47PF0024R0030 Sol_DB_2_Phase_Part_I_MAY 2025.pdf

GSA Solicitation No. 47PF0024R0030

Document: DB201-1/MAY 2025 (The Solicitation)

Design Build Contract for: Metzenbaum Courthouse Plaza Replacement and Structural Repairs Project

The Solicitation, Phase 1 – Request for Qualifications

Note: The Contract resulting from this Solicitation will be funded in part by Inflation Reduction Act (Pub. L. No. 117-169) (IRA) appropriations. The Contract contains IRA-specific requirements that include, but are not limited to, requirements regarding pricing, invoicing, submittals, materials, and construction. Offerors shall carefully review this Solicitation, the Agreement, and incorporated documents.

Table of Contents

I. General Information A. The Project B. The Solicitation and Contract C. List of Phase 1 Solicitation Documents D. Authorized Representatives E. Pre-Proposal Conference F. Estimated Price Range G. Questions Regarding Phase 1 H. Receipt of Qualifications

II. Proposals

A. Proposal Contents B. Proposal Format C. Technical Proposal D. Other Requirements E. Requirements of Joint Venture Offerors

III. General Provisions

A. Availability of Funds B. Requests for Clarification or Interpretation C. Notice to Small Business Firms D. Information Concerning the Disclosure of Solicitation Results E. Affirmative Procurement Program F. Notice Concerning Preparation of Proposals G. Bond Requirements (Phase 2 Requirements) H. Contractor Performance Information I. Safeguarding and Dissemination of Controlled Unclassified Information

(CUI) Building Information

J. INFORM

IV. FAR/GSAR Solicitation Provisions To be issued in Phase 2 A. GSAR 552.252-5 Authorized Deviations in Provisions (Nov

2021)(DEVIATION FAR 52.252-5)

V. Additional Solicitation Provisions and Instructions A. Additional Provisions

(i) GSAR 552.236-74, Evaluation of Options (Mar 2019)

(ii) GSAR Clause 552.236-77, Government’s Right to Exercise Options (Mar 2019)

VI. Method Of Award A. Evaluation of Phase 1 Proposals B. Evaluation of Phase 2 Proposals C. Determination of Responsibility

D. Price Realism E. Unbalanced Price F. Total Evaluated Price G. Non Price Factors H. Evaluation of Joint Ventures

I. General Information

I.A. The Project

This project seeks design and construction services for the improvements necessary to repair or replace the plaza and its structural support system for the safety of tenants and visitors and long term stabilization of the property.

This project will take place at the Howard M. Metzenbaum U.S. Courthouse in Cleveland, OH. The Metzenbaum Courthouse, built between 1903 and 1910, is a five-story structure designed in the neoclassical style. It is one of the most significant structures in Cleveland’s downtown cityscape and is listed in the National Register of Historic Places. The facade is clad with granite and remains essentially the same as when it was originally constructed. Between 2002 and 2005, the courthouse was modernized for the primary use of the Bankruptcy Courts after the District Courts relocated to the newly constructed Stokes Courthouse.

The Metzenbaum U.S. Courthouse is located at the center of Cleveland Ohio’s Public

Square. This prominent location adds to the building’s status as a Cleveland landmark.

The building is surrounded on three sides by a plaza that addresses the Public Square.

The plaza is heavily trafficked by pedestrians and supports two priceless Daniel

Chester French statues that are part of the GSA’s public art collection.

The plaza’s concrete, waterproofing membrane, and most of its supporting steel framing was last replaced in 1972, and the top slab was replaced in 1987. Shoring was installed over a decade ago to support the sidewalk vault structurally and to prevent the public sidewalk from collapsing. Maintenance and repairs are no longer sufficient for preventing water leaks through the plaza.

The plaza’s concrete structural slab is failing. Widespread deterioration under the plaza’s structural slab ranges from small spalls to large areas of complete delamination.

The damage has gone beyond concrete and reinforcing deterioration to significant loss of structural steel sections. The steel can be restored in some areas but will have to be replaced in others. The elevator lift that serves the mail screening room in the basement must remain operational during the project and will be used by the construction contractor for vertical conveyance. Refurbishment of the lift will be required after the plaza work is completed.

The foundation wall’s lack of waterproofing allows moisture and water to infiltrate through several cracks. Waterproofing that was applied in previous slab replacement projects only goes down a few feet below grade and has worn away. The remainder of the foundation wall has no waterproofing. The wall moisture has corroded the full height of the vertical steel channels at the inside face of the wall that are likely a key part of the wall’s strength.

The two significant Daniel Chester French statues are located on the south elevation of the building. The statues are supported by both the building exterior wall and the sidewalk slab. Movement and deterioration of the sidewalk slab create a risk of cracking in the statues. The original clay tile floor slab supporting the base of the statues has fallen away, leaving only unreinforced cement topping between the steel beams and the statue base. A new support system needs to be installed to isolate the statues from the sidewalk slab.

Notice 1: Clause and provision deviations dated February 2025 do not affect the following:

1. Any FAR subparts that are based on statute or are not covered by E.O.

11246 such as:

a. FAR subparts 22.13, Equal Opportunity for Veterans and its related clauses and provisions; and

b. FAR subpart 22.14, Employment of Workers and Disabilities.

2. Existing U.S. laws on civil rights, nondiscrimination, or any laws that generally apply to a company regardless of whether it is a government contractor.

End of Notice

Notice 2:

System updates may lag policy updates. The System for Award Management (SAM) may continue to require entities to complete representations based on provisions that are not included in agency solicitations, including FAR 52.222- 25, Affirmative Action Compliance, 52.223-22, Public Disclosure of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Reduction Goals—Representation and paragraph (t) of FAR 52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications— Commercial Products and Commercial Services..

GSA will not consider or use these representations. Entities are not required to, nor are they able to, update their entity registration to remove these representations in SAM.

End of Notice

NOTICE 3: February 2025 clause or provision deviations are available in class deviations CD-2025-04 (February 15, 2025) and CD-2025-05 with Supplement 1

(March 7, 2025), available at https://www.gsa.gov/policy-regulations/policy/acquisiti2on-policy/acquisition-policy-library-and-resources#tab--Class-deviations) https://www.gsa.gov/policy-regulations/policy/acquisition-policy/acquisition-policy-library-and-resources#tab--Class-deviations https://www.gsa.gov/policy-regulations/policy/acquisition-policy/acquisition-policy-library-and-resources#tab--Class-deviations https://www.gsa.gov/policy-regulations/policy/acquisition-policy/acquisition-policy-library-and-resources#tab--Class-deviations

End of Notice

I.B. the Solicitation and Contract

(1) This procurement is being conducted using the two phase selection process found in FAR 36.3. Qualification proposals will be evaluated in Phase One to determine which offerors will submit proposals for Phase Two. One contract will be awarded using competitive negotiation. In Phase 1, GSA will select a short list of the most highly qualified offerors and request that those offerors submit Phase 2 proposals. All responsible sources may submit a Phase 1 proposal. A maximum of 5 firms will be selected to submit Phase 2 proposals. Only those selected offerors are authorized to submit Phase 2 proposals. Those offerors not selected for participation in Phase 2 will be notified in accordance with FAR 15.503(a).

(2) This Solicitation sets forth requirements for Phase 1 qualifications proposals and the evaluation factors for Phase 2 proposals for a Contract to construct the Project.

Proposals conforming to the Solicitation requirements will be evaluated in accordance with the Method of Award set forth herein. The Government will award the Contract to the selected Offeror, subject to the conditions set forth herein.

(3) Neither the Solicitation nor any part of an Offeror's proposal shall be part of the

Contract except to the extent expressly incorporated therein by the Contracting Officer.

I.C. List of Phase 1 Solicitation Documents

The Solicitation Documents are comprised of:

(1) The Solicitation – Phase 1

(2) Offeror Representations and Certifications Form

(3) Standard Form (SF) 1442 – Solicitation Offer and Award

(4) Draft of the Agreement

(5) The Scope of Work

I.D. Authorized Representatives

The following individuals are designated as the authorized GSA representatives under this Solicitation:

Authorized Representative Information:

Contracting Officer’s Information

Name: Anna Vanko

Authorized Representative Information:

Address: 200 N. High St, Rm 607, Columbus, OH 43215

Telephone: 614-469-2791

Email: anna.vanko@gsa.gov

I.E. Pre-Proposal Conference

Interested parties must notify the Contracting Officer for further information about attendance and to confirm location, time, and date. Only those parties who have notified the Contracting Officer and provided necessary information in advance of the meeting will be allowed to attend. Please see the provided PreProposal Conference Registration

Form, and return to the Contracting Officer no later than 12:00pm EST on Wednesday

June 25, 2025. To request reasonable accommodation due to a disability, contact the

Contracting Officer. Please note, contractors will be required to wear a hardhat for a portion of the walk-through. Hardhats must be provided by the offeror; GSA is unable to provide hardhats for those participating. The PreProposal Conference will be held at the following date and time:

Date: June 26, 2025

Time: 1:00pm EST

Location: 201 Superior Avenue, Cleveland, Ohio 44114

I.F. Estimated Price Range

The estimated price range for the Project is between $18,000,000.00 and $28,000,000.00.

I.G. Questions Regarding Phase 1

Submit all questions regarding the Phase 1 to the Contracting Officer on or before 7/2/2025. Any responses provided by GSA will be posted on the Governmentwide Point of Entry (GPE) as an Amendment to the Solicitation.

I.H. Receipt of Qualifications

(1) In order to be considered for Phase 2 and award, Phase 1 qualifications proposals conforming to the requirements of the Solicitation must be received at the following office no later than 4:00 pm Eastern time on the following date and at the following address.

Date: 7/15/2025

Address: anna.vanko@gsa.gov

II. Proposals

II.A. Proposal Contents

Proposals shall consist of the following documents, completed and executed in accordance with this Solicitation:

1. Technical Proposal

2. Proprietary Information Agreement(s)

3. Acknowledgement of all amendments

4. Proof of bonding

5. Other Documents as Required

II.B. Proposal Format

Firms having the capability to perform the services will be invited to respond to the RFP posted on the SAM.gov website.

Offerors who then wish to submit an offer will be required to submit one digital copy of their Phase I Proposal. The subject line of the email shall include “47PF0024R0030 Metzenbaum Plaza Repairs Phase I” followed by the firm(s) name. Emails, including message body, headers, and attachments are limited to 25MB. Zip files are acceptable, but the following attachment type/extensions are not permitted in any email incoming to GSA, including inside zip files: ade, adp, asx, bas, bat, BHx, cer, chm, cmd, com, cpl, crt, dbx, dll, exe, hta, htp, inf, ins, isp, js, jse, lnk, mda, mde, mdz, msc, msi, msp, mst, nch, pcd, pif, prf, reg, scf, scr, sct, shb, shs, url, vb, vbe, vbs, wms, wsc, wsf, wsh, htm, 7z.

The Phase I Proposal shall not contain more than 50 numbered pages inclusive of the table of contents, charts, exhibits, and any other materials the Offeror deems required for each evaluation factor listed herein for which the offeror is addressing.

Acknowledgment of any amendment(s) are not included in the 50 page requirement.

II.C. Technical Proposal

Proposals must address the technical approach, technical qualifications, and the other Phase 1 evaluation factors stated herein, see Section VI.G. for further details. Any proposal not meeting all of the following criteria may result in not being further considered for award.

II.D. Other Information to be Submitted with Proposals

(1) Representations and Certifications

Offerors are reminded their SAM registration status must be “Active”, at the time their offer is submitted and at time of award, to be considered for award (see 52.204-7).

Offerors submitting a proposal in response to this Solicitation shall complete electronic Annual Representations and Certifications in conjunction with required Entity registration in System for Award Management (SAM), accessed via System for Award Management. Offerors shall also submit with their proposal, the Annual Representations and Certifications (FAR 52.204-8), using the attached Offeror’s Representations and Certifications (C301).

(2) Proof of Bonding to $28,000,000.00

(3) Proprietary Information Agreement(s)

Offerors are advised that employees of a Construction Manager as Agent (CMa) firm may require access to your firm’s proprietary information in performing advisory and assistance services for the Government under separate contract. These individuals will be authorized access only to such information that is necessary to enable them to perform their respective duties. Such firm(s) are expressly prohibited from competing on the subject acquisition. A CMa firm has not yet been awarded for this project, but the contact information for the selected firm will be provided at a later date.

Pursuant to FAR Part 9.505-4(b), these firms must execute an agreement with each offeror that states that they will (1) protect the offerors’ information from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary and (2) refrain from using the information for any purpose other than that for which it was furnished.

To expedite the evaluation process, each offeror must contact the above-listed firm(s) to effect execution of such an agreement prior to the submission of proposals. Each offeror must submit copies of any such agreement(s) with their proposal.

II.E. Requirements of Joint Venture Offerors

(1) All offers submitted by joint ventures must include a copy of an executed joint venture agreement (with original signatures) which fully discloses the legal identity of each member of the joint venture, the relationship between the members, the form of ownership of each member, and any limitations on liability or authority for each member.

(2) An authorized representative of each member of the joint venture must sign the SF

1442 accompanying an offer regardless of any agency relationship established between the members.

(3) In the case of corporations that are joint venture members, the corporation secretary must certify that the corporation is authorized to participate in the joint venture, either by certifying in the joint venture agreement, or by submitting a separate certification to the Government. The joint venture must also provide a certificate that https://www.sam.gov/ https://www.sam.gov/ identifies a principal representative of the joint venture with full authority to bind the joint venture.

(4) Representations and certifications, financial information, and past performance information must be submitted for each member of the joint venture.

III. General Provisions

III.A. Availability of Funds

Issuance of this Solicitation does not warrant that funds are presently available for award of a Contract. Award of the contract shall be subject to the availability of appropriated funds, and the Government shall incur no obligation under this Solicitation in advance of contract award.

III.B. Requests for Clarification or Interpretation

The Government will attempt to answer all requests for clarifications or interpretations of the Solicitation Documents prior to the date set for receipt of offers, but do not warrant that all such requests will be answered within 10 calendar days. Prospective Offerors should make such requests not less than 10 calendar days prior to the date set for receipt of offers.

III.C. Notice to Small Business Firms

A program for the purpose of assisting qualified small business concerns in obtaining certain bid, payment, or performance bonds that are otherwise not obtainable is available through the Small Business Administration (SBA) (Small Business Administration). For information concerning SBA's surety bond guarantee assistance, contact your SBA District Office.

III.D. Information Concerning the Disclosure of Solicitation Results

In accordance with FAR 3.104, after receipt of proposals, no information regarding the identity of those submitting offers, the number of offers received, or the information contained in such offers will be made available until after award.

III.E. Affirmative Procurement Program

GSA has implemented an Affirmative Procurement Program (APP) intended to maximize the use of recovered materials, environmentally preferable, and bio-based products. Offerors should familiarize themselves with the requirements for using and reporting on the use of such materials in performance as set forth in the Agreement.

III.F. Notice Concerning Preparation of Proposals

Offerors are cautioned to carefully read the entire Solicitation and the Agreement to be included in the Contract contemplated by the Solicitation in order to be fully aware of all http://www.sba.gov/ http://www.sba.gov/ requirements and clauses in the contemplated Contract. Verify that all blanks requiring information to be supplied in an Offer have been properly filled out, that all pricing and other numerical data is accurately calculated, and that all copies of the Offer contain the same information.

III.G. Bond Requirements (Phase 2 Requirements)

If a bid guarantee is required to be submitted with your offer, any contract awarded will require a performance bond and payment bond as specified in the Agreement. Offerors who utilize individual sureties should note the requirement for a certified, audited, financial statement for each person acting as an individual surety under clause FAR 52.228-1 Bid Guarantee and the requirements of clause FAR 52.228-11 Pledge of Assets.

III.H. Contractor Performance Information

(1) Evaluating Contractor Performance: The General Services Administration is using the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) module as the secure, confidential, information management tool to facilitate the performance evaluation process. CPARS enables a comprehensive evaluation by capturing comments from both GSA and the contractor. The website for CPARS is Contractor Performance Assessment

Completed CPARS evaluations may then be used by the Federal acquisition community for use in making source selection decisions. CPARS assists acquisition officials by serving as the single source for contractor past performance data.

(2) CPARS Registration: Each award requiring an evaluation must be registered in CPARS. The contractor will receive several automated emails. Within thirty days of award, the contractor will receive an e-mail that contains user account information, as well as the applicable contract and order number(s) assigned. Contractors will be granted one user account to access all evaluations.

(3) Contractor CPARS Training: Contractors may sign up for CPARS training. A schedule of classes will be posted to the CPARS training site (CPARS Training) and updated as needed.

(4) Contractor Representative (CR) Role: All evaluations will be sent the Contractor Representative (CR) named on your award. The CR will be able to access CPARS to review and comment on the evaluation. If your CR is not already in the CPARS system, the contracting officer will request the name and email address of the person that will be responsible for the CR role on your award.

Once an evaluation is ready to be released the CR will receive an email alerting them the evaluation is ready for their review and comment. The email will indicate the time frame the CR has to respond to the evaluation; however, the CR may return the evaluation earlier than this date.

http://www.cpars.gov/ http://www.cpars.gov/ https://www.cpars.gov/lc.htm

GSA shall provide for review at a level above the contracting officer (i.e., contracting director) to consider any disagreement between GSA and the contractor regarding GSA’s evaluation of the contractor. Based on the review, the individual at a level above the contracting officer will issue the ultimate conclusion on the performance evaluation.

Copies of the evaluations, contractor responses, and review comments, if any, will be retained as part of the contract file.

III.I. Safeguarding and Dissemination of Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) Building Information

Certain information contained in the Solicitation Documents may have been designated as Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) building information. With respect to such information, Offerors shall agree to the terms for receipt of such information, as set forth in the provision “Administrative Matters” in Section III of the Agreement, as a condition of receipt of such information.

III.J. INFORM

A. Overview of the IN-depth Feedback through Open Reporting Methods (INFORM) Process

This solicitation is part of GSA’s post award communication process called INFORM. The process is designed to enhance the quality and usefulness of post-award communications by providing greater transparency and openness into the procurement process. INFORM seeks to increase GSA-industry communication by providing clearer and more complete information to explain the award decision.

Through the INFORM process, GSA will seek to share additional information with offerors in writing and/or through an oral feedback meeting1 that is not required by statute or regulation. For Part 15 including mandatory debriefs and Part 16, and in addition to any information required by FAR 15.503 and 15.506, GSA is providing each offeror with the opportunity to participate in the INFORM process as further discussed below.

B. Detailed Description of the INFORM Process

B.1. Component 1 - Notification of Award

After award and in accordance with any post-award notification timeframes required by regulation (i.e., FAR Parts 15.503(b) and 16.505(b)(6)), the contracting officer will issue written notices to the successful and unsuccessful offerors (the Notification Letter and Evaluation Statement (NLES)). The notices will contain:

1 The oral feedback meeting may be held in person or via an electronic means.

● All information required by statute or regulation;

● An unredacted copy of the complete technical evaluation for that particular offeror that includes a full description of the unsuccessful offeror’s strengths, weaknesses, risks, and deficiencies;

● An overall technical evaluation summary for that particular offeror and the successful offeror that includes evaluated price; overall technical ranking, rating, or score.

B.2. Component 2 - Request for Oral Feedback Meeting or Written Questions

Within three business days after receipt of the NLES, an offeror may, but is not required to:

● submit a written request to the contracting officer for an oral feedback meeting;

● submit a list of written questions to the contracting officer; or

● take no further action.

If the offeror timely elects to request an oral feedback meeting or submit a list of written questions, GSA will consider any such request to constitute a required debriefing pursuant to FAR 15.506. If an offeror does not request an oral feedback meeting or submit a list of written questions within the three day time period, the receipt of the NLES concludes the INFORM process and satisfies the FAR requirement for debriefs pursuant to FAR 15.506.

If the offeror submits a list of written questions in lieu of the oral feedback meeting, the contracting officer will attempt to respond within five business days of receipt of the written questions. Unless otherwise stated, the contracting officer’s response to the written questions will conclude the INFORM process and any corresponding post-award debriefing as further set forth at FAR 15.506.

If the offeror requests an oral feedback meeting, the offeror should provide the following information:

● Primary point of contact;

● List of participants with titles (e.g., Senior Vice President);

● List of topics to assist GSA better prepare for the oral feedback meeting;

and

● Preference for in-person, telephone, or web-based conferencing (if available).

B.3. Component 3 - Oral Feedback Meeting

During the oral feedback meeting, GSA’s objectives are to provide:

● Reasonable responses to written questions submitted by the offeror;

● Explanations for the evaluation conclusions and contract award decisions;

● Any additional information about the fairness and impartiality of the evaluation and why the award decision was rational;

● Reasonable responses to additional questions raised during the meeting;

● Additional transparency into the underlying competition process; and,

● A greater understanding of the evaluation and award process.

GSA will not provide any information that is prohibited by law or regulation.

B.4. Component 4 - Post Oral Feedback Meeting Questions

Within two business days after the conclusion of the oral feedback meeting, the offeror may submit a list of written questions to the contracting officer. The contracting officer will provide a written response within five business days and, unless otherwise noted by the contracting officer, the INFORM process and any corresponding post-award debriefing as further set forth at FAR 15.506 will have concluded.

If the offeror elects not to submit a list of written questions within two days after the oral feedback meeting, the INFORM process and any corresponding post-award debriefing as further set forth at FAR 15.506 is concluded.

IV. FAR/GSAR Solicitation Provisions

To be issued with Phase 2 Solicitation.

IV.A. GSAR 552.252-5 Authorized Deviations in Provisions (Nov 2021)(DEVIATION

FAR 52.252-5)

(a) Deviations to FAR provisions. This solicitation identifies any authorized deviation to a Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) (48 CFR chapter 1) provision by—

(1) The addition of “(DEVIATION)” after the date of the FAR provision when an authorized deviation to a FAR provision is being used, and

(2) The addition of “(DEVIATION FAR (provision number))” after the date of the GSAR provision when a GSAR provision is being used in lieu of a FAR provision.

(b) Deviations to GSAR provisions. This solicitation identifies any authorized deviation to a General Services Administration Acquisition Regulation (GSAR) (48 CFR chapter 5) provision by the addition of “(DEVIATION)” after the date of the provision.

(c) “Substantially the same as” provisions. Changes in wording of provisions prescribed for use on a “substantially the same as” basis are not considered deviations.

V. Additional Solicitation Provisions and Instructions

V.A. Additional Provisions

(i) GSAR 552.236-74, Evaluation of Options (MAR 2019)

The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(ii) GSAR 552.236-77, Government’s Right to Exercise Options (MAR 2019) (a)The Government may exercise any option in writing in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract within 120 days of award. Unless otherwise specified, options may be exercised within 90 calendar days of contract award.

(b) If the Government exercises the option, the contract shall be considered to include this option clause.

VI. Method of Award

VI.A. Evaluation of Phase 1 Proposals

The Government will evaluate Phase 1 proposals based on the following evaluation factors and short list a maximum of three offerors to submit Phase 2 proposals. Non- Price Factors, when combined, are significantly more important than Total Evaluated Price.

PHASE I EVALUATION CRITERIA ELEMENTS - WEIGHTED POINTS

1. Technical Qualifications

a. Subfactor 1.A: Experience of the General Contractor and A/E 40

b. Subfactor 1.B: Past Performance of the General Contractor and A/E 15

2. Approach to Design Build

3. Lead Designer

Total Points = 100

VI.B. Evaluation of Phase 2 Proposals The Government will award a contract resulting from this Solicitation to the responsible Offeror whose offer conforming to the Solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, Total Evaluated Price and other factors considered. In addition to Total Evaluated Price, the following Phase 2 non-price factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

PHASE II EVALUATION CRITERIA ELEMENTS - WEIGHTED POINTS

1. Quality of Design Concept 40

2. Qualifications, Experience and Past Performance of Key Personnel 35

3. Management and Technical Approach 25 Total Points = 100

VI.C. Determination of Responsibility

In order to be considered responsible, an Offeror must demonstrate that it meets the requirements of FAR 9.104-1. The Contracting Officer's determination of an Offeror's responsibility or non-responsibility may be based upon any information obtained by the Contracting Officer, and is independent of the evaluation of offers set forth herein.

VI.D. Price Analysis and Price Realism Analysis

(1) The Contracting Officer will use Price Analysis to analyze the Offeror’s proposal to ensure that the final agreed-to-price is fair and reasonable. In performing Price Analysis, the Contracting Officer may use, singly or in combination with others, the analytical techniques described in FAR 15.404-1, to ensure that the final price is fair and reasonable. The Contracting Officer may request the advice and assistance of other experts to ensure that appropriate Price Analysis is performed.

(2) In addition, the Contracting Officer will use Price Realism Analysis in conjunction with the evaluation of the offeror’s (fill in the appropriate non-price factor) to measure an Offeror's understanding of the requirements and to assess the risk inherent in an Offeror's proposal. Accordingly, Offerors are advised that a business decision to submit significantly low pricing will be considered as reflecting on their understanding or the risk associated with their proposals. Price Realism Analysis will not be used for the purpose of determining the probable cost to the Government.

VI.E. Unbalanced Prices

Offers must include balanced prices. Unbalanced pricing may increase performance risk and could result in payment of unreasonably high prices. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly over or understated as indicated by the application of price analysis techniques. All offers with separately priced line items or subline items shall be analyzed to determine if the prices are unbalanced. If price analysis techniques indicate that an offer is unbalanced, the contracting officer shall: (i) Consider the risks to the Government associated with the unbalanced pricing in determining the competitive range and in making the source selection decision; and (ii) Consider whether award of the contract will result in paying unreasonably high prices for contract performance. An offer may be rejected if the contracting officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

VI.F. Total Evaluated Price

Total Evaluated Price shall be calculated using the prices indicated in the Phase 2 Price Proposal using the formula in the Phase 2 Solicitation.

VI.G. Non-Price Factors

PHASE I

PHASE I EVALUATION CRITERIA ELEMENTS WEIGHTED POINTS

1. Technical Qualifications

a. Subfactor 1.A: Experience of the GC and A/E 40 points

b. Subfactor 1.B: Past Performance of the GC and A/E 15 points

2. Approach to Design Build 20 points

3. Lead Designer 25 points

Total Points = 100

EVALUATION FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL QUALIFICATIONS (55 Points)

SUBFACTOR 1.A: EXPERIENCE OF THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND A/E (40

Points)

This evaluation factor considers the extent of the past experience of the General Contractor and A/E members of the Offeror’s design-build (DB) team. For purposes of this evaluation factor, the term A/E is defined as an individual, firm, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity permitted by law to practice the profession of architecture and engineering that will have responsibility for developing detailed design and construction documents.

Submittal Requirements

Each Offeror shall provide sufficient documentation in order to demonstrate the extent of the Offeror’s past experience for at least three (3) but no more than five (5) similar projects. Of this group of similar projects, the General Contractor must have served as the prime contractor of at least one project and the A/E must have had responsibility for developing the detailed design and construction documents for at least one project.

ALL projects must meet the following minimum requirements:

● Construction was substantially completed within fifteen years of the submission deadline for Phase 1 proposals;

● Construction contract cost at award was greater than or equal to $15 million; and

● The project was delivered by Design-Build or Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) methods. For purposes of this evaluation factor, IPD is defined as the execution of a multiparty agreement in which the owner or developer contracted with a single Offeror to provide all, or substantially all, of the design and construction services for that project.

Similar is defined as a plaza repair and replacement, including waterproofing and subgrade structural concrete and steel repairs. Projects will be considered more similar if they exhibit some or all of the following characteristics:

● Construction on an occupied government or similar commercial property;

● Construction included the construction and/or complete replacement of a plaza, including subgrade features or sidewalk vaults, site utilities, storm drainage, grading, and/or security;

● Construction occurred on a historically significant facility;

● Construction included multiple phases and spanned multiple years;

● Construction took place near a transportation corridor and included coordination with public transportation (i.e. train tracks/station, bus stops);

● Construction took place in a similar climate:

● Construction took place within a similar urban community (i.e. central business district) that required coordination with the local municipality;

● Construction required protection of significant historic architectural or artistic features.

Provide the following information for each similar project:

● Companies performing the project (offeror, GC, DOR)

● Project title and location of the project

● Contract type and Contractor's Responsibilities (Scope of Work)

● Name, current telephone number and email address of the owner’s representative most knowledgeable of the project

● Owner and/or Occupants(s)/Tenant(s)

● Contract number for Federal Government projects

● Contract Cost at Award and Contract Cost at Completion

● Roles of Offeror’s team members on the project (prime or subcontractor/subconsultant)

● Facility details, including type of facility, tenant mission and population, square footage, security level, LEED certification, etc.

● Special Features (Historic Consideration, significant protections for historic or artistic features, etc)

● Contract Award Date, Scheduled Contract Completion, actual Date of Substantial

Completion, and the Date of Final Completion

● Modifications - number and total amount that are attributable to unforeseen conditions and/or design deficiencies.

● A Narrative explaining how the characteristics of the submitted project relate to the characteristics of the project described in this solicitation.

● Images of completed work referenced.

Standard for Evaluation The standard is met when the Offeror submits at least three (3) similar projects.

Additional favorable consideration will be given for the following:

● The General Contractor and the A/E firm worked on the same project; and

● A project possesses more than three of the characteristics for consideration as more similar, listed above.

SUBFACTOR 1.B: PAST PERFORMANCE OF THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND

A/E (15 Points).

This factor considers the Offeror’s past performance in providing design and construction services on the projects submitted by the Offeror under Evaluation Factor 1A. Past performance will be evaluated to determine the probability that the Offeror will successfully perform the project identified in the RFQ based on demonstrated past performance. The Offeror’s past performance will be evaluated based on the information provided on the past performance questionnaires and any other sources the Government uses to obtain such information, such as CPARs/FAPIIS. In the case of the 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.

Information Required:

Past Performance Questionnaires (“PPQ”):

Offerors shall be responsible for initiating a request for at least one questionnaire for each of the projects submitted as “similar” under Factor 1.The PPQ is included in the solicitation as Attachment “PBS_Past_Performance_Form”. The Offeror shall follow the instructions for completing and submitting the PPQs, which are due no later than the Phase I proposal due date and time. The questionnaire information relates to ratings of the Offeror’s timeliness of performance, cost control, quality of product, business relationship, continuity of personnel, qualification of personnel, etc. Offerors are responsible for ensuring the references provided are willing and available to complete the questionnaires on time, and also willing to be contacted by the Government.

The Government intends for the contractor to contact their references directly, and that the references respond with a completed PPQ to be submitted directly to the Contracting Officer (CO), prior to the due date of the proposal. The CO also reserves the right to contact those individuals who provide references for the Offeror to verify that the services provided comply with the similarity requirements of this RFP and to assist with the assessment of the quality of those services provided through a Past Performance Questionnaire. In addition to the references provided by the Offeror, the Government may solicit other sources to find references for other relevant, similar work performed by the Offeror.

The Government also reserves the right to use other government data available in its assessment of the offeror. The quality of the reference information supplied will be considered.

Submittal Requirements: The Offeror is responsible for ensuring submission of a PPQ for EACH project submitted under Evaluation Factor 1A: EXPERIENCE OF THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND A/E. References must have thorough knowledge of the details of the Offeror’s performance (such as the Project Manager, Building Owner, or Contracting Official associated with the project) for the majority of the contract performance period, so that the reference may sufficiently respond to the questionnaire.

Offerors should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ for each reference, which will provide contract and client information for the project in the event the PPQ is not received by the Contracting Officer at the time proposals are due (this does not obligate the government to contact references).

Completed PPQs should be submitted directly to the Contracting Officer. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submission of questionnaires. All completed Past Performance Questionnaires shall be submitted via email to anna.vanko@gsa.gov prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs (by reference or otherwise).

If any problems were encountered on the identified contracts for which the Offeror has submitted references, the contractor may provide a brief narrative describing the nature of the problems and the corrective action taken.

Standard for Evaluation The standard is met when:

1. Responses provided for projects outlined in Subfactor 1A: Experience of the GC and A/E, provided favorable evaluations indicating that the projects have met or exceeded the customer's requirements as set forth in the construction contract documents (drawings and specifications) in a timely manner, and within established budgets.

Factor 2: Approach to Design-Build (20 points)

This factor considers the Offeror’s approach to establishing a design-build team that will proactively and collaboratively work together to satisfy the Government’s objectives, including the realization of Design Excellence. For purposes of this evaluation factor, “Design Excellence” refers to GSA’s Design Excellence (DE) Program which seeks a holistic approach (incorporating expertise in many areas, including but not limited to architecture, engineering, historic rehabilitation, sustainability, and construction) that delivers value by producing high quality, high performance facilities on budget and on time. DE further seeks to commission our nation’s most talented constructors, designers, and artists to design, construct, and modernize federal buildings of outstanding quality and value. These projects are to demonstrate the value of integrated design that balances aesthetics, cost, functionality, constructability, and reliability;

creating environmentally superior workplaces for federal employees; and giving contemporary form and meaning to our democratic values.

Submittal Requirements Each Offeror must submit a written narrative concerning its approach to the DB process.

Standard for Evaluation The narrative must discuss each of the subjects set forth below; the bullets are not subfactors; rather, they are elements the Government will consider when evaluating the Offeror’s proposal.

a. Community Approach: The Offeror should demonstrate how they plan to work closely with GSA and external stakeholder organizations to minimize disruptions to the local transit system, overall pedestrian experience and avoid adverse impacts to adjacent infrastructure and cultural programming. Meeting both the needs of the community and of GSA will be critical throughout the project and in the final result. The Government expects clear, thoughtful phrases that demonstrate the ability of the team to communicate ideas.

b. Management Process: The Offeror shall describe their overall management approach to DB and should discuss topics such as; planning, decision making;

the lines and methods of communication, interaction with consultants;

NEPA/NHPA Consultation, the means to integrate client and community input;

the physical location of major design and production work vs project location; the role of specialty contractors; uses of technology and innovation, cost management, and their ability to control and ensure the maintenance of design quality during design execution and construction. The Government will evaluate the probability that the Offeror’s management process will result in a cohesive and collaborative team effort.

c. Design Excellence: The Offeror’s approach to supporting and collaborating as a cohesive team in order to realize Design Excellence. The Government will evaluate the probability that the Offeror will realize Design Excellence on this project.

The standard is met when:

a. The Offeror’s philosophy, design and community intent is suitable for this project;

b. There is a satisfactory probability that the Offeror’s management process will result in a cohesive and collaborative team effort; and

c. There is a satisfactory probability that the Offeror will realize Design Excellence on this project.

Additional favorable consideration may be given for any of the following:

● Clearly demonstrated and defined corporate values and corporate philosophies.

Factor 3: Lead Designer (25 points) This factor considers the Lead Design Engineer or Architects portfolio in the context of Design Excellence and considers the extent of the design lead's past experience and the quality of their past performance. This factor also considers the Lead Designer’s philosophy and design intent which considers their flexibility and attitude towards design. For purposes of this evaluation factor, the term “Lead Designer” means an individual or team of designers who will have the primary responsibility to develop the concept and the project design, this may include designers from both engineering and architecture disciplines. For purposes of this evaluation factor, “Design Excellence” has the same meaning as stated in Evaluation Factor 2.

Submittal Requirements Each Offeror must submit the information requested below. The following are not subfactors, but, rather, are elements the Government will consider when evaluating the Offeror’s proposal.

a. Submit a portfolio representative of the Lead Designer’s ability to provide Design Excellence and ability to demonstrate innovation and creativity. Address his or her participation in each project.

i. If the Lead Designer is an individual, submit a portfolio of up to three (3) projects completed in the last 10 years (maximum of 5 five pages per project).

ii. If the Lead Designer is a team, submit a portfolio of up to two (2) completed projects by each of the lead designer(s) on the team (maximum of 5 five pages per project).

1. If the Lead Designer is a team, the team should not include more than two individuals.

iii. Each project must include a narrative that addresses the design approach with salient features and discuss how the client's program, functionality, image, mission, economics, schedule, and operational objects were satisfied by the overall design/planning solution. Include tangible evidence such as certificates, awards, or peer recognition demonstrating Design Excellence.

iv. In addition to the page limits above, each Offeror may include:

1. One of the following for each project: a representative floor plan, a site plan, a rendered 3D model, a building section, or other appropriate drawing, and

2. Two pages of photographs for each project.

v. Identify and describe areas of responsibility and commitment to each project.

Standard for Evaluation The standard is met when:

a. The submission demonstrates an understanding of the design and engineering issues to be addressed in the project identified in the RFQ as evidenced by the projects that the Offeror chose to submit for this evaluation factor;

b. The submission portrays appropriate responses to client criteria and needs, demonstrates design leadership, and clearly exemplifies Design Excellence.

Additional favorable consideration may be given for any of the following:

● Lead Designer has a track record of delivering superior quality;

● Lead Designer demonstrates history of dedication to clients with complex building projects;

● Designs demonstrate a consistently high level of exploration, rigor, and personal commitment to Design Excellence;

● The portfolio includes a similar project as defined in Evaluation Factor 1

VI.H. Evaluation of Joint Venture Offerors

In the evaluation of responsibility and non-price factors, information submitted for a party to the joint venture will only be evaluated to the extent that the terms of the joint venture agreement do not limit such party's performance or financial obligations as a party to the Contract contemplated by this Solicitation.