Inactive Total Small Business Set-Aside (FAR 19.5)

1.) SYNOPSIS: This announcement is open to small business. The proposed services, which will be obtained by negotiated Firm- Fixed- Price Contracts, are for a variety of efforts to provide Value Engin... 1.) SYNOPSIS: This announcement is open to small business. The proposed services, which will be obtained by negotiated Firm- Fixed- Price Contracts, are for a variety of efforts to provide Value Engineering (“VE”) services or workshops in support of the American Jobs Plan consisting of a wide range of project types, including but not limited to civil works, military, and environmental projects worldwide. Awards will be made as Firm-Fixed-Price task orders during the period of performance. The total combined contract capacity is valued at $20,000,000 over a five-year period. This is a five-year contract, with no option years. Task orders are expected to range from approximately $20,000 to $250,000; however, larger task orders up to the maximum contract value may be awarded. This total dollar amount cannot be guaranteed since the task orders are on an as-needed basis. Task orders may be assigned for any work within the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Contract capacity may be shared with other Districts, Divisions, or Centers throughout USACE. There is no limit on the value of individual task orders. Work will be issued by negotiated Firm-Fixed-Price task orders. Firm(s) that are selected for negotiation of a contract may be required to submit additional information at a later time for use in the evaluation of qualifications for specific task orders. The period of performance for task orders issued under these contracts may extend beyond the five (5) year ordering period. Up to five firms will be selected. If the Contracting Officer determines during the selection process that fewer or more contracts should be awarded, based upon the selection criteria, the Contracting Officer has the discretion of adjusting that number, or awarding no contracts at all. Once selected, the following factors will be used in deciding which selected firm will be utilized for task orders: a. Professional qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of required services; b. Capacity and availability to accomplish the work in the required time; c. Specialized experience and technical competence in the type of work required (specifically work related to the American Jobs Plan), including, where appropriate, master of Value Methodology, effective communication, and experience diversity; d. Past performance on contracts with Government agencies and private industry in terms of cost control, quality of work, and compliance with performance schedules; and e. Other appropriate evaluation criteria specific to the task order requirement. Multiple task orders may be awarded with similar completion schedules and overlapping delivery dates. Estimated start date is September 2022. In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) 36.604 and the supplements thereto, and upon final acceptance or termination, all task orders above $35,000 will receive a performance evaluation. A performance evaluation may be prepared for lesser task orders and interim performance evaluations may be prepared at any time. Performance evaluations will be maintained for use in future source selections for Architect-Engineer Services. 2.) PROJECT INFORMATION: a. General Nomenclature: VE, Value Analysis (VA), Value Management (VM), and Certified Value Specialist (CVS). For the purpose of this contract, VE, VA, and VM are all synonymous. Studies and Workshops are synonymous. b. Agency Goals and Objectives: USACE’s goal is to use the VE/VM process to ensure the project(s) needs and required functions are met with the highest value possible, where value is defined as the relationship between functions (performance) and resources. For example, this can be accomplished by helping projects achieve a full scope award, stay within budget, remain on schedule, minimize maintenance needs, extend lifetime of systems, minimize risk, improve processes, and/or reduce life cycle costs. The overall goal is to have a viable VE program by performing VE work that our customers appreciate, respect, and actively seek the involvement of value management. c. Agency Requirements of Consultant Approach to VE Studies: VE, VA, and VM workshops will follow the formal SAVE International approved job plan as well as the USACE VE Standard (Chief Office of Value Engineer [COVE] policy letters). The Consultant/Agency contractual relationship will be a partnership to achieve the goals and objectives stated above; thus, acceptance of a task order scope of work implies agreement to the approach unless specified otherwise by the District Value Officer (DVO), via Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR). Otherwise, a written alternative approach is required prior to the award of a task order. The CVS team leader is the primary POC for assigned project task orders, after the contract has been negotiated and awarded, and will be responsible for all contract matters, task management, and assuring the successful execution of the scope. All CVS team leaders shall be accredited by SAVE International. d. Workshop Types: The task orders will include performance of formal VE studies, value-based program/project planning/design charrettes, risk analysis including mitigation plans, large program (versus project) level and business process review workshops, lessons learned reviews, and after-action reviews. e. USACE has six (6) different types of VE workshops/levels of effort: Level 1 – Level 6 (COVE policy letter 2015-03). Also, there are two other approaches to address the VE requirement; identified as “Bridges and Scans” (COVE 2015-03). The various levels of effort are intended to meet the intent of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-131 as well as comply with USACE policy by scaling the VE approach to match the project complexity and anticipated value opportunity. f. Project Types: Projects and programs requiring services under this contract may include, but are not limited to, civil work improvement projects, large variety of military facilities, complex navigation and flood risk management projects, and extensive environmental restoration projects. These projects may use design/build, adapt/build, design/bid/build and other project delivery methods. Additionally, specialty workshops for headquarters-level program assessments and evaluations of agency-wide engineering business procedures may be required. VE related efforts include, but not limited to, the examination and evaluation of product, service, and program associated with military installations, Federal, State, and local agencies that have come to USACE to support their missions, respectively. g. Relevant Projects: Projects that are considered most relevant to the typical work performed by USACE are: Horizontal Construction, the design and repair of major civil works infrastructure projects like locks and dams, flood protection system, levees, environmental remediation/removal efforts. It is not required for the submitted projects to be for the military or the U.S. Government to be considered relevant; however, those who offer a variety that does include military or civil work may be considered more relevant. h. Work Assignment Protocol: It is anticipated that work will be distributed on a rotational basis and will remain on a rotational basis. Some of the factors that may affect an even distribution of work are but not limited to the following: the consultants’ availability, the consultants’ responsiveness, experience with the type of work being performed, and performance on previous task orders on this contract. Firms that demonstrate the capacity to meet a project schedule under short notice will be considered more favorable. i. Core Value Project Team Structure: All value studies will be led by a Certified Value Specialist ((CVS), may be junior or senior based on project complexity). Desired teams consist of experts on relevant aspects of the project or procurement being studied. USACE has found the quality of the technical team members provided has a profound effect on the success of the VE workshop. All team members will be approved by the COR and will be hired on a task order basis based on the direction in the scope of work. 3.) SELECTION CRITERIA: Selection criteria in descending order of importance are listed below. Paragraph 3(a) through Paragraph 3(d) are primary. There is minimum content that MUST be included in the firm(s)’s response in order to be considered qualified. Any proposal that fails to meet the minimum qualifications will not be given any further consideration. The following list the minimum content that is required to demonstrate meeting the minimum requirements: a. Professional Qualifications: The government’s evaluation of professional qualifications will consider education, training, certifications, registrations, overall experience, relevant experience, and longevity with the firm. Only SF330 Section E, Section F, Section G, and the Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) additional consideration information in Section H will be used to evaluate the offeror’s professional qualifications. b. Specialized Experience and Technical Competence: The government’s evaluation of Specialized Experience and Technical Competency will consider example projects in SF330 Section F that demonstrate the Specialized Experience and Technical Competencies below. The government’s evaluation will also consider how these same Specialized Experience and Technical Competencies are demonstrated in the respective team members’ resumes for both CVS and Junior CVS in SF330 Section E, for the disciplines as indicated below in parentheses. 1. Mastery of the Value Methodology: The Consultant’s response to the sample VE workshop summaries is expected to demonstrate a strong understanding of function analysis. Terminology & Definitions: i. Demonstration of a “true understanding of function analysis” would be in the form of project specific functions (not cursory or general) that are active verbs and measureable nouns. The functions should define “What is the core of the project’s purpose.” ii. True value alternatives are alternatives that maximize the Value expression of Functions divided by Resources without sacrificing quality while maintaining or increasing function and reducing or maintaining resources. True value alternatives are not cost cutting options. iii. Significant value contribution means it was accepted by the customer, it was implemented into the project, and changed the direction of the project in a positive way. 2. Effective Communication: The Consultant will be evaluated on how effective they are at succinctly conveying the idea, at setting the context behind an idea by including all the salient or relevant background elements, and selling the idea. The submitted sample Value Engineering Workshop Summaries will be used to evaluate this factor. 3. Management Plan: The Consultant will be evaluated on the firm's management approach; management of subcontractors (if applicable); quality control procedures (for all products including reports and electronic documents); procedures to ensure internal resources are not over-committed. An organizational chart showing the inter-relationship of management and various team components (including subcontractors) is required. This organizational chart is required in Part 1 section D of the SF330. 4. VE Experience: The Consultant will be evaluated based on a narrative that discusses the volume of value engineering studies conducted in the last 36 months that followed the SAVE standard and were greater than 24 hours in length; illustrate how many studies the firm typically performs simultaneously. The firms who demonstrate a high volume of VE workshop experience on an annual basis will be rated more favorably. 5. Team Member Selection: One of the basic functions of Value Engineering is to “Supplement Knowledge” by infusing expertise. The Consultant will be evaluated based on their process (approach) in selecting individual team members for a value engineering study. The Consultant will be evaluated based on the various companies your firm has a relationship (Portfolio Diversity) with that has served as a source for technical team members and how long your firm has worked with these companies. The Consultant will also be evaluated based on your firm’s ability to find unique or specialized team members for a value engineering study. Terminology and Definitions: i. Senior Level: Technical team member expertise is critical to the overall success of value studies. The Louisville District defines senior level to be a minimum of 15 years’ experience actually performing the work as a credentialed professional and not just managing it. Any technical team member listed shall be experts in design and construction as represented by the types of projects they designed rather than being team members on value studies or having VE credentials. ii. Quality of Technical Team: The evaluation factors that will be used to gauge the quality of the technical team members are: relevant expertise applicable to the type of work the Louisville District typically does and successful demonstration that the team members are an expert in his or her field. iii. Unique/Specialized Experience: The Consultant will also be evaluated on its ability to use members from disciplines outside of the “core” technical disciplines (i.e., Civil, Architect, Mechanical, Electrical, Structural, Geotechnical, and Constructability) in a way that adds expertise to the team and successfully contributes to its value studies. iv. Portfolio Diversity: The Consultant will be given a more favorable rating for: having a diverse portfolio of technical team members in which to pull from, for having a long relationship with these sources, and for having an active relationship. i. Valuable Technical Team Member Expertise: Based on the type of planned as part of the American Jobs Plan, the following experience will be considered valuable and will be rated more favorably: Hydraulic Engineers, Dam and Levee Experts, and hydrogeologist. 6. Effective Process: The Consultant will be evaluated based on a brief narrative that describes what makes your process/studies effective. 7. Workshop Planning: The Consultant will be evaluated based on a brief narrative that describes your experience planning, coordinating, staffing, executing and reporting value engineering studies/workshops for complex military, environmental, and civil works programs and projects. Consultants who demonstrate a higher number of relevant VE workshops in which they were responsible for planning will be rated more favorably. 8. Consensus Building: The Consultant will be evaluated based on a brief narrative that describes the firms experience coordinating/organizing large and diverse groups with various agendas (some contentious) and how your facilitation skills allowed you to arrive at a common list of objectives and requirements for programs and projects. 9. Experience Diversity: The Consultant will be evaluated based on a brief narrative that describes the firms experience doing the following: i. Organizing nontraditional approaches using the Value Methodology and specifically Function Analysis to identify solutions to complex problems. ? Nontraditional is defined as something different than a 3-5 day consecutive VE workshop following the 6-step job plan. ii. Applying the Value Methodology to programmatic level efforts. iii. Leading/facilitating planning and design charrettes. iv. Describe your firm’s application of the value engineering methodology in a nonconventional or non-standard workshop for which your CVS team leader developed the approach. Additionally, indicate the outcomes of this application. c. Capacity: The government’s evaluation of the offeror’s capacity narrative and associated tables, figures, etc. included in SF330 Section H will consider the offeror’s ability to complete the work in the required time with the understanding that this contract may require multiple design teams to work multiple task orders at various locations simultaneously. The ID/IQ additional consideration information included in Section H will also be considered when evaluating capacity. d. Past Performance: The government’s evaluation of past performance will consider the following: 1. The performance evaluations provided in Section H for the projects in Section F, 2. Any performance evaluations in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) for the Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) numbers of any firms or offices listed in the SF330 or for any of the projects included in Section F, and 3. If not already considered, the overall past performance on ID/IQ contracts provided in the ID/IQ additional consideration information included in Section H. Performance evaluations completed by the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) or equivalent role on the contract are preferred. While all performance evaluations may be considered, those for projects listed in Section F and projects with similar scopes of work will receive the most consideration when evaluating past performance. 4.) SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: Responses Due by 15 April 2022 at 2PM EST. Offerors must submit one (1) hard copy and one (1) electronic copy on compact disc (CD) of the SF 330, Part l, and one copy of the SF330, Part II for the prime firm. Each branch office that will have a key role in the proposed contract must also submit a copy of the SF 330 Part II. Offerors must submit a current and accurate SF 330, Part II, for each proposed sub-consultant. Any firm with an electronic mailbox responding to the solicitation should identify such address in the SF 330, Part I. Please identify the Dun & Bradstreet number of the office(s) performing the work in Block 5 of the SF 330, Part I. Dun & Bradstreet numbers may be obtained by contacting (866) 705-5711, or via the internet at http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform. The proposal shall be submitted as one file using Adobe Acrobat (.pdf). Font size shall be 10 or larger on white letter-sized paper (8 inches by 11 inches). The SF 330 will be no longer than 150 pages in length (excluding the SF 330, Part IIs). Resumes in Section E can be no more than two pages in length, and individual projects in Section F can be no more than 4 pages in length. Section H shall be 20 pages or less in length and may only include information specifically required by this pre-solicitation to be in Section H. All government evaluation of proposals associated with the selection criteria in Paragraph 3(a) and 3(b) will be performed using Section E, Section F, Section G and Section H as indicated in Paragraph 3. Any additional information included in the proposal not specifically required may not be evaluated or considered. Each printed side of a page will count as one page. The data on the CD shall not substitute for the hard copy submission. Dividers, bindings and cover sheets do not count against the total page count of the response to the request for proposal (RFP). Do not furnish design portfolios, prints, magazines, newspaper clippings, or CDs of completed projects. All requirements of this notice must be met for a firm to be considered responsive. Additional instructions and clarifications for SF330: SF330 Section C: ? The offerors shall submit the Proposed Team; a list all your core VE related staff that are critical to the success of the overall VE effort, not technical team members. SF330 Section D: ? The offerors shall submit an Organizational Chart that illustrates the organizational structure of the company. Clearly illustrate who the contract manager is. The contract manager is considered the primary point of contact for the overall contract and the person(s) that will discuss scope, schedule, budget, and negotiate the task order contracts. The organizational structure shall clearly illustrate if the core staff are company employees or consist of subcontracted employees. If core staff consist of subcontracted employees, clearly indicate the organizational structure between prime and subs. SF330 Section E: The individuals identified by the project roles on the SF330 may not have multiple duties or be “dualhatted”. Offerors shall provide individual resumes in SF330 Section E for each of the individuals identified in the SELECTION CRITERIA. Individuals included in SF330 Section E must possess the certifications and registrations listed below and must have performed in their respective role (e.g., CVS, junior CVS, etc.) on projects similar to those listed in PROJECT INFORMATION of this solicitation. Proposals that strongly demonstrate, in lieu of just listing, the specialized experience and technical competence included in Paragraph 3(b) will be evaluated more favorably. Section E of the SF330 shall be submitted for each team member required in this solicitation as well as any additional core team members submitted beyond the minimum. 1. Clearly indicate licenses (Professional Engineer [PE], Registered Architect [RA], etc.) and certifications (CVS, etc.) along with the year the licenses and certifications were obtained. It is critical to include the length of time the CVS has been certified and facilitating VE workshops. 2. Demonstrate the experience of each team member and their experience relevant to the type of work USACE typically performs. A maximum of five projects is allowed per person. 3. Brief Description: Make sure to clearly illustrate the person’s role on the project. Additional pages may be added for each team member. Identify up to three (3) examples of Key VE alternatives/proposals that were instrumental to the success of the submitted VE study. The proposer will be evaluated on the following as a minimum to be given any further consideration: 1. At least three (3) resumes for senior certified value specialists (CVS) defined as having at least ten (10) years of experience as a CVS facilitating VE workshops in accordance to SAVE standards. 2. Include at least one (1) resume for a junior CVS defined as having at least two years of experience facilitating VE workshops as a CVS in accordance to SAVE standards. i. A junior CVS with several years of diverse work experience will be given a more favorable rating. 3. All CVSs shall be certified by SAVE International and be in and maintain good standing. 4. The three (3) minimum senior CVS team members must be active by demonstrating VE workshop facilitation within the last three (3) years. i. Validation of VE workshop facilitation may be in the form of a statement from their customer(s) or a list of projects recently performed. ii. The contractor is recommended to provide supporting evidence and/or feedback from the customer(s). 5. The three (3) minimum CVS team members must demonstrate having at least three (3) of their five (5) submitted projects as relevant (Standard Form 330 [SF330] Section E). 6. Team members with more than three (3) relevant projects will be rated more favorably. SF330 Section F: Projects included in SF330 Section F will be considered more relevant if they demonstrate the items in Paragraph 2 (f). Submit summaries of up to five (5) relevant Value Engineering Workshops that demonstrate a mastery of the value methodology and illustrate how these workshop results had a significant value contribution to the project being studied. The submitted studies must have been done by the firm and by the CVS team members submitted in your proposal. The projects do not need to be (but can be) the same as those submitted in Section E for the individual team members. At least one (1) of the submitted projects shall be for a customer other than USACE. List the technical team members used for each study in field 25 of section F. All of the Firm’s submitted projects must have been performed by the firm and shall have been led by one of the CVSs submitted in your proposal. SF330 Section H: In SF330 Section H, include an evaluation of performance from the project owner (preferred) or the client (if an evaluation from the project owner cannot be obtained) for all example projects included in SF330 Section F. Performance evaluations will not be counted against the 20-page limit of SF330 Section H or the 150- page limit for the entire SF330. In SF330 Section H, each offeror shall produce a detailed Design Quality Management Plan including the following items: 1. An explanation of the firm's management approach 2. Management of sub-consultants (if applicable) i. Team member section. Include a table of the various companies your firm has a relationship with that has served as a source for technical team members and how long your firm has worked with these companies; a matrix of companies showing the projects and years you have worked together on may be a good way to illustrate this information. Also, include a sampling of technical team members that highlights the quality of the team members that you utilize and to whom you have access. 3. Include a discussion of Workshop Planning, Workshop Execution, and Consensus Building. 4. Quality control procedures to include the roles and responsibilities team members. 5. Risk management and mitigation processes, procedures to ensure that internal resources are not over committed 6. A narrative explaining the chain of command to include individuals that will serve as the single point of contact for the contract and other senior leaders who are responsible to ensure successful execution of task orders 7. An organizational chart showing the inter-relationship of management and various team components (including sub-consultants). 8. Also, in Block H indicate the estimated percentage involvement of each firm on the proposed team or describe the type of work and roles the prime and subcontractors will perform under this contract. It is the responsibility of the Prime Contractor to comply with FAR 19.508(e) and 52.219-14. Section H shall also include a Capacity Narrative and associated tables, figures, etc. showing the offeror’s ability to complete the work with available resources and available ramp-up capacity with numerous high-quality design teams. In SF330 Section H, the offerors may receive additional consideration for the successful execution of IDIQ contracts. Demonstration of Diversity of VE workshops variety (i.e., more than three of the examples discussed in paragraph 2 (f)) will receive additional consideration. For each IDIQ included, the offeror shall provide the contract number, the total contract capacity and capacity used, number of task orders executed, performance evaluation ratings for task orders (ratings only, not entire evaluation, summary format acceptable), team members noted in Section E that were VE members for the task orders and team members that were responsible for the overall management of the IDIQ. Do not submit a list of task orders for each IDIQ contract. IDIQ contracts included in Section H will be considered more relevant if the staff who worked on those IDIQ contracts align with the staff proposed in Section E. Antiterrorism and Operation Security All contractor employees, to include subcontractor employees, requiring access to Army installations, facilities, controlled access areas, or require network access, shall complete AT Level I awareness training within 30 calendar days after contract start date or effective date of incorporation of this requirement into the contract, whichever is applicable. Upon request, the contractor shall submit certificates of completion for each affected contractor employee and subcontractor employee, to the COR or to the contracting officer (if a COR is not assigned), within 5 calendar days after completion of training by all employees and subcontractor personnel. AT Level I awareness training is available at the following website: http://jko.jten.mil/courses/atl1/launch.html; or it can be provided by the RA ATO in presentation form which will be documented via memorandum. All contractor and all associated sub-contractor employees shall comply with applicable installation, facility and area commander installation/facility access and local security policies and procedures (provided by government representative). The contractor shall also provide all information required for background checks to meet installation/facility access requirements to be accomplished by installation Provost Marshal Office, Director of Emergency Services or Security Office. Contractor workforce must comply with all personal identity verification requirements (FAR clause 52.204-9, Personal Identity Verification of Contractor Personnel) as directed by DOD, HQDA and/or local policy. In addition to the changes otherwise authorized by the changes clause of this contract, should the Force Protection Condition (FPCON) at any installation or facility change, the Government may require changes in contractor security matters or processes. The contractor and all sub-contractor employees will be issued a CAC only if duties involve one of the following: (1) Both physical access to a DoD facility and access, via logon, to DoD networks on-site or remotely; (2) Remote access, via logon, to a DoD network using DoD-approved remote access procedures; or (3) Physical access to multiple DoD facilities or multiple non-DoD federally controlled facilities on behalf of the DoD on a recurring basis for a period of 6 months or more. At the discretion of the sponsoring activity, an interim CAC may be issued based on a favorable review of the FBI fingerprint check and a successfully scheduled NACI at the Office of Personnel Management. The contractor and all associated sub-contractors shall receive a brief/training (provided by the RA) on the local suspicious activity reporting program. This locally developed training will be used to inform employees of the types of behavior to watch for and instruct employees to report suspicious activity to the project manager, security representative or law enforcement entity. This training shall be completed within 30 calendar days of contract award and within 30 calendar days of new employees commencing performance with the results reported to the COR NLT 5 calendar days after the completion of the training. All new contractor employees will complete Level I OPSEC Training within 30 calendar days of their reporting for duty. Additionally, all contractor employees must complete annual OPSEC awareness training. The contractor shall submit certificates of completion for each affected contractor and subcontractor employee, to the COR or to the contracting officer (if a COR is not assigned), within 5 calendar days after completion of training. OPSEC awareness training is available at the following websites: https://www.iad.gov/ioss/ or http://www.cdse.edu/catalog/operations-security.html; or it can be provided by the RA OPSEC Officer in presentation form which will be documented via memorandum. All contract employees, including subcontractor employees who are not in possession of the appropriate security clearance or access privileges, will be escorted in areas where they may be exposed to classified and/or sensitive materials and/or sensitive or restricted areas. The Contractor must pre-screen Candidates using the E-verify Program (http://www.uscis.gov/e-verify) website to meet the established employment eligibility requirements. The Vendor must ensure that the Candidate has two valid forms of Government issued identification prior to enrollment to ensure the correct information is entered into the E-verify system. An initial list of verified/eligible Candidates must be provided to the COR no later than 3 business days after the initial contract award. To be eligible for award, a firm must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) database, via the SAM Internet site at https://www.sam.gov. Submit responses to: US Army Corps of Engineers, Detroit District, ATTN: Joseph Russ...