DOCSLIB.ORG

Selection Process Procedures

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Selection Process Procedures Publication 93 (02-11) Chapter 2 – Selection Process Procedures 2.1 – Introduction The Selection Process discussed in this chapter begins with identifying the need for a consultant and continues to the Notice to Proceed for the Agreement. PennDOT uses the following methods of selecting a Consultant to provide services: 1) Normal Selection Procedures 2) Modified Selection Procedures 3) Enhanced Modified Selection Procedures – Discussed in Chapter 3 4) Accelerated Bridge Program Selection Procedures – Discussed in Chapter 3 5) Sole Source Selection Procedures – Discussed in Chapter 3 6) Emergency Selection Procedures – Discussed in Chapter 3 Normal Selection Procedures are most commonly used. This procedure requires the interested consultants to submit a SOI from which the IO short lists three consultants. These short-listed consultants submit a Technical Proposal from which the IO ranks these short listed consultants. Modified Selection Procedures are normally used for Open End, Highway Occupancy Permit Inspection, Utility Designating and Locating, On-Call Survey, Construction Inspection, or NBIS Bridge Inspection Agreements. This procedure requires the interested consultants to submit a SOI that serves as an abbreviated Technical Proposal for the purpose of selection. The IO will rank the top three consultants from this SOI. The IO must ensure that complete, definitive information can be obtained solely from the review of SOIs and Consultant Qualification Packages prior to designating the Modified Selection Procedure. If the nature of the project is such that additional information is needed to justify the final ranking, normal selection procedures should be used to obtain additional information from a Technical Proposal or Oral Presentation. 2.1.1 – Normal Selection Procedures Normally this process takes four to six months. There is a maximum timeframe of 12 months allowed from the date of the advertisement to the date of Agreement Execution. For Agreements advertised before January 31, 2010, the maximum allowed timeframe will be 18 months. [Not meeting these time limitations may require that the project be readvertised.] The CAS Chief has the authority to waive these timeframes in unique circumstances, upon receipt of written request and justification. Chapter 2 Selection Process Procedures Page 2.1 Publication 93 (02-11) Multiple Agreement Selections from One Advertisement When projects are similar in scope (betterments, general maintenance, and bridges), Modified Selection Procedures and Open End Agreements have the capacity to select multiple consultants from one advertisement. The information on the following fields must be the same in all the projects that are to be linked in one advertisement: Initiating Organization Agreement Type Open End Type Selection Process Enhanced Modified Services Requested Agreement Status o Must be in Setup if linking at the Planned Project stage; o Must be in Planned Project Published if linking at the Advertisement stage. The determination to use this procedure is the responsibility of the ADE for Design, Portfolio Manager, Bureau Director, or Division or Section Chief. The IO must determine at the Planned Project phase to “batch” the projects into groups (example: 3 groups of 4 projects, 4 groups of 3 projects, etc.) or to establish a separate agreement for each project. Because of the potential for large numbers of projects in one advertisement, IOs should use discretion in their expectations for the consultants to visit all the project sites listed in this type of advertisement. Districts are encouraged to group multiple minor projects to reduce the number of advertisements, selections, and also the number of SOIs needed to be prepared by consultants. Selections for Multiple Agreements must occur at the same time for all agreements on the advertisement. Final Ranking procedures should follow the procedures discussed in Section 2.8.6. A consultant that desires to be selected for a particular agreement(s) in the advertisement, should indicate such on their submitted SOI. Oral Presentations For Consultant Agreements for unusual or complex projects, the IO may require oral presentations of the shortlisted consultants to further evaluate a consultant’s qualifications. Advertisements for such projects should indicate that PennDOT anticipates oral presentations. Oral presentations are highly recommended for CMPM Agreements. Selection Criteria When generating the Consultant Agreement’s selection criteria and corresponding weights, the criteria listed under Transportation Design Project Advertisements and Transportation Construction Inspection Advertisements should be represented. Evaluation criteria should be structured to fully express the requirement without exaggerating the need. Overstating the qualifications and capabilities required to perform a task can be problematic. The reasons for Shortlisting or Final Ranking will be driven by the selection criteria. IO Project Managers should seek concurrence of Agreement Team members prior to submitting advertisements for publishing. Chapter 2 Selection Process Procedures Page 2.11 Publication 93 (02-11) Advertisements that request information concerning a firm’s costs, cost-effectiveness, or cost-efficiency as part of the selection criteria are prohibited. Examples of these costs include: a firm’s overhead rate, minimizing or not charging for direct or indirect costs, an indication of money returned to PennDOT for work not performed, or employee hourly rates. References to cost-effective solutions, reduced construction project costs, or minimizing future maintenance costs are permitted. Advertisements that request information concerning a firm’s location or proximity to a PennDOT office are prohibited. If there is a justifiable requirement for a firm to respond to assignments in person, then the criteria must be defined in relation to the ability to provide prompt response, and not on its proximity. The firm has the burden of demonstrating how it will satisfy the need for prompt response. Field Views For minor projects, or in other cases when conditions warrant, it may be desirable to provide photographs of the project site to eliminate the need for interested consultants to perform a field view in advance of SOI preparation. If so, the photographs must be attached to, or linked to, the advertisement along with the statement that field views are discouraged. The advertisement should indicate that firms are neither expected nor encouraged to visit this project(s) prior to submitting their Statements of Interest (SOIs) Firms that indicate in their SOI that a field view was performed will not receive any benefit during the selection process. Transportation Design Project Advertisements All advertisements for design projects published by PennDOT should include the following selection criteria in addition to any other criteria deemed appropriate by the IO. These criteria help ensure that the best qualified consulting team is selected. The order of importance is established by the IO. The team being referenced is the proposed consultant team, comprising both prime and subconsultants: 1) What will the team do to ensure that a proper application of principles will result in more cost-effective solutions that apply design flexibility with consideration of the surrounding land use and all transportation modes? 2) How will the team assure PennDOT that it will provide a quality construction plan?Use and experience of sub-consultants, how sub-consultants are planned to be incorporated into the projects, and how they will be managed to ensure that their work and deliverables are timely and meet high quality standards. 3) How will the team manage the design of the project(s) and minimize future maintenance of the project(s)? 4) How will the team pursue project delivery in relation to developing and/or meeting design and construction project schedules? 5) How did the team perform on past projects? The first criterion deals with the methodology proposed by the consultant to assure PennDOT that the design of a cost-effective, quality construction plan will be delivered. The second criterion addresses how sub-consultants will be managed and incorporated into the project, and that deliverables meet time and quality expectationsthe firm’s commitment to and methods of ensuring that the Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Plan will be integrated into every aspect of the design. Responses to the third criterion will need to include the specifics, rather than generalities, and commitments to minimize Scope of Work or construction cost creep. The fourth criterion addresses the consultant’s commitment to adherence to the design and construction schedules, which minimizes impacts to the traveling public. The fifth criterion takes into account the actions and evaluation of the consultant for past projects. Chapter 2 Selection Process Procedures Page 2.12 Publication 93 (02-11) Transportation Construction Inspection Advertisements All advertisements for transportation Construction Inspection projects published by PennDOT will need to include the following selection criteria in addition to any other criteria deemed appropriate by the IO. These criteria should ensure that the best qualified consulting team is selected: 1) Review of inspector's resumes, including the length of employment with the submitting firm, with emphasis on construction inspection capabilities and specific project work assignments and timeframes. 2) Work experience and supervisory experience
Load more

Recommended publications
  • OSH-Training and Education Fiscal Review Guide
    Page 1 Contractor Assistance Program (CAP) Guide Hazard Abatement Board (HAB) Occupational Health and Safety- Training and Education Grants (OSH T&E) The goal of the OSH T&E Program is to promote safe and healthful conditions in the workplace through training, education, and other proven preventive programs designed to: • Identify, evaluate, and control safety and health hazards in the workplace; • Encourage voluntary compliance with occupational safety and health regulations; • Foster activities by employers and employees intended to prevent workplace accidents, injuries and illnesses; and • Make employers and employees more aware of the NYS Right-to-know Law and other regulations which mandate training and education on toxic substances in the workplace. The purpose of the Occupational Safety and Health – Training and Education Grants (OSH T&E) grant is to secure the services of eligible Public and Private Employers (must employ one or more individuals beyond self- employment); Labor Organizations or their Federations; Trade Associations; Non-profit Organizations; and Educational Institutions to provide training for general or hazard-specific training on how to identify, evaluate and control employee exposure to workplace hazards; Activities intended to improve the effectiveness of labor-management safety and health committees; Programs designed specifically to reduce workplace accidents by teaching lockout/tagout procedures, safe electrical work practices, methods of working safely in confined spaces, etc., where not readily available
    [Show full text]
  • Ceo Report May 2017 Our Mission
    CEO REPORT MAY 2017 OUR MISSION The Virginia Railway Express, a joint project of the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission and the Potomac Rappahannock Transportation Commission, will provide safe, cost-effective, accessible, reliable, convenient, and customer responsive commuter-oriented rail passenger service. VRE contributes to the economic vitality of its member jurisdictions as an integral part of a balanced, intermodal regional transportation system. OUR MISSIONTABLE OF CONTENTS CEO REPORT | MAY 2017 2 Success at a Glance 3 On-Time Performance 5 Ridership 6 Summonses 7 Train Utilization 8 Parking Utilization 9 Financial Report 10 FY 2017 Year End Financial Projection 12 Capital Projects Updates – Lorton Platform Extension – Arkendale to Powell’s Creek Third Track Project – Quantico Station – Alexandria Pedestrian Tunnel Project – Lifecycle Overhaul and Upgrade Facility – L’Enfant (North) Storage Track Wayside Power Construction – L’Enfant (South) Storage Track Wayside Power – Franconia-Springfield Station Improvements (Penta-Platform Program) – Lorton Second Platform (Penta-Platform Program) – Rippon Station Improvements (Penta-Platform Program) – Brooke Station Improvements (Penta-Platform Program) – Leeland Road Station Improvements (Penta-Platform Program) – Midday Storage Replacement Facility – Rolling Road Platform Extension – Crossroads Real Estate Acquisition – Manassas Line Expansion/Gainesville-Haymarket Extension Study 16 Facilities Update 17 Upcoming Procurements 18 Projects Progress Report 22 Notes MAY 2017 | TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 SUCCESS AT A GLANCE 0% 0K 80% 7 80 1 % % 15 90 60 K % 9 % 0 0 % K 7 % 5 0 5 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 % 0 % % % K 0 0 0 PARKING AVERAGE DAIL Y ON-TIME UTILIZATION RIDERSHIP PERFORMANCE The total number of parking spaces The average number of boardings each Percentage of trains that arrive at used in the VRE system during the operating day inclusive of Amtrak Step-Up their destination within five minutes month, divided by the total number of boardings but excluding “S” schedule of the schedule.
    [Show full text]
  • AGREEMENT Between the CITY of FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA and {Name of Firm} for PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES for SMALL AREA PLANS
    AGREEMENT between THE CITY OF FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA and {Name of Firm} for PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR SMALL AREA PLANS THIS IS AN AGREEMENT made as of _____ {date} _________ between The City of Fairfax, Virginia, a Virginia municipal corporation, (“CITY”) and {Name of Firm} (“CONSULTANT”). CITY intends to utilize CONSULTANT to individual assignments necessary to provide for a Project, or series of Projects together which shall comprise the “Program”. CITY and CONSULTANT in consideration of their mutual covenants herein, agree as follows concerning professional services by CONSULTANT with respect to the Program and the payment for those services by CITY as set forth below. Execution of this Agreement by CONSULTANT and CITY constitutes CITY’s written authorization to CONSULTANT to provide Multi-phase Professional Services for each Project which will be described and defined in conjunction with the CITY’s Scope of Work and CONSULTANT’S Work Plan. This Agreement will become effective upon issuance of the first CITY Purchase Order. CONSULTANT shall commitment to be legally obligated for each assignment awarded by a CITY Purchase Order. SECTION 1 – GENERAL 1.1 Standard of Performance. CONSULTANT shall provide CITY professional services and related work in all aspects of the Program to which this Agreement applies as hereinafter provided and in concert with Standard of Care as defined in Section 1.4.7. CONSULTANT shall serve as CITY’s professional representative for each Project under the Program. CONSULTANT may employ such Sub- consultants as CONSULTANT deems necessary to assist in the performance or furnishing of professional services hereunder. CONSULTANT shall not require CITY to approve any Sub- consultant reasonably unacceptable to CITY.
    [Show full text]
  • Mdot Fy12 Program Pro
    Table of Contents DBE PROGRAM AUTHORITY........................................................................ 4 FUNDING SOURCES OF THE MDOT DBE PROGRAM ................................................................................. 4 DBE PROGRAM OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................. 5 A. DBE PROGRAM GOALS ................................................................................. 6 METHODOLOGY................................................................................................................................. 7 PROJECTING RACE-NEUTRAL/RACE-CONSCIOUS PORTIONS OF THE GOAL ..................................................... 9 THE CST AND DBE PARTICIPATION GOALS ON MDOT-LET HIGHWAY PROJECTS ......................................... 10 SETTING GOALS ON INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS ............................................................................................ 12 DBE PARTICIPATION DESIGNATIONS ON DESIGN-BUILD PROJECTS ............................................................ 13 COMPOSITION OF THE CONTRACT SELECTION TEAM (CST) ...................................................................... 13 DBE GOAL MONITORING AND REPORTING ........................................................................................... 13 B. MICHIGAN UNIFIED CERTIFICATION PROGRAM (MUCP)(UPDATED) ............ 15 MUCP-CERTIFYING AGENCY REQUIREMENTS ....................................................................................... 16 ANNUAL
    [Show full text]
  • CONSULTANT AUDIT GUIDE 12/01/98 CONSULTANT AUDIT GUIDE TABLE of CONTENTS Preface Page 2
    CONSULTANT AUDIT GUIDE 12/01/98 CONSULTANT AUDIT GUIDE TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface Page 2 Part I. Introduction Page 4 Part II. Definitions Page 6 Part III. Role of the State External Auditor in Accepting Overhead Audits Performed by Others Page 13 Example of Overhead Audit Report Checklist Page 14 Part IV. Contract Types and Audit Emphasis Page 16 A. Lump Sum (Fixed Price) B. Cost Plus Fixed Fee C. Unit Price (Negotiated Hourly Rate) Part V. Overhead Rate Development and Audit Report Presentation Page 18 A. Audit Standards and Allowable Cost Guidelines B. Contents of the Report Part VI. Consultant Field Offices Page 21 A. General B. Allowable Costs C. Guidelines Sample of Field Office Allocation Page 27 Sample of Overhead Audit Report, Overhead Rate Page 28 Calculation, Notes to Overhead report, Report on Internal Controls, Report on Compliance Acknowledgments Page 37 DCAA – Cost Principle Assessment Attachment 1 12/01/98 CONSULTANT AUDIT GUIDE PREFACE Over the last several years, there has been an increased use of consultant firms contracting with State Department of Transportation (SDOT’s) to perform engineering and other related services. Correspondingly, there has been a workload increase for SDOT auditors providing financial information to management on the consultant firms. Auditors not only provide an audit function for the SDOT’s, but also provide management with financial information on the firm’s ability to perform work. A consultant firm, particularly one that is new to the State/Federal contracting process, may not be aware of the Federal Acquisition Regulations and other financial information necessary to support eligible costs.
    [Show full text]
  • Select Board Town Meeting
    TOWN OF ARLINGTON MASSACHUSETTS REPORT OF THE SELECT BOARD TO THE TOWN MEETING MONDAY APRIL 26, 2021 8:00 P.M. INTRODUCTION The Select Board is pleased to present its report to Town Meeting of its main motions under the following articles. These votes are the result of hearings the Board conducted between February 22nd and April 5th, during which time the Board heard from proponents and opponents of the various articles. The Board has also included its votes of support for two warrant articles (Articles 38 and 43) that will be presented through the main motions of the Arlington Redevelopment Board. The objective of Select Board Warrant Article Hearings is to develop the Board’s recommendations on each article before it by majority vote, to be set forth with the comments in the Select Board Report in advance of Town Meeting. Where the Board supports taking some action contemplated by an article, regardless of how it appears before the Board, the Select Board, with assistance of Town Counsel, shall develop a motion for Town Meeting to take a specific action. Where the Board opposes an article, it will recommend a vote of “no action” to Town Meeting in its report. The Board would like to welcome back John V. Hurd to serve as Arlington’s newly re- elected member of the Board, and Eric D. Helmuth, our newly elected member. The Board thanks Town Meeting members for their service and for their willingness to give fair and serious consideration to all of the important issues raised by the various articles.
    [Show full text]
  • Contract Budget Justification.Xlsx
    TEMPLATE FOR CONTRACT BUDGET JUSTIFICATION PREPARATION Agency Name: Budget Term: Program: All individual line items must show actual amounts. Rounded amounts are carried to the Grant Budget page. INTRODUCTION: Guidance is offered for the preparation of a budget request. Following this guidance will facilitate the review and approval of a requested budget by insuring that the required or needed information is provided. Note: Each Line item category below that has a Superscript 2 must be on the Grant Budget Line-Item Detail page For each requested position, provide the following information: name of staff member occupying the position, if available; monthly salary; percentage of time budgeted for this program; total months of salary budgeted; and total salary requested. Also, provide a justification and describe the scope of responsibility for each position, relating it to the accomplishment of program objectives. Name Position & Title Monthly % of Time # of Months Longevity Amount $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Actual Total for Salaries listed above (amount total) $ - Rounded Total for Salaries listed above (nearest 100) $ - B.Fringe Benefits Fringe benefits are usually applicable to direct salaries and wages. Provide information
    [Show full text]
  • Request for Proposal (Rfp) for Investment Consulting Services
    REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) FOR INVESTMENT CONSULTING SERVICES August 1, 2019 Issuing Entity: City of Jacksonville Police and Fire Pension Fund One West Adams Street, Suite 100 Jacksonville, FL 32202-3616 Page 1 of 58 City of Jacksonville Police and Fire Pension Fund Request for Information 1.1 Introduction The City of Jacksonville Police and Fire Pension Fund (“PFPF” or “Fund”) is issuing a Request for Proposal (“RFP”) from investment consulting firms to provide consulting services to PFPF Board of Trustees and Financial Investment Advisory Committee (“FIAC”). This is a non-discretionary, full-retainer mandate. PFPF will retain discretion over all manager/fund selection decisions. Respondents to this RFP are encouraged to describe ways in which they believe their firm’s capabilities are unique and add compelling value. This search is was authorized by the FIAC and seeks to identify potential full-service, general retainer investment consultants. The consultant will report to the Board of Trustees and will also be required to work with and provide assistance to the FIAC. It is anticipated that PFPF will enter into a three to five year contract with the consultant. The Jacksonville Police and Fire Pension Fund (the 'Fund') is a single-employer contributing defined benefit pension plan covering all full-time police officers and firefighters of the Consolidated City of Jacksonville. The Fund was created in 1937 and is structured as an independent agency of the City of Jacksonville. The Fund is administered solely by a five member Board of Trustees. Additional information regarding PFPF can be obtained at http://www.coj.net/departments/police---fire-pension-fund.
    [Show full text]
  • Architect and Engineering Consultant Negotiations and Contracting Recommendations
    Exhibit 1 Architect and Engineering Consultant Negotiations and Contracting Recommendations March 5, 2015 Report No. 15 - 8 Office of the County Auditor Evan A. Lukic, CPA County Auditor Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY………………………………………….…….………………. 1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE …………………………………….…………………………. 2 BACKGROUND …………………………………………………….…………………… 2 RECOMMENDATIONS ………………………………………….……………………… 5 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS …………………………………………….... 10 Executive Summary The purpose of this report is to provide recommendations to the Board to improve the process by which the County negotiates hourly rates with architect and engineering consultants. The basis for the recommendations within this report include, among other things; 1) our observations of negotiations over several years, 2) billing rate reviews of consultants’ contracts with the Aviation Department (BCAD) and several Public Works Department (PW) divisions including: Seaport Engineering and Construction, Highway Construction and Engineering, and Water and Wastewater Engineering, and 3) focus group discussions with County staff, consultants and subconsultants. As discussed more fully in this report, the culmination of our observations, reviews and discussions indicate opportunities to: Reduce administrative burden for County staff, consultants and their subconsultants Reduce the time needed for negotiations Reduce the risk of overpayment by the County Reduce future audit costs of the County, consultants and subconsultants Provide greater consistency in the negotiation process Our recommendations include: 1) Adoption of a Safe Harbor rate option for overhead and fringe benefit costs. 2) Formalizing the County’s general practice of limiting the maximum contract multiplier to 3.0, but permitting exceptions, when justified, on a case by case basis. 3) Adoption by the County of the Florida Department of Transportation model for negotiating consultant operating margins.
    [Show full text]
  • Substantial Revisions Publication 93 (2019) Policy and Procedures for the Administration of Consultant Agreements Chapter 1
    Substantial Revisions Publication 93 (2019) Policy and Procedures for the Administration of Consultant Agreements Chapter 1 - Consultant Requirements Sub Section Title Comment section Chapter 1.1 Introduction No Change Chapter 1.2 1.2.1 Consultant Registration Process ECMS new web address 1.2.2 Municipality Registration Process ECMS new web address Chapter 1.3 Consultant Quality Plan No Change Chapter 1.4 Certificate of Authority to Do Business No Change Chapter 1.5 Engineering Involvement Restrictions No Change 1.5.1 Construction Inspection No Change Chapter 1.6 Conflict of Interest No Change Chapter 1.7 Adverse Interest Act No Change 1 of 7 Chapter 2 – Selection Process Procedures Sub Section Title Comment section Chapter 2.1 2.1.1 Normal Selection Procedures No Change 2.1.2 Modified Selection Procedures No Change Chapter 2.2 Identifying Need for Consultant Services No Change 2.2.1 Right-of-Way Acquisition Services No Change 2.2.2 Photogrammetry Services No Change 2.2.3 Consultant Management Project Manager (CMPM) and Review Gender Neutral Policy Assistance Information 2.2.4 Construction Management Support Service No Change 2.2.5 Consultant Inspection No Change 2.2.6 Highway Construction Design Professional Services Matrix Added per Consultant Procurement Process Mapping BOI meetings to address procurement Chapter 2.3 2.3.1 ECMS Setup No Change 2.3.2 Planned Project No Change 2.3.3 Advertisement No Change 2.3.4 Agreement Clarification Forums No Change Chapter 2.4 Statement of Interest (SOI) No Change 2.4.1 Disqualification of a SOI
    [Show full text]
  • (O-'3(-L9 Department Director Date
    Agenda Item #3K-3 PALM BEACH COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: December 3, 2019 Consent [X] Regular [ ] Public Hearing [ ] Department: Water Utilities Department I. EXECUTIVE BRIEF Motion and Title: Staff recommends motion to approve: Amendment No. 2 to the Contract for Consulting/Professional Services Lift Station Rehabilitation Project B (Contract) with Mock, Roos & Associates, Inc. (Consultant) to extend the project schedule by 486 calendar days and increase the not to exceed amount by $198,766.92. Summary: On September 13, 2016, the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approved the Water Utilities Department (WUD) Contract (R2016-1172) with Consultant to provide engineering services during the design, permitting, bidding and construction phases for the Lift Station Rehabilitation Project B (Project) which includes the rehabilitation of sixty (60) lift stations. Amendment No. 2 to the Contract provides for the performance of additional project management, survey, engineering design and permitting support services as requested by WUD. These additional services are related to revised requirements occurring after the Contract was executed. This Contract was procured under the requirements of the 2002 Small Business Enterprise (SBE) Ordinance (R2002-0064) prior to the adoption of the new Equal Business Opportunity Ordinance on October 16, 2018. The SBE participation goal established by the 2002 SBE Ordinance was 15% overall participation. The Contract provides for 96% SBE participation. Amendment No. 2 includes an overall SBE participation of 100%. The cumulative SBE participation including Amendment No. 2 is 100%. Consultant is a Palm Beach County company. The Project is included in the WUD FY20 budget.
    [Show full text]
  • City of San Gabriel STAFF REPORT
    City of San Gabriel STAFF REPORT DATE: June 1, 2021 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Lazzaretto, City Manager BY: Domenica Megerdichian, Acting Community Development Director Samantha Tewasart, Planning Manager SUBJECT: Professional Services Agreement with William Hezmalhalch Architects (WHA) for Architectural, Urban Design, and Historic Preservation Professional Services SUMMARY On January 4, 2021, the City of San Gabriel issued a Request for Proposals (RFP 21-01) for a qualified firm to provide architectural, urban design, and historic preservation professional services. The City received six proposals and William Hezmalhalch Architects (WHA) best met the criteria outlined in the RFP. Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Professional Services Agreement with William Hezmalhalch Architects (WHA) and authorize the City Manager to execute said agreement and issue a purchase order in the amount of $40,000. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS In 2000, the City Council approved the selection of consulting firms to assist the different City departments with specialized city services. A review of the Planning Division’s current contract agreements showed that a Request for Proposals (RFPs) has not been issued for architectural services since 2009. As the City continues to update its agreements for various services, the Planning Division began the process for updating its architectural and preservation services contract. On January 4, 2021, an RFP was issued (Attachment A) seeking qualified consulting firms to assist the City with architectural, urban design, and historical preservation professional services for a three-year period. The RFP was issued to 20 firms and posted on the American Planning Association and American Institute of Architects websites.
    [Show full text]