O'Neill Phase I RFP Final 030410.pdf

U.S. General Services Administration Public Buildings Service

New England Region (Region 1)

RECOVERY

Phase I – Request for Proposal (RFP) Construction Contract

Renovation of 10th and 11th Floor O’Neil Federal Building, Boston, Solicitation

No. GS-01P-10-BZ-C-0005

Proposals Due: March 19, 2010 3:00 p.m. (EST)

This project is funded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

(ARRA)

Phase I – Request for Proposal (RFP) Renovation of 10th and 11th Floors O’Neil Federal Building, Boston MA 02222 Solicitation No. GS-01P-10-BZ-C-0005

U.S. General Services Administration New England Region (Region 1)

Property Development Division (1PC) March 4, 2010

- i -

General Instructions to Offerors Each Offeror shall submit a Proposal as outlined in Section 3. Proposal Content and Format Instructions, of this Phase I Solicitation. Proposals may be mailed or hand carried, but they must be delivered to the Contracting Officer, at the location below, no later than the time and date specified below.

All Proposals shall be submitted in original; no faxed Proposals will be accepted.

The complete Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) is available through the U.S. Government Printing Office or via Internet access at http://www.arnet.gov/far/.

The General Services Administration’s (GSA) points of contact for inquiries and clarifications are Kim Yates, Contract Specialist and cc Deborah Fournier, Contracting Officer. Each Offeror must designate one point of contact for all communications between the Offeror and the GSA. No other communications regarding this Solicitation or Project are allowed. Communications that occur between any other individual on an Offeror’s team, including consultants and subcontractors, and any other GSA staff member may be grounds for disqualification of the Offeror’s Proposal.

GSA Point of Contact: Kim Yates, Contract Specialist

(617) 565-6013

(617) 565-5967 (Fax) Kimberly.yates@gsa.gov

GSA Alternate Point of Contact: Deborah Fournier, Contracting Officer

(617) 565-5970

(617) 565-5967 (Fax) deboarh.fournier@gsa.gov

Submit Proposals To: Ms. Kimberly Yates, Contract Specialist (1PC) U.S. General Services Administration Thomas P. O’Neill, Jr., Federal Building 10 Causeway Street, 11th Floor Boston, MA 02222-1077

Phase I Proposal Due Date and Time: March 19, 2010, 3:00 p.m. (EST)

Construction Contract Renovation of 10th and 11th Floors O’Neil Federal Building Boston MA 02222 Solicitation No. GS-01P-10-BZ-C0005-

U.S. General Services Administration New England Region (Region 1)

Property Development Division (1PC) March 5, 2010

- ii -

Solicitation Table of Contents

Section 1. General Information

1.1. Executive Summary

1.2. Set Aside

1.3. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

Section 2. Phase I Evaluation Factors

2.1. Definition of Similar Projects

2.2. Evaluation Factors

Section 3. Proposal Content and Format Instructions

3.1. Questions to the Phase I RFP

3.2. Notification of Phase I Qualification and Selection

3.3. Summary of the Phase II Solicitation Process

3.4. Service of Protest (FAR 52.233-2) (Aug 1996)

3.5. Listing of Attachments

Attachment 1: Owner Evaluation Questionnaire

Renovation of 10th and 11th Floors O’Neil Federal Building Boston MA 02222 Solicitation No. GS-01P-10-BZ-C0005-

U.S. General Services Administration New England Region (Region 1)

Property Development Division (1PC) March 5, 2010

Section 1. General Information

1.1. Executive Summary

Continuing a legacy of outstanding public architecture and construction, the GSA Design and Construction Excellence Programs seek to commission our nation’s most talented designers and constructors to design and to construct federal buildings of outstanding quality and value. These projects are to demonstrate the value of true integrated design that balance aesthetics, cost, constructability, and reliability; create environmentally-responsible and superior workplaces for civilian federal employees; and give contemporary form and meaning to our democratic values.

GSA’s Construction Excellence Program provides for the development and implementation of innovative approaches to project management and execution to provide the Federal Government and client agencies the highest quality construction within budget and schedule.

GSA announces an opportunity, through this Solicitation, for Construction excellence. Specifically, this Solicitation is for the procurement of a qualified construction firm to provide all supervision, labor, materials and equipment necessary to provide for Renovations of the 10th and Eleventh Floors of the O’Neill Federal Building, Boston, MA.

The work includes, but is not limited to:

Renovate the entire Eleventh Floor and a portion of the Tenth Floor of the Thomas P. O’Neill Federal Building to allow the construction and relocation of several departments within the Public Building Service. This project is the third in a series of phases to realign departments.

The O’Neill Phase III Project will involve the renovation of approximately 43,900 square feet, including approximately 36,100 on the Eleventh Floor, and 7,800 square feet on the Tenth Floor to construct permanent offices, work stations, conference rooms, and support spaces for the General Services Administration – Public Buildings Service (PBS).

Approximately two-thirds of the eleventh floor will remain occupied during the project, and will require a series of separate sub-phases to construct a portion of the final layout, relocate offices, work stations, support spaces, and occupants, and proceed with the next phase of work in the vacated space. All construction phasing, activities, and access, including any temporary system shut-downs, must be fully coordinated and approved in advance by PBS and the Building Manager. Construction is to be completed with minimal disruption to occupants and functions within the building The project will be funded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, (ARRA), and must comply with all ARRA requirements regarding commissioning, energy conservation, and reporting.

It is a goal of the project to achieve as many LEED – CI credits as possible, by following the LEED Guiding Principles for Sustainable Existing Buildings. The contract performance period is approximately 420 calendar days. The magnitude of construction is between $5,000,000 and $10,000,000. The NAICS Code is 236220. Size standard is $33.5 Mil. All individuals working on this project will be required to obtain security clearances.

GSA intends to award a firm-fixed price construction contract pursuant to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Two-Phase Selection Procedures. For this contract award process, GSA will issue two Solicitations in sequence, Phase I and Phase II. The Phase I procedure is to determine which Offerors demonstrate the highest qualifications to successfully deliver the project. All responsible Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Businesses may submit a Phase I Proposal; a maximum of five (5) Offerors that are found to demonstrate the highest qualifications will be selected to participate in Phase II. In Phase II, a price proposal will be submitted. Award will be made based on a combination of technical and price factors. The combined weight of the technical evaluation factors is approximately equal to cost and price.

GSA is hereby requesting Phase I Proposals. This Phase I Solicitation provides Offerors with instructions regarding the submission of their complete Proposals and the evaluation thereof. Utilizing the format prescribed herein, Offerors are to provide the requested information and demonstrate their qualifications. Responses shall be as complete and accurate as possible and present data relative to the specific Project under consideration. Offerors shall make every effort to present information clearly and concisely in accordance with the formats described herein.

Renovation of 10th and 11th Floors O’Neil Federal Building Boston MA 02222 Solicitation No. GS-01P-10-BZ-C0005-

U.S. General Services Administration New England Region (Region 1)

Property Development Division (1PC) March 5, 2010

1.2. Set Aside

This procurement is set aside for award to Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business. Certification of such must be provided. OFFERS FROM OTHER BUSINESSES INCLUDING LARGE BUSINESS WILL NOT BE

CONSIDERED. CONTRACTORS WILL BE REQUIRED TO REGISTER WITH THE CENTRAL CONTRACTOR

REGISTRATION (CCR) AT: http://www.ccr..gov. Interested Offerors must be a firm with experience which has successfully and satisfactorily completed projects of similar size, scope, quality, cost, magnitude, and construction approach. Participation by contractors and subcontractors located within the New England region is encouraged.

Offerors must have the capacity to obtain performance and payment bonds for 100% of the Construction Contract.

An Offeror's proposed Phase I team and key personnel proposed in response to this Phase I Solicitation, must remain fixed for the duration of the contract and warranty period unless a change is submitted in writing to the Contracting Officer, who, at his or her sole discretion, provides written authorization of the change. Unauthorized changes to the Offeror's team at anytime during the two-phase selection process can result in the elimination of the Offeror from further consideration.

1.3. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

This project is funded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act ("Recovery Act" or “ARRA”) of 2009.

Accordingly, the project will be subject to unprecedented levels of transparency and accountability so Americans will know where their tax dollars are going and how they are being spent. Mechanisms through special contract terms and conditions will be implemented to accurately track, monitor and report on taxpayer funds. The Recovery Act requires extensive reporting from the prime recipients of Federal funding. This may include special Buy American Act requirements, additional requirements for contractor reporting, and expanded Government Accountability Office and Office of Inspector General access to contractor records.

Renovation of 10th and 11th Floors O’Neil Federal Building Boston MA 02222 Solicitation No. GS-01P-10-BZ-C0005-

U.S. General Services Administration New England Region (Region 1)

Property Development Division (1PC) March 5, 2010

Section 2. Phase I Evaluation Factors

Proposals submitted in response to this Solicitation will be evaluated using the following evaluation factors, which are listed in descending order of importance:

Factor 1 Past Performance - Demonstration of company’s construction experience on similar projects in terms of complexity, size and dollar value such as:

a. Phased/Building Occupied Construction Projects

b. Replacement of Building HVAC and Electrical Systems

Factor 2 Management Plan and Technical Approach to Completing Phased/Building Occupied Construction Projects

2.A Minimizing Disruption to Occupied Areas in Phased Construction

2.B (a). Sceduling and On Time Delivery of Finished Space in Successive Phases (b). Coordinating tenant move schedules of finished space with he start of each new phase

2.C Managing on time completion of construction projects simlilar in size and scope in an occupied building

Factor 3 Key Personnel & Past Performance of Key Personnel

3.A Key Personnel

3.B Past Performance of Project Manager and General Superintendent

3.C Personnel Organization Structure

2.1. Definition of Similar Projects

For this RFP, Similar Projects are those with the following characteristics:

§ Phased renovation of an occupied building (Governmental, Courthouse, or

Private) of approximately $4 million dollars or more.

§ Replacement of Building HVAC and Electrical Systems in occupied building

(Governmental, Courthouse, or Private) or approximately $4 million dollars or more.

2.2. Evaluation Factors

Factor 1 - Past Performance

This factor will evaluate the degree to which an offeror satisfied its customers in the past and complied with Federal, state, and local laws and regulations. This factor considers the extent of the offeror's past performance with reference to such aspects as cost, timeliness, and technical success. GSA has determined that successful past performance on similar projects is critical for the successful construction and completion of this project. Demonstrated quality construction workmanship, demonstrated success in the coordination of several construction trades, and demonstrated success in properly phasing such a project have been determined to be integral components of this project.

The past performance, experience, and management of the general contractor is important to the overall administration of this project, since the building will be partially occupied during the renovation of the building.

Renovation of 10th and 11th Floors O’Neil Federal Building Boston MA 02222 Solicitation No. GS-01P-10-BZ-C0005-

U.S. General Services Administration New England Region (Region 1)

Property Development Division (1PC) March 5, 2010

Offeror Shall:

Submit at least two (2) distinct projects completed approximately within the past five years that demonstrate the company’s construction experience for each type of similar project listed above. Projects submitted should meet the definition of Similar Projects defined above. Submitted projects may contain combinations of any of the criteria.

Failure to provide projects meeting GSA’s definition of similar will result in a lower technical score.

For each project listed above, offerors shall provide a minimum of two owner evaluations. Instructions and procedures for the submission of owner evaluations are provided below. Failure to submit required owner evaluations will result in a lowered technical score for this evaluation factor.

The GSA may also consider any information obtained from past performance evaluations currently on file and on PPIRS for any of the offerors proposing on this project as part of their overall evaluation on this factor.

For each project identified, provide the following information for each project:

a. Name of Architect

b. Name & location of the project

c. Description of work

d. Date of award; date of substantial completion; date of completion

e. Construction cost at award

f. Construction cost at completion

g. Description of the three (3) most significant change orders that impacted the project and any specific actions taken by the contractor to successfully address

h. Two owner contact points including owner’s name, telephone number, address, and current address and telephone numbers of persons to contact

i. Contractor responsibilities (i.e., actual work the firm performed under the scope of work)

j. Any special features (security systems, historical consideration, etc.)

k. Experience working with subcontractors proposed for this project

Owner Evaluation Questionnaires

Offerors shall:

• Ask references from at least two of the projects listed above provide answers to the “Owner Evaluation Questionnaire” (Attachment 1 of this RFP).

• Complete the top section of the “Individual’s Performance Questionnaire” and forward to your references.

• Ask your references to complete the remaining sections;

• Ask your references to send the completed Performance Questionnaire directly to the GSA

Contracting Officer at the following address:

Ms. Deborah Fournier, Contracting Officer (1PC) U.S. General Services Administration Thomas P. O’Neill, Jr., Federal Building 10 Causeway Street, 11th Floor Boston, MA 02222-1077

• The Performance Questionnaire must be received by the Contracting Officer no later than the Phase I Proposal due date and time:

Phase I Proposal Due Date and Time: March 19, 2010, 3:00 p.m. (EST)

Offerors are responsible for ensuring that the responses are sent to the correct place and are received no later than the Phase I Proposal due date and time.

Renovation of 10th and 11th Floors O’Neil Federal Building Boston MA 02222 Solicitation No. GS-01P-10-BZ-C0005-

U.S. General Services Administration New England Region (Region 1)

Property Development Division (1PC) March 5, 2010

Offerors are responsible for ensuring that the references provided are willing and available to be contacted by Government. If, after three (3) attempts to contact the reference, the Government is unable to speak directly with the reference provided, the specific transaction related to the reference may be excluded from evaluation.

Factor 2 - Management Plan and Technical Approach to Completing Phased/Building Occupied Construction Projects

This factor will evaluate offerors on their management plan on doing work in an occupied building and their approach to completing these projects on time without disruption to the tenants.

Factor 2.A Minimizing Disruption to Occupied Areas in Phased Construction The Offeror shall describe how they intend to forecast, schedule, and perform work, which minimizes disruption to occupied areas within phased construction projects of a similar size and scope.

Factor 2.B Coordinating Tenant Move Schedules of Finished Space with the start of each new phase The Offeror shall describe how they intend to accurately schedule for and meet successive completion dates for each defined phase of work.

The Offeror shall describe how they intend to successfully coordinate these dates with building personnel in order to allow for efficient pre-determined tenant moves into finished spaces.

Factor 2.C Managing On Time Completion of Construction Projects Similar in size and scope in an occupied building The Offeror shall describe how they intend to overcome through planning, coordination and communication the constraints of phasing and building occupation.

Factor 3 - Key Personnel & Past Performance of Key Personnel

This factor will evaluate that the Offeror’s demonstrate technically qualified personnel with demonstrated decision making authority, ability to direct work in the safest and most efficient manner. Offeror's key personnel wil be evaluated on the basis of their personal experience, education, and any registration or certification of the key personnel. Equally, the proposed team must have a proven track record of completing projects that are similar in nature which must be demonstrated through submission of successful past performance on similar projects.

Factor 3.A Key Personnel Offeror shall identify the project management staffing: key personnel and the support staff that will make up a project team for the proposed project. Complete resumes for all key personnel and support personnel shall be submitteddfor each team member, listing their education, training, qualifications and experience relative to the tasks they will be performing. Offerors shall include any professional qualifications, specialized experience in this type of work, and the technical competence of the staff on similar projects. Offerors shall provide a list of two (2) projects that each proposed team member worked on that meets the definition of similar project defined in section 2.1 above.

These projects may vary from the projects listed in factor #1-past performance, however, the complexity and size of the project should not vary. Not meeting the definition of a similar project as listed in factor #1 may result in a lower technical score. Offerors shall provide detail concerning any previous experience the proposed team may have working together on similar projects.

Each proposed team member will be evaluated based on the qualifications and experience of the proposed staff with similar roles and project experience as proposed on this project.

Proposed personnel staffing qualifications and past experience: Offerors shall submit a proposed team with the minimum required disciplines and respective experience levels as stated below.

Renovation of 10th and 11th Floors O’Neil Federal Building Boston MA 02222 Solicitation No. GS-01P-10-BZ-C0005-

U.S. General Services Administration New England Region (Region 1)

Property Development Division (1PC) March 5, 2010

One individual must be assigned to each of the disciplines listed below. Offerors demonstrating proposed key personnel who exceed the minimum qualifications and experience levels identified herein may receive a greater technical score for this evaluation factor.

During construction and post construction phases, the positions of Project Manager and General Superintendent cannot deviate from those individuals contained in the proposal without prior approval from GSA.

Minimum Standards:

Project Manager: The offeror shall designate at least one Project Manager for this contract who possesses a 4 year college degree and 5 years of Project Manager Construction experience.

General Superintendent: The offeror shall designate at least one individual who possesses 10 years of construction experience as a General Superintendant.

Factor 3.B Past Performance of Project Manager and General Superintendent Two individuals listed under factor #3A - Key Personnel Qualifications- will be assessed based on their individual past performance on previous projects. Failure to provide two (2) previous projects for either the PM or the General Superintendent may result in a lower technical score.

For each Key Personnel identified, offerors shall provide the following information for each project identified.

• Owner contact point and phone number

• Name, date and location of the project

• Description of work

• Construction value

• Title the individual held under the project

• Experience the individual had with subcontractors

The PM and the General Superintendent will be evaluated based on reference checks concerning the key areas listed below.

• Timeliness of Performance

• Cost Control

• Project Management

• Scheduling

• Safety History

The GSA may also consider any information received as a result of any past performance evaluations currently on file for any of the proposed individuals as part of the overall evaluation on this sub-factor. If any of the individuals for keys positions have no experience they will receive a “neutral” rating.

Factor 3.C Personnel Organization Structure

Offerors shall submit an organizational structure that will detail the relationships these individuals will maintain in meeting the requirements of the RFP. The responsibilities and positions of the proposed team shall be discussed in complete detail. The offeror must demonstrate a structured organizational unit, which details a comprehensive understanding of the government requirements and is so structured that teamwork will enhance the team’s ability to coordinate a project of this size and complexity. The discussion should include the team’s proposed overall organizational control addressing the construction aspects of this project.

The narrative describing the team’s organizational structure should detail the relationships and responsibilities of the key individuals proposed for this contract and demonstrate that the proposed team is capable of managing the proposed project. The offeror should demonstrate a structured organizational unit which details a comprehensive understanding of the government requirements. The discussion should include the team’s proposed overall organizational control addressing the construction aspects of this project.

Renovation of 10th and 11th Floors O’Neil Federal Building Boston MA 02222 Solicitation No. GS-01P-10-BZ-C0005-

U.S. General Services Administration New England Region (Region 1)

Property Development Division (1PC) March 5, 2010

Section 3. Proposal Content and Format Instructions

Utilizing the format prescribed below, Offerors are to provide the requested information in a brief and succinct manner making every effort to present information clearly and concisely. Lengthy narratives containing extraneous information are discouraged. All information shall be submitted in English. Proposals that do not follow these Instructions, or otherwise include documentation that is difficult to read, may result in a Phase I disqualification or a lower Phase I evaluation rating.

Submit six (6) copies of your company's proposal – one (1) original and five (5) copies – in 3-ring binders or "GBC" bound. Include a Table of Contents and lettered/numbered dividers for each section. Print each copy single-sided on 8-1/2" x 11" white paper, using a 10- to 12-point standard font for the text. Section and paragraph headings may be larger, bold, or in color; headers and footers may be smaller. Clearly show the following information on the cover of each copy: 1) Your company's (the Offeror's) name; 2) the Solicitation information: Proposal for Phase I Solicitation, RFP – GS-01P-10-BZ-C-0005; and 3) the time and date for the receipt of Proposals. Identify each copy on its cover as “Copy ___ of 4 Copies.” Whether the proposal is printed in color or black and white, the information provided in the Proposal should be easily reproducible by normal black and white photocopying machines, so be careful if you include photographs or use colors or shading in the text. Lastly, include a .pdf copy of the proposal on a CD-ROM for the Government's use in case additional copies need to be made. The CD may be submitted in a protective sleeve in the bound original.

All signatures on all documents (originals and copies) must be original signatures in ink and in a color other than black.

All Phase I Proposal development costs shall be borne by the Offerors without reimbursement from GSA.

Phase I Proposals shall be submitted using the following organizational structure:

Section I – Cover Letter: Provide a letter consisting of no more than two (2) pages on letterhead identifying a single point of contact, address, phone and fax numbers, and e-mail address (if any) where GSA inquiries or notices should be directed. The letter shall also contain a statement that:

(1) outlines the extent of availability and corporate commitment of the Key Personnel for this contract that clearly indicates the name and proposed title of individuals; and (2) certifies that the information contained in the Proposal is complete, accurate, and is free of any false representations to the best of the Offeror’s knowledge and belief.

Section II – Forms/Questionnaires: Include all of the completed forms required by this RFP.

Section III – Past Performance Section IV –Management Plan and Technical Approach to Completing Phased/Building Occupied Construction Projects

Section V – Key Personnel & Past Performance of Key Personnel

Section VI – Minimum Requirement of Bonding Capacity: Provide a notarized letter from a corporate surety, or multiple corporate sureties, whose name appears on the list contained in Treasury Department Circular 570 that the Offeror has the capacity to obtain payment and performance bonds with penal sums in excess of $10,000,000 (ten million dollars).

Section VII – Professional Licenses: Provide proof that the Offeror maintains any licenses that may be required in order to perform construction services in the State of Massachusetts.

Section VIII - Certification of Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business Status

3.1. Questions to the Phase I RFP

Submit questions to the Phase I RFP via e-mail to the Contract Specialist (kimberly.yates@gsa.gov) and cc the Contracting Officer (deborah.fournier@gsa.gov) and her) before 5:00 p.m (EST), Friday, March 12, 2010. At GSA’s discretion, GSA may provide written responses to the questions as appropriate. Any such responses will be published on FedBizOpps via an Amendment.

Renovation of 10th and 11th Floors O’Neil Federal Building Boston MA 02222 Solicitation No. GS-01P-10-BZ-C0005-

U.S. General Services Administration New England Region (Region 1)

Property Development Division (1PC) March 5, 2010

3.2. Notification of Phase I Qualification and Selection

Upon completion of the Phase I evaluation and selection process, a maximum of five (5) Offerors deemed to be most highly-qualified shall be invited to submit proposals in response to the Phase II Solicitation. However, GSA reserves its right to select less than five (5) Offerors for Phase II. Only those Offerors selected to participate in Phase II will be sent a Phase II Solicitation after their selection. Unsuccessful Phase I Offerors will be sent a notice of their non-selection at the same time. Phase II proposals will not be accepted from Offerors that are not invited to submit a proposal.

3.3. Summary of the Phase II Solicitation Process

The most highly-qualified Offerors selected in Phase I will be provided the opportunity to submit competitive technical and price Proposals as detailed in the Phase II Solicitation. Phase II shall be conducted in accordance with FAR Part 15 (Contracting by Negotiation); one Contract will be awarded using competitive negotiation.

3.4. Service of Protest (FAR 52.233-2) (Aug 1996)

Protests, as defined in section 33.101 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, that are filed directly with an agency, and copies of any protests that are filed with the General Accounting Office (GAO), shall be served on the Contracting Officer (addressed as follows) by obtaining written and dated acknowledgment of receipt from:

Ms. Deborah Fournier, Contracting Officer (1PC) U.S. General Services Administration Thomas P. O’Neill, Jr., Federal Building 10 Causeway Street, 11th Floor Boston, MA 02222-1077

The copy of any protest shall be delivered to and received in the office designated above within one day of filing a protest with the General Accounting Office.

3.5. Listing of Attachments

The following attachments to this Solicitation are provided for the convenience and/or use of the Offerors in developing Phase I Proposals

Attachment 1. Owners Evaluation Questionnaire

END OF PHASE I SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS

OWNER EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE

Similarity of Projects All potential offerors will be ranked on their performance of similar projects. A similar project is described as one that has been completed approximately within the last five years that demonstrate the company’s construction experience on similar projects in terms of complexity, size and dollar value. GSA has defined similar projects as:

Similar Projects: 1. Phased renovation of an occupied office building (Governmental, Courthouse, or Private) of approximately $4 million dollars or more.

2. Replacement of Building HVAC and Electrical Systems in occupied office building (Governmental, Courthouse, or Private) of approximately $4 million dollars or more.

On Time - Timeliness of Performance

1. Did the contractor complete the project on schedule?

_____ Contractor completed project prior to originally scheduled completion date.

_____ Contractor completed project by original scheduled completion date.

_____ Contractor completed within agreed to extended completion date.

_____ Contractor failed to meet project completion date.

Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________________________

2. To what extent did the contractor adhere to contract delivery schedules at significant milestones?

____ Contractor consistently improved scheduled milestone dates.

____ Contractor exceeded scheduled milestone requirements.

____ Contractor typically delivered as scheduled but occasionally missed milestone dates.

____ Contractor rarely met scheduled milestone requirements.

Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________________________

3. How responsive was the contractor in addressing unforeseen/unanticipated conditions?

____ Contractor consistently exercised a pro-active approach.

____ Contractor rarely demonstrated a pro-active approach.

____ Contractor never demonstrated a pro-active approach.

Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________________________

4. Did the contractor provide monthly schedule updates?

___ Contractor consistently updated the schedule each month; owner never had to request any updates.

___ Contractor updated the schedule on a regular basis (not monthly).

___ Contractor updated the schedule only when requested.

___ Contractor did not update schedule when required or requested.

Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________________________

5. Were the contractor submittals completed on time?

___ Contractor consistently made submissions ahead of schedule.

___ Contractor made some submissions ahead of schedule and all other on time.

___ Contractor made majority of submissions on time.

___ Contractor submissions were usually behind schedule.

Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________________________

Cost Control

1. Did the contractor submit reasonably priced change proposals?

____ Contractor consistently submitted fair and reasonably priced change proposals.

____ Contractor typically submitted fair and reasonably priced change proposals.

____ Contractor submitted fair and reasonably priced proposals some of the time.

____ Contractor rarely submitted fair and reasonably priced change proposals.

Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________________________

2. How responsive was contractor in submitting proposals for owner initiated changes?

____ Contractor was extremely responsive in expediting proposal submissions.

____ Contractor was generally responsive in expediting proposal submissions ____ Contractor was generally nonresponsive in timely submissions of change proposals.

____ Contractor was nonresponsive in timely submissions of change proposals.

Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________________________

3. How reasonable were contractor initiated changes?

____ Contractor initiated changes were extremely reasonable.

____ Contractor initiated changes were typically reasonable.

____ Contractor initiated changes were reasonable some of the time.

____ Contractor initiated changes were not reasonable.

Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________________________

Quality Product

1. How well has the contractor complied with contract requirements?

____ Contractor consistently surpassed contract requirements.

____ Contractor exceeded contract requirements.

____ Contractor met the minimum requirements.

____ Contractor did not meet the minimum requirements.

Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________________________

2. Was the contractor responsive in completing punch list items?

___ Contractor completed punch list items after initial notification.

___ Contractor completed most punch list items after initial notification.

___ Contractor eventually completed all punch list items.

___ Some punch list items were never completed by contractor.

Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________________________

3. Does the contractor have the ability to adapt to changing requirements while maintaining a desired level of quality?

____ Contractor was extremely effective in adapting to changing requirements.

____ Contractor was considerably effective in adapting to changing requirements.

____ Contractor was effective in adapting to changing requirements.

____ Contractor was ineffective in adapting to changing requirements.

Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________________________

4. Did the contractor have a program to monitor quality?

____ Contractor has an established, comprehensive program which he uses on every project with individuals employed specifically for quality control.

____ Contractor set up a satisfactory quality control program to comply with the requirements for your project.

____ Contractor has an established program which he uses on every project.

____ Contractor’s quality control program was ineffective on your project.

Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________________________

5. Did the contractor respond timely to warranty work?

____ Contractor responded and corrected warranty items after first notification.

____ Contractor responded but could not correct warranty items (EXPLAIN) ____ Contractor did not respond or correct warranty items.

____ There were no warranty issues.

Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________________________

6. Did the contractor take efficient measures to minimize disruption to building occupants?

___Contractor took maximum measures to ensure the least disruption to building occupants ___Contractor took minimum measures to ensure the least disruption to building occupants

Comments___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Project Management

1. How well did the contractor maintain a good relationship with the owner and the owner’s technical advisor / representatives?

____ Contractor was extremely cooperative.

____ Contractor was very cooperative.

____ Contractor was generally cooperative.

____ Contractor was not cooperative.

Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________________________

2. Was the contractor cooperative, businesslike, and concerned with the interests of project related third party entities (i.e. tenants)?

____ Contractor was extremely cooperative.

____ Contractor was very cooperative.

____ Contractor was generally cooperative.

____ Contractor was not cooperative.

Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________________________

3. Did the contractor maintain a consistent on site management/project team throughout the duration of the project?

____ No adjustments were made: contractor maintained the same team throughout the duration of the project.

____ Minor adjustments to the support team were made during the project.

____ Significant changes to the key personnel of the project team were made during the project.

____ Contractor maintained no consistency in key personnel during the project

Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________________________

4. Did the contractor adequately staff project?

____ Contractor’s staff was extremely effective.

____ Contractor’s staff was very effective.

____ Contractor’s staff was generally effective.

____ Contractor’s staff was ineffective.

Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________________________

5. How effective was the contractor's on site management team?

___ Contractor's team was extremely effective.

___ Contractor's team was very effective.

___ Contractor's team was generally effective.

___ Contractor's team was ineffective.

Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________________________

Safety History of Each Project

1. Did the contractor implement an effective accident prevention program?

_____ Contractor was extremely safety conscious.

_____ Contractor was generally safety conscious.

_____ Contractor was occasionally safety conscious.

_____ Contractor was rarely safety conscious.

Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________________________

2. Did the contractor carry a satisfactory safety plan for your project?

____ Contractor set up a satisfactory safety plan specific to the requirements of my project ____ Contractor adapted a generic safety plan that met project needs.

____ Contractor has a generic safety plan which he uses on every project; no adaptations.

____ Contractor's safety plan was ineffective for my project.

Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________________________

Overall Performance

1. Would you award a contract to this firm again for similar work?

____ Yes, they are the best firm I have ever contracted.

____ Yes, they are among the better firms.

____ Yes, they are satisfactory.

____ No, they are unsatisfactory.

Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________________________

Evaluated By: ____________________ Signature / Date

Name and Title: _______________

Organization: _______________