03 - RFP Evaluation Plan.docx
DOCX document 192 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Category 4 - Credit Monitoring Services
- Solicitation number
- 25
- Issued by
- Ada County, Idaho
About this file
This document is an RFP Evaluation Plan issued by the State of Idaho in collaboration with the NASPO ValuePoint cooperative purchasing program for Information Security Services, specifically Credit Monitoring Services. The RFP outlines a 4-stage evaluation process to select one or more Master Agreement contractors. Stage 1 will conduct an initial responsiveness review. Stage 2 will evaluate and score technical proposals, with a minimum score of 400 points required to advance to Stage 3. Stage 3 will evaluate and score cost proposals, with the lowest average cost per service earning the maximum 400 points. The final Stage 4 will combine the technical and cost scores for a total of 1,000 possible points. Award(s) will be made to the highest scoring responsive and responsible offeror(s). Multiple awards may be made at the State's discretion.
The RFP covers a broad scope of credit monitoring and identity theft protection services, including notification, call center support, single-bureau and triple-bureau monitoring, and reduced scope "codes only" services. Pricing will be evaluated on a per-unit or per-service basis, with the lowest proposed prices earning the maximum points. No information is provided on set-asides, incumbents, funding sources, or the current service environment.
View the file
Other files
Show all 23
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Request for Proposals for
[PORTFOLIO NAME]
Issued by the State of [Lead State] Solicitation Number: [#######]
Request for Proposals for INFORMATION SECURITY SERVICES: Credit Monitoring Services Issued by the State of Idaho Solicitation Number RFP Event 25 Attachment 3
RFP EVALUATION PLAN
Stage 1: Initial Responsiveness Evaluation. All Proposals will be reviewed first to determine if they meet the mandatory submissions requirements. Any Proposals not meeting the mandatory submission requirements or specifications may be deemed non-responsive and receive no further consideration. Note: IDAPA 38.05.01.074.03 and 38.05.01.091.05 allow the designated State official to waive minor informalities as well as minor deviations.
Stage 2: Technical Criteria Evaluation. Each Technical Proposal will be evaluated and scored by one (1) or more Technical Proposal Evaluation Committee(s) according to the Evaluation Criteria provided below:
| Criteria |
| Technical Points Possible |
| Organization, Staffing, Customer Service (Attachment 2 Sections II, III, IV) |
| 250 |
| Scope of Work (all other sections of Attachment 2) |
| 350 |
| Stage 2 Total: |
| 600 |
The scores for the Technical Proposals will be normalized as follows: The Technical Proposal with the highest raw score will receive all available Technical Points: 600 points. The remaining Proposals will be assigned a proportional amount of the available Technical Points using the formula:
600 X Raw Score of Technical Proposal Being Evaluated Highest Raw Technical Score
Offerors earning a minimum of 400 normalized Technical Points will move on to Stage 3. Proposals failing to meet the 400-point threshold will not move on to the cost evaluation or be considered for award.
Stage 3: Cost Evaluation. Cost Proposals will only be reviewed following completion of the Technical Proposal evaluations. Cost Proposals will only be evaluated for Offerors that meet the minimum technical score requirement detailed in Stage 2.
The scores for the evaluation of Cost Proposals for Category 4 – Notification and Credit Monitoring Services will be normalized as follows:
For Cost Per Notification, the Cost Proposal with the lowest Average Unit Price proposed will receive 80 points. Other Proposals will be assigned a portion of the 80 points using the formula:
80 X Lowest Average Unit Price Average Unit Price Being Evaluated
For General Call Center, the Cost Proposal with the lowest Average Unit Price proposed will receive 80 points. Other Proposals will be assigned a portion of the 80 points using the formula:
Average Unit Price Being Evaluated
For One Year Single-Bureau Credit Monitoring/Identity Theft Protection, the Cost Proposal with the lowest Average Unit Price proposed will receive 80 points. Other Proposals will be assigned a portion of the 80 points using the formula:
Average Unit Price Being Evaluated
For One Year Triple-Bureau Credit Monitoring/Identity Theft Protection, the Cost Proposal with the lowest Average Unit Price proposed will receive 80 points. Other Proposals will be assigned a portion of the 80 points using the formula:
80 X Lowest Average Unit Price Average Unit Price Being Evaluated
For “Codes Only” Reduced Scope Service, the Cost Proposal with the lowest proposed Fee per PIN Issued will receive 80 points. Other Proposals will be assigned a portion of the 80 points using the formula:
80 X Lowest Fee Per PIN Issued Fee Per PIN Issued Being Evaluated
The resulting totals from Cost Per Notification, General Call Center, One Year Single-Bureau Credit Monitoring/Identity Theft Protection, One Year Triple-Bureau Credit Monitoring/Identity Theft Protection, “Codes Only” Reduced Scope Service will be averaged per service for each proposer. The lowest cost average for each cost section will earn 80 points. The remaining cost proposals will be assigned a proportional amount of the available cost points using the formulas indicated above.
The averages of all sections will be added and normalized. The proposer earning the highest points for all sections will receive all 400 points for Cost Evaluation the remaining cost proposals will be assigned a proportional amount of the available cost points using the formula as indicated below.
400 X Lowest Cost Evaluation Cost Being Evaluated
Stage 4: Evaluation Summary
| Technical & Cost Evaluation Summary |
| Total Points Possible |
| Offeror’s Total Points Earned |
| Technical Criteria Evaluation |
| 600 |
| Cost Evaluation |
| 400 |
| Total: |
| 1,000 |
Award Selection Award of contracts(s) will be made to Offerors deemed responsive and responsible receiving the highest number of normalized total points. The State may make multiple awards in accordance with Idaho Code section 67-9211, at its discretion; and may choose not to award if in the best interest of the State.
Prior to the announcement of awards and execution of Master Agreements, the Lead State will present an award recommendation to NASPO ValuePoint for approval of the proposed awards.
Following approval of NASPO ValuePoint, Idaho will issue notices of intent to award contract(s) to the winning vendors.
The Lead State and Multistate Sourcing Team will then determine which proposals are most advantageous to the Lead State and potential Participating Entities and Purchasing Entities based on each Offeror’s total score, in descending order. Methods used to establish the final list of awardees may include, but are not limited to, one or more of the following:
· Identification of a natural break in total scores
· Identification of a minimum scoring threshold above which Proposers are deemed to be adequately qualified
· Consideration of the optimal number of Contractors required to successfully supply Deliverables to Participating Entities and Purchasing Entities” Following approval of NASPO ValuePoint and any other approvals required by the Lead State, the Lead State will issue letters of intent to award.
Page 2 of 9 – Attachment [X], RFP TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Attachment 3, RFP EVALUATION PLAN image1.png image2.png
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .