• Pages

    • The Evaluation Criteria for Written Proposals

    Criteria   Weight
    Professional Qualification (Ability of Professional Personnel)

    Experience/Qualifications of Firm

    1. Company credentials
    2. Completed projects of similar scope within last five years
    3. Subconsultants emphasizing similar scope of services
    4. Whether Certified Minority Business Enterprise

    Experience of Project Personnel

    1. Organizational chart for personnel assigned to this project
    2. List of project staff
    3. Principal’s credentials
    4. Credentials of the design professionals affiliated with this project
    5. Professional credentials for personnel assigned to this contract
    6. List of licenses held by project staff
    		 20
    Proposed Project
    1. Clear understanding of the scope of the project
    2. Quality and durability of building materials proposed
    3. Visual appeal of the structure
    4. Layout and flow inside the structure
    5. Number of sleeping rooms
    6. Ratio of bathrooms to sleeping rooms
    7. Innovative design techniques
    		 25
    General Business Terms/Past Performance

    Litigation and Disputes

    1. Summary of any litigation
    2. Pending litigation and potential disputes
    3. Liquidated damages assessed
    4. License sanctions
    5. Lost or cancelled accounts
    		 10
    References
    1. Tabulated results of written reference check
    2. Letters of reference included in written submittal
    3. Site visits, if any
    4. Letters of reference for similar projects completed in the last five years
    		 15
    Work Plan
    1. Adequacy of description for performance of the project, including change orders, subcontractors, and material management
    2. Number of calendar days to complete project
    3. Sufficiency of explanation of scheduling methodology
    4. Adequacy of explanation for resolving conflicts with existing activities on SFSC campus and minimizing noise and other disruptions to the SFSC campus activities
    5. Discuss how you manage projects, with emphasis on similar projects
    		 15
    Finance
    1. Satisfactory funding in place
    2. Sufficient bonding capacity
    3. Annual amount proposed to be donated to the SFSC Foundation
    		 15
        100

     

    Questions and Answers

      1. What is the size of the housing project SFSC Foundation is requesting? What is the number of beds needed?

        The SFSC Foundation is allowing the development firm the flexibility to determine the size and/or number of beds for this project. The Foundation currently provides housing accommodations for 80 student athletes. A developer is free to propose a number of beds/units that accommodates current students and a consideration for additional beds/units considering the size of the SFSC student population.

      2. What is the intention of SFSC and the SFSC Foundation for the land shown on Exhibit A, Proposed Leased Land, stated as Future Site?

        Exhibit A shows the proposed leased land of Site No. 1 for Student Housing Accommodations for this particular project. The land shown as Future Site could potentially be for expanded Student Housing Accommodations or as land needed for the College and educational opportunities.

      3. Clarification of what an unduplicated headcount of 6,024 refers to:

        6,024 represents the number of students who enrolled at SFSC during the 2020-2021 academic year.

      4. What development firm(s) submitted the unsolicited proposals?

        1. Heartland Development Group, LLC
        2. A joint development effort between JMJ Development and Short Pants Development

      5. Please clarify if there are specific scoring reference forms. If not, can you please list the reference check list items and ranking system you would like for this section.

        There is no specific scoring reference form. The tabulated results of written reference check is an acknowledgment of reference documents submitted by the potential project developer.

      6. Please clarify what this section is referring to in regards to references.

        It refers to whether the potential project developer inspected the site prior to submitting a proposal.