Phase_I_-_RFQ_Hebert_8_15_2018.pdf

(See ).

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair) IMPORTANT - The "offer" section on the reverse must be fully completed by offeror.

9. FOR INFORMATION

CALL:

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid and "bidder".

SOLICITATION

1. SOLICITATION NUMBER

5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NUMBER

CODE

6. PROJECT NUMBER

8. ADDRESS OFFER TO

4. CONTRACT NUMBER

7. ISSUED BY

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS (Title, identifying number, date)

11. The contractor shall begin performance within

12a. THE CONTRACTOR MUST FURNISH ANY REQUIRED PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS?

(If "YES", indicate within how many calendar days after award in Item 12b.)

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

a. Sealed offers in original and

b. An offer guarantee

c. All offers are subject to the (1) work requirements, and (2) other provisions and clauses incorporated in the solicitation in full text or by reference.

d. Offers providing less than

STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 8/2014)

Prescribed by GSA - FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(d) calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due will not be considered and will be rejected.

is, is not required.

local time containing offers shall be marked to show the offeror's name and address, the solicitation number, and the date and time offers are due.

(date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers will be publicly opened at that time. Sealed envelopes copies to perform the work required are due at the place specified in Item 8 by (hour) award, YES NO notice to proceed. This performance period is mandatory negotiable.

calendar days and complete it within calendar days after receiving

a. NAME b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

12b. CALENDAR DAYS

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID (IFB)

NEGOTIATED (RFP)

3. DATE ISSUED PAGE OF PAGES

47PH0819R-Hebert

General Services Administration Public Buildings Service Acquisition Management Division (7PQA) Attn: Marsha Howard 819 Taylor Street Suite 12B-372 Fort Worth, Texas 76102-6105

This solicitation is for the Design Build for Infrastructure Upgrades at the Hebert Federal Building, New Orleans, LA The resulting contract will be awarded at a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) amount.

This solicitation includes the following documents:

SF1442 Solicitation, Offer and Award Document, The Solicitation Phase I Request for Qualifications, Representations and Certifications Document, The Agreement draft Document, Wage Determination LA180045 dated 01/12/2018, Hebert Design Build Statement of Work Final, Plans and Specifications.

The estimated range of costs for this project is between $50,000,000.00 and $60,000,000.00.

A Bid Guarantee will be required with the Phase II Proposal.

Same as Block #7

Marsha Howard 817-978-0123

1 22708/15/2018

10 1095

Section I.C Period of Perform

17. The offeror agrees to perform the work required at the prices specified below in strict accordance with the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted calendar days after the date offers are due. (Insert any number equal to or greater than the minimum requirement by the Government in writing within stated in Item 13d. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13d.)

OFFER (Must be fully completed by offeror)

AMOUNTS

18. The offeror agrees to furnish any required performance and payment bonds.

19. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the solicitation -- give number and date of each)

AMENDMENT

NUMBER

DATE.

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR (Include ZIP Code)

CODE FACILITY CODE

15. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code)

16. REMITTANCE ADDRESS (Include only if different than Item 14.)

20a. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN OFFER (Type or print)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED:

22. AMOUNT

26. ADMINISTERED BY

30a. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN (Type or print)

31c. DATE

STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 8/2014) BACK

31b. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BY

31a. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

29. AWARD (Contractor is not required to sign this document.) Your offer on this solicitation is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award consummates the contract, which consists of (a) the Government solicitation and your offer, and (b) this contract award. No further contractual document is necessary.

30b. SIGNATURE 30c. DATE

28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT (Contractor is required to sign this document and return and deliver all items or perform all work requirements identified on this form and any continuation sheets for the consideration stated in this contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be governed by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and (c) the clauses, representations, certifications, and specifications incorporated by reference in or attached to this contract.

copies to issuing office.) Contractor agrees to furnish

24. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

ITEM 25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY

10 U.S.C. 2304(c) ( ) 41 U.S.C. 3304(a) ( )

20b. SIGNATURE 20c. OFFER DATE

GSA Solicitation No.47PH0819R-Hebert Upgrades

Document: DB201-1/DEC 2017 (The Solicitation – Request for Qualifications)

Design Build Contract for Design Build for Infrastructure Upgrades at the Hebert Federal Building, New Orleans, LA

The Solicitation, Phase 1 – Request for Qualifications

552.219-71 Notice to Offerors of Subcontracting Plan Requirements (MAR 2012)

The General Services Administration (GSA) is committed to assuring that maximum practicable opportunity is provided to small, HUBZone small, small disadvantaged, women-owned, veteran-owned, and service-disabled veteran owned small business concerns to participate in the performance of this contract consistent with its efficient performance. GSA expects any subcontracting plan submitted pursuant to FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, to reflect this commitment. Consequently, an offeror, other than a small business concern, before being awarded a contract exceeding $700,000 ($1,500,000 for construction), must demonstrate that its subcontracting plan represents a creative and innovative program for involving small, HUBZone small, small disadvantaged, women-owned, veteran-owned, and service-disabled veteran owned small business concerns as subcontractors in the performance of this contract.

Notice of Apprenticeship Programs

GSA is promoting the use of registered apprenticeship programs on this project. An Apprenticeship Plan is required after the award.

Notice of Commercial Package Carriers

Because of increased security standards, commercial package carriers may experience delays in making deliveries to the address designated for receipt of offers. United States Mail delivered to Government offices in the Washington, DC area is subject to irradiation, significantly delaying deliveries and potentially damaging or defacing mail contents. Offerors should take these facts into consideration when determining how and when to transmit offers to the office designated for receipt.

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 Documents Designated as Sensitive But Unclassified

IV. FAR/GSAR Solicitation Provisions To be issued in Phase 2

V. Additional Solicitation Provisions and Instructions A. Additional Provisions

VI. Method Of Award A. Evaluation of Phase 1 Proposals B. Evaluation of Phase 2 Proposals C. Determination of Responsibility D. Price Reasonableness/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 is for the design and construction for the Infrastructure upgrades at the F. Edward Hebert Federal Building in New Orleans, Louisiana.

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). Those offerors not selected for participation in Phase 2 will be notified. In Phase 2, Offerors may submit a price proposal subject to the Project Labor Agreement (PLA) requirements set forth in the Phase 2 solicitation (a PLA proposal), a price proposal not subject to the PLA requirements set forth in the Phase 2 solicitation, or both. Any price proposal submitted in Phase 2 shall clearly identify whether it is subject to such PLA requirements.

(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, Specifications, Drawing Exhibits and other Attachments to the

Agreement

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: Marsha Howard

Address: 819 Taylor Street, Suite 12B-372, Fort Worth, Texas 76102

Telephone: 817-978-0123

Email: marsha.howard@gsa.gov

Alternate POC Information

Name: Thomas Norman

Address: 700 W CAPITOL AVE Room: 3423, LITTLE ROCK AR 72201-3225

Telephone: 501-707-2393

Email: Thomas.norman@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.

To request a reasonable accommodation due to a disability, contact the Contracting Officer

Date: August 23, 2018

Time: 1:00 pm Central Time

Location: 600 S. Maestri Place, 4th Floor, New Orleans, LA

I.F. Estimated Price Range The estimated price range for the Project is between $50,000,000.00 and $60,000,000.00.

I.G. Questions Regarding Phase 1

Submit all questions regarding the Phase 1 to the Contracting Officer on or before [August 30, 2018]. Any responses provided by GSA will be posted on FedBizOpps 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 2:00 pm central time on the following date and at the following address.

Date: September 6, 2018 Address: 819 Taylor Street, Suite 12B-372, Fort Worth, Texas 76102

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. Other Documents as Required

II.B. Proposal Format Firms responding to the Phase I solicitation shall submit one (1) original and three (3) copies of the required technical information. The submission should be organized to correspond with the evaluation factors listed below. Standard Form 330 for the design portion is not required. The total submission should not exceed 25 double-sided, 8 ½” x 11” pages. The cover letter, table of contents and section dividers are excluded from this page count.

II.C. Technical Proposal

Proposals must address the technical approach, technical qualifications, and the other Phase 1 evaluation factors stated herein. Any proposal that does not meet all of the following criteria will be rejected as unresponsive.

EVALUATION FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL QUALIFICATIONS (60%)

SUB-FACTOR 1.A: EXPERIENCE OF THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND A/E

Description: This evaluation sub-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.

SUBFACTOR 1.B: PAST PERFORMANCE OF THE GENERAL

CONTRACTOR AND A/E

Description: This evaluation sub-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.

EVALUATION FACTOR 2: APPROACH TO DESIGN-BUILD (20%)

Description: This factor considers the Offeror’s approach to establishing a designbuild 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, urban design, interior design, 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 and construct, and renovate 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, reliability; energy efficiency, durability, and ease-of-maintenance, creating environmentally superior building features and systems.

EVALUATION FACTOR 3: LEAD DESIGNER (20%)

Description: This factor considers the Lead Designer’s portfolio in the context of Design Excellence. 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. For purposes of this evaluation factor, “Design Excellence” has the same meaning as stated in Evaluation Factor 2.

Procedure for Evaluation: Additional references may be contacted. The SSEB may consider performance on contracts which are not submitted by the firm if they have knowledge of contracts not listed or if contracts not listed are discovered. The same basic questions shall be asked of each reference contacted. A reference is defined as the most knowledgeable person who has official records on file. The interviews of references not submitted shall be documented to indicate who called for the Government, who was interviewed, questions asked and answers provided. The documentation shall be reviewed by all evaluators. Each offeror is responsible for submitting the sealed envelopes containing the questionnaires filled out by the references for each factor (Figures 2 and 3).

If the offeror is a joint venture, information submitted for a party to the joint venture will not be evaluated to the extent that the terms of the joint venture agreement limit such party's performance or financial obligations as a party to the Contract contemplated by this Solicitation.

II.D. Other Information to be Submitted with Proposals

(1) Representations and Certifications

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-SAT).

(2) Proof of Bonding to $60,000,000.00.

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 so certifying in the joint venture agreement, or by submitting a separate certification to the Government. The joint venture must also provide a certificate that 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 such time as funds are made available to the Contracting Officer for the purpose 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 ten (10) calendar days. Prospective Offerors should make such requests not less than ten (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

This acquisition is being conducted under the provisions of FAR Part 15 as a negotiated procurement. In accordance with FAR 3.104 and FAR 15.207, 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 except as provided by FAR 15.503.

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. Refer to Clause FAR 52.223-10 encouraging vendors to practice waste reduction.

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 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 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 are sent to the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) which may then be used by Federal acquisition community for use in making source selection decisions. PPIRS 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.

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 Documents Designated as Sensitive But Unclassified

Certain information contained in the Solicitation Documents may have been designated as Sensitive but Unclassified (SBU) 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.

IV. FAR/GSAR Solicitation Provisions

To be issued with Phase 2 Solicitation.

V. Additional Solicitation Provisions and Instructions

V.A. Additional Provisions

None

VI. Method of Award

VI.A. Evaluation of Phase 1 Proposals

The Government will evaluation Phase 1 proposals based on the following evaluation factors and short list a maximum of five offerors to submit Phase 2 proposals.

EVALUATION FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL QUALIFICATIONS (60%)

SUB-FACTOR 1.A: EXPERIENCE OF THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND A/E

Description: This evaluation sub-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 Requirement:

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) projects of similar size, scope, and complexity (as further defined in this evaluation factor). 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 eight years of the submission deadline for Phase 1 proposals; and

• The project was delivered by DB 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.

A project that possesses the following characteristics will be considered similar in size, scope, and complexity for purposes of this evaluation factor:

1. Major renovations to office buildings, or comparable building types. Examples of comparable building types include:

Commercial office buildings;

Courthouses Federal and State Office buildings Hospitals

2. Project of $30 million or greater,

3. At least 4 floors

4. 150,000 GSF or more.

5. Upgrades to the mechanical and electrical infrastructure

6. Remodel and/or Addition of Public Restrooms

7. Renovations conducted in buildings with continuous ongoing occupancy requiring phased relocation of tenants are also a requirement.

Standard for Evaluation:

The standard is met when the Offeror submits at least three (3) projects of similar in size, scope, and complexity.

Additional favorable consideration may be given for the following:

The General Contractor and the A/E firm worked on the same project A project possesses more the 5 of the characteristics listed above.

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

A/E Description: This evaluation sub-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.

Submittal Requirement:

Each Offeror shall provide sufficient documentation in order to demonstrate the extent of the Offeror’s past performance for at least three (3) but no more than five (5) projects of similar size, scope, and complexity (as further defined in this evaluation factor). 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.

Standard for Evaluation:

The standard is met when:

1. Three (3) similar projects have been completed with a satisfactory rating or better within the last ten (10) years as evidenced by references contacted who also indicate they would contract with the firm again for the same services;

2. All references contacted shall be evaluated on the basis of having been given a rating of satisfactory or better;

3. At least one successfully completed project dealt with energy conservation measures, sustainability or a high performance green building; and

4. The firm must have completed the work on-time (no liquidated damages assessed), within budget, and in accordance with the contract requirements. The firm must demonstrate that it has been successful in meeting all schedules on these similar projects.

The standard is exceeded when:

1. The firm has successfully completed one or more design/build project with the proposed design/build team and received a very good or better performance rating from the reference (in accordance with Contractor Performance Appraisal Rating System (CPARS);

2. The firm has successfully completed a minimum of three (3) similar projects within the last ten (10) years and received a very good or better performance rating from references (in accordance with Contractor Performance Appraisal Rating System (CPARS);

3. Having completed a similar project in a historic building should also receive consideration.

Additional favorable consideration may be given for the following:

● Certificates, awards, peer recognition, etc. demonstrating design and/or construction excellence

EVALUATION FACTOR 2: APPROACH TO DESIGN-BUILD (20%)

Description: This factor considers the Offeror’s approach to establishing a designbuild 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, urban design, interior design, 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 and construct, and renovate 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, reliability; energy efficiency, durability, and ease-of-maintenance, creating environmentally superior building features and systems.

Submittal Requirement:

Each Offeror must submit a written narrative (not to exceed 10 pages) concerning its approach to the DB process. An Offeror may allocate the 10 pages in any manner it chooses.

Standard for Evaluation:

The narrative must discuss each of the subjects set forth below. The following bullets are not sub-factors; rather, they are elements the Government will consider when evaluating the Offeror’s proposal:

• Philosophy and Design Intent: The Offeror’s philosophy and design intent as related to the project that is described in the solicitation. Such a discussion may include such topics as the parameters of an overall design philosophy; the Offeror’s approach to the challenge of architecture modifications to government buildings, building systems engineering, and commitment to integrated and sustainable design. The Offeror’s philosophy and design intent should be characterized by clarity, standard grammar, and the absence of clichés or jargon. The Government expects clear, thoughtful phrases that demonstrate the ability of the team to communicate ideas. The Government will evaluate whether the Offeror’s philosophy and design intent is suitable for this project.

• Management Process: The Offeror shall describe their overall management approach to DB including such topics as the lines and methods of communication; decision-making;

interaction with consultants; the means to integrate client and community input; the physical location of major design and production work; work to be produced in remote offices; the role of specialty contractors; and, managing quality and cost. The Government will evaluate the probability that the Offeror’s management process will result in a cohesive and collaborative team effort.

• 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.

• Stipend: Explain how the stipend will be distributed among the team members. The Government will evaluate the extent to which the Offeror will share the stipend in an equitable manner among the team members.

The standard is met when:

• The Offeror’s philosophy and design intent is determined to be suitable for this project;

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

• There is a satisfactory probability that the Offeror will realize Design Excellence on this project; and,

• There is a satisfactory probability that the Offeror will share the stipend in an equitable manner among team members.

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

• Clearly demonstrated and defined compatible corporate values and corporate philosophies;

• The proven, successful implementation of the Management Process on any of the projects listed under Evaluation Factor 1.A;

• Entities that have developed a patented process or unique product on which the design-builder intends to rely in performing the project identified in the RFQ;

• Written, binding agreements between the team members on the equitable distribution of the stipend.

EVALUATION FACTOR 3: LEAD DESIGNER (20%)

Description: This factor considers the Lead Designer’s portfolio in the context of Design Excellence. 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. 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 sub-factors, but, rather, are elements the Government will consider when evaluating the Offeror’s proposal:

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

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

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

o Each project must include a narrative that addresses the design approach with salient features and discuss how the client's program, functional, image, mission, economic, 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.

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

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

Two pages of photographs for each project.

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

Standard for Evaluation:

The standard is met when:

• The submission demonstrates an understanding of the design 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;

• The submission portrays creative and 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.

Procedure for Evaluation: Additional references may be contacted. The SSEB may consider performance on contracts which are not submitted by the firm if they have knowledge of contracts not listed or if contracts not listed are discovered. The same basic questions shall be asked of each reference contacted. A reference is defined as the most knowledgeable person who has official records on file. The interviews of references not submitted shall be documented to indicate who called for the Government, who was interviewed, questions asked and answers provided. The documentation shall be reviewed by all evaluators. Each offeror is responsible for submitting the sealed envelopes containing the questionnaires filled out by the references for each factor (Figures 2 and 3).

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:

(1) Design Concept

(2) Management Approach and Key Personnel

(3) Construction Safety

(4) Project Labor Agreement

(5) Small Business Subcontracting Plan

PROCUREMENT PHASE 2 CRITERIA

EVALUATION FACTOR 1: DESIGN CONCEPTS (45%)

Description: This factor evaluates how well the submitted drawings and narratives illustrates compliance with proposed functional and aesthetic design intent in the Basis of Design, including the Architectural Elements of the building.

This factor also evaluates the conceptual designs, and/or the narratives for the new Mechanical and Electrical systems, and their clarity for compliance with the related Basis of Design.

This factor will evaluate whether the offeror demonstrates creativity, innovation, and technical excellence, in proposing to meet the Government’s requirements indicated by, such as:

Use of new and emerging technologies Skillful integration of architectural elements Discuss commitment to balancing aesthetic design elements within the project budget limitations.

Discuss issues the DB Team must explore and resolve in the preparation of the design for this Project.

This factor also evaluates the Offerors emphasis on those design features which optimize and emphasize functional/operational requirements; interior/exterior finishes and systems; and life cycle/energy efficiency where applicable.

Submittal Requirements:

Offeror shall submit the following:

Provide sufficient drawings and narratives to clearly illustrate compliance with proposed functional and aesthetic design intent in the Basis of Design. Include these supplemental drawings in a volume three.

Describe and discuss the aesthetic and functional features and merits of the design. Briefly address materials and methodology which are to be covered in more detail below as they relate to design aesthetics and function.

Demonstrate an understanding of the Government’s requirements and goals for this Project.

Demonstrate creativity and innovation in proposing to meet the Government’s requirements indicated by, but not limited to:

Use of new and emerging technologies https://www.gsa.gov/governmentwide-initiatives/sustainability/gpg-program/published-findings

Skillful integration of architectural elements The DB contractor should also consider the GSA Proving Ground (GPG) Program for next-generation building technologies, and implementing such technologies where applicable into the project. Reference the GPG website https://www.gsa.gov/governmentwide-initiatives/sustainability/gpg-program/published-findings for additional information.

Discuss commitment to balancing aesthetic design elements with the project budget limitations.

Discuss the issues the DB Team must explore and resolve in the preparation of the design for this Project.

EVALUATION FACTOR 2: QUALIFICATIONS AND PAST PERFORMANCE OF KEY

PERSONNEL (20%)

Description: This factor considers the qualifications and past performance of the Offeror’s key personnel with design-build or integrated project delivery (IDP) methods. The Government will evaluate the probability that the Offeror’s key personnel will be able to successfully manage the execution of the project. Aspects of consideration include: education, experience, training, and response of the references. For purposes of this evaluation factor, IPD is characterized as the use of a multiparty agreement in which the owner or developer executed a single contract with the Offeror to provide all, or substantially all, of the design and construction services for the project

Submittal:

Each Offeror must submit data evidencing the key personnel’s qualifications as set forth in this evaluation factor. This may be provided in any manner that the Offeror chooses and may include, for example, a resume or curriculum vitae. There is a fifteen (15) page limit for this evaluation factor, including reference information. An Offeror may allocate the pages in any manner it chooses.

Key Personnel shall include: Principal-In-Charge, Project Manager (construction), Project Manager (design), Construction Superintendent, and Quality Control/Assurance Coordinator.

Each person submitted under this evaluation factor must have worked on at least one (1) project of similar size, scope, and complexity in the same or similar capacity as one of the key personnel positions described in this evaluation factor. (For purposes of this evaluation factor, the phrase “similar size, scope, and complexity” has the same meaning as that used in Evaluation Factor 1 of the Request for Qualifications.) For instance, on the prior project, the key person served in the capacity as the Project Manager, but for purposes of this evaluation factor, that same person is being proposed as the Principal in Charge. In such an instance, the proposed person may, depending upon the qualifications, be able to satisfy this requirement.

For each key person, the Offeror shall provide reference information for at least one (1) project of similar size, scope, and complexity in the same or similar capacity as one of the key personnel positions described in this evaluation factor.

EVALUATION FACTOR 3: MANAGEMENT PLAN (15%)

Description: This factor considers the project specific plan that the Offeror intends to implement in order to deliver a successful project.

Submittal:

Provide a written narrative of not to exceed twenty (20) pages (inclusive of flowcharts, spreadsheets, diagrams, and any other supporting information) describing the Offeror’s plan for increasing the likelihood that the Project will be delivered ontime, within budget, and promote excellence in design and construction.

Information Required:

• The plan shall identify key subcontractors for the following engineering disciplines:

Mechanical, Structural, Electrical, and Commissioning Agent. For each key subcontractor, the Offeror shall provide a narrative describing the subcontractor’s experience with design-build or Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) and how that experience is relevant to the work that the subcontractor will perform for the Offeror. For purposes of this evaluation factor, IPD has the same meaning as used in Evaluation Factor 2.

• The plan shall include a detailed description for how the Offeror will ensure the safety of its employees, contractors, subcontractors, and other individuals accessing or otherwise working at the project site during the construction phase of the Project.

• The plan shall include a project schedule that highlights key assumptions on which the schedule is based, and discusses the Offeror's strategy for sequencing the work. The narrative should also discuss any significant contingency issues that could potentially delay overall progress on the project and what actions the Offeror would propose to mitigate the impact on project completion. Provide a proposed project schedule in Gantt chart format for execution of the design-build project from award of the contract to completion. The proposed schedule should provide sufficient detail to illustrate the proposed flow of design and construction activities for the project with the overall duration clearly shown.

• The plan shall include a narrative describing the Offeror’s approach to planning, organizing and controlling the execution of the design and construction on the project.

The plan should identify how the Offeror plans to implement management techniques to ensure the success and quality of the design and construction of this project.

EVALUATION FACTOR 4: PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENT (PLA) (10%)

Description: A proposal submitted subject to the PLA requirements set forth in this solicitation will receive full credit under this evaluation factor. A proposal submitted not subject to such PLA requirements will receive no credit under this evaluation factor.

Standard for Evaluation:

The standard is met when the offeror provides documentation indicating that the offeror has a PLA for this project.

EVALUATION FACTOR 5: SUBCONTRACTING PLAN (10%)

Description: This factor is concerned with the Offeror’s understanding of the Government’s subcontracting program.

Submittal:

SUB-FACTOR 5.A: PARTICIPATION OF SMALL BUSINESS IN THE PAST CONTRACTS

The offeror shall list three (3) recently completed projects and provide the following information for each project:

a. The complete identity of the project along with a point of contact and contact information

b. The dollar value of the project specific to contract amount

c. The specific target goals prior to the beginning of the project

d. The specific goals reached by your firm at completion of the project

e. Were the targeted goals specified by your firm or by the owner?

f. Final or latest eSRS reports correlating to the three (3)recently completed projects

(eSRS reports will not count against total page count)

SUB-FACTOR 5.B: PARTICIPATION OF SMALL BUSINESS IN THE PERFORMANCE OF

THIS CONTRACT

Identify, in terms of dollar value and percentage of total proposed price, the extent of work you will perform as the prime contractor in your proposed Subcontracting Plan. Identify, in terms of dollar value and percentage of total proposed price, the extent of work you will perform as the prime contractor. State the extent of work, including type and percentages, you plan to subcontract to LB, HUBZone, SB, SDB, WOSB, VOSB, SDVOSB firms, and if applicable, HBCU/MI. Small business Offerors should not submit subcontracting plans.

SUBFACTOR 5.C: PAST PERFORMANCE IN UTILIZING THE SMALL BUSINESS

PROGRAM

Provide information on any awards you received within the past three years for outstanding support to HUBZone, Small Business (SB), Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB), Woman Owned Small Business (WOSB), Veteran Owned Small Business (VOSB), or Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) firms. Include the total dollar value and the dollar value percentage of work (of total contract value) subcontracted to Large Business, HUBZone, Small Business, Small Disadvantage Business, Woman Owned Small Business, Veteran

Owned Small Business, or Small Disadvantage Veteran Owned Small Business firms for each contract referenced in this proposal. If subcontracting was not used on submitted contracts, provide an explanation as to why for each category.

GSA is committed to supporting the Small Business Program. These commitments extend to Historically Underutilized Business Zones (HUBZone), Small Business (SB), Small Disadvantage Business (SDB), Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB), Veteran-Owner Small Business (VOSB), and Service Disabled Veteran- Owned Small Business (SDVOSB). Large business will be required to submit a subcontracting plan for this evaluation sub-factor. This subcontracting plan only applies to work performed in the United States and its possessions.

GSA has established subcontracting goals of at least 37% of the subcontracted effort to small businesses. Of the total subcontracted effort, the targets are a minimum of 3% to HUBZone firms, 6% to SDB firms, 5% to WOSB firms, 5% to VOSB firms and 3% to SDVOSB firms. Large Business firms will be evaluated against the above stated targets with more credit given to firms that exceed these targets.

FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns states in part: “The Contractor hereby agrees to carry out this policy in the awarding of subcontracts to the fullest extent consistent with efficient contract performance.” If the Offeror does not…