W912QR22R0019 05.05.23.pdf

SEE ADDENDUM

(No Collect Calls)

W912QR22R0019

b. TELEPHONE NUMBER

502.315.6179

8. OFFER DUE DATE/LOCAL TIME

11:00 AM 06 Jun 2023

5. SOLICITATION NUMBER 6. SOLICITATION ISSUE DATE

05-May-2023

AUTHORIZED FOR LOCAL REPRODUCTION

PREVIOUS EDITION IS NOT USABLE

STANDARD FORM 1449 (REV. 2/2012)

Prescribed by GSA – FAR (48 CFR) 53.212

(TYPE OR PRINT)

(SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER)

ADDENDA X ARE

26. TOTAL AWARD AMOUNT (For Gov t. Use Only )

23.

CODE 10. THIS ACQUISITION IS

SUCH ADDRESS IN OFFER

17b. CHECK IF REMITTANCE IS DIFFERENT AND PUT

BELOW IS CHECKED

TELEPHONE NO.

W912QR9. ISSUED BY

18b. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN BLOCK 18a. UNLESS BLOCK

7. FOR SOLICITATION

INFORMATION CALL:

a. NAME

JESSICA K MOSS

2. CONTRACT NO. 3. AWARD/EFFECTIVE DATE 4. ORDER NUMBER

(TYPE OR PRINT)

30b. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER 30c. DATE SIGNED 31b. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

30a. SIGNATURE OF OFFEROR/CONTRACTOR 31a.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

1 27a. SOLICITATION INCORPORATES BY REFERENCE FAR 52.212-1. 52.212-4. FAR 52.212-3. 52.212-5 ARE ATTACHED.X

25. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

1. REQUISITION NUMBER

20.

ADDITIONAL SHEETS SUBJECT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS SPECIFIED.

OFFEROR TO COMPLETE BLOCKS 12, 17, 23, 24, AND 30

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT/ORDER FOR COMMERCIAL ITEMS

ARE NOT ATTACHED

27b. CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER INCORPORATES BY REFERENCE FAR 52.212-4. FAR 52.212-5 IS ATTACHED. ADDENDA ARE ARE NOT ATTACHED

(BLOCK 5), INCLUDING ANY ADDITIONS OR CHANGES WHICH ARE

SET FORTH HEREIN, IS ACCEPTED AS TO ITEMS:

. YOUR OFFER ON SOLICITATION

28. CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO SIGN THIS DOCUMENT AND RETURN

% FOR:SET ASIDE:UNRESTRICTED OR X

SMALL BUSINESSX

17a.CONTRACTOR/ CODE FACILITY

OFFEROR CODE

U. S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, LOUISVILLE

600 DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. PLACE

ROOM 821

LOUISVILLE KY 40202-2239

18a. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY CODE

RATED ORDER UNDER

DPAS (15 CFR 700)

13a. THIS CONTRACT IS A

13b. RATING

CODE15. DELIVER TO CODE 16. ADMINISTERED BY

SEE SCHEDULE

12. DISCOUNT TERMS11. DELIVERY FOR FOB DESTINA-

TION UNLESS BLOCK IS

MARKED

SEE SCHEDULE

14. METHOD OF SOLICITATION

RFQ IFB RFPX

FAX:

TEL: 502.315.7494 SERVICE-DISABLED

VETERAN-OWNED

SMALL BUSINESS

8(A)

HUBZONE SMALL

BUSINESS

SIZE STANDARD:

$21,500,000

NAICS:

541611

X

OFFER DATED

29. AWARD OF CONTRACT: REF.

DELIVER ALL ITEMS SET FORTH OR OTHERWISE IDENTIFIED ABOVE AND ON ANY

COPIES TO ISSUING OFFICE. CONTRACTOR AGREES TO FURNISH AND

EMAIL:

TEL:

31c. DATE SIGNED

SEE SCHEDULE

SCHEDULE OF SUPPLIES/ SERVICESITEM NO. QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

24.22.21.19.

WOMEN-OWNED SMALL BUSINESS (WOSB)

ELIGIBLE UNDER THE WOMEN-OWNED

SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAM

EDWOSB

32g. E-MAIL OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT/ORDER FOR COMMERCIAL ITEMS

(CONTINUED)

PAGE 2 OF68

ACCEPTED, AND CONFORMS TO THE CONTRACT, EXCEPT AS NOTED: ______________________________________________________

32a. QUANTITY IN COLUMN 21 HAS BEEN

RECEIVED INSPECTED

32b. SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT

REPRESENTATIVE

32c. DATE 32d. PRINTED NAME AND TITLE OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT

REPRESENTATIVE

32e. MAILING ADDRESS OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE 32f . TELEPHONE NUMBER OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE

37. CHECK NUMBER

FINALPARTIALCOMPLETE

36. PAYMENT35. AMOUNT VERIFIED

CORRECT FOR

34. VOUCHER NUMBER

FINAL

33. SHIP NUMBER

PARTIAL

38. S/R ACCOUNT NUMBER 39. S/R VOUCHER NUMBER 40. PAID BY

41a. I CERTIFY THIS ACCOUNT IS CORRECT AND PROPER FOR PAYMENT

41b. SIGNATURE AND TITLE OF CERTIFYING OFFICER 41c. DATE

42a. RECEIVED BY (Print)

42b. RECEIVED AT (Location)

42c. DATE REC'D (YY/MM/DD) 42d. TOTAL CONTAINERS

STANDARD FORM 1449 (REV. 2/2012) BACK

Prescribed by GSA – FAR (48 CFR) 53.212

AUTHORIZED FOR LOCAL REPRODUCTION

PREVIOUS EDITION IS NOT USABLE

SEE SCHEDULE

20.

SCHEDULE OF SUPPLIES/ SERVICES

21.

QUANTITY UNIT

22. 23.

UNIT PRICE

24.

AMOUNT

19.

ITEM NO.

Section SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

OFFEROR'S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

Technical inquiries and questions relating to proposal procedures or bonds are to be submitted via Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet at http://www.ProjNet.org/ProjNet. As noted below, offerors shall not submit their proposals via ProjNet.

Offerors shall submit their proposals in accordance with the provisions stated in the solicitation.

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

The Solicitation Number is: W912QR22R0019 Solicitation Review Name is: Solicitation W912QR22R0019 The Bidder Inquiry Key is: FIF7RI-9UXUH7 Specific Instructions for ProjNet Bid Inquiry Access:

1. From the ProjNet home page linked above, click on Quick Add on the upper right side of the screen.

2. Identify the Agency. This should be marked as USACE.

3. Key. Enter the Bidder Inquiry Key listed above.

4. Email. Enter the email address you would like to use for communication.

5. Select Continue. A page will then open stating a user account was not found and will ask you to create one using the provided form.

6. Enter your First Name, Last Name, Company, City, State, Phone, Email, Secret Question, Secret Answer, and Time Zone. Make sure to remember your Secret Question and Answer as they will be used from this point on to access the ProjNet system.

7. Select Add User. Once this is completed you are now registered within ProjNet and are currently logged into the system.

Specific Instructions for Future ProjNet Bid Inquiry Access:

1. For future access to ProjNet, you will not be emailed any type of password. You will utilize your Secret Question and Secret Answer to log in.

2. From the ProjNet home page linked above, click on Quick Add on the upper right side of the screen.

3. Identify the Agency. This should be marked as USACE.

4. Key. Enter the Bidder Inquiry Key listed above.

5. Email. Enter the email address you used to register previously in ProjNet.

6. Select Continue. A page will then open asking you to enter the answer to your Secret Question.

7. Enter your Secret Answer and click Login. Once this is completed you are now logged into the system.

From this page you may view all bidder inquiries or add an 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.

Offerors are requested to review the specification in its entirety and to 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. Information concerning the status of the evaluation and/or award will NOT be available after receipt of bids/proposals.

NOTES:

1. Offerors shall not submit their proposals via ProjNet, but in accordance with the provisions stated in the solicitation. Any questions regarding acceptable means of submitting offers shall be made directly to the Contract Specialist identified in the solicitation.

2. Government responses to technical inquiries and questions relating to proposal procedures or bonds that are submitted to ProjNet in accordance with the procedures above are not binding on the Government unless an amendment is issued on Standard Form 30. In the case of any conflicts, the solicitation governs. Any changes or revisions to the solicitation will be made by formal amendment.

3. The ability to enter technical inquiries and questions relating to proposal procedures or bonds will be disabled ten

(10) business days prior to the closing date stated in the solicitation. No Government responses will be entered into the ProjNet system within five (5) business days prior to the closing date stated in the solicitation.

EVALUATION CRITERIA

PROCEDURES FOR SUBMITTAL OF OFFERS AND PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

1. Overview.

1.1 The intent of this solicitation is to award a target of up to seven (7) contractors for Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts as part of a Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) pool in support of Construction Management Services (CMS) related to Civil Works projects within the mission boundaries of the Great Lakes and Ohio River Division (LRD). The basis of award is the Best Value Trade-Off process. The Government will evaluate the proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein. The Contracting Officer will target up to seven IDIQ contracts to the responsible offerors whom the Source Selection Authority (SSA) determines conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable, and offers the best overall value to the Government, all factors considered. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers.

1.2 This project is for professional, administrative and management services (not to include AE) for CMS support at various civil offices/projects primarily within the Great Lakes and Ohio River Division. The scope of services includes aiding the US Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) in its CMS mission at various projects in the above service area.

2. Submittal of offers.

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

Offerors submitting proposals for this project should limit submissions to data essential for evaluation of proposals so that a minimum of time and monies will have been expended in preparing information required herein. However, in order to be effectively and equitably evaluated, the proposals must include information sufficiently detailed to clearly describe the offeror's capability for successfully completing the solicited project. Requirements stated in this Request for Proposal (RFP) are minimums. Proposals should follow in the order of sequence set forth in the RFP. Information provided out of sequence may not be evaluated and may result in the offeror’s disqualification from award.

Offerors shall submit their proposal to the US Army Corps of Engineers no later than the time and date specified in Block 8 of Standard Form 1449. NOTE: The Louisville District is in the Eastern Time Zone.

Offerors are required to submit a proposal consisting of the information identified in paragraphs 2.4 and 2.5 below. The sections should parallel the submission requirements identified herein.

Volume I shall be submitted and include the following information:

Volume I – Factor I: Past Performance Volume I – Factor II: Management Approach

2.5 Volume II shall be submitted and include the following information:

Volume II – Tab A: Standard Form 1449 and Schedule A Volume II – Tab B: Joint Venture Agreements Volume II – Tab C: Proof of Financial Ability Volume II – Tab D: Pre-Award Information

NOTE: All submissions to this proposal announcement shall be submitted electronically through the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) Solicitation Module (https://wawf.eb.mil/). Hand carried delivery or USPS/UPS/FEDEX delivery of hard copies and/or CD-ROMs are not authorized Facsimile submission is not authorized. Failure to place the required submission information under the appropriate tab may result in a lower rating if the evaluators cannot readily find the appropriate information. Instructions for uploading are as follows:

1. Register in PIEE:

a. Navigate to https://piee.eb.mil/

b. Select Register [top right]

c. Select Vendor

d. Create a User ID and Password and follow the prompts [next]

e. Create Security Questions [next]

f. Complete your User Profile Information [next]

g. Complete your Supervisor or Approving Official Information [next]

h. Complete Roles

i. Step 1. Select SOL-Solicitation

ii. Step 2. Select Proposal Manager

iii. Step 3. Click Add Roles

iv. Step 4. Fill in your Location Code (CAGE Code) [next]

i. Provide a justification for your registration [next]

j. Follow the remaining prompts to submit your registration

2. Log into PIEE and select the Solicitation Icon.

3. Enter search criteria to find the solicitation. (Search Criteria can be the complete solicitation number, Solicitation Open Date, Response Due Date, Product or Service Code, NAICS, Set Aside code, Place of Performance Zip Code, Contracting Office DODAAC, or Status)

4. The search results display. Select the Solicitation Number link to open the solicitation.

5. The solicitation displays. The information is view only.

6. Scroll down to see the Contract Information and Attachments. The Attachments can be viewed by selecting the File link. Scroll back up to the top of the screen and click the Offer tab.

7. Click the Offer tab to Add and review current offers on the Solicitation. Click the Add button to add an offer to the Solicitation.

8. Select the applicable CAGE Code for which submitting the offer for. The list is prefiltered based on the CAGEs in the Proposal Manager’s profile.

9. Upload the attachments that comprise the offer by selecting the Choose Files link.

10. After entering all necessary information enter a Signature Date and Click the Signature button.

11. The Sign Document pop-up will be displayed requiring the user to enter a Digital Pin and One Time Password (OTP). Click the Sign and Submit button to continue.

12. After successfully adding the Offer a success message of the submission will be displayed and the offer displayed collapsed. Users may expand and view all their offers on a Solicitation.

The Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) help desk may be reached by calling telephone number 866-618-5988 for assistance.

3. Proposal Evaluation Process.

3.1. A Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) comprised of representatives of the Corps of Engineers, User/Customer, and other required personnel will evaluate the proposals. Offerors are advised that the technical evaluation and rating of proposals will be conducted in strict confidence. Technical proposals (Volume I) will be reviewed and rated without knowledge of the price offered. The number and identities of offerors are not revealed to anyone not involved in the evaluation and award process or to other offerors.

Proposals will be evaluated based on the factors described herein, and the basis of award is a Best Value Trade-Off, as stated above.

3.2 The evaluation process essentially consists of four parts: proposal compliance review and responsibility review, evaluation of Volume I factors, price evaluation, and price/technical trade-off analysis.

3.2.1 Proposal Compliance/Responsibility Review: This is an initial review to ensure that all required forms and certifications are complete, that both a technical and price proposal were received, and that the offeror is financially capable of sustaining performance under the contract.

3.2.2 Evaluation of Volume I Factors: The SSEB will evaluate and rate the Volume I proposals against the RFP requirements. Factor II – Management Approach will be rated using Table 3 below.

3.2.3 Source Selection Advisory Council (SSAC) Review: The SSAC will review the evaluation results of the

SSEB to ensure the evaluation process follows the evaluation criteria, and the ratings are appropriately and consistently applied. The SSAC will consolidate their advice and recommendations into a written comparative analysis and recommendation for use by the SSA in selecting the offeror who represents the best value to the Government.

3.2.4 Price Evaluation: The SSEB, SSAC, and SSA will evaluate price proposals by utilizing binding rates multiplied across estimated hours per multiple disciplines, independent of the technical evaluation.

3.2.5 Price/Technical Trade-off Analysis: After all above evaluations are complete, the SSA will compare the relative advantages and disadvantages of technical proposals and compare prices. The SSA will then consider all factors to select the proposal offering the best value to the Government.

4. Proposal Information and Related Evaluation Factors.

4.1 Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the factors below, listed in descending order of importance.

All evaluation factors, other than price, when combined are considered approximately equal to price. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and target to award up to seven (7) IDIQ contracts without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, 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.

4.2 Volume I – Factor I – Past Performance

4.3 Volume I – Factor II – Management Approach

4.4 Volume II - Price and Pro Forma Information

Tab A Standard Form 1449 and Schedule A Not Rated

Tab B Joint Venture Agreement Not Rated Tab C Proof of Financial Ability Not Rated

Tab D Pre-Award Information Not Rated

4.5 Ratings

Evaluators will apply the l rating for the definition that most closely matches the evaluation.

TABLE 1

Factor I – Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Rating Description 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.

TABLE 2

Factor I - Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Description 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 factor 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 successfully perform the required effort.

TABLE 3

Factor II - Technical / Risk Assessment Ratings Adjectival Rating Description

Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

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

Acceptable

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

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

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable.

Proposal is unawardable.

4.6 Definitions

1. Deficiency. A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. See FAR 15.001.

2. Strength. An aspect of an offeror’s proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

3. Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See

FAR 15.001.

4. Significant Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

5. Uncertainty. Any aspect of a non-cost/price factor proposal for which the intent of the offeror is unclear (e.g., more than one way to interpret the offer or inconsistencies in the proposal indicating that there may have been an error, omission, or mistake).

6. Clarification. Limited exchanges between the Government and offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated. No proposal revisions are allowed. See FAR 15.306(a)(1).

7. Discussions. Exchanges (i.e., negotiations) in a competitive environment that are undertaken with the intent of allowing the offeror to revise its proposal. Discussions take place after establishment of the competitive range. See FAR 15.306(d).

5.0 Volume I – Factor I: Past Performance

5.1 Submission Requirements:

5.1.1 Provide descriptions of up to three (3) example contracts performed within the last seven (7) years (from the solicitation issue date) where the interested firm served as the Prime Contractor, that are similar to this contract in size and scope. If your example contracts include multiple disciplines or were completed simultaneously with other similar projects performed by the same prime contractor, offerors should include that information in the project description. Contracts completed more than seven (7) years before the solicitation issue date may be considered for evaluation purposes but may lessen the overall relevancy rating for that project. An Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract may be submitted only if a single task order could be considered similar in size and scope. Task orders may not be combined in order for the contract to be considered similar.

5.1.2 Projects considered similar in size are those with a value of at least $500,000.00 for the construction management services contract.

5.1.3 Projects considered similar in scope to this project include those for full or part time on-site construction inspection and oversight services, that include safety oversight, as set forth by OSHA or Corps of Engineers Safety Manual (EM 385-1-1). The following services are considered to be on-site construction inspection and oversight services:

Review of submittals, safety plans and shop drawings for contract compliance;

Review of actual work performed to evaluate compliance with contract terms, contract schedule and make recommendations for contractor’s monthly earnings;

General office engineering duties such as drafting change documents, preparing cost estimates, reviewing schedules (CPM analysis), drafting correspondence, reviewing contractor proposals, participating in various communications with contractors, customers and internal staff, records establishment and maintenance;

Conducting quality assurance and safety meetings with contractors;

Coordinating work activities with customers and contractors;

Preparing daily quality assurance reports and other incidental reports;

Provide technical expertise related to structural steel erection, painting, masonry, site work, interior finishes, roofing, electrical, mechanical, civil, and examination of welds, NFPA Life Safety Code, testing and other expertise/service related to construction for both civil and military projects;

Providing computer expertise in commonly used software for letters, data base, spreadsheet, communications and other applications as appropriate;

Construction management for over-all surveillance and management of construction projects or offices from conducting preconstruction conferences through final inspection and close-out;

Providing engineering, technical, clerical and administrative support personnel related to the above services, including contract interpretation and recommendations;

Provide expert testimony or opinions or reports in connection with any of the above in support of change/ claim/ dispute administration;

HTRW certified staff may be required for oversight of hazardous waste removal and disposal.

5.1.4 Additional consideration may be given for projects that contain the following features:

a) Past Performance of CMS for USACE

b) Projects that include multiple disciplines included in paragraph 5.1.3

5.1.5 The following information shall be provided for each project/contract:

a) Name, Title, Project Role, E-Mail address, and Telephone Number of at least one reference (References may be used to verify project scope, dollar value percentages and quality of performance.)

b) Project Title, Location, and Contract Number/Unique Identifier

c) Contract Award Date and Date of Completion (or date when will be complete)

5.1.6 For this factor, also include any ratings, letters, awards, etc. that support past performance on these projects/contracts. Any of this information that is submitted shall clearly identify to which of the submitted projects it pertains. A sample Past Performance Questionnaire is attached for your convenience. If used, the Past Performance Questionnaire must be submitted by the offeror with the proposal submission and not sent directly to the agency from the reference. For each project, the offeror may provide information on problems encountered on the identified contracts and the offeror’s respective corrective action.

NOTE: For purposes of evaluating past performance, the Prime Contractor is defined as the contractor identified in Block 17a of the Standard Form 1449. Projects performed by contractors other than the offeror, including, but not limited to, teaming partners, subcontractors, sister or parent companies, and affiliates will not be evaluated for past performance, unless those other contractors are part of a joint venture offeror as demonstrated by a signed joint venture agreement. If more than one contractor is listed in Block 17a, then a signed joint venture must be submitted with the proposal and the joint venture shall be registered as such in the System for Award Management (SAM). However, each party of the Joint Venture (JV) must submit their own Unique Entity Identifier Number (formerly known as DUNS) with the JV proposal. If the offeror represents the combining of two or more companies as a JV for the purpose of this RFP, each company in the JV may submit project examples, but the total submitted by the JV will not exceed three (3).

5.2 Evaluation Criteria:

5.2.1 The SSEB will first evaluate the relevancy of recent past performance identified in the proposal in response to paragraph 5.1 above. By using the criteria identified above, the SSEB will determine how relevant a past contract is when compared to the scope and size of the solicited contract. A relevancy rating will be assigned to each submitted project using the Past Performance Relevancy Ratings table above. Projects that include past performance of CMS contracts with USACE and those that include multiple disciplines may be considered more relevant.

5.2.2 The SSEB will next review how well the offeror performed on those projects. The Government reserves the right to check any or all cited references to verify supplied information and to assess owner satisfaction.

The Government also reserves the right to not contact the provided references. In addition to the information submitted by the offeror, the Government reserves the right to review any other sources of relevant information for evaluating past performance, including projects other than those submitted by the offeror. The Government may review past performance information retrieved through the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/Unique Entity Identifier numbers.

Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved from 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.

5.2.3 The SSEB will review all past performance information collected and determine the quality of the offeror’s performance, general trends, and usefulness of the information and incorporate this information into the performance confidence assessment. The SSEB will assign a final, overall Performance Confidence rating, using the ratings in the Performance Confidence Assessment table above, based on the SSEB’s assessment of (1) the degree of the offeror’s recent, relevant experience, and (2) how well the offeror performed that experience. Firms that demonstrates successful performance of contracts across multiple geographic areas simultaneously may receive a higher confidence rating.

6.0 Volume I – Factor II: Management Approach

6.1 Submission Requirements:

Provide a management plan narrative for the project that describes how your labor, resources, and subcontractors will be managed, supervised, coordinated, and used to ensure successful completion of the contract. Additionally, the Management Approach shall include the following information:

Describe tools/methods used to find qualified CMS personnel across various disciplines, also how you will manage, supervise and coordinate the performance of work by hired CMS personnel, in the field; and who in the organization will be responsible for this management and coordination.

Discuss which resources are available to support the contract from the home office to include any full-time personnel/Contract Manager.

Discuss how you will leverage communication and the partnering process to assist with risk management/cost control on the contract. Specifically, address the offeror’s process to administer multiple projects/task orders simultaneously.

Discuss your approach to ensure successful completion of multiple projects/task orders across multiple geographic boundaries.

NOTE: There is a page limit of ten (10) pages, using a minimum font size of 11 and a minimum margin of one-half inch on all sides for the Management Approach factor.

6.1.2 Evaluation Criteria:

Management Approach narratives will be evaluated based on the level of understanding of the work and the involvement the contractor will have in the management, oversight, control, and coordination of the work performed during the project. Narratives that demonstrate a clear understanding of the project requirements and provide a thorough approach for successfully managing the solicited project may be rated more favorably by the SSEB.

7.0 Volume II - Price and Proforma Information

7.1 Tab A - Standard Form 1449 and Schedule A.

7.1.1 Submission Requirements:

The offeror shall complete and submit Schedule A.

7.1.2 Evaluation Criteria:

The Total Evaluated Price will be evaluated for fairness and reasonableness through the use of price analysis. The Total Evaluated Price will be calculated by multiplying proposed binding rates for each discipline by the estimated number of hours for each discipline and adding the estimated cost for each discipline together as specified in the Price Breakout Schedule. Note that proposed binding rates must be utilized in each Task Order awarded and that offerors will be required to submit evidence with each Task Order proposal that its binding rates were used in the establishment of its proposed Task Order price. Also note that the estimated number of hours for each discipline in the Price Breakout Schedule are estimates for price evaluation purposes only and do not constitute a guarantee.

7.2 Tab B – Joint Venture Agreements

7.2.1 Submission Requirements:

If more than one contractor is listed in Block 17a, or the offeror listed in Block 17a is a joint venture (JV), then a signed JV agreement must be submitted with the proposal and the offeror shall be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) as a legal entity separate from the individual joint venture members. However, each member of the JV must submit its own Unique Entity Identifier (formally DUNS number) with the proposal.

Small business offerors (e.g., 8(a), HUBZone, SDVOSB) submitting a proposal as a JV or Mentor-Protégé shall submit evidence from the offeror's SBA Servicing Agency that the offeror has notified and discussed the proposed joint venture for this specific project with the appropriate SBA Representative or Business Opportunity Specialist. Joint Venture agreements and approved 8(a) Mentor-Protégé agreements must be submitted with the proposal.

7.2.2 Evaluation Criteria:

This information will be used for the purpose of completing the Pre-Award Survey and will not be rated.

Joint Venture Agreements and Mentor-Protégé agreements must comply with the relevant regulations in Title 13 of the Code of Federal Regulations in order for an offeror to be eligible for any small business-related price preference.

7.3 Tab C – Proof of Financial Ability

7.3.1 Submission Requirements:

Financial Capability. Submit Proof of Financial Ability (Most recent financial statement covering assets and liabilities). Include the name, address, and telephone number of offeror's banking institution. If the offeror is a joint venture, submit this information for all joint venture members.

7.3.2 Evaluation Criteria:

This information will be used for the purpose of completing the Pre-Award Survey and will not be rated.

See FAR Part 28 for information related to bonds.

7.4 Tab D – Pre-Award Information

7.4.1 Submission Requirements:

A. The offeror shall submit one completed copy of Representations and Certification.

B. The offeror shall submit the following information:

a) Number of years the firm has been in business

b) Name, address, and telephone numbers of two credit/trade references

c) A list of present commitments, including the dollar value

If the offeror is a joint venture, submit this information for all joint venture members.

7.4.2 Evaluation Criteria:

This information will be used for the purpose of completing the Pre-Award Survey and will not be rated.

NOTE: NAVFAC/USACE REQUESTS THAT THE CLIENT COMPLETES THIS QUESTIONNAIRE AND SUBMITS DIRECTLY BACK TO THE OFFEROR. THE OFFEROR WILL SUBMIT THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO USACE WITH THEIR PROPOSAL, AND MAY DUPLICATE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FUTURE SUBMISSION ON USACE SOLICITATIONS. THE

GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO VERIFY ANY AND ALL INFORMATION ON THIS FORM.

NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Form PPQ-0) CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1-4)

1. Contractor Information Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: DUNs Number:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:

2. Work Performed as: Prime Contractor Sub Contractor Joint Venture Other (Explain) Percent of project work performed:

If subcontractor, who was the prime (Name/Phone #):

3. Contract Information Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):

Contract Type: Firm Fixed Price Cost Reimbursement Other (Please specify):

Contract Title:

Contract Location:

Award Date (mm/dd/yy):

Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Explain Differences:

Original Contract Price (Award Amount):

Final Contract Price (to include all modifications, if applicable):

Explain Differences:

4. Project Description:

Complexity of Work High Med Routine How is this project relevant to project of submission? (Please provide details such as similar equipment, requirements, conditions, etc.)

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)

5. Client Information Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

6. Describe the client’s role in the project:

7. Date Questionnaire was completed (mm/dd/yy):

8. Client’s Signature:

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(E) Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

(VG) Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were effective.

A Very Good rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the Government/Owner. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

(S) Satisfactory Performance meets minimum contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor appear or were satisfactory.

A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the Contractor recovered from without impact to the contract. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. Per DOD policy, a fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that Contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.

(M) Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the Contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The Contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

A Marginal rating is appropriate when a significant event occurred from which the Contractor had trouble overcoming and that impacted the Government/Owner.

(U) Unsatisfactory

Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains serious problem(s) for which the Contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

An Unsatisfactory rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred from which the contractor had trouble overcoming and that impacted the Government/Owner. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an Unsatisfactory rating.

(N) Not Applicable

No information or did not apply to your contract Rating will be neither positive nor negative.

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT

PLEASE CIRCLE THE ADJECTIVE RATING THAT BEST REFLECTS

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE.

1. QUALITY:

a) Quality of technical data/report preparation efforts E VG S M U N

b) Ability to meet quality standards specified for technical performance E VG S M U N

c) Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance

E VG S M U N

d) Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements (without adverse effect on performance)

E VG S M U N

2. SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:

a) Compliance with contract delivery/completion schedules including any significant intermediate milestones. (If liquidated damages were assessed or the schedule was not met, please address below)

E VG S M U N

b) Rate the contractor’s use of available resources to accomplish tasks identified in the contract

E VG S M U N

3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

a) To what extent were the end users satisfied with the project? E VG S M U N

b) Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes;

responsiveness to administrative reports; efforts to keep lines of communication open)

E VG S M U N

c) To what extent was the contractor cooperative, businesslike, and concerned with the interests of the customer?

E VG S M U N

d) Overall customer satisfaction E VG S M U N

4. MANAGEMENT/ PERSONNEL/LABOR

a) Effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractors, suppliers, materials, and/or labor force?

E VG S M U N

b) Ability to hire, apply, and retain a qualified workforce to this effort E VG S M U N

c) Government Property Control E VG S M U N

d) Knowledge/expertise demonstrated by contractor personnel E VG S M U N

e) Utilization of Small Business concerns E VG S M U N

f) Ability to simultaneously manage multiple projects with multiple disciplines E VG S M U N

g) Ability to assimilate and incorporate changes in requirements and/or priority, including planning, execution, and response to Government changes

E VG S M U N

h) Effectiveness of overall management (including ability to effectively lead, manage, and control the program)

E VG S M U N

5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

a) Ability to meet the terms and conditions within the contractually agreed price(s)?

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor proposed innovative alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability, or other factors that benefited the client

E VG S M U N

c) If this is/was a Government cost type contract, please rate the Contractor’s timeliness and accuracy in submitting monthly invoices with appropriate back-up documentation, monthly status reports/budget variance reports, compliance with established budgets, and avoidance of significant and/or unexplained variances (under runs or overruns)

E VG S M U N

d) Is the Contractor’s accounting system adequate for management and tracking of costs? If no, please explain in Remarks section.

Yes No

e) If a Government contract, has it been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations? Indicate if show cause or cure notices were issued, or any default action in comment section below.

Yes No

f) Have there been any indications that the contractor has had any financial problems? If yes, please explain below.

Yes No

6. SAFETY/SECURITY

a) To what extent was the contractor able to maintain an environment of safety, adhere to its approved safety plan, and respond to safety issues?

(Includes: following the users rules, regulations, and requirements regarding housekeeping, safety, correction of noted deficiencies, etc.)

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor complied with all security requirements for the project and personnel security requirements.

E VG S M U N

7. GENERAL

a) Ability to successfully respond to emergency and/or surge situations (including notifying the COR, PM, or Contracting Officer in a timely manner regarding urgent contractual issues).

E VG S M U N

b) Compliance with contractual terms/provisions (explain if specific issues) E VG S M U N

c) Would you hire or work with this firm again? (If no, please explain below) Yes No

d) In summary, provide an overall rating for the work performed by this Contractor.

E VG S M U N

Please provide responses to the questions above (if applicable) and/or additional remarks. Furthermore, please provide a brief narrative addressing specific strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, or other comments that may assist our office in evaluating performance risk (please attach additional pages if necessary).

REPS AND CERTS

REPRESENTATIONS & CERTIFICATIONS

COMPANY NAME AND ADDRESS:________________________________________________________

PHONE NUMBER FAX NUMBER_________________

EMAIL ADDRESS_____________________________________________________

BUSINESS SIZE (select one)

Large Business Small Business HUBZone Business 8A_______ Woman-Owned Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned______

Contractor is registered with SAM: YES NO (See FAR 52.204-7)

TAX ID #_________________________

INDICATE Unique Entity Identifier (previously DUNS NUMBER)______________________________

(Note: See FAR 52.204-7. Unique Entity Identifier is a 9 digit numeric code.)

CAGE NO._________________

(FAR 52.204-7)

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

SECTION C

PROFESSIONAL, ADMINISTRATIVE AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR CONSTRUCTION

MANAGEMENT SERVICES (CMS) SUPPORT AT VARIOUS CIVIL TYPE WORK PRIMARILY WITHIN

THE GREAT LAKES AND OHIO RIVER DIVISION MISSION BOUNDARIES.

The scope of services includes providing assistance to the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) in its CMS mission at various projects in the above service area. The solicitation will seek a target of seven (7) IDIQ contracts with a duration of five (5) year base. Each request for CMS services will be ordered by “task order” under a solicitation to the contractor. All task order work is considered to be non-personal services or performance of inherently governmental actions. The contractor will be responsible for performing inspections, producing reports and notifying to Government of any issues. The contractor’s personnel will report to the contractor with clear lines of communication established between the contractor, their employee, and Government personnel delegated by the Contracting Officer. The duration will be as set forth with each task order. However, the contractor may not perform any work that is an “Inherently Governmental” function.

Guidance on recognition of “Inherently Governmental” function is given in Attachment 1.

The support services may include, but are not limited to the items listed below:

Full or part time on-site construction inspection/oversight with special consideration for safety as set forth both by OSHA and US Army Corps of Engineers safety Manual (EM 385-1-1)

Review of submittals, safety plans and shop drawings for contract compliance Review of actual work performed to evaluate compliance with contract terms, contract schedule and make recommendations for contractor’s monthly earnings General office engineering duties such as drafting change documents, preparing cost estimates, reviewing schedules (CPM analysis), drafting correspondence, reviewing contractor proposals, participating in various communications with contractors, customers and internal staff, records establishment and maintenance

Conducting quality assurance and safety meetings with contractors Coordinating work activities with customers and contractors Preparing daily quality assurance reports and other incidental reports Provide technical expertise related to structural steel erection, painting, masonry, site work, interior finishes, roofing, electrical, mechanical, civil, and examination of welds, NFPA Life Safety Code, testing and other expertise/service related to construction for both civil and military projects;

Providing computer expertise in commonly used software for letters, data base, spreadsheet, communications and other applications as appropriate

Construction management for over-all surveillance and management of construction projects or offices from conducting preconstruction conferences through final inspection and close-out

Providing engineering, technical, clerical and administrative support personnel related to the above services, including contract interpretation and recommendations

Provide expert testimony or opinions or reports in connection with any of the above in support of change/ claim/ dispute administration

HTRW certified staff may be required for oversight of hazardous waste removal and disposal

The Construction Management Services may consist of, but not be limited to, the following disciplines and skills:

Senior and/or Junior Construction Representative Serves as the Construction Representative responsible for surveillance of construction projects and delivering findings to the USACE Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR). Delivers surveillance reports on all phases of construction for compliance with plans and specifications in respect to workmanship, materials, installation and construction methods to government personnel. Becomes familiar with contract plans and specifications relative to all phases of construction and delivers recommendations of any necessary changes to government personnel. Provides surveillance at construction sites, assists COR to resolve apparent differences, and delivers opinion to government personnel, surveys quality assurance programs related to projects, discusses changed conditions, and delivers advice to government personnel. Delivers assistance to the

Government relative to investigating the need for, and preparing data for change orders. Develops detailed inspection requirements and control methods in coordination with Government personnel. Delivers drafts change orders and modifications for the COR’s signature. All deliverables from the contract employee under this discipline will be reviewed by government personnel within 10 calendar days of receipt.

The following are a list of specialized skills or codes which may be required:

Medical Gases (NFPA 99) Life Safety Code (NFPA 101) National Electric Code (NFPA 70) Plumbing (IPC) Fire Protection Systems (NFPA 13 & 72)

HVAC/TAB (ASHRAE/AABC/NEBB)

Building Commissioning Communications & Security (IT, Nurse Call/Code Blue, Imaging & IDS/PACS, ICD 705) Biomedical Engineering (CT, PET, CATH, MRI, etc.)

Transport/Equipment (Patient Lifts, Elevators, Transport Systems, Pneumatic Tube, Food Service, Sterilizers, Mortuary, & Laboratory) Dredging Welding Inspection Painting and Metalizing Inspection Environmental HAZWOPER, site sampling (40 hour HTRW course and current 8 hour refresher) Airfield Paving and Concrete Fabricated Items Inspection Heavy Machinery Inspection Electrical Quality Verification Services

Construction Surveillance to be Performed by Construction Representatives: Performs contract surveillance which broadly defined will include: assist and provide recommendations in contract administration matters; deliver draft requests for proposals to government personnel; deliver cost proposal analyses and prepares draft cost and price analyses in support of audits.