(a)

1. (1) The evaluation and scoring of the statement of qualifications (SOQ) should be performed by the project evaluation team (PET), which should ideally be comprised of individuals who possess a broad array of experience in the D-B delivery process.
2. (2) The SOQ ESC will establish the D-B evaluation scoring metrics and the PET members should be trained on the purpose, content, and incorporation of the SOQ ESC into the evaluation in advance of the SOQ evaluation period.
3. (3) Since the PET will be comprised of individuals from various areas within the Arkansas Department of Transportation, scoring the submittals in a common, secure environment should provide opportunity for sharing of expertise as well as help reduce the required time for outside research by individual PET members.

(b)

1. (1) A common evaluation location will also allow for information exchange and workload sharing during the evaluation process to allow for any weakness in the PET staff to be minimized.
2. (2) For instance, if an individual on the PET has no past experience with quality management, then he or she may not be the appropriate member to score on that particular section and the scoring can be performed by another PET member.
3. (3) By allocating the areas of responsibility and working as a team in scoring, the PET can ensure that all SOQ are scored fairly and consistently.

(c)

1. (1) The intended result of the RFQ process is to select the best three (3) to five (5) proposers based on the evaluation scoring of the SOQ.
2. (2) The top-ranked proposers will herein be referred to as the short-list proposers.

(d)

1. (1) During the SOQ evaluation, the Arkansas Department of Transportation may wish to obtain additional information concerning the personnel or organization.
2. (2) In such case, the Arkansas Department of Transportation, through the DPT, may issue a formal department request for clarification (DRFC) to the respective proposer to allow a response to provide information to clarify a specific portion of the SOQ.
3. (3) The DRFC should be focused on a specific area or page in the SOQ and not include a general question.
4. (4) The response should be brief and considered an addendum to the original submission, and the Arkansas Department of Transportation should not allow the resubmission of the entire SOQ to address the issue.
5. (5) The Arkansas Department of Transportation is not obligated to request the additional information from a proposer.
6. (6) While the implementation of this process should be minimized to avoid potential protests, it may be considered in an effort to fairly evaluate the SOQs and, in particular, to avoid classifying the respective SOQ as nonresponsive and rejecting the submittal.

(e)

1. (1) The Arkansas Department of Transportation will subsequently request the short-list proposers to participate in the next step of the selection process by preparing a proposal in response to the impending RFP.
2. (2) It should be noted that increasing the number of short-list proposers above three (3) might not be in the best interest of the project.
3. (3) The short-list proposer’s cost to prepare a D-B proposal is extremely high and increasing the number of short-list proposers beyond the minimum might cause some proposers to back out of the RFP portion of the selection process.
4. (4) Unless the submitted SOQs are likely to result in significantly different proposal results, the number of short-list proposers should be minimized to what the Arkansas Department of Transportation determines would reflect as the right mix to maximize the design/construction value for the project.

(f)

1. (1) The short-list proposers represent the proposers that have been scored the highest in the SOQ evaluation and who are deemed to be most highly qualified to perform the required services of the project.

2. (2) Following the SOQ evaluation/scoring process by the PET, the PET recommendations for the short-list proposers will be forwarded to the project steering committee for:

   1. (A) Review;
   2. (B) Discussion; and
   3. (C) Confirmation.
3. (3) Upon confirmation of the project steering committee, the deputy director/chief operating officer will present the short-list proposers to the Director of State Highways and Transportation for approval.