47PJ0020R0066 Solicitation 002.pdf

GSA Solicitation No. 47PJ0020R0066 002 March 16, 2020

Document: DB201-1/AUGUST 2019 (The Solicitation)

Design Build Contract for: Building 48 Modernization located at the Denver Federal

Center in Lakewood, Colorado

The Solicitation, Phase 1 – Request for Qualifications

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

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

(ii) GSAR 552.236-75, Evaluation Exclusive of Options (Mar 2019)

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

VI. Method Of Award A. Evaluation of Phase 1 Proposals B. Evaluation of Phase 2 Proposals C. Determination of Responsibility D. Price 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 of taking an existing warehouse and converting into a modern office space.

Continuing a legacy of outstanding public architecture that was initiated with the founding of the nation, the General Services Administration (GSA) Public Buildings Service (PBS) seeks to commission our nation’s most talented architects, landscape architects, interior designers, engineers, and construction professionals to design and construct federal buildings of outstanding quality and value. These projects are to demonstrate the value of true integrated design that balances aesthetics, cost, functionality, constructability, durability, and reliability;

create environmentally responsible and superior workplaces for civilian Federal employees; and give contemporary form and meaning to our democratic values.

In this context, GSA announces an opportunity for Design and Construction Excellence in public architecture for performance of Architectural Engineering Design and Construction services in accordance with GSA quality standards and requirements. GSA intends to issue a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for a Design Build (DB) contract for the existing Building 48 on the Denver Federal Center. This acquisition encompasses the design and construction needed to convert an existing vacant warehouse building into the offices and related space as required by GSA and the Interior Business Center (IBC). GSA is planning the relocation of IBC employees from leased space into Building 48, who will be the sole tenant. Data around how each directorate works, will be presented when the RFP is released which are the result of a project development study performed by GSA prior to the release of this RFP. The design build scope of work includes all labor, materials, design, engineering, construction, commissioning, and other related services necessary to support the modernization of Building 48 and conversion to modern office space.

The total space of the building consists of approximately 154,000 gross square feet, all of which is currently vacant. The estimated total design/build cost is between $35,000,000 and $50,000,000. The modernization project will support the roughly 800 incoming IBC employees to be relocated from approximately 195,000 gross square feet of leased office space. Building 48 was previously occupied by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), for use primarily as a warehouse with a small office component. The building was vacated by NARA in 2013 and has remained unoccupied since. The scope of the modernization project will consist of the installation or replacement of all major systems, such as mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and communications, as well as structural enhancements and roofing replacement as identified in the program development study. The project will maximize opportunities for natural daylight into the resulting space, utilizing existing and introducing new building penetrations.

The tenant finish will support an open office layout, incorporating elements of the existing warehouse into the architectural design. The main entry of the building will be relocated and modernized. Additionally, exterior to the building is roughly 200,000 square feet of ware yard, including four small satellite buildings which as a part of this acquisition will be cleared and replaced with a new parking lot to support incoming IBC personnel. Outdoor spaces will be designed and constructed at the building exterior to enhance the landscape architecture and for use by the tenant agency. The scope of Design Build Services may include, but not limited to, the following: design/construction documents and construction work, which consists of providing all labor, equipment, and materials for a complete buildout.

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 firms3 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). 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) 47PJ0020R0066 Solicitation Attachment 1

(2) Standard Form (SF) 330 – Architecture-Engineer Qualifications

(3) Draft of the Agreement

(4) 47PJ0020R0066 SOW Attachment 4, (dated February 13, 2020 / 70 pages /

PDF)

(5) Building 48 Program Development Study Attachment 5, (dated September 30, 2015 / 661 pages / PDF)

(6) 47PJ0020R0066 PPQ Attachment 6 (4 pages / WORD)

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: Ms. Len Wilson

Address: W. 6th & Kipling St., Lakewood, CO 80225

Telephone: 303.594.9195

Email: len.wilson@gsa.gov

Alternate POC Information

Name: Mr. John Kelley

Address: 1 Denver Federal Center, Bldg. 41, Lakewood, CO 80225

Telephone: 720.292.8507

Email: john.kelley@gsa.gov

I.E. Estimated Price Range

The Design/Build budget amount is $35,000,000

I.F. Questions Regarding Phase 1

Submit all questions regarding the Phase 1 to the Contracting Officer (Len Wilson) and Contract Specialist (John Kelley) on or before March 10, 2020. Any responses provided by GSA will be posted on https://beta.sam.gov/ as an Amendment to the Solicitation.

I.G. Receipt of Qualifications

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

Date: March 19, 2020

Address: Attention John Kelley 1 Denver Federal Center, Bldg. 41 P.O. Box 25546, Denver, CO. 80225-0546

Email: john.kelley@gsa.gov mailto:john.kelley@gsa.gov

** The Offeror is to submit via email to Contract Specialist John Kelley ( john.kelley@gsa.gov ) and Contracting Officer Ms. Len Wilson ( len.wilson@gsa.gov ). Offeror is to submit 7 hard copies and Contract Specialist John Kelley will contact offerors at a later date for 1 USB flash drive for acceptable submission. Failure to comply with 7 hard copies and 1 USB flash drive may be considered non-responsive.

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. Small Business Entity certification

II.B. Proposal Format

The Offeror is to submit via email to Contract Specialist John Kelley ( john.kelley@gsa.gov ) and Contracting Officer Ms. Len Wilson ( len.wilson@gsa.gov ). Offeror is to submit 7 hard copies and Contract Specialist John Kelley will contact offerors at a later date for 1 USB flash drive for acceptable submission. Failure to comply with 7 hard copies and 1 USB flash drive may be considered non-responsive.

II.C. Technical Proposal

PHASE 1

The approach to selection of an Offeror for this procurement will be pursuant to the design build approach in FAR 36.3. The purpose of Phase 1 (the Request for Qualifications) is to select the most highly qualified offerors from Phase 1 to participate in Phase 2 (the Request for Proposals). The

Contracting Officer will select a maximum of three of the most highly rated offerors to proceed to

Phase 2. Phase 1 will consist of the following non-price/technical factors:

1. Technical Qualifications

1A. Experience of the General Contractor and A/E

1B. Past Performance of the General Contractor and A/E

2. Approach to Design-Build

3. Lead Designer

For the non-price factors, subfactors 1A. and 1B. are equally important and, when combined are more important than the combined weight of factors 2 and 3, which are equally important.

mailto:john.kelley@gsa.gov mailto:len.wilson@gsa.gov mailto:john.kelley@gsa.gov mailto:len.wilson@gsa.gov

For this evaluation factor, similar project (SP) or similar projects (SPs) means:

Construction was substantially completed within eight years by the proposed General

Contractor as the General Contractor or the proposed A/E as the A/E of record prior to the submission deadline for Phase 1 proposals, and the project included all of the following characteristics:

o Renovation of an existing building for commercial, public, or institutional use, excluding projects where over 20 percent of the gross square footage of the building is for storage such as, for example, warehouses and airplane hangars;

o Project area was not less than 80,000 gross square feet; and o Contract cost was greater than $25 million.

Note: The Government will only consider experience and past performance for work completed by

General Contractors or A/Es as a prime contractor or A/E of record, as applicable; however, in the case of General Contractors or A/Es that are Joint Ventures (JV), the experience and past performance for work completed as the prime contractor by the JV or either individual company comprising the JV will be considered and evaluated as work completed by the General Contractor or A/E as the prime contractor or A/E of record, as applicable.

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

This subfactor considers the extent of the past experience of the offeror’s proposed General Contractor and A/E. For purposes of this Evaluation Factor, the term General Contractor is defined as an individual, firm, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity permitted by law whose main responsibility is for the construction, improvement or renovation project under contract. 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. If the Offeror is neither the proposed General Contractor or the A/E for this procurement, then this subfactor considers the past experience of the Offeror’s proposed General Contractor or A/E.

Additionally, “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 federal buildings of outstanding quality and value. These projects are to demonstrate the value of integrated design that balances aesthetics, cost, functionality, constructability, reliability; creating environmentally superior workplaces for federal employees; and giving contemporary form and meaning to our democratic values.

Submittal Requirement: Each Offeror should submit at least three (3) but no more than five (5)

SPs for the offeror’s proposed General Contractor and A/E. A page limitation of 3 pages per similar project for a potential cumulative maximum of 15 pages will be accepted. Of this group of

SPs, the General Contractor should have served as prime contractor on at least one SP and the

A/E should have served as A/E on at least one SP.

Additional favorable consideration may be given to the extent of the following:

The SP used the design-build delivery method;

The proposed General Contractor and the proposed A/E worked on the same SP;

Two or more SPs are received for the GC; and

The SP of the proposed General Contractor or A/E was:

o for Design Excellence;

o certified for LEED, SITES, or WELL; and o received award for superior design and/or project delivery.

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

This subfactor considers the past performance of the offeror’s proposed General Contractor and A/E on SPs.

Submittal Requirement: The reference must provide the completed Attachment 6 – Past

Performance Questionnaire directly to the Contract Specialist John Kelley at john.kelley@gsa.gov.

Past Performance Questionnaires are due as provided for and no later than the due date for initial proposals under this Solicitation. Past performance ratings for Relevant Projects found in

Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) or Past Performance Information

Retrieval System (PPIRS) may also be used to evaluate each offeror’s past performance. Each

Offeror is responsible for providing the necessary information to the reference in a timely manner to allow the Attachment 6 completed by the reference to be submitted by the reference in accordance with the solicitation. Completed Attachment 6 within the Offeror proposal will not be accepted.

EVALUATION FACTOR 2: APPROACH TO DESIGN-BUILD

This factor considers the Offeror’s approach to design build to satisfy the Government’s objectives, including the realization of Design Excellence, considering A and B below. 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 federal buildings of outstanding quality and value. These projects are to demonstrate the value of integrated design that balances aesthetics, cost, functionality, constructability, reliability; creating environmentally superior workplaces for federal employees; and giving contemporary form and meaning to our democratic values.

Submittal Requirement: Each Offeror is to submit a written narrative (not to exceed 10 pages) concerning its approach to the DB process for the project described in the solicitation. The narrative should discuss each of the following set forth below, in the context of DE:

A. Design Philosophy and Intent: The Offeror’s approach to achieving a superior and integrated design related to the project described in the solicitation, considering factors such as (i) architecture, (ii) building performance, (iii) spatial efficiency and flexibility, (iv) modern workspace, and (v) ease of maintenance.

B. Design-Build Process: The Offeror’s overall approach to design-build in the following areas (1) quality, (ii) cost, and (iii) schedule.

EVALUATION FACTOR 3: LEAD DESIGNER

This factor considers the likelihood of the offeror’s proposed Lead Designer (LD), based on the LD’s portfolio of projects as LD, of achieving Design Excellence on the project described in the solicitation.

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” 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 federal buildings of outstanding quality and value. These projects are to demonstrate the value of integrated design that balances aesthetics, cost, functionality, constructability, reliability;

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

The offeror’s proposed Lead Designer (LD), based on the LD’s portfolio of projects as LD, should have at least an adequate likelihood of achieving Design Excellence on the project described in the solicitation.

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

Projects in the portfolio delivered using the design-build delivery method;

The proposed Lead Designer and the Offeror worked on the same project in the portfolio of projects submitted for the Lead Designer; and

The projects in the portfolio involved:

o An office space supported more than 500 employees from various program areas, requiring flexibility in their work space to account for fluctuations in space type and headcount;

o Certifications, such as LEED, SITES, or WELL; and o Awards for superior design.

Submittal Requirements: Each Offeror should submit the information requested below. The following are not subfactors; rather, they are elements the Government will consider when evaluating the

Offeror’s proposal.

Submit a portfolio of projects representative of the Lead Designer’s ability to provide Design

Excellence as the Lead Designer. 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 the

Lead Designer completed as the Lead Designer in the last ten (10) years (maximum of five pages per project) prior to issuance of the solicitation.

o If the Lead Designer is a team, submit a portfolio of up to two (2) projects per Lead

Designer completed as the Lead Designer in the last ten (10) years by the lead designer(s) on the team (maximum of five pages per project) prior to issuance of the solicitation.

o Each project should 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.

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

Projects in the portfolio delivered using the design-build delivery method;

The proposed Lead Designer and the Offeror worked on the same project in the portfolio of projects submitted for the Lead Designer; and

The projects in the portfolio involved:

o An office space supported more than 500 employees from various program areas, requiring flexibility in their work space to account for fluctuations in space type and headcount;

o Certifications, such as LEED, SITES, or WELL; and o Awards for superior design.

Proposals will be evaluated in Phase One to determine which offerors will be on the shortlist to submit proposals for Phase 2. At the conclusion of Phase 2, GSA intends to award a contract to a single

Offeror for all design and all construction services pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)

Best Value Design-Build Selection Procedures (FAR Subpart 15.3).

PHASE 2

The approach to selection of an Offer for this procurement will be pursuant to the best value/tradeoffs in

FAR Part 15. After Phase 2 and selection of the short-listed offerors, award of the contract under the solicitation will be based solely on the offers submitted in response to the Phase 2 evaluation factors and Phase 2 of the solicitation to the offeror whose proposal offers the best value to the government considering all evaluation factors, including price. The non-price/technical evaluation factors, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price.

The three non- price/technical evaluation factors for Phase 2 are:

1. Design Concept

2. Key Personnel Qualifications

2A. Experience

2B. Past Performance

3. Management Plan

For the non-price factors, factor 1 is more important than either factors 2 and 3, which are equally important. Subfactors 2A. and 2B. are equally important.

EVALUATION FACTOR 1: DESIGN CONCEPT

This factor considers to the adequacy of the Design Concept to, consistent with the need to integrate solutions, (a) support all functional objectives; (b) achieve the innovation, purpose, and vision indicative of a DE project (taking into account the functionality, performance, quality, and architectural design considerations in this factor); and (c) optimize functional interests and support by system expected building performance.

For purposes of this evaluation factor, “Design Excellence” (DE) refers to GSA’s Design

Excellence 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 federal buildings of outstanding quality and value. These projects are to demonstrate the value of integrated design that balances aesthetics, constructability, functionality, and reliability; create environmentally superior workplaces for federal employees; and give contemporary form and meaning to our democratic values.

Submittal Requirements: Offeror should submit the following:

1. Submission of a Final Concept

Offerors should provide the information and generally follow the format and structure as set forth in Appendix H to the Phase 2 RFP.

2. Functional Objectives Matrix

A functional objectives matrix is provided as an attachment with the RFP. The

Government is seeking design concepts that will optimize functional interests and support by building expected building performance, consistent with the need to integrate solutions that will support all functional objectives.

The PBS P100 contains both performance-based and prescriptive requirements. A large portion of the standard specifies levels of performance, which allows Offerors to identify and implement the best strategies to meet those goals.

Four levels of performance are defined throughout the P100 in matrices, in which

"baseline" performance (plus all prescriptive requirements) is the lowest permissible level.

The three higher-performance levels are more rigorous and voluntary. Each project may implement any combination of performance levels, in order to prioritize performance opportunities that stem from climate, site, program, mandates, budget, and other conditions.

The Offeror should identify the attainment of achieving the functional objectives (and required performance tier) as represented by the matrix. This should take the form of a narrative report that, by system, indicates how the proposed design supports expected building performance.

The page limit for this section is twenty (including the matrix).

3. Betterments

The Offeror should include a section entitled “Betterments” in their proposal. For purposes of this evaluation factor, a “Betterment” is defined as any element, component or system, which exceeds the minimum performance requirements set forth in the RFP and/or includes the addition of features or amenities that exceed the minimum Program of

Requirements.

If Betterments are offered, they should:

meet or exceed the requirements specified in the RFP;

enhance the overall quality and performance of the project;

be clearly identified as Betterments in the proposal;

be identified by document and page reference to the minimum requirements to be exceeded;

state the higher performance tier that the Betterment will provide;

identify any potential conflicts between the Betterment and the minimum requirements; and state the anticipated benefit of any such Betterment (e.g., improved functionality).

Any Betterment not specifically identified by the Offeror in this section will not be evaluated. If the Offeror is not providing any Betterment, the Offeror should indicate

“None” in this section of its submission.

Consideration will be given to the quality, impact and relative significance of each

Betterment, not just the quantity offered.

The page limit for this section is twenty.

4. Design Quality

The following list identifies characteristics of design that the Government will use to evaluate the probability that the Offeror’s Design Concept will achieve the innovation, purpose, and vision indicative of a DE project. Offerors may provide an additional narrative (not to exceed five pages) to provide additional information to explain how the

Design Concept provides for Design Quality.

Functionality

The extent to which the Offeror’s Design Concept focuses on organizational and operational needs, adjacencies, efficiency, flexibility, and way finding.

Performance

The extent to which the Offeror’s Design Concept provides due consideration to areas such as energy, water and material efficiency, as well as any other contributing factors.

Quality

The extent to which the Offeror’s Design Concept incorporates the design features and level of finish consistent with a modern office space and other project objectives, while considering best value and ease of maintenance.

Architectural Design

The extent to which the Offeror’s Design Concept considers the use of natural daylight, a new welcoming visitor entryway, new courtyard and other outdoor spaces, and an overall modern, industrial aesthetic.

The Design Concept should at least adequately, consistent with the need to integrate solutions, (a) support all functional objectives; (b) achieve the innovation, purpose, and vision indicative of a DE project (taking into account the functionality, performance, quality, and architectural design considerations in this factor); and (c) optimize functional interests and support by system expected building performance.

Additional favorable consideration may be given for the following:

The extent to which the quality, impact and relative significance, not just quantity, of each

Betterment exceeds the minimum performance requirements and/or includes the addition of features or amenities that exceed the minimum Program of Requirements.

EVALUATION FACTOR 2: KEY PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS

For this evaluation factor, similar project (SP) or similar projects (SPs) means:

Construction was substantially completed within eight years by the proposed General

Contractor as the General Contractor or the proposed A/E as the A/E of record prior to the submission deadline for Phase 1 proposals, and the project included all of the following characteristics:

o Renovation of an existing building for commercial, public, or institutional use, excluding projects where over 20 percent of the gross square footage of the building is for storage such as, for example, warehouses and airplane hangars;

o Project area was not less than 80,000 gross square feet; and

Contract cost was greater than $25 million.

EVALUATION FACTOR 2.A: EXPERIENCE OF KEY PERSONNEL

This subfactor considers the experience of the Offeror’s key personnel on SPs.

Submittal Requirements: Each Offeror should submit data evidencing the Key Personnel’s experience as set forth in this evaluation subfactor. 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 subfactor, including reference information, who may be contacted to confirm information submitted for this subfactor. An Offeror may allocate the pages in any manner it chooses.

Key Personnel is defined as: Principal-In-Charge, Project Manager (construction), Project Manager

(design), Construction Superintendent, and Quality Control/Assurance Coordinator.

Each person submitted under this evaluation factor should have worked in the same or similar the Key

Personnel position (for which the offeror is proposing the person in the offer) on at least one (1) SP for at least 12 consecutive months. For instance, the person proposed in the offer as the Project Manager should have worked in the capacity as the Project Manager on the SP.

Additional favorable consideration may be given to the extent (assuming each person submitted under this evaluation factor worked in the same or similar the Key Personnel position, for which the offeror is proposing the person in the offer, for at least 12 consecutive months:

Key personnel who have worked together on the same SP;

Two or more SPs are received for the person proposed by the Offeror for the Key Personnel position; and

Key personnel proposed by the Offeror served in the same Key Personnel position from the beginning through completion of the project.

EVALUATION FACTOR 2.B: PAST PERFORMANCE OF KEY PERSONNEL

This subfactor considers the past performance of the Offeror’s Key Personnel on SPs submitted for subfactor 2.A.

Submittal Requirements: For the person for each Key Personnel, the Offeror should provide reference information for each SP submitted for subfactor 2.A. The reference name and contact information to include phone number, email, and the name of the similar project. The Offeror is responsible to ensure that contact information is current and reliable. The Government will consider information provided by reference as well as other information from other sources when evaluating past performance as well as to confirm information submitted for subfactor 2A. References will be asked to provide feedback in the following areas related to the Key Personnel:

Stakeholder management, Problem solving, and

Meeting project objectives within the allowable budget.

EVALUATION FACTOR 3: MANAGEMENT PLAN

This factor considers, based on A-C below of this factor, the likelihood of the offeror’s management plan to deliver a successful project in accordance with the solicitation.

Submittal Requirements: Provide a written narrative (not to exceed 20 pages, inclusive of flowcharts, spreadsheets, diagrams, and any other supporting information) of the offeror’s management plan that, considering A-C below, demonstrates at least an adequate likelihood of delivering a successful project in accordance with the solicitation.

A. Project Schedule: Offeror to identify (1) key schedule assumptions, (2) strategy for sequencing the work, in the narrative as well as a schedule Gantt chart; and (3) schedule risks and potential mitigation strategies.

B. Staffing Plan: Offeror’s staffing by discipline to accomplish the work described in the solicitation, by discipline, identifying any in-house and subcontracting staffing.

C. Management Approach: Offeror’s approach to (1) planning, organizing and controlling the execution of design and construction for the project described in the solicitation; and

(2) management techniques to to ensure the success and quality of the design and construction of the project.

PRICE The offeror’s price for the work (design and construction) to complete the project that is described in the solicitation will be evaluated. The non-price/technical evaluation factors, when combined, are significantly more important than price. Offers with prices that are unreasonable, unrealistic, or unbalanced may be rejected as unacceptable and ineligible for award.

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 are reminded their SAM registration status must be “Active”, at the time their offer is submitted, to be considered for award (see 52.204-7). Offerors submitting a proposal in response to this Solicitation shall complete electronic Annual Representations and Certifications in conjunction with required Entity registration in System for Award Management (SAM), accessed via System for Award Management. Offerors shall also submit with their proposal, the Annual Representations and Certifications (FAR 52.204-8), using the attached Offeror’s Representations and Certifications (C301-SAT).

(2) Proof of Bonding to $50,000,000

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 15 calendar days. Prospective Offerors should make such requests not less than 10 calendar days prior to the date set for receipt of offers.

III.C. Notice to Small Business Firms

A program for the purpose of assisting qualified small business concerns in obtaining certain bid, payment, or performance bonds that are otherwise not obtainable is available through the https://www.sam.gov/

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 http://www.sba.gov/ http://www.cpars.gov/ 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

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

(ii) GSAR 552.236-75, Evaluation Exclusive of Options (March 2019) [CO

(iii) GSAR Clause 552.236-77, Government’s Right to Exercise Options (Mar 2019) https://www.cpars.gov/webtrain.htm

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 three offerors to submit Phase 2 proposals.

(1) Technical Qualifications

(2) Approach to Design-Build

(3) Lead Designer

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) Key Personnel Qualifications

(3) Management Plan

VI.C. Determination of Responsibility

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

VI.D. Price Reasonableness

The proposed prices will be evaluated for reasonableness. Price reasonableness determines whether an Offeror’s price is too high. Analysis of price proposals will be performed using one or more of the techniques defined in FAR 15.404 in order to determine price reasonableness.

Normally, price reasonableness is established through adequate price competition, but may also be determined through price analysis techniques as described in FAR 15.404-1.

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this solicitation and for the avoidance of doubt, the Government will not perform a price realism analysis of the Offeror’s proposal.

VI.E. Unbalanced Prices

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

VI.F. Total Evaluated Price

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

VI.G. Non-Price Factors

In accordance with FAR 15.101-1 Tradeoff process, for the non-price factors, factor 1 is more important than either factors 2 and 3, which are equally important. Subfactors 2A. and 2B. are equally important.

(1) Design Concept

This factor considers to the adequacy of the Design Concept to, consistent with the need to integrate solutions, (a) support all functional objectives; (b) achieve the innovation, purpose, and vision indicative of a DE project (taking into account the functionality, performance, quality, and architectural design considerations in this factor); and (c) optimize functional interests and support by system expected building performance.

For purposes of this evaluation factor, “Design Excellence” (DE) refers to GSA’s Design

Excellence 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 federal buildings of outstanding quality and value. These projects are to demonstrate the value of integrated design that balances aesthetics, constructability, functionality, and reliability; create environmentally superior workplaces for federal employees; and give contemporary form and meaning to our democratic values.

VI.H. Evaluation of Joint Venture Offerors

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