MURIEL BOWSER
MAYOR
June 16, 2023
Honorable Phil Mendelson
Chairman
Councilofthe District of Columbia
John A. Wilson Building
1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 504
Washington, DC 20004
Dear Chairman Mendelson:
Pursuant to section 451 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act (D.C. Official Code § 1-
204.51) and section 202of the Procurement Practices Reform Act of 2010 (D.C. Official Code §
2-352.02), enclosed for consideration and approval by the Councilof the District of Columbia is
proposed Contract No. DCAM-23-CS-RFP-0007 with CGL Companies, LLC in the amount of
$5,891,182.96 (inclusive of a letter contract in the amount of $751,599). The period of
performance is from May 9, 2023, through May 8, 2024.
Under the proposed contract, CGL Companies, LLC will develop and provide an architectural
program to guide the design and construction of the Department of Correction’s Correctional
Treatment Facility Annex.
If you have any questions regarding this contract, please contact Delano Hunter, Acting Director
of the Departmentof General Services (DGS), or have your staff contact George G. Lewis, DGS’s
Chief of Contracts and Procurement, at (202) 727-2800.
look forward to the Couneil’s favorable consideration of this contract.
Sincerely,
Myfriel Bkwser
 GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES
Pursuant to section 202(c) of the Procurement Practices Reform Act of 2010, as amended, D.C.
Official Code § 2-352.02(c), the following contract summary is provided:
COUNCIL CONTRACT SUMMARY
(Letter Contract)
Contract No. DCAM-22-CS-RFP-0007
Department of Corrections Architectural Program Consultant
Central Treatment Facility Annex
(A) Contract Number: DCAM-23-CS-RFP-0007 (the “Contract”)
Proposed Contractor: CGL Companies, LLC (the “Contractor”)
Proposed Contract Amount: $5,891,182.96 (Base Period) (includes $751,599
under Letter Contract)
Unit and Method of Compensation: Payment will be based on monthly progress and
includes a percentage of work completed and
approved reimbursable expenses.
Term of Contract: May 9, 2023 – May 8, 2024
Type of Contract: Fixed Price with a Cost Reimbursement Component
Source Selection Method: Competitive Sealed Proposal (Request for Proposal)
(B) For a contract containing option periods, the contract amount for the base period and for
each option period. If the contract amount for one or more of the option periods differs from
the amount for the base period, provide an explanation of the reason for the difference:
The proposed contract includes a Base Period and three Option Periods, where each period
correlates to a specific phase in the project with the Base Period for pre-design, Option Period 1
for design, Option Period 2 for construction, and Option Period 3 for transition, activation, and
post-occupancy. The term and amount of the Base Period and each Option Period are as follows.
1
 Period Term Amount
Base Period Date of Award through one (1) year thereafter $5,891,182.96
Option Period 1 Date of Exercise of Option through two (2) years $3,381,523.30
thereafter
Option Period 2 Date of Exercise of Option through three (3) $3,668,775.42
years thereafter
Option Period 3 Date of Exercise of Option through one (1) year $348,822.68
thereafter
The type of services to be provided by the Contractor (“Contractor” or “Architectural Program
Consultant” (“APC”) will vary during each option period. The specific services to be provided
each year will be determined by the specific requirements of each phase of the project. A
description of the phases and type of services to be provided in each phase is provided in the next
section of the Council Summary.
(C) The date on which the letter contract or emergency contract was executed:
The Notice to Proceed & Letter Contract (“Letter Contract”) was executed on May 9, 2023.
(D) The number of times the letter contract or emergency contract has been extended:
None.
(E) The value of the goods and services provided to date under the letter contract or emergency
contract, including under each extension of the letter contract or emergency contract:
The total value of the services provided to date is $751,599, which represents the initial NTE
amount established by the Letter Contract.
(F) The goods or services to be provided, the methods of delivering goods or services, and any
significant program changes reflected in the proposed contract:
Under the proposed contract, the APC shall develop and provide an architectural program to guide
the design and construction of the Department of Correction’s (“DOC”) Correctional Treatment
Facility (“CTF”) Annex (“CTF Annex”). The new CTF Annex will be located at 1901 E Street SE
Washington, DC, on the Hill East Campus (formerly known as DC General Hospital Campus).
During the Base Period or Pre-Design phase, the APC shall establish the mission, size, general
design configuration, building methods, and capital and operating cost estimates regarding the new
CTF Annex.
2
(G) The selection process, including the number of offerors, the evaluation criteria, and the
evaluation results, including price, technical or quality, and past performance components:
On January 13, 2023, the Department issued a Request for Proposal (“RFP”) in the open market
to engage an APC to develop and provide an architectural program to guide the design and
construction of the DOC’S CTF Annex. The RFP was posted on the Department’s website and
sent to a group of potential offerors determined to be potentially qualified and interested in the
RFP. The due date for proposals was set as February 16, 2023.
A Pre-proposal conference and site visit were held on January 26, 2023. A total of five (5)
amendments were issued to the RFP; A summary of each amendment follows:
- Amendment No. 1, issued on January 20, 2023, provided updated information on
the Pre-proposal Conference.
- Amendment No. 2, issued January 27, 2023, provided Pre-Proposal Conference
information, including the Pre-proposal presentation and attendance records.
- Amendment No. 3, issued on February 6, 2023, clarified the Past Performance
evaluation requirements and provided responses to some of the questions recieved
about the RFP.
- Amendment 4, issued on February 9, 2023, provided responses to the remaining
questions about the RFP and included the addition of a Conflicts Clause to clarify
the ability of the selected contractor to participate in future procurements related to
the design and construction of the new CTF Annex.
- Amendment 5, issued on April 24, 2023, incorporated a revised Price Schedule to
accommodate the need for Reimbursables. The amendment also defined
reimbursables and incorporated language into the contract to address payment of
reimbursables and the cost reimbursement ceiling.
On February 16, 2023, the Department received one proposal from CGL Companies, LLC
(“CGL”).
In accordance with the evaluation factors in the RFP, the proposal was scored on a scale of zero
(0) to one hundred twelve (112) points. The 112 points include a maximum of 75 points for the
technical criteria, including Past Performance and Relevant Experience of the Offeror and the
Offeror’s Team (25 Points), Technical Capabilities and Expertise of Offeror and Key Personnel (25
points) and Project Management Plan and Approach (25 Points), Price (25 points) and up to 12
preference points based on the Offeror’s status as a Certified Business Enterprise (“CBE”).
The proposal was evaluated by a Technical Evaluation Panel (“Technical Evaluation Panel” or
“Panel” or “TEP”). First, each of the TEP members individually completed an independent
evaluation of the proposal. In doing so, each TEP member rated the Offeror with respect to 13
subfactors within the 3 evaluation factors in accordance with the following criteria:
3
 Numeric Adjective Description
Rating
0 Unacceptable Fails to meet minimum requirements; e.g., no
demonstrated capacity, major deficiencies which are not
correctable; offeror did not address the factor.
1 Poor Marginally meets minimum requirements; major
deficiencies which may be correctable.
2 Minimally Marginally meets minimum requirements; minor
Acceptable deficiencies which may be correctable.
3 Acceptable Meets requirements; no deficiencies.
4 Good Meets requirements and exceeds some requirements; no
deficiencies.
5 Excellent Exceeds most, if not all requirements; no deficiencies.
At the conclusion of the individual assessments, the TEP met to develop a consensus technical
rating for each Offeror. In developing the consensus rating, the Panel discussed the details of the
proposal considering the evaluation factors and subfactors. Then, as a group, the Panel arrived at
a consensus rating as described in the chart above, for the offeror with respect to each evaluation
subfactor. The TEP provided favorable ratings in each subfactor. The ratings were then converted
into points relative to the total points available for each evaluation factor. The CBE Preference
points, and Price points were added to the total technical points. The offeror’s total score is as
follows:
Factor Points
Past Performance, and Relevant Experience Offeror and 19
Offeror's Team (0 - 25 points)
Technical Expertise of Offeror and Key Personnel 23
(0 - 25 points)
Project Management Plan and Approach (0 - 25 points) 19
Price (0 - 25 points) 25
CBE Preference (0 – 12 points) 0
Total (0 – 112) 86
Discussions were conducted with the offeror to clarify the scope, responsibilities, expectations,
and overall price. Discussions resulted in the removal of unnecessary items included in the
offeror’s Price proposal and the expansion of services in critical areas with the final price of
$13,290,304.36, a reduction of $1,579,172.45 from the initial total proposed price.
Because the proposed Base Period contract exceeds $1 million in a 12-month period, Council
approval is being sought at this time.
4
(H) A description of any bid protest related to the award of the contract, including whether the
protest was resolved through litigation, withdrawal of the protest by the protestor, or
voluntary corrective action by the District. Include the identity of the protestor, the
grounds alleged in the protest, and any deficiencies identified by the District as a result of
the protest:
The award of the Contract was not protested.
(I) The background and qualifications of the proposed contractor, including its organization,
financial stability, personnel, and performance on past or current government or private
sector contracts with requirements similar to those of the proposed contract:
Founded in 1974, CGL has grown into the world’s largest, most comprehensive criminal justice
consulting firm. CGL has worked in more than 900 counties and municipalities, all 50 states, and
20 countries. The Contractor has demonstrated, based on their experience and past performance
presented in their technical proposal, has the ability, both financially and technically speaking, to
successfully provide the services required by the District. The Contractor has been determined
responsible in accordance with 27 DCMR 4706.1.
(J) A summary of the subcontracting plan required under section 2346 of the Small, Local,
and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Development and Assistance Act of 2005, as
amended, D.C. Official Code § 2-218.01 et seq. (“Act”), including a certification that the
subcontracting plan meets the minimum requirements of the Act and the dollar volume of
the portion of the contract to be subcontracted, expressed both in total dollars and as a
percentage of the total contract amount:
Pursuant to D.C. Code § 2-218.46 (d-1), the Contractor shall submit a detailed subcontracting plan
to DSLBD that meets the requirements of D.C. Code § 2-218.46(d).
The Contractor intends to self-perform a portion of the Contract with its own organization and
resources. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Contractor has certified that it will subcontract a
portion of the Contract amount to SBE/CBEs that are certified by DSLBD, as follows:
5
 Total Contract Amount $13,290,304.36
Subcontract Amount $4,658,000
Percentage 35%
(K) Performance standards and the expected outcome of the proposed contract:
In general, the Contractor shall provide a range of technical planning, design, engineering,
operational, and construction management-related services throughout each phase of the project
exclusively for the District to achieve the most cost-and-operationally effective outcome. The
Contractor will be required to meet or exceed performance standards in accordance with the
Contract’s scope of work. Designated DGS and DOC staff will monitor the Contractor’s
performance to ensure schedules and contract milestones are met and monitor the timeliness and
quality of deliverables and other work products.
(L) The amount and date of any expenditure of funds by the District pursuant to the contract
prior to its submission to the Council for approval:
On May 9, 2023, the Department executed a Notice to Proceed/Letter Contract in the amount of
$751,599.
(M) A certification that the proposed contract is within the appropriated budget authority for
the agency for the fiscal year and is consistent with the financial plan and budget adopted
in accordance with D.C. Official Code §§ 47-392.01 and 47-392.02:
The Agency Fiscal Officer has certified that the proposed Contract is within the Department’s
appropriated budget authority for the fiscal year and is consistent with the financial plan and budget
adopted in accordance with D.C. Official Code §§ 47-392.01 and 47-392.02. The relevant
certification accompanies this Council Package.
(N) A certification that the contract is legally sufficient, including whether the proposed
contractor has any pending legal claims against the District:
The proposed Contract has been deemed legally sufficient by the Department’s Office of the
General Counsel and the Contractor does not appear to have any current pending legal claims
against the District.
(O) A certification that Citywide Clean Hands database indicates that the proposed contractor
is current with its District taxes. If the Citywide Clean Hands Database indicates that the
proposed contractor is not current with its District taxes, either: (1) a certification that the
contractor has worked out and is current with a payment schedule approved by the
District; or (2) a certification that the contractor will be current with its District taxes after
the District recovers any outstanding debt as provided under D.C. Official Code § 2-
353.01(b):
6
 The Citywide Clean Hands database indicates that the Contractor is in compliance with the
Government of the District of Columbia tax laws and regulations. The applicable Clean Hands
certification for the Contractor accompanies this Council Package.
(P) A certification from the proposed contractor that it is current with its federal taxes, or has
worked out and is current with a payment schedule approved by the federal government:
The Contractor has certified that it is current with its federal tax laws.
(Q) The status of the proposed contractor as a certified local, small, or disadvantaged business
enterprise as defined in the Small, Local, and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise
Development and Assistance Act of 2005, as amended; D.C. Official Code § 2-218.01 et seq.:
According to the DSLBD’s website, the Contractor is not a certified local, and resident owned
business enterprise.
(R) Other aspects of the proposed contract that the Chief Procurement Officer considers
significant:
None.
(S) A statement indicating whether the proposed contractor is currently debarred from
providing services or goods to the District or federal government, the dates of the
debarment, and the reasons for debarment:
The Contractor is not debarred from providing services to the Government of the District of
Columbia or the Federal Government according to the Office of Contracts & Procurement’s
Excluded Parties List and the Federal Government’s Excluded Parties List.
(T) Any determination and findings issues relating to the contract’s formation, including any
determination and findings made under D.C. Official Code § 2-352.05 (privatization
contracts):
None.
(U) Where the contract, and any amendments or modifications, if executed, will be made
available online:
Contract award information will be published on the DGS website.
(V) Where the original solicitation, and any amendments or modifications, will be made
available online:
The original solicitation and any amendments were posted on the Department’s website and can
be found at https://dgs.dc.gov/event/dcam-23-cs-rfp-0007-department-corrections-architectural-
program-consultant-correctional
7
(W) A certification that the proposed contractor has not been determined to be in violation of
D.C. Official Code § 1-1163.34a:
Based upon certification from the Contractor, the Contractor has not been determined to be in
violation of D.C. Official Code § 1-1163.34a.
8
 +,87!84ÿÿ458ÿ 474ÿÿ!"
-8ÿÿ458ÿ58ÿ#