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

Page 2 of 2 DESCRIPTION: This is a Pre-Solicitation Notice for the establishment of an Architect-Engineering (A-E) contract with services to be performed at the Salem VA Medical center at 1970 Roanoke... Page 2 of 2 DESCRIPTION: This is a Pre-Solicitation Notice for the establishment of an Architect-Engineering (A-E) contract with services to be performed at the Salem VA Medical center at 1970 Roanoke Blvd, Salem, VA 24153. This requirement is being executed under a 100% Set-Aside to Service-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. Interested firms should submit their current SF-330, Parts I and II, to chanel.johnson@va.gov. The SF-330s are due no later than 9:00 AM, EST, February 18, 2025. SCOPE OF WORK: Intent Provide professional engineering services to include option analysis, phasing design, investigative surveys and reports, planning, consultation and visits, design work, preparation of contract drawings and specifications, preparation of cost estimates and provision of construction period services as necessary for project 658-24-109 Renovate Patient Restrooms, at VAMC Salem, Virginia. The restrooms identified for renovation shall be brought up to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) standards and specifications as well as the Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility (ABAA) standards. There are 18 restrooms currently planned to be in the scope of this project. The VA will review the cost estimate at the Design Development stage and confirm or alter the list of restrooms. In no case will new restrooms be added to the scope but one or more MAY be removed if necessary to meet the available funding. Â The project intent is to develop a complete design package that addresses all VA and ABAA requirements on restrooms in Building 143. Restrooms to be brought up to standards typically require expansion and complete renovation of all finishes and fixtures. Design efforts shall include: Conduct a site investigation of all identified restrooms in building 143. Identify nonconformance issues using the requirements of all applicable VA standards and specifications, and of the ABAA standards. Utilizing a rating or scoring system, identify the restrooms that are priority based on greater nonconformity with standards. Ratings / scoring shall be documented in a schedule such that the construction can be phased accordingly. For the Design Development (60%) submission review, the VA will review the cost estimate submission and confirm or alter the restrooms that will be in scope. Provide a recommendation for VA personnel to follow up, regarding requirements of the ABAAS for wheelchair accessible toile rooms in existing buildings. Specifically, use F202 Existing Buildings and Facilities, Paragraph F213.2, Exception Number 4 to determine whether VA policy and requirements for renovations may take advantage of this exception, and recommend methods to comply to include: Provision of two wheelchair accessible unisex single use toilet rooms per floor. Recommend other renovations as needed such as grab bars and clearance of fixtures, for the other single use toilet rooms on each floor. Make a recommendation on whether to provide on each floor one wheelchair accessible unisex single use toilet room, and one ambulatory accessible toilet room of a lesser minimum square footage. Examine whether on the First Floor, the single use toilet rooms constitute a cluster of single use toilet rooms and are therefore subject to a minimum of 50% wheelchair accessible. Examine potential benefits or impacts on the Basement Floor of Building 143, where we have identified five single use toilet rooms for renovation. The benefits to examine are the expected completion of four wheelchair accessible toilet rooms with more than one toilet (two Men s and two Women s), which are being renovated and brought up to ABAAS compliance as part of Project# 658-24-104 Renovate Main Lobby. Specifically make a recommendation whether the completion of those restroom renovations will mean no other toilet rooms need be made wheelchair accessible but only meet ambulatory patient requirements such as space in the room and clearance of fixtures, provision of grab bars, etc. Examine according to the the requirements of F213.2 and Exception 4 BUT ALSO any applicable VA policies and standards which speak to the issue. Provide a complete design package which shall include drawings and construction specifications to renovate all restrooms included in the program. In addition to the overall restoration requirements, the following shall also be required: A/E satisfy the following milestones: Schematic Design (30%) Drawings Outline Specifications and a draft of the submittal register Construction Cost Estimate Design Development Review Meeting Final Design Submission (95%). The Final Design shall be complete, free of errors and ready in the A/E firm s judgment to be issued for construction. The purpose of the review is a check for inadvertent errors and no further design is anticipated other than correction of errors in the set. Drawings Full Specifications and the submittal register Construction Cost Estimate Design Development Review Meeting Construction Documents (100%) Drawings Full Specifications Construction Cost Estimate Construction Documents Review Meeting . The A/E shall complete the project design in accordance with this A/E scope, with all applicable VA standards and specifications, and with ABAA Standards for toilet rooms in healthcare facilities unless otherwise approved by the VA. The A/E shall retrieve all VA design information and standards from the VA Facilities Web Site (http://www.va.gov/facmgt/standard). The A/E shall incorporate these documents and all national, state and local codes adopted and used by the VA in the design of this project. All applicable standards shall be reflected in the construction cost estimate. The facility record drawings and AutoCAD files are available for the A/E s use. NOTE: Not all record drawings are available on AutoCAD. Additionally, the accuracy of facility record drawings must be field verified by the A/E. At a minimum, the A/E shall utilize the following references, as applicable, for planning and design purposes. National CAD Standards and Standard Details PG-18-4 VHA Program Guide PG-18-3 VA Master Construction Specifications PG-18-1 H-18-8 Seismic Design Requirements Sanitary Design Manual for Hospital Projects PG-18-13 Barrier Free Design Handbook NFPA Codes Design Manuals PG-18-10 Cultural Resource Management D-7545 & H-7545 Government-furnished Record Drawings (A/E to field verify conditions) PG-18-15 A/E Submission Requirements. PG-18-12 Design Guides (graphical, by function) PG-18-14 Room Finishes, Door, and Hardware Schedules Facility Guidelines Institute (FGI) American Institute of Architects (AIA) A/E shall address the following items in the design: Estimate of construction project costs and duration including simplified schedule to include progress and final inspections and all work required for the base bid and the bid alternatives. Revise cost estimates and schedules for each design submittal. Access to buildings must remain adequately operational and completely protected during site investigations and shall be phased to minimize impacts to patients during the construction process. Contractor shall comply with all applicable records management laws and regulations, as well as National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) records policies, including but not limited to the Federal Records Act (44 U.S.C. chs. 21, 29, 31, 33), NARA regulations at 36 CFR Chapter XII Subchapter B, and those policies associated with the safeguarding of records covered by the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a). These policies include the preservation of all records, regardless of form or characteristics, mode of transmission, or state of completion. The A/E has responsibility for Duty to Report any fraud, waste and abuse witnessed while on VA premises to the Integrity and Compliance Officer. The following quantities of design review material are required for the Schematic Design, Design Development, Final Design, and Construction Document submissions: One (1) full size, one (1) half size, and one (1) electronic set (PDF and AutoCAD 2022 format) of the design drawings. Two (2) paper copies and one (1) electronic copy (MS Word) of sample edited and marked-up (track changes enabled) VA Master Specifications. Two (2) hardcopy sets and one (1) electronic set of final engineering calculations. Provide two (2) hard copies and one (1) electronic copy each of the budgetary cost estimate and preliminary schedule. In addition to those items listed above in item 5, for the Construction Document submission the following quantities of review materials are required. This submission shall include severable components and the overall Project as described above: Brief description of work for inclusion in IFB (Microsoft Word), including descriptions of deductive alternates and associated completion times. List of sole source items with justification (if applicable). List of Or-equal items with justification (if applicable). Schedule: Overall period of performance: 210 days from the notice to proceed. Site investigation report is due 45 calendar days from the notice to proceed. Schematic Design (30%) submission is due 45 calendar days from the receipt of the Site investigation report The Government will provide review comments 15 calendar days from receipt of the design submission. Design Development (60%) submission is due 30 calendar days from the date Schematic Design comments are provided. The Government will provide review comments 15 calendar days from receipt of the design submission. Final Design (95%) submission is due 30 calendar days from the date Design Development comments are provided. The Government will provide review comments 15 calendar days from receipt of the design submission. Construction Documents submission is due 15 calendar days from the date Full Design review comments are provided. The Government will accept the Construction Documents within five calendar days of receipt, or will require re-submission of the Construction Documents if there are remaining comments that have not been adequately addressed. Any delays to the schedule due to re-submissions that may be required upon Government review, is the responsibility of the A/E and shall not result in a claim for delay. Evaluation Factors for Award The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible Offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, and other factors considered. Boards will evaluate firms' qualifications strictly on the basis of the announced selection criteria and their stated order of importance. The criteria will be applied as follows: PART I TECHNICAL CAPABILITY The following criteria will be used to by a selection board to determine the most highly qualified firms in respect to their technical capability. Technical capability will be evaluated based on the following factors: Specialized Experience and Technical Competence (FAR 36.602-1(a)(2)). Offerors will be evaluated based on the specialized experience of a firm on similar projects and the technical capabilities (such as design quality management procedures, CADD/BIM, and equipment resources,) of the prime firm and any subcontractors. Evaluation will be based on the information presented in the Architect-Engineer Qualifications - Standard Form 330 (SF330). A maximum of five (5) example projects may be submitted for consideration under SF330, Part I, Section F. Example projects should be designs completed within six (6) years of solicitation closing date. Professional Qualifications (FAR 36.602-1(a)(1)). A board will evaluate, as appropriate, the education, training, registration, certifications (see paragraph 3-4.d(4)), overall and relevant experience, and longevity with the firm of the key management and technical personnel. This criterion is primarily concerned with the qualifications of the key personnel and not the number of personnel, which is addressed under the capacity criterion. The lead designer in each discipline must be registered as required by FAR 36.609-4 and 52.236-25 but does not have to be registered in the particular state where the project is located. Capacity (FAR 36.602-1(a)(3)). A firm s capacity will be evaluated based on their experience with similar size projects, the available capacity of key disciplines to perform the work in the required time, and a primary design schedule. The volume of work awarded during the previous 12 months, based on data extracted from the Federal Procurement Data System, will be considered when evaluating capacity. Additionally, the full potential value of any current indefinite delivery contracts that a firm has been awarded will be considered when evaluating capacity. Knowledge of the Locality (FAR 36.602-1(a)(5)). Firms will be evaluated on their knowledge of the locality such as knowledge of local historical features, climatic conditions, and local construction methods that are unusual or unique to the area. Design Quality Control Plan. Firms will be evaluated on their approach to ensure technical quality and accuracy of work products. A firm's approach to resolve issues of quality will be analyzed to determine its ability to provide quality design products. Describe and define the processes of the firm's quality control plan and list, by name and position, all key personnel responsible for its execution. Quality control information shall also address safety measures particularly with respect to field work and site investigations. Information describing Quality Management may be presented in SF330, Part I, Section H. A design quality control plan shall be submitted as part of the proposal. Experience in Construction Period Services. Firms will be evaluated on their experience in providing construction period services to include professional field inspections during construction, review of construction submittals, support in answering request for information, and support of construction contract changes to include drafting statements of work and preparing cost estimates. PART II PAST PERFORMANCE The following criteria will be used to by a selection board to determine the most highly qualified firms based on a firm s past performance. Past Performance (FAR 36.602-1(a)(4)). Firms will be evaluated based on their CPARS for past projects. PART I TECHNICAL CAPABILITY First, the technical capability of all offers will be evaluated on an adjectival basis. Sub-factors will be weighted equally, and all areas must have at least a satisfactory rating. Evaluators shall assign a rating from the following table based on the minimum requirements stated in each sub-factor section. Adjectival Rating Definitions Exceptional Meets all requirements and exceed majority of requirements. Overall the proposal meets and significantly exceeds, in all aspects, the standards for evaluation: very high probability of success: no significant weaknesses. Very Good Meets all requirements and exceed some requirements. The proposal meets and, in some cases, exceeds the standards for evaluation; high probability of success; no significant weaknesses and only minor correctable deficiencies. Satisfactory The proposal meets the standard for evaluation; good probability of success; only minor weaknesses and correctable deficiencies. Marginal Lacks material information. The proposal fails to meet some of the standards for evaluation; low probability of success; major weaknesses and/or uncorrectable. Unacceptable Lacks material information. The proposal fails to meet some or all of the standards for evaluation; need major revision to a new submission to make if acceptable or may contain uncorrectable deficiencies. Sub-Factor 1 Specialized Experience and Technical Competence CRITERIA: This factor will evaluate the Offeror s technical competence, based on successful completion of projects, in the design of fire protection systems in a hospital environment. MINIMUM STANDARD OF ACCEPTABILITY: The minimum standard of acceptability is met when the Offeror provides a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) examples of their choice of completed projects or in progress of similar contracts in size and scope (hospital remodel/renovation; minimum threshold value of $500,000). In describing the experience, provide the following information: Project title, location and brief description including the building use (Medical Facility, etc) and contracting method (design build, design bid construct, CM at risk, Turnkey, etc). Project owner and name and telephone number of owner s contact person. Indicate your firm s role as a prime contractor or subcontractor, etc. Project Prime Contractor and Major Subcontractors and name and telephone number of contact person(s). Project Statistics including start and completion dates (original vs. actual) for design; cost (with brief explanation of what is included in the cost); square footage; and any awards (prizes) received. Sub-Factor 2 Professional Qualifications CRITERIA: This factor evaluates the Offerors specific experience and qualifications of personnel proposed for assignment to the project and their record of working together as a team. MINIMUM STANDARD OF ACCEPTABILITY: The Offeror must provide the resumes for the following Key Personnel purposed for assignment to the project: Project/Design Manager: Must have a minimum of five (5) years experience successfully managing design projects that meet the criteria for similar projects as defined in evaluation factor 3 above. Electrical Engineer: Must have a minimum two (2) years experience designing electrical systems within a hospital environment. Projects shall meet the criteria for similar projects as defined in evaluation factor 3 above. Mechanical Engineer: Must have a minimum of two (2) years experience designing HVAC systems within a hospital environment. Projects shall meet the criteria for similar projects as defined in evaluation factor 3 above. Civil Engineer: Must have a minimum of two (2) years experience designing HVAC systems within a hospital environment. Projects shall meet the criteria for similar projects as defined in evaluation factor 3 above. Architect: Must have a minimum of two (2) years experience designing projects that meet the criteria for similar projects as defined in evaluation factor 3 above BIM Manager: Must have a minimum two (2) years experience managing the design of projects using Building Information Modeling Software. Other Disciplines proposed by the Offeror: Must have a minimum of two (2) years experience successfully designing projects that meet the criteria for similar projects as defined in evaluation factor 3 above. All Resumes must include the following information and may not exceed two (2) pages per Resume, and must explain how the proposed key personnel s experience meets the minimum qualification requirements for this contract, as described above: Name and title Project assignment Name of firm with which associated Sub-Factor 3 Capacity CRITERIA: This factor will evaluate the Offeror s ability to perform both the design and construction period services. The Offeror shall demonstrate that is has the capacity to accomplish the work in the required time. Additionally, the Offeror shall show that it can perform the required site investigations, design services, and construction period services without adversely affecting the project schedule. MINIMUM STANDARD OF ACCEPTABILITY: The minimum standard of acceptability is met when the Offeror provides: Offeror must specify the total volume of work awarded to the firm within twelve (12) months of solicitation closing and provide a proposed design schedule not to exceed 215 calendar days. Prepare and submit a practicable design schedule laying out all necessary performance elements needed to complete this project identified in the solicitation in the proposed period of performance. The schedule must be in the form of a progress chart of suitable scale to indicate appropriately the percentage of work scheduled for completion by any given date during the performance period. In addition, the schedule must be submitted in the Microsoft Project format. Offerors should only include the work elements necessary to complete the required work. It is the Offeror s responsibility to identify all necessary project/work elements and the proposal adequately identifies acceptable critical path elements. Sub-Factor 4 Knowledge of the Locality CRITERIA: Identify example projects that demonstrate the firms knowledge of the locality (i.e. Salem VA Medical Center). MINIMUM STANDARD OF ACCEPTABILITY: The minimum standard of acceptability is met when the Offeror provides: Firms shall demonstrate knowledge of localities per example projects. Knowledge of the VA VISN 6 service area will hold much higher weight and evaluated more favorably than projects outside the VISN 6 service area. General understanding of the local conditions, including physical environment, local engineering criteria, and construction methods will be evaluated. The following key personnel resumes shall also be evaluated for knowledge of localities: Project Manager, Architectural, Mechanical, and Electrical. The basis of evaluation for this criterion will focus on the information provided in SF330, Part I, Section E (Resume of Key Personnel), Section F (Example Projects), and Section H (Additional Information) that provides additional information describing same/similar qualifications as deemed relevant to performance at the Salem VA Medical Center Sub-Factor 5 Design Quality Control Plan CRITERIA: The plan shall identify personnel, design review procedures, site investigation/confirmation of existing conditions plan, tests proposed, and forms to be used. A finalized, more detailed Design Quality Control Plan (QCP) will be required to be submitted and approved after contract award. MINIMUM STANDARD OF ACCEPTABILITY: The minimum standards of acceptability are met when the Offeror provides: A description of the quality control system, including a chart showing lines of authority and acknowledgement that the Design Manager shall implement control measures for verification of all design activities. The names, qualifications (in resume format), duties, responsibilities, and authorities of each person assigned as Design Quality Control (QC) manager. Any replacements must have similar qualifications in dealing with projects of similar size and scope. Sub-Factor 6 - Experience in Construction Period Services CRITERIA: Identify example projects that demonstrate the firms experience providing construction period services. will be evaluated on their experience in providing construction period services to include professional field inspections during construction, review of construction submittals, support in answering request for information, and support of construction contract changes to include drafting statements of work and preparing cost estimates. MINIMUM STANDARD OF ACCEPTABILITY: The minimum standard of acceptability is met when the Offeror provides a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) examples of their choice of completed projects of similar contracts in size and scope (hospital remodel/renovation; minimum threshold value of $500,000) for which construction period services were provided. PART II PAST PERFORMANCE Next, the Government will evaluate the offeror s demonstrated past performance of projects in order to determine the offeror s ability to perform the contract successfully and help determine responsibility. As with technical capabilities, the firms will be evaluated with an adjectival rating system. Adjectival Rating Definitions Exceptional Meets all requirements and exceed majority of requirements. Overall the proposal meets and significantly exceeds, in all aspects, the standards for evaluation: very high probability of success: no significant weaknesses. Very Good Meets all requirements and exceed some requirements. The proposal meets and, in some cases, exceeds the standards for evaluation; high probability of success; no significant weaknesses and only minor correctable deficiencies. Satisfactory The proposal meets the standard for evaluation; good probability of success; only minor weaknesses and correctable deficiencies. Marginal Lacks material information. The proposal fails to meet some of the standards for evaluation; low probability of success; major weaknesses and/or uncorrectable. Unacceptable Lacks material information. The proposal fails to meet some or all of the standards for evaluation; need major revision to a new submission to make if acceptable or may contain uncorrectable deficiencies. NOTE: Offerors with no relevant past performance history will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and will be given a neutral rating. CRITERIA: Offerors must provide a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) references of their choice of projects of similar contracts in size and scope (hospital building remodel/renovation; minimum construction threshold value of $500,000). The Offeror must provide for each reference the reference's company name, POCs, address, contact information to include phone number and e-mail address, project description, dollar value and period of performance. The Government will consider and evaluate Offeror's past performance information, to include the references, which are deemed recent and relevant for the requirements of this RFP. Recency Assessment: An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past 6 years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated. Relevancy Assessment: An evaluation of all recent performance information obtained to determine whether the provided design performed under those contracts relate to a similar size and scope as those required by this solicitation. In determining the relevancy of effort performed under individual past performance contracts, the Government will consider the specific effort or portion consistent with that proposed by the prime contractor and/or subcontractors. The past performance information obtained from sources will be used to establish the relevancy of past performance. MINIMUM STANDARD OF ACCEPTABILITY: The minimum standard of acceptability is met when the Offeror provides minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) references of their choice of projects of similar contracts in size and scope (hospital building remodel/renovation; minimum threshold value of $500,000) in which the Offeror adhered to period of performances. The Offeror must provide for each reference the reference's company name, POCs, address, contact information to include phone number and e-mail address, project description, dollar value and period of performance. The Government will consider and evaluate Offeror's past performance information, to include the references, which are deemed recent and relevant for the requirements of this RFP. -- END OF ITEM 8. EVALUATION CRITERIA -- Release of Claims for Delivery Orders: Prior to the final payment under each delivery order issued under this contract or prior to settlement upon termination of the delivery order, and as a condition precedent thereto, the A/E shall execute and deliver to the Contracting Officer a release of all claims against the Government arising under or by virtue of this contract, other than such claims, if any, as may be specifically excepted by the A/E from the operation of the release in stated amounts to be set forth therein. Upon completion of construction and incorporation of all revisions required to complete the record drawings, the following items shall be submitted: A. 1 set of reproducible hard copy as-built plans (30 X 42 ) plus an electronic set in AutoCAD version 2022 (.dwg) and PDF format.