Sect 2.1 Cont SF 1449–Fort Worth TX.pdf

CONTINUATION OF SF-1449, BLOCK 20

SCHEDULE OF SUPPLIES/SERVICES

The contractor shall be capable of providing community-based outpatient substance use disorder and mental health treatment services to male and female Adults in Custody (AICs) in community placement residing in a Residential Reentry Center (RRC), on home confinement, or on Federal Location Monitoring or, if applicable, reporting to a Day Reporting Center, in Fort Worth, Texas.

Thes services are needed within a six (6) mile radius of Fritz G Lanham Federal Building, 819 Taylor Street, Fort Worth, Texas, 76102 and within a half (½) mile to a bus stop. This requirement will ensure the contractor is located within walking distance of public transportation, AICs are not subjected to walking long distances in inclement weather, and accountability of AICs is maintained at the performance site(s).

All references to Residential Re-Entry Center (RRC) and Community Correctional Center (CCC) shall be treated equally for the purpose of this contract.

The performance period for the resulting contract will be a one-year base period (to begin upon the effective date of contract award) and four additional one-year option period. The anticipated total contract period is five years. The anticipated performance start date is May 1, 2025.

Services are to be delivered in-person at performance site(s) meeting the solicitation restrictions and may also be provided by telehealth, according to SOW requirements. Telehealth is defined as audio-visual, two-way interactive communication. Audio-only services are allowed in limited circumstances and requires pre-approval. The method of service delivery is contingent on the requirements of the contract, contractor capabilities, accessibility and technical availability of the AIC, and the type of service being rendered, e.g., intake and clinical assessments must be provided in-person, unless preauthorized on a case-by-case basis. The use of telehealth for the delivery of services must not be simply for the sake of convenience for the contractor or the AIC but based on sound clinical judgment, resulting in a treatment delivery of both in-person and telehealth services, as defined above, with very limited or no audio-only services taking place.

Services requested are: Substance Use Disorder Treatment Planning and Follow-up, Substance Use Intake Screening, Substance Use Disorder Individual Counseling, Substance Use Disorder Intake Assessment and Report, Co-occurring Intake Assessment and Report, Substance Use Disorder Group Counseling, Substance Use Disorder Relationship and Parenting Counseling, Mental Health Treatment Planning and Follow-up, Mental Health Intake Screening, Mental Health Intake Assessment and Report, Psychiatric Evaluation and Report, Crisis Intervention Evaluation and Report, Mental Health Individual Counseling, Mental Health Relationship and Parenting Counseling, and Mental Health Medication Monitoring and Report.

All treatment services are to be provided by clinicians who currently hold a professional license to practice independently, without supervision, in the state of Texas.

COMMUNITY TREATMENT SERVICES DECISIONAL RULE CRITERIA BEST VALUE

Each proposal will be initially reviewed to determine that all document submission requirements listed under Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors-Commercial Items, are met. By using the documentation submitted with each proposal, an initial review will also be conducted to determine whether it meets the minimum requirements contained in the Decisional Rule Criteria below. Any proposal not meeting these criteria may not receive any further consideration for award.

Proposals must clearly demonstrate at the time of submission, unless otherwise stated, the capability to meet the Decisional Rule Criteria below. Proposals will be rated on a best value basis based on the Decisional Rule Criteria. In addition, offerors may be eliminated from the competition based on a competitive range determination if the proposal submitted does not represent the best value to the Government.

Based on the Decisional Rule Criteria below the Government will award the contract to the proposal that offers the best value to the Government. Technical and Past Performance when combined (non-Price), are significantly more important than Price. In the non-Price areas, Technical is more important than past performance.

The source selection authority shall determine the relevance of similar past performance information [FAR 15.305(a)(2)(ii)].

The Government will assign an adjectival rating to each of the factors/sub factors as identified as well as assigning an overall adjectival rating to each of the evaluation areas. The adjectival rating depicts how well the quote meets the evaluation areas/factors/subfactors and solicitation requirements. The adjectival definitions are defined below:

Rating Criteria

Exceptional -Exceeds requirements of solicitation in many areas.

-Benefits to the Government are identifiable.

-Significant strengths exist.

-No weakness or deficiencies exist.

Very Good -Meets requirements of solicitation.

-Exceeds requirements in some areas.

-Benefits to the Government are identifiable.

-Problems may exist, but are minor, and may be resolved through discussion.

-One or more significant strengths exist.

-No deficiencies exist.

-Weaknesses may exist, but none are considered significant and are easily correctable.

Satisfactory -Meets requirements of solicitation.

-Some minor problems exist but are resolved through discussion.

-Strengths may exist.

-If deficiencies exist, can be easily resolved.

-The weaknesses are correctable.

-Proposal shows a satisfactory solution for meeting the needs and objectives of the program.

Marginal -Does not meet some requirements of solicitation.

-Identified problems may result in a negative impact on service delivery (a negative impact on the Government).

-Problems are serious but can be resolved through discussions.

-Weaknesses/deficiencies outweigh any strength that may exist.

-The weaknesses/deficiencies are difficult to correct.

-Proposal shows a marginal solution for meeting the needs and objectives of the program.

Unsatisfactory -Fails to meet most requirements of solicitation.

-Problems will result in a negative impact on service delivery (a negative impact on the Government).

-Problems are serious, and it is not likely that they can be resolved through discussions.

-There are numerous weaknesses/deficiencies.

-The weaknesses/deficiencies will be very difficult to correct or are not correctable.

-Proposal shows an unsatisfactory solution for meeting the needs and objectives of the program.

DECISION RULE CRITERIA – COMMUNITY TREATMENT SERVICES (CTS)

Community Treatment Services Decisional Rule Criteria Matrix SOW 2022 Fort Worth, Texas

CRITERIA QUOTATION INSTRUCTIONS

STAFFING EVALUATION AREA

1. Factor: Key Personnel - Licensure

This factor evaluates Quoter’s key personnel proposed to meet the solicitation requirements. This includes evaluating all

The following information shall be submitted in the quotation and will be evaluated as meeting the minimum requirements below:

a. The Quoter shall submit the Technical Personnel document personnel providing clinical services meet the appropriate licensure/certification as required by the state authority where the services will be rendered, to practice independently, without supervision. [SOW 5.4] that identifies the position and responsibility of all personnel proposed to meet or exceed the minimum staffing requirements of key personnel in table 1a below. All key personnel and administrative positions must be identified on this document.

b. The Quoter shall submit copies of current and valid professional licenses for key personnel who will provide direct clinical services to Adults in Custody (AICs) while in community placement. Clinical licenses submitted must be listed in table 1b below and must correspond to the respective clinical duties performed.

i. Staff licenses for medical staff (e.g., medical doctor, physician assistant, nurse practitioner) must meet the standards of practice established by the applicable state’s professional regulatory board in the state where services will be rendered.

ii. If submitting a non-medical license that is not listed in table 1b, complete the Mental Health/Behavioral Health Professionals Scope of Practice Summary. Any licenses other than those listed below will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.

iii. If unable to produce an original license, provide a license verification sheet with a copy of a government-issued photo identification card for the staff member.

c. Psychiatric/Medication Monitoring: The Quoter shall submit a Drug Enforcement Agency Controlled Substance Registration Certificate for a qualified practitioner with prescriptive authority who meets the standards of practice established by the state’s professional regulatory board to provide psychiatric evaluations, medication monitoring, and if applicable, MAT services.

[SOW 5.4.5)

STAFFING EVALUATION AREA

2. Factor: Key Personnel – Experience

This factor evaluates Quoter’s key personnel and their experience. Clinical staff should have documented experience providing substance use disorder treatment and/or mental health services to a criminal justice population. For sex offender treatment, clinical staff must have experience working with a sex offender population. [SOW 5.3]

The following information shall be submitted in the quotation and will be evaluated on the degree to which the quoter meets the solicitation requirements and provides a benefit to the Government:

a. The Quoter shall submit resumes for key personnel listed on the Technical Personnel document 1a. Resumes must show documented experience working with a criminal justice population providing substance use disorder, mental health, or sex offender treatment services and must correspond to their respective clinical duties as noted on the Technical Personnel document.

b. Documented experience on a resume must include descriptions of the type of clinical services provided and show prior clinical experience working with AICs providing treatment services or with programs of a similar type or complexity.

Resumes shall not exceed three pages.

OPERATIONAL EVALUATION AREA

3. Factor: Clinical Treatment Standards and Practices

This factor evaluates the quality, comprehensiveness, and innovativeness of the Quoter’s plan to implement and follow expectations for treatment services, which include elements of the following standards.

[SOW 3.2]

1. Treatment Services

2. Assessments

3. Clinician Engagement

4. Frequency of Sessions

5. Standard Session Length

6. Session Breaks

7. Schedules

8. Individual

9. Group Counseling

10. Group Size Limitations

11. Agency Rules

12. Cell Phones

13. Disruptive Behavior

The following information shall be submitted in the quotation and will be evaluated on the degree to which the quoter meets the solicitation requirements and provides a benefit to the Government:

a. The Quoter shall provide a plan which describes their approach for delivering Community Treatment Services. The Quoter shall describe the procedures and practices they will employ to meet the solicitation requirements.

b. The Quoter shall ensure the plan is relevant to the requirements but must not merely restate or paraphrase the Statement of Work requirements, as this will be found unacceptable.

c. The intent of this requirement is to evaluate Quoter’s delivery of services to AICs in the community according to elements of the standards in the SOW.

d. It provides an opportunity for Quoter to describe the capabilities of their organization in performance of the contract to offer a more comprehensive and supportive environment in the delivery of treatment services for AICs in the community.

The plan shall not exceed seven pages.

14. Favors and Items of Value

15. Immediate Crisis Intervention Plan

16. Continuing Contract Performance During A Government Shutdown, Pandemic, Influenza, or Other Nation Emergency

FACILITY EVALUATION AREA

4. Factor: Proposed Location(s)

The factor evaluates the Quoter’s performance site(s) meet the specified restrictions, space requirements, ADA compliance guidelines, and do not present safety risks to the community. [SOW 7.1 & 7.2.1]

The following information shall be submitted in the quotation and will be evaluated as meeting the minimum requirements below:

a. List addresses for all proposed performance sites, including subcontractors, where the following services will be provided: Substance Use Disorder and Mental Health Services, which must be within a 6 mile radius of the Fritz G Lanham Federal Building, 819 Taylor Street, Fort Worth, Texas, 76102 and within 1/2 mile access to public transportation.

b. Submit a deed, lease, bill of sale, option or intent to lease, or option to buy in the name of the Quoter, or subcontractor, if applicable, for all addresses listed in 4a.

i. Acceptable proof of intent to lease must address, at a minimum, the following provisions: names of the parties (landlord and prospective tenant), property details, including location, proposed terms of lease, desired start and end dates, condition of premises, i.e., space is being leased in “AS IS” condition or will require either party to build out the space, and signature of both parties.

c. Describe how individual and group rooms at the proposed performance site(s) will be private and allow for confidentiality during treatment sessions. [SOW 7.1.1]

d. Submit an office diagram (see attached example) for each proposed performance site listed in 4a. The diagram must identify all rooms that will be used for counseling space and services, i.e., individual, group, or psychiatric treatment rooms, as well as space used for a waiting, lobby or reception area.

The location of the restroom facilities should also be identified. [SOW 7.1.1]

i. Specify on the office diagram the number of individuals each group room can comfortably accommodate.

Therapeutic group rooms must be primarily dedicated to treatment or reserved for outpatient community treatment services.

e. Complete and submit the attached Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Checklist for each proposed performance site listed in 4a.

[SOW 7.1.1]

f. Complete and submit the attached Local Areas of Concern document for each proposed performance site listed in 4a.

This document must identify the following areas of concern that are within: 500 feet. This must include the same space and/or same building, of each proposed performance site, and include a plan to mitigate risk to children and other vulnerable populations:

i. Schools, day-care centers, playgrounds, developed or improved parks, athletic fields, churches, school bus stops, and any facilities/businesses that primarily care for/educate/entertain minors or other vulnerable populations.

[SOW 7.2.1]

Past Performance

The past performance area addresses the Government’s confidence in the offeror’s probability of successfully performing the effort as proposed based on their record of performance in current and past relevant contract efforts. The Past Performance evaluation will be accomplished by reviewing aspects of the offeror’s relevant present and recent past performance, focusing on and targeting performance that is relevant to the Past Performance factors outlined below. The Past Performance information is critical to the Government’s evaluation. More recent, more relevant Performance information will have a greater positive impact on the Past Performance evaluation than less recent, less relevant performance. The Contract Officer will be responsible for making final evaluation decisions regarding past performance.

The Government may consider efforts performed by the offeror for agencies of the federal, state, or local governments and commercial customers as potentially relevant to the Past Performance evaluation. Where relevant performance record indicates performance problems, the Government will consider the number and severity of the problems and the appropriateness and effectiveness of any corrective actions taken (not just planned or promised). The Government may review more recent contracts or performance evaluations to ensure corrective actions have been implemented and to evaluate their effectiveness. Offerors without a record of relevant company past performance or for whom information on Past Performance is not available will not be evaluated favorable or unfavorable on Past Performance and will be considered Neutral.

