1 / 17

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTING

Presenter Name John Moore Chief Contracting Division Savannah District 20 May 2010. CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTING. AGENDA ACQUISITION PROCESS ACQUISITION PLANNING ACQUISITION DECISIONS BEST VALUE BEST VALUE CONTINUUM TRADE OFFS SOURCE SELECTION CRITERIA SOURCE SELECTION DECISION

umed
Download Presentation

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTING

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Presenter Name John Moore Chief Contracting Division Savannah District 20 May 2010 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTING

  2. AGENDA • ACQUISITION PROCESS • ACQUISITION PLANNING • ACQUISITION DECISIONS • BEST VALUE • BEST VALUE CONTINUUM • TRADE OFFS • SOURCE SELECTION CRITERIA • SOURCE SELECTION DECISION • SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS • IDIQ CONTRACTS • MATOC COMPETITION PROCESS • BENEFIT OF MATOCS/SATOCS

  3. RFP Process

  4. Considerations in Acquisition Planning • Project Size and Budget • Scope Complexity • Urgency • Customer/Politics • Funding Stream • Market Conditions • Socio-Economic Programs • Availability of Current Contract Vehicles • In-House Staff Capacity/Capability

  5. Acquisition Decisions • In-House vs. Contract • Solicitation – IFB or RFP • Contract Type – Fixed Price or Cost • Small Business or Unrestricted • Design-Bid-Build or Design-Build • Existing Contract or New Acquisition • Sole Source or Competitive • Acquisition Planning is Risk Management!

  6. The Best Value Continuum Assumes Greatest Risk/ Control Invitation for Bid – Sealed Bid Low Price Technically Acceptable Price-Performance Trade-off One Step Design-Build GOVERNMENT Two Step Design-Build CONTRACTOR Assumes Greatest Risk/Control Least Control

  7. THE BEST VALUE CONTINUUM • INVITATION FOR BID • PROs: • Relatively fast acquisition phase • Less Resources needed during acquisition • CONs: • Government assumes most risks • No quality control over Contractor selection • No negotiations! • Long lead time for design

  8. THE BEST VALUE CONTINUUM Request for Proposal • PROs: • Contractor selection based on pre-established evaluation criteria • Performance evaluated with price • Ability to negotiate • CONs: • More resource intensive • Acquisition Time is Longer

  9. BEST VALUE TRADE-OFFS • QUALITY • SCOPE • PAST • PERFORMANCE RISK • COST • SCHEDULE • PROJECT REQUIREMENTS • SIZE • COMPLEXITY • FUNDING STREAM • RESTRICTIONS

  10. SOURCE SELECTION CRITERIA • True discriminators have the following characteristics: • A reasonable expectation of variance among offerors • An assessable variance (quantitative or qualitative measurement) • The requirement(s) warrant a comparative evaluation • of that Factor (worthy of a Price/Cost Premium) Do Criteria Focus on Issues of Substance? Is there time to evaluate the selected criteria? ID of skilled evaluators to assess the criteria?

  11. THE SOURCE SELECTION DECISION • Represents the Source Selection Authority’s rational and independent judgment; • Is based on a comparative analysis of the proposals; • Must be consistent with solicitation evaluation factors and subfactors. • Must Reflect Why Discriminators among Offerors (e.g. Lower Risk, Better Past Performance, Strengths and Weaknesses) are: • Worth of any Price Premium, or • Not Worth of a Price Premium

  12. Socio-economic Considerations: Unrestricted Small Business 8(a) HubZone SDVOSB

  13. SOCIO-ECONOMIC TARGETS Small Businesses 32.0% Small Disadvantaged Businesses 18.0% Women-Owned Small Businesses 5.8% HUBZone Small Businesses 10.0% Service Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Bus. 3.0% HBCU/MI 13.0%

  14. IDIQ Contracts • Multiple Award (MATOC) • Multiple contractors • (compete for task orders) • Examples • GSA • COS • etc • Single Award (SATOC) • One contractor • (no competition for task orders) • Examples • 8(a) < $3 Million • A-E • O&M Construction

  15. MATOC COMPETITION PROCESS • RFP Letter & SOW • Evaluation Criteria Identified in RFP Letter • Technical Board for Design Build T.O.s • Importance of Price vs Technical • Source Selection Decision

  16. THE BENEFIT OF MATOCS/SATOCS • Time Advantage - No 30 day Synopsis • Ability to manage workload/manpower • Limited Number of Offerors • Less Cost to Issue/Award a T.O. • Can Involve Contractors During Design Development • More Balanced use of MATOCs and Stand Alone Contracts as Workload Draws Down

  17. Questions?

More Related