Appendix A Evaluation Forms.pdf

PDF 144 KB Posted

Attached to
2027-031M26 Building Stabilization, CMHHIP Buildings Ph1&
Solicitation number
RFQ1 IHHA 2027000001 2
Issued by
Pueblo County, Colorado

About this file

This document contains evaluation forms developed by the State of Colorado Office of the State Architect for the State Buildings Program to assess prequalified firms competing for architectural/engineering/consulting services on project 2027-031M26, Building Stabilization at CMHHIP Buildings Phase 1. The evaluation process consists of two stages: a prequalification submittal evaluation and an oral interview evaluation. Firms must meet minimum requirements, including submission of a letter from a surety and acknowledgment/attestation documents. The prequalification evaluation assesses six primary categories: project team qualifications and experience, firm/team capabilities and management structure, prior experience on similar projects, project approach including budget methodology and quality control, equity/diversity/inclusion initiatives, and work location considerations. Each category contains weighted criteria rated on a scale of 0 to 5, with 0 indicating missing information, 1 representing unacceptable qualifications, and 5 representing excellent qualifications.

The oral interview evaluation follows the prequalification stage and employs a similar rating methodology across five primary criteria: project team, team capabilities, prior experience, project approach, and work location. Both evaluation phases utilize a weighted scoring system using whole numbers, with evaluators calculating total scores by multiplying assigned weights by numerical ratings for each criterion. The document includes a ranking matrix for qualification-based selection that consolidates results from multiple evaluators to identify the most qualified firm. The evaluation structure emphasizes relevant experience on projects of similar scope and complexity, demonstrated success on comparable work, quality control and cost management methodologies, team structure and coordination, and knowledge of local labor and material markets specific to the Colorado project area.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
RFQ AE 2027-031M26.SL.docx DOCX document
Addendum 1.docx DOCX document
Appendix B Sample AE Agreement with T&C.pdf 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

RFQ1-App-A

STATE OF COLORADO

OFFICE OF THE STATE ARCHITECT

STATE BUILDINGS PROGRAM

APPENDIX A1: PREQUALIFICATION SUBMITTAL

EVALUATION FORM

Name of Firm:____________________________________________________________________ Name of Project: 2027-031M26 / Building Stabilization, CMHHIP Buildings Evaluator No:_______________________________________ Date:______________________________________________

RFQ REFERENCE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS Y ____ N ____

If the minimum requirements (including letter from surety) have not been met, specify the reason(s):

Acknowledgment and Attestation included: Y ____ N ____

INSTRUCTIONS:

1. Criteria: Agencies/Institutions are encouraged to include additional criteria that reflect unique characteristics of the project under each category to help determine the submitter’s overall qualifications.

2. Weights: Agency/Institutions to assign weights, using whole numbers, to all criteria on evaluation forms for inclusion into RFQ document and prior to evaluations.

3. Ratings: Evaluator to assess the strength of each firms qualifications and assign a numerical rating of 1 to 5 using whole numbers

4. Rating: 0 = Not provided, 1 = Unacceptable, 2 = Poor, 3 = Fair, 4 = Good, 5 = Excellent

5. Total Score: Includes the sum of all criteria.

1. PROJECT TEAM Weight X Rating = Score Qualifications and Relevant individual experience 5 x = Unique knowledge of key team members 4 X = Experience on projects as a team 5 X = Key staff involvement in project management and on-site presence

5 X

Time commitment of key staff 4 X = Qualifications and relevant subconsultant experience 5 X =

2. FIRM/TEAM CAPABILITIES Weight X Rating = Score Are the lines of authority and coordination clearly 5 X = defined?

Are essential management functions identified? 5 X = Are the functions effectively integrated? (e.g., subconsultants’ role delineated)? 4 X = Current and projected work load. 3 X =

3. PRIOR EXPERIENCE Weight X Rating = Score Experience of key staff and firm with projects of similar scope and complexity 5 X = Demonstrated success on past projects of similar scope and complexity

5 X

References 5 X =

4. PROJECT APPROACH Weight X Rating = Score Budget Methodology / Cost Control 4 X = Quality Control Methodology 5 X = Schedule 4 X =

5. EQUITY, DIVERSIY AND INCLUSION Weight X Rating = Score Incentives and promotion of diverse individuals 2 X = Partnering with SDVOSB or other disadvantaged businesses 2 X =

6. WORK LOCATION Weight X Rating = Score Location of prime and subconsultants 3 X = Familiarity with project area 2 X = Knowledge of local labor and material markets 5 X =

Total Score: _________

STATE OF COLORADO

OFFICE OF THE STATE ARCHITECT

STATE BUILDINGS PROGRAM

APPENDIX A2: ORAL INTERVIEW EVALUATION FORM

INSTRUCTIONS/EXAMPLE:

1. Criteria: Agencies/Institutions are encouraged to include additional criteria that reflect unique characteristics of the project under each category to help determine the submitter’s overall qualifications.

2. Weights: Agency/Institutions to assign weights, using whole numbers, to all criteria on evaluation forms for inclusion into RFQ document and prior to evaluations.

3. Ratings: Evaluator to assess the strength of each firms qualifications and assign a numerical rating of 0 to 5 with 5 being the highest rating. (Use whole numbers), 0 is missing information.

4. Total Score: Includes the sum of all criteria. Note: a passing score (as a percentage of the total points available) is optional and should be assigned by the agency/institution prior to evaluation.

CRITERIA Weight X Rating = Score

1. PROJECT TEAM

5 x =

2. TEAM CAPABILITIES

3. PRIOR EXPERIENCE

4. PROJECT APPROACH

5. WORK LOCATION

TOTAL SCORE

APPENDIX A3: PREQUALIFICATION AND ORAL

INTERVIEW RANKING MATRIX

QUALIFICATION BASED SELECTION

(Use this form to rank and determine the most qualified architectural/engineering/consulting services firm for both the preliminary and interview evaluations.)

FIRM NAME

QUALIFICATIONS

QUALS

SCORE

RANK

EVAL

#1

EVAL

#2

EVAL

#3

EVAL

#4

EVAL

#5

EVAL

#6

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .