supervision.

4. Provide a list of key personnel names (i.e., Site Superintendent, Project Manager, [5yrs experience or more] along with a description of the individual’s experience and a list of successfully completed projects (three no more than five) of similar size, scope, and complexity (in a hospital facility or similar working mailto:Renardo.hollowell@va.gov http://www.fbo.gov/ conditions) within the last 5-years. Include all certifications, licenses, and specialized training such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) 30-hour construction safety courses.

5. Contractor shall provide a detailed explanation as to how the project will be implemented and managed through completion to ensure compliance with all applicable Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and OSHA standards. Contractor shall plan and execute the work with minimal impact to the normal functioning of the Medical Center as a whole, including patient care, operations of utility services, etc.

6. Provide information about the business or firm’s resource capabilities to ensure successful completion of this project.

7. Provide Experience Modification Rate (EMR) https://safetymanagementgroup.com/emr-experience-modification-rate/

In addition to the above, offerors shall provide a confirmation letter from an acceptable Surety, indicating their company’s bonding capacity and capability.

TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTOR RATINGS: The SSEB will rate an offeror's technical proposal at the factor level using the adjective ratings below that combines technical merit and proposal risk that most accurately defines the offeror's performance risk considering all subfactors identified in this section. The SSEB must establish overall team ratings by consensus and not by vote.

If a consensus cannot be reached, the SSEB will provide the SSA with written majority and minority opinions. The SSA and/or SSEB Chair will ensure that none of the SSEB members have misinterpreted or misunderstood any aspects of the proposal prior to issuing the majority and minority opinions.

Combined Technical/Risk Ratings

Rating Description

Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Good

Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Acceptable

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal

Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable

Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is not awardable.

__ Strength: Any aspect of a proposal that, when judged against a stated evaluation criterion enhances the https://safetymanagementgroup.com/emr-experience-modification-rate/ https://safetymanagementgroup.com/emr-experience-modification-rate/ merit of the proposal or increases the probability of successful performance of the contract.

__ Weakness: A flaw in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

__ Deficiency: A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

Factor 2 — Past Performance: (Non-Price Factors)

Past Performance is one indicator of an offeror’s ability to perform the contract successfully and determine responsibility. The Prime Contractor shall coordinate with previous customers to submit to julius.jones@va.gov a minimum of three, no more than five, recent and relevant projects completed as the general contractor (See Exhibit A of solicitation 36C25622R0140). The Government shall consider the offeror’s past performance based on submitted projects. Recent - is defined as a construction project completed within the last 5 years. Relevant - is defined as a construction project for a similar type of project in size, scope, complexity, and value ($2.0M to $5.0M). The contractor may identify contracts that include Federal, State, and local government and private for efforts like the government requirement. The Government may evaluate Past Performance information using Exhibit B “Past and Present Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)” completed by the offeror's references; use data independently obtained from other Government or commercial sources, including, but not limited to, Government databases; and/or rely upon personal business experience with the offeror. The Offeror shall return the questionnaire prior to the due date or with their proposal submission to the CO.

To be a completed past performance questionnaire, the “PPQ” shall include correct phone number, correct email address and all requested information on the Questionnaire Form. In some circumstances Past Performance may receive a neutral rating. In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. (See FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). The government can use other methods to determine past performance.

NOTE SUBCONTRACTOR’S CONSENT – Past performance information pertaining to a subcontractor cannot be disclosed to the prime offeror without the subcontractor’s consent. Provide with their proposal, a letter of consent from referenced subcontractors authorizing release of their past performance information for this requirement.

Factor 3-Schedule:

The Contractor shall submit to the CO a practicable schedule showing the order in which the Contractor proposes to perform the work, and the dates on which the Contractor contemplates starting and completing several salient features of the work (including acquiring materials, plant, and equipment). The schedule shall be in the form of a progress chart of suitable scale to indicate appropriately the percentage of work scheduled for completion by 300-calendar day performance period.

Factor 4-Price:

Offers shall provide best proposal meeting or exceeding the government requirement and performance period.

Price will be evaluated to ensure reasonableness and determine availability of funds. The Government may use various price techniques and procedures to conclude a price reasonableness determination.

5. BASIS FOR AWARD:

BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD: This is a competitive Request for Proposal (RFP) that represents the best value to the Government conducted under FAR Part 15, Tradeoff Source Selection process. THE

GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO AWARD TO OTHER THAN THE OFFEROR WITH

mailto:julius.jones@va.gov

THE LOWEST PRICED PROPOSAL OR HIGHEST RATED TECHNICAL PROPOSAL.

The Government intends to evaluate proposals solely on the information provided and award a contract without discussions. Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal shall contain the offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. Offerors are cautioned to submit sufficient information in the format specified in the “Offeror Submission Instructions” section of this solicitation. Communication conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors would not constitute discussions and the CO reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for proposal revisions. There will be no public proposal opening.

A single award will be made to a Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) using best value Technical/ Past Performance/Schedule/Price tradeoff process considering all non-price factors and allows the Government in accordance with FAR 15.101-1, to accept other than the lowest price proposal or other than the highest technically rated offer and award to the responsible offeror whose proposal the SSA has determined conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable, represents fair market value and offers the best overall value to the Government.

