ATTACHMENT A - PHASE 1 FACTOR 2 - EXPERIENCE.xlsx

XLSX spreadsheet 23 KB Posted

Attached to
Y1LZ--Construct Additional Parking Lots Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
36C26120R0028
Issued by
Department of Veterans Affairs Veterans Health Administration Veterans Integrated Service Network 21

About this file

This document outlines the requirements for a design-build project to construct additional parking lots at a Department of Veterans Affairs medical center in Las Vegas, Nevada. The solicitation will be issued on or around April 27, 2020 for a two-phase design-build project between $2-5 million to design and construct approximately 500,000 square feet of additional asphalt parking across three areas. Work will include grading, paving, lighting, signage and stormwater management. This opportunity is set aside for Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Businesses only. Proposals are due by the date specified in the solicitation, which may be delayed beyond April 27 due to local shelter-in-place orders. The contractor will be selected using a two-phase evaluation process in accordance with FAR 36.3.

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to Y1LZ--Construct Additional Parking Lots, newest first.
File Type Posted
S27 - Notice of Award - 36C26120C0069_1.docx DOCX document
ATTACHMENT B_Version 2 - Past Performance Questionnaire.docx DOCX document
Amend 0002 - Vendor Questions and Government Response.docx DOCX document
ATTACHMENT A_Version 2 - PHASE 1 FACTOR 2 - EXPERIENCE.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Solicitation 36C26120R0028 - Amend 0002.pdf PDF
Amend 0001 - Off-Site Tributary Drainage.pdf PDF
Amend 0001 - Existing Site Storm Drain Infrastructure.pdf PDF
Amend 0001 - Combined Campus Utility CU-107 to CU-119.pdf PDF
Solicitation 36C26120R0028 - Amend 0001.pdf PDF
Amend 0001 - Site Vistit - Construct Additional Parking Lots.pptx PPTX presentation
Amend 0001 - Instructions to Offerors.docx DOCX document
Amend 0001 - Statement of Work.doc DOC document
Amend 0001 - Existing Site Drainage.pdf PDF
Amend 0001 - Existing Peak Run-off Rates at POA.pdf PDF
Amend 0001 - Vendor Questions and Government Response.docx DOCX document
Amend 0001 - Pre Proposal Site Visit - Prime Contractor List - Those Agreeing to Publication of Info.pdf PDF
ATTACHMENT E - Wage Determination - NV20200001.txt TXT text file
ATTACHMENT C - Offerors Key Personnel.docx DOCX document
01 32 16 16 Schedule - Design-Build Only.pdf PDF
Const Add Parking Lots Dwg 20200122.pdf PDF
Phase IV Geotechnical Report 050106.pdf PDF
01 42 19 Reference Standards.pdf PDF
ATTACHMENT B - Past Performance Questionnaire.docx DOCX document
S02 - Solicitation 36C26120R0028.pdf PDF
ATTACHMENT F - Supplemental Pricing Breakdown.docx DOCX document
ATTACHMENT D - CONTRACTOR CERTIFICATION REGARDING SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL.docx DOCX document
01 33 23 Shop Drawings Product Data and Samples.pdf PDF
01 35 26 SAFETY.pdf PDF
01 45 00 Quality Control 050120.pdf PDF
01 57 19 Temporary Environmental Controls.pdf PDF
010000 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Rev 200117.pdf PDF
01 45 29 Testing Laboratory Services.pdf PDF
36C26120R0028-006.docx DOCX document
36C26120R0028-007.pdf PDF
Show all 34

On GovTribe

Work with this file on GovTribe

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

Basis of Evaluation

ATTACHMENT A

FACTOR 2 - EXPERIENCE

36C26120R0028

Submit the following information: 1. Submit a maximum of Two (2) example projects demonstrating the experience and capability of the lead Architect-Engineering Firm that will be designing the project. Examples should demonstrate offerors experience as the Prime Contractor on recent, relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP.

2. Submit a maximum of Two (2) example projects demonstrating the experience and capability of the lead Construction Contractor that will be performing the largest construction effort on the project. Examples should demonstrate offerors experience as the Prime Contractor on recent, relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP

3. Submit a maximum of Two (2) example design/build projects that the prime contractor and proposed Architect-Engineering firm have completed together. If no project completed together, offeror may be rated more unfavorably.

BASIS OF EVALUATION:The basis of evaluation will include the offeror’s demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing recent, relevant construction and design projects as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements of similar size, scope and complexity. The assessment of the offeror’s relevant experience will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP. Offeror’s projects will be rated individualy and then combined to achieve an overall factor rating. Offeror’s demonstrating recent and relevant design-build experience; timely project completion; recent and relevant design/construction of surface parking; recent and relevant examples of offeror and partner firm demonstrating a successful contractor team arrangement; and, recent and relevant projects completed in the NCO 21 Geographic location may be rated more favorably.
Design-buildRecent and relevant projects that demonstrate design-build experience may be considered more favorably than those that do not have design-build experience.
Surface Parking faciltiesRecent and relevant projects that demonstrate experience in designing and/or constructing surface parking of similar size, scope and complexity may be considered more favorably.
Timely completionRecent and relevant projects that demonstrate timely completion of projects may be rated more favorably.
Geographic locationsRecent and relevant projects completed in the NCO 21 geographic locations of Nevada, Northern California and Hawaii may be rated more favorably..
ADJECTIVAL RATINGS
RatingDescription
OutstandingProposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.
GoodProposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.
AcceptableProposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.
MarginalProposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.
UnacceptableProposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of

unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.

