Contract 3 selection of professional service providers (signed 1-11-12)
1 like645 views
The document outlines procedures for conducting confidential discussions and ranking qualified service providers (QSPs) for professional services procurement in accordance with Hawaii's procurement laws. It describes two ranking formats: Format A (based on existing qualifications) and Format B (inviting project-specific proposals), emphasizing the importance of documentation and approval for using Format B. The ranking results must be documented and submitted to the Department of Budget and Fiscal Services, with specified evaluation methods provided for the selection committees.
![DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET AND FISCAL SERVICES
Procurement of Professional Services
Appointment of Selection Committee
1. TO: Chief Procurement Officer
2.FROM:
Department/Division/Agency
3. Date: 4. Solicitation Number : 5. Solicitation Date:
6. Description of Project or Procurement:
Eligible Class or Category of Professional Services to be procured from State Procurement Office
7.
Professional Services List, SPO Procurement Circular 2009-6:
In accordance with the State of Hawaii Public Procurement Code and the related Hawaii Administrative
Rules, HRS §103D-304 and HAR 3-122-69, we request approval of the selection committee for this
procurement. Deputy directors or equivalent appointed positions shall not serve on selection
committees. The members of the committee (minimum of three required) are:
SELECTION COMMITTEE [Minimum of three (3) required]:
1.
(Name,Title,Dept)
Description of sufficient education, training, and licenses or credentials in the area of the service
required:
2.
(Name,Title,Dept)
Description of sufficient education, training, and licenses or credentials in the area of the service
required:
3.
(Name,Title,Dept)
Description of sufficient education, training, and licenses or credentials in the area of the service
required:
9. Direct questions to: Phone:
_____________________________________
Department Head or Designee Date
BFC-11-06
DDC SOP CONTRACT 3 ATTACHMENT 1](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/contract3-selectionofprofessionalserviceproviderssigned1-11-12-120726212342-phpapp01/85/Contract-3-selection-of-professional-service-providers-signed-1-11-12-3-320.jpg)
![DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET AND FISCAL SERVICES
Procurement of Professional Services
Approval of Selection and Delegation of Authority to Negotiate
1. TO: Chief Procurement Officer
2.FROM:
(Committee Chair)
3.THROUGH:
(Director)
4. Date: 5. Solicitation Number: 6. Solicitation Date:
7. Description of Project or Procurement:
Eligible Class or Category of Professional Services to be procured from State Procurement Office
8.
Professional Services List, SPO Procurement Circular 2009-6:
In accordance with Chapter 103D-304, the following were determined to be the [minimum of three (3)]
most qualified firms to provide the professional services required for the above project. Attached are the
relevant supporting documents.
CONSULTANT NAME RANKING
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Pursuant to HRS 103D-304(g), if there are any ties in the rankings provide explanation of actions to
9.
be taken to ensure equal distribution of contracts among the consultants holding the same
qualifications:
10. Direct questions to: Phone:
Pursuant to the delegation of authority by the Chief Procurement Officer, we will proceed to negotiate a
contract.
THE AUTHORITY FOR CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS RELATED TO THE ABOVE IS DELEGATED
TO THE
(Department)
_____________________________________
Committee Chair Date
Reserved for BFS Use Only
BFC-11-05
DDC SOP CONTRACT 3 ATTACHMENT 5](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/contract3-selectionofprofessionalserviceproviderssigned1-11-12-120726212342-phpapp01/85/Contract-3-selection-of-professional-service-providers-signed-1-11-12-8-320.jpg)
Contract 3 selection of professional service providers (signed 1-11-12)
- 2. Form DDC-SOP The SC may conduct confidential discussions with any of the QSPs listed in the subject Service Category regarding service capabilities; however, any such discussions shall not disclose information obtained from or regarding the competing QSPs. Ranking of the QSPs shall be done by either Format A that is based solely on the existing SOQ packages on file for each QSP or alternatively by Format B that initially ranks the QSPs based on the existing SOQ packages and then invites the top-ranked QSPs to submit project-specific proposals for final ranking and selection. Format B is intended for use on projects for which submittal of specific project team technical approaches is either required or considered to be of significant benefit. The use of Format B requires documentation of the DDC Director’s approval on a memorandum presenting justification for the alternate format. Both Format A and Format B use the same rating procedures, except that rating for Format A can be done either on an individual basis or by consensus and rating for Format B must be done on an individual basis. Rating of QSPs by either the individual or consensus approach shall be done using the Professional Services Selection Form (Attachment 3). If the individual approach is used, the results of the individual Professional Services Selection Forms shall be summarized on the Evaluation Summary Form (Attachment 4) to determine the final ranking based on the sum of the ordinal rankings. For all ratings done on an individual basis the sum of the ordinal scores, not the individual raw scores, shall be used to determine the final ranking. For Format B, results of the Evaluation Summary Form shall be used to select a few top QSPs from whom team technical approach proposals will be solicited. The number of QSPs invited to submit team technical approach proposals must be documented adequately to defend the decision in the event of a protest. The technical approach proposals shall be evaluated and ranked by the SC using the documented selection criteria and ranking processes identified above. At the completion of ranking by either format, the ranking documentation and results shall be transmitted to the Department of Budget and Fiscal Services (Attachment 5). The attachment of SOQs for consultants listed shall be done by DocuShare links, not by hard copy. REFERENCES: HRS 103D-304, Procurement of Professional Services ATTACHMENTS: 1. BFC-11-06 – Appointment of Selection Committee 2. BFS 24 – Affidavit/Attestation for Serving on an Evaluation, Review, or Selection Committee 3. Professional Services Selection Form 4. Evaluation Summary Form 5. BFC-11-05 – Approval of Selection and Delegation of Authority to Negotiate DDC SOP CONTRACT 3 PAGE 2 OF 2
- 3. DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET AND FISCAL SERVICES Procurement of Professional Services Appointment of Selection Committee 1. TO: Chief Procurement Officer 2.FROM: Department/Division/Agency 3. Date: 4. Solicitation Number : 5. Solicitation Date: 6. Description of Project or Procurement: Eligible Class or Category of Professional Services to be procured from State Procurement Office 7. Professional Services List, SPO Procurement Circular 2009-6: In accordance with the State of Hawaii Public Procurement Code and the related Hawaii Administrative Rules, HRS §103D-304 and HAR 3-122-69, we request approval of the selection committee for this procurement. Deputy directors or equivalent appointed positions shall not serve on selection committees. The members of the committee (minimum of three required) are: SELECTION COMMITTEE [Minimum of three (3) required]: 1. (Name,Title,Dept) Description of sufficient education, training, and licenses or credentials in the area of the service required: 2. (Name,Title,Dept) Description of sufficient education, training, and licenses or credentials in the area of the service required: 3. (Name,Title,Dept) Description of sufficient education, training, and licenses or credentials in the area of the service required: 9. Direct questions to: Phone: _____________________________________ Department Head or Designee Date BFC-11-06 DDC SOP CONTRACT 3 ATTACHMENT 1
- 4. Reserved for BFS Use Only Chief Procurement Officer's comments: APPROVED DISAPPROVED ____________________________ _________ Chief Procurement Officer Date Attachments Affidavit of committee members BFC-11-06 DDC SOP CONTRACT 3 ATTACHMENT 1
- 5. DDC SOP CONTRACT 3 ATTACHMENT 2
- 6. Print Date: 7/25/2012 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SELECTION FORM DDC SOP CONTRACT 3 DEPARTMENT OF DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU PROJECT TITLE: SCOPE OF SERVICES: PROFESSIONAL SERVICE CATEGORY: APPROPRIATION TO BE USED (FY): ESTIMATED CONTRACT AMOUNT: SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: EXPERIENCE AND OPTIONAL - FAMILIARITY PAST PERFORMANCE ON CAPACITY TO ACCOMPLISH THE PROFESSIONAL WITH FACILITY/SITE/PRIOR PROJECTS OF SIMILAR SCOPE WORK IN THE REQUIRED TIME QUALIFICATIONS RELATED PROJECTS (Multiplier = 4) (Multiplier = 3) (Multiplier = 2) (Multiplier = 1) TOTAL TYPE WEIGHTED WEIGHTED WEIGHTED WEIGHTED WEIGHTED FINAL FIRM NAME CODE RATING RATING RATING RATING RATING RATING RATING RATING RATING RANK 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 TYPE CODE: A = Architectural E = Electrical RATING SCALE: 10 = Excellent C = Civil LA = Landscape Architecture 5 = Satisfactory E = Environmental M = Mechanical 0 = Minimal/None NAMES OF EVALUATORS TITLE EMPLOYER IF OTHER THAN THE CITY 1 2 DATE: ATTACHMENT 3 3 4 Form Revised 8/07
- 7. EVALUATION SUMMARY FORM Print Date: 7/25/2012 DEPARTMENT OF DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION DDC SOP CONTRACT 3 PROJECT TITLE: SCOPE OF SERVICES: PROFESSIONAL SERVICE CATEGORY: APPROPRIATION TO USED (FY): ESTIMATED CONTRACT AMOUNT: SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: NAMES OF EVALUATORS WEIGHTED ORDINAL WEIGHTED ORDINAL WEIGHTED ORDINAL WEIGHTED ORDINAL WEIGHTED ORDINAL SUM ORDINAL FINAL FIRM NAME SCORE* RANK SCORE RANK SCORE RANK SCORE RANK SCORE RANK RANKING RANK 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 8 0 9 0 10 0 11 0 12 0 NAMES OF EVALUATORS TITLE EMPLOYER IF OTHER THAN CITY 1__________________________ _______________________ ___________________________________ 2__________________________ _______________________ ___________________________________ ATTACHMENT 4 3__________________________ _______________________ ___________________________________ 4__________________________ _______________________ ___________________________________ *Maximum weighted score is 100 **Ordinal Ranking is the order of the weighted score. The highest weighted score being #1. Form Rev 6/12
- 8. DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET AND FISCAL SERVICES Procurement of Professional Services Approval of Selection and Delegation of Authority to Negotiate 1. TO: Chief Procurement Officer 2.FROM: (Committee Chair) 3.THROUGH: (Director) 4. Date: 5. Solicitation Number: 6. Solicitation Date: 7. Description of Project or Procurement: Eligible Class or Category of Professional Services to be procured from State Procurement Office 8. Professional Services List, SPO Procurement Circular 2009-6: In accordance with Chapter 103D-304, the following were determined to be the [minimum of three (3)] most qualified firms to provide the professional services required for the above project. Attached are the relevant supporting documents. CONSULTANT NAME RANKING 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Pursuant to HRS 103D-304(g), if there are any ties in the rankings provide explanation of actions to 9. be taken to ensure equal distribution of contracts among the consultants holding the same qualifications: 10. Direct questions to: Phone: Pursuant to the delegation of authority by the Chief Procurement Officer, we will proceed to negotiate a contract. THE AUTHORITY FOR CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS RELATED TO THE ABOVE IS DELEGATED TO THE (Department) _____________________________________ Committee Chair Date Reserved for BFS Use Only BFC-11-05 DDC SOP CONTRACT 3 ATTACHMENT 5
- 9. Chief Procurement Officer's comments: APPROVED DISAPPROVED ____________________________ _________ Chief Procurement Officer Date Attachments Long List Scope of Services Evaluation Forms Statement of Qualifications for Consultants listed BFC-11-05 DDC SOP CONTRACT 3 ATTACHMENT 5