to the criteria issued under the vision competition rules. The jury evaluates the design
concepts without knowledge of authorship. Only after the jury has completed its evaluation
and ranking is the lead designer-A/E team associated with each submission revealed.
One of the jury members is appointed by the Office of the Chief Architect to serve as
chair and works with the professional advisor to pre p a re the jury report. The chair must
ascertain from fellow jurors the ranking as well as the reasons for such ranking. The
report, with its ranking and evaluation, is delive red verbally to the A/E Evaluation Board
by the jury chair and the professional advisor. How they convey this result to the board
and articulate the jury's thinking will have a major impact on the board's final determination.
The board will weigh the jury evaluation substantially (40%) and incorporate the jury
ranking with the Stage II interview results to determine the A/E Evaluation Board's final
ranking of the lead designer-A/E teams.
RULES AND THE D ESIGN PRO GRAM
The professional advisor, in conjunction with the Office of the Chief Architect, is responsible
for preparing written rules for the vision competition. This includes an ove rview of the
p rocess, the schedule, submission requirements, allowable materials, and a summary of
the evaluation criteria. One important re q u i rement is a mandate that each lead designer-
A/E team include an accurate cost estimate as part of its submission along with a state
ment assuring GSA that the vision could be constructed within the proposed budget.
This must be submitted in a way that preserves the anonymity of the submission.
The professional advisor also pre p a res the vision competition pro g ram. This is a written
document with information on the site, functional re q u i rements including brief descriptions
of their use and square footage, design priorities, adjacency re q u i rements, and any
special considerations related to such elements as image, preservation, and security.