4-OP-B-11-C1 Architect/Engineer Selection Process

Responsible Executive: Vice President for Finance and Administration

Approving Official: Vice President for Finance and Administration

Effective Date: April 8, 2019

Last Revision Date: 01/01/2014 (original), 01/01/2021

    1. This policy provides guidelines for selection of Architect/Engineers (A/E) under the following types of Florida State University construction contracts:
      1. Continuing Service Agreements
        Architects and Engineers may be selected to provide services under a continuing contract for projects for which the construction cost is $4,000,000 or less, or for planning or study activities for which the fee is $400,000 or less. A Continuing Service Agreement is effective for one year, with the option to amend up to two times.
      2. Individual Project Agreements
        Architects and Engineers may be selected to provide services for a specific project as described in a public notice placed in accordance with Florida State University Policy OP-B-11-A, Advertisements for Architect/Engineer and Construction Manager Services, Design-Build Services and Calls for Bid.
      3. Projects with construction costs exceeding $4,000,000 must comply with Florida State University Policy OP-B-11-I, Development of Facilities Programs.
    1. In addition to providing guidelines for the selection of AEs, this policy describes development of the Selection Committee, advertisement for services, development of a Shortlist and the interview process.
        1. When the University is ready to select an Architect/Engineer for an individual project, or to provide continuing services under a Continuing Service Agreement, a Certification and Selection Committee (Committee) is appointed.
        2. The Committee discusses the requirements of the Project and determines any selection criteria, in addition to that in the standard Professional Qualifications Supplement (PQS) Form. Selection criteria must elicit information which cannot otherwise be determined from the standard PQS form, must be related to the firm’s experience and ability and must not request a firm to describe its approach to the proposed project (approach is only requested of the shortlisted firms). The Committee also develops the Selection Schedule, establishing dates for the Shortlist meeting and the final interviews. The Committee reviews and approves the proposed Project Fact Sheet (Forms section).
        1. The University places a Notice to Professional Consultants in the Florida Administrative Register (FAR) as described in Florida State University Policy OP-B-11-A, Advertisements for Architect/Engineer, Construction Manager Services, Design-Build and Calls for Bid. If the “Design Ability” category is not being considered for the Project, the advertisement must so state.
        1. The advertisement contains information relating to the submission of qualification data, including:
          1. Professional Qualifications Supplement (PQS)
            A copy of the Florida State University PQS (Forms section). This form must be signed by an officer or principal of the firm. (Note: Applicants using forms from other state agencies or outdated SUS forms are disqualified.)
          2. Professional Registration Certificates
            A reproduction of the Applicant's current Professional Registration Certificate in the name of the Applicant offering the services. An Applicant must be properly registered to practice in the State of Florida with the appropriate state board governing the services offered. The University verifies the current status with the appropriate state board before the interviews.
          3. Corporate Charter Registration
            If the Applicant offering services is a corporation, it is required to include a reproduction of its corporate charter registration with the Department of State to operate in Florida. The University verifies the status of the corporation with the Division of Corporations before the Shortlist is made final.
          4. Joint Ventures
            An Applicant applying as a Joint Venture must submit a complete and executed copy of the parties’ Joint Venture Agreement, indicating the percentages and responsibilities to be assigned to each firm. Each party to the Joint Venture must possess a qualifying professional holding a current State of Florida license at the time of application, and a copy of each qualifying license MUST be included in the submitted PQS. Note that the Joint Venture Agreement is not required to be registered with the State of Florida until the Joint Venture is notified that the University intends to award to the JV Applicant.
          5. Other
            The Committee may require other data deemed appropriate for a specific project and include such requirements in the Notice to Professional Consultants.
        1. The FDC will post the following information on its web site: the firm; the Project Fact Sheet (Forms section), the final project advertisement, the PQS form, the Facilities Program, and any other information the University considers relevant.
        1. After receipt of submittals, the Facilities Design and Construction (FDC) office reviews them for completeness. The FDC prepares Schedule “A” of the Selection Evaluation Form (Forms section), using the applicants' Professional Qualifications Supplements as the information source for all entries. Instructions for completing Schedule “A” are included in the Forms section. A copy of a completed Schedule “A” will be provided to each member of the Committee. Irregularities in submittals will be handled as described on the PQS Irregularities checklist (page 5 of the PQS form).
        2. The Committee convenes to screen the Applicants and develop a Shortlist. The Committee completes Schedule “B” of the Selection Evaluation Form (Forms section), consisting of the following categories:
          1. Past Performance
            The most recent rating for those Applicants which have a current rating on file with Florida State University. Where no performance data are on file for the Applicant, the Applicant is assigned the University rating average. The score range is 0-20.
          2. Experience and Ability
            Based on the selection criteria and the information provided by the PQS forms, the Committee reviews each Applicant's relevant experience and qualifications. After the Committee discusses the merits of each application, the committee members rate the Applicants. Their individual scores are averaged, and the composite score is entered into the column, "Experience and Ability." The score range is 0-20.
          3. Design Ability
            The Committee reviews each Applicant's proposal to determine its design ability. The Committee should consider examples of the Applicant's prior work and its design philosophy, as well as the Applicant's prior projects, their sensitivity to site and surroundings and their aesthetic appeal. The score range is 0-5 or 0-10 depending on the project.

            The committee members' individual scores are averaged and the composite score is entered into the column, "Design Ability."

            NOTE: This category is not applicable in selections for projects for which there are no architectural implications, e.g. traffic studies, asbestos abatement projects, re-roofing projects, utility projects, etc.
          4. Calculating Work in Progress, Volume of University Work and Location
        1. The Committee reviews the standard reference questions (Forms section) and adds additional questions pertaining to the unique requirements of the Project, if necessary. The Committee designates a person (or persons) to conduct the reference checks. An effort should be made to conduct two (2) recent reference checks per applicant. Reference checks must be documented using the form provided in this section and presented to the Committee for its consideration during the interview.
        1. Applicants are notified of the results of the Shortlist by the posting of the results on the FDC website. The posting will include the following: “We are required to include in this notice the following statement: ‘Failure to timely file a protest or failure to timely deliver the required bond or other security in accordance with the Board of Governors’ Regulations 18.002 and 18.003 shall constitute a waiver of protest proceedings.’”
        2. The University notifies the firms which were short-listed and provides them with the following: a list of the final interview evaluation criteria; the time, date and location of the interview and the length of time allotted for the interview. The notification letter requests that each firm bring a hard copy and an electronic copy of its presentation to leave with the Committee members.
        1. The Committee will convene to hear the finalists’ presentations. The Committee Chair should introduce the voting members and the visitors present. Once an applicant has begun its presentation, the door will be closed to minimize interruptions to the Applicant’s presentation. Following the oral interviews and discussion of the presentations, the Committee rates each Applicant on Schedule “C” of the Selection Evaluation Form (Forms section, page 3) in the following categories (individual committee members' scores will be averaged to arrive at composite scores):
          1. Understanding of the Program and Project Requirements
            The Applicants are evaluated on their understanding of the requirements and needs of the Project as demonstrated by their project teams, including consultants. The Applicants are rated on the completeness of their understanding of the factors which are unique to the Project, including the thoroughness demonstrated in analyzing and investigating the scope of the Project and in preparing for the interview. The score range is 0-20.
          2. Approach and Method
            The Committee considers the applicants' and their consultants' approaches to the Project and methods proposed for planning, designing and administration of the project. The Applicants should be asked to identify by name the key personnel of their proposed teams: Project Manager, Project Architect, Project Construction Administrator and other key staff members to be assigned to the job. The Applicant should also identify those responsible in areas such as: civil engineering, electrical engineering, landscape design, mechanical engineering, structural engineering, etc. The score range is 0-20. 3.
          3. Ability to Provide Service
            The Committee evaluates the Applicants' ability to meet the owner's required timetable and to provide for the special or unique requirements of the Project, including a projected time-line of activities through project completion. The Applicants should be asked to discuss their ability to fulfill each project requirement and to describe all other projects on which team members are currently involved. Results of the reference checks are considered in this category. The score range is 0-20.
        1. Following the presentation, a time may be set aside for questions and answers. Initially, only the Committee members may ask questions of the firms. If time permits and the Committee members have no further questions, other interested observers may be allowed to ask questions.
        1. Immediately following the interviews, the Committee should ask for input from non-committee member user representatives who attended the interviews. After review with the non-committee member representatives, the Committee meets to score the presentations, totals the points for each Applicant interviewed, and determines the recommended ranking.
        2. The Committee ranks the interviewed Applicants, and recommends the ranking on Schedule “C” of the Selection Evaluation Form (Forms section, page 3). In the event of a tie, a majority vote of the Committee prevails. Schedule “C” must be signed by all members of the Committee. The Committee shall not divulge its recommendation to anyone until after the recommendation has been approved by the University President or designee.
        1. The completed Selection Evaluation Forms (Schedule “A”, Schedule “B” and Schedule “C”) are filed electronically in the University Facilities Office, together with any notes kept by Committee members throughout the selection, correspondence related to the selection and the proposals of the Applicant firms.
        1. The University Facilities Office presents the Committee’s recommendation to the University President or designee for action.
        1. The University notifies each interviewed firm of the President’s or designee’s action by posting the results on the FDC website. The posting will include the following: “We are required to include in this notice the following statement: ‘Failure to timely file a protest or failure to timely deliver the required bond or other security in accordance with the Board of Governors’ Regulations 18.002 and 18.003 shall constitute a waiver of protest proceedings.’”
    • Sections 287.055, 1013.45