10 Houston Solicitation 2020 12 21.pdf

GSA Solicitation No. 47PH0818R0004

Document: C201-SB / DEC 2017

(The Solicitation)

Multiple Award Indefinite-Delivery Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) Task Order Contract for Construction, Repair, and Alteration, with Design-Build and Incidental Abatement for GSA/PBS Region 7

The Solicitation AMENDMENT 38, opening Houston Zone for proposals.

Notice to Offerors of Total Small Business Set-Aside

The General Services Administration (GSA) is setting aside the contract under the following clause found in the Agreement:

FAR 52.219-6, Notice of Total Small Business Set Aside

Table of Contents

I. General Information A. The Solicitation and Contract B. List of Solicitation Documents C. Authorized Representatives D. Pre-Proposal Conference E. Estimated Contract Value F. Receipt of Offers

II. Proposals A. Proposal Contents B. Proposal Format C. Price Proposal D. Technical Proposal E. Other Information to be Submitted with Proposal F. Requirements for 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. Contractor Performance Information H. Safeguarding Documents Designated as Sensitive But Unclassified

IV. FAR/GSAR Solicitation Provisions

A. FAR 52.211-1 Availability of Specifications Listed in the GSA Index of Federal Specifications, Standards and Commercial Item Descriptions, FPMR Part 101-

B. FAR 52.211-3 Availability of Specifications Not Listed in the GSA Index of Federal Specifications, Standards and Commercial Item Descriptions

C. FAR 52.203-2 Certificate of Independent Price Determination D. FAR 52.216-1 Type of Contract

E. FAR 52.216-18 Ordering F. FAR 52.216-22 Indefinite Quantity G. FAR 52.216-32 Task-Order and Delivery-Order Ombudsman H. FAR 52.222-5 Construction Wage Rate Requirements—Secondary Site of the Work I. FAR 52.222-23 Notice of Requirement for Affirmative Action to Ensure Equal

Employment Opportunity for Construction J. FAR 52.233-2 Service of Protest K. FAR 52.225-10 Notice of Buy American Requirement-Construction Materials L. FAR 52.225-12 Notice of Buy American Requirement-Construction Materials

Under Trade Agreements M. Buy American Exceptions N. FAR 52.252-1 Solicitation Provisions Incorporated by Reference O. GSAR 552.102 Incorporating Provisions and Clauses

V. Instructions to Offerors and Clauses

A. FAR 52.215-1 Instructions to Offerors—Competitive Acquisition B. FAR 52.219-14 Limitations on Subcontracting C. FAR 52.222-62 Paid Sick Leave under Executive Order 13706 D. Additional Security Requirements E. Additional Clauses

VI. Method of Award A. Evaluation of Offers B. Determination of Responsibility C. Price Reasonableness D. Unbalanced Prices E. Total Evaluated Price F. Non-Price Factors G. Evaluation of Joint Venture Offerors

I. General Information

I.A. The Solicitation and Contract

(1) This Solicitation is set-aside for Small Businesses in accordance with FAR 19. This Solicitation sets forth requirements for proposals for contracts to provide the services described in the attached Agreement. Proposals conforming to the Solicitation requirements will be evaluated in accordance with the Method of Award set forth herein.

The Government will award contracts to the selected Offerors, subject to the conditions set forth herein.

(2) 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.

For this procurement, the Offeror’s Pricing Proposal Form and Solicitation sections I.E., II.F., III.G., and IV. will be incorporated into the contract.

(3) An Offeror's proposal submitted in response to this Solicitation shall constitute a firm offer. No contract shall be formed unless and until the Contracting Officer has countersigned the SF1442 submitted by an Offeror, and delivered to the Contractor a copy of the SF1442 with original signatures together with the Agreement reflecting the Offeror's proposed prices.

I.B. List of Solicitation Documents

The Solicitation Documents are comprised of:

(1) The Solicitation

(2) The Agreement and Attachments to the Agreement

(3) Contractor’s Qualification and Financial Information (GSA Form 527)

(4) Offeror Representations and Certifications (GSA Form C301)

(5) Solicitation Offer and Award (SF1442)

(6) Base IDIQ Statement of Work

(7) Hypothetical Projects, Statements of Work and attachments

(8) Pricing Proposal Form

(9) Task order price proposal format requirements

(10) Zonal map

(11) Counties with required RFP participation

(12) Solicitation Response Form

(13) PBS Past Performance Questionnaire Form

(14) Subcontractor Consent Form

I.C. Authorized Representatives

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

Primary Point of Contact (POC) for the Houston Zone

Name: Marsha Howard Address: 819 Taylor St / Fort Worth, TX 76102

Email: r7idiq.ht@gsa.gov (for preaward only)

I.D. Pre-Proposal Conference

(1) Awards will be staggered by zone. The first twelve zones competed and awarded are listed below, and no proposals are being accepted for any of the closed zones. The zone currently open for proposals is the Houston Zone. Note: the table below is not necessarily the order in which these zones were solicited.

Dallas to Shreveport Zone Closed

Fort Worth Zone Closed

West Oklahoma Zone Closed

Border El Paso Zone Closed

Arkansas Zone Closed

Border San Antonio Zone Closed

Tulsa to Fayetteville Zone Closed

Border McAllen Zone Closed

North New Mexico Zone Closed

Austin Zone Closed

West Texas Zone Closed

Houston Zone Open for proposals

Louisiana Zone Closed

(2) Pre-proposal conference regarding this Solicitation will be scheduled as the Solicitation is amended to announce the zone being competed. The pre-proposal conference for the Houston Zone is scheduled as follows and will be conducted on-line:

Date: January 6, 2021 On-line: https://meet.google.com/xsd-yxve-qkg Time: 1:00 pm Central Standard Time Note, this web address is specific for this solicitation and is not a general GSA pre-proposal site

(3) Questions regarding this Request for Proposals (RFP) will be addressed at a pre-proposal conference where questions will be answered relative to this RFP. All prospective Offeror(s) are requested to submit in advance any questions they may have in writing to the GSA POCs above. The submission of written questions will not preclude anyone from posing questions during the pre-proposal conference. Offerors are highly encouraged to attend the pre-proposal conference, particularly because it is possible that award will be made without discussions.

(4) Failure of a prospective Offeror to attend the pre-proposal conference will be construed to mean that the Offeror fully understands all requirements of the solicitation. Prospective Offerors are advised that the pre-proposal conference will be held solely for the purpose of explaining the hypothetical projects, terms, and conditions of this solicitation. Offerors are highly encouraged to attend the pre-proposal conference, particularly because it is possible that award will be made without discussions.

(5) All prospective Offerors are advised that this solicitation will remain unchanged unless it is amended in writing. All amendments will be published on www.beta.sam.gov.

(6) Amendment 38 opens the solicitation for proposals for the Houston Zone. All documents associated with this zone are included in Amendment 38 and subsequent amendments which will provide additional information. NO DOCUMENT OR FORM POSTED PRIOR TO AMENDMENT 38 SHOULD BE USED FOR THE HOUSTON ZONE, except for Past https://meet.google.com/xsd-yxve-qkg

Performance Questionnaires which were previously submitted for another zone. See details on page 14 of this solicitation. Documents posted to www.beta.sam.gov prior to Amendment 38 apply to earlier zones, which are now closed.

I.E. Estimated Contract Value

The Maximum Ordering Limitations (MOL) under these contracts will be in the amounts shown below, per contract, per year, by pool. A contract can have as its primary pool(s) just the Small Projects Pool, just the Large Projects Pool, or both project pools. See the Zonal IDIQ Statement of Work (SOW), section 5. The MOL is applicable for the sum of all task orders awarded under that contract per year regardless of the value of individual task orders.

The MOL includes the value of all task orders placed under that contract during that period of performance (including changes in task order value due to modifications issued at any time), regardless if the orders were for work in the primary zone or in any secondary zone.

Small Projects Pool Large Projects Pool Both Project Pools Zone Annual MOL per IDIQ

(primary in only this pool) Annual MOL per IDIQ

(pri(primary in only this pool) Annual MOL per IDIQ (primary in both pools)

Arkansas $1,000,000.00 $4,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 Austin $1,000,000.00 $4,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 Border El Paso $1,000,000.00 $4,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 Border McAllen $1,000,000.00 $4,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 Border San Antonio $1,000,000.00 $4,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 Dallas to Shreveport $1,000,000.00 $4,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 Fort Worth $1,000,000.00 $4,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 Houston $1,000,000.00 $4,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 Louisiana $1,000,000.00 $4,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 North New Mexico $1,000,000.00 $4,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 West Oklahoma $1,000,000.00 $4,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 Tulsa to Fayetteville $1,000,000.00 $4,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 West Texas $1,000,000.00 $4,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00

The Maximum Ordering Limitation of a contract does not commit the Government to issue orders to that magnitude. The guaranteed minimum for the base year only is $2,000, regardless of which pool(s) a contract covers. There is no guaranteed minimum for any of the four one-year option periods (if exercised by the Government).

Historically, the average project that would fall within the Small Projects Pool has been between approximately $12,000 and $30,000, depending on the zone. However, projects are frequently less than $10,000 and occasionally less than $5,000 in any zone. Historically, the average project that would fall within the Large Projects Pool has been between approximately $250,000 and $600,000. However, there is a great variance in the value of task order values in any zone, up to $3,500,000. And of course, historical spend does not predict future requirements.

I.F. Receipt of Offers

(1) In order to be considered for award, electronic offers conforming to the requirements of the Solicitation, at this time just for the Houston Zone, must be received via email only by:

Date: January 20, 2021 Time: No later than 5:00 PM Central Standard Time

Addresses: For Houston Zone, submit proposal to: r7idiq.ht@gsa.gov

(2) Electronic Submission of Proposals: Offers must be received by the email address of the GSA Point of Contact (POC) listed herein on or before the date and time established for receipt of offers. The date and time of receipt will be established according to the Government computer system’s documentation showing the exact official time of receipt by the GSA POC listed herein and not by the time the electronic proposal was sent by the Offeror or received by the GSA server. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to ensure proposals are complete and submitted early enough to be received by the GSA POC before the deadline, and to confirm receipt before the deadline. Proposals or portions of proposals which are received by the GSA POC later than the time noted within will be rejected and will not be considered.

(3) NOTE: The maximum file size is 25 MB. GSA has occasionally experienced delays in delivery of emails from the GSA server to an email account. Therefore contractors/offerors need to plan accordingly.

(4) WARNING: Consistent with GAO case law on the issue of “late-is-late rule” related to electronically submitted proposals, GSA will strictly comply with and enforce FAR 52.215- 1(c)(3)(ii)(A). Pursuant to GAO’s application of FAR 52.215-1(c)(3)(ii)(A), an electronically submitted proposal that is received late will not be considered unless (1) it is received before award is made, (2) the Contracting Officer determines that accepting the late offer would not unduly delay the acquisition and (3) it was received at the initial point of entry to the Government infrastructure not later than 5:00 p.m. one working day prior to the date specified for receipt of proposals. FAR 52.215-1 (c)(3)(ii)(A)(1).

(5) Email attachments must be in a format that can be opened by the Government, and are legible. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to ensure proposals have attachments that can be opened (Word, Excel, pdf are fine – do not send “.mpp” files), and are submitted early enough to be confirmed by the Government that the proposal was received and attachments can be opened. Proposals or portions of proposals which cannot be opened or read by the Government by the time noted above will not be accepted, reviewed, or considered.

(6) Hand-carried, mailed, or commercially delivered electronic (ex. thumb drives, CDs, etc.)

or hard copies of offers will not be accepted.

II. Proposals An Offeror’s proposal must include all data and information requested. Any Offeror who submits an incomplete proposal package may be considered ineligible for award. Material contained in proposals that falls outside the stated requirements (e.g. resumes, capability statements, letters of recommendation) are discouraged, and will be disregarded and not considered in the evaluation.

The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation.

The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements, but rather provide convincing, factually-based explanation on how the Offeror intends to meet the requirements. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the Offeror being ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and must provide complete supporting rationale. The Government reserves the right to determine any such exceptions unacceptable, and the proposal ineligible for award, regardless of the proposal’s technical rating or price analysis result. If the Offeror communicates in its proposal any qualifications, exclusions, or conditions to the contract terms, the Contracting Officer may reject the proposal and exclude the Offeror from further consideration.

The Government will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Offeror’s proposal, and the Government reserves the right to use any past performance information available to it, whether provided by the Offeror or independently obtained by the Government. Offerors are reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussions. The Government also reserves the right to limit discussions, if conducted, to just a portion/section of all submitted proposals and accept revisions to only that portion/section of the submitted proposals, such as only accepting revisions to the pricing factors without allowing revision of any other part of any proposal (such as the hypothetical projects). If discussions are conducted, all Offerors within the Competitive Range will be given the opportunity to revise the same portion/section of their proposal, such as the pricing factors.

Amendments to the solicitation prior to the deadline for receipt of proposals will be posted and available on http://www.beta.sam.gov under the announcement number of the solicitation.

Offerors are encouraged to check the solicitation announcement regularly to verify issuance of amendments. Offerors shall acknowledge receipt of all amendments (beginning with Amendment

38) and provide confirmation upon submission of the offeror’s proposal in block 19 of the SF1442.

Any unacknowledged amendments in the Offeror’s proposal will be considered a deficiency in the evaluation of the proposal.

II.A. Proposal Contents Proposals shall consist of the following documents, completed and executed in accordance with this solicitation, in exactly three volumes, using the documents and forms provided in Amendment 38:

(1) Volume 1: Pricing Proposal Form (RSMeans coefficient factors, using the attached form in Amendment 38, in Excel format, do not convert to .pdf or other format)

(2) Volume 2: Technical Proposal (Hypothetical project(s): proposal(s)/submittals, using project proposal formats as required in solicitation in Amendment 38)

(3) Volume 3:

• Signed Solicitation Response Form (using attached form in Amendment 38, can be converted to pdf)

• Contractor’s Qualification and Financial Information (using attached GSA Form 527)

• Offeror Representations and Certifications (using attached GSA Form C301)

• Solicitation Offer and Award (using attached Standard Form 1442 in Amendment 38)

• Signed bonding letter

• Signed consent from all major subcontractors regarding past performance (using attached template)

• Joint Venture documentation, if applicable

• Other Documents as Required

Unnecessary documentation is strongly discouraged and will not be reviewed in any way (eg.

resumes, organization charts, capability statements, and pictures of previous projects).

Proposals should not include Contract Performance Assessment Reports (CPARs) or Past Performance Questionnaires. All Questionnaires must be submitted by the Client directly to the appropriate GSA email address.

II.B. Proposal Format Offerors responding to the solicitation notice shall submit proposals in three (3) separate electronic folders/documents named as stated below, via email only.

(1) Volume 1: Price Proposal, see section II.C. below

(a) Pricing Proposal Form (RSMeans coefficient factors, using the attached form in Amendment 38, in Excel format, do not convert to .pdf or other format)

(2) Volume 2: Technical Proposal, see section II.D. below

(a) Technical Proposal (Hypothetical project(s): proposal(s)/submittals, using project proposal formats as required in solicitation in Amendment 38)

(3) Volume 3: Other Documents, see section II.E. below

(a) Signed Solicitation Response Form (using attached form in Amendment 38, can be converted to pdf)

(b) Contractor’s Qualification and Financial Information (using attached GSA Form 527)

(c) Offeror Representations and Certifications (using attached GSA Form C301)

(d) Solicitation Offer and Award (using attached Standard Form 1442)

(e) Signed bonding letter

(f) Signed consent from all major subcontractors regarding past performance (using attached template)

(g) Joint Venture documentation, if applicable

(h) Other Documents as Required

Only one proposal per zone may be submitted by each Offeror. Proposals will only be accepted in electronic format, via email. No disc, hard copy, mailed, hand-delivered, or faxed proposals will be accepted.

II.C. Volume 1: Pricing Proposal

(1) The Pricing Proposal shall consist of the coefficient factor pricing form included in the solicitation (Pricing Proposal Form in Excel format) in Amendment 38. All fields must be completed as indicated on the form, including the factors for “Other Than Normal Working Hours” and one factor for projects equal to or below $3,500. Otherwise, if any factor is missing or omitted, the proposal may be rejected as incomplete and not considered for award. The form should not be edited in any way other than to fill in the indicated fields.

(2) The proposed divisional RSMeans coefficient factors, and the single factor for projects initially estimated by the Government to be equal to or less than $3,500, must include all markups, indirect costs, profit, and overhead for both the General (prime) and Subcontractors by division factor. General Contractor overhead and profit shall not be listed as separate line items for task order proposals under this contract. Separate markups for subcontractors, indirect costs, profit, or overhead within task order proposals will not be allowed either. Direct costs, including but not limited to Project Management, On-Site Supervision, and necessary and reasonable travel which are directly allocable to a specific task order, should be separately identified in each task order’s price proposal and not included in the RSMeans coefficient factors.

(3) The proposed factors will be applicable to projects within all zip codes included in the primary geographic zone when the TO Request for Proposal (TO RFP) is limited to contractors in the primary geographic zone, for the life of the contract. For any project for which competition is opened to one or more secondary zones, the pre-negotiated RSMeans coefficients are not required to be used for that project, for any task order offeror under that TO RFP (although they can be used).

(4) If the Offeror communicates in its proposal any qualifications, exclusions, or conditions to the proposed prices/factors not provided for in the Contract Documents, the Contracting Officer may reject the proposal and exclude the Offeror from further consideration.

(5) Tradeoff decisions will use the analysis of the coefficient factor pricing and technical evaluation of the proposal. Tradeoff decisions for contract award will not be based on the pricing of the hypothetical projects.

(6) Coefficient factors should be applied to RSMeans Bare Cost pricing, not RSMeans with O&P already applied.

II.D. Volume 2: Technical Proposal

The Technical Proposal shall include the information requested below.

The evaluation factors in this solicitation will be used in the evaluation of proposals for the base Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts themselves. Task orders will be issued on a best value basis, and each task order could each have different evaluation factors. The technical (non-price) evaluation factors for this base IDIQ acquisition when combined are significantly more important than price. The base IDIQ technical evaluation factors, in the order of their importance, are Past Performance and Hypothetical Projects.

Point scores and adjectival ratings are guides to the Source Selection Authority’s (SSA) source selection decision, but do not mandate automatic selection of a particular proposal or automatic inclusion in the competitive range. Furthermore, if Contract Performance Assessment Report (CPAR) or Questionnaire narratives do not adequately support the rating given for any element in accordance with the rating definitions in the solicitation, the SSA can afford less confidence to those ratings in the tradeoff and contract award decision when considering the proposal as a whole. The SSA may also consider the number and severity of problems, mitigating circumstances, and effectiveness of corrective actions when evaluating how adverse past performance impacts confidence in the Offeror’s ability to successfully perform.

As proposals become more equal in their technical merit, price becomes more important.

Whether a given point spread between two competing proposals indicates a significant superiority of one proposal over another is primarily a matter within the discretion of the SSA.

Elements to be considered include potential effect on performance, and advantages and costs to the Government. Where proposals are considered substantially technically equal, price may properly become the determining factor for award or inclusion in the competitive range notwithstanding that the evaluation criteria assign less importance to price than to technical factors.

(1) Past Performance

This evaluation factor considers past performance, and has two subfactors. Listed in the order of their importance, the subfactors are the Questionnaire and Contractor Performance Assessment Reports.

(a) Questionnaire on Sample Projects

This subfactor addresses the past performance of the Offeror’s team as it relates to quality of work, timeliness of performance, management of personnel and subcontractors, and overall customer satisfaction for particular recent and relevant projects. The currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor’s performance shall be considered in accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2)(i). The Offeror will complete blocks 1-4 of the “PBS Past Performance Questionnaire” which is included in the solicitation in Amendment 38, and indicate at the top of the form the zone(s) for which the Questionnaire is to be evaluated. The Offeror will send one to each sample project’s reference (the client), and the clients will submit the fully completed Questionnaires directly to the applicable Government point of contact stated on the last page of the Questionnaire. The “client” is the organization, entity, or property owner for whom the work was performed.

General contractors, partners, subcontractors, or designers who performed the work in whole or in part are not “clients” and should not complete or submit a Questionnaire. The Offeror is solely responsible for providing the Questionnaire to their references/clients. The Offeror is solely responsible for following up with each reference/client to encourage the client’s timely submission of the fully completed Questionnaire directly to the Government POCs indicated on the Questionnaire. If a Questionnaire is received by the Government, it will be considered only for the zone(s) noted at the top of the Questionnaire itself. The Government will not unilaterally apply a Questionnaire to any zone that is not indicated at the top of the Questionnaire. GSA will not accept completed Questionnaires sent directly from the Offeror, nor from any joint venture member, subcontractor, teaming member, parent company, or other affiliate. Nor will GSA accept any Questionnaire other than the version attached to this solicitation. GSA evaluators will attempt to contact those clients who submit Questionnaires, based on email addresses and/or phone numbers provided. The Offeror is authorized to provide information on problems encountered on the identified sample projects and the Offeror’s corrective actions.

GSA evaluators can also (but are not required to) consider past performance on projects which are not submitted or identified by the Offeror’s team but which are identified by other methods, previously obtained past performance information, and through other known sources. The Government is not required to obtain past performance information from other sources and can (but is not required to) base evaluation ratings on only the information identified through the Offeror, if any. Responses to the Questionnaires will be made available to GSA evaluators for the zone in question.

For the purposes of this evaluation and this subfactor:

“Recent” is defined as a contract, order, or call completed within the last five (5) years as of the date of the solicitation’s original issuance, or within five (5) years of the date the solicitation was amended to request proposals for the zone for which an Offeror wants to submit an offer (whichever date is later).

“Relevant” is defined as a fixed-priced contract, order, or call that meets all the elements of scope, magnitude and complexity described below, which is similar in comparison to the types of work listed in the IDIQ Statement of Work of the solicitation. The sample projects submitted may have been federal, state, or private sector contracts. The sample projects do not have to be located in the zone(s) for which the Offeror is proposing.

Scope: Fixed-price general construction, repair, and/or alteration to real property in or on an occupied building Complexity: Similarity of technical difficulty, managerial involvement and/or coordination efforts, potential obstacles, specialized requirements or locations, and labor disciplines involved, in comparison to the hypothetical projects and work listed in the IDIQ Statement of Work

Magnitude: Similarity of the dollar value, meaning final project values between $2,000 and $250,000 for the Small Projects Pool, and final project values between $250,000 and $3,500,000 for the Large Projects Pool Note: The Simplified Acquisition Threshold (SAT) at the time of the initial IDIQ solicitation for GSA PBS is/was $250,000. Therefore all past performance relevancy and magnitude determinations will be based upon that amount throughout the life of the solicitation. However, for purposes of task order RFP participation, competition, and other matters, the SAT value may change over the life of these contracts.

“Similar” can include (but is not limited to): airport facilities, terminals, Ports Of Entry, executive offices, courthouses, Class A office spaces, parking garages, prisons, jails, correctional facilities, or detention centers. Types of work not considered similar include (but are not limited to): manufacturing or processing facilities; residential projects (e.g. housing, hotels, barracks, dormitories, etc.), sports facilities, retail projects, schools and university classroom buildings, parking lots, roads, bridges, subways, dams, drainage ditches, water towers, vessels, aircraft, or other kinds of personal property.

“Complete” as it pertains to the Questionnaire itself means that a client provided a clear rating for each of the nine (9) statements or questions on page three (3) of the Questionnaire, and signed and dated the Questionnaire. Missing or unclear ratings for any of the nine elements may be identified or clarified when the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) member or representative contacts the client.

“Historical” means a building or facility that is in the National Register of Historic Places registry.

“Major subcontractor” is defined as a subcontractor performing any of the following:

Mechanical/Electrical/Plumbing (MEP), Finishes, or Millwork, and their work can be evaluated through Questionnaires. For the purposes of this solicitation, design and abatement subcontractors are not considered to be major subcontractors, and Questionnaires which are received for only a design or abatement subcontractor will not be evaluated or included in the Offeror’s rating.

“Acceptable” is defined as a PBS Past Performance Questionnaire in the version included in Amendment 38 of the solicitation (or notated Questionnaire from this Solicitation as described on pages 12 - 15 below) for a project that is recent, relevant, similar, and complete, is performed by the prime, a joint venture partner, a major subcontractor, or a parent company (if that parent company will be directly involved with performance of this contract), and if that project does not have a final CPAR, addresses all rating elements and is verifiable with the client.

A project submitted on a Questionnaire cannot already have a completed final Contractor Performance Assessment Report, as described in section 1.b. below.

Although only one Questionnaire may be submitted by a client for each project, it is possible that Questionnaires for the same project(s) could be obtained by the Government from other sources. Sample projects that receive more than one Questionnaire will have their individual Questionnaire scores averaged for a single score for that sample project.

“Client” is defined as the organization, entity, or property owner for which the work was done. General contractors, partners, subcontractors, or designers who performed the work in question, in whole or in part, are not “clients” and should not complete or submit a Questionnaire. Any one client may submit Questionnaires for multiple sample projects – each project must be on a separate Questionnaire.

“Occupied building” is defined as a building or structure populated in whole or in part by the client’s or organization’s personnel (including administrative, janitorial, and other staff) during the period of performance of the work to the degree that arrangements must be made to work around either personnel or schedules, considering noise, safety, entrances/exits, foot traffic, restroom access, lighting/electricity, heating/cooling/ventilation, water/plumbing, and maintaining the client’s business functionality. Work done in or on an unoccupied building or structure, such as new construction, is not considered relevant for evaluation purposes under this subfactor.

For a sample project to be included in the Questionnaire score, it must be recent, relevant, similar, complete, and verified by the client for whom the project was performed or by the reference who submitted the Questionnaire. The Offeror is solely responsible for ensuring that Questionnaires are for projects that meet all the requirements for acceptability.

The standards and scoring for each rating are listed in the table below.

-1 0 +1 +2 +3 NA

UNSATISFACTORY MARGINAL SATISFACTORY VERY GOOD EXCEPTIONAL NOT

APPLICABLE

Performance did not meet most contractual requirements and recovery was not accomplished in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element contained a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions were ineffective.

Performance did not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element being evaluated reflected a serious problem for which the contractor did not identify corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions were only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

Performance met all contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory.

Performance met contractual requirements and exceeded some to the government’s/ owner’s benefit.

The contractual performance of the element being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

Performance met contractual requirements and exceeded many to the government’s/ owner’s benefit.

The contractual performance of the element being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

The project/ contract did not involve the element in question, and it will be rated as neutral.

An “unsatisfactory” rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming, with negative effects. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone merits an “unsatisfactory” rating.

A “marginal” rating is appropriate when one or two significant events occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming, with negative effects.

A “satisfactory” rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract.

There should have been no significant weaknesses identified. The contractor should not be given a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.

A “very good” rating is appropriate when the contractor successfully performed a significant event that exceeded requirements and was of benefit to the government/owner.

There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

An “exceptional” rating is appropriate when the contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that exceeded requirements and were of benefit to the government/owner.

A singular beneficial event, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone merits an “exceptional” rating. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

Note: Questionnaire relevancy will be based upon a $250,000 threshold as described below, due to the fact that at the time of the initial IDIQ solicitation for GSA PBS, the SAT is/was $250,000. However, for purposes of task order RFP participation, competition, and other matters, the SAT value may change over the life of these contracts.

The Offeror must demonstrate successful contract performance for no more than four (4) recent, similar, relevant, verified projects completed within five (5) years of the date of the issuance of the solicitation, or within five (5) years of the date the solicitation was amended to request proposals for the zone for which an Offeror wants to submit an offer (whichever date is later), for each pool the Offeror is interested in as its primary pool(s). For Offerors interested in being primary in only the Small Projects Pool, that means no more than four (4) acceptable Questionnaires for projects with final values under $250,000. For Offerors interested in being primary in only the Large Projects Pool, that means no more than four (4) acceptable Questionnaires for projects with final values between $250,000 and $3.5M. For Offerors interested in being primary in both pools, that means no more than four (4) acceptable Questionnaires for projects with final values under $250,000 and no more than four (4) acceptable Questionnaires for projects with final values between $250,000 and $3.5M. Offerors may ask clients to submit more than four (4) Questionnaires. However, if more than four (4) Questionnaires are received for either pool, the Government will disregard all beyond the first four (4) acceptable Questionnaires received per pool (as determined by the date and time the email arrives in the GSA Contracting Officer’s email inbox) and may not evaluate them in any way. The Government reserves the right to consider past performance projects that it identifies independently of and other than the Offeror’s submitted sample projects that the Government determines to be relevant to this solicitation.

A sample project submitted on a Questionnaire cannot already have a completed final Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR) documenting that project’s performance as defined in section 1.b. below. Sample projects can have interim reports in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), and can have final reports in progress that have not been completed by the date of the issuance of this solicitation. In no case will a single project, contract, order, or call be evaluated on both an acceptable Questionnaire and a final

CPAR.

Sample projects submitted that are not complete, recent, relevant, or similar as defined above will not be considered acceptable or included in the evaluation. The Offeror is responsible for identifying only projects that are complete, recent, relevant, and similar as defined above, with factual information provided in blocks one through four (1-4) on page one

(1) of the Past Performance Questionnaire attached to this solicitation. Offerors and/or clients shall not use or submit questionnaire forms which were previously used for other solicitations – all questionnaires submitted must use the form which is attached and tailored to this solicitation. Questionnaires other than the form attached to this solicitation will not be accepted or evaluated in any way. If a client completed a Questionnaire for any previous round of source selection under this solicitation (such as for previous zones), that client can submit that same Questionnaire IF they indicate on the top of page 1 the new zone(s) for which the Questionnaire is being submitted (eg. the Houston Zone) AND they sign page 3 with the date they submit the Questionnaire for the new zone(s).

If the Offeror materially misrepresents information relating to its past performance, the Government may reject the proposal in its entirety.

Submitted sample projects should be examples of the Offeror’s own work to the greatest extent possible. If the Offeror does not have experience that fits the requirements stated above, sample projects can be submitted for work done by a major subcontractor of the Offeror, or by one or any of the joint venture partners if the Offeror is a joint venture. If the Offeror is submitting any sample project that was work performed not by itself, but by a major subcontractor, the Offeror is required as part of their proposal to provide written consent from that subcontractor for its past performance information to be disclosed to the Offeror. For any sample project using a subcontractor’s performance that does not include the written consent of that subcontractor, that sample project’s Questionnaire will be evaluated and included in the Offeror’s score; however, results of that evaluation cannot be shared with the Offeror. Past performance information is proprietary source selection information, and the Government will discuss it directly with the Offeror only with consent of the subcontractor. However, if there is a concern with a proposed subcontractor’s past performance, the Offeror can be notified of the issue during discussions (if held) or debriefing (if requested). But no details may be discussed with the Offeror without the subcontractor’s written permission. If the Contracting Officer cannot determine that a sample project significantly correlates to the Offeror’s ability to perform the contract, that sample project’s Questionnaire may be removed from consideration and not be included in the Offeror’s score. The Offeror will not be informed if a sample project is evaluated or removed from evaluation for any reason, unless a debriefing is requested in accordance with FAR subpart 15.5. If one or more sample projects/Questionnaires are removed from evaluation for any reason, the Offeror will not have the opportunity to arrange for other sample projects/Questionnaires to be submitted for the zones currently/previously open to proposals.

The reference (client) listed on each Past Performance Questionnaire must be available to be contacted by the Government. The Government will make no more than two (2) attempts to contact each client. The Offeror should ensure all contact information, phone numbers and email addresses are current and valid at the time the proposal is submitted. If the Government cannot contact a client, that project’s Questionnaire will not be included in the past performance score. The Offeror is solely responsible for following up with each client to encourage their timely submission of the completed, signed Questionnaire. Questionnaires received by the Government later than the time and date specified in the Solicitation for receipt of proposals for the zones in question will not be accepted or evaluated. The Offeror will not be told by the Government how many Questionnaires were received or scored unless a debriefing is requested in accordance with FAR subpart 15.5.

Expressed facts and opinions obtained as part of the past performance evaluation constitute protected and proprietary “Source Selection Information”. GSA will only discuss past performance information directly with the prospective prime contractor that is being reviewed (the Offeror). If there is a concern with the past performance of a proposed subcontractor, the Offeror can be notified of an issue, but no details may be discussed without the subcontractor’s written permission.

Offerors will be provided an opportunity to respond to all adverse reports if they have not previously had the opportunity. Adverse is defined as past performance information that contains a less than satisfactory or acceptable assessment on any evaluated element. An unfavorable comment within past performance information which contains only satisfactory or better assessments on evaluated elements does not constitute adverse past performance.

Offerors and subcontractors will not be provided an opportunity to see, respond to, or comment upon positive or satisfactory reports.

The Government reserves the right to award without discussions. Therefore, all proposals must be correct and complete at initial submission. If any information is missing or unclear, and/or if the Government cannot determine that a project is recent and relevant, the sample project’s Questionnaire will be removed from consideration and will not be included in the past performance score. The Offeror will not be informed if a sample project is evaluated or removed from evaluation for any reason unless a debriefing is requested in accordance with FAR subpart 15.5. If one or more sample projects/Questionnaires are removed from evaluation for any reason, the Offeror will not have the opportunity to arrange for other sample projects/Questionnaires to be submitted for the zones currently/previously open to proposals.

For each element rated on the Questionnaire, points will be assigned as shown in the table above, based upon the adjectival rating given by the client: minus one (-1) point for an element rated as Unsatisfactory, zero (0) points for an element rated as Marginal, plus one (+1) point for an element rated as Satisfactory, plus two (+2) points for an element rated as Very Good, and plus three points (+3) for an element rated as Exceptional. No point value will be assigned for an element that is not applicable (NA) to the project being rated.

For sample projects receiving no rating below “Satisfactory” on any of the nine (9) rated elements on the Questionnaire, additional credit will be given for projects which include any or all of the following (plus one tenth of a point (+0.1) each), and are indicated in section 4 of the Questionnaire: work in a high-rise building of at least three (3) floors; work in a secured building which required badging or clearances; work in a courthouse or legal office; work in a historical building; high-end woodwork or millwork; a complete office space renovation; or a design-build project. The additional credit will not be given for any project which received a rating below “Satisfactory” for any of the nine (9) rated elements on the Questionnaire, regardless if that sample project included any of the additional credit elements in this paragraph.

A lack of past performance on recent, relevant sample projects will be treated as neutral and will be given no rating at all. However, because the Government can consider past performance information from the Offeror’s major subcontractors, and/or any party of a joint venture, it is anticipated that the Offeror will be able to submit sample projects which meet requirements. In addition, the Government may (but is not required to) identify other past performance projects on Government contracts performed by the Offeror’s team or subcontractors to rate under this subfactor. The Government can (but is not required to) evaluate past performance on projects which are not submitted by the Offeror’s clients, but which are identified through other sources and documented on the Past Performance Questionnaire form attached to this solicitation. Projects evaluated on a Questionnaire by the Government or other sources will be rated in the same manner as, and will receive the same weight as, those project Questionnaires which are submitted by an Offeror’s client. Points will be averaged for one total Questionnaire score for each sample project, regardless of the number of Questionnaires evaluated for that project. It is possible that an Offeror’s score for this subfactor can be based on just one acceptable and scored Questionnaire, and that one scored Questionnaire could be a Questionnaire provided by a client or obtained by the Government from another source. Furthermore, that one scored Questionnaire can be for the performance of a project by the Offeror, joint venture partner, or major subcontractor.

If the required narratives supporting any rating other than “Satisfactory”, on page four (4) of the Past Performance Questionnaire, do not adequately support the rating given for any element in accordance with the rating definitions on page two (2) of the Questionnaire, the Source Selection Authority (SSA) can afford less confidence to those ratings in the tradeoff and award decision when considering the proposal as a whole. Unsupported ratings or narratives can be amended when the Government contacts the client for verification and clarification, and the ratings and/or narratives which may have been amended or clarified by the client as a result of that contact will be used in the evaluation for that sample project’s score.

While the Government may elect to consider data from a variety of sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

(b) Contractor Performance Assessment Reports

This subfactor addresses the past performance of the Offeror’s team as it relates to quality of work, schedule, management, and overall customer satisfaction. However, this sub-factor evaluates overall performance quality and is not restricted to only projects which meet the relevancy description that is listed in the Questionnaire on Sample Projects subfactor in section 1.a. above. The Government will rely upon recent Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARs) in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS).

Reports from PPIRS can be pulled using any Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number associated with the Offeror or the Offeror’s team. For joint ventures, the DUNS associated with the joint venture itself and the DUNS of each of the joint venture partners will be used to identify CPARs, and they will all be included in the scoring for the joint venture. Reports from PPIRS will also be pulled for all of the Offeror’s proposed major subcontractors, and their eligible past performance will be included in the Offeror’s score.

For the purposes of this evaluation and this subfactor:

“Recent” is defined as a contract, order, or call completed within the last five (5) years as of the date of this solicitation’s original issuance, or within five (5) years of the date the solicitation was amended to request proposals for the zone for which an Offeror wants to submit an offer (whichever date is later).

“Relevant” is defined as a final CPAR report for the business sector “construction” which covers a…