Estimate # E25-060 USACE WPAFB AIMR-2C Building Addition

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM:

CCC met with USACE for a debrief of our unsuccessful proposal for the design-build building addition to the AIMR building at Wright Patterson Air Force Base. This was a two phase procurement, CCC-Arcadis made it through the first round however was not awarded in the second round. The Government provided the following feedback during the debrief. 

The Factor 1 - Design Narrative was marked "Unacceptable". Even though CCC did not have the lowest price, the unacceptable rating precluded us from being awarded.

Factor 1 - Management Plan was marked "Good".

ROOT CAUSE:

COURSE OF ACTION:

1) Factor 1- Design Narrative, the government mentioned 8 specific evaluation criteria they used: 
    1.Mechanical 2.Electrical 3.Plumbing 4.Fire protection 5.Architectural features 6.Telecommunications 7.Site utilities 8.Fast-track design

We could not find this specific criteria in the solicitation like the Officer mentioned. The Solicitation lists 3 bullet points to address in the design narrative, which are primarily administrative/project management items. It was clear that the Officer wanted to see technical approach and summary for each discipline/component of the project in the narrative. In the future, ask RFI on restrictive page limits, and be sure to include some summary description of the key design elements associated with the project repeated back to them, wether it is asked for or not. 

2) Factor 1 - Management Plan Strengths identified in our proposal:
    a.Clear organizational chart for chain of command and communication
    b.Self-perform capabilities listed and ability to control critical path activities by self-performing the work.
    c.Discussed coordination with the stakeholders, utility companies, and outlined the communication process during design.
    d.Had plan to minimize the impacts to the operations within the facility during construction.

3) Factor 1 - Management Plan Weaknesses identified in our proposal:
    a.Did not mention or outline our specific approach to quality control or the role of QC staff.

LESSON FOR FUTURE PROJECTS:

see above feedback for Army Corp work.