Tuesday, October 5, 2010 Wenatchee Convention Center 9:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Fee $50 (4 CASC Certificate Hours)

Transcription

1 2010 Washington Chapter APWA Fall Conference Preconference Workshop Help Build Your Extraordinary Future (Projects) by Selecting Extraordinary Consultants Now Tuesday, October 5, 2010 Wenatchee Convention Center 9:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Fee $50 (4 CASC Certificate Hours) Co Sponsored By: 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) Introduction Are the following statements true or false? All local agencies in Washington State understand and apply correctly the statutes relating to selection of A/E firms for planning, design, and construction management of agency projects. A/E consultants are always completely happy with local agency practices in selecting A/E firms for planning, design, and construction management of agency projects. Of course, both are false. Agencies are always under pressure to get projects done for the lowest cost in the shortest time possible. Consultants want to do the best job possible for their clients, but also must make a profit to stay in business. Chapter RCW governs selection of A/E consultants in Washington State, but it creates only a framework on which local agency policies are built. Selection practices vary greatly among agencies, much to the chagrin of AE firms. Among other things, this workshop will cover: Understanding qualifications based selection principles and practices Appropriate and inappropriate evaluation criteria. Appropriate and inappropriate selection processes. How different project complexities, type, and dollar volume affect the selection process. How can shared rosters best be utilized? Results of a comprehensive survey on A/E selection practices for both consultants and agencies Agenda Presenters/Panel Members Session A Contracting for Professional Services in Washington State Statutes and Principles Procedures versus Contract Size and Complexity Session B Qualifications Based Selection (QBS) Appropriate Processes Inappropriate Processes Kudos and Brickbats Session C Qualifications Based Selection (QBS) Appropriate Criteria Inappropriate Criteria Kudos and Brickbats Session D Shared Consulting Services Rosters How Do They Work? How Should they Work? Session A Moderator Panel Speakers: Sessions B & C Moderator: Panel Speakers: Session D Moderator Panel Speakers: Art Louie, Snohomish County Jim Doherty, MRSC John Carpita, MRSC Sheila Harrison, GHD Bill Garrity, ACEC Jan Olivier, Kittitas County Bob Giberson, City of Tukwila Jeff Monsen, CRAB Sam Yaghmaie, Harris and Associates Dan Dawson, Otak Tom Zerkel, Gray and Osborne Art Louie, Snohomish County Ellen Hutchinson, MRSC Rosters John Carpita, MRSC Tom Skillings, Skillings and Connolly Ingrid Gaub, City of Auburn

2 Help Build Your Extraordinary Future (Projects) by Selecting Extraordinary Consultants Now October 5 th, 2010 Wenatchee Convention Center

3 Session A Contracting for Professional Services: Statutes & Principles Municipal Research and Services Center

4 Chapter The Legal Framework Jim Doherty MRSC Legal Consultant

5 Purpose A uniform state-enacted policy for the procurement of architectural, engineering and land surveying services by all state and local government agencies in the State of Washington. The basic statutes were adopted in 1981 and went into effect Jan. 1, 1982.

6 Applies to whom? State agencies Cities Counties Special Purpose Districts all types and sizes

7 A/E Professional Services Under Chapter RCW Professional services rendered by any person, other than as an employee of the agency, contracting to perform activities within the scope of the general definition of professional practice in Chapters (Architects), (Engineers and Land Surveyors), or (Landscape Architects) RCW. RCW (5). Services are procured using the qualifications based selection (QBS) requirements in Chapter RCW. Licenses or certification by State agencies are required.

8 Purpose of this State Policy It makes sense to hire people with the best skills when designing basic public infrastructure price should not be the primary determining factor. We all want well designed public infrastructure built in the proper location (and not like the next slide).

9

10 MRSC Personal Services Definition Technical expertise provided by a consultant to accomplish a specific study, project, task, or other work statement, which may not reasonably be required in connection with a public works project meeting the definition in RCW (4). Personal services do not include purchased services or professional services procured using the competitive selection requirements in Chapter RCW (A&E). Activity or product is mostly intellectual in nature. Licenses or certification by State agencies are not required.

11 MRSC Non A/E Professional Services Definition Professional and/or technical expertise provided by a consultant to accomplish a specific study, project, task, or other work statement, which may or may not reasonably be required in connection with a public works project meeting the definition in RCW (4). Non A/E professional services do not include purchased services, personal services, or professional services procured using the competitive selection requirements in Chapter RCW (A&E). Licenses or certification by State agencies are required.

12 What about other personal and professional services? If not covered by chapter 39.80, then the QBS process is not required, but can be used. Examples of other professionals: appraisers, planners, geologist, hydrologist, environmental consultant, accountant, etc.

13 Planning Services A contract for a conceptual or facility plan may seem to require merely a planning (personal) services background, but if the planning services involve architectural or engineering work, then the entire contract should be handled using the chapter QBS process.

14 Construction Management If construction management services will necessarily involve professional services covered by chapter 39.80, then at least those portions involving chapter services must be procured using the QBS process.

15 AGO 1988 No. 4 A public agency may not, in procuring architectural or engineering services, consider proposed price or cost in determining which firm is most highly qualified to provide services.

16 AGO 1988 No. 4 - continued When a public agency selects a firm to perform architectural or engineering services, price and cost may be considered only after the most qualified firm has been selected, at which time the law provides for negotiation of a "fair and reasonable" price.

17 AGO 1988 No. 14 The principles stated in AGO 1988 No. 4 apply in the same way to land surveyors.

18 Lack of Significant Additional Legal Authority (Case Law) Why? Either the consulting engineering community has learned how to play nice with each other or The benefits of contesting an agency s process are outweighed by potential negatives, or Consultants have learned that losing out on a potential contract does not justify running out and hiring a lawyer.

19 John s Interpretation Perhaps the legislature did this right: The statute is short and to the point. Local government agencies and the professional consultant community have adopted a reasonable process that makes sense and is generally accepted. Washington ACEC has helped in education & accountability role.

20 Chapter The Not-So-Legal Framework John Carpita, PE MRSC Public Works Consultant

21 Agenda Advance Notification per RCW Consultant Rosters Shared Rosters On-Call Rosters L.A.G. Manual Local Agency Agency and Consultant Surveys Contract Size vs. Suggested Process Guidelines

22 Advance Publication RCW requires advance publication of an agency's requirement for professional services. Two methods of compliance are noted: an announcement for each project or a general announcement of projected requirements for any category or type of professional services. [Typically referred to as a Consultant Roster.]

23 Consultant Rosters Basic information - such as UBI, federal tax information and insurance contacts Qualifications information, such as: categories and subcategories of services provided references, experience and financial capacity project descriptions, staff bios, awards, recognitions

24 Consultant Roster Major roster headings could match Chapter RCW: Architect, Engineer, Landscape Architect, Land Surveying Disciplines Ex.: civil, mechanical, electrical, etc. Subcategories Ex.: transportation planning or design, utilities, solid waste, etc.

25 Consultant Selection Consultant selection under Ch RCW can occur in three main scenarios: With no roster, agency must advertise for consulting services for individual projects, perhaps combining the RFQ and RFP processes, with or without interviews. With a roster, an agency may select consultants from the roster and ask them to respond to RFPs for individual projects, with or without interviews. Even with a roster, for certain projects, the agency may choose to advertise its specific need for services and select firms based on the RFQ submittals to submit proposals and then interview those firms using a committee.

26 Shared Rosters Agencies may share a consultant roster Need lead agency Need interlocal agreements Agencies may contract with a service provider MRSC Rosters ecitygov Operate just like individual rosters

27 On-Call Rosters LAG Manual - Chapter 31 Advertisement on each occasion OR Annual notice required to solicit firms for oncall rosters (an unfortunate terminology) These on-call rosters are equivalent to a local agency s consultant roster, except that an agency is not (for WSDOT funded projects) to: enter into additional contracts with any firm until that firm completes active contracts award more than one contract from the rosters at any one time.

28 On-Call Rosters Local Agencies Some agencies have on-call contracts for firms to perform task orders in a given category of work for a set period of time Solicitation is a based on either Advertisement Selection from agency consultant roster

29 On-Call Rosters Local Agencies In each of the service contract categories, there is opportunity to develop master or on-call contracts. Multiple awards for on-call service contracts: Agency may award on-call service contracts to more than one provider If the lowest cost provider cannot do a given service in a timely manner, the agency could rotate to the next highest proposer. Or use a lottery to determine the order of rotation.

30 On-Call Rosters Local Agencies Selection of firms for on-call service contracts is roughly the same as for selection of a single firm for one contract. An agency will review the qualifications of a number of firms in a given work category. It will then place the most qualified firms on the oncall roster in each category of work. As contracts for a given work category become available the agency will negotiate a contract for that work with one of the firms listed.

31 Agency and Consultant Surveys APWA & MRSC June/July Agencies 122 A/E Consultants Many great comments/responses

32 RFQs and RFPs for Services Request for Qualifications (RFQ) Ask for firm s general capabilities, list of principals, previous projects, number of employees, licenses, etc. Request for Proposals (RFP) May include RFQ items, unless already on file Ask for firm s capabilities with respect to a specific project, including approach, tasks and milestones Price may not be requested Evaluation is based on criteria established by the agency

33 Agency Survey Process Questions Routinely Issue RFPs for Most Projects 35.4% Routinely Issue RFQs for Most Projects 45.6% Solicit Directly 22.8% Written policies for consultant selection Yes - 70% No - 30%

34 Does your agency use different processes for different levels of professional service fees? Select the consultant using an RFQ, then RFP Process? % (23) Select the consultant using a combined RFQ/RFP process? % (25) Select the most qualified firm directly from the consulting services roster? % (33) Use the consulting services roster to select firms to which RFPs are sent? % (24) Answered Question 42 Skipped Question - 38

35 Select the most qualified firm directly from the consulting services roster? Responses range from $3K to $350K Average of $80K Less than $25K to $50K is typical

36 Use the consulting services roster to select firms to which RFPs are sent? Range from $20K to $200K Typically $100K and above

37 Select the consultant using a combined RFQ/RFP process? Range $25K to $350K Typically above $50K to $100K

38 Select the consultant using an RFQ, then RFP Process? Range $50K to $350K Typically over $250K

39 Recommended Professional Services Process Guidelines An agency may wish to establish an upper dollar limit ( X ) and level of complexity above which a structured RFQ/RFP process is required. Formal Process There then could be a range ( X to Y ) in which a less structured process is followed. Informal Process There also could be a lower dollar limit ( Y ), below which agency staff could simply solicit responses from 1-3 firms or select directly from a roster. Minimal Process

40 Recommended Process Guidelines Below $ Y Minimal Process RFQ/RFP encouraged, but not required. Select directly from roster? $ Y to X Informal Process Prepare RFQ/RFP Send to minimum of three firms Evaluate responses and make award decision. Over $ X Formal Process Prepare RFQ/RFP Publish legal notice (Web and Print) Formal evaluation with a committee Interview short listed firms Select best firm based on quality/price combination. See attached Local Agency Contracting for Services Guidelines

41 Leonardo Da Vinci says: Questo è tutto, gente!

42 Help Build Your Extraordinary Future (Projects) by Selecting Extraordinary Consultants Now Panel: Jan Olivier, Kittitas County Bob Giberson, City of Tukwila Jeff Monsen, CRAB Sam Yaghmaie, Harris and Associates Dan Dawson, Otak Tom Zerkel, Gray and Osborne Tom Skillings, Skillings Connolly Ingrid Gaub, City of Auburn Moderators: Cliff Webster, Carney Bradley Spellman Sheila Harrison, GHD Image placeholder

43 QBS - Goals of Sessions B&C: Increase understanding that the process is viewed from different perspectives Increase effectiveness of the QBS process Improve participants ability to develop effective solicitations and responses within the QBS system IMPLEMENTATION CONSISTENT WITH THE LAW Help Build Your Extraordinary Future

44 Basis for sessions B & C: June 2010 Survey was distributed to multiple mailing lists available through MRSC Great Response! 80 Agency Representatives 122 Consultant representatives Thank You! Help Build Your Extraordinary Future

45 Rules of the game: Session B Review Survey Results on Selection Criteria Introduce Criterion Agency/Consultant lead & respond how can intent be communicated through the selection process? Summarize key points Session C Big Picture/Subjective Questions Agency/Consultant lead & respond Encourage audience discussion Summarize key points Help Build Your Extraordinary Future

46 2010 WA State Survey Selection Criteria Based on Ranking Agency Response Consultant Response Specific Team Members 5 5 Experience, Ability & Reputation 5 & 4 5 Past Performance for Agency 5 4 Ability to Meet Deadlines 4 5 Production Capabilities 4 4 Similar Project Experience 4 4 Familiarity with Project 4 4 Responsiveness to Solicitation Requirements 4 4 Immediate Availability 4 4 References 4 4 Location of Firm to Project Size & Scope 3 3 Level of Effort Estimates 3 3 & 1 Desire to Spread Work 3 3 Location of Firm to Agency 3 3 Desire to Retain Consultant for Follow-Up Work 3 3 Familiarity of Firm through Networking 3 3 Marketing Materials 2 2 Funding Source 2 2 Help Build Your Extraordinary Future

47 What can you conclude from them? What are the liabilities? Relationship between lowest cost of services & lowest cost of project Can lower LOE = more conservative design = higher total cost? Help Build Your Extraordinary Future

48 Design Costs vs. Construction Costs Help Build Your Extraordinary Future

49 Everyone agrees that this is important! Need a good relationship to have trust. How to communicate this through the selection process? Help Build Your Extraordinary Future

50 Linked criteria how to confirm experience, ability, and reputation if there is no history? Help Build Your Extraordinary Future

51 How to measure and interpret this criterion? Commitment? Available Staff? Specialties? Equipment? Help Build Your Extraordinary Future

52 Location, location, location Get to the core of why this is important on each project political (keep the work local) or efficiency on the project? Help Build Your Extraordinary Future

53 OPTIONAL/ALTERNATE SLIDE You are hiring the project manager You may be selecting some technical gurus You want assurance that you will get staff offered Help Build Your Extraordinary Future

54 OPTIONAL/ALTERNATE SLIDE Do Agencies check beyond the listed references? Real references? How best to check references? Help Build Your Extraordinary Future

55 Next Session Quality Based Selection Enjoy your lunch! Help Build Your Extraordinary Future

56 Qualifications Based Selection Presented By: Sam Yaghmaie, PE, LEED AP Harris & Associates, Inc.

57 What is QBS? An objective, flexible procedure to obtain professional services on public projects Straightforward & Easy to Implement Well Documented Open to Audit QBS Raises Your Comfort Level & Lowers Personal Risk

58 What is QBS? Request for Qualifications (RFQ) Submittal: Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) Consultant Roster (own or subscribe) On-Call Consultant List On-Call Consultant Agreement Request for Proposal (RFP) Submittal: Proposal Signed Agreement

59 Washington law lacks an enforcement mechanism and is open to individual interpretation The Laws

60 Current Status of QBS (2006) Courtesy of AIA & ACEC

61 2010 Survey Results 1. Qualification 2. Competence 3. Performance

62 When choosing a doctor for surgery do you select based on who is least expensive or who is most qualified? Similar Project Experience Staff Credentials Staff Specialty References Firm Reputation Culture Coordination Qualification

63 Competence Ability to perform specific tasks Each project category has it s own subcategories Capability Depth Back-Ups

64 Performance Responsiveness Large Firms vs. Small Projects Availability Workload Deadline Care about community & client concerns Meet commitments & promises

65 Agency Misconception QBS COSTS MORE & creates A LOT OF WORK on both sides

66 Consultant Impact on Project Cost Consulting Costs are Less Than 1% of Total Construction, Operations & Maintenance Costs of an Agency s CIP

67 Consultant Impact on Project Cost Construction Cost Growth 10% 3% Industry Average QBS Projects

68 Consultant Impact on Project Cost Sufficient funds invested in less than 1% will bring out most cost-effective alternates: Less Time Pressure More Time for Details More Quality Checks Alternative Methods & Materials Life-Cycle Cost Factors

69 Consultant Impact on Project Cost Creativity, innovation & professional judgment Emerging society issues (sustainability) Addresses more stakeholder concerns Eliminates political favoritism More cost control & higher degree of satisfaction

70 Undefined Scope of Work Lack of definitive scope Consultants turn your undefined concept into documents Lowest bidder Contractor (all major aspects of the project are defined including materials) GCCM Delivery Method

71 Building Stronger Relationships Understand community & public agency objectives Representing the owner Not a buyer-seller relationship Fosters cooperation Establishes trust & reliability

72 Building Stronger Relationships APWA/ACEC National Study: Agency s rated their QBS projects success as High or Very High

73 Agency Comment I Don t Use QBS for SMALLER PROJECTS

74 Smaller Project Size QBS Still Applies Consultant Roster Pre-Approved On-Call Contract Pre-Approved On-Call List

75 Smaller Project Size How small does a project have to be to follow this different QBS process?

76 Smaller Project Size Example: For a $200K project a consultants fee ranges from 5-10% with a profit of 5-10% of that fee. Consultant Profit

77 Smaller Project Size With limited profit it s not encouraging for consultants to go through the complete QBS process Modified QBS process still makes more sense.

78 Agency Comment We prefer LOCAL CONSULTANTS who contribute to the LOCAL COMMUNITY

79 Local Consultants What if a preferred consultant is not the most qualified for the project?

80 Local Consultants QBS provides flexibility in tailoring RFQ s Develop criteria based on agency preferences

81 Agency Comment I want to continue using the SAME CONSULTANT On other phases of the work and future projects since I know they will do a GOOD JOB for me

82 Same Consultant Here Again QBS provides flexibility in tailoring RFQ s Develop criteria based on agency preferences

83 RFQ s can state that a contract can be extended pending agency satisfaction with consultant work Same Consultant

84 Same Consultant Enhanced effectiveness Lower transaction cost Both consultant and owner Relational contracting Efficient procurement Dampening competition Risk of less innovation

85 Same Consultant How about using the same consultant for many years without issuing an RFQ? Or asking the preferred consultant to perform other tasks that may be a conflict of interest?

86 Same Consultant Focus should be: What is best for our tax payers? Process QBS regardless of past relationships Promotes competition Inspires innovative options Less expensive Less risk Safer

87 QBS Benefits 2009 APWA/ACEC National Study Results: QBS Ensures a Competitive Process QBS has Positive Correlation with Successful Projects Cost Schedule Quality Society Trust

88 QBS Benefits It Matters How We Interpret the Law

89 Thank You Sam Yaghmaie, PE, LEED AP Harris & Associates (425) x4321

90 Help Build Your Extraordinary Future (Projects) by Selecting Extraordinary Consultants Now October 5, 2010 Wenatchee Convention Center

91 Session D Consulting Services Rosters: How do they work? How should they work? & RFQ/RFP Tips for Agencies Moderator: John Carpita, MRSC Panel Members: Ellen Hutchinson, MRSC Rosters Jan Olivier, Kittitas County Bob Giberson, City of Tukwila Tom Skillings, Skillings and Connolly Ingrid Gaub, City of Auburn

92 Agenda Consulting Services Rosters Shared (Electronic) Rosters MRSC Rosters (184 agencies) ecitygov (24 agencies) Good Things Not So Good Things RFQ/RFP Tips for Agencies

93 Consultant Services Roster As authorized by Ch RCW, public agencies may choose to select consultants off of a consultant roster for small to medium size architectural, engineering, surveying, on-call, and other professional services, as an alternative to advertising per project. The existence of the roster must be advertized annually to indicate that businesses may join at anytime. On-Call Roster is a confusing term used by the LAG Manual to describe an On-Call Contracts List to be used when receiving federal funds for a project.

94 Roster Survey Responses 41 - (55%) have own roster 9 - (12%) share roster with other agencies 22 - (30%) use service provider 2 - (3%) do not use rosters at all

95 Individual vs. Shared Rosters Public agencies can individually maintain a roster or share the costs of maintaining a roster with other public agencies. The same QBS procedures apply for either type of roster. Individual Roster One public agency maintains the roster for their individual use. Shared Roster One lead public agency maintains the roster for use by multiple public agencies through an interlocal agreement. OR Multiple public agencies contract with a service provider, such as MRSC Rosters, to have them maintain their rosters. Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington

96 MRSC Rosters is an online, shared small public works and consultant roster system for Washington State counties, cities, and authorized special districts, which is currently used by 186 public agencies in 27 counties. Including workshop attendees: the Cities of Bonney Lake, Edmonds, Fife, Olympia, Snohomish County and almost all consultants Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington

97 How does MRSC Rosters work? 1. Public agencies join at anytime by signing MRSC contract and submitting fee. 2. Consultants join at anytime by completing the application. 3. MRSC verifies business eligibility to be on a consultant roster. 5. Public agencies search for consultants by service categories. 6. Public agencies follow QBS Selection Process. *MRSC has no involvement in the QBS Process the convenient and affordable alternative Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington

98 Consultant Registration 1. Consultant creates account and chooses membership *Third of current members use the Enhanced Option 2. Completes application 3. MRSC verifies Washington State Department of Revenue 4. Business renews account annually Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington

99 Consultant Application The application includes a general Statement of Qualifications, equivalent to a marketing brochure. Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington

100 Searching the Roster 1. Public agency logs into their account 2. Clicks to search by main service category or narrows by sub-category 3. Generates a list of businesses who selected that service and joined their roster. * Business selected their specific public agency, any public agency is their county, or all participating public agencies. Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington

101 Questions about MRSC Rosters? Visit the website at Or contact Ellen Hutchinson, MRSC Rosters Manager at or

102 Good Things About Shared (Electronic) Rosters Saves time and money for public agencies Reduces consultant marketing costs Online applications increases efficiency Allows short-listing directly from the roster for small projects and telephone interviews Standardized category listings

103 Consultant Comments: Good Things Shared rosters can be effective because the public works universe is limited in size and most professional services firms are preceded by their reputations or by the past experience of the municipality seeking services. Being listed on shared roster has been a good way for us to get our foot in the door with some agencies that we might not have otherwise worked with. It has also assisted the agency with more quickly getting the task order under way. In some cases the agency has been facing a big time crunch and the shared roster relieved some of their time issues. In general I appreciate the shared roster in that we are able to provide one set of qualifications that many of our clients have access to. It is preferable that clients would shortlist from the roster to 3 or so qualified firms and then conduct interview or conduct a proposal process.

104 Not So Good Things About (Electronic) Shared Rosters Tend to be too generic Categories broad and confusing Sometimes appear to be a paperwork exercise to satisfy the statutes Select same firms over and over Not enough focus on specific agency clients and local projects Too many firms come up on simple searches

105 Consultant Comments: Not So Good Things It is not possible to provide enough focus on specific clients and local projects in a shared roster; so that you can't address the specific project that is being solicited for. The shared roster is becoming kind of a "black hole" where we submit info and do not have much feel for how the info is distributed to agencies or which agencies look at the information. Little, if any, work comes from them, unless you are marketing a client who happens to need you to be on their roster in order to select you. Typically too broad to be of much use other than identifying a rather large pool of qualified and interested firms.

106 RFQ/RFP Tips for Agencies Four CASC Workshops in September Two consultants per workshop Everett - Perteet and CH2M Renton - DEA and Harris Camas and Yakima - Otak and G&O Great agency comments and responses Following slides distill best advice from consultant presentations Thanks much to consultant presenters

107 The Go/No-Go Decision What does a consultant look for? Clear, well written scope Adequate budget Realistic expectations and schedule Match between RFP criteria and selection criteria Do the scope and budget match? Can we compete? What firms have prior experience? Is there enough time to respond? 18

108 Thoughts Open competition is great if it is really open On-call contracts are good for numerous, similar, smaller projects also efficient and cost effective Use of shared rosters to shortlist, with interviews is quicker and less costly Consider hiring key subconsultants separately or later 19

109 What Consultants Would Like from Clients Open, honest, knowledgeable Available, easy to communicate with Act as an internal partner, advocate Share responsibilities If project changes, change scope, budget and schedule: amend the contract If you ask for more work please pay us! 20

110 Before the RFP is Released Shared rosters: MSRC and Egov Alliance Will they work for you? If you re selecting from a shared roster to ask for a proposal, you know our qualifications Tell us we were selected from a shared roster and ask only for additional information in the RFP/Q. Is the project is funded? Will the agency be able to continue with the project after selection/negotiation

111 RFQ/RFP - What s Helpful Clear and concise written RFQ/Ps Review before sending out to eliminate conflicting information Reasonable deadlines 2-3 weeks Call out contact person available for questions via or phone List and provide link or contact to additional information on the project available for the team to review when RFP is issued

112 RFQ/RFP - What Presents a Challenge File Size If proposals need to be submitted electronically, it would be helpful to know the maximum file size for documents and attachments SF 330 We are sometimes asked to submit a complete SF 330 plus a separate SOQ that contains exactly the same information When requesting information in table format, it would be helpful to have an example of what you want

113 RFQ/RFP - What Presents Challenges Page limitation How does 11 X 17 size count towards the total page count? Specify whether resumes or cover letters are included in the page limit Submittal Requirements and Scoring Criteria Quite often the submittal requirements listed in the RFP does not match the scoring criteria (also listed in the RFP) Proposals due around holidays

114 RFQ/RFP - What s Helpful Copy of contract terms and conditions attached to the RFP, if available Scope of work included in the RFP Agency s decision schedule Dates for final decisions, shortlist, award and contracting Specify 2-sided proposal page limits For example: 20 pages (10 double-sided pages) Provide scoring criteria We like it when we know what we have to address in the proposal and in what order will make it easier for you to score

115 Make Interviews Fun? Consider Alternative Formats Ask consultant to design a similar project at a working interview? Ask consultant to conduct a public meeting at a working interview? Ask real interview questions The less rehearsed, the better

116 Step 1 - Positioning To receive the highest quality submittals Make time to meet with consultants Be willing to discuss key issues No cone of silence Share specifics on the scope of the project Market your projects Pre-Proposal Meetings Good things Bad things

117 Step 2 - Proposal Phase How to get the best selection on proposals Clear rules Share dates and stick to them Provide a clear scope Consider the page limit (and be realistic) Leave some room for creativity Select a review panel that has an interest in the project

118 Step 3 - Interview To get the best presentation Format give specifics Focus topics Time enough notice Rules be thoughtful and follow them Scoring have standards- how are you scoring? Notification when will you decide? Anticipate the debrief

119