|Agency:||State Government of Ohio|
|Type of Government:||State & Local|
|Posted Date:||Jun 5, 2020|
|Due Date:||Jul 6, 2020|
|Bid Source:||Please Login to View Page|
|Contact information:||Please Login to View Page|
|Bid Documents:||Please Login to View Page|
PUCO Salesforce Systems Applications RFPOpportunity Description
The purpose of this Request for Proposal is to solicit proposals to enhance and maintain all PUCO Salesforce Systems Applications throughout the life of the Contract. The Work includes programming, analysis, configuration management, project management, database administration, production operations support, system testing, network support functions, installation, maintenance and business support activities (e.g., training, help desk support, design) for the PUCO Salesforce Systems Application, consisting of 23 Salesforce PUCO applications.
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
RFP NUMBER: 0A1270
DATE ISSUED: June 5, 2020
The State of Ohio, through the Department of Administrative Services, Enterprise Information Technology Contracting, for the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) is requesting proposals for:
PUCO Salesforce Systems Applications RFP
INQUIRY PERIOD BEGINS: June 5, 2020
INQUIRY PERIOD ENDS: June 22, 2020 at 8:00 am (Columbus, OH local time)
OPENING DATE: July 6, 2020
OPENING TIME: 1:00 pm (Columbus, Ohio local time)
OPENING LOCATION: Department of Administrative Services
4200 Surface Road
Columbus, Ohio 43228-1313
This RFP consists of five (5) parts and 13 attachments totaling 97 consecutively numbered pages. Supplements are also attached to this RFP with a beginning header page. Please verify that you have a complete copy.
PART ONE: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Purpose. This is a Request for Competitive Sealed Proposals (“RFP”) under Sections 125.071 and 125.18 of the Ohio Revised Code (the “Revised Code”) and Section 123: of the Ohio Administrative Code (the “Administrative Code”). The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) has asked the Ohio Department of Administrative Services (DAS) to solicit competitive sealed proposals (“Proposals”) for PUCO Salesforce Systems Applications (the “Project”), and this RFP is the result of that request.
The purpose of this Request for Proposal (RFP) is to solicit proposals to enhance and maintain all PUCO Salesforce Systems Applications throughout the life of the Contract.
The Work includes programming, analysis, configuration management, project management, database administration, production operations support, system testing, network support functions, installation, maintenance and business support activities (e.g., training, help desk support, design) for the PUCO Salesforce Systems Application, consisting of 23 Salesforce PUCO applications.
Background. The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) affects every household in Ohio. That's because the PUCO regulates providers of all kinds of utility services, including electric and natural gas companies; local and long-distance telephone companies; water and wastewater companies; and rail and trucking companies. The PUCO was created to assure Ohioans adequate, safe and reliable public utility services at a fair price. The PUCO also has responsibility for facilitating competitive utility choices for Ohio consumers to choose their own energy supplier for natural gas or electricity.
RFP Process. If a suitable offeror solution is made in response to this RFP, the State, through the Department of Administrative Services (DAS), may enter into a contract (the “Contract”) to have the selected Offeror (the “Contractor”) perform all or part of the Project.
This RFP provides details on what is required to submit a Proposal for the Project, how the State will evaluate the Proposals, and what will be required of each Contractor in performing the Project.
This RFP also gives the estimated dates for the various events in the submission process, selection process, and performance of the Project. While these dates are subject to change, prospective offerors must be prepared to meet them as they currently stand.
Once awarded, the term of the Contract will be from the award date until the Project is completed to the satisfaction of the State and the Contractor is paid or June 30, 2021, whichever is sooner. The State may renew this Contract for up to five (5) additional two (2) year term(s), subject to and contingent on the discretionary decision of the Ohio General Assembly to appropriate funds for this Contract in each new biennium for a maximum contract term expiring June 30, 2031. Any such renewal of all or part of the Contract also is subject to the satisfactory performance of the Contractor and the needs of the State.
The State may reject any Proposal if the offeror fails to meet a deadline in the submission or evaluation phases of the selection process or objects to the dates for performance of the Project or the terms and conditions in this RFP.
Minority Business Enterprise (MBE). The State is committed to improving the number of minority-owned enterprises that do business with the State of Ohio. A "minority-owned enterprise" is an individual, partnership, corporation or joint venture of any kind that is owned and controlled by U. S. Citizens and residents of Ohio, who are and have held themselves out as members of the following socially and economically disadvantaged groups: Blacks, American Indians, Hispanics and Asians.
The offeror is encouraged to seek out and set aside work for Ohio certified minority business enterprises (MBEs). The MBE must be certified by the Ohio Department of Administrative Services pursuant to ORC 123.151. For more information regarding MBE and MBE certification requirements please refer to the DAS Equal Opportunity Division Web site at: http://das.ohio.gov/Divisions/EqualOpportunity/MBEEDGECertification.aspx
In addition, to search for Ohio MBE-Certified Providers, utilize the following search routine published on the DAS Equal Opportunity Division website:
• Select “MBE Certified Providers” as the EOD Search Area selection;
• On the subsequent screen, at minimum, select the appropriate Procurement Type, e.g., “Information Technology Service” as a search criterion;
• Select “Search”; and
• A list of Ohio MBE Certified Service Providers will be displayed.
Scope of Work. An overview of the Project scope of work is provided below. The Project’s scope of the work and requirements are provided in greater detail within Supplement 1 to this RFP.
The scope of the Work is provided in Attachment Two of this RFP. This section only gives a summary of the Work. If there is any inconsistency between this summary and the attachment's description of the Work, the attachment will govern.
The Contractor must work with designated PUCO staff as identified by the PUCO Contract Manager Representative in the development of deliverables for each defined interval for the duration of this Contract. The deliverables will be negotiated prior to the start of each Interval Deliverable Agreement (IDA), in the format attached as Supplement 4 and will be monitored throughout the interval and the life of the Contract.
The State and the Contractor will agree in writing, during the course of the Contract, to specific work assignments, sub-deliverables, due dates, Contractor staffing requirements (based on positions and descriptions provided in the proposal and based on hourly rates quoted in the Cost Summary), PUCO resources and the deliverable agreement for the defined interval. A deliverable or sub-deliverable may be identified as a work product or hours toward completion of a work product. These documents, entitled Interval Deliverable Agreement (IDA) documents, must be identified and agreed to at least 30 days in advance of the interval start date. An IDA is not effective until the State and Contractor have indicated agreement to the deliverable or work assignments by signing the document.
The IDA specifications, including sub-deliverables and due dates agreed on by the State and the Contractor, will be attached hereto as an IDA and incorporated into the Contract.
Upon award of the Contract, the Contractor must be prepared to provide staff to participate in activities needed to develop the initial IDA.
Calendar of Events. The schedule for the RFP process and the Project is given below. The State may change this schedule at any time. If the State changes the schedule before the Proposal due date, it will do so through an announcement on the State Procurement Website’s question and answer area for this RFP. The Website announcement will be followed by an amendment to this RFP, also available through the State’s Procurement Website. After the Proposal due date and before the award of the Contract, the State will make schedule changes through the RFP amendment process. Additionally, the State will make changes in the Work schedule after the Contract award through the change order provisions in the General Terms and Conditions Attachment to this RFP. It is each prospective offeror’s responsibility to check the Website question and answer area for this RFP for current information regarding this RFP and its Calendar of Events through award of the Contract.
RFP Issued: June 5, 2020
Inquiry Period Begins: June 5, 2020
Inquiry Period Ends: June 22, 2020 at 8:00 AM (Columbus, Ohio local time)
Proposal Due Date: July 6, 2020 at 1:00 PM (Columbus, Ohio local time)
Award Date: July 14, 2020
Work Begins: July 2020
There are references in this RFP to the Proposal due date. Unless it is clearly provided to the contrary in this RFP, any such reference means the date and time (Columbus, Ohio local time) that the Proposals are due and not just the date.
PART TWO: STRUCTURE OF THIS RFP
Organization. This RFP is organized into five parts and has thirteen attachments. The parts and attachments are listed below. There also may be one or more supplements to this RFP listed below.
Part 1 Executive Summary
Part 2 Structure of this RFP
Part 3 General Instructions
Part 4 Evaluation of Proposals
Part 5 Award of the Contract
Attachment One Evaluation Criteria
Attachment Two Special Provisions, Interval Deliverable Agreement (IDA)
Attachment Three Requirements for Proposals
Attachment Four General Terms and Conditions
Attachment Five Sample Contract
Attachment Six Offeror Certification Form
Attachment Seven Sample Deliverable Submittal Form
Attachment Eight Offeror Profile Summary
Attachment Nine Personnel Profile Summary
Attachment Ten Affirmation and Disclosure Form
Attachment Eleven Cost Summary
Attachment Twelve Current Salesforce Applications
Attachment Thirteen Potential PUCO Salesforce Applications
Supplement 1 Scope of Work
Supplement 2 State IT Policy Standard and Service Requirements
Supplement 3 State Security Privacy and Data Handling
Supplement 4 IDA Sample
PART THREE: GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
The following sections provide details on how to get more information about this RFP and how to respond to it. All responses must be complete and in the prescribed format.
Contacts. The following person will represent the State during the RFP process:
Cyrus Carter, IT Acquisition Analyst
Department of Administrative Services
General Services Division
Office of Procurement Services
Enterprise IT Contracting
4200 Surface Road
Columbus, Ohio 43228
During the performance of the Project, a State representative (the “Project Representative”) will represent the State and be the primary contact for the Project. The State will designate the Project Representative after the Contract award.
Inquiries. Offerors may make inquiries regarding this RFP anytime during the inquiry period listed in the Calendar of Events. To make an inquiry, offerors must use the following process:
• Access the State’s Procurement Website at http://procure.ohio.gov/
• From the Quick Links menu on the right, select “Bid Opportunities Search”;
• In the “Document/Bid Number” field, enter the RFP number found on the first page of this RFP (the RFP number begins with zero followed by the letter “A”);
• Select “Request for Proposal” from the Opportunity Type dropdown;
• Click the “Search” button;
• On the Procurement Opportunity Search Results page, click on the hyperlinked Document/Bid Number;
• On the Procurement Opportunity Details page, click the “Submit Inquiry” button;
• On the document inquiry page, complete the required “Personal Information” section by providing:
o First and last name of prospective offeror’s representative who is responsible for the inquiry,
o Representative’s business phone number,
o Company Name,
o Representative’s email address;
• Type the inquiry in the space provided including:
o A reference to the relevant part of this RFP,
o The heading for the provision under question, and
o The page number of the RFP where the provision can be found; and
• Enter the Confirmation Number at the bottom of the page
• Click the “Submit” button.
An offeror submitting an inquiry will receive an immediate acknowledgement that the State has received the inquiry as well as an email acknowledging receipt. The offeror will not receive a personalized response to the question nor notification when the State has answered the question.
Offerors may view inquiries and responses on the State’s Procurement Website by using the “Bid Opportunities Search” feature described above and by clicking the “View Q & A” button on the document information page.
The State usually responds to all inquiries within three (3) business days of receipt, excluding weekends and State holidays. But the State will not respond to any inquiries received after 8:00 a.m. on the inquiry end date.
The State does not consider questions asked during the inquiry period through the inquiry process as exceptions to the terms and conditions of this RFP.
Amendments to the RFP. If the State revises this RFP before the Proposals are due, it will announce any amendments on the State Procurement Website.
Offerors may view amendments by using the “Bid Opportunities Search” function of the State’s Procurement Webpage (described in the Inquiries Section above) and then clicking on the amendment number to display the amendment.
When an amendment to this RFP is necessary, the State may extend the Proposal due date through an announcement on the State Procurement Website. The State may issue amendment announcements any time before 5:00 p.m. on the day before Proposals are due, and it is each prospective offeror’s responsibility to check for announcements and other current information regarding this RFP.
After the Proposal due date, the State will distribute amendments only to those offerors whose Proposals are under active consideration. When the State amends the RFP after the due date for Proposals, the State will permit offerors to withdraw their Proposals within five business days after the amendment is issued. This withdrawal option will allow any offeror to remove its Proposal from active consideration should the offeror feel that the amendment changes the nature of the transaction so much that the offeror’s Proposal is no longer in its interest. Alternatively, the State may allow offerors that have Proposals under active consideration to modify their Proposals in response to the amendment.
If the State allows offerors to modify their Proposals in response to an amendment, the State may limit the nature and scope of the modifications. Unless otherwise provided in the State’s notice, offerors must make any modifications or withdrawals in writing and submit them to the State within five business days after the amendment is issued at the address and in the same manner required for the submission of the original Proposals. If this RFP provides for a negotiation phase, this submission procedure will not apply to changes negotiated during that phase. The State may reject any modification that is broader in scope than the State has authorized in the announcement of the amendment and treat it as a withdrawal of the offeror's Proposal.
Proposal Submittal. Each offeror must submit a technical section and a cost section as part of its total Proposal before the opening time on the Proposal due date. The offeror must submit the technical section as a separate package from the cost section of its Proposal, and each section must be submitted in its own separate, opaque package. The package with the technical section of the Proposal must be sealed and contain one (1) originally signed technical section and three (3) additional copies of the technical section, and the package with the cost section also must be sealed and contain (2) complete copies of the cost section of the Proposal.
The offeror must mark the outside of each package with either:
“RFP #0A1270 PUCO Salesforce Systems Application RFP – Technical Proposal” or
“RFP #0A1270 PUCO Salesforce Systems Application RFP – Cost Proposal,” as appropriate.
Included in each sealed package, the offeror also must provide an electronic “searchable” copy of everything contained within the package on a flash drive (portable storage device) in Microsoft Office (native format), Microsoft Word (native format), Microsoft Project (native format), Microsoft Excel (native format) and Adobe Acrobat format, as appropriate. If there is a discrepancy between the hard copy and the electronic copy of the Proposal, the hard copy will control, and the State will base its evaluation of the offeror’s Proposal on the hard copy.
Proposals are due no later than 1:00 p.m. on the Proposal due date. Proposals submitted by email, fax, or other electronic means are not acceptable, and the State may reject them. Offerors must submit their Proposals to:
Department of Administrative Services
Attn: Cyrus Carter c/o Bid Desk RFP 0A1270
4200 Surface Road
Columbus, Ohio 43228
Bid Desk Main Phone Number: 614-466-5090
The State may reject any Proposals or unsolicited modifications it receives after the deadline. An offeror that mails its Proposal must allow for adequate mailing time to ensure its timely receipt. Offerors also must allow for potential delays due to increased security. The Bid Desk accepts packages between the hours of 7:30 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Monday through Friday, excluding State Holidays. No deliveries will be accepted before or after these hours without prior arrangements. Offerors must allow sufficient time since the State may reject late Proposals regardless of the cause for the delay.
Each offeror must carefully review the requirements of this RFP and the contents of its Proposal. Once opened, Proposals cannot be altered or withdrawn, except as allowed by this RFP.
By submitting a Proposal, the offeror acknowledges it has read this RFP, understands it, and agrees to be bound by its requirements. The State is not responsible for the accuracy of any information regarding this RFP that was gathered through a source other than the inquiry process described in the RFP.
Revised Code Section 9.24 prohibits the State from awarding a contract to any entity against whom the Auditor of State has issued a finding for recovery (a "Finding"), if the Finding is unresolved at the time of the award. This also applies to renewals of contracts. By submitting a Proposal, the offeror warrants it is not subject to an unresolved Finding under Section 9.24 at the time of its submission. Additionally, the offeror warrants it will notify the Department of Administrative Services in writing immediately upon becoming subject to such an unresolved Finding after submitting its Proposal and before the award of a Contract under this RFP. Should the State select the offeror’s Proposal for award of a Contract, this warranty of immediate written notice will apply during the term of the Contract, including any renewals or extensions. Further, the State may treat any unresolved Finding against the Contractor that prevents a renewal of the Contract as a breach, in accordance with the provisions of Attachment Four, General Terms and Conditions.
If an offeror includes in its proposal confidential, proprietary, or trade secret information, it must also submit a complete redacted version of its Technical Proposal in accordance with Confidential, Proprietary or Trade Secret Information that follows. Offerors shall only redact (black out) language that is exempt from disclosure pursuant to Ohio Public Records Act. Offerors must also submit an itemized list of each redaction with the corresponding statutory exemption from disclosure. The redacted version must be submitted as an electronic copy in a searchable PDF format. The redacted version, as submitted, will be available for inspection and released in response to public records requests. If a redacted version is not submitted, the original submission of the proposal will be provided in response to public records requests.
The State may reject any Proposal if the offeror takes exception to the terms and conditions of this RFP, includes unacceptable assumptions or conditions in its Proposal, fails to comply with the procedure for participating in the RFP process, or fails to meet any requirement of this RFP. The State also may reject any Proposal it believes is not in its interest to accept and may decide not to award a contract to any or all of the offerors responding to this RFP.
Offerors may not prepare or modify their Proposals on State premises.
All Proposals and other material offerors submit will become the property of the State and may be returned only at the State's option. All Proposals will be open to the public after the State has awarded the Contract.
The State will retain all Proposals, or a copy of them, as part of the Contract file for at least three (3) years. After the three-year retention period, the State may return, destroy, or otherwise dispose of the Proposals and any copies of them.
Waiver of Defects. The State may waive any defects in any Proposal or in the submission process followed by an offeror, but the State will only do so if it believes that it is in the States interest and will not cause any material unfairness to other offerors.
Multiple or Alternate Proposals. The State will not accept multiple Proposals from a single offeror or any alternative solutions or options to the requirements of this RFP. Additionally, any offeror that disregards a requirement in this RFP simply by proposing an alternative to it may have its Proposal rejected by the State. Further, any offeror that submits multiple Proposals for each of these options may have all of its Proposals rejected.
Changes to Proposals. The State will allow modifications or withdrawals of Proposals only if the State receives them before the Proposal due date. No modifications or withdrawals will be permitted after the due date, except as authorized by this RFP.
Proposal Instructions. Each Proposal must be organized in an indexed binder ordered in the same manner as the response items are ordered in the applicable attachments to this RFP. The requirements for a Proposal's contents and formatting are contained in the attachments to this RFP. The State wants clear and concise Proposals, but offerors must answer questions completely and meet all the RFP’s requirements.
The State is not liable for any costs an offeror incurs in responding to this RFP or from participating in the evaluation process, regardless of whether the State awards the Contract through this process, decides not to go forward with the Work, cancels this RFP for any reason, or contracts for the Work through some other process or through another RFP.
PART FOUR: EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS
Disclosure of Proposal Contents. The State will seek to open the Proposals in a manner that avoids disclosing their contents. Additionally, the State will seek to keep the contents of all Proposals confidential until the Contract is awarded. But the State will prepare a registry of Proposals that contains the name of each offeror. The public may inspect that registry after the State opens the Proposals.
Rejection of Proposals. The State may reject any Proposal that proposes to do any work or make any State data available outside the United States. The State also may reject any Proposal for which the Contractor has not submitted the affirmation and disclosure form representing that it will ensure that all work on the Project will be done within the United States and that all State data will remain in the United States.
Evaluation of Proposals Generally. The evaluation process may consist of up to six distinct phases:
1. Initial review;
2. Technical evaluation;
3. Evaluation of costs;
4. Requests for more information;
5. Presentations and Demonstrations and
6. Contract Negotiations.
The State may decide which phases are necessary, and the State may rearrange the order in which it proceeds with the phases. The State also may add or remove sub-phases to any phase at any time, if the State believes doing so will improve the evaluation process.
Clarifications and Corrections. During the evaluation process, in the State’s sole discretion, it may request clarifications from any offeror under active consideration and may give any offeror the opportunity to correct defects in its Proposal, if the State believes doing so would not result in an unfair advantage for the offeror, and it is in the State’s interest. The State may reject any clarification that is non-responsive or broader in scope than what the State requested. If the State does so, or if the offeror fails to respond to the request for clarification, the State then may request a corrected clarification, consider the offeror’s Proposal without the clarification, or disqualify the offeror’s Proposal.
Corrections and clarifications must be completed off State premises.
Initial Review. The State will review all Proposals for their format and completeness. The State normally rejects incomplete or incorrectly formatted Proposals, though it may waive any defects or allow an offeror to submit a correction, if the State believes doing so would not result in an unfair advantage for the offeror and it is in the State’s interest. Further, if the Auditor of State does not certify a Proposal due to lateness, the State will not open it. After the initial review, the State will forward all timely, complete, and properly formatted Proposals to an evaluation team, which the Procurement Representative will lead.
Technical Evaluation. The State will evaluate each Proposal that it has determined is timely, complete, and properly formatted. The evaluation will be scored according to the requirements identified in this RFP, including the requirements in Attachment One. Other attachments to this RFP may further refine these requirements, and the State has a right to break these requirements into components and weight any components of a requirement according to their perceived importance.
The State also may have the Proposals or portions of them reviewed and evaluated by independent third parties or various State personnel with experience that relates to the Work or to a criterion in the evaluation process. Additionally, the State may seek reviews from end users of the Work or the advice or evaluations of various State personnel that have subject matter expertise or an interest in the Work. The State may adopt or reject any recommendations it receives from such reviews and evaluations or give them such weight as the State believes is appropriate.
During the technical evaluation, the State will calculate a point total for each Proposal that it evaluates. At the sole discretion of the State, it may reject any Proposal receiving a significant number of zeros for sections in the technical portions of the evaluation. The State may select those offerors submitting the highest rated Proposals for the next phase. The number of Proposals that advance to the next phase will be within the State’s discretion, but regardless of the number of Proposals selected, they always will be the highest rated Proposals from this phase.
At any time during this phase, in the State’s sole discretion, it may ask an offeror to correct, revise, or clarify any portions of its Proposal.
The State will document all major decisions and make these a part of the Contract file, along with the evaluation results for each Proposal considered.
Requirements. Attachment One provides requirements the State will use to evaluate the Proposals, including any mandatory requirements. If the offeror’s Proposal meets all the mandatory requirements, the offeror’s Proposal may be included in the next phase of the evaluation, which will consider other requirements described in a table in Attachment One.
In the case of any requirements for a team of people the offeror is proposing, the offeror must submit a team to do the Work that collectively meets all the team requirements. But the experience of multiple candidates may not be combined to meet a single requirement. Further, previous experience of the candidate submitted for a Work Manager position may not be used to meet any other team member requirements. Each candidate proposed for the Work team must meet at least one of the requirements.
This RFP asks for responses and submissions from offerors, most of which represent components of the requirements in Attachment One. While each requirement represents only a part of the total basis for a decision to award the Contract to an offeror, a failure by an offeror to make a required submission or meet a mandatory requirement normally will result in a rejection of that offeror's Proposal. The value assigned above to each requirement is only a value used to determine which Proposal is the most advantageous to the State in relation to the other Proposals that the State received. It is not a basis for determining the importance of meeting that requirement.
If the State does not receive any Proposal that meets all the mandatory requirements, the State may cancel this RFP. Alternatively, if the State believes it is in its interest, the State may continue to consider the highest-ranking Proposals despite their failure to meet all the mandatory requirements. In doing this, the State may consider one or more of the highest-ranking Proposals. But the State may not consider any lower-ranking Proposals unless all Proposals ranked above it are also considered, except as provided below.
In any case where no Proposal meets all the mandatory requirements, it may be that an upper ranking Proposal contains a failure to meet a mandatory requirement that the State believes is critical to the success of the RFPs objectives. When this is so, the State may reject that Proposal and consider lower ranking Proposals. Before doing so, the State may notify the offeror of the situation and allow the offeror an opportunity to cure its failure to meet that mandatory requirement.
If the offeror cures its failure to meet a mandatory requirement that the State has deemed critical to the success of the RFP’s objectives, the State may continue to consider the offeror’s Proposal. But if the offeror is unwilling or unable to cure the failure, its Proposal may be rejected. The State then may continue to consider the other remaining Proposals, including, if the State so chooses, Proposals that ranked lower than the rejected Proposal.
Cost Evaluation. Once the technical merits of the Proposals are considered, the State may consider the costs of one or more of the highest-ranking Proposals. But it is within the State’s discretion to wait until after any interviews, presentations, and demonstrations to evaluate costs. Also, before evaluating the technical merits of the Proposals, the State may do an initial review of costs to determine if any Proposals should be rejected because of excessive cost. And the State may reconsider the excessiveness of any Proposal’s cost at any time in the evaluation process.
The State may select one or more of the Proposals for further consideration in the next phase of the evaluation process based on the price performance formula contained in Attachment One. The Proposal(s) selected for consideration in the next phase always will be the highest-ranking Proposal(s) based on this analysis. That is, the State may not move a lower-ranking Proposal to the next phase unless all Proposals that rank above it also are moved to the next phase, excluding any Proposals that the State disqualifies because of excessive cost or other irregularities.
If the State finds that it should give one or more of the highest-ranking Proposals further consideration, the State may move the selected Proposals to the next phase. The State alternatively may choose to bypass any or all subsequent phases and make an award based solely on its scoring of the preceding phases, subject only to its review of the highest-ranking offeror’s responsibility, as described below.
Requests for More Information. The State may require some offerors to interview, make a presentation about their Proposals, or demonstrate their products or services. If the presentations, demonstrations, or interviews are held as part of the technical evaluation phase, all offerors that have Proposals under evaluation may participate. Alternatively, if the presentations, demonstrations, or interviews are held after the technical evaluation, the State normally will limit them to one or more of the highest ranking offerors. The State normally will limit such presentations, demonstrations, and interviews to areas in which it seeks further information from the highest ranking offeror or offerors. Typically, these discussions provide an offeror with an opportunity to do one or more of the following:
• Clarify its Proposal and ensure a mutual understanding of the Proposal’s content;
• Showcase its approach to the Work; and
• Demonstrate the professionalism, qualifications, skills, and work knowledge of its proposed candidates.
The State will schedule the presentations, demonstrations, and interviews at its convenience and discretion. The State will determine the scope and format of any such presentations, demonstrations, and interviews and may record them. Additionally, if the State moves more than one offeror to this phase, the scope and format of these presentations, demonstrations, and interviews may vary from one offeror to the next, depending on the particular issues or concerns the State may have with each offeror’s Proposal.
The State normally will not rank interviews, demonstrations, and presentations. Rather, if the State conducts the interviews, demonstrations, or presentations as part of the technical evaluation, the State may use the information it gathers during this process in evaluating the technical merits of the Proposals. If the State holds the demonstrations, presentations, or interviews only for one or more of the top-ranking offerors after the evaluation phase, the State may decide to revise its existing Proposal evaluations based on the results of this process.
Presentations and Demonstrations. The state may request the offeror to perform Presentations and/or Demonstrations involving its proposed solution. The state will coordinate the time and location and provide a framework for any requested presentations and/or demonstrations.
Determination of Responsibility. The State may review the background of one or more of the highest-ranking offerors and its or their key team members and subcontractors to ensure their responsibility. For purposes of this RFP, a key team member is a person that an offeror identifies by name in its Proposal as a member of its proposed team. The State will not award the Contract to an offeror that it determines is not responsible or that has proposed candidates or subcontractors to do the Work that are not responsible. The State’s determination of an offeror’s responsibility may include the following factors: experience of the offeror and its key team members and subcontractors, its and their past conduct on previous contracts, past performance on previous contracts, ability to execute this Contract properly, and management skill. The State may make this determination of responsibility based on the offeror’s Proposal, reference evaluations, a review of the offeror’s financial ability, and any other information the State requests or determines is relevant.
Some of the factors used in determining an offeror’s responsibility, such as reference checks, may also be used in the technical evaluation of Proposals in phase two of the evaluation process. In evaluating those factors in phase two, the weight the State assigns to them, if any, for purposes of the technical evaluation will not preclude the State from rejecting a Proposal based on a determination that an offeror is not responsible. For example, if the offeror's financial ability is adequate, the value, if any, assigned to the offeror's relative financial ability in relation to other offerors in the technical evaluation phase may or may not be significant, depending on the nature of the Work. If the State believes the offeror's financial ability is inadequate, the State may reject the offeror's Proposal despite its other merits.
The State may make a responsibility determination at any time during the evaluation process, but it typically will do so only once it has evaluated the technical merits and costs of the Proposals. The State always will review the responsibility of an offeror selected for an award before making the award, if it has not already done so earlier in the evaluation process. If the State determines that the offeror selected for award is not responsible, the State then may go down the line of remaining offerors, according to rank, and determine responsibility with the next highest-ranking offeror.
Reference Checks. As part of the State’s determination of an offeror’s responsibility, the State may conduct reference checks to verify and validate the offeror’s and its proposed candidates’ and subcontractors’ past performance. Reference checks that indicate poor or failed performance by the offeror or a proposed candidate or subcontractor may be cause for rejection of the offeror’s Proposal. Additionally, the State may reject an offeror’s Proposal as non-responsive if the offeror fails to provide requested reference contact information.
The State may consider the quality of an offeror’s and its candidates’ and subcontractors’ references as part of the technical evaluation phase, as well as in the State’s determination of the offeror’s responsibility. The State also may consider the information it receives from the references in weighing any requirement contained in the technical evaluation phase, if that information is relevant to the requirement. In checking an offeror’s or any of its proposed candidates’ or subcontractors’ references, the State will seek information that relates to the offeror’s previous contract performance. This may include performance with other governmental entities, as well as any other information the State deems important for the successful operation and management of the Work and a positive working relationship between the State and the offeror. In doing this, the State may check references other than those provided in the offeror’s Proposal. The State also may use information from other sources, such as third-party reporting agencies.
Financial Ability. Part of State’s determination of an offeror’s responsibility may include the offeror's financial ability to perform the Contract. This RFP may expressly require the submission of audited financial statements from all offerors in their Proposals, but if this RFP does not make this an express requirement, the State still may insist that an offeror submit audited financial statements for up to the past three years, if the State is concerned that an offeror may not have the financial ability to carry out the Contract. Also, the State may consider financial information other than the information that this RFP requires as part of the offeror’s Proposal, such as credit reports from third-party reporting agencies.
Contract Negotiations. The final phase of the evaluation process may be contract negotiations. It is entirely within the discretion of the State whether to permit negotiations. An offeror must not submit a Proposal assuming that there will be an opportunity to negotiate any aspect of the Proposal, and any Proposal that is contingent on the State negotiating with the offeror may be rejected. The State is free to limit negotiations to particular aspects of any Proposal or the RFP, to limit the offerors with whom the State negotiates, and to dispense with negotiations entirely. If negotiations are held, they will be scheduled at the convenience of the State, and the selected offeror or offerors must negotiate in good faith.
The State may limit negotiations to specific aspects of the RFP or the offeror’s Proposal. Should the evaluation result in a top-ranked Proposal, the State may limit negotiations to only that offeror and not hold negotiations with any lower-ranking offeror. If negotiations are unsuccessful with the top-ranked offeror, the State then may go down the line of remaining offerors, according to rank, and negotiate with the next highest-ranking offeror. Lower-ranking offerors do not have a right to participate in negotiations conducted in such a manner.
If the State decides to negotiate simultaneously with more than one offeror, or decides that negotiations with the top-ranked offeror are not satisfactory and therefore negotiates with one or more of the lower-ranking offerors, the State then will determine if an adjustment in the ranking of the offerors with which it held negotiations is appropriate based on the negotiations. The Contract award, if any, then will be based on the final ranking of offerors, as adjusted.
Auction techniques that reveal one offeror's price to another or disclose any other material information derived from competing Proposals are prohibited. Any oral modification of a Proposal will be reduced to writing by the offeror as described below.
Following negotiations, the State may set a date and time for the offeror(s) with which the State conducted negotiations to submit a best and final Proposal. If negotiations were limited and all changes were reduced to signed writings during negotiations, the State need not require a best and final Proposal.
If best and final Proposals are required, they may be submitted only once, unless the State determines that it is in the State's interest to conduct additional negotiations. In such cases, the State may require another submission of best and final Proposals. Otherwise, discussion of or changes in the best and final Proposals will not be allowed. If an offeror does not submit a best and final Proposal, the State will treat that offeror's previous Proposal as its best and final Proposal.
From the opening of the Proposals to the award of the Contract, everyone evaluating Proposals on behalf of the State will seek to limit access to information contained in the Proposals solely to those people with a need to know the information. The State also will seek to keep this information away from other offerors, and the State may not tell one offeror about the contents of another offeror's Proposal in order to gain a negotiating advantage.
Before the award of the Contract or cancellation of the RFP, any offeror that seeks to gain access to the contents of another offeror's Proposal may be disqualified from further consideration.
Negotiated changes will be reduced to writing and become a part of the Contract file, which will be available for public inspection after award of the Contract or cancellation of the RFP, provided the State does not plan to reissue the RFP. If the State plans to reissue the RFP, the Contract file will not be available until the subsequent RFP process is completed. Unless the State agrees otherwise in writing, the offeror must draft and sign the written changes and submit them to the State within five (5) business days. If the State accepts the changes, the State will give the offeror written notice of the State’s acceptance, and the negotiated changes to the successful offer will become a part of the Contract.
Failure to Negotiate. If an offeror fails to provide the necessary information for negotiations in a timely manner, or fails to negotiate in good faith, the State may terminate negotiations with that offeror, remove the offeror’s Proposal from further consideration, and seek such other remedies as may be available in law or in equity.
PART FIVE: AWARD OF THE CONTRACT
Contract Award. The State plans to award the Contract based on the schedule in the RFP, if the State decides the Work is in its best interest and has not changed the award date.
Included with this RFP, as Attachment Five, is a sample of the Contract for the RFP. The State will issue two (2) originals of the Contract to the Contractor proposed for award. The offeror must sign and return the two (2) originals to the Procurement Representative. The Contract will bind the State only when the State's duly authorized representative signs all copies and returns one to the Contractor with an award letter, the State issues a purchase order, and all other prerequisites identified in the Contract have occurred.
The Contractor must begin work within 15 business days after the State issues a purchase order, or on a mutually agreed start date, under the Contract. If the State awards a Contract pursuant to this RFP, and the Contractor is unable or unwilling to perform the Work, the State may cancel the Contract, effective immediately on notice to the Contractor. The State then may return to the evaluation process under this RFP and resume the process without giving further consideration to the originally selected Proposal. Additionally, the State may seek such other remedies as may be available to the State in law or in equity for the selected Contractor’s failure to perform under the Contract....
With Free Trial, you can:
You will have a full access to bids, website, and receive daily bid report via email and web.
Case ID Requester Document title Solicitation type Bid type Bidding by invitation only
City of Columbus
Bid Due: 7/10/2020
Case ID Requester Document title Solicitation type Bid type Bidding by invitation only
City of Columbus
Bid Due: 7/14/2020
Description Addendums Q&A Respondents Issue Date Inquiry End Date Due Date RFP -
Ohio Turnpike Commission
Bid Due: 8/07/2020
Procurement Opportunity Search Detail **Please Note** This opportunity was not issued by a
State Government of Ohio
Bid Due: 7/24/2020