Section D.2 Method of Award.pdf

SECTION D.2 Method of Award

A. Evaluation of Offers

The Government will award a contract resulting from this Solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the Solicitation will provide the best value to the Government, Total Evaluated Price and other factors considered in accordance with FAR 13.106. In addition to Total Evaluated Price, the following non-price (or “technical”) factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

Phase I Phase II

Factor 1: Past Performance Factor 5: Qualifications of Key Personnel

Factor 2: Sample Design Intent Drawings Factor 6: Presentation on Sample Design Intent Drawings & Sample Furniture Design Submittal

Factor 3: Sample Furniture Design Submittal

Factor 4: Sample Space Requirements Report (SRR)/Workplace Recommendations Report (WRR) Submittals

Advisory Two Phase Selection Approach

An advisory two phase selection will be used and occur as depicted below.

*A notional schedule for the procurement is below (actual dates may differ depending on amendments):

Event Date(s)

RFQ Issued 3/21/24

Pre-Proposal Conference 4/2/24

Phase I Submission Deadline 4/19/24

Advisory Notification 5/17/24

Phase II Submission Deadline 6/21/24

Factor 6 Oral Presentation Scheduling 6/17/24 – 6/21/24

i) Phase I Instructions Interested offerors will submit the information required, in the below Section F. Technical (Non –Price) Factors, for the following factors:

1. Past Performance

2. Sample Design Intent Drawings

3. Sample Furniture Design Submittal

4. Sample Space Requirements Report (SRR)/Workplace Recommendations Report (WRR) Submittals

Advisory Notification The Government will evaluate the Phase 1 factor submissions and score them accordingly. Each offeror will be ranked in order to determine which offeror will be advised to move to the next phase. For those offerors rated most highly and advised to proceed to Phase II of the offer submission process, the Contracting Officer will include the Phase II submission instructions on the advisory notification, including the date, time and exact location of the offeror's scheduled oral presentation. Offeror's who were not among the most highly rated will be advised that they are unlikely to be viable competitors, along with the general basis for the Government’s advisory recommendation. The intent of this advice is to minimize offer development and travel costs for those offerors with little to no chance of receiving an award.

The Government intends to provide multiple offerors with an advisory notification to proceed. However, the Government’s advice will be a recommendation only, and those offerors who are advised not to proceed may elect to continue their participation in the procurement.

The Government does not intend to provide debriefings after the completion of the advisory notifications. Failure to participate in Phase I of the procurement precludes further consideration of an offeror. Phase 2 submissions will not be accepted from offerors who have not submitted Phase 1 offers by the due date and time stated in this solicitation. For those offerors that are rated most highly and advised to proceed to Phase 2, the Contracting Officer will include the Phase 2 submission instructions on the advisory notification, including the date, time, and exact location of the Offeror's scheduled presentation. The Government recommends offerors begin preparation of Phase 2 offers only after receipt of the Phase 1 advisory notice.

Those offerors that received advisory notification not to proceed to Phase II, but regardless choose to proceed to Phase II, shall send an email to Timothy.Novak@gsa.gov, not later than 24 hours after receipt of the advisory recommendation not to proceed, indicating its intent to participate in Phase II. After the

Contracting Officer receives notice from the offeror stating its intent to participate in Phase II despite the Government’s advisory notification not to proceed, the Contracting Officer will send a separate email with Phase II submission instructions within two (2) business days.

ii) Phase II Instructions

Offerors who participate in phase II will submit the information required, in the below Section F. Technical (Non –Price) Factors, for the following factors:

5. Qualifications and Experience of Key Personnel

6. Presentation on the Sample Design Intent Drawings & Sample Furniture Design Submittal

Note: In addition to the Technical (Non-Price) Factors, the pricing sheet (Section D.4 Pricing Worksheet), will be required in Phase II.

Factor 6 Presentation instructions will be included on the advisory notification or email after advisory notification not to proceed. The Government will schedule presentation meetings throughout a period of one week prior to the end of Phase II.

Location: Oral presentations will be held in-person. The order in which offerors will be scheduled will be randomly selected by the Government. The location will be at a Federal facility in Chicago, IL.

Recording: The presentation will not be recorded.

Offeror Participants: The offeror’s presentation team is limited to three (3) employees. Please provide the Contracting Officer with the name, employer/ company, and emails of the participants for the presentation as part of its Phase II submission at least one (1) day before the presentation.

The Government will not ask questions that will invite or allow the offeror to change its offer. The offeror shall not volunteer any information that might be construed as changing its offer.

Basis of Award The Government intends to award multiple indefinite-delivery indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts to the offerors who represent the best value to the Government, Total Evaluated Price and other factors considered in accordance with FAR 13.106. It is important to note, Phase I advisory recommendation is based on technical factors 1-4 and the overall selected contractors for award in Phase II will be based on all factors considered to include price. Using the best value, tradeoff process, the Government will evaluate each offer in accordance with the evaluation criteria in Section F.

Technical (Non –

Price) Factors. Offerors are cautioned that awards may not necessarily be made to the lowest priced offer.

All offerors remaining in phase II, will be notified whether they were chosen for an award by issuance of an SF1449, Contract for Commercial Services. Upon request, the Contracting Officer shall furnish notification to unsuccessful offerors the information required by FAR 5.301. If an offeror requests information on this award, a brief explanation of the basis for the contract award decision shall be provided (see 15.503(b)(2)).

B. Determination of Responsibility

In order to be considered responsible, an Offeror must demonstrate that it meets the requirements of FAR 9.104-1. The Contracting Officer's determination of an Offeror's responsibility or non-responsibility may be based upon any information obtained by the Contracting Officer, and is independent of the evaluation of offers set forth herein.

C. Price Fair and Reasonable

Proposed prices will be evaluated for reasonableness in accordance with FAR 13.106-3(a). Analysis of prices will normally be based on competitive quotations or offers. If only one response is received, price reasonableness will be determined in accordance with FAR 13.106-3(a)(2). The Government reserves the right to request price reductions from each offeror upon receipt of Phase 2 price submission.

D. Unbalanced Prices

All offers must include balanced prices. This Solicitation requires unit prices, option pricing, and the Contracting Officer may reject any offer determined to be unbalanced with respect to such prices or rates. An offer may be deemed unbalanced if the Base Contract Price, unit prices, option prices or bid rates vary so markedly from either the Government estimate or the range of such prices contained in competing offers as to materially reduce the effectiveness of the Total Evaluated Price formula in determining the potential cost of an offer in comparison to other, balanced, offers.

E. Total Evaluated Price

Total Evaluated Price shall be calculated using the prices provided in the Price Proposal to include pricing for options. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

See Pricing Worksheet.

Price Rating Formula (Note: The total evaluated price determined by the formula is for evaluation purposes only. Proposed line item prices and hourly rates are binding and will become part of the contract and will be used as a basis to price task orders issued under the contract.)

Refer to the Pricing Worksheets(Section D.4). Provide per square foot pricing for each line item activity (hereinafter referred to as “line item prices”) listed in the worksheet for the base year and each option year. Each activity is described in the solicitation. There is a worksheet (Section D.4) for three categories based on the total square footage of the project: 0-10,000 sq. ft.; 10,001-30,000 sq. ft., and; 30,0001+ sq. ft..

The base and option year prices will be totaled and averaged. The resulting average price for each line item activity will then be weighted by a percentage based on expected use, which is in turn based on historical use. The weighted number for each activity will then be totaled to derive the total unit price. The total for each of the three categories of total project size will then be weighted by the percentage of expected use, which is in turn based on historical use. The resulting numbers will then be totaled to derive the composite line item price.

For hourly services, the hourly rates for each position for the base year and four option years will be averaged to determine a composite hourly price. The composite prices will then be weighted by a percentage based on expected use, which is in turn based on historical use. The resultant products will be totaled to determine a composite hourly rate price.

The composite line item price and composite hourly rate price will then be added to provide the total evaluated price.

F. Technical (Non –Price) Factors

Offerors must submit the information identified below.

Technical Proposals will be evaluated on the criteria described below:

Evaluation Factor Phase I

1. Past Performance

2. Sample Design Intent Drawings

3. Sample Furniture Design Submittal

4. Sample Space Requirements Report (SRR)/Workplace Recommendations Report (WRR) Submittals

Phase II

5. Qualifications and Experience of Key Personnel

6. Presentation on the Sample Design Intent Drawings & Sample Furniture Design Submittal

Factor 1: Past Performance

Description:

This factor considers the quality of the offeror’s past performance in successfully completing projects similar to those that will be performed under the contract.

References must be submitted for projects that meet the criteria stated below.

Standard for Evaluation:

Past Performance is defined as follows: Past performance is relevant information regarding an offeror’s actions under previously awarded contracts. The criteria on which relevant past performance will be rated includes the offeror’s compliance with the terms and conditions of the contract; overall quality of performance, record of conforming to contract requirements and to standards of good workmanship; the offeror’s adherence to contract schedules, including the administrative aspects of performance;

responsiveness and communication; overall contract performance; and a previous/current customer’s desire to contract with the firm again. The contracts may have been Governmental (Federal, State, or Local) or private sector contracts.

Offerors are responsible for obtaining past performance information prior to submission of offers in Phase I. The Past Performance Questionnaire and Survey appearing in section D.3 of the solicitation shall be completed and submitted by the references directly to the GSA Contracting Officer, Timothy Novak, via email (email address: Timothy.novak@gsa.gov). Questionnaires or surveys received directly from the offeror will not be considered. The email subject line shall be marked “Past Performance Questionnaire – RFQ 47PF0024Q0033.

A “Past Performance Questionnaire/Survey” is included in section D.3 of the solicitation package and must be utilized for this purpose. An optional sample letter is also included to assist in requesting this information. The Past Performance Questionnaire/Survey must be received by the Contracting Officer by the time set for receipt of offers in Phase I.

Past performance will be considered relevant if it meets all of the following criteria:

● The contract was for office space planning, interior design services, or furniture design services for a commercial or government owned space that involved at least 5,000 sq. ft.

● If completed, the contract was completed/active within the past five years.

● If current, the contract is at least 90% complete.

● The offeror cannot use the same reference/contact person or project more than once.

The Government is not required to review more than three references and forms, although it may choose to do so. Should more than three forms be received, the

Government reserves the right to choose which references and forms to include in its evaluation.

In addition to the above, the Contracting Officer may identify and analyze the past performance of the offeror on any other contract that the offeror currently has or had about which the Contracting Officer has knowledge or obtains knowledge, including but not limited to projects listed in the Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). Because of the wide variety of past performance history of individual offerors, the Government is not required to ensure that an equal number of references be obtained for each offeror.

Past performance will be evaluated using confidence intervals that measure the Government’s confidence – based on a review of relevant past performance information including the quantity and quality of the references – in the offeror’s ability to successfully perform the projects that will be covered by the contract:

Substantial Confidence: Based on the offeror’s past performance record, the Government has a high expectation the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence: Based on the offeror’s past performance record, the Government has an expectation the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Limited Confidence: Based on the offeror’s past performance record, the Government has a low expectation the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence: Based on the offeror’s past performance record, the Government has no expectation the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral: No relevant past performance.

For this factor, the Government will not consider past performance information submitted by the offeror regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement. If the offeror is a joint venture, the Government will only consider past performance on projects performed by the joint venture.

Factor 2: Sample Design Intent Drawings

Description This factor considers the offeror’s technical expertise in generating design intent documentation in a suitable format to satisfy the requirements of a typical project. The intent of the drawing package is for use in preparing construction documents.

Submittal Requirements The Offeror must submit the following information from a previously completed project:

Provide one example of each of the items listed below for a project that was at least 5,000 square feet. The drawings and plans should be clear and include all details necessary to communicate the design. The drawings are to be labeled and keyed in such a way that all information necessary to read the drawings is available. The drawing package should include wall types, notes on special space construction, technical information on telephone / electrical specifications and systems furniture componentry and furniture plans.

The submittals shall include the following:

1. Demolition Plan

2. Test Fits/Block Plans

3. Construction Plan

4. Furniture Plan

5. Power/Communication Plan/Equipment Plan

6. Reflected Ceiling Plan

7. Interior Finish Plan

8. Elevation/ Sections

9. Door/Hardware Schedule

10. Typical Legend Sheet

Standard for Evaluation The standard is met when:

The submittal is complete and includes drawings that reference each of the above elements and all information necessary for a clear understanding of the submitted drawings. The standard is exceeded based on the consideration of overall quality and thoroughness of the submittal.

The submittal will be evaluated and assigned an adjectival score, as indicated in the chart below.

ADJECTIVAL

RATING DESCRIPTION

Excellent Proposal significantly exceeds the standard.

Very Good Proposal exceeds, to varying degrees, the standard.

Good Proposal meets, in all respects, the standard.

Fair Proposal has few shortcomings when measured against the standard.

Poor Proposal has major shortcomings when measured against the standard

Factor 3: Sample Furniture Design Submittal

Description This factor considers the offeror’s programming expertise in generating a furniture design services submittal in a suitable format to meet the requirements of a typical project.

Submittal Requirements The Offeror must submit the following information from a previously completed project:

Provide one furniture design submittal that contains the items listed below for a project that was at least 5,000 square feet. The furniture design submittal shall have sufficient detail to communicate the furniture requirements. The furniture design should not be manufacturer specific but designed to guide the furniture dealers in preparing furniture specifications, specification drawings and ultimately, the furniture order. The submittals shall include the following:

1. Furniture typical drawings and generic finishes;

2. Preliminary furniture layouts;

3. Furniture scope document that includes description of salient characteristics;

4. Furniture cost estimate.

Standard for Evaluation The standard is met when:

The submittal is complete and contains all the information necessary for a clear understanding of the furniture requirements. The standard is exceeded based on the consideration of overall quality and thoroughness of the submittal.

The submittal will be evaluated and assigned an adjectival score, as indicated in the chart below.

ADJECTIVAL

RATING DESCRIPTION

Excellent Proposal significantly exceeds the standard.

Very Good Proposal exceeds, to varying degrees, the standard.

Good Proposal meets, in all respects, the standard.

Fair Proposal has few shortcomings when measured against the standard.

Poor Proposal has major shortcomings when measured against the standard

Factor 4: Sample Requirements Report (SRR)/Workplace Recommendations Report (WRR) Submittals

Description This factor considers the offeror’s programming expertise in generating a SRR in a suitable format to communicate the requirement of a project. This report shall quantify the spatial and functional needs of the client in terms of offices, workstations, support space, area factor (circulation and layout), and space utilization rate. The WRR is a detailed extension of the SRR that includes a narrative summary of focus group feedback, survey results and observations made during the onsite visit. It includes recommendations for future workspace changes and proposed change management strategies.

Submittal Requirements The Offeror must submit the following information from a previously completed project:

Provide one example SRR that contains the items listed below for a project that was at least 5,000 square feet. All SRR submittals shall be at 8 ½” x 11” size. The SRR shall quantify the spatial and functional needs of the client in terms of office workstations, support space, area factor (circulation and layout) space utilization rate, and list all construction, finish, HVAC, security, telecommunications, millwork, etc., requirements on a room-by-room basis. The submittals shall include the following:

1. Narrative description describing data collection / intent of each exhibit / general observations / analysis of possible expansion or contraction.

2. Typical / prototypical guidelines of personnel workstations, support / supplemental space, special spaces, storage spaces and above standard finishes /special requirements.

3. Critical internal adjacencies.

4. Personnel space requirements, to include: job titles / function, number of personnel in each title, type of space, square footage allowance, circulation factor, and subtotal of space by organizational unit.

5. Support, Special, Storage and/or Supplemental Space Requirements to include:

square footage requirements, circulation factor, subtotal of space by organizational unit.

6. Summary data to include: total office type space (including square footage per person), total support/special/storage space, functional adjacency diagrams, individual and overall utilization rates.

Provide one example of the WRR that contains a narrative summary of focus group feedback, survey results and observations made during the onsite visit. It includes recommendations for future workspace changes and proposed change management strategies.

Standard for Evaluation The standard is met when:

The SRR and WRR include the above elements and contain all information necessary for a clear understanding. The standard is exceeded based on the consideration of overall quality and thoroughness of the submittal.

The submittal will be evaluated and assigned an adjectival score, as indicated in the chart below.

ADJECTIVAL

RATING DESCRIPTION

Excellent Proposal significantly exceeds the standard.

Very Good Proposal exceeds, to varying degrees, the standard.

Good Proposal meets, in all respects, the standard.

Fair Proposal has few shortcomings when measured against the standard.

Poor Proposal has major shortcomings when measured against the standard

Phase II Factors- STOP here if you are only submitting for Phase I.

Factor 5: Qualifications and Experience of Key Personnel

Description This factor considers relevant experience, knowledge, and expertise of key employees who will be assigned to work on this contract. Education, technical qualifications, and awards are also evaluated.

Note: Offerors must use the key personnel identified in their Technical Proposal for work under the contract. Any changes or substitutions require the explicit approval of the Contracting Officer or Contracting Officer’s Representative.

Submittal Requirements The Offeror must submit the following information:

The Offeror shall identify the employees they propose to fill the key positions listed below and state their roles and responsibilities for work to be performed under the contract.

The Offeror shall provide evidence of the competency, qualifications and related experience of key team members. Provide contact information for a reference who can provide thorough knowledge of the details of the individual’s experience (such as a Client, Project Manager, Building Owner, or Contracting Official associated with a project). The Offeror shall provide resumes for each key team member that clearly indicate their currently held position/title, education, qualifications, professional licensing, personal awards received, and work experience over the last ten (10) years, including job title, work performed, and significant projects. Provide a chart clearly identifying the roles (if any) that key team members held on the projects submitted under the Past Performance factor.

Key team members are defined as follows:

● Project Manager

● Sr. Designer/Space Planner

● Jr. Designer/Space Planner

Standard for Evaluation The standard is met when:

Each of the key team members has the appropriate education, training and experience required to be assigned to this position for work under this contract, and has held up to five comparable positions in the past five (5) years for projects that included space planning, interior design services, furniture design, programming, and the preparation of DIDs and furniture plans. Exception: For the Jr. Designer/Space Planner, at least one comparable position in the past three (3) years for projects that included space planning, interior design services, furniture design, programming, and the preparation of DIDs and furniture plans.

The following key team member(s) shall be qualified under the National Council of Interior Design Qualification (NCIDQ). This includes the NCIDQ certificate.

● Sr. Designer/Space Planner

Preference shall be given to those members having experience on multiple successfully completed projects in comparable positions.

The qualifications and experience of each team member will be given an adjectival score, as indicated in the chart below. If more than one individual is identified for a position, the rating assigned to each will be averaged to provide one score.

ADJECTIVAL

RATING DESCRIPTION

Excellent Proposal significantly exceeds the standard.

Very Good Proposal exceeds, to varying degrees, the standard.

Good Proposal meets, in all respects, the standard.

Fair Proposal has few shortcomings when measured against the standard.

Poor Proposal has major shortcomings when measured against the standard

Factor 6: Presentation on the Sample Design Intent Drawings & Sample Furniture Design Submittal

Description This factor considers the offeror’s programming expertise in generating a Design Intent Drawing and a Furniture Design Submittal. The offeror will provide an onsite presentation of the submittals provided in phase 1, evaluation factors 2 & 3.

Presentation and Submittal Requirements The offeror shall provide a presentation on the submitted Design Intent Drawing and Furniture Design Submittal provided for in phase 1 of the solicitation.

Topics to cover during the presentation include (limited to):

● Brief Introduction limited to introducing each presenter

● Background on the project(s) for both submittals

● Furniture Design Submittal

○ Furniture typical drawings and generic finishes;

○ Preliminary furniture layouts;

○ Furniture scope document that includes description of salient characteristics;

○ Furniture cost estimate.

● Design Intent Drawing

○ Demolition Plan

○ Test Fits/Block Plans

○ Construction Plan

○ Furniture Plan

○ Power/Communication Plan/Equipment Plan

○ Reflected Ceiling Plan

○ Interior Finish Plan

○ Elevation/ Sections

○ Door/Hardware Schedule

○ Typical Legend Sheet

Contractors will not be allowed to discuss anything outside of the limited topics mentioned above. At no time will a negotiation or change to a contractor’s offer be discussed or allowed. If a contractor breaks these rules, they may risk receiving a lower overall score for Factor 6. The Government may ask questions to the presenters to understand the proposed submittals. At no point will a contractor be asked by the Government to revise any element of their offer.

The presentation will be in person at the JCK building in Chicago, IL., and is limited to the aforementioned topics as well as a time limit of 40 minutes and is followed up by a question and answer period of 20 minutes. Presentations will occur during phase 2 and each contractor advised to proceed to phase 2 will receive a meeting invitation for a specific date and time indicated on the advisory notification. Presentation slides may be used but will not be accepted by the Government after the presentation is complete. Scoring will be based solely on the standard for evaluation.

Standard for Evaluation The standard is met when:

The submittal is complete after a scheduled and completed presentation meeting the standards as indicated above in the Presentation Requirements.

CONFIDENCE RATING DESCRIPTION

High Confidence

The Government has high confidence that the contractor understands the requirement and will be successful in performing the contract with little or no Government intervention.

Some Confidence

The Government has some confidence that the contractor understands the requirement and will be successful in performing the contract with some Government intervention.

Low Confidence

The Government has low confidence that the contractor understands the requirement and will be successful in performing the contract even with Government intervention.