2014_0512_CCpacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

��i�� Ira A. Fulton Schools f Engineering ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY The three submittal documents (Risk, Project Capability, and Value Added) are limited to two pages. This is done to focus on just the critical items relative to the intent of each submittal, and also minimize efforts of the City and proposers. The evaluators do not see the Cost and Past Performance Information of proposers until after all evaluations and interviews have been completed. After prioritizing all of the Respondents, the City reviewed costs in the following manner (this process was also identified in each RFP): 1) 2) If the highest ranked Respondent's Total Cost is within budget then they will be invited to the Clarification Phase. If the highest ranked Respondent is within budget, but is greater than 10% of the second highest ranked Respondent's Total Cost, the City reserves the right to invite the second highest ranked contractor to the Clarification Phase. 3) If the highest ranked Respondent's Total Cost is over-budget, the City reserves the right to proceed to the highest ranked Respondent within the budget (or the City may seek additional funding to proceed with a Respondent that is over the budget). 4) If all of the Respondents' Total Costs are over-budget, the City may: obtain additional funds, re- scope the project, or cancel the project. 2. Clarification Once the potential best value firm is identified, the City begins the Clarification Phase. This phase is carried out prior to signing the contract, and to ensure all parties (City, Contractor, and Design Consultants) have a clear understanding of the project expectations. During this phase, the City may review and confirm project cost, scope, schedule, and risk. Each potential best value firm prepared a Clarification Phase Document summarizing these items. The City, Design Consultants, and ASU reviewed each document and provided general comments. If the City is comfortable with each potential best value firm and their plan, an award can be made. 3. Prolect Execution Once an award is made, a Weekly Risk Report (WRR) will be setup. This simple excel tool is submitted each week by the contractor to the owner, and summarizes any deviations to the project, in terms of cost and schedule. The tool also includes the contractor's risk management plan, milestone schedule, and critical contact information related to the project. ASU prepares the WRR (based on the unique cost and schedule duration of each award) and reviews the WRRs. Summary In closing, the methodology for how the City would apply the best value process was identified upfront as part each RFP. ASU monitored, and provided education, during the City's implementation of the best value process for each of the construction packages. The process is designed to minimize bias and provides the City an opportunity to clarify scope, understand each proposer's risk mitigation approach, cost, and schedule. Each project's performance will be monitored for the duration of its execution through the use of Weekly Risk Reports. Performance Based Studies Research Group School of Sustainable Engineering & the Built Environment Arizona State University