Active SLED Opportunity · OHIO · CENTRAL OHIO TRANSIT AUTHORITY (COTA)
AI Summary
COTA seeks qualified A/E and program management advisory firms for transit planning, design, and implementation services supporting the LinkUS program. Services include architectural and engineering design, construction administration, materials testing, and commissioning. Selection is qualifications-based with emphasis on transit experience.
The Central Ohio Transit Authority (COTA) is soliciting Statements of Qualifications from qualified professional engineering/architectural (A/E) firms and program management advisory firms to provide general professional A/E and program management advisory services, with an emphasis on transit planning, design, and implementation in support of the LinkUS program. Services under this RFQ may include transit planning; architectural and engineering design; construction administration and inspection; program oversight and controls; materials testing; and commissioning. Firms should demonstrate rapid transit experience and a proven track record in transit planning, engineering, design, operations, and program management. COTA encourages Statements of Qualifications from firms and teams that bring a diverse range of skills and disciplines to support the full scope of program needs.
The Evaluation Committee will assess the Respondent's understanding of the project, COTA's objectives, and the challenges associated with the requested services. Consideration will be given to the firm's understanding of the project requirements, its ability to identify key issues, and the clarity with which its qualifications and value proposition are presented.
Scoring Considerations
The Evaluation Committee will evaluate the overall qualifications of the Respondent, including organizational stability, years of experience, available resources, technical expertise, and successful completion of similar projects. Preference will be given to firms with demonstrated experience performing comparable services for public agencies or organizations of similar size and complexity.
Scoring Considerations
The Evaluation Committee will evaluate the qualifications, experience, and availability of the proposed project manager and key personnel assigned to the project. Consideration will be given to the team's experience working together, individual technical expertise, professional licenses and certifications, and the appropriateness of staff assignments.
Scoring Considerations
The Evaluation Committee will evaluate the Respondent's experience successfully completing projects similar in scope, size, complexity, and delivery method. Greater consideration may be given to projects completed for public agencies, transportation organizations, or projects with similar operational requirements.
Scoring Considerations
The Evaluation Committee will assess the Respondent's proposed technical approach, methodology, work plan, quality assurance procedures, communication strategy, and understanding of the services required. The Committee will consider whether the proposed approach is practical, comprehensive, and likely to achieve successful project outcomes.
Scoring Considerations
The Evaluation Committee will evaluate the Respondent's ability to successfully manage the project and provide sufficient resources throughout the contract term. Consideration will be given to current workload, staffing capacity, project controls, scheduling, reporting, and overall organizational capability.
Scoring Considerations
The Evaluation Committee may evaluate references and past performance information to determine the Respondent's history of successfully performing similar work. Information obtained from references, previous clients, and COTA's own experience with the Respondent may be considered.
Scoring Considerations
At COTA’s discretion, and if deemed necessary, selected Respondents may be invited to participate in presentations or interviews as part of Phase 2 of the evaluation process. This phase is intended to provide Respondents an opportunity to clarify and expand upon information contained in their written Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) and to demonstrate their understanding of the project, proposed approach, and team capabilities.
Presentations or interviews may include discussions of the Respondent’s methodology, project management approach, key personnel, relevant experience, and implementation strategy, as well as responses to questions from the evaluation committee. Participation in Phase 2 does not guarantee award.
Following the evaluation and ranking of Statements of Qualifications (SOQs) and completion of the presentation and/or interview process, COTA will negotiate scope, staffing, schedule, and pricing with the highest-ranked Respondent to establish a fair and reasonable contract price. Cost proposals shall not be submitted or considered as part of the initial SOQ evaluation.
If COTA is unable to reach agreement with the highest-ranked Respondent, negotiations may be terminated and initiated with the next highest-ranked Respondent, continuing this process until a satisfactory agreement is reached or the solicitation is canceled.
COTA reserves the right to reject any or all cost proposals, discontinue negotiations, or make no award if deemed to be in the best interest of the Authority.
If Yes, identify each subcontractor and describe the scope of services to be performed, the subcontractor’s qualifications and experience, and the proposer’s approach to managing and overseeing subcontracted work.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please Upload your Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) response, including any and all required forms listed in the solicitation and the corresponding attachments.
**Do not upload cost information in here.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Enter the name and title of the respondent’s authorized official that will be charged with signing the awarded contract.
Enter the number of years the Vendor’s firm has been in business.
Provide the Vendor’s gross annual receipts for the most recently completed fiscal year.
Please enter a CAGE Code if applicable.
CAGE stands for Commercial and Government Entity. A unique CAGE code is assigned to all businesses and individual's that complete the System for Award Management registration process. This "system" is a database that contains information about all active government contractors.
Enter the full name, title, and email address of the authorized company representative submitting the Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) on behalf of the Vendor.
Upload a tracked-changes (redlined) version of the Contract Terms and Conditions included in the solicitation.
Redlines must be limited to items that were submitted by your firm during the official Q&A period and subsequently acknowledged or addressed by the Agency.
Do not include new or additional requested changes that were not raised during the Q&A period.
Failure to comply with these requirements may result in the Agency deeming your response non-responsive or requiring withdrawal of unapproved redlines during contract negotiations.
By certifying, the Bidder certifies that they are duly authorized to submit this proposal on behalf of the Vendor.
By confirming, the Vendor agrees to Net 30 payment terms as set forth in the Terms and Conditions.
What is the proposed contract term (years)?
What is the proposed contract term (months)?
Enter the total number of one-year option periods to be included beyond the initial base term.
Do not include the base term in this number.
Option years must be supported by budget planning and operational need.
Each option year must be exercisable at COTA’s sole discretion.
If federal funds are involved, ensure the total potential contract term (base + options) complies with applicable federal regulations and does not create an impermissible multi-year commitment without funding availability.
If no option years are anticipated, enter “0.”
Select the payment method that best aligns with the anticipated contract structure and scope of work. The payment method should reflect the level of scope definition, risk allocation, and funding source.
Firm Fixed Price (FFP): Use when the scope is clearly defined and deliverables are measurable.
Unit Price: Use when quantities may vary but pricing per unit is established.
Time & Materials (T&M) / Labor Hour: Use only when the scope cannot be fully defined in advance. A not-to-exceed ceiling must be established.
Cost Reimbursement (CPFF, CPIF, etc.): Requires justification and financial oversight; typically used for complex or research-based services.
Milestone / Deliverable-Based: Payments tied to completion and acceptance of defined phases or deliverables.
Progress Payments: Generally used for construction projects based on percentage of completion.
Subscription / Recurring Fee: For SaaS, licensing, or ongoing support services.
Select the evaluation and award methodology that will be used to determine the successful proposer. The selection method must align with applicable federal, state, and agency procurement requirements.
Best Value (Trade-Off): Award is based on a combination of technical merit, experience, and price, where higher technical quality may justify a higher cost.
Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA): Award is made to the lowest-priced proposal that meets all minimum technical requirements.
Qualifications-Based Selection (QBS): Used for Architectural & Engineering services. Firms are ranked based on qualifications only, and price is negotiated with the highest-ranked firm.
Competitive Range & Best and Final Offer (BAFO): A shortlist of the highest-rated proposers may be established for discussions, clarifications, and the submission of revised proposals prior to final evaluation and award.
Fixed Budget / Feasibility Selection: A maximum budget is established in advance, and proposals are evaluated based on technical merit and feasibility within the stated budget constraint.
Enter the DBE participation percentage established for this contract.
Enter the maximum page limit for the proposal submission (excluding required notarized forms and the separate price proposal).
SLED stands for State, Local, and Education. These are solicitations issued by state governments, counties, cities, school districts, utilities, and higher education institutions — as opposed to federal agencies.
SamSearch Platform
AI-powered intelligence for the right opportunities, the right leads, and the right time.