Municipal Research and Services Center Washington State Chapter APWA

Transcription

1 Municipal Research and Services Center Washington State Chapter APWA Contracting for Professional Services in Washington State A Survey of Local Agencies and Consultants June July 2010 Contents Introduction Page 1 Agency Survey Questions and Responses Page 2 Consultant Survey Questions and Responses Page 32 Combined Agency/Consultant Responses to Criteria Questions (Charts) Page 80 Introduction This survey was performed in anticipation of and in preparations for the Fall 2010 Washington Chapter APWA preconference workshop entitled Help Build Your Extraordinary Future (Projects) by Selecting Extraordinary Consultants Now. This workshop was co sponsored by the following groups: Contract Administration Subcommittee (CASC) Management & Public Administration Committee (MPAC) Construction Management Committee (CM) American Council of Engineering Companies of Washington (ACEC Washington) Municipal Research and Services Center (MRSC) Two separate surveys, one for agencies and one for consultants were sent out. The surveys (using Survey Monkey) were sent to the APWA Chapter Roster, the APWA Exhibitor Group, and a large number of city and county engineers and public works directors across Washington State. While similar in nature, the questions posed in each survey were different except for the question on what are considered appropriate criteria for selection of professional service consultants, which was identical for both groups. Numerical results for each group s responses to the criteria question are shown in the survey results for that group. In addition, charts showing the combined responses are included. Eighty folks responded to the agency survey and 121 folks responded to the consultant survey. Workshop presenters and or moderators include: Art Louie, Snohomish County John Carpita, MRSC Jan Olivier, Kittitas County Jeff Monsen, CRAB Dan Dawson, Otak Ellen Hutchinson, MRSC Rosters Ingrid Gaub, City of Auburn Jim Doherty, MRSC Sheila Harrison, GHD Bob Giberson, City of Tukwila Sam Yaghmaie, Harris and Associates Tom Zerkel, Gray and Osborne Tom Skillings, Skillings and Connolly

2 1. Professional Service Contracting in Washington State In preparation for the Washington State Chapter APWA 2010 Fall Pre-Conference Workshop (October 5th) entitled Help Build Your Extraordinary Future (Projects) by Selecting Extraordinary Consultants Now (see below* for the date and sponsorship information), the organizing committee has asked MRSC to poll agency public works professionals across the state. We want to get a better idea of how agencies and consultants view the qualifications based selection process required in Chapter RCW for selection of engineers, architects, landscape architects, and surveyors. No personal data will be collected and we ask that your comments where requested be sanitized so that no firms, agencies, or individuals are named or implied. 1. I am a: nmlkj Public Works Director/City Engineer nmlkj Engineering Services Director/Manager nmlkj Project Manager nmlkj Contracts Administrator nmlkj Finance Director nmlkj Procurement Specialist/Buyer Other (please specify) 2. Does your agency? gfedc Routinely issue Request for Proposals(RFPs)for most projects? gfedc Routinely issue Request for Qualifications RFQ)for most projects? gfedc Other than during an emergency, solicit a consultant company directly for architectural, engineering, land surveying, or landscape architecture services? gfedc Have its own consulting services roster? gfedc Share a consulting services roster with other local agencies? gfedc Use a service provider such as MRSC Rosters or EcityGov for your consulting services rosters? gfedc Not use consulting service rosters at all? 3. If your agency has a consultant roster, how often is it advertised? nmlkj Annually? nmlkj Every 2 years? nmlkj Every 3 years? Other (please specify)

3 4. How many times within the last 12 months has your agency hired a professional services consulting firm, including individual work authorizations from an on-call roster? nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj or more 5. Does your agency have written policies for consultant selection? nmlkj nmlkj Yes No Comment 5 6. Does your agency use different processes for different levels of professional service fees? Please identify the fee corresponding fee range? Select the consultant using an RFQ, then RFP Process? Select the consultant using a combined RFQ/RFP process? Select the most qualified firm directly from the consulting services roster? Use the consulting services roster to select firms to which RFPs are sent? 7. How much money does your agency spend on architectural, engineering, land surveying, and landscape architect consultants per year? Architectural Engineering (any discipline of engineering) Land surveying Landscape architecture 6

4 8. Do you agree that selection of consultants for professional services contracts should be based on qualifications first, with no initial consideration of price (QBS)? nmlkj nmlkj Yes No Comment 5 9. Please describe one or more scenarios in which qualifications based selection has either worked well for your agency or has produced disappointing results When a firm has performed an initial phase of a project, do you (in the absence of any federal/state grant requirements) use the same firm for subsequent phases without further selection processes? 6 nmlkj nmlkj Yes No Other (please specify) 5 6

5 11. On a scale of 1 to 5,with 5 being the most important, please rank the following criteria as being important in selecting a consulting firm: Location of firm in relation to agency location Location of firm in relation to size and scope of project nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj Familiarity with project nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj Specific team members nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj Production capabilities nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj Funding source nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj Similar projects in portfolio nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj References nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj Past performance for agency Experience, ability and reputation Ability to meet deadlines for contract performance Responsiveness to solicitation requirements Familiarity of firm through professional networking opportunities Availability to immediately work on project nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj Marketing materials nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj Level of effort estimates or similar Desire to spread work to multiple companies Desire to retain the existing company for follow-on work nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj nmlkj

6 Agency - Professional Services Contracting I am a: Response Percent Response Count Public Works Director/City Engineer Engineering Services Director/Manager 48.0% % 16 Project Manager 17.3% 13 Contracts Administrator 8.0% 6 Finance Director 2.7% 2 Procurement Specialist/Buyer 2.7% 2 Other (please specify) 7 answered question 75 skipped question 5 Other (please specify) 1 Purchasing staff member, but not a buyer or office support Jun 24, :15 PM 2 County Engineer Jun 24, :30 PM 3 consultant Jun 25, :00 AM 4 general manager Jun 25, :37 AM 5 County Engineer Jun 28, :48 PM 6 Construction Manager Jul 10, :26 AM 7 County Engineer Jul 15, :49 PM 1 of 1

7 Agency - Professional Services Contracting Does your agency? Response Percent Response Count Routinely issue Request for Proposals(RFPs)for most projects? 35.4% 28 Routinely issue Request for Qualifications RFQ)for most projects? 45.6% 36 Other than during an emergency, solicit a consultant company directly for architectural, engineering, land surveying, or landscape architecture services? 22.8% 18 Have its own consulting services roster? Share a consulting services roster with other local agencies? 51.9% % 9 Use a service provider such as MRSC Rosters or EcityGov for your consulting services rosters? 27.8% 22 Not use consulting service rosters at all? 2.5% 2 answered question 79 skipped question 1 1 of 1

8 Agency - Professional Services Contracting If your agency has a consultant roster, how often is it advertised? Response Percent Response Count Annually? 66.0% 33 Every 2 years? 22.0% 11 Every 3 years? 12.0% 6 Other (please specify) 8 answered question 50 skipped question 30 Other (please specify) 1 Annually starting this year Jun 24, :50 PM 2 Supposed to be advertised twice/year - but that is not happening Jun 24, :26 PM 3 Consultants can apply continuously Jun 28, :34 PM 4 Every 2 years with the option of extending the roster for a third year Jun 28, :36 PM 5 An informal roster at best is used Jun 28, :48 PM 6 process is changing - used to be every 2 years; now not used much. Jul 3, :16 PM 7 We select 4-5 consultants off the MRSC roster for on-call contracts and review those each year. Jul 6, :34 PM 8 Semiannually Jul 15, :15 PM 1 of 1

9 Agency - Professional Services Contracting How many times within the last 12 months has your agency hired a professional services consulting firm, including individual work authorizations from an on-call roster? Response Percent Response Count % % % or more 25.3% 19 answered question 75 skipped question 5 1 of 1

10 Agency - Professional Services Contracting Does your agency have written policies for consultant selection? Response Percent Response Count Yes 70.1% 54 No 29.9% 23 Comment 14 answered question 77 skipped question 3 Comment 1 part of the Agency's standard operating procedures Jun 25, :37 AM 2 Use the requirements in state law. Jun 25, :05 PM 3 WSDOT Local Agency Guidelines Jun 25, :02 PM 4 Comply with LAG. Jun 28, :44 PM 5 My answers are only for "environmental consultants" - not all the engineering consultants my agency uses. Jun 28, :53 PM 6 We follow the LAG Manual for policies regarding consultant selection Jun 28, :36 PM 7 Not a formal adopted policy, but a gudieline/check list document Jun 28, :48 PM 8 We adhere to the selection preocesses that pertain to the agency funding the particular project for which a consultant's services are required. Jun 28, :25 PM 9 Follow applicable agency rules for the funding source. Jun 28, :46 PM 10 Our written policy adopts sites the RCW. Jun 28, :34 PM 11 We follow State law but our purchasing policies also reference the process. Jul 6, :34 PM 12 LAG Manual is followed. Jul 7, :49 PM 13 It is impossable to determine the amount of time it will require a consultant to do the work!!!!!! The small cities need help!!!!! Jul 15, :41 PM 14 We use the procedures specified by law. Jul 15, :49 PM 1 of 1

11 Agency - Professional Services Contracting Does your agency use different processes for different levels of professional service fees? Please identify the fee corresponding fee range? Response Percent Response Count Select the consultant using an RFQ, then RFP Process? 54.8% 23 Select the consultant using a combined RFQ/RFP process? 59.5% 25 Select the most qualified firm directly from the consulting services roster? Use the consulting services roster to select firms to which RFPs are sent? 78.6% % 24 answered question 42 skipped question 38 Select the consultant using an RFQ, then RFP Process? 1 $250,000 and up Jun 24, :44 PM 2 Jun 24, :10 PM 3 Jun 24, :18 PM 4 over $50K, complexity of project and funding source may influence decision Jun 24, :26 PM 5 Jun 24, :30 PM 6 fee greater than $100,000 Jun 25, :02 AM 7 the same dollar limits for all Jun 25, :37 AM 8 Jun 25, :06 PM 9 $150,000+ Jun 25, :28 PM 10 NA Jun 25, :49 PM 11 yes Jun 25, :28 PM 12 $75K and up Jun 25, :13 PM 13 use the RFQ for the smaller projects Jun 25, :05 PM 14 >$125k Jun 25, :26 PM 15 Jun 25, :23 PM 16 Jun 25, :55 PM 17 Jun 25, :02 PM 18 Jun 28, :39 PM 19 Yes Jun 28, :12 PM 1 of 5

12 Select the consultant using an RFQ, then RFP Process? 20 Over $15,000 Jun 28, :15 PM Jun 28, :17 PM 22 Greater than $250,000 Jun 28, :34 PM 23 Yes, for projects > $100K estimated fee Jun 28, :45 PM 24 Jun 28, :53 PM 25 larger projects, generally over $100,000 in fee Jun 28, :06 PM 26 Greater than $350,000 Jun 28, :36 PM 27 Jun 28, :48 PM 28 Jun 28, :32 PM 29 Jun 28, :32 PM 30 Jun 28, :46 PM 31 $250,000 + Jun 30, :19 PM 32 Jul 2, :18 AM 33 Jul 2, :21 PM 34 Above 250k Jul 3, :16 PM 35 Jul 6, :34 PM 36 over $50K Jul 15, :31 AM 37 Jul 15, :07 PM 38 n/a Jul 15, :15 PM 39 Jul 15, :31 PM 40 RFQ only Jul 16, :14 AM 41 Jul 16, :47 PM 42 No Jul 19, :20 PM Select the consultant using a combined RFQ/RFP process? 1 $50,000 to $250,000 Jun 24, :44 PM 2 Jun 24, :10 PM 3 For large complex projects Jun 24, :18 PM 4 RFPs are rare, but are used when appropriate, Jun 24, :26 PM 5 Jun 24, :30 PM 6 fee greater than $100,000 Jun 25, :02 AM 7 Jun 25, :37 AM 8 Jun 25, :06 PM 9 Jun 25, :28 PM 10 NA Jun 25, :49 PM 11 no Jun 25, :28 PM 12 Jun 25, :13 PM 13 for the larger projects Jun 25, :05 PM 14 >125k Jun 25, :26 PM 15 Jun 25, :23 PM 16 Jun 25, :55 PM 17 50K + Jun 25, :02 PM 18 Jun 28, :39 PM 19 No Jun 28, :12 PM 20 Jun 28, :15 PM 2 of 5

13 Select the consultant using a combined RFQ/RFP process? 21 Jun 28, :17 PM 22 Jun 28, :34 PM 23 Yes, for projects > $100K Jun 28, :45 PM 24 Every 2-3 yrs Jun 28, :53 PM 25 Jun 28, :06 PM 26 Greater than $350,000 Jun 28, :36 PM 27 Our most common approach Jun 28, :48 PM 28 $50,000 Jun 28, :32 PM 29 greater than $25,000 in services Jun 28, :32 PM 30 > $100,000 Jun 28, :46 PM 31 Jun 30, :19 PM 32 Large/complex projects; no set fee threshold Jul 2, :18 AM 33 >$200K Jul 2, :21 PM 34 Above 250k/request approach, not price. Jul 3, :16 PM 35 Jul 6, :34 PM 36 N/A Jul 15, :31 AM 37 federal and specialized projects Jul 15, :07 PM 38 n/a Jul 15, :15 PM 39 Jul 15, :31 PM 40 Jul 16, :14 AM 41 Yes, for contracts with expected value > $100k Jul 16, :47 PM 42 No Jul 19, :20 PM Select the most qualified firm directly from the consulting services roster? 1 0 to $50,000 Jun 24, :44 PM 2 Jun 24, :10 PM 3 for more straight forward projects Jun 24, :18 PM 4 always when less than $20K, typically also when under $50K Jun 24, :26 PM 5 Jun 24, :30 PM 6 Do not use this approach. Jun 25, :02 AM 7 Jun 25, :37 AM 8 OH & FF are negotiated before the contract is in place Jun 25, :06 PM 9 $10,000 to $150,000 Jun 25, :28 PM 10 NA Jun 25, :49 PM 11 only for specialized emergency type work Jun 25, :28 PM 12 $50K and lower Jun 25, :13 PM 13 select the best for the particular project. CHM2Hill, and other large firms, are the most qualified engineering for all projects. Jun 25, :05 PM 14 <$125k Jun 25, :26 PM 15 all fee ranges Jun 25, :23 PM 16 Jun 25, :55 PM 17 1K - 20K Jun 25, :02 PM 18 Most Jun 28, :39 PM 19 No Jun 28, :12 PM 20 $7,500 to $15,000 Jun 28, :15 PM 3 of 5

14 Select the most qualified firm directly from the consulting services roster? 21 Jun 28, :17 PM 22 Greater than $15,000 Jun 28, :34 PM 23 Yes, if < $100K Jun 28, :45 PM 24 yes, once the RFQ/RFP process is complete Jun 28, :53 PM 25 smaller projects and then use phone interviews with written follow up Jun 28, :06 PM 26 Less than $350,000 Jun 28, :36 PM 27 Jun 28, :48 PM 28 Jun 28, :32 PM 29 Jun 28, :32 PM 30 < $3,000 Jun 28, :46 PM 31 <$40,000 Jun 30, :19 PM 32 Small to medium projects: no set fee threshold Jul 2, :18 AM 33 <$200K Jul 2, :21 PM 34 below 250k Jul 3, :16 PM 35 Generally this is the process. On special or big projects we may use the RFP process. Jul 6, :34 PM 36 sometimes, if used, under $50K Jul 15, :31 AM 37 most projects Jul 15, :07 PM 38 n/a Jul 15, :15 PM 39 Less than $25,000 Jul 15, :31 PM 40 Jul 16, :14 AM 41 Yes, for contracts with expected value < $100k Jul 16, :47 PM 42 Yes Jul 19, :20 PM Use the consulting services roster to select firms to which RFPs are sent? 1 Jun 24, :44 PM 2 Typically this is what we do. Jun 24, :10 PM 3 Jun 24, :18 PM 4 not aware that our dept does this Jun 24, :26 PM 5 The vast majority of A/E Consultants are selected by this method. Jun 24, :30 PM 6 fee less than $100,000 Jun 25, :02 AM 7 Jun 25, :37 AM 8 Jun 25, :06 PM 9 Jun 25, :28 PM 10 NA Jun 25, :49 PM 11 yes - plus advertise Jun 25, :28 PM 12 Jun 25, :13 PM 13 do not use a rostoer since we do not utilize consultants very often Jun 25, :05 PM 14 <$125 Jun 25, :26 PM 15 if RFP seems most appropriate Jun 25, :23 PM 16 most of the time we use this scenario, regardless of cost range Jun 25, :55 PM 17 20K - 50K Jun 25, :02 PM 18 Jun 28, :39 PM 19 No Jun 28, :12 PM 20 Jun 28, :15 PM 4 of 5

15 Use the consulting services roster to select firms to which RFPs are sent? 21 Jun 28, :17 PM 22 Jun 28, :34 PM 23 Sometimes, for high visibility projects btwn $50K - $100K Jun 28, :45 PM 24 Jun 28, :53 PM 25 Jun 28, :06 PM 26 Less than $350,000 Jun 28, :36 PM 27 Informal consultant list with simple scope/low cost Jun 28, :48 PM 28 Jun 28, :32 PM 29 Jun 28, :32 PM 30 <100,000 Jun 28, :46 PM 31 $40, ,000 Jun 30, :19 PM 32 Medium size projects; no set fee threshold Jul 2, :18 AM 33 >$200K Jul 2, :21 PM 34 only RFP (asking for price) to one firm Jul 3, :16 PM 35 Jul 6, :34 PM 36 N/A Jul 15, :31 AM 37 Jul 15, :07 PM 38 n/a Jul 15, :15 PM 39 $25,000 and greater Jul 15, :31 PM 40 Jul 16, :14 AM 41 Jul 16, :47 PM 42 No Jul 19, :20 PM 5 of 5

16 Agency - Professional Services Contracting How much money does your agency spend on architectural, engineering, land surveying, and landscape architect consultants per year? Response Percent Response Count Architectural 66.7% 38 Engineering (any discipline of engineering) 100.0% 57 Land surveying 71.9% 41 Landscape architecture 61.4% 35 answered question 57 skipped question 23 Architectural 1 Jun 24, :32 PM 2 Jun 24, :44 PM 3 $120,000 Jun 24, :50 PM 4 0 Jun 24, :04 PM 5 Jun 24, :10 PM 6 We use architects sparingly, or as a sub consultant Jun 24, :18 PM 7 0 Jun 24, :26 PM 8 $100K Jun 24, :30 PM 9 $20,000 Jun 25, :02 AM 10 Jun 25, :33 AM 11 $300,000 unique for the past year. ususally not so high Jun 25, :37 AM 12 Jun 25, :21 PM 13 Jun 25, :56 PM 14 Jun 25, :06 PM 15 Varies Jun 25, :28 PM 16 $25,000 to $50,000 Jun 25, :49 PM 17 0 Jun 25, :28 PM 18 Jun 25, :13 PM 19 Usually none, 0 to $800,000 for the new city hall being built this year. Jun 25, :05 PM Mil? Jun 25, :26 PM 21 Jun 25, :14 PM 22 varies was around $150,000 Jun 25, :23 PM 23 varies wildly, depending on whether we have an applicable project Jun 25, :55 PM 24 30K Jun 25, :02 PM 1 of 6

17 Architectural ,000 Jun 28, :39 PM 26 Jun 28, :12 PM 27 0 Jun 28, :15 PM 28 Jun 28, :39 PM 29 varies, last year > $200K, but most years < $25K Jun 28, :45 PM 30 $50,000 - $100,000 Jun 28, :06 PM 31 Less than $100,000 Jun 28, :36 PM 32 $0 - $10,000 Jun 28, :48 PM 33 Jun 28, :25 PM 34 Jun 28, :31 PM 35 Jun 28, :32 PM 36 Jun 28, :32 PM 37 $700,000-1,000,000 Jun 28, :46 PM 38 10K Jun 28, :34 PM 39 0 Jun 29, :56 PM 40 Jun 29, :56 PM 41 <50,000 Jun 30, :19 PM 42 $30,000 Jul 2, :18 AM 43 Jul 2, :21 PM k Jul 3, :16 PM 45 Several million the last few years (two large bldg. projs). Jul 6, :34 PM 46 none Jul 10, :26 AM 47? Jul 15, :31 AM Jul 15, :50 PM 49 Jul 15, :07 PM 50 unknown Jul 15, :15 PM 51 0 Jul 15, :30 PM 52 $500,000 Jul 15, :31 PM K Jul 15, :48 PM 54 none Jul 15, :41 PM 55 Jul 15, :49 PM 56 Varies Jul 16, :47 PM 57 0 Jul 19, :20 PM Engineering (any discipline of engineering) 1 $150,000 Jun 24, :32 PM 2 $500,000 Jun 24, :44 PM 3 $30,000 Jun 24, :50 PM 4 750,000 Jun 24, :04 PM Jun 24, :10 PM 6 Less than one million per year Jun 24, :18 PM 7 close to $1M Jun 24, :26 PM 8 $500K - $750K Jun 24, :30 PM 9 $1,000,000 Jun 25, :02 AM 10 $500,000 Jun 25, :33 AM 2 of 6

18 Engineering (any discipline of engineering) 11 $800,000 Jun 25, :37 AM 12 $50K-$500K Jun 25, :21 PM Jun 25, :56 PM ,000 Jun 25, :06 PM 15 Varies Jun 25, :28 PM 16 $100,000 to $150,000 Jun 25, :49 PM ,000 Jun 25, :28 PM 18 $500K Jun 25, :13 PM 19 $20,000 - electrical, 20,000 geotechnical Jun 25, :05 PM Mil? Jun 25, :26 PM 21 Over $100, Jun 25, :14 PM 22 varies was around $200,000 Jun 25, :23 PM 23 more than $1M Jun 25, :55 PM 24 60K Jun 25, :02 PM ,000 Jun 28, :39 PM 26 $4M Jun 28, :12 PM 27 $100,000 Jun 28, :15 PM 28 $110,000 Jun 28, :39 PM 29 varies greatly but usually $500K to $2M Jun 28, :45 PM 30 $250,000 - $400,000 Jun 28, :06 PM 31 Greater than $2,000,000 Jun 28, :36 PM 32 $50,000 - $250,000 Jun 28, :48 PM 33 project dependent, this year 275,000 Jun 28, :25 PM 34 $500,000 Jun 28, :31 PM 35 over $2M Jun 28, :32 PM 36 $100k Jun 28, :32 PM 37 $1-3 million Jun 28, :46 PM 38 Average 3M/year Jun 28, :34 PM 39 $ K Jun 29, :56 PM Jun 29, :56 PM 41 $300,000 - $500,000 Jun 30, :19 PM 42 $2 million past several years; will drop to about $500,000 Jul 2, :18 AM 43 $500K - $1,000K Jul 2, :21 PM million Jul 3, :16 PM 45 Less than a million. Jul 6, :34 PM 46 quite a bit Jul 10, :26 AM 47 $4M+ Jul 15, :31 AM Jul 15, :50 PM ,000 Jul 15, :07 PM 50 2 to 3 million per year Jul 15, :15 PM 51 on average, probably $300,000 Jul 15, :30 PM 52 $5,000,000 Jul 15, :31 PM 53 1 to 3 million Jul 15, :48 PM 54 $200,000 to $400,000 per year Jul 15, :41 PM 55 Up to $200,000 Jul 15, :49 PM 3 of 6

19 Engineering (any discipline of engineering) 56 Varies Jul 16, :47 PM 57 $500,000 Jul 19, :20 PM Land surveying 1 Jun 24, :32 PM 2 Jun 24, :44 PM 3 $5,000 Jun 24, :50 PM 4 20,000 Jun 24, :04 PM Jun 24, :10 PM 6 less than 20 thousand per year Jun 24, :18 PM 7 0 Jun 24, :26 PM 8 <$50K Jun 24, :30 PM 9 $10,000 Jun 25, :02 AM 10 $150,000 Jun 25, :33 AM 11 $30,000 Jun 25, :37 AM 12 Jun 25, :21 PM 13 Jun 25, :56 PM 14 Jun 25, :06 PM 15 Varies Jun 25, :28 PM 16 $10,000 Jun 25, :49 PM 17 10,000 Jun 25, :28 PM 18 $75K Jun 25, :13 PM 19 0 Jun 25, :05 PM 20 <500k Jun 25, :26 PM 21 Jun 25, :14 PM 22 Jun 25, :23 PM 23 less than $150K Jun 25, :55 PM 24 20K Jun 25, :02 PM 25 50,000 Jun 28, :39 PM 26 Jun 28, :12 PM 27 0 Jun 28, :15 PM 28 Jun 28, :39 PM 29 ~$50K - $100K Jun 28, :45 PM 30 $25,000 - $50,000 Jun 28, :06 PM 31 Less than $500,000 Jun 28, :36 PM 32 $0 - $10,000 Jun 28, :48 PM 33 Jun 28, :25 PM 34 Jun 28, :31 PM 35 Jun 28, :32 PM 36 Jun 28, :32 PM 37 $15-25,000 Jun 28, :46 PM K/year Jun 28, :34 PM 39 $1-50K Jun 29, :56 PM 40 Jun 29, :56 PM 41 not directly, usually in the engineering fee Jun 30, :19 PM 4 of 6

20 Land surveying 42 $15,000 Jul 2, :18 AM 43 Jul 2, :21 PM 44 2 million Jul 3, :16 PM 45 Less than $50K. Jul 6, :34 PM 46 a fair amopunt Jul 10, :26 AM 47 $500K+ Jul 15, :31 AM Jul 15, :50 PM 49 5,000 Jul 15, :07 PM 50 less than $50,000 Jul 15, :15 PM 51 not sure Jul 15, :30 PM 52 $200,000 Jul 15, :31 PM K Jul 15, :48 PM 54 $10,000 Approx. Jul 15, :41 PM 55 Jul 15, :49 PM 56 Varies Jul 16, :47 PM 57 Not sure, another person does this, but it's a decent amount Jul 19, :20 PM Landscape architecture 1 Jun 24, :32 PM 2 Jun 24, :44 PM 3 $5,000 Jun 24, :50 PM 4 0 Jun 24, :04 PM 5 Jun 24, :10 PM 6 only as a sub consultant Jun 24, :18 PM 7 included in the $1M - typically part of the overall contract Jun 24, :26 PM 8 0 Jun 24, :30 PM 9 $0 Jun 25, :02 AM 10 Jun 25, :33 AM 11 Jun 25, :37 AM 12 Jun 25, :21 PM 13 Jun 25, :56 PM 14 Jun 25, :06 PM 15 Varies Jun 25, :28 PM 16 $20,000 Jun 25, :49 PM 17 0 Jun 25, :28 PM 18 Jun 25, :13 PM 19 0 Jun 25, :05 PM k to 1mil Jun 25, :26 PM 21 Jun 25, :14 PM 22 Jun 25, :23 PM 23 less than $100K Jun 25, :55 PM Jun 25, :02 PM ,000 Jun 28, :39 PM 26 Jun 28, :12 PM 27 0 Jun 28, :15 PM 5 of 6

21 Landscape architecture 28 Jun 28, :39 PM 29 ~$0K - $50K Jun 28, :45 PM 30 $10,000 Jun 28, :06 PM 31 Less than $200,000 Jun 28, :36 PM 32 $0 - $10,000 Jun 28, :48 PM 33 Jun 28, :25 PM 34 Jun 28, :31 PM 35 Jun 28, :32 PM 36 Jun 28, :32 PM 37 <$10,000 Jun 28, :46 PM K/year Jun 28, :34 PM 39 0 Jun 29, :56 PM 40 Jun 29, :56 PM 41 <$100,000 Jun 30, :19 PM 42 None Jul 2, :18 AM 43 Jul 2, :21 PM k Jul 3, :16 PM 45 Less than a million (two park projects the last two years) Jul 6, :34 PM 46 very little Jul 10, :26 AM 47? Jul 15, :31 AM 48 Jul 15, :50 PM 49 Jul 15, :07 PM 50 this profession is normally a subset of engineering contracts Jul 15, :15 PM 51 0 Jul 15, :30 PM 52 $300,000 Jul 15, :31 PM 53 0 Jul 15, :48 PM 54 none Jul 15, :41 PM 55 Jul 15, :49 PM 56 Varies Jul 16, :47 PM 57 $35000 Jul 19, :20 PM 6 of 6

22 Agency - Professional Services Contracting Do you agree that selection of consultants for professional services contracts should be based on qualifications first, with no initial consideration of price (QBS)? Response Percent Response Count Yes 74.3% 55 No 25.7% 19 Comment 26 answered question 74 skipped question 6 Comment 1 Cost should also be a factor for selection. Jun 24, :50 PM 2 For most street projects, there are multiple qualified firms which makes selecting one difficult. Allowing agencies to ask for prices would help narrow down the choices. I don't believe in having to go with the lowest price every time, but providing a price would help in the selection process. Jun 24, :10 PM 3 As a professional engineer in this state I believe that this is the proper method Jun 24, :18 PM 4 Absolutely, on an RFQ. The work has not been defined well enough for a price to be put on it until youget down to the Scope of Work. We still have an out should we not be able to agree. 5 I see the negative impacts from fee based selection that goes on with private projects almost daily in our Development review process. 6 The challenge is that the larger firms can put together a diverse, well qualified team due to their size. Smaller, equally qualified teams often don't have the resources of a marketing team to do this. It's been my experience smaller, local firms are often much more responsive. 7 I think cost should be one of the evaluation criteria. Maybe it's 60/40 or some other combination for how its weighted. Jun 24, :26 PM Jun 24, :30 PM Jun 25, :21 PM Jun 25, :14 PM 8 Legally there seems to be no choice, however economically, it makes little sense Jun 25, :23 PM 9 Prefer selection based upon qualifications rather than prices. Jun 25, :25 PM 10 While the cost of a project is always important, the idea of using price to select consultants is typically based on the notion that engineering consulting is a comoditiy - and nothing could be further from the truth. Good engineering results in a good project, and conversely, shoddy engineering ultimately leads to a poor project with long-term problems for the Owner. 11 Yes, however the consultant's understanding of the scope and budget of the project is a qualification in which selection is based. For example, we would not rank a consultant firm favorably if their plan is to fly in an asphalt pavement expert from across the country to prepare plans for a typical overlay project. But we may rank a consultant firm favorably if they propose to fly in a leading expert from across the country in the design of sun dial bridges to do QA/QC for the design of a proposed sun dial bridge. Jun 28, :45 PM Jun 28, :36 PM 1 of 2

23 Comment 12 I prefer a combination RFQ with a preliminary task and scope proposal (not dollars) to gauge the consultant's understanding of a project. 13 The consultants should be required to furnish a cost per hour for the various employees expected to be utilized and the markups used for overhead, fixed fee, etc. thecontracting agency would have another tool to help in the selction process, especialy when two or three are very close in their ability to perform the work requested. 14 It would be nice to have some idea of price so we don't waste time with someone if they are way off the mark on price and not willing to negotiate. Having some idea up front would be helpful. Jun 28, :48 PM Jun 28, :25 PM Jun 28, :41 PM 15 I vote that price becomes an allowable criteria to the evaluation process. Jun 28, :34 PM 16 It seems to me that everyone is responsible to hold the standards set by WSDOT and local agencies. References will allow agencies to follow-up with firm's ability to complete the work at hand. However, what I have seen is that richer firms are able to develop the Statements of Qualifications directly to respond to RFQ's and so often score better. 17 I agree with qualifications based selection. However, I think we should be allowed to require some indication of the level of effort a consultant envisions - approximate total billable hours without rates attached, or some other indicator. Without that indicator, a firm may have qualified staff and appropriately describe the process to complete the project, but after selection their level of effort and fee is substantially more or less than we estimated, often indicating the firm doesn't really understand the project. I would like to use that lack of project understanding as a factor during the selection process, rather than having to wait until the firm is selected and we've begun negotiations. Jun 29, :56 PM Jul 2, :18 AM 18 Need to make sure we get the best qualified, otherwise we pay later. Jul 3, :16 PM 19 Except that it should depend on the project. Where there is no risk to the public welfare (safety and health), I think that price considerations should be a factor. 20 Looking at the price tells us whether the fiem sees the project the same way we do. I had a project to do a hydrologic evaluation of a section of river in Oregon. We thought it was about a $50,000 job. We got five proposals. One was $250,000, one was $14,000, and three were in the $40,000 - $60,000 range. We did not waste our time on the high and the low and picked a good firm from the middle three (and not the cheapest of those). 21 Generally, I agree, but there needs to be a balance. It doesn't matter if X firm is more qualified, if they are going to cost 5 times more than anybody else as well as 5 times more than the budget! Jul 6, :34 PM Jul 15, :05 PM Jul 15, :30 PM 22 Because we are unable to determine the hours to do the work, we need help. Jul 15, :41 PM 23 State law rrequires this of counties. Jul 15, :49 PM 24 I feel that the consultant rosters should already have pre-sreened the qualifications and ability to provide the services as described in the roster. I feel that the RFQ process is driving up consultant costs as some agencies do a blanket rfq request when it is only 1 consultant that the contract is awarded to. It is also a waste of resources. 25 It should be based on qualifications and proposed scope of work without a cost proposal. 26 Although we limit profit to 10% and overhead to 170% for all selected consultants so that we achieve some balance and equality for all consultants hired by our department. Jul 16, :14 AM Jul 16, :47 PM Jul 19, :20 PM 2 of 2

24 Agency - Professional Services Contracting Please describe one or more scenarios in which qualifications based selection has either worked well for your agency or has produced disappointing results. Response Count 32 answered question 32 skipped question 48 Response Text 1 The consulant selected where to costly so we had to go with the second firm on our selection list. 2 We have used interview teams to select the most qualified consultant. It worked well on our City Hall project. 3 The difficulty is to determine what the real cost for the service is. A tight Scope of Work gives you a tool to estimate the work.. Lately I have been a bit under the consultants estimate for the work. 4 We have had projects where Consultants performed poorly, and could not live up to the committments thay made during the selection process. Consultants must honestly assess and communicate their abilities for the system to work. 5 $40,000,000 Combined Sewer Overflow Project, RFP issued then short developed followed by interviews. Jun 24, :32 PM Jun 24, :18 PM Jun 24, :26 PM Jun 24, :30 PM Jun 25, :02 AM 6 I believe the processes we have in place for selecting consultants has worked well Jun 25, :06 PM 7 We always seem to need to pay to train the consultant. No matter what experience they seem to have, we always need to go over our standards, federal funding requirements, standard procedures, being responsive to our agency needs on PSE layout, etc. 8 1.) Hired a good lead firm that with a miserable sub. 2.) In another instance the successful firm was aware of the budget and indicated in the interview they were comfortable with the budget. Subsequent negotiation could not fit within the project budget. Wasted time energy and trust. 9 We generally get good results. We had one bad experience where reputation of the firm helped with selection but then the firm failed to live up to it's reputation. A bad experience that cost us a lot of money. Will not use the firm again. 10 I can think of a few cases when a rather large firm appears well qualified for a small to medium project. However the large firms sometimes are not able to adapt or are unwilling to adapt (in a timely manner) to a specific engineering need or condition of the project. However the same large firms seem well suited for a large complexed project such as a waste water treatment plant upgrade. 11 Qualifications are no guarantee of a successful project and using qualifications does not even let you lessen the impact by selecting lower prices QBS is fine but in a few cases we had at least two equally qualified consultants to choose from. Without being able to compare cost we do not know if our money is being used the most efficiently. Jun 25, :06 PM Jun 25, :28 PM Jun 25, :28 PM Jun 25, :13 PM Jun 25, :26 PM Jun 25, :14 PM 1 of 3

25 Response Text 13 Following legal requirements choosing the most qualified consultant has not produced disappointing results but certainly, a certain number of simple projects could have been completed just as well by a lesser qualfied selection. 14 Most cases have favorable results. Disappointing results are most frequent when local consultant(s) are asked to respond to an RFP, then exert political pressure when they are not selected - despite it being clear to the selection panel that the local consultant cannot even approach the level of service and quality that the selected consultant can provide. 15 I think it has paid off that we get a combination between the most qualified with the best fit to the proejct and our organization. 16 The qualification based selection has worked well for the City of Fircrest in every instance. 17 I can see a scenario in which qualifications-based selection lead to the selection of a team that had a particular sub-consultant that the Owner was interested in, with the lead consultant ultimatly turning out to be a disappointing choice. However, I am not sure that a cost-based selection would have changed the results. 18 After a lengthy QBS selection process involving first a RFQ, then secondly a RFP to the top four ranking firms, then finally an interview process, the top four firms were ranked from the most qualified to the least qualified. Negotiations for a contract then began with the most qualified firm, which took an inordinate amount of time. The total time for the RFQ/RFP/Interview/Negotiations process was almost a year. In the meantime the progress of the project crawled along at a snails pace requiring us to devise some workarounds to keep the project going. Need a speedier process that is QBS to bring Consultants on board without having to resort to a roster to maintain project schedule. 19 I have not had a good or bad consequence based solely on the qualification based selection process as I find that establishing and maintaining good communications resolves most problems. I have encountered firms that change personnel on you or have personnel not up to the task that can't necessarily be sorted out through the selection process. 20 The only drawback to the current QBS process is the time and cost to the agency and the consultant community. Start oif RFP to execution of contract is well over one year. Otherwise, it works fine. 21 Assuming our jurisdiction has compettive environment, pricing is less of an issue than qualifications. If we were more remote this would likely make price a more critical element upfront 22 We have had pretty good success with consultants. We've been dissappointed at times. No particular issue why this has occurred. In my opinion sometimes they have too many contracts to juggle and cannot focus enough time on any given one. Other issues have been quality of work product - or lack thereof. 23 The first thought is we have benefited greatly when Responsible Bidder Criteria was codified in RCW for competitive public works projects. Jun 25, :23 PM Jun 25, :55 PM Jun 25, :02 PM Jun 28, :15 PM Jun 28, :45 PM Jun 28, :36 PM Jun 28, :48 PM Jun 28, :32 PM Jun 28, :32 PM Jun 28, :41 PM Jun 28, :34 PM In the area of professional/a&e serivces, we have had positive and negative experiences using our consultant roster that was derived from the qualifications selection process. When consultants with known successes make it through the selection process, they are favored to receive proposals; frankly, Project Managers want a quality job delivered on time and within budget. It's human nature to to choose those firms on the roster that are known to meet these requirements with a high degree of success. 2 of 3

26 Response Text 24 Qualifications based selection has generally worked well for us across all sizes of projects. One component of the process is having to defend a selection to the firms that weren't selected, because typically most of the firms are well qualified and the differences between them and reasons for selecting one over the others is very slight. I have experienced several firms that became rather beligerent that they weren't selected, arguing again why they should have been selected and being rude and disrepctful to me and my staff. Of course, after behavior like that, they will never be sent an RFP or selected to work on any of our projects, regardless of their qualifications. 25 QBS process gave us the best team for two major utility projects - sound advice, common sense, creative, and proactive; looking ahead for ptifalls during construction and operation. Paying a bit more up front, but it will cost us lessinthe long run. 26 Won't go into detail, but have had it go both ways. The three biggest problems I had experienced with firms, even after an extensive selection process, is that: 1. They don't keep you posted. 2. They sometimes make decisions on things like schedules without checking to make sure the change is OK, and; 3. They sometimes assign more junior staff to assignments resulting in less quality product due to the lack of experience. 27 There is a lot of time and taxpayer money wasted when you do a qualificationsonly based selection and the top firm wants too much money for the project. You spend a lot of time and waste money trying to talk them down and reducing the scope, only to eventually reject them and move on to number two (who you would have most likely picked in the first place without this foolish rule). The purpose of the rule is to keep city/county public works agencies (or city councils) from always picking the lowest priced firm. I have been in the business for 25 years and have never seen that happen. Who would buy a car based on the spec sheet without also considering the price? 28 Qualification based selection has always worked well for the City. It especially works the best when all the subconsultants are present during the interview process. 29 After selection of the most qualified firm and when their project manager leaves the company--that is not good. The process works well most of the time in identifying who has the expertise/desire to perform the work. 30 When the consultant wants to do part of the work lump sum with no costs and no hours The costs were disappointing. Jul 2, :18 AM Jul 3, :16 PM Jul 6, :34 PM Jul 15, :05 PM Jul 15, :15 PM Jul 15, :31 PM Jul 15, :41 PM 31 Design services for all-weather soccer fields. Jul 16, :47 PM 32 We follow the WSDOT consultant contract process; some smaller firms don't know how to fill out some of the exhibits required for the contract. Environmental process- archaeological/historical firms are in high demand, but often the quality of the work varies a lot, this is an area where the region needs more consultants. Need to have a clear and defendable scoring/selection criteria, and maintain those records for the duration of all contracts. This is subject to review/audit. Jul 19, :20 PM 3 of 3

27 Agency - Professional Services Contracting When a firm has performed an initial phase of a project, do you (in the absence of any federal/state grant requirements) use the same firm for subsequent phases without further selection processes? Response Percent Response Count Yes 80.4% 45 No 19.6% 11 Other (please specify) 46 answered question 56 skipped question 24 Other (please specify) 1 depends on the consultant's performance Jun 24, :04 PM 2 We would typically do this provided we were pleased with the work done during the initial phase of the project. Jun 24, :10 PM 3 don't know Jun 24, :15 PM 4 It depends on how satisfied we were with the initial work. We have recently hired a second firm for the first time to my knowledge 5 We tend to do that as we feel it safes time and money - if we are happy with the work performed. 6 Depends upon legal requirements, and whether or not performance was satisfactory. 7 it depends on how well the consultant performed and whether the project can reasonably be picked up by another firm and completed w/o substantive efforts 8 Performance is reviewed and follow on work if associated no further selection performed. Jun 24, :18 PM Jun 24, :26 PM Jun 24, :30 PM Jun 24, :38 PM Jun 25, :02 AM 9 we do considder performance before we continue to the next phast Jun 25, :37 AM 10 Yes, if it's clearly stated in the RFP and we've been satisfied with the work. Jun 25, :21 PM 11 Yes, unless we are not satisfied with initial phase performance. Jun 25, :28 PM 12 It depends on variables like performance, time between phases, cost of the phases, variation of work between the phases. Jun 25, :13 PM 13 Sometimes Jun 25, :34 PM 14 A qualified yes, because it happens more often than not, but it is no guaranteed event. 15 This is generally on a case by case basis. Certain times, by doing the initial phase, they become the most qualified. Jun 25, :26 PM Jun 25, :23 PM 16 But, it is indicated up front that there may be other phases. Jun 25, :25 PM 17 More often than not, but not always. Question should have been framed better to include a range of "all of the time", "most of the time", "rarely" and "never". Jun 25, :55 PM 1 of 3

28 Other (please specify) 18 Not automatically. There is an opportunity to review the performance and that will tell a lot about whether or not a consultant may proceed on subsequent phases. There is an advantage to carrying on with the same consultants knowledge base and less time to come up to project speed. However, the consultant has to prove himself. Jun 25, :02 PM 19 Sometimes, it depends on the scope fo the work Jun 28, :33 PM 20 Generally wee do, however on large multi-year multi-phase projects we may change consultants Jun 28, :39 PM 21 Sometimes Jun 28, :58 PM 22 Yes if the services provided were postive and relatively free of errors and omissions. 23 Yes, sometimes, but not always. When we do, we make a point to bring this to the attention of our board so that they are aware of the situation and can confirm the staff recommendation. 24 Most times but not always. Some depends on their performance and our relationship throughout the process. 25 Depends on how things have gone during the initial phase but usually it is advertised as new project. Jun 28, :12 PM Jun 28, :45 PM Jun 28, :09 PM Jun 28, :35 PM 26 if stated in the initial contract that this was an option Jun 28, :06 PM 27 This is normally done when a Consultant selected from our on-call roster to perform an initial phase of a project does an acceptable job. We then issue the work authorization for the next follow-on phase to the same Consultant in order to maintain continuity. If the Consultant does not perform acceptably on the first phase, we will choose another Consultant from the on-call roster to prepare the next phase. For RFQ/RFP process, we state that in the contract that we reserve the option to retain the Consultant for follow-on work or terminate the contract and issue a new RFQ/RFP. 28 Not necessarily. When a project's funding is dependent on phased completion steps, a phased consultant approach would be done with an extension of the same firm doing subsequent tasks. In some cases, phases may require different kinds of expertise (ie structural versus civil) and it would make more sense to select different consultants. 29 Unless the firm did not do an acceptable job for the first phase, or they are not qualified or able to handle the following phase. Jun 28, :36 PM Jun 28, :48 PM Jun 28, :04 PM 30 It is clearly stated in the RFP and it is at the agency option. Jun 28, :32 PM 31 This has become problemattic inthat under competitve bidding the original form could lose and the County has to absorb training up expenses form switching. We are oftent faced with scoping exercise that is heavily involved in field investigations. End products of this phase need to be readily transferable 32 We've done this only when we've indicated in the initial contract that additional work related to the same project may be added later. Jun 28, :32 PM Jun 28, :41 PM 33 Depends on how the RFP or RFQ was advertised. Jun 28, :45 PM 34 Yes, If they have performed well. Jun 28, :46 PM 35 Mostly yes, but not always. Liability or responsibility is easier to assign when a single entity is involved in the engineering process, for example. It's good business sense. Jun 28, :34 PM 36 Typically. But this isn't a rule. Jun 29, :56 PM 37 We often use the same firm for future phases of a project, provided they performed well on the initial phase of the project. We typically conduct our solicitation and selection process to include the future phases of the project in case we want to continue using the same firm. If we don't, we always have the option of conducting a new solicitation and selection process for the future phases. Jul 2, :18 AM 2 of 3

29 Other (please specify) 38 Depends on project and timing of design phase Jul 2, :21 PM 39 We change only if the performance drops, or we decide to go D-B Jul 3, :16 PM 40 Yes, but not without considering performance and the best interests of the public. Jul 6, :34 PM 41 It depends on performance of the consultant and/or other unforseen circumstances, but in many cases, yes. Jul 7, :49 PM 42 Usually, but not always. Jul 15, :05 PM 43 Sometimes - depends on that firm's performance to date, as well as what action is in the best interests of the City. Jul 15, :30 PM 44 if the work on the initial phase is done OK Jul 15, :41 PM 45 Yes and no as it depends on the performance during the initial phase. Jul 16, :14 AM 46 More efficient to do this, saves money Jul 19, :20 PM 3 of 3