ATTACHMENT A - PHASE 1 FACTOR 2 - EXPERIENCE.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 24 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Z1DA--DB Construction | Project No. 570-26-611 Install Tieback Roof Anchors, Building 1 - Fresno
- Solicitation number
- 36C26126R0003
About this file
This document is an Attachment A evaluation matrix for a Phase 1 design-build contract solicitation (Solicitation No. 36C26126R0003) for the Department of Veterans Affairs at the Fresno VA Medical Center. The solicitation requires offerors to submit detailed experience information for up to six projects demonstrating capability in design-build construction, specifically focusing on roof anchor installation for Building 1. The contract is a total Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) set-aside with a project value between $250,000 and $500,000, classified under NAICS code 236220 with a $45M small business size standard.
Key submission requirements include documenting two projects each from the lead Architect-Engineering Firm, lead Construction Contractor, and joint design-build projects completed together. Projects must be completed within the last five calendar years, with a minimum value of $500,000, and demonstrate relevance to healthcare, industrial, or nonresidential infrastructure construction. The evaluation will use an adjectival rating system from Unacceptable to Outstanding, assessing factors like project complexity, recency, prime contractor status, and geographic relevance. Phase 1 proposals are due on December 3, 2025, at 2:00 PM PST, with a performance period of 240 calendar days after Notice to Proceed.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| VA Fresno ACM Survey Asbestos Study_20251205.pdf | ||
| 36C26126R0003 0004.docx | DOCX document | |
| As-built Drawings - Tie backs Merged.pdf | ||
| RFI Responses FRE Anchor Tie Downs 20251205.pdf | ||
| DB SOW Draft_Fresno VA_B1 Tiebacks _R1.pdf | ||
| 36C26126R0003 0003.docx | DOCX document | |
| 36C26126R0003 0002.docx | DOCX document | |
| 36C26126R0003 0001.docx | DOCX document | |
| ATTACHMENT D - Pre-solicitation Site Visit Presentation.pptx | PPTX presentation | |
| DB SOW_Fresno VA_B1 Tiebacks_Final.pdf | ||
| ATTACHMENT B - PHASE 1 FACTOR 3 - Past Performance Questionnaire.docx | DOCX document | |
| 01 00 00 - General Requirements.pdf | ||
| DBA Wage Determination No. CA20250018 dated 20250926.pdf | ||
| ATTACHMENT E - RFI Form.docx | DOCX document | |
| ATTACHMENT C - PHASE 2 FACTOR 4 - Offerors Key Personnel.docx | DOCX document | |
| 36C26126R0003_2.docx | DOCX document |
Show all 16
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
Basis of Evaluation
ATTACHMENT A
FACTOR 2 - EXPERIENCE
36C26126R0003
Submit the following information: Provide information on relevant and recent experience on design-build contracts of comparable size, complexity and scope within the last five calendar years as described in the below requirements. The Offeror shall complete the attached Phase-One Factor 2 Spreadsheet (Attachment A) for each project submitted. The attached (Attachment A) is structured to allow for the entry of up to six (6) total projects as requested in items 1 thru 3 below. The use of (Attachment A) and all information therein is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to evaluate experience. The Government will evaluate only the information provided in (Attachment A) and all other information provided on other than (Attachment A) will not be considered. The Offeror may expand individual cells on the (Attachment A). (Attachment A) submittals that do not comply with these requirements will NOT be evaluated.
1. Submit a maximum of Two (2) example projects demonstrating the experience and capability of the lead Architect-Engineering Firm that will be designing the project. Examples should demonstrate offerors experience as the Prime Contractor on recent, relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP.
2. Submit a maximum of Two (2) example projects demonstrating the experience and capability of the lead Construction Contractor that will be performing the largest construction effort on the project. Examples should demonstrate offerors experience as the Prime Contractor on recent, relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP.
3. Submit a maximum of Two (2) example design/build projects that the prime contractor and the partner firm have completed together. Examples should demonstrate offerors and partner firm’s coordination and teamwork leading to successful completion on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP.
| BASIS OF EVALUATION: | |
| The above listed key positions are listed and will be rated in descending order of importance. The Offeror's key personnel shall be evaluated based upon experience of work construction, demonstrated by a maximum of two (2) roof replacement projects for each person. Each project shall have a dollar value of approximately $500,000.00 or more, completed within the last ten (10) years. Each person shall have a minimum of two years of construction experience in their respective positions and five years in their respective fields. Key personnel with demonstrated experience in the specific civil and site improvement disciplines outlined in this paragraph may be rated more favorably. Likewise, key personnel with 5 or more years in their respective positions and 10 or more years in their respective fields may be rated more favorably. |
| ADJECTIVAL RATINGS | |
| Rating | Description |
| Outstanding | Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low. |
| Good | Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate. |
| Acceptable | Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate. |
| Marginal | Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high. |
| Unacceptable | Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of |
unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.
| DEFINITIONS | |
| Strength | An aspect of an offeror’s proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance. |
| Weakness | A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. |
| Significant Weakness | A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. |
| Deficiency | A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. |
| RELEVANCY DEFINITIONS | |
| Relevancy Definition: | For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is defined as new construction and/or repair, alteration and related demolition of existing infrastructure completed within the past five years of the proposal issue date of this RFP. Infrastructure is defined as: 1) construction of a healthcare facility; 2) construction for industrial buildings and warehouses; 3) nonresidential buildings, other than industrial buildings and warehouses; or 4) improvements such as utilities, landscaping, and roadways. “New Construction” is defined as construction that provides for new or expanded facilities or infrastructure. New construction does not include repair and/or modernization of an existing facility nor does it include replacement or upgrade to an existing infrastructure. |
| Not Relevant: | Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. |
| Size Defintition: | $500,000.00 or More |
| Complexity Definition: | Complexity is defined as a design-build project that includes several specialty trades and some engineering. |
| Scope Definition: | Scope is defined as work or activities related, or closely related to that which is outlined in the Statement of Work such as but not limited to; construction of new asphalt paving, compaction, grading, seal coating, striping, electrical and solar. |
| Recency Definition: | For purposes of this evaluation, a recent project is defined as a project completed in the previous five (5) calendar years. |
| Project Definition: | A project is defined as a construction project performed under a single task order or contract. For multiple award and indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity type contracts, the contract as a whole shall not be submitted as a project; rather Offerors shall submit the work performed under a task order as a project. |
| Prime Contractor: | the Offeror (or JV Partner) must have been a Prime Contractor for the projects and each project shall be $25,000 or more in dollar value for Group 1 offerors |
FIRM NAME
36C26126R0003
FACTOR 2 - EXPERIENCE
| FIRM NAME | |
| Experience - Project 1 | Title |
| Contract # | |
| Project Description | |
| Dollar Amount | |
| Project Description | New construction, Alteration, Repair, ect…. |
| Construction Type | Design-build / Design Bid Build, ect…. |
| Completed Project? | Yes / No |
| Recent (within five years)? | Yes / No |
| On time? | Yes / No |
| Performed as Prime Contractor? | Yes / No |
| Self-Performance? | % of self-performance |
| Joint Venture? | Yes / No |
| Within VISN 21 Geographic Location? | Yes / No |
| Experience - Project 2 | Title |
| Contract # | |
| Project Description | |
| Dollar Amount | |
| Project Description | New construction, Alteration, Repair, ect…. |
| Construction Type | Design-build / Design Bid Build, ect…. |
| Completed Project? | Yes / No |
| Recent (within five years)? | Yes / No |
| On time? | Yes / No |
| Performed as Prime Contractor? | Yes / No |
| Self-Performance? | % of self-performance |
| Joint Venture? | Yes / No |
| Within VISN 21 Geographic Location? | Yes / No |
| Experience - Project 3 | Title |
| Contract # | |
| Project Description | |
| Dollar Amount | |
| Project Description | New construction, Alteration, Repair, ect…. |
| Construction Type | Design-build / Design Bid Build, ect…. |
| Completed Project? | Yes / No |
| Recent (within five years)? | Yes / No |
| On time? | Yes / No |
| Performed as Prime Contractor? | Yes / No |
| Self-Performance? | % of self-performance |
| Joint Venture? | Yes / No |
| Within VISN 21 Geographic Location? | Yes / No |
| Experience - Project 4 | Title |
| Contract # | |
| Project Description | |
| Dollar Amount | |
| Project Description | New construction, Alteration, Repair, ect…. |
| Construction Type | Design-build / Design Bid Build, ect…. |
| Completed Project? | Yes / No |
| Recent (within five years)? | Yes / No |
| On time? | Yes / No |
| Performed as Prime Contractor? | Yes / No |
| Self-Performance? | % of self-performance |
| Joint Venture? | Yes / No |
| Within VISN 21 Geographic Location? | Yes / No |
| Experience - Project 5 | Title |
| Contract # | |
| Project Description | |
| Dollar Amount | |
| Project Description | New construction, Alteration, Repair, ect…. |
| Construction Type | Design-build / Design Bid Build, ect…. |
| Completed Project? | Yes / No |
| Recent (within five years)? | Yes / No |
| On time? | Yes / No |
| Performed as Prime Contractor? | Yes / No |
| Self-Performance? | % of self-performance |
| Joint Venture? | Yes / No |
| Within VISN 21 Geographic Location? | Yes / No |
| Experience - Project 6 | Title |
| Contract # | |
| Project Description | |
| Dollar Amount | |
| Project Description | New construction, Alteration, Repair, ect…. |
| Construction Type | Design-build / Design Bid Build, ect…. |
| Completed Project? | Yes / No |
| Recent (within five years)? | Yes / No |
| On time? | Yes / No |
| Performed as Prime Contractor? | Yes / No |
| Self-Performance? | % of self-performance |
| Joint Venture? | Yes / No |
| Within VISN 21 Geographic Location? | Yes / No |
| Overall Rating | FOR GOVERNMENT USE ONLY |
| Basis for the Rating | FOR GOVERNMENT USE ONLY |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .