California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation RFQ 10846575 Attachment 1

RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS

DESKTOP MILL AND DESKTOP LATHE

You are invited to review and respond to this Request for Quote (RFQ) for IT Goods and Services entitled Desktop Mill and Desktop Lathe, Request for Quote 10846575. In submitting your quote, you must comply with the instructions found herein. The services required are stated in Exhibit A, Statement of Work.

Please read the enclosed document carefully.

Quotes must be received no later than the date and time specified on the face of this RFQ and in Section I, C. Key Action Dates.

I. General Information

A. Purpose

The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), Division of Rehabilitative Programs (DRP), Office of Correctional Education (OCE), necessitates the acquisition of a Desktop CNC Mill 3 Axis and Lathe, and outlines the professional services to be rendered by the Contractor. The mill and lathe shall be used for the Career Technical Education (CTE) Manufacturing, Design and Engineering (MDE) Program for incarcerated individuals at Central California Women's Facility (CCWF) and Correctional Institution for Women (CIW). This Statement of Work (SOW), hereafter referred to as the “Agreement.”

Offers submitted in response to this RFQ must contain all information requested and must conform to the format prescribed. It is the Contractor’s responsibility to provide all required data and other information deemed necessary for CDCR’s Evaluation Team to determine and verify the Contractor’s ability to provide the equipment and perform the tasks and activities defined in Exhibit A, SOW. Responses to the RFQ may be disqualified if they fail to respond completely to RFQ requirements and subsequent Addendum(s) if any.

Bidder can only propose one model in their response for each Mill and Lathe. Multiple proposed models for each Mill and Lathe will not be accepted.

Only one (1) Contractor will be awarded the resulting Agreement. Award will be based on a Value-Effective methodology.

B. Period of Performance

The term of this Agreement shall be effective upon the Agreement start date of October 26, 2026, or upon the date the Purchase Order is signed, whichever is later through December 26, 2026, or project is completed, whichever is earlier.

The period of performance must be changed by a written amendment to the Agreement, if the department exercises its option to extend services.

The selected Contractor shall not be authorized to start work under this Agreement until notified by the CDCR. If the Contractor starts performance before final approval (execution) of the Agreement, it shall be considered voluntary on the part of the Contractor and non-compensable by the CDCR.

The CDCR may, at its discretion, amend the Agreement to lengthen the term and, or increase the funding consistent with the original Scope of Services, and as specified in Exhibit B, Line-Item Cost Worksheet. Any and all amendments must be in writing and signed by both parties prior to commencement of additional work.

C. Key Action Dates

Listed below are the key action dates and times by which the actions must be taken or completed. If the State finds it necessary to change any of these dates, it will be accomplished via an addendum to this RFQ. The State may modify any part of the RFQ, prior to the date Offers are due, by the issuance of one

(1) or more addenda. Addendums will be numbered consecutively and posted to the advertisement on the California State Contracts Register System (CSCR).

Key Action Dates

Date Time

1. Release of RFQ 9/29/2026 2:00 PM

2. Submission of written questions 9/30/2026

5:00 PM

3. Department’s response to written questions

10/02/2026

4. RFQ Solicitation Due Date (by date and time)

10/13/2026 2:00 PM

5. RFQ Evaluation Process 10/13 – 10/16/2026

7. Intent to Award 10/16/2026

8. Date of Award 10/26/2026

All dates after Submission of Quotes (date and time) are approximate and may be changed if needed to allow the State additional time for evaluation and contract execution.

The Notice of Intent to Award shall be published on Cal eProcure in the same location as the solicitation was published: Bid opportunities in the California State Contracts Register (CSCR).

This RFQ does not constitute a commitment by the CDCR to award a Purchase Order. The CDCR reserves the right to reject any or all quotes received, if the CDCR determines that it is in the CDCR's best interest. The CDCR restricts the responding firms replying to this solicitation to be headquartered and doing business within the United States only. No foreign firms are allowed to respond to this solicitation.

BIDDER RESPONSE CLARIFICATION: The State may request that a Bidder clarify any area of their response that the State determines to be unclear. The State may also request clarification for areas that may render the bid non-responsive to the requirements and provide Bidders the opportunity to resubmit a responsive bid by the date and time specified by the State. However, if the Bidder does not resubmit a responsive bid to the areas identified by the date and time specified by the State, the Bidder’s bid will be rendered non-responsive, and ineligible to proceed to the next phase of the solicitation process. Clarifications may be requested via email.

D. Written Questions

Interested Contractors may submit questions and/or requests for clarification, via e-mail on or before the date and time listed in the table above, to:

robin.adams@cdcr.ca.gov. All submitted questions and/or requests shall have the subject line “Robin Adams - RFQ 10846575 – Questions” for questions regarding the content of this RFQ. The CDCR responses to Contractor questions that provide new or additional information will be provided to all Contractors via an Addendum and posted to the California State Contracts Register (CSCR).

CDCR shall be notified immediately if clarification is needed. Contractors that fail to report a known or suspected problem with the RFQ, or fail to seek clarification, shall submit a quote at their own risk. All questions must be received by the date and time listed in the Key Action Dates. Questions not submitted via email by the deadline shall be answered at the CDCR’s option. At its discretion, the CDCR may contact an inquirer to seek clarification of any inquiry received.

What to include in a contractor inquiry:

1. Contractor’s firm name, individual’s name submitting the question or inquiry, telephone number, email address, and RFQ number.

2. A description of the subject, issue, or clarification needed.

3. RFQ section, page number, and/or other information useful in identifying the specific problem or issue in question.

4. Remedy sought if any.

When the CDCR has completed its review of the questions, all of the questions and answers will be distributed in writing via an Addendum and posted to the California State Contracts Register (CSCR).

E. RFQ Response Guidelines

This RFQ and the Contractor's quote in response to this document will be made a part of the contract. Responses to this RFQ must contain all data, and information requested and must conform to the format described in this RFQ. It is the Contractor's responsibility to provide all required data and any other information deemed necessary for the State's evaluation team to determine and verify the Contractor's ability to perform the tasks and activities defined in the

Contractor's Statement of Work.

1. The response must be submitted via email in a format compatible with CDCR’s standard software applications (i.e., Microsoft [MS] Office, ADOPE PDF, etc.).

A n y c o n t r a c t o r - g e n e r a t e d printed documents must be single-spaced, using a 12-point font. A smaller font may be used for tables.

2. The CDCR must receive electronic copies, via email, of the response no later than the date and time specified in the Key Action Dates. Responses not received by the date and time specified in the Key Action Dates shall be rejected.

The RFQ response is submitted in two separate emails to:

robin.adams@cdcr.ca.gov.

The Cost proposal must be submitted via email and clearly marked “COST - RFQ 10846575” in the subject line.

The Administrative and Technical proposals must be emailed together and clearly labeled as “ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL- RFQ 10846575” in the email subject line.

3. Administrative, Technical and Deliverables’ proposals will be evaluated to determine the responsiveness of the bidder. (Cost proposal emails will not be opened at the time of Administrative, Technical, and Deliverables’ proposals evaluation.)

4. The cost proposals’ email for responsive proposals shall then be opened at the time and place designated in the solicitation and the remainder of the evaluation completed. (Cost proposals of non-responsive bids/proposals will not be opened.)

F. RFQ Response Content

The following documents must be submitted in the RFQ Response.

1. Signed and dated Request for Quote – Information Technology Services (RFQ).

2. Exhibit A-1: Completed Technical Requirements - Mill.

3. Exhibit A-2: Completed Technical Requirements - Lathe.

4. Exhibit A-3: Completed Deliverables Requirements.

5. Exhibit B: The Cost portion of the RFQ response must be submitted separate from the Administrative and Technical requirements as outlined in Section “E.

RFQ Response Guidelines.” The following document will be submitted in the Cost RFQ Response:

Exhibit B: Line-Item Cost Worksheet

6. Exhibit C: Completed Response Checklist.

7. Attachment 2: Bidder Declaration Form (GSPD-05-105).

8. Attachment 3: Postconsumer Recycled-Content Certification (Cal Recycle 74), if applicable.

9. Attachment 4: Disabled Veteran Business Enterprise Declaration (STD. 843), if

10. Attachment 5: Completed Payee Data Record (STD 204)

11. Attachment 6: Completed Supplemental Payee Data Record

12. Attachment 7: Completed California Civil Rights Laws Certification.

13. Attachment 8: Completed California TACPA Preference Request Form (STD.

830), if applicable.

14. Attachment 9: Completed Iran Contracting Act Verification, if applicable.

15. At the State's option prior to award, bidders may be required to submit additional written clarifying information. Failure to submit the required written information as specified may be grounds for bid rejection.

II. Evaluation Information

A. Evaluation Process

All bidder responses will be reviewed for responsiveness to the requirements of the RFQ. Incomplete offers will not be considered. If a response is missing required information, it will be deemed non-responsive. Responsive offers will be compared based on the “Value-effective” criteria listed below. Further review is subject to CDCR’s discretion.

B. Value Effective Evaluation Criteria

The overall responsiveness of each RFQ response is based on the complete response from the bidder to the RFQ requirements, including Exhibit A, Statement of Work. The following sub-sections and criteria shall be reviewed by the State's evaluation team.

1. Administrative Requirements Evaluation Criteria (100% Pass/Fail)

Reference Requirements

RFQ

Signed and dated Request for Quote – Information Technology Services (RFQ).

Exhibit A-1 Completed Mill Technical Requirements

2. Technical and Deliverable Table Requirements:

The Assessment Team will review the RFQ response to determine whether the Contractor meets all the mandatory Technical and Deliverable Requirements.

a. Mandatory (M) requirements:

The Mandatory Technical and Deliverables Requirements are evaluated as either pass or fail. Bidders must respond “Yes” to “Bidder Agrees to Meet Requirement (Yes/No)" to pass each requirement identified in Exhibit A-1, Technical-Mill Requirements, Exhibit A-2, Technical Lathe Requirements, and Exhibit A-3, Deliverables Table. The evaluation team will evaluate Bidder’s responses to every requirement. If the Bidder responds with a “No” response to any requirement, the proposal will be deemed non-responsive, and the Bidder disqualified.

b. Mandatory Scorable (MS) requirements:

Bidders must respond “Yes” to “Bidder Agrees to Meet Requirement (Yes/No)" to each requirement identified in Exhibit A-1, Technical Mill Requirements, Exhibit A-2, Technical Lathe Requirements, and Exhibit A-3, Deliverables Table and provide a description of how they will meet the mandatory scorable (MS) requirement in the “Describe the Proposed Solution to Meet or Exceed Requirement”. The evaluation team will evaluate Bidder’s description to every mandatory scorable (MS) requirement listed in Exhibit A-1, Technical Mill Requirements, Exhibit A-2, Technical Lathe Requirements, and Exhibit A-3, Deliverables Table to determine whether the response fully addresses the (MS) requirements and will determine points awarded utilizing the scoring key as shown in Table 2-1, Technical Requirements Mill and Lathe and Table 2- 2, Deliverables.

Exhibit A-2 Completed Lathe Technical Requirements

Exhibit A-3 Completed Deliverables Table

Exhibit B Signed and dated Line-Item Cost Worksheet

Exhibit C Response Checklist

Attachment 2 Bidder Declaration Form (GSPD-05-105).

Attachment 3 Postconsumer Recyled-Content Certification

Attachment 4 Disabled Veteran Business Enterprise Declaration (STD. 843), if applicable.

Attachment 5 Completed Payee Data Record (STD 204)

Attachment 6 Completed Supplemental Payee Data Record

Attachment 7 Completed California Civil Rights Laws Certification.

Attachment

Completed California TACPA Preference Request Form (STD. 830), if applicable.

Attachment

Completed Iran Contracting Act Verification, if

Table 2-1 (Technical Requirements – Mill and Lathe)

Evaluation Criteria Evaluation Outcome

Score

Excellent: Bidder fully meets the requirement with a comprehensive and well-documented description. Response clearly explains how the proposed mill and lathe equipment will integrate seamlessly with the current environment, including software, hardware, workflow, and operator usage.

1. The description is clear, complete, and directly explains compatibility with existing systems and processes.

2. Bidder demonstrates a thorough understanding of the current environment and provides evidence of proven capability, with no significant deficiencies in integration.

Excellent 3 points available for the requirement.

Good: Bidder meets the requirement to some extent but with deficiencies.

Response indicates compatibility but lacks detail, clarity, or does not address all integration aspects.

1. The description addresses compatibility and integration but is incomplete or unclear.

2. Bidder does not demonstrate a full understanding of current systems and/or cannot fully validate integration capability.

Good Up to 2 points available for the requirement.

Evaluation Outcome

Score

Poor: Bidder fails to meet the requirement entirely. There is no relevant information or the response is inadequate.

1. Bidder did not provide a description;

or

2. The description does not address compatibility or integration with the current environment.

Poor 0% of points requirement

Table 2-2 (Deliverables)

Evaluation Outcome

Score

Excellent: Bidder fully meets the requirement with a comprehensive and well-documented description. The information provided is detailed and thoroughly addresses all aspects of the requirement.

1. The description is clear, complete, and directly addresses the requirement.

2. Bidder demonstrates a thorough understanding and existing capability to meet the requirement with no significant deficiencies.

Excellent 3 points requirement.

Evaluation Outcome

Score

Good: Bidder meets the requirement to some extent but with deficiencies. The description is partially complete but lacks details or clarity.

1. The description addresses the requirement but is incomplete or unclear.

2. Bidder does not demonstrate a thorough understanding and/or existing capability to fully meet the requirement.

Good Up to 2 points available for the requirement.

Poor: Bidder fails to meet the requirement entirely. There is no relevant information, or the response is completely inadequate.

1. Bidder does not agree to meet requirement (responded “no” or blank); or

2. Bidder did not provide a description;

or

3. The description does not address the requirement.

Poor 0% of points requirement

c. Technical Requirements – Mill (M – Pass/Fail) (MS - Maximum of 33 points)

The technical requirements evaluation consists of scored and non-scored items. Bidders that meet the technical qualifications will be scored up to a maximum of 33 total points.

d. Technical Requirements – Lathe (M – Pass/Fail) (MS - Maximum of 21 points)

The technical requirements evaluation consists of scored and non-scored items. Bidders that meet the technical qualifications will be scored up to a maximum of 21 total points.

The combined score of each bidder’s Technical Requirements’ score for the mill and lathe will be weighted at 60% of the total points available.

e. Deliverables Table (M – Pass/Fail) (MS – Maximum of 21 points)

The Deliverables Table evaluation consists of scored and non-scored items.

Bidders that meet the deliverables requirements within the table will be scored up to a maximum of 21 points. Each bidder’s Deliverables’ Table score will be weighted at 30% of the total points available.

3. Cost (Maximum of 20 points).

The cost is weighted at 10% of the total points available. The contractor will be evaluated on the total extended cost for both the contracted term and any optional extension years.

Each bidder’s cost score will initially be calculated based on the ratio of the lowest cost proposal to the bidder’s cost, multiplied by the maximum number of cost points available (20), as shown in the calculation below:

Example: To help illustrate this process, refer to the table below, for an example of the cost score calculation process. Cost figures in the example below explain the calculations and have no other significance.

Cost Evaluation and Scoring Methodology Example Bidder Grand

Total Cost Calculation Cost Points

Awarded

A $400,000 $300,000 X 20 $400,000

B $350,000 $300,000 X 50

$350,000 I

C $300,000 $300,000 X 20 $300,000 I

4. Scoring Table (All Categories)

The following is an example of calculated weighted scores:

Table 4.1

Criteria Weight

Scoring Scale

Total Score

Weighted Score

Technical Requirements

60% 0 = Poor, 1 - 2 = Good, 3 = Excellent

52 10.4

Deliverables 30% 0= Poor, 1 - 2 = Good, 3 = Excellent

21 2.1

Cost 10% See Cost Methodology

18 .6

Total Weighted

100% 91 13.1

Methodology:

Weighted Score = (Total score ÷ 3) x Weight

Total Weighted Score is the sum of all weighted scores.

The cost evaluated is the “Total Evaluated Cost” as reflected on the cost

Worksheet, including 10 percent of initial total contract value for option to increase.

5. Final Scoring Methodology

The following is provided as an example only:

Table 5.1

Bidder Technical

Requirements Score

Deliverables Table Score

Cost Score

Total

A 4 2.5 3 9.5

B 3.46 4.2 1.2 8.86

C 2 5.1 1.2 8.3

In this case, the highest scored proposal from Bidder A would be the intended awardee.

In the event of a precise tie between bidders, the EIS procurement official will conduct a coin toss. At least one witness must observe and document the coin toss. Affected bidders will be given the opportunity to attend the tie breaker coin toss. An email notification will be sent to the affected bidders at least 24 hours before the coin toss is conducted.