Source: https://lakelandconnect.net/2017/06/27/request-for-qulaifiers/
Timestamp: 2018-11-14 19:39:54
Document Index: 67390035

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 1', 'art 3', 'art 4', 'art 5', 'art 6', 'art 3']

Request for Qualifiers - Lakeland Connect
Request for Qualifiers
June 27, 2017 June 27, 2017 Public Notices County of St. Paul, Request for Qualifier, Summer Village of Horseshoe bay, Town of Elk Point, town of St. Paul
Alberta Community Partnership: URBAN Multi-jurisdictional Intermunicipal Development Plans Project
THE TOWN OF ELK POINT, TOWN Of ST. PAUL, SUMMER VILLAGE OF HORSESHOE BAY, AND COUNTY OF ST. PAUL
4914 – 50 Avenue, Elk Point, AB T0A 1A0
Project Contact: Ken Gwozdz, Chief Administrative Officer
Responses will only be considered if received in the Town of Elk Point Administration Office
no later than the closing date and time of July 19th, 2017 at noon, 12:00 pm, Mountain Daylight Time.
part 1 – Summary of the project requirementS
1.1 Prequalification invitation
The Town of Elk Point (“Town”) and its’ collaborative partners, the Town of St. Paul, Summer Village of Horseshoe Bay, and the County of St. Paul (the “Partners”), invites the submission of a Statement of Qualifications from interested planning consultants for the provision of consulting services for the proposed Urban Multi-jurisdictional Intermunicipal Development Plans Project (the “Project”). The Town and its Partners recognize the beneficial importance in coordinating inter-municipal development plans to enhance the physical, environmental, social and economic development within the region.
The Project is funded by the Alberta Community Partnership Grant and by the Partners. The project will be undertaken for the Town and its Partners with the Town as the managing partner.
The purpose of the Request for Qualification (“RFQ”) is to engage a Land Use Planning Consultant that will provide the necessary consulting services for executing the Project.
This RFQ uses a Qualifications Based Selection (“QBS”) procedure to engage the prospective consultants.
To establish the Inter-municipal Development Plans (IDPs), the Partners will form a working committee with representation from each municipality. Senior Administration staff from the municipalities will be involved throughout the process as technical advisors.
The Town, as the managing partner, will administer the grant, oversee the consultant, and pay the required invoices.
The purpose of this proposed project is to foster an inter-jurisdictional approach to address land use planning near the boundaries of the partnering urban municipalities. In accordance with the forthcoming changes proposed in the Modernized Municipal Government Act (MMGA), the project must comply with the new legislation and regulations. The intent of the project is to update two (2) and develop one (1) new urban, multi-jurisdictional inter-municipal development plans (IDPs).
It is noteworthy that this project extends well beyond the activities typically associated with land use planning. In addition to land use planning issues, proposed legislative changes state that an inter-municipal development plan must address: the provision of transportation systems for the area, proposals for the financing and programming of intermunicipal infrastructure, the coordination of intermunicipal programs relating to the physical, social, and economic development of the area, environmental matters within the area, and any other matter related to physical, social, or economic development of the area. It is important to recognize that the final deliverable intermunicipal development plans will differ significantly from traditional inter-municipal development plans as well as traditional IDPs between an urban and rural municipality; the documents will be more substantial and provide enhanced utility for the partners.
1.4 projected schedule
The following is the anticipated schedule for the completion of the project:
Issue Request for Qualification June 27th, 2017
Request for Questions Deadline July 5th, 2017
Request for Qualification Closing July 19th, 2017
Short List and Interview July 20th – July 26th, 2017
Negotiate Scope and Fees July 27th/ 28th, 2017
Final Consultant Selection August 2nd , 2017
The following terms apply to this RFQ and to any subsequent contract(s). Submission to this RFQ indicates acceptance of the terms and conditions contained in the RFQ.
2.1 Governing Legislation
This RFQ is subject to all applicable legislation including the Municipal Government Act, the Freedom of Information and Privacy Act, the bylaws and policies of the Town and its Partners, and all other relevant governing legislation which includes the New West Trade Partnership Agreement, the Canadian Fair Trade Agreement and the European Free Trade Agreement.
2.2 Definition of contract
Only the full execution of a written contract will constitute a contract for the services, and no prospective consultant will acquire any legal or equitable rights or privileges relative to the services until this occurs.
2.3 Use of request for qualification
This document, or any portion thereof, may not be used for any other purpose other than the submission of qualifications.
2.4 Confidentiality of Responses
All documents and information submitted in response to this RFQ will be held in confidence and may be subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information and Privacy Act (Alberta) (FOIP). Except as required by FOIP or any other law, responses to this RFQ will be considered to have been provided in confidence and will not be disclosed.
The Town will not provide compensation or be responsible in anyway for the costs, expenses, losses, damages or liability incurred by respondents in the preparation of their response to this RFQ.
part 3 – Request for qualification process
Respondents are to submit six (6) printed copies and one (1) digital copy in pdf format on a USB drive of their complete Statement of Qualifications. The submission should be in a sealed envelope clearly marked with the consultant’s name, address and identify that it is for the “Urban Multi-jurisdictional Inter-municipal Development Plans Project.”
Submissions are to be addressed and delivered to:
4914 – 50th Avenue
Attention: Ken Gwozdz, Chief Administrative Officer
Alternatively, submissions can be sent by email to [email protected].
Note that it is the responsibility of the Respondent’s to ensure that the submission has been received prior to the closing time and date.
The Statement of Qualifications document is to provide a clear and concise description of the respondent’s ability to satisfy the requirement of the Project. The Town will not assume capabilities or advantages of the respondents.
Respondents must ensure that their application in the RFQ is conducted without collusion, fraud or conflict of interest on their part or the part of any of their team members. This includes other respondents and members of the municipalities and governments involved in the Project. Breach of this provision may result in disqualification from the RFQ process.
3.3 Respondents Acting in Good Faith
The Town and its Partners may refuse to do business with Respondents who do not act in good faith towards the Town or any of its Partners, whether by failing to live up to the terms and conditions of the agreement or contracts, or by entering litigation against the Town or any of its Partners without valid justification.
3.4 right to accept / reject submissions
The Town reserves the right to accept or reject any or all submissions in whole or part. The Town will be under no obligation to receive further information, whether written or oral, from any consultant.
Only the full execution of a written contract will constitute a contract for the services, and no Consultant will acquire any legal or equitable rights or privileges relative to the services until this occurs.
3.5 Closing date & Location
Responses will only be considered if received in the Town of Elk Point Administration Office no later than the closing date and time of July 19th, 2017 at noon, 12:00 pm, Mountain Daylight Time.
3.6 Late responses
Late proposals will not be accepted or considered, and will be returned to the respondent.
3.7 Delay in negotating a contract
If a written contract cannot be negotiated within a reasonable period of time, the Town may, at its sole discretion at any time thereafter, terminate negotiations with a respondent or choose to terminate the solicitation process and not enter a contract with any of the respondents.
3.8 Respondents to review Request for Qualification
Respondents shall promptly examine all the documents comprising this RFQ and (a) shall report any errors, omission or ambiguities and (b) may direct questions or seek additional information in writing by email to the Project Contact on or before the Deadline for Questions. The Town and its Partners are under no obligation to provide additional information but may do so at their sole discretion. It is the responsibility of the respondent to seek clarification from the Project Contact on any matter it considers to be unclear. The Town and its Partners shall not be held responsible for any misunderstanding on the part of the respondent concerning this RFQ process.
Requests for clarification should be identified with the Project Name and submitted in writing to:
Respondents and their representatives may not contact individuals employed or engaged by any member of the Town or its Partners, other than the Project Contact, concerning matters with this RFQ. Only information received by the Project Contact will be considered in the RQF process. All such communications must be in writing. Any respondent that does not follow these instructions may be disqualified.
Note that all inquiries will be compiled, answered and provided to all Consultants.
3.9 Amendment and new information by way of Addenda
This RFQ may be amended only by an addendum in accordance with this section. The Town and its Partners reserves the right to modify the terms of the RFQ at any time, at its sole discretion prior to and including the closing date of the submission.
If the Town and its Partners, for any reason, determines that it is necessary to provide additional information relating to this RFQ, such information will be communicated to all respondents by addendum. Each addendum shall form an integral part of this RFQ. Such addenda may contain important information, including significant changes to this RFQ. Respondents are responsible for obtaining all addenda issued by the Town.
3.10 termination of Request for qualification
The Town and its Partners also reserves the right to cancel this RFQ or reject all Statements of Qualification submitted.
3.11 amendment of consultant responses
Respondents may amend their responses prior to the Submission Deadline by submitting the amendment in a sealed package addressed to the Project Contact and labelled with the return address of the respondent.
3.12 withdraWing submissions
At any time throughout the RFQ Process, a respondent may withdraw their submission. To affect a withdrawal, a notice of withdrawal must be sent to the Project Contact and must be signed by an authorized representative. The Town is under no obligation to return withdrawn submissions.
part 4 – qualification requirements
To be considered, the respondent must provide documentation to substantiate their ability to meet the mandatory requirements and complete the following tasks:
Provide a Clearance Certificate from the Workers Compensation Board (WCB);
Provide evidence of insurability for professional liability, comprehensive general liability and automobile, each in an amount of not less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00) per occurrence; and
Provide a Statement of Qualifications, as per format below in Section 4.2.
4.2 Format for statement of qualifications
The Statement of Qualifications document is to provide a clear and concise description of the Respondent’s ability to satisfy the requirements of the Project. The Town will not assume capabilities or advantages of the Respondents.
Submissions should be organized in the following format to facilitate evaluation and to ensure full consideration:
Confirmation of Mandatory Requirements
Past Performance on Similar Projects
Public Participation and Consultation Practices
Note: There is no limit on the length of the submission document; however, the Consultant’s ability to effectively communicate the rationale for their selection will be a component in the evaluation.
4.3 content of statement of qualifications
The cover page must be signed by an authorized representative of the consulting company and provide a contact name with address, phone, fax and email for subsequent follow up to questions or clarifications necessary during the evaluation process.
Confirmation of Mandatory Requirements:
Respondents need to provide both confirmation and evidence of meeting these requirements, as listed in 4.1.
Corporate Qualifications and Experience:
This section should provide the following minimum information;
Full legal name of respondent, with contact information for the office(s) that will provide consultant services to the Project.
Full legal name of any sub consultants or partners that are included as part of the consulting team, together with contact information.
General overview of the Respondents corporate information (an organizational chart in the Appendix is recommended) showing management and reporting structure.
Dates and the length of time that the respondent has been providing the necessary expertise for similar projects within Alberta and in other Canadian jurisdictions.
Provide a list of projects of a similar nature to those in this RFQ that the Respondent has provided within the past three (3) years, including value, the physical size of the projects and a brief description of the Respondent’s role and responsibility (detailed project profiles can be provided in the Appendices).
Indicate the measures and practices that will be employed to maintain schedule and cost controls for the project(s).
Key Staff Qualifications and Experience:
This section should identify key staff and an indication of which area(s) of the Project they will be engaged on. Detailed resumes should be included in the appendices for each identified person.
Name and qualifications of the senior managers that will be engaged on the Project with a brief description of related experience.
Name and qualifications of the key individuals that will provide consulting and related services for the Project, including their experience on similar projects.
A projection of the hours each team member would be contributing to the Project.
The resumes of everyone should include, as a minimum, relevant information on education, experience, number of years with the company, position within the company, recently completed projects of a similar nature and the role and responsibility that the individual had on the identified projects.
Key staff should be identified and information provided for each of the components of consulting the Respondent identifies as required for the completion of the Project.
Past Performance on Similar Projects:
Respondents should provide a minimum of three (3) references for projects of similar nature, size and scope completed within the past three (3) years by identified Key Staff as those required by this RFQ.
Title, location and brief description of projects.
Start and completion dates of project, size of project and unique conditions.
Name and contact information of the project owner’s representative.
The Town may contact these and additional references at their discretion and use this information in the evaluation process.
Respondents have an opportunity to identify additional skills, innovation, value added attributes that their firm can bring to the project. This may include performance improvements, use of new or improved technology, and other relevant information.
Respondents have an opportunity to identify theirunique approach to public participation and consultation practices that their firm can bring to the project. This should include the input of engaging all stakeholders through a variety of methods.
part 5 – EVAluation methodology & criteria
5.1 Stages of Evaluation
Submissions will be evaluated and ranked, based on the information provided within the submission. Respondents must demonstrate in their submission that they have a clear understanding of the Deliverables and ensure the information requested within the RFQ. The evaluation of qualifications will be conducted in the following stages:
Stage 1 will consist of a review to determine which submissions satisfy the mandatory requirements
Stage 2 will consist of a scoring basis of the Rated Criteria as set out, below.
Statement of Qualifications that do not meet Mandatory Requirements identified in the Submission Requirements section or that are incomplete or missing important required information will be disqualified at the sole discretion of the Evaluation Committee.
Statement of Qualifications meeting the Mandatory Requirements will be evaluated based on the following:
Criteria: Point Scale Weighting Total Points Available
Corporate Qualifications and Experience 0 to 5 x 2 / 10
Key Staff Qualifications and Experience 0 to 5 x 5 / 25
Past Performance on Similar Projects 0 to 5 x 4 / 20
Innovation / Value Added 0 to 5 x 3 / 15
Public Participation and Consultation Practices 0 to 5 x 6 / 30
The responses to the RFQ requirements will be evaluated using the weighted values noted. The evaluation and scoring will be at the sole discretion of the Evaluation Committee.
5 Fully exceeds expectations; Respondent clearly understands the requirement, excellent probability of success.
4 Somewhat exceeds expectations; high probability of success.
3 Fully meets expectations; Respondent has good understanding of requirement, no weakness or deficiencies, good probability of success.
2 Partially meets expectations; minor weaknesses or deficiencies, fair probability of success.
1 Does not meet expectations or demonstrate understanding of the requirements, major weaknesses or deficiencies, low probability of success.
0 Lack of response or complete misunderstanding of the requirements, no probability of success.
The evaluation team may at its discretion invite a respondent for an interview or seek further clarification without any obligation to any of the other respondents.
part 6 – Final Selection of Consultant(s)
Based on the evaluation of the Statement of Qualifications and the Interviews (if applicable) the Evaluation Committee will select the preferred consultant for the Project and then meet to fine tune the project scope, methodology, team and to negotiate the fees for the Project.
If a contract is not made with the top-ranked consultant, the evaluation team shall contact the second-ranked consultant and if needed, further subsequent consultants to form a contract for the Project.
As Per, Part 3, 3.7: Delay in Negotiating a Contract, the Town may, at its sole discretion at any time thereafter, terminate negotiations with a consultant or choose to terminate the solicitation process and not enter a Contract with any of the Consultants.
← STICK THIS: Friendship Bracelet (Last Minute Teacher Gift)
Junior B Heat Bounce Back; Win Big Over Vermilion →