A&E
STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES
FOR
INITIAL AND FINAL
EVALUATION/SCORING
Division
DPAC
Procurement and Contracts
Flex your power! Be energy efficient!
Division of Procurement and Contracts (DPAC)
A&E Standards and Procedures for Scoring Initial and Final Evaluation
Revised 07/20/04
TABLE OF CONTENT
SECTION
PAGE
Instructions For Consultant Selection Committee Participation
1
Consultant Selection Committee Code of Ethical Conduct
1
General Guidelines For Scoring Initial Evaluation
3
Consultant Interviews
4
General Guidelines For Scoring Final Evaluation
4
Scoring The RFP When Part of The RFQ Solicitation
5
Guidelines For Debriefing The Consultant
5
Do’s
6
Don’ts
7
Attachment A – Consultant Selection Committee Participation Memo
Attachment B – Oral Interview Letter to Consultant
Attachment C –Criteria for Evaluation of Consultant Technical Proposals
ADM2027 – Initial Scoring System for Caltrans Consultant Selection Committee. This is used
to score the Statement of Qualifications (SOQs). Note: A Suggested Scoring System is
attached as page 2 of this form.
ADM2028-Final Scoring System for Caltrans Consultant Selection Committee. This is used to
score the Oral Interview. Note: A Suggested Scoring System is attached as page 2 of
this form.
Exhibit A – Conflict of Interest Form (Submit with Form 360)
Exhibit B – Confidentiality of Information Certification
Exhibit C – Consultant Interview Format
Division of Procurement and Contracts (DPAC)
A&E Standards and Procedures for Scoring Initial and Final Evaluation
Revised 07/20/04
INSTRUCTIONS FOR CONSULTANT SELECTION COMMITTEE PARTICIPATION
A Consultant Selection Committee must be established at the same time the contracting out
process begins. The Consultant Selection Committee Participation Memo (See Attachment
A), must be submitted to the Division of Procurement and Contracts (DPAC) with the ADM
360 Contract Request. If modification is necessary, the Consultant Selection Committee
Participation Memo must be provided before the RFQ is advertised in the California State
Contract Register (CSCR). This nominating memo must adhere to the following:

The memo must be signed by a Deputy District Director or a Headquarters’
Division Chief.

A majority of the voting committee members cannot be in the same chain of
command.

The Committee must include technical expert(s) representing the functional
area(s) related to the contract scope of work detailed in the solicitation
(RFQ).

Panel members may be substituted for the initial evaluation, however, more
time may be required before the interview may be scheduled. An addendum
to the Nominating memo will be required to add panel members.

A minimum of three (3) full voting members are required for a quorum. To
prevent any difficulty, it is better to assign more than 3 members to the
panel.

If a committee member can not attend the Consultant interview which would
cause the minimum number of voting members to drop below 3 members, a
DPAC Contract Officer exception approval will be required prior to the
interview. Rescheduling the interview would be costly to all but may be the
best choice.)

The Committee Chairperson is a non-voting member, who will be assigned
by a DPAC Contract Officer.
Although DPAC is specifically charged it is every participant’s personal responsibility to
maintain the integrity of the solicitation process. All applicable procurement laws, regulations,
and DPAC policies shall be adhered to. There is an implied covenant of good faith and fair
dealing in every DPAC contract procurement that must be maintained.
CONSULTANT SECTION COMMITTEE CODE OF ETHICAL CONDUCT
1.
Each committee member shall conduct themselves throughout the evaluation process
professionally, with truth, accuracy, fairness, objectivity and duty to the public in
carrying out State business with efficiency and frugality.
Page 1 of 7
Division of Procurement and Contracts (DPAC)
A&E Standards and Procedures for Scoring Initial and Final Evaluation
Revised 07/20/04
2.
Each committee member shall not represent conflicting or competing interests, nor be
in a position where personal interest may be in conflict, or appear to be in conflict with
the purpose and administration of the solicitation or award.
3.
Each committee member shall be aware of the Conflict of Interest laws with respect to
the contracting process. If any committee member knows of a conflict of interest or
the appearance of a conflict of interest, the member shall report it to the DPAC
Contract Analyst immediately (see CA Public Contract Code (PCC) §10410 - §10411).
4.
Each Committee member shall safeguard the confidences of all parties involved in the
evaluation process, including such information disclosed in the context of
communications relating to an anticipated professional relationship with potential
Consultants.
5.
Committee members shall not accept gratuities from any Consultants or interested
parties.
6.
Committee members shall not discuss any aspects of the proceedings with anyone not
designated as a committee member or Chairperson for the particular service being
solicited. This limitation includes, but is not limited to, discussing any details regarding
the number of Consultants, the identity of the Consultants, short listing, or final
evaluation. SOQs and scoring information shall be treated as confidential. Formal
notification is provided to all firms by the DPAC Analyst as it pertains to short listing
firms and the final results of oral interviews. Debriefing occurs after the execution of
the contract.
7.
Refer any attempted communication by or to Consultants to the DPAC Contract
Analyst.
8.
Committee members are prohibited from contacting Consultants to discuss their
SOQs. Any questions are to be handled by the DPAC Contract Analyst.
9.
All Department employees involved in the procurement/contracting process are
required to complete and place a signed (pdf or fax) copy of the Conflict of Interest
form (DGS-GC19990) in each contract file for every contract that is for $100,000 or
more. Examples of personnel affected: District/Division Consulting Services Unit
Staff, Consultant Selection Committee Members, Negotiation Team Members,
Contract Managers, A&E Coordinators, DPAC Contract Officers, DPAC Contract
Analyst(s) and any other District or Division personnel involved in the contract
procurement process. Contracts cannot be executed until the signed Conflict of
Interest forms are received by the DPAC Contract Analyst for the contract file (See
Exhibit A).
10.
In addition, see Exhibit B regarding confidentiality of information certification. This
signed form is also required and must accompany the Consultant Selection Committee
nomination memo as a PDF file when submitting the 360 package electronically.
Page 2 of 7
Division of Procurement and Contracts (DPAC)
A&E Standards and Procedures for Scoring Initial and Final Evaluation
Revised 07/20/04
GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR SCORING INITIAL EVALUATION
The Scoring process begins with the initial evaluation of the SOQs. The purpose of the initial
evaluation is to evaluate all SOQs in detail to determine which Consultants will be short listed
and continue to the next phase of the process – the formal interview. The initial evaluation
process uses the ADM-2027 form and Suggested Scoring System.
Each voting member will perform individual evaluations on each SOQ. Upon completion of
individual evaluations, the committee members will forward their score sheets to the DPAC
Contract Analyst. Once the results are verified, a short list is established and the DPAC
Contract Analyst sends notification to the Consultants. Each score sheet will have attached,
a signed Conflict of Interest statement from each committee member and will be subject to
public disclosure.
Short listed Consultants will continue to the next phase of the process. The Contract
Manager and DPAC Contract Officer will determine the number of firms to be interviewed.
For instance, if the Department has one contract to award, a minimum of three firms will be
interviewed. If the fourth ranked firm were a DBE or DVBE firm, it would be appropriate to
interview that firm as well.
1.
Committee members shall adhere to the following evaluation process for initial scoring:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j)
(k)
Read each SOQ in its entirety.
Evaluations must follow the requirements established in the RFQ. It is therefore
essential that all committee members read and understand the RFQ.
Do not add, subtract or change any evaluation factors on the score sheet.
For each evaluation factor you will weigh and document Consultants abilities,
significant weaknesses, and missing information (deficiencies) as related in the
SOQs. Deficiencies may include the lack of qualified personnel required by the
scope of work.
Focus on essential information related to scoring criteria, be clear and concise
in documentation to support your scores. This will be of great importance for
debriefing Consultants who want to know how to improve and do business with
the Department.
Evaluate the merit of each SOQ.
Evaluate only what is written in the SOQ.
Do not substitute personal knowledge or judgement for what may or may not be
written in the SOQ.
Do make comparisons between SOQs.
Regarding scoring criteria, if you are unclear please discuss any questions with
your DPAC Coordinator.
DO NOT DELEGATE RESPONSIBILITY! You are responsible to review and
score each SOQ.
Page 3 of 7
Division of Procurement and Contracts (DPAC)
A&E Standards and Procedures for Scoring Initial and Final Evaluation
Revised 07/20/04
CONSULTANT INTERVIEWS
Consultant interviews are the basis for the final evaluation of the selection process. A
uniform approach will be applied to all firms interviewed. An interview letter, (See Attachment
B), will be sent by the DPAC Analyst to each short listed Consultant with information
regarding the interview process. The interviews will be arranged so that:






The committee Chairperson will chair the interviews
The same amount of time is allotted for each Consultant
Oral interviews will include a question and answer session
The same questions will be asked of each Consultant
Follow-up questions are allowed if there is time remaining
Interviews will be confidential and take place outside the purview of other
Consultants
GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR SCORING FINAL EVALUATION
The scoring method to be used for the final evaluation of the Consultants interviewed utilizes
the score sheet, ADM 2028, and Suggested Scoring System as advertised. The designated
DPAC Analyst assigned to the solicitation will assist the Consultant Selection Committee
members and monitor the scoring. The Committee Chairperson will lead the final scoring
evaluation session. All scores shall be verified and checked, then converted to rank scores
which will be tallied by the Chairperson or DPAC Contract Analyst.
The Committee Chairperson is responsible for ensuring that the committee members have a
common understanding of all scoring criteria, the suggested scoring system that relates to
the evaluation criteria, and an understanding of the evaluation process. The Chairperson is
responsible to facilitate this common understanding and to document the proceedings
utilizing a Consulting Services Unit (CSU) staff person for the recordation if necessary. The
preliminary documentation will be held for purposes of debriefing. The completed score
sheets will be given to the DPAC Contract Analyst for the official contract file and will be
subject to public disclosure.
After each Consultant firm is interviewed and the corresponding evaluation criterion factors
are considered, the panel member individually scores the Consultant and those scores are
converted to ranks. The rank scores are combined to determine the top ranked firm.
1.
In order to ensure an objective scoring process, the Committee Chairperson will
instruct the members on how to use the Suggested Scoring System. This can be
accomplished by meeting with committee members. This will ensure that all members
are evaluating Consultants based on a common understanding of the evaluation
Page 4 of 7
Division of Procurement and Contracts (DPAC)
A&E Standards and Procedures for Scoring Initial and Final Evaluation
Revised 07/20/04
factors. A discussion of each evaluation factor/criterion on the score sheet may be
necessary as well.
3.
The final score sheets for each Consultant firm will have committee members named
and by their signatures, shall certify under penalty of perjury, that he/she fully
understands the Committee Rules and Code of Ethical Standards and that noncompliance, including any disclosure as described herein is a basis for disciplinary
action, including dismissal.
4.
Committee members shall consider the following for final scoring:
Did the Consultant’s team answer the committee’s questions?
Did the Consultant’s presentation support the information provided in the SOQ?
Be objective.
Do not deviate from criteria of the score sheet.
Do the reference checks before the interviews and if available, check DPAC
Consultant evaluations on file for negative reports.
 All relevant experience will be considered equally. Caltrans experience will not be
given more weight in the evaluation process.
 All scores will be checked for accuracy before the DPAC Contract Analyst
tabulates ranked scores for final outcome. If the Analyst is not in attendance the
Chair will assume this responsibility.





SCORING THE RFP WHEN PART OF THE RFQ SOLICITATION
When the solicitation requires a technical proposal, the Scoring System for the Caltrans
Consultant Selection Committee will be the standard Suggested Scoring System that is
utilized for scoring Consultant technical proposals in the RFP process (See Attachment C).
The scoring for the technical proposal will be pass/fail. Consultants must meet a minimum
score of 85 points. If the Consultant does not meet the minimum score, they will be
disqualified from further evaluation (initial or final evaluation).
GUIDELINES FOR DEBRIEFING THE CONSULTANT
At the beginning of the final evaluation process, the Committee Chairperson will announce
who will be the Debriefer. The Debriefer can be the Contract Manager or another committee
member who has been designated by the District. Debriefing may only be conducted by a
member of the committee. At the conclusion of the award process (contracts fully executed
and distributed), the Consultant(s) requesting debriefing may then be debriefed. The DPAC
Analyst will provide a memo to the Consultants and the Debriefer to announce the debriefing
period allowed.
Page 5 of 7
Division of Procurement and Contracts (DPAC)
A&E Standards and Procedures for Scoring Initial and Final Evaluation
Revised 07/20/04
At the conclusion of the Consultant interviews, it is recommended that the designated
debriefer consult with the other committee members regarding the strengths and weaknesses
of the unsuccessful Consultant(s), take notes as necessary and collect from the committee
members, any relevant evaluation notes. This information will assist the debriefer in
providing the Consultants with information about their interview, how they may improve their
SOQ and be more competitive in the future. One way to look at the debriefing is to ask “what
information can I provide that will help Consultants do better in the future?” The debriefing
should be short and professional. The following definitions may be of use in debriefing:
“Deficiency” is a material failure of a Statement of Qualifications (SOQs) to meet a
requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a SOQ that increases the
risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level (FAR 15.001).
“Weakness” means a flaw in the SOQ that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract
performance. A “significant weakness” in the SOQ is a flaw that appreciably increases
the risk of unsuccessful contract performance (FAR 15.001).
Do’s
Initial Evaluation Review
 Do identify SOQ strengths that offer advantages.
 Do look for content of SOQ meeting requirements.
 Do recognize and clearly identify inconsistencies, errors, omissions, irregularities, and
deficiencies that may affect scoring.
 Do ratings based on objective and best-reasoned judgment.
Consultant Evaluation at Interview
 Do discuss the Consultant’s individual presentation.
 Do avoid forming “first impressions” of a Consultant that may provide undue influence.
 Do recognize and discount flattery on the part of the Consultant.
Debriefer
 Do collect documentation regarding the SOQ and interview for the debriefing.
 Do connect your comments to the published selection criteria.
 Do discuss deficiencies or weaknesses only of that firm you are debriefing.
 Do have the Chairperson attend the debriefing session.
Page 6 of 7
Division of Procurement and Contracts (DPAC)
A&E Standards and Procedures for Scoring Initial and Final Evaluation
Revised 07/20/04
Don’ts
Initial Evaluation Review
 Do not downgrade an SOQ because it did not address something that was NEVER asked
for in the RFQ.
Consultant Evaluation at Interview
 Do not discuss costs, remember, this is qualification-based selection.
 Do not discuss travel expense costs for out-of-state Consultants.
 Do not discuss character/personal traits of individuals within the Consultant’s team.
Debriefer
 Do not discuss negative or problem experiences with Consultant’s team on prior
contracts.
except for that information that results from the reference checks or information gathered
from recent contract evaluation forms.
 Do not discuss other Consultant’s scores with the Consultant.
 Do not discuss information that does not relate to the Consultant’s presentation.
 Do not share written notes (written notes are considered “working papers” and not subject
to public disclosure).
 Do not do debriefing until after the contract has been fully executed and distributed.
Page 7 of 7
Business, Transportation and Housing Agency
State of California
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Memorandum
Flex your power!
BE ENERGY EFFICIENT!
Attachment A, Sample Only/Subject to Change
To:
From:
Subject:
STEVE ALSTON, Chief
Division of Procurement and Contracts
Date:
Month day, year
File:
[Optional]
Contract Manager or CSU Officer
District or Headquarters name; and Division
Consultant Selection Committee Participation
The employees listed on page two are nominated for participation on the selection committee for
the upcoming (contract description) services. Prior approval has been obtained from each
Headquarters (and/or District) Office Chief for the appointment of their respective
representatives.
For accurate delivery of the Statement of Qualification (SOQ) packets, please distribute SOQ’s
to the District as follows:

Send entire SOQ packets directly to District CSU, Attn: _____________, at (physical
address), MS ____, for distribution and evaluation; or

Send SOQ packet for evaluation, to each individual at the specific address indicated in
the chart on page two.
When SOQ’s are mailed we would like:

to be notified by email at the time the SOQ’s are mailed out.

each individual listed in the chart to receive notification by email at
the time when the SOQ’s are mailed out.
“Caltrans improves mobility across California”
[ADDRESSEE]
[Date]
Page 2




Please provide the Supervisor’s name for each panel participant.
Please do not use a P.O. box address for a mailing address.
Please submit no less than three participants to form a quorum.
Please contact your respective A&E Coordinator if you have any questions.
Telephone/Fax/
Individual
Classifica
District/Street Address
Calnet/Cell/Pag
tion
er
Name
DPAC
Division of
T: 916-227Staff,
Procurement and
____
Non
Contracts (DPAC),
Fax: 916-227Voting
1727 30th Street
6155
Chair
Sacramento, CA
Calnet: 8-49895816
____
Cnet Fax: 8498-6155
Name
T.E Civil,
District CSU, MS
T:
Range D
____
Fax:
(Contract
Physical Address
Calnet:
Manager)
Cell:
Pager:
Name
Senior
District
T:
T.E.
Planning, MS ____
Fax:
Physical Address
Calnet
Cell:
Pager:
Name
Senior
HQ Environmental,
T:
Env.
MS ____
Fax:
Planner
Physical Address
Calnet
Cell:
Pager:
Approved:
_____________________________________,
Deputy District Director or HQ Division Chief
“Caltrans improves mobility across California”
[ADDRESSEE]
[Date]
Page 3
Note: Only a Deputy District Director or a HQ Division Chief may sign.
(A District Division Chief may not sign.)
c:
Committee Members
Manager, Design Program
Manager, Planning Program
Manager, HQ Environmental Program
Kform 50 (Rev. 07/06/04) (Please leave Kform and revision date in the document)
“Caltrans improves mobility across California”
STATE OF CALIFORNIA-------BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ADMINISTRATION
DIVISION OF PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTS MS-67
1727 30TH STREET
SACRAMENTO, CA 95816-7006
PHONE (916) 227-6000
FAX (916) 227-6155
INTERNET http://caltrans-opac.ca.gov
Current Date
Flex your power power!
Be energy efficient!
Agreement Number: XXAXXX
Attachment B, Sample Only/Subject to Change
Consultant’s Name
Street Address
City, State, Zip Code
Attn: Consultant’s Contact Person, Title
This is to confirm that you are scheduled for an interview with the Consultant Selection
Committee for Agreement Number XXAXXX for Type and General Title of Service on
Day
of
Week,
Month,
Day,
Year,
at
Time a/p
m.,
in
the
Headquarters/District/Conference Room of Department of Transportation, located
at Street Address, Suite/Floor, City, California. If your Consultant firm’s team can not
make the interview scheduled date/time because of conflict(s), DPAC is under no
obligation to change its scheduled date/time.
It is the State’s policy that every visitor is required to present either, a driver’s license or
another form of photo identification to the security guard before being admitted to a State
building. Please ensure that each member of your team has the appropriate identification.
Page 2
Please provide the following information prior to the interview date:
-
a list of all Subconsultants and the anticipated percentage of work each will perform
-
name of the audit firm, name of contact person and phone number if your firm has had
an independent audit by a public entity within the last twelve months
Should your firm be selected, the Department may utilize this information to assist with
expediting the audit process.
During the interview, we will discuss your approach to performing the work. A Proposed
Form of Agreement (STD 213) is enclosed.
Your presentation should be no longer than 20 minutes and should address the factors
listed on the attached Consultant Evaluation Form/Final Evaluation ADM 2028. Your
Project Manager is expected to attend the interview. Absence of the Project Manager will
be reflected in your score. Representatives from any firm listed on your organizational
chart may address the panel during the interview regardless of whether or not the
individual is specifically identified in your Statement of Qualifications (SOQ). However,
the Consultant must identify the representative(s) as not being listed in the SOQ. The panel
will consider the fact that the representative addressing the panel is not part of the
“proposed team” and will score accordingly. The Department of Transportation does not
provide audiovisual equipment (i.e. screens, projectors, extension cords, etc.) for
presentations. A total time of 50 minutes has been allowed for your interview, structured as
follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Set-up equipment and introductions
Consultant’s presentation
Questions by panel
Closing statement and take down equipment
05 minutes
20 minutes
20 minutes
05 minutes
Please confirm your attendance and contact me if you have any questions concerning the
interview or the Proposed Form of Agreement (STD 213) .
Page 3
Please bring appropriate # copies of your cost proposal to the interview. If Subconsultants
are to be used, separate cost proposal forms must be submitted for each Subconsultant in
the same format as the prime, with date of submittal (same date on every page) and page
numbered continuously - page 1 of 20, page 2 of 20, etc. It is mandatory that you have
your Consultant firms’ return address on the front of the sealed envelope containing the
cost proposals.
Each page of the Cost Proposal must be marked in the upper right corner with the
following: Attachment 1, Agreement Number, continuous page number and the date of
submittal. If applicable, attach and page in the applicable Goal Documentation form and/or
Good Faith Effort forms as the last page(s) of your cost proposal. The following
documents are attached to assist you in preparing your cost proposal:
1. Proposed form of Agreement (STD 213)
In an effort to streamline the way the State of California conducts business, we are
in the process of standardizing current contracting procedures and formats. The first
step toward achieving this goal is to eliminate unnecessary duplication of agreement
language and documentation. You will note that in the new format of the Standard
Agreement a copy of the General Terms and Conditions (GTC’s) is not provided.
The GTC’s are available on the Internet at www.dgs.ca.gov/contracts and may be
downloaded and printed for your file.
2. Cost Proposal format and Instructions (ADM 2033)
If you are the selected Consultant, please be prepared to attend the cost negotiation session
on Day of the Week, Month, Day, Year at Time a/pm., in the
Headquarters/District/Conference Room (number) of The Department of Transportation,
located at Street Address, Suite/floor, City, California.
You will be required to provide the following documents at the cost negotiations:
1. Payee Data Record (STD 204)
Page 4
2. Certificate of Insurance (ADM 367) [or provide your insurance carrier’s “acord”
version which is preferred]
3. Contractor Certification Clauses (CCC-304)
The CCC-304 package contains clauses and conditions that may apply to persons doing
business with the Department under this agreement. The CCC-304 are to be kept on file in
a central location and must be renewed every three (3) years and updated as changes occur.
The CCC’s are available on the Internet at www.dgs.ca.gov/contracts and may be
downloaded and printed for your use. Please sign and return the first page of the CCC-304.
Failure to do so will prohibit the State of California from doing business with your
company.
Sincerely,
Contract Analyst Name
Contract Analyst
e-mail: [email protected]
Consultant Enclosures:
Proposed Form of Agreement (STD 213)
Consultant Evaluation Form/Final Evaluation and Suggested Scoring System (ADM 2028)
Cost Proposal Format and Instructions (ADM 2033)
Payee Data Record (Form STD 204)
Certificate of Insurance (ADM 367)
c: Consultant Selection Panel Members
Consultant Selection Panel Member Enclosures:
Proposed Form of Agreement (STD 213)
Consultant Evaluation Form/Final Evaluation (ADM 2028) and Suggested Scoring System
Page 5
Interview Schedule
A&E Consultant Reference Check (Kform 63)
A&E Standards and Procedures for Initial and Final Evaluation/Scoring
Kform 54 (Revised 0706/04) (Please leave Kform and revision date in the document)
ATTACHMENT C
CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF CONSULTANT TECHNICAL PROPOSALS
Technical Proposal Evaluation:
Maximum
Possible
Score
(Weighted
Score)
Determination %
I. CLARITY AND ORGANIZATION OF PROPOSAL RESPONSE
A. Clarity of Proposal
B. Organization of Proposal
C. Conciseness of Proposal
NARRATIVE
II.
A.
B.
C.
CONTRACTOR'S UNDERSTANDING OF DEPARTMENT'S REQUEST
Project Scope
Department's Problems and Requirements
Project Requirements
NARRATIVE
III.
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
CONTRACTOR'S APPROACH TO TECHNICAL WORK
Design Methodology
Design Techniques for Achieving Flexibility
Statement of Technical Requirements
Meets Project Requirements
Project Scope
NARRATIVE
IV. CONTRACTOR'S APPROACH TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT
A. Project Work Plan and Schedule
NARRATIVE
V. CONTRACTOR QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE
A. Internal Organization and Size
B. References
NARRATIVE
VI. STAFF QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE
A. Consulting Team Organization
B. Resumes
NARRATIVE
A.
B.
Score
NARRATIVE
TOTAL POSSIBLE
TOTAL ACTUAL
TOTAL PERCENT
Passing Score: ______ or ______%.
Only those proposers with a passing score will proceed to initial evaluation scoring.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA  DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ARCHITECTURAL & ENGINEERING (A&E) CONSULTANT EVALUATION FORM
INITIAL EVALUATION (for Short Listing)
ADM-2027 (Rev. 07/20/04)
Page 1 of 2
Consultant: __________________________________________________________
Contract No.:
_________________
Project: ______________________________
Criteria
1. Professional excellence, demonstrated competence in
the service to be provided, and specialized experience of
the Prime and Subconsultants.
2. Education and experience of the Project Manager and
other key personnel to be assigned.
3. Staffing capability, workload, and record of meeting
schedules on similar projects, including an assessment
of the firm’s ability to handle additional work, in view of
the firm’s current workload.
4. Nature, quality, and relevance of recently completed
work.
5. Feasibility of oversight, ability and willingness to respond
to Department requirements, and accessibility to
Department Reviewers.
(a)
Weight
(b) Score
(0-10)
(a) x (b)
Weighted
Score
3.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.0
Total
Comments (continue on reverse if necessary):
I certify that I have performed an independent evaluation of the above named Consultant. I further certify
that I have not engaged in discussions within the last year with the above-named Consultant regarding my
future employment with said Consultant.
Signature of Evaluator:
____________________________________ Date______
Printed Name of Evaluator: ____________________________________
Checked by: _______________________________________________ Date______
STATE OF CALIFORNIA  DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ARCHITECTURAL & ENGINEERING (A&E) CONSULTANT EVALUATION FORM
INITIAL EVALUATION (for Short Listing)
ADM-2027 (Rev. 07/20/04)
Page 2 of 2
SUGGESTED SCORING SYSTEM
for
CALTRANS CONSULTANT SELECTION COMMITTEE
Fail (0 points)
Zero (0) points are given when the category being evaluated is nonresponsive.
Below Average (1 - 4 points)
One (1) to four (4) points are awarded to responses that are considered to be minimally acceptable.
Average (5 points)
Five (5) points are awarded if qualifications fully satisfy the requirement.
Above Average (6 - 9 points)
Six (6) points to nine (9) points are awarded if qualifications more than satisfy the requirement and
experience specifically applies to the project under consideration.
Exceptional (10 points)
Ten (10) points are awarded if a firm’s qualifications far exceed those required. Scores of ten (10)
points generally are infrequent.
This scoring system is provided as a guideline for evaluating Statements of Qualifications that
are submitted in response to a Request for Qualifications and for evaluating consultant
proposals. All relevant experience will be considered equally.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA  DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ARCHITECTURAL & ENGINEERING (A&E) CONSULTANT EVALUATION FORM/FINAL EVALUATION
(Qualifications-Based Selection)
ADM-2028 (Rev. 07/06/04)
Page 1 of 2
Contract No.: ___________________Consultant: _____________________________________
(a) Weight
Criteria
1. PROJECT TEAM
 Qualifications and relevant individual experience
 Unique qualification of key personnel
 Time commitment of key members
 Organization Chart
2. FIRM’S CAPABILITIES
 Demonstrated capability on similar or related projects
 Management and scheduling abilities
 Other on-going projects and priorities
 Quality and cost control
 Staff availability
3. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING AND APPROACH
 Demonstrated knowledge of the work required
 Explanation of the project
 Knowledge of general engineering processes
 Innovative approaches and internal measures for timely
(b) Score
(0-10)
(a) x (b)
Weighted
Score
2.0
3.0
3.0
completion of project
5. FEASIBILITY OF OVERSIGHT
 Ability and willingness to respond to Department
1.0
requirements
Accessibility to Department reviewers

6. REFERENCES*
 Record of producing a quality product on similar projects
1.0
on time and within budget
*All panel members must enter a zero (0) for all interviewed Consultants
if time did not allow for reference checks or if the reference checks were
not completed on all the Consultants.
Total
Comments (continue of reverse if necessary:
I certify that I have performed an independent evaluation of the above named consultant. I further certify that I
have not engaged in discussions within the last year with the above-named consultant regarding my future
employment with said consultant.
Signature of Evaluator: ______________________________
Date: ___________
Printed Name of Evaluator ___________________________
Checked by: ______________________________________ Date: ___________
STATE OF CALIFORNIA  DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ARCHITECTURAL & ENGINEERING (A&E) CONSULTANT EVALUATION FORM/FINAL EVALUATION
(Qualifications-Based Selection)
ADM-2028 (Rev. 07/06/04
Page 2 of 2
SUGGESTED SCORING SYSTEM
for
CALTRANS CONSULTANT SELECTION COMMITTEES
Fail (0 points)
Zero (0) points are given when the category being evaluated is nonresponsive.
Below Average (1 - 4 points)
One (1) to four (4) points are awarded to responses that are considered to be minimally acceptable.
Average (5 points)
Five (5) points are awarded if qualifications fully satisfy the requirement.
Above Average (6 - 9 points)
Six (6) points to nine (9) points are awarded if qualifications more than satisfy the requirement and
experience specifically applies to the project under consideration.
Exceptional (10 points)
Ten (10) points are awarded if a firm’s qualifications far exceed those required. Scores of ten (10) points
generally are infrequent.
This scoring system is provided as a guideline for evaluating Consultant Interviews. All relevant
experience will be considered equally.
EXHIBIT A
SOLICITATION (RFQ) NO.________________
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
(GOVERNMENT CODE 19990)
A state officer or employee shall not engage in any employment, activity, or enterprise which is clearly inconsistent,
incompatible, in conflict with, or inimical to her or her duties as a state officer or employee.
Each appointing power shall determine, subject to approval of the Department, those activities which, for employees under its
jurisdiction, are inconsistent, incompatible or in conflict with their duties as state officers or employees. Activities and
enterprises deemed to fall in these categories shall include, but not be limited to all of the following:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
Using the prestige or influence of the State or the appointing authority for the officer’s or employee’s private gain or
advantage or the private gain of another.
Using State time, facilities, equipment, or supplies for private gain or advantage.
Using, or having access to, confidential information available by virtue of State employment for private gain or
advantage or providing confidential information to persons to whom issuance of this information has not been
authorized.
Receiving or accepting money or any other consideration from anyone other than the State for the performance of his or
her duties as a State officer or employee.
Performance of an act in other than his or her capacity as a State officer or employee knowing that the act may later be
subject, directly or indirectly to the control, inspection, review, audit, or enforcement by the officer or employee.
Receiving or accepting, directly or indirectly, any gift, including money, or any service, gratuity, favor, entertainment,
hospitality, loan, or any other thing of value from anyone who is doing or is seeking to do business of any kind with the
officer’s or employee’s appointing authority or whose activities are regulated or controlled by the appointing authority
under circumstances from which it reasonably could be substantiated that the gift was intended to influence the officer or
employee in his or her official duties or was intended as a reward for any official actions performed by the officer or
employee.
Subject to any other laws, rules, or regulations as pertain thereto, not devoting his or her full time, attention and efforts
to his or her State office or employment during his or her hours of duty as a state officer or employee.
The Department shall adopt rules governing the application of this section. The rules shall include provision for notice to
employees prior to the determination of proscribed activities and for appeal by employees from such a determination and from
its application to an employee. Until the department adopts rules governing the application of this section, as amended in the
1985-86 Regular Session of the Legislature, existing procedures shall remain in full force and effect.
If the provisions of this section are in conflict with the provisions of a memorandum of understanding reached pursuant to
Section 3517.5, the memorandum of understanding shall be controlling without further legislative action, except that if such
provisions of a memorandum of understanding require the expenditure of funds, the provisions shall not become effective
unless approved by the Legislature in the annual Budget Act. (Added by Stats. 1981, c230. Amended by Stats. 1986, c1344.)
I have read and understand Government Code 19990, and will comply with its provisions.
______________________________
Print Name
__________________________
Position
_______________________________
__________________________
Signature
Date
Department of Transportation
DGS-GC19990
08/21/00
Copies of the form and instructions can be accessed at the following Caltrans DPAC intranet site:
http://admin.dot.ca.gov/pc/aesched.shtml
EXHIBIT B
Ethical conduct demands that confidentiality be maintained during the solicitation
process, evaluation process and final selection process. It would be considered
a breach in duty and may result in disciplinary action should information be
shared regarding the contract procurement process. EXAMPLE: Should the
Consultant call with questions related to the SOQ or scope of work refer the
caller to the DPAC Contract Analyst. If the question is of a nature that all
proposers should be apprised of, the Contract Analyst will prepare an Addendum
to the solicitation and provide the question(s) and answer(s) to all proposers to
ensure a level playing field. Failure to do so could result in a protest or
cancellation of the solicitation.
To maintain confidentiality, one must always be aware of any information being
provided and understand that it may be a conflict of interest or breach of conduct
to do so. By signing below, each Consultant Selection Committee panel member
certifies that he or she will abide by the code of ethical conduct and will not
disclose any information related to this contract procurement to anyone. Please
contact your respective A&E Coordinator if you have any questions regarding
confidentiality of information.
PANEL MEMBER NAME: ___________________________
SIGNATURE: ___________________________________ DATE ___________
SOLICITATION (RFQ) NUMBER: __________________________
Kform 65 (New 11/03)
EXHIBIT C
CONSULTANT INTERVIEW FORMAT*
(The final score will be determined by using Consensus Scoring)
1. Committee must meet at least 30 minutes prior to interviews.
COMMITTEE
PRE-INTERVIEW 2. Committee must decide who will ask each question.
3. Place sign on interview door: “Interview in Progress Do Not Enter.”
4. Consultants are not allowed in the room until Committee is ready.
5. The interview room door must remain closed during interviews.
6. Chairperson must inform Committee members that Score sheets are
subject to the Public Records Act.
7. Contract Manager must indicate to the Chairperson who is to be
designated a “Debriefer”.
Chairperson will inform Consultants they have five (5) minutes to
CONSULTANT
INTERVIEW SET- reconfigure room and/or set-up equipment. Equipment set-up is
Consultant’s responsibility. Committee must not assist with any
UP
equipment set-up. Longer time to setup will result in time taken from
5 MINUTES
their presentation.
INTRODUCTION
2 TO 5 MINUTES
1. Chairperson will begin interview when set-up is complete or when
five (5) minutes have elapsed, whichever occurs last.
2. Begin with self-introduction.
3. Describe interview format.
4. Inform Consultant not to divulge Questions to other Consultants
and/or Subconsultants.
5. Allow voting members to self-introduce.
6. Introduce other participant(s) as observer(s).
7. Question any new/revised resumes, organizational charts and/or
staffing information submitted by Consultant.
8. Determine if any key individuals have been replaced.
CONSULTANT
PRESENTATION
20 MINUTES
1. After introductions are complete (5 minutes), Consultant has 20
minutes for entire presentation (25 minute total).
2. Chairperson monitors Consultant’s time.
3. Give a signal when two (2) minutes remain. Call time at 20 minutes if
necessary.
1. Committee has 20 minutes for questions and answers.
2. Begin questions with the first Committee member.
3. After last question, Chairperson asks if there are any follow-up
questions if time allows.
4. Chairperson will inform Consultants they have five (5) minutes for
closing remarks.
5. Chairperson thanks Consultants for presentation.
*See Selection Interview Notes/Script for more detail.
COMMITTEE
QUESTIONS AND
ANSWERS
20 MINUTES