Request for SF330 OR1_Atch 4 - Orig Tech Question Responses - Round 1.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 15 KB Posted
- Attached to
- C1DA--Amendment 0001 - Responses to Technical Questions National AE IDIQ MATOC On-Ramping Opportunity 1
- Solicitation number
- 36C77626R0013
About this file
The file is a Request for SF330 containing questions and answers related to a Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Program Contracting Activity Central (PCAC) Indefinite-Delivery, Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) for nationwide Architect-Engineering (A-E) services. The solicitation, numbered 36C77626R0013, seeks to establish a $5 billion capacity contract with multiple awardees, covering key disciplines including various planning and engineering specialties.
Key details include a 35-page submission limit, with evaluations focused on professional qualifications across nine primary disciplines. All IDIQ contract holders will have opportunities to submit task order proposals, with no predetermined number of awards. The contract will not replace existing VISN IDIQs but will serve as a non-mandatory vehicle for VHA contracting offices. Submissions must include SF330 forms, professional licensing information, and SDVOSB compliance statements. The contract emphasizes nationwide coverage, with task order geographic location potentially used as a tie-breaker in future project selections. No due date extensions will be granted, and joint ventures will not receive preferential treatment.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 36C77626R0013_1.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 1 - Technical Question Responses - AE MATOC OR1.pdf | ||
| Request for SF330 OR1_Atch 3 - Past Performance Questionnaire.docx | DOCX document | |
| Request for SF330 OR1_Atch 5 - Orig Tech Question Responses - Round 2.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Request for SF330 OR1_Atch 2 - AE IDIQ MATOC SOW FINAL 05 2024.docx | DOCX document | |
| 36C77626R0013.docx | DOCX document | |
| Request for SF 330 OR1_Atch 1 - National AE IDIQ MATOC.docx | DOCX document |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Round 1 Questions
| PCAC A-E IDIQ MATOC Technical Questions | ||
| Question | Response | |
| 1 | Can the page limit for this be raised ? |
And
| Page 10 of 12, Paragraph 5 Submission Requirements, Format of Submissions: 1st bullet has a page limitation of 35 pages, yet the third paragraph has a page limitation of 40 pages. Please clarify the page limitations. | Based on the information requested, 35 pages should be sufficient to provide a full response. The page limit will not be increased. The 40 was an error, and this has been corrected to 35. See modified Request for SF 330 on page 8. | ||
| 2 | Will you consider planning resumes to be a component of this contract given the requirements listed in the scope (i.e.;, Space Planner, Medical Facility Planners, Master Planners, Clinical Planners, etc.) | The resumes requested for the initial evaluation to receive an IDIQ are sufficient and will not change. Each subsequent task order Request for SF330 may include different resumes as required. | |
| 3 | Page 6 of 12, Paragraph 4 Submission Criteria, Item #2 Professional Qualifications: The A-E shall demonstrate they are able to sign and stamp each drawing by individuals licensed in any state in the United States for the key positions listed below. Provide Professional License numbers and/or proof of Licensure. Please clarify what proof of licensure is, and if copies of licenses are required, please exclude them from the page count. This is particularly important for those with multiple licenses. | Each resume will have a section E. RESUMES OF KEY PERSONNEL PROPOSED FOR THIS CONTRACT page, and box 17. CURRENT PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATION (State and Discipline) is where the professional license numbers and information would be listed. If a license number is not provided on section E, a copy of the licensure needs to be provided. Any copy of a license will not be included in the page count. The Request for SF330 has been modified to exclude the copies of licensure from the page count (see revised page 7). | |
| 4 | Page 7 of 12, Paragraph 4 Submission Criteria, Item #2 Professional Qualifications, statement to be provided on SDVOSB Compliance: Is this statement part of SF330 Part I, Section E or is it part of the SDVOSB Documentation file requested? | Due to the difficulty of including this statement within the form margins in section E, this statement is permitted in section H of the SF 330 form. Do not include this statement on the separate SDVOSB company information document as this separate document is not evaluated. The statement must be contained within the SF 330 submission document. The Request for SF 330 has been modified to allow this statement in Section H (see page 4). | |
| 5 | Page 8 of 12, Item 6, Experience in construction phase period services: The requirement states we are to provide project descriptions where the offeror has provided construction period services (CPS) and that these projects may be the same as in Section F. If CPS is a component of our Section F projects, should the CPS scope be presented in the Section F projects? Or only in Section H? If only in Section H, do you require it to be in the SF330 Section F format or may we address as narrative text within Section H? Please advise. | It is advised that all section F project descriptions encompass the entirety of the project, and if CPS was a component then that should be mentioned in section F to demonstrate the experience for Factor 1. Factor 6 is a stand-alone factor aimed to have you describe in detail the CPS experience you have - and that experience may or may not be from the section F projects. This factor will allow you to go into more detail of the CPS experience you have if you use the section F projects. There are additional requirements for Factor 6 that go beyond the five bullets for CPS project experience. |
Section H is a narrative section that can be formatted however you choose, it does not need to conform to section F.
| 6 | Page 9 of 12, Secondary Selection Criteria, Geographic Location: The heading indicates this will be evaluated at the task order level, but this conflicts with words in italics that this criterion is to be used as a tie breaker for the SF330 contract proposal. Since the contract is nationwide, please clarify what is needed for the SF330 submittal. | Geographic location is not being evaluated at the IDIQ level, as indicated by the header. The entire factor, including the italicized language, is reserved for task order SF 330 evaluations only. There is no secondary selection criterion for the IDIQ, and therefore nothing is required to be submitted at this time for this section. |
| 7 | Page 10 of 12, SF 330 PDF is to be submitted in one email and have a file size no larger than 5MB. Please clarify if this one email includes the separate pdf for the SDVOSB certification information or if that is to be emailed separately. | One email shall be sent to both points of contact and that one email will contain both the SF 330 and the SDVOSB document with company information. |
| 8 | This is a very large IDIQ sharing $5 Billion capacity, yet in the Professional qualifications only 9 disciplines are asked for. It seems to be missing folks like Cost Estimators, Communications, Interiors, Landscape Arch, Commissioning to name a few. Did some disciplines inadvertently get left off the list? | No, the list of disciplines in the Request for SF 330 are a sampling of the most important and overarching disciplines that will be evaluated now in order to award an IDIQ. Each task order solicitation will include a Request for SF 330 per specific project, which will include a list of disciplines required for that specific project. |
| 9 | Secondary Selection Criteria does not seem to apply as this is an IDIQ not a specific single project at a specific location. Should this criteria be deleted? | Geographic location is not being evaluated at the IDIQ level, as indicated by the header. It is included here to define the scope of how this vehicle will be used and to notify potential IDIQ holders that this criterion will be used, if necessary, on future task orders. It will not be deleted. |
| 10 | Is there an estimate for how many contracts the VA intends to award? | No, there is not an estimated number of awards. The VA intends to make as many awards as possible. |
| 11 | Are there any incumbents for this nation-wide IDIQ? If so, who are the incumbent firms? | No, there is not a current nationwide MATOC for A-E services for there to be incumbents. |
| 12 | Does this nationwide PCAC contract replace any existing IDIQs for individual VISNs? | No. |
| 13 | Does the VA plan to continue using any VISN IDIQs that are still valid or do they plan to transition to only using this PCAC IDIQ? | This nationwide MATOC will be a non-mandatory vehicle for use by any VHA contracting office with an A-E requirement within scope. The use or non-use of this vehicle will be made on a case by case basis. |
| 14 | Can you clarify the secondary Selection Criteria, and which project location you would like us to measure the driving distance from. | Geographic location is not being evaluated at the IDIQ level, as indicated by the header. It is included here to define the scope of how this vehicle will be used and to notify potential IDIQ holders that this criterion will be used, if necessary, on future task orders. The task order will have a place of performance where this information will become relevant. You do not have to do anything with this at this time. |
| 15 | For a Task Order that issued under this MATOC, how will the VA decide which contract holders receive the request for additional qualifications? | All IDIQ holders will have the opportunity to submit a task order SF 330 or direct the VA to use the annual SF330 on file, if they choose. |
| 16 | Will all contract holders have an opportunity to submit on any task order issued under this MATOC? | Yes. |
| 17 | We’ve seen other nation-wide IDIQs have contract holders select the states where they want to be considered for projects. Will the VA consider a similar approach and have a form for contract holders to select states where they want to work? This could benefit the VA by minimizing the number of qualifications the VA would have to evaluate in order to award each task order. | No, the VA will not be conducting a geographic interest survey for designs. If you do not wish to participate in a certain task order project, do not submit an SF 330 for consideration. |
| 18 | We would like the ability to present at least 2 personnel for each discipline, as well as provide for additional disciplines beyond the key positions listed to account for the some of the services listed in the statement of work. | You are free to use your 35 pages how you wish but please note that resumes for additional personnel beyond the key personnel listed are permitted but will not be evaluated to the extent as the ones listed. The list of disciplines in the Request for SF 330 are a sampling of the most important and overarching disciplines that will be evaluated now in order to award an IDIQ. Each task order solicitation will include a Request for SF 330 per specific project, which will include a list of disciplines required for that specific project. |
| 19 | For task order RFQs, will you be favoring teams where their main office is in the general area of the project site or will you be looking at branch office locations too? | As stated in the Secondary Criterion header, the distance from a firm's office (branch or otherwise) to the project is only evaluated for a tie breaker scenario. Otherwise, actual physical distance to a site is not taken into consideration beyond knowledge of the locality or other relevant past performance with similar site conditions. |
| 20 | Since there is such a large monetary amount associated with these contracts, will you be favoring mentor-protege JVs/ SDVOSB JVs, who tend to have a larger in-house capacity, versus SDVOSB firms who prime themselves? | There is no favoring or additional credit given for joint ventures. |
| 21 | Would an SDVOSB mentor-protege JV with multiple office locations nationwide receive task order RFPs for VAMCs in proximity to each one of those offices, or will they only receive task order RFPs for VAMCs in proximity to the JV’s primary office? | All IDIQ holders will receive task order Request for SF 330s. |
| 22 | What is the weighting for the primary selection criteria—or is everything weighted equally? | As stated in the request, the factors are in descending order of importance. |
| 23 | Do you want other disciplines besides the ones listed as key positions identified on an organizational chart? | The level of detail in the organizational chart is up to the submitting firm. |
| 24 | Since there was no Industry Day offered to go over this solicitation and answer questions, will the due date for our responses be extended to allow us time to review the RFIs for clarity and adjust our submissions accordingly? | There will not be a due date extension. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .