STANDARD FORM 330:
The New Form for Architect-Engineer Qualifications Don Evick, P.E. HQUSACE
Background/Schedule
• 1996: Report by Federal Facilities Council identified needed improvements to SFs 254/255 • October 1998: Ad hoc Federal group established to develop a replacement for SFs 254/255: GSA (Chair), USACE, NAVFAC, NASA and Veterans Affairs • July 2000: Proposed SF 330 submitted by ad hoc group to FAR Council for review • October 2001: Proposed SF 330 published in Federal Register for public comment • January 2002: Public comment period closed
Background/Schedule
• January 2003: Ad hoc group submitted final form and response to public comments to FAR Secretariat • March 2003: Approved by Civilian Agency Acquisition Council • Mid-summer 2003: Final form to be published in Federal Register. Must still be approved by: – Defense Acquisition Regulations Council – Office of Management and Budget • Effective date: 6 Months after publication
Objectives
• Replace SFs 254 and 255, which are largely unchanged since 1975 • Merge two forms into one (SF 254 was rarely used alone): – Part I: Contract-Specific Qualifications – Part II: General Qualifications • Delete duplicate information • Expand essential information • Eliminate information of marginal value • Reflect current A-E disciplines and services
Part I - Contract-Specific Qualifications
• A. Contract Information • B. A-E Point of Contact • C. Proposed Team - including role in contract • D. Organizational Chart - attach • E. Resumes of Key Personnel:
– Similar to SF 255 – Expanded to one page per person – Requires information on 5 relevant projects
Part I - Contract-Specific Qualifications
• F. Example Projects - more detailed than SF 255:
– One page per project – Brief description and relevance – Firms involved and roles
• G. Key Personnel Participation In Example Projects - matrix format • H. Additional Information • I. Authorized Representative
Part I - Contract-Specific Qualifications
Other Major Changes From SF 255:
• Better instructions • Number of Personnel by Discipline:
– Shown in Part II only - not duplicated in Part I
• Deleted Block 9 - All Work Currently Being Performed for Federal Agencies: limited value
Part II - General Qualifications
• Blocks 1-8: Name, Address, POC, Ownership, Corporate History, DUNS Number, Etc. • Block 9: Employees by Discipline: – Using discipline code numbers – Totals for branch office and firm - not number to be utilized on project as in SF 255/Block 4 • Block 10: Profile of Firm’s Experience: – Uses revenue index number instead of specific $ – Doesn’t require # of projects as in SF 254/Block 10 • Block 11: Revenue History – only average of last 3 years instead of 5 year breakdown as in SF 254/Block 9 • Block 12: Authorized Representative
Part II - General Qualifications
Other Major Changes From SF 254: • Deleted list of all offices of firm (Block 7) • Deleted 30 example projects (Block 11) • Updated/expanded disciplines and experience profile codes
Major Comments/Responses
Reporting burden underestimated Significant effort required to convert databases New form is not necessary Overemphasizes branch offices Format is too cramped and not easy to expand/adjust Page numbering is burdensome and confusing Should take no more effort than 254/255 after initial learning 330 uses much of same info as 255. All current profile codes kept. Needed to reflect current A-E industry and agency info needs Selection boards focus on specific offices proposed for work Many items deleted and combined. Format “opened up” Page numbers were eliminated
Major Comments/Responses
Overemphasizes previous teams Proven competence of project teams is very important
Requirement for organization chart unclear and burdensome Need better instructions on photos. Should insert in text instead of attaching. Request for fees on example projects violates Brooks Act Matrix on personnel vs. projects is redundant Many additional disciplines and profile codes suggested
Instructions clarified. To be same chart firms are now submitting. Reference to photos deleted
Fee information eliminated No. Resumes of key persons only have 5 select projects. Those suggested several times were added
Summary
• Final SF 330 to be published in summer 2003 and effective 6 months later • Final SF 330 responsive to public comments • Provides essential information agencies need for A-E selection in streamlined format • Reflects current A-E industry • Should take less effort to complete after initial “learning curve”