DEFINITIONS
StrengthAn aspect of an offeror’s proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.
WeaknessA flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.
Significant WeaknessA flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.
DeficiencyA material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.
RELEVANCY DEFINITIONS
Relevancy Definition:For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is defined as new construction and/or repair, alteration and related demolition of existing infrastructure completed within the past five years of the proposal issue date of this RFP. Infrastructure is defined as: 1) construction of a healthcare facility; 2) construction for industrial buildings and warehouses; 3) nonresidential buildings, other than industrial buildings and warehouses; or 4) improvements such as utilities, landscaping, and roadways. “New Construction” is defined as construction that provides for new or expanded facilities or infrastructure. New construction does not include repair and/or modernization of an existing facility nor does it include replacement or upgrade to an existing infrastructure.
Not Relevant:Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.
Size Defintition:$1,000,000 or more
Complexity Definition:Complexity is defined as a design-build project that includes several specialty trades and some engineering.
Scope Definition:Scope is defined as work or activities related, or closely related to that which is outlined in the Statement of Work such as but not limited to; construction of new asphalt paving, compaction, grading, seal coating, striping, electrical and solar.
Recency Definition:For purposes of this evaluation, a recent project is defined as a project completed in the previous five (5) calendar years.
Project Definition:A project is defined as a construction project performed under a single task order or contract. For multiple award and indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity type contracts, the contract as a whole shall not be submitted as a project; rather Offerors shall submit the work performed under a task order as a project.
Prime Contractor:the Offeror (or JV Partner) must have been a Prime Contractor for the projects and each project shall be $25,000 or more in dollar value for Group 1 offerors

FIRM NAME

36C26118R0065

FACTOR 2 EXPERIENCE

GROUP 1

FIRM NAME
Experience - Project 1Title
Contract #
Project Description
Dollar Amount
Project DescriptionNew construction, Alteration, Repair, ect….
Construction TypeDesign-build / Design Bid Build, ect….
Completed Project?Yes / No
Recent (within five years)?Yes / No
On time?Yes / No
Performed as Prime Contractor?Yes / No
Self-Performance?% of self-performance
Joint Venture?Yes / No
Within VISN 21 Geographic Location?Yes / No
Experience - Project 2Title
Contract #
Project Description
Dollar Amount
Project DescriptionNew construction, Alteration, Repair, ect….
Construction TypeDesign-build / Design Bid Build, ect….
Completed Project?Yes / No
Recent (within five years)?Yes / No
On time?Yes / No
Performed as Prime Contractor?Yes / No
Self-Performance?% of self-performance
Joint Venture?Yes / No
Within VISN 21 Geographic Location?Yes / No
Experience - Project 3Title
Contract #
Project Description
Dollar Amount
Project DescriptionNew construction, Alteration, Repair, ect….
Construction TypeDesign-build / Design Bid Build, ect….
Completed Project?Yes / No
Recent (within five years)?Yes / No
On time?Yes / No
Performed as Prime Contractor?Yes / No
Self-Performance?% of self-performance
Joint Venture?Yes / No
Within VISN 21 Geographic Location?Yes / No
Experience - Project 4Title
Contract #
Project Description
Dollar Amount
Project DescriptionNew construction, Alteration, Repair, ect….
Construction TypeDesign-build / Design Bid Build, ect….
Completed Project?Yes / No
Recent (within five years)?Yes / No
On time?Yes / No
Performed as Prime Contractor?Yes / No
Self-Performance?% of self-performance
Joint Venture?Yes / No
Within VISN 21 Geographic Location?Yes / No
Experience - Project 5Title
Contract #
Project Description
Dollar Amount
Project DescriptionNew construction, Alteration, Repair, ect….
Construction TypeDesign-build / Design Bid Build, ect….
Completed Project?Yes / No
Recent (within five years)?Yes / No
On time?Yes / No
Performed as Prime Contractor?Yes / No
Self-Performance?% of self-performance
Joint Venture?Yes / No
Within VISN 21 Geographic Location?Yes / No
Experience - Project 6Title
Contract #
Project Description
Dollar Amount
Project DescriptionNew construction, Alteration, Repair, ect….
Construction TypeDesign-build / Design Bid Build, ect….
Completed Project?Yes / No
Recent (within five years)?Yes / No
On time?Yes / No
Performed as Prime Contractor?Yes / No
Self-Performance?% of self-performance
Joint Venture?Yes / No
Within VISN 21 Geographic Location?Yes / No
Overall RatingFOR GOVERNMENT USE ONLY
Basis for the RatingFOR GOVERNMENT USE ONLY

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .