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

This announcement is for the selection of an Engineering Services (ES) Firm for 2024 Short Circuit and Arc Flash Study for the Department of Veterans Affairs, Lebanon VA Medical Center located in Leba... This announcement is for the selection of an Engineering Services (ES) Firm for 2024 Short Circuit and Arc Flash Study for the Department of Veterans Affairs, Lebanon VA Medical Center located in Lebanon, PA. The Government intends to award a single Firm Fixed Price Contract. All potential offerors must provide a SF 330 containing all required information listed below. The form format must be the General Services Administration SF 330 found on the website http://www.gsa.gov/portal/forms/download/116486 Forms Library. CONTRACT INFORMATION: The project consists of conducting an electrical engineering study, calculations, drawings and modeling of the Lebanon VAMC campus. The contract award will incorporate the attached Statement of Work. Expected design services may require any combination of the following: Title I Site Investigation Services, Title I - Design Services, and Title II Construction Period Services. This contract is being procured in accordance with the Brooks Act as implemented in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 36.6, Veterans Administration Acquisition Regulation (VAAR) 836.6 and the Veterans Administration Acquisition Manual (VAAM) Part M836 . The firm will be selected for presentations based on demonstrated competence and qualifications for required work. This contract is set-aside 100% for Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business s (SDVOSB) capable of completing work under the North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code 541330. The small business standard is $22.5 million dollars. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: Interested firms having the capabilities to perform this work must submit an electronic copies of Standard Form 330 (SF 330). Standard Forms 330 s must be received no later than 1:00 PM on January 3rd, 2024. The submittal packages are to be sent to the following: Email submission of the SF 330 are to be submitted to John Mignogna at John.Mignogna@va.gov Additionally, the submissions must include an insert detailing the following information placed at the front of the Submission. SAM Unique Identity Number Tax ID Number The E-mail address of the Primary Point of Contact. A printed copy of the firms VetBiz Registry. A copy of Errors and Omissions Insurance Policy for the SDVOSB Prime. A copy of the firm s Pennsylvania State Licensure for the SDVOSB Prime or a statement indicating how the provided drawings will be sealed by a PA licensed Engineer. A statement indicating what office the Engineering Services firm will utilize as its primary design office. Special Note: An Engineering Services Firm failing to provide any of the documentation detailed in the Pre-Solicitation Notice may be determined as Non-Responsive and may not be considered. Please note this is not a request for proposal. Eligible responses received will be evaluated and the most highly qualified will be compiled on a shortlist of candidates who will be contacted for an interview. For the evaluation, Professional Qualifications to Perform the Services Required, Specialized Experience and Technical Competence, Past Performance, and Experience in Construction Period Services are more important than the other three (3) factors and are of equal weight. The remaining three (3) factors are of equal weight among themselves. The following evaluation criteria shall be used to evaluate firms and determine the most highly qualified firm for possible contract award. A-E SELECTION BOARD GUIDE CRITERIA 2024 Short Circuit and Arc Flash Study FOR LEBANON VA MEDICAL CENTER There are five evaluation factors for each firm: Professional Qualification, Specialized Experience, Past Performance, Capacity to Accomplish Work, and Location. Detailed evaluation guidance is offered for each factor below. The adjectival system uses the adjectives and associated definitions listed in the table below. Adjectival Rating Definition OUTSTANDING Firm has excellent ability to meet project requirements GOOD Firm has good ability to meet project requirements ACCEPTABLE Firm has average ability to meet project requirements MARGINAL Firm has a minimum ability to meet project requirements UNACCEPTABLE Firm does not meet project requirements Note: All ratings are not used for each factor. Some objective factors simply use unacceptable, acceptable, and outstanding. The initial evaluation of the packages should determine which firms are the most highly qualified firms. The Selection Board shall produce a list in the order of preference with a narrative explanation supporting the order of preference. Where firms are rated the same adjective, credence will be given to the descending order of importance. The Source Selection Authority will then select no less than two but no more than five firms for interviews, unless a logical break in the rankings occur. For example, if six firms are rated GOOD, the sixth firm will be given an interview. Upon completion of interviews, the Selection Board will then rank the interviewed firms from most highly qualified to least highly qualified. Negotiations will begin with the most highly qualified firm. The Professional Qualification, Specialized Experience and Past Performance factors are significantly more important than the other two factors which are listed in descending order of importance. The determination of a firm's overall rating shall be made in accordance with the following guidance. The lower of a firm's rating in the three key areas (Professional Qualifications, Specialized Experience and Past Performance) establishes the maximum overall rating a firm can receive as shown below. Overall Rating Lowest of Professional Qualifications, Specialized Experience and Past Performance If the remaining two factors are not both unacceptable ratings. If the remaining two factors are both unacceptable ratings Outstanding OUTSTANDING GOOD Good GOOD ACCEPTABLE Acceptable ACCEPTABLE MARGINAL Marginal MARGINAL UNACCEPTABLE Unacceptable UNACCEPTABLE UNACCEPTABLE Recency/Relevance: Evaluators will grade the ten projects that the firms submitted in part F of the SF Form 330. If a firm submitted more than ten projects, only the first ten shall be evaluated, the additional projects shall be ignored. Each of the ten projects will be assigned a grade of relevant if the project s professional services completion year (F22) is within the past five years AND the evaluator believes that the project is similar in size and scope to the statement of work for this solicitation. A project that is only partially similar in size and scope AND has been completed in the past eight years may received a grade of somewhat relevant . A project that is not similar in size and scope OR has not been completed in the last eight years will be assigned a grade of not relevant . Relevancy is a judgement call made by the evaluator. Typical items that influence the relevancy decision include function (exact, similar, not-similar), size/purpose, and new construction vs renovation. Professional Qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of required services: This is intended to evaluate the personal experience and qualifications of firm members who work in the firm's project office and are scheduled to be assigned to the design team and who are listed in section E. The number of key positions will vary based on the scope of work of the project. Key positions include Project Manager(s), Quality Assurance, and technical staff that are important to the successful outcome of the project. A complex multi-disciplined project may have many key technical staff, including Architects, Civil Engineers, Electrical Engineers, Environmental Engineers, Fire Protection Engineers, Health Care Planners, Interior Designers, Mechanical Engineers, Structural Engineers and Surveyors. A simpler parking lot project may only have Civil Engineers and Surveyors as key technical staff although all assigned personnel are required to be qualified to practice in their field. Of the personnel listed in section E, each board member shall determine which individuals are actually key individuals. For an individual in a key position to count as experienced, they must have experience in relevant projects as documented in Sections E or F/G, and they must have the appropriate professional qualifications for their role. All lead engineers must have a Professional Engineers license (PE) (per Federal Law, they do not need to be licensed in PA, just in one of the 54 states or territories as we are not in PA). Best approach is to have at least one PE per discipline Lead Architect must be a registered architect, this is normally indicated by NCARB, RA or AIA. Associate AIA are not registered and therefore do not count. Interior Designer registration is preferred (NCIDQ) Surveyors must be licensed (PLS) Other qualifications include (each board member shall determine the requirement for and relevancy of additional credentials) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LED AP or LEED AP BD+C) Project Management Professional (PMP, PgMP) Constructions Specifications Institute (CSI, CCS, CCCA, CDT) Other industry qualifications Determination of what personnel are sub-contractor personnel and what personnel are in branch offices versus the main office shall be made based on Section C and D, and Part II The larger proportion of key personnel who have the required experience/qualifications and work for the Prime Contractor, the higher the grade as shown on the chart below. Adjectival Rating Definition UNACCEPTABLE The majority of personnel assigned to the key positions do not appear to have any experience in designing the type of facilities and systems anticipated in this contract or, none of the key personnel listed appear to work in the firm s designated project office. MARGINAL The majority of personnel assigned to the key positions appear to have experience on one or fewer of the type anticipated in this contract ACCEPTABLE The majority of personnel assigned to the key positions appear to have experience on one to three projects of the type anticipated in this contract or at least four of the key personnel are subcontractor personnel GOOD The majority of personnel assigned to the key positions appear to have experience on at least three projects of the type anticipated in this contract or any of the key personnel are subcontractor personnel OUTSTANDING All personnel assigned to the key positions appear to have experience with more than three projects of the type anticipated in this contract and are employees of the prime A-E firm. Specialized Experience and Technical Competence in the type of work required. This factor evaluates the experience of the firm in completing projects relevant to this contract. Firms provided sample projects as part of section F. Each board member determines which projects are relevant, some what relevant and not relevant. Extra consideration may be given for experience designing projects for Department of Veterans Affairs Facilities. For a project to count as relevant for this section, the offeror must have completed the project as the prime contractor. Projects completed by the firm as a sub-contractor or projects completed by key personnel while employed by another firm are not relevant for this section. Board members may use their judgement in providing some credit for projects that are only somewhat relevant but must be consistent. The more projects that the firm has completed, the higher the grade as shown below. Adjectival Rating Definition UNACCEPTABLE The firm does not have experience completing any projects of the type anticipated for this contract MARGINAL The firm's experience completing projects of the type anticipated for this contract is limited to one project or only projects that do not include a majority of the skills required ACCEPTABLE The firm has experience completing at least two projects of the type anticipated for this contract or primarily projects that do not include the majority of the skills required GOOD The firm has experience completing at least four projects of the type anticipated for this contract or includes projects that do not include the majority of the skills required OUTSTANDING The firm has experience completing at least six projects of the type anticipated for this contract including the majority of the skills required Past performance on contracts with Government agencies (Particularly Department of Veterans Affairs) and private industry in terms of cost control, quality of work and compliance with performance schedules. Sources of past performance information include CPARS and personal knowledge. The VA is solely responsible for accessing CPARS data. Board members may give as much weight to contractor provided performance data as they feel appropriate. This data, when provided, is in section H. The more favorable the information, the higher the grade as shown below. Adjectival Rating Definition UNACCEPTABLE Past performance evaluation reports indicate significant negative information or board members have firsthand knowledge of significant poor performance MARGINAL Past performance evaluation reports indicate minor negative information or board members have firsthand knowledge of minor poor performance ACCEPTABLE Past performance evaluation reports contain some favorable information with few instances of unfavorable information or board members have predominantly favorable firsthand knowledge of past performance GOOD Past performance evaluation reports contain several instances of favorable information or board members have firsthand knowledge of several instances of favorable past performance with few to no instances of negative past performance. OUTSTANDING Past performance evaluation reports indicate multiple instances of favorable information or board members have firsthand knowledge of multiple instances of favorable past performance. No negative past performance information was found Capacity to accomplish the work in the required time: this factor evaluates the ability of the A-E firm, given their current projected workload and the availability of their key personnel, to accomplish the project in the required time. Each A/E firm should address their capacity in part H. This is typically expressed as a firm having a percentage of their resources available for additional work. A firm whose part II section 11 shows a large revenue number likely needs a lower percent capacity in order to perform our project then a firm with a small revenue number. Typically, a design firm will bill 70% of the design fee over the first year and then 30% over the next two years. Rating a firm to have unacceptable capacity requires positive knowledge that they are unable to perform or have had substantial difficulty performing in the past. Adjectival Rating Definition UNACCEPTABLE The firm's past history or current/projected work load indicates that the firm does not have the capacity to accomplish work in accordance with standard design schedules ACCEPTABLE The firm's past history indicates problems with meeting schedules but the current/projected workload indicates that the firm should have the capacity to accomplish the work in accordance with the standard design schedules OUTSTANDING The firm's past and the current/projected workload indicate that the firm has the capacity to accomplish the work in accordance with standard design schedules Location in the general geographic area of the project and knowledge of the locality of the project: This factor evaluates the distance from the A-E firms design office from the location of work (Lebanon VA Medical Center). The personnel identified as the design team staff are expected to work in the design office identified for evaluation of this factor. Distance shall be measured from the Lebanon VA Medical Center, Lebanon, PA Sections C, D, E and Part II shall be used to determine what project office the majority of key personnel are operating from. Adjectival Rating Definition UNACCEPTABLE Majority of key personnel and designated project office are over 400 miles from the project location ACCEPTABLE Majority of key personnel and designated project office are between 200 and 400 miles from the project location OUTSTANDING Majority of key personnel and designated project office are less than 200 miles from the project location Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Businesses must be registered and verified in the VetBiz Registry at time of SF 330 submittal. Visit www.vip.vetbiz.gov to complete your company registration. Additionally, any potential awardee must also be registered in the System For Award Management (SAM) at time of SF 330 submittal. Registration can be accomplished by visiting https://sam.gov.