C219--637-21-902 Security Camera Upgrades Design (VA-21-00041716)

Page 7 of 7 PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT FOR PROCUREMENT OF ARCHITECT-ENGINEERING (A/E) SERVICES: This is a request for Standard Form 330, Architect-Engineer Qualifications only. A-E Services are being procured in accordance with the Selection of Architects and Engineers Statute (Public Law 92-582), formerly known as the Brooks Act, and implemented in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 36.6. All submissions will be evaluated in accordance with the below selection criteria. The Government will not pay, nor reimburse, any costs associated with responding to this request. The Government is under no obligation to award a contract as a result of this announcement. Firms will be selected based on demonstrated competence and qualifications for the required work. Any resulting award for the proposed A/E services will be procured under a negotiated Firm-Fixed Price contract. The NAICS Code for this acquisition is 541310 Architectural Services, and the applicable Small Business Size Standard is $7.5 million annual revenue. During performance, the selected A/E firm will be required to attend meetings in person, on site, at the Charles George VA Medical Center in Asheville, North Carolina. Therefore, the area of consideration is RESTRICTED to a maximum 250-mile radius of the Charles George VA Medical Center in Asheville, North Carolina 28805 in which either the A/E firm s Primary or established Auxiliary/Satellite office must be located. NOTE: The 250-mile radius will be measured by one or more of the nationally recognized commercial free on-line mapping services from the Primary or established Auxiliary/Satellite Office address to the above VA address (shortest driving distance option). Proximity of the firm s assigned office, to the project site, including within the 250-mile radius, is one of the criteria on which selection of the most highly qualified firms will be based. Interested parties shall ensure current licensing to provide real property design services ( Architect Services ) in accordance with the State regulations of which the firm s assigned office is located, and shall have a current registration in: (1.) the System for Award Management (SAM) database at https://www.sam.gov, (2.) and the Vendor Information Pages database at http://www.va.gov/osdbu, if applicable, and (3.) have submitted the current cycle VETS-4212 Report at http://www.dol.gov/vets/programs/fcp/main.htm (for contracts in the amount of $150,000.00 or more). Failure of a proposed SDVOSB to be certified by the CVE at the time the SF 330 is submitted shall result in elimination from further consideration. PROJECT INFORMATION: Project No. 637-21-902; Security Camera Upgrade (A/E Design) Charles George VA Medical Center 1100 Tunnel Rd. Asheville, North Carolina 28805 **SEE ATTACHED SCOPE OF WORK PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Provide professional Architect/Engineer (AE) and healthcare planning services necessary to design for Upgrading the Security Camera System at the Charles George VAMC, Asheville, NC. Project includes running new wire for replacing the existing and expansion of new Security Cameras to be purchased by Logistics. Construction includes running wire and possible solar panels for all the existing cameras and where new cameras are to be installed. Estimated 75 or more cameras. A/E will investigate the existing conditions at the main building (Building 47), review documents, review the latest NFPA code, and VA Fire Safety code. **SEE ATTACHED SCOPE OF WORK DESIGN COSTS: All offerors are advised that in accordance with VAAR 836.606-73(a) the total cost of the architect or engineer services contracted for must not exceed six percent (6%) of the estimated cost of the construction project plus any fees for related services and activities. Additionally, FAR 52.236-22 Design Within Funding Limitations, will be applicable to this procurement action. Design limitation costs will be provided to the most highly rated A-E firm(s) selected in accordance with the process outlined below. SDVOSB SET-ASIDE: This request for A-E firm qualifications packages is 100% set-aside for Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) concerns under VAAR clause 852.219-10, VA Notice of Total Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Set-Aside (Dec 2009). LIMITATIONS ON SUBCONTRACTING: In accordance with VAAR 852.219-10, VA Notice of Total Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Set-Aside and 13 CFR 125.6, a service disabled veteran-owned small business concern (SDVOSB) agrees that, in the performance of the contract, it will not pay more than 50% of the amount paid by the government to it, to firms that are not similarly situated. Firms that are similarly situated are those that are also CVE-registered SDVOSBs. SELECTION PROCESS: The agency has convened an evaluation board for the evaluation of responses to this notice. Responses will be evaluated in accordance with the Selection of Architects and Engineers Statute (Public Law 92-582), formerly known as the Brooks Act, and implemented in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 36.6. Specifically, SF 330 submissions will be evaluated to identify the most highly qualified firms, using the selection criteria identified below. Discussions will be held with at least three (3) of the most highly qualified firms. Interviews may be conducted. The processes at FAR 36.602-4 and FAR 36.606 will then be followed. SELECTION CRITERIA: The submitted SF330s will be evaluated in accordance with the following eight criteria from the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 36.602-1 and Veteran Administration Acquisition Regulation (VAAR) 836.602. Therefore, information provided by interested parties, on the SF330, shall address the following criteria. Instructions are provided. CRITERIA 1: Professional qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of required services; Key personnel shall, at a minimum, include the project managers and designers of record who would be assigned to perform the work. (See SF330 Part I Sections E, F and G, but not excluding other information provided on the SF330 and supporting documentation.) Weight: 15% CRITERIA 2: Specialized experience and technical competence in the type of work required; (See SF330 Part I Sections E, F and G, but not excluding other information provided on the SF330 and supporting documentation.) Weight: 15% CRITERIA 3: Capacity to accomplish the work in the required time; Weight: 10%; Respond as follows, as an addendum to the SF330: Provide a list of current projects with a design fee of greater than $20,000 currently being designed in the firms office. Indicate the availability of the proposed project team (including sub-consultants) for the specified contract performance period in terms of: (1.) both the average and maximum number of projects being worked simultaneously for the previous twelve (12) month period, for each key personnel member, (2.) the number of projects currently being worked by each key personnel member identified in the SF330, and (3.) the number of projects that could be added to workload, given size and complexity; CRITERIA 4: Past performance on contracts with Government agencies and private industry in terms of cost control, quality of work, and compliance with performance schedules (three (3) references required); Weight: 15%; Respond as follows, as an addendum to the SF330: Submit no less than three (3) and no more than five (5) past performance references for recent and relevant projects identified on SF330 Part I Section F. Any of the following evaluations are acceptable: (a.) A-E Contractor Appraisal Support System (ACASS), (b.) Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS), or (c.) Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) evaluation. The required PPQ template is provided as an attachment to this announcement (Attachment C). A-Es should follow-up with references to ensure timely submittal of PPQ s, if used. Completed PPQs shall be submitted ONLY by the company/agency providing the reference, directly to the Contracting Officer, prior to the due date. If a completed ACASS/CPARS evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the completed SF330 package, in lieu of completing the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ). Project Recency: A project will be considered recent only if performance was completed within five (5) years of the date of issuance of this public announcement. Ongoing projects will not be considered as no accurate performance record can exist for work not yet completed. Project Relevance: The past performance references must be similar in scope to the design project described in the attached Statement of Work. CRITERIA 5: Location in the general geographical area of the project and knowledge of the locality of the project (maximum allowable distance of 250 miles from the project location, measured as previously stated). The actual location of key personnel will be considered in the evaluation and assignment of a rating. Firms with offices or substantial project key personnel outside of the 250-mile radius will not be further evaluated; Weight: 5% CRITERIA 6: Reputation and standing of the firm and its principal officials with respect to professional performance, general management, and cooperativeness. (See SF330 Part I Sections E, F and G, but not excluding other information provided on the SF330 and supporting documentation, or otherwise identified in Federal and/or State Government databases.) Weight: 15% CRITERIA 7: Record of significant claims against the firm because of improper or incomplete architectural and engineering services. Weight: 10% CRITERIA 8: Specific experience and qualifications of personnel proposed for assignment to the project and their record of working together as a team. (See SF330 Part I Section G, but not excluding other information provided on the SF330 and supporting documentation.) Weight: 15% DUE DATE FOR SF330 QUALIFICATIONS SUBMISSIONS: Firms that meet the requirements listed in this announcement are invited to electronically submit the completed Standard Form (SF) 330 (Parts I and II) packages to contact@example.gov no later than 10:00am EST, Monday, May 24, 2021. Submissions should be encrypted and may require multiple emails. The single email limit for file attachments is 10MB per email. Late proposal rules found in FAR 15.208 will be followed for late submittals. Acknowledgement of receipt will be provided, which will include the number of emails and number of attachments received. All SF 330 submissions shall be clearly marked with the subject line displaying the Solicitation Number 36C24621Q0587. The SF 330 form may be downloaded from https://www.gsa.gov/reference/forms and is also provided as an attachment to this notice. Completed SF 330 shall include the primary firms, subcontractor firms, and any consultants expected to be used on the project. Interested firms shall address each of the Eight (8) Selection Criteria in their SF 330 s and additional documents/submittals. THIS IS NOT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL. THERE ARE NO SOLICITATION DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE. This is a request for SF 330, Architect/Engineer Qualifications packages only. Any requests for a solicitation will not receive a response. EVALUATION METHOD: Identification of the most highly qualified firms will occur by using the following rating methodology and the above selection criteria. The number of firms identified by the evaluation board as the most highly qualified will be determined based on the responses received. Where three (3) or more responses are received from qualified firms, a minimum of three (3) firms will be identified as the most highly qualified. If less than three (3) responses are received, then only those firms that are qualified will be considered, or the requirement may be re-advertised. SF330 packages rated as marginal or unacceptable (see below) for any one criteria, or more than one criteria, may be removed from consideration as that firm may not represent a qualified firm for the purposes of this procurement. The excluded firm(s) will not be counted towards the tally of three (3) responses, or three (3) qualified firms, described above. Each of the eight (8) criteria will be assigned one of the ratings shown below, based on a consensus rating of the board s evaluation of the response. The weights for each of the criteria are identified above. A total weighted score will be calculated by multiplying the individual criterion ratings by the criteria weights, and then summing the individual criteria scores. The highest possible total score is 300. Outstanding: Criterion response suggests the firm has a high-level of demonstrated competence and/or qualifications relevant to the requirement, and/or the capacity to perform the work. For location, an outstanding rating will be assigned to a firm operating from within 100-miles of the facility, measured as previously stated. This rating will also be applied where no record of significant claims can be identified. An outstanding rating will be applied where no adverse information could be identified regarding Criteria 6. Rating Value: 3 Good: Criterion response suggests the firm has a moderate level of demonstrated competence and/or qualifications relevant to the requirement, and/or the capacity to perform the work. For location, a good rating will be assigned to a firm within the required radius but operating from outside of a 100-mile radius to the facility. This rating will not be used regarding records of significant claims. This rating will not be used regarding Criteria 6. Rating Value: 2 Marginal: Criterion response suggests the firm has limited demonstrated competence and/or qualifications relevant to the requirement, and/or limited capacity to perform the work. For location, a marginal rating will not be used. This rating will not be used regarding records of significant claims. A marginal rating will be applied where adverse information was obtained regarding Criteria 6, but the information does not warrant potential disqualification from further consideration. Rating Value: 1 Unacceptable: Criterion response suggests the firm is unqualified for this requirement, and/or lacks the capacity to perform the work. For location, an unacceptable response is one received from a firm operating from outside the required 250-mile maximum radius, identified above. This rating will be used when a record of significant claims has been identified. A marginal rating will be applied where adverse information was obtained regarding Criteria 6 that warrants potential disqualification from further consideration. Rating Value: 0 See attached document: Attachment - Scope of Work See attached document: Attachment B - SF330 See attached document: Attachment C - Past Performance Questionnaire