Award Information
36 KB Posted
- Attached to
- RFP 2022-05 Pine Needle Park Playground
- Solicitation number
- 2022-05-RFP
- Issued by
- Henry County, Georgia
About this file
This is an Award Information document from the City of Perry, Georgia, detailing the evaluation results for RFP 2022-05 Pine Needle Park Playground. The project involves the design and construction of an accessible playground at Pine Needle Park (1020 Country Club Road, Perry, GA) suitable for children ages two to ten years old, with capacity for approximately fifty age-appropriate children. The proposal evaluation was conducted by a selection committee using a weighted rubric assessing four primary criteria: equitable usage for ages two to ten (30-point weight), physical and sensory adaptive uses for disabled children (30-point weight), demonstrated experience with similar projects (10-point weight), and total price relative to the original $50,000 budget (30-point weight). A non-mandatory pre-bid meeting was held on June 24, 2022, at 9:30 AM at the site location.
Four proposals were submitted and evaluated: Summation Miracle scored highest at 83.94 points with a bid of $52,388.55; Playsouth scored 79.67 points at $49,999.00; DRP/Gametime scored 74.82 points at $62,508.47; and Bliss scored lowest at 60.33 points at $168,000.00. Miracle received the highest aggregated scores from evaluators Mitchell Worthington, Robert Smith, and Ansley Fitzner across equitable usage (24.00 weighted points) and physical and sensory adaptive uses (24.00 weighted points), though Playsouth met the original budget constraint at nearly $50,000 and received a perfect 10-point price score. Bliss, despite scoring perfectly on equitable usage criteria, received a zero price score due to its bid of $168,000.00, significantly exceeding the original budget threshold.
Text of this file
Summation
| Miracle | 83.94 |
| Playsouth | 79.67 |
| DRP/Gametime | 74.82 |
| Bliss | 60.33 |
Playsouth
| PROPOSAL REVIEW RUBRIC | |||||||||
| The Owner has judged each major category of criteria to be worth a maximum of 10 points and "weighted" as identified on this Proposal Review Rubric. | |||||||||
| Offeror: | Playsouth | Evaluator: | Aggregated | ||||||
| RFQ Criteria | Evaluation Criterion | Score Range | Score | Weight Factor | Weighted Score | Part Level | |||
| Mitchell Worthington | Robert Smith | Ansley Fitzner | |||||||
| Provides for equitable usage for ages two (2) to ten (10) years | Range 0-10 points |
*Equitable usage provided = 10
| *Age group omitted from usage = 0 | 7.00 | 5.00 | 9.00 | 7.00 | 30 | 21.00 |
| Provides for physical & sensory adaptive uses | Range 0-10 points | |||||
| *Physical/Sensory adaptive uses provided = 10 *Not Provided = 0 | 7.00 | 7.00 | 7.00 | 7.00 | 30 | 21.00 |
| Demonstrated experience with similar projects | Range 0-10 points | |||||
| Extensive= 10/ No experience =0 | 8.00 | 8.00 | 7.00 | 7.67 | 10 | 7.67 |
| Total Price¥ | Range 0-10 points |
Total price of ≤ $50k (original budget) = 10 Price > $50k results in relative point deduction 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 30 30.00
| GRAND TOTAL SCORE: | 79.67 | |
| * Evaluator is given discretion to give any score between 0 & 10. Evaluator should consider all proposals submitted and score each proposal relative to all proposals submitted . |
¥ Total Price score will be calculated by the Finance Department and held constant across each evaluator's scorecard/rubric.
Miralce
| PROPOSAL REVIEW RUBRIC | |||||||||
| The Owner has judged each major category of criteria to be worth a maximum of 10 points and "weighted" as identified on this Proposal Review Rubric. | |||||||||
| Offeror: | Miracle | Evaluator: | Aggregated | ||||||
| RFQ Criteria | Evaluation Criterion | Score Range | Score | Weight Factor | Weighted Score | Part Level | |||
| Mitchell Worthington | Robert Smith | Ansley Fitzner | |||||||
| Provides for equitable usage for ages two (2) to ten (10) years | Range 0-10 points |
*Equitable usage provided = 10
| *Age group omitted from usage = 0 | 8.00 | 9.00 | 7.00 | 8.00 | 30 | 24.00 |
| Provides for physical & sensory adaptive uses | Range 0-10 points | |||||
| *Physical/Sensory adaptive uses provided = 10 *Not Provided = 0 | 8.00 | 8.00 | 8.00 | 8.00 | 30 | 24.00 |
| Demonstrated experience with similar projects | Range 0-10 points | |||||
| Extensive= 10/ No experience =0 | 8.00 | 9.00 | 8.00 | 8.33 | 10 | 8.33 |
| Total Price¥ | Range 0-10 points |
Total price of ≤ $50k (original budget) = 10 Price > $50k results in relative point deduction 9.20 9.20 9.20 9.20 30 27.61
| GRAND TOTAL SCORE: | 83.94 | |
| * Evaluator is given discretion to give any score between 0 & 10. Evaluator should consider all proposals submitted and score each proposal relative to all proposals submitted . |
¥ Total Price score will be calculated by the Finance Department and held constant across each evaluator's scorecard/rubric.
DRP_Gametime
| PROPOSAL REVIEW RUBRIC | |||||||||
| The Owner has judged each major category of criteria to be worth a maximum of 10 points and "weighted" as identified on this Proposal Review Rubric. | |||||||||
| Offeror: | DRP/Gametime | Evaluator: | Aggregated | ||||||
| RFQ Criteria | Evaluation Criterion | Score Range | Score | Weight Factor | Weighted Score | Part Level | |||
| Mitchell Worthington | Robert Smith | Ansley Fitzner | |||||||
| Provides for equitable usage for ages two (2) to ten (10) years | Range 0-10 points |
*Equitable usage provided = 10
| *Age group omitted from usage = 0 | 8.00 | 9.00 | 7.00 | 8.00 | 30 | 24.00 |
| Provides for physical & sensory adaptive uses | Range 0-10 points | |||||
| *Physical/Sensory adaptive uses provided = 10 *Not Provided = 0 | 8.00 | 8.00 | 9.00 | 8.33 | 30 | 25.00 |
| Demonstrated experience with similar projects | Range 0-10 points | |||||
| Extensive= 10/ No experience =0 | 8.00 | 9.00 | 8.00 | 8.33 | 10 | 8.33 |
| Total Price¥ | Range 0-10 points |
Total price of ≤ $50k (original budget) = 10 Price > $50k results in relative point deduction 5.83 5.83 5.83 5.83 30 17.49
| GRAND TOTAL SCORE: | 74.82 | |
| * Evaluator is given discretion to give any score between 0 & 10. Evaluator should consider all proposals submitted and score each proposal relative to all proposals submitted . |
¥ Total Price score will be calculated by the Finance Department and held constant across each evaluator's scorecard/rubric.
Bliss
| PROPOSAL REVIEW RUBRIC | |||||||||
| The Owner has judged each major category of criteria to be worth a maximum of 10 points and "weighted" as identified on this Proposal Review Rubric. | |||||||||
| Offeror: | Bliss | Evaluator: | Aggregated | ||||||
| RFQ Criteria | Evaluation Criterion | Score Range | Score | Weight Factor | Weighted Score | Part Level | |||
| Mitchell Worthington | Robert Smith | Ansley Fitzner | |||||||
| Provides for equitable usage for ages two (2) to ten (10) years | Range 0-10 points |
*Equitable usage provided = 10
| *Age group omitted from usage = 0 | 10.00 | 10.00 | 10.00 | 10.00 | 30 | 30.00 |
| Provides for physical & sensory adaptive uses | Range 0-10 points | |||||
| *Physical/Sensory adaptive uses provided = 10 *Not Provided = 0 | 7.00 | 6.00 | 9.00 | 7.33 | 30 | 22.00 |
| Demonstrated experience with similar projects | Range 0-10 points | |||||
| Extensive= 10/ No experience =0 | 8.00 | 9.00 | 8.00 | 8.33 | 10 | 8.33 |
| Total Price¥ | Range 0-10 points |
Total price of ≤ $50k (original budget) = 10 Price > $50k results in relative point deduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30 0.00
| GRAND TOTAL SCORE: | 60.33 | |
| * Evaluator is given discretion to give any score between 0 & 10. Evaluator should consider all proposals submitted and score each proposal relative to all proposals submitted . |
¥ Total Price score will be calculated by the Finance Department and held constant across each evaluator's scorecard/rubric.
Pricing
| Original Budget | $ 50,000.00 | ||
| Possible Points | 30 | ||
| Price | Score | 1-10 Score | |
| Playsouth | $ 49,999.00 | 30.00 | 10 |
| Miracle | $ 52,388.55 | 27.61 | 9.2038166667 |
| DRP/Gametime | $ 62,508.47 | 17.49 | 5.83051 |
| Bliss | $ 168,000.00 | 0.00 | 0 |
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| RFP 2022-05 Pine Needle Park | — | |
| Addendum No. 1 Change Due Date | — |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .