Hillsborough County evaluation committee ranks SES Engineers ahead of Civil & Environmental Consultants in closed‑landfill services procurement

An evaluation committee for Hillsborough County’s RPS 2000000 425,020 professional services solicitation for closed‑landfill and solid‑waste system work ranked SES Engineers first and Civil and Environmental Consultants Inc second after reviewing and scoring two proposals.

The committee, chaired by Amanda Grant of the Hillsborough County Solid Waste Management Department, reached a consensus score of 105 for SES Engineers and 104 for Civil and Environmental Consultants Inc (CEC). Lisa Danita, the county’s chief buyer, announced the final scores and the ranking at the close of the meeting and said the recording would be posted after the meeting.

The committee evaluated both proposals against the solicitation’s published criteria: ability of the firm and its professional personnel (45 points), firm experience with similar projects (40 points), willingness and ability to meet schedule and budget requirements (10 points), recent/current/projected workload (5 points), volume of work (5 points), past performance rating (5 points) and DMDWBE participation (6 points). Committee members discussed strengths and weaknesses under those criteria before stating consensus scores.

Discussion centered on local staffing and team composition, past project experience, quality‑assurance and cost‑control tools, and availability of key personnel. Committee members said CEC presented a project team with significant national resources but fewer locally based staff; the committee noted CEC listed one Florida‑licensed professional engineer on the prime team and relied on local subcontractors for some roles. SES’s proposal emphasized local offices and prior county experience; multiple committee members noted SES’s long history working on Hillsborough County projects and a larger share of personnel based in Florida offices.

Under “experience with projects of a similar size and type,” evaluators gave SES a consensus 39 of 40 and CEC a consensus 37 of 40. Both firms received full marks (10 of 10) for willingness and ability to meet schedule and budget requirements; evaluators highlighted firms’ use of project‑management and cost‑tracking tools such as Deltek/VantagePoint and proprietary scheduling and monitoring platforms. For staffing and workload, SES scored 5 of 5 and CEC scored 4 of 5, reflecting committee concerns about some CEC team members listed at partial (50%) availability.

Economic Development review points for DMDWBE participation were applied as recorded: 5 points for SES and 5 points for CEC. Past performance points were recorded as 1 for SES and 3 for CEC in the procurement score calculation. Those criterion‑level results produced final consensus totals of 105 for SES Engineers and 104 for Civil and Environmental Consultants Inc.

Lisa Danita opened the meeting by advising, "For the record, this meeting is being recorded, and the recording will be available after the meeting has ended," and reminded attendees that the procurement "cone of silence" remained in effect until the earlier of five business days after the county posts a notice of intent to award or cancellation of the solicitation. At the meeting’s close Lisa Danita said she would "complete a spreadsheet for the consensus scoring and print before you leave so that I can obtain everyone's signatures," and that she would post the recording as soon as possible.

No oral presentations were requested and the committee did not take a separate formal vote; the record reflects consensus scoring and the ranking of the two offerors. The committee chair led the scoring discussion and the chief buyer recorded the final consensus results and will proceed with procurement posting steps required by county policy.