24-1003-Q-AR942_Eustis_High_Sch_Shortlist_evaluation_CMR_Scores.pdf

Title

Number

Phase Date: 12/4/24

Criteria Past

Performance History

Assigned Personnel

Professional Qualifications

Project Summary

Recap

Current and Projected Workload

Willingness to Meet Time and

Budget Requirements

Local Vendor Mentorship/Part nership Program

Certified Minority

Firm

Distance to District Office

Total

Weight 25 15 10 18 20 5 95 5 100

Wharton-Smith, Inc. 23.6 13.8 8.4 16 19.6 4.4 0 4 89.8

Charles Perry Partners Inc. 23.4 13.8 7.6 16.6 17.7 3.7 0 4 86.8

WELBRO Building Corporation 22.4 12.6 8 16 18.6 4.7 0 4 86.3

Williams Company 23.2 13.8 8.8 15.4 17.4 3.3 0 4 85.9

D. E. Scorpio Corporation 22.6 12.8 8.6 15.2 18 4.5 0 4 85.7

Ajax Building Company, LLC 22.7 13.7 7 15.4 17.4 3.7 0 4 83.9 The Whiting-Turner Contracting Co. 19.8 12 8 15.6 16.8 4.5 0 4 80.7

D&A Construction Group, Inc. 20.8 13.6 7.4 14.8 11.4 4.1 2 4 78.1 Allstate Construction, Inc. 18.8 13.6 6.2 13.6 13.4 2.6 0 4 72.2

Respondent: Wharton-Smith, Inc.

Criteria: Past Performance History Evaluator: Helen LaValley

Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) Services for Eustis High School Addition

24-1003-Q-AR942

Initial Shortlist (Evaluation)

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Experience with occupied campuses. Worked on Aurelia Cole.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Impressive job history with similar scope. Good experience with occupied schools.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Listed multi phased projects on occupied campuses and tight sites.

I believe this will match our scope of work. High school experience.

Criteria: Assigned Personnel Professional Qualifications Evaluator: Helen LaValley

Comment: 1984, 750 k12 projects, projects in several FL counties, Clewiston school - occupied, phased, CR addn, on budget 37 mill, on time / HS Orlando, CR addn, occupied, phased on budget 42 mill, on time / HS Kissimmee, business academy, CR addn, occupied, on time, Comment: Org chart of team - extensive public-school experience, local experience, experience with occupied school projects, Lk County residents Included staffing utilization for the team, resources in FL

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: no current ass.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Members worked on Aurelia Cole & Lake Pointe.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Long tenure with lots of experience in school construction. Many have recent experience with Lake county schools.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Team members have good experience also good LCSB experience. Local smaller firm is on the team.

Criteria: Project Summary Recap Evaluator: Helen LaValley

Comment: Lk Howell Addition and Reno, similar proj, occupied, site constraints, phased.

The project was on time and budget. Quality and cost control challenges -above ceiling coordination - did coordinate with suppliers, district staff, etc.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Worked on an occupied high school campus.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Similar project, demonstrated how they were able to overcome obstacles utilizing in house specialists.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Project referenced seems to be similar to our scope of work.

Occupied campus, tight site etc. Noticed big ODP savings, seem to look out for the owner.

Criteria: Current and Projected Workload

Comment: Current workload indicates estimated completion of last project July 2027.Most are in various stages of construction. Some minor projects to large projects.Did not determine if the assigned team is available for this project since they have HS project starting the same time.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: no status for GSB.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Looks like a brand new high school that is projected to be completed at the same time as us.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Minimal info and how team for this project will be available. No information on partner firm.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Work load seems moderate. 2 projects during the one advertised. No GSB work load.

Criteria: Willingness to Meet Time and Budget Requirements

Comment: Statement included.site knowledge is outstanding, scope, design and construction considerations, local codes/ords

- actually listed several Eustis regulations, communication and collaborative plan included. Scheduling information is included.

This section was extensive and informative.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: alot of depth. took some time on getting info.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Impressive amount of depth on this section. Explained how everything would impact the daily operations of the school.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Extensive work done on familiarizing themselves with site and logistics plan during construction.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson

Comment: Agree to meet time and budget.

Detailed spread sheet about schedule.

Extensive knowledge of the site. Blew me away with how much thought was put into the future project. A lot of time and effort.

Criteria: Local Vendor Mentorship/Partnership Program Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: partnership with GSB construction/GSB will lead precon outreach efforts for the project.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good with GSB.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Local participation is a little low.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Great mentorship program.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Partnered with GSB, a local smaller firm. Good plan in place for the inclusion of local labor.

Criteria: Certified Minority Firm Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: Not minority firm

Comment: o.k.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Not a minority firm.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Not a minority firm

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: No

Criteria: Distance toDistrict Office Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: within 50 miles

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: o.k.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Provided by Ms. Russell.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: within 50 miles

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Within 50 miles

Respondent: Charles Perry Partners Inc.

Criteria: Past Performance History

Comment: 56 years, 210 employees - has Lake County Schools experience, 8 LCS, renos and additions in the last 10 years.School projects in FL counties - 1 in Savannah, GA which was new construction.Has done projects on occupied campuses.Litigation -none, Insurance Claims -none.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Local experience (EMS). Clearly laid out proposal with great detail.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer

Comment: similar scope and size of projects, with much experience in Lake County.

Worked on Eustis school.

No litigation or insurance claims. Showed budget savings on past projects.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Great school and LCSB experience. Occupied campus experience. Listed all jobs in detail. No litigations stated.

Criteria: Assigned Personnel Professional Qualifications Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: chart shows depth of the employee resources. Assigned team has public school experience, several in Lk County Schools.Includes a partnership emp from GP Construction. Lots of experience in Lk, Volusia, Seminole and Orange County schools.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch

Comment: Many employees with experience in Lake County (superintendent worked on EMS).

Comment: Long tenures, good staff with lots of school experience and in Lake County.

Superintendent has been with them for 20yrs, with multiple Lake County schools in his resume.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Team has good experience.

Experience is in line with his project.

I like how they showed the percentages of each personal and their dedication to LCSB.

Criteria: Project Summary Recap Evaluator: Helen LaValley

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: no local labor.

Comment: Project was a comprehensive reno, addition and site work improvements.Multiphase on occupied campus. Had to coordinate with city and FDOT.Long lead times were coordinated to eliminate scheduling delays.In constant communication with school staff so as

Comment: More of a case study than a quantitative overview. No mention of local labor %s.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer

Comment: Extensive phasing on project. Very detailed plan on how they were able to construct project on occupied campus without disrupting. No mention of local labor participation.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Summary was a occupied campus with phasing. Steps were taken to ensure a safe and clean site. Very detailed.

Criteria: Current and Projected Workload Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: Had current projects. All complete by December 2026. Did not find projected workload projects.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Anticipated completion dates are all before July 2027.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Good information, but it does not specify any future/projected workload.

Comment: Work load seems moderate. Work to begin is in line as far as cost with our project. I don`t think other jobs will take precedent.

Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: Did have statement.This section was extensive and provided information and methodology on how the company will meet the schedule and budget. Provided a timeline.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Not as much information on EHS as others. Clearly showed they have met time & budget requirements, though.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Great format showing budget and schedules were met on previous projects. Good technology.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Great examples of getting jobs done on time and budget. East to follow. Would like of seen more knowledge of the site.

Criteria: Local Vendor Mentorship/Partnership Program

Comment: participating in Mentor protege partnerships, no specific emps from these partnerships is listed on the team.Did mention including local area providers.Outreach for local participation.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: Local if avail.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: No specific references to local involvement in Lake County/who`s on the team.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Good plan, and local participation.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Good standards for local participation. Involved with schools and community.

Criteria: Certified Minority Firm Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: not minority firm

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: o.k.

Comment: Not a minority firm.

Comment: not a minority

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: No

Criteria: Distance toDistrict Office Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: within 50 miles

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: o.k.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Given by Ms. Russell.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: within 50 miles

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Within 50 Miles

Respondent: WELBRO Building Corporation

Comment: Some lit.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Some litigation. Local experience; Lake Brantley project was similar.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Good background, many similar projects in size and scope, occupied. Like how they stated lessons learned on occupied campuses.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Projects listed seem to meet the same scope of our project. All previous ones listed met time and budget. Good school experience. Occupied sites.

Criteria: Assigned Personnel Professional Qualifications Evaluator: Helen LaValley

Comment: started 1979, 105 emps.Has public school experience, LCS 7 projects, has Educational Focus Group dedicated to k12 projects.Lk Minn HS CR addition, occupied-Lk Brantley HS CR add, occupied-Lyman HS career tech add, occupied-St Cloud HS Add, Comment: Org chart of team assigned team has public school experience-although a few are new to Welbro.One is a Eustis HS alumnus, several are Lk County residents, one is an intern.Included staff from CEP on various projects.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: Missing 3 people profile.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Lake County residents; 1 EHS grad. Smaller projects.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Robust staff, many Lake County residents with 1 Eustis HS graduate.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Team has good experience.

Experience with occupied campuses.

Team is large and have the mentoring firm in place and their role is explained.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: What did they mean by missed opportunities with value engineering?

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Large obstacle overcome, late NTP. Value engineering info was confusing. Good community participation.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: 44% local labor. Summary was in good detail and a good project. Liked the Budgeting Modification Log.

Criteria: Current and Projected Workload Evaluator: Helen LaValley

Comment: Provided list of current projects -estimated completion dates will be December 2025.State7d that the assigned team members will be available. Did include CEP project list.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: Covered well.

Comment: new Elem school-greenfield, 98 K SF, timeline of methodology, 9/23 to 7/24.Obstacle was a delay in NTP, new sequencing to make up for delay-additional casting beds to work on tilt panels and the underground together.as well as other challenges - they resolved

Comment: All projects are finished before July `27.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Good availability.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Work load seems good with most projects ending in 2025. Projects have similar budgets as ours.

Criteria: Willingness to Meet Time and Budget Requirements Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: Included statement meeting target date and budget.has timeline, has info on site knowledge, scope, and local codes.Pages on stakeholder communication and collaborative plan.Discusses ways to interest subs.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: fair.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Great depth in this section.

Comment: Extensive plan. Good PM technology. Good plan for getting local sub participation on project.

Comment: Agree to meet time and budget. Very detailed spread sheet of how they would like the schedule to be.

Criteria: Local Vendor Mentorship/Partnership Program Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: Partnering with CEP, MWBE firm. CEP is part of the assigned team.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Included local connections on assigned team.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Mention partnership with CEP, and how they will be implemented in the project.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Partnering with a minority firm. CEP. Involved with the students/next generation.

Criteria: Certified Minority Firm Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: Not minority business

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: o.k.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis

Comment: Not a minority firm

Comment: No

Criteria: Distance toDistrict Office Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: within 50 miles

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: o.k.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Provided by Ms. Russell.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Within 50 miles

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Within 50 miles

Respondent: Williams Company

Criteria: Past Performance History Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: 93 Orlando staff, established 1920, 200 K12 projects.HS-Pt Richey, occupied, on time & budget 56 millCR addn / HS Orlando, occupied, phased, under budget, on time 46 mill/K8 Odessa, CR addn, under budget, on time, 12 mill /K8 replacement, under budget, on

Comment: Good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Finished projects under budget & ahead of time. Boone High School was very similar, and they did very well.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Great experience, Boone HS project stood out due to similarity to this project.

Projects were under budget and on time.

Similar scope and size. No litigation, no insurance claims.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Good high schools experience. Projects listed where completed on time and on budget. No litigation or insurance claims.

Criteria: Assigned Personnel Professional Qualifications Evaluator: Helen LaValley

Comment: experience in multiphase projects, Org chart, extensive public-school experience for most of team, One Lake County resident, most of team has decades with industry

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Plenty of experience working on large public school projects.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Good experience. long tenures for executive staffs.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Team has good experience. Overall solid team. Did not show the availability of team members.

Criteria: Project Summary Recap Evaluator: Helen LaValley

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: Obstacles covered and savings. Local good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Met many obstacles. High local business participation.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Good background on overcoming substantial obstacles. Excellent local participation.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Occupied campus. Gave examples of obstacles of problems and how they where resolved. 74% local labor.

Criteria: Current and Projected Workload Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: Current projects indicate last estimated Bldg. Division completion in July 2027.3 Precon stage.Did include subs project lists.

Comment: Gulf HS - replacement, included a written timeline and methodology. Had to ensure uninterrupted utility service. quality and cost controls.Had a cost savings of $825K. challenges included location of new sewer lines and connection in relationship to occupied

Comment: no remain balance.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Several projects due in the same timeline.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Decent workload, one large project on hold.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Seems slightly high. Did show mentorship firms work load.

Criteria: Willingness to Meet Time and Budget Requirements Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: includes statement, phasing strategies, timeline, knowledge of site, scope, local codes/ords, and an execution strategy.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Strong knowledge.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Not good familiarization with site, minimal info.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Agree to meet time line and budget. Good strategies in place.

Criteria: Local Vendor Mentorship/Partnership Program

Comment: Minority Business Enterprise Program.2 are on the assigned team?with mentorship program?

Comment: local was average.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Relatively generic section. High local numbers in previous section, though.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: No clear indication of involvement with programs

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Generic. Hard to follow and understand.

Criteria: Certified Minority Firm Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: Not a minority firm

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: o.k.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Not a minority firm.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Not a minority firm

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: No

Criteria: Distance toDistrict Office

Comment: within 50 miles

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Provided by Ms. Russell.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: within 50 miles

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Within 50 miles

Respondent: D. E. Scorpio Corporation

Comment: 70 emps, 11 yrs, 22 school districts, 9 LCSLincoln Park HS repurpose expansion, 2 Midd reno/redesign-new bldgs., El reno, Jr high new CR addition-On time, under budget, could not determine if any of the schools were occupied during construction.Litigation -none, claims - none

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: Good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Ahead of time & under budget in many cases!

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Good experience with projects completed under budget and on or ahead of schedule. Good references.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Good experience and past history. All jobs stated under or at budget and schedule. Occupied campuses?

Criteria: Assigned Personnel Professional Qualifications

Comment: Assigned contact - Nate Watson, List depth/capabilities of firm.Org chart!Listed total years` experience, did not state years with company. However, did break out each staff experience with firm and individual projects. All have public school experience

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: No years with scorpio and no current ass.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Worked on Lake County Schools before.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: No info on tenures. Single point of contact only. has 50% availbility

Comment: Good experience for the team.

Availability for team members shown.

Some team members have high school experience.noted that the sr pm is the single point of contact but only available 50% of the time.

Criteria: Project Summary Recap Evaluator: Helen LaValley

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: Local Labor good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Overcame significant obstacles. 65% local labor.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Good examples of obstacles overcome. Great local labor participation.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: 65% local subs! Used VE to save cost. Example of obstacles and how they resolved them.

Criteria: Current and Projected Workload Evaluator: Helen LaValley

Comment: Middle school redesign/redev - Active campus, students staged in off-site buildings. 18-month deadline. Quality & Cost Control/Value Eng. Electrical feed running under bldgs and abandoned utilities including a buried fuel tank, which seeped into the water

Comment: Included list of current projects - most estimated to be complete by December of 2025.

Did not include projected workload. Did include info stating $90 mill under contract and a capacity of $150 mill.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: little vage on %.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Projects will all be finished before July `27. Clearly have $40 million available.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Many projects, but they will be complete in time for this project. Like how they showed their capacity.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Seems slightly heavy. Some jobs will be done this year 2024. They state 90 million under contract but can handle 150 million.

Comment: Has statement. Did include an easy-to-read timeline.

Did include info on site, scope, etc.no code or ordinance Did include communication plan

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good schedule.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Talked about site & plan very clearly (occupied, small area, changes that are necessary).

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Good understanding of site. Good layout of schedule and milestones. Good project management software.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Took time to understand site. Time line with how the project should run easy to follow.

Comment: partnership with HERZ Construction -minority, woman, veteran owned company.Committed to 30% min goal of SMDVW participation in each project. Included strategies on how to achieve

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: local mentorship good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Highly detailed in this section.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Good partnership with minority owned and veteran business.. Good plan too include local labor participation with a minimum goal

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Partnership with minority firm. HERZ Construction. Standards set in place.

Criteria: Certified Minority Firm Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: Not minority firm

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: o.k.

Comment: Not a minority firm

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: No

Criteria: Distance toDistrict Office Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: within 50 miles

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: o.k.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Provided by Ms. Russell.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Within 50 miles

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Within 50 miles

Respondent: Ajax Building Company, LLC

Comment: 300 public school projects and 49 HS projects. Florida Public School experience, varied projects, familiar with budgets ranging from 18 mill to 79 mill.Has done a replacement HS, which was occupied. Litigation -none and Insurance claims in the last 5 years indicated 6 injury or illness claims.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Worked on Eustis High. Familiar with high school projects.

Comment: Showed many past projects including letters of recommendations.

Many Florida public schools process. Size and scope of projects align with this project. Have worked on Eustis HS.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson

Comment: Only gave (4) past jobs. One is still ongoing. Good experience with High Schools.

Not much past jobs with Additions. Budgets vastly ranging. No litigations and 6 insurance claims.

Comment: Included Org chart, majority of work experience indicates public school experience and years with the company.Project engineer is new. This company does have several Lake County school projects they have done.One project team member lives in Lake County.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Eustis High School grad as principal-in-charge. Long tenures with company.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Long tenure.

Familiarity with Lake County. Large team.

Principal is a Eustis HS graduate.

Many of team members have worked in Lake County, familiar with procedures.

Comment: Team has good experience. All team members have school experience.

Principle in Charge graduated from EHS.

Have alot of LCSB Experience.

Criteria: Project Summary Recap Evaluator: Helen LaValley

Comment: This section seemed confusing. No specific timeline found, did discuss methodology.

Did not find any obstacles and how they resolved them.Did note an Ajax/Shifting Gears partnership but did not seem specific to local labor participation.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Project summary recap was not as in-depth as some other proposals.

Comment: A little light on detail and background on this subject. Project was built during Covid supply issues.

Comment: Used creative ways to have cost savings with VE options. Project was successful. Could of used al little more clearer info. Generic.

Criteria: Current and Projected Workload Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: Company seems to have the capacity to do the project with the projects listed.Projects under construction will be complete in January 2026.Most of the projects in design phase noted as complete in August 2026 and 2028.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: July 2027 deadline is not as busy for this company--their other projected projects all have different end times.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Large projects, but not too many. Many are scheduled to be completed or nearly completed by the time this project commences.

Comment: Projects in design is projected to finish in Aug 2026. All around same cost as this project. Don`t feel like one will take precedent.

Comment: Included a timeline, had proposed phasing plans, had a section about site knowledge, scope, and codes & ordinances.Did include communication and collaborative plan.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Strong familiarity with site.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Detailed approach, good technology. Very good knowledge of the site and local requirements.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Has good knowledge of the process. Planning is a little generic but knew the processes of LCSB and knowledge of codes.

Criteria: Local Vendor Mentorship/Partnership Program Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: No mentor program but did mention MWBE Action Program.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good on local labor.

Comment: High local labor. Lower MWBE participation.

Comment: Not much background on local mentorships, but proved a high percentage of local vendors are used on their project keeping the money within the community.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Good goals with great intent. Plan set in place. Missed the mark slightly.

Criteria: Certified Minority Firm Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: not minority firm

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: o.k.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Not a minority firm.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Not a minority.

Comment: No

Criteria: Distance toDistrict Office

Comment: within 50 miles

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: o.k.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Given by Ms. Russell.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Within 50 miles

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Within 50 miles

Respondent: The Whiting-Turner Contracting Company

Comment: Orlando - 130 staff, established 1993 3 Maryland schools, Middle- High-Tech Ctrall were occupied during construction.20- 85 mill budgets Litigation -none for Orlando office Insurance claims - 1, Verity noneAdditional info for Bldg. addition at

FSU.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: only three projects could have been 5.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Plenty of experience in construction; none locally in LCS. Occupied campuses, but postsecondary.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Large projects, many private.Large Orlando staff. No litigation for the Orlando office.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Good examples of past history and experience. No schools in FL listed.

Comment: Org Chart, Lake County Residents on team, the team indicated is 3 staff members.Florida projects, varies with nonpublic school projects.Project Manager has Orange County public school experience. She is a Verity emp.

Superintendent has minimal Orange County public schools experience.He is a Lake County resident.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: 10 people but only three profiles.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Varied experience; less in public ed than other companies.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Short tenures. Missing information on 2 team members. Lake county residents.

Comment: Some members reside in Lake County. Team members listed have great experience with occupied campus and tight sites. Only detailed info on 3 members.

Criteria: Project Summary Recap Evaluator: Helen LaValley

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good layout

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Highly technical.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Impressive project, very complex and they were able to complete on time and at budget.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Project completed on time and on budget. 46% local labor. Used VE to have a cost savings. Overcame obstacles

Criteria: Current and Projected Workload Evaluator: Helen LaValley

Comment: UF Engineering Lab, occupied site,2017-2020.It was a phased project. Included project methodology, quality/cost controls and value engineering info.Budget came in below budget.Challenges included hurricanes/weather events, materials cost increases, pandemic, Comment: Current workload of projects indicate last completion date of August 2025.

List of local projects was 6.It noted that none of the assigned team members were working on these projects with the exception of the 1st one which is estimated to be completed November 2024.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Availability before 2027. However, called "Lake Eustis HS."

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Many large projects, but staff for this project will be available.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Not so heavy of a load with a few projects wrapping up. Noted none of the team members where on those projects listed.

Comment: Included statement, local knowledge, scope and the challenges, mentioned preconstruction activities.had info about local ordinances and quality, communication process, project controls

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Somewhat generic.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Information was general and vague, not project specific.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Agree to meet time and requirements. Did some homework and had some knowledge of the site.

Criteria: Local Vendor Mentorship/Partnership Program Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: has a partnership with Verity Construction and Verity employees are part of the team. listed mentoring management

Evaluator: Rich Hatch

Comment: Very in-depth with local connections.

Comment: Current mentorship ongoing.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Plan in place. Partnered with another firm.

Criteria: Certified Minority Firm Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: Not a minority firm

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: o.k.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Not a minority firm.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Not a minority firm

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: No

Criteria: Distance toDistrict Office Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: within 50 miles

Evaluator: Rich Hatch

Comment: Provided by Ms. Russell.

Comment: within 50 miles

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Within 50 miles

Respondent: D&A Construction Group, Inc.

Criteria: Past Performance History Evaluator: Helen LaValley

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Smaller projects & not similar in work.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Large track record of completed projects in occupied schools, but mostly refurbishments. Scale of projectsmuch smaller.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson

Comment: founded in 2010-woman owned, 50 emps varied projects, public school experience, roof replacements/refurbish on 49 occupied campuses, campus wide reno/additions (3) 1 is HS, elementary upgrade, Budgets of 10-25 mill. on time/in budget.

Litigation - none, insurance claims - none, included additional info on historic bldg. experience, FPE extra participation, Lk Hills canopy

Comment: Occupied campus experience.

Addition experience.

Value of past jobs budgeted up to 10 million. Completed on time and budget. No litigation or insurance claims.

Criteria: Assigned Personnel Professional Qualifications Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: Org chart, staffing resources - has depth of staff. Public school experience, local experience.

Majority of team has over 10 years of experience. Team does include a Community Liaison.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Led by a woman. They have a community liaison.

Comment: Good experience, smaller staff. Has a community liaison.

Comment: Good experience. Like the fact they have a community liaison. All employees have been with the company some time 10 years or so.

Criteria: Project Summary Recap Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: Elementary School campus wide reno

- similar to Eustis HS project.18-month timeline, included quality and cost controls, value engineering.Not sure what obstacles were?

Mentioned local labor participation but did not specify any for this project.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: Good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Project was smaller than EHS.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Good information, did not specify any obstacles. Mentioned local participation.

Comment: Planning and logistics in great detail.

Saved money through thought out VE Options.

Would like to of seen what obstacles and solutions occurred on project.

Criteria: Current and Projected Workload Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: Had current projects with anticipated completion in 2024, one project August of 2025. No projected projects listed.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Projects will all be completed before 2027. This would be their biggest one.

Why are they 10% available with so few projects compared to other companies?

Comment: Did not show any projected projects, looks likethey have capacity too do the project. This project would be more than all of their other projects combined.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Light work load. Only 2 jobs listed. All others listed are continuing contracts.

Criteria: Willingness to Meet Time and Budget Requirements Evaluator: Helen LaValley

Comment: Has statement agreeing to schedule and budget.Did not include proposed timeline, no mention of knowledge of site, scope, codes, etc. No stakeholder communication or collaborative plan.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: not much info.

Comment: Barely any information.

Comment: No information on this section besides that they will meet schedule and budget.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Agree to meet time and requirements.

Criteria: Local Vendor Mentorship/Partnership Program Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: mentors a local construction company Dorado Quality Construction.

Does state that Dorado would be included in the project.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good info.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Referenced a local company partnership explicitly.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Mentioned a local construction company and they would be included in the project.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Good plan. Connected with smaller firm to help them gain experience.

Criteria: Certified Minority Firm

Comment: Minority firm

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Minority firm.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Is a minority firm.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Yes

Criteria: Distance toDistrict Office Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: within 50 miles

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: o.k.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Given by Ms. Russell.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: within 50 miles

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Within 50 miles

Respondent: Allstate Construction, Inc.

Comment: Florida Public School experience, varied projects, familiar with budgets ranging from 10 mill to 44 mill.Most of the projects listed were occupied campuses with exception of new elementary. Has done similar project of CR addition on occupied campus. (Leon Cty HS) Litigation - none and Insurance claims none.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: T-2 No Letters for wakulla, bay, walton. No lit or insurance.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Worked on projects of similar scope. Experience with Eustis Heights.

Comment: Good history, most in panhandle.

Similar in size and scope on an occupied campus.

No reference letters for a few of the projects.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Occupied campus experience. Cost of project similar to this size.

All listed as met budget but did not list cost specifics. How much under budget was it?

Comment: Majority of team assigned have public school experience some worked on projects with occupied campus. A few have under 5 years` experience. (Proj Mgr./Asst Proj Mgr./Asst Superintendent) Local residents on the team.

Included a chart of the pending and active projects.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Some local residents. Immediate availability for most people on project.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Local field supervision, good availability of team. Good experience in occupied schools.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Good school experience. Supers are all local residents. This may helpduring construction.

Comment: Did list start and completion dates.Methodology?Did have obstacles faced on previous project

- what they were and how resolved.Didn`t find local labor participation.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: No local labor.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Missing information on local labor.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: No mention of local labor participation. Overcame hurricane Idalia.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Listed project seem to go smoothly and with in budget.

Criteria: Current and Projected Workload

Comment: Several pending projects with no completion dates - noted as TBD.

Didn`t seem to be major projects - $71 mill.Current workload completion dates indicate 2024 & 2025.This would indicate capacity to do addition.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: no work load or status.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Lots of TBDs in timeline.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Large workload, many in panhandle. Lots of projects in preconstruction.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: A lot of work in the pre con phase. How will our job match up with the others. Work load seems quite extensive.

Comment: Included required information but did not find communication/collabora tive plan info.

Did mention historic reno projects and accessibility of their staff during the project.

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: vage on site.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Seemed "light on approach of how they would meet timeline."

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: Not much information on how this will be achieved. No communication plan.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: A little light on homework and approach. Short and sweet.

Comment:

Comprehensive mentorship program - did not mention any personnel from firms assigned to this project. Stated it could offer mentorship to smaller local firms.

(leveraging and offering)

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: good.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: No percentages included in this section.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: No real detail, or plan on how this will be achieved.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: Good plans in place. Didn`t provide percentages of local labor.

Criteria: Certified Minority Firm Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: not minority firm

Evaluator: Rich Hatch

Comment: Not a minority firm.

Evaluator: Daivd Patterson Comment: No

Criteria: Distance toDistrict Office Evaluator: Helen LaValley Comment: within 50 miles

Evaluator: Rich Hatch Comment: o.k.

Evaluator: Ben Phillis Comment: Given by Ms. Russell.

Evaluator: Ryan Bitzer Comment: within 50 miles

Comment: With in 50 miles downloadxls (52)