Tinker AFB Market Research(3).docx

Market Research Questionnaire | Project Delivery & Acquisition Strategy Comprehensive Market Research Questionnaire Project Delivery & Acquisition Strategy

Table of Contents

1. Project Information Packet (PIP) Project Overview & Constraints

2. Administrative offices

3. Airfield Apron paving

2. Secure administrative offices (SCIF standards)

3. Controlled-humidity storage

2. Airfield Apron paving

2. Administrative area

2. Industry Questionnaire Purpose: The Government seeks your expert feedback to select the optimal project delivery method and contracting vehicle (FAR-based or OTA) for the above facilities. Please email your response to Daniel Foyil – Daniel.A.Foyil@usace.army.mil, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Tulsa District (CECT-SWT), no later than 2:00PM CST 23 July 2026.

Accelerated Design-Build to Budget (DBtB) FAR-based delivery approach where the Government develops sufficient project definition to competitively establish a Firm-Fixed-Price before collaborative design development.

Construction Manager at Risk (CM At Risk) - OTA Project delivery method where a construction manager acts as a consultant to the owner during the design phase and transitions to a general contractor role during construction.

Progressive Design-Build (PDB) – OTA Single design-build agreement. Phase 1 collaboratively matures the design and negotiates a Guaranteed Maximum Price before the Government decides whether to proceed with construction.

Part I: Company Information & Bidding Intent

Insert Name & CAGE]

Socioeconomic Status (Check all that apply) ☐ Large Business ☐ Small Business (SB) ☐ 8(a) Business Development Program ☐ HUBZone Small Business ☐ Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned (SDVOSB) ☐ Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB)

Aggregate Limit: $[Insert Amount]

☐ Yes as Sub ☐ No ☐☐ Undecided

☐ Joint Venture (JV) ☐ Mentor-Protégé ☐ Subcontractor/Designer Only

Part II: Delivery Method Feasibility & Risk

1. Design Control vs. Single-Point Responsibility Given the projects scale and complexity described in Section 1, which foundational approach poses the least risk to cost and schedule?

☐ Owner-Controlled Design: The Government should retain the design team but hire a builder early for constructability/pricing (CM@Risk).

☐ Single-Point Responsibility: The Government should shift design-completion risk to a single Design-Build entity (DBtB or PDB).

2. Feasibility of Early Price Certainty For the projects listed above, is it feasible to propose a reliable fixed-price early in the process (e.g., DBtB), or are the scope too undefined, requiring progressive design development (e.g., PDB)?

☐ Yes, a reliable price is achievable early based on the provided requirements.

☐ No, there is too much risk. We would need the design to reach [Insert %] completion before offering a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP).

3. Rationale Please briefly explain the top 1–2 factors driving your answers to Questions 1 and 2:

[Insert Response Here]

4. Relevant Delivery Experience Has your firm successfully executed projects of similar size/complexity using your recommended delivery method in the last 5 years?

☐ Yes ☐ No If yes, please provide 1 brief project name/location:

[Insert Response Here

Part III: Budget, Cost Drivers & Schedule

5. Budget Realism Based on current market data, does the target budget appear realistic for these facility types and scale?

[Insert Response Here]

6. Primary Cost Drivers What specific mission needs or functional requirements do you anticipate driving the most cost?

[Insert Response Here]

7. Schedule/Supply Chain Risk What systems or trades present the most significant schedule risk (e.g., long-lead MEP, local labor)?

[Insert Response Here]

Part IV: Defining Value, Collaboration & Financial Drivers

8. Collaboration Priorities Please rank the areas that would benefit most from early builder involvement during the design phase of the above projects (1 = Greatest Benefit, 5 = Least Benefit).

9. Industry Engagement & Proprietary Meetings If the Government utilizes a delivery method that allows for confidential, one-on-one proprietary meetings during the solicitation phase to collaboratively discuss innovative solutions, would your firm participate?

☐ Yes ☐ No

10. Stipends (Honorariums) & Proposal Costs In highly collaborative procurement methods (like DBtB), offerors will incur design and proposal development costs. Would the Government's offer of a stipend significantly influence your decision to compete?

☐ Yes ☐ No If Yes, what is a commercially reasonable stipend amount for a project of this scale? [Insert Amount/Percentage Here]

11. Contract Incentives What specific contract incentives would best drive innovation and maximize your firm's interest in this project?

☐ Shared Cost Savings (e.g., within a GMP structure) ☐ Award Fee for Quality / Innovation ☐ Other: [Insert Response Here]

12. Program Capability/Interest (Tinker AFB) Considering the four projects listed in Section 1 for Tinker AFB with a combined estimated value of approx. $320M:

a) Would your firm be interested in proposing as a prime contractor for all four projects?

☐ Yes ☐ No

b) If yes, does your firm have the necessary bonding capability to cover the total estimated program value?

☐ Yes. Please state your firm's current aggregate bonding capacity: $__________________ ☐ No Part V: Overall Delivery Recommendation

13. Recommended Project Delivery Path Considering all factors, which project delivery path is optimal for this specific projects? (Provide a response for each project listed in Section 1 above) ☐ Design-Bid-Build (DBB): Scope is simple and fully defined (closer to 30-35%); traditional FAR Part 36 and FAR 15 is sufficient.

☐ 6CM@Risk: Government needs to control the design but needs early builder collaboration.

☐ Design-Build to Budget (DBtB): Requirements are understood enough to drive a competitive (10-15%), fixed-price solution, use of proprietary meetings to advance design solutions (highly collaborative).

☐ Progressive Design-Build (PDB): Scope is highly complex/undefined. Requires a single contract to collaboratively mature the design before locking in a GMP.

14. Basis of Recommendation & Contracting Vehicle Please explain your selections above for each project. Indicate if you recommend executing this via a standard FAR-based contract or an Other Transaction Authority (OTA):

[Insert Response Here]

15. Evaluation Strategy For these specific projects, what evaluation criteria do you believe the Government should weigh most heavily to ensure success? (Rank top 3: 1 being most important) ☐ Past Performance ☐ Technical Approach/Design ☐ Price/GMP ☐ Key Personnel & Team Integration ☐ Other: [Insert recommendations here]

16. Commercial Best Practices & Concerns Please provide any additional comments, overly prescriptive constraints to avoid, or commercial best practices the Government should consider:

[Insert Response Here]