6. SOURCE SELECTION: Under the guidance of the chairperson, the SSEB Chair shall prepare a Source Selection Evaluation Board Report summarizing the strengths and weaknesses of each proposal. The report will be sent to the SSA for the final evaluation decision. The SSA will conduct an integrated assessment to determine the Best Value to the Government.

The SSA shall prepare the Source Selection Decision Document which establishes the basis for award.

Information obtained from the SSEB Report may be considered in the SSA's final determination.

SUBMIT EXHIBIT A ON NO LESS THAN THREE (3) PROJECTS, including information on problems encountered and corrective actions.

Past Performance Questionnaire – Offerors shall prepare and forward to prior client(s) for submission to the Contracting Office EXHIBIT B PAST AND PRESENT PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE for all the projects listed by contractor and submitted using EXHIBIT A PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY SURVEY.

This includes correspondence explaining the requirement to obtain an independent evaluation of prior contract performance and the Past and Present Performance Questionnaire for use in evaluating Past Performance. It is preferred that these are the same projects for ease of evaluation and comparison.

Completed Past Performance Questionnaires shall be submitted to the Contracting Office so as to arrive not later than the closing date/time for receipt of proposals shown on the SF1442. Completed questionnaires shall be forwarded via email to julius.jones@va.gov. The subject line shall state 36C25622R0140 Past Performance for (Name of Company.) NOTE: Offeror shall not review the Past Performance Questionnaire prior to submission. Past Performance Questionnaire must be submitted by the client/evaluator directly to the Contracting Office. It is the offeror’s responsibility to follow up with their references to ensure that the Past Performance Questionnaires have been submitted by the offer due date to the Contracting Office. Past performance questionnaires submitted by the contractor and not from third party will be rejected.

Again, Offerors should follow-up and encourage references to submit the questionnaires to the Contracting Office by the time set for receipt of proposals. Do not include copies of the letters or questionnaires in the proposal.

The Government may evaluate Past Performance information through the use of Exhibit B completed by the offeror's references; use data independently obtained from other Government or commercial sources, including, but not limited to, Government databases; and/or rely upon personal business experience with the offeror. The evaluation may take into account Past Performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel mailto:julius.jones@va.gov.

who have relevant experience, and/or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to this acquisition. Past Performance information on contracts not listed by the offeror, or that of planned subcontractors, may also be evaluated. The Government may contact references and contact parties other than those identified by the offeror, and information received may be used in the evaluation of the offeror’s Past Performance. While the Government may elect to consider data obtained from other sources, the burden of providing current accurate and complete Past Performance information rests with the offeror. The Government reserves the right to obtain and evaluate Past Performance information from any source it deems appropriate. An offeror with limited or no past performance may receive a rating based on the evaluation of its subcontractors and/or key personnel, provided an Attachment D SUBCONTRACTOR INFORMATION AND CONSENT FORM has been executed and included in the proposal for proposed subcontractors and/or potential key personnel not employed by the offeror. These ratings shall have the same weight as the ratings of the offeror.

Offerors without a record of relevant past performance will be assigned a neutral rating in accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv). However, the proposal of an offeror with no relevant Past Performance history, while rated “Neutral” in Past Performance, may not represent the most advantageous proposal to the Government and thus, may be an unsuccessful proposal when compared to the proposal of other offerors.

In accordance with FAR 15.306(a)(2), if award will be made without conducting discussions, an offeror may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of their proposal (i.e., the relevance of an offeror's past performance information) as related to this acquisition, address adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond or to resolve minor clerical errors.

Performance Currency, Trends, and Relevancy: The Government will consider the currency, trends and relevancy of the performance information while conducting its performance evaluation. For the purpose of this solicitation, performance currency is performance occurring within the last five (5) years from the proposal issuance date. Within this period, performance occurring later in the period may have greater significance than work occurring earlier in the period. For example, performance information for work occurring during March 2020 may have greater importance than performance information for work occurring during March 2018.

Performance Trends may, depending upon the circumstances, have greater significance than sporadic incidents of "Exceptional" or "Unsatisfactory" performance. For example, a contractor showing consistent “Exceptional performance from 2016 to 2021 opposed to a contractor with ratings of Exceptional- yr. 2015, Satisfactory-yr.

2016, Unsatisfactory-yr. 2017, Satisfactory-yr. 2018, Unsatisfactory-yr. 2019 and Sat-yr. 2020, establishes a trend. For the purpose of this solicitation, Performance Relevancy is defined as contracts (ongoing or completed) which are similar in scope, magnitude, and complexity to the current requirement. Higher relevancy will be assessed for contracts that are similar to the effort, or portion of effort, for which that contractor is being proposed, and may contribute to an overall higher relevancy score for the offeror. Based on the evaluation of offers, the Government will assign a performance confidence rating for each proposal at the factor level. The evaluation will consider the sub-factors as described herein. Following assignment of the performance confidence rating for each proposal, each offeror will receive a final risk rating for performance based on the cumulative rating of performance currency, trends, and relevancy.

The following Performance Relevancy definitions apply:

Rating Definition

Very Relevant Present/Past Performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/Past Performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant

Present/Past Performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/Past Performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.