Architect and Engineering Services for Letter of Map Revision/MT-2 Support Services For Risk Management Division–'s Risk Map Program

Notice Type: Presolicitation Notice

Posted Date: 06-APR-21

Office Address: Homeland Security, Department of; FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY; MITIGATION SECTION(MIT60); WASHINGTON, DC 20472

Subject: Architect and Engineering Services for Letter of Map Revision/MT-2 Support Services For Risk Management Division--'s Risk Map Program

Classification Code: C - Architect and engineering services

Solicitation Number: HSFE60-21-S-0002

Contact: Randall Christner

Setaside: Total Small Business Set-Aside (FAR 19.5)Total Small Business Set-Aside (FAR 19.5)

Place of Performance Country: USA

Description: Homeland Security, Department of

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

MITIGATION SECTION(MIT60)

This Amendment 0001 is being issued to update the synopsis notice in its entirety, update the statement of objectives, and post the questions and answers. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Original Synopsis 1. Overview This Synopsis is being publicized on beta.sam.gov in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 36.601-1. The requirement, Letter of Map Revision/MT-2 Support Services is being competed as a small business set-aside. These services are referred to herein as MT-2 support services. This procurement is for architect and engineering (A&E) services. The selection of the most qualified firm will be conducted in accordance with the Selection of Architects and Engineers statute as implemented in FAR Subpart 36.6 and HSAR 3036.6. The Product Service Code (PSC) is C219, Other Architect and Engineering Services and the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) is 541330, Engineering Services with a small business size standard of $16.5 million. Responsible A&E firms, also referred to as "Offerors", meeting the requirements described in this announcement are invited to submit: (1) a Standard Form (SF) 330, Architect-Engineer Qualifications, Parts I and II and (2) supplemental data described below to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for consideration. The Government intends to issue a single award contract to the most qualified, responsible Offeror with fair and reasonable cost/pricing. The contract will include a 12-month base period and four 12-month option periods. The required MT-2 support is included in the scope of work currently provided by the incumbent Production and Technical Services (PTS) contractors and will be transitioned to the successful small business concern for this effort upon contract award. 2. Issuing Office: Federal Emergency Management Agency Office of Chief Procurement Officer 500 C. Street, SW, 3rd Floor Washington, DC 20472 3. Description of Services: The purpose of this acquisition is to procure A&E services to support FEMA/Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration's (FIMA) Risk Mapping, Assessment, and Planning (Risk MAP) program. FIMA requires Contractor provided A&E services to support the Letter of Map Change (LOMC) process in-place to revise published flood hazard information by letter, as frequently as needed, to keep the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) maps up-to-date and related appeals reimbursement support. The Contractor shall provide MT-2 support services to meet the Statement of Objectives (SOO) provided as Attachment 1. The Contractor shall also support the reimbursement of certain appeals submitted through the flood mapping process. Please note the scope of work does not require the Contractor to make any reimbursement payments on behalf of the Government and all final reimbursement decisions will be determined by FEMA. The required MT-2 support services augment the flood mapping and modeling activities provided by the PTS Contractors which are the basis for NFIP's floodplain management regulations and flood insurance requirements. The NFIP maintains and updates flood hazard information through flood insurance rate maps and risk assessments for the United States and its territories under the PTS contracts. FIMA's Risk Management Directorate (RMD) has operated the Risk MAP program since 2009. Through collaboration with federal, state, local, tribal and private stakeholders, Risk MAP delivers quality data to increase public awareness and leads to actions that reduce risk to life and property. The Risk MAP program which includes this MT-2 requirement is closely aligned with FEMA Strategic Goal 1.1, "Incentivize investments that reduce risk, including pre-disaster mitigation, and reduce disaster costs at all levels." Virtual Library A virtual library containing relevant Risk MAP program and MT-2 documents is available to all interested vendors. To obtain access rights to the library interested vendors shall send a written request via email to the Government points of contact set forth in Section 4 of this synopsis. The request must include: (1) vendor's legal company name, (2) DUNS number, and (3) names of individuals who will access the library. The request must include a completed and signed non-disclosure agreement (NDA) for each individual who will access the library. The NDA is provided as Attachment 2. 4. Submission of Vendor Questions: All questions pertaining to this synopsis are due no later than March 19, 2021 at 2:00PM (local time) of the Issuing Office. All questions and communications regarding this solicitation must be received via email to the Contracting Officer, Mark Blevins at Mark.Blevins@fema.dhs.gov, Contract Specialist, Randall Christner at Randall.Christner@fema.dhs.gov, and Contract Specialist, Stephen Roane at Stephen.Roane@associates.fema.dhs.gov. No phone calls will be accepted. The Government will post all vendor questions and answers on beta.sam.gov. The Government reserves the right to answer any late questions. 5. Submission of Phase-1 Proposals SF-330s and other Qualification Data: Phase-1 submissions are due by April 14, 2021 at 10:00AM (local time of the issuing office). All submissions in response to this synopsis must be submitted via email to the Contracting Officer, Mark Blevins at Mark.Blevins@fema.dhs.gov, Contract Specialist, Randall Christner at Randall.Christner@fema.dhs.gov and Contract Specialist, Stephen Roane at Stephen.Roane@associates.fema.dhs.gov. Completed Past Performance Questionnaires provided as Attachment 3 must be received from project owners are due by this date/time. Please note, electronic files shall not exceed 10MB or they will be rejected by the FEMA server. As necessary, files shall be submitted in parts in order to stay within the 10MB limit. Failure to follow the instructions as noted herein could result in the untimely receipt by the Government of an Offeror's submission. Late submissions will not be accepted or evaluated and will preclude the Offeror from award consideration. It is the Offeror's responsibility to ensure it complies with instructions as noted herein, to include being timely. 6. Instructions for Submission Preparation: Offerors shall submit the following for Phase-1 of this procurement to be considered for award. * Written Standard Form (SF) 330 Part I -- Contract-Specific Qualifications. * Written Standard Form (SF) 330 Part II -- General Qualifications. * Response to the Project Scenarios set forth in this synopsis under Section H of the SF-330. * Proposed Performance Work Statement (PWS) and Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) based on the MT-2 Statement of Objectives provided as Attachment-1. The proposed PWS/QASP shall be provided in Section H of the SF-330. 7. Phase-1 SF-330 Instructions: Offerors shall submit the SF-330 and other qualification data in response to the five standard evaluation factors prescribed by FAR 36.602-1 which shall be addressed under Sections A through J of the SF-330 and two additional evaluation factors (reference FAR 35.602-1(a)(6)), which shall be addressed under Section H of the SF-330. The SF 330 can be found at https://www.gsa.gov/forms-library/architect-engineer-qualifications. The total page limit for all parts of the SF-330 and other qualifications shall not exceed thirty (30) single-sided pages. The cover page, table of contents, proposed PWS/QASP, and letters of commitment do not count towards the page limit. A cover page and table of contents shall be included for up to 2-additonal pages. The cover page shall include: (1) The legal company name(s) and DUNS number(s) for all team members including but not limited to the prime Offeror, Joint Venture (JV) members and proposed subcontractors and (2) Synopsis number. All pages (including written, project photographs, sketches, drawings, and additional information) submitted in addition to the SF-330 shall be 8.5 by 11 inch and shall use a type pitch that is no smaller than a standard 11-point font type, with the exception of charts, graphs, or tables, which shall use a pitch not smaller than 10-point font. Each page shall have not less than one-inch margins on each side of the page. Header/footer information (which does not include any information to be evaluated) may be included in the 1" margin space. Each 8.5 inch by 11 inch "page" shall count as one page. Pages shall be numbered. Only Calibri or Times New Roman fonts may be used. All other material such as brochures or samples of work, attachments, or extra pages will not be considered. In addition to the specific instructions on the SF-330, Offerors shall adhere to the following additional requirements. SF-330 Part I Section A. Contract Information. For the title Offeror shall reference synopsis number HSFE60-21-S-0002 for MT-2 Support Services for FEMA's Risk MAP Program. This section applies towards the 30-page limit. SF-330 Part I Section B. Architect-Engineer Point of contact. The Offeror shall insure the point of contact is available to respond to emails and phone calls 7-days a week including Saturday and Sunday between the hours of 7:00AM and 7:00PM (local time of the Issuing Office). All emails and phone-calls must be promptly returned within 2-hours of receipt unless a longer response period is provided. This section applies towards the 30-page limit. SF-330 Part I Section C. Proposed Team. The Offeror shall include legal company name and DUNs number for the prime Offeror, each JV Member (if applicable), and all proposed subcontractors. Signed letters of commitment are required for proposed subcontractors and key personnel and must be addressed to the legal name of the prime Offeror. No consideration will be given to any proposed team member that fails to provide this information and/or the required signed letters of commitment. No consideration will be given to parent companies and subsidiaries unless the parent company and/or subsidiary is proposed as a team member that will have substantial involvement in the work to be provided as evidenced by the SF-330 submission. This section applies towards the 30-page limit. SF-330 Part I Section D. Organizational Chart of Proposed Team. No supplemental instruction applies to this section. This section applies towards the 30-page limit. SF-330 Part I Section E. Resumes of Personnel Proposed for this Contract. The proposed Key Personnel shall meet or exceed the minimum qualifications set forth in the SOO provided as Attachment-1. Additional Key Personnel may be proposed. Only proposed Key Personnel with a signed letter of commitment to the legal company name of the prime Offeror will be considered. The Offeror may provide up to five (5) projects in which the person had a significant role that demonstrates the person's capability relevant to her/his proposed role in this contract. In addition, work for the example projects must have been provided within the past five (5) years (from the synopsis release date). This may include any contract type, task orders and option exercise. Work outside this timeframe will not be considered. This section applies towards the 30-page limit with the exception of the signed letters of commitment. Part I Section F. Example Projects Which Best Illustrate Proposed Team's Qualifications for this Contract: The Offeror may provide up to six (6) example projects where multiple team members worked together, if possible, that demonstrate the team's capability to perform work comparable to that required for this contract. To be considered, example projects must be comparable to the MT-2 requirements under this announcement and have been performed by: (1) the Prime Offeror, (2) JV members and/or (3) proposed subcontractors and key personnel that have submitted a signed letter of commitment that will have substantial involvement in the requirement. In addition, work for the example projects must have been provided within the past five (5) years (from the synopsis release date) and may include any contract type, task order, and/or option exercise. The contract number and applicable task order number(s) must be provided to be considered. Work not provided within this timeframe will not be considered. This section applies towards the 30-page limit with exception of the signed letters of commitment. Greater consideration will be given to projects that are more relevant. Greater consideration will be given to the qualifications of the prime Offeror. Example projects may include illustrations of the proposed team's qualifications including but not limited to project photographs, sketches, drawings, and additional information. Each project example must clearly identify the Offeror(s) and/or team member(s) who applied direct effort on the example project including the legal company name(s) and DUNS number(s), contract number and any applicable task order numbers, the relative portion of the example project performed by the Offeror, a description of the relevant example project task(s), and the results and/or deliverables provided. Clarity and completeness are expected. No consideration will be given to general or overarching statements regarding the Offeror's experience that is not specific and traceable to a project (including the contract number and any applicable task order numbers) documented is the SF-330. The use of vague and/or broad, sweeping language is strongly discouraged and may reduce the Government's confidence rating. The use of the terms "we" or "the team" is strongly discouraged and may reduce the Government's confidence rating. Rather, specific data and facts are needed as they relate to the Corporate Experience of the Offeror and its team for the Government to make an accurate confidence rating assessment. Offerors who fails to follow this guidance run the risk that its evaluation will receive a low confidence rating. The Government must be able to clearly identify the legal company name(s) and DUNS number(s) of the entities actually performed the work referenced for each project to accurately assess its confidence rating. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to demonstrate that it and/or its proposed team member(s) provided the specific services referenced in each project and the work is not a part or a portion of the combined effort such as a joint venture (JV) or any other teaming arrangement. No consideration will be given to projects if the Government is left guessing or trying to figure out what legal entity performed the work and/or the extent of work was provided by the Offeror. Therefore, every Offeror should be ensuring and asking itself the following question: "Does this project fall within the five year window and is it readily clear on its face that my company or a proposed subcontractor actually provided the services referenced in each project". Due to the numerous potential scenarios involving JVs, subcontractors, etc., Offerors are placed on notice that if the Government cannot readily determine which proposed team member performed the work and in what capacity, that Offeror faces the possibility that no consideration will be given for that example project. The Past Performance Questionnaire, provided as Attachment 3 shall be sent to by each Project Point of contact (POC) listed in this section for completion and will be used by the Government to evaluate the Offeror's Past Performance. To be considered, the questionnaire must be submitted via email directly from the project's POC to Contracting Officer and Contract Specialists by the due date for SF-330's set forth in Section 5 of this synopsis. Any questionnaire submitted to the Government by the Offeror rather than the Project Owner (client) will not be considered. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to ensure the Project Owner for each example project is available to be reached by phone or email during the days immediately following the submission deadline. Part I Section G. Key Personnel Participation in Example Projects: Example projects must be for work within the past 5-year after release of the synopsis. This may be for work under any contract type, task orders and option exercise. This section applies towards the 30-page limit. Part I Section H. Additional Information: Offerors shall use this section to provide: (1) the responses to the scenarios set forth in Appendix A of this synopsis and (2) the proposed PWS and QASP submitted in response to the Statement of Objectives provided as attachment 1. Please note that Offerors who include unacceptable conditions and assumptions in the proposed PWS may not be considered for award. The proposed PWS shall: (1) demonstrate how each objective of the SOO will be achieved, (2) describe the services to be provided in terms of the required results rather than either "how" the work will be accomplished, (3) enable the Government's assessment of work performance against measurable performance standards, and (4) establish and rely on the use of measurable performance standards. The Offeror shall include the proposed level of effort and labor mix for each SOO objective without reference to price based on the Offeror's unique PWS. The proposed QASP shall include: (1) purpose, (2) roles and responsibilities, (3) performance requirements and assessments, and (4) performance reporting and identify the methods and procedures the Government will use to ensure it receives compliant, high quality, cost effective, and timely services under the resultant contract as identified in the proposed performance work statement. The responses to the scenarios do count towards the 30-page limit. The proposed PWS and QASP do not count towards the page limit. Discussions In accordance with HSAR 3036.602-3, the Government intends to conduct discussions with at least three firms considered most highly qualified to perform the required work. The Contracting Officer will notify the Offerors of the date and time they are scheduled for discussions which may be conducted in person, by telephone, via virtual conference, or in writing. In the event an Offeror is selected to participate in discussions, the Offeror's program and project manager and other key project personnel proposed by the firm shall participate and shall: (1) address concepts and the relative utility of alternative methods of furnishing the required services and (2) provide an oral presentation of their qualifications, experience and other data included in the Offeror's SF-330. During the oral presentation Offerors shall effectively articulate and communicate their qualifications and their responses to the seven (7) evaluation factors and effectively communicate the necessary technical knowledge. All Offerors will be afforded the same amount of time for discussions. The amount of time allotted for discussions will be provided by the Contracting Officer with the invitation to participate. Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Offeror are put on notice that the solicitation and resultant contract will include the following OCI provision: HSAR 3052.209-72 Organizational Conflicts of Interest. (a) Determination. The Government has determined that this effort may result in an actual or potential conflict of interest or may provide one or more offerors with the potential to attain an unfair competitive advantage. The nature of the conflict of interest (OCI) is the potential of/or an actual OCI of unequal access to information that creates an unfair competitive advantage on this procurement including, but not limited to: (1) Access to Risk MAP contractor proprietary data that is non-public and/or (2) FIMA data that is non-public related to this procurement, and not provided in the Virtual Library. The nature of this OCI may additionally include "impaired objectivity" if a current FEMA contractor in the performance of its current contract and/or task order assesses the effectiveness and/or performance of the current PTS Contractors (which includes the required MT-2 services). (b) If any such conflict of interest is found to exist, the Contracting Officer may (1) disqualify the offeror, or (2) determine that it is otherwise in the best interest of the United States to contract with the offeror and include the appropriate provisions to avoid, neutralize, mitigate, or waive such conflict in the contract awarded. After discussion with the offeror, the Contracting Officer may determine that the actual conflict cannot be avoided, neutralized, mitigated or otherwise resolved to the satisfaction of the Government, and the offeror may be found ineligible for award. (c) Disclosure: The offeror hereby represents, to the best of its knowledge that:(1) It is not aware of any facts which create any actual or potential organizational conflicts of interest relating to the award of this contract, or (2) It has included information in its proposal, providing all current information bearing on the existence of any actual or potential organizational conflicts of interest, and has included a mitigation plan in accordance with paragraph (d) of this provision. (d) Mitigation. If an offeror with a potential or actual conflict of interest or unfair competitive advantage believes the conflict can be avoided, neutralized, or mitigated, the offeror shall submit a mitigation plan to the Government for review. Award of a contract where an actual or potential conflict of interest exists shall not occur before Government approval of the mitigation plan. If a mitigation plan is approved, the restrictions of this provision do not apply to the extent defined in the mitigation plan. (e) Other Relevant Information: In addition to the mitigation plan, the Contracting Officer may require further relevant information from the offeror. The Contracting Officer will use all information submitted by the offeror, and any other relevant information known to DHS, to determine whether an award to the offeror may take place, and whether the mitigation plan adequately neutralizes or mitigates the conflict. (f) Corporation Change. The successful offeror shall inform the Contracting Officer within thirty (30) calendar days of the effective date of any corporate mergers, acquisitions, and/or divestures that may affect this provision. (g) Flow-down. The contractor shall insert the substance of this clause in each first tier subcontract that exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold. Limitation of Future Contracting. Offeror are put on notice that the solicitation and resultant contract will include the following Limitation of Future Contracting Provision. HSAR 3052.209-73 Limitation on Future Contracting. (a) The Contracting Officer has determined that this acquisition may give rise to a potential organizational conflict of interest. Accordingly, the attention of prospective offerors is invited to FAR Subpart 9.5 --Organizational Conflicts of Interest. (b) The nature of two conflict identified include: (1) reviewing the applicable reimbursement of successful appeals determined by FEMA in response to a proposed regulatory flood map change during the statutory 90-day appeal period and (2) providing requirement/specifications development and/or testing system changes for future procurements that are not orders under this contract's scope of work. (c) The restrictions upon future contracting are as follows: (1) If the Contractor, under contract with an appellant to FEMA's proposed regulatory map change, is required to develop engineering studies or technical analysis that supports the appellant's submission to FEMA, the Contractor shall be ineligible to perform any reviews for applicable reimbursement for successful flood map appeals as a prime or subcontractor under an ensuing DHS contract and will be ineligible to receive reimbursement for services performed. In no way shall the contractor benefit or profit from reviewing the applicable reimbursement of successful appeals. A second restriction applies. The contractor (inclusive of the prime contractor, JV members, and subcontractors) may not submit a proposal or serve as a subcontractor (at any tier) for any solicitation in which the contractor assisted with the development of the solicitation requirements. This restriction applies from the date of contract award through 12-months after the expiration of the contract. (2) To the extent that the work under this contract requires access to proprietary, business confidential, or financial data of other companies, and as long as these data remain proprietary or confidential, the Contractor shall protect these data from unauthorized use and disclosure and agrees not to use them to compete with those other companies. Phase-2: Instructions The Contracting Officer will issue a solicitation and commence cost/price negotiations in accordance with FAR Part 15, beginning with the most preferred firm as determined by the Source Selection Authority (SSA). The cost/price proposed for the resultant contract (inclusive of options) and the proposed PWS and QASP will be the basis of negotiations. The price/cost proposal shall include a detailed breakdown of all direct and indirect costs and fee in accordance with FAR Table 15-2, Instructions for Submitting Cost/Price Proposals When Certified Cost or Pricing Data Are Required and must contain all applicable Disclosure Statements and other supplemental information which clearly indicates how the total proposed cost/price is derived. Because certified cost and pricing data will be required, each Offeror must also submit information which will allow the CO to determine the Offeror's Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) compliance. Price/Cost negotiations will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.404 and 15.405 beginning with the most preferred firm. The Government reserves the right to negotiate any aspect of the proposed PWS and QASP in addition to cost/price during Phase-2. Negotiations will include: price/cost reasonableness, the proposed PWS and QASP, and any applicable OCI Mitigation Plan. The Offeror shall submit sufficient evidence of responsibility for the Contracting Officer to make an affirmative determination of responsibility pursuant to the requirements of FAR Subsection 9.104-1 and the requirements of the solicitation and required representations and certifications. If a mutually satisfactory contract cannot be negotiated (inclusive of the proposed PWS, QASP and cost/price) or if the Offeror has an unmitigable OCI, the Contracting Officer will obtain a written final proposal revision from the firm and notify the firm that negotiations have been terminated. The Contracting Officer will then initiate negotiations with the next firm on the final selection list. This procedure will be continued until a mutually satisfactory contract has been negotiated. If negotiations fail with all selected firms, the Contracting Officer will refer the matter to the SSA who, after consulting with the Contracting Officer as to why a contract cannot be negotiated, may direct the evaluation board to recommend additional firms in accordance with FAR 36.602. 8. Evaluation of Offerors a. Basis for Selection FEMA intends to issue a single award contract to the most qualified, responsible Offeror with fair and reasonable cost/pricing. The Government will evaluate each proposal (SF-330 and other qualification data) against the evaluation factors stated in the synopsis to develop a ranking of the three (3) most qualified Offerors in accordance with HSAR 3036.602-3(a)(9). The methodology of FAR 36.6 will be used to rank Offerors based on: (1) the technical merit of their SF-330 and other qualification data submitted in response to the synopsis based on the evaluation factors, (2) an assessment of their past performance, and (3) the discussions conducted (as appliable). The Government will assess and rank the SF-330s and other qualification data based on how well the Offerors addresses the five (5) selection criteria listed in FAR 36.602-1 and the two other evaluation criteria (reference FAR 35.602-1(a)(6)), which are listed below in descending order of importance. (1) Specialized Experience and Technical Competence (2) Geographical location and knowledge of the locality (3) Capacity to accomplish the work in the required time (4) Professional Qualifications (5) Past Performance (6) Proposed approach to example project scenarios (7) Proposed PWS and QASP in response to the MT-2 Statement of Objectives provided as Attachment-1. Based on the selection criteria, the Government will holistically evaluate its confidence in the Offeror's ability to successfully perform the work, and will numerically rank, in order of preference, at least three (3) firms that are considered to be the most highly qualified to perform the required services. The following confidence ratings apply: Ratings High Rating - The Government has a high level of confidence that the Offeror understands the requirement. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low. Moderate Rating - The Government has a moderate level of confidence that the Offeror understands the requirement. Risk of unsuccessful performance is moderate. Low Rating - The Government has a low level of confidence that the Offeror understands the requirement. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high. Neutral Rating - Only applies to Past Performance. The Government cannot assess a level of confidence due to no relevant performance record identifiable upon which to base a meaningful confidence rating. A search was unable to identify any relevant past performance information for the Offeror or subcontractors. b. Selection Criteria All factors and criteria listed below are considered to be independent of one another and will be evaluated as stand-alone elements, and they will not be combined or augmented. The evaluation factors are listed in descending order of importance. The qualifications and information set forth in Sections A through G of the SF-330 will be used to evaluate the following five evaluation factors listed in FAR 36.602-1. The qualifications and information set forth on Section H of the proposed SF330 will be used to evaluate factors 6 and 7. Factor 1: Specialized Experience and Technical Competence The Government will assess its level of confidence that the Offeror can: (1) successfully meet the Statement of Objectives provided as attachment-1 and the following competencies based on the specialized experience and technical competence demonstrated in the SF-330, Sections A through G and (2) effectively convey its qualifications during any discussions conducted with the necessary technical knowledge for this evaluation factor. Specialized experience and technical competence 1. Strong aptitude in the realm of levees, understanding not only technical details for 44 CFR 65.10 compliance, but shifting landscape in approaches from other agencies such as the Unites States Army Corps of Engineers and demonstrated experience and success in handling the de-accreditation process. 2. Demonstrated experience of riverine hydrology and hydraulic modeling, including: the effective models used in NFIP mapping including 2D modeling and floodway analysis; the applicable Guidelines and Standards for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping (https://www.fema.gov/flood-maps/guidance-reports/guidelines-standards), with awareness of new policies and standards being developed; and the ability to influence new solutions/guidance/policies that account for unique topographic features including distributed/split flow paths and flooding on alluvial fans. 3. Demonstrated experience in the realm of coastal analysis, awareness of new policies and standards being developed, understanding not only technical details for compliance, but shifting landscape approaches from other agencies. 4. Understanding of the complexity of vertical datums across states and territories, related activities by other federal agencies, and the difficulties on the local level on how transformations occur. The vendor should have experience with navigating data development steps that allow for creation and distribution of flood hazard mapping products to inform floodplain management requirements. Factor 2: Geographic Location and knowledge of the locality The Government will assess its level of confidence that the Offeror can: (1) successfully meet the Statement of Objectives provided as attachment-1 based on the necessary and relevant geographic locality knowledge of the United States and its territories demonstrated in the proposed in the SF-330, Sections A through G and (2) effectively convey its qualifications during any discussions conducted with the necessary technical knowledge for this evaluation factor. Factor 3: Capacity to accomplish the work in the required time The Government will assess its level of confidence that the Offeror: (1) can successfully meet the completion dates and timeframes set forth in the Statement of Objectives provided as attachment-1 based on the capacity demonstrated in the SF-330, Sections A through G and (2) effectively convey its qualifications during any discussions conducted with the necessary technical knowledge for this evaluation factor. Factor 4: Professional Qualifications The Government will assess its level of confidence that the Offeror can: (1) successfully meet the Statement of Objectives provided as attachment-1 based on qualifications demonstrated in the SF-330, Sections A through G and (2) effectively convey its qualifications during any discussions conducted with the necessary technical knowledge for this evaluation factor. Factor 5: Past Performance The Government will assess its level of confidence that the Offeror can successfully meet the Statement of Objectives provided as Attachment-1. This assessment will be based on the responses to the past performance questionnaires received from the Project Owner references in Section F of the SF-330. Consideration may be given to the past performance of the prime Offeror, JV members, and proposed subcontractors and key personnel, as applicable. The Government may also consider any past performance information retrieved from the Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and any other readily available information. An Offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably if it lacks relevant past performance. Factor 6: Proposed approach to example project scenarios The Government will assess its level of confidence that the Offeror can: (1) successfully meet the Statement of Objectives provided as attachment-1 based on the responses to the project scenarios demonstrated in the SF-330, Section H and (2) effectively convey its qualifications during any discussions conducted with the necessary technical knowledge for this evaluation factor. Factor 7: Proposed Performance Work Statement and QASP The Government will assess its level of confidence that the Offeror can: (1) successfully meet the Statement of Objectives provided as attachment-1 based on the proposed PWS and QASP provide in the SF-330, Section H and (2) effectively convey its qualifications during any discussions conducted with the necessary technical knowledge for this evaluation factor. In addition, the Government will give consideration on how well the proposed PWS: (1) demonstrates how each objective of the SOO will be achieved (2) describes the services to be provided in terms of the required results rather than either "how" the work will be accomplished, (3) enables the Government's assessment of work performance against measurable performance standards, (4) establishes and relies on the use of measurable performance standards, and (5) the sufficiency of the proposed level of effort and labor mix for each SOO objective without reference to price. The Government will also give consideration to how well the proposed QASP: (1) identifies purpose, (2) defines roles and responsibilities, (3) identifies performance requirements and assessments, and (4) identifies performance reporting and identifies the methods and procedures the Government will use to ensure it receives compliant, high quality, cost effective, and timely services under the resultant contract as identified in the proposed performance work statement. 9. Proposed Price/Cost Price/Cost negotiations will be conducted in accordance with FAR Part 15.404 and 15.405 beginning with the most preferred firm in the final selection. To be considered for award the Offeror's proposed price/cost must be deemed fair and reasonable, any proposed OCI Mitigation Plan must be deemed acceptable, and the Offeror must be responsible pursuant to FAR 9.104-1. 10. Attachments and Appendicies: Attachment 1 - Statemen of Objectives, dated 03-01-2021 Attachment 2 - DHS Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA), dated 08-01-2004 Attachment 3 - Past Performance Questionnaire, dated 02-24-2021 Appendix A - Example Project Scenarios, dated 03-09-2021 11. Contractor Facilitation Support: Contractor support will be used to facilitate technical and price evaluations. Garud Technology Services Inc (GTS) will be used to provide technical evaluation facilitation and will have access to proposals and proprietary information included in the proposal. GTS' support will be limited to facilitation and administrative support. GTS staff will not evaluate technical proposals or provide any input or opinions with respect to the technical evaluation. Further, the price determinations of fair and reasonableness will be made by the Contracting Officer. GTS' Blanket Purchase Agreement with FEMA includes the required Limitation of Future Contracting and Non-Disclosure Agreements to permit access to proposal information. Appendix A --Project Scenarios Dated 3-09-2021 Project Scenario-1 A potential Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) requestor is interested in using the preliminary data for Flood County. The proposed project site is being considered for a federal project, but only on the condition that it is not in the floodplain. The site is in the effective Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA), but not on the preliminary mapping. The county-wide map update was issued preliminary in 2009, and the statutory appeal period occurred in 2010. However, the study has been on hold due to revised preliminary maps being developed for four (4) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) panels (a new levee analysis). The revised preliminary mapping does not affect the panel in question for this potential LOMR. Instructions: The Offeror shall provide a description of its solution and reference the applicable FEMA policy, guidance, and/or standards and describe the consideration(s) and factor(s) in determining the appropriate MT-2 submittal for this proposed project site. Project- Scenario 2 Referencing the applicable NFIP regulation(s), the Offeror shall describe when a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) is required for a community with higher floodplain management standards, using a 0.00-foot floodway surcharge. In addition, for this community with higher standards, please answer "yes/no/unknown" (with any supporting brief explanation) for the three situations of whether a CLOMR is required: (1) proposed project will widen the SFHA, and the Base Flood Elevations (BFEs) are decreasing or staying the same compared to the effective area; (2) The proposed project will decrease the width of the SFHA and the BFEs will decrease compared to the existing conditions; and (3) The proposed project will increase the width of the floodway approximately 30% compared to the effective area. Instructions: The Offeror shall provide a description of its solution that addresses the elements in the above scenario, and references the applicable FEMA policy, guidance, and/or standards. Project Scenario-3 If an appeal is received following issuance of a LOMR, please describe in general the LOMR appeal submittal requirements, and FEMA's processes/protocols/procedures for issuing an appeal resolution. For the appeal resolution, please generally describe the typical outcomes of the resolution and path forward. Please describe a scenario where a "second" appeal period would be required following an appeal resolution for an "appeal resolution" LOMR issuance. Instructions: The Offeror shall provide a description of its solution that addresses the elements in the above scenario, and references the applicable FEMA policy, guidance, and/or standards of riverine hydrology and hydraulic modeling, including: the effective models used in NFIP mapping and including the applicable Guidelines and Standards for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping (https://www.fema.gov/flood-maps/guidance-reports/guidelines-standards).

Link/URL: https://beta.sam.gov/opp/9935d5b81dd5455d9c6c4416f96d9434/view