Evaluation_Guidelines_Small_AE_BOA1.20.26.docx
DOCX document 27 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Small A&E Project
- Solicitation number
- 98586
- Issued by
- Prince George's County, Maryland
About this file
This Evaluation Guidelines document outlines the scoring criteria and rating scales for the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission's (WSSC) Small Architecture & Engineering Services contract opportunity in Maryland. The solicitation seeks sealed responses for comprehensive design and construction administration services for existing WSSC office buildings, depots, laboratories, warehouses, and other occupied vertical facilities. Services encompass architectural design, mechanical (HVAC) systems design, electrical design, plumbing design, structural design, civil/site works design, IT security services, and low-voltage instrumentation control services. A non-mandatory pre-bid meeting is scheduled for March 12, 2026, at 10:00 a.m., with questions due by March 16, 2026, at 2:00 p.m., and sealed responses required by 2:00 p.m. on Tuesday, March 31, 2026. Technical proposals are limited to 48 single-sided pages in Arial font, 10 point or larger. WSSC intends to award up to two firms, with a base term of three years at $2,000,000 per selected firm, plus two optional one-year renewal terms of $500,000 each, for a potential total of $3,000,000 per firm over five years.
Proposals will be evaluated on Technical Approach (30%), Firm's Experience (40%), Key Personnel and Staffing Plan (20%), and Price (10%), using a scoring scale from 0 to 5, with price evaluation occurring only after minimum qualifications are met. The pricing evaluation uses a team multiplier and average salary rates based on specific labor classifications: Principal, Project Manager, Project Engineer, Engineer or Architect, CADD Technician, and Surveyor. The contract includes a 32% Minority Business Enterprise (MBE) and Small Local Business Enterprise (SLBE) subcontracting goal with full participation required from certified African American, Women-Owned, and WSSC-approved SLBE firms. Individual task orders will be negotiated separately and compensated on either a lump sum or cost reimbursement basis, with direct labor costs reimbursed at hourly rates established in the Labor Classification with Salary Schedule. Contractors must maintain comprehensive insurance coverage including Workers' Compensation (statutory), Commercial General Liability ($1,000,000 minimum per occurrence), Umbrella Liability ($1,000,000), and Errors or Omissions Liability ($1,000,000). This is a Requirements Contract with no guaranteed minimum purchase amounts.
View the file
Other files
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
Small Architecture & Engineering Services Evaluation Guidelines and Factors Page 1 of 5 Small Architecture & Engineering Services
Contract No. TBD
Evaluation Guidelines and Factors
Evaluation Guidelines
The following definitions apply to these evaluation guidelines:
Cost Efficiency – price analysis using team member role weighted average hourly cost loaded rate.
Cost Loaded Rate – hourly billing rate including overhead and profit.
No Disruption – construction sequence constraints defined to maintain existing occupied office building and/or other facilities throughout construction.
Page(s) - Single-sided, 8.5 by 11 inch. Text shall be Arial font, 10 pt size or greater. (Note: Arial, 10 pt is consistent with the default font in the downloadable, editable version of SF330 forms). The submission addressing Evaluation Guidelines and Factors Sections 1, 2, and 3 shall not exceed a total of 48 pages.
Prime Consultant - refers to qualifications that shall be demonstrated specifically by the Prime.
Prime Consultant’s Team - refers to qualifications that apply to the Prime or Subconsultants.
Team Member Role Descriptions – The proposer shall use the following role descriptions in their proposal:
1) Principal – directs and oversees administration of the Contract
2) Project Manager – individual responsible for managing the overall design project quality, schedule, cost, and risk
3) Project Engineer – lead technical designer for each relevant engineering discipline
4) Engineer or architect – design engineer for each relevant engineering discipline
5) CADD technician – CAD drafting preparer
6) Surveyor – licensed and experienced in land, control, and construction surveys
*Note: These role descriptions are required for consistency of evaluating price proposals, only.
*The Labor Classification with Salary Schedule will apply once the Contract is awarded.
A.
| Rating |
| Unsatisfactory |
(20) Marginal (40) Satisfactory (60) Good (80)
| Excellent |
| (100) |
Price The Team price proposal has the highest cost efficiency.
| The Team price proposal has the second highest cost efficiency. |
| The Team price proposal has the median cost efficiency. |
| The Team price proposal has the second lowest cost efficiency. |
| The Team price proposal has the lowest cost efficiency. |
Total points: 100
1. This factor will evaluate the team multiplier and average salary rates submitted by each consultant.
| Rating |
| Unsatisfactory |
(1) Marginal (2) Satisfactory (3) Good (4) Excellent (5)
| Price Proposal |
| The Team Multiplier is greater than or equal to two standard deviations above the average of multipliers submitted by the other proposers, and the Team has the highest salary rate average. |
| The Team Multiplier is greater than or equal to one standard deviation above the average multipliers submitted by the other proposers, and the Team has a high salary rate average. |
| The Team Multiplier is within one standard deviation above or below the average of multipliers submitted by the other proposers, and the Team salary rate average is reasonable. |
| The Team Multiplier is less than or equal to one standard deviation below the average of multipliers submitted by the other proposers, and the Team salary rate is reasonable. |
| The Team Multiplier is less than or equal to two standard deviations below the average of multipliers submitted by the other proposers, and the Teams salary has the lowest salary rate average. |
EVALUATION FACTORS
All Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with WSSC Procurement Regulation Chapter 6.15.320, Competitive Sealed Proposals. Accordingly, Offerors must note that a number of factors will be considered by WSSC in making an award. Price will not be the sole determining criterion.
Evaluation Criteria Technical Approach 30% Firm Experience 40% Key Personnel & Staffing Plan 20% Price 10%
PROPOSAL EVALUATION
All Proposals meeting the Minimum Qualifications will be evaluated in accordance with WSSC Water Procurement Regulation Chapter 6.15.320, Competitive Sealed Proposals. Price will not be evaluated at this stage.
Scoring Scale (0–5)
· 5 – Excellent: Exceeds requirements; comprehensive, detailed, and well-documented; very low risk.
· 4 – Good: Meets requirements; minor weaknesses; low risk.
· 3 – Satisfactory: Generally meets requirements; moderate risk.
· 2 – Marginal: Partially meets requirements; significant weaknesses; high risk.
· 1 – Poor: Does not adequately meet requirements; major weaknesses; very high risk.
· 0 – Unacceptable: Fails to meet requirements; insufficient information; not eligible for award.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .