MFAES_pre-synopsis_conference_slides.14November2012.pptx

Health Affairs (HA-PPMD) Medical Facility A-E Services (MFAES) IDIQ MATOC-Pre Synopsis Solicitation : W912DY-12-R-0023 Medical Facilities Center of Expertise and Standardization U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Casey Building-HECSA (Room 140) 14 November 2012

BUILDING STRONG®

Welcome Mr. David Marquardt, AIA Chief, Medical Facilities Center of Expertise and Standardization (MCX) Logo

To publicize to the medical design community our intention to solicit and advertise a replacement contract for Architect-Engineer (A-E) Services in support of the Department of Defense Medical (DoDM) program throughout the Contiguous United States (CONUS) and Outside the Contiguous United States (OCONUS).

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Medical Facilities Mandatory Center of Expertise and Standardization (MX) through Huntsville Center, partners with the various Corps' project delivery teams, regional business centers/divisions, stakeholders and geographical districts to provide medical expertise and the highest quality medical and medical research facility life cycle support to the Department of Defense (DoD), other federal agencies and foreign governments.

Pre-Synopsis Conference Purpose

Agenda 0930-1000 Registration & Sign-In

Expectations and MFAES Contract Overview - Mr. Todd Watts - USACE Project Manager, MFAES Contract MCX Overview- Mr. David Marquardt , AIA

1100-1115 Break

1200-1215 Closing Thoughts & Wrap Up - Mr. David Marquardt , AIA

An Overview to MFAES Pre-synopsis Conference Attendees by

Mr. Robert Haddix, R.A.

Chief, Acquisition and Management Office

Portfolio Planning and Management Division Office of the Chief Financial Officer

Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) TRICARE Management Activity

Overview - Defense Health Program

OASD-HA (PPMD)

Welcome / Introduction…

A Week in the MHS…

21,800 inpatient admissions 5,000 direct care 16,800 purchased care

1.6 million outpatient visits 737,000 direct care 878,400 purchased care 2,300 births 1,000 direct care 1,300 purchased care

3.5 million claims processed

12.6 million electronic health record messages

2.5 million prescriptions 910,000 direct care

1.41 million retail pharmacies 223,000 home delivery 179,300 behavioral health outpatient services 46,100 direct care 133,200 purchased care

9.6 million beneficiaries

≈ $50 billion annually

MHS Facility Inventory Current Plant Replacement Value ~ $35.4 Billion / 106 million GSF

READINESS

Military force is ready to deploy Medical force is ready to deliver health care anytime, anywhere in support of the full range of military operations

POPULATION HEALTH

Reduce generators of ill health Encourage healthy behaviors Decrease the likelihood of illness through focused prevention & development of increased resilience

Over-Arching Vision of the MHS The Quadruple Aim

EXPERIENCE OF CARE

Patient and family centered Compassionate, convenient, equitable and safe Highest quality

PER CAPITA COST

Create value by focusing on quality, eliminating waste, and reducing unwarranted variation Consider the total cost of care over time and not just the cost of an individual health care activity Facilities provide the platforms necessary for execution of the MHS missions

Roles & Responsibilities

Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) Provide policy, guidance, criteria for Department of Defense (DoD) Advocate for MILCON projects with DoD, OMB, and Congress Programmatic oversight of MILCON program design and execution Final decision authority on issues concerning scope, cost, and schedule Service Medical Departments (MEDCOM-HFPA and HQ AF/SG) Service Surgeons General’s lead for design input to Architect/Engineer thru USACE Monitor design and construction execution at project level Oversight of transition from old to new facilities, and initial outfitting US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Presents and certifies design submittals to HA-PPMD through Medical Facilities Mandatory Center of Expertise and Standardization (CEHNC-MX) Design and construction agent from initial design authorization through construction Certify to HA-PPMD that designs meet project authorization, codes and criteria Ensure projects remain on schedule, within budget, and incorporates tenets of “world class” design principles and guidance

The Future Continue to provide the best medical facilities for our military Recapitalize aging inventory (dental clinics, medical clinics, ACCs) Work closely with Services on restoration / sustainment funding requirements Mandate facilities incorporate tenets of World Class and Evidence Based Design Increase focus on Total Life-Cycle Asset Management Sustainable design and operations Initial outfitting and transition Total building commissioning Reduced medical MILCON funding More value for our money

New Medical UFC 4-510-01 released as of 1 Nov 2012 Culmination of over 1.5 years extensive effort to update HA led UFC training session coming in Jan 2013…please attend!

DoD Medical Space Template revisions started in 2010 to overhaul all 154 templates in Revit Templates were categorized into (4) priority levels Being published to WBDG website as they are finished The mission - Refine the TOOL (Templates) used to help us visualize, understand, and improve decisions on medical practices and equipment needs for the Tri-services USACE is Managing Entity for the Templates

Whole Building Design Guide Website - know it!

Visually confusing, difficult to understand Not maintained or updated on regular basis Not in CAD or BIM Lost time, additional cost

Original Guide Plate Equipment Plan

New Medical Template 3D Model

After Before Medical Template Updates Dental Treatment Room Created in CAD with BIM association Regular update program in place Complies with HA criteria Guides for uniformity and operational efficiency

Summary

A lot of great people are counting on all of us!

They Deserve the Very Best Facilities – YOUR Firm is Critical to That Goal

Overview Health Facilities Planning Agency (HFPA) Presented by – Ms Trillis Birdseye Health Facilities Planning Agency (HFPA)

Overview Air Force Surgeon General (SG8F) Presented by - Maj Matthew Sakal, USAF, BSC Chief, Health Facilities Strategic Planning AFMSA/SG8F

MFAES Overview Presented by – Mr. Todd Watts, PE, PMP Project Manager - MFAES Contract, Huntsville Center

Historical Projects/Agencies Project Types Hospitals Clinics Labs New Construction Additions/Alterations

CONUS/OCONUS

Studies Research

SRM

Agencies Army Air Force DoD Veterans Administration

MCX Overview Presented by – Mr. David Marquardt, AIA Chief, Medical Facilities Center of Expertise and Standardization (MCX)

MX Mission Details

Directly support DoD Health Affairs’ Medical MILCON program world-wide and assures enterprise-wide consistency in the understanding and application of UFC 4-510-01 Design: Medical Military Facilities.

USACE’s mandatory center of technical expertise ensuring delivery of World Class DOD and Host Nation medical facilities through… Partnership with 18 USACE districts worldwide Oversight of medically unique technical areas, support acquisition strategy initiation and A-E selection, and proactive support for resolution of construction issues.

Subject matter experts in preparation and interpretation of medical unique standards, criteria, specifications and guidance.

Review during all design stages.

Oversight of MFAES IDIQ contract business process.

USACE’s primary liaison between USACE elements and the Using Military Departments’ Offices of the Surgeon General on medically unique project technical matters.

USACE’s liaison with medical academia, code bodies, testing & standards setting jurisdictions, and professional associations.

Varied Funding sources:

DODM

MCA

BRAC winding down Other (ARRA, UMC, SRM & Host Nation) Acquisition methods:

Design Bid Build - 45% Design Build- 33% Other- 28% Special Studies and support to HA Diversity of our Program

Program Stakeholders

OASD-Health Affairs- Mr John Becker Portfolio Planning & Management Division (HA/PPMD) Using Military Departments/Surgeons General

- Army- COL Stephen Wooldridge

- Air Force- Col Rex Langston Local Medical Facility Managers USACE Elements Garrison/DPW or Base/BCE

Primary Stakeholders/Responsibilities are defined by Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 6015.17, Military Health System (MHS) Facility Portfolio Management. Under the authority, direction, and control of the ASD(HA), as defined by DoD Directive 5136.01 thru 12:

HA/PPMD Manages the execution of policy issued by the ASD(HA), pursuant to DoD Directive 5136.01, and tasks DoDM project execution to HQUSACE and the MX (or NAVFAC).

Military Departments Represent their Surgeons General; Plan/program both DoDM and SRM projects; provide initial outfitting and transition (IO&T) support; and operate/maintain facilities.

Healthcare Facilities Steering Committee (HFSC) acts as clearance body for the technical contents UFC 4-510-01 composed of HA/PPMD, Military Departments, and Execution Agents involved in planning, programming, design, and construction of facilities Local FM/Medical staffs are represented by the Services for DoDM, but have a closer relationship in the SRM program as greater local knowledge is required.

Support for Others USACE as various agreements and MOA/MOU with other Federal, or other customers, such as DTRA (multiple BSL-3 lab OCONUS), VA (primarily outpatient care), FDA (various labs), etc.….

USACE multiple players will be addressed later, primarily, IAW DoDI 6015.17, USACE is a design and construction “execution agent” for Army, Air Force, & Navy medical projects depending on location. Other “execution agents” are NAVFAC & the Air Force in England. Recent Navy projects by USACE include Okinawa (Lester Hospital) and Qartar (health/dental).

USACE Elements

HQUSACE

Program Integration Division (PID) National Program Manager (CEMP-II) – Jane Smith Engineering and Construction Medical Facilities Mandatory Center of Expertise and Standardization (MX) Regional Integration Teams (RITs) Regional Commands/Divisions Geographical District Commands

MILCON in accordance with:

a. CEMP-MD Memorandum dated 11 Jun 1999, Subject: Medical and Medical Research Facility Acquisition

b. CEMP-MD Memorandum dated 13 Dec 2002, Subject: Medical MILCON Facility Design and Construction Execution

c. CEMP-II Memorandum dated 29 Nov 2005, Subject: Medical Military Construction (MILCON) Facility Design and Construction

d. Army Regulation (AR) 420-1, Army Facilities Management

e. Consolidated into DRAFT (21 June 2011) ER 1110-345-721, Design and Construction Policy for Medical Facilities SRM in accordance with MOA:

a. Memorandum of Agreement between MEDCOM and the Corps, Mobile and Huntsville staff engineering and contracting centers, called Medical Support Teams (MST) that are direct funded by MEDCOM (Army) to execute the Army Medical SRM Program

David D. Marquardt, AIA - Chief Anthony Travia, P.E., CFM – Deputy Chief Administrative Staff Evelyn Bynum-Young - Project Management Specialist Brenda Diaz – Project Management Specialist Patricia Jackson – Secretary Larri Gilbert - Secretary Technical Engineering Staff

Jeffrey Hardin, P.E. - Team Leader

Russell Thomason - Mechanical David Braidich, P.E., CEM, LEED AP - Mechanical

James Meade, P.E. - Electrical Gary Spivey, P.E. - Electrical Louis Feller, P.E. - Electrical

Philip Hoge, P.E. - Fire Protection Bruce Abell, P.E. - Fire Protection

John Phillips - Communications Warren Lemay - Communications

Richard Grulich, R.A., LEED AP BD+C - Architect & LEED Eric Garcia, R.A.- Architect & Standards Our Staffing Project Director Staff

Brandi Dennis, PMP - Team Leader

Project Directors:

Anthony Hairston Paul Hanreeder, AIA Yashpal Kainth, R.A.

Michael Lanier, PMP Laura Riddle, P.E.

Lawrence Romett, P.E.

Project Directors (Remote):

Raymond Flock - Europe District Liaison Charles Matar - Fort Worth District Liaison

15-Minute Break

Medical Facilities Architect-Engineer Services (MFAES)

W912DY-12-R-0023

Tonju L. Butler Procuring Contracting Officer

Michael Ashworth Contract Specialist

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Huntsville Center

Pre-Award Acquisition Team

Tonju Butler

Michael Ashworth

Todd Watts Project Manager

Ryan Black Office of Counsel

Acquisition Approach

NAICS – 541330, Engineering Services Small Business Size Standard – Cannot exceed $14 million in annual receipts.

Contract Type – multiple indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contracts; also known as the Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) Task orders (individual projects) will issued to the MATOC holders in accordance with FAR 36.6 and EP 715-1-7, using the fair opportunity process, subject to ordering procedures outlined in FAR 16.505 One Unrestricted synopsis with awards and task orders reserved for small businesses. Small businesses may also be considered on task orders not reserved for small businesses.

The synopsis will specify the circumstances for reserving a task order award for small businesses.

If a small business is merged with or acquired by a large business during the life of the contract, the firm must provide timely notice of its acquisition in accordance with 13 C.F.R. Sec. 121.404(g)(2) and must either recertify to the agency its small business size status or must inform the agency that it is other than small.

A small business that becomes other than small will no longer be solicited for those Task Orders that are reserved for small businesses but will be solicited for any Task Orders that are competed among all multiple award ID/IQ contract holders.

Ordering Period – the length of time during which the Government may award individual task orders Base period of one year, plus four one-year option periods, for a potential total ordering period of five years

Capacity – $249 Million of estimated in shared contract capacity For administration purposes any awarded contracts will all show a capacity of $249M

Target Awards – Six responsible firms 3 large businesses and 3 small businesses The Government reserves the right to make staggered awards.

The Government also reserves the right to award more, less or none at all

Administration The Government is under no obligation to issue any orders against this contract in excess of the minimum guaranteed amount (will be specified in the RFPP) The only authorized ordering office is the U.S. Army Engineering and Support Center, Huntsville. Other agencies may be delegated this authority, in which case an advance written notice will be given to the Contractor.

Regulatory Guidance FAR 36.6 Architect-Engineer Services EP 715-1-7 dated 29 Feb 12

Current Contracts

Contract Awards Current generation MATOC was awarded at Huntsville Center utilizing staggered awards in September 2009, November 2009 and January 2010 One base year and four one year options. Option Year 4 ends September 2014

Capacity Originally awarded with a $249M capacity with $15M set-aside for the small business restricted pool J&A was executed to increase capacity due to changes in projected work load Current capacity of the MATOC is $498M with approximately $30M set-aside for the small business restricted pool and the remaining $468M for the unrestricted suite

Current Contracts Administered by Huntsville Center Two pools - Unrestricted and Restricted Small Business Set-Aside

A-E Process

SYNOPSIS

Typical 30 day posting that requesting a technical submittal (SF 330) and details regarding that process Question & Answer period Submittal of SF 330 by date and time specified

EVALUATION

Pre-Selection Board Evaluates proposals to determine the highly qualified firms that will be recommended for further evaluation by the SSEB The firms that demonstrate higher aggregate qualifications relevant to the primary selection criteria are considered highly qualified firms The pre-selection board will not be restricted to a specific or max number of firms for referral to a selection board.

EVALUATION

Selection Board Evaluates the highly qualified firms identified by the pre-selection board Firms that demonstrate higher aggregate qualifications relevant to the primary selection criteria are considered to be the most highly qualified firms Interviews will be held with all of the most highly qualified firms and asked similar questions related to the announced selection criteria.

After interviews the most highly qualified firms will be ranked in order of preference using the primary selection criteria and information obtained from the interviews Secondary selection criteria will only be used as a tiebreaker criteria

*Note that receiving an interview does not guarantee that your firm will be issued a RFPP

SELECTION

Request for Price Proposal (RFPP) Issued to highest qualified firms in order of ranking DCAA Audits if not recently performed Cost Evaluation Negotiations Contract Award

DCAA Audit Process The Government reserves the right to refer the firm’s price proposal to the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) for a rate audit Will be conducted by the firm’s cognizant DCAA field office Submitting firms are encouraged to refer to DCAA’s “Information for Contractors” that can be found at www.dcaa.mil

Steps of the audit process Step 1: Government will forward price proposal to cognizant DCAA field office Step 2: DCAA will perform an adequacy review of the proposal to determine if audit can proceed. If inadequate the proposal will be returned to the contractor with a list of correctable actions to take Step 3: DCAA will conduct a full rate audit of the firm’s direct and indirect rates Step 4: The Government will receive the audit report and determine whether to enter negotiations with the firm

*Note that receiving a DCAA audit does not guarantee your firm an award

Negotiations The Government will only negotiate with firms that are sent the RFPP

Agreement on direct labor and overhead rates is the central issue negotiating an ID/IQ contract

Direct labor and overhead rates are negotiable. Verification of the labor and overhead rates by audit does not mean that they are reasonable

If an agreement cannot be reached the Government can elect to terminate negotiations and issue a RFPP to the next most highly qualified firm

Questions Submit questions via the ProjNet website at www.projnet.org You will have to register if you have never done so before

Bidder Inquiry Key will be released in the synopsis

Answers will be posted to www.fbo.gov and may result in amendments to the synopsis

** No questions will be accepted via email or by phone. Individual meetings with firms will not be scheduled.

**All official information related to this acquisition will be posted to www.fbo.gov

W912DY-12-R-0023

Ryan A. Black Attorney-advisor US Army Engineering and Support Center, Huntsville

US Army Corps of Engineers

Who May Apply:

Any firm permitted by law to practice architecture and/or engineering work in at least one state, territory, or jurisdictions of the United States as required by FAR 36.601-4(b)

Contractor arrangement Sole contractor Joint Venture (JV) Prime contractor with team member subcontractor(s)

Small Business Jobs Act

Under section 1331 of the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (Jobs Act) the Government has reserved awards and task orders for small businesses

Instead of two separate pools the Government will issue a single Unrestricted synopsis

FAR 52.219-14, Limitations in Subcontracting will still apply to prime small business contractors

Task Order (TO) Selection:

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 16.505 (b)(1)(iii) requires TO exceeding the Simplified Acquisition Threshold (currently $150,000) to be competed among the base contract holders.

That process includes providing all firm notice of the intent to purchase, a clear description of the work to be performed, the basis of the selection for award, allowing all contractors to submit an offer, and fairly considering that offer. See FAR 16.505 (b)(1)(iii)(B)(1)-(2).

Brooks Acts requires selection of A/E contracts to be based on qualifications, not price.

TO Selection (Continued):

To comply with FAR and Brooks Act, the government will send out a notice of an upcoming procurement that will describe the work to be performed, how selection will be made, and allow the base contract holders to update their SF 330s

The Government will then review the updated SF 330s (or the 330s on file if an A/E firm chooses not to update) and select the A/E firm based on the qualifications of the firm as it relates to the work to be performed

Some Helpful Hints

Don’t have any deficiencies in your proposal The Government will not enter negotiations with a firm whose proposal contains a deficiency.

A deficiency is a failure to meet a material requirement of the synopsis.

What is a material requirement of the synopsis?

Those items that says the firm shall, will, or must do something or otherwise indicates that it is not discretionary to do something, are requirements of the solicitation. If it is substantive, it is a material requirement.

Example: “Proposal shall be submitted in three ring binders.” “Proposal shall use no smaller than 10 pt. font.”

Assumptions: Caveats or assumptions included in your proposal have a high likelihood of rendering the proposal deficient.

Frequent Mistakes

Firm must be licensed as an A-E if required by state, not just the principal

Small business prime firm must demonstrate the ability to perform 50% of the total contract value

JV teams must provide actual rates from the JV members for auditing and negotiating purposes, not an averaged or blended rate

Experience is what work that the firm has completed. Past performance is how well the firm performed that work.

Read the synopsis and criteria thoroughly and provide all information required

Sharon R. Morrow Deputy for Execution, SB Programs

W912DY-12-R-0023

Small Business Issues

Agenda Size Affiliates Joint Venture Teaming Agreement Evaluation – SB Participation Subcontracting Limitations on Subcontracting

NAICS and Size Standard NAICS for acquisition: 541330, Engineering Services Size Standard: $14M Size includes “affiliates” A Joint Venture (JV) is a small business (SB) concern when the combined revenue of all joint venture partners does not exceed the SB size standard.

JV size exemption for a “Large” Procurement Procurement is bundled; or It is a “large” procurement (i.e. dollar value of acquisition is exceeds ½ of the size standard) Then JV is Small if EACH joint venture partner is small.

Affiliates An affiliate has common controls, common ownership, common management JV are affiliates 2 types of Affiliation On-going (general) For a specific procurement

Joint Venture Defined in 13 CFR 121.103(h) A JV is an association of individuals and/or concerns with interests in any degree or proportion consorting to engage in and carry out no more than 3 specific or limited-purpose business ventures for joint profit over a 2-year period, for which purpose they combine their efforts, property, money, skill, or knowledge, but not on a continuing or permanent basis.

A JV cannot be awarded more than 3 contracts over a 2-year period, starting from the date of the submission of the 1st offer. (Otherwise, it will be determined to have a general affiliation.)

Joint Venture (continued) Must be in writing Must do business in its own name May be in the form a legal entity and have its own employees, but it is not required.

8(a) 8(a) JV must be approved by the SBA In an unpopulated JV (one without its own employees, 8(a) JV must perform 40% of the work done by the JV and must not be simply administrative functions. [Source: 13 CFR 124.513(d)] 8(a) mentor-protégé JVs are considered small as long as the 8(a) protégé is small for the procurement.

HUBZone A HUBZone may only JV with another HUBZone concern to be considered a HUBZone concern However, the JV itself need not be certified as a HUBZone HUBZone JVs offering on a “large” procurement can qualify as small as long as each HUBZone partner is small for the acquisition.

Limitation on Subcontracting applies to the aggregate effort of JV HUBZone mentor and protégé will not be found affiliated when the mentor-protégé relationship is Federally approved.

HUBZone mentor can subcontract to its protégé

SDVOSB

SDVOSB can JV with 1 or more SBs SDVOSB JVs are considered affiliated unless they are offering on a “large” procurement Limitation on contracting applies to the aggregate JV work.

An individual SDVOSB can fulfill the Limitations on subcontracting by using other SDVOSB subcontractors

ED/WOSB

WOSB/EDWOSB JVs are affiliated unless offering on a “large” procurement The WOSB/EDWOSB participant in the JV must be designated in CCR and ORCA as WOSB/EDWOSB JV must provide a written JV agreement to the Contracting Officer (KO) containing the elements of 13 CFR 127.506 Limitation on Subcontracting applies to the aggregate JV work

Teaming Agreement Can be a JV Can be a prime/sub relationship

JV or Prime/Sub Teaming Agreement?

Determined by:

Language in the teaming agreement Proposal Wording Reliance on Bonding Who is in Control or Managing the Contract Clear Delineation of Work Role in Pursuit of a Contract Whether the Subcontractor was the Incumbent

Several factors are used to determine whether a teaming agreement is considered a JV by SBA.

SBA used to use a “7 factor test” – which is no longer used.

Evaluation of Proposals Small Business (SB) Participation is a secondary evaluation factor …

BUT

Large Businesses (LBs) may be evaluated for their past performance in achieving their subcontracting goals in the “Past Performance” evaluation factor

All firms will submit a SB Participation Proposal SBs can include their contract performance in the %s to be completed by SB in their SB Participation Proposal

Subcontracting LBs will be required to submit a subcontracting plan Resulting contracts will include FAR clause 52.219-16, Liquidated Damages LBs contractors will be required to submit subcontracting reports in accordance with (IAW) FAR 52.219-9 Success in achieving SB Subcontracting goals will be evaluated as part of the Contracting Performance Appraisal.

Limitations on Subcontracting For the Small Business Set Aside (SBSA) reserve, FAR 52.219-14, Limitations of subcontracting applies 50% of work performed by prime contractor

SB “Graduation” Under SB Jobs Act of 2010, SBs who become large can compete on the unrestricted task order solicitations on the MATOC

THANK YOU

for attending

Health Budgets & Financial Policy

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ (USACE) Medical Facilities Mandatory Center of Expertise and Standardization (CEHNC-ED-MX), in partnership with the JTFs, HA-PPMD, the Military Services, USACE Regional Integration Teams/Major Subordinate Commands/Geographic District PDTs, NAVFAC MFDO, and the design and construction industry, pledges to provide the highest quality professional, medical specific, technical expertise and life cycle support to the Department of Defense (DoD), other Federal agencies, and foreign governments.

The mission of the MX is to provide worldwide expertise to deliver the highest quality medical and medical research facilities for the DoD, other Federal agencies, and foreign governments. As such, the MX is the USACE-wide MCX for medical unique aspects of medical and medical research facilities, including design policy and construction policy and criteria, technical guidance, procedures, criteria, specifications, and standards.

image3.png image20.gif image21.png image22.png image23.png image24.png image25.png image26.jpeg image27.jpeg image28.png image29.png image30.png image31.jpeg image32.jpeg image33.jpeg image34.png image35.png image36.jpeg image37.jpeg image38.jpeg image39.jpeg image40.jpeg image41.jpeg image42.png image43.png image44.wmf image45.wmf image46.wmf image47.wmf image50.wmf oleObject1.bin oleObject2.bin oleObject3.bin oleObject4.bin image48.wmf image49.jpeg image1.jpeg image2.png image4.jpeg image5.png image6.jpeg image7.png image8.jpeg image9.png image10.png image11.png image12.jpeg image13.jpeg image14.jpeg image15.jpeg image16.jpeg image17.jpeg image18.jpeg image19.jpeg