Rev. 11/2024

1655 W. Jackson St., MD 100P Phoenix, AZ 85007

Executive Summary

BPM007068

On Call Transit Consultant Services

Pre-Solicitation Activities

The solicitation package (including: Procurement Request form and Scope of Work) was received from Multimodal Planning Division (MPD) on July 17, 2025. In accordance with A.R.S. §41-2546, agency spend and usage reports were analyzed to identify that estimated requirements are reasonable and continuing during the term of the anticipated contract. It is expected that a multi-term contract will serve the best interest of the State by encouraging competition.

Solicitation Process

On August 7, 2025, electronic notification of the solicitation was sent to 104 prospective suppliers who were registered on Arizona Procurement Portal (APP) for Commodity Codes: 81141602 Transit Analysis. An email notification was also sent to 0 suppliers identified on the additional supplier list.

The solicitation was formally advertised in the Arizona Republic in accordance with A.R.S. § 41- 2534(C) and A.A.C. R2-7-C301(B).

A pre-offer conference was conducted on August 20, 2025 at Virtual. The conference was attended by ten (10) people representing the Department and twenty-four (24) people representing sixteen (16) suppliers.

Evaluation Process

Eleven (11) responses were received, opened and recorded in APP on September 10, 2025 at 3:01 P.M in accordance with A.R.S. § 41-2534(D) and A.A.C. R2-7-C306. Offers were evaluated in accordance with A.R.S. § 41-2534 and A.A.C. R2-7-C316 by the ADOT Evaluation Committee.

Responses were received from:

• AECOM Technical Services Inc.

• Civtech Inc.

• HDR Engineering Inc.

• Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.

• KFH Group

• Kimley-Horn and Associates Inc.

• Kittelson and Associates Inc.

• LSC Transportation Consultants Inc.

• Mapsol Geo Inc.

• Parametrix Inc.

• RLS & Associates Inc.

Docusign Envelope ID: F3751C31-3E44-4CC2-B34A-0D1F2A52D22C

Rev. 03/2025

The following were determined not susceptible for award in accordance with A.R.S. § 41-2534 and A.A.C. R2-7-C311:

• Mapsol Geo. Inc.

An ADOT Evaluation Committee was assembled, comprised of individuals determined to have the qualifications and expertise needed who participated in the evaluation. Committee members were:

• Tina Munoz from ADOT

• Jesse Zargoza from ADOT

• Jill Dusenberry from ADOT

The following people participated in the evaluation as non-voting technical experts:

• Sally Palmer from ADOT

The Procurement Officer facilitated the evaluation process as a non-voting committee member. The committee evaluations were concluded on November 12, 2025.

Recommendation for Award

In accordance with A.R.S. § 41-2533(G) and A.A.C. R2-7-B314 the solicitation shall be awarded to the responsible offeror whose offer is determined to be most advantageous to the state based on the evaluation factors set forth in the solicitation. The ADOT Procurement Officer recommends the following award:

Supplier Name

Disciplines

D-

D-

D-3 D-4 D-5 D-6

AECOM Technical Services Inc. ☒ ☒ ☒ ☒ ☒ ☒

Civtech Inc. ☒ ☒ ☒ ☐ ☒ ☐

HDR Engineering Inc. ☒ ☒ ☒ ☒ ☒ ☒

Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. ☒ ☒ ☒ ☐ ☒ ☒

KFH Group ☒ ☒ ☒ ☐ ☐ ☒

Kimley-Horn and Associates Inc. ☒ ☒ ☒ ☐ ☒ ☒

Kittelson and Associates Inc. ☒ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

LSC Transportation Consultants Inc. ☒ ☒ ☒ ☐ ☐ ☐

Parametrix Inc. ☒ ☒ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

RLS & Associates Inc. ☒ ☒ ☒ ☒ ☒ ☒

Date:

Kelly Greene Procurement Officer

Docusign Envelope ID: F3751C31-3E44-4CC2-B34A-0D1F2A52D22C

11/19/2025

Rating Scale Formula used:

5 = 100 4.5 = 90 Rating x Weight = Weighted Score 4 = 80 3.5 = 70 3 = 60 2.5 = 50 2 = 40 1.5 = 30 1 = 20 0.5 = 10

COMMITTEE EVALUATION SCORES 0 = 0

Firm Name Total Score

Evaluation Criteria Weight Rating Weighted

Score Comment Rating

Weighted Score

Comment Rating Weighted

Score Comment Rating

Weighted Score

Comment Rating Weighted

Score Comment Rating

Weighted Score

Comment Rating Weighted

Score Comment Rating

Weighted Score

Comment Rating Weighted

Score Comment Rating

Weighted Score

Comment

1. Proposal Requirements for Firm Qualifications and Experience 50.00% Firm Experience- (A separate response is required for each Discipline that the Offeror is proposing on) Provide a document, no longer than six (6) pages per Discipline, describing the firm's experience and subcontractor’s providing services described in the scope of work. Include examples of projects, relating each to the discipline's categories of work.

Each document must first reference the Discipline Number and Title and area(s) of expertise within the discipline. Provide an explanation that speaks specifically to the discipline being proposed, describing how the Offeror is qualified to provide services in the discipline, which specific services offeror is qualified to provide from the categories of work indicated in the Scope, and precisely how Offeror expects to fulfill the Department’s needs. You may also list transit-specific categories of work not mentioned in the Scope as long as they are relevant to the Discipline and are not located as a category of work in another Discipline. If not proposing under a Discipline, attach a single page with the discipline name and number, indicating "Not Proposed".

40.00%

4 32.00

The firm has 65+ years relevant experience. The Offer provided a detailed matrix to demonstrate the various relevant transit project examples. Most experience demonstrated is in urban transit, limited experience in rural transit.

Demonstrated experience with other State transit studies. It is unclear as to the dates of the examples provided.

4 32.00

The firm has 23+ years relevant experience. The Offer provided a detailed matrix to demonstrate the various relevant transit project examples. Most experience demonstrated is in urban transit, limited experience in rural transit.

Firm demonstrated understanding and strategy for providing services under this scope including quality assurance/quality control (qa/qc) strategies.

4 32.00

The firm has 66+ years relevant experience. The Offer provided a detailed matrix to demonstrate the various relevant transit project examples. Most experience demonstrated is in urban transit, limited experience in rural transit.

4.5 36.00

The firm has 59+ years relevant experience. The Offer provided a detailed matrix to demonstrate the various relevant transit project examples. Firm demonstrated experience with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) programs relevant to the scope of work.

4 32.00

The firm has 30+ years relevant experience. A graphic was provided to demonstrate firm specialties. Firm has a focus on transit services specifically, including urban, small urban and rural, and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) programs. While projects were referenced in general, details of the firm's role in the project examples were not provided.

4.5 36.00

The firm has 32+ years relevant experience. The Offeror provided multiple examples of transit projects, many of them rural. Offeror has experience working with ADOT sub recipients on rural projects.

4.5 36.00

The firm has 35+ years relevant experience. The Offer provided a detailed matrix to demonstrate the various relevant transit project examples. Offeror has experience working with ADOT sub recipients on rural projects.

4.5 36.00

The firm has 40+ years relevant experience. The Offer provided a detailed matrix to demonstrate the various relevant transit project examples. Firm has worked on many rural transit projects and had experience working with multiple state Department of Transportations (DOT's) in transit projects.

4.5 36.00

The firm has 56+ years relevant experience. Offeror has experience working with an ADOT sub recipient and relevant FTA programs.

4.5 36.00

The firm has 37+ years relevant experience. Offeror has experience working with relevant FTA programs and state DOT's. Urban and rural experience, multiple rural examples provided.

Organizational Chart- (A separate response is required for each Discipline that the Offeror is proposing on) Attach a single one (1) page document per Discipline that provides a complete organizational chart (Org Chart). Each chart shall indicate each team member’s name, job title, firm name, and designation as SubContractor or Prime for each team member who will be performing work under that discipline. Please indicate which person will be the primary contact with each firm (Prime and SubContractors). The organizational chart should show relationships within the team as well. If not proposing under a Discipline, attach a single page with the discipline name and number, indicating "Not Proposed".

10.00%

4 8.00

The org chart provided met most requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

3.5 7.00

The org chart provided met some requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

While all firm names were listed it did not differentiate between which firms were the prime or sub. Also, a primary contact within each firm was not identified.

3.5 7.00

The org chart provided met some requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

Additionally the prime contact was not identified nor was there a differentiation between prime or sub firms (if any). There is a discrepancy between team members on org chart and those proposed as key personnel.

4.5 9.00

Org chart met all requirements.

3.5 7.00

The org chart provided met some requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

Additionally the prime contact was not identified nor was there a differentiation between prime or sub firms (if any).

4 8.00

The org chart provided met most requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

4 8.00

The org chart provided met most requirements but did not differentiate between prime or sub firms (if any).

4 8.00

The org chart provided met most requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

3.5 7.00

The org chart provided met some requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

Additionally the prime contact was not identified nor was there a differentiation between prime or sub firms (if any).

3.5 7.00

The org chart provided met some requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

Additionally the prime contact was not identified nor was there a differentiation between prime or sub firms (if any). There is a discrepancy between team members on org chart and those proposed as key personnel.

2. Proposal Requirements for Key Personnel Qualifications and Experience 40.00% Project Manager (PM) Resume- (A separate response is required for each Discipline that the Offeror is proposing on) Multiple project managers may be proposed for each Discipline. Provide a one (1) page resume per PM per Discipline to identify who will actively manage projects and serve as the primary point of contact for project teams and for the Department Project Manager. The submitter shall:

● Present qualifications and experience in managing projects relevant to the scope;

● Present qualifications and experience as a subject matter expert relevant to the project objectives;

● Explain any quality control practices commonly used and specifically how the project manager will ensure that each task assignment / quoted project will meet stated objectives and how managed to assure each to be delivered within scope, budget, and schedule.

If multiple PM’s are being proposed, submit one (1) combined PDF document of the resumes per Discipline.

If not proposing under a Discipline, attach a single page with the discipline name and number, indicating "Not Proposed".

25.00%

4 20.00

The Offeror provided resumes for three

(3) PM's. Each PM had multiple years experience relevant to the solicitation and multiple years with the firm. While the resumes were strong in urban transit, there were limited examples of rural transit experience. Additionally, the quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget were noted but details were not provided.

4 20.00

The proposed PM has multiple years experience in transit and cited examples in rural and urban studies. PM's quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget were detailed. PM has a manual to guide through qa/qc procedures.

3.5 17.50

The proposed PM has multiple years experience in transit, but the examples did not seem to include rural transit. The quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget were not addressed.

4 20.00

The proposed PM has multiple years experience in transit, but the examples did not seem to include rural transit. PM's quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget were provided.

3.5 17.50

Three proposed PM resumes were submitted but it was unclear if all were PM's as two of the resumes submitted are listed as principals on the org chart. The proposed PM's have multiple years experience in transit, one PM has many rural transit examples but it is unclear if the other PM's examples are urban or rural. The quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget while mentioned, were not addressed.

4 20.00

The proposed PM has multiple years experience in transit, but the examples did not include details. The quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget while mentioned, were not addressed.

4.5 22.50

The two proposed PM's have multiple years experience in transit and cited examples in rural and urban studies. Both have experience working with ADOT sub recipients. The PM's quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget were detailed.

4 20.00

The proposed PM has multiple years experience in transit, but it was unclear if the examples were urban or rural. The quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget were not addressed.

4 20.00

The proposed PM has multiple years experience in transit, the examples were both urban or rural. PM has experience with FTA programs. The quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget were not addressed.

4.5 22.50

The proposed PM has multiple years experience in transit, urban and rural. The PM's quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget were detailed.

Key Personnel Bios (excluding PM’s) (A separate response is required for each Discipline that the Offeror is proposing on) In one (1) combined PDF document per Discipline, and on no more than one half (1/2) page per key team member (excluding the PMs), and at a maximum of ten (10) pages, summarize the experience and qualifications of the entire team, including sub-contractors for the team proposed under each Discipline. Clearly indicate on the PDF which Discipline it is being proposed for.

Present qualifications and experience in performing the discipline's described activities.

Include technical education/training, special experience, certifications, licenses and memberships in professional associations, societies or boards.

Include relevant, recent (no older than five (5) years past) project experience indicating the role performed within each project, especially performing work of a similar or related nature for the public sector. Please indicate "No recent experience" or "None" if the team has no experience.

If not proposing under a Discipline, attach a single page with the discipline name and number indicating "Not Proposed".

15.00%

4 12.00

The Offeror provided a matrix to outline the staff's skills and experience. Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work although staff experience was limited on rural projects. Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements.

4 12.00

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, multiple transit examples were presented although not all examples were transit related. Some rural transit experience identified. Not all staff listed years of experience. Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements.

4 12.00

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, multiple transit examples were presented, one team member had rural experience. Resumes do not align with the org chart.

Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements.

4 12.00

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements. Not all proposed staff had transit experience and it was unclear if there was any rural transit experience within the team.

3.5 10.50

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, some rural transit experience identified. Not all staff listed years of experience. Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were not provided.

4 12.00

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, some rural transit and urban transit experience identified.

Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements.

4 12.00

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, some rural transit and urban transit experience identified.

Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements.

4 12.00

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, some rural transit and urban transit experience identified.

Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements.

4.5 13.50

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, some rural transit and urban transit experience identified. Staff have experience with FTA programs.

Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements.

4 12.00

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, some rural transit and urban transit experience identified. Staff have experience with FTA programs.

Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements.There is a discrepancy between team members on org chart and those proposed as key personnel.

4. Proposal Requirements for Price 10.00% 48 4.80 58 5.80 52 5.20 59 5.90 69 6.90 50 5.00 75 7.50 100 10.00 50 5.00 100 10.00

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

qu

Tina Munoz, Transit Group Manager, MPD Date

Jesse Zargoza, Transit Program Manager, MPD Date

Jill Dusenberry, Transit Consultant, MPD Date

Evaluation Committee - D-1 Evaluation Report

RFP NO. BPM007068

Solicitation Title: On Call Transit Consultation Services

AECOM

76.80

The members of the evaluation committee have completed their review of the proposals, and any subsequent best and final offers, received in response to the ADOT solicitation referenced above, and have reached consensus. Based on the detailed evaluation of the individual proposals, it would be in the best interest of the State, to request BAFO from the following firms:

As a participating member of the evaluation committee, I agree with the information provided in this document and concur that the consensus scoring is a complete and accurate reflection of the committee's agreement regarding the evaluation of the proposals received.

76.80 Civtech Jacobs

82.90

HDR

AECOM Technical Services Inc., Civtech Inc., HDR Engineering Inc., Jacobs Engineering Group Inc., KFH Group, Kimley-Horn and Associates Inc., Kittelson and Associates, LSC Transportation Consultants Inc., Parametrix Inc., and RSL and Associates Inc.

RLS & Associates 87.5073.70

Kimley-Horn 81.00

KFH Group 73.90

Kittelson and Associates 86.00

LSC Transportation 86.00

Parametrix 81.50

Docusign Envelope ID: 5B95CB80-A5A0-4783-ABCA-22E8416472BE

10/8/2025

10/8/2025

4 = 80 3.5 = 70 3 = 60 2.5 = 50 2 = 40 1.5 = 30 1 = 20 0.5 = 10

COMMITTEE EVALUATION SCORES 0 = 0

Firm Name Total Score

Evaluation Criteria Weight Rating Weighted

Score Comment Rating

Weighted Score

Comment Rating Weighted

Score Comment Rating

Weighted Score

Comment Rating Weighted

Score Comment Rating

Weighted Score

Comment Rating Weighted

Score Comment Rating

Weighted Score

Comment Rating Weighted

Score Comment

1. Proposal Requirements for Firm Qualifications and Experience 50.00% Firm Experience- (A separate response is required for each Discipline that the Offeror is proposing on) Provide a document, no longer than six (6) pages per Discipline, describing the firm's experience and subcontractor’s providing services described in the scope of work. Include examples of projects, relating each to the discipline's categories of work.

Each document must first reference the Discipline Number and Title and area(s) of expertise within the discipline. Provide an explanation that speaks specifically to the discipline being proposed, describing how the Offeror is qualified to provide services in the discipline, which specific services offeror is qualified to provide from the categories of work indicated in the Scope, and precisely how Offeror expects to fulfill the Department’s needs. You may also list transit-specific categories of work not mentioned in the Scope as long as they are relevant to the Discipline and are not located as a category of work in another Discipline. If not proposing under a Discipline, attach a single page with the discipline name and number, indicating "Not Proposed".

40.00%

4 32.00

The firm has 65+ years relevant experience. The Offer provided a detailed matrix to demonstrate the various relevant transit project examples. Demonstrated experience with FTA and State transit studies. It is unclear as to the dates of the examples provided.

4 32.00

The firm has 23+ years relevant experience. The Offer provided a detailed matrix to demonstrate the various relevant transit project examples. Demonstrated experience in rural transit, FTA programs and experience working with ADOT sub recipients. Firm demonstrated understanding and strategy for providing services under this scope including qa/qc strategies.

4 32.00

The firm has 66+ years relevant experience. The Offer provided a detailed matrix to demonstrate the various relevant transit project examples. Most experience demonstrated is in urban transit, limited experience in rural transit.

4.5 36.00

The firm has 59+ years relevant experience. The Offer provided a detailed matrix to demonstrate the various relevant transit project examples. Firm demonstrated experience with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) programs relevant to the scope of work and has worked with four Arizona Department of Transportations (ADOT) sub recipients.

4 32.00

The firm has 30+ years relevant experience. A graphic was provided to demonstrate firm specialties. Firm has a focus on transit services specifically, including urban, small urban and rural, transit planning, tribal, and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) programs. Details of project examples were limited.

4.5 36.00

The firm has 32+ years relevant experience. The Offeror provided multiple examples of transit projects, many of them rural. Offeror has experience working with multiple ADOT sub recipients on rural projects.

4.5 36.00

The firm has 40+ years relevant experience. The Offer provided a detailed matrix to demonstrate the various relevant transit project examples. Firm has worked on many rural transit projects and had experience working with multiple state DOT's in transit projects.

4.5 36.00

The firm has 56+ years relevant experience. Offeror has experience working with an ADOT sub recipient and relevant FTA programs, rural, tribal, and other state DOT's.

4.5 36.00

The firm has 37+ years relevant experience and specializes in public transit. Offeror has experience working with relevant FTA programs and state DOT's. Urban and rural experience, multiple rural examples provided.

Organizational Chart- (A separate response is required for each Discipline that the Offeror is proposing on) Attach a single one (1) page document per Discipline that provides a complete organizational chart (Org Chart). Each chart shall indicate each team member’s name, job title, firm name, and designation as SubContractor or Prime for each team member who will be performing work under that discipline. Please indicate which person will be the primary contact with each firm (Prime and SubContractors). The organizational chart should show relationships within the team as well. If not proposing under a Discipline, attach a single page with the discipline name and number, indicating "Not Proposed".

10.00%

4 8.00

The org chart provided met most requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

3.5 7.00

The org chart provided met some requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

While all firm names were listed it did not differentiate between which firms were the prime or sub. Also, a primary contact within each firm was not identified.

3.5 7.00

The org chart provided met some requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

Additionally the prime contact was not identified nor was there a differentiation between prime or sub firms (if any). There is a discrepancy between team members on org chart and those proposed as key personnel.

3.5 7.00

The org chart provided met some requirements but the prime contact was not identified nor was there a differentiation between prime or sub firms (if any).

3.5 7.00

The org chart provided met some requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

Additionally the prime contact was not identified nor was there a differentiation between prime or sub firms (if any).

4 8.00

The org chart provided met some requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

4 8.00

The org chart provided met most requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

3.5 7.00

The org chart provided met some requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

Additionally the prime contact was not identified nor was there a differentiation between prime or sub firms (if any).

3.5 7.00

The org chart provided met some requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

Additionally the prime contact was not identified nor was there a differentiation between prime or sub firms (if any). There is a discrepancy between team members on org chart and those proposed as key personnel.

2. Proposal Requirements for Key Personnel Qualifications and Experience 40.00% Project Manager (PM) Resume- (A separate response is required for each Discipline that the Offeror is proposing on) Multiple project managers may be proposed for each Discipline. Provide a one (1) page resume per PM per Discipline to identify who will actively manage projects and serve as the primary point of contact for project teams and for the Department Project Manager. The submitter shall:

● Present qualifications and experience in managing projects relevant to the scope;

● Present qualifications and experience as a subject matter expert relevant to the project objectives;

● Explain any quality control practices commonly used and specifically how the project manager will ensure that each task assignment / quoted project will meet stated objectives and how managed to assure each to be delivered within scope, budget, and schedule.

If multiple PM’s are being proposed, submit one (1) combined PDF document of the resumes per Discipline.

If not proposing under a Discipline, attach a single page with the discipline name and number, indicating "Not Proposed".

25.00%

4 20.00

The Offeror provided resumes for two PM's. Both PM had multiple years experience relevant to the solicitation and multiple years with the firm. While the resumes had transit experience, there were limited examples of rural transit experience. Additionally, the quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget were noted but details were not provided.

4 20.00

The proposed PM has multiple years experience in transit and cited examples in rural and urban studies including 3 projects for ADOT sub recipients. PM's quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget were detailed. PM has a manual to guide through qa/qc procedures.

3.5 17.50

The proposed PM has multiple years experience in transit, but the examples did not seem to include rural transit. The quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget were not addressed.

4 20.00

The proposed PM has multiple years experience in transit, but the examples did not seem to include rural transit. PM's quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget were provided.

3.5 17.50

Three proposed PM resumes were submitted but it was unclear if all were PM's as two of the resumes submitted are listed as principals on the org chart. The proposed PM's have multiple years experience in transit, one PM has many rural transit examples but it is unclear if the other PM's examples are urban or rural. The quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget while mentioned, were not addressed.

4 20.00

The proposed PM has multiple years experience in transit, including projects with 4 ADOT sub recipients. The quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget while mentioned, were not addressed.

4 20.00

The proposed PM has multiple years experience in transit, but it was unclear if the examples were urban or rural. The quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget were not addressed.

4 20.00

The proposed PM has multiple years experience in transit, the examples were all transit related with some rural. PM has experience with other state DOT and FTA programs. The quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget were not addressed.

4.5 22.50

The proposed PM has multiple years experience in transit, urban and rural, also FTA, state DOT, and drug and alcohol compliance. The PM's quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget were detailed.

Key Personnel Bios (excluding PM’s) (A separate response is required for each Discipline that the Offeror is proposing on) In one (1) combined PDF document per Discipline, and on no more than one half (1/2) page per key team member (excluding the PMs), and at a maximum of ten (10) pages, summarize the experience and qualifications of the entire team, including sub-contractors for the team proposed under each Discipline. Clearly indicate on the PDF which Discipline it is being proposed for.

Present qualifications and experience in performing the discipline's described activities.

Include technical education/training, special experience, certifications, licenses and memberships in professional associations, societies or boards.

Include relevant, recent (no older than five (5) years past) project experience indicating the role performed within each project, especially performing work of a similar or related nature for the public sector. Please indicate "No recent experience" or "None" if the team has no experience.

If not proposing under a Discipline, attach a single page with the discipline name and number indicating "Not Proposed".

15.00%

4 12.00

The Offeror provided a matrix to outline the staff's skills and experience. Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work although staff experience was limited on rural projects. Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements.

4 12.00

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, Some rural transit experience identified. Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements.

3.5 10.50

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, multiple transit examples were presented, one team member had rural experience. Resumes do not align with the org chart. Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements.

4 12.00

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements. While transit experience was demonstrated, it was unclear if there was any rural transit experience within the team.

3.5 10.50

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, some rural transit and FTA experience identified. Not all staff listed years of experience. Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were not provided.

4 12.00

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, some rural transit and urban transit experience identified including some experience with ADOT sub recipients. Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements.

4 12.00

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work,limited rural transit and some urban transit experience identified.

Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements.

4.5 13.50

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, some rural transit and urban transit experience identified. Staff have experience with FTA programs.

Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements.

4 12.00

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, some rural transit and urban transit experience identified. Staff have experience with FTA programs.

Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements.There is a discrepancy between team members on org chart and those proposed as key personnel.

4. Proposal Requirements for Price 10.00% 48 4.80 58 5.80 52 5.20 59 5.90 69 6.90 50 5.00 100 10.00 50 5.00 100 10.00

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Tina Munoz, Transit Group Manager, MPD Date

Jesse Zargoza, Transit Program Manager, MPD Date

Jill Dusenberry, Transit Consultant, MPD Date

Evaluation Committee - D-2 Evaluation Report

RFP NO. BPM007068

Solicitation Title: On Call Transit Consultation Services

AECOM Civtech

As a participating member of the evaluation committee, I agree with the information provided in this document and concur that the consensus scoring is a complete and accurate reflection of the committee's agreement regarding the evaluation of the proposals received.

Jacobs KFH Group

76.80 76.80 72.20 80.90 73.90

HDR

AECOM Technical Services Inc., Civtech Inc., HDR Engineering Inc., Jacobs Engineering Group Inc., KFH Group, Kimley-Horn and Associates Inc., LSC Transportation Consultants Inc., Parametrix Inc., and RSL and Associates Inc.

Parametrix RLS & Associates

81.50 87.50

The members of the evaluation committee have completed their review of the proposals, and any subsequent best and final offers, received in response to the ADOT solicitation referenced above, and have reached consensus. Based on the detailed evaluation of the individual proposals, it would be in the best interest of the State, to request BAFO from the following firms:

LSC Transportation 86.00

Kimley-Horn 81.00

Docusign Envelope ID: 5B95CB80-A5A0-4783-ABCA-22E8416472BE

10/8/2025

4 = 80 3.5 = 70 3 = 60 2.5 = 50 2 = 40 1.5 = 30 1 = 20 0.5 = 10

COMMITTEE EVALUATION SCORES 0 = 0

Firm Name Total Score

Evaluation Criteria Weight Rating Weighted

Score Comment Rating

Weighted Score

Comment Rating Weighted

Score Comment Rating

Weighted Score

Comment Rating Weighted

Score Comment Rating

Weighted Score

Comment Rating Weighted

Score Comment Rating

Weighted Score

Comment

1. Proposal Requirements for Firm Qualifications and Experience 50.00% Firm Experience- (A separate response is required for each Discipline that the Offeror is proposing on) Provide a document, no longer than six (6) pages per Discipline, describing the firm's experience and subcontractor’s providing services described in the scope of work.

Include examples of projects, relating each to the discipline's categories of work. Each document must first reference the Discipline Number and Title and area(s) of expertise within the discipline. Provide an explanation that speaks specifically to the discipline being proposed, describing how the Offeror is qualified to provide services in the discipline, which specific services offeror is qualified to provide from the categories of work indicated in the Scope, and precisely how Offeror expects to fulfill the Department’s needs. You may also list transit-specific categories of work not mentioned in the Scope as long as they are relevant to the Discipline and are not located as a category of work in another Discipline. If not proposing under a Discipline, attach a single page with the discipline name and number, indicating "Not Proposed".

40.00%

4 32.00

The firm has 65+ years relevant experience.

The Offer provided a detailed matrix to demonstrate the various relevant transit project examples. Most experience demonstrated is in urban transit, limited experience in rural transit. Demonstrated experience with other State transit studies.

4 32.00

The firm has 23+ years relevant experience.

The Offer provided a detailed matrix to demonstrate the various relevant transit project examples. Demonstrated experience in rural transit, FTA programs and experience working with ADOT sub recipients. Firm demonstrated understanding and strategy for providing services under this scope including qa/qc strategies.

4 32.00

The firm has 66+ years relevant experience.

The Offer provided a detailed matrix to demonstrate the various relevant transit project examples. Most experience demonstrated is in urban transit, unclear if there is experience in rural transit.

4.5 36.00

The firm has 59+ years relevant experience.

The Offer provided a detailed matrix to demonstrate the various relevant transit project examples. Firm demonstrated experience with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) programs relevant to the scope of work and has worked with four ADOT sub recipients.

4 32.00

The firm has 30+ years relevant experience.

A graphic was provided to demonstrate firm specialties. Firm has a focus on transit services specifically, including urban, small urban and rural, tribal, and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) programs. Operations focus is in small urban.

4.5 36.00

The firm has 32+ years relevant experience.

The Offeror provided multiple examples of transit projects, many of them rural.

Experience with operation plans. Offeror has experience working with ADOT sub recipients on rural projects.

4.5 36.00

The firm has 40+ years relevant experience.

The Offer provided a detailed matrix to demonstrate the various relevant transit project examples. Firm has worked on many rural transit projects, worked with an ADOT sub-recipient, and had experience working with multiple state DOT's in transit projects.

4.5 36.00

The firm has 37+ years relevant experience.

Offeror has experience working with relevant FTA programs and state DOT's.

Urban and rural experience, multiple rural examples provided. Operational planning experience.

Organizational Chart- (A separate response is required for each Discipline that the Offeror is proposing on) Attach a single one (1) page document per Discipline that provides a complete organizational chart (Org Chart). Each chart shall indicate each team member’s name, job title, firm name, and designation as SubContractor or Prime for each team member who will be performing work under that discipline. Please indicate which person will be the primary contact with each firm (Prime and SubContractors). The organizational chart should show relationships within the team as well. If not proposing under a Discipline, attach a single page with the discipline name and number, indicating "Not Proposed".

10.00%

4 8.00

The org chart provided met most requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

3.5 7.00

The org chart provided met some requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

While all firm names were listed it did not differentiate between which firms were the prime or sub. Also, a primary contact within each firm was not identified.

3.5 7.00

The org chart provided met some requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

Additionally the prime contact was not identified nor was there a differentiation between prime or sub firms (if any). There is a discrepancy between team members on org chart and those proposed as key personnel.

3.5 7.00

The org chart provided met some requirements but the prime contact was not identified nor was there a differentiation between prime or sub firms (if any). There is a discrepancy between team members on org chart and those proposed as key personnel.

3.5 7.00

The org chart provided met some requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

Additionally the prime contact was not identified nor was there a differentiation between prime or sub firms (if any).

4 8.00

The org chart provided met most requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

4 8.00

The org chart provided met most requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

3.5 7.00

The org chart provided met some requirements but did not include job titles relevant to the roles for this solicitation.

Additionally the prime contact was not identified nor was there a differentiation between prime or sub firms (if any).

2. Proposal Requirements for Key Personnel Qualifications and Experience 40.00% Project Manager (PM) Resume- (A separate response is required for each Discipline that the Offeror is proposing on) Multiple project managers may be proposed for each Discipline.

Provide a one (1) page resume per PM per Discipline to identify who will actively manage projects and serve as the primary point of contact for project teams and for the Department Project Manager. The submitter shall:

● Present qualifications and experience in managing projects relevant to the scope;

● Present qualifications and experience as a subject matter expert relevant to the project objectives;

● Explain any quality control practices commonly used and specifically how the project manager will ensure that each task assignment / quoted project will meet stated objectives and how managed to assure each to be delivered within scope, budget, and schedule.

If multiple PM’s are being proposed, submit one (1) combined PDF document of the resumes per Discipline.

If not proposing under a Discipline, attach a single page with the discipline name and number, indicating "Not Proposed".

25.00%

4 20.00

The Offeror provided resumes for two PM's.

Both PM had multiple years experience relevant to the solicitation and multiple years with the firm. Both resumes had transit experience, and included national coordination of rural and human services.

The quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget were noted but details were not provided.

4 20.00

The proposed PM has multiple years experience in transit and cited examples in rural and urban studies. PM has experience working with ADOT sub recipients. Limited reference to transit operations planning.

PM's quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget were detailed. PM has a manual to guide through qa/qc procedures.

3.5 17.50

The proposed PM has multiple years experience in transit, but the examples did not seem to include rural transit. The quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget were not addressed.

4 20.00

The proposed PM has multiple years experience in transit, but the examples did not seem to include rural transit. Some experience in fleet management. PM's quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget were provided.

3.5 17.50

Three proposed PM resumes were submitted, the proposed PM's have multiple years experience in transit. It was unclear if one PM had rural transit experience. Some FTA. The quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget while mentioned, were not addressed.

4 20.00

The proposed PM has multiple years experience in transit, including short and long range plans. The quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget while mentioned, were not addressed.

4 20.00

The proposed PM has multiple years experience in transit, but it was unclear if the examples were urban or rural. The quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget were not addressed.

4.5 22.50

The proposed PM has multiple years experience in transit, urban and rural, FTA, operations, grants, and compliance. The PM's quality control (qa/qc) practices and the PM's plan to ensure that projects are delivered within scope, schedule, budget were detailed.

Key Personnel Bios (excluding PM’s) (A separate response is required for each Discipline that the Offeror is proposing on) In one (1) combined PDF document per Discipline, and on no more than one half (1/2) page per key team member (excluding the PMs), and at a maximum of ten (10) pages, summarize the experience and qualifications of the entire team, including sub-contractors for the team proposed under each Discipline. Clearly indicate on the PDF which Discipline it is being proposed for.

Present qualifications and experience in performing the discipline's described activities.

Include technical education/training, special experience, certifications, licenses and memberships in professional associations, societies or boards.

Include relevant, recent (no older than five (5) years past) project experience indicating the role performed within each project, especially performing work of a similar or related nature for the public sector. Please indicate "No recent experience" or "None" if the team has no experience.

If not proposing under a Discipline, attach a single page with the discipline name and number indicating "Not Proposed".

15.00%

4 12.00

The Offeror provided a matrix to outline the staff's skills and experience. Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work although staff experience was limited on rural projects. some FTA experience.

Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements.

4 12.00

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, Some rural transit experience identified. Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements.

3.5 10.50

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, multiple transit examples were presented, one team member had rural experience. Resumes do not align with the org chart. Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements.

4 12.00

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements. Transit experience was demonstrated by some but not all team members, and while transit experience was demonstrated, it was unclear if there was any rural transit experience within the team.

Resumes do not match org chart.

3.5 10.50

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, some rural transit experience identified. Not all staff listed years of experience. Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were not provided.

4 12.00

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, some rural transit and urban transit experience identified. Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements.

4 12.00

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, some rural transit and urban transit experience identified. Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements.

4.5 13.50

Overall staff had experience relevant to the scope of work, some rural transit and urban transit experience identified. Staff have experience with FTA programs. Information on staff's education, training, licenses, certifications, etc. were provided and relevant to the requirements.

4. Proposal Requirements for Price 10.00% 48 4.80 58 5.80 52 5.20 59 5.90 69 6.