14000 Evaluation Panel Report.pdf
PDF 92 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 14000-0-2025-BP
- Issued by
- Dane County, Wisconsin
About this file
This is an Evaluation Panel Report for the City of Madison's Olbrich Botanical Gardens Comprehensive Master Plan solicitation, which sought qualifications from landscape architecture and design firms. The city issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQu) that initially attracted 11 vendors, with the evaluation panel conducting a two-stage selection process. After an initial scoring round evaluating technical capabilities, the panel selected four finalists - Reed Hilderbrand, Saiki Design, Sasaki Associates, and SmithGroup - for in-person presentations. These finalists were each given a two-hour timeslot to present their proposals.
The evaluation panel ultimately selected Reed Hilderbrand as the top-scoring vendor, with a total score of 153.25 out of 200 possible points. Notably, while Reed Hilderbrand was the highest-scoring firm, the panel was also impressed with EQT by Design, a subcontractor for Sasaki Associates. Through subsequent discussions, a mutual agreement was reached to utilize both Reed Hilderbrand and EQT by Design for the project. The selection process occurred between March and May 2025, with key dates including proposal distribution on 3/21/2025, finalist presentations on 5/7-5/8/2025, and final vendor confirmation on 5/27/2025. The local purchasing ordinance did not impact the bid outcome, and cost was not a factor in the initial qualifications evaluation.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 14000 Addendum 2.pdf | ||
| 14000-0-2025-BP Olbrich Gardens Master Plan.pdf | ||
| 14000 Addendum 1.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
EVALUATION PANEL REPORT
14000-0-2025-BP
Olbrich Botanical Gardens Comprehensive Master Plan
May 28, 2025
Introduction
The City of Madison solicited qualifications from qualified vendors. The following proposed:
1. Didier Design Studio
2. Field Operations L.L.C.
3. Grimshaw, Inc.
4. Hodgson Douglas, LLC
5. Hoerr Schaudt Landscape Architects LLC
6. Living Habitats LLC
7. Reed Hilderbrand Landscape Architecture
8. Ryan Associates Landscape Architecture and Planning
9. Saiki Design, Inc.
10. Sasaki Associates, Inc.
11. SmithGroup, Inc.
Please refer to the RFQu for additional information.
Summary of Evaluation Panel Activity
1. Panel members first conducted evaluations of proposals independently based on the pre-established criteria determined by the panel. Then, the panel met to discuss all qualitative and quantitative aspects of the proposals and overall ratings as a group. Note that this was Request for Qualifications, and cost was not factored into the evaluation.
Below is a summary of the scoring:
Section
Max Points
Dider Design
Field Operations
Grimshaw
Hodgson Douglas
Hoerr Schaudt
Living Habitats
Technical
95 65.08 56.92
61.08
52.83
65.92
68.92
Local Vendor
5 0.00 0.00
0.00
Total
65.08
56.92
61.08
52.83
65.92
68.92
Points
Reed Hilderbrand
Ryan Associates
Saiki Design
Sasaki Associates
SmithGroup
95 73.50
63.17
74.50
73.67
76.50
5 0.00 0.00
5.00
73.50
63.17
79.50
After the first round of scoring, the panel asked to bring the top four scoring vendors onsite for in-person presentations. They were Reed Hilderbrand, Saiki Design, Sasaki Associates, and SmithGroup. All four finalists were given an agenda and a two-hour timeslot to make their presentation.
The scores after the round of in-person presentations was:
Points
Reed Hilderbrand
Saiki Design
Sasaki Associates
SmithGroup
Presentation
95 79.75
53.83
69.17
(First Round)
95 73.50
74.50
10 0.00
10.00
153.25
138.33
142.83
150.17
When the evaluation panel reviewed the scoring, they were comfortable with Reed Hilderbrand being the top scoring and awarded vendor. However, they were especially impressed with EQT by Design, the engagement subcontractor for Sasaki Associates. Upon further discussions, a mutual agreement was able to be established to utilize EQT by Design along with Reed Hilderbrand and EQT by Design.
2. Final Selection of the Panel: Reed Hilderbrand
3. Local Preference
Was the outcome of this bid changed by the local purchasing ordinance? ___Yes _X_No
4. Evaluation Panel Meetings:
3/21/2025 Distribution of Proposals
4/14/2025 Review of first round of scoring and selection of finalists 5/7 + 5/8/2025 In-Person Presentations 5/13/2025 Review of final round of scoring and determination of next steps 5/27/2025 Confirmation of winning vendor
| Introduction |
| Summary of Evaluation Panel Activity |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .