Inactive Total Small Business Set-Aside (FAR 19.5)

AWARD NOTICE - AMENDED TO INCLUD ZONE A - ALASKA Contract ID # 47PL0021D0004 Zone A - NORTH A-E IDIQ awarded to ECI / HYER INC. dba ECI effective date February 16, 2021 Contract ID #: 47PL0021D0005 Zo... AWARD NOTICE - AMENDED TO INCLUD ZONE A - ALASKA Contract ID # 47PL0021D0004 Zone A - NORTH A-E IDIQ awarded to ECI / HYER INC. dba ECI effective date February 16, 2021 Contract ID #: 47PL0021D0005 Zone B - EAST A-E IDIQ awarded to ECH Architecture PS effective date of January 1, 2021 Contract ID #: 47PL0021D0006 Zone C - WEST A-E IDIQ awarded to Studio Petretti Architects, LLC effective of January 11, 2021 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ AMENDMENT A07 DATE: 07/28/2020; Amendment A07, see documents attached as of 07/28/2020. Statement of Qualifications are due Thursday July 30, 2020, no later than 4:00pm Pacific Time. Documents attached: "A07 47PL0020R0001 Requests for Qualifications", "A07 AE RFI and Responses as of 07282020", "A07 47PL0020R0001 AE IDIQ SOW 07282020." AMENDMENT A06 DATE: 07/24/2020; Amendment A06, see attached documents' "47PL0020R0001 AE SATOC IDIQ AMENDMENT A06" and "A06 47PL0020R0001 AE SATOC IDIQ SOW 07242020". AMENDMENT A05 DATE: 07/23/2020; Amendment A05, see attached document "47PL0020R0001 AE SATOC IDIQ AMENDMENT A05.pdf". Amendment includes GSA responses to Requests for Information (RFI) received through 07/21/2020. AMENDMENT DATE (A04): 07/14/2020; Amendment A04 , see attached document "47PL0020R0001 AE SATOC IDIQ AMENDMENT A04.pdf", AMENDMENT DATE (A03): 07/07/2020; 1. GSA remove and replace 'Pre-Proposal Conference Registration' and 'Request for Information (RFI)' links with links below. a). To register to attend the pre-proposal conference, copy and paste this link into a browser: https://forms.gle/X6pcK9saHz8VgVtGA b). To submit an RFI or other general solicitation questions, cop and paste this link into a browser: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1bLxU4QiHL-5t7LqCCTQYFGZnt3yCAabUfel1lATrS-U/edit 2. SOLICITATION SCHEDULE [Date // Time]: a). Pre-proposal Conference: July 9, 2020 // 1:00pm to 2:00pm Pacific Time b). Request for Information (RFI) Period Ends: July 23, 2020 // no later than 4:00pm Pacific Time c). Submit Request for Qualification: July 30, 2020 // no later than 4:00pm Pacific Time d). Oral Presentation/Interview Target: Complete by August 27, 2020 e). Award three SATOC IDIQ Target: September 24, 2020 3. Remove and replace RFQ with 'A03 R10 AE IDIQ Request for Qualifications 07072020.pdf' AMENDMENT DATE (A02): 07/02/2020 GSA Post Request for Qualification(s) AMENDMENT DATE (A01): 06/29/2020 GSA posts Synopsis/Solicitation Notice INITIAL POSTING: 06/03/2020 The U.S. General Services Administration (GSA), Public Buildings Service (PBS), Northwest/Arctic Region (R10) has requirements for three Single Award Task Order Contract (SATOC) Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts for supplemental Architect-Engineer (A-E) Services. This Notice amends the subject Synopsis/Solicitation Notice posted on June 3, 2020 and amended on June 29, 2020 with this Request For Qualifications (RFQ) of A-E firms interested in contracting for this work. The Solicitation Procurement Instrument Identifier (PIID) Number is 47PL0020R0001 This procurement is conducted in accordance with Public Law 92-582, the Architect-Engineer Act, FAR Part 36.6 and GSAM Part 536. This RFQ may result in the award of three Single Award Task Order Contract (SATOC) IDIQ contracts. ** The information below is inserted into beta.SAM.gov using a rich text format, charts and other formatting has been removed. Offerors are instructed to downloand the Request for Qualification attachment when preparing the response Statement of Qualifications. ** I. Introduction The United States General Services Administration (GSA), Public Buildings Service (PBS), Northwest/Arctic Region (R10) has a requirement for three Architect-Engineer Services Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts. GSA Region is responsible for 402 GSA leased and 102 GSA owned properties in Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. The GSA has requirements for minor repair and alteration plus tenant improvement projects forecasted for the next five years. The SATOC IDIQs will provide consistent and repeatable method of sourcing A-E services to support future construction projects. GSA may use the professional services as a stand along action with no further construction, as traditional design before construction and design concurrent with construction. GSA anticipates ordering studies, design and construction documents, drawings, various reports, professional estimating, construction administration support services, and related services to satisfy federal requirements. This is procurement is issued Full And Open After Exclusion of Sources, a ‘total small business set-aside’ procurement. The North American Industrial Classification Standard (NAICS) code for this procurement is 541310 for Architectural Services, and the annual small business size standard is $8 million in annual receipts. Firms that design or prepare specifications for construction contracts or task orders issued under the resulting contract are prohibited from providing the subsequent construction. This limitation also applies to subsidiaries/affiliates of the firm. II. Description of Services Required The requirement is for multi-disciplinary Architect and Engineering (A/E) services, including, but not limited to, architectural, structural, historic preservation, civil, fire life safety, mechanical, and electrical services for projects including space renovations, water proofing, roofing, painting, asbestos abatement, security, fire protection, safety, health, building equipment/systems, and other repair/alteration work. The IDIQ SATOCs will support R10’s projects at or below the Prospectus level for both GSA funded and Tenant Improvements via Reimbursable Work Agreements. The IDV award pool will consist of three A-E firms, with each firm awarded a primary zone (see list of zones below) and two secondary zones. Use of an A-E SATOC for work in a secondary zone will be solely at the discretion of the GSA/PBS R10 IDIQ Program Office. The GSA may, at its discretion, choose to request qualifications for individual requirements from all IDIQ awardees if it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government by the IDV Contracting Officer and COR. These actions are anticipated to be made on a situational basis and rarely requested. The three award zones are: Zone A being the State of Alaska, Zone B being Eastern Washington, Eastern Oregon (East side of the Cascades), and the state of Idaho; and Zone C being Western Washington and remaining area of the state of Oregon. A-E Firms shall be required to perform services in all three zones (primary and both secondary zones), as required by the GSA. An Offeror may not be awarded more than one Primary Zone. III. Acquisition Strategy The acquisition and source selection are being conducted pursuant to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 36.6, PL 92-582, (formally known as the Brooks Act) and with elements of FAR Subpart 15. The acquisition will be completed as a total small business set aside. The Government intends to award three IDIQ contracts with fixed hourly labor rates in accordance with geographically delineated areas of responsibility. The cumulative planned Contract Maximum Value (CMV) is $20 million; and includes a $15 million base CMV, plus one option to increase the CMV by $5 million. The option for the increase in CMV has been determined to be necessary to meet unforeseen project surges within a reasonable allowance that may be necessary to bridge any potential service gaps in order to place replacement A-E IDVs. Each awarded IDIQ contract will have a five year base period and will contain the clause 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services. The five year limitation is in accordance with FAR 17.204 (e) regarding services. Task Order ordering procedures will include a list of standardized evaluation criteria that includes the review of the current A-E qualifications (SF 330s) and labor price lists for individual IDV awards. IV. Statement of Architect-Engineering Services Refer to the Statement of Architect-Engineering Services, dated 06/24/2020. V. The Evaluation Process, Methodology, and Techniques The GSA, PBS, Region 10 intends to award contracts to responsible offerors whose proposal conforms to the synopsis, Request for A-E Qualifications, and is the most technically qualified based on written technical qualification packages and oral presentations/interviews. The evaluation of qualifications and selection of the three most highly qualified firms for each individual IDIQ award will be accomplished in accordance with 40 U.S.C. § 1103. Selection will be based on the criteria established by this Request for Qualifications. Each individual IDIQ contract will be negotiated in accordance with 40 U.S.C. § 1104 Negotiation of Contract. The CO will negotiate architectural and engineering services at prices which are determined to be fair and reasonable to the Federal Government, with special emphasis on FAR 15.404-4(c)(4)(i) regarding fee limitation. Fair and reasonable pricing will be established utilizing the analysis methodologies identified in FAR Subsection 15.4 and include consideration of the scope, complexity, professional nature and estimated value of the services to be rendered in consideration of the average anticipated task order contract scope of service and estimated cost of construction at award. Negotiations will be held with the most highly qualified firm(s) selected pursuant to 40 U.S.C. § 1104. If the agency is unable to negotiate a satisfactory contract- with the highest ranked firm, negotiations will be terminated with that firm. The agency will engage in negotiations with the next most highly qualified firm based on the selection list until agreement is reached. If the agency is unable to negotiate a satisfactory contract, then additional firms will be selected based on the order of their competence and qualification and the agency will continue negotiations until an agreement is reached. Successful negotiations for one zone will result in one contract award. Negotiations for all three zones may be completed simultaneously. The GSA reserves the right to process contract awards for each zone based on successful negotiations as they are completed. A. Written Qualifications Package Written qualification packages shall be evaluated against the evaluation criteria. Firms that submit a qualifications package and meet the minimum requirements will be evaluated. Offerors determined to be the most highly qualified may be given an opportunity to conduct oral presentations/interviews. B. Oral Presentation/Interviews Oral presentations/interviews will be evaluated based on the offeror’s overall architectural knowledge, ability to assess, strategize, and communicate efficiently, while creating innovative solutions to project challenges. Design documents from one sample project meeting the requirements of “similar” projects shall be provided prior to the interviews, which will be discussed as part of the interview. Offerors will have 45 minutes to present based upon the GSA-furnished interview pre-written questionnaire. The GSA will be allowed 15 minutes for questions and answers. C. Evaluation Criteria: Selection of the primary criteria (FAR 36.602-1) shall consist of the following in descending order of importance: 1. Acceptability under other appropriate evaluation criteria: specifically Oral Presentation/Interview 2. Professional qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of required services; 3. Specialized experience and technical competence in type of work required; 4. Capacity to accomplish the work in the required time; 5. Past performance on contracts with Government agencies and private industry in terms of cost control, quality of work, and compliance with performance schedules; and 6. Location in the general geographical area of the project work, knowledge of the locality, building codes and applicable laws of the three geographic zones. VI. Evaluation Criterion The evaluation criteria and relative weight of importance between them are in descending order of importance. USE THE ATTACHED 'REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS' IN ORDER TO RESPOND. SEE CHART OF CRITERION AND STATEMENTS OF RELATIVE IMPORTANCE ON PAGE 4. Any single criterion evaluated as U - unacceptable or VL - Very Low Confidence renders the entire proposal as ineligible for award. The Government shall conduct interviews with at least the three highest qualified Offerors per zone identified on the short-list established as a result of this Solicitation for Qualifications, and shall then prepare a selection report for the selection authority recommending, in order of importance, the Offerors that are considered to be the most highly qualified to perform the required services. A. Criterion 1: Professional Qualifications 1. Description This criterion considers the Offeror’s proposed team, the overall organization structure, and key personnel professional qualifications. 2. Submission Requirements Complete SF 330 Part I Instructions Pages 1 and 2. Note amplification to certain portions of the instruction is provided below. SF 330, Part 1, Section C: Proposed Team Complete form. SF 330, Part 1, Section D: Organization Chart The instructions for Section D are amplified as follows: Offerors are required to identify the overall relationship and lines of authority among all of the total proposed team, including key subconsultants. Administrative or lower level engineering positions are not required to submit resumes in Section E. SF 330, Part 1, Section E: Resumes of Key Personnel Proposed for this Contract The instructions for Section E are amplified as follows: a. Submit professional qualifications and experience of the proposed Key personnel of the Offeror’s team, Prime and Subconsultant, to be assigned to this contract, which are necessary for the satisfactory performance of the type of work requirements listed in the Statement of Architect-Engineer Services. For this contract, the lead discipline shall be a registered Architect or licensed Professional Engineer, either Electrical, Mechanical, Civil, or Structural. b. Ensure to include the resumes of Key Personnel for each proposed team member who will serve as Project Manager or, Designer(s) of Record/ Engineer(s) of Record (DOR and EOR), identified by individual discipline, architectural, electrical, mechanical, civil/structural, fire life safety, as well as the primary cost estimator. The DORs and EORs shall perform and direct the design within their respective discipline and shall sign and seal the drawings. Project Managers and EOR/DORs must be professionally registered or licensed, in the subject discipline, in the states for the Zone that the prime offeror is submitting qualifications. Offerors shall include at least one professionally registered, licensed, architect and engineer for the states in the secondary zones. Refer to Criterion 3, Capacity, for specific secondary zone requirements. c. Provide license number(s), in addition to state of registration, and discipline, in Section E, Block 17. Do not include licenses or registrations other than those that are active/current for the States of Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. Credentials submitted will be verified with credentialing organizations, State licensing boards, institutions of higher learning, or other reliable means. d. Ensure that other professional qualifications provided in Section E, Block 18 are relevant for the kinds and types of A-E services identified in the Statement of Architect-Engineer Services and in the GSA, PBS, Region 10 Area of Responsibility. Do not provide extraneous information because no extra credit will be provided. SF 330, Part 1. Section G: Key Personnel Participation in Example Projects a. The instructions for Section G are amplified to require the Offeror to include in the same block as the names of Key Personnel, the name of the firm that the individual. 3. Standard of Evaluation The standard of evaluation is met when: The Organizational Chart submitted as part of Section D clearly identifies an adequate overall relationship and lines of authority of the proposed team, including key subconsultants and administrative or lower level engineering positions of the Prime Offeror; and The resumes of Key Personnel submitted as part of Section E clearly identify sufficient highly qualified and highly experienced and currently registered Architects and licensed Professional Engineer with the requisite experience in successfully performing similar work as listed in the Statement of Architect-Engineer Services; and The submissions under this criterion leave the Government no doubt in the Offeror’s Team’s organization and Key Personnel’s qualifications to successfully perform any work that may be issued within the scope of the Statement of Architect-Engineer Services. B. Criterion 2: Specialized Experience 1. Description This criterion considers the Offeror’s specialized experience and technical competence of the proposed team with the type of work described in the Statement of Architect-Engineer Services, as well as the technical expertise and experience in design, design management and philosophy, and Construction Administration expertise. 2. Submission Requirements Complete SF 330 Part I, Section F and H Instructions Pages 1 and 2. Note amplification to certain portions of the instruction is provided below. 1. SF 330, Part 1, Sections F: Example Projects Which Best Illustrate Proposed Team's Qualifications for this Contract Instructions for Section F are amplified as follows: a. Section F: For the proposed team (prime A/E or JV, A/E partner, and subconsultant firms), provide between two (2) and five (5) completed projects, including the contract and/or task order contract number, that best illustrates overall team experience relevant to this type of work described in the Statement of Architect-Engineer Services. b. Firms with multiple offices shall indicate which office completed each project listed. A project is defined as either a single function contract or a single task order contract if awarded in accordance with an Indefinite Delivery Vehicle (IDV) type contract. c. Submitted projects should address the following elements: Example projects for GSA planned work: Federal courthouses, Federal Land Port of Entries, Federal offices in Federal owned and leased facilities, at the different finish levels as described in the current GSA/PBS P100, design of tenant space, form, fit, function, building envelope, etc.; and Project Experience: between two (2) and five (5) projects included in this section. This information can be used to demonstrate energy and environmental efficiency and sustainable design excellence; and d. Project Completion: Projects must be successfully completed within the previous six years from the date submission of Qualifications are due; and e. Similar Scope: Similar Scope is defined as design and engineering efforts similar to the work anticipated to be completed under this synopsis/Request for A-E Qualifications; and f. Construction Project Cost Magnitude: Construction Project Cost Magnitude is defined as design and engineering services for similar scope within an Estimated Cost of Construction (ECC) between $150,000 and $3.95 million. 2. SF 330, Part 1, Sections H: Specialized experience and technical competence of the proposed team with the type of work described in the Statement of Architect-Engineer Services Individual page limitations are identified for each amplification. Font name; Arial, minimum font size; 10. Section H is amplified as follows: a. Provide a narrative detailing the Offeror's team’s familiarity, experience, and expertise in specific building design specialties such as: roof replacement, interior design, space planning services to include furniture layout, design and move coordination, elevator, childcare, building system evaluation, historic preservation, landscaping, laboratory, sustainable and accessible design, energy conservation, pollution prevention, waste reduction, and the use of recovered materials. Other specialized design includes fire protection, life safety, and security systems design. Page limitation: two pages b. Technical Expertise: Provide narrative detailing how the Principal and Project Manager proposed for this synopsis/Request for A-E Qualifications have worked together on prior projects to successfully satisfy the client's program, function, image, mission, budget, schedule and operational objectives on past projects. The supporting evidence should show the Project Manager is the best project manager for the IDIQ services. In addition, the firm/joint venture shall detail its plan to employ those strategies in this contract. Page limitation: one page c. Design Philosophy and Methods: Provide a narrative indicating how project management, cost estimating, coordination, quality control, planning, scheduling, timeliness, problem resolution and cost control measures are addressed by your firm/joint venture during design. Give detailed information regarding your firm’s method for conducting site investigations/site verifications on projects. Discuss design philosophy, energy consciousness and low maintenance design features. Proven design philosophy information that illustrates how the firm responds to project challenges, application of design intent, realize actual constructed systems and operations, energy conservation measures and sustainable durable design features. This narrative should include verifiable information, objective details, facts, performance history, and other information that can substantiate the architect and engineering firms’ design philosophies and approach to public architecture. Page limitation: two pages 3. Standard of Evaluation The standard is met when: The Offeror demonstrates that the proposed design team(s) have the required specialized experience and technical competency necessary successfully accomplish the required design services to be ordered under the SATOC IDIQ by GSA. Statements of Qualifications clearly address each section of the SF 330 and associated amplifications noted above. The page limitations will be strictly adhered too. Pages in excess of the maximum pages will not be evaluated. C. Criterion 3: Capacity 1. Description This criterion takes into consideration the Offerors team’s capacity to accomplish the work in the required time and its ability to successfully manage concurrent projects. 2. Submission Requirement Complete SF 330, Part II General Qualifications for the Offeror, branch offices, and key subconsultants composed of the proposed team. Minimum font size is Arial 10. Page limitation; one page for each individual entity proposed. Illustrative example; an Offeror firm with one primary office will propose with a team of two branch offices. The maximum number of pages is three. The same Offeror proposes four key subconsultants. Two subconsultant firms will independently include one branch office each. The maximum page for the subconsultants is six. a. For the Offeror, include a narrative (in terms of labor capacity, operational control and quality assurance that describes the firm's experience in successfully delivering projects per performance schedule, how the Offeror will meet deliverable schedules while working on multiple concurrent projects, providing timely construction support, and successfully completing multiple projects with similar delivery dates; and, b. For the Offeror, discuss in the narrative how surge workload (i.e. emergencies, partial or complete redesign, secondary zone work, etc.), would be managed. Page limit of two single sided pages for list of current projects and one page for discussion regarding items b) and c); and, c. Provide verification of Offeror’s team’s ability and capacity to perform design and engineering services within the secondary zones, including the number of architects and professional engineers that are licensed and registered in the States within the secondary zones to perform the types and kinds of services described in the Statement of Architect-Engineer Services. Page limit of three single sided pages. Preference may be provided for the Prime A-E firm with greater in-house capacity. 3. Standard of Evaluation The standard of evaluation is met when the Offeror demonstrates that its design team has sufficient capacity to perform the required service for the kinds and types of work identified in the Statement of Architect-Engineer Services. That it has sufficient experience in successfully delivering projects per performance schedules, has well thought out and detailed plan to meet delivery schedules for multiple simultaneous projects, and its plan to handle surge work, as well as its ability and capacity to perform work in the secondary zones should need arise. The narratives should leave no doubt to the Government that the Offeror has sufficient resources and an excellent strategy to address the items identified in the submission requirements. Credentials submitted will be verified with credentialing organizations, State licensing boards, institutions of higher learning, or other reliable means. D. Criterion 4: Past Performance 1. Description This criterion takes into consideration the Offeror's past performance on projects with Government agencies and private industry on projects submitted under Criterion 2, in terms of quality of work, cost control, and compliance with performance schedules. Points of contact provided in other criteria may be contacted. A firm with no record of relevant past performance information shall be evaluated either favorably or unfavorably. The evaluation criteria are based upon degrees of confidence/risk. This criterion considers the offeror’s record of past performance for design and engineering services for projects with an Estimated Cost of Construction (ECC) between $150,000 and $3.95 million. The past performance is eligible for review if the design and engineering services were accomplished (100% CD) from six years to the closing date of this synopsis/Request for A-E Qualifications. Specifically, the following areas of past performance will be considered: quality of design, cost saving design approaches, quality of A/E services during design implementation, and compliance with performance schedule. 2. Submission Requirement Submissions for this criterion shall be separate from the SF330. Offerors shall submit past performance for the five projects identified in Criterion 2 for consideration of its record of past performance of A/E services that are relevant to the work anticipated to be performed by the GSA as defined in the scope of services for this synopsis/Request for A-E Qualifications. For each project provided as experience under Criterion 2 submit: a) If a federal contract, provide copies of Interim or Final Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and/or Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) evaluations, or completed past performance questionnaires (PPQ) if CPAR’s or PPIRS evaluations have not been completed; b) if not a federal contract, provide facility owner documentation or a PPQ of the firm’s performance issued on that contract/task order. If no documentation exists, clearly state so; c) provide accessible owner points of contact-name, title, address, telephone number, Contract/task order number; and d) Provide copies of awards and letters of appreciation/ commendation. 3. Standard of Evaluation The standard of evaluation is a determination to the degree of risk of unsuccessful performance and the associated confidence the Government has regarding the Offeror’s team completion of future projects based upon the Offerors Team past performance on projects identified in Criterion 2 in respect to quality of work, cost control, and compliance with performance schedules. See Definitions tables for specific risk, confidence rating definitions. E. Criterion 5: Geographical Considerations 1. Description This criterion assesses the Offeror’s ability to adequately serve the GSA’s Area of Responsibility (primary zone and secondary zones) and demonstrated knowledge of design approaches, construction materials, codes/ordinances, costs, and other conditions unique to the Area of Responsibility (Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington). 2. Submission Requirements Provide a succinct description of the firm’s design capability within the geographical area specified in your technical qualifications submission. The description should indicate the following: a. Location of Offeror’s primary and branch Offices, as well as Key Subconsultant primary and branch offices that are seeking work in the geographical Zone under this Synopsis , or, if applicable, the Offeror’s plans to establish such capabilities b. Specific knowledge of the geographical area including demonstration knowledge of design approaches, construction materials, codes/ordinances, costs, and other conditions unique to the primary zone that the Offeror is submitting qualifications for. c. Detailed plan conveying your firm’s ability to respond immediately (within 72 hours) to any GSA building site within the geographic area your firm has specified in the most cost effective and efficient manner. 3. Standard of Evaluation The standard of evaluation is met when the Offeror has provided sufficient evidence of capacity and leaves no doubt to perform the required services identified in the Statement of Architect-Engineer Services within the zone. Preference will be provided for Offerors for having offices within the primary zone. VII. Oral Presentation/Interview Evaluation: A Short-List of the most highly qualified Offerors will be selected at the conclusion of the Written Phase of the A-E competition to be invited to participate in the second phase of A-E Qualifications Evaluation Oral presentations/interviews will be evaluated based on the offeror’s overall experience and architectural knowledge, efficient communication and project flow, ability to assess, strategize, and create innovative processes and solutions to project challenges. Five calendar days prior to the scheduled Oral Presentation/interview, or within the timeframe identified in the written notification by the GSA regarding said presentation/interview, the Offeror shall provide an example design package of one of the example projects submitted for Criterion 2, to include drawings, specifications at the different design stages. The Government will review the design package for consistency with the oral presentation. A. Oral Presentation/Interviews Phase Offerors should provide an overview of the firm, lead designers, and overall Project Management Process including design solutions. Offerors presentation should address critical facets of the project management process including negotiation of work orders, owner engagement, onsite inspection and evaluation, staffing, strategies for project execution in fully occupied facilities, communication, scheduling, budget, and cost estimating. Offerors should discuss design solutions, including innovative architectural/engineering concepts, security, historic conservation and preservation, the integration of sustainable design practices, and the use of CAD/BIM technology throughout design, in addition to overall project management. Offerors are expected to present information not already included in the written portion of the Qualifications. Elements 2, 3, and 4 are of equal importance to each other. Element 1 is significantly less important than the remaining elements. 1. Oral Presentation by the Principal in charge of the IDIQ services, introducing the Project Manager and, including an overview of the firm/joint venture and sub consultants, and lead designers. This element is significantly...