Ipswich Doyon ES OPM RFS FINAL 08.12.26 TM.pdf

TOWN OF IPSWICH

Ipswich Public Schools Ipswich, Massachusetts

OWNER’S PROJECT MANAGER REQUEST FOR SERVICES

Paul F Doyon Memorial Elementary School Building Project, Proposed Ipswich RFS Project Bid #27.100.4

August 12, 2026

1. Section 1, Introduction

The Ipswich Public School District, (the “Owner”) is seeking the services of a qualified OPM “Owner’s Project Manager” as defined in Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 149, Section 44A½ and as further defined by the provisions of this Request For Services (RFS), to provide Project Management Services for the design, construction, addition to and /or renovation of the Paul F Doyon Memorial Elementary School in Ipswich, Massachusetts (the “Project”).

The Owner is requesting the services of an OPM to represent the Owner during the feasibility study and schematic design phases of the project initially. Subject to the approval of the Project by the Massachusetts School Building Authority (the “MSBA”) and further subject to continued funding authorized by the Owner, the contract between the Owner and the Owner’s Project Manager may be amended to include continued Project Management Services through design development, construction documents, bid and award, construction and final closeout of the potential Project. A potential approved Project may include a renovation of the existing School, a renovation and addition of the existing School and/or new construction.

Based on project costs of recent similarly sized school projects, the broadly estimated total project cost of an approved potential Project may range from $125,000,000 to $175,000,000 depending upon the solution that is agreed upon by the Owner and the MSBA and that is ultimately approved by affirmative votes of Ipswich taxpayers and the MSBA Board of Directors.

MSBA Note: To ensure goals are set properly, Municipalities should contact SDO.Construction@mass.gov or 617- 872-4064 as soon as possible for assistance from the Supplier Diversity Office (“SDO”) in goal setting. Please note that the Owner’s Project Manager will be expected to utilize the SDO’s online reporting system, presently known as “The Hub,” and will be expected to adhere to all requirements set forth in M.G.L. c. 7, § 61, as well as any associated guidance from the SDO. The Owner’s Project Manager will also be expected to provide, in the forms and formats required by the Owner and the SDO, regular reports of information pertaining to the businesses engaged in work set forth in the Contract for Project Management Services with the Owner, as amended.

2. Section 2, Background

Ipswich Public Schools Mission Statement

Ipswich Public Schools aspires to empower ALL students to be global citizens who are effective communicators, analytical problem solvers and savvy consumers of information. We propose to do this through an emphasis on communication, critical thinking, creativity, self-management, perseverance and collaboration. Students will be active partners in authentic learning, offering voice and choice in demonstrating competency.

mailto:SDO.Construction@mass.gov

Ipswich Public Schools Statement of Non-Discrimination

The Ipswich School Committee and Ipswich Public Schools are committed to maintaining an education and work environment for all school community members, that is free from all forms of discrimination, including harassment and retaliation. The members of the school community include the School Committee, employees, administration, faculty, staff, students, volunteers in the schools, and parties contracted to perform work for the Ipswich Public Schools.

Ipswich Public Schools does not exclude from participation, deny the benefits of Ipswich Public Schools from or otherwise discriminate against, individuals on the basis of race*, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, sex stereotypes, sex characteristics, religion, disability, age, genetic information, active military/veteran status, marital status, familial status, pregnancy, or pregnancy-related condition, homelessness, ancestry, ethnic background, national origin, or any other category protected by state or federal law in the administration of its educational and employment policies, or in its programs and activities. [* race to include traits historically associated with race, including, but not limited to, hair texture, hair type, hair length and protective hairstyles.]

This commitment to the community is affirmed by the following statements. The School Committee commits to:

1. Promoting the rights and responsibilities of all individuals as set forth in the State and Federal Constitutions, pertinent legislation, and applicable judicial interpretations.

2. Encouraging positive experiences in human values for children, youth and adults, all of whom have differing personal and family characteristics and who come from various socioeconomic, racial and ethnic groups.

3. Working toward a more integrated society and enlisting the support of individuals as well as groups and agencies, both private and governmental, in such an effort.

4. Use all appropriate communication and action techniques to air and address the grievances of individuals and groups.

5. Carefully consider, in all the decisions made within the school district, the potential benefits or adverse consequences that those decisions might have on human relations.

6. Initiating a process of reviewing policies and practices of the school district in order to achieve to the greatest extent possible the objectives of this statement.

The Ipswich Public Schools requires all members of the school community to conduct themselves in accordance with this policy.

It shall be a violation of this policy for any member of the school community to engage in any form of discrimination, including harassment and retaliation, or to violate any other civil right of any member of the school community. We recognize that discrimination can take a range of forms and can be targeted or unintentional; however, discrimination in any form, including harassment and retaliation, will not be tolerated.

It shall also be a violation of this policy for any school community member to subject any other member of the school community to any form of retaliation, including, but not limited to, coercion, intimidation, interference, punishment, discrimination, or harassment, for reporting or filing a complaint of discrimination, cooperating in an investigation, aiding or encouraging another member of the school community to report such conduct or file a complaint, or opposing any act or practice reasonably believed to be prohibited by this policy.

The Ipswich School Building Committee

Established on August 26, 2025 the School Building Committee was appointed and approved for the purpose of leading this elementary school construction project. It consists of twelve (12) members, led by Michael Dougherty of the Select Board as chair and Haley Rist of the School Committee as vice chair, and includes all statutorily required positions and community members with relevant experiences in education administration, local finance, and school construction and design.

The Paul F Doyon Memorial Elementary School

The Paul F Doyon Memorial Elementary School is located at 216 Linebrook Road, Ipswich, MA. The school sits on approximately 17.2 acres of land, located on a main road, about two miles from downtown, bordered by single-family residential houses and the Willowdale State Forest. The original school was built in 1965, with an addition in 1996, for a current square footage of approximately 57,625 square feet. The Paul F Doyon Memorial Elementary School offers a full complement of course offerings to approximately 350 K-5 students, in-line with Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE). A Pre-Kindergarten program serving approximately 35 students is also present.

The school is set back from the road with a grassy area and some tall trees in front of the building. A horseshoe shaped driveway leading up to and away from the school has space for 94 parking spaces. Behind the building are two storage sheds, a playground for the school, and several athletic and playing fields. The main body of the building is rectangular and consists of the main office, a cafetorium and gym-playroom, library and 14 classrooms. The boilers are fed from an 8,000-gallon underground fuel tank, and there is also a 3,000-gallon underground propane tank.

The Paul F. Doyon Memorial School is a one-story structure with an I beam roof and wall skeleton construction; the foundation and floor are of poured concrete. The building is constructed of concrete masonry units (CMU) clad in a brick facade on the exterior. Many areas have cracking and crumbling mortar.

The roof system is steel-framed with a combination of cold multi-ply roofing with a pebble sheet cover, as well as tar/membrane and gravel roofing. Sections of the roof were replaced in 2006 and 2009. While there have been annual roof repairs, severe leaking has occurred for years, resulting in stained ceiling tiles, damaged school supplies, and students and staff accustomed to water-collecting trash barrels around the building. In 2023, taxpayers emergently funded a costly roof overlay modification and repair (for both elementary schools), though this is anticipated to last only up to seven years. The building features aluminum encased windows, with some updates occurring in 2005 and 2016. Exterior doors have to be regularly serviced due to their age, and replacement parts are difficult to find.

The Winthrop Elementary School

The Winthrop Elementary School is located at 65 Central Street, Ipswich, MA. The school sits on approximately 6.8 acres of land, located on a main road, in the downtown area, bordered by single-family residential houses, local businesses and the town fire station. The original school was built in 1956, with two additions in 1988 and 1997, for a current square footage of approximately 60,463 square feet. The Winthrop Elementary School offers a full complement of course offerings to approximately 375 K-5 students, in-line with Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE). A Pre-Kindergarten program serving approximately 35 students is also present.

The school is set back from the road with a grassy area and some tall trees in front of the building. A horseshoe shaped driveway leading up to and away from the school has space for 98 parking spaces. Aside from and behind the building is a modular classroom, three storage sheds, two playgrounds for the school and neighborhood. The main building is a two-story rectangular structure and consists of the main office, a cafetorium and gym-playroom, library and 16 classrooms. The school is heated by forced steam from two low pressure steam boilers, both of which are at end of life and have been repaired and/or replaced as required in recent years. The antiquated heating system results in inconsistent temperatures throughout the building often resulting in disturbed teaching and learning experiences for staff and students.

The Winthrop School is a two-story structure with metal reinforced concrete construction, concrete foundation with concrete and steel pilings, and poured concrete floors. The building is constructed of concrete masonry units (CMU) clad in a low R-value brick facade on the exterior. Many areas have cracking and crumbling mortar.

The roof system is wood-framed with single-ply EPDM and membrane with ballast. Roof drains are in a pitched center design, which flow into the town drainage system. Sections of the roof were replaced in 2003 and 2006. While there have been annual roof repairs, severe leaking has occurred for years, resulting in stained ceiling tiles, damaged school supplies, and students and staff accustomed to water-collecting trash barrels around the building. In 2022, the roof was deemed insurable only for actual value due to its age and condition. In 2023, taxpayers emergently funded a costly roof overlay/modification and repair (for both the Winthrop and Doyon schools), though this is anticipated to last only up to seven years. The building features oversized vinyl encased windows, with some updates occurring in 1987, 2023 and 2026. Exterior doors have to be regularly serviced due to their age, and replacement parts are difficult to find.

Looking ahead

The Owner is looking to create a new elementary school that will be able to serve all students for another 50+ years. We are looking to study ways in which the school would be well integrated into the natural environment, as the current school campus is surrounded by residential neighbors, a state forest and conservation land. We hope the building will have healthy light and air features to support healthy bodies and minds. The Owner plans to be forward-thinking about future requirements for energy efficiency and environmental impact. As a building that will house future good citizens, we are looking for the building to have as small of a carbon footprint as possible. Lastly, and most importantly, we hope the building will be a place that safely welcomes all learners and educators, sparks joy in learning and helps create lifelong memories.

3. Section 3, Guiding Principles, Project Description, Scope of Services and Objectives

3.1 Guiding Principles: It is the goal of the Town of Ipswich, its School Committee and its School Building Committee to build a school that reflects Ipswich values – educational excellence, community spirit, and fiscal responsibility. These principles guide our decisions and align the School Committee, the Select Board and the Finance Committee.

• Students First: Education drives every decision. Ipswich puts student learning and well-being at the center as a core value.

• Smart Spending: Be responsible with taxpayer dollars. Balance needs, costs and long-term value.

• Ipswich Identity: Design a school that feels like Ipswich; connected to its people, landscape and spirit.

• Transparent Process: Keep the Town informed. Invite input. Build trust through openness.

3.2 Project Overview, Brief Historical Context

The Town of Ipswich has two preschool through fifth grade elementary schools: Winthrop Elementary and Paul F. Doyon Memorial Elementary. Currently, all Ipswich elementary students are being educated in buildings which are well outdated, overcrowded, and no longer meet the educational needs of our student population.

In 2014 the Town submitted two Statements of Interest (SOIs) for the consideration of new elementary school construction. In 2015 the Town was invited into the MSBA’s School Building Project Feasibility Phase as it sought to replace the aging Winthrop Elementary School. A Feasibility Study was funded, a consultant hired, and the study was conducted and completed in January 2016 providing four options for grade configuration, utilizing one and/or two schools, at five possible building sites, all owed by the Town.

A single consolidated school serving 775 students in grades K-5 on the Doyon campus was ultimately selected as the preferred project, but narrowly failed to obtain the required two-thirds vote of Town Meeting in 2018, but did pass at the ballot. The 2018 vote results and discussions show that town residents acknowledged the need to address the continued deterioration of both the Doyon and Winthrop schools but citizens remain split on the size, location and configuration of the proposed new school. The dire need to address the poor conditions of the two elementary schools having not been diminished, in 2021 the School Committee began anew an effort to build community consensus around an elementary school construction project.

In 2022 the School Committee and town leaders held numerous public discussions, working group sessions, a NESDEC enrollment study and Community Listening Sessions, leading to a non-binding ballot vote in May 2023, which resulted in a majority of support reaffirming the need to address the elementary schools and for a combined school on the Doyon property. In April 2024, the Town submitted two SOIs to MSBA, one for each elementary school, but clearly identifying that the project scope should include potential consolidation.

In December 2024, the MSBA voted to invite into the Eligibility Period the SOI for the Paul F Doyon Memorial School for grades PreK-5 and the potential during the feasibility study phase to examine the consolidation of the two elementary schools to serve grades PreK-5 town wide.

On April 11, 2024, the Owner submitted a Statement of Interest (ATTACHMENT A) to the MSBA for the Paul F Doyon Memorial Elementary School. The MSBA is an independent public authority that administers and funds a program for grants to eligible cities, towns, and regional school districts for school construction and renovation projects. The MSBA’s grant program is discretionary, and no city, town, or regional school district has any entitlement to any funds from the MSBA. At the April 29, 2026 Board of Directors meeting, the MSBA voted to issue an invitation to the Owner to conduct a feasibility study for this Statement of Interest to identify and study possible solutions and, through a collaborative process with the MSBA, reach a mutually-agreed upon solution. The MSBA has not approved a Project and the results of this feasibility study may or may not result in an approved Project.

It is anticipated that, among other below stated expectations, the feasibility study to be facilitated by the OPM will review the problems identified in the Paul F Doyon Memorial Elementary School SOI.

3.3 Scope of the Feasibility Study

As a result of a collaborative analysis, dated February 17, 2026, with the Massachusetts School Building Authority (the “MSBA”) of enrollment projections and space capacity needs for the Paul F Doyon Memorial Elementary School (the “Proposed Project”), the Town of Ipswich acknowledged and agreed that the design of alternatives, which may be evaluated as a part of the feasibility study for the Paul F Doyon Memorial Elementary School, shall be based in accordance with the following. This collaborative analysis resulted in the MSBA’s Enrollment Study Recommendation letter, dated March 19, 2026, that was endorsed by the Ipswich School Building Committee (ATTACHMENT B).

The Scope of the Feasibility Study, conducted under the award of an OPM contract, shall consist of the development of a Feasibility Study/Schematic Design for the evaluation of a renovation of the existing school, a renovation of and addition to the existing school and/or new construction of the Paul F Doyon Memorial Elementary School. The Feasibility Study shall contain all information required by 963 CMR 1.10(8) and any other applicable rules, regulations, policies, guidelines and directives of the MSBA including, but not limited to, a final design program, educational space summary, budget statement for preferred educational objectives, and a proposed total project budget. The Feasibility Study for this proposed project will examine the below two enrollment and grade configuration options:

Enrollment for Grades K-5, at

Paul F Doyon Memorial Elementary School

(plus PreK)

Enrollment for Grades K-5, in a Consolidated

Paul F Doyon Memorial Elementary School and Winthrop

Elementary School (plus PreK)

425 students

805 students

The Feasibility Study will prepare the District to submit to the MSBA the educational space summaries for all eight options outlined below for the above table, for its review and acceptance.

Base Repair Options:

(1) Base Repair option at Paul F. Doyon Memorial Elementary School site

(2) Base Repair option at Winthrop Elementary School site

Addition/Renovation options:

(3) Add/Reno option for 425 students at the Paul F. Doyon Memorial Elementary School site

(4) Add/Reno option for 805 students at the Paul F. Doyon Memorial Elementary School site

(5) Add/Reno option for 805 students at the Winthrop Elementary School site

New Construction Options:

(6) New Construction option for 425 students at the Paul F. Doyon Memorial Elementary School site

(7) New Construction option for 805 students at the Paul F. Doyon Memorial Elementary School site

(8) New Construction option for 805 students at the Winthrop Elementary School site

Upon acceptance of the educational space summaries, the District will commence with the evaluation of options. The Schematic Design that is developed pursuant to this Agreement shall be based on the final design enrollment, which shall be subject to the written approval of the MSBA. The Schematic Design shall include, but not be limited to, the information required by the MSBA’s Feasibility Study Guidelines, including, but not limited to, a site development plan, environmental assessment, geotechnical assessment, geotechnical analysis, code analysis, utility analysis, septic system suitability analysis, Zone II bylaw compliance, schematic building floor plans, schematic exterior building elevations, narrative building systems descriptions, LEED for Schools checklist, outline specifications, cost estimates, project schedule and proposed total project budget.

The foundation of our educational program is built on the collaboration of the professionals in the building, which is challenged by the building layout. The school maintains a similar layout to its original design.

There is no vestibule at the building’s entry, and the front office is down a hall, not facing the doors; this poses an ongoing safety concern. Looking from above, the original design was three perpendicular hallways, and with the 1996 addition, the open section in the back was closed off, now creating a square with a small courtyard in the middle. Classrooms are on either side of the two side hallways, and along one side of the newer back hallway; the front part of the building houses the cafeteria, entrance, library and gymnasium.

Travel time from one end of the building to the other can take our youngest students several minutes; this is especially problematic when this time detracts from special education service delivery time.

The perpendicular hallway design and limited space erodes collaboration. Of the school’s 21 general education classrooms, only three classrooms are sized to current space standards (900-1,000 square feet);

most classrooms are 10% to 20% below standards, and Kindergarten classrooms are extremely undersized (space standards are 1,100-1,300 square feet). Due to the building’s layout, until just this year, Kindergarteners could be taught in the relatively larger classrooms from the addition but those rooms were significantly farther from the bathroom facilities. In a building with very limited closet space, classrooms are further tightened with the storage of modern-day teaching materials stacked around the rooms.

Configuration of the educational space is limited. There are no breakout spaces. Small group project-based learning is an important concept in modern education, but space limitations impede the execution in our facility, both in individual classrooms, and across grade levels, due to the size and layout of our classrooms and building. There is not enough space to have multiple small groups at one time, nor a place for teachers to sit and lead the group. Teachers often have to sit on the floor or kneel. Considerable distractions are present in all learning locations due to close proximity and the inability to buffer noise.

3.4 Feasibility Study Objectives and Responsibilities

In addition to items referenced above identified under Scope of Work (Section 3.3), the School Building Committee has identified the following Feasibility Study Objectives and Responsibilities that are under project consideration by the Owner and are expected to be included, but not exclusive, in the OPM RFS, to be acknowledged by the bidder in its proposal, and that are ultimately to be examined for inclusion in the Feasibility Study:

1. Review and evaluation of Statements of Interest (SOIs) from April 11, 2024, School Committee Vote and subsequent letter to MSBA from October 18, 2024 and Enrollment Analysis from February 17, 2026; MSBA Enrollment Study letter from March 19, 2026.

2. Conduct a thorough review and evaluation of the Feasibility Study and Schematic Design materials, presentations and recommendations from the prior elementary school building project, 2014 – 2018, in an effort to capture, analyze, and incorporate any and all relevant information and direction deemed to still be current, accurate, and credible in guiding this Feasibility Study and Schematic Design.

3. Limit the review and analysis of possible site locations to four of the five previously identified sites in the prior Feasibility Study, namely the Doyon school campus, the Winthrop school campus, Town Hall, and Mile Lane fields and surrounding area. The Bialek Park site is to be excluded from this analysis. The OPM should use the existing data and analysis from that prior Feasibility Study as the foundation for its evaluation and recommendations moving forward.

4. In the analysis above it Item #3, identify any changed site conditions, circumstances or standards which could affect prior recommendations and conclusions from remaining valid.

5. Engage the professional services of a strategic communications consultant(s) in designing, guiding, and managing community outreach.

6. Conducting, hosting and facilitating community forums, surveys and other outreach opportunities to engage stakeholder groups to identify and define the community’s values, priorities and expectations of the proposed project. This is to include the identification of community concerns that may impact study options.

7. Identification of specific milestone requirements and/or constraints of the district – e.g., Town required votes and timelines, swing space, occupancy issues, etc.

8. Life cycle costs of operating the school as it relates to future operational budgets.

9. Awareness and recognition that Ipswich is a designated Massachusetts Green Community enforcing the Stretch Energy Code expecting new construction to meet strict energy performance standards.

10. Awareness and recognition of the US Green Building Council’s LEED for Schools (LEED-S) Rating

System.

11. Identification of construction management alternatives including but not limited to CM-at-Risk

Delivery Method.

12. Consideration be given to advise the District on its options and possibilities for participation in the

MSBA Model Schools program.

13. Effective space that satisfies anticipated and unanticipated enrollment patterns and demand.

14. Integration with surrounding green and/ or conservation areas which supports educational goals; and,

15. Consideration of best practices for public health, including lighting, heating and ventilation.

The required scope of services is set forth in Article 8 of the standard contract for Owner’s Project Management Services for a Design/Bid/Build project that is attached hereto as ATTACHMENT C and incorporated by reference herein. If the Owner determines to use a CM-at-Risk delivery method, this contract shall need to be amended and/or substituted.

The work is divided into the Project Phases as listed in Attachment A of this contract. The durations of the Phases shown below are estimates only, based on the Owner’s experience. Actual durations may vary depending upon the Project agreed upon by the Owner and the MSBA. The total duration of the Contract is estimated as follows:

1. Feasibility Study/Schematic Design Phase; 20-24 months*

2. Design Development/Construction Documents/Bidding Phase; and 18-24 months*

3. Construction Phase. 24-36 months*

*these ranges are for scheduling purposes only and are provided as MSBA windows of time between project phases and as guidelines only and are based on schedules established by other Owners/School Districts for projects of similar size

4. Section 4, Minimum Requirements and Evaluation Criteria:

4.1 Minimum Requirements:

In order to be eligible for selection, each Respondent must certify that it meets the following minimum requirements. Any Response that fails to include such certification in its response, demonstrating that these criteria have been met, may be rejected without further consideration.

Each Respondent must designate an individual who will serve as the Project Director. The Project Director shall be certified in the Massachusetts Certified Public Purchasing Officer Program (the “MCPPO”) as administered by the Inspector General of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and must also meet the following minimum requirements:

• The Project Director shall be a person who is registered by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts as an architect or professional engineer and who has at least five years’ experience in the construction and supervision of construction and design of public buildings; OR

• If not registered as an architect or professional engineer, the Project Director must be a person who has at least seven (7) years’ experience in the construction and supervision of construction and design of public buildings.

4.2 Evaluation Criteria

In addition to the minimum requirements set forth above, all Respondents must demonstrate that they have significant experience, knowledge and abilities with respect to public construction projects, particularly involving the construction and renovation of K-12 schools in Massachusetts. The Owner will evaluate Responses based on criteria that shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

1. [15 points] Past performance of the Respondent, if any, with regard to public, private, DESE funded and MSBA-funded school projects across the Commonwealth, as evidenced by:

a) [7.5 points] Documented performance on previous projects as set forth in the OPM Application (ATTACHMENT D), including the number of projects managed, project dollar value, number and percentage completed on time, number and dollar value of change orders, average number of projects per project manager per year, number of accidents and safety violations, dollar value of any safety fines, and number and outcome of any legal actions;

b) [7.5 points] Satisfactory working relationship with designers, contractors, Owner, the MSBA and local officials.

2. [ 5 points] Thorough knowledge of the Massachusetts State Building Code, regulations related to the Americans with Disabilities Act, and all other pertinent codes and regulations related to successful completion of the project.

3. [ 5 points] Thorough knowledge of Commonwealth construction procurement laws, regulations, policies and procedures, as amended by the 2004 Construction Reform laws.

4. [ 5 points] Thorough knowledge of Commonwealth’s Construction Management At-Risk (CM-At- Risk) procurement and delivery methods, laws, regulations, policies and procedures, as evidenced through successful experience in managing similarly sized projects.

5. [ 15 points ] Management approach: Describe the Respondent’s approach to providing the level and nature of services required as evidenced by proposed project staffing for a potential (hypothetical) proposed project for new construction of 124,000 square feet or renovation of 60,000 square feet;

proposed project management systems; effective information management; and examples of problem solving approaches to resolving issues that impact time and cost; Provides internal and external communication through digital correspondences, public forums and websites.

6. [ 10 points] Key personnel: Provide an organizational chart that shows the interrelationship of key personnel to be provided by the Respondent for this project and that identifies the individuals and associated firms (if any) who will fill the roles of Project Director, Project Representative and any other key roles identified by the Respondent, including but not limited to roles in design review, estimating, cost and schedule control. Specifically, describe the time commitment, turnover, continuity, experience and references for these key personnel including relevant experience in the supervision of construction of several projects that have been either successfully completed or in process that are similar in type, size, dollar value and complexity to the project being considered.

7. [ 10 points] Capacity and skills: Identify existing employees by number and area of expertise (e.g., field supervision, cost estimating, schedule analysis, value engineering, constructability review, quality control and safety). Identify any services to be provided by sub-consultants.

8. [ 5 points] Identify the Respondent’s current and projected workload for projects estimated to cost in excess of $1.5 million.

9. [ 10 points] Familiarity with the MSBA’s Green Schools Program. Demonstrated experience working on high performance green buildings (if any), green building rating system used (e.g., LEED), life cycle cost analysis and recommendations to Owners about building materials, finishes etc., ability to assist in grant applications for funding and track Owner documentation for LEED prerequisites.

10. [ 12 points] Thorough knowledge and demonstrated experience with life cycle cost analysis, cost estimating and value engineering with actual examples of recommendations and associated benefits to Owners.

11. [ 3 points] Knowledge of the purpose and practices of the services of Building Commissioning Consultants.

12. [ 5 points] Financial Stability: Provide current balance sheet and income statement as evidence of the Respondent’s financial stability and capacity to support the proposed contract.

In order to establish a short-list of Respondents to be interviewed, the Owner will base its initial ranking of Respondents on the above Evaluation Criteria. The Owner will establish its final ranking of the short-listed Respondents after conducting interviews and reference checks.

The Owner reserves the right to consider any other relevant criteria that it may deem appropriate, within its sole discretion, and such other relevant criteria as the MSBA may request. The Owner may or may not, within its sole discretion, seek additional information from Respondents.

This RFS, any addenda issued by the Owner, and the selected Respondent’s response, will become part of the executed contract. The key personnel that the Respondent identifies in its response must be contractually committed for the Project. No substitution or replacement of key personnel or change in the sub-consultants identified in the response shall take place without the prior written approval of the Owner and the MSBA.

The selected Respondent(s) will be required to execute a Contract for Project Management Services with the Owner in the form that is attached hereto as ATTACHMENT C and incorporated by reference herein. Prior to execution of the Contract for Project Management Services with the Owner, the selected Respondent will be required to submit to the Owner a certificate of insurance that meets the requirements set forth in the Contract for Project Management Services.

Prior to execution of the Contract for Project Management Services, the fee for services shall be negotiated between the Owner and the selected Respondent to the satisfaction of the Owner, within its sole discretion.

The initial fee structure will be negotiated through the Feasibility Study/Schematic Design Phase. The selected Respondent, however, will be required to provide pricing information for all Phases specified in the Contract at the time of fee negotiation.

5. Section 5, Selection Process and Selection Schedule Process

1. In summary, the School Building Committee (“Committee”) shall oversee the OPM selection process via formation of an OPM Selection Committee (“OPM SC”). Each member of the OPM SC will receive and review all Responses submitted to this RFS. It shall be determined for each Respondent if they meet the minimum requirements set forth in Section 4.1 above. If so, they move forward to evaluation as set forth in Section 4.2 above.

2. All Responses meeting the minimum requirements shall be reviewed and evaluated in accordance with the criteria set forth in Section 4 above. Reviewers will rank the Responses based on those weighted evaluation criteria and record their evaluations on a scoring template. A minimum of three Responses will be short-listed for further evaluation, in accordance with MSBA requirements.

3. After determining the number of short-listed Respondents, the OPM SC shall schedule and conduct interviews with the representatives of the appropriate responding firms, during which each firm shall provide an uninterrupted 30-minute overview of its qualifications, relevant strengths and experience, and other presentations supporting its selection as Project OPM. Each presentation shall be followed by a 15-minute Q&A session to allow interaction with the Committee.

a. During the period in which interviews are scheduled, the OPM SC shall perform reference checks of all firms who are being interviewed. The OPM SC shall consider information received via reference checks in the areas of past performance on similar projects, job and industry knowledge, demonstrated value-added abilities, communications skills as they relate to project management, and overall client satisfaction.

b. Each OPM SC member will score each firm on their interview and reference checks combined, based on the below 3-point scale.

• 3 Points - Exceptional

• 2 Points – Average

• 1 Point - Below average

4. Upon conclusion of the interviews, the OPM SC will total the points assigned by the OPM SC members based on the interview and reference checks per subsection 5.3.a and 5.3.b above. The firm with the highest number of total points will be ranked first, the firm with the second highest total points will be ranked second, the firm with the third highest total points will be ranked third, and so

on. In the event of a tie, the OPM SC will remove the lowest ranked firm, if any, hold a discussion, and vote again. The tiebreaker process will be repeated until one firm is the sole highest ranked firm.

5. The evaluation criteria scoring under Section 4.2 above is used to determine which Respondents will be short-listed and move forward to the interview and reference check stage under subsection 5.3 and

5.4 above. It is the scoring of interview and reference check scale that alone will determine which short-listed firm is ranked first, second, third, and so on for the purpose of requesting a fee proposal.

6. After ranking the short-listed Respondents per subsections 5.3 and 5.4 above, the Owner will request a detailed fee proposal from the first-ranked firm, with cost estimates for each significant category of the planned Project. For any costs based on third-party services, the firm will provide supporting documentation for such cost estimates.

7. The Owner will commence fee negotiations with the first-ranked selection and, if successful, prepare a draft outline of the OPM contract using the MSBA OPM contract as a standard.

8. If the Owner is unable to negotiate a contract with the first-ranked selection, the Owner will then commence negotiations with its second-ranked selection and so on, until a contract is successfully negotiated and approved by the Owner.

9. The successfully selected firm will be submitted to the MSBA for its approval.

10. The successful selection may be asked to participate in a presentation to the MSBA and/or submit additional documentation, as required by MSBA, as part of the MSBA approval process.

Respondents should be advised that the selection process and final contract are subject to the approvals of the MSBA in accordance with its regulations.

11. The Owner reserves the right, at its sole option, to re-advertise the RFS if less than three responses are received or in the event that fee negotiations fail with all firms so selected.

12. The following is the schedule of the OPM selection process, subject to change at the Owner’s and MSBA’s discretion.

August 12, 2026 RFS released publicly and published in the Central Register of the

Commonwealth of Massachusetts, posted on COMMBUYS and on the IPS website, and advertised in the Ipswich Local News

September 4, 2026 Informational meeting and site walk-through at 10:00am at Paul F

Doyon Memorial Elementary School located at 216 Linebrook Road, Ipswich, MA 01938. Attendance at this session is optional and not a requirement for a successful response.

September 21, 2026 Last Day for questions from Respondents, questions due by 1:00pm

September 30, 2026 Responses due to the District by 1:00pm; OPM SC begins Reviews and Rankings

October 14, 2026 Announcement of Respondents short-listed

October 28, 2026 Interviews concluded with short-listed Respondents

November 4, 2026 Conclude negotiations with selected Respondent

November 12, 2026 Final selection submitted to the MSBA for review and approval

December 7, 2026 Anticipated MSBA OPM Review Panel Meeting

December 21, 2026 Anticipated execution of contract

13. The OPM RFS may be obtained from:

On or after August 12, 2026, by downloading the PDF from the Ipswich Public Schools website (www.ipsk12.net) under Finance & Operations, Bids & Quotes or by requesting same via email to tmarkham@ipsk12.net. Hard copies may also be obtained during normal summer business hours Monday-Thursday 8:30am - 4:00pm in the School Business Office located at:

1 Lord Square Ipswich MA, 01938

Any questions, inquiries or clarifications concerning this RFS must be submitted in writing to:

Thomas Markham, Director of Finance & Operations, Ipswich Public Schools Email address: tmarkham@ipsk12.net Not later than 1:00pm on Monday, September 21, 2026

14. Responses/Proposals to this OPM RFS are due as follows:

Sealed, hard copy Responses to the RFS for OPM services must be clearly labeled “Sealed Bid”, and “Owner’s Project Management Services for Ipswich Elementary School Project” and http://www.ipsk12.net/ mailto:tmarkham@ipsk12.net delivered to:

Ipswich Public Schools Business Office c/o Thomas Markham, Director of Finance & Operations 1 Lord Square Ipswich MA, 01938 no later than 1:00pm on Wednesday, September 30, 2026, as read on the clock in the Main Office lobby. The Owner assumes no responsibility or liability for late delivery or receipt of Responses.

Any proposal received after that time shall be rejected as non-responsive.

Facsimile and email submissions will not be accepted.

Proposals must be delivered during the normal summer hours of operation, excluding Fridays and holidays: Monday-Thursday: 8:30 AM – 4:00 PM

UNFORESEEN OFFICE CLOSURE: If, at the time of the scheduled due date, 1 Lord Square, Ipswich, MA 01938, is closed due to uncontrolled events such as fire, weather, wind, power outage, or building evacuation, the due date will be postponed until 1:00pm on the next normal business day. Proposals will be accepted until that date and time.

6. Section 6, Requirements for content of response:

Submit Twelve (12) hard copies of the response to this RFS and one electronic version in PDF format on USB Flash Drive, each labeled “Ipswich RFS Project Bid #27.100.4.

All responses shall be:

1. Signed in ink, where called for, and printed as typewritten pages;

2. Presented in an organized and clear manner;

3. Must include the completed and signed OPM Application form (ATTACHMENT D)

4. Must include the required forms in ATTACHMENT E;

5. Must include all required respondent attachments and certifications

6. And must include the following information:

6.1 Cover letter, on company letterhead, shall be a maximum of two pages in length and include:

6.1.1 An acknowledgement of any addendum issued to the RFS.

6.1.2 An acknowledgement that the Respondent has read the RFS. Respondents shall note any exceptions to the RFS in its cover letter.

6.1.3 An acknowledgement that the Respondent has read the Scope of Work (Section 3.3) and the Feasibility Study Objectives and Responsibilities (Section 3.4) and is prepared to address them if awarded the OPM Contract

6.1.4 An acknowledgement that the Respondent has read the Contract for Project Management Services. Respondent shall note any exceptions to the Contract for Project Management Services in its cover letter.

6.1.5 A specific statement regarding compliance with the minimum requirements identified in Item 4 of this RFS to include identification of registration, number of years of experience and where obtained (as supported by the resume section of Attachment D), as well as the date of the MCPPO certification. (A copy of the MCPPO certification must be attached to the cover letter).

6.1.6 A description of the Respondent’s organization and its history.

6.1.7 The signature of an individual authorized to negotiate and execute the Contract for

Project Management Services, in the form that is attached to the RFS, on behalf of the Respondent.

6.1.8 The name, title, address, e-mail and telephone number of the contact person who can respond to requests for additional information.

7. Selection Criteria: The response shall address the Respondent’s ability to meet the

“Evaluation Criteria”, Section 4, including submission of additional information as needed.

The total length of the Response (including Attachment D only, excluding Attachment E) may not exceed twenty (20) single-sided numbered pages with a minimum acceptable font size of “12 pt.” for all text.

8. Certifications required by the Owner in accordance with procurement law shall be completed as part of Responses (ATTACHMENT E), but those pages will not count toward the total per the preceding paragraph.

8.1 Certificate of Non-Collusion: (attached)

8.2 Tax Compliance Certification Pursuant to M.G.L. c. 62C, §49A, (attached)

8.3 Certificate of Corporate Authority (if Applicable) (attached)

8.4 Good Faith Form (attached)

8.5 Debarment (attached)

9. Respondents may supplement this proposal with graphic materials and photographs that best demonstrate its project management capabilities of the team proposed for this project. Limit this additional information to a maximum of five 8½” x 11” pages, double-sided.

7. Section 7, Payment Schedule and Fee Explanation:

The Owner will negotiate the fee for services dependent upon an evaluation of the level of effort required, job complexity, specialized knowledge required, estimated construction cost, comparison with past project fees, and other considerations. As construction cost is but one of several factors, a final construction figure in excess of the initial construction estimate will not, in and of itself, constitute a justification for an increased OPM fee.

8. Section 8, Other Provisions

8.1 Public Record

All responses and information submitted in response to this RFS are subject to the Massachusetts Public Records Law, M.G.L. c. 66, § 10 and c. 4, § 7(26). Any statements in submitted responses that are inconsistent with the provisions of these statutes shall be disregarded.

8.2 Waiver/Cure of Minor Informalities, Errors and Omissions

The Owner reserves the right to waive or permit cure of minor informalities, errors or omissions prior to the selection of a Respondent, and to conduct discussions with any qualified Respondents and to take any other measures with respect to this RFS in any manner necessary to serve the best interest of the Owner and its beneficiaries.

8.3 Communications with the Owner

The Owner’s Procurement Officer for this OPM RFS is:

Thomas Markham, Director of Finance & Operations

1 Lord Square Ipswich MA, 01938 Email address: tmarkham@ipsk12.net

Respondents that intend to submit a response are prohibited from contacting any of the Owner’s staff other than the Procurement Officer. An exception to this rule applies to Respondents that currently do business with the Owner, but any contact made with persons other than the Procurement Officer must be limited to that business, and must not relate to this RFS. In addition, such respondents shall not discuss this RFS with any of the Owner’s consultants, legal counsel or other advisors. FAILURE TO OBSERVE

THIS RULE MAY BE GROUNDS FOR DISQUALIFICATION.

9. Section 9, Costs incurred preparing RFS response

Neither the Owner nor the MSBA will be liable for any costs incurred by any Respondent in preparing a response to this RFS or for any other costs incurred prior to entering into a Contract with an OPM approved by the MSBA.

10. Section 10, Withdrawal/Irrevocability of Responses and Modifications

A proposer may correct, modify, or withdraw proposals by written notice received by Ipswich Public Schools prior to the time and date set the proposal due date. Modifications must be submitted in a sealed envelope clearly labeled "Modification No. " to the address listed to submit responses. Each modification must be numbered in sequence, and must reference the RFS.

After the proposal due date, a proposer may not change any provision of the proposal in a manner prejudicial to the interests of the District or fair competition. Minor informalities will be waived or the proposer will be allowed to correct them.

11. Section 11, Rejection of Responses, Modification of RFS

The Owner reserves the right to reject any and all responses if the Owner determines, within its own discretion, that it is in the Owner’s best interests to do so. This RFS does not commit the Owner to select any Respondent, award any contract, pay any costs in preparing a response, or procure a contract for any services. The Owner also reserves the right to cancel or modify this RFS in part or in its entirety, or to change the RFS guidelines. A Respondent may not alter the RFS or its components.

12. Section 12, Subcontracting and Joint Ventures

Respondent’s intention to subcontract or partner or joint venture with other firm(s), individual or entity must be clearly described in the response.

13. Section 13, Validity of Response

Submitted responses must be valid in all respects for a minimum period of ninety (90) days after the submission deadline.

mailto:tmarkham@ipsk12.net

14. Section 14, Changes If any changes are made to this RFS, addenda will be issued. Addenda will be posted in the Business Office, on the District website and e-mailed to all on record as having picked…