TO: AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM: Michael A. Hursh, General Manager/Chief Executive Officer
SUBJECT: Awarding the On-Call A&E Services
ACTION ITEM
AGENDA PLANNING REQUEST: ☐
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Title
Consider approving the award of eight (8) contracts for On-Call Architectural/Engineering services to Parsons Transportation Group, Inc.; Interactive Resources, Inc.; STV, Inc.; Chow Engineering, Inc.; Group 4 Architecture Research + Planning, Inc.; Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc.; Mott-McDonald Group, Inc.; and West Coast Code Consultants, Inc.
Staff Contact:
Ramakrishna Pochiraju, Executive Director of Planning & Engineering
Body
STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE:
Goal - Safe and Secure Operations
Initiative - Infrastructure Modernization
On-call architecture and engineering (A&E) contracts support the execution of the District’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) by having specialized resources available to address specific and often short-term project needs. Having these resources on-call and readily available saves months of procurement time.
BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no immediate fiscal impact from the award of these contracts. Only when a task order is issued under one of the eight on-call contracts will there be an impact. The maximum value of each individual tasking will be equal to the unused portion of the annual allocation for that specific contractor. The minimum value of each task order is $2,500.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
On-Call A&E contracts will provide the District with access to specialized architectural and engineering services as well as short-term staff augmentation to accommodate the capital project’s program needs. These needs cover a variety of A&E areas, which include, but are not limited to permit code compliance review and inspection, architectural design, civil engineering, structural design and analysis, mechanical / electrical / plumbing design, landscape architecture and design, cost estimating, and scheduling. Many of these specialties are only needed for a limited time period ranging from days to weeks to months, depending on the specific project need.
Procurement Timeline
1. Board authorization to issue solicitation 02-23-2022
2. Solicitation issued 07-05-2022
3. Solicitation closed 08-15-2022
4. Evaluations complete 10-19-2022
Each firm was evaluated by the panel for qualifications in the following four (4) separate practice areas:
1. Civil Design (Horizonal)
2. Architectural Design (Vertical)
3. Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)
4. Code Compliance and Inspection
The evaluation panel was comprised of five (5) evaluators. Four (4) evaluators were from AC Transit’s Planning and Engineering Department and one (1) outside evaluator was from the City of Hayward Public Works Department. The panel evaluated the statements of qualifications for each proposer with respect to each of the four (4) practice areas utilizing the evaluation criteria listed in the solicitation and shown below.
Qualifications Evaluation Criteria
1. Relevant Past Performance 30%
2. Technical Specialized Experience 20%
3. Professional Qualifications and Competence of Team / Depth of Firm 25%
4. Capacity of Firm to Accomplish the Work in the Required Time 20%
5. Quality Control Program 5%
The evaluation results indicate that all eight (8) firms scored in the competitive range (80% and above) in at least one of the four practice areas.
Staff is proposing eight (8) on-call A&E contracts, each valued at a maximum of $1,000,000 per year during an initial three-year offering period when work can be tasked and started. Each contract will have a five-year period of performance for completion of the work authorized during the offering period. This is to ensure that all taskings issued during the three-year tasking period will be complete prior to the final expiration of the contract term. These contracts are on-call, task order-based contracts. When the need for services under these contracts is identified, the District will order the services by issuing a task order to the best qualified firm followed by a purchase order.
The procurement approach used was a qualifications-based, price not determinative, “Brooks Act,” as defined by Federal Transit Administration Circular 4220.1F Rev 3. It utilized a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) procurement approach. Actual tasking will be made by applying a mini-Brooks evaluation to determine the best qualified firm.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
There are a number of advantages associated with continuing the use of on-call A&E contracts, including:
1. Relatively quick access to specialized skills when necessary;
2. Pay as you go approach, so the District pays only for the services utilized; and
3. No cost to the District if the services are not required or used.
There are no immediate disadvantages to re-soliciting these on-call contracts.
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
Staff considered three (3) alternative approaches to providing the District with the kinds of services envisioned for these contracts; however, it is important to note that having these contracts in place would not preclude the District from using any of these alternative methods:
1. Hire employees. Adding staff to handle the wide range of specialties and paying them full-time wages and benefits when they are only needed part of the time. Staff does not recommend this alternative because it is not a prudent use of District funds.
2. Individual Procurements. The District could opt to solicit proposals for PM/CM services as the need arises. Staff does not recommend this alternative because it would result in lengthened implementation schedules and increased workload for project managers and contract specialists with no corresponding benefit.
3. Temporary Employees. The District could use temporary employees, perhaps hired through a placement agency, for the duration of a particular project. Staff does not recommend this approach because a project typically requires a specialty for a limited number of hours per month over a several month duration.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTION/POLICIES:
SR 22-157, Permission to Solicit On-Call A&E contracts, February 23, 2022.
Board Policy 465 - Procurement Policy
ATTACHMENTS:
None
Prepared by:
Joe Callaway, Director of Capital Projects
Approved/Reviewed by:
Ramakrishna Pochiraju, Executive Director of Planning & Engineering
Fred Walls, Director of Procurement and Materials
Cecil Blandon, Director of Maintenance
Salvador Llamas, Chief Operating Officer
Chris Andrichak, Chief Financial Officer
Jill A. Sprague, General Counsel/Chief Legal Officer