6-Att. D AK27-106 DPS UBFS Document Control Technical Criteria 92926 GD.pdf

Attachment D – Technical Criteria

For ease of evaluation, the proposals must provide a point-by-point response, addressing in detail each area of the evaluation criteria, including addressing how the point-by-point response addresses the issues discussed in this RFP. The criteria are not intended to limit a proposal's content or exclude any relevant or essential data.

Offerors are at liberty and are encouraged to expand upon the criteria to explain the Offeror’s capability to provide the State with a solution.

Minimum Mandatory Requirements

1. Offeror MUST agree to specifications, requirements, and project timeline in the Scope of Work.

2. Offeror must have 10+ years of proven quality document control in Forensic Science.

3. Must have or be working toward a system that complies with the FedRAMP or GovRAMP level of certification – https://govramp.org/

4. Must hold and maintain ISO 9001 Certification

Scoring Criteria - These will be scored from 1-5 x Weight

1. Document Control & Life Cycle Criteria (Possible 250 points): Offer to submit a detailed outline of the criteria below

• Granular Versioning Control: How automatically and cleