43 Tex. Admin. Code § 9.34
Short List Determination
Effective Nov 18, 201035 TexReg 10056Source Note: The provisions of this §9.34 adopted to be effective April 1, 1997, 22 TexReg 64; amended to be effective March 21, 1999, 24 TexReg 1821; amended to be effective March 15, 2001, 26 TexReg 2053; amended to be effective January 9, 2003, 28 TexReg 363; amended to be effective February 17, 2005, 30 TexReg 725; amended to be effective November 18, 2010, 35 TexReg 10056.Texas Secretary of State
(a) Composition of the Consultant Selection Team.
(1) The CST shall be composed of:
- (A) the department staff member designated to be the chair;
- (B) the department project manager; and
- (C) at least one other department employee designated by the managing officer.
- (2) At least one CST member must be a professional engineer for engineering contracts; a professional engineer or registered or licensed professional land surveyor for surveying contracts; or a registered architect for architectural contracts.
(b) Qualification for long list.
- (1) The department may disqualify a team if the department or the team's references have knowledge that a firm on the team or an employee of a firm on the team has a record of unprofessional conduct, including being cited by the appropriate licensing board for a violation of its rules concerning conduct.
- (2) If a team is not disqualified under paragraph (1) of this subsection, the CST will review each letter of interest to see if it meets the submittal requirements and precertification requirements of §9.33(b)(3) of this subchapter (relating to Notice of Intent and Letter of Interest).
- (c) Long list evaluation. The CST will review the information submitted in the letters of interest and evaluate each team on the long list to determine the short list based on the criteria described in subsection (d) of this section and as listed in the notice.
(d) Criteria. The CST will consider the following criteria in its review of long-listed providers:
- (1) project understanding and approach;
- (2) the provider project manager's experience with similar projects;
- (3) similar project related experience of the task leaders responsible for the major work categories identified in the notice;
- (4) the provider's Quality Assurance/Quality Control program, if not evaluated under §9.35 or §9.36 of this subchapter (relating to Short List Proposals and Evaluation and Short List Interviews and Evaluation, respectively); and
- (5) other criteria approved by the Design Division and listed in the notice.
- (e) Score. The CST will assign a relative importance factor (RIF) weight to each criterion. The RIF total for all criteria will equal 100. Each criterion will be scored separately on a 0-10 point scale with 10 considered the best qualified. The maximum possible score that a CST member may give is 1000 points.
- (f) Short list. Selection of the short list will be made using the LOI score. For individual contract selections, the short list shall contain a minimum of three of the most highly qualified providers, by score, unless fewer than three qualified providers submitted a letter of interest. For multiple contract selections, the short list shall contain a minimum number of providers equal to the desired number of contracts plus three unless fewer than the desired minimum submitted a letter of interest.
- (g) Notification. The department will notify a prime provider submitting a letter of interest that it was or was not selected for the short list. If a prime provider is selected for the short list, the department will either notify it that a meeting will be held, or if a meeting is not held, the department will provide a Request for Proposal (RFP) or an Interview and Contract Guide (ICG). The department will also notify selected prime providers of any additional required reference information and the deadline for submission.
- (h) Short list meeting. The managing office may require a short list meeting during the selection process for providers advancing to the short list. A provider will be dropped from further consideration if the provider's representative fails to attend the short list meeting.
Source Note:The provisions of this §9.34 adopted to be effective April 1, 1997, 22 TexReg 64; amended to be effective March 21, 1999, 24 TexReg 1821; amended to be effective March 15, 2001, 26 TexReg 2053; amended to be effective January 9, 2003, 28 TexReg 363; amended to be effective February 17, 2005, 30 TexReg 725; amended to be effective November 18, 2010, 35 TexReg 10056.