Proposal_Score_Sheet_BPM003384.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 58 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Master Agreement AZ|CTR057594
- Contract number
- CTR057594
- Issued by
- Arizona
About this file
This document is a Proposal Score Sheet for a Request for Statement of Qualification (RFQ) for Hydro Engineering Services, solicitation number BPM003384, issued by the Arizona Game and Fish Department. The document includes an evaluation framework for scoring potential engineering and environmental design firms, with multiple companies listed as potential bidders, including Cardno Inc, Dowl HKM, J2 Engineering, Natural Channel Design Inc, NextGen Engineering, Stantec Consulting Services, Tetra Tech, and Wilson & Co.
The scoring criteria for the hydro engineering services contract includes five key evaluation areas: Project Experience (40 points), Overall Experience (20 points), Design Philosophy/Process (15 points), Common Problems (15 points), and Overall Quality of Proposal (10 points). The evaluation process requires bidders to submit detailed information about their relevant projects from the past five years, organizational capabilities, design approach, problem-solving strategies, and potential subcontractors. The document appears to be a preliminary scoring sheet used to rank and select the most qualified engineering firm for hydro-related services for the Arizona Game and Fish Department.
View the file
Other files
Show 40 more
50 files listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.
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
Sheet1
| Offerors | ||||||||||
| ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT | Maximum Points | Cardno Inc | Dowl Hkm | J 2 Engineering and Environmental Design LLC | JE Fuller Hydrology & Geomorphology Inc | Natural Channel Design Inc | NextGen Engineering Inc | Stantec Consulting Services Inc | Tetra Tech Inc | Wilson & Co. |
| Request for Statement of Qualification for Hydro Engineering Services Solicitation BPM003384 |
| Evaluator's name: | |
| Project Experience | 40 |
| Overall Experience | 20 |
| Design Philosophy, Process, QA/QC | 15 |
| Common Problems | 15 |
| Overall Quality of Proposal | 10 |
| TOTAL POINTS | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| I hereby attest that the points awarded to each bidder listed above were scored in accordance with the established evaluation criterita and | ||||||||||
| represent my best judgement of the bidder's proposal. As indicated by the highest total score, my ranking of the proposals are: |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
SIGNATURE
PRINTED NAME TITLE
DEPARTMENT DATE
1. Project Experience (Maximum 40 Points) -List of relevant projects completed within the last 5 years. Please list the location of the project and the personnel who worked on that project that would be working with AGFD. Please list what items of work which that person was responsible for on that project. Please do not list items that were consulted out. A resume should be provided for each person listed. Resumes will not be part of the page count.
2. Overall experience. (Maximum 20 Points) Provide any relevant organizational charts, resumes, and projects created as a team. Please list what design services will be performed in house versus subcontracted. Provide a list of all sub-consultants.
3. Design Philosophy (Maximum 15 Points) Provide factors your firm would consider for each study or design for each category.
4. Common Problems (Maximum 15 Points) List the common problems that you have seen with each criteria or challenges to design. How you have overcome these problems. Provide reference for projects listed with company/agency name, contact person and phone number
5. Overall Quality of Proposal (Maximum 10 Points)
Sheet2 image4.emf image5.emf image6.emf image7.emf image8.emf image9.emf image1.emf image2.emf image3.emf
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .