INSTRUCTIONS CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS.docx

Instruction, Conditions, and Notice to Offerors

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. SCOPE: VISN 1 located within the VA New England Healthcare system, has a requirement for ongoing asbestos abatement, for the following VISN 1 VA Facilities: (1) VA Togus, Maine; (2) VA White River Junction, Vermont; (3) VA Manchester, New Hampshire; (4) VA Central Western MA, Northampton, Massachusetts; (5) Edith Nourse Rogers Veterans Memorial Hospital, Bedford, MA; (6) VA Boston Health Care System, MA, including the Brockton Campus, the Jamaica Plain Campus, and the West Roxbury Campus; (7) VA Providence, RI; (8) VA Connecticut Health Care System, including the West Haven Campus, and the Newington Campus; (9) any Community Based Outpatient Clinics located within VISN 1; and (10) any other VA facility and/or location within the New England Healthcare System.

1.2. As a result of this solicitation, the Government intends to award an indefinite-delivery indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts to support the VA Medical Centers within the VISN 1 New England Healthcare System, providing sufficient qualified contractors present offers. This is a Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) Set Aside. In order to be responsive to the solicitation, each SDVOSB must be verified in the Veteran Small Business Certification (VetCert) database at https://veterans.certify.sba.gov by the Center for Veterans Enterprises at the time of proposal submission.

1.2.1. Awards will be made to offerors whose proposals, responsive and conforming to the RFP, are determined to be most advantageous to the Government in terms of Technical, Past Performance, Price, and other factors considered.

1.2.2. Work to be performed under the contracts shall provide construction services for projects designated for real property facilities. Most projects will be bid build type from already completed designs.

1.2.3. This is not a solicitation for a Requirements Contract.

1.3. Work performed under these multi-discipline contracts/and or Task Orders will fall under NAICS 562910. The size standard for offerors responding to this RFP is $25M, as provided in Commercial and Institutional Building Construction. Therefore, the “gatekeeper”, for participation in this RFP is $25M revenue at time of submission of your offer in response to this RFP. VHA New England seeks well-qualified general and specialty trade contractors who are at or below the size standard of NAICS 562910.

1.4. CONTRACT DURATION, LIMITS AND AMOUNTS

1.4.1. This IDIQ is expected to be awarded in FY24.

1.4.2. The maximum limit is $3,000,000 per contract over a five (5) year period, whichever comes first.

1.5. SEED PROJECT

1.5.1. Please see “Sample abatement projects.docx.” Seed projects will be evaluated on fair and reasonableness.

1.6. TASK ORDERS

1.6.1. As requirements develop, all eligible contractors will be provided a fair opportunity to compete for each project offered under this contract unless FAR 16.505(b)(2) exceptions apply.

1.6.2. The contract will be administered by a Contracting Officer within the Network Contracting Office (NCO) 1.

1.6.3. Individual Task Orders will be awarded and administered by Federally appointed Contracting Officers from NCO 1.

1.6.4. Construction performance requirements will be specified for each project in the Task Order Request for Proposal. Awardees will compete for Task Orders among other holders. Most of the Task Orders shall be awarded based on competitive proposals received in response to the agency request for proposal.

1.7. FORMAL COMMUNICATION, OFFEROR EXPLANATIONS

1.7.1. Any explanation desired by an offeror regarding the meaning or interpretation of the solicitation, for proposals, drawings, specifications, etc. must be requested in writing (via Exhibit D Proposal Inquiry Form). All requests for information (RFI) for the Asbestos Abatement project must be received NOT LATER THAN the tenth working day prior to the closing of the solicitation. Responses to the RFI’s received will be posted not later than five working days prior to the closing of the solicitation. OFFERORS ARE STRONGLY ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT QUESTIONS EARLY IN THIS PROCESS (submit via Exhibit D Proposal Inquiry Form).

1.7.2. Any interpretations made will be in the form of an amendment of the solicitation, drawings, specifications, etc., and will be furnished to all prospective offerors via posting to our web site at: https://sam.gov/content/opportunities. Offerors are strongly cautioned to check this site frequently and to “refresh” their web page to ensure they have the lasted information.

1.7.3. All potential offerors and printing companies are required to register in the System for Award Management (SAM) in order to view or download the plans or drawings from the website.

1.7.4. Receipt of amendments by the offeror must be acknowledged in the space provided on the SF1442 and by returning a signed copy of the amendment by the time set for receipt of proposals. Explanations or instructions given in a form other than an amendment to the solicitation shall not be binding. Questions (on a non-attribution basis) and answers shall be furnished to all prospective offerors via Contract Opportunities.

1.7.5. Submit the Exhibit D, Proposal Inquiry Form by email to the contracting office at the email address show below.

Subject Line: Reference No. 36C24124R0007 Email: Nicholas.muro@va.gov

1.8. WAGE DETERMINATION:

1.8.1. Construction (formerly Davis Bacon) Wage Rates are applicable to the seed project and any subsequent Task Order. Be advised the determination that is current at the time of the Task Order award is the determination that will apply for the project. Applicable wage rates can be found at: https://sam.gov/content/wage-determinations, and are based on the location of the work, e.g. MA, ME, CT, VT, NH, or RI.

1.9. PROPOSAL EXPENSES AND PRE-CONTRACT COSTS: This RFP does not commit the Government to pay costs incurred in preparation and submission of initial and subsequent proposals or for other costs incurred prior to award of a formal contract.

1.10. DISPOSITION OF ADDITIONAL COPIES OF SUCCESSFUL AND UNSUCCESSFUL PROPOSALS: In compliance with FAR Subpart 4.8 the Government will retain one electronic copy of all proposals. The Government will destroy extra copies of proposals. No destruction certificate will be provided.

1.11. PROPOSAL ACCEPTABILITY: Offerors are cautioned to strictly comply with all instructions within this solicitation to ensure submission of a complete proposal. Failure to furnish a complete proposal, at the time of proposal submission, may result in the proposal being unacceptable to the Government and eliminated from consideration for award. The offeror is hereby advised that its proposal is presumed to represent its best and final offer in response to this solicitation.

1.12. CLARIFICATIONS: Offerors may, at the discretion of the Government, be asked to provide information for clarification purposes regarding their proposals. Requests for such clarification information does not constitute discussions.

1.13. EXCEPTIONS: If the offeror takes exception to any of the requirements specified in this solicitation, the offeror shall clearly identify each exception and include a complete explanation of why the exception was taken and what benefit accrues to the Government. All exceptions to the solicitation requirements and supporting rationale shall be included in an addendum to the proposal and clearly labeled "Exceptions". An addendum is only required if the offeror takes exception to any requirement in the solicitation. (The addendum does not have a page limitation but shall only include information relevant to exceptions taken to the solicitation requirements.) The Government will assume an offeror takes no exceptions to any solicitation requirement if the offeror does not submit an addendum identifying exceptions. Offerors are advised that solicitation requirements are not necessarily negotiable and such exceptions may render an offeror's proposal unacceptable and ineligible for award.

Submission Requirements and Instructions

1. GENERAL PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS:

1.1. These instructions prescribe the format of proposals and describe the approach for the development and presentation of the proposal data. They are designed to ensure the submission of necessary information to provide for the understanding and comprehensive evaluation of proposals. Carefully review this section prior to commencing proposal preparation. In order for proposals to receive full consideration for award, offerors shall ensure that the information furnished in support of the proposal is factual, accurate, and complete.

1.1.1. Offerors are cautioned to strictly comply with all instructions within this solicitation to ensure submission of a complete proposal. Failure to furnish a complete proposal, at the time of proposal submission may result in the proposal being unacceptable to the Government and eliminated from consideration for award. All solicitation amendments must be acknowledged in accordance with FAR Clause 52.215-1.

2. SOURCES OF PERSONNEL ON SELECTION BOARD

2.1. Offerors are advised that the Government reserves the right to include non-governmental employees to serve as advisors to Source Selection Evaluation Board members in the source selection process. These individuals will be authorized access to only those portions of the proposal data and discussions that are necessary to enable them to perform their respective duties. Such firms are expressly prohibited from competing on the subject acquisition and from rating proposals or recommending a selection.

2.2. In accomplishing their duties related to the source selection process, the aforementioned firms may require access to proprietary information contained in the offeror’s proposals. Therefore, pursuant to FAR 9.505-4, a contractor that gains access to proprietary information of other companies in performing advisory and assistance services for the Government must agree with the other companies to protect their information from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary and refrain from using the information for any purpose other than that for which it was furnished. The contracting officer shall obtain copies of these agreements and ensure that they are properly executed.

2.3. PROPOSAL CONTENT: Prospective offerors shall submit the proposal in one complete proposal containing all required documents to satisfy technical information, past performance, and price requirements detailed in the solicitation.

3. PROPOSAL DUE DATE SCHEDULE AND DELIVERY LOCATIONS:

3.1. Binders and the electronic copy are due by the date and time set for the receipt of proposals shown in Block 13 of the SF1442. The due date for receipt of Past Performance Questionnaires from your references is the same as the date and time set for the receipt of proposals in Block 13 of the SF1442.

3.2. After compiling all required information, submit the information in accordance with the “Proposal Due Date Schedule” paragraph and Block 13 of the SF1442. Return the specified number of copies to the issuing office listed in Block 7 of the SF1442. Mark the front of the envelope/box with the following: “PROPOSAL No. 36C24124R0007, DO NOT OPEN--- Competitive Proposal

3.2.1. Delivery Locations:

VISN 1 – Proposals shall be delivered to: Nicholas.Muro@va.gov

3.2.2. Proposals are due 5/31/2024 @11:00 AM EST

3.3. PROPOSAL FORMAT

3.3.1. Purpose: These instructions prescribe the format of proposals and describe the approach for the development and presentation of the proposed data. The proposal shall include all of the information requested in the specific instructions. Failure to include all information requested may adversely affect the evaluation. A proposal that merely reiterates or promises to accomplish the requirements of the RFP will be considered unacceptable. A proposal that is orderly and sufficiently documented will enable the Government to easily understand and perform a thorough and fair evaluation.

3.3.2. Offerors are cautioned to submit enough information to enable the evaluation committee to fully ascertain each offeror’s capability to perform all of the requirements contemplated by this solicitation. All commitments made in the proposal may become a part of the resultant contract. The data submitted with each proposal shall be complete and concise, but not overly elaborate. Excessive reliance on promotional brochures is discouraged.

3.3.3. Written proposals shall be prepared on standard 8.5 x 11-inch paper (charts may be landscaped but must be on 8.5 x 11-inch paper) and shall be in a legible font size (10). All pages of each proposal shall be appropriately numbered and identified with the RFP number. For ease of reference, consecutive page numbering with tabs is required.

3.3.4. Binding: Elaborate format and binding are neither necessary nor desirable. All binders will be capable of lying flat when opened. Three ring binders are preferred. The cover and spine of each binder will clearly identify the offeror’s name, Binder number, RFP number, RFP title, and copy number, (e.g. copy 2 of 3). All binders will allow for easy removal and replacement of pages.

3.3.5. Indexing: Each binder will contain a “Table of Contents”. The “Table of Contents” will identify major areas, paragraphs and subparagraphs by number and title as well as by page number and locations. Tab indexing will be used to identify Sections as appropriate.

3.3.6. Electronic Copy: Offeror is required to submit three (3) hard copies and one (1) electronic copy in response to this solicitation. If the file is too large to send via email, the offeror may send multiple emails with multiple files (maximum file size allowed via email is 40MB, suggest requesting positive confirmation of receipt. See Self-Service - Microsoft Exchange: Email Sending Limits (va.gov) regarding file size).

3.3.7. If revised proposals are requested, all proposal revisions shall be submitted on colored paper as page changes with each page identified by date and page number. Revised pages shall be printed on one side and punched with a 3-hole punch along the left margin. The number of revised copies to be submitted is the same as the initial proposal, including one electronic copy.

3.4. PROPOSAL CONTENTS: Each offeror’s proposal shall be submitted as set forth below and all information shall be confined to the appropriate part to facilitate independent evaluation. Proposals which do not include the requested minimum information may be eliminated from further consideration for award.

3.4.1. FACTOR 1, TECHNICAL INFORMATION. The Technical proposal shall be prepared in accordance with the instructions. Failure to provide a Technical proposal in accordance with the solicitation may render an offeror’s proposal incomplete and ineligible for award. Offerors are strongly cautioned to follow the format in the Technical instructions. Include the question before each narrative. This will allow for ease of evaluation. Technical Proposals shall not include price or pricing information.

3.4.2. General Instructions: The Technical proposal shall be submitted in accordance with the instruction contained herein. In no case shall statements such as “we comply with the requirements of the contract” or its equivalent be acceptable to meet the requirements of this request for proposal. A proposal that merely reiterates or promises to accomplish the requirements of the RFP will be considered unacceptable. A proposal that is orderly and sufficiently documented will enable the Government to easily understand and perform a thorough and fair evaluation. This should preclude the rejection of a proposal due to items not being addressed.

3.4.3. The Government intends to use the Project Information Sheet (Exhibit A) for the evaluation of experience. The Government acknowledges that this will involve discussion of some of the same projects discussed in Past Performance. While Past Performance examines how an offeror performed in the past to determine the probability of success on future projects, this factor examines the offeror’s experience with project management, execution, and understanding of the project requirements. Project management includes the full spectrum of activities such as: estimating, proposal preparation, subcontract purchasing and management, work scoping and planning, construction superintendent duties, quality controls, safety and infection controls. Contractors must adequately address the identified factors for award.

3.4.4. OFFERORS ARE CAUTIONED TO READ ALL SECTIONS OF THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS BEFORE COMPLETING YOUR TECHNICAL PROPOSALS, AS YOUR ANSWERS MUST MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOUND IN THESE SECTIONS.

3.4.5. FACTOR 2 PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION. Past Performance includes current on-going (present) performance. Do not include price or pricing information in this section. Failure to provide past performance information may render an offeror’s proposal incomplete and ineligible for award.

3.4.6. Offerors shall discuss, using the Project Information Sheet for Contractors (Exhibit A), their performance for a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) completed projects. Offerors are strongly cautioned to complete Exhibit A in its entirety, in the format provided, and provide as much detail as possible (use as much space as necessary). Failure to do so may eliminate your proposal from consideration for award.

3.4.7. Offerors should consider the currency and relevancy of the Past performance information. This information shall address relevant contracts held within the last seven (7) years.

3.4.8. Offerors should include with their proposal information on problems encountered on the identified contracts and the offeror's correction actions. Include construction awards, customer letters of commendation, etc., with points of contact and telephone numbers.

3.4.9. Past Performance References – (REQUIRED and must be submitted by the client/evaluator directly to the Contracting Officer) – Offerors shall prepare and submit to prior client(s) up to two (2) Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaires (Exhibit B) for projects listed under Factor 1; Technical Expertise shall have a form completed (Exhibit A).

3.4.9.1. Completed Performance Questionnaire shall be submitted to the Contracting Office not later than the closing date for receipt of proposal shown on the SF1442. Email is preferred to Nicholas.Muro@va.gov. The subject line shall state 36C24124R0007 Past Performance for (Name of Company.) NOTE: Offerors must not review the Past Performance Questionnaire prior to submission. They must be submitted by the client/evaluator directly to the Contracting Officer.

3.4.9.2. Offerors should follow-up and encourage references to get the questionnaires to the Contracting Officer in a timely manner. Do not include copies of the letters or questionnaires in the proposal

3.4.10. FACTOR 3, OFFER DOCUMENTS AND PRICE INFORMATION:

3.4.10.1. Offer–Complete in its entirety the “Offeror” portion of the SF1442. An official having the authority to contractually bind your company must sign the SF1442 in accordance with FAR 4.102. One copy of the SF1442 is required to have an original signature.

3.4.11. Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors: Include in your proposal only the Representations and Certifications FAR 52.204-8 contained in this solicitation. All other required representations and certifications are to be completed online in the System for Award Management (SAM).

3.4.11.1. All potential offerors are required to register in the System for Award Management (SAM) in order to complete the annual Representations and Certifications. Ensure your System for Award Management (SAM) information is up to date. In addition, all SDVOSB SDVOSB’s must be verified in the Veteran Small Business Certification (VetCert) database at https://veterans.certify.sba.gov by the Center for Veterans Enterprises at the time the proposal is submitted.

3.4.12. Seed Project Requirements: For evaluation purposes, all Offerors will be required to submit a price proposal for the seed project.

3.4.12.1.1. A bid bond is required for the seed project.

3.4.12.1.2. Please see attachment named “Sample abatement projects.docx” for seed projects.

3.4.12.2. Offerors shall provide all price information necessary to provide a meaningful basis for Government's analysis and evaluation of price for the seed project. The Government is not and does not intend to request certified cost or pricing data.

3.4.12.3. Complete VAAR 852.219-75 VA Notice of Limitations on Subcontracting – Certificate of Compliance for Services and Construction for the seed project. This certification can be found in the clause section of the solicitation.

Proposal Evaluation and Basis for Award

1. GENERAL INFORMATION:

1.1. GENERAL:

1.1.1. The Government intends to award approximately three (3) contracts to qualified offerors deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), whose proposals conform to the RFP's requirements and represent the Best Value to the Government. The Best Value is the most advantageous offer, price and other factors considered, and consistent with the Government's stated importance of evaluation criteria. This may result in award being made to a higher-rated, higher-priced offeror where the Contracting Officer determines that the Past Performance and Technical capability of the higher-priced offeror outweighs the cost difference.

1.1.2. To arrive at a Best Value decision, the Contracting Officer will integrate the evaluation of Past Performance, Technical and Price. Past Performance and Technical, which are of equal weight, but when combined are significantly more important than Price.

1.1.3. While the Government and the Contracting Officer will strive for maximum objectivity, the evaluation process, by its nature, is subjective and therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire evaluation process.

1.1.4. The source selection process will be conducted in accordance with FAR Part 15.3, source selection procedures. Offers will be evaluated using the criteria listed in “Evaluation Factors and Basis for Award.”

1.1.5. The Contracting Officer will conduct proposal compliance review after closing for determination of basic proposal adequacy prior to providing the proposals to the board. Failure to provide a complete proposal consisting of all factors and the pricing for the seed project, or other applicable sections, may result in the proposal being removed from further consideration for award.

1.1.6. Noncompliance with the RFP requirements may raise serious questions regarding an offeror’s technical and/or cost performance and may be grounds to eliminate the proposal from consideration for contract award. Failure to include all information requested may adversely affect the evaluation. A proposal that merely reiterates or promises to accomplish the requirements of the RFP will be considered unacceptable. A Proposal that is not presented in an orderly format may be considered noncompliant with solicitation instructions, not evaluated, and removed from consideration for award. A proposal that is orderly and sufficiently documented will be easy for the Government to understand and will enable the Government to perform a thorough and fair evaluation.

1.1.7. Although the assessment of Past Performance as a specific evaluation factor is separate and distinct from the Determination of Responsibility required by FAR Part 9, Past Performance information obtained herein will be used during the Government’s responsibility determination. The Government also reserves the right to obtain additional information solely for the purpose of making a responsibility determination from all offerors after receipt of proposals. Requests for responsibility information do not constitute discussions.

1.1.8. ENFORCEABILITY OF PROPOSAL: The proposal must set forth full, accurate and complete information as required by this solicitation. The Government will rely on such information in the award of a contract. By submission of the offer, the Offeror agrees that all items proposed (if applicable e.g., key personnel, plans, etc.) will be utilized for the duration of the contract and any substitutions will require prior Contracting Officer's approval.

1.1.9. The offeror shall be held responsible for the validity of all information supplied in his/her proposal. Should subsequent investigation disclose that the fact and conditions were not as stated, the proposal may be rejected.

1.1.10. The Government reserves the right to reject any or all proposals at any time prior to award if such action is in the Government's best interest; award a contract to other than the offeror submitting the lowest price(s) or highest technically rated; and award contracts to offerors submitting a proposal determined by the Government to be the most advantageous to the Government.

1.1.11. SDVOSB’s must be verified in the Veteran Small Business Certification (VetCert) database at https://veterans.certify.sba.gov by the Center for Veterans Enterprises.

1.1.12. JOINT VENTURE AND MENTOR PROTÉGÉ INFORMATION Instructions to Offerors (Joint Ventures and Mentor Protégé Offerors Only):

1.1.12.1. Joint Ventures are required to certify that they comply with the requirement for SDVOSB set asides prior to award. Joint Venture firms must additionally submit a certification stating the parties to the joint venture have entered into a joint venture agreement that fully complies with paragraph (c) of 852.219-73, located in the General Conditions. Failure to submit the certification will render the offer ineligible for award.

2. EVALUATION FACTORS AND BASIS FOR AWARD:

2.1. Evaluation factors consist of Past Performance, Technical and Price. Past Performance and Technical, which are of equal weight, but when combined are significantly more important than Price. The evaluation process is as follows:

2.1.1. The Government will assign ratings for the offeror's technical proposal, at the subfactor level, using an adjectival rating that combines technical merit and proposal risk that most accurately defines the offeror's performance risk considering all subfactors identified in this section. The technical evaluation will be divided into six (6) subfactors. Subfactor 1, Capability and Experience, is more important than Subfactors 2 through 6, which are of equal importance.

2.1.2. The Government will evaluate the offeror's past performance to determine the level of confidence that the contractor will successfully perform the current requirement. The Government will rate an offeror's Past Performance for projects identified in their Offer under Factor 1 (Exhibit A), Technical Expertise, offeror provided past performance meeting the requirements of this section, and other related experience the Government obtains. The Government may evaluate present and past performance information by using data independently obtained from other Government or commercial sources, including, but not limited to: Government databases; personal business experience with the offeror; and information provided in the Project Information Sheet for Contractors, (Exhibit A); Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaires, (Exhibit B) completed by the offeror’s references. Past Performance will be evaluated utilizing a Performance Risk Rating considering all potential evaluation criteria identified in this section.

2.1.3. The Price will be evaluated on the basis of its fair and reasonableness to the Government. “Best Value” means the expected outcome of an acquisition that, in the Government’s estimation, provides the greatest overall benefit in response to the requirement. Government will evaluate the reasonableness of the total proposed price for the seed project that will be used for price evaluation. The VA presently does not have funding for the seed project, but has a reasonable expectation of funding and intends to make award in FY24.

2.2. PROCESS: The following process will be used to determine the best value for selection of the contract award.

2.2.1. The Government intends to use the “Best Value” tradeoff process source selection approach in accordance with FAR 15.101-1. To arrive at a Best Value decision, the Source Selection Authority, using the SSEB documentation will integrate the evaluation of Past Performance, Technical and Price. Past Performance and Technical, which are of equal weight, but when combined are significantly more important than Price. The firms that represent the best value to the Government will be selected for contract award. The VA will award to as many offerors as it deems is in its best interest.

2.2.2. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the offeror's initial proposal should contain the offeror's best terms from a price and technical approach. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary.

2.3. The Government reserves the right to waive informalities and minor irregularities in offers received. If a minor clerical error has occurred, then the offeror may be given an opportunity to correct the minor error within the constraints of the "clarifications" process.

3. FACTOR 1 TECHNICAL EXPERTISE

3.1. The Government will assign ratings for the offeror's technical proposal, at the subfactor level, using an adjectival rating that combines technical merit and proposal risk that most accurately defines the offeror's performance risk considering all subfactors identified in this section. The technical evaluation will be divided into six (6) subfactors. Subfactor 1, Capability and Experience, is more important than Subfactors 2 through 6, which are of equal importance.

3.2. Offerors are cautioned to review the full solicitation, Special Requirements attachment, and General Contract Requirements attachment prior to completing the technical requirements to ensure they meet the minimum requirements found in these documents. Each question should be covered in sufficient detail to clearly address all required information. Answer questions in order presented. You are NOT limited to the space provided; use as much space as necessary to provide answers. It is advisable to state the question then give the answer. This will aid in the evaluation.

3.3. In the event you reference another document or part of the proposal you must be clear as to where the information can be found to answer the particular question(s). Such statements as see Company profile or see Safety Plan are not acceptable. You must indicate on what page of the proposal the answer can be found in the referenced document.

3.4. The Project Management data is obtained for the purpose of evaluating technical capability in performance of future task order projects. The offeror is required to provide required information to show experience and capability to manage multiple disciplined projects.

3.5. SUBFACTOR 1 CAPABILITY AND EXPERIENCE

3.5.1. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s experience with facilities construction, alterations, and repair of buildings that involve multiple trades and the ability to obtain adequate payment protections (performance and payment bonds and alternative payment protections for construction contracts as prescribed in FAR 28.102). Higher ratings will be given to offerors that demonstrate experience in the completion of multi-discipline/multi-trade projects in hospital environments.

3.5.1.1. Describe your experience and capability in successfully managing facilities asbestos abatement of buildings as a prime contractor or subcontractor within the last seven (7) years. Prepare a Project Information Sheet for Contractors (Exhibit A) for a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) completed projects. Project magnitude shall be in the price range of $10,000.00 - $500,000.00. The seven (7) years on previous experience shall be calculated from the solicitation issue date.

3.5.1.2. Provide a letter from the offeror’s surety company addressing ability to obtain bonding and the limits of bonding capacity per project, per aggregate. The inability of an offeror to have the ability to obtain adequate payment protections (performance and payment bonds and alternative payment protections for construction contracts as prescribed in FAR 28.102) will exclude them from award.

3.5.2. SUBFACTOR 2 ORGANIZATION

3.5.3. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed team to ensure adequate coverage to support the VISN 1 facilities to ensure successful oversight/performance of the work. Higher ratings will be given to those that currently employ multiple crews showing adequate coverage to support medical centers across VISN 1.

3.5.3.1. Provide an Organizational Chart listing company personnel and their roles to ensure adequate coverage to support VISN 1 facilities. Organizational chart shall include but is not limited to Project Managers, Site Superintendents, Quality Control Managers, Safety Managers, and Infection Control Managers.

3.6. SUBFACTOR 3 QUALITY CONTROL

3.6.1. The Government will evaluate the offerors’ ability to provide and implement a quality control plan in accordance with contract specification requirements ( General Contract Requirements, Section 01451).

3.6.1.1. Submit a quality control plan for past Asbestos abatement projects for review. The VA will require offerors to meet CQC System Manager requirements including the completion of the Construction Quality Management (CQM) for Construction course (per the General Contract Requirements, Section 01451). This quality control plan will be used if the offeror is awarded the task order for the seed project.

3.6.1.2. Discuss within the plan how quality issues will be dealt with on various types of construction projects. Include in the discussion as a minimum, meetings, inspections, submittal reviews, correction of non-compliant work and how you intend to ensure non-reoccurrence and reporting of quality problems to Government officials.

3.7. SUBFACTOR 4 SAFETY

3.7.1. The Government will evaluate the offerors’ safety performance and their ability to provide and implement a safety plan in accordance with contract specification requirements (Safety Specification).

3.7.1.1. Discuss your Safety Program in general, and provide as a minimum, details on training, documentation, and your plan to ensure adherence to OSHA Standards. Include documentation regarding the successful training of personnel in accordance with OSHA requirements (i.e., 30-hour or 10-hour completed OSHA training) as well as relevant information regarding any safety accidents or violations and corrective action taken or demonstrates no documented violations. Offeror shall complete the Pre-Award Contractor Construction Safety Evaluation Form (Exhibit C) and demonstrate that the contractor in question has no more than three serious, or one repeat, or one willful OSHA or EPA violation(s) in the past 3 years and has an Experience Modification Rate (EMR) of equal to or less than 1.0. Simply having an EMR greater than 1.0 does not eliminate a contractor from selection. The Offeror will be allowed to submit an offer with additional information explaining the EMR; and the CO will need to make a responsibility determination based upon all the usual factors.

3.8. SUBFACTOR 5 INFECTION CONTROL

3.8.1. Infection Control is required when working in a hospital environment. The Government will evaluate the offerors’ experience with and their ability to provide and implement an infection control plan in a hospital environment in accordance with contract specification requirements.

3.8.1.1. Submit an infection control plan from a previously awarded asbestos abatement project at a VA medical Center.

3.8.1.2. Provide an infection control plan from one (1) previous project at a healthcare facility and a narrative on specific infection control measures that were required and how well you implemented them.

3.9. SUBFACTOR 6 SCHEDULE

3.9.1. The Government will evaluate the offerors based on their ability to provide and administer a cost-loaded project schedule that demonstrates the schedule specification requirements. Adequate scheduling processes are necessary to ensure completion and control of the project from beginning to the end of the project. Please provide a minimum of three (3) schedules from previously performed asbestos abatement projects that adequately demonstrates the firm’s ability to perform work within a specified time frame.

4. PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION:

4.1. FACTOR 2 PAST PERFORMANCE

4.1.1. The Government will evaluate the offeror's past performance to determine the level of confidence that the contractor will successfully perform the current requirement. The Government will rate an offeror's Past Performance for projects identified in their Offer under Factor 1 (Exhibit A), Technical Expertise, offeror provided past performance meeting the requirements of this section, and other related experience the Government obtains. The Government may evaluate present and past performance information by using data independently obtained from other Government or commercial sources, including, but not limited to: Government databases; personal business experience with the offeror; and information provided in the Project Information Sheet for Contractors, (Exhibit A); Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaires, (Exhibit B) completed by the offeror’s references. Past Performance will be evaluated utilizing a Performance Risk Rating considering all potential evaluation criteria identified in this section.

4.1.2. Past Performance Submission Requirements.

4.1.2.1. Past Performance References–Offerors shall prepare and submit to prior client(s) up to two (2) Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaires (Exhibit B) for projects listed under Factor 1; Technical Expertise shall have a form completed (Exhibit A).

4.1.2.2. Offerors lacking relevant Past Performance experience may submit information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement if such information is relevant to this acquisition. Such information shall, as a minimum, include Name(s) of Predecessor Company and/or Key Personnel and include Complete Address and Point of Contact; Telephone, and email address; and a brief synopsis of the experience and relevancy.

4.1.3. Other Past Performance Information

4.1.3.1. The Past Performance information on contracts not listed by the offeror may also be evaluated. The Government may contact references and contact parties other than those identified by the offeror, and information received may be used in the evaluation of the offeror’s Past Performance. The evaluation may take into account Past Performance information regarding predecessor companies or key personnel who have relevant experience that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to this acquisition. The Government reserves the right to obtain and evaluate Past Performance information from any source it deems appropriate. For offerors that are joint ventures, the evaluation will take into account past performance of the joint venture. If the joint venture does not demonstrate past performance for award, the contracting officer will consider the past performance of each party to the joint venture.

4.1.4. Past Performance Definitions

4.1.4.1. Recency is defined as projects submitted shall be completed within the past seven (7) years of the date of issuance of this RFP.

4.1.4.2. Relevancy is defined as performance of work on projects that are similar in scope (Asbestos abatement) and magnitude of effort and complexities to the type of project anticipated under the resultant contract. Common aspects of relevancy include similarity of service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and degree of subcontract/teaming.

4.1.5. To conduct the overall performance risk assessment, the Government may evaluate present and past performance including but not limited to, companies owned or previously owned by owner, information using questionnaires completed by the offeror's references; use of Government-wide databases, in part on information from CPARS, data independently obtained from other Government or commercial sources, personal business experience with the offeror, and any performance related information available regardless of relevancy in the development of performance confidence assessments. The evaluation may also consider information provided relative to corrective actions taken to resolve problems on past or existing contracts and trends in performance. The Government may contact references provided by the offeror, as well as any other source it identifies, and information received may be used in the evaluation of the offeror’s Past Performance. The burden of providing current, accurate and complete Past Performance information rests with the offeror. Past Performance information on contracts not listed by the offeror, or that of planned subcontractors, may also be evaluated. Offerors shall be given an opportunity to discuss adverse past performance information if the offeror has not had a previous opportunity to comment on the information. The contracting officer may review recent contracts to ensure that corrective measures raised in discussions have been implemented. In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. The Government reserves the rights to obtain and evaluate Past Performance information from any source it deems appropriate.

4.1.6. The Government will conduct a performance risk assessment based upon the Past Performance of the offeror as it relates to the probability of successful accomplishment of the work required by the solicitation. Ratings will consider the offeror's Past Performance considering currency, relevancy, sources, context, and trends, using descriptive adjectives that most accurately define the offeror's performance risk considering all potential evaluation criteria identified in this factor. Relevance will be considered in the overall Past Performance rating. An adjectival rating for past performance will be assigned based on the confidence of success on this project, based on recency and relevancy of projects submitted, CPARS evaluations, and personal knowledge.

4.1.7. Past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. It considers each offerors demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that met the contract requirements. The Government will evaluate and provide a confidence assessment rating after evaluating the offeror's recent past performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the contract requirements (See FAR 15.305).

5. FACTOR 3 PRICE EVALUATION

5.1. The purpose of the price evaluation is to provide an assessment of the reasonableness of the proposed price in relation to the solicitation requirements. Proposals will be evaluated in the following manner.

5.1.1. Offerors will be required to submit a price proposal for the seed project.

5.1.2. Prices will be evaluated for reasonableness utilizing one or more of the price analysis techniques set forth in FAR 15.305.

5.2. DEBRIEFINGS:

5.2.1. Offerors excluded from the competition before award, may submit a written request for a debriefing to the Contracting Officer in accordance with FAR 15.505.

5.2.2. After award, unsuccessful offerors may submit a written request for a debriefing to the Contracting Officer in accordance with FAR 15.506.

5.2.3. Requests for pre and post award debriefings will only be accepted by email.

End of Section Proposal Evaluation and Basis for Award