PTS_(AE)_Solicitation_Synopsis.pdf

Production and Technical Services A&E Solicitation/Synopsis

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 1

Architectural and Engineering Services

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) seeks to identify a number of architects and engineers qualified to provide architectural and engineering services for various projects to be initiated approximately between April 2014 and 2019.

Date: December 23, 2013

Contracting Office Zip Code: 20472-3205

Classification Code: C (Architect and Engineering Services)

NAICS Code: 541330

Contracting Office Address: Patriots Plaza

395 E Street SW 5th Floor Washington, DC 20472-3205

Subject: Risk MAP, HMTAP, and TARC Production and Technical Services (PTS)

Solicitation Number: HSFE60-14-R-0003 IDIQ A & E Services

Opening and Closing Response Date: December 23, 2013 and close January 30, 2014

All questions are due by 02:45pm January 3, 2014 Washington, DC Time

Contact: michael.sutton@fema.dhs.gov or barry.taylor@fema.dhs.gov

Place of Performance: See Attachment B

Set Aside Status: None

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 2

1. INTRODUCTION

The Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS's) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is continuing its large-scale efforts to provide quality flood and other risk data to increase public awareness and achieve mitigation actions to reduce the risk to life and property.

This Source Selection Plan (SSP) describes FEMA’s source selection strategy to obtain Architect/Engineering Services for the procurement of Production and Technical Services (PTS) for the Risk MAP, HMTAP and TARC programs

2. PROJECT HISTORY

As part of the DHS, FEMA has operated the Risk Mapping, Assessment, and Planning (Risk MAP) Program since 2009. Through collaboration with federal, state, local, tribal, and private entities, Risk MAP delivers quality data that increases public awareness and leads to actions that reduce risk to life and property.

Risk MAP combines flood hazard mapping, risk assessment tools, and hazard mitigation planning into one program. This integrated program encourages beneficial partnerships and innovative uses of flood hazard and risk assessment data in order to build more resilient communities. While flooding is the primary focus of Risk MAP, FEMA actively encourages a Whole-Community approach, and is focused on enhancing the usability and value of natural hazard risk information, leading to an increase in the public’s awareness of risk, and communities taking mitigative actions to reduce the risk to life and property, increasing resilience so they may withstand, adapt, and recover from disasters.

In addition, FEMA operates HMTAP under the authorities of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, as amended, PL 93-299 and the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968.

Assistance is provided to aid headquarters, its regional counterparts, and field offices to meet post-disaster mitigation responsibilities.

FEMA also operates TARC to bring together engineers, architects, design professionals, natural hazard experts and the building science community to conduct studies and activities focused on flood, wind, hurricane, tornado and other hazard mitigation, building codes and standards, technical assessments, rapid post-disaster building performance studies and analysis to create nationally applicable FEMA publications, tools, training and education for use by emergency managers and the building community, across the nation.

Risk MAP, HMTAP, and TARC are mature, high-performing, and operational programs. Information on Risk MAP, HMTAP, and TARC can be found on FEMA’s website (http://www.fema.gov) as well as the virtual library at http://virtuallibrary.asigovt.com/Risk-Map-PM/Mitigation_PTS/SitePages/Home.aspx.

Risk MAP, HMTAP, and TARC currently have several other contractors and partners that the PTS contractor will frequently interact with. In addition to contract support, FEMA has developed and rigorously supported the Cooperating Technical Partners (CTP) Program, which

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 3 is an innovative approach to creating partnerships between FEMA and participating National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) communities, regional agencies, state agencies, Tribes, and universities that have the interest and capability to become more active participants in the FEMA flood hazard mapping program. The CTP program will continue to be enhanced to involve all aspects of Risk MAP with capable partners.

3. PURPOSE OF THIS SOLICITATION/SYNOPSIS

FEMA seeks to continue to leverage the successes of Risk MAP, HMTAP, TARC and their predecessor programs to further enhance the usability and value of natural hazard risk information, leading to communities taking mitigative actions to reduce the risk to life and property, and increase resilience so they may withstand, adapt, and recover from disasters. This suite of A&E services will be referred to as Production and Technical Services (PTS) throughout this and other documents. The scope of services to be delivered is detailed below. The PTS require the continuous review and improvement of existing processes and tools as the environmental, technological, and political considerations impacting the programs continue to evolve.

This solicitation is to obtain new contracts which will replace the current suite of Architecture and Engineering (A&E) contracts which expire in March, 2014 for Risk Map, September, 2014 for HMTAP, and May, 2015 for TARC respectively. By including the A&E portions of HMTAP and TARC into this Risk MAP solicitation, FEMA is seeking to promote integration, innovation, and efficiencies into the Program.

It is anticipated that two or more Offerors will be selected to enter into IDIQ contracts with FEMA for PTS work for all Regions to include Headquarters. Those Offerors may compete for various projects and tasks as they may arise during the life of the contract. Because the scope and number of projects and tasks are unknown at the time of contract execution, the IDIQ contract vehicle will be used. The term of the IDIQ contracts for these projects will be for 5 years. The period of performance may be extended beyond 5 years or 60 months in accordance with FAR clause 52.217-8 (see section I.8). A map of the regions is included in this Solicitation/Synopsis as Attachment B.

This Solicitation is the means for prospective Service Providers to submit their qualifications for the IDIQ services for PTS.

4. SCOPE OF SERVICES

The scope of the services that will be provided under contracts awarded under this Solicitation include professional services of an engineering nature as well as incidental architectural services that members of those professions and those in their employ may logically or justifiably perform.

5. RESPONDING TO THIS SOLICITATION

Responses to this Solicitation will provide straightforward, concise information that satisfies the requirements specified. Expensive bindings, color displays, and the like are not necessary.

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 4

Emphasis should be placed on brevity, conformity to instructions, specified requirements of this Solicitation, and clarity of content.

Strict adherence to the submission instructions will be enforced. In addition, submissions must acknowledge notice/receipt of all amendments or modifications. Facsimile transmissions or electronic submissions will not be accepted.

Your Synopsis must include:

SF 330 Part I – Contract-Specific Qualifications: A prime or joint venture SF 330 Part I submittal must not exceed sixty (60) pages, 8 1/2" x 11" front side only. Charts and drawings will be counted as two pages if submitted on 11 x 17" size paper. Double-sided pages shall be counted as two pages. The 60 page limit does not apply to Part II of the SF 330. Front and back cover pages and tab pages will not be counted in the page limit nor will these pages be evaluated;

i.e., any information listed on these pages will be ignored. All pages following the first sixty

(60) pages will not be considered. All other material such as brochures or samples of work, attachments or extra pages will not be considered.

SF 330 Part II – General qualifications: Part II is required for each branch office of the prime firm and any subcontractors that will have a key role in the proposed contract. There is no page limit on Part II.

Offerors not performing all work in-house must identify proposed business structure in their submittal. Joint ventures must include a copy of the legal joint venture agreement with the chief executive of each entity identified. Copies of any agreements between offerors participating in a prime/subcontractor relationship must also be included in the submittal. The joint venture and the prime/subcontractor documents will not be subject to the page limitation set forth above. Any submission with a joint venture or subcontractor business structure must list the percentage and type of work that will be performed by each participating firm.

The IVL (Interested Vendors List) feature has been activated on the Vendors portal to FedBizOpps, and offerors are encouraged to provide their contact information there to help maximize teaming arrangements and small and small disadvantaged business participation on this procurement.

Only offerors that respond by the date and time stated in the announcement will be considered for selection. Late responses will be handled in accordance with FAR 52.215-1, Late Submissions, Modifications, and Withdrawals of Bid. No materials will be returned. This is not a request for a proposal. No other announcement is anticipated for this requirement.

Your Statement of Qualifications Must Include:

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 5

Standard Form 330, (U.S. General Services Administration), additionally complete the following parts, per specific instructions included therein.

Part 1 (F): Examples of the prospective Service Provider’s projects (at least 5 projects).

Provide owner’s information for each project as a reference contact.

Part 1 (H): The prospective Service Provider shall describe its specific responses to the selection criteria, numbered and titled to correspond to those listed in section 7 of this Solicitation.

The proposal must not discuss or allude to cost or price, although information that could affect cost or price, such as labor hours, labor categories, labor mix, or materials, must be discussed in sufficient detail in the proposal to allow the Agency to evaluate the contractor's understanding of the work.

The proposal must be in a three-ring binder, clearly labeled with the Solicitation number and Offeror’s name along with an electronic copy. Submissions must use a font no smaller than 11 points, with the exception of charts, graphs, or tables, which shall use a font no smaller than 10 points. All margins must be at least one inch.

Offerors shall submit the following copies of their proposals:

One signed original of the proposal, on paper.

Seven additional paper copies of the proposal.

Electronic copies of the proposal.

Prepare the electronic text submissions in Microsoft Word or compatible format and charts and graphs in Microsoft Excel or compatible format. Tables may use either Word or Excel formats.

Submit electronic copies on a CD, DVD, or thumb drive. In addition to the Word and Excel documents, include a PDF version of the entire proposal in the electronic submission.

Responses may be sent by registered mail, certified mail, using the overnight courier of your choice, or by hand delivery. FEMA is not responsible for undelivered or incorrect hand off of a response. Incomplete responses will be rejected without review. All Responses must be received in the FEMA Acquisition Operations Division Office, in the Patriot’s Plaza Building on January 30, 2014 by 2:45 pm Local Washington DC Time. So, offerors should allow sufficient time for delivery through the mailroom, to the Acquisitions Office. Responses received after the deadline date and time will be considered LATE, and will be handled in accordance with FAR 15.208.

To ensure that your proposal arrives at the proper place on time, and to prevent opening by unauthorized individuals, the proposal must also be identified on the outer/shipping containers as follows:

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 6

SF 330 Submitted in Response to Solicitation/Synopsis: HSFE60-13-R-0001 If there are any proposal changes, whether resulting from a solicitation amendment, from discussions, or otherwise, the offeror must mark the changes using strikeout and underlining, changing the color of the text, or “track changes”. Include the date of the amended submission in the header or footer.

Response submissions must be sent or delivered to:

DHS/FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) OCPO (Office of the Chief Procurement Officer)/Mitigation Branch Attn: Michael Sutton/Barry Taylor 395 E St. SW, 5th Floor Washington, DC 20472-3205

(Indicate SOLICITATION Number and Name of Your Organization, at lower left corner of outer packaging)

5.1 If a Response is to be hand delivered, it will only be considered a valid submission if it is received by Michael Sutton or Barry Taylor at the security desk at the entrance of Patriot’s Plaza at 395 E. Street SW, Washington, DC 20472- 3205 between the hours of 6:45 am and 2:45 pm daily Monday through Friday.

Proposals cannot be accepted by the guards, and couriers are not allowed inside the building. However, offerors are cautioned that both Mr. Sutton and Mr.

Taylor are not obligated to receive proposals at the building security desk and may not be available to accept proposals when they arrive at the building.

5.2 Contractors are advised to obtain a handwritten receipt from the CO or Contract Specialist when submitting your response.

5.3 The CO does not issue communications confirming its receipt of responses and participants are asked to refrain from such requests. If you require a confirmation, please contact your delivery service.

5.4 The due date and time for submission of your response can be found in the most recent version of the website (http:// www.fbo.gov/) on which this Solicitation is posted. Please keep abreast of changes to the Solicitation by monitoring the website throughout the duration of the Solicitation, evaluation, and award processes.

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 7

6. SELECTION PROCESS

6.1 An evaluation panel composed of predominantly technical staff will review and evaluate the SF330's, based on the Performance Objectives, Goals and Outcomes, and the Evaluation Factors in this Solicitation.

6.2 After the final approval from the Selection Official, the CO will send a Request for Proposal (RFP) to at least the top two most highly qualified offerors. Interviews may be held at the CO offices in Washington, DC 20472.

6.3 At any time, the CO may contact previous Clients and Owners to verify the experience and performance of the prospective Service Provider, their key personnel, and their sub-consultants.

6.4 Those offerors that were not selected for negotiations may be notified. In the notice, the CO will remind the offerors that even though they were not selected for negotiations initially, if an agreement cannot be reached with a successful offeror(s) that was selected, they may be requested at a later date to provide a proposal for this procurement.

7.0 EVALUATION OF SOLICITATION

The Government will evaluate each of the 7 factors below under Part 1 of the SF 330. Factors 1‐6 will be given an adjectival rating, detailed in Section 3.4 below. Factor 7 will be rated as pass/fail. The Factors as listed in descending order of importance. Factors 1 and 2 are equally important. Factor 2 is more important than Factor 3. Factor 3, 4, 5 and 6 are equally important. Factor 7 is no more or less important than factors 1‐6, because Factor 7 will be rated as pass/fail. If a factor contains sub‐factors, the relative order of importance of each sub‐factor is noted in the factor.

Factor 1: Specialized Experience and Technical Competence, Which Is Relative To the Type of Work

Required (FAR 36.602‐1(a)(2))

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Specialized Experience and Technical Competence in the

Type of Work Required utilizing the following sub‐factors, which are listed in decreasing order of importance:

Sub‐factor A: The Offeror’s experience and capabilities increasing resilience (increasing risk awareness and getting communities to take mitigation action to reduce the risk to life and property), and producing all elements of regulatory and non‐regulatory Risk MAP products with high quality.

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 8

Sub‐factor B: The Offeror’s experience and capabilities providing technical support for Risk Analysis and

Floodplain Management issues to internal and external stakeholders, including regions, Tribes, states, and local partners.

Sub‐factor C: The Offeror’s experience and capabilities providing Risk Reduction and Hazard Mitigation

Assistance technical support.

Sub‐factor D: The Offeror’s experience and capabilities providing building sciences technical support.

Sub‐factor E: The Offeror’s experience and capabilities producing and managing MT‐2s.

Projects submitted in Section F of the SF330 should clearly identify which work was performed by the firm submitting it, vs. their Joint Venture (JV) partners, prime, or subcontractors.

Factor 2: Regional Support and Delivery (FAR 36.602‐1(a)(6))

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Regional Support and Delivery approach utilizing the following sub‐factors below, which are listed in decreasing order of importance:

Sub‐factor A: Regional Support ‐ The Offeror’s experience and proposed solution to deliver flexible, tailored, and innovative methods for providing support to the regions, including the physical location and number of personnel; experience with Risk MAP, HMTAP, TARC, and other mitigation programs; and familiarity with the region and their unique requirements and challenges.

Sub‐factor B: Data Development and Program Delivery – The Offeror’s experience and proposed solution demonstrating knowledge and experience in developing and seamlessly delivering technically sound risk information in post‐disaster and non‐disaster environments to ensure maximum usability for Tribal, state and local governments and citizens increasing the public’s awareness of risk, and leading to mitigation action, supporting the TARC, HMTAP, and Risk MAP missions.

Sub‐factor C: Innovation and Efficiency ‐ The Offeror’s experience and proposed solution for providing continuous process improvement, and the likelihood of delivering significant, large scale efficiencies and innovation throughout the life of the contract for all production and technical services, including engineering, mapping, and MT‐2/Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) services.

Sub‐factor D: The Offeror’s proposed approach to effectively manage the contract transition, approach to quality management, and approach to incorporate broad program and policy impacts, including the methods and techniques used to balance the Government’s competing interests.

Factor 3: Professional Qualifications Necessary for Satisfactory Performance of Required Services (FAR

36.602‐1(a)(1))

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 9

The Government will evaluate the Professional Qualifications of the Offeror’s proposed personnel, necessary for Satisfactory Performance of Required Services by analyzing the Offeror’s qualifications, relevant experience, and degree of authority of the Project Director and other Key Personnel; the

Offeror’s proposed staffing plan and organizational structure, including number of personnel, labor categories, and labor mix, and the numbers and types of certifications (e.g. Professional Engineer, Project Management Professional, Certified Floodplain Manager, etc.)

Factor 4: Capacity to Accomplish the Work Required (FAR 36.602‐1(a)(3))

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Capacity to Accomplish the Work in the Required Time by analyzing the Offeror’s ability to perform multiple complex projects, in multiple states and regions concurrently, while accomplishing the work within required time limits, meeting quality thresholds; the

Offeror’s planned versus existing capacities and the availability of proposed team members (including subcontractors and consultants), for the specified contract period; and the Offeror’s ability to provide staff to meet surge requirements necessary to provide post‐disaster PTS services.

Factor 5: Past Performance on Contracts with Government Agencies and Private Industry in terms of

Cost Control, Quality of Work, and Compliance with Performance Schedules (FAR 36.602‐1(a)(4))

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s past performance on projects similar in size, scope, contract type, and complexity to Risk MAP, HMTAP, and TARC. The Government may evaluate prime contractors, joint ventures, and key subcontractors and may consider matters including, but not limited to, the overall success of the Offeror’s portion of the project; the Offeror’s conformance to contract requirements; the quality of the Offeror’s work; the Offeror’s adherence to the project schedule; the

Offeror’s success in managing the budget and controlling costs; the Offeror’s client communication; the

Offeror’s responsiveness to customer concerns; the Offeror’s ability to manage its subcontractors and employees; and the Offeror’s adherence to any subcontracting plan. The Government will evaluate

Offerors that are newly established joint ventures based on past performance information from the members of the joint venture.

The Government may use all relevant sources of information in evaluating this factor, (e.g., information gathered from Appendix C, below, reference checks, FEMA’s own experience, information from external contracting offices, data from government past performance databases, and data from the Defense

Contract Audit Agency (DCAA). Relevant past performance information may include information regarding federal contracts, contracts with other levels of government, and contracts with private entities. Contract performance that ended earlier than five (5) years from the date that the current solicitation was issued is not considered relevant.

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 10

Factor 6: Location in the Geographic Area of the Project and Knowledge of the Locality. (FAR 36.602‐

1(a)(5))

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Location in the Geographic Area of the Project and

Knowledge of the Locality by analyzing the Offeror’s experience working with state, local, and Tribal government entities in each FEMA Region; partnering and coordinating with Cooperating Technical

Partners (CTPs), professional organizations and societies in all FEMA Regions; and building effective partnerships between various levels of government and the private sector. In addition the Government will evaluate the Offeror’s experience generating products compliant with all national, regional, state, and local rules and regulations; with all necessary certifications; and with appropriately licensed/certified personnel (Professional Engineer, Professional Surveyor, etc.); as well as the Offeror’s ability to identify, assess, and communicate multiple hazards and localized risk situations, and ability to rapidly deploy staff to offer technical services in disaster areas throughout the nation and its territories.

PTS Scenario 1 – Montana Run Watershed

Background: FEMA Region A has initiated a Risk MAP project in FY14 for this watershed. This is a heavily developed area with 12 individual local governments, and FEMA doesn’t have significant working relationships with any of the jurisdictions. Maps in portions of the watershed were not updated throughout Map Modernization, and the local engineer is concerned that any changes will put many expensive homes and businesses into the floodplain. George Jefferson University just delivered high‐ quality 2‐foot contours for the entire watershed. The communities are well connected politically, and are quick to contact the U.S. Representatives and Senators. This area of the country is heavily interested in environmental issues and sustainability. The Montana County Hazard Mitigation Plan expires on

January 1, 2015, and the local planner is retiring next month. Hurricane Isobel and Tropical Storm Lee did significant damage to areas within the watershed in the last 10 years.

Requirement: The Offeror must provide Production and Technical Services for the full Risk MAP lifecycle, starting with preparations for the Discovery meeting, continuing through Data Development, Flood Risk

Review, Resilience Meetings, and due process for updated DFIRMs. The project requires updating of

100 detailed riverine miles (assume use of HEC‐RAS), and development of 1,000 new approximate riverine miles. In addition, 20 modernized DFIRM panels and 20 non‐modernized FIRM panels must be delivered. The full suite of regulatory products and standard non‐regulatory must be delivered. Any special considerations from CERC must be addressed. The CERC contractor must be closely coordinated with, since they will have significant scope in this project. FEMA staff time will be limited due to competing requirements.

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 11

Instructions: The Offeror will provide a 5‐page description of their solution, including how they will work with FEMA and other providers; a basis of estimate including labor categories, level of effort, deliverables/work products, and a project schedule for the sample task order.

PTS Scenario 2 – Disaster Strikes

Background: Early in the first option year of the PTS contract a powerful winter storm nicknamed Allyson does widespread significant damage along the Great Lakes, with Fredville, by far the largest city in the state, being hit the hardest. This is easily the largest weather‐related disaster in the last 50 years in the region. Most homes and businesses within a mile of the lake shores have been substantially damaged or destroyed as they were built long before NFIP standards were adopted. The communities, fearing increased insurance rates because of BW‐12, desperately want information on recovery. They are confused about different options regarding how and where to rebuild, what insurance rates will be, and how best to mitigate future disasters while allowing homeowners to rebuild as quickly as possible.

All of FEMA is mobilizing to begin response and recovery. The Great Lakes Risk MAP projects released preliminary risk data two months before the storm (developed by the offeror under a legacy contract vehicle). The Federal Coordinating Officer strongly supports mitigation initiatives. While disaster relief funds may be obligated in the future, support is needed now through Standard Operations and active

Regional Task Orders. The addition of funds to active work is unlikely to occur.

Requirement: The Offeror must support FEMA to rapidly mobilize at the Joint Field Office, and begin delivering risk and hazard information in the affected areas, engaging other providers as needed. In addition, many critical Risk MAP elements in progress through Standard Operations must be delivered in the next 90 days despite 70% of HQ staff deploying to disaster area. The provider must support as many non‐inherently governmental tasks as possible. Continuity of Operations is critical.

Instructions: The Offeror will provide a 5‐page description of their solution, including how they will work with FEMA and other providers; and the approach to balance competing demands, national, regional and local program delivery.

PTS Scenario 3 – Standard Operations

Many Standard Operations tasks require the efforts of several providers. The Offeror will provide one example how each of the activities below would be supported:

Support BW‐12 implementation (using the Policy analysis Control Account)

Support PM Contractor led Annual Program Planning (using the Program Planning Control Account)

Develop and Deliver a National Communications Plan for Coastal Risk MAP Project Rollout (using the

Program Communications and Outreach Control Account)

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 12

Participate in the development of the Risk MAP Innovation road map – a Customer and Data Services

(CDS) lead effort to upgrade Risk MAP’s digital platform – using the IT Strategy Control Account)

The Offeror will provide a response, limited to 300 words, for each task, including the description of their solution, how they will work with FEMA and other providers; a basis of estimate including labor categories, level of effort, deliverables/work products, and project schedule.

Factor 7 ‐ Subcontracting Plan (Large Businesses Only) – Pass/Fail

The Agency will analyze the extent to which the Offeror’s small business subcontracting plan meets or exceeds FEMA and DHS small business goals, and provides for subcontracting with or purchasing services and supplies from; small businesses, veteran‐owned small businesses, service‐disabled veteran‐ owned small businesses, HUBZone small businesses, small disadvantaged businesses, and women‐ owned small businesses; and ensures timely payment of amounts owed under subcontracts with small businesses, veteran‐owned small businesses, service‐disabled veteran‐owned small businesses, HUBZone small businesses, small disadvantaged businesses, and women‐owned small businesses.

The Small Business subcontracting goals for this solicitation are:

All Small Business 65.0% Small Disadvantaged Business 15.0% Woman Owned Small Business 15.0% HUBZone Subcontracts 10.0% Small Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business 10.0%

Note that this Solicitation is to be scored solely on the basis of qualifications.

7.1 ADJECTIVAL RATING DEFINTIONS:

The following rating scale applies to each sub-factor for all technical criteria except past performance. If there are no sub-factors under a particular factor, then the scale applies to the factor as a whole.

EXCELLENT

The proposal’s content with regard to this factor [sub-factor] is expected to contribute to the superior achievement of objectives with minimal or no risk.

An EXCELLENT rating indicates that, with regard to the factor [sub-factor], the proposal contains significant strengths, no weaknesses, and no deficiencies.

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 13

GOOD

The proposal’s content with regard to this factor [sub-factor] is expected to contribute to the achievement of objectives with, at most, minimal risk. A GOOD rating indicates that, with regard to the factor [sub-factor], the proposal contains strengths, and may include weaknesses, but no significant weaknesses or deficiencies. The strengths outweigh the weaknesses.

SATISFACTORY

The proposal’s content with regard to this factor [sub-factor] is expected to introduce moderate risk in achieving objectives. A SATISFACTORY rating indicates that, with regard to the factor [sub-factor], the proposal’s strengths and weaknesses are generally balanced, or the proposal has no strengths but any weaknesses are minor. The proposal contains no deficiencies.

UNSATISFACTORY

The proposal’s content with regard to this factor [sub-factor] is expected to introduce excessive risk, making it unlikely that performance will meet objectives. An UNSATISFACTORY rating indicates that, with regard to the factor [sub-factor], the proposal contains deficiencies, significant weaknesses or its weaknesses significantly outweigh its strengths.

The following rating scale applies to Factor 4 - past performance:

High The company’s past performance on relevant projects was excellent or good. Either the company experienced no problems or it corrected them promptly.

Medium The company’s past performance on relevant projects, on balance, was satisfactory; the company corrected any problems.

Poor* *A company that is given a poor rating willbe given an opportunity to rebut the information that formed the basis for the rating.

The company’s past performance on relevant projects was not satisfactory; and the company failed to correct problems in a timely manner.

Neutral

No relevant past performance is available for evaluation.

This rating is neither favorable nor unfavorable; if the panel assigns a neutral rating, past performance does not form any part of the proposal’s overall rating.

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 14

7.2 OTHER EVALUATION TERMS:

Strength An aspect of a proposal that increases the likelihood of successful contract performance, or provides an approach directly related to the requirement that exceeds the minimum expectation and is likely to benefit the government.

Weakness “Weakness” means a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Significant Weakness

“Significant weakness” in the proposal is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Deficiency “Deficiency” is 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.

Risk “Risk” is a measure of the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

An “Unsatisfactory” rating for any factor will result in an unsatisfactory rating for the proposal overall.

ORGANIZATION’S PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 15

Your assistance is requested in support of a source selection. Please complete this questionnaire and email by January 30, 2014 at 02:45 pm Washington DC Time to:

Contract Specialist Michael Sutton at michael.sutton@fema.dhs.gov

When complete, the information on this form is SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE INFORMATION (41 U.S.C. 423) and shall be protected accordingly.

TO BE COMPLETED BY CONTRACTOR

1. CONTRACTOR’S NAME AND

ADDRESS

3. CONTRACT NO.:

4. CONTRACT INITIATION DATE:

5. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE:

7. CONTRACT VALUE $

2. PROJECT NAME:

8. TYPE OF CONTRACT:

9. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT’S KEY CHARACTERISTICS:

Please add a continuation page if additional space is necessary.

TO BE COMPLETED BY EVALUATING ORGANIZATION REPRESENTATIVE

10. EVALUATION

a. EVALUATOR’S NAME, POSITION DURING PROJECT EXECUTION (Project

Manager/COR/Other) AND ORGANIZATION

b. EVALUATOR’S PHONE NUMBER

c. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

MONITORED BY EVALUATOR:

Please check the response code for each topic that best reflects your experience with this contractor:

EX = Exceptional G = Good S = Satisfactory US = Unsatisfactory N/O = Not Observed

A. Quality of Products and Services- Assess the contractor’s conformance to contract requirements.

EX G S US N/O

B. Overall Performance- Assess the contractor’s overall performance for the project.

EX G S US N/O

C. Schedule- Assess the timeliness of the contractor against the schedule of activities (as appropriate).

EX G S US N/O

D. Technical Requirements- Assess the contractor’s ability and capacity to fulfill the technical requirements of the contract.

EX G S US N/O

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 16

E. Cost Control- Assess the contractor’s willingness and ability to manage the contract budget and control costs.

EX G S US N/O

F. Subcontracting- Assess the contractor’s success at complying with subcontracting goals.

EX G S US N/O

G. Customer Satisfaction- Assess the contractor’s responsiveness to customer concerns and

“user friendliness” in ROUTINE matters.

EX G S US N/O

H. Customer Satisfaction- Assess the contractor’s responsiveness to customer concerns and

“user friendliness” in UNEXPECTED DIFFICULTIES.

EX G S US N/O

I. Repeat Business- Assess the likelihood that you would want this contractor to perform another contract for you in the near future.

EX G S US N/O

J. List Contractor’s Weak Points:

K. List Contractor’s Strong Points:

L. List any other projects this contractor has completed for you:

M. If an incentive contract, describe the type of incentive involved and the contractor’s success in earning its incentives.

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 17

After the evaluations, the Request for Proposal (RFP) will be sent to at least the top two highest qualified offerors ranked with details and instructions on this Phase.

Contract Information:

Each of the resulting contracts will be IDIQ, Performance Based Architect/Engineer contracts, with five (5) ordering periods covering a total of 60 months from the date of award (a twelve (12) month base period and four (4) twelve (12) month option periods).

The resulting contract(s) will be structured to allow for the issuance of Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) and Firm Fixed Price (FFP) task orders.

The minimum value of each contract will be $50,000 and the maximum will be:

If two contracts are awarded: $TBD If three contracts are awarded: $TBD

The NAICS Code for this action is 541330 and the small business size standard is $14 million in average annual receipts over the past three years. This announcement is open to all businesses regardless of size. Small businesses are encouraged to participate as prime contractors and should consider teaming with other businesses. Large businesses are encouraged to include a high percentage of small business offerors in their team composition which will be identified in the Request for Proposal (RFP). If a large business firm is selected for a contract, after the Phase II selection process and prior to contract negotiations, it must comply with FAR Clause 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan and HSAR 3019.705-1, Small Business Subcontracting Program.

It is anticipated that the offeror’s business proposal may be audited by the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) prior to award. During this audit the offeror’s cost accounting system will be reviewed for adequacy. Changes or adjustments to the offeror’s cost accounting system and/or proposed (both for direct costs and indirect costs) rates may be required as a result of this review.

Offerors must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) at the time of contract award. You may register via the internet at: www.sam.gov.

Offerors are also required to be registered in the Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA) at the time of contract award. You may also register via the internet at: http://orca.bpn.gov.

Contract awards are anticipated no later than MAY 2014

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 18

Attachment A

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)

Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration (FIMA)

STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES

Production and Technical Services (PTS)

A. DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND:

As part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has operated the Risk Mapping, Assessment, and Planning (Risk MAP) Program since 2009. Through collaboration with federal, state, local, tribal, and private entities, Risk MAP delivers quality data that increases public awareness and leads to actions that reduce risk to life and property.

Risk MAP combines flood hazard mapping, risk assessment tools, and hazard mitigation planning into one program. This integrated program encourages beneficial partnerships and innovative uses of flood hazard and risk assessment data in order to build more resilient communities. While flooding is the primary focus of Risk MAP, FEMA actively encourages a Whole-Community approach, and is focused on enhancing the usability and value of natural hazard risk information, leading to an increase in the public’s awareness of risk, and communities taking mitigative actions to reduce the risk to life and property, increasing resilience so they may withstand, adapt, and recover from disasters.

In addition, FEMA operates HMTAP to provide aid to FEMA headquarters, its regional counterparts, and field offices to meet post-disaster mitigation responsibilities.

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 19

FEMA also operates TARC to bring together engineers, architects, design professionals, natural hazard experts and the building science community to conduct studies and activities focused on flood, wind, hurricane, tornado and other hazard mitigation, building codes and standards, technical assessments, rapid post-disaster building performance studies and analysis to create nationally applicable FEMA publications, tools, training and education for use by emergency managers and the building community, across the nation.

Risk MAP, HMTAP, and TARC are mature, high-performing, and operational programs.

Information on Risk MAP, HMTAP, and TARC can be found on FEMA’s website (http://www.fema.gov) as well as the virtual library at http://virtuallibrary.asigovt.com/Risk- Map-PM/Mitigation_PTS/SitePages/Home.aspx.

Risk MAP, HMTAP, and TARC currently have several other contractors and partners that the PTS contractor will frequently interact with. In addition to contract support, FEMA has developed and rigorously supported the Cooperating Technical Partners (CTP) Program, which is an innovative approach to creating partnerships between FEMA and participating National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) communities, regional agencies, state agencies, Tribes, and universities that have the interest and capability to become more active participants in the FEMA flood hazard mapping program. The CTP program will continue to be enhanced to involve all aspects of Risk MAP with capable partners.

B. PURPOSE:

FEMA seeks to continue to leverage the successes of Risk MAP, HMTAP, TARC and their predecessor programs to further enhance the usability and value of natural hazard risk information, leading to communities taking mitigative actions to reduce the risk to life and property, and increase resilience so they may withstand, adapt, and recover from disasters.

The purpose of this Statement of Objectives is to obtain contract support that will replace the current suite of Production and Technical Services (PTS) contracts that expire in March of 2014, September of 2014, and May of 2015 for Risk MAP, HMTAP, and TARC respectively, and deliver the scope of services detailed below. These contracts will cover Headquarters Standard Operations support as well as National and Regional Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) production and technical services. In addition, FEMA is seeking to promote integration, innovation, and efficiencies, and therefore has included the production and technical services portions of the HMTAP and TARC programs into this document. This suite of services will be referred to as Production and Technical Services throughout this and other documents.

This Statement of Objectives aims to improve the FEMA Risk MAP, HMTAP, and TARC programs’ responsiveness to its stakeholders; increase FEMA’s effectiveness at community

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 20 engagement and risk communications in order to raise risk awareness and lead to citizens and communities taking mitigation actions; respond effectively to natural disasters and provide mitigation support in a response and recovery environment; effectively and efficiently deliver quality regulatory and non-regulatory risk identification and risk assessment data; leverage the building sciences to advance risk reduction and improve the nation’s codes and standards; and provide efficient process administration and program performance.

C. SCOPE / MISSION:

While the Production and Technical Services (PTS), Community Engagement and Risk Communications (CERC), and MT-1 Processing will each have separate contract(s) and specific Statement of Objectives (SOOs), the success or failure of Risk MAP, HMTAP, and TARC will hinge on the interaction and cooperation of all contractors working as a team to ensure the smooth, seamless flow of information to all internal and external stakeholders and partners.

FEMA must have a comprehensive, coordinated approach to delivering products and services to customers at all levels. A failure by a single contractor at any level may lead to program failure.

It is the responsibility of all contractors to participate as team members with all other contractors.

To this end, FEMA has established Universal Objectives.

Universal Objective A: Leverage technology, relationships, and mutual interests across the public and private sectors to improve project delivery and effectiveness in order to increase risk awareness, leading to citizens and communities taking mitigation action to substantially reduce risk to life and property and increase the Nation’s resilience to natural hazards.

Universal Objective B: Deliver flexible, tailored, rapid, and innovative methods for providing regional support. Regional support must be flexible enough to be tailored to the specific needs of the region, including but not limited to: physical location, number of personnel, familiarity with the natural hazards and risks faced by these regions, etc.

Universal Objective C: Provide a high level of cooperation and integration across all Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration (FIMA) contractors, ensuring seamless and integrated program delivery. Offer subject matter expertise as required (e.g. business requirements, training development, field investigations, authors, committees, etc.)

Universal Objective D: Implement sound program management practices to enable reliable and efficient operations, support of FIMA Governance structures, and forward-thinking innovation throughout the Risk MAP, HMTAP, and TARC programs.

Universal Objective E: Assist with the design, implementation, communication, and/or management of new and revised requirements, processes, and procedures resulting from the

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 21

Biggert-Waters National Flood Insurance Program Reform Act of 2012 (also known as “BW- 12”), Presidential Policy Directive-8 (PPD-8), Presidential Policy Directive-21 (PPD-21), the National Mitigation Framework (NMF), the National Disaster Recovery Framework (NDRF), and other statutory and regulatory changes impacting the Risk MAP, HMTAP, and TARC programs. Promote integration with other Risk Analysis, Risk Reduction, FIMA, FEMA, DHS, and Other Federal Agencies (OFAs) programs.

Universal Objective F: Provide support and expert personnel for rapid disaster response and recovery as requested by the government. Incorporate data that is created from post-disaster situations into Risk Analysis and Risk Reduction programs, and improve program delivery in post-disaster environments.

D. PTS PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES, GOALS, AND OUTCOMES:

Objective 1 – Increase Resiliency: Produce Regulatory and Non-Regulatory Risk MAP Products: Produce effectual, flexible, and sustainable Risk MAP products that are aligned with user needs using innovative production processes in order to increase risk awareness and achieve mitigation actions. Provide innovations and methodologies to enable the mapping program to become significantly more efficient and cost-effective.

Evolve / innovate the Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) production process to leverage advances in technology and eliminate the paper FIRM inventory.

Deliver large-scale flood data in an automated, cost-effective, and sustainable method.

Develop Risk MAP products that reflect the level of sophistication and types of risk within each community studied. Incorporating project and community level data from CERC contractors, as needed.

Create, refine, and produce innovative Risk MAP datasets and products that will incorporate a variety of multi-hazard risk data, including current and future conditions.

Develop and implement processes and procedures to achieve measurable efficiencies in each year of the contract.

Produce the full range of Risk MAP engineering and mapping elements (e.g. Hydrology and Hydraulics), ensuring compliance with FEMA standards.

Support FEMA and the CERC contractor in preparing for and participating in community meetings as requested.

Administer due process for all Risk MAP Regulatory products (including MT-2s – detailed in Objective 3 below), and ensure compliance with all statutes, regulations, policies and procedures.

Ensure all required information and files are delivered to the Customer and Data Services (CDS) contractor in a timely manner. Coordinate with CTPs and legacy PTS contractor(s), as required.

Production and Technical Services (A&E) Solicitation/Synopsis Page 22

Maintain the CNMS database to identify flood hazard data needs and enable a life cycle prioritization approach to maintain the nation’s flood maps. Incorporate data from CERC contractor, as needed.

Objective 2 – Provide Technical Support to FEMA, CTPs, and other Risk MAP Program Stakeholders: Provide technical support to internal and external stakeholders on programmatic issues.

Provide technical support to FEMA (headquarters and regional) and external stakeholders on complex technical Risk MAP issues such as levees, coastal, geographic information systems (GIS) data, the National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL), dam safety, risk assessments, and post-preliminary processing.

In conjunction with Universal Objective B; provide mission support that is tailored to the specific needs of each region.

Support, advise, and implement recommendations from the Technical Mapping Advisory Committee (TMAC).

Perform Quality Assurance on CTP generated Risk MAP products, coordinating with legacy PTS contractor(s) and CTPs as needed.

Actively participate in FEMA’s Quality Working Group, by updating policies and procedures to ensure quality throughout the…