Attachment B_Selection Criteria.pdf

Attachment B - Architect-Engineer Selection Criteria

This acquisition will be in accordance with FAR Part 36.602-1 and VAAM Part M836.602-1.

The Architecture-Engineer (AE) must demonstrate its qualifications with respect to the published evaluation criteria for all services. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) shall evaluate each potential contractor in terms of the following:

• “M” - firm meets the selection criterion.

• “NM” - does not meet the selection criterion.

The submitted SF-330s will be evaluated on the criteria below, listed in order of importance:

(1) Professional Qualifications

(2) Specialized Experience and Technical Competence

(3) Capacity to Accomplish the Work

(4) Past Performance

(5) Construction Period Services

(6) Record of Significant Claims

(7) Set-Aside

(8) Location (tiebreaker)

Selection Criterion 1: Professional Qualifications

Professional qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of required services showing recent experience of the project team with comparable hospital projects within the past five years in which the construction has been completed. Each resume shall include a minimum of two (2) specific completed projects through construction in the last 5 years.

Evaluation Considerations

a. Do the qualifications indicate that the project team has recent direct experience on Hospital projects designing similar improvements to those proposed at Hampton VAMC? Is the architect/engineer providing a team where each member has more than 5 years of experience and are they licensed/registered? What will be the role of interns if used during design?

b. Firm shall provide a table of a minimum of 5 comparable projects comparing their IGE with the bid/award amount during construction.

Selection Criterion 2: Specialized Experience and Technical Competence

The AE must have the necessary specialized experience and technical competence in the type of work required, specifically water distribution systems including mains.

Provide a minimum of three (3) and no more than five (5) projects that are at least 85% complete through construction. Submitted projects must be from within the past five (5) years and should be projects that best illustrate specialized experience of the proposed team. Example projects shall note project’s square footage. All projects provided in the SF-330 must be completed by the office, branch, regional office, or individual team member proposed to manage and/or perform work under this contract.

To enable verification, firms should include the DUNS number along with each firm’s name in the SF-330 Part 1, Section F Item 25 “Firms from Section C Involved in this Project,” block (1). Include a contract number or project identification number in block

21. Include an email address and phone number for the point of contact in block 23(c).

Include in the project description, the contract period of performance, award contract value, current contract value, and summary of the work performed that demonstrates relevance to specialized experience as outlined above.

If the contractor served as a subcontractor on a project, indicate the value of the work they provided towards the performance of the overall project. If a project was performed by a joint venture, and not all joint venture partners are on the team proposed for this contract, the offeror/team should specifically address the work performed by the joint venture partner offering/teaming on this contract. Likewise, if the offeror/team member worked as a subcontractor on a project, the description should clearly describe the work performed by the offeror/team member and the roles and responsibilities of each on the project, rather than the work performed on the project as a whole.

If the project description does not clearly delineate the work performed by the entity/entities offering/teaming on this contract, the project could be eliminated from consideration.

Additionally, firms are required to submit information that will clearly demonstrate specific experiences and qualifications of proposed personnel and their record of working together as a team. Specifically list similar scoped projects no more than five

(5) years old that clearly show participation. (See SF330 Part I Section G, but not excluding other information provided on the SF330 and supporting documentation.)

NOTE: If the Offeror is a joint venture, information should be submitted as a joint venture. However, if there is no information for the joint venture, information should be submitted for each joint venture partner, not to exceed a total of five (5) projects for this criterion. Projects shall be submitted on the SF330. For submittal purposes, a task order on an IDIQ contract is considered a project, as is a stand-alone contract award. Do not list an IDIQ contract as an example of a completed project. Instead, list relevant completed task orders or stand-alone contract awards that fit within the definition above.

Examples of project work submitted that do not conform to this requirement will not be evaluated.

Evaluation Considerations

a. Does the architect/engineer provide evidence of understanding of the project; and any unique architectural/engineering aspects associated with the proposed project and how to address them?

Selection Criteria 3: Capacity to Accomplish the Work

The A/E must have the capacity to accomplish the work in the required time for both the prime and sub-consultants. This factor evaluates the ability of the firm, given their current projected workload (percentage) and the availability of their key personnel, to accomplish the possible myriad of design projects in the required time. The general workload and staffing capacity of the design office will be evaluated.

I. List current projects with a design fee of greater than $100,000 being designed in the firms’ office.

II. Indicate the firms’ present workload and the availability of the project team (including sub-consultants) for the specified contract performance period;

III. Describe experience in successfully delivering projects per performance schedule, providing timely construction support, and successfully completing multiple projects with similar delivery dates

IV. Volume of VA contract awards in the last 12 months.

Evaluator Consideration:

a. Does the proposed design team have sufficient capacity to work on this project?

b. Has the firm demonstrated an ability to meet design schedules in the past?

c. Has the firm demonstrated a record of working together as a team?

Selection Criteria 4: Past Performance

Offerors will be evaluated on past performance on contracts with Government agencies and private industry in terms of cost control, quality of work, and compliance with performance schedules in a hospital setting. Provided past performance and experience shall include information in the Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) or CPARS/ACASS for criterion 2 projects. Past performance may also include other information provided by the firm such as customer inquiries, Government databases, and other information available to the Government. Failure to provide requested data, accessible points of contact, or valid phone numbers could result in a firm being rated lower.

Evaluator Consideration:

a. Does the proposed architect/engineer have past performance with ratings satisfactory and above while working on hospital projects?

b. Does the architect/engineer have a reputation and standing of the firm and its principal officials with respect to professional performance, general management, and cooperativeness.

c. Are the evaluations provided for the projects listed in Specialized Experience?

Project Recency:

A project will be considered recent only if performance was completed within five (5) years of the date of issuance of this public announcement. Ongoing projects will not be considered as an accurate performance record cannot exist for work not yet completed.

Submission requirements:

Submit a completed and current (most recent) CPARS/ACASS evaluation for each project submitted under criterion 2. If the project does not have a completed CPARS/ACASS evaluation, the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in this notice is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client. Please ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Do not submit a PPQ when a completed CPARS/ACASS is available.

Submit no less than three (3) and no more than five (5) past performance references for recent and relevant projects identified on SF330 Part I Section F. Individual completed PPQs should be no more than five (5) pages long and submitted with your SF-330. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before the response date set forth in this notice, offerors should complete and submit with their responses the first page of the PPQ (Attachment C), which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors may submit a PPQ from a previous special notice/RFP. It must be on the same form included with this special notice, and it must be legible. Offerors should follow up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires.

If requested by the client, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Network Contracting Office 6, Attn: Cilena Adams via Cilena.Adams@va.gov prior to the response date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their response PPQs or CPARS previously submitted in response to other A/E services procurements. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

Evaluator Consideration:

a. Does the proposed architect/engineer have past performance with ratings satisfactory and above while working on hospital projects?

b. Does the architect/engineer have a reputation and standing of the firm and its principal officials with respect to professional performance, general management, and cooperativeness.

c. Are the evaluations provided for the projects listed in Specialized Experience?

Selection Criteria 5: Construction Period Services

Offerors will be evaluated on the quality of the construction period services provided.

Construction period services include but are not limited to professional field inspections, review of construction submittals, support in answering requests for information, and support of construction contract changes.

Experience in construction period services to include professional field inspections during the construction period, review of construction submittals, support in answering requests for information during the construction period, and support of construction contract changes to include drafting statements of work, and cost estimates shall be included as an evaluation criterion when construction period services is included in the statement of work for A-E services.

Provide up to three (3) completed projects in the past five (5) years that best illustrates the construction period services performed by the team. Describe construction period services provided and whether the project was completed within schedule and budget.

Include a contract number or project identification, include name, telephone number, and email of the completed project stakeholder.

Evaluator Consideration:

a. What evidence do the qualifications provide as to the architect/engineer’s commitment to proactive and consistent representation during construction specifically answering RFIs, reviewing submittals and periodic site visits?

Selection Criteria 6: Record of Significant Claims

Interested A/E firms must share any record of significant claims against the firm because of improper or incomplete architectural and engineering services.

Indicate any claims against the firm because of improper or incomplete architectural and engineering services within the past five (5) years.

Selection Criteria 7: Set-Aside

The extent to which potential contractors identify and commit to the use of service-disabled Veteran-owned small businesses, Veteran-owned small businesses, and other types of small businesses as subcontractors.

Selection Criteria 8: Location

TIE-BREAKER:

In the event that evaluations of SF330’s result in the same rating, proximity to the facility will be used as a tiebreaker. The distance will be determined according to http://maps.google.com/. For firms that have multiple/regional offices, the location of the primary project team will be used to calculate the distance and should be provided in the SF330. If the location of the primary project team is not identified, the location of the main office will be used.

Indicate the location (physical address) of the firms or teams, including main offices, branch offices, any sub consultants’ offices, and the location of the primary project team. Explain how this will be advantageous to the Government.

http://maps.google.com/