23-R-0002 P00003 Conformed Final.pdf

PROJECT TITLE: Multiple Aw ard Task Order Contract (MATOC). This is an indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity type contract to acquire real property repair, maintenance, minor construction, demolition, and w ork plan/non-w ork plans on an as need basis in support of Directorate of Public Works, U.S. Army Garrison and other various customers at Department of Defense locations w ithin the state of Haw aii. Task Orders w ill be aw arded on an "as needed" basis. The government intends to aw ard a minimum of four (4) individual contracts to Women Ow ned Small Businesses (WOSB).

Term of the contract is a one year base period plus four one-year option periods. A one-time Minimum Guarantee for each WOSB contract is $2,000.00 for the base period. The annual maximum combined value for all aw arded contracts w ill be an estimated value of $25,000,000.00 per year. The maximum contract value for the total of all aw arded contracts to include the one year base period, four (4) one year option periods, and a 6-month option in accordance w ith FAR 52.217-8 is $137,500,000.

NAICS code for this acquisition is 236220. The small business size standard for NAICS 236220 is $45,000,000.00.

BRONSON K ABRIGO 808.787-8846

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS

NEGOTIATED

30-Aug-2023

(RFP)

(IFB)

X

CALL:

B. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

See Item 7

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID

3. DATE ISSUED

9. FOR INFORMATION A. NAME

SOLICITATION

NSN 7540-01-155-3212 1442-101 STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 4-85)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(e)

11. The Contractor shall begin performance w ithin _______ calendar days and complete it w ithin ________ calendar days after receiving aw ard, X notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________FAR 52.211-10

12 A. THE CONTRACTOR MUST FURNISH ANY REQUIRED PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS?

(If "YES," indicate within how many calendar days after award in Item 12B.)

X YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and __________1 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specified in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________13 Oct 2023 (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers must be publicly opened at that time.

shall be marked to show the offeror's name and address, the solicitation number, and the date and time offers are due.

B. An offer guarantee X is, is not required.

C. All offers are subject to the (1) w ork requirements, and (2) other provisions and clauses incorporated in the solicitation in full text or by reference.

D. Offers providing less than _______120 calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due w ill not be considered and w ill be rejected.

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

1. SOLICITATION NO.

IMPORTANT - The "offer" section on the reverse must be fully completed by offeror.

4. CONTRACT NO.

7. ISSUED BY CODE

413 CSB

413TH CSB, RCO-HAWAII,

742 SANTOS DUMONT AVENUE

BLDG 108, 3RD FLOOR (WAAF)

SCHOFIELD BARRACKS HI 96857-5026

W912CN

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

03:30 PM (hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NO. 6. PROJECT NO.

8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If Other Than Item 7)

FAX:TEL: TEL: FAX:

W912CN23R0002 152

20B. SIGNATURE

(REV. 4-85)STANDARD FORM 1442 BACK

TO SIGN

NSN 7540-01-155-3212

SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD (Continued) (Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

CODE FACILITY CODE

17. The offeror agrees to perform the w ork required at the prices specif ied below in strict accordance w ith the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in w riting w ithin ________ calendar days after the date offers are due.

the minimum requirements stated in Item 13D. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13D.)

AMOUNTS SEE SCHEDULE OF PRICES

18. The offeror agrees to furnish any required performance and payment bonds.

19. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the solicitation -- give number and date of each)

AMENDMENT NO.

DATE

20A. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN

OFFER (Type or print)

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED:

22. AMOUNT 23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

24. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

CODE

(Insert any number equal to or greater than

20C. OFFER DATE

25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

10 U.S.C. 2304(c) 41 U.S.C. 253(c)

CODE27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY:26. ADMINISTERED BY

(Include ZIP Code)14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR 15. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code)

See Item 14

(Include only if different than Item 14)16. REMITTANCE ADDRESS

30B. SIGNATURE

29. AWARD (Contractor is not required to sign this document.)

document and return _______ copies to issuing office.) Contractor agrees Your of f er on this solicitation, is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award con-to f urnish and deliv er all items or perf orm all work, requisitions identif ied summates the contract, which consists of (a) the Gov ernment solicitation and on this f orm and any continuation sheets f or the consideration stated in this y our of f er, and (b) this contract award. No f urther contractual document is contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be necessary .

gov erned by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and (c) the clauses, representations, certif ications, and specif ications or incorporated by ref er-ence in or attached to this contract.

30A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED 31A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

30C. DATE

(Type or print)

TEL: EMAIL:

31B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 31C. AWARD DATE

BY

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

(Contractor is required to sign this28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT

(M ust be fully completed by offeror)OFFER

W912CN23R0002

Section 00 10 00 - Solicitation

SOLICITATION INFORMATION

SECTION I

OVERVIEW

This defines the criteria, organization, and policies to be used in selecting contractors to provide real property repair, maintenance, demolition, work plan/non-work plans, and minor construction for United States Army Garrison (USAG) Hawaii Areas of Responsibility (AoR), and other various customers as needed.

A. BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The Regional Contracting Office (RCO), Hawaii has a requirement from the Directorate of Public Works (DPW), Hawaii to acquire real property repair, maintenance, demolition, work plan/non-work plans, and minor construction for Army installations on the Island of Oahu and Hawaii under the jurisdiction of DPW. Work may also be required at other military sites as needed.

See USAG Hawaii AoR for known sites.

Locations for work may include, but are not limited to:

Site 1: Helemano Site 2: Schofield Barracks Site 3: Wheeler Army Airfield Site 4: Camp Stover Site 5: Tripler Army Medical Center Site 6: Aliamanu Military Reservation Site 7: Fort Shafter Site 8: Fort DeRussy Site 9: Fort Ruger Site 10: Mokuleia Site 11: Kahuku Site 12: Kaena Point Site 13: Waianae Army Recreation Center Site 14: Pohakuloa Training Area Site 15: Kilauea Military Camp

SECTION II

SOLICITATION PROVISIONS

A. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

1. Introduction: The offeror’s proposal shall be submitted in hard copy and electronic copy as set forth in instructions below. The Request for Proposal (RFP) shall provide the Government address and receipt date for proposal submittal.

Offerors are required to furnish a complete proposal package, addressing any and all factors relevant to the specific requests stated in this Request for Proposal. Failure to submit a complete package by the date and time specified for receipt of offers will render an offer as non- compliant and may not be considered in the evaluation process.

Offer Acceptance Period is in accordance with the closing date and time identified in Block 13, on the Standard Form (SF) 1442. The submission of the documentation in response to this Request for Proposal will constitute the offeror's acceptance of the terms and conditions of the RFP, concurrence with the Statement of Work, and the proposed contract type.

2. Points of Contact:

Contract Specialist: Chelsea Smith, Email: chelsea.p.smith4.civ@army.mil

Risha Walters, Email: risha.o.walters.civ@army.mil Contracting Officer: Mark Dahilig, Email: mark.r.dahilig.civ@army.mil

Bronson Abrigo, Email: bronson.k.abrigo.civ@army.mil

Address: Regional Contracting Office, Hawaii

ATTN: Chelsea Smith/Risha Walters

742 Santos Dumont Road, Bldg. 108, 3rd Floor Wheeler Army Airfield Schofield Barracks, HI 96857

3. Offeror Questions: Interested offerors are urged to submit in writing any questions regarding this RFP to Chelsea Smith and Risha Walters 10:00 am (HST) on 13 September 2023. A Summary of questions received and Government responses will be provided via amendment and posted at SAM.gov. Offerors are responsible for monitoring the website until solicitation closing date for any issued amendments. Questions received after the specified date and time may not be considered or answered.

4. Proposal Content and Format:

a. The offeror’s proposal shall consist of the volumes as identified in paragraph 4.D below. The offeror’s proposal shall be submitted in hard copy and electronic format via PIEE Solicitation Module along with an email notification to Contract Specialist and Contracting Officer referenced in paragraph 2 confirming submission to PIEE Solicitation Module, as set forth below by the date and time specified in Block 13 of the SF1442. Files shall not contain classified data. Font shall be 12 pt. Times New Romand with Normal size (1” all around) margins. The use of hyperlinks in proposals are prohibited.

b. Proposal electronic and hard copy submittals are due on the date specified in block 13A by 1530 (3:30pm) Hawaii Standard Time (HST) to the address referenced in paragraph 2.

I. PIEE Solicitation Module

i. PIEE Solicitation module can be located at https://piee.eb.mil/. An overview of the PIEE Solicitation Module is available at https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/xhtml/wbt/piee/index.xhtml All Vendors can view solicitations in the Solicitation Module by selecting “SOLICITATION SEARCH” in the Award section or “Solicitation Search” under the SUPPORT section at the bottom of the page.

Search for W912CN23R0002 postings. The SAM.gov site will reference back to this module.

ii. The Solicitation Module is a vendor portal for solicitations within the PIEE platform to automate and secure the process for capturing solicitations, attachments, and responses from industry. The Solicitation Module allows vendors to retrieve and respond to solicitations and communicate directly with Solicitation Managers in a secure environment. Vendors choosing to submit an offer/proposal shall submit a request for the Proposal Manager role. Training resources are provided below (there are additional resources available online as well).

Vendor Access Instructions and Account Support Contact Information https://www.acq.osd.mil/asda/dpc/ce/cap/docs/piee/PIEE_Solicitation_Module_Ve ndor_Access_Instructions.pdf .

Proposal Manager Instructions in the Solicitation Module:

https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/sol/Proposal_Manager.pdf.

All PIEE Solicitation Module Web Based Training:

https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/xhtml/wbt/sol/index.xhtml.

The Government strongly recommends that offerors familiarize themselves with the system:

both for retrieving information and to enable them to submit their offers in a timely manner.

iii. The offeror shall establish a Proposal Manager account in sufficient time to access documents and submit offers within the RFP’s submission deadline. The offer closing date and time is identified in Block 13 on the Standard Form (SF) 1442. Do not use the PIEE Solicitation Module to submit classified information. Offerors are strongly encouraged to plan accordingly, submit proposals well in advance of the designated submission deadline, and ensure affirmative receipt of proposals. After successfully adding the Offer, a success message of the submission will be displayed in the Solicitation module and the offer display will collapse. The “message of submission”, a red lined box, will be your confirmation and should state words to the effect of:

“The offer was submitted on 2021-09-22 10:51:07 AM Eastern Daylight Time (2021-09-22

15:51:07 UTC) by Proposal Manager. Please print this page and maintain for your records.” The Solicitation Module automatically tracks the date and time of all submissions. Proposals not received by the designated submission deadline will be regarded as “late” and will not be considered (see FAR 15.208 for further information regarding late proposals).

iv. Offerors are cautioned that individual document size limitations for the PIEE “Solicitations” module are 1.9GB per file; however, there is no maximum total size or quantity limit associated with the collective documents.

v. In the event that the PIEE submission system is inoperable or the Offeror is unable to submit their Proposal via PIEE, Proposals may be submitted via DODSAFE at https://safe.apps.mil/ .

Offerors shall send an email notification to Contract Specialists and Contracting Officer referenced in paragraph 2 confirming submission to DODSAFE.

vi. Hard copies shall be hand delivered by date in SF 1442 Box 13A to the address referenced in paragraph 2 by 1530 (3:30PM) Hawaii Standard Time (HST) to the following authorized personnel:

Mark Dahilig Bronson Abrigo Risha Walters Chelsea Smith Meoldie Clare Jonathan Chong Royce Abcede SSG Rajeev Shrestha Noah Branscom Lorenzo Lopez RCO Hawaii Personnel located at 742 Santos Dumont Road, Bldg. 108, 3rd Floor

Wheeler Army Airfield Schofield Barracks, HI 96857

Hard copies shall follow the same formatting and organization as the digitial copy.

b. Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the Technical requirements or the Statement of Work with a statement of intent to perform does not reflect an understanding of the requirement or capability to perform.

Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each volume. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

c. Each volume shall be submitted in separate files and be clearly numbered with the solicitation number

(W912CN-23-R-0002), offeror name, volume number, the section number (if applicable), and the document name.

See section e. below for format example. Should discussions be conducted, pages revised as a result of discussions shall be of a different color and have revisions clearly marked by highlighting the revised text. Revised pages shall be dated.

d. The following volumes of material shall be submitted. The submittal of an incomplete proposal or failure to provide the required number of copies in the format requested may render the proposal as non-compliant.

Faxed and e-mailed copies of proposals are not acceptable.

Volume Title PIEE Solicitation Module Digital Copy Hard Copy I – Technical 1 Copy 1 1 Binder

II – Past Performance 1 Copy 1 1 Binder

III – Price 1 Copy 1 1 Binder

e. Digital Files. All of the proposal files shall be provided electronically via PIEE Solicitation Module.

Hard copies shall match digital submissions. The Offeror shall submit each non-cost/price volume in electronic format readable by Microsoft (MS) Office Word 2016 or Adobe PDF. The cost/price volume shall be submitted in Microsoft Excel format with formulas intact. Each proposal volume shall be in a single searchable file, with copy/paste capability. Offerors shall label each document with the volume and section numbers to which it belongs.

This will provide organizational structure and allow rapid location of all portions of the proposal. The offeror shall use the following labeling format for their submissions: [W912CN-23-R-0002] [Offeror Name]_[Volume #- Section #]_[Document/File Name]: i.e., Acme_III_Price].

f. All information shall be confined to the appropriate file. The offeror shall confine submissions to essential matters, sufficient to define the proposal in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Offeror shall adhere to page limitations listed below. Any pages submitted beyond the stated limits will not be evaluated.

g. Proposal Content Volume I – Factor I – Technical (maximum 60 pages total for Volume I, including resumes and organizational chart)

Sub-factor A – Key Personnel Qualifications and Experience Sub-factor B – Organization Approach in Multi-Project/Multi-Discipline Management Sub-factor C – Sample Project Response

Volume II – Factor II – Past Performance (maximum 30 pages total for Volume II) Key Submittals: Past Performance Information and Past Performance Questionnaire

Volume III – Factor III – Price Sub-factor A – Detailed Price Proposal for Sample Project Task Order (To include Rates) (maximum 8 pages total for Sub-factor A) Key Submittals: Completed and Signed SF 1442 and Amendments (if Any), Representations / Certifications / Other Statements of Offerors, Bid Bond as indicated in FAR Clause 52.228-1, Bid Guarantee

5. Proposal Submission Requirements:

a. Volume I: Factor I – Technical - Project Management Capability

Sub-factor (A) Key Personnel Qualifications and Experience. The specialized experience and technical competence of the offeror’s key personnel are important in evaluating the potential success of this contract.

Biographical summaries/resumes shall be included to demonstrate qualification and experience in the various skills required in the scope of work. Provide an organizational chart describing functions, responsibilities and authorities of key personnel. The offeror’s key personnel to include Project Manager, Project/Task Order Superintendent, Quality Control Manager, and Site Safety and Health Officer shall meet the minimum qualifications listed below.

Project Manager/Engineer: shall have an Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) accredited engineer program bachelor’s degree or construction management Bachelor’s degree, and a minimum of ten (10) years of building construction experience and five (5) years as a project/task order manager on Federal construction contracts. Shall have experience with commercial construction cost, scheduling, estimating, purchasing and engineering principles and techniques. Shall have experience reading, understanding and interpreting contract documents, drawings, specifications, scopes of work and project schedules. Shall have experience establishing, updating, and communicating the Master Project Schedule and manage its implementation. Relevant experience is defined as experience gained as Project Manager for a Construction Contractor performing work similar in nature to this contract’s scope of work.

Project/Task Order Superintendent: shall have 2-year Degree in a Construction related field or Licensed Journeyman, and a minimum of eight (8) years of building construction experience and three

(3) years as a project/task order superintendent on commercial construction contracts. Shall have experience demonstrating knowledge and understanding of the general and subcontract documents, drawings, specifications, construction means, methods and materials.

Experience overseeing work among all trades to promote and coordinate project operations, and resolving local area problems regarding procedures, precedence, design clarifications, adequate labor and equipment, schedule and all other appropriate matters. Shall have the ability to physically inspects task order site daily when work is in progress.

Project Estimator: shall have a minimum of five (5) years of relevant experience in estimating construction projects within the past seven (7) years. Relevant experience is defined as experienced gained as Project Estimator for a construction contractor performing work similar in nature to this contract’s scope of work. The Estimator must have knowledge of Government labor laws, the Davis/Bacon Act, and schedule of wages.

Must also have the capability to supervise subcontractors and perform periodic construction inspections.

Quality Control Manager: shall have 2-year Degree in a Construction related field or Licensed Journeyman and minimum of (5) years of building construction experience. Shall have a minimum (5) years’ experience demonstrating a thorough knowledge of construction means and methods, materials.

Shall have a minimum (5) years’ experience reading, understanding and interpreting contract documents, drawings, specifications, scopes of work and project schedules.

Must have experience documenting all non-compliant materials and/or workmanship, and compliance after corrective work is completed prior to starting any subsequent work. Shall have experience operating various internet based interface platforms, and experience coordinating and scheduling meetings between multiple entities. Shall be independent from Project Superintendent.

Site Safety and Health Officer (SSHO): shall have a minimum of five (5) years of relevant experience of construction industry safety in building construction projects or a minimum of three (3) years if he/she possesses a Certified Safety (CSP) or safety/health degree. Shall have the following current certifications and trainings: OSHA30, and First Aid and Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) certified. Shall have experience identifying, eliminating and controlling hazardous conditions that may lead to injury and or property damage using job specific safety standards and best management practices. Have experience leading, directing and enforcing safety on multiple task orders/projects concurrently. Shall have experience creating and enforcing a Safety Program, the related policies and procedures, and implement immediate corrective actions IAW current Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards as updated. Have experience holding pre-construction planning meeting with subcontractors to review overall site safety program and job hazard analysis for their scope of work, and ensure plans are in place to mitigate risks. Have experience developing the overall project safety program, creating safety reports for the project, analyzing metrics and making recommendations for improvement over baseline.

Shall be independent from Project Superintendent.

Sub-factor (B) Organization Approach in Multi-project/Multi-Discipline Management

Provide a brief narrative describing your management strategy that demonstrates your ability to handle no less than three (3) projects with oversight of no less than three (3) disciplines (examples Mechanical, electrical, structural, architectural, civil, etc.).

Provide a brief narrative regarding the size of the organization’s current workload and ability to absorb additional work. Include a plan on how your firm will accommodate sudden increases or decrease in workload, and how it will respond to emergency requests.

Explain what construction/project management software will be used for the contract, including submitting, and tracking of submittals, daily logs, requests for information (RFIs), schedules, project documents, and overall project(s) progress.

Explain how your organization will coordinate multiple subcontractors working on multiple concurrent task orders at numerous locations to meet schedule requirements and maintain adequate quality.

Describe how your organization will identify areas of work to be subcontracted and explain how subcontracted efforts will be managed to ensure satisfactory and timely completion.

Describe how your organization will meet FAR Clause 52.219-14 Limitations on Subcontracting, with your organization to perform at least fifteen (15) percent of the cost of the contract, not including the cost of materials, with its own employees.

Sub-factor (C) Sample Project Task Order Response:

Offerors must illustrate their capability to successfully provide a proposal on the sample project located at Attachment 2. Total price for Sample Project Task Order will not be evaluated under this sub-factor.

Using all the information in the solicitation, offerors submissions, specifications/drawings provided, and identified item descriptions the offeror shall submit a proposal for the Sample Project. The Sample Project was an actual project awarded. The sample project is to determine that a contractor understands the work and provides materials, labor, and equipment that would fulfill the work. Submission shall be in accordance with instructions provided in the solicitation. Submission shall address the following:

1. A detailed progress schedule of work for major activities, duration of activities, and sequence of work to be performed that accurately reflects the sequencing of work to be performed in accordance with Attachment 2 Sample Project SOW.

2. A detailed submittal register clearly itemizing all deliverables and submittals.

3. A sound process in place to manage subcontractors, and their integration into the overall structure.

4. A breakdown of tasks identifying and detailing line item descriptions that clearly demonstrates the offeror fully understands the complexity of the work to be performed.

b. Volume II: Factor II – Past Performance

Past performance will describe the recency, relevancy and quality of past work efforts as it pertains to current and completed contracts which offerors consider relevant to demonstrate their ability to perform the proposed contract effort. Quality of past work efforts will be demonstrated by assessing quality of services, customer satisfaction, timeliness of performance and business relations.

Offeror is advised that in conducting this assessment the Government reserves the right to use both data provided by the Offeror and data obtained from other sources.

Past Performance Information

The offeror shall describe record of past performance with programs similar in nature, work (fully designed and at least 50% construction progress completed), size, magnitude, complexity and scope. Submit information presently active or completed within the past three (3) years that you consider relevant in demonstrating your ability to perform the proposed effort. This information shall include data on efforts performed by other divisions, corporate management, critical subcontractors, or teaming contractors, if such resources will be brought to bear or significantly influence the performance of the proposed effort. Offerors may identify state and local government and private contracts that are similar to the Government’s requirements.

There are no minimum number of references required; however, the offeror shall submit sufficient past performance information to demonstrate the depth and breadth to successfully satisfy all Task Areas. It is incumbent upon the contractor to present the past performance information in such a manner and in sufficient detail to ensure the Government clearly understands the information provided. The offeror shall submit no more than five (5) references.

Submissions should explain the aspects of the contracts/references that are deemed relevant to the proposed effort. Include a discussion of significant achievements or explain past problems considered to be relevant to the proposed efforts, as well as past efforts to identify and manage program/project risk. In describing contractual effort and the past performance, include specific details of performance as follows and as applicable:

Documentation Format:

Past performance information shall be presented in the following format similar to Attachment 3, Past Performance Information (PPI). Each PPI contract reference shall have active work/services that was/were performed during the last three (3) years preceding the date of issuance of this solicitation.

This includes contracts that were awarded prior to this period, but still had active performance during the last three (3) years.

1. Name of Contracting Activity that awarded the contract

2. Contract Number and Period of Performance

3. Contract Type (i.e. Firm-Fixed Price, Cost Plus-Award Fee, etc.) and Total Contract Value

4. Name of the Contracting Officer, to include Phone Number and Email address

5. Name of Contract Administrator, to include Phone Number and Email address

6. List of Major Subcontractors

7. Brief history of the work performed on each reference given

8. Discuss how offeror determined that referenced experience is relevant to the task areas of the

IDIQ SOW

9. Name/organization/position and phone number of knowledgeable individual who can be contacted by Government evaluators.

Past Performance Questionnaire

Offerors shall complete the top portion and Part A and Part I (A) & (B) of Attachment 4, Past Performance Questionnaire Form, and forward to each reference for completion of Part 2. Offerors shall provide instructions to the reference to email the completed questionnaire directly to the Contract Specialist, Chelsea Smith and Risha Walters. Questionnaires are due no later than the date/time listed in Block 13 of the SF1442. It is the responsibility of the offeror to ensure questionnaires are received in sufficient time to meet the proposal submission date.

The Government may contact references to determine or substantiate customer satisfaction with an offeror’s performance. Sources other than those identified by the offeror may be contacted by the Government in the evaluation of an offeror’s past performance and experience. The Government may use any source to obtain data and information concerning an offeror’s past performance and experience and consider all information obtained for evaluation purposes.

c. Volume III: Factor III – Price.

This volume shall consist of all information required to support offered prices and all key submittal documents.

The offeror shall submit their detailed price proposal in Excel format electronically via PIEE Solicitation Module specified in SF1442 along with an email to Contract Specialist and Contracting Officer referenced in Section II, paragraph 2 confirming submission to PIEE Solicitation Module, as set forth above.

Sub-factor A: Detailed Price Proposal for Sample Project Task Order (To Include Rates)

Price proposal for task order shall include a price to perform the work identified in the sample project task order, associated rates, and a rationale for proposed rates. Price proposal shall be submitted IAW Attachment 2.a, Proposal Cost Breakdown Instructions and 2.b, Cost Estimate Summary Sheet (Sample Project). Proposal to include the detailed cost breakdown with the same or similar format as the attachment. Submitted price for task order and all elements of price will be evaluated in accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(1).

Included with the price proposal, offerors shall provide proposed rates for future Task Orders. Rates shall be provided as a percentage and shall be binding for the entire five (5) year ordering period. Rates utilized for future Task Orders shall not exceed the proposed rates; however, the rates may be lower.

Offeror shall provide a written narrative of how rates relate to task orders to be ordered. Rates to be proposed are as follows:

o Prime Overhead on Subcontractor o Overhead o Profit o Bond

Key Submittals for Volume III:

Completed and Signed Standard Form 1442 and Any Amendments (if any)

Representation / Certifications / Other Statements of Offerors

Bid Bond as indicated in FAR Clause 52.228-1, Bid Guarantee

Attachments 1 , 2a. and 2b

Information Regarding Joint Ventures

Joint Venture Requirements - Parties wishing to propose as a joint venture must submit, with the Pro Forma documents, an executed copy of the joint venture agreement. The joint venture agreement shall be executed in accordance with FAR 4.102(d). Each joint venture partner shall submit evidence satisfactory to the Contracting Officer that its Board of Directors has approved its participation in the joint venture or by an instrument of similarly binding character in the case of an unincorporated entity. Offerors are reminded that to obtain an award the awardee, to include a joint venture, must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) database.

Applicable to set- aside solicitations: Joint Ventures must meet applicable size standards (See FAR Subpart 19.1).

Submit with the proposal any size determination for the Joint Venture entity received from the Small Business Administration. A Joint Venture where-in one party is not a small business may be referred to the Small Business Administration (IAW FAR 19.302 (b)) to determine eligibility. Note that there were significant changes in 2011 to the SBA requirements for a Joint Venture Agreement in a small business set-aside.

Ensure that you have the most up to date regulations from the Small Business Administration. All questions regarding this must be directed the Small Business Administration and not the Contracting Officer.

All Joint Ventures are advised to avoid a potential conflict of interest. Joint Venture (JV) partners WILL NOT be eligible for individual MATOC awards in addition to an award to the JV entity.

Joint Ventures will be assessed to qualify as Women Owned Small Business (WOSB) in accordance with applicable SBA regulations (e.g. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 13, Chapter I, Part 127 (Women-Owned Small Business Federal Contract Program).

B. BASIS FOR AWARD

The MATOC requirement in support of DPW, USAG, Hawaii, will be solicited as a women- owned small business competitive action. The Government intends to award multiple contracts to a minimum of four (4) women-owned small businesses registered in SAM.

The award will be made based on the best overall proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors and sub-factors with appropriate consideration given to the three (3) evaluation factors: Technical, Past Performance, and Price. The subjective trade-off process will be used in this procurement. The subjective tradeoff process permits award to other than the lowest priced offeror or other than the highest technically rated offeror when it may be in the best interest of the Government.

To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for the Technical factor (to include all sub-factors). Offerors will be cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest cost offered.

The relative importance of the evaluation of sub factors and factors are as follows:

Factor I – Technical is more important than Factor II - Past Performance. When combined, Factors I and II are approximately equal in importance to Factor III, Price.

This requirement will be solicited as a competitive, negotiated Request for Proposals (RFP) using FAR Part 15 “Contracting by Negotiation.” As set forth in FAR 52.215-1(f)(4), the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a), Clarifications and award without discussions). Should the SSA determine that discussions are necessary, a competitive range determination may be made prior to conducting discussions. This range will be comprised of the most highly rated proposals based on the ratings of all tradeoff factors. The competitive range may include lesser rated proposals at the sole discretion of the Government.

As described in FAR 15.306(c)(2), After evaluating all proposals the contracting officer may determine that the number of most highly rated proposals that might otherwise be included in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted. This paragraph serves as notification to offerors that the competitive range may be limited for purposes of efficiency. The contracting officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals

To be considered for award, the proposal shall conform to all terms and conditions contained in the solicitation and the prospective contractor determined responsible in accordance with FAR Subpart 9.1.

C. FACTORS AND SUB-FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The following evaluation factors and sub-factors will be used to evaluate each proposal: Factor I – Technical Sub-factor A – Key Personnel Qualifications & Experiences Sub-factor B – Organization Approach in Multi-Project/Multi-Discipline Management Sub-factor C – Sample Project Task Order Response

These three (3) sub factors are approximately equal in importance.

Evaluation of the offeror’s proposal shall address each sub-factor as it applies to the Statement of Work (SOW). A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation is set forth in the “Evaluation Approach”, Paragraph D of this section. During evaluations of each proposal, the Government will assign each sub-factor an adjectival rating and write a narrative evaluation reflecting the identified findings. The ratings of each subfactor will be considered toward assigning an adjectival rating for the overall Factor I.

Factor II: Past Performance

Each offeror’s past performance will be reviewed as indicated in section D, Evaluation Approach, Past Performance Factor, to determine relevancy and confidence assessment.

Factor III: Price - Sub-factor A – Detailed Price Proposal for Sample Project Task Order (To Include Rates)

Although not scored or rated, Factor III will require a priced proposal on a sample project to include a variety of construction repair elements based on historical requirements performed. The rates (Overhead, Profit, Bond, Prime Overhead on Subcontractor) used in the sample project calculation will be the rates used for the base and option periods of the entire contract period. Rates utilized for future Task Orders shall not exceed the proposed rates;

however, the rates may be lower.

Rates shall be provided as a percentage and shall be binding for the entire five (5) year ordering period. Offerors are advised to ensure that rates are consistent for all CLINs when completing the SF 1442.

Factor I – Technical is more important than Factor II – Past Performance. When combined, Factors I and II are approximately equal in importance to Factor III – Price.

The resulting awards will be a firm-fixed price IDIQ construction contract. Price reasonableness will be utilized in the evaluation of the Firm-Fixed Price effort.

D. EVALUATION APPROACH

All proposals shall be subject to evaluation by the Source Selection Team (SST).

1. The overarching evaluation approach for all factors and sub-factors is as follows:

Adequacy of Response. The proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the offeror’s methods and approach have adequately and completely considered, defined,and satisfied the requirements specified in the RFP. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement has been addressed in the proposal in accordance with the proposal submission section of the RFP.

Feasibility of Approach. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven devices and techniques. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule.

2. The Technical factor is divided into the following sub-factors:

Sub-factor A: This sub-factor evaluates the offeror’s proposed Key Personnel Qualifications and Experience for the basic contract period and all option years. The Government will evaluate offeror’s proposed Organizational Chart(s). The Organizational Chart will represent an Organizational Chart where there are over 5 active projects with concurrent work at the same point in time.

The Government will evaluate the biographical summaries/resumes submitted to determine the extent to which personnel meet the qualifications requirements as identified in this solicitation Section 00 73 00 - Supplementary Conditions, MATOC TASK ORDER PROCEDURES, Para 5.2, Contractor Responsibilities.

Marginal ratings could indicate a lack of understanding concerning mission requirements and may result in the entire proposal receiving an unfavorable rating and/or being eliminated from the competitive range. The evaluation will focus on the offerors' certifications and resumes provided to determine the ability to have qualified individuals that meet the minimum requirements. The evaluation will use the overarching evaluation approach as mentioned in paragraph D. Evaluation Approach, paragraph 1.

Sub-factor B: The offeror’s proposal submissions addressing the sub-factor, Organization Approach in Multi-Project/Multi-Discipline Management will be evaluated with major emphasis placed on the overarching evaluation approach identified in paragraph D. Evaluation Approach.

Sub-factor C: The offeror’s proposal submissions addressing the Sample Project Task Order Response, will be evaluated for the minimum requirements below:

Minimum Requirements: The offeror demonstrates the capability to successfully execute the Task Order.

Sample Project Schedule, Submittal Register, Subcontractor Management integration, and Work Plan (narrative) will be evaluated. The offeror demonstrates a clear understanding of the task order and presents an approach that ensures successful completion with low risk of performance. Total price for the TO will not be evaluated under this element. Actual Pricing shall be submitted in Volume III, Factor III, Price.

The Technical Factor Ratings Factor I will be evaluated using the Combined Technical/Risk Rating (see Table 1 below). This methodology considers risk, in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.

TABLE 1 – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Color Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength or significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and is unawardable, and/or risk of performance is unacceptably high.

Table 1.b Technical Risk Rating Method

Adjectival Rating Description

Low Proposal may contain weakness/weaknesses which have low potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost, or degradation of performance. Normal contractor emphasis and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Moderate Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which may have a moderate potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost, or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

High Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which is likely to have high potential to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will unlikely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Unacceptable Proposal contains a deficiency or a combination of significant weaknesses that causes an unacceptable level of risk of unsuccessful performance.

3. Past Performance Factor. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s record of past performance to ascertain the probability of successfully performing the required efforts of the SOW.

Past Performance Information. Evaluation on the contractor submitted Past Performance Information will be based on the contractor’s ability to demonstrate the depth and breadth to successfully satisfy all task component areas as listed in the SOW. Offeror to submit Past Performance Information in accordance with instructions in Section D, PROPOSAL SUBMISSION (Section 00 21 16).

Past Performance Questionnaire.

a. Evaluation of past performance shall be in accordance with this plan utilizing the forms and questionnaires set forth in attachemnt 3 and 4.

b. The Government will focus its inquiries on the offeror’s record of performance as it relates to all solicitation requirements, including cost, schedule, performance and management of subcontractors. A significant achievement, problem, or lack of relevant data in any element of the work can become an important consideration in the evaluation process. Therefore, offerors will be reminded to include the most recent and relevant efforts (within the past three (3) years) in their proposal. Absent any recent and relevant past performance history or when the performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror will be assigned a “neutral” rating and its proposal will not be evaluated either favorably or unfavorably on past performance. The Government may use data provided by the offeror in its proposal and data obtained from other sources, including data in Government files or data obtained through interviews with personnel familiar with the contractor and their current and past performance under Federal, State or Local government or commercial contracts for same or similar services as compared to the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 236220.

Data used in conducting performance risk assessments shall not extend past three (3) years prior to the issue date of the RFP, but may include performance data generated during the past three (3) years without regard to the contract award date.

c. Offerors shall include all Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime offeror awarded during the past three (3) years, from the issue date of this RFP, which are relevant to the efforts required by this RFP.

d. The past performance factor considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract requirements. There are three (3) aspects to the past performance evaluation: Recency, Relevancy, and Quality.

i. RECENCY: The first aspect is to evaluate the recency of the offeror’s past performance.

Recency is generally expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant and is critical to establishing the relevancy of past performance information.

ii. RELEVANCY: The second aspect is to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection.

Relevancy is not separately rated; however, the following criteria (see Table 2) will be used to establish what is relevant which shall include similarity of service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and degree of subcontract/teaming.

Table 2 - Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Rating Definition

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.

iii. QUALITY ASSESSMENT: The third aspect assesses the overall quality of the offeror’s past performance. Documented results from Past Performance Questionnaires, interviews, CPARS, and other sources form the support and basis for this assessment.

e. Performance Confidence Assessment: Utilize the Performance Confidence Assessment (see Table

3 below) to select the most appropriate confidence level for each Offeror. Ensure the rationale for the conclusions reached are included.

TABLE 3 - Performance Confidence Assessments

Rating Definition

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.

Neutral Confidence 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. The Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the facto of past performance.

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 be able to successfully perform the required effort.

4. Price Factor

The contracts will be a Firm Fixed Price Indefinite-Delivery Indefinite-Quantity type contract. The Government will evaluate price reasonableness for the fixed priced effort.