Proposal Due
- Due Sep 23, 2021 by 7:45am
- Points 190
- Submitting a file upload
- File Types pdf
- Available Sep 6, 2021 at 12am - Sep 30, 2021 at 7:45am
12.04.2020
Upload a pdf version of your proposal. All components of the proposal must be in a single file, except for the Fee Proposal.
The number of pages for each section of this proposal is limited. The limits are described in the request for proposal.
The Request for Proposal describes the required content of the Proposal.
Two graded Spring 2019 proposals plus grading rubrics can be found at this link Team 4 Proposal Middleton Pheasant Branch Creek Hydraulics, Example Proposal Team 5 Madison Unit Well 15 Treatment.pdf'.
A discussion of words to be avoided in Engineering Documents can be found here Red Flag Words White Paper.docx.
General information on document preparation is shown here Organizational, Written and Graphics White Paper.docx.
Guidance for this documents is located here, Proposal White Paper.docx.
The Kentucky USDA/RD fee table can be found here Kentucky USDA Engineering Fee Guidance.pdf. This presents one way to estimate engineering fees for your proposal.
The required form and guidance for the Draft Engineering Agreement can be found here.
Rubric
Find Rubric
| Criteria | Ratings | Pts |
|---|---|---|
|
1.
Was a signed cover letter included on company letterhead and how well did its contents meet expectations?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
|
2. Was a cover included with project name, client name, and company logo? How well did its appearance meet expectations?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
|
3. Was the disclaimer included?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
|
4. Was a statement of interest included and how well did its contents meet expectations? Qualifications may be included as part of the statement but this should not be a statement of qualifications.
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
|
5. Did the proposal identify the client's desired needs of the system, component, or process? How well did this meet your expectations?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
|
6. Did the proposal identify a set of constraints for the system, component, or process? How well did this meet your expectations?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
|
7. Did the proposal identify a scope of services for the design work? How well did this meet your expectations? Was the Work Plan reasonable for the scope of the project? Were good ideas presented?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
|
8. Did the proposal identify project elements involving at least four technical areas of civil engineering? Note: For undergraduate education purposes, ASCE considers seven technical areas of civil engineering: (1) structural,(2) geotechnical, (3) environmental, (4) transportation, (5) hydraulics/hydrology, (6) construction, and (7) surveying/geospatial measurements.
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
|
9. Did the project team consist of students with coursework or work experience representing more than one technical area of civil engineering? Technical areas are listed in the above row.
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
|
10. Was an organization chart included? How well did it meet your expectations?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
|
11. Did the proposal show that each student would serve in a well-defined role, bringing a particular expertise to bear in solving the problem? How well did this discussion meet your expectations?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
|
12. Did the proposal state how the team would monitor schedule and budget? How well did this meet your expectations?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
|
13. Did the proposal describe team qualifications? How well did this meet your expectations?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
|
14. Did the proposal describe individual qualifications? How well did this meet your expectations?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
|
15. Did the proposal include a project schedule, limited to one page? How well did this meet your expectations?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
|
16. Did the proposal include an invoicing methodology, limited to one page? How well did this meet your expectations?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
|
17. Did the proposal include resumes, written to target the proposed work? How well did this meet your expectations?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
|
18. Overall, was the proposal an effectively organized written document? In assessing performance, please consider whether the proposal:·Was effectively organized into sections and subsections in an audience appropriate manner.·Was effectively organized into paragraphs and itemized/bulleted text in an audience appropriate manner.
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
|
19. Overall, was the proposal an effectively delivered written document? In assessing performance, please consider whether the proposal:· Provided compelling, logical, credible, and audience-appropriate justifications for engineering proposals.· Identified and created suitable graphics and equations and integrated them usefully to clarify technical concepts.· Employed clear, concise, unambiguous, and cohesive writing (with emphasis on correct mechanics and fluid style).· Was free of spelling errors? Free of red flag words?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|