Americas Interchange Proposal Evaluation Board of Directors Presentation February 26, 2010.
-
Upload
dustin-burns -
Category
Documents
-
view
218 -
download
3
Transcript of Americas Interchange Proposal Evaluation Board of Directors Presentation February 26, 2010.
Americas InterchangeProposal Evaluation
Board of Directors PresentationFebruary 26, 2010
Agenda
• Project Overview• Procurement Process• Evaluation Process• Next Steps• Questions and Answers
Scope of Work
PROPOSED PROJECT
FUTURE PROJECT
JOE BATTLE
BLVD. / LP 375
Project Funding
Basic Information• Total Project Cost = $146M• ARRA (Stimulus) Funding
― TxDOT ARRA Funds $75M― MPO ARRA Funds $21M
• Additional Funding ― State Infrastructure Bank Loan Backed by
Transportation Reinvestment Zone― TxDOT Funds via Pass-Through Financing
Procurement ProcessTwo Step Process• Request for Qualifications (RFQ)
– Issued June 11, 2009– Received July 8, 2009– Evaluation Completed
• Short List of Proposers– Announced July 30, 2009
• Request for Detailed Proposals (RFDP)– Issued November 18, 2009– Received February 11, 2010– Evaluation Process
Short Listed Proposers
Team Make-Up• Americas Gateway Builders
– Zachry Construction Corporation– CH2M Hill– Frank X. Spencer and Associates Inc.– Montoya PR– Structural Engineering Consultants– Quantum Engineering Consultants
Short Listed Proposers
Team Make-Up• Paso Del Norte Constructors
– Austin Bridge & Road– Huitt-Zollars– Dan Williams Company– aci Consulting– Aguilera and Associates– Border Research Solutions– CEA Engineering Group– Frank X. Spencer and Associates Inc.– Maldonado/Burkett Intelligent
Transportation Systems, LLP
Short Listed Proposers
Team Make-Up• J.D. Abrams, LP
– Michael Baker, Jr., Inc.– EPI Global, Inc.– The Laster Group– P.E. Structural Consultants, Inc.– Kellogg Brown and Root Services, Inc.– HDR Engineering Inc.– Moreno Cardenas Inc.– Parkhill, Smith and Cooper Inc.– Frank X. Spencer and Associates Inc.– SLI Engineering Inc.– Rodriguez Engineering Laboratories
RFDP Evaluation Process
Basic Information• Evaluation Team• Best Value Process• Schedule• Results
Evaluation TeamOverview
• Document Control• Pass/Fail Advisor• Oversight Committee• Price Evaluation Committee• Technical Evaluation Team
– Evaluation & Selection Recommendation Committee– Technical Advisors
• Senior Advisory Committee• CRRMA Board
RFDP Evaluation Process
Best Value Process• Qualitative Technical Score
– Innovation– Value Added Concepts– Pass/Fail Analysis– Without Pricing Information– 30% of Total Proposal Score
Major CategoriesProject Management Plan = 43 Points
Development Plan = 47 PointsCommunity Involvement Plan = 5 Points
Value-Added Concepts = 5 Points
RFDP Evaluation Process
Best Value Process• Development Price Proposal Evaluation
– Price Proposal Value Calculation– Schedule Adjustment Factor– Lane Rental Differential Factor– “Blind” Scoring– 70% of Total Proposal Score
Development Price+
Schedule Adjustment Factor+
Lane Rental Differential Factor=
Price Proposal Value
RFDP Evaluation ProcessFinal Total Proposal Score• Qualitative Technical Score Converted to
Technical Score (Numerical)
Qualitative RatingEvaluator’s Potential
Scoring Range
Excellent 100
Good 80
Fair 60
Poor 40
Unsatisfactory 0
RFDP Evaluation ProcessFinal Total Proposal Score• Qualitative Factor Calculated Using
Technical Scores (Numerical)
Qualitative Factor = Technical ScoreHighest Technical Score
TECHNICAL Component of Final Score
RFDP Evaluation ProcessFinal Total Proposal Score• Price Proposal Value Converted to Price
Factor– Development Price– Schedule Adjustment Factor– Lane Rental Differential Factor
Price Factor = Lowest Price Proposal ValuePrice Proposal Value of Proposal
FINANCIAL Component of Final Score
RFDP Evaluation ProcessFinal Total Proposal Score• Weighted Price Factor added to Weighted
Qualitative Factor
Best Value Proposal Having the Highest FTPS
FTPS = (Price Factor x 70) + (Qualitative Factor x 30)
Evaluation ScheduleOverview• Proposals Received – February 10-11• Document Control – February 11-12• Pass/Fail Analysis – February 15• Price Proposal Analysis – February 15-16• Technical Evaluation – February 15-19• ESRC Consensus Scoring – February 24
Evaluation ResultsThree Proposals Exceed
Maximum Amount Available to be Paid to the Design/Builder
The Board has two options:
Adjust the Scope and Request
Updated Proposals
Terminate the Procurement
GEC Team Recommends Adjusting the Scope and Requesting Updated Proposals
FHWA ConcurrenceTxDOT Concurrence
Next Steps
Overview• Value Engineering • Develop Project Cost Estimate• Develop Addendum 4• Review and Approval by TxDOT/FHWA• Issue Addendum 4• Updated Proposal Due Date ~ Early April• Re-Evaluate Revised Proposals• Seek CRRMA Board Approval of
Apparent Best Value Proposal
Questions?