47PJ0025R0049 - DB Phase 1 Solicitation NPS Building 50 Office Renovation Project.pdf

GSA Solicitation No. 47PJ0025R0049

Design Build Contract for: The National Park Service (NPS) Building 50 Office Renovation Project

The Solicitation, Phase 1 – Request for Qualifications

Document: DB201-1-SB/MAR 2025 (The Solicitation)

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 H. Contractor Performance Information I. Safeguarding and Dissemination of Controlled Unclassified Information

(CUI) Building Information

IV. FAR/GSAR Solicitation Provisions To be issued in Phase 2 A. GSAR 552.252-5 Authorized Deviations in Provisions (Nov 2021)

(DEVIATION FAR 52.252-5)

V. Method Of Award A. Evaluation of Phase 1 B. Evaluation of Phase 2 C. Determination of Responsibility D. Price Reasonableness 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 office and office related space at the existing building 50 at the Denver Federal Center campus in Lakewood, Colorado.

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.

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

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

11246 such as:

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

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

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

End of Notice

Notice 2:

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

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

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

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

End of Notice

I.B. The Solicitation and Contract

(1) This procurement is being conducted using the two phase selection process found in FAR 36.3. Qualification proposals will be evaluated in Phase One to determine which offerors will submit proposals for Phase Two. One contract will be awarded using competitive negotiation. In Phase 1, GSA will select a short list of the most highly qualified offerors and request that those offerors submit Phase 2 proposals. All responsible sources may submit a Phase 1 proposal. A maximum of 3 firms will be selected to submit Phase 2 proposals. Only those selected offerors are authorized to submit Phase 2 proposals. Those offerors not selected for participation in Phase 2 will be notified in accordance with FAR 15.503(a).

(2) This Solicitation is set-aside for Small Businesses, in accordance with FAR 19. 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) Draft of the Agreement

(4) 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:

https://www.gsa.gov/policy-regulations/policy/acquisition-policy/acquisition-policy-library-and-resources#tab--Class-deviations https://www.gsa.gov/policy-regulations/policy/acquisition-policy/acquisition-policy-library-and-resources#tab--Class-deviations

Authorized Representative Information:

Contracting Officer’s Information

Name: Joseph Dorsey

Address: One Denver Federal Center Building 41 Denver, CO 80225

Telephone: (720) 431-0386

Email: joseph.dorsey@gsa.gov

Alternate POC Information

Name: Jamie Potter

Address: One Denver Federal Center Building 41 Denver, CO 80225

Telephone: (303) 588-9153

Email: jamie.potter@gsa.gov

I.E. Pre-Proposal Conference

Date: May 7, 2025

Time: 9:00 AM MT

Location: Denver Federal Center Building 50 (West 6th Avenue and Kipling Street Lakewood, CO 80225)

I.F. Estimated Price Range The estimated price range for the Project is between $5,000,000 and $10,000,000.

I.G. Questions Regarding Phase 1 Submit all questions regarding the Phase 1 to the Contracting Officer on or before May 14, 2025. Any responses provided by GSA will be posted on the Governmentwide Point of Entry (GPE) as an Amendment to the Solicitation.

I.H. Receipt of Qualifications

(1) In order to be considered for Phase 2 and award, Phase 1 qualifications proposals conforming to the requirements of the Solicitation must be received 2:00 pm MT on the following date and at the following address.

Date: May 28, 2025 Address: joseph.dorsey@gsa.gov, jamie.potter@gsa.gov

II. Proposals

II.A. Proposal Contents

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

1. Technical Proposal (Factors 1-3)

2. Proprietary Information Agreement(s)

3. Other Documents as Required

II.B. Proposal Format Offerors are encouraged to submit proposals that are as concise as possible while still addressing the preparation instructions specified in the solicitation. Attention should be given to the size and page limits outlined below.

Offerors are required to submit proposals as follows:

Technical Proposal: The technical proposal must contain all of the necessary information to address the evaluation factors as set forth in the solicitation. The maximum page limit for the technical proposal submission is discussed within each factor below.

II.C. Technical Proposal

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

Factor 1: Technical Qualifications (60%)

This factor has four (4) subfactors. The subfactors, relative weights, and their evaluation criteria are individually listed below.

● Past Experience of the General Contractor (20%)

● Past Experience of the A/E Firm (20%) mailto:joseph.dorsey@gsa.gov mailto:jamie.potter@gsa.gov

● Past Performance of the General Contractor (10%)

● Past Performance of the A/E Firm (10%)

Consideration for Small Business Concerns in Joint Ventures and First-Tier Subcontractors

For subfactor 1A (Past Experience of the General Contractor), subfactor 1B (Past Performance of the A/E firm), subfactor 1C (Past Performance of the General Contractor) and subfactor1D (Past Performance of the A/E Firm), the Government recognizes the unique circumstances of small business concerns participating in joint ventures or relying on first-tier subcontractors. In accordance with 13 CFR § 125.11(b)(1) and 13 CFR § 125.2(g), the following considerations will apply:

In accordance with the following conditions, which appear in 13 CFR § 125.11(b)(1), the Government will consider for the past performance factor only, giving due consideration to the information required below:

(i) When submitting an offer for a prime contract, a small business concern that has been a member of a joint venture may elect to use the experience and past performance of the joint venture (whether or not the other joint venture partners were small business concerns) where the small business does not independently demonstrate past performance necessary for award. The small business concern, when making such an election, shall:

(A) Identify to the contracting officer the joint venture of which the small business concern is or was a member;

(B) Identify the contract or contracts of the joint venture that the small business elects to use for its experience and past performance for the prime contract offer;

and

(C) Inform the contracting officer what duties and responsibilities the concern carried out or is carrying out as part of the joint venture.

Capabilities, Past Performance, and Experience of Joint Ventures (JV)

A small business JV may submit a proposal in response to this RFP. In accordance with regulations promulgated by the Small Business Administration in 13 CFR § 125.8(e), the Government will consider the capabilities, past performance, and experience of each partner to the JV as well as work done by the JV itself.

Capabilities, Past Performance, and Experience of First-Tier Subcontractors

The Government will consider the capabilities, past performance, and experience of each first-tier subcontractor in accordance with the regulations promulgated by the Small Business Administration in 13 CFR § 125.2(g), which states that –

When an offer of a small business prime contractor includes a proposed team of small business contractors and specifically identifies the first-tier subcontractor(s) in the proposal, the head of the agency must consider the capabilities, past performance, and experience of each first tier subcontractor that is part of the team as the capabilities, past performance, and experience of the small business prime contractor if the capabilities, past performance, and experience of the small business prime does not independently demonstrate capabilities and past performance necessary for award.

Subfactor 1A: Past Experience of the General Contractor (20%)

This factor considers the extent of the past experience of the General Contractor of the Offeror’s design-build (DB) team. For the 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 to and whose main responsibility is for the construction, improvement, or renovation of a project under contract.

Offerors should submit at least two (2) relevant projects for consideration. Projects will be deemed relevant if they meet all of the following criteria:

● Substantial completion occurred within the last eight (8) years prior to the issuance of the RFQ.

● The project was an office space remodel.

● The project was delivered by Design-Build (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).

● The total project cost was above $1 million.

Additional favorable consideration may be given to the extent the Offeror meets any of the following conditions:

● The Offeror submits three (3) projects that meet the definition of relevant under this factor.

● The project was completed ahead of the original schedule.

● The project included acoustical design.

● The total project cost was between $3 and $10 million.

● The total project cost was over $3 million and the design and construction were both completed within a total of 1.5 years.

For purposes of evaluation, a “project” is a discrete project, and is not an Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract, blanket purchase agreement, other type of master contract or a list of more than one discrete project. However, if the “project” was performed under an IDIQ, blanket purchase agreement or other type of master contract, this should be identified, and may be considered to be an asset.

The Offeror may submit no more than three (3) projects for the prime contractor team as a whole.

For each project, Offerors should submit, at a minimum, the following information:

1. Project Title.

2. Owner and/or Occupants/Tenants.

3. Role in the Project (e.g. prime contractor, subcontractor).

4. Location.

5. Project Team (including major subcontractors).

6. Description of Work (include square footage of work area).

7. Special Considerations or Plans for Occupied Spaces.

8. Contract Award Date.

9. Contract Type and Contractor’s Responsibilities.

10. Date of Substantial Completion.

11. Date of Final Completion (if applicable).

12. Total Project Cost.

13. Original Scheduled Completion Time Calendar Days).

14. Actual Completion Time (Calendar Days) or Current Timeline for Ongoing

Projects.

15. Number of Change Orders.

16. Reasons for Change Orders.

17. Project Similiaries to This Solicitation.

Submission for each project is limited to a maximum of four (4) pages. The Government will not consider any pages beyond the first four for any of the projects that the General Contractor submits.

Standard for Evaluation: The standard is met when the Offeror has submitted at least two (2) projects that meet the definition of relevant.

Subfactor 1B: Past Experience of the A/E Firm (20%)

This factor considers the extent of the past experience of the A/E Firm of the Offeror’s design-build (DB) team. For the 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 to and whose main responsibility is for the construction, improvement, or renovation of a project under contract.

Offerors should submit at least two (2) relevant projects for consideration. Projects will be deemed relevant if they meet all of the following criteria:

● Substantial completion occurred within the last eight (8) years prior to the issuance of the RFQ.

● The project was an office space remodel.

● The project was delivered by Design-Build (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).

● The total project cost was above $1 million.

Additional favorable consideration may be given to the extent the Offeror meets any of the following conditions:

● The Offeror submits three (3) projects that meet the definition of relevant under this factor.

● The project was completed ahead of the original schedule.

● The project included acoustical design.

● The total project cost was between $3 and $10 million.

● The total project cost was over $3 million and the design and construction were both completed within a total of 1.5 years.

Relevant projects may include those performed under government (federal, state, or local) or private sector contracts. While the Government is looking for past experience by the prime contractor or joint venture, the Government may consider relevant experience by affiliated companies, key personnel and subcontractors.

For purposes of evaluation, a “project” is a discrete project, and is not an Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract, blanket purchase agreement, other type of master contract or a list of more than one discrete project. However, if the “project” was performed under an IDIQ, blanket purchase agreement or other type of master contract, this should be identified, and may be considered to be an asset.

The Offeror may submit no more than three (3) projects for the prime contractor team as a whole.

For each project, Offerors should submit, at a minimum, the following information:

1. Project Title.

2. Owner and/or Occupants/Tenants.

3. Role in the Project (e.g. prime contractor, subcontractor).

4. Location.

5. Project Team (including major subcontractors).

6. Description of Work (include square footage of work area).

7. Special Considerations or Plans for Occupied Spaces.

8. Contract Award Date.

9. Contract Type and Contractor’s Responsibilities.

10. Date of Substantial Completion.

11. Date of Final Completion.

12. Total Project Cost.

13. Original Scheduled Completion Time Calendar Days).

14. Actual Completion Time.

15. Number of Change Orders.

16. Reasons for Change Orders.

17. Project Similiaries to This Solicitation.

Submission for each project is limited to a maximum of four (4) pages. The Government will not consider any pages beyond the first four for any of the projects that the General Contractor submits.

Standard for Evaluation: The standard is met when the Offeror has submitted at least two (2) projects that meet the definition of relevant.

Subfactor 1C: Past Performance of the General Contractor (10%)

This factor assesses the degree of confidence the Government has in an Offeror's ability to deliver DB services to meet user needs, based on a demonstrated record of past performance.

Performance Confidence Assessment: The Government will evaluate recent and relevant past performance efforts to assign an integrated past performance confidence assessment rating. Offerors with no recent or relevant performance history, or whose performance record is too limited to assess, will receive a "Neutral Confidence" rating.

This rating indicates the Offeror will be treated neither favorably nor unfavorably in the evaluation. Confidence ratings of "Substantial" or "Satisfactory" will be rated more favorably than a "Neutral Confidence" rating.

Submittal Requirements: For each relevant project example provided in response to subfactor 1A, the Offeror shall provide the completed Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ). In addition to PPQs, the Government may review past performance ratings available in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and other independently obtained information.

The Offeror should direct their customer points of contacts (such as Government contracting officers, building owners and managers, or lessee representatives) associated with each relevant project to complete the PPQ via the following link:

https://forms.gle/u2SoRdBzUAwS8rvf9. The Offeror is solely responsible for ensuring all PPQs are submitted by the designated date and time for receipt of proposals.

Standard for Evaluation: The standard for evaluation is met when the Government determines that the Offeror demonstrates at least Satisfactory Confidence in their ability to successfully perform the required work. This determination requires the submission of at least two (2) Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) reflecting satisfactory performance.

Additional favorable consideration may be given to the extent the Offeror meets any of the following conditions:

● The Offeror submits three (3) PPQs, all reflecting at least satisfactory performance.

● At least one (1) PPQ demonstrates an overall performance rating exceeding satisfactory.

The Government reserves the right to use any relevant information, whether submitted by the Offeror or independently obtained, in determining past performance confidence.

Subfactor 1D: Past Performance of the A/E Firm (10%)

This factor assesses the degree of confidence the Government has in an Offeror's ability to deliver DB services to meet user needs, based on a demonstrated record of past performance.

https://forms.gle/u2SoRdBzUAwS8rvf9

Performance Confidence Assessment: The Government will evaluate recent and relevant past performance efforts to assign an integrated past performance confidence assessment rating. Offerors with no recent or relevant performance history, or whose performance record is too limited to assess, will receive a "Neutral Confidence" rating.

This rating indicates the Offeror will be treated neither favorably nor unfavorably in the evaluation. Confidence ratings of "Substantial" or "Satisfactory" will be rated more favorably than a "Neutral Confidence" rating.

Submittal Requirements: For each relevant project example that the Offeror provides in response to subfactor 1B, the Offeror should direct their customer points of contract for those relevant projects to complete and submit the completed Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) to the Government. In addition to PPQs, the Government may review past performance ratings available in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and other independently obtained information.

The Offeror should direct their customer points of contacts (such as Government contracting officers, building owners and managers, or lessee representatives) associated with each relevant project to complete the PPQ via the following link:

https://forms.gle/Cc6a83cLmRPL5LiP9. The Offeror is solely responsible for ensuring all PPQs are submitted by the designated date and time for receipt of proposals.

Standard for Evaluation: The standard for evaluation is met when the Government determines that the Offeror demonstrates at least Satisfactory Confidence in their ability to successfully perform the required work, based on the PPQs that the Government receives and on other past performance information that the Government may collect. A Satisfactory Confidence determination may be met by the submission of at least two (2) PPQs that reflect a satisfactory performance or higher.

Additional favorable consideration may be given to the extent the Offeror meets any of the following conditions:

● The Offeror submits three (3) PPQs, all of which reflecting at least satisfactory performance.

● At least one (1) PPQ demonstrates an overall performance rating exceeding satisfactory.

The Government reserves the right to use any relevant information, whether submitted by the Offeror or independently obtained, in determining past performance confidence.

Factor 2: Approach to Design-Build (20%) https://forms.gle/Cc6a83cLmRPL5LiP9

This factor evaluates the Offeror’s approach to establishing a design-build team that will proactively and collaboratively work together to satisfy the Government’s objectives, including the realization of Design Excellence (DE).

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, 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 Requirements: Each Offeror must submit a written narrative (not to exceed five pages) describing its approach to the DB process. An Offeror may allocate the five pages in any manner they choose but must address the following four elements:

1. Philosophy and Design Intent: Describe the Offeror’s overarching design philosophy and design intent for this project. Topics may include: the Offeror’s approach to the challenge of public architecture and related issues; parameters that may apply in creating a new tenant space in an existing building; and commitment to integrated 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 align with the specific objectives of this project.

2. 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 likelihood that the Offeror’s management process will foster a cohesive and collaborative team effort.

3. Design Excellence: Explain the team’s approach to achieving Design Excellence through collaboration and cohesive team dynamics. The Government will evaluate the probability that the Offeror’s approach will effectively support the realization of Design Excellence on this project.

4. 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.

Standard for Evaluation: The standard is met when the following conditions are satisfied:

● The Offeror’s philosophy and design intent are clearly articulated, well-suited for this project and aligned with the Government’s objective.

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

● The Offeror presents a satisfactory approach to achieving Design Excellence on this project.

● The Offeror’s stipend distribution plan reflects an equitable and transparent allocation among team members.

Additional favorable consideration: Proposals may receive additional favorable consideration for 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 Factors 1A & 1B;

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

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

Factor 3: Lead Designer (20%)

This factor evaluates the Lead Designer’s portfolio to determine their ability to achieve Design Excellence. For this evaluation factor, “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 Government will consider each of these elements when evaluating the Offeror’s proposal.

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

○ 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).

○ 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).

● Project Narrative: 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.

● Supporting Documentation: In addition to the page limits above, each Offeror may include: 1) one of the following for each project: a representative floor plan, a site plan, a rendered 3-D model, a building section, or other appropriate drawing, and 2) two pages of photographs for each project.

● Identify and describe areas of responsibility of the lead designer and involvement with 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 requirements, demonstrates design leadership, and clearly exemplifies Design Excellence.

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

● Lead Designer has a proven history of delivering superior quality designs.

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

● Designs demonstrate a consistently high level of exploration, rigor, and personal

● commitment to Design Excellence.

● The portfolio includes a project that is of the same size, scope, and complexity as defined in Evaluation Factor 1A and 1B.

II.D. Other Requirements

(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).

(2) Proof of Bonding to $10 million.

(3) Proprietary Information Agreement(s)

Offerors are advised that employees of the firm(s) identified below may require access to your firm’s proprietary information in performing advisory and assistance services for the Government under separate contract. These individuals will be authorized access only to such information that is necessary to enable them to perform their respective duties. Such firm(s) are expressly prohibited from competing on the subject acquisition.

Michael Ray, michael.ray@jacobs.com, Jacobs Technology Inc.

Claressa Bellah, claressa.bellah@jacobs.com, Jacobs Technology Inc.

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

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

II.E. Requirements of Joint Venture Offerors https://www.sam.gov/ mailto:michael.ray@jacobs.com mailto:claressa.bellah@jacobs.com

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

(2) An authorized representative of each member of the joint venture must sign the SF 1442 accompanying an offer regardless of any agency relationship established between the members.

(3) In the case of corporations that are joint venture members, the corporation secretary must certify that the corporation is authorized to participate in the joint venture, either by certifying in the joint venture agreement, or by submitting a separate certification to the Government. The joint venture must also provide a certificate that 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 15 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.

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

III.D. Information Concerning the Disclosure of Solicitation Results

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

III.E. Affirmative Procurement Program

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

III.F. Notice Concerning Preparation of Proposals

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

III.G. Bond Requirements (Phase 2 Requirements)

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

III.H. Contractor Performance Information

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

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

(2) CPARS Registration: Each award requiring an evaluation must be registered in CPARS. The contractor will receive several automated emails. Within thirty days of award, the contractor will receive http://www.cpars.gov/ http://www.cpars.gov/ 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 to 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 and Dissemination of Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) Building Information

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

IV. FAR/GSAR Solicitation Provisions

To be issued with Phase 2 Solicitation.

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

(DEVIATION FAR 52.252-5)

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

(1) The addition of “(DEVIATION)” after the date of the FAR provision when an authorized deviation to a FAR provision is being used, and https://www.cpars.gov/lc.htm

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

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

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

V. Method of Award

V.A. Evaluation of Phase 1 Proposals

The Government will evaluate Phase 1 proposals based on the following evaluation factors and shortlist a maximum of three offerors to submit Phase 2 proposals.

Factor 1: Technical Qualifications (60%)

● Past Experience of the General Contractor (20%)

● Past Experience of the A/E Firm (20%)

● Past Performance of the General Contractor (10%)

● Past Performance of the A/E Firm (10%)

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

Factor 3: Lead Designer (20%)

V.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:

Factor 1: Design Concept (60%)

Factor 2: Key Personnel (25%)

Factor 3: Management Plan (15%)

In order to encourage robust participation and innovation in the design-build process, the Government may, at its discretion, provide a design-build development stipend to each contractor that is shortlisted as part of the competitive development process. To encourage high-quality submissions and compensate shortlisted offerors for a portion of their proposal development cost, a stipend, at an amount to be determined at the Government’s discretion, and will be provided for each unsuccessful shortlisted offeror that submits a responsive and responsible proposal. The stipend will be paid under the following conditions:

● The offeror must submit a complete proposal that meets all of the requirements outlined in the Solicitation documents

● The offeror must not be selected for contract award.

● Upon payment of the stipend, the General Services Administration reserves the right to use any ideas or information contained in the offerors proposal for project implementation or other purposes.

Offerors are advised that the stipend is intended to partially offset the cost of proposal preparation and is not intended to provide full compensation for the total expenses incurred. Offerors that submit incomplete or unacceptable Phase 2 proposals will not be eligible for the stipend. No stipend will be provided during Phase 1.

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.

V.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.

V.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.

V.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.

V.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.

Capabilities, Past Performance, and Experience of Joint Ventures (JV)