081205 comments on Fox Elevator Design Audit

The “Special Review” of the Fox procurement, dated 11/25/08, raises more questions than it answers. The Review discusses a Request for Proposals (RFP) for design work for the proposed elevator at Fox. Prior to issuing the RFP, RPS had contacted Ballou Justice Upton (BJU) and requested a cost proposal for design of the elevator. BJU produced a proposal, priced at $291,080. Three days later, RPS issued the RFP. The RFP described the project in terms identical to the proposal from BJU. The RFP contained five criteria for decision as to the winning proposal. The First criterion was: “Firm‟s previous experience in design of an addition at Fox Elementary School.” Five firms submitted proposals in response to the RFP. By inference from this poorly written Review, BJU was the only firm with “previous experience in design of an addition at Fox Elementary School.” Thus, RPS short-circuited the competitive negotiation required by the Public Procurement Act and issued an RFP that assured BJU would receive the contract. At CODE § 2.2-4301(3), the Act provides that a public body procuring professional services shall engage in individual discussions with two or more offerors deemed fully qualified, responsible and suitable on the basis of initial responses and with emphasis on professional competence, to provide the required services.” The statute continues: The offerors shall be encouraged to elaborate on their qualifications and ...