Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7.1 Labor Compliance City Projectsor 19 82 /ii � 111 DATE: TO: FROM: STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL July 16, 2013 Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Joni Pattillo City Manager""' CITY CLERK File #600 -10 SUBJECT: Cost Impacts of Prequalification of Bidders on City Projects and Implementation of Labor Compliance Program for City Projects Prepared by Stephen Muzio, Assistant City Attorney EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: At the City Council's direction, staff has prepared cost estimates for implementation of prequalification and labor compliance monitoring on the City's public works projects, and is seeking direction from the City Council as to whether to proceed with implementation. FINANCIAL IMPACT: As discussed in this report, the financial impact will depend on the direction given by the City Council. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council receive the staff presentation and provide direction to staff on if it wishes to implement prequalification of bidders on City projects or a labor compliance program for City projects and, if so, how it would like to implement those processes. Page 1 of 6 ITEM NO. 7.1 Estimated Estimated Pre - Qualification Labor Compliance Program Costs Program Costs Start -up $10,000 $7,600 On -Going Project by Project $5,500 x estimated Public Works Pre - qualification: average of projects Capital $12,000 x estimated per FY (4 -8) = Projects average of projects $22,000 - $44,000 per FY (4 -8) = plus 0.25% of total $48,000 - $96,000 project costs. On -Going $27,800 x estimated $5,700 x estimated Parks & Comm. average of projects average of projects Srvcs. Capital per FY (4) = $111,200 per FY (4) = $22,800 Projects plus 0.25% of total project costs. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council receive the staff presentation and provide direction to staff on if it wishes to implement prequalification of bidders on City projects or a labor compliance program for City projects and, if so, how it would like to implement those processes. Page 1 of 6 ITEM NO. 7.1 ell Submitted By City Attorney DESCRIPTION Background Reviewed By Assistant City Manager At its October 2, 2012 meeting, following a presentation from staff on various factors relating to City public project contracts (Attachment 1 — Staff Report), the City Council directed staff to prepare an analysis of the costs to the City of implementing a program for prequalification of bidders on City public projects and potential measures the City could take to monitor contractors' compliance with prevailing wage and apprenticeship utilization laws. Pre - qualification Pre - qualification of bidders is a statutorily authorized means of screening potential bidders on public works projects. California Public Contract Code section 20101 authorizes cities to utilize pre - qualification procedures. Contractors that fail to qualify can be excluded from bidding on that project, or during that period of time. A contractor that is disqualified through the pre- qualification process is entitled to an administrative appeal procedure to seek a reversal of the determination. If the appeal is unsuccessful, the contractor may then file a lawsuit challenging the determination. The costs of such litigation will depend in large part on the arguments made in the claim against the City, and thus cannot be easily estimated. However, such litigation costs would likely be significant, and even where the City prevails in such litigation, it would not be entitled to recover its attorneys' fees. The appeals procedure must be established and in place at the time prequalification occurs. Pre - qualification can either be done on a project- specific basis, or to prequalify a successful applicant for a one year period from the time of pre - qualification. A disadvantage to one -year pre - qualification is that contractors with specialized skills and licenses may not participate in the process while they might do so if given notice of a specific project that requires their particular expertise. In other words, one -year pre - qualification may result in eligible bidders that are only willing or able to work on particular kinds of projects, and few or no bidders willing and able to work on other kinds of projects. The nature and complexity of projects administered by Public Works and Parks and Community Services staff varies widely from project to project, and can range from relatively simple neighborhood parks or street paving projects to very complex construction projects such as the construction of a public safety complex or other administrative buildings. To ensure that a representative pool of capable contractors is made aware of, applies for, and is found eligible to work on even specialized projects, both Public Works and Parks and Community Services Department Staff strongly recommend that, if the City Council elects to require pre - qualification for public works projects, pre - qualification be conducted on a project- specific basis, instead of a one -year basis. The California Department of Industrial Relations ( "DIR "), in consultation with representatives of public agencies and a broad spectrum of interested parties, has prepared a model pre- qualification form that is utilized by most cities in the state (Attachment 2). The model form addresses issues relating to insurance, compliance with labor and work safety laws, and the Page 2 of 6 contractor's experience on certain types of projects. Most cities that prequalify bidders utilize the model form, either fundamentally unchanged or with additional questions and modifications to reflect project- specific factors and /or issues of local concern. It should be noted that the greater degree of modifications made to the model form, the more preparation costs will increase. Anecdotal evidence is mixed on the impact of pre - qualification on the number of bidders on projects. On the one hand, utilization of a pre - qualification process may have the effect of reducing the number of bidders on a project, both because some may be weeded out, but also because some contractors may not wish to incur the burden of undergoing the process. On the other hand, some contractors with whom Staff has spoken have said that they actually prefer pre - qualification because it ensures that they are "competing" only against responsible contractors, rather than contractors that generally comply with state law requirements. Staff has also been made aware of a significant public works project undertaken in Walnut Creek that utilized pre - qualification where significant problems eventually arose with the pre - qualified contractor on the project. Thus, pre - qualification may not always effectively identify problem contractors. "Start -up" Cost Estimate for Pre - qualification As indicated above, the "start -up" costs of implementing pre - qualification include the adoption of a City Council Resolution approving a pre - qualification policy, adaptation of the model questionnaire, and the establishment of scoring standards and an appeals procedure. Estimated "start -up" costs would total approximately $10,000 for approximately 75 hours of work. Public Works Department Cost Estimates for On -Going Implementation for Pre - qualification The two City Departments that administer public bidding procedures are Public Works and Parks and Community Services. The Public Works Department typically conducts public bidding on 4 -8 projects each year. These projects can vary with respect to the complexity of the work required and include: annual overlay, slurry seal and sidewalk repair projects, bike trail projects, road widening projects, traffic signal projects, storm drain replacement and repair projects, landscaping projects and lighting projects. Staff has prepared cost estimates for required actions such as Clerical Support; Preparation of Mailers /Invitations; Responses to Questions; Review, Verification and Scoring of Applications; Preparation of Results; Handling of Appeals; and Miscellaneous Administrative Time which would result in estimated total costs for per - project pre - qualification of approximately $12,000 for approximately 138 hours of work. These estimates are from the Public Works Department, and assume that just the basic model questionnaire is utilized. Changes made to the model questionnaire or variations in the number of applications received may significantly impact the estimates. Page 3 of 6 Parks and Community Services Department Cost Estimates for Pre - qualification Parks and Community Services projects are typically larger, more complex projects. Generally speaking, Parks and Community Services staff put two projects to bid each year. The Parks and Community Services Department has awarded contracts for the following projects in Fiscal Year 2013/14: Shannon Water Play feature remodel ($485,000), ALCO Joint Use Admin Building ($4.0 million), ALCO Joint Use Maintenance Building ($7.5 Million), and Passitempo Park ($1.5 million).) Each of these project types required different levels and types of expertise and experience. Staff has prepared cost estimates for required actions such as Preparation of Pre - Qualification Questionnaire; Preparation of Request for Qualifications (RFQ); Print and Distribution of RFQ; Responding to Questions; Review, Verification and Scoring of Applications; Selection and Notification of Short List; and Handling of Appeals which would result in estimated total costs of approximately $27,800 for approximately 213 hours of work. These estimates are from the Parks and Community Services Department, and assume that project- specific questionnaires will be utilized. Variations in the number of applications received may significantly impact the estimates. Given the proposed work schedule for FY 2013 -14, the total costs of pre - qualification for the four projects would have been approximately $111,000 for FY 2013 -14. Labor Compliance Program The Labor Code permits government agencies to implement a labor compliance program. (Labor Code § 1771.5.) Agencies that do so are permitted to waive the prevailing wage requirement for public works project of $25,000 or less when the project is for construction work, and for public works projects of $15,000 or less when the project is for alteration, demolition, repair, or maintenance work. A labor compliance program must, at a minimum, include provisions for the conduct of pre -job conferences with contractors and subcontractors to discuss labor law requirements, reviews and audits of payroll records to ensure compliance with prevailing wage and apprenticeship utilization laws, and the withholding of contract payments when payroll records are not provided or where it is determined that workers on a project have not been paid prevailing wages. The legislation that established labor compliance programs permitted agencies to create and implement their own programs, or to retain a consultant to implement such programs, but required that the programs be certified by the DIR. However, at this time the DIR has ceased to certify such new programs, meaning that new programs must be administered by the Department of Industrial Relations. Under the DIR program, the City would be required to implement and conduct the pre -job conferences, while the DIR would perform the analysis of payroll records. City staff and the DIR would work together with respect to contract payment withholdings. In addition to costs associated with staff time to implement a labor compliance program, the City would also be required to pay the DIR 0.25% of the contract value of all public works contracts in order to receive administrative services. "Start -up" Cost Estimate for Labor Compliance Program The "start -up" costs of implementing a labor compliance program include contracting with the DIR for the provision of services, establishment of a pre -job conference protocol to be Page 4 of 6 implemented by City staff, and revising the City's form public works contracts to ensure compliance with program requirements. (Note that the cost estimates presume that Staff time spent on these tasks would be performed by a Senior Civil Engineer with the Public Works Department.). Estimated total "start -up" costs would equal approximately $7,600 for approximately 59 hours of work. Public Works Department Cost Estimates for On -Going Implementation for Labor Compliance Program Ongoing costs associated with implementation of a labor compliance program includes preparing for and conducting pre -job conferences, responding to questions from contractors, preparing forms to notify the DIR of new projects, and administration and follow -up on monitoring activities. Implementation of sanctions for violations of state law would likely also require additional staff and City Attorney time, though it is difficult to know how much time would be required. (Note that the staff time estimates include separate figures for Public Works Department Projects and Parks and Community Services Projects.) Estimated ongoing costs associated with implementation of a labor compliance program for Public Works totals approximately $5,500 for approximately 70 hours of work, while Parks and Community Services is estimated at approximately $5,700 for the same amount of time. As noted above, in addition to costs associated with staff time to implement a labor compliance program, the City would also be required to pay the DIR 0.25% of the contract value of all public works contracts in order to receive administrative services. An alternative to utilizing the DIR labor compliance program would be for the City to contract with a third -party consultant to provide labor compliance monitoring services that are otherwise performed by the DIR. Because agencies, until recently, were able implement their own labor compliance programs under Section 1771.5, there are a number of consultants who are competent to perform the work. If the City retained a consultant to perform the services, it would not be permitted to raise the threshold for requiring prevailing wages on projects as it would if it utilized the DIR. Initial contacts with consultants indicates that pricing of their compliance review services may be competitive with the costs of the DIR administered program depending on the project type. However, it is unclear whether an "on- call" agreement with a consultant for labor compliance services on all City public projects would result in cost savings over use of the DIR program. Next Steps Staff requests that the City Council: 1) provide direction on whether and how it would like prequalification to be implemented; 2) whether it would like to implement a labor compliance program to be administered by the DIR; and 3) whether it would like the City to put out a request for proposals for the provision of labor compliance monitoring services by third -party consultants. If the City Council provided direction to utilize prequalification, the City Attorney's office would prepare a resolution establishing the City's prequalification policy for adoption by the City Council, and would begin working with staff on implementing the "startup" tasks referenced above. In addition, if the City Council is supportive of the implementation of a labor compliance program, then the City Attorney's office would coordinate with staff and the DIR to initiate a program or work with staff to solicit proposals for labor compliance monitoring services, as appropriate depending on the City Council's direction. Page 5 of 6 NOTICING REQUIREMENTS /PUBLIC OUTREACH: I101 •[Tits ATTACHMENTS: 1. Labor Guidelines Staff Report 2. Department of Industrial Relations Model Pre - Qualification Materials Page 6 of 6 1!! DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL October 2, 2012 Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Joni Pattillo, City Manager, �) Labor Guidelines Report Prepared by Stephen. Muzio, Assistant City Attorney EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: CITY CLERK File #600 -10 The City Council requested the City Attorney prepare an analysis of various labor items relating to City construction projects. In completing its analysis, the City Attorney's Office has identified various alternatives to the City's current practices the City Council may wish to pursue. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Depending on the City Council's direction, changes to the City's current policies and procedures relating to construction projects will have varying financial impacts on the City. The current two - year budget and work plan does not include the Staff time required to implement any of the alternatives pursuant to this presentation. If the City Council wishes to pursue changes, Staff would return with a report on the estimated implementation costs and ongoing impacts to projects. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council receive the Staff presentation and provide Staff with direction. Submitted By City Attorney DESCRIPTION: Reviewed B. Park & Community Services Director The City Council previously directed the City Attorney's Office to prepare an analysis of various issues relating to City projects to both identify the City's current practices and to provide the City Council with information regarding various alternative practices that the City could legally implement if it wished to do so. Pursuant to this direction, the City Attorney's Office and City Staff have prepared a report addressing the following: pre - qualification of bidders on City projects, options to encourage the hiring of local contractors on City projects, an overview of Page 1 of 5 ITEM NO. 7.3 California prevailing wage law and apprenticeship programs. Each section of this Staff Report includes a brief discussion of alternatives that the City may wish to consider if it wishes to modify the City's current practices. Originally the City Council directed that the analysis also address the use of Project Labor Agreements. However, based on direction given at the April 17, 2012 City Council Meeting, the issue of Project Labor Agreements is not addressed in this report. A. Prequalification of Bidders Prequalification of bidders is a statutorily authorized means of screening potential bidders on public works projects. The California Public Contract Code specifically authorizes cities to utilize prequalification procedures. The California Department of Industrial Relations ( "DIR "), in consultation with representatives of public agencies and a broad spectrum of interested parties, has prepared a sample prequalification form that is utilized by most cities in the state. The model questionnaire addresses issues relating to insurance, compliance with labor and work safety laws, and the contractor's experience on certain types of projects. Cities can develop their own questionnaires, or they can modify the DIR questionnaire to address issues of local concern. Most cities utilize the DIR prequalification form, either unchanged or with some modifications. The questions (and scoring of the questions) should comply with statutory and constitutional requirements. Contractors wishing to bid for public works jobs fill out the questionnaire to "pre- qualify" for the right to bid on either a specific public works project, or on public works projects undertaken by a public agency during a specified period of time. Contractors that fail to qualify can be excluded from bidding on that project, or during that period of time. A contractor that is disqualified through the prequalification process is entitled to an administrative appeal procedure to seek a reversal of the determination, and may then file a lawsuit. Prequalification can be utilized to qualify contractors for particularly large or complex projects, or can be used to prequalify contractors to bid on all projects meeting a certain price threshold over a period of time. Because prequalification is a means of "weeding out" bidders, the bases for exclusion of bidders should be related to the City's legitimate needs for the project or projects. Anecdotal evidence is mixed on the impact of prequalification on the number of bidders on projects. On the one hand, utilization of a prequalification process may have the effect of reducing the number of bidders on a project, both because some may be weeded out, but also because some contractors may not wish to incur the burden of undergoing the process. On the other hand, some contractors with whom Staff has spoken have said that they actually prefer prequalification because it ensures that they are "competing" only against responsible contractors, rather than contractors who may not be as meticulous about creating safe work environments and complying with state law requirements. The City Council may wish to direct Staff to return with a policy requiring the use of DIR form questionnaire on some or all City projects that are required to be publicly bid. If that is the City Council's Direction, Staff would provide the City Council with additional information regarding the costs of implementing a prequalification process. In addition, depending on the City Council's direction on other items in this Study, the City Council may wish to ask that specific questions be added to the prequalification questionnaire to address local policies and concerns. Potential Costs of Implementation: Preparation and implementation of prequalification would require the expenditure of Staff time and other City resources to develop a questionnaire, to review completed questionnaires, and to develop and administer a process by which contractors are disqualified from bidding on City projects and can appeal their disqualification. These costs Page 2 of 5 would increase if the Council was to direct that prequalification be used for all City projects, as opposed to only projects of a certain size or type. B. Local Preferences Two types of local preferences exist. Local hiring ordinances encourage the use of local labor on certain projects. Local business ordinances encourage the utilization of local businesses (rather than employees specifically). In theory, local business and local hiring ordinances can have either "good- faith" or "mandatory" standards for compliance. Good -faith ordinances require that outreach efforts be made to local businesses and labor but do not establish firm quotas. Mandatory ordinances establish firm quotas for the utilization of local businesses or labor but would likely face challenge in the absence of a study that establishes a strong factual basis to justify their imposition. Additionally, ongoing administration of such ordinances would likely result in substantial costs to the City. Due to Constitutional concerns relating to the Privileges and Immunities Clause, it is extremely difficult to establish a legally defensible basis for mandatory ordinances, though San Francisco, which prepared an analysis showing that businesses in San Francisco operated at a competitive disadvantage to businesses located in other jurisdictions, successfully defended its local business preference ordinance against a lawsuit challenging portions of the ordinance. Another factor to consider is whether there are sufficient local contractors with the necessary experience and qualifications to work on City projects. Although it is unclear that it will be possible to justify a mandatory local hire or local business preference ordinance, the City Council could direct Staff to return with a proposed consultant contract for the preparation of a study assessing whether sufficient grounds exist to justify the adoption of either or both types of ordinances. Alternatively, the City Council may wish to direct Staff to return with an analysis of alternatives for a good -faith local hire or local business preference ordinance and the costs of implementing those alternatives. Potential Costs of Implementation: The preparation of a study by a consultant to assess whether a mandatory local hire or local business preference ordinance can be justified would likely cost at least $30,000 to $50,000. The outcome of such a study is very uncertain. Preparation and implementation of a good -faith local hire or local business preference would require the expenditure of Staff time and other City resources to develop the policy and monitor compliance with it. C. Prevailing Wage Law Consistent with its obligations under the California Labor Code, the City, in its contracts for certain public works projects with a value of more than $1,000, requires that labor employed on those projects be paid the "general prevailing rate of per diem wages for work of a similar nature," or "prevailing wages." This requirement also applies to parts of some projects constructed by private entities, such as the construction of necessary infrastructure, including roads and utilities, required as a condition of development. Enforcing compliance on these projects poses some additional difficulties for the City. Although the City is required to properly identify projects subject to prevailing wages, to ensure that prevailing wage provisions are included in the contracts for the project, and to report to the state any violations of the prevailing wage law that come to its attention, the contractors themselves are most directly responsible for compliance with the prevailing wage laws. Among other things, contractors are required to maintain certified payroll records that show that they are paying appropriate prevailing wages. The City could, if it wished, require that these records be Page 3 of 5 provided to the City as a matter of due course, either on all projects or on projects meeting a specified threshold. The Labor Code contains provisions that would allow the City to establish a labor compliance program, to be administered by the City, a third party, or the Department of Industrial Relations. Such programs require the monitoring and auditing of certified payroll records and that agencies using them take certain other actions. If the City adopted such a program, then the "trigger" for projects where prevailing wages would be required would increase to $25,000 for construction projects and to $15,000 for alteration, demolition, repair and maintenance projects. Effective January 1, 2012, agencies that construct a project that paid for in whole or in part with state issued bond funds are required to utilize the labor compliance program administration services provided by the Department of Industrial Relations for that project. The City Council may wish to direct Staff to return with a policy that imposes default reporting obligations on City contractors subject to prevailing wages. The City Council may also wish to direct Staff to return with alternatives for a policy that explores means by which the City may better ensure compliance on private projects that are subject to prevailing wage requirements. Staff would also prepare an analysis of the costs that may be associated with implementing the policies. Costs of Implementation: The development and implementation of either type of policy would require the expenditure of Staff time and other City resources. . D. Apprenticeship Requirements The Labor Code also requires contractors on local agency projects with a value of $30,000 or more to utilize a certain percentage of apprentice labor, to the extent that such labor is available. To the best of our knowledge, no Bay Area cities comparable in size to the City of Dublin have taken steps to increase apprenticeship participation on their projects beyond what is required under state law. Although the City does not have any direct responsibility for monitoring compliance with the applicable statute, it is required to inform the State Division of Apprenticeship Standards when it awards a contract that is subject to the apprenticeship requirements. Included within these statutes are provisions that permit, but do not require, agencies to closely monitor contractors' compliance with the apprenticeship requirements. The City Council may wish to direct Staff to return with a policy that increases the level of oversight by the City with respect to contractors' compliance with the statutory apprentice utilization requirements. The City Council could also direct Staff to return with options for a policy that either reduces the threshold for triggering apprenticeship requirements or that increases the level of apprentice participation on covered projects. Staff would also prepare an analysis of the costs that may be associated with implementing such policies. Costs of Implementation: The development and implementation of such a policy would require the expenditure of Staff time and other City resources. SUBSEQUENT STEPS Upon receipt of direction from the City Council, Staff will return at a future meeting date with an analysis of the deliverables that have been requested, their cost implications and the estimated time needed to implement them. Page 4 of 5 NOTICING REQUIREMENTS /PUBLIC OUTREACH: In preparing its analysis, the City Attorney's Office met two times each with representatives from various local unions and with representatives from Associated Builders and Contractors, a trade organization representing "merit based" (non- union) contractors. The City Attorney's Office also contacted members of organizations representing union contractors. At the first meeting with each group, the representatives were given the opportunity to provide their perspective regarding the major subject areas of the study. At the second meeting with each group, the representatives were given an opportunity to give feedback on a draft of the City Attorney's summary findings. Based on this second meeting, these summary findings were amended and have been included in the "Description" section of this Staff Report. ATTACHMENTS: None Page 5 of 5 MODEL PRE- QUALIFICATION QUESTIONNAIRE CONTACT INFORMATION Firm Name: Check One: ❑ Corporation (as it appears on license) ❑ Partnership ❑ Sole Prop. Contact Person: Address: Phone: Fax: If firm is a sole proprietor or partnership: Owner(s) of Company Contractor's License Number(s): PART I. ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR QUALIFICATION Contractor will be immediately disqualified if the answer to any of questions 1 through 5 is "no."' Contractor will be immediately disqualified if the answer to any of questions 6, 7, 8 or 9 is "Yes. ,2 If the answer to question 8 is "yes," and if debarment would be the sole reason for denial of pre - qualification, any pre - qualification issued will exclude the debarment period. Contractor possesses a valid and current California Contractor's license for the project or projects for which it intends to submit a bid. ❑ Yes ❑ No 2. Contractor has a liability insurance policy with a policy limit of at least $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate. ❑ Yes ❑ No 3. Contractor has current workers' compensation insurance policy as required by the Labor Code or is legally self - insured pursuant to Labor Code section 3700 et. seq. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Contractor is exempt from this requirement, because it has no employees 4. Have you attached your latest copy of a reviewed or audited financial statement with accompanying notes and supplemental information.3 ❑ Yes ❑ No NOTE: A financial statement that is not either reviewed or audited is not acceptable. A letter verifying availability of a line of credit may also be attached; however, it will be considered as supplemental information only, and is not a substitute for the required financial statement. 5. Have you attached a notarized statement from an admitted surety insurer (approved by the California Department of Insurance) and authorized to issue bonds in the State of California, which states: (a) that your current bonding capacity is sufficient for the project for which A "no" answer to Question 4 will not be disqualifying if the contractor is exempt from complying with Question 4, for reasons explained in footnote 7. z A contractor disqualified solely because of a "Yes" answer given to question 6, 7, or 9 may appeal the disqualification and provide an explanation of the relevant circumstances during the appeal procedure. s Public Contract Code section 20101(e) exempts from this requirement a contractor who has qualified as a small business pursuant to Government Code section 14837(d)(1), if the bid is "no more than 25 per cent of the qualifying amount provided in section 14837(d)(1)." As of January 1, 2001, the qualifying amount is $10 million, and 25 per cent of that amount, therefore, is $2.5 million. you seek pre - qualification if you are seeking pre - qualification for a single project; or (if you are seeking pre - qualification valid for a year) (b) your current available bonding capacity ?4 ❑ Yes ❑ No NOTE: Notarized statement must be from the surety company, not an agent or broker. 6. Has your contractor's license been revoked at any time in the last five years? ❑ Yes ❑ No 7. Has a surety firm completed a contract on your behalf, or paid for completion because your firm was default terminated by the project owner within the last five (5) years? ❑ Yes ❑ No 8. At the time of submitting this pre - qualification form, is your firm ineligible to bid on or be awarded a public works contract, or perform as a subcontractor on a public works contract, pursuant to either Labor Code section 1777.1 or Labor Code section 1777.7? ❑ Yes ❑ No If the answer is "Yes," state the beginning and ending dates of the period of debarment: 9. At any time during the last five years, has your firm, or any of its owners or officers been convicted of a crime involving the awarding of a contract of a government construction project, or the bidding or performance of a government contract? ❑ Yes ❑ No ' An additional notarized statement from the surety may be requested by Public Entity at the time of submission of a bid, if this pre - qualification package is submitted more than 60 days prior to submission of the bid. 4 PART IL ORGANIZATION, HISTORY, ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE WITH CIVIL AND CRIMINAL LAWS A. Current Organization and Structure of the Business For Firms That Are Corporations: 1 a. Date incorporated: lb. Under the laws of what state: lc. Provide all the following information for each person who is either (a) an officer of the corporation (president, vice president, secretary, treasurer), or (b) the owner of at least ten Der cent of the corporation's stock. Name Position Years with Co. % Ownership Social Security # Id. Identify every construction firm that any person listed above has been associated with (as owner, general partner, limited partner or officer) at any time during the last five years. NOTE: For this question, "owner" and "partner" refer to ownership of ten per cent or more of the business, or 10 per cent or more of its stock, if the business is a Dates of Person's Participation Person's Name Construction Firm with Firm For Firms That Are Partnerships: 1 a. Date of formation: lb. Under the laws of what state: lc. Provide all the following information for each partner who owns 10 per cent or more of the firm. Name Position Years with Co. % Ownership Social Security # 5 Id. Identify every construction company that any partner has been associated with (as owner, general partner, limited partner or officer) at any time during the last five years. NOTE: For this question, "owner" and "partner" refer to ownership of ten per cent or more of the business, or ten per cent or more of its stock, if the business is a Dates of Person's Participation Person's Name Construction Company with Company For Firms That Are Sole Proprietorships: 1 a. Date of commencement of business. lb. Social security number of company owner. lc. Identify every construction firm that the business owner has been associated with (as owner, general partner, limited partner or officer) at any time during the last five years. NOTE: For this question, "owner" and "partner" refer to ownership of ten per cent or more of the business, or ten per cent or more of its stock, if the business is a corporation. Dates of Person's Participation Person's Name Construction Company with Company For Firms That Intend to Make a Bid as Part of a Joint Venture: la. Date of commencement of joint venture. lb. Provide all of the following information for each firm that is a member of the joint venture that expects to bid on one or more projects: Name of firm % Ownership of Joint Venture B. History of the Business and Organizational Performance 2. Has there been any change in ownership of the firm at any time during the last three years? NOTE: A corporation whose shares are publicly traded is not required to answer this question. ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," explain on a separate signed page. 3. Is the firm a subsidiary, parent, holding company or affiliate of another construction firm? NOTE: Include information about other firms if one firm owns 50 per cent or more of another, or if an owner, partner, or officer of your firm holds a similar position in another firm. ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," explain on a separate signed page. 4. Are any corporate officers, partners or owners connected to any other construction firms. NOTE: Include information about other firms if an owner, partner, or officer of your firm holds a similar position in another firm. ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," explain on a separate signed page. 5. State your firm's gross revenues for each of the last three years: 6. How many years has your organization been in business in California as a contractor under your present business name and license number? years 7. Is your firm currently the debtor in a bankruptcy case? ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," please attach a copy of the bankruptcy petition, showing the case number, and the date on which the petition was filed. 8. Was your firm in bankruptcy at any time during the last five years? (This question refers only to a bankruptcy action that was not described in answer to question 7, above) ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," please attach a copy of the bankruptcy petition, showing the case number and the date on which the petition was filed, and a copy of the Bankruptcy Court's discharge order, or of any other document that ended the case, if no discharge order was issued. Licenses 9. List all California construction license numbers, classifications and expiration dates of the California contractor licenses held by your firm: 10. If any of your firm's license(s) are held in the name of a corporation or partnership, list below the names of the qualifying individual(s) listed on the CSLB records who meet(s) the experience and examination requirements for each license. 11. Has your firm changed names or license number in the past five years? ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," explain on a separate signed page, including the reason for the change. 12. Has any owner, partner or (for corporations:) officer of your firm operated a construction firm under any other name in the last five years? ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," explain on a separate signed page, including the reason for the change_ 13. Has any CSLB license held by your firm or its Responsible Managing Employee (RME) or Responsible Managing Officer (RMO) been suspended within the last five years? ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," please explain on a separate signed sheet. Disputes 14. At any time in the last five years has your firm been assessed and paid liquidated damages after completion of a project under a construction contract with either a public or private owner? ❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, explain on a separate signed page, identifying all such projects by owner, owner's address, the date of completion of the project, amount of liquidated damages assessed and all other information necessary to fully explain the assessment of liquidated damages. 15. In the last five years has your firm, or any firm with which any of your company's owners, officers or partners was associated, been debarred, disqualified, removed or otherwise prevented from bidding on, or completing, any government agency or public works project for any reason? NOTE: "Associated with" refers to another construction firm in which an owner, partner or officer of your firm held a similar position, and which is listed in response to question lc or ld on this form. ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," explain on a separate signed page. State whether the firm involved was the firm applying for pre - qualification here or another firm. Identify by name of the company, the name of the person within your firm who was associated with that company, the year of the event, the owner of the project, the project and the basis for the action. 16. In the last five years has your firm been denied an award of a public works contract based on a finding by a public agency that your company was not a responsible bidder? ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," explain on a separate signed page. Identify the year of the event, the owner, the project and the basis for the finding by the public agency. NOTE: The following two questions refer only to disputes between your firm and the owner of a project. You need not include information about disputes between your firm and a supplier, another contractor, or subcontractor. You need not include information about "pass- through" disputes in which the actual dispute is between a sub - contractor and a project owner. Also, you may omit reference to all disputes about amounts of less than $50,000. 17. In the past five years has any claim against your firm concerning your firm's work on a construction project been filed in court or arbitration? ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," on separate signed sheets of paper identify the claim(s) by providing the project name, date of the claim, name of the claimant, a brief description of the nature of the claim, the court in which the case was filed and a brief description of the status of the claim (pending or, if resolved, a brief description of the resolution). 18. In the past five years has your firm made any claim against a project owner concerning work on a project or payment for a contract and filed that claim in court or arbitration? ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," on separate signed sheets of paper identify the claim by providing the project name, date of the claim, name of the entity (or entities) against whom the claim was filed, a brief description of the nature of the claim, the court in which the case was filed and a brief description of the status of the claim (pending, or if resolved, a brief description of the resolution). 19. At any time during the past five years, has any surety company made any payments on your firm's behalf as a result of a default, to satisfy any claims made against a performance or payment bond issued on your firm's behalf, in connection with a construction project, either public or private? ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," explain on a separate signed page the amount of each such claim, the name and telephone number of the claimant, the date of the claim, the grounds for the claim, the present status of the claim, the date of resolution of such claim if resolved, the method by which such was resolved if resolved, the nature of the resolution and the amount, if any, at which the claim was resolved. 20. In the last five years has any insurance carrier, for any form of insurance, refused to renew the insurance policy for your firm? ❑ Yes ❑ No 9 If "yes," explain on a separate signed page. Name the insurance carrier, the form of insurance and the year of the refusal. Criminal Matters and Related Civil Suits 21. Has your firm or any of its owners, officers or partners ever been found liable in a civil suit or found guilty in a criminal action for making any false claim or material misrepresentation to any public agency or entity? ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," explain on a separate signed page, including identifying who was involved, the name of the public agency, the date of the investigation and the grounds for the finding. 22. Has your firm or any of its owners, officers or partners ever been convicted of a crime involving any federal, state, or local law related to construction? ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," explain on a separate signed page, including identifying who was involved, the name of the public agency, the date of the conviction and the grounds for the conviction. 23. Has your firm or any of its owners, officers or partners ever been convicted of a federal or state crime of fraud, theft, or any other act of dishonesty? ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," identify on a separate signed page the person or persons convicted, the court (the county if a state court, the district or location of the federal court), the year and the criminal conduct. Bonding 24. Bonding capacity: Provide documentation from your surety identifying the following: Name of bonding company /surety: Name of surety agent, address and telephone number: 25. If your firm was required to pay a premium of more than one per cent for a performance and payment bond on any project(s) on which your firm worked at any time during the last three years, state the percentage that your firm was required to pay. You may provide an explanation for a percentage rate higher than one per cent, if you wish to do so. 10 26. List all other sureties (name and full address) that have written bonds for your firm during the last five years, including the dates during which each wrote the bonds: 27. During the last five years, has your firm ever been denied bond coverage by a surety company, or has there ever been a period of time when your firm had no surety bond in place during a public construction project when one was required? ❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, provide details on a separate signed sheet indicating the date when your firm was denied coverage and the name of the company or companies which denied coverage; and the period during which you had no surety bond in place. C. Compliance with Occupational Safety and Health Laws and with Other Labor Legislation Safety 28. Has CAL OSHA cited and assessed penalties against your firm for any "serious," "willful" or "repeat" violations of its safety or health regulations in the past five years? NOTE: If you have filed an appeal of a citation, and the Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board has not yet ruled on your appeal, you need not include information about it. ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," attached a separate signed page describing the citations, including information about the dates of the citations, the nature of the violation, the project on which the citation(s) was or were issued, the amount of penalty paid, if any. If the citation was appealed to the Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board and a decision has been issued, state the case number and the date of the decision. 29. Has the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration cited and assessed penalties against your firm in the past five years? NOTE: If you have filed an appeal of a citation and the Appeals Board has not yet ruled on your appeal, or if there is a court appeal pending, you need not include information about the citation. ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," attach a separate signed page describing each citation. 30. Has the EPA or any Air Quality Management District or any Regional Water Quality Control Board cited and assessed penalties against either your firm or the owner of a project on which your firm was the contractor, in the past five years? 11 NOTE: If you have filed an appeal of a citation and the Appeals Board has not yet ruled on your appeal, or if there is a court appeal pending, you need not include information about the citation. ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," attach a separate signed page describing each citation. 31. How often do you require documented safety meetings to be held for construction employees and field supervisors during the course of a project? 32. List your firm's Experience Modification Rate (EMR) (California workers' compensation insurance) for each of the past three premium years: NOTE: An Experience Modification Rate is issued to your firm annually by your workers' compensation insurance carrier. Current year: Previous year: Year prior to previous year: If your EMR for any of these three years is or was 1.00 or higher you may, if you wish, attach a letter of explanation. 33. Within the last five years has there ever been a period when your firm had employees but was without workers' compensation insurance or state - approved self - insurance? ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," please explain the reason for the absence of workers' compensation insurance on a separate signed page. If "No," please provide a statement by your current workers' compensation insurance carrier that verifies periods of workers' compensation insurance coverage for the last five years. (If your firm has been in the construction business for less than five years, provide a statement by your workers' compensation insurance carrier verifying continuous workers' compensation insurance coverage for the period that your firm has been in the construction business.) Prevailing Wage and Apprenticeship Compliance Record 34. Has there been more than one occasion during the last five years in which your firm was required to pay either back wages or penalties for your own firm's failure to comply with the state's prevailing wage laws? NOTE: This question refers only to your own firm's violation of prevailing wage laws, not to violations of the prevailing wage laws by a subcontractor. ❑ Yes ❑ No 12 If "yes," attach a separate signed page or pages, describing the nature of each violation, identifying the name of the project, the date of its completion, the public agency for which it was constructed; the number of employees who were initially underpaid and the amount of back wages and penalties that you were required to pay. 35. During the last five years, has there been more than one occasion in which your own firm has been penalized or required to pay back wages for failure to comply with the federal Davis -Bacon prevailing wage requirements? ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," attach a separate signed page or pages describing the nature of the violation, identifying the name of the project, the date of its completion, the public agency for which it was constructed; the number of employees who were initially underpaid, the amount of back wages you were required to pay along with the amount of any penalty paid. 36. Provide the name, address and telephone number of the apprenticeship program (approved by the California Apprenticeship Council) from whom you intend to request the dispatch of apprentices to your company for use on any public work project for which you are awarded a contract by [Public Entity]. 37. If your firm operates its own State - approved apprenticeship program: (a) Identify the craft or crafts in which your firm provided apprenticeship training in the past year. (b) State the year in which each such apprenticeship program was approved, and attach evidence of the most recent California Apprenticeship Council approval(s) of your apprenticeship program(s). (c) State the number of individuals who were employed by your firm as apprentices at any time during the past three years in each apprenticeship and the number of persons who, during the past three years, completed apprenticeships in each craft while employed by your firm. 13 38. At any time during the last five years, has your firm been found to have violated any provision of California apprenticeship laws or regulations, or the laws pertaining to use of apprentices on public works? NOTE: You may omit reference to any incident that occurred prior to January 1, 1998, if the violation was by a subcontractor and your firm, as general contractor on a project, had no knowledge of the subcontractor's violation at the time they occurred. ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes," provide the date(s) of such findings, and attach copies of the Department's final decision(s). PART III. RECENT CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS COMPLETED 39. Contractor shall provide information about its six most recently completed public works projects and its three largest completed private projects within the last three years .5 Names and references must be current and verifiable. Use separate sheets of paper that contain all of the following information: Project Name: Location: Owner: Owner Contact (name and current phone number): Architect or Engineer: Architect or Engineer Contact (name and current phone number): Construction Manager (name and current phone number): s If you wish, you may, using the same format, also provide information about other projects that you have completed that are similar to the project(s) for which you expect to bid. 14 Description of Project, Scope of Work Performed: Total Value of Construction (including change orders): Original Scheduled Completion Date: Time Extensions Granted (number of days): Actual Date of Completion: I, the undersigned, certify and declare that I have read all the foregoing answers to this prequalification questionnaire and know their contents. The matters stated in the questionnaire answers are true of my own knowledge and belief, except as to those matters stated on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing is correct. Dated: 15 (Name) A LIST OF THE SCORABLE QUESTIONS AND THE SCORING INSTRUCTIONS 16 A LIST OF THE SCORABLE QUESTIONS AND THE SCORING INSTRUCTIONS The scorable questions arise in three different areas: (I) History of the business and organizational performance; (II) Compliance with occupational safety and health laws, workers' compensation and other labor legislation; and (III) Completion of recent projects and quality of performance. The interview questions (interviews by the public agency of project managers on projects completed recently by the contractor) are included in group III. In a pre - qualification procedure for a single project, this last category would also include a scoring of the number of recently completed projects that are similar to the project on which pre - qualification is at issue. However, scoring linked to the similarity of past projects would probably not be possible or useful if the public agency as part of a procedure to pre - qualify contractors for an extended period. Note: Not all questions in the questionnaire are scorable; some questions simply ask for information about the contractor firm's structure, officers and history. This document includes only those questions that are "scorable." The question numbers in this document are the numbers used in the questionnaire. Thus, the questions included here begin with question number 6, and there are a few breaks in the numerical sequence. The Scores Needed for Prequalification To prequalify, a contractor would be required to have a passing grade within each of the three large categories referred to above. For Section I, "History of the business and organizational performance," DIR recommends use of a passing score of 57 on this portion of the questionnaire (of a maximum score of 76 on this portion of the questionnaire). For Section II, Compliance with occupational safety and health laws, workers' compensation and other labor legislation DIR recommends use of a passing score of 38 on this portion of the questionnaire (of a maximum score of 53 points on this portion of the questionnaire). Section III, Completion of recent projects and quality of performance, includes a series of interview questions, and may also include questions about recently completed (public or private) construction projects. For the interview questions, DIR recommends that a public agency interview project managers for the owners of two completed projects. DIR recommends a scoring system that would allow a maximum score of 120 points for each interview. For these questions, DIR recommends qualification for a contractor whose score on each of two interviews is 72 points or more; a denial of pre - qualification 17 for a contractor whose score on either interview is less than 55 points; and an additional interview with another reference if the score resulting from one interview is between 55 points and 72 points. DIR makes no recommendation about how to score a contractor's answers about recently completed past projects. Because of the wide range of projects that a public agency may be planning, and the similarly wide range in the skills, abilities, and experience that a public agency will consider most important for a pending project, it is impossible to propose a useful model scoring system to apply to the answers given about a contractor's completed projects. Questions about History of the Business and Organizational Performance (16 questions) How many years has your organization been in business in California as a contractor under your present business name and license number? years 3 years or more = 2 points 4 years = 3 points 5 years = 4 pts. 6 years or more = 5 points 2. Is your firm currently the debtor in a bankruptcy case? ❑ Yes ❑ No "No" = 3 points" "Yes" = 0 points 3. Was your firm in bankruptcy any time during the last five years? (This question refers only to a bankruptcy action that was not described in answer to question 7, above). ❑ Yes ❑ No "No" = 3 points" "Yes" = 0 points 4. Has any CSLB license held by your firm or its Responsible Managing Employee (RME) or Responsible Managing Officer (RMO) been suspended within the last five years? ❑ Yes ❑ No No = 5 points Yes = 0 points 18 5. At any time in the last five years, has your firm been assessed and paid liquidated damages after completion of a project, under a construction contract with either a public or private owner? ❑ Yes ❑ No No projects with liquidated damages of more than $50,000, or one project with liquidated damages = 5 points. Two projects with liquidated damages of more than $50,000 = 3 points Any other answer: no points 6. In the last five years has your firm, or any firm with which any of your company's owners, officers or partners was associated, been debarred, disqualified, removed or otherwise prevented from bidding on, or completing, any government agency or public works project for any reason? NOTE: "Associated with" refers to another construction firm in which an owner, partner or officer of your firm held a similar position, and which is listed in response to question lc or ld on this form. ❑ Yes ❑ No No = 5 points Yes = 0 points 7. In the last five years, has your firm been denied an award of a public works contract based on a finding by a public agency that your company was not a responsible bidder? ❑ Yes ❑ No No = 5 points Yes = 0 points NOTE: The following two questions refer only to disputes between your firm and the owner of a project. You need not include information about disputes between your firm and a supplier, another contractor, or subcontractor. You need not include information about "pass- through" disputes in which the actual dispute is between a sub - contractor and a project owner. Also, you may omit reference to all disputes about amounts of less than $50,000. 19 8. In the past five years, has any claim against your firm concerning your firm's work on a construction project, been filed in court or arbitration? ❑ Yes ❑ No If the firm's average gross revenue for the last three years was less than $50 million, scoring is as follows: 5 points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 2 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than 2 such instances. If your firm's average gross revenue for the last three years was more than $50 million, scoring is as follows: 5 points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1, 2, or 3 such instances. 3 points for "Yes" indicating either 4 or 5 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than 5 such instances. 9. In the past five years, has your firm made any claim against a project owner concerning work on a project or payment for a contract, and filed that claim in court or arbitration? ❑ Yes ❑ No If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less than X50 million scoring is as follows: 5 points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 2 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than 2 such instances. If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than $50 million, scoring is as follows: 5 points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1, 2, or 3 such instances. 3 points for "Yes" indicating either 4 or 5 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than 5 such instances. 20 10. At any time during the past five years, has any surety company made any payments on your firm's behalf as a result of a default, to satisfy any claims made against a performance or payment bond issued on your firm's behalf in connection with a construction project, either public or private? ❑ Yes ❑ No 5 points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such claim. 3 points for "Yes" indicating no more than 2 such claims Subtract five points for "Yes" if more than 2 such claims 11. In the last five years, has any insurance carrier, for any form of insurance, refused to renew the insurance policy for your firm? ❑ Yes ❑ No 5 points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 2 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" or if more than 2 such instances. 12. Has your firm, or any of its owners, officers, or partners ever been found liable in a civil suit, or found guilty in a criminal action, for making any false claim or material misrepresentation to any public agency or entity? ❑ Yes ❑ No No = 5 points Yes = subtract 5 points 13. Has your firm, or any of its owners, officers or partners ever been convicted of a crime involving any federal, state, or local law related to construction? ❑ Yes ❑ No No = 5 points Yes = subtract 5 points 14. Has your firm or any of its owners, officers or partners ever been convicted of a federal or state crime of fraud, theft, or any other act of dishonesty? ❑ Yes ❑ No No = 5 points Yes= subtract 5 points 21 15. If your firm was required to pay a premium of more than one per cent for a performance and payment bond on any project(s) on which your firm worked at any time during the last three years, state the percentage that your firm was required to pay. You may provide an explanation for a percentage rate higher than one per cent, if you wish to do so. 5 points if the rate is no more than one per cent 3 points if the rate was no higher than 110 per cent. 0 points for any other answer. 16. During the last five years, has your firm ever been denied bond credit by a surety company, or has there ever been a period of time when your firm had no surety bond in place during a public construction project when one was required? ❑ Yes ❑ No No = 5 points Yes = 0 points Questions about compliance with safety, workers compensation, prevailing wage and apprenticeship laws. (11 questions) Has CAL OSHA cited and assessed penalties against your firm for any "serious," "willful" or "repeat" violations of its safety or health regulations in the past five years? Note: If you have filed an appeal of a citation and the Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board has not yet ruled on your appeal, you need not include information about it. ❑ Yes ❑ No If the firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less than $50 million, scoring is as follows: 5 points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 2 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than 2 such instances. If the firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than $50 million, scoring is as follows: 5 points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1, 2, or 3 such instances. 3 points for "Yes" indicating either 4 or 5 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than 5 such instances. 22 2. Has the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration cited and assessed penalties against your firm in the past five years? Note: If you have filed an appeal of a citation and the appropriate appeals Board has not yet ruled on your appeal, you need not include information about it. ❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, attach a separate signed page describing each citation. If the firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less than $50 million, scoring is as follows: 5 points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 2 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" or if more than 2 such instances. If the firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than $50 million, scoring is as follows: 5 points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1, 2, or 3 such instances. 3 points for "Yes" indicating either 4 or 5 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than 5 such instances. 3. Has the EPA or any Air Quality Management District or any Regional Water Quality Control Board cited and assessed penalties against either your firm or the owner of a project on which your firm was the contractor, in the past five years? NOTE: If you have filed an appeal of a citation and the Appeals Board has not yet ruled on your appeal, or if there is a court appeal pending, you need not include information about the citation. ❑ Yes ❑ No If the firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less than $50 million, scoring is as follows: 5 points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 2 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" or if more than 2 such instances. If the firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than $50 million, scoring is as follows: 5 points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1, 2, or 3 such instances. 3 points for "Yes" indicating either 4 or 5 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than 5 such instances. 23 4. How often do you require documented safety meetings to be held for construction employees and field supervisors during the course of a project? 3 points for an answer of once each week or more often. 0 points for any other answer 5. List your firm's Experience Modification Rate (EMR) (California workers' compensation insurance) for each of the past three premium years: NOTE: An Experience Modification Rate is issued to your firm annually by your workers' compensation insurance carrier. Current year: _ Previous year: Year prior to previous year: If your EMR for any of these three years is or was attach a letter of explanation. 1.00 or higher, you may, if you wish, NOTE: An Experience Modification Rate is issued to your firm annually by your workers' compensation insurance carrier. 5 points for three-year average EMR of .95 or less 3 points for three-year average of EMR of more than .95 but no more than 1.00 0 points for any other EMR 6. Within the last five years, has there ever been a period when your firm had employees but was without workers' compensation insurance or state - approved self - insurance? ❑ Yes ❑ No 5 points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such instance. 0 points for any other answer. 24 7. Has there been more than one occasion during the last five years on which your firm was required to pay either back wages or penalties for your own firm's failure to comply with the state's prevailing wage laws? ❑ Yes ❑ No NOTE: This question refers only to your own firm's violation of prevailing wage laws, not to violations of the prevailing wage laws by a subcontractor. If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less than $50 million, scoring is as follows: 5 points for either "No," or "Yes" indicating either 1 or 2 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 3 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" and more than 3 such instances. If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than $50 million, scoring is as follows: 5 points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating no more than 4 such instances. 3 points for "Yes" indicating either 5 or 6 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" and more than 6 such instances. 8. During the last five years, has there been more than one occasion on which your own firm has been penalized or required to pay back wages for failure to comply with the federal Davis -Bacon prevailing wage requirements? ❑ Yes ❑ No If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less than X50 million, scoring is as follows: 5 points for either "No," or "Yes" indicating either 1 or 2 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 3 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" and more than 3 such instances. If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than $50 million, scoring is as follows: 5 points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating no more than 4 such instances. 3 points for "Yes" indicating either 5 or 6 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" and more than 6 such instances. 25 9. Provide the name, address and telephone number of the apprenticeship program sponsor(s) (approved by the California Division of Apprenticeship Standards) that will provide apprentices to your company for use on any public work project for which you are awarded a contract by [Public Entity]. 5 points if at least one approved apprenticeship program is listed. 0 points for any other answer. 10. If your firm operates its own State - approved apprenticeship program: (a) Identify the craft or crafts in which your firm provided apprenticeship training in the past year. (b) State the year in which each such apprenticeship program was approved, and attach evidence of the most recent California Apprenticeship Council approval(s) of your apprenticeship program(s). (c) State the number of individuals who were employed by your firm as apprentices at any time during the past three years in each apprenticeship and the number of persons who, during the past three years, completed apprenticeships in each craft while employed by your firm. 5 points if one or more persons completed an approved apprenticeship while employed by your firm. 0 points if no persons completed an approved apprenticeship while employer by your firm. 26 11. At any time during the last five years, has your firm been found to have violated any provision of California apprenticeship laws or regulations, or the laws pertaining to use of apprentices on public works? NOTE: You may omit reference to any incident that occurred prior to January 1, 1998 if the violation was by a subcontractor and your firm, as general contractor on a project, had no knowledge of the subcontractor's violation at the time they occurred. ❑ Yes ❑ No. If yes, provide the date(s) of such findings, and attach copies of the Department's final decision(s). If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less than $50 million, scoring is as follows: 5 points for either "No," or "Yes" indicating either 1 or 2 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 3 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" and more than 3 such instances. If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than $50 million, scoring is as follows: 5 points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating no more than 4 such instances. 3 points for "Yes" indicating either 5 or 6 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" and more than 6 such instances. 27 Questions concerning recent construction projects completed: (one question, plus 11 interview questions) The following question to be scored only where a public agency is undertaking a pre - qualification procedure valid for a single project only. Contractor shall provide information about its six most recently completed public works projects and its three largest completed private projects within the last three years .6 Names and references must be current and verifiable. Use separate sheets of paper that contain all of the following information: Project Name: Location: Owner: Owner Contact (name and current phone number): Architect or Engineer: Architect or Engineer Contact (name and current phone number): Construction Manager (name and current phone number): Description of Project, Scope of Work Performed: Total Value of Construction (including change orders): Original Scheduled Completion Date: Time Extensions Granted (number of days): Actual Date of Completion: 6 If you wish, you may, using the same format, also provide information about other projects that you have completed that are similar to the project(s) for which you expect to bid. 28 Scoring of previous projects completed: For pre - qualification for a single project that may require specific skills and capabilities, public agencies may choose to score contractors for the number of similar projects completed, and the degree of similarity between past projects and the planned project. DIR has not suggested any scoring for this aspect of the pre - qualification process, because of the numerous possible variations in both the type of project to be built and the points of similarity between the pending project and past projects that may be significant to the public agency. 29 MODEL INTERVIEW QUESTIONS 30 MODEL INTERVIEW QUESTIONS The following questions will be used to interview randomly selected contacts from at least two completed projects. [Public Entity] will conduct the interviews. No action on the contractor's part is necessary. These questions are included on the package given to the contractor for information only. The highest possible score is 120 Points. A score less than 55 points disqualifies a contractor from bidding on projects that are proposed by [Public Entity]. A score of between 56 and 72 indicates the Public Entity should conduct an interview of another contact, that is, a manager of another completed project. A score of 72 or higher on each of two interviews is sufficient for pre - qualification. First, please give a brief description of the project. Are there any outstanding stop notices, liens, or claims by the contractor that are currently unresolved on contracts for which notices of completion were recorded more than 120 days ago? (1 point for each is deducted from overall score; maximum amount to be deducted is 5 points) 2. On a scale of 1 -10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate personnel? (Max. 10 points) 3. On a scale of 1 -10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate supervision? (Max. 10 points) 4. On a scale of 1 -10, with 10 being the best, was there adequate equipment provided on the job? (Max. 10 points) 5. On a scale of 1 -10, with 10 being the best, was the contractor timely in providing reports and other paperwork, including change order paperwork and scheduling updates? (Max. 10 points) 6. On a scale of 1 -10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor adhere to the project schedule that your [agency] [business] approved? (Max. 10 points) 7. Was the project completed on time? (10 points if the answer is "Yes"). Or, if the answer is "no," on a scale of 1 -10, with 10 being the best, to what extent was the contractor responsible for the delay in completion? 8. On a scale of 1 -10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on the timely submission of reasonable cost and time estimates to perform change order work. (Max. 10 points) 31 9. On a scale of 1 -10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on how well the contractor performed the work after a change order was issued, and how well the contractor integrated the change order work into the existing work. (Max. 10 points). 10. On a scale of 1 -10, with 10 being the best, rate how has the contractor been performing in the area of turning in Operation & Maintenance manuals, completing as -built drawings, providing required training and taking care of warranty items? (Max. 10 points) 11. On a scale of 1 -10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on whether there were an unusually high number of claims, given the nature of the project, or unusual difficulty in resolving them. (Max. 10 points) 12. On a scale of 1 -10, with 10 being the highest, rate the contractor with respect to timely payments by the contractor to either subcontractors or suppliers. (If the person being interviewed knows of no such difficulties, the score on this question should be "10.1) 13. On a scale of 1 -10, with 10 being the best, how would you rate the quality of the work overall? (Max. 10 points) 1411894.1 32