The Government will assign an adjectival rating to each of the past performance factors, as well as assign an overall adjectival rating to past performance. The adjectival rating depicts how well the offeror meets the solicitation requirements. Technical and Past Performance when combined are significantly more important than price. In the Non-Price areas, Technical is more important than Past Performance.

The source selection authority shall determine the relevance of similar past performance information [FAR 15.305(a)(2)(ii)].

The adjectival ratings are defined below:

Exceptional: Offeror’s past performance exceeds many of the requirements of the program. Their past performance shows they have an exceptional record for exceeding the needs and objectives of the program.

Very Good: Offeror’s past performance exceeds some of the requirements of the program. Their past performance shows they have a very good record for exceeding some of the needs and objectives of the program.

Satisfactory: Offeror’s past performance satisfies the requirements of the program. Their past performance shows they have a satisfactory record for meeting the needs and objectives of the program.

Marginal: Offeror’s past performance does not satisfy some of the requirements of the program.

Their past performance shows they have a marginal record of meeting the needs and objectives of

Unsatisfactory: Offeror’s past performance fails to meet the requirements of the program. Their past performance shows they have an unsatisfactory record of meeting the needs and objectives of

The specific Past Performance Evaluation Factors are described below and are all equal in importance. Each factor considers the Offeror’s record of performance and level of success in:

Factor 1: Treatment Services- This factor evaluates the contractor’s timeliness in conducting intake screening and/or assessments, quality of counseling services, quality of treatment related documents (i.e., assessments, treatment plans, monthly progress reports), ability to deliver services that are compatible to the Bureau of Prison’s (Bureau) philosophy and approach, ability to provide counseling space conductive to counseling, and their adherence in providing the type and frequency of counseling services directed by the Bureau

Factor 2: Communication- This factor evaluates the contractor’s flexibility, pro-activeness, professionalism, and cooperation in their relationships with Community Treatment Services (CTS) staff, RRC’s, the U.S. Probation office, or other companies. This factor also includes an evaluation of the contractor’s compliance in reporting accountability issues, behavior concerns, and staffing difficult cases timely with the CTS or other staff.

Factor 3: Administration – This factor evaluates the contractor’s accuracy and timeliness of bill submissions, maintenance of inmate treatment files, responsiveness to requests, and technical direction as provided by the CTS or other staff. This factor also includes an evaluation of the contractor’s compliance with licensure and certification requirement of all staff providing services to inmates, and participation in Bureau contractor events.

PRICING

Pricing will be evaluated for price reasonableness and cost realism. The Government will not specifically score or rate the offeror’s price. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s prices to ensure it is reasonable. The offeror’s evaluated price will be assessed against the evaluation results of the Non-Price areas in conducting possible tradeoff analysis and determining the best value to the Government. Technical and Past Performance when combined are significantly more important than price. The offeror’s Price, although of lesser importance than Technical and Past Performance, might contribute substantially to the SSA’s contract award decision. As the offeror’s offer becomes more equal in the non-price factors, the overall price of the entire contract will be given greater importance.

Prices offered to the Government shall be as low as or lower than those charges to the supplier’s most favored customer for comparable quantities under similar terms and conditions, in addition to any discounts offered for prompt payment.

Please complete the chart below with total offer price for the base period and each option year.

Year Total

Base Period $

Option Year 1 $

Option Year 2 $

Option Year 3 $

Option Year 4 $

Six Month Extension $

Total of All Years $

DELIVERIES

In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 16.505, and the clause located in FAR 52.216-18, Ordering any supplies or services to be furnished under this contract shall be ordered by issuance of task orders by a warranted Contracting Officer in the CTS Contracting Office.

BILLING INFORMATION

The Government will make payment monthly via Electronic Fund Transfer. Invoices with the contract number should be submitted electronically to BOP-RSD-CRBCTS-BILL-DAL-S@bop.gov.

Contractors that are classified as a small business are required to indicate their small business size status on each invoice submitted for payment.

AWARD WITHOUT DISCUSSIONS

Offerors are advised an award may be made without discussions. The Contracting Officer cannot overemphasize the necessity for the initial proposal of an offeror to provide the Government with sufficient information identifying the offeror's best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint.

FUNDING

Funds are not presently available for this solicitation. No award will be made under this solicitation until funds are made available and confirmed in writing by the contracting officer. The Government reserves the right to cancel this solicitation at any time, either before or after the closing date. In the event of cancellation, the Government shall have no obligation to reimburse any offeror for any costs incurred in connection with the preparation or submission of its proposal.

mailto:BOP-RSD-CRBCTS-BILL-DAL-S@bop.gov