City Council
October 15, 2013
Request For Competitive Sealed Proposals

• RFCSP’s allow for selection criteria other than price for
construction contrac...
RFCSP Documents
• RFCSP documents must reflect:
• Construction Documents
• Weighted Selection Criteria to be used
• Estima...
Selection Criteria

• Texas Local Government Code criteria
•
•
•
•
•
•

Price
Quality of Respondents Service
Safety Record...
Examples
• Example 1
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

35 Points = Price
30 Points = Past Performance
20 Points = Project Management
10 Poi...
Examples
• Example 2
• 70 Points = Price
• 15 Points = Local Presence/Experience
• 15 Points = Local Area Experience
Bid Analysis
Non-local
Airport Hangar $
348,574 $
1,132,000
Civic Events-Barn
WU-Red Bluff
2,306,430
WU-East Draw
2,296,20...
Recommendations
• Staff ‘s preferred approach is to use a balanced
methodology that will increase consideration for
awardi...
City Council
October 15, 2013
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

San angelo city council 11 5-13 - request for competitive sealed proposals

172
-1

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
172
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

San angelo city council 11 5-13 - request for competitive sealed proposals

  1. 1. City Council October 15, 2013
  2. 2. Request For Competitive Sealed Proposals • RFCSP’s allow for selection criteria other than price for construction contracts • May not be used with Federal/State funding • Selection Criteria must be published in the proposal. • Must be advertised for 2 consecutive weeks • Best and Final Offers can be requested • Contract may be negotiated • Negotiations begin with the highest rank respondent
  3. 3. RFCSP Documents • RFCSP documents must reflect: • Construction Documents • Weighted Selection Criteria to be used • Estimated Budget • Estimated Completion Date • Other information in order to respond to the request
  4. 4. Selection Criteria • Texas Local Government Code criteria • • • • • • Price Quality of Respondents Service Safety Records Proposed Personnel Financial Capability Any other relevant factor • Local Preference Research indicates that criteria varies depending on the city and project requirements
  5. 5. Examples • Example 1 • • • • • • • • 35 Points = Price 30 Points = Past Performance 20 Points = Project Management 10 Points = Subcontractors 06 Points = Litigation 05 Points = Relevant Experience 04 Points = Financial Stability 120 Total Points
  6. 6. Examples • Example 2 • 70 Points = Price • 15 Points = Local Presence/Experience • 15 Points = Local Area Experience
  7. 7. Bid Analysis Non-local Airport Hangar $ 348,574 $ 1,132,000 Civic Events-Barn WU-Red Bluff 2,306,430 WU-East Draw 2,296,201 WU-Water Line 1,344,648 Total $ 7,427,853 $ Local 409,700 $ 1,227,500 2,734,440 3,304,868 1,399,276 9,075,784 $ Increase cost to City $1.6M or 22% Increase cost to City $1.6M or 22% Diff 61,126 95,500 428,010 1,008,667 54,628 1,647,931
  8. 8. Recommendations • Staff ‘s preferred approach is to use a balanced methodology that will increase consideration for awarding to local contractors, promote fair/open competition and maximizing budget funds. • Recommendation – Sliding Point Scale Projected Contract Amount % <$500,000 5% <$1.5 Million 4% +$1.5 Million 3%
  9. 9. City Council October 15, 2013

×