10-13-2016 - Laserfiche WebLink

4 After the completion of all interviews, the Evaluation Team held a final session to discuss each SOQ and assess final scores. Once final scores were computed, the Evaluation Team discussed whether to short list three (3) or four (4) Respondents, as permitted by Section 4.2(a) on page fourteen (14) of the Request for Qualifications. Ultimately, the Evaluation Team determined the quality, capacity, and capabilities of the Respondents and the comprehensive nature of the evaluation process warranted that four (4) Respondents be short-listed. VI. Team Overviews1 • For ease of reference, this SOQ Evaluation Report includes general references to each team’s members. Formal descriptions of the membership of each team are provided in the Executive Summary of Team Structure and Experience. • All information referenced below is derived solely from Respondents’ SOQs (or clarifications thereof at their respective interviews). 1. Lake Agassiz Partners (LAP): LAP presented strong, experienced Key Personnel, a strong organizational structure, were thorough and detailed in identifying personnel for all phases of the Project, and identified eighteen (18) different projects in which team members had worked together. They have closed a number of significant projects, albeit few water projects. LAP presented local knowledge of the Red River Valley with Knife River, Gowan, IBI, and Northern Improvement as Major Participants in the Project and have experience with heavy earthmoving and road and railway bridge projects. Safety was somewhat less of a strength with Archer Western having a higher EMR rating, but the remainder of the team had lower ratings. LAP demonstrated a strong understanding of the Project and of the P3 delivery method and identified a majority of the risks associated with the Project, along with mitigation strategies previously employed for these issues. LAP’s Equity Members have engaged in a number of high value, complex projects, albeit only two (2) of the six (6) reference projects provided have been completed. LAP Equity Members have been short-listed on forty (40) projects over the past five (5) year period and have submitted a proposal on each of those occasions. LAP’s Equity Members demonstrated experience with a diverse range of financing products in their reference projects. In addition to those local companies listed above, LAP’s team members include Meridiam, Walsh, AECOM, and Stanley Consultants. 2. Red River Alliance (RRA): RRA identified Key Personnel for the Project that offer limited experience in those positions, and although RRA indicated that its team had previously worked together on projects, they provided few details about their roles in those projects. RRA had limited experience with projects similar in size and scope to the Project. Additionally, RRA provided few projects completed in the northern climate. Although RRA has engaged in heavy civil earthwork, has experience with road bridges, and has a strong safety rating, they demonstrated limited experience with open channel conveyance projects and railway bridges and did not demonstrate strong geotechnical experience in the Red River Valley or with HEC-RAS. RRA identified Project risks and applicable third parties but exhibited more of a general understanding of the Project rather than having developed an in-depth, thorough understanding. RRA’s Equity Members have engaged in a number of complex, high value projects, with five (5) of the six (6) reference projects having an availability payment structure. All of RRA’s Equity Members appear to have sufficient capacity to fund the Project. RRA’s Equity Members demonstrated experience with a diverse range of financing products in their 1 Scores assessed by the Evaluation Team for each Respondent for each Evaluation Criteria are attached to this report. The Respondents are listed in this report in alphabetical order, not based upon any ranking.