National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Front Matter
Suggested Citation:"Introduction." National Research Council. 1996. Survey on the Use of Standard Forms 254 and 255 for Architect-Engineer Qualifications. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9145.
×

1
INTRODUCTION

PURPOSE

This survey was conducted by the Standing Committee on Procurement and Contracting of the FFC. Its purposes were to evaluate the current use of Standard Forms 254 and 255 which are used for the submission of qualifications by architect-engineer (A-E) firms interested in Federal contracts, and identify possible improvements to these forms which would better serve the needs of Federal agencies and the A-E industry.

BACKGROUND

The Federal Government procures about $7 billion in A-E services annually in accordance with the Brooks Architect-Engineer Act (40 U.S.C. 541–544). The Brooks A-E Act requires the public announcement of all requirements for A-E services and stipulates that A-E firms shall be selected on the “basis of demonstrated competence and qualification for the type of professional services required” (see Appendix 1).

The Brooks A-E Act is implemented in Federal agencies through Part 36 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), the pertinent excerpts of which are in Appendix 2. FAR 36.603(b) and 36.702(b)(1) require firms to file a Standard Form (SF) 254, “Architect-Engineer and Related Services Questionnaire,” (Appendix 3) to be considered for an A-E contract. Firms are also required to submit a SF 255, “Architect-Engineer and Related Services Questionnaire for Specific Project,” (Appendix 4) in accordance with FAR 36.603(b) and 36.702(b)(2) for contracts over the simplified acquisition threshold. FAR 36.603(c)-(e) requires Federal agencies to maintain an A-E qualifications data file and use this information when selecting firms for A-E contracts.

The qualification-based selection (QBS) process in the Brooks A-E Act has proved to be an effective, efficient and appropriate way to procure A-E services. The QBS process differs from other procurement methods since firms respond by addressing their professional qualifications on the SF 254 and 255 rather than

Suggested Citation:"Introduction." National Research Council. 1996. Survey on the Use of Standard Forms 254 and 255 for Architect-Engineer Qualifications. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9145.
×

submitting price and/or technical proposals in their initial submission1 Instead of lowest price, QBS focuses on demonstrated capabilities for providing quality services and products, which are essential for ensuring public health and safety, meeting functional needs, reducing life cycle costs, and producing aesthetically pleasing facilities.

OBSERVATIONS AND SURVEY OBJECTIVES

The Committee determined that a review of SF 254 and 255 was warranted based on the following observations on current agency and industry practice.

  1. SF 254 and 255 have changed little since their introduction in 1975, although the variety of A-E services (such as environmental remediation) has greatly expanded. A review of Commerce Business Daily synopses for proposed A-E contracts indicates that some contracting activities request supplementary information in addition to that provided on the SF 254 and SF 255. Hence, the need for general updating of these forms was examined in this survey.

  2. FAR 36.603 requires agencies to maintain a file of SF 254 and to encourage A-E firms to update their SF 254 annually. However, many contracting activities request firms to submit a SF 254 with their SF 255 even though one may be on file. The committee surmised that agencies do this to ensure that the SF 254 are current and relevant, and to eliminate the administrative effort of searching their files. In many cases, the SF 254 is now used as a project-specific or project-type document rather than a general resume as it was originally intended. Accordingly, the purpose and use of the SF 254 was reviewed in this survey.

  3. FAR 36.702(b)(2) requires the submission of a SF 255 to supplement the SF 254 for a contract over the simplified acquisition threshold, and allows the use of a SF 255 for smaller contracts. Hence, an evaluation board must review both the SF 254 (as well as the SF 254 for each consultant) and the SF 255, when applicable, of each firm responding to a public announcement. Several committee members felt that the submission and selection process could possibly be simplified, and conflicts between the SF 254 and SF 255 eliminated, if the SF 255 alone provided all the necessary information. Hence, the concept of a “stand-alone” SF 255 was examined in this survey.

  4. Currently, firms submit a SF 254 to each separate agency or contracting office. A single Federal SF 254 data base could simplify the submission process for A-E firms and eliminate the administrative burden of each agency or contracting

1  

A price proposal is then submitted by only the most preferred firm after selection. However, this selection is subject to negotiation of a fair and reasonable price to the Government. If a reasonable price cannot be negotiated with the first preferred firm, then a proposal is requested and negotiations initiated with the second selected firm, and then, failing accord with the second most qualified firm, undertake negotiations with the next selected firm until a reasonable price and acceptable contract is negotiated.

    Suggested Citation:"Introduction." National Research Council. 1996. Survey on the Use of Standard Forms 254 and 255 for Architect-Engineer Qualifications. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9145.
    ×

    office maintaining separate SF 254 files. Hence, this survey questioned whether there was interest in a single Federal SF 254 data base.

    1. Although most firms use automated software to prepare SF 254, they submit paper copies to agencies. Further, agencies that maintain an automated SF 254 data base must manually transcribe the information into their system. If, however, the SF 254 were submitted electronically, agencies and activities would be able to use an automated storage and retrieval system. Hence, electronic submission of the SF 254 was also considered in this survey.

    SURVEY METHOD

    This survey was developed, conducted and analyzed by the FFC Standing Committee on Procurement and Contracting, which is comprised of representatives of 12 Federal agencies and five A-E and construction industry organizations. A questionnaire, which is included as Appendix 5, was developed to explore the observations discussed above.

    In March 1995, the questionnaire was distributed to all 17 FFC member agencies as well as several other agencies. Agencies were allowed to distribute the survey within their organization in any appropriate manner. In some agencies only one consolidated response was requested from a field activity. Other agencies allowed individuals to respond, resulting in many responses from a single activity. The questionnaire was also provided to various A-E industry organizations for distribution to their member firms. The responses were catalogued in an electronic data base and evaluated by an ad hoc subcommittee of the Committee on Procurement and Contracting.

    SURVEY RESPONSE

    A total of 244 questionnaires were returned, 188 from Federal agencies and 56 from A-E firms. The distribution of responses for the Federal agencies was as follows:

    71

    Naval Facilities Engineering Command

    43

    Department of Veterans Affairs

    34

    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

    27

    Air National Guard

    1

    National Aeronautics and Space Administration

    3

    General Services Administration

    2

    Environmental Protection Agency

    2

    U.S. Postal Service

    1

    Voice of America

    1

    Department of State

    3

    Unidentified

    Suggested Citation:"Introduction." National Research Council. 1996. Survey on the Use of Standard Forms 254 and 255 for Architect-Engineer Qualifications. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9145.
    ×
    Page 1
    Suggested Citation:"Introduction." National Research Council. 1996. Survey on the Use of Standard Forms 254 and 255 for Architect-Engineer Qualifications. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9145.
    ×
    Page 2
    Suggested Citation:"Introduction." National Research Council. 1996. Survey on the Use of Standard Forms 254 and 255 for Architect-Engineer Qualifications. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9145.
    ×
    Page 3
    Next: Survey Findings on Standard Form 254 »
    Survey on the Use of Standard Forms 254 and 255 for Architect-Engineer Qualifications Get This Book
    ×
    MyNAP members save 10% online.
    Login or Register to save!
    Download Free PDF
    1. ×

      Welcome to OpenBook!

      You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

      Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

      No Thanks Take a Tour »
    2. ×

      Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

      « Back Next »
    3. ×

      ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

      « Back Next »
    4. ×

      Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

      « Back Next »
    5. ×

      Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

      « Back Next »
    6. ×

      To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

      « Back Next »
    7. ×

      Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

      « Back Next »
    8. ×

      View our suggested citation for this chapter.

      « Back Next »
    9. ×

      Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

      « Back Next »
    Stay Connected!