N4008523R2535-0002.pdf

ACQR 5959495

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

N4008523R2535 Regional Fire Alarm Services for Hampton Roads of Virginia

This amendment is issued to post site visit information (L.5) and correct attachment name in section L, and in section M.2.

The proposal due date remains 12/20/23 and all other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 12

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 30-Nov-2023

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street , County, State and Zip Code) X N4008523R2535

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

16-Nov-2023

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, X is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

30-Nov-2023

CODE

NAVFACSYSCOM MID-ATLANTIC

CONTRACTING CORE

9324 VIRGINIA AVENUE

NORFOLK VA 23511-3095

N40085 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N4008523R2535

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

L.1 Contractor Proposal Certification:

Contractor is required to certify in writing on page 1 of the proposal the following:

(Name of Offeror) warrants that its proposal

(of date or other Identifier) incorporated herein by reference, including, but not limited to, proposed approaches, staffing, methodology, or work plans, will meet the performance objectives set forth in this contract during the execution thereof. The contractor is not excused from meeting such performance objectives. The contractor understands that it bears all of the cost and performance risk associated with adopting acceptable additional (and/or alternative) means or methods of meeting the performance objective.

L.2 Contractor Payment Schedule:

Reserved.

L.3 Inquiries:

All questions from offerors concerning any aspect of this request for proposal (RFP) must be submitted in writing. Prospective offerors are requested to submit written questions specifying the section and paragraph of the specification for which clarification is desired. All inquires will be answered in writing.

Telephone questions will not be entertained. Offerors are specifically cautioned that verbal discussions and replies to questions shall not have the effect of changing the provisions of the written RFP.

All questions must be submitted at least 2 days before proposals are due. This is the most efficient way to ensure all questions are addressed in a timely manner.

Pre-Proposal Inquires shall be electronically sent to Kristina DeGroat, Contract Specialist, at the following email address: kristina.l.degroat.civ@us.navy.mil or Pamela Waller, Contracting Officer, at the following email address: pamela.waller@navy.mil

L.4 Content of Proposal:

a) The price proposal shall be submitted separately but at the same time as the non-cost/price proposal. Any non-cost/price information in the price proposal will not be considered. Likewise, any price information in the non-cost price proposal will not be considered.

b) The offeror shall submit the following information:

Price:

(i) Price Submittal Requirements: Offerors shall submit one (1) hard copy and (1) CD-ROM that shall include the following:

- Include a cover page with the Solicitation number, Solicitation title, Prime Contractor Name, Address, Phone Number, Fax Number, Unique Entity ID, Cage Code, and Point of Contact with their phone and email address;

- Signed Solicitation, Offer and Award Forms (SF 33), including Section B (CLINs 0001 through 0012), with all amendments acknowledged;

- Attachment J-0200000-15 (Exhibits A through F). All pricing shall be submitted with only two decimal places. This includes Offerors ensuring the Excel pricing cells do not include additional, hidden decimal places. The CD-ROM shall include this attachment as a Microsoft Excel file;

- If applicable, where Exhibit Line Items/sub Exhibit Line Items contain a quantity of zero or a blank quantity, unit pricing shall be provided in the event future quantities are added;

- The Unique Entity ID and/or CAGE for all the Offeror’s team members (e.g., partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the proposal; and

- Completed Contractor Proposal Certification (See Section L, Paragraph 1).

The hard copy proposal shall match the electronic version of the proposal. However, in the event of a discrepancy between the hard copy and CD-ROM, the CD-ROM electronic copy of the proposal will govern.

The price proposal shall be submitted separately but at the same time as the non-cost/price proposal. Any non-cost/price information in the price proposal will not be considered. Likewise, any price information in the non-cost/price proposal will not be considered.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO BE SUBMITTED WITH PRICE PROPOSAL PACKAGE:

RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATION INFORMATION – In order to be eligible for award, the offeror must be determined responsible in accordance with FAR Part 9, specifically 9.104-1, General Standards. In a separate tab, the offeror shall provide the following information in the price proposal package:

1. Provide name of financial institution, point of contract, telephone number, and email address. Provide a signed statement of release giving the reference permission to release the information to the Navy.

2. One (1) signed bank reference demonstrating adequate financial resources. If offeror’s firm has a line of credit, provide information on how many figures offeror can borrow against the line of credit (i.e. medium 6 figures – exact line of credit is not required).

3. The offeror shall provide the latest three complete fiscal year financial statements for the prime contractor, certified by an independent accounting firm, if practicable, or signed by an authorized officer of the organization.

Submit evidence of availability of working/operating capital, which will be used for the performance of the resultant contract. For Joint Venture arrangements, submit the latest three complete fiscal year financial statements for each company in the Joint Venture and discuss the financial responsibilities among the companies. The Government may also utilize Dun & Bradstreet reports to evaluate the financial capacity of the offeror.

4. Description of offeror’s facilities and equipment.

5. Other offeror’s work presently under contract.

Although required to be submitted with offeror’s price proposal, this information will not be evaluated as part of the price proposal. This information will be used as the basis of your firm’s responsibility determination should your firm be considered for award.

Non-cost/price Factors:

Non-cost/price Factors Submission Requirements: Offeror shall submit three (3) hard copies and one (1) CD-ROM that shall include the following:

- 8 ½ x 11 format;

- No smaller than 10-point Arial or Times New Roman font;

- 100-page limit (inclusive of all charts, forms and other documentation responsive to the solicitation requirements except as noted below), pages sequentially numbered;

- Include a cover page with Contract Number, Contract Title, Prime Contractor Name, Address, Phone

Number, Fax Number, Unique Entity ID, Cage Code, Point of Contact and their phone and email address;

- Include only information in response to Factors 1, 2, 3, and 4 separated by tabs, as applicable;

- Provide Attachment J-0200000-14: Contractor(s) Self-Performance Evaluation and Notification of

Subcontracting in accordance with Factor 1 –Management Approach;

- Provide signed Joint Venture Agreement or SBA approved Mentor-Protégé agreement (if applicable); and

- The non-cost/price proposal shall include responses to each non-cost/price factor as specified in Section M.

Offerors are advised that in the event of a discrepancy between the hard copies and the CD-ROM, the CD-ROM electronic copy of the proposal will govern.

NOTE: Offerors are cautioned that merely repeating the Performance Work Statement Performance Objectives, with a statement of intent to perform, does not reflect an understanding of the requirement or capability to perform, and may result in finding that the proposal is Unacceptable for that factor.

The following are not included in the 100-page limitation: Price proposals, JV Agreements, CPARS for Projects submitted under Factor 2, Experience. Pages exceeding the 100-page limitation shall not be considered during evaluation of the proposal. Offerors are advised that some Factors include additional page limitations.

No pricing shall be included in the non-cost/price proposal. Any price information on the non-cost/price proposal will not be considered. Likewise, any non-cost/price information in the price proposal will not be considered.

L.5 Site Visit Oceana Naval Air Station ONLY

Date: 6 December 2023 Time: 0930 EST Meeting Location: Meet outside Hangar 145, 733 Operations Dr #200, Virginia Beach, VA 23460

Site Visit POC:

Victor Gargano, victor.d.gargano.civ@us.navy.mil, (757) 433-2626

***THE FOLLOWING NEEDS TO BE COMPLETED FOR ALL ATTENDEES THAT NEED BASE ACCESS:

Attachment I-Instructions for SVS, SECNAV_5512_1 and Blank Sponsor Verification Spreadsheet must be completed for each individual attendee who needs base access.

Complete all information to ensure your forms are processed. All forms must be submitted to NAVFACML_CIOceanaBaseAccess@navy.mil. REQUESTS ARE DUE BY MONDAY, 04 DECEMBER 2023

@ 1200 EST.

Attendees are reminded that No answers will be provided to verbal or written questions asked during the preproposal conference/site visit. Attendees should submit any questions that they may have resulting from the site visit via email to, kristina.l.degroat.civ@us.navy.mil or pamela.waller@navy.mil. Answers to the questions will be provided via Amendment to this solicitation posted on https://www.sam.gov. No hard copies will be sent.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

M.2

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1. The solicitation requires the evaluation of price and the following non-cost/price factors:

Factor 1 – Management Approach Factor 2 – Recent/Relevant Experience

Factor 3 – Safety Factor 4 – Past Performance

NOTE: The distinction between experience and past performance is that experience pertains to the volume of work completed by a contractor that are comparable to the types of work described under the definition of recent, relevant projects, in terms of size, scope, and complexity. Past performance pertains to both the relevance of recent efforts and how well a contractor has performed on the contracts.

1. The relative order of importance of the non-cost/price evaluation factors is the technical factors 1, 2, and 3, are of equal importance to each other and, when combined, are equal in importance to the past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment Factor 4. When the proposal is evaluated as a whole, the technical factors and past performance/performance confidence assessment factor combined (i.e., the non-cost/price evaluation factors) are approximately equal to price.

The importance of price will increase if the Offerors’ non-cost/price proposals are considered essentially equal in terms of overall quality, or if price is so high as to significantly diminish the value of a non-cost/price proposal’s superiority to the Government. Award will be made to the responsible Offeror(s) whose offer conforms to the solicitation and represents the best value to the Government, price and non-price factors considered.

Basis of Evaluation and Submittal Requirements for Each Factor:

(i) Basis of Evaluation:

The Government will evaluate price based on the total price. Total price consists of the basic requirements and all option items (see Section B of the solicitation). The Government intends to evaluate all options and has included the provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) in Section M of the solicitation. In accordance with FAR 52.217-5, evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). Analysis will be performed by one or more of the following techniques to ensure a fair and reasonable price:

(i) Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the RFP.

(ii) Comparison of proposed prices with the IGCE.

(iii) Comparison of proposed prices with available historical information.

(iv) Comparison of market survey results.

Proposals will be evaluated for completeness and reasonableness as follows:

Completeness: All pricing information required by the solicitation has been provided, all mathematic computations are correct and the pricing application understood, prices are on an “all or none” basis, and failure to submit a price on an item or a number of items may cause this factor and the entire offer to be determined unacceptable.

Reasonableness: Price analysis comparisons indicate the offered price to be fair and reasonable, balanced across option years, and balanced between recurring and non-recurring items.

Unreasonable, unbalanced or incomplete pricing may cause a proposal to be determined unacceptable.

NOTE: The non-cost/price proposal shall include submittals for each non-cost/price factor as specified below:

Factor 1 Management Approach:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The offeror shall submit a narrative response that clearly demonstrates its understanding of and approach to accomplishing the complexity and magnitude of service requirements set forth in the performance objectives and standards of the Performance Work Statement. Each of the topics below must be included in the narrative, tabbed in the non-price/cost proposal and discussed separately.

a. Phase-In Transition Plan. The phase-in transition period is 30 calendar days, per F.2 of the RFP. Describe what you will do to “start-up” performance in accordance with the contract requirements:

(1) Include a schedule of phase-in transition key events that starts on the first day of the transition period and goes to the 30th day. In addition to the key events, your schedule shall address the Section F Deliverables submission requirements.

(2) Provide a phase-in transition plan narrative that includes, but is not limited to:

a. The roles and responsibilities of personnel involved in the phase-in period;

b. Your plan to complete personnel/staffing actions; and

c. Your plan to have on hand adequate equipment/material to begin services on the start date of the period of performance.

b. Workforce Management. For each of the following, clearly:

(1) Describe the relationship between overall management (corporate and on-site), key personnel, administration, and subcontractors. Your description shall include the lines of management authority, supervision, span of control, and accountability.

(2) Describe your plan to recruit and maintain a qualified workforce.

(3) Describe your plan to manage competing priorities, including surges, at various locations in this contract.

(4) Describe the work to be performed as the prime contractor (self-performed) as well as the work to be performed by each subcontractor proposed. Additionally, Offerors shall submit completed Attachment J- 0200000-14 as part of this factor since the awardee will be required to meet the requirements of FAR 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting, during contract performance. Note: The Offeror shall clearly state in their narrative if they plan to self-perform 100% of the work as the prime.

c. Quality Management. Provide a summary of your “Quality Management System” (QMS). Your summary shall be no more than six (6) single-sided pages (or three (3) double-sided pages). Your summary shall address the practices and resources you will use to ensure full compliance with all Performance Objectives and Performance Standards as described in (0200000-C) Management and Administration. Additionally, your summary shall address your plan to audit, surveil, and inspect work performance and your strategy for taking corrective action when necessary.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation: The Management Approach factor shall be evaluated based upon the following criteria:

a. The proposal demonstrates an understanding of the performance objectives and standards.

b. The proposal demonstrates a plan for having equipment and personnel in place to commence work on the contract start date. In addition, the proposal clearly defines the controls and/or processes that are in place to ensure continuity of services.

c. The proposal provides a feasible technical approach with the capability to, at least, meet solicitation performance objectives and standards.

Factor 2, Recent/Relevant Experience:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: The Offeror shall submit the following information:

Submit a minimum of one (1) up to a maximum of five (5) relevant projects demonstrating prime contractor experience of the Offeror and/or the Offeror’s corporate affiliate(s) that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the work requirements specified in the solicitation. Experience of the Offeror or its corporate affiliate(s) as a subcontractor will not be considered.

For the purposes of this solicitation, a relevant project is further defined as follows:

Size: A project with a yearly value of at least $450,000.00 for recurring services.

Scope: Offeror must have provided all labor, supervision, management, tools, materials, and equipment for fire protection services such as those described in the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

Complexity: Offeror must have been responsible for responding simultaneously to requirements for several customers or installations.

The attached Recent/Relevant Experience Form (Attachment J-0200000-12) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. The Government will not consider information submitted in addition to this form nor will the Government consider information submitted via any other medium. Individual blocks on this form may be expanded; however, total length for each project data sheet shall not exceed two (2) single-sided pages (or one (1) double-sided page).

Projects submitted for the offeror shall be ongoing (having been performed for a period of at least one year from the date of issuance of this solicitation) or completed within the past 5 years of the date of issuance of this solicitation.

Projects with periods of performance beyond one year shall be clearly defined as multi-year contracts or as base contracts with option periods. If the project has option periods, state which contract period is in progress (e.g., base, 1st option, etc.). If the Recent/Relevant Experience Form does not clearly demonstrate that the project meets the above requirements, the Government may deem the project not relevant.

For all submitted projects, the description of the project shall clearly describe the scope of work performed and the relevancy to the requirements of this RFP as it relates to Size, Scope, and Complexity, as defined above, or the Government may consider the project not relevant. If an Offeror intends to submit work completed/issued off an Indefinite Quantity/Indefinite Delivery (IDIQ) contract as a qualifying project, the Offeror is limited to submitting the IDIQ contract itself. The Government will not consider or evaluate any task orders whether submitted individually or collectively.

If the offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), relevant experience should be submitted for projects completed by the JV entity. If the JV does not have shared experience, projects may be submitted for each JV member. Offerors who fail to submit experience for all JV members may be rated lower (except for offerors covered by Mentor-Protégé Agreements approved by the Small Business Administration). If the Offeror is submitting experience for individual JV partners in which the company was a partner in a different JV entity, the Offeror must specifically address what portion of the work under the submitted project was performed by the JV partner offering on this contract and demonstrate that the work meets the Size, Scope, and Complexity, as defined above, or the project will not be considered relevant. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined. Offerors proposing as a JV shall submit a signed JV agreement. For Mentor-Protégé Joint Ventures, the offeror shall submit the signed and U.S.

Small Business Administration (SBA) approved Mentor-Protégé agreement.

Offerors that are not submitting as a JV may submit a project where it performed as a JV with another entity, but must clearly demonstrate how its work on that project met Size, Scope, and Complexity, as defined above.

If an Offeror is utilizing the prime contractor experience of a corporate affiliate(s) (e.g., subsidiaries, sister companies, predecessor companies, and parent companies), the proposal shall include a teaming agreement signed by the Offeror and the corporate affiliate(s) or a letter of commitment signed by the corporate affiliate(s) on the letterhead of the corporate affiliate(s). In order for the experience to be considered, the Offeror is also required to clearly demonstrate that the corporate affiliate(s) will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract by identifying the personnel or resources from the corporate affiliate(s) that will be dedicated to the contract.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

The assessment of the Offeror’s recent/ relevant will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the Offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP as defined above. The minimum standard for this Factor has been met when the Offeror has demonstrated adequate experience by submitting at least one relevant project of similar size, scope, and complexity, as defined above, on which the Offeror or its corporate affiliate was the prime contractor.

Projects completed by the Offeror, or, if permitted as discussed above, its corporate affiliate(s) (e.g., subsidiaries, sister companies, and parent companies) in any capacity other than as a prime contractor will be considered Not Relevant.

Factor 3, Safety:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit the following information: The Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate and Total Case Rate (TCR) for the specified five (5) Calendar Years (CY), as well as a safety narrative, as described further below. For a partnership or joint venture, the Offeror shall submit separate DART rates and TCR for the specified five (5) CY for each contractor who is part of the partnership/joint venture; however, only one safety narrative is required. Any fatalities experienced within this 5-year timeframe must be explained in detail, to include root cause and corrective actions.

NOTE: DART, and TCR shall not be submitted for subcontractors.

1. DART Rate: Submit five (5) previous complete calendar years’ worth of data (not an overall average). If the Offeror has no DART rate, for any year, affirmatively state so and explain why. Should a negative trend occur above moderate risk levels, an acceptable/detailed explanation is required that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. DART cases include injuries or illnesses resulting in death, days away from work, and/or restricted work or transfer to another job days beyond the day of injury/illness.

b. Calculation of DART rate: Multiply the total number of DART cases by 200,000, and then divide by the number of employee labor hours worked.

2. TCR Rate: Submit five (5) previous complete calendar years’ worth of data (not an overall average). If the Offeror has no TCR rate, for any year, affirmatively state so and explain why. Should a negative trend occur above moderate risk levels, an acceptable/detailed explanation is required that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. TCR cases include injuries or illnesses resulting in death, days away from work, restricted work or transfer to another job days beyond the day of injury/illness, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness.

b. Calculation of TCR rate: Multiply the total number of TCR incidents by 200,000, and then divide by the number of employee labor hours worked.

3. Technical Approach to Safety. The Technical Approach to Safety narrative shall be limited to six (6) single-sided pages or three (3) double-sided pages and shall address the following:

a. Describe the Offeror’s approach to implementing and executing a Safety Management System (SMS) including Management/Leadership involvement, Employee involvement, Hazard prevention, Hazard control, Worksite analysis, and Safety and health training, to include the standard(s) used to benchmark the SMS.

b. Describe the evaluation process used to select potential subcontractors.

c. Describe the processes of how the Offeror will oversee safety compliance of subcontractors at all levels throughout performance of the contract (to include the Offeror’s own in-house workforce).

4. The Government reserves the right to review other available sources (public/Government internal) of information.

These may include but are not limited to OSHA data, NAVFAC’s Contractor Incident Reporting System (CIRS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Electronic Contract Management System (eCMS), etc.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

The Government is seeking to determine that the Offeror has consistently demonstrated a commitment to safety and that the Offeror plans to properly manage and implement safety procedures for itself and its subcontractors. The evaluation will collectively consider the DART rate and TCR, Technical Approach to Safety, and other sources of information available to the Government as part of such collective evaluation. The board will evaluate the DART rates and TCR to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any negative trends and extenuating circumstances that impact the rating.

1. DART Rate: The board will evaluate trends over the last five complete calendar years considering changes that take it from one risk level (or more) to the next up or down. Negative trends occurring above moderate risk levels require the offeror to provide a detailed explanation that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. Missing data without an explanation is considered a deficiency.

b. Consistent Low Risk or Very Low Risk DART rates may be considered a strength.

c. Declining trends that push the risk levels from Moderate Risk (MR) or higher to Low Risk (LR) or Very Low Risk (VLR) may be considered a strength.

d. An increasing DART rate trend could be considered a weakness (i.e., MR or better to High Risk (HR) or Extremely High Risk EHR)) if an acceptable explanation is not provided for any trends that rise above Moderate.

e. This chart correlates the DART rate to the level of risk:

Risk DART Rate

Very Low Risk Less Than 1.0 Low Risk From 1.0 to 1.99 Moderate Risk From 2.0 to 2.99 High Risk From 3.0 to 4.0

Extremely High Risk Greater than 4.0

2. TCR Rate: The board will evaluate trends over the last five complete calendar years considering changes that take it from one risk level (or more) to the next up or down. Negative trends occurring above moderate risk levels require the offeror to provide a detailed explanation that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. Missing data without an explanation is considered a deficiency.

b. Consistent Low Risk or Very Low Risk TCR rates may be considered a strength.

c. Declining trends that push the risk levels from Moderate Risk (MR) or higher to Low Risk (LR) or Very Low Risk (VLR) may be considered a strength.

d. An increasing TCR rate trend could be considered a weakness (i.e., MR or better to High Risk (HR) or Extremely High Risk EHR)) if an acceptable explanation is not provided for any trends that rise above Moderate.

e. This chart correlates the TCR rate to the level of risk:

Risk TCR Rate

Very Low Risk Less Than 2.49 Low Risk From 2.5 to 3.49 Moderate Risk From 3.5 to 4.49 High Risk From 4.5 to 5.99

Extremely High Risk Greater than 6.0

3. The Technical Approach to Safety Narrative. To determine the degree to which the Offeror:

a. Describes a viable SMS that addresses elements, such as Management/Leadership involvement, Employee involvement, Hazard prevention, Hazard control, Worksite analysis, and Safety and health training, to include the standard(s) used to benchmark the SMS.

b. Describes a methodical process of evaluating subcontractor’s safety performance in their selection process.

c. Describes a logical management plan to hold themselves and their subcontractors accountable for adhering to the safety requirements of the contract.

4. The Government reserves the right to review other available sources (public/Government internal) of information.

These may include but are not limited to OSHA data, NAVFAC’s Contractor Incident Reporting System (CIRS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Electronic Contract Management System (eCMS), etc.

Factor 4, Past Performance:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

For projects submitted for Factor 2, Recent/Relevant Experience:

a. IF CPARS EVALUATIONS ARE AVAILABLE, THEY SHALL BE SUBMITTED WITH THE PROPOSAL.

The Offeror shall submit all CPARS evaluations available for that project, not just the most recent.

b. IF THERE ARE NO CPARS EVALUATIONS, the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in this solicitation is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each Factor 2 project.

Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQs should be submitted with your proposal. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ (Attachment D), which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Kristina DeGroat, via email at Kristina.l.degroat.civ@us.navy.mil prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs or CPARS previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

AN OFFEROR SHALL NOT SUBMIT A PPQ WHEN CPARS EVALUATIONS ARE AVAILABLE.

The Offeror may include performance recognition documents received within the last five years (from the date of issuance of the solicitation) such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of recommendation, and any other forms of performance recognition.

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to:

- Past performance information retrieved through the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System

(CPARS) for the Offeror’s team members (e.g., partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the proposal;

- Inquiries of owner representative(s);

- Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS);

- Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS); and

- Any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

A copy of the blank Past Performance Questionnaire to be used for requesting client references is included as Attachment J-0200000-13.

IMPORTANT: It is the responsibility of the offeror to provide accurate points of contact for each identified contract and current telephone numbers and/or email addresses. Failure to provide requested data, accessible points of contact, or valid phone numbers could result in a firm being considered less qualified.

The Government reserves the right to contact references for verification or additional information. The Government’s inability to contact any of the Offeror’s references or the references’ unwillingness to provide the information requested may affect the Government’s evaluation of this factor.

Offerors may provide any information on problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Factor 2, Recent/Relevant Experience. Offerors may also address any adverse past performance issues. Such explanations shall not exceed two (2) double-sided pages (or four (4) single-sided pages) in total.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

This evaluation focuses on the quality of performance on the relevant projects submitted under Factor 2, Recent/Relevant Experience, and past performance on other projects currently documented in known sources.

The quality of performance is informed by the degree to which past performance evaluations and all other past performance information reviewed by the Government (e.g., CPARS, Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), performance recognition documents, and information obtained from any other source) reflect a trend of satisfactory performance considering:

- A pattern of successful completion of tasks;

- A pattern of deliverables that are timely and of good quality; and

- A pattern of cooperativeness and teamwork with the Government at all levels (task managers, contracting officers, auditors, etc.).

The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, the source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in performance. This evaluation is separate and distinct from the Contracting Officer’s responsibility determination. The assessment of past performance will be used as a means of evaluating the Offeror’s probability to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP. More relevant past performance may have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance. 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, and will receive a Neutral Confidence rating.

(End of Summary of Changes)