MTAC_RFP_Amendment_A0001.pdf

Solicitation No. DTRT57-13-R-20012 Amendment No. A0001

The purpose of this amendment is to make the following changes to Solicitation DTRT57-13-R- 20012:

1. The slides from the May 16, 2013 Pre-Proposal Webinar are attached to this amendment.

2. The list of attendees from the May 16, 2013 Pre-Proposal Webinar are attached to this amendment.

3. The Government whichs to clarify the Award Exclusion (L.2.A) by referring to the following table:

Prime Offeror Subcontractor Government

Determination Offeror A submits a proposal as a Prime for CLIN 0001

Offeror A is proposed as a subcontractor to Offeror B under CLIN

Offeror’s A’s proposal as a prime will not receive consideration

Offeror A submits a proposal solely as a Prime (either CLIN)

Offeror A is not proposed as a subcontractor

Proposal will receive consideration (evaluated)

Offeror A submits a proposal as a Prime for CLIN 0001

Offeror A is proposed as a subcontractor to Offeror B under CLIN

Proposal will receive consideration (evaluated)

4. The due date and time for the submission of proposals remains unchanged.

5. Please acknowledge receipt of this amendment with the submission of your proposal.

6. All other terms and conditions of this solicitation remain unchanged.

Pre-Proposal Conference Monitoring and Technical Assistance Contractor (MTAC) and Training Support

RFP No. DTRT57-13-R-20012

The National Transportation Systems Center

Advancing transportation innovation for the public good

U.S. Department of Transportation Research and Innovative Technology Administration John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center

May 16, 2013

Today’s Agenda

Ground Rules and Logistics

Volpe Center Overview

Program Overview & Objectives

Proposal Requirements – Technical and Cost - CLIN’s 0001 and 0002

Proposal Submission Reminders

Today’s Presenters

Robert Robinson, Contracting Officer

Robert Dorer, Director, Center for Infrastructure Systems and Engineering

Julie Borgesi, Environmental Science and Engineering Division

Jeffrey Bryan, Organizational Development Specialist

Roland Regan, Contract Specialist

Ground Rules and Logistics

Any statements, remarks or explanations made during this pre-proposal conference shall not qualify the terms of the RFP, unless an amendment is issued.

A copy of today’s presentation and list of attendees will be provided as an amendment to the solicitation.

No questions will be entertained during this webinar.

Ground Rules and Logistics – cont’d

Any requests or questions for RFP clarification must be submitted, in writing, no later than 3:00 p.m. EDT on May 30th, 2013

Written questions received after May 30, 2013 will be answered by amendment only if determined by the CO to be in the best interest of the Government.

An amendment will be issued answering written questions received by May 30th, 2013

Volpe Center Overview and Program Background

Robert Dorer, Director, Center for

Infrastructure Systems and Engineering

Background Volpe established in 1970 Part of U.S. Department of

Transportation (DOT) Research and Innovative Technology Administration

(RITA)

Named after former DOT Secretary and MA Governor John A. Volpe

Volpe supports DOT goals Safety State of good repair Economic competitiveness Livable communities Environmental sustainability

About Volpe

Who we are

Our Purpose: Advancing transportation innovation for the public good

Our Mission: Improve the nation’s transportation system by serving as a center of excellence for informed decision making, anticipating emerging transportation issues, and advancing technical, operational, and institutional innovations

Our Values:

Public service Innovative solutions Professional excellence Collaboration and partnering

What makes us unique

Entrepreneurial, objective, efficient

Fee-for-service; no direct appropriations Flexibility and responsiveness of a consultant A trusted, objective advisor focused on safety and the public good

Federal advantage

Guided by a deep understanding of federal responsibilities, objectives, and practices

Accessibility of a federal in-house resource that can partner on strategy, tactics, policy, and acquisitions

Driven by public interest—not profit

Volpe Center Organization

Technical Centers

Safety Management

Systems Stephen Popkin

Transportation Policy and Planning

Rachel Winkeller

Environmental and Energy

Systems Gregg Fleming

Transportation Logistics and Security

Michael Dinning

Air Traffic Systems and Operations Steven Lang

Infrastructure Systems and Engineering Robert Dorer

Human Factors Research and

System Applications

Michael Dinning, Act.

Advanced Transportation Technologies

Gary Ritter

Chief Financial Officer William Henrikson

Chief Counsel Monica Conyngham

EEO Officer vacant

Director and Associate Administrator

Robert C. Johns

Human Resources

Susan Connors

Acquisitions Mary Doherty

Information Technology

Eric Frykenberg

Facilities Management David Duncan

Communication and Knowledge Management

Marc Mandler

Director Emeritus Richard John

Organizational Culture and Development

Helen Blackman

Strategic Initiatives for Research and Innovation

Ellen Bell

Deputy Associate Administrator for Research and Innovation

Anne Aylward

Deputy Associate Administrator for Operations David Ishihara

Volpe Support to FRA - Background

The FRA has engaged the Volpe Center to enhance the FRA’s existing monitoring and technical assistance program by using the Volpe Center’s expert Federal and Contractor resources in a manner similar to other USDOT agencies.

The FRA currently has several large grant and loan portfolios comprised of investments for more than 325 active grants and loans distributed across multiple programs for projects located throughout the entire United States.

The Volpe Center will be responsible for the development of operating procedures and management of the monitoring and technical assistance program for specific programs that will support the efforts of the FRA’s Regional Teams.

Volpe Support to FRA - Objective

The Volpe Center, through an Intra-Agency Agreement (IAA) with the FRA, is providing support to enhance the FRA’s monitoring and technical assistance program for High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) and the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) Discretionary Grant program.

The Monitoring and Technical Assistance Contractor (MTAC) will work with the Volpe Center to execute monitoring and technical assistance (MTA) under this contract.

Volpe Support to FRA – Objective (cont’d)

MTAC support includes: compliance and programmatic monitoring support, deliverable review and technical assistance, and training support to Recipients, FRA and/or their contractors.

MTACs will assist in the execution of the program, including producing reports, memorandums, presentations, and training materials.

CLIN 0001 Overview & Objectives

Julie Borgesi, Environmental Science and Engineering Division

CLIN 0001: MTAC support

CLIN 0001: MTAC support includes 3 Task Areas:

Task Area 1 – Program support

Task Area 2 – Project monitoring and monitoring support

Task Area 3 – Deliverable review and technical assistance

CLIN 0001: MTAC Support

TASK AREA 1 – PROGRAM SUPPORT

A. Monitoring Plan Support B. Implementation and Transition Plans C. Monitoring Report D. Meeting and Teleconference Support E. Ancillary Support

TASK AREA 2 – PROJECT MONITORING AND

MONITORING SUPPORT

A. Compliance Monitoring Support B. Performance Monitoring Support C. Financial Monitoring Support

TASK AREA 3 – DELIVERABLE REVIEW AND TECHNICAL

ASSISTANCE

A. Deliverable Reviews B. Technical Assistance C. Technical Studies and Papers

CLIN 0002 Overview & Objectives

Jeffrey Bryan, Organizational Development Specialist

CLIN 0002: Training Support

Task Area 4

Overall Purpose of Training Support

Expertise in developing training materials, conference logistics, and educational website development.

Use of subject matter experts to develop training and website materials.

CLIN 0002 – Training Tasks

Webinar and Classroom Training

Annual Conference(s) for Recipients

Peer-to- Peer exchanges

Competency Building Website

Proposal Requirements:

Technical Proposal

Robert Robinson, Contracting Officer

CLIN Structure

Solicitation consists of two Contract Line Items (CLINs):

CLIN 0001 – Monitoring and Technical Assistance Contractor (MTAC) Support

Provide monitoring and technical assistance support to the Volpe Center for the FRA’s Grant and Loan Programs, including High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) and Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) Discretionary Grant Program.

CLIN 0002 – Training Support

Provide Training Support to Recipients, FRA and/or their contractors

CLIN 0001 and CLIN 0002

Each CLIN will be evaluated separately with different evaluation teams

CLIN 0001 is being competed on an unrestricted, Full and Open (F&O) basis

CLIN 0002 is being competed as a Service-Disabled Veteran- Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) set-aside

If a qualified Offeror wants to propose on both, they must submit two separate proposals

Refer to L.2.A for Award Exclusions

CLIN 0001

Technical Proposal Requirements

Written Portion Volume II – Staffing and Past Performance

• Offerors must include the required information as specified in Section L.5.

• Page limits are specified in L.5.B.

Oral Portion Oral Presentation

• Offerors will be notified via e-mail a minimum of 10 calendar days in advance of their scheduled oral presentation

• The Government will not accept for evaluation any written documentation from the oral presentation

• Evaluation for this factor will be solely based on offeror’s oral presentation.

Volume II – Part A: Staffing

• No more than 6 resumes shall be submitted

• Must be verifiable; relevant dates, names and addresses of educational institutions and employers provided

• Demonstrate qualifications of proposed personnel

• Experience, education, certifications, and training relevant to SOW requirements

• Resumes must be representative of, and consistent with, the Offeror’s proposed labor cost presented in the Cost and Business Proposal

Labor Category # of Resumes

Program Manager 1

Task Order Manager 1

Lead Engineer 1

Lead Environmental Specialist

Lead Professional Planner 1

Lead Railroad Safety Specialist

Total Required Resumes 6

Note: Substitutions made for degrees or years of experience require approval by the Contracting Officer or designee

Volume II – Part A: Staffing (cont’d)

In addition to resumes, Offerors must submit

Staffing Plan and Approach

Staffing Matrix

Organizational Chart

If proposing contingent candidates include commitment letters.

Volume II – Part B: Past Performance

Only relevant past performance history will be considered. The Government will determine relevance of past performance information based on the similarity of the nature of the previous work to the current requirement (i.e., Section C), the dollar value of the previous efforts (i.e., equal to or greater than $1,000,000), and the currency of the prior work (i.e., within the past three years)

Refer to pages 90-93 for Past Performance Proposal Instructions

Volume II – Part B: Past Performance

(cont’d)

Offerors must send Client Authorization Letters (Exhibit E) for Non-Federal references listed in the five most relevant sources.

Offerors are responsible for making sure that past performance evaluations from Federal and non-Federal sources are received by the proposal due date and time (2:00 PM, EDT, June 25, 2013).

If the Offeror does not include past performance history or does not affirmatively state that no past performance history exists or can be obtained, the Offeror’s proposal will be rated Unacceptable.

Oral Presentation

Oral Presentation Schedule

Evaluation Criteria Topic Time Limit Presenter(s)

N/A Introduction 5 minutes Program Manager and/or any Key Personnel

Technical Understanding

Presentation of Technical Understanding

10 minutes Program Manager and/or any Key Personnel

Technical Understanding

Structured Q&A on Technical Understanding

30 minutes Program Manager and/or any Key Personnel

Management Approach

Presentation of Management Approach

10 minutes Program Manager and/or any Key Personnel

Management Approach

Structured Q&A on Management Approach

30 minutes Program Manager and/or any Key Personnel

N/A Conclusion 5 minutes Program Manager and/or any Key Personnel

CLIN 0002

Technical Proposal Requirements

Written Portion Volume II – Staffing and Past Performance

• Offerors must include the required information as specified in Section L.6.

• Page limits are specified in L.6.B.

Oral Portion

• Offerors will be notified via e-mail a minimum 10 calendar days in advance of their scheduled oral presentation

• The Government will not accept for evaluation any written documentation from the oral presentation.

• Evaluation for this factor will be solely based on offeror’s oral presentation.

Volume II – Part A: Staffing

• No more than 4 resumes shall be submitted

• Must be verifiable; relevant dates, names and addresses of educational institutions, and employers provided

• Demonstrate qualifications of proposed personnel

• Experience, type of degree(s) received, certifications, and training relevant to SOW requirements

• All presenters must have submitted resumes.

Labor Category # of Resumes

Program Manager 1

Senior Trainer or Curriculum Development Specialist

Logistic Coordinator for Conferences

Web Design Project Manager

Total Required Resumes 4

Note: Substitutions made for degrees or years of experience require approval by the Contracting Officer or designee

Volume II – Part A: Staffing (cont’d)

Resumes must be representative of, and consistent with, the Offeror’s proposed labor cost presented in the Cost and Business Proposal

A Staffing Narrative is also required

If proposing contingent candidates include commitment letters.

Volume II – Part B: Past Performance

Only relevant past performance history will be considered.

The Government will determine relevance of past performance information based on the similarity of the nature of the previous work to the current requirement (i.e., Section C), the dollar value of the previous efforts (i.e., equal to or greater than $500,000), and the currency of the prior work (i.e., within the past three years).

Refer to pages 98-101 for Past Performance Proposal Instructions.

Volume II – Part B: Past Performance

(cont’d) Offerors must send Client Authorization Letters (Exhibit E) for

Non-Federal references listed in the five most relevant sources.

Offerors are responsible for making sure that past performance evaluations from Federal and non-Federal sources are received by the proposal due date and time (2:00 PM, EDT, June 25, 2013).

If the Offeror does not include past performance history or does not affirmatively state that no past performance history exists or can be obtained, the Offeror’s proposal will be rated Unacceptable.

Volume II – Part B: Past Performance

(cont’d) In addition to the past performance information, Offerors must provide A syllabus from a recent course (within the past 3 years) and three copies of course materials, including presentation slides and workbooks.

Screenshots of all web pages from a web-based information clearinghouse along with the web address.

No page limits

Oral Presentation Schedule

Evaluation Criteria Topic Time Limit Presenter(s)

N/A Introduction 5 minutes Program Manager and/or any Key Personnel

Technical Merit Presentation of Technical Merit

10 minutes Program Manager and/or any Key Personnel

Technical Merit Q&A

Structured Q&A on Technical Merit

30 minutes Program Manager and/or any Key Personnel

Learning Methodology

Presentation of Learning Methodology

10 minutes Program Manager and/or any Key Personnel

Learning Methodology Q&A

Structured Q&A on Learning Methodology

30 minutes Program Manager and/or any Key Personnel

N/A Conclusion 5 minutes Program Manager and/or any Key Personnel

Proposal Requirements:

Cost and Business Proposal

Volume I - Cost and Business Proposal for CLIN’s 0001 and 0002

• The cost and business proposal must consist of a signed Standard Form 33 and the solicitation documents from Exhibit D.

• Level of Effort (for both CLINs) represents approximately one year of the requirement.

• Labor Category rates must be consistent with rates of resumed staff

• Include information on Uncompensated Overtime (IAW

FAR 52.237-10).

• Include Compensation Plan for Professional Employees

(IAW FAR 52.222-46)

Volume I - Cost and Business Proposal (cont’d)

• Cost and pricing information must be contained only in Volume I; under no circumstances should financial information be included elsewhere

• Proposals must contain sufficient information for the Government to complete its evaluation

• Supporting documentation must be clear, complete, and convincing

• Proposals need to be stand-alone proposals and not reference previously submitted proposals or other provided documentation

Cost and Business Proposal – Subcontracting

• Offerors must comply with the consent requirements of FAR 52.244-2 and FAR 52.244-4.

• If proposed subcontractors have an acceptable, Government approved accounting system, their proposal must be submitted as a CPFF type.

• A Subcontracting Plan is only required for CLIN 0001.

• Goals identified in the RFP are based on departmental (DOT) goals.

• Proposed subcontracting plans require approval by SBA and DOT before proposals can be considered acceptable.

Evaluation Factors for Award

Robert Robinson, Contracting Officer

Basis for Award

Award will be made to responsive and responsible Offerors whose offers will provide the “best value” to the Government based on the Cost/Business Proposal and Technical Proposals.

It is the Offeror’s responsibility to ensure that its proposal is sufficiently complete and comprehensive so that the Government can accomplish its evaluation without further dialogue.

Government intends to make 10 to 15 awards for CLIN 0001 (F&O) and 2 to 4 awards for CLIN 0002 (SDVOSB).

While it is the Government's intent to make award based upon initial offers, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions. In that case, the CO will proceed to establish a competitive range and conduct negotiations with the firms in that range.

Order of Importance

Technical evaluation factors, when combined, are significantly more important than cost in selection of a Contractor for award.

Each Technical Proposal will be assessed based on the evaluation criteria in Section M.

However, Offerors are cautioned not to minimize the importance of the Cost and Business Proposal (Volume I); when Technical Proposals are evaluated as essentially equal, evaluated cost may become the determining factor.

Technical Proposal Evaluation

Section M.2 – CLIN 0001 The first factor, Technical Understanding, is of the most importance.

The second and third factors, Staffing and Management Approach, are of equal importance; but each is of lesser importance than the first factor and of more importance than the fourth factor. The fourth factor, Past Performance, is of the least importance.

Section M.3 – CLIN 0002 The first factor, Technical Merit, is of the most importance. The second and third factors, Past Performance and Staffing Qualifications, are of equal importance, but each is of lesser importance than the first factor and of more importance than the fourth factor. The fourth factor, Learning Methodology, is of the least importance.

Cost and Business Proposal Evaluation

Section M.4 - Cost and Business Evaluation Criteria

• Competitiveness of the proposed fixed fee and profit

• Acceptability of the Professional Employees Compensation Plan

• Acceptability of the Cost Control Plan

• Uncompensated Overtime, if any proposed, will be evaluated IAW FAR 52.237-10

• Acceptability of the Small Business Subcontracting Plan (if applicable)

• Potential Cost Risk

• Evaluation of COI Disclosure Statements

• Price Reasonableness (will be added via an amendment)

Important Dates and Reminders

Proposals are due no later than 2:00 p.m. EDT, Tuesday, June 25, 2013

Oral Presentations are estimated to take place July 22 – August 2, 2013

Contract Awards for both CLINs are projected to be made by October 31, Terms and conditions of the RFP remain unchanged unless an amendment is issued.

Closing Remarks

Offerors are encouraged to ask questions on the solicitation.

Questions must be submitted in writing via e-mail to Robert.Robinson@dot.gov. Questions must be submitted NLT May 30, 2013.

Responses to question will be provided as an amendment to the solicitation.

Thank you for your attendance at today’s conference.

mailto:Robert.Robinson@dot.gov

FirstName LastName Email Company Dennis Newjahr dennis.newjahr@atkinsglobal.com Atkins Don Carnell don.carnell@atkinsglobal.com Atkins North America Victoria Adams adams_victoria@bah.com Booz Allen Hamilton Leslie Dubuc dubuc_leslie@bah.com Booz Allen Hamilton Brian Pickerall pickerall_brian@bah.com Booz Allen Hamilton Frank Keuchel fkeuchel@caci.com CACI Alexander Granados agranados@caci.com CACI Walter Butcher wbutcher@cambriasolutions.com Cambria Solutions Joe Garcia jgarcia@casamargroup.com Casamar Group Jeff Montera monterajg@cdmsmith.com CDM Smith David Ashworth ashworthcd@cdmsmith.com CDM Smith Nick Benedico benedicona@cdmsmith.com CDM Smith Thomas Donahue thomas.donahue@ch2m.com CH2M HILL Kathie Gabor kgabor@ch2m.com CH2M HILL Dan Heilig dan.heilig@ch2m.com CH2M HILL Stephan Lindenau nico.lindenau@ch2m.com CH2MHILL David Solow david.solow@ch2m.com CH2MHill Pete Hankovszky pzh@deainc.com David Evans and Associates Eric Chang ehch@deainc.com David Evans and Associates Adrian Roberts adcr@deainc.com David Evans and Associates, Inc.

John Lisciandro jlisciandro@deloitte.com Deloitte Andrea stone andreas@consultdpi.com Dynamic Pro Inc Rinn Stansfield rinn@consultdpi.com Dynamic Pro Inc. (DPI) Angelica Gonzalez angelica@ecdriving.com EC DRIVING ANN DANCIK edit@edit-inc.com EDIT, INC.

Susan Schruth susanschruth@hillintl.com Hill International, Inc.

Sara Barone sarabarone@hillintl.com Hill International, Inc.

Vince Gallagher vincegallagher@hillintl.com Hill International, Inc.

Jay Van Esley jmv@ieitransit.com IEI Michele Butchko mxb@ieitransit.com Interactive Elements Sid Taubman smt@ieitransit.com Interactive Elements Eli Gilbert ejg@ieitransit.com Interactive Elements Inc.

Peter Nagrod pnagrod@centerforcert.com International Centre for Certification

Timo Mantych tim.mantych@jacobs.com Jaocbs Engineering Group Inc.

Gary Gordon gary.gordon@kkcsworld.com Kal Krishnan Consulting Service, Inc.

Christopher Barber chris.barber@kimley-horn.com Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Paul Elman paul.elman@kimley-horn.com Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Ron Anderson ron.anderson@kkcsworld.com KKCS Edgar Zelaya edgar.zelaya@kkcsworld.com KKCS claudia elliott celliott@lkgcmc.com LKG-CMC Inc.

Richard Lashford rlashford@managementconcepts.com Management Concepts Teidi Tucker ttucker@managementconcepts.com Management Concepts, Inc.

Eric Jacobs ejacobs@msag.net MSAG Jamil Scotland jamil@myiconsulting.com MyYI Consulting Paul Cevolani paul.cevolani@novusorigo.com Novus Origo Dale Ross dale.ross@novusorigo.com Novus Origo LLC Ron Rhodes rrhodes@ostglobal.com OST, Inc.

Ron Rhodes rrhodes@ostglobal.com OST, Inc.

Lindsay Yamane lyamane@parametrix.com Parametrix Howard Hillinger hhillinger@parametrix.com Parametrix, Inc.

Errin Green errin.green@rer-solutions.com RER Solutions Jessie Johnson jjohnson@stockbridgeconsulting.com Stockbridge Consulting tarek mady tarek.mady@stvinc.com STV Inc.

Norman Forde norman.forde@stvinc.com STV, Inc Paul Sullivan psullivan@systrausa.com SYSTRA Nicola Belzer nbelzer@systrausa.com SYSTRA Dharm Guruswamy dharm.guruswamy@tylin.com T.Y. Lin International Richard Brody brody.topologe@gmail.com Topologe Margareth Sarmiento msarmiento@topologe.com Topologe, LLC Robert DiAdamo rdiadamo@tprg.net TPRG Astrid Glynn aglynn@tprg.net TPRG Marian Rule-Cope mrcope@transystems.com TranSystems Jennifer Byers jdbyers@transystems.com TranSystems Corporation Bill Bewley bewley@cse.ucla.edu UCLA National Center for Research