Q-25-03-COC_Evaluation_Commitee_Recommendation.pdf

Purchasing 65 Stone Street » Cocoa, FL 32922

PHONE: (321) 433-8833

EMAIL: purchasing@cocoafl.gov

February 4, 2025

To: Cocoa City Council

Re: Evaluation Committee Recommendation for Qualifications (RFQ) Q-25-03-COC

The City of Cocoa Purchasing Division solicited the RFQ for Engineering Services for the Pineda Causeway Phase 2 Water Main Installation in the City9s bidding platform, VendorLink, on November 22, 2024. The solicitation was simultaneously advertised in the Florida Today newspaper and posted to the City of Cocoa9s website. A total of 1,742 notifications were sent out to vendors with 36 individual downloads of the RFQ.

A public proposal opening was conducted by the Purchasing Division on January 10, 2025.

The City received responses from two engineering firms:

e Kimley Horn and Associates, Inc e CHA Inc.

On January 16, 2025 the Evaluation Committee held a public meeting to review the response to the solicitation. The committee was comprised of the following individuals:

e Katheryn Ennis, Utilities Deputy Director, City of Cocoa e John Perrin, Senior Engineer, City of Cocoa e Josh Frary, Utilities Associate Engineer Ill, City of Cocoa

During the meeting, the committee reviewed the RFQ requirements, the evaluation criteria and the proposals submitted. The committee decided that in addition to the written submittals, oral presentation would be required by the proposers to facilitate the evaluation process.

Representatives from both firms met with the Evaluation Committee at separate times on January 29, 2025, to present their proposal and to respond to committee members questions.

The Evaluation Committee then independently submitted their scoring results to the Purchasing Division on or before February 3, 2025. On February 4, 2025, The Evaluation

Committee reconvened in a public meeting to discuss their scoring results and to finalize its recommendations to City Council.

The scoring results were compiled by the Purchasing Division and summarized in the following table:

Firm Project MWBE Qual. Team Experience | Approach | Location | Firm Total

Rank| _Firm _| [20 pts] | [25 pts] | [25pts]_| [13 pts] | [15 pts] | [2 pts] | [100 pts] | cee _ Kimley-Horn Se i ae YS eee Be sheces oom Sis citer se Saat a

2 CHA Consulting 19.2 23.9 23.17 10.4 15 0 91.67

Stay Connected: www.CocoaFL.org 0o0®@

Both proposals were highly professional, demonstrating the capacity of each firm to successfully execute the project.

In accordance with the RFQ process, the City Manager and City Attorney will now enter into negotiations with the top-ranked firm. Should these negotiations prove unsuccessful, discussions will commence with the second-ranked firm. If an agreement cannot be reached with the second-ranked firm, a new RFQ process will be initiated.

A copy of the evaluation scoring results and evaluator comments are attached to this recommendation for your review.

Should there be additional questions or clarification needed please contact the Purchasing

Department at purchasing@cocoafl.gov.

Sincerely, Brian Dale

Purchasing Manager

City of Cocoa

Stay Connected: www.CocoaFL.org fT vin)

PURCHASING DEPARTMENT

Xs ) 433-6655

EMAIL: PURCHASING@:COCOFL.ORG

Technical Evaluation Score Sheet Summary

Q-25-03-COC

Engineering Services for the Pineda Causeway Phase 2 Water Main Installation

Instructions:

1. Enter your Name and Title: Name Josh Frary Title Utility Engineer III

2. Review each of the submittal

3. Enter your scores on the corresponding worksheet in the workbook

4. Enter completion date and notes if any on each worksheet

5. Completed worksheets to be submitted by the Due Date: 4/29/2025 Upload to Vendorlink

Submittal List 20 2 25 25 13 15 100 8Gompany Proj:sTeam9

Qual: Qual Location Total Score Worksheet Bid9 Tab #. Firm: Name Experience Proj, Appr. Rank 4

1-KH 1 KIMLEY HORN ;

[2-CHA 2 CHA CONSULTING 18.4 0 24.5 22 10.4 15 90.3 2

Joshua Frary

Utilitv Enaineer Ill

Summary Pg. 1 of 1

Technical Evaluation Scoring Sheet

Q-25-03-COC

Engineering Services for the Pineda Causeway Phase 2 Water Main Installation

Proposer: KIMLEY HORN

, . . Score Points Section Document Points | Weight (0-5) Awarded

Responsiveness of Prime 20% 5 4

Sufficient Resources Available 20 20% 5 4

Efnni's Cualifieations Similar Projects 20% 5 4

Proven Track Record 40% 4 6.4

Subtotal 18.4

Certified Minority Business Enterprise 2 100% LC] 0

Project Manager Experience 45% 4 9

Project Team's Qualifications Project EneinGer Experience 25 45% 5 11.25

Organizational Structure 10% 5 2.5

Subtotal} 22.75

Project 1 20% 5 5

Project 2 20% 4 4

Experience and Perfomance Project 3 -3 20% 5 5 Project 4 20% 5 5

Project 5 20% 4 4

Subtotal 23

Project Approach 13 100% 5 13

: Project Manager, Engineer and Office hesatlon Location within 75 miles of the City a ee ie

Total Points 92.15

Column Definition

Section

Document

Points

Weight

Score

Points awarded

Evaluation Criteria sections as defined in the RFP

Required documentation requested to be submitted in each tab

Total Point Value for Tab or section in the RFP

Prorate of Points towards each document being reviewed

O-Not Covered, 1-Poor, 2- Below Avg, 3- Average, 4-Above Avg, 5-Excellent

Points Awarded = Points * Weight * (Score/5)

Evaluator Name

Evaluator Title

Date Completed

Josh Frary

Utility Engineer III

Friday, January 31, 2025

Notes:

1-KH Pg. 1 of 1

Engineering Services for the Pineda Causeway Phase 2 Water Main Installation

Proposer: CHA CONSULTING i . . Score Points Section Document Points | Weight (4-10) | Awarded

Responsiveness of Prime 20% 4 3,2

Sufficient Resources Available 20 20% 5 4

Firm's Qualifications Similar Projects 20% 4 3.2

Proven Track Record 40% 5 8

Subtotal 18.4

Certified Minority Business Enterprise 2 100% L] 0

Project Manager Experience 45% 5 11.25

; ; hphe a Project Engineer Experience 25 45% 5 11.25

Project Team's Qualifications Organizational Structure 10% 4 2

Subtotal 24.5

Project 1 20% 5 5

Project 2 20% 4 4

Experience and Perfomance Project 3 2 20% 4 4 Project 4 20% 4 4

Project 5 20% 5 5

Subtotal 22

Project Approach 13 100% 4 10.4 aiaé ee Menaeet EnBineet and Oilre 15 100% 15

Location within 75 miles of the City

Total Points 90.3

Column Definition

Section

Document

Points

Weight

Score

Points awarded

Evaluation Criteria sections as defined in the RFP

Required documentation requested to be submitted in each tab

Total Point Value for Tab or section in the RFP

Prorate of Points towards each document being reviewed

0-Not Covered, 1-Poor, 2- Below Avg, 3- Average, 4-Above Avg, 5-Excellent

Points Awarded = Points * Weight * (Score/5)

Evaluator Name

Evaluator Title

Date Completed

Josh Frary

Utility Engineer III

Friday, January 31, 2025

65 Stone Street » Cocoa, FL 34922

PHONE: (324) 433-8832

FAX: (32%) 432-8685

EMATL: DURCHASING jiCOCOFL.ORG

Technical Evaluation Score Sheet Summary

Q-25-03-COC

Engineering Services for the Pineda Causeway Phase 2 Water Main Installation

Instructions:

1. Enter your Name and Title: Name Katherine Ennis Title Deputy Utilties Director

2. Review each of the submittal

3. Enter your scores on the corresponding worksheet in the workbook

4. Enter completion date and notes if any on each worksheet

5. Completed worksheets to be submitted by the Due Date: 1/29/2025 Upload to Vendorlink

Submittal List 20 2 25 25 13 15 100 = ompa = Pro . =

O ee Bid lan F 5 D Oj. ADP O O O O x

= Sa = Qua Qua a

1-KH 1 KIMLEY HORN 19.2 0 22.75 22 13 15 91.95 2

2-CHA 2 CHA CONSULTING 20 0 22.75 24 10.4 15 92.15 1|

Katherine Katherine Enns : Date: 2025.02.03

X Ennis 08:14:30 -05'00"

Summary Pg. 1 of 3

Engineering Services for the Pineda Causeway Phase 2 Water Main Installation

Proposer: KIMLEY HORN

: , . Score Points Section Document Points | Weight (0-5) Awarded

Responsiveness of Prime 20% 5 4

Sufficient Resources Available 30 20% 5 4

Firms Qualifeations Similar Projects 20% 4 332

Proven Track Record 40% 5 8

Subtotal 19.2

Certified Minority Business Enterprise 2. 100% LI] 0

Project Manager Experience 45% 5 11.25

Project Team's Qualifieations Project Engineer Experience 25 45% 4 9

Organizational Structure 10% 5 2.5

Subtotal] 22.75

Project 1 20% 5 5

Project 2 20% 5 5

Experience and Perfomance Project 3 2 20% 4 a Project 4 20% 4 4

Project 5 20% 4 4

Subtotal 22

Project Approach 13 100% 5 13 i Project Manager, Engineer and Office pocation Location within 75 miles of the City oe 100% a : 1

Total Points 91.95

Column Definition

Section

Document

Points

Weight

Score

Points awarded

Evaluation Criteria sections as defined in the RFP

Required documentation requested to be submitted in each tab

Total Point Value for Tab or section in the RFP

Prorate of Points towards each document being reviewed

0-Not Covered, 1-Poor, 2- Below Avg, 3- Average, 4-Above Avg, 5-Excellent

Points Awarded = Points * Weight * (Score/5)

Evaluator Name

Evaluator Title

Date Completed

Katherine Ennis

Deputy Utilities Director

Monday, February 3, 2025

1-KH Pg. 2 of 3

OGGA

PLORIDA

Technical Evaluation Scoring Sheet

Q-25-03-COC

Engineering Services for the Pineda Causeway Phase 2 Water Main Installation

Proposer: CHA CONSULTING

Scor Point Section Document Points | Weight 4 Awarded

Responsiveness of Prime 20% 5 4

Sufficient Resources Available 20 20% 5 4

ERE : =

Firm's Gualifications Similar Projects 20% 5 4

Proven Track Record 40% 5 8

Subtotal 20

Certified Minority Business Enterprise 2 100% CL]. 0

Project Manager Experience 45% 5 11.25

- ; ; 5 o

Projest Team9: Qualifications Project engineer Experience 45% 4 9

Organizational Structure 10% 5 2.5

Subtotal] 22.75

Project 1 20% 5 5

Project 2 Be 20% 5 5

Experience and Perfomance Project 3 20% 4 4 Project 4 20% 5 5

Project 5 20% 5 5

Subtotal 24

Project Approach 13 100% 4 10.4

: Project Manager, Engineer and Office Locat 15 100% 15 ee Location within 75 miles of the City 2 uo

Total Points 92.15

Column Definition

Section

Document

Points

Weight

Score

Points awarded

Evaluation Criteria sections as defined in the RFP

Required documentation requested to be submitted in each tab

Total Point Value for Tab or section in the RFP

Prorate of Points towards each document being reviewed

O-Not Covered, 1-Poor, 2- Below Avg, 3- Average, 4-Above Avg, 5-Excellent

Points Awarded = Points * Weight * (Score/5)

Evaluator Name

Evaluator Title

Date Completed

Katherine Ennis

Deputy Utilities Director

Monday, February 3, 2025

6D Stone Street + Cocoa, FL 32922

PHONE: (324) 433-8832

FAX: (32%) 432-8685

EMAIL: DURCHASING GtCOCOFL.ORG

Technical Evaluation Score Sheet Summary

Q-25-03-COC

Engineering Services for the Pineda Causeway Phase 2 Water Main Installation

Instructions:

1. Enter your Name and Title: Name John Perrin Title Senior Engineer

2. Review each of the submittal

3. Enter your scores on the corresponding worksheet in the workbook

4, Enter completion date and notes if any on each worksheet

5. Completed worksheets to be submitted by the Due Date: 4/29/2025 Upload to Vendorlink

Submittal List ; 20 2 25 25 13 15 100 Company Proj. Team

Worksheet Bid Tab # Firm Name Qual. Qual Experience Proj:Appr. Location Total Score Rank

1-KH ee KIMLEY HORN 19.2 0 ~ 23.3125 22.5 12.35 15s «92.3625

|2-CHA 2 CHA CONSULTING 19.2 0 24.4375 23.5 10.4 15 92.5375 1|

2/3/2025

Xx John Perrin

Signed by: John Perrin

Summary Pg. 1 of 3

Engineering Services for the Pineda Causeway Phase 2 Water Main Installation

Proposer: KIMLEY HORN

. . . Score Points Section Document Points | Weight (0-5) awanled

Responsiveness of Prime 20% 5 4

Sufficient Resources Available 0 20% 5 4

Femnle Qualifications Similar Projects 20% 4 3.2

Proven Track Record 40% 5 8

Subtotal 19.2

Certified Minority Business Enterprise 2 100% <L 0

Project Manager Experience 45% 4.5 10.125

Project Team's Qualifications Project Bubaeet Experience 25 45% 4.75 10.6875

Organizational Structure 10% 5 2.5

Subtotal} 23.3125

Project 1 20% 5 5

Project 2 20% 5 5

Experience and Perfomance Project 3 2p 20% 4 ay Project 4 20% 4 4 Project 5 20% 4.5 4.5

Subtotal 22.5

Project Approach 13 100% 4.75 12.35

: Project Manager, Engineer and Office

Focanon Location within 75 miles of the City Wa eae El te Total Points 92.3625

Column Definition

Section

Document

Points

Weight

Score

Points awarded

Evaluation Criteria sections as defined in the RFP

Required documentation requested to be submitted in each tab

Total Point Value for Tab or section in the RFP

Prorate of Points towards each document being reviewed

O-Not Covered, 1-Poor, 2- Below Avg, 3- Average, 4-Above Avg, 5-Excellent

Points Awarded = Points * Weight * (Score/5)

Evaluator Name

Evaluator Title

Date Completed

John Perrin

Senior Engineer

Monday, February 3, 2025

Notes: Score range for each firm is 0-5.

1-KH Pg. 2 of 3

Engineering Services for the Pineda Causeway Phase 2 Water Main Installation

Proposer: CHA CONSULTING

S Point Section Document Points | Weight asi Meranded

Responsiveness of Prime 20% 4.5 3.6

Sufficient Resources Available 0 20% 5 4 Sane : 5

Firms Qualifications Similar Projects 20% 5 4

Proven Track Record 40% 4.75 7.6

Subtotal 19.2

Certified Minority Business Enterprise 2 100% Fil 0

Project Manager Experience 45% 4.75 10.6875 j i i 25 9 . Projeatleam9s Qualitivations Project Engineer Experience 45% 5 11.25

Organizational Structure 10% 5 2.5

Subtotal] 24.4375

Project 1 20% 5 5

Project 2 Be 20% 5 5

Experience and Perfomance Project 3 20% 4 a:

Project 4 20% 4.5 4.5

Project 5 20% 5 5

Subtotal 23.5

Project Approach 13 100% 4 10.4

Loaation elise Manag allies and culic 15 100% 15

Location within 75 miles of the City

Total Points 92.5375

Column Definition

Section

Document

Points

Weight

Score

Points awarded

Evaluation Criteria sections as defined in the RFP

Required documentation requested to be submitted in each tab

Total Point Value for Tab or section in the RFP

Prorate of Points towards each document being reviewed

O-Not Covered, 1-Poor, 2- Below Avg, 3- Average, 4-Above Avg, 5-Excellent

Points Awarded = Points * Weight * (Score/5)

Evaluator Name John Perrin

Evaluator Title Senior Engineer

Date Completed Monday, February 3, 2025

Notes: Score range for each firm is 0-5.