Inactive Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) Set-Aside (FAR 19.14)

DESCRIPTION: This is a Sources Sought-Pre-Solicitation Notice for the establishment of an Architect-Engineering (A-E) contract with services to be performed at the Buffalo VA Medical Center, 3495 Bail... DESCRIPTION: This is a Sources Sought-Pre-Solicitation Notice for the establishment of an Architect-Engineering (A-E) contract with services to be performed at the Buffalo VA Medical Center, 3495 Bailey Ave, Buffalo, NY 14215. This requirement is 100% set-aside to Small Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) firms. THIS ANNOUNCEMENT IS NOT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL; NO SOLICITATION PACKAGE WILL BE ISSUED UNTIL AFTER AN EVALUATION HAS BEEN MADE ON THE PROVIDED SF-330s. The SF-330 can be downloaded through the GSA Forms Library at: http://www.gsa.gov/portal/forms/type/TOP, scroll down to locate and click on the SF-330 hyperlink entitled, Architect-Engineer Qualifications. VA intends to award an Architect/Engineer contract for complete design services (preliminary concepts and layouts, program development, investigative services, preparation of contract drawings and specifications, cost estimating services, and construction period services) for the Design Building 3 Renovation and Additions, Project# 528-24-112. The area of consideration is restricted to firms with offices and key personnel to be assigned to the design located within a 600-mile radius of the Buffalo VAMC site as indicated by a mapquest.com driving directions search from the prime designer s main or satellite office address to the project site. Written questions pertaining to this requirement should be submitted no later than 12:00 PM. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT), June 03, 2024. Interested firms should submit their current SF-330, Parts I and II, to Nicholas.Winne@va.gov. The SF-330s are due no later than 12:00 PM, EDT, June 10, 2024. 1.1 Location Services performed under this scope will be for and conducted in part at the VA Western New York Healthcare System (VAWNYHS), Buffalo VA Medical Center (VAMC) located at 3495 Bailey Avenue, Buffalo, NY 14215. 1.2 Background Buildings 2 and 3 are both standalone buildings located on the Buffalo VAMC campus with additional access from Lebrun Rd. Building 3, is a two-story structure and was renovated in 1991 to operate a tenant leased Daycare on the first floor with a few additional office spaces. contained on the second floor. There is current need to upgrade the leased Daycare space on the first floor as well as convert the second floor into additional childcare spaces to serve the VA Medical Center Drop off Childcare program. 1.3 Purpose The intent of this effort is to fully renovate the exterior and interior of Building 3 at the Buffalo VAMC and convert both floors into updated and code compliant daycare and childcare spaces. As part of the renovations there is a need to add an elevator, a stairwell for egress, and spaces to accommodate new HVAC and other building utility systems upgrades and replacements to the building. Additionally, the effort shall include complete demolition of Building 2 and the open site area gained to be restored to a facility vehicle parking area. The Buffalo VAMC requires a Consultant to perform the Architectural and Engineering (A/E) services necessary to accomplish this goal. The supporting objectives to achieve the purpose are: Site investigation(s) of existing conditions and systems related to both buildings, existing floorplans, utility infrastructure, future replacement equipment, and research of facility historical drawings. Licensed surveying of land and structures as necessary to develop the design. Consultation and discussion with VA staff to establish Design Basis Development of a design narrative to document the design process and delineate the construction impacts to the Medical Center Reconciliation of Contractor As-Built Drawings into Record Drawings Coordinate with and obtain approvals (as required) from City of Buffalo and Town or Amherst officials. Complete a NHPA section 106 assessment for both buildings and coordinate with and obtain necessary approvals from the State Historic Preservation Office. Determine possible courses of action to resolve issues identified by VAMC and identified by the Consultant during site surveys. Develop detailed construction documents (35%, 65%, 95%, 100%), specifications, cost estimates, and an associated execution plan with constructability review (with phasing, required shutdowns, and overall impact on Medical Center) to demolish building 2 and fully renovate Building 3 at the Buffalo VAMC inclusive of any building additions. Answering requests for information (RFI) Submittal tracking and review. Oversee construction operations in conjunction with Buffalo VAMC personnel to ensure construction contractor is in compliance with developed detailed construction. documents and specifications. Detailed information for these objectives is contained in Section 3: Requirements. 1.5 Scope Work under this effort will affect Building 2 and Building 3 (current location of the Daycare) and the exterior site work around it. This includes the complete demolition of Building 2 and restoration to a parking area as well as all systems within Building 3 (electric, plumbing, structural, security cameras, communications, etc.) and its surroundings to include exterior building work (additional structures, landscaping, fencing, and playground area). The VA has established a schematic design, which will serve as one of the selected options that will be provided in the 35% design drawings. The information identified in Section 2.2 is intended to provide a starting point for existing conditions, certain required items, drawings and specifications, and design parameters to be included in the project. It is the Consultant s responsibility to verify the provided information for accuracy. All systems related to the existing spaces (communications, architectural, structural, electrical, mechanical, plumbing, sanitary, fire proofing, fire protection, fire detection, building controls, slab penetrations, roofing, hazardous material abatement, etc.) are within the scope of this effort as required to support the final design and constructed space. OFFERORS WILL BE EVALUATED ON THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: The submitted SF-330s will be evaluated on the following criteria: This acquisition will be in accordance with FAR Part 36.602-1 and VAAR Part 836.602-1. The following evaluation criteria will be used to evaluate SF-330 technical proposals. The A/E must demonstrate its qualifications with respect to the published evaluation criteria for all services. Evaluation Criteria (1) through (2) are considered most important and equal among themselves; Criteria (3) and (5) are of slightly less importance than (1) through (2) but are equal value among themselves; Criteria (6) and (7) are the least important and listed in descending order of importance. Specific evaluation criteria include: (1). Specialized experience and technical competence in the type of work required, including, where appropriate, experience in energy conservation, pollution prevention, waste reduction, and the use of recovered materials. (2). Professional Qualifications Offerors will be evaluated in terms of the qualifications, competence and experience of the individual key personnel and technical team members proposed to accomplish this work. (3) Capacity to accomplish the work in the required time. (4) Past performance on contracts with Government agencies and private industry in terms of cost control, quality of work, and compliance with performance schedule. (5) Construction period services Experience in construction period services to include professional field inspections during the construction period, review of construction submittals, support in answering requests for information during the construction period, and support of construction contract changes to include drafting statements of work, and cost estimates shall be included as an evaluation criterion when construction period services is included in the statement of work for A-E services (6) Small Business Subcontractors The extent to which potential contractors identify and commit to the use of service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses, veteran-owned small businesses, and other types of small businesses as subcontractors (7) Location in the general geographical area of the project and knowledge of the locality of the project. Criterion 1: Specialized Experience & Technical Competence Offerors will be evaluated on the proposed team s specialized experience and technical competence in the performance of services similar to those anticipated under this contract with regard to: Experience with daycare design. Experience with phasing and constructability of building demolition and building renovations and additions. Experience with landscape design. Experience with State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) processes and requirements. Experience with force protection and physical security for healthcare and childcare facilities. Experience with elevator design. Experience in providing post construction award services (shop drawing review, as-built drawing, and Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) preparation, construction inspection services, and Operating and Maintenance Manuals). Submission requirements: Provide up to five (5) projects completed or substantially completed within the past five (5) years that best illustrate specialized experience of the proposed team in the areas outlined above. Example projects shall note project s square footage. All projects provided in the SF-330 must be completed by the office/branch/regional office/individual team member proposed to manage and/or perform work under this contract. To enable verification, firms should include the DUNS number along with each firm name in the SF-330 Part 1, Section F Item 25 Firms from Section C Involved in this Project, block (1). Include a contract number or project identification number in block 21. Include an e-mail address, and phone number for the point of contact in block 23(c). Include in the project description the contract period of performance, award contract value, current contract value, a summary of the work performed that demonstrates relevance to specialized experience as outlined above. If the contractor served as a subcontractor on a project, indicate the value of the work they provided towards the performance of the overall project. If a project was performed by a joint venture, and not all joint venture partners are on the team proposed for this contract, the offeror/team should specifically address the work performed by the joint venture partner offering/teaming on this contract. Likewise, if the offeror/team member worked as a subcontractor on a project, the description should clearly describe the work performed by the offeror/team member and the roles and responsibilities of each on the project, rather than the work performed on the project as a whole. If the project description does not clearly delineate the work performed by the entity/entities offering/teaming on this contract, the project could be eliminated from consideration. NOTE: If the Offeror is a joint venture, information should be submitted as a joint venture; however, if there is no information for the joint venture, information should be submitted for either joint venture partner, not to exceed a total of five (5) projects for this criterion. Projects shall be submitted on the SF-330. For submittal purposes, a task order on an IDIQ contract is considered a project, as is a stand-alone contract award. Do not list an IDIQ contract as an example of a completed project. Instead, list relevant completed task orders or stand-alone contract awards that fit within the definition above. Examples of project work submitted that do not conform to this requirement will not be evaluated. Failure to provide requested data, accessible points of contact, or valid phone numbers could result in a firm being rated lower. All information for Criterion 1 should be submitted in Part 1, Section F of the SF-330. The Government WILL NOT consider information submitted in addition to Part 1, Section F in evaluating Criterion 1. Criterion 2: Professional Qualifications Offerors will be evaluated in terms of the qualifications, competence and experience of the individual key personnel and technical team members proposed to accomplish this work. Key personnel are individuals who will have major contract or project management responsibilities and/or will provide unusual or unique expertise. Provide a balanced licensed and or certified workforce for the disciplines anticipated to be necessary, including: Architecture Structural Engineering Civil Engineering Land Surveyor Landscape Design Mechanical Engineering Electrical Engineering Control Systems Fire Protection Engineering Elevator design Hazardous Materials Abatement Additional disciplines may be provided/required based on developed and proposed design. Submission requirements: Provide resumes for all proposed key personnel. Resumes are limited to one page each and should cite project specific experience and indicate proposed role in this contract. Provide professional registration, certification, licensure and/or accreditation. Indicate participation of key personnel in example projects in the SF-330 Part 1 Section G. Criterion 3 - Capacity to accomplish the work in the required time. Firms/teams will be evaluated in terms of their ability to plan for and manage work under the contract and capacity to accomplish the work in the required time. Submission requirements: Describe the firm s ability to concurrently perform and manage multiple projects in different locations to meet aggressive schedules, multiple disciplines, and control costs and the firm s capacity as well as the sub consultants to accomplish multiple projects simultaneously. Contractor shall provide evidence of current workload and proposed team availability for this project. Provide a list of ongoing design project along with its percentage of completion. Criterion 4 - Past Performance Offerors will be evaluated on past performance with Government agencies and private industry in terms of work quality, compliance with schedules, cost control, and stakeholder/customer satisfaction. Evaluating past performance and experience will include information provided in Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) or CPARS/ACASS for Criterion 1 projects and may include other information provided by the firm, customer inquiries, Government databases, and other information available to the Government including contacts with points of contact in other criteria. Failure to provide requested data, accessible points of contact, or valid phone numbers could result in a firm being rated lower. NOTE: Past performance information for projects listed under Criterion 1. Submission requirements: SUBMIT A COMPLETED CPARS/ACASS EVALUATION FOR EACH PROJECT UNDER CRITERION 1. IF THERE IS NOT A COMPLETED CPARS/ACASS EVALUATION, the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in this notice is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes under Criterion 1. AN OFFEROR SHALL NOT SUBMIT A PPQ WHEN A COMPLETED CPARS/ACASS IS AVAILABLE. IF A CPARS/ACASS EVALUATION IS NOT AVAILABLE, ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQs should be submitted with your SF-330. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before the response date set forth in this notice, offerors should complete and submit with their responses the first page of the PPQ (Attachment), which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors may submit a PPQ previously submitted under a different Notice/RFP (legible copies are acceptable) as long as it is on the same form as posted with this Synopsis. Offerors should follow up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If requested by the client, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Network Contracting Office 2 Attn: Nicholas Winne via email at Nicholas.Winne@va.gov prior to the response date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their response PPQs or CPARS previously submitted in response to other A/E services procurements. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation Criterion 5 Construction period services Experience in construction period services to include professional field inspections during the construction period, review of construction submittals, support in answering requests for information during the construction period, and support of construction contract changes to include drafting statements of work, and cost estimates shall be included as an evaluation criterion when construction period services is included in the statement of work for A-E services. Criterion 6 - Subcontracting. The extent to which potential contractors identify and commit to the use of service-disabled Veteran-owned small businesses, Veteran-owned small businesses, and other types of small businesses as subcontractors. Submission requirements: Indicate sub-consultant firms socio-economic status on SF 330 Part I, Contract Specific Qualifications, Section C, Proposed Team Criterion 7 - Location within a 600-mile radius to the design site (Buffalo, NY) and knowledge of the location (Buffalo, NY); provided, that application of this criterion leaves an appropriate number of qualified firms, given the nature and size of the project. Provided that the application of this criterion leaves an appropriate number of qualified firms, given the nature and size of the contract, firms/teams will be evaluated on the locations of their office or offices that will be performing the work under this contract. Submission requirements: Indicate firms/teams location, including main offices, branch offices and any subconsultants offices and demonstrate how this will be advantageous to the Government Evaluation Scoring Evaluation factors 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7 will be evaluated using the following adjectival ratings as follows: Outstanding: Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low. Good: Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low. Acceptable: Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is moderate. Marginal: Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high. Unacceptable: Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is not awardable. The firm s proposal demonstrates a misunderstanding of the requirement, and the approach fails to meet performance standards. The firm s proposal has major omissions and inadequate details to assure evaluators that the offeror has an understanding of the requirement. The ratings identified below were used in the evaluation of Past Performance (Criterion 4): Past Performance will be evaluated in two parts: Relevance and Confidence Relevancy will be evaluated using the following adjectival ratings: Very Relevant: Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. Relevant: Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. Somewhat Relevant: Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires Not Relevant: Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. Confidence will be evaluated using the following adjectival ratings: 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. No doubt exists based on the offeror s past performance that they can satisfy the requirements of the contract. 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. Little doubt exists based on the offeror s past performance that they could satisfy the requirements of the contract. Unknown Confidence (Neutral): No recent/relevant performance record is available, or the offeror s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. Limited Confidence: Based on the offeror s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has little expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort. Some doubt exists based on past performance that they could satisfy the terms and conditions of the contract. No Confidence: Based on the offeror s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has little expectations that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort. Significant doubt exists based on the offeror s past performance that they can satisfy the requirements of the contract. SELECTION INTERVIEW: Interviews shall be scheduled with firms slated as the most highly qualified. Firms slated for interviews may be asked to explain or expand on information contained in the SF-330 submittal through a formal interview or a discussion questionnaire as determined by the Contracting Officer GENERAL INFORMATION: All design and work will conform to the current edition of the VA Master Specifications and VA Design Standards as published at the following site: www.cfm.va.gov; ASME, OSHA, IBC 2009, NFPA and NEC building codes and standards. Coordinate all work through the COR of Facilities Management Service. Contractor is responsible for all cleanups and refuse disposal throughout the construction period. The A-E firm will prepare drawings and specifications in sufficient detail such that qualified outside General Contracting companies can prepare accurate and timely proposals for the desired construction work. Microsoft Project scheduling and management software will be used by both the A-E and Contractors to allow for regular tracking of schedules and work by the VA Medical Center. Schedules with MS Project will be regularly sent to the COR upon project initiation and whenever significant changes occur in the schedule. The estimated magnitude of construction is between $5,000,000 and $10,000,000. The A-E will provide an initial estimate of cost to perform the above work and will design only those items that can be provided within the cost limitation. The Medical Center must remain operational throughout the construction period and a detailed sequence of work will be provided by the A-E to minimize impact of the construction. The A-E will provide documents at each submission as indicated in the statement of work. The NAICS code for this procurement will be 541330, Engineering Services. The current small business size standard for 541330 is $16.5 million. Requirement for Electronic Submission Unless paper offers are specifically authorized, all responses to this pre-solicitation notice must be submitted electronically as described below. The only acceptable paper form for this requirement is the receipt of past performance questionnaires. Failure to comply with this requirement may jeopardize the possibility of receiving an award for the contract due to non-compliance with the terms of the solicitation. You must submit your electronic offer, and any supplemental information (such as spreadsheets, backup data, technical information), using any of the electronic formats and media described below. In addition, contractors are notified of the award via an electronic Notice of Award e-mail. The award document will be attached to the Notice of Award e-mail. Acceptable Electronic Formats (Software) for Submission of Offers Files readable using the current Microsoft* Office version Products: Word, Excel, PowerPoint, or Access. Spreadsheet documents must be sent in a format that includes all formulas, macro, and format information. Print or scan images of spreadsheets are not acceptable.  Please see security note below for caution regarding use of macros. When submitting construction drawings contractors are required to submit one set in AutoCAD and one set in Adobe PDF. (Purpose: contracting can open the PDF version and engineering can open AutoCAD files) Files in Adobe* PDF (Portable Document Format) Files: When scanning documents scanner resolution should be set to 200 dots per inch, or greater. Other electronic format.  If you wish to submit an offer using another format than those described in these instructions, e-mail the Contracting Officer who issued the solicitation. Please submit your request at least ten (10) calendar days before the scheduled closing date of the solicitation.  Request a decision as to the format acceptability and make sure you receive approval of the alternate format before using it to send your offer. Please note that we can no longer accept .zip files due to increasing security concerns. E-mail Submission Procedures: For simplicity in this guidance, all submissions in response to a solicitation will be referred to as offers. Subject Line: Include the solicitation number, name of company, and closing date of solicitation. Use only one of the terms Quotation, Offer, or Bid depending on the solicitation type. Size: Maximum size of the e-mail message shall not exceed five (5) megabytes. The SF330, in its entirety, shall not exceed one email of 5MB. Only one email is permitted unless otherwise stated in this paragraph or in writing by the Contract Officer submitting the solicitation. The Microsoft Outlook © Email time/date stamp will be used to date and time stamp offers for the official record of receipt for the submission. The date and time stamp in recipients inbox is the official record of receipt. Security Issues, Late Bids, Unreadable Offers Late submission of offers are outlined at FAR Parts 52.212-1(f), 52.214-7, and 52.215-1(c)(3). Particular attention is warranted to the portion of the provision that relates to the timing of submission.  Please see FAR 15.207(c) for a description of the steps the Government shall take with regard to unreadable offers.  To avoid rejection of an offer, vendors must make every effort to ensure their electronic submission is virus-free. Submissions or portions thereof submitted and which the automatic system detects the presence of a virus or which are otherwise unreadable will be treated as unreadable pursuant to FAR Parts 14.406 and FAR 15.207(c ). The virus scanning software used by our e-mail systems cannot always distinguish a macro from a virus. Therefore, sending a macro embedded in an e-mail message or an e-mail attachment may cause the e-mail offer to be quarantined. You may send both the spreadsheet and the spreadsheet saved in PDF format to ensure that your proposal is readable. Password protecting your offer is not permitted. The Contracting Officer will file the offer electronically which will allow access only by designated individuals. Important Notice: Apparent successful offerors must apply for and receive verification from the Department of Veterans Affairs Center for Verification and Evaluation (CVE) in accordance with 38 CFR Part 74 and VAAR 819.70 by submission of documentation of Veteran status, ownership and control sufficient to establish appropriate status, offerors must be both VISIBLE and VERIFIED by the Department of Veterans Affairs Center for Verification and Evaluation prior to contract award. Failure to be both VERIFIED by CVE and VISIBLE on SBA prior to contract award will result in the offeror s proposal being deemed non-compliant. All offerors are urged to contact the CVE and submit the aforementioned required documents to obtain CVE verification of their SDVOSB status if they have not already done so.