ESBD_487718_1773772220551_PM-1413_CSP Summary Tab.pdf
PDF 125 KB Posted
- Attached to
- PM-1413 JBK, CC & Cornette Lib. Roof Replacement
- Solicitation number
- PM-1413
- Issued by
- Ochiltree County, Texas
About this file
This is a Best Value Scoring Summary document for a Texas state and local contract opportunity (PM-1413) for roof replacement services at Jack B. Kelly, Classroom Center, and Cornette Library. Seven contractors submitted proposals for the project, with evaluation based on total bid cost (51% weight), construction time (10% weight), technical proposal (24% weight), and qualitative factors including litigation/claims history, safety/risk assessment, and quality control (10% combined weight). The evaluation process identified dGen Energy as the highest-ranked contractor based on best value scoring with a total score of 8.05, followed by AG & Sons (7.06) and CS Advantage (6.86).
The base bids ranged from $2,296,933.28 (dGen Energy, lowest cost) to $7,342,906.00 (Mikocorp), with proposed construction schedules ranging from 45 days to 430 days. dGen Energy was not awarded the contract due to non-compliance with project specifications requiring ISO insulation adhered using low-foam adhesive, as the contractor proposed a mechanically fastened system instead. AG & Sons was disqualified for non-compliance with solicitation requirements. CS Advantage was ultimately awarded the project following negotiations, with a base bid of $3,580,000.00 and a proposed construction schedule of 150 days.
View the file
Other files
Show all 17
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
PROJECT NAME/DESCRIPTION: Pkg A - JBK, CC, & Cornette Lib. Roof Replacement
PROJECT NUMBER: PM-1413
PROJECT LOCATION: Jack B. Kelly, Classroom Center, & Cornette Library
OVERALL RANKING
Contractor Score Rank LBK Roofing 5.02 6 CS Advantage 6.86 3
Tecta 6.35 4
AG & Sons 7.06 2 dGen Energy 8.05 1 Lydick-Hooks 5.52 5 Mikocorp 4.82 7
COST
Contractor Base Bid Total Alt. Total Bid LBK Roofing $3,783,980.42 $0.00 $3,783,980.42 CS Advantage $3,580,000.00 $0.00 $3,580,000.00 Tecta $3,244,610.00 $0.00 $3,244,610.00
Lydick-Hooks $4,168,094.00 $0.00 $4,168,094.00 Mikocorp $7,342,906.00 $0.00 $7,342,906.00 AG & Sons $3,000,280.00 $0.00 $3,000,280.00 dGen Energy $2,296,933.28 $0.00 $2,296,933.28
Min Bid $2,296,933.28 Max Bid $7,342,906.00
SCHEDULE
Contractors Base Time Total Alt. Time Total Time
Tecta 430 0 430 CS Advantage 150 0 150 LBK Roofing 119 0 119
Lydick-Hooks 404 0 404 Mikocorp 220 0 220 dGen Energy 45 0 45 AG & Sons 60 0 60
Min Time 45 Max Time 430
BEST VALUE SCORING
Category Value Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score Total Bid 51% 5.51 2.81 6.07 3.10 3.13 1.60 6.42 3.27 7.66 3.90 7.08 3.61 10.00 5.10 Construction Time 10% 1.11 0.11 3.78 0.38 2.05 0.20 3.00 0.30 7.50 0.75 1.05 0.10 10.00 1.00 Technical Proposal 24% 6.67 1.60 4.35 1.04 6.32 1.52 7.47 1.79 5.87 1.41 6.80 1.63 3.97 0.95 Litigation/Claims 5% PASS 0.50 PASS 0.50 PASS 0.50 PASS 0.50 PASS 0.50 PASS 0.50 PASS 0.50 Safety/Risk Assessment 5% FAIL 0.00 FAIL 0.00 PASS 0.50 PASS 0.50 FAIL 0.00 PASS 0.50 Quality Control 5% PASS 0.50 FAIL 0.00 PASS 0.50 PASS 0.50 PASS 0.50 PASS 0.50 FAIL 0.00
TOTAL SCORES 100% 5.52 5.02 4.82 6.86 7.06 6.35 8.05
LBK Roofing
ACCEPTABLE Examples: 1) Contract agreement cannot be reach with top ranked contractor (terms & conditions or VE).
2) After interviews, it is determined that a contractor does NOT have everything needed in their proposal that represents an accurate price and they are disqualified/they'd like to withdraw their proposal, etc.
UNACCAPTABLE Examples: Client wants a particular contractor that isn't the best value contractor per rankings below.
CSP: FINAL BEST VALUE RANKING (Tab 9)
Tecta dGen EnergyLydick-Hooks Mikocorp CS Advantage AG & Sons
Notes/Comments/Remarks: Information can be entered below to document how/why the best value contractor (as shown below) did not end up being the final contractor selected… dGen Energy was not awarded this project because the specifications required all ISO insulation to be adhered using low-foam adhesive, while the contractor proposed a mechanically fastened system.
AG & Sons was not awarded the project due to non-compliance with solicitation requirements.
CS Advantage was awarded this project after negotiations.
9. Final BV Ranking&Scores
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .