Dr. David Hoffert, superintendent of Warsaw Community Schools, did all the talking Wednesday evening at a board meeting to update the public on the district’s building projects.
The 50 people in attendance included the criterion design company of Lancer + Beebe LLC; the three design-build companies selected to compete for the building projects – Hagerman, Korte and Performing Services; and WCS administration, staff and a few community members.
The projects include building a new Lincoln Elementary School and renovating/expanding Washington STEM Academy and Edgewood Middle School. The projects were approved through a referendum in May by voters for a cost of $39.9 million.
“Tonight, what we’re going to do is we’re going to really take an upper level view of what’s been going on here for the last couple of months. We are not probably going to (get) down into the weeds because that’s really what the design-build teams are going to be doing over this next month. We wanted to give some big themes we know we’re going to be looking at in all three of these projects and provide an opportunity also to gather some comments and questions from the individuals here,” Hoffert said.
He started his presentation by discussing the three drivers for WCS’s decision making on the project.
“Driver number one … is really looking at the larger community,” Hoffert said. “We call this the efficient and safe delivery of children to school, fiscal responsibility and needs.”
The second driver is school neighborhoods – safety and security of children on and near school property – and the third is academic excellence, which he defined as “creating educational excellence through spaces that provide a technology-driven education, collaborative flexible spaces while valuing WCS traditions of excellence.” He said they wanted to make sure there was an emphasis on the uniqueness of the community.
Hoffert introduced the criterion designer, Lancer + Beebe, which is WCS’s team of architects and engineers. “Really what they help us do is they develop the project requirements, they oversee, direct and lead the design-build process,” Hoffert explained.
Lancer + Beebe help the three design-build teams through the process. It also led WCS through the Request For Qualifications stage to pick the final three design-build companies, and now is leading WCS through the Request For Proposals phase over the next couple of months.
Lancer + Beebe will hold meetings with the design-build firms, review the design build and look over the pricing and proposals.
The criterion designer started its work with focus groups, Hoffert said. The groups were comprised of “really specific interest in one of any of the three projects. So we worked with a Lincoln focus group, we worked with an Edgewood focus group, we worked with a Washington focus group. And these focus groups were pretty much to lay out everything on the table,” he said. They were comprised of teachers, staff, parents and community members, but had no cap on the number of people in the groups.
Another group involved in the process has been the Advisory Council, “comprised of community members with specific knowledge on technical expertise related to the project or requirement,” Hoffert said. “We wanted to make sure we had wiring experts, transportation experts, technology experts, so that way we’re bringing all these individuals together to really take a look at all those specific things and say, ‘Wait a minute. That might not work inside this school building,’ or ‘Have we ever thought about it a different way?’”
The Advisory Council has been providing input to the Technical Review Committee. The TRC includes the criterion designer and engineer, School Board President Jennifer Tandy, Hoffert, Chief Financial Officer Kevin Scott and Director of Maintenance Dirk Felger.
“These are the individuals who are trying to take all the feedback that is coming from the Advisory Council, the focus groups, the criterion designer – and what they really are going to do is they’re going to rate and score the RFQs and RFPs on criteria rubrics,” Hoffert explained. A rubric is a scoring guide that has specific criteria.
The TRC also will evaluate references, he said. One aspect that the design-build companies will be evaluated on is qualified local labor participation.
“And this is something that our board has been very passionate about – making sure that subcontractors and our local businesses have an opportunity to be involved inside this as a qualified partner,” Hoffert said.
After listing all the needs of the three schools involved in the building project, Hoffert listed the next steps for the process.
Hagerman, Korte and Performing Services are creating plans now for presentation in September.
“Each one is very unique, but each one has a wonderful reputation out there, not only in Indiana but really nationwide in the services they are providing and references they are providing …,” Hoffert said.
The three companies will be meeting with the TRC and Advisory Council multiple times. Hoffert said three half-day meetings are scheduled currently, but that could increase.
In October, the TRC will evaluate the plans with the criteria rubric. In a separate session, the bids also will be opened.
“With both of those recommendations, the TRC will present those to the full school board for consideration and then for selection of one of the design-build firms,” Hoffert said, noting that it will be a very hard decision with each company’s reputation.
The school board will be presented with a recommendation in October. Depending on how the selection takes place, Hoffert said the board may call a special meeting to “get the ball rolling.”
As soon as the selection is made, the chosen design-build company will be “hitting the ground running and we’ll be seeing shovels in the ground very quickly,” he said.
As the process continues, Hoffert said a newsletter will be sent out and put on the school corporation’s website, to keep the public informed. He also promised community feedback sessions will take place.
Hoffert opened the meeting up to any questions or comments, but none were given. The school board also didn’t have any additional comments, so the meeting was concluded.
(Story By The Times Union)
