Laserfiche WebLink
<br />26 <br />27 <br />28 A summary of the proposal’s cost and hours associated with the work is included in the <br />29 table below. Due to different funding for the project, the cost of the project is split between <br />30 the LPCDS and MOC. <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 Based on the RFQ scoring, staff moved five firms onto the RFP step which is the second <br />35 part of the CmaR process. These firms included Kraus-Anderson, McGough Construction, <br />36 Knuteson Construction, RJM Construction and Stahl Construction. <br />37 <br />38 All five firms completed a proposal. In the proposals, the firms submitted additional <br />39 information related to project approach and work plan. Additionally, they submitted <br />40 information on project cost estimating and scheduling. The project team and fee structure <br />41 were re-scored from information submitted with the RFQ. Based on the scoring of the <br />42 proposals by the review committee, the top two scoring firms were invited for interviews. <br />43 Kraus-Anderson (80.9 before interview score) and RJM Construction (73.7 before interview <br />44 score). <br />45 <br />Page 2 of 5 <br />Qbhf!289!pg!:15 <br /> <br />