2-TB2624-GDP - Geothermal Design RFSQ.pdf

REQUEST FOR STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATION (RFSQ)

Geothermal System Assessment and Professional Design Prequalification Solicitation # TB2624-GDP

This Request for Statement of Qualifications (RFSQ), having been determined to be the appropriate procurement method to provide the best value to the Conducting Procurement Unit, is designed to solicit information regarding the qualifications of potential vendors and provide interested firms with sufficient basic information to submit statements of qualification. This RFSQ is issued in accordance with State of Utah Procurement Code, Utah Code Annotated (UCA) Chapter 63G-6a, and applicable Rules found in the Utah Administrative Code (UAC). If any provision of this RFSQ conflicts with the UCA or UAC, the UCA or UAC will take precedence.

PART 1: OVERVIEW AND INSTRUCTIONS

1.1 PURPOSE OF REQUEST FOR STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATIONS

Salt Lake District School District (SLCSD) is soliciting Statements of Qualifications (SOQ) from qualified firms or individuals to establish a Closed-Ended Approved Vendor List (AVL) as defined in UCA §63G-6a-507 to be used when soliciting proposals for geothermal heating and cooling assessment and professional design services for projects within SLCSD. Successful firms will be placed on an Approved Vendor List for the period of 18 months. Please reference Section 2.1 below for additional project information.

This RFSQ is not being used to solicit costs or prices. Design Professionals who are placed on the AVL will be invited to participate in a later Request for Proposals in accordance with the Utah Procurement Code.

1.2 RFSQ PROCESS

Pursuant to UCA §63G-6a-410, this RFSQ is being used to identify qualified professional design firms for placement on an approved vendor list for subsequent solicitations related to geothermal system design services. This approved vendor list will be established for no longer than eighteen (18) months.

The following is a brief outline of the process to establish the approved vendor list:

Step 1 - RFSQ: Qualifications

During this stage vendors will submit SOQ’s based on the criteria described herein. Vendors during this stage will also provide any additions and/or exceptions to the Standard Terms and Conditions. Vendors will be evaluated based on the evaluation criteria noted herein.

Step 2 – Establishment of a Closed-Ended Approved Vendor List

Only vendors who are deemed responsive, responsible, and meet the minimum score thresholds from Step 1 will be placed on the Approved Vendor List. This list will remain in place for a period of 18 months.

Step 3 – Standard Procurement Process(es)

Step 3 will consist of other standard procurement processes (Invitations for Bid, Requests for Proposals, Small Purchases, etc.). Those vendors placed on the Approved Vendor List from Step 2 will be eligible to participate. No other vendors will be allowed.

1.3 ISSUING & CONDUCTING PROCUREMENT UNIT, AND RFSQ SOLICITATION NUMBER

Salt Lake City School District is both the Issuing Procurement Unit and the Conducting Procurement Unit for this RFSQ and all subsequent addenda relating to it. The reference number for this RFSQ is Solicitation # TB2624-GDP. This number must be referred to on all SOQ’S, correspondence, and documentation relating to this RFSQ.

1.4 QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD

All questions MUST be submitted through Bonfire (https://utah.bonfirehub.com/portal/?tab=openOpportunities) during the designated time for questions (“Q&A period”) listed on Bonfire. Questions submitted through any other channel will not be answered. Questions may be answered in the order that they are submitted or may be compiled into one document and answered via an addendum. Answers disseminated by SLCSD through the Bonfire system shall serve as the official and binding position of SLCSD and will constitute an addendum to this RFSQ.

Questions, exceptions, or notification to SLCSD of any ambiguity, inconsistency, excessively restrictive requirement, or error in this RFSQ, MUST be submitted as a question through Bonfire during the Q&A period.

Questions may be answered individually or may be compiled into one document. Questions may also be answered via addenda. An answered question or addenda may modify the specification or requirements of this RFSQ. Answered questions and addendums will be posted on Bonfire. Vendors should periodically check Bonfire for answered questions and addendums before the closing date. It is the responsibility of the vendors to submit their SOQ as required by this RFSQ, including any requirements contained in an answered question and/or addendum.

Exceptions to the scope of work or other content of the RFSQ that have not been previously addressed during the active Q&A period of the procurement are not allowed and may result in the vendor’s SOQ being considered non-responsive.

1.5 ADDENDUMS

Vendors are encouraged to periodically check Bonfire for posted questions, answers and addendums.

Any modification to this procurement will be made by addendum issued by SLCSD Purchasing. Addendums to this RFSQ may be made for the purpose of making changes to: the scope of work, the schedule, the qualification requirements, the criteria, the weighting, or other requirements of this RFSQ.

After the due date and time for submitting a SOQ to this RFSQ, at the discretion of the chief procurement officer or head of a procurement unit with independent procurement authority, addenda to this RFSQ may be limited to the vendors that have submitted SOQs, provided the addenda does not make a substantial change to this RFSQ that likely would have impacted the number of vendors responding to the original publication of this RFSQ, in the opinion of the chief procurement officer or head of a procurement unit with independent procurement authority.

Authorized and properly issued addenda shall constitute the official and binding position of SLCSD.

Any response to this RFSQ which has as its basis any communications or information received from sources other than this RFSQ or related addenda may be considered non-responsive and be rejected at the sole discretion of SLCSD.

1.6 RESTRICTIONS ON COMMUNICATIONS

From the issue date of this RFSQ until a vendor is awarded a contract and the award is published, vendors are prohibited from communications regarding this RFSQ with the conducting procurement unit staff, evaluation committee members, or other associated individuals EXCEPT the SLCSD procurement officer overseeing this RFSQ. Failure to comply with this requirement may result in disqualification.

https://utah.bonfirehub.com/portal/?tab=openOpportunities

1.7 SUBMITTING YOUR SOQ

By submitting a SOQ to this RFSQ, the vendor acknowledges and agrees that the requirements, scope of work, and evaluation process outlined herein are fair, equitable, understood, and are not unduly restrictive. Any exceptions to the content of this RFSQ must be addressed within the Q&A period. The vendor further acknowledges that it has read this RFSQ, along with any attached or referenced documents, including the General Provisions.

All costs incurred by a vendor in the preparation and submission of a SOQ, including any costs incurred during interviews, oral presentations, and/or product demonstrations are the responsibility of the vendor and will not be reimbursed.

SOQs must be received by the posted due date and time posted on Bonfire (“deadline”). SOQs received after the deadline will be late and ineligible for consideration.

The RFSQ will end at the deadline. Do not wait until the last minute. If a vendor is in the middle of uploading a SOQ when the deadline arrives, the system will stop the upload process, the SOQ will not be accepted by Bonfire, and the attempted submission will be considered late and ineligible for consideration.

Electronic SOQs may require uploading of electronic attachments. Bonfire will accept a wide variety of document types as attachments. However, SLCSD is unable to view certain documents. Therefore, DO NOT submit documents that are embedded (zip files), movies, wmp, encrypted, or mp3 files. All documents must be uploaded in Bonfire as separate files.

Please allow sufficient time for delivery of hardcopy SOQs. SOQs sent overnight but not received by the deadline will not be accepted. When submitting a SOQ by physical delivery (U.S. Mail, courier service, hand-delivery, or other physical means), vendors are solely responsible for meeting the deadline. Delays caused by a delivery service or other physical means will not be considered as an acceptable reason for a SOQ being late. All SOQs received by physical delivery will be date and time stamped by SLCSD.

1.8 CONTRACT AWARD INTENT

No contracts will be awarded under this RFSQ process. Contracts will only be awarded in subsequent standard procurement processes as noted in Section 1.2 above.

1.9 STANDARD CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS, EXCEPTIONS, AND NEGOTIATIONS

Any contract resulting from this RFSQ will include, but not be limited to, the Salt Lake City School District Standard Terms and Conditions (Attachment A).

Exceptions and/or additions to the Standard Terms and Conditions are strongly discouraged. However, vendors requesting exceptions and/or additions to the Standard Terms and Conditions must be submitted with the SOQ.

Exceptions and/or additions submitted after the date and time for receipt of SOQs will not be considered. Vendors may not submit requests for exceptions and/or additions by reference to a vendor’s website or URL. URLs provided with a SOQ may result in that SOQ being rejected as non-responsive. Vendors may submit questions during the Q&A period regarding the Standard Terms and Conditions.

SLCSD may refuse to negotiate exceptions and/or additions that are determined to be excessive; that are inconsistent with similar contracts of the procurement unit; to warranties, insurance, or indemnification provisions that are necessary to protect the procurement unit after consultation with the Attorney General's Office or other applicable legal counsel; where the solicitation specifically prohibits exceptions and/or additions; or that are not in the best interest of the procurement unit.

If negotiations are required, vendor must provide all documents in Microsoft Word format for redline editing. Vendor must also provide the name, contact information, and access to the person(s) that will be directly involved in legal negotiations.

Any mandatorily required acceptance of a vendor’s terms and conditions may result in the SOQ being determined to be non-responsive.

An award resulting from this RFSQ is subject to successful contract terms and conditions negotiation (if required).

SLCSD, at its sole discretion, will determine when contract terms and conditions negotiations become unproductive and will result in termination of award to that vendor and SLCSD may move to the next eligible vendor.

1.10 PROTECTED INFORMATION

The Government Records Access and Management Act (GRAMA), UCA § 63G-2-305, provides in part that:

the following records are protected if properly classified by a government entity:

(1) trade secrets as defined in Section 13-24-2, the Utah Uniform Trade Secrets Act, if the person submitting the trade secret has provided the governmental entity with the information specified in UCA § 63G-2- 309 (Business Confidentiality Claims);

(2) commercial information or non-individual financial information obtained from a person if:

(a) disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to result in unfair competitive injury to the person submitting the information or would impair the ability of the governmental entity to obtain necessary information in the future;

(b) the person submitting the information has a greater interest in prohibiting access than the public in obtaining access; and

(c) the person submitting the information has provided the governmental entity with the information specified in UCA § 63G-2-309;

(6) records, the disclosure of which would impair governmental procurement proceedings or give an unfair advantage to any person proposing to enter into a contract or agreement with a governmental entity, except, subject to Subsections (1) and (2), that this Subsection (6) does not restrict the right of a person to have access to, after the contract or grant has been awarded and signed by all parties,…

Pricing may not be classified as confidential or protected and will be considered public information after award of the contract.

Process for Requesting Non-Disclosure: Any Vendor requesting a record be protected shall include with their response a Claim of Business Confidentiality. To protect information under a Claim of Business Confidentiality, the Vendor must complete the Claim of Business Confidentiality form, which is provided as a separate attachment with this solicitation, and include the following information:

1. Provide a written Claim of Business Confidentiality at the time the information (SOQ) is provided to the state, and

2. Include a concise statement of reasons supporting the claim of business confidentiality (UCA §63G-2- 309(1)).

3. Submit an electronic “redacted” (excluding protected information) copy of the response. Copy must clearly be marked “Redacted Version.”

An entire response cannot be identified as “PROTECTED”, “CONFIDENTIAL” or “PROPRIETARY”, and if so identified, shall be considered non-responsive unless the Vendor removes the designation.

Redacted Copy: If a Vendor submits a response that contains information claimed to be business confidential or protected information, the Vendor must submit two separate SOQs: one redacted version for public release, with all protected business confidential information either blacked-out or removed, clearly marked as "Redacted Version"; and one non-redacted version for evaluation purposes, clearly marked as "Protected Business Confidential."

1.11 INTERVIEWS AND PRESENTATIONS

If it is determined to be in the best interest of the Conducting Procurement Unit, interviews and presentations may be held at the option of SLCSD. SLCSD shall establish a date and time for the interviews or presentations and shall notify eligible vendors of the procedures. Vendors invited to interviews or presentations shall be limited to those vendors meeting any minimum requirements and/or minimum technical score threshold specified in the RFSQ.

Representations made by a vendor during interviews or presentations shall be documented and shall become an addendum to the vendor’s SOQ. Representations must be consistent with the vendor’s original SOQ and may only be used for purposes of clarifying or filling in gaps in the vendor’s SOQ. Interviews and presentations will be at the vendor’s expense.

1.12 SITE VISITS AND/OR PRE-SOLICITATION CONFERENCES

The SLCSD will NOT hold any site visits or pre-solicitation conferences in relation to this RFSQ.

PART 2: SCOPE OF WORK AND REQUIREMENTS

2.1 DETAILED SCOPE OF WORK AND ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

The Salt Lake City School District (SLCSD) is soliciting Statements of Qualifications (SOQ) from qualified geothermal assessment and professional system design consultants to conduct the services described below.

A. SLCSD anticipates conducting geothermal feasibility assessments, test wells, and/or thermal conductivity testing to prepare for future geothermal heating and cooling system installations at 10-12 facilities. The feasibility assessment may include a review of both closed-loop and open-loop system designs. Specific deliverables associated with the assessments may include:

a. Geological and hydrological investigations of SLCSD properties

b. Ground heat exchanger and bore field assessment and design (closed-loop and/or open-loop systems)

c. Thermal modeling and system performance analysis

d. Construction drawings and preparation of technical specifications

e. Regulatory permitting support

f. Field oversight of drilling operations and QA/QC implementation

g. Support during construction, installation, and commissioning phases

B. A critical component of vendor selection will be the firm’s approach to selection and oversight of geothermal drilling operations. Respondents must:

a. Demonstrate prior experience with qualified and licensed geothermal drillers

b. Provide examples of direct oversight and quality control during bore field installations

c. Outline procedures to verify driller licensing, training, and regulatory compliance

d. Detail QA/QC protocols used during drilling and installation phases

C. SLCSD has contracted with McKinstry to provide all engineering design and documentation for geothermal systems. Selected vendors will be asked to work with McKinstry to conduct site feasibility assessments and geothermal system designs at selected school district facilities. McKinstry will act as the prime design consultant and general contractor for construction projects.

Step 1 of this process requires the submission of SOQ’s based upon the evaluation criteria outlined below. During Step 2, vendors will be placed on an approved vendor list for a period of 18 months. During Step 3, vendors on the approved vendor list will be invited to submit proposals for selected projects.

2.2 MANDATORY MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS/QUALIFICATIONS

This section contains mandatory minimum requirements that must be met in order for an offer to be considered responsive. If required, vendors shall include a detailed narrative outlining how the proposed solution meets the following minimum mandatory requirements. For ease of evaluation, a vendor’s SOQ must be a point-by-point response, addressing in detail each area of the mandatory minimum requirements and/or qualifications.

Failure to meet any one of the mandatory requirements/qualifications will result in the SOQ being rejected pursuant to UCA § 63G-6a-704 and the SOQ will not move forward in the evaluation process.

All of the items described in this section are non-negotiable. A rejection of a SOQ due to a SOQ not meeting mandatory minimum requirements can occur at any time in the evaluation process.

A. Business License and Contractor’s License as Required by DOPL

Vendor shall have and maintain all professional licenses required by the State of Utah. Evidence of required licenses shall include a copy of the vendor’s business license, contractor’s license, etc. with vendor’s SOQ.

B. Insurance Requirement

Vendor shall obtain and maintain insurance as required per state general conditions in the attached Terms and Conditions (Attachment A). Documentation showcasing the required insurance shall be included with vendor’s

SOQ.

C. McKinstry Prequalification Application

Vendor must review and complete Attachment B - McKinstry Prequalification Application and provide the document with your submitted SOQ.

D. Safety and Health Performance

Vendor shall provide their Worker’s Compensation Interstate Experience Modification Rate (EMR) for the last three years. Our target is an EMR below 1.0, RIR of less than 5.0, and DART below 2.0. Any citations in the past 3 years are also requested for review. We collaborate with subcontracting partners outside of these parameters at times under corrective action plans, and work together to plan and improve the focus on safety.

E. Page Limits

SOQ submissions shall not exceed a total of fifteen (15) pages (11 pt font with a standard page size of 8.5” x 11”).

Proposals that exceed this page limit will be automatically rejected. The following will not count toward the page limitation:

i. Table of Contents

ii. Potential Conflicts of Interest, refer to RFSQ Section 3.1

iii. Exceptions to Terms and Conditions, refer to RFSQ Section 1.9

iv. Claims of Business Confidentiality, refer to RFP Section 1.10

v. Responses to Mandatory Minimum Requirements, RFP Section 2.2

2.3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A. The Executive Summary is limited to two (2) pages at most. The executive summary is used to briefly describe the vendor’s SOQ. This summary should highlight the major features of the SOQ. It must indicate any requirements that cannot be met by the vendor. The reader should be able to determine the essence of the SOQ by reading the executive summary. If a Vendor’s executive summary is condensed to a single page, the remainder of the SOQ may total 14 pages.

2.4 DETAILED STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATION

To determine which SOQ provides the best value to SLCSD, the evaluation committee will evaluate each responsive and responsible SOQ that has not been disqualified or rejected using the following criteria:

A. Vendor Qualifications and Relevant Company Experience – 400 points Total

Provide a brief description of your company’s historical background, the scope and nature of geothermal system assessment and design routinely provided by your company on projects of the size and scope identified in part 2.1 above, especially as it relates to schools and other education facilities. Identify the type of business (corporation, partnership, sole proprietor, etc.) and whether your company is licensed to do business in the State of Utah.

Evaluation Criteria for Closed Loop Systems – 200 of 400 points available under 2.4.A:

• Explanation of geothermal system assessment and design experience specific to closed loop system design at commercial and/or K-12 facilities,

• Vendor demonstrated ability to perform the required services at specified levels described in the Scope of

Work,

• Vendor indication of the understanding of the purpose and scope of the proposed services as evidenced by the quality of the SOQ submitted,

• Total number, capacity, and type (e.g. vertical, horizontal “slinky”, etc.) of closed loop geothermal systems that the vendor has successfully completed within the last five (5) years, especially on educational buildings and facilities,

• Vendor’s experience selecting and overseeing of driller and geothermal ground loop installation contractors.

• Vendor’s familiarity with provisions of Inflation Reduction Act relating to geothermal system rebates.

Evaluation Criteria for Open Loop Systems – 200 of 400 points available under 2.4.A:

• Explanation of geothermal system assessment and design experience specific to open loop system design at commercial and/or K-12 facilities,

• Vendor demonstrated ability to perform the required services at specified levels described in the Scope of

Work,

• Vendor indication of the understanding of the purpose and scope of the proposed services as evidenced by the quality of the SOQ submitted,

• Total number, capacity, and type of open loop geothermal projects that the vendor has successfully completed within the last five (5) years, especially on educational buildings and facilities,

• Vendor’s experience selecting and overseeing of driller and geothermal ground loop installation contractors.

• Vendor’s familiarity with provisions of Inflation Reduction Act relating to geothermal system rebates.

B. Project Team – 200 Points

This area of evaluation will consider the individual qualifications and working experience of the individual project team members. This category includes the technical qualifications and work experience of the key personnel assigned to the project and experience of the team working on previous projects to achieve the project objectives.

Also to be considered will be the proven capability of vendor to deal effectively with SLCSD based upon references provided and other resources such as SLCSD’s experiences and other school or governmental agencies’ experience.

Evaluation Criteria:

• Project team’s collective experience and qualifications in successfully completing projects of comparable size and complexity, on-time and within budget,

• Project team’s collective familiarity working around and within school districts,

• Project team’s collective familiarity working with energy service companies providing guaranteed energy savings performance contracting,

• Project team’s individual experience and qualifications for each employee in the role proposed by Vendor during the project,A

• The framework of leadership and accountability structure proposed by the Vendor for the project team.

C. Past Performance and References – 150 Points

Vendors shall provide a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) references for projects of comparable scope, magnitude, and clientele. References should demonstrate the vendor’s capacity to perform successfully on similar projects for projects which have been completed within the last 5 years. Reference information must include: (a) name and address of the project; (b) name, role/title, phone number, and email of the person able to answer questions about the project; (c) date of when the work was completed; (d) the capacity of the project, the cost of the project, and the type of project.

Be sure reference information is complete, accurate and current. SLCSD will not chase vendor’s references in an attempt to locate or contact them. Inaccurate or obsolete reference information will be considered a non-submittal of that reference which can result in a low score on references.

Vendor must disclose in their submittals if there are any current judgments and/or liens against their company and include a list of those liens (if any) and the amounts.

Evaluation Criteria: Similarity and strength of portfolio compared to SLCSD and overall comments and other information obtained from the provided references.

D. Management Plan – 150 Points

This area of evaluation will consider the working relationship the Vendor will maintain with the School District, McKinstry, and drillers or other subcontractors. Please describe your approach to maintaining clear and updated communications between these entities. A special emphasis shall be placed on the working relationship between the vendor, drilling professional, and the McKinstry superintendent during all drilling operations.

Evaluation Criteria:

• Project team’s collective familiarity working with energy service companies providing guaranteed energy savings performance contracting,

• The strength of the framework of leadership and accountability structure proposed by the Vendor for the project team.

• The Vendor’s success in navigating relationships between District, McKinstry, and subcontracted drilling professionals.

E. Safety Record EMR/ OSHA – 100 Points

Vendor shall provide their Worker’s Compensation Interstate Experience Modification Rate (EMR) for the last three years. Our target is an EMR below 1.0, RIR of less than 5.0, and DART below 2.0. Any citations in the past 3 years are also requested for review. We collaborate with subcontracting partners outside of these parameters at times under corrective action plans and work together to plan and improve the focus on safety. These requirements are also identified in Section 2.2, Article D.

It is understood that the portion of the Scope of Work in Section 2.1 relating to Professional Design Services will not require the same safety record provisions as construction activities. In relation to drilling management scopes of work, please also provide a typical management plan for drilling operations including safety procedures specific to closed, open, and test well drilling services.

Evaluation Criteria: Demonstration of the above requested safety metrics and any additional information provided on standard safe work practices followed by the Vendor.

NOTE: For ease of evaluation, the SOQs must provide a point-by-point response, addressing in detail each area of the evaluation criteria, including addressing how the point-by-point response addresses the issues discussed in this RFSQ. The criteria are not intended to limit a SOQ's content or exclude any relevant or essential data. Vendors are at liberty and are encouraged to expand upon the criteria to demonstrate the Vendors capability to provide SLCSD with a solution.

PART 3: INFORMATION REQUIRED IN SUBMISSION OF A SOQ

3.1 SOQ FORMAT

AS NOTED IN SECTION 2.2 ABOVE, THE DETAILED SOQ SHALL BE UP TO TWO (2) PAGES FOR THE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND AN OVERALL LIMIT OF FIFTEEN (15) PAGES.

A. Section Title: Executive Summary.

The Executive Summary is limited to two (2) pages at most. The executive summary is used to briefly describe the vendor’s SOQ. This summary should highlight the major features of the SOQ. It must indicate any requirements that cannot be met by the vendor. The reader should be able to determine the essence of the SOQ by reading the executive summary. If a Vendor’s executive summary is condensed to a single page, the remainder of the SOQ may total 14 pages.

B. Section Title: Protected Information.

All protected/proprietary information must be identified in this section of the SOQ by completing the Claim of Business Confidentiality referenced in Section 1.10.

If the vendor’s SOQ contains protected/proprietary information (refer back to the Protected Information section of this RFSQ for additional information), then vendor must submit a redacted copy of the SOQ at the same time vendor submits its SOQ. The redacted copy of the vendor’s SOQ must be submitted in compliance with other sections of this RFSQ.

If there is no protected information, write “None” in this section.

Failure to comply with this Section 3.1 and Section 1.10 releases SLCSD from any obligation or liability arising from the inadvertent release of vendor information.

C. Section Title: Potential Conflicts of Interest.

Vendor must identify any conflict, or potential conflict of interest, that might arise during the contract. If no conflicts are identified or expected, write “None” in this section.

D. Section Title: Exceptions and/or Additions to the Standard Terms and Conditions. Proposed exceptions and/or additions to the Standard Terms and Conditions must be submitted in this section.

Vendor must provide all proposed exceptions and/or additions, including a Vendor’s terms and conditions in Microsoft Word format for redline editing. Vendor must also provide the name, contact information, and access to the person(s) that will be directly involved in terms and conditions negotiations.

If there are no exceptions or additions to the Standard Terms and Conditions, write “None” in this section.

E. Section Title: Mandatory Requirements.

As described in Section 2.2, vendor must provide the required narratives that demonstrate compliance with the stated Mandatory Minimum Requirements/Qualifications. Vendor’s failure to meet any one of the mandatory requirements will result in the SOQ being classified as non-responsive and will be rejected under the provisions of the Utah Procurement Code.

Please provide a response to all requirements noted in Section 2.2 as follows:

1. Business License and Contractor’s License as Required by DOPL

2. Insurance Requirement

3. McKinstry Pre-Qualification Application

4. Safety and Health Performance

5. Page Limit Requirement

F. Section Title: Detailed Statement of Qualifications.

As described in Section 2.4 above, this section will constitute the major portion of the SOQ and must be a concise overview of the vendor’s assessment of the required work, the vendor’s ability and approach, and the resources necessary to fulfill the requirements. This section should demonstrate the vendor’s understanding of the desired overall performance expectations, deliverables, if any, and outcomes.

Clearly indicate any options or alternatives proposed (if allowed). In any case wherein the vendor cannot comply with an evaluation criterion outlined in Section 2.4, such inability must be stated in response to the applicable requirement. Vendors should reference the Scope of Work in Section 2.1 in their response.

SOQs will be evaluated against the SOQ evaluation criteria described in Section 2.4 and listed in Attachment D: RFSQ Evaluation Score sheet. Attachment D provides the scoring methodology, states the relative weight that will be given to each score for the criteria, and the minimum scoring thresholds associated with the evaluation criteria.

For ease of evaluation, the Detailed Statement of Qualifications section must be a point-by-point response, addressing in detail each area of the evaluation criteria as follows:

A. Vendor Qualifications and Relevant Company Experience B. Project Team C. Past Performance and References D. Management Plan E. Safety Record EMR/OSHA

PART 4: SOQ EVALUATION

4.1 SOQ EVALUATION

All SOQs in response to this RFSQ will be evaluated in a manner consistent with the Utah Procurement Code, Administrative Rules, policies and the evaluation criteria in this RFSQ.

Vendors bear sole responsibility for the items included or not included within the SOQ submitted by the vendor. Each area of the evaluation criteria must be addressed in detail in the SOQ.

4.2 SOQ EVALUATION PROCESS

Step 1: Initial Review and Evaluation of Mandatory Minimum Requirements In the initial phase of the evaluation process, the conducting procurement unit will review all SOQs timely received. Non-responsive SOQs, those not conforming to RFSQ requirements, or those unable to meet the mandatory minimum requirements will be eliminated from further consideration.

Step 2: Statement of Qualifications Evaluation Responsive SOQs will then be evaluated by an evaluation committee appointed by the conducting procurement unit against the SOQ evaluation criteria noted in Attachment D. Attachment D establishes any minimum score thresholds for this RFSQ.

Step 3: Scoring Criteria for Detailed Statement of Qualifications For ease of evaluation, the Detailed Statement of Qualifications section must be a point-by-point response, addressing in detail each area of the evaluation criteria as described in Part 2.4 and noted below. SOQ’s will be evaluated against a total of 1,000 points as follows:

1. Vendor Qualifications and Relevant Company Experience - 400 points (200 open loop, 200 closed loop)

2. Project Team - 200 points

3. Past Performance and References - 150 points

4. Management Plan – 150 Points

5. Safety Record EMR/ OSHA - 100 points

4.3 DETERMINATION OF APPROVED SOQ’S

All vendors who receive a minimum score of 700 points or greater will be qualified to be included on the Approved Vendor List.