Attach__1_Revised_Solicitation_Section_VI_Method_of_Award_GS-11-P-17-YM-C-0021.pdf

GSA Solicitation No. GS-11P-17-YM-C-0021 Amendment 0008 Attachment 1

16 of 22 VI.

VI. Method of Award

VI.A Evaluation of Offers – Lowest Price Technically Acceptable

(1) The Government intends to award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror(s) whose proposal(s) represents the best value from the selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price. Award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting the acceptability standards for non-price factors. Proposals will be evaluated for acceptability but will not be ranked using the non-price factors.

(2) The Government may reject any or all proposals if such action is in the Government’s interest. This may be a result of an incomplete proposal, an insufficient proposal (lacking context), or other reasons.

(3) The Government may waive informalities and minor irregularities in proposals received.

(4) The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award on initial proposals. Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal shall contain the offeror’s best price. If multiple line items are priced, each line item will be evaluated to ensure that balanced pricing exists. If the line items are determined to be unbalanced for the offeror that presents the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal, the Government will allow that offeror the opportunity to balance the line items prior to award. If the offeror cannot, or chooses not to, balance the line items, the

Government shall deem the offeror’s proposal as unacceptable.

(5) A written award or acceptance of proposal emailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time specified in the proposal shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party.

(6) Unsuccessful offerors will be notified in accordance with FAR 15.503.

VI.B Lowest Price Technically Acceptable Evaluation Process

(1) The bid will be considered only if that firm is found to be technically qualified. Technical qualification will be established as pass/fail evaluation. Any costs incurred by offerors in preparing or submitting offers are the offerors' sole responsibility; the United States will not reimburse any offeror for any proposal preparation costs.

(2) Award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting the acceptability standards for non-price factors.

(3) The following non-price factors will be evaluated for acceptability:

a) Factor 1 –Past Experience

Evaluation Criteria:

This factor evaluates the extent of the offeror’s past experience as a firm in providing similar construction services to determine the firm’s experience in completing the tasks detailed in the specifications. Experience will be evaluated as an indicator of the offeror’s capacity and experience to perform the contract contemplated by this solicitation.

A “similar construction service” or “relevant” is defined as a project that is comparable in nature, type, and complexity.

1. Provide complete information for all projects. Projects must be of the size and complexity of the proposed project with a minimum area of 1000 m2. The experience of the

GSA Solicitation No. GS-11P-17-YM-C-0021

17 of 22 VI.

General Contractor must include the following experience relevant to the proposed project:

protection of existing facilities, concrete removal and construction, traffic coatings and striping, crack injection, shoring and bracing and painting concrete finishes.

2. Describe the nature of this work and indicate how your special skills were relevant to each project in sufficient detail to allow a determination to be made that the selected project is within the same scope of work as the proposed project.

3. Fill out project name, completed date, and location. Give a thorough description of the work performed, explaining the materials and methods used to perform the work in sufficient detail for GSA to determine that the project is similar in complexity to the proposed project.

4. Fill out the client's name for each project represented, including address, contact person for the client, his/her title, telephone number and address.

Acceptability Standard (Pass): Contractors must provide no less than three (3) project summaries, with at least two demonstrating the majority of the tasks that were accomplished similar to this scope of work. Experience older than 5 years from the date of the solicitation, may result in the summary being rejected. Use the attached Form B.

b) Factor 2 - Key Personnel

Evaluation Criteria: This factor evaluates the Offerors’ demonstrated qualifications of proposed key personnel. Key Personnel are site superintendent and site quality control.

Key personnel, in addition to other support personnel separately identified by the contractor will be evaluated per the acceptability standard. The contractor is required to provide resumes for those key personnel listed. This factor considers the education, knowledge, experience and expertise of the offeror’s key personnel proposed to be assigned directly to the contract.

Resume General Information: Name, Training, experience record, years with your firm and total years performing this specialty.

Resume Project information: Provide a list of previous projects of similar size and complexity to his project which the individual has worked on for your firm. Include the year(s) work was performed and identify which of the specific skills listed on the form were performed on that project. Equivalent evidence of comparable, successful experiencing, citing specific projects and providing the necessary information may be accepted.

Acceptability Standard (Pass): Provide a personnel chart outlining roles & responsibilities of key personnel. Qualified means experience that is similar. The site quality control personnel cannot be the superintendent or the project manager. Site quality control shall not be subordinate to the superintendent or any other on site personnel. The resumes must reflect no less than 3 years’ experience performing same or similar work for the site (project) superintendent. The designated onsite quality control manager must have no less than 5 years’ experience as an engineer, QC Manager, or project manager. Resumes must demonstrate relevancy as defined in this RFP. Generic and nonspecific statements about past projects and experience will not be accepted. The site superintendent must be an employee of the prime contractor and will have a variety of responsibilities to include preparing, signing and submitting contractor production reports and be an authorized individual to act on your behalf in accordance with FAR

Clause 52.536-6.

Generic resumes, those that contain general language and do not provide specifics to

18 of 22 VI.

substantiate each positions experience, will fail to meet the purposeful intent of the evaluation and may subject the proposal to be disqualified on the basis of inadequate information.

c) Factor 3 - Past Performance of Offeror

Evaluation Criteria: This factor evaluates the past performance of the Offeror. Past performance will be evaluated as a predictor of the offeror’s compliance with contract requirements and overall quality of performance. Information to be evaluated includes timeliness of performance, adherence to contract schedules, resolution of disputes, number of contract extensions, conformance to contract requirements, quality of workmanship and ability to correct deficiencies in a timely manner. Additionally, past performance seeks to understand the offeror’s history for reasonable and cooperative behavior and commitment to customer satisfaction and generally, the offeror’s business-like concern for the interest of the customer.

Acceptability Standard: The Offeror’s past performance record demonstrates satisfactory performance on at least three (3) similar projects substantially completed within the last five

(5) years. Any proposal which does not demonstrate satisfactory performance on at least three (3) similar projects substantially completed within the last five (5) years will not be considered technically acceptable. The Offeror must return the GSA PBS Standard Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) for each reference person or persons who may be contacted regarding the quality of the Offeror’s past performance. The name, title, company name, current address, and current phone number, for each reference must appear on the form.

The Government reserves the right to use other government data available (e.g. Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) and any other reference information it obtains on its own) in its assessment of the offeror. The quality of the reference information supplied will be considered. In accordance with FAR 15.306, the offeror will be given the opportunity to respond to adverse past performance information, only if a response is not already available (e.g., databases).

d) Other Considerations:

The Proposal must be clearly and concisely written. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of this RFP or failure to submit all documents required may result in the proposal being removed from consideration for award.

All proposals must be complete, self-sufficient, and respond directly to the requirements of this RFP. Any commitments made in the proposal shall become a part of the resultant contract. In no case shall words like "we will comply with the requirements of the SOW," or equivalent and similar statements, be acceptable to meet the requirements of this RFP.

Failure to comply with these instructions may result in the Government summarily rejecting the proposal.

This RFP may be formally amended to incorporate changes, answer questions, extend the proposal due date, or other actions as deemed necessary by the contracting officer.

Contractor shall sign and return all published amendments with their proposal to be eligible for evaluation.

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

19 of 22 VI.

Contracting Officer, and is independent of the evaluation of offers set forth herein.

VI. 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.

VI.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.

VI. F Total Evaluated Price

The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. Evaluation of options will not obligate the

Government to exercise the option(s). Total Evaluated Price shall be calculated using the prices indicated in the Price Proposal:

Award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting the acceptability standards for non-price factors.

VI. G Non-Price Factors

See Section VI.B.

VI. 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.