W9127S-16-R-6000-01.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to incorporate changes as detailed in the follow ing Summary of Changes and to incorporate the ProjNet Questions and Answ ers into the solicitation. Changes are in bold and italicized. All other terms and conditions remain the same.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 45

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 04-Aug-2016

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

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X W9127S-16-R-6000

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

06-Jul-2016

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

04-Aug-2016

CODE

CONTRACTING DIVISION

USACE, LITTLE ROCK (W9127S)

700 W. CAPITOL AVE, RM 7315

LITTLE ROCK AR 72201-3225

W9127S 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W9127S-16-R-6000

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SECTION 00 11 00 - SF1442 AND CLIN SCHEDULE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 21 00 - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS & NOTICES TO OFFERORS

The following have been added by reference:

52.222-33 Alt I Notice of Requirement for Project Labor Agreement (May

2010) Alternate I

MAY 2010

The following have been deleted:

52.222-33 Alt II Notice of Requirement for Project Labor Agreement (MAy

2010) Alternate I

MAY 2010

SECTION 00 22 10 - PHASE 1 OF A 2 PHASE DESIGN BUILD SELECTION PROCESS

The following have been modified:

PHASE I INFORMATION

SECTION 00 22 10

PHASE I PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION CRITERIA

PHASE I – GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

1. INQUIRIES

OFFEROR'S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS:

Questions and/or comments relative to these documents should be submitted via e-mail to:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Little Rock District ATTN: Bettye Lou Mahoney 700 W. Capitol Ave, Rm 3410 Little Rock, AR 72201

Phone: 501-340-1056 Email: bettye.l.mahoney@usace.army.mil mailto:bettye.l.mahoney@usace.army.mil

BIDDER INQUIRY:

Technical inquiries and questions relating to proposal procedures and bonds are to be submitted via:

Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet at http://www.projnet.org/projnet

To submit and review bid inquiry items, bidders will need to be a current registered user or self-register into system.

To self-register go to web page identified above, click BID tab select Bidder Inquiry, select agency USACE, enter Key for this solicitation listed below, and your e-mail address, click login. Fill in all required information and click create user. Verify that information on next screen is correct and click continue. From this page you may view all bidder inquiries or add inquiry.

Bidders will receive an acknowledgement of their question via email, followed by an answer to their question after it has been processed by our technical team.

The Solicitation Number is: W9127S-16-R-6000

The Bidder Inquiry Key is: 7PXPCK-ET7MGY

The Phase I Review is open from July 7, 2016 through July 22, 2016

The Bidder Inquiry System will be unavailable for new inquires ten (10) calendar days prior to proposal submission in order to ensure adequate time is allotted to form an appropriate response and amend the solicitation, if necessary.

Offerors are requested to review the specification in its entirety, review the Bidder Inquiry System for answers to questions prior to submission of a new inquiry.

The call center operates weekdays from 8AM to 5PM U.S. Central Time Zone (Chicago). The telephone number for the Call Center is 800-428-HELP.

Offers will NOT be publicly opened. Information concerning the status of the evaluation and/or award will NOT be available after receipt of proposals.

Oral explanations or instructions are not binding. Any information given to an Offeror which impacts the solicitation and/or offer will be given in the form of a written amendment to the solicitation.

As this is a competitive negotiation acquisition, there is no public bid opening and no information will be given out as to the number of Offerors or the results of the competition until all awards are made.

2. DIRECTIONS FOR SUBMITTING PROPOSALS:

Submit proposals to:

CONTRACTING DIVISION

USACE, LITTLE ROCK (W9127S)

700 W. CAPITOL AVE, ROOM 7315

LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201-3225

Facsimile (fax) proposals will not be accepted.

http://www.projnet.org/projnet

The Packaging:

The Proposals shall be marked:

“Proposals for Solicitation Number: W9127S-16-R-6000-PHASE I- AFMSA, MATOC DBIO CONSTRUCTION

SERVICES “DO NOT OPEN”

Submission Deadline:

Offer Closing Date: August 16, 2016, Offer Closing Time: 2:00PM CT Proposals shall be received by the Corps of Engineers no later than the time and date specified.

Submission Format:

Cover Sheet & Table of Contents. Phase I Proposals shall consist of one volume. A cover sheet identifying the Offeror (name, address, point of contact) and solicitation number shall be provided. The second sheet shall be a table of contents. The proposals shall contain a detailed table of contents. Offers that violate these rules unnecessarily delay the evaluation process and may be rejected by the Government after the initial evaluation without receiving any further consideration. Neither the cover sheet nor the table of contents count toward the page limitations.

Tabs. Written proposal materials shall be submitted in standard three-ring loose‐leaf binders. Proposals shall be tabbed and labeled as specified in a manner to afford easy identification from a Table of Contents.

Font Size. Shall not be less than 10 point.

Sheet Size. Shall be 8‐1/2 inches x 11 inches; however, if drawings, charts, or other graphics are submitted, sheets no larger than 11 inches x 17 inches and folded to 8‐1/2 inches x 11 inches shall be used. Sheets that are 11 x 17 inch will be counted as two 8‐1/2 inch x 11‐inch sheets against the page limit. All sheets shall be dated and numbered.

Page Limits. Pages will be double‐sided and each page shall be identified with the appropriate page number centered at the bottom of the page. The proposal shall not exceed the page limits specified in the Submission Requirements of each technical factor. The Government will not review any information in excess of the page limits or information submitted in an appendix or attachment to the proposal. The Offeror shall not submit verbatim sections of this solicitation as part of their proposal. Offers that do not meet these requirements may be subject to rejection.

Number of Copies. Offerors shall submit one (1) original and seven (7) hard copies of their proposal with seven (7) electronic copies (CDs).

PHASE I ‐ SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

GENERAL REQUIREMENTS:

The proposal shall describe the capability of the Offeror to perform the program requirements. The proposal should be specific and complete in every detail; and should be prepared simply and economically, providing a straightforward and concise description of capabilities to satisfactorily perform the requirements. The proposal should be practical, legible, clear, and coherent.

In order to effectively and equitably evaluate all proposals, the Contracting Officer must receive information containing sufficient detail to allow review and evaluation by the Government. Proposal clarity, organization, and cross-referencing are mandatory. Failure to submit and organize proposals as requested may adversely affect an Offeror's evaluation.

Proposals shall not include any cost information and shall not exceed the page limits described. Provide all information in tabbed sections. Appendices and attachments are not permitted and will not be evaluated.

No technical designs, prices/costs or detailed technical illustrations are required or requested and will not be evaluated.

PHASE I – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL FACTORS

Volume 1, Tab A – Factor 1: Relevant Qualifications & Experience Volume 1, Tab B – Factor 2: Management Approach Volume 1, Tab C – Factor 3: Technical Approach Volume 1, Tab D – Factor 4: Past Performance Volume 1, Tab E Required Proposal Documents

Weight among technical factors for Phase I:

FACTOR LOCATION DESCRIPTION RELATIVE IMPORTANCE

Factor 1 Vol. 1, Tab A Relevant Qualifications &

Experience Factors 1 and 4 are of equal importance and are more important than Factors 2 and 3.

Factor 2 Vol. 1, Tab B Management Approach Factors 2 and 3 are of equal importance and are less important than Factors 1 and 4.

Factor 3 Vol. 1, Tab C Technical Approach Factors 2 and 3 are of equal importance and are less important than Factors 1 and 4.

Factor 4 Vol. 1, Tab D Past Performance Factors 1 and 4 are of equal importance and are more important than Factors 2 and 3.

Format and Content of Volume 1 and List of Tabs: Volume 1 shall be appropriately labeled as such and shall be organized as indicated in the following chart:

PHASE I – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

VOLUME 1 – Submit an “Original” and seven (7) hard copies and seven (7) digital CD copies TAB Contents of the Phase I – Technical Proposal A Factor 1: Relevant Qualifications & Experience B Factor 2: Management Approach C Factor 3: Technical Approach D Factor 4: Past Performance

E REQUIRED PROPOSAL DOCUMENTS

E1 Standard Form (SF) 1442, Proposal Cover Sheet and Acknowledgement of Amendments

(SF30)

E2 Proposal Data Sheet (Attachment 1) E3 Agreement with Non-Government Advisors

FACTOR 1 – RELEVANT QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE (VOL 1, TAB A)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: Page Limit: Six (6) Pages. Submit five (5) project examples that communicate recent and relevant experience completed by the proposed team members. Recent means projects completed, or in progress with at least 80% construction in place, within 5 years from the date of this solicitation. Relevant means projects that are predominately self-performed on-site by the Prime Contractor and similar to the projects outlined in the following program description:

Most projects (task orders) range between $750K and $75M with an average performance period of 2-4 years. The scope of the work includes “cradle-to-grave” services such as design, construction, outfitting, excessing, moves (aka “transition”), and demolition and will be predominately healthcare facilities such as inpatient care, outpatient clinics, medical research and labs, outpatient rehabilitation, dental, veterinary, pharmacies, etc. Most projects will be required to meet a minimum of LEED Silver certification, range between 20,000-400,000 SF, and involve either multi-phased renovation projects all while maintaining on-going healthcare operations or new construction. It is estimated that approximately six (6) to twelve (12) task orders will be executed annually so contractors may be required to simultaneously delivery multiple projects at different locations. Projects will be mostly for Air Force clients, but other Federal/Department of Defense clients (such as Army) may also use the contract so familiarity with DOD criteria is required. Using integrated project delivery (IPD) principles and Lean processes, the contractors and their partners/subcontractors will be required to work closely with multiple stakeholders to include users, owner and installation representatives, government subject matter experts, architectural review boards, etc.

At a minimum, communicate relevant experience by outlining: the cost of the project (i.e. ><$12M small business, >$12M large), the date of project; performance period and percent complete (i.e. 2-4 years, 80% complete); scope to include facility type (hospital, clinic, dental, veterinary treatment, lab etc.), the work involved (design, construction, outfitting, etc.), and type of work (new construction, renovation, additions); project team to include client &/or agency (Kaiser, USACE, Air Force, VA, Sutter Health, etc.) and types of key subcontractors involved in the execution; and the project delivery method used (DBB, DB, DB via IPD (e.g. IDBIO), CM at Risk, etc.) and criteria used to design the facility.

Offerors representing the combining of two or more companies for the purpose of this RFP must describe the nature of the association; indicate whether the firms have experience working together in design-build-outfitting ventures, including how long and how many projects. If the Joint Venture (JV), or teaming arrangement, has little or no recent and/or relevant projects performed, then each member of the teaming arrangement and/or JV may provide a combined total of five projects.

EVALUATION CRITERIA: The Government will use recent and relevant specialized experience to assess the Offeror’s probability of successfully performing the scope of work described in this RFP. For this solicitation, the government considers the more projects that align with the features outlined in the above program description, the more likely the contractor will successfully perform in this program. Healthcare facility renovation qualifications and experience is more relevant than new construction. Experience with DOD criteria is more relevant than experience with just private industry criteria, and IDBIO plus transition service experience is considered more relevant than experience with other project delivery methods.

Teaming Arrangements and Joint Ventures. Qualifications and experience of the builder, designer and outfitter listed on Attachment 1, Proposal Data Sheet will be evaluated. Include the list of companies you will team with (Teaming Agreements) and/or Joint Venture with to execute the program and projects. It will not be included in the page count. Provide a copy of the teaming/joint venture agreement in TAB E2. [Note: Any JV approval must be obtained in accordance with Small Business Administration policy].”

FACTOR 2 – MANAGEMENT APPROACH (Volume 1, Tab B)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: Page Limit: Eight (8) Pages. Describe (via illustration and narrative) how your company will manage multiple, concurrent task orders issued under the contract. Provide:

a. Program Management Plan. Provide an illustration of how you would resource the program detailed in the

RFP, who would fill the various roles, and how you would support multiple and simultaneous projects awarded against this contract.

Clearly illustrate the responsibilities and lines of communication and authority relative to your program management team. Describe your plan to interface with program leadership for informational, collaborative and historical purposes. Describe your process for optimizing communication and integration with government and key stakeholders at the Program level.

b. Project Management Plan. Provide a typical project staffing plan and what services the Offeror will self-perform. Include the title of their role and at what stages of the project they will be involved. Include all key personnel, subcontractors and/or consultants. Clearly illustrate the responsibilities and lines of communication and authority relative to your project management team. Describe your process for optimizing communication and integration with government and key stakeholders at the Project level. Describe how contractor key personnel will work with subcontractors to achieve results. Your project management plan should address the following:

1. Change Management Plan. Describe your approach to change management. Include your understanding of how funding, timing, project management tools & systems would be utilized to manage contract changes.

2. Risk Management Plan. Describe key tasks required to maximize integrated project delivery processes to proactively address risks. Describe how you will forecast, mitigate, and address risks as it relates to cost, schedule, scope, quality and safety during a project’s life cycle.

3. Quality Control Plan. Describe your formal process of control quality relative to your management approach.

EVALUATION CRITERIA The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the Program and Project Management Plans:

a. Program Management Plan demonstrates Offeror has applied the right skill sets at the right time during the course of a given program and identifies and meets the requirements outlined in the RFP. Demonstrates Offeror’s understanding of internal and external communication protocols, roles and responsibilities, and integrated design-build and outfitting.

b. Project Management Plan demonstrates Offeror has applied the right skill sets at the right time during the course of a project and identifies and meets the requirements outlined in the RFP. Demonstrates Offeror’s understanding of internal and external communication protocols, roles and responsibilities, and integrated design-build and outfitting.

1. Change Management Plan demonstrates Offeror’s understanding of how change management must be administered and the tools and protocols as they relate to the requirements of the RFP, including funding parameters, to manage the project.

2. Risk Management Plan demonstrates the Offeror’s understanding of the fundamental principles relative to the project delivery methodology to include resources required to proactively manage risk during the life cycle of the project.

3. Quality Control Plan demonstrates the Offeror has a formal process in place to control quality throughout the course of the project.

Factor 3 – Technical Approach (Volume 1, Tab C)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: Page Limit: Ten (10) pages. Submit how you will technically approach the project described in the RFP. Include a narrative and supporting graphics and/or tables. Note: Do NOT show floor or departmental block plans or detailed technical designs; they will not be reviewed or accepted as part of your proposal.

a. Design Development. Describe your design development approach for the project outlined in the RFP to include the process by which you would provide physical space, systems, furniture, and equipment that promotes innovative and lean business practices, operational efficiencies, and patient well-being. Highlight who is involved, the submittal process, and the quality control measures implemented to ensure the project requirements are achieved.

b. Criteria & Standards. Based on the hierarchy of statutes, directives, code, standards, etc. relative to federal, Department of Defense (DoD), military healthcare, and Air Force design, construction & outfitting, describe your understanding of how criteria would be applied in the execution of a Task Order.

c. Continued Operations. Describe and show how you would ensure the required continued operations of the facility during the course of the project.

d. Existing Conditions. Describe your approach to identifying and validating existing field conditions, constraints, and mitigating existing conditions risks as there may be few as-builts, record drawings, or documents available that accurately show existing conditions.

e. Functional Concepts. Graphically depict how the departments will function to include relationships and inter-and intra-dependencies. Include primary and secondary circulation and access points. Address public/visitor, patient, staff and work area flow.

EVALUATION CRITERIA: The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which it demonstrates the Offeror’s understanding of:

a. Design development, documentation required to ensure compliance with the RFP, and a clear illustration of the capability to solve the problem.

b. The complex regulatory environment relative to federal healthcare code, criteria and standards to include document precedence & hierarchy.

c. Infection control, interim life safety, and environment of care while maintaining operations during the course of the project with minimal impact on patients/staff as well as meet the time and phasing constraints outlined in the RFP. Note: Less impact to staff and patients is considered a better approach; the fewer number of departmental moves or phases is considered a better value to the government.

d. Necessary tasks, roles & responsibilities, and timelines for identifying existing conditions and how construction methods commonly used in the past may affect field conditions today.

e. The Contractor has graphically demonstrated an understanding of the functional concepts, to include the departmental and area-specific functions the Government envisions inside the facility. The Contractor has graphically illustrated visitor/public, patient, work, and staff “flow” throughout and/or between the spaces, noted special requirements specific to those spaces, and adjacency requirements within and among the various departments/spaces.

Factor 4 – Past Performance (Volume 1, Tab D)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: Page Limit: Six (6) Pages. Submit references and documentation from at least five (5) customers and/or clients that demonstrate successful performance on similar projects (design-build-outfitting projects, DB via IPD (e.g. DBIO), medical design-build, etc.) completed within the past five (5) years of the date of the solicitation. The Government will use the information to determine the Offeror’s probability of successfully executing the work described in this solicitation.

For each project, list the clients who can certify or confirm the documentation. Include the client's name, title/role, phone number, e-mail address; and project title and construction type. Provide documentation that the Offeror’s work lead to favorable results. References and documentation may include letters, awards, transcripts, post occupancy surveys, evaluations, 3rd party press releases, etc.

NOTE: Teaming arrangements and Joint Ventures. Past performance of the builder, designer, and outfitter will be evaluated as listed on Attachment 1 – Proposal Data Sheet. Include the list of companies you will team with (Teaming Agreements) and/or Joint Venture with to execute the program and projects. It will not be included in the page count. Provide a copy of the teaming/joint venture agreement in TAB E2. [Note: Any JV approval must be obtained in accordance with Small Business Administration policy].

EVALUATION CRITERIA:

Evaluation Criteria:

The Government will evaluate how well the contractor performed on the listed projects and similar types of work.

The Government may contact sources other than those provided by the Offeror for information with respect to past performance. These other sources may include, but are not limited to, relative program performance, Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; and telephone interviews with organizations familiar with the Offeror’s performance, and Government personnel with personal knowledge of the Offeror’s performance capability.

Relevancy

The Government will assess how relevant a contract accomplished by the Offeror is to the proposed contract and will evaluate how well the contractor performed on these contracts. The Government may contact sources other than those provided by the Offeror for information with respect to past performance. These other sources may include, but are not limited to, Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), telephone interviews with organizations familiar with the Offeror’s performance, and Government personnel with personal knowledge of the Offeror’s performance capability. The Government will also assess the degree of success of the Offeror’s compliance with their established Sub-Contracting goals. (FAR Clause 52.219-9)

More relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance.

Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present /past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Confidence

The SSEB will review the past performance information available, to include CPARS and other past performance information deemed relevant, to determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to performance confidence assessment. If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, the Government will only evaluate past performance of the division or unit submitting the offer.

Owners/references may be asked to comment on items such as quality of design or construction, timeliness, management of the work, subcontractor management, including timely payment to subs or suppliers, safety, relations between owner and designer or contractor, level of support for such things as as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, correcting design or construction errors, warranty work, etc.

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), 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), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the Offeror.

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

The confidence rating will be established based on the past performance of the firms or that of its predecessor, if applicable. An entity may not establish past performance based on the past performance of its key personnel apart from that of the entity.

If negative information is received, the Offeror will be given an opportunity to provide input as required by FAR 15.

ACASS, CCASS, and CPARs that are part of the official record will be utilized as if the Offeror has already had an opportunity to respond.

RATING PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS

Substantial Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Limited Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Unknown Confidence (Neutral)

No recent/relevant performance record is available or the Offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

No Past Performance History

In most cases, this problem will not be encountered, since this solicitation allows firms to identify related relevant past performance information for federal, state, and local government contracts, commercial contracts and major sub-contractors. However, in those cases where there is no relevant information, the Offeror’s lack of past performance must be treated as an unknown performance risk, having no positive or negative evaluative significance. Firms without relevant performance history must be neither rewarded or penalized a rating of Unknown (Neutral) confidence will be assigned.

REQUIRED PROPOSAL DOCUMENTS (VOLUME 1, TAB E)

E1 ‐ Standard Form (SF) 1442, Proposal Cover Sheet and Acknowledgement of Amendments (SF30). Proposal must include Offeror’s telephone, number, FAX number, email address, and DUNS number. DUNS number will be used to access Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) Data.

E2: The Proposal Data Sheet (see Attachment 1) must be completed by all Offerors. This document will be used by the Contracting Officer for the Contracting Officer’s Determination of Responsibility done prior to contract award in accordance with FAR Part 9.

If the Offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), include a copy of the JV Agreement. If a JV Agreement has not been finalized/approved, indicate its status. JV Agreements must clearly indicate the percentages of the JV participants, in particular the percent of the controlling party, and a clear delineation of responsibilities and authorizations between the JV parties.

If the Offeror has teaming agreements and/or letters of commitment, please include under this tab.

E3: In accordance with FAR 9.505-4, proposals shall include an agreement with each non-government advisor listed in Section 00 21 00 – Instructions, Conditions & Notices to Offerors that states that they will (1) protect the offerors’ information from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary and (2) refrain from using the information for any purpose other than that for which it was furnished.

The proposal cover sheet is required by FAR 52.215-1 (c) (2) (i)-(v) and a scanned copy must be submitted by all Offerors. This provision, titled “Instructions to Offerors—Competitive Acquisition,” and the format for the proposal cover sheet as shown here:

Format only of Proposal Cover Sheet as follows:

PROPOSAL COVER SHEET

1. Solicitation Number.

2. The name, address, and telephone and facsimile numbers of the Offeror (and e-mail address if available):

3. A statement specifying the extent of agreement with all terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation and agreement to furnish any and requirements IAW the RFP.

4. Names, titles, and telephone and facsimile numbers (and e-mail addresses if available) of persons authorized to negotiate on the Offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation:

5. 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.

END OF SECTION 00 22 10

SECTION 00 44 00 - PROCUREMENT FORMS AND SUPPLEMENTS

The following have been modified:

ATTACHMENT 1

PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

PROJECT TITLE: Solicitation No. W9127S-16-R-6000, Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contracts (MATOC) for Design-Build Construction and Initial Outfitting (DBIO) Services In Support of U.S. Air Force Medical Services Agency (AFMSA)

1. IDENTIFICATION OF OFFEROR

Name of Firm:

Address:

Phone:

Fax:

E-mail:

DUNS #

2. IDENTIFICATION OF JOINT VENTURE PARTICIPANTS/TEAMING

ARRAGEMENT

Provide any other assigned number that identifies the member firm(s) in the CPARS database. If a separate DUNS has been created for a joint venture (J-V) it must also be submitted. Provide a DUNS number for each company identified in any proposed Teaming Arrangement. If the firm is a joint venture or teaming arrangement, list the individual firms and briefly describe the nature of the association. Provide DUNS for each.

Firm 1:

DUNS# :

Firm 2:

DUNS# :

Firm 3:

DUNS# :

Nature of Association:

3. AUTHORIZED NEGOTIATORS

Reference FAR 52.215-1. The Offeror represents that the following persons are authorized to negotiate on its behalf with the Government in connection with this Request for Proposals (RFP).

Name of Person Authorized to Negotiate:

Negotiator's Address:

Negotiator's Telephone:

Negotiator’s E-mail:

SECTION 00 73 00 - SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

The following have been deleted:

252.234-7002 Earned Value Management System MAY 2011

SECTION SF30 - CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

PROJNET QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Bid Inquiry Contractor Report All Inquiries

Project: DBIO MATOC 4.0 Review: DBIO MATOC 4.0 Phase 1 (00001) (sorted by CommentID ) Displaying 83 inquiries.

Id Discipline Sheet Detail Spec

6589898 General N/A N/A Page 23, Factor 1 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) Relevant Qualifications and Experience states "Experience by other corporate entities or JVs not named on the Standard Form (SF) 1442 is prohibited and will not be evaluated." Our Team has very relevant experience with the Integrated Project Deliver Principles incorporating "cradle to grave" services on several projects we completed with a JV partner for the Little Rock MEDCOM group. That Joint Venture has graduated from the Small Business program and is no longer in existence. Since our company was a member of that Joint Venture and we played an integral role in the success of the project, can we use this as Relevant Qualifications and Experience in our proposal?

On: Jul 07 2016.

Government Response. . The following will be deleted by Amendment:"Experience by other corporate entities or JVs not named on the Standard Form (SF) 1442 is prohibited and will not be evaluated".

Teaming Arrangements & Joint Ventures. Qualifications & Experience of the builder, designer, and outfitter will be evaluated as listed on "Attachment 1, Proposal Data Sheet". Include the list of Companies you will Team with (Teaming Agreements) and/or Joint Venture with to execute the Program and Projects. It will not be included in the page count. Reference Tab E2 Submission Requirements. On: Jul 25 2016

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

6590436 General N/A N/A N/A https://www.projnet.org/projnet/binKornHome/index.cfm?strKornCob=BicPublicReportAll&strReportType=AllCont&RequestTimeout=1000&pagStrRowSort=CommentID https://www.projnet.org/projnet/binKornHome/index.cfm?strKornCob=BicPublicReportAll&strReportType=AllCont&RequestTimeout=1000&pagStrRowSort=Discipline https://www.projnet.org/projnet/binKornHome/index.cfm?strKornCob=BicPublicReportAll&strReportType=AllCont&RequestTimeout=1000&pagStrRowSort=Sheet https://www.projnet.org/projnet/binKornHome/index.cfm?strKornCob=BicPublicReportAll&strReportType=AllCont&RequestTimeout=1000&pagStrRowSort=Detail https://www.projnet.org/projnet/binKornHome/index.cfm?strKornCob=BicPublicReportAll&strReportType=AllCont&RequestTimeout=1000&pagStrRowSort=SpecText

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) Please confirm it is acceptable to include the illustration of the Program/Project Management Plan as a graphic directly within the written proposal narrative, rather than a separate 11x14 tabloid?

On: Jul 07 2016.

Government Response. . It is acceptable to include the graphic within the narrative portion of the proposal. On: Jul 25 2016

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

6590437 General N/A N/A N/A Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) For Factor 4, Past Performance, is the intent to submit references and documentation specifically for the projects included in Factor 1, Tab A, or may we provide references and documentation for clients outside of those projects provided in Factor 1, Tab A?

Government Response. . Offerors are permitted to provide references and documentation for clients outside of this projects provided in Factor 1. On: Jul 25

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

6590439 General N/A N/A N/A Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) Page 28 of the RFP lists the following under Tab E1 "Proposal Data Sheet (See the format provided as Attachment 1). Proposal must include Offeror's telephone, number, FAX number, email address, and DUNS number. DUNS number will be used to access Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) Data." Please confirm the intent is for this content to be included in E2 instead.

Government Response. . The intention was for the Proposal Data Sheet to be included under Tab E2. The reference to the Proposal Data Sheet will be removed from Tab E1 in a forthcoming amendment. On: Jul 25 2016

6590440 General N/A N/A N/A Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) Please confirm that the Proposal Cover Sheet, as required by FAR 52.215-1 (c ) (2) (i) (v) and described on page 29 of the RFP is to be submitted as the first page of the proposal prior to the Table of Contents.

Government Response. . The intention was for the Proposal Data Sheet to be included under Tab E2. The reference to the Proposal Data Sheet will be removed from Tab E1 in a forthcoming amendment. On: Jul 25 2016

6590443 General N/A N/A N/A Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) Per page 29 of the RFP, we understand that we are to include an agreement with each non-government advisor listed in Section 00 21 00. We respectfully request the government provide contact information for each non-governmental advisor so that we can obtain these executed agreements.

Government Response. . Allison Keck allison@form-hc.com 530-305-6593

Sharon Robert sharon.roberts.3.ctr@us.af.mil 210-925-2298

Don Napierala donald.napierala.ctr@us.af.mil 210-925-1601

Cynthia Miller cynthia.miller.9.ctr@us.af.mil 210-925-1485 On: Jul 25 2016

6590446 General N/A N/A N/A Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) Per page 29 of the RFP, we understand that we are to include an agreement with each non-government advisor listed in Section 00 21 00. Will offerors be provided with a template that these governmental advisors should execute, or are we to provide one of our own?

Government Response. . A template will not be provided. On: Jul 25 2016

6590498 General N/A N/A N/A

Page 42 of the RFP has "Attachment 2 – For PHASE 2" in text listed under "3. Authorized Negotiators" of the Proposal Data Sheet. Was the intent for this text to begin at the beginning of RFP page 43 above the Small Business Participation Plan, and for offerors to complete item 3 as part of the Proposal Data Sheet to be submitted with Phase I?

Government Response. . Attachment 2 - For Phase 2 should be on the top of page 43 above the Small Business Participation Plan. Item 3 of the Proposal Data Sheet should be submitted with Phase I On: Jul 25 2016

6592626 General RFP SECTION 00 22 10 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) Will Government revise recency period for projects in progress to being at least 50% complete, rather than 80% complete?

On: Jul 08 2016.

Government Response. . The government requires a minimum of 80% construction completion in order to evaluate if offerors have experience and has placed and executed similar projects. 80% construction completion assumes the project is designed, built and is in the process of being outfitted. On: Jul 25 2016

6592629 General RFP SECTION 00 22 10 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) Page limit is currently set to 5 pages for Factor 1. Can Government increase page limit to 6 pages? This enables five, one-page project examples and one page to include a narrative describing the nature of team associations per the RFP requirement for teams consisting of two or more companies.

Government Response. . Page count for Factor 1 may be increased from 5-pages to 6-pages. On: Jul 25 2016

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

6592631 General RFP SECTION 00 22 10

If our design partner is a key subcontractor with teaming agreement in place, will their project example and past performance information be allowed and evaluated?

Government Response. . The builder, designer, and outfitter will be evaluated as listed on "Attachment 1, Proposal Data Sheet". Include the list of Companies you will Team with (Teaming Agreements) and/or Joint Venture with to execute the Program and Projects. It will not be included in the page count. Reference instructions on the top of Page 29. On: Jul 25 2016

6593608 General RFP, pg. 33 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) Please confirm that there is no pre-proposal conference intended for this procurement, just a site visit for the seed project in Phase 2.

On: Jul 11 2016.

Government Response. . The pre-proposal [on-site] conference will be held as part of Phase 2 only. On: Jul 25 2016

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

6596115 General NA NA NA Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) Factor 1 – Relevant Qualifications & Experience on page 23 of the RFP requests that we include the project team, including the types of subcontractors involved in the execution. Please confirm that by "type" of key subcontractor, the intent is to identify just the trade type for the major key subcontractors used, i.e., mechanical, design, electrical, and that no additional information is required for this item.

On: Jul 12 2016.

Government Response. . Outline key subcontractors you believe to be instrumental and relevant to the types of projects outlined in the program description. On: Jul 25

6596233 Project Management RFP Page 23 of 171 Factor 1 Relevant

Qualifications & Experience

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) RFP Document Solicitation W9127S-16-R-6000 Page 23 of 171 Section Factor 1 Relevant Qualifications & Experience Submission Requirement. Requires the contractor to submit 5 project examples that communicate recent and relevant experience completed by the proposed team members. Is it the government's intent for the contractor to only submit a total of 5 combined projects even if the team members are joined by Prime Subcontractor Agreements in lieu of a JV or Official Teaming Agreement? Would the contractor respond similar to what is provided for a JV with little or no relevant projects performed?

On: Jul 12 2016.

Government Response. . The following will be deleted by Amendment:"Experience by other corporate entities or JVs not named on the Standard Form (SF) 1442 is prohibited and will not be evaluated".

Teaming Arrangements & Joint Ventures. Qualifications & Experience of the builder, designer, and outfitter will be evaluated as listed on "Attachment 1, Proposal Data Sheet". Include the list of Companies you will Team with (Teaming Agreements) and/or Joint Venture with to execute the Program and Projects. It will not be included in the page count. Reference Tab E2 Submission Requirements (pg 29). On: Jul 25

6597316 General N/A N/A N/A Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) Please confirm it is acceptable to provide the functional concept graphic as a graphic directly within the narrative of Factor 3 – Technical Approach, rather than as a separate 11x17 tabloid.

On: Jul 13 2016.

Government Response. . It is acceptable to provide the functional concept graphic directly within the narrative. On: Jul 25 2016

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

6597657 Contracting Pg. 18 agreements with all the non-Government Advisors

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) Pg 18 of RFP says that the requirement will flow down to Subcontractors. Are our Subcontractors required to sign agreements with all the non-Government Advisors and provide copies of the agreements under Tab E3?

Government Response. . Only the prime contractor's agreement with non-government advisors should be submitted under Tab E3. On: Jul 25 2016

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

6597661 General p23 FACTOR 1 – RELEVANT

QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE

FACTOR 1 – RELEVANT QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE (VOL 1, TAB A) – p23 of RFP: Please clarify the statement, "Relevant means projects that are predominately self-performed on-site by the Prime Contractor." Please confirm that this definition of relevant means that you would like most of the projects provided to be performed by the Prime / Offeror.

On: Jul 13 2016.

Government Response. . Predominately self-performed on-site by the Prime Contractor means that the Prime contractor performed the majority of the work. In other words, did not subcontract out the majority of the work. On: Jul 25 2016

6597666 General p23 FACTOR 1 – RELEVANT

QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) FACTOR 1 – RELEVANT QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE (VOL 1, TAB A) – p23 of RFP: Please consider increasing the page limit of this section to 8 pages for the SB response.

This will allow us room to provide project overview/summary and narrative to describe the "nature of the association" of our team since we are combining two or more companies.

Government Response. . The page limit will be increased from 5 pages to 6 pages.

An amendment is forthcoming. On: Jul 25 2016

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

6597674 General p23 FACTOR 1 – RELEVANT

QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) FACTOR 1 – RELEVANT QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE (VOL 1, TAB A) – p23 of RFP: For the SB response, if our team is a combination of two or more firms, please consider increasing the number of projects allowed for the SB team to more than 5 and also increasing the page limit to more than 5.

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

6597681 General p23 FACTOR 1 – RELEVANT

QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE

FACTOR 1 – RELEVANT QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE (VOL 1, TAB A) – p23 of

RFP: Please confirm that "Experience by other corporate entities or JVs not named on the Standard Form (SF) 1442 is prohibited and will not be evaluated" should refer to the Proposal Data Sheet instead of the SF1442.

On: Jul 13 2016.

Government Response. . The following will be deleted by Amendment:"Experience by other corporate entities or JVs not named on the Standard Form (SF) 1442 is prohibited and will not be evaluated".

Teaming Arrangements & Joint Ventures. Qualifications & Experience of the builder, designer, and outfitter will be evaluated as listed on "Attachment 1, Proposal Data Sheet". Include the list of Companies you will Team with (Teaming Agreements) and/or Joint Venture with to execute the Program and Projects. It will not be included in the page count. Reference Tab E2 Submission Requirements. On: Jul 25 2016

6597687 General p26 Factor 4 – Past Performance Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) Factor 4 – Past Performance (Volume 1, Tab D) – pg 26 of RFP: "Past performance of the builder, designer, and outfitter will be evaluated as listed on Standard Form (SF) 1442." Please confirm that this should refer to the Proposal Data Sheet and not the SF 1442.

Government Response. . The following will be deleted by Amendment:"Experience by other corporate entities or JVs not named on the Standard Form (SF) 1442 is prohibited and will not be evaluated".

Teaming Arrangements & Joint Ventures. Qualifications & Experience of the builder, designer, and outfitter will be evaluated as listed on "Attachment 1, Proposal Data Sheet". Include the list of Companies you will Team with (Teaming Agreements) in the page count. Reference Tab E2 Submission Requirements. On: Jul 25 2016

6597694 General p26 Factor 4 – Past Performance…