Preproposal_Conf_Brief.pdf

Pre-Proposal Conference

Solicitation Number: N62473-14-R-2201

Contract Name: Complete EDWOSB Set-Aside for

Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Roofing

Contract Location: MCB Camp Pendleton, NOC Fallbrook, NWS Seal Beach, NWS Seal Beach Detachment Norco, CA

Agenda

Welcome/Introductions Contract Overview

Contractual Background Contract Procedures

Source Selection Process Wrap-Up

Presenter Presentation Notes The purpose of this Pre-Proposal Conference is to discuss the requirements for Request for Proposal N62473-14-R-2201 an EDWOSB set-aside for Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite quantity for Roofing construction at various locations aboard MCB Camp Pendleton, NOC Fallbrook, NWS Seal Beach, NWS Seal Beach Detachment Norco, CA.

The Agenda is as follows: Welcome/Introductions, Contract Overview (Type of contract, task order issuance, etc.) , Contractual Background (REGULATIONS AND FORMATION OF THE CONTRACT), Safety (NAVFAC Safety Requirements), Contract Procedures (RFP REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION PROCESS), and Wrap-Up.

Welcome/Introductions

Attendance sign in sheet

Questions

SBA, FBO & SAM Registration

Amendments

CAUTION – Today’s Q&As are not contractually binding.

Presenter Presentation Notes Attendance Roster.

Please take a moment to sign the attendance roster. I’ve pre-printed the names of attendees who RSVP’d in Alphabetical order by company name, so please find your name, add your position title and sign.

b. Questions Please withhold questions until the end of the presentation.

SBA, FBO, & SAM Registration This acquisition is being restricted to qualified EDWOSB firms. In order to qualify as an EDWOSB firm, companies must meet the requirements and steps listed at the SBA’s webpage at the SBA Website, have current registration in the System for Award Management (SAM) database and upload / categorize all required documents in the WOSB program repository through the SBA’s General Login System (GLS) at https://eweb.sba.gov/gls.

In order to receive updates about this solicitation, ensure you are registered in FedBizOps at FBO.gov.

Also, Contractors are required to be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) prior to award of a DoD contract. Contractors may obtain information on registration and annual confirmation requirements via the SAM accessed through https://www.acquisition.gov or by calling 866-606-8220, or 334-206-7828 for international calls. A contract cannot be awarded to a contractor not registered in the SAM. Remember to review your record to ensure you have listed the NAICS code for this procurement.

d. Amendments.

We understand we make mistakes and/or may need to clarify, update, or change our requirements via amendment. If you have a question, please submit an RFI. Please be advised that unless the solicitation is amended in writing, it remains unchanged. If an amendment is issued, the acknowledgement and confirmation of receipt of RFP amendments is required with submission of your proposal. Remember to acknowledge ALL amendments on the SF1442 in Box 19.

Just remember, we also see the mistakes you all make in your proposals, so lets be respectful in our communications.

Attendants are advised that written questions and answers of this conference, as well as meeting minutes, will not be published. However, any clarification or correction of the solicitation, as a result of discussions during this conference, will be issued as a formal amendment. In the event the issuance of an amendment is necessary as a result of this site visit meeting, it will be promptly issued.

The Government does not intend to respond to inquiries submitted less than 10 days before the proposal receipt date.

Please hold all questions until the end of the presentation.

FAR 52.219-29

Notice of Set-Aside for Economically Disadvantaged Women-Owned Small Business Concerns (Jul 2013)

• Offers solicited only from EDWOSBs. Offers received from concerns that are not EDWOSBs will not be considered.

• Concern will perform at least 25 percent of the cost of the contract with its own employees (not including the cost of materials).

Contract Overview

Presenter Presentation Notes IAW with the FAR 52.219-29 in the RFP, Offers are solicited only from EDWOSB concerns and offers received from concerns that are not EDWOSBs will not be considered. (2) Any award resulting from this solicitation will be made to an EDWOSB small business concern. In addition, the EDWOSB small business concern must perform at least 25 percent of the cost of the contract with it’s own employees.

IDIQ CONTRACT

This is an indefinite delivery indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contract with fixed ELIN contract prices that will be established upon award of the contract. The actual quantity of work to be performed and the time of such performance will be determined by a Contracting Officer, who will issue written Task Orders to the Contractor. Award of Task Orders will be on a firm fixed price basis in accordance with the pre-priced and non pre-priced ELIN quantities as required for the completion of each individual Task Order. This is not a requirements contract.

Contract Overview

Contract Overview Continued

The estimated dollar value for base year and options is $25,000,000.

The contract duration will be 5 (five years) – one base year and four (12 months) option periods.

The minimum guarantee under the contract is $5,000. Task orders are expected to be between $2,000 and $500,000.

NAICS 238160; Size Standard: $14.0 M

Contractual Background

The Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) www.arnet.gov/far

Procurement Integrity Act Ethics Standards of Conduct

Presenter Presentation Notes This requirement is being procured in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) which can be found at www.arnet.gov/far.

Per FAR 3.1102, The Government’s policy is to require contractors to—

(a) Identify and prevent personal conflicts of interest of their covered employees; and

(b) Prohibit covered employees who have access to non-public information by reason of performance on a Government contract from using such information for personal gain.

NO GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL MAY ACCEPT A GIFT OR ANYTHING OF MONETARY VALUE FROM ANYONE WHO IS SEEKING GOVERNMENT BUSINESS WITH THE OFFICIAL’S AGENCY.

Contractual Background Continued

The Contract Advertised Solicitation RFIs Posted Amendments Contract Award

Presenter Presentation Notes The solicitation was posted on FBO on December 12, 2013 with a proposal due date of NLT 11 AM PST, January 23, 2014. Late proposals will not be accepted. Remember to check the solicitation for FEDEX and USPS mailing addresses and procedures. USPS can take a few more days to get here so please keep that in mind when submitting your proposals.

When submitting RFIs, remember to use ‘Exhibit F’ as required in the solicitation. RFIs will be answered by Amendment only.

Any and all amendments to the solicitation will be posted on FBO.gov and again, must be acknowledged on the SF1442 submitted with your proposal.

The notification of Award will also be posted on FBO once the proposal representing the best value to the Government, as established using the LPTA process, has been selected.

Contract Procedures

The LPTA Source Selection Process

The Source Selection Plan (SSP)

The Source Selection Team

Evaluation Factors

Proposal Requirements

Presenter Presentation Notes IAW FAR PART 15 – Contracting by Negotiation is used in Competitive Acquisitions to foster an impartial and comprehensive evaluation of offerors’ proposals, leading to selection of the proposal representing the best value to the Government.

Selection of contractor(s) will be accomplished using Source Selection Procedures on the basis of Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) to the Government, considering price and other factors combined. The LPTA process is selected as appropriate for this acquisition because the best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price. Interested firms are expected to review the RFP and participate in a pre-proposal conference and site visit, provide proposals, and provide proposal information requested to evaluate their technical and past performance factors.

The Source Selection Plan (SSP) provides the procedures for a single board to evaluate and select the best value offer using the lowest price technically acceptable (LPTA) source selection process. The individual factors (technical and price) will be evaluated IAW the submittal requirements and basis of evaluation as established in the SSP and incorporated and provided in the RFP.

The Source Selection Team (SST) includes the Contracting Officer, Contract Specialist, Advisors, Pricing Experts, Legal Counsel, other subject matter experts, the Source Selection Authority (SSA) and the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB), which is the single board who will perform the non-price related factors evaluation, as well as the deliberation on the lowest price technically acceptable offeror.

The award decision is based on evaluation factors that are tailored to this acquisition. The Evaluation factors represent the key areas of importance and emphasis to be considered in the source selection decision; and support meaningful comparison and discrimination between and among competing proposals. The evaluation factors that apply to this acquisition and their relative importance were decided upon within the discretion of agency acquisition officials and are subject to the requirement that price will be evaluated in this source selection.

The proposal requirements are set forth within the RFP, Sections 00201 & 00210.

Overview of the Source Selection Process

1. Define the requirement

2. Establish the team and the plan

3. Request and evaluate offers

• Establish competitive range, Discussions, Request proposal revisions, Re-evaluate

4. Select LPTA Offeror

5. Make Award

Presenter Presentation Notes The steps in the source selection process are as follows:

Define the requirement Establish the team and the plan Request and evaluate offers Establish competitive range, Discussions, Request proposal revisions, Re-evaluate Select LPTA Offeror Make Award

Step 1 Define the Requirement

The procurement is to perform repair and replacement of various types of facilities roofs systems, to include shingle, built-up roofs, preformed metal roofs, asbestos abatement, and other incidental work at various locations aboard Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton , Naval Ordnance Center (NOC), Fallbrook, Naval Weapons Station (NWS) Seal Beach, NWS Seal Beach Detachment Fallbrook, NWS Seal Beach Detachment Norco, CA.

Presenter

****The IDIQ Roofing requirement as identified in N62473-14-R-2201 is a brand new requirement and has a very wide scope and large AOR, along with extensive and varied requirements in terms of the type of roofing construction requirements needed by various customers.****

Step 2 - Establish the Team

Source Selection Authority

(SSA)

Technical Evaluation Board

(TEB)

Price Evaluation Board

(PEB)

Source Selection Evaluation Board

(SSB)

Presenter

The Source Selection Team for this requirement is made up of the SSA and SSEB which is comprised of the Technical Evaluation Board and Price Evaluation Board.

Step 2 Continued - Establish the Team

Source Selection Authority (SSA) Oversee acquisition Determine competitive range Selects LPTA Offeror

Source Selection Board (SSB) Make recommendations on competitive range & LPTA selection to SSA Document strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, deficiencies, risks & possible discussion questions (if necessary)

Technical Evaluation Board (TEB) Assign technical ratings (Acceptable/Unacceptable)

Price Evaluation Board (PEB) Evaluate reasonableness of individual cost elements Evaluate price reasonableness & risk

Presentation Notes The roles of the Source Selection Team are shown:

Please note, the SSA makes the determination on the competitive range and makes the final decision of the LPTA Offeror.

The SSB will document the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, deficiencies, risks & possible discussion questions (if necessary).

The TEB will assign technical ratings.

The PEB will evaluate the reasonableness of individual cost elements as stated in the RFP.

Step 2 Continued - Establish the Plan

LPTA SOURCE SELECTION PROCESS

FAR 15

NON TECHNICAL FACTOR:

Price

TECHNICAL FACTORS:

Factor 1 – Management Approach and Capabilities of the Offeror

Factor 2 – Experience of the Offeror & Offeror’s Team Factor 3 – Past Performance Factor 4 – Safety

Presentation Notes Basic Procedures and framework for LPTA:

FAR 15.101-2 -- Lowest Price Technically Acceptable Source Selection Process.

(a) The lowest price technically acceptable source selection process is appropriate when best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price. (b) When using the lowest price technically acceptable process, the following apply:

The evaluation factors that establish the requirements of acceptability shall be set forth in the solicitation. Solicitations shall specify that award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors.

(2) Tradeoffs are not permitted.

(3) Proposals are evaluated for acceptability but not ranked.

(4) Discussions/Exchanges may occur.

The Evaluation Factors are as follows:

The Non-Technical Factor is Price.

The Technical Factors are:

FACTOR 1 – MANAGEMENT APPROACH AND CAPABILITIES OF THE OFFEROR

FACTOR 2 – EXPERIENCE OF THE OFFEROR AND OFFEROR’S TEAM

FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE

“The distinction between experience and past performance is experience pertains to the types of work and volume of work completed by a contractor that are comparable to the types of work covered by this requirement, 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.”

FACTOR 4 – SAFETY

An overall non-price factors rating must be at least “ACCEPTABLE” in order to be eligible for award. An “UNACCEPTABLE” rating in any factor results in the overall non-price factors proposal being rated “UNACCEPTABLE” unless corrected through discussions. An overall non-price factors rating of “UNACCEPTABLE” makes a proposal ineligible for award.

Step 2 Continued – Establish the Plan:

Non-Technical Factor: PRICE Submittal Requirements:

SF1442

Part 6, Attachment 8 Bid Bond Exhibit E Financial Questionnaire Print-out of the Offeror’s Reps & Certs and Active/Inactive

Exclusions from SAM.

The burden of proof of price realism rests solely with the offeror.

NO UNBALANCED PRICING!

Presenter Presentation Notes Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit the following as part of their Volume I, Price Proposal in a sealed envelope.

SF1442 with blocks 14 through 20c completed and all amendments acknowledged.

ii. Part 6, Attachment 8, Roof Bid Schedule for both Camp Pendleton and Seal Beach in a separate sealed envelope. Also include an electronic copy of your MS Excel ELIN Price Schedule on the required CD and round all unit prices to the second place behind the decimal. Complete all Price ELINs (A001 through J017).

iii. Bid Bond (see clause 5252.228-9302 Bid Guarantee in RFP for Bid Bond amount)

iv. Exhibit E Financial Questionnaire (in sealed envelope from financial institution).

If the Offeror is a joint venture, information should be submitted for the joint venture. If there is no information for the joint venture, information should be submitted for each joint venture partner. The Joint Venture Agreement, Financial Questionnaire and Representations and Certifications will not be rated. They will, however, be considered in assessing the Offeror’s responsibility and compliance.

v. A print-out of the Offeror’s filled out Representations and Certifications and Active and Inactive Exclusions from the System for Award Management (SAM). Also, per Section 00600 of the RFP, fill-out responses to FAR clause 52.219-1 “Small Business Program Representations” (APR 2012) and DFARS clause 252.209-7999 “Representations by Corporations Regarding an Unpaid Delinquent Tax Liability or a Felony Conviction under any Federal Law” (Dev 2012-O0004) (JAN 2012).

The PEB will evaluate the reasonableness of individual cost elements as stated in the RFP through any of the following techniques to ensure a fair and reasonable price:

i. Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the solicitation.

ii. Comparison of proposed prices with the independent Government Estimate

iii. Comparison of proposed prices with available historical information.

iv. Comparison of market survey results.

Please note:

Exhibit line item numbers (ELIN) unit prices shall be multiplied by the estimated quantity to determine the total price for each ELIN. In the event the total price for an ELIN does not mathematically equate to the product of the unit price and estimated quantity, the unit price shall take precedence over the total price. The unit price shall be considered the Offeror’s intended bid price for the ELIN.

A price that is found to be either unreasonably high or unrealistically low in relation to the proposed work may be indicative of an inherent lack of understanding of the solicitation requirements, or in the case of unrealistically low prices, may pose an unacceptable performance risk, and may result in the overall proposal not being considered for award.

The Government may determine that an offer will not be considered if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Any inconsistency whether real or apparent, between proposed performance and price must be clearly explained in the price proposal. For example, if unique and innovative approaches are the basis for an apparently unbalanced or inconsistently priced proposal, the nature of these approaches and their impact on price must be completely documented. The burden of proof of price realism rests solely with the offeror.

Each ELIN shall be priced independent of other ELINS as if it were stand-alone work (unless otherwise noted in the schedule or elsewhere in the solicitation). Proposals that appear to be unbalanced relative to unit prices may not be considered for award.

Factor 1 – MANAGEMENT APPROACH &

CAPABILITES OF THE OFFEROR

Submittal Requirements:

Exhibit A – Factor 1 Worksheet

Bondability Letter

JV/Partnership/Teaming Agreement (if applicable)

Letter of Commitment (if applicable)

Step 2 Continued – Establish the Plan:

Evaluation Factors

Presenter Presentation Notes Solicitation Submittal Requirements Use the Exhibit A – Factor 1 Worksheet to address the following:

Provide both the single and aggregate bonding capacity of the Offeror Provide the number of in-house personnel employed by the Offeror.

Provide the percentage of work that the in-house personnel employed by the Offeror will perform under this requirement as the Prime EDWOSB Offeror in accordance with the RFP requirements.

Describe how the Offeror will ensure that it meets the percentage of work indicated above in accordance with the RFP requirements.

Describe the type of roof related work, as prescribed in the technical specifications of the RFP that the Prime Contractor will self-perform on individual task orders.

List the name of all affiliates, the role of the affiliate (i.e. subcontractor, parent company, subsidiary, etc.), and the type of work they will responsible to perform. Offerors shall provide a letter(s) of commitment for each affiliate as a separate attachment.

Describe the Offeror’s capabilities (manpower, equipment, and materials).

Describe the Offeror’s ability to effectively manage and perform multiple task orders at various locations within the footprint designated for this IDIQ contract.

The Offeror will describe how they will effectively perform quality control management by explaining how they will go about selecting a Quality Control Manager (QCM) that meets the requirements of the RFP. Offerors shall also indicate how the QCM will manage the 3 phases of control as identified in the RFP.

Offerors shall respond in the space provided on the worksheets using a minimum of 12 pt. Times New Roman or Arial font. The boxes may not be expanded. The information requested in subparagraph (b) and (c) below are not included in this page limitation.

(b) The Offeror shall provide a bondability letter from the surety company to demonstrate the minimum single project bonding capacity and aggregate bonding capacity of at least $10,000,000 for the management of multiple concurrent projects at the higher dollar magnitude within the task order range. The letter will also indicate the current available bonding capacity.

(c) In addition to the narrative, if applicable, the Offeror shall submit a signed copy of a joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment for each member of the Offeror’s team identified above (e.g., joint venture partner, partner, team member, subcontractor, parent company, subsidiary, or other affiliated company, etc.).

Basis of Evaluation:

The assessment of the Offeror’s management approach and capabilities will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the Offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the solicitation.

The composition and management of the firm proposed as the Offeror’s team, capabilities/resources, ability to manage multiple task orders, percentage of the effort the offeror will self-perform and bonding capacity for this contract will be evaluated in this factor.

Factor 2 – EXPERIENCE OF THE OFFEROR &

OFFEROR’S TEAM

Three (3) to five (5) roofing projects on Exhibit B.

Roofing projects shall be completed within the past five

(5) years of the date of issuance of the RFP or if substantially (80%) completed.

No “Basic” contracts from which TOs/DOs are issued!

Presenter Presentation Notes Solicitation Submittal Requirements.

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements. Provide the following for evaluation under Tab 2 of the Technical Proposal Volume II.

Submittals: Submit a minimum of three (3) roofing projects to a maximum of five (5) roofing projects that best demonstrates the experience of the Offeror and Offeror’s team, as identified in the narrative submittal for Factor 1, for repair and replacement of roof systems, to include composite shingle roof systems, built-up roof systems, preformed metal roof systems, and asbestos abatement of existing roof systems in accordance with the technical sections and attachments of the solicitation. Desirable project dollar values shall range between a minimum of $10,000 and $500,000.

Projects submitted for the Offeror shall be completed within the past five (5) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. Projects may be submitted if substantially completed (80%) completed by the date of issuance of this RFP.

A project is defined as a construction project performed under a single task order or contract. Multiple award and indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity type contracts (basic contracts from which task orders are issued) are not permissible and will not be evaluated.

The attached Offeror’s Team Experience Project Data Sheet (Exhibit B – Factor 2 Worksheet) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. Except as specifically requested, the Government will not consider information submitted in addition to this form. Individual blocks on this form may be expanded. A completed Exhibit B shall be submitted for each project submitted under this factor.

For all submitted projects, the description of the project shall clearly describe the scope of work performed and the relevancy to the scope requirements of this solicitation (at least 3-4 sentences).

If the Offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), relevant project experience should be submitted for projects completed by the Joint Venture entity. If the Joint Venture does not have shared experience, projects shall be submitted for each Joint Venture partner. Offerors who fail to submit experience for all Joint Venture partners may be rated unacceptable. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined.

The Offeror should submit relevant experience information of predecessor, affiliates/ /subsidiaries/parent member companies that are part of the Offeror’s Team identified in Factor 1. The proposal shall clearly demonstrate that these companies will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract.

The Offeror may utilize experience of a subcontractor that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement to demonstrate experience under this evaluation factor. These subcontractors should be indicated as part of the Offeror’s Team in Factor 1 and the proposal shall provide a letter of commitment and an explanation of the meaningful involvement that the subcontractor will have in performance of this contract. If the Offeror fails to make clear the relationship(s), the project may be removed and discarded prior to evaluation.

Basis for Evaluation: The basis of evaluation will include the Offeror’s demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing relevant roofing projects as described in the solicitation submittal requirements.

The assessment of the Offeror’s relevant experience will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the Offeror and Offeror’s team to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP. The Government will only review up to five projects. Any projects submitted in excess of five (5) will not be considered. A proposal containing less than a minimum of three (3) required roofing projects will be considered unacceptable.

Factor 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE

Completed CPARS or Exhibit C (PPQ) for each project submitted under Factor 2.

Performance Recognition Documents for each project (if applicable)

Presentation Notes Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

IF A COMPLETED CPARS EVALUATION IS AVAILABLE, IT SHALL BE SUBMITTED WITH THE PROPOSAL. IF THERE IS NOT A COMPLETED CPARS EVALUATION, the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), Exhibit C) included in the solicitation is provided for the Offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project included in Factor 2, Experience. AN OFFEROR SHALL NOT SUBMIT A PPQ WHEN A COMPLETED CPARS IS AVAILABLE.

IF A CPARS EVALUATION IS NOT AVAILABLE, ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. The Offeror should provide completed PPQs in the proposal. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference in 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. 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, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). The Government may make reasonable attempts to contact the client noted for that project(s) to obtain the PPQ information. However, Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to help ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Sarah Chambers via email at sarah.chambers2@navy.mil prior to proposal closing date.

Also include performance recognition documents received within the last three years such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, 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 Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the Offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), and any other known sources not provided by the Offeror.

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.

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.

Basis of Evaluation:

Past Performance shall be evaluated when using the LPTA process and will be rated on an “acceptable” or “unacceptable” basis using the ratings in the following table:

Acceptable (A) Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown. (See note below.)

Unacceptable (U) Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, the source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in the Contractor’s performance. This evaluation is separate and distinct from the Contracting Officer’s responsibility determination. The assessment of the Offeror’s past performance will be used as a means of evaluating the Offeror’s probability to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP.

The Government will assess the degree to which past performance evaluations and all other past performance information reviewed by the Government (e.g., PPIRS, 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;

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

- Recency of tasks performed that are identical to, similar to, or related to the task at hand; and

- A respect for stewardship of Government funds

Offerors lacking relevant past performance history will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably in past performance. The Offerors shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability “ unknown” shall be considered “acceptable”.

Factor 4 – SAFETY

Using Exhibit D submit:

EMR for the three (3) previous complete calendar years

OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job

Transfer (DART) Rate for the three (3) previous complete calendar years.

Technical Approach for Safety

Evaluation Factors

Presenter Presentation Notes The Offeror shall submit the following information in the Technical Proposal Volume II under Tab 3 using Exhibit D. (For a partnership or joint venture, the following submittal requirements are required for each contractor who is part of the partnership or joint venture. EMR and DART Rates shall not be submitted for subcontractors.)

Experience Modification Rate (EMR):

For the three (3) previous complete calendar years (2010, 2011, and 2012), submit the Offeror’s EMR (which compares your company’s annual losses in insurance claims against its policy premiums over a three (3) year period). If you have no EMR, affirmatively state so, and explain why. Offeror’s shall provide a letter from their Insurance Company that verifies these rates or indicates that an EMR rate(s) was/were not issued. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the EMR and upward or downward trends should be addressed as part of this element.

OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate:

For the three (3) previous complete calendar years (2010, 2011, and 2012), submit your OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate, as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. If you cannot submit an OSHA DART Rate, affirmatively state so, and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA DART Rate data and upward or downward trends should be addressed as part of this element.

(c) Technical Approach for Safety:

Using Exhibit D, the Offeror shall answer Questions 3 – 6 to explain the plan that the Offeror will implement to:

Enforce safety procedures for itself How the Offeror will evaluate safety performance for potential subcontractors when selecting all levels of subcontractors How the Offeror will manage and enforce safety performance of selected subcontractors as a part of the selection process for all levels of subcontractors.

The responses to Questions 3-6 can be expanded up to two (2) pages total overall, not per question.

(2) 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 Government will evaluate the Offeror’s overall safety record, the Offeror’s plan to select and monitor subcontractors, any and innovative safety methods that the Offeror plans to implement for this procurement. The Government’s sources of information for evaluating safety may include, but are not limited to, OSHA, NAVFAC’s Facility Accident and Incident Reporting (FAIR) databases, and other related databases. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete safety information regarding these submittal requirements rests with the Offeror. The evaluation will collectively consider the following:

Experience Modification Rate (EMR) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate Offeror Technical Approach to Safety Other sources of information available to the Government

(a) Experience Modification Rate (EMR):

The Government will evaluate the EMR to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any upward or downward trends and extenuating circumstances that impact the rating.

(b) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate:

The Government will evaluate the OSHA DART Rate to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any upward or downward trends and extenuating circumstances that impact the rates.

(c) Technical Approach to Safety: The Government will evaluate the Exhibit D responses to determine the degree to which the Offeror will enforce safety procedures for itself and subcontractors and how subcontractor safety performance will be considered in the selection of all levels of subcontractors on the upcoming project. Those Offerors whose plan demonstrates a commitment to hire subcontractors with a culture of safety and who propose innovative methods to enhance a safe working environment may be given greater weight in the evaluation.

Proposals shall be submitted in three-ring binders or bound, with tabs or separators. Page limits on Exhibits, must be adhered to and cannot be expanded unless stated on the numbered question of the Exhibit.

Proposals shall be submitted on 8.5" X 11" paper, double-sided print with at least 12 point font.

Step 2 Continued – Establish the Plan:

Proposal Submission

Presenter Presentation Notes Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation shall be formatted as follows and furnished in the number of copies stated herein. A cover letter shall accompany the proposal.

We WILL NOT track down your information. The cover letter is part of the submission requirements and must include—

(a) The solicitation number;

(b) The name, address, telephone and facsimile numbers, and e-mail address of the Offeror;

(c) The DUNS Number, CAGE Code, and TIN of the Offeror;

(d) A statement specifying the extent of agreement with all amendments, terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation and agreement to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item;

(e) Names, titles, and phone and facsimile numbers (and electronic addresses if available) of persons authorized to negotiate on the offeror’s behalf with the Government in connectio n with this solicitation and;

(f) Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal. Proposals signed by an agent shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent’s authority, unless that evidence has been previously furnished to the issuing office.

Proposals shall be submitted in three-ring binders or bound, with tabs or separators. Page limits, if stipulated, must be adhered to. Proposals shall be submitted on 8.5" X 11" paper, utilizing both sides of the paper, and using at least 12 point font.

The format for the proposal is as follows:

Cover Letter

Cover Letter Volume 1 – Price Proposal Volume 2 – Technical Proposal Tab 1:

Factor 1 submittals Tab 2:

Factor 2 submittals Factor 3 submittals (immediately following applicable project submitted under Factor 2) Tab 3:

Factor 4 submittals

Offerors are asked to submit only the information/exhibits required. Do not submit any additional information such as brochures, CDs (excludes the required electronic copy), or other pre -printed materials. You will be wasting resources because it will be thrown away.

A total of one (1) original, two (2) hard copies and one (1) electronic copy of the complete proposal, in response to this RFP must be received by this office no later than 11:00 a.m., PST, on 23 January 2014. Electronic copies shall be submitted as one document on CD in an Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF).

Ensure you include the information listed under each factor. You may want to have someone in your company spot check your proposal prior to submitting it. Also, to reiterate, do not forget to complete and include the SF1442 as required.

Cover Letter

Volume 1 – Price Proposal

SF1442

Completed Bid Schedule Bid Bond Financial Questionnaire

Step 2 Continued – Establish the Plan:

Proposal Submission

Presenter Presentation Notes Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation shall be formatted as follows and furnished in the number of copies stated herein. A cover letter shall accompany the proposal.

We WILL NOT track down your information. The cover letter is part of the submission requirements and must include—

(a) The solicitation number;

(b) The name, address, telephone and facsimile numbers, and e-mail address of the Offeror;

(c) The DUNS Number, CAGE Code, and TIN of the Offeror;

(d) A statement specifying the extent of agreement with all amendments, terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation and agreement to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item;

(e) Names, titles, and phone and facsimile numbers (and electronic addresses if available) of persons authorized to negotiate on the offeror’s behalf with the Government in connectio n with this solicitation and;

(f) Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal. Proposals signed by an agent shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent’s authority, unless that evidence has been previously furnished to the issuing office.

Proposals shall be submitted in three-ring binders or bound, with tabs or separators. Page limits, if stipulated, must be adhered to. Proposals shall be submitted on 8.5" X 11" paper, utilizing both sides of the paper, and using at least 12 point font.

The format for the proposal is as follows:

Cover Letter

Volume 1 – Price Proposal

SF1442

Completed Bid Schedule Bid Bond Financial Questionnaire

Volume 2 – Technical Proposal Tab 1:

Factor 1 submittals Tab 2:

Factor 2 submittals Factor 3 submittals (immediately following applicable project submitted under Factor 2)

Tab 3:

Factor 4 submittals

Step 2 Continued – Establish the Plan:

Proposal Submission

Presenter Presentation Notes Volume 2 – Technical Proposal Tab 1:

Factor 1 submittals Tab 2:

Factor 2 submittals Factor 3 submittals (immediately following applicable project submitted under Factor 2) Tab 3:

Factor 4 submittals

Offerors are asked to submit only the information/exhibits required. Do not submit any additional information such as brochures, CDs (excludes the required electronic copy), or other pre -printed materials. You will be wasting resources because it will be thrown away.

Also, DO NOT edit any of the information on the typed text on the Exhibits. Only fill-in your responses in the boxes provided.

A total of one (1) original price and (1) original technical proposal, two (2) hard copies of the technical proposal and one (1) electronic copy of the complete proposal, in response to this RFP must be received by this office no later than 11:00 a.m., local time, on 23 January 2014. Electronic copies shall be submitted as three separate documents on CD as follows:

1. One (1) Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) document of the Price Proposal (SF1442, Bid Bond, Section 00600 Representations and Certifications, and System for Award Management Representations and Certifications)

2. One (1) unlocked/unprotected MS Excel file of the completed Bid Schedule

3. One (1) Adobe PDF document of the technical proposal.

Ensure you include the information listed under each factor. You may want to have someone in your company spot check your proposal prior to submitting it. Also, to reiterate, do not forget to complete and include the SF1442 as required.

Step 3 Request and Evaluate Offers

Review technical and price proposals Evaluate based on all evaluation criteria in RFP

Establish competitive range - if necessary Conduct discussions Discuss weaknesses and deficiencies

Request Final Proposal Revisions Re-evaluate Recommend LPTA proposal to SSA

Presenter Presentation Notes As stated in the solicitation, the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract after conducting discussions with offerors whose proposals have been determined to be within the competitive range. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

Award of the basic construction contract will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal, conforming to the solicitation, is determined to be the most advantageous to the Government considering the technical and price factors. The Government reserves the right to eliminate from consideration for award any or all offers at any time prior to award of the contract; to negotiate with offerors in the competitive range; and to award the contract to the offeror submitting the lowest price technically acceptable proposal. Proposals should be submitted initially on the most favorable price and technical terms. Offerors should not assume that they would be contacted or afforded the opportunity to qualify, discuss, or revise their proposal. Firms participating in the pre-proposal conference will not be compensated for their participation.

After conclusion of the technical and price evaluation, if the lowest price offeror is technically acceptable, there will be no need for discussions as they represent the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable offeor.

Step 4 Select Best Value

Source Selection Authority Determination Comparative assessment against all evaluation criteria Independent decision Document decision

Presenter

The source selection authority’s (SSA) decision is based on a comparative assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in the solicitation. While the SSA may use reports and analyses prepared by others, the source selection decision shall represent the SSA’s independent judgment. The source selection decision shall be documented, and the documentation shall include the rationale for any business judgments and tradeoffs made or relied on by the SSA.

Step 5 - Make Award

Notification of award to successful and unsuccessful Offerors Debriefings to successful and unsuccessful

Offerors Responsibility Determination

Presenter Presentation Notes

DEBRIEFINGS INSTILL CONFIDENCE IN OFFERORS THAT THEY WERE TREATED FAIRLY

IMPROVES QUALITY OF PROPOSALS IN RESPONSE TO FUTURE RFPs

Per FAR 9.103, contracts shall be awarded to, responsible prospective contractors only. No award shall be made unless the contracting officer makes an affirmative determination of responsibility. Make sure you pay attention to the requirements in the RFP including Section 00600 – Representations and Certifications.

Again, EDWOSBs must meet the SBA requirements.

Questions?

Points of Contact

Sarah Chambers – sarah.chambers2@navy.mil

Remember - the solicitation remains unchanged unless an amendment is issued.

Wrap-Up

Presenter Presentation Notes Remember all RFIs shall be routed to the Contract Specialist, Sarah Chambers. Do not attempt to contact the Technical POCs directly as they will tell you to contact the CS.

mailto:sarah.chambers2@navy.mil

Thank you for your participation in today’s Pre-Proposal Conference!

Wrap-Up