668-24-102_AE SOW_Attachment E.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 14 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 36C26024R0054
About this file
This document is a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for Architect-Engineer (A-E) services to support a federal contract opportunity from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to replace windows at Building 1 of the Mann-Grandstaff VA Medical Center in Spokane, Washington.
The VA is seeking A-E services for preliminary concept and program development, investigative services, design narratives/analysis, planning consultations and visits, design work, calculations, preparation of contract drawings and specifications, sample boards, cost estimates, construction period services, site visits, and project phasing. The contract is expected to be awarded in June 2024 with a 205-calendar day period of performance for design completion. The construction cost estimate range is between $5-10 million. The procurement is a 100% Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) set-aside. Firms must submit an SF 330 qualification package by April 29, 2024, and will be evaluated on professional qualifications, specialized experience, past performance, construction period services experience, and knowledge of the local area.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 36C26024R0054 0001.pdf | ||
| 668-24-102_AE SOW_Attachment A.pdf | ||
| 668-24-102_AE SOW V3-1.pdf | ||
| 668-24-102_AE SOW_Attachment B.pdf | ||
| 36C26024R0054.docx | DOCX document | |
| 668-24-102_AE SOW_Attachment C.docx | DOCX document | |
| 668-24-102_AE SOW_Attachment D.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| PPQ 668-24-102.docx | DOCX document | |
| 668-24-102 A-E Presolicitation 02.docx | DOCX document |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Cost Estimate review
| https://www.gao.gov/assets/710/705312.pdf | KEY | |||||
| VA or A/E provided evidence that satisfied the entire criterion = | Met | |||||
| VA or A/E provided evidence that satisfies a larger portion of the criterion = | Substantially Met | |||||
| VA or A/E provided evidence that satisfied half of the criterion = | Partially Met | |||||
| VA or A/E provided evidence that satisfied a small portion of the criterion = | Minimally Met | |||||
| VA or A/E provided no evidence that satisfied any of the criterion = | Not Met | |||||
| GAO Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide (GAO-20-195G) March 2020 | 10% Design Construction Cost Estimate | 35% Design Construction Cost Estimate | 65% Design Construction Cost Estimate | 95% Design Construction Cost Estimate | 100% Design Construction Cost Estimate | |
| Four Characteristics of a high-quality and reliable cost estimate | Best Practices in Chapter 16: Auditing and Validating the Cost Estimate (Go to page 196 of 476) | Individual Assessment | Individual Assessment | Individual Assessment | Individual Assessment | Individual Assessment |
| Comprehensive | The cost estimate includes all life cycle costs | |||||
| The technical baseline description completely defines the program, reflects the current schedule, and is technically reasonable. | ||||||
| The cost estimate is based on a WBS that is product-oriented, traceable to the statement of work, and at an appropriate level of detail to ensure that cost elements are neither omitted nor double counted. | ||||||
| The cost estimate documents all cost-influencing ground rules and assumptions. | ||||||
| Well documented | The documentation should show the source data used, the reliability of the data, and the estimaring methodology used to derive each element's cost. | |||||
| The documentation describes how the estimate was developed so that a cost analyst unfamiliar with the program could understand what was done and replicate it. | ||||||
| The documentation describes step by step how the estimate was developed so that a cost analyst unfamiliar with the program could understand what was done and replicate it. | ||||||
| The documentation discusses the technical baseline description and the data in the technical baseline are consistent with the cost estimate | ||||||
| The documentation provides evidence that the cost estimate is reviewed and accepted by management. | ||||||
| Accurate | The cost model was developed by estimating each WBS element using the best methodology from the data collected. | |||||
| The estimate has been adjusted properly for inflation. | ||||||
| The estimate contains few, if any, minor mistakes. | ||||||
| The cost estimate is regularly updated to ensure it reflects program changes and actual costs. | ||||||
| Variances between planned and actual costs are documented, explained, and reviewed. | ||||||
| The estimate is based on a historical record of cost estimating and actual experiences from other comparable programs. |
| Credible | The cost estimate included a sensitivity analysis that identifies a range of possible costs based on varying major assumptions, parameters, and data inputs. |
| A risk and uncertainty analysis was conducted that quantified the imperfectly understood risks and identified the effects of changing key cost driver assumptions and factors. | |
| Major cost elements were crossed checked to see if results were similar. | |
| An independent cost estimate (ICE) was conducted by a group outside the acquiring organization to determine whether other estimating methods produce similar results. |
&F &A page &P of &N https://www.gao.gov/assets/710/705312.pdf
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .