Oklahoma A&M Board of Regents

 

Selection of Architectural, Construction Management, Engineering and Landscape Architectural Professional Services and Implementation of Projects

2.09

This procedure applies to all institutions governed by the Board.  The tasks identified hereinafter shall be managed by LRFP, or its successor, except for the system-wide selection process for On-Call CMAR, and except for the selection and implementation of OSU-Stillwater campus projects involving utilities only, both of which shall be managed by OSU FM, or its successor.

  1. Approval to Proceed.  At such time as an institution, under the governance of the Board, plans to solicit consultants for architectural, construction management, engineering, and/or landscape architectural professional services (collectively, “Consultants”), approval to proceed with the selection process must be obtained from the Board.  All institutions should work with LRFP or FM to present a request for approval to the Board.  The request should contain a brief description of the scope of the project and its associated requirements, an estimated budget range and an estimated schedule for the project.

  2. Solicitation of Qualified Consultants.  After the Board has given its approval to proceed with planning and designing a specific project, a list should be obtained of all discipline specific Consultants registered with the Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES).  Each such Consultant listed should be informed, by mailing a Project Notification, of the intent of the Board to select a Consultant. Interested Consultants should respond by submitting a Letter of Interest.

  3. Screening, Evaluation, and Recommendation of Consultants.  A Selection Committee should be established for each project, for recommending to the Fiscal Affairs Committee of the Board those Consultants found acceptable for the project, using Attachment A – Guidelines for the Selection of Architectural, Construction Management, Engineering, Landscape Architectural Professional Services.

  4. Selection of Consultants by the Board.  At the conclusion of the screening and evaluation process, approval to select a particular Consultant must be obtained from the Board.  Administration from the specific institution should work with LRFP or FM to insure the particular Consultant selection is on the Board agenda.  The Fiscal Affairs Committee of the Board will, in open session, vote and make a recommendation regarding which Consultant to select to the Board.  Thereafter, the Board will, in open session, vote and make a final selection of the Consultant to be hired.  Unless otherwise stated in the motion approved by the Board, the selection of a Consultant for a particular project will constitute authority for LRFP or FM to utilize said Consultant for all phases of said project; however, LRFP or FM has the authority, should it so choose, to:

    1. Exercise that authority piecemeal by entering into separate contracts or amendments with the selected Consultant for various phases of the project, and/or
    2. Terminate a Consultant’s contract, without prior Board approval; however, under such a circumstance LRFP or FM will be required to obtain Board approval before signing a contract with a replacement Consultant.

  5. Implementation of Projects.  Once a Consultant has been selected by the Board, the President, or President’s designee, at each respective institution governed by the Board is authorized to sign contracts or amendments with the selected Consultant.

    See Attachment A for “Guidelines for the Selection of Architectural, Construction Management, Engineering, and Landscape Architectural Professional Services.”

    For Architectural consulting services, Attachment B “Recommended Guidelines for Basic Architectural Consulting Fees” will be used.

    For implementation of projects, Attachment C “Recommended Guidelines for Implementation of Projects for Architectural, Construction Management, Engineering, and Landscape Architectural Professional Services” will be used.

Attachment A

Guidelines for the Selection of Architectural, Construction Management, Engineering, and Landscape Architectural Professional Services

These guidelines are recommended for capital projects at all institutions governed by the Board.

  1. Evaluation of Qualified Consultants – Project Notification and Letter of Interest.  Based upon approval by the Board to proceed with the selection of a Consultant to assist the institution with a project, LRFP or FM should obtain a list of discipline specific Consultants registered with OMES.  Each Consultant listed should be informed, by mailing a Project Notification, of the intent of the Board to select a Consultant.  Interested Consultants should respond by submitting a Letter of Interest.  The Project Notification should include the following information:

    1. A description and scope of the project.
    2. An estimated project budget range and schedule.
    3. The deadline for submitting a Letter of Interest by the Consultant.
    4. Instructions for providing specific information requested by the Selection Committee, which may be required at the Initial Screening or Final Screening.
    5. A date for a non-mandatory project seminar, if deemed necessary, to be conducted by LRFP or FM for the purpose of explaining the project and answering any questions pertaining to the project and the selection process.
    6. Notification that OMES Cap Forms, as appropriate, must be submitted.
    7. The selection criteria and weighting to be used at the Initial and Final Screening/Interview.
    8. Other information as required by the Board and/or the Selection Committee.

  2. Screening of Consultants.

    1. Selection Committee:
      1. A Selection Committee should be established for each project for the purpose of providing both Initial Screening and Final Screening of Consultants submitting Letters of Interest and recommending Consultants to the Board for its consideration.
      2. The Selection Committee should consist of a chair/facilitator and members with a variety of backgrounds to provide input from different perspectives.
      3. The membership of the Selection Committee should consist of personnel from LRFP or FM and representatives from the institution, college and/or department that will use and/or maintain the facility.
      4. It is encouraged that a faculty member and/or a student from an appropriate academic discipline (architecture, construction management, engineering, landscape architecture) be included as a member of the Selection Committee.
    2. Selection Committee Charge: The chair of the Selection Committee is responsible for providing a charge to the Selection Committee to include, but not be limited to:
      1. Pursue a process that guarantees the institution’s best interests are served.
      2. Maintain the work of the Selection Committee in the strictest confidence; each Selection Committee member should hold the content of each committee meeting in strict confidence without discussion with anyone outside of the Selection Committee unless authorized by the chair.
    3. Initial Screening:
      1. Initial Screening should begin upon receipt of Letters of Interest from Consultants requesting consideration.
      2. The criteria to be used by the Selection Committee for the Initial and Final Screening, weighted as determined for each project and included in the project notification, are:
        1. Overall Experience.
        2. Specialized Experience.
        3. Management Team/Staff.
        4. Budget, Cost, and Schedule Management.
        5. Other items as determined by the Selection  Committee.
      3. Calculation of Points and Identification of Top Consultants:
        1. The members of the Selection Committee  should individually review the Letters of Interest and  rate the Consultants using the criteria and percentage  weightings previously determined.
        2. The results should be reviewed, considering  numerical scores awarded and rankings, and the top  Consultants identified.  The Consultants to be invited  for Final Screening should number no less than three  (if attainable) and no more  than nine. The Board  should be notified of the names of Consultants invited  to attend for Final Screening with the date(s) and times  of the interviews
    4. Final Screening:
      1. Each of the top Consultants identified during the Initial Screening should be invited to attend an interview for the Final Screening.  Interviews should be scheduled with due consideration for holidays, special Consultant commitments (within reason and with prior notice), and critical time requirements.
      2. Each Consultant should bring key personnel including, but not limited to, principal(s), project manager(s), lead design professional(s), and other personnel assigned to the project.
      3. Each Consultant should be given a specified time for presentation of its credentials and for questions from the Selection Committee.
      4. Calculation of Points and Identification of Consultants to be Recommended:(vi) For each Consultant recommended to the Board for consideration, the chair of the Selection Committee should prepare a report to include:
        1. The members of the Selection Committee  should individually assess each Consultant using the  criteria and percentage weightings previously  determined.
        2. The results should be reviewed by the Selection  Committee, considering numerical scores awarded  and rankings, to determine which Consultants to  recommend to the Board as being most qualified to  carry out the project.
        3. There should be at least three names sent to the  Board, unless fewer than three Consultants are  acceptable to the Selection Committee
      5. The chair of the Selection Committee should prepare a report to be submitted to the institution’s President, or President’s designee, to include a list of the interviewed Consultants, and the recommendation of the Selection Committee.  Supporting information should provide an overview of the selection process including the project description, budget range, delivery method, schedule, Selection Committee membership, screening criteria, number of Consultants who submitted Letters of Interest, names of Consultants invited for interview, summary of Selection Committee comments and recommendations, and a conclusion.
      6. For each Consultant recommended to the Board for consideration, the chair of the Selection Committee should prepare a report to include:
        1. Introduction: a description of the Consultant.
        2. Proposed key staff.
        3. Preferred sub-consultants.
        4. OSU Projects: a list of projects the Consultant is  currently working on or has worked on within the past  five years at OSU or at any other institution under the  governance of the Board.
        5. OK/OSU Presence.
        6. Minority Inclusion Plan: a brief overview of the  Consultant’s representations concerning inclusion of  minority consultants.
        7. Selection Committee Comments: a brief  overview of the discussions of the Selection  Committee.
        8. Selection Committee Conclusion: a brief  statement recommending the Consultant to the Board  for consideration.
    5. Presentation of the Selection Committee’s recommendation to the Fiscal  Affairs Committee of the Board:  The institution’s President, or designee, shouldpresent the list of recommended Consultants to the Fiscal Affairs Committee of the Board and should include the report prepared by the chair of the Selection Committee.

Attachment B

Recommended Guidelines for Basic Architectural Consulting Fees
Construction Cost                   Fee  

$0 - $300,000                          7 %  

$300,000 - $400,000               $26,000 plus 6.5% over $300,000  

$400,000 - $500,000               $32,500 plus 6.0% over $400,000  

$500,000 - $600,000               $38,500 plus 5.5% over $500,000  

$600,000 - $700,000               $44,000 plus 5.4% over $600,000  

$700,000 - $800,000               $49,400 plus 5.3% over $700,000  

$800,000 - $900,000               $54,700 plus 5.2% over $800,000  

$900,000 - $1,000,000            $59,900 plus 5.1% over $900,000  

Above $1,000,000                   $65,000 plus 5.0% over $1,000,000 

 

The above fees apply to Basic architecture and engineering professional services for a project involving new construction of average complexity.  Multipliers (which may be additive or deductive) may be applied to adjust for the nature of the work and the user’s knowledge of the specific project.  Such modifiers may be necessary for factors including, but not limited to, complexity of the project, the degree of renovation of existing structures, and the need for special Consultants.  These Basic Fees do not include Additional Services or Reimbursable

Costs, as defined in the standard OSU Owner/ Architect Contract.


Attachment C
 
Recommended Guidelines for Implementation of Projects for Architectural, Construction Management, Engineering, and Landscape Architectural Professional Services

  1. Once a Consultant has been selected by the Board for a particular project, LRFP or FM has the authority to utilize said Consultant for all phases of that project; however, LRFP or FM has the authority, should it so choose, to exercise that authority piecemeal by entering into separate contracts or amendments with the selected Consultant for various phases of the project.  Unless otherwise stated in a Board action, Board approval for a particular project is deemed to include approval for all attendant utilities, parking spaces and parking structures that may be necessary.  The total project amount of all contracts, amendments, fees, services and purchases of furniture, fixtures and equipment for any such project should not exceed the highest level of the estimated budget range given to the Board without first obtaining additional Board approval. Construction projects supervised by LRFP or FM on behalf of the Board benefit the public.  Further, there is a need for cost control and a need for specialized or complex construction methods on such projects due to the unique nature of constructing facilities suitable for the educational mission of each institution governed by the Board.  Accordingly, LRFP or FM has the discretion to utilize any of the following three project delivery methods for such construction projects
    1. Design/Bid/Build contracts;
    2. Construction Manager Agency (CMA) contracts; or
    3. Construction Manager At Risk (CMAR) contracts.

  2. However, LRFP and FM have recommended, and the Board concurs, that in most circumstances a CMAR contract will generally provide a quicker, less costly and more flexible model for dealing with construction projects, and therefore is preferred.  Accordingly, the following guidelines for CMAR contracts have been adopted by the Board:
    1. A selected CMAR should competitively bid all subcontracts for construction services, materials, supplies, furniture, fixtures and equipment necessary for completion of the scope of work contemplated in that phase of the project and should accept the lowest responsible bid for such subcontracts.  However, in some circumstances, LRFP or FM may elect to competitively bid, solicit, and procure through the CPO (See, 2.07) some materials, supplies, furniture, fixtures and equipment, and in such circumstances, the CMAR will not be responsible or “at risk” for providing same.  Although the provisions of 61 O.S. §§ 101-138 may not technically apply to Board construction projects, the Board has directed that such bids, whether by the CMAR, LRFP or FM, should be solicited, opened and awarded in general conformity with the provisions of 61 O.S. §§ 101-138.  A representative from LRFP or FM should attend all such bid openings.\
    2. A selected CMAR may, itself, submit a bid on a particular subcontract, but should be treated in that respect as any other subcontractor, such that in order to be awarded that subcontract, the CMAR must be the lowest responsible bidder.
    3. After the subcontracts for a particular phase of the project have been awarded, the selected CMAR should provide LRFP or FM with an Interim Guaranteed Maximum Price (IGMP) which should cover all of the CMAR’s own professional services and all of the construction services to be performed, together with all materials, supplies, furniture, fixtures and equipment necessary for completion of the scope of work contemplated in that particular phase of the project.  The CMAR is “at risk” for providing all professional services, construction services, materials, supplies, furniture, fixtures and equipment set forth in that scope of work for the IGMP, or less.  That IGMP should be set forth in a formal contract between the selected CMAR and the Board, which contract should provide that if the final cost of the scope of work exceeds the IGMP, the CMAR will bear such additional cost, and if the final cost of the scope of work is less than the IGMP, 100% of the difference will be retained by the Board institution for whom the contract was entered.  The Board has vested the President, or President’s designee, at each of the institutions governed by the Board, to sign such contracts on its behalf.
    4. An increase or decrease in the scope of a CMAR contract is permitted when deemed necessary or appropriate by LRFP or FM.  Such scope revision should contain a revised IGMP for the scope of the revised services, materials, supplies, furniture, fixtures and equipment to be provided.  The total of all IGMP’s for a particular project should constitute the final Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP). 
    5. On a periodic basis, the Board has authorized LRFP and/or FM to utilize certain CMAR’s on an “on-call” basis.  By Board action, LRFP and FM are authorized to utilize such CMAR’s on projects with an anticipated GMP of $1,000,000 or less.  Further, the cumulative total of such On-Call CMAR contracts is limited, on a per fiscal year basis, to the total sum of $7,500,000 for the OSU System and $1,000,000 for each other institution governed by the Board (hereinafter “Yearly Cap”).  However, when time is of the essence, or a particular On-Call CMAR is otherwise deemed by LRFP or FM to be best suited to manage a particular project, LRFP or FM may request approval to utilize such On-Call CMAR on a project greater than $1,000,000 without utilizing the selection processes and criteria in “Attachment A –Guidelines for the Selection of Architectural, Construction Management, Engineering, and Landscape Architectural Professional Services.”  In such circumstances, LRFP or FM should, in its request for approval to proceed, advise the Board of LRFP or FM’s intent to utilize an On-Call CMAR for that project.  If approved, the CMAR contract awarded to that particular On-Call CMAR for that particular project, should not be considered to be a part of any Yearly Cap for OnCall CMAR services.

      Amended Date: 
      January 27, 2006
      October 24, 2014
      March 4, 2016
      June 22, 2018
      June 16, 2023