Appendix A1 - AFB-CSBV Appendix A 2025.pdf
PDF 446 KB Posted
- Attached to
- FRCC-AFB-27-02-W Replace AHU and Exhaust
- Solicitation number
- IFB1 GJEA 2027000011 1
- Issued by
- Adams County, Weston CDP, Colorado
About this file
This document is an Evaluation of Qualifications Form and Qualifications and Bid Ranking Matrix for Competitive Sealed Best Value Bidding administered by the Colorado Office of the State Architect, State Buildings Program, for the project FRCC-AFB-27-02-W Replace AHU and Exhaust. The evaluation framework assesses bidder qualifications across eight primary criteria: Technical Approach to Project, Experience and Past Performance, Project Management Approach, Staffing Plan, Safety Plan and Safety Record, Job Standards, Availability and Use of Domestically Produced Goods, and Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. Each criterion is weighted and rated on a scale where 0 indicates not provided, 1 is unacceptable, 2 is poor, 3 is fair, 4 is good, and 5 is excellent. Bidders must submit documentation including strategic project approach summaries, examples of actual work products, detailed descriptions of subcontractor selection and management processes, firm composition and organizational charts, detailed staffing plans with time commitments, safety records from the preceding ten years, examples of quality workmanship, workforce development practices, training and apprenticeship programs, worker benefits information, domestically produced goods sourcing plans, and service-disabled veteran-owned or disadvantaged business participation details.
The evaluation utilizes a combined qualifications and bid scoring methodology wherein qualifications comprise 40 percent of the total evaluation score and the sealed bid comprises 60 percent. The maximum qualification score is standardized to 600 points, which converts to 40 points in the final ranking matrix, while the lowest submitted bid receives the maximum 60 points, with all other bids scored proportionally. The average qualification scores from multiple evaluators are calculated and converted to a percentage of the maximum points available. Final contractor ranking is determined by adding the average qualification score to the bid score, with the highest cumulative score identifying the most qualified and advantageous firm for the state. A passing score threshold must be established by the state prior to evaluation, and all evaluation forms must be completed consistently with predetermined weights applied uniformly across all bidders.
View the file
Other files
Show all 15
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
AFB-CSBV-App-A
STATE OF COLORADO
OFFICE OF THE STATE ARCHITECT
STATE BUILDINGS PROGRAM
EXHIBIT A1: EVALUATION OF QUALIFICATIONS
FORM: COMPETITIVE SEALED BEST VALUE BIDDING
Name of Firm:_____________________________________________________________________ Name of Project: __________________________________________________________________ Evaluator No:_______________________________________ Date:______________________________________________
AFB REFERENCE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS Y ____ N ____
If the minimum requirements (including letter from surety) have not been met, specify the reason(s):
INSTRUCTIONS:
1. Weights are to be assigned prior to evaluation and are to be consistent on all evaluation forms.
2. Use only whole numbers.
3. Rating: 0 = not provided, 1 = Unacceptable, 2 = Poor, 3 = Fair, 4 = Good, 5 = Excellent
4. Total score includes the sum total of all criteria.
5. A passing score (as a percentage of the total points available) is to be established by the state prior to evaluation.
1. TECHNICAL APPROACH TO PROJECT Weight X Rating = Score ◻ Provide a strategic project approach summary discussing how your firm will provide successful Construction Contracting Services for this project. Include specific examples (1-2 page excerpts) of actual products (estimates, progress reports, schedules, constructability reviews, value engineering studies, forms, etc.). x =
◻ Provide a detailed description of how your firm will select qualified sub-contractors and manage them effectively on this project.
Weight
X
Rating
Score
2. EXPERIENCE, PAST PERFORMANCE AND EXPERTISE Weight X Rating = Score ◻ Provide a description of successful prior construction contracts, including performance in the areas of cost, quality control, schedule, compliance with plans and specifications and adherence to applicable laws and regulations as performed by your firm and by your subcontractors. x =
3. PROJECT MANAGEMENT APPROACH Weight X Rating = Score ◻ Provide a description of the composition and management structure of your firm. Identify the firm’s roles and responsibilities and relevant technical expertise and experience of the key management personnel that will be used on this project. Provide a description and separate graphic organizational chart complete with working titles identifying the lines of authority, responsibility and coordination between your firm and your subcontractors and, ◻ Describe the proposed project schedule, quality control program, financial resources, equipment to be used on this project and its current location, and any other information or resources that demonstrates your firm’s competency to perform this work
Weight
X
Rating
Score
4. STAFFING PLAN Weight X Rating = Score ◻ Provide a detailed staffing plan of key management personnel to be assigned to this project from your firm and your subcontractors and identify the time commitments and all current office locations. x =
5. SAFETY PLAN AND SAFETY RECORD Weight X Rating = Score ◻ Describe your firm’s safety program and provide your firms’ safety record over the last ten years. x =
6. JOB STANDARDS Weight X Rating = Score
◻ Demonstrate on past projects examples how a high quality of workmanship was achieved and industry standards of care were achieved and, X =
◻ Describe the firm’s method of personnel procurement, employment of Colorado workers, work force development and long-term career opportunities of workers and, Weight
X
Rating
Score
◻ Describe the firm’s availability of training programs, including apprenticeships approved by the United States Department of Labor and, Weight
X
Rating
Score
◻ Describe the benefits provided to workers, including healthcare and defined benefit or defined contribution retirement benefits, and whether the firm pays industry-standard wages.
Weight
X
Rating
Score
7. AVAILABILITY AND USE OF DOMESTICALLY PRODUCED GOODS Weight X Rating = Score ◻ Describe how your firm intends to use domestically produced iron, steel, and related manufactured goods in this project.
x
8. EQUITY, DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION Weight X Rating = Score ◻ Describe what Services under the contract or any Subcontract will be performed by a Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business or historically disadvantaged businesses x =
Weight X Rating = Score
Total Score: _________
STATE OF COLORADO
OFFICE OF THE STATE ARCHITECT
STATE BUILDINGS PROGRAM
EXHIBIT A2: QUALIFICATIONS AND BID RANKING
MATRIX: COMPETITIVE SEALED BEST VALUE
BIDDING
INSTRUCTIONS/EXAMPLE:
1. QUALIFICATIONS 40% / BID 60%
2. Insert total score from each evaluator's SUBMITTAL review.
3. Add all evaluators’ total scores and divide by the number of evaluators to determine the average score for each firm’s qualifications.
4. The maximum score for qualifications on the evaluation form is equivalent to 40 points and is equivalent to the maximum points available for qualifications. Therefore, each firm’s score is determined as a percentage of the maximum points available. To score each average qualification score, use the example formula.
5. Assume the highest score is 600.
SCORING OF QUALIFICATIONS
FIRM B: 600 X 40 points = 40 points
FIRM C: 500 X 40 points = 33.33 points
FIRM A: 400 X40 points = 26.66 points
6. Determine score for each firm’s sealed Bid with the lowest fee being equivalent to a maximum score of 60 points. To score each Bid, use the example formula.
7. Assume the lowest Bid was $100,000.
SCORING OF BIDS
FIRM A: $100,000 X 60 points = 60 points $100,000
FIRM B: $100,000 X 60 points = 48 points $125,000
FIRM C: $100,000 X 60 points = 39.99 points $150,000
8. Add the average qualification score to the Bid score to determine cumulative qualifications and fee score.
9. Numerically rank all firms with the highest scoring firm being the most qualified and advantageous to the state.
FIRM
QUALIFICATIONS
AVE.
QUALS
SCORE
BID
& BID
RANK
EVAL
#1
EVA
L #2
EVA
L #3
EVA
L #4
EVA
L #5
EVA
L #6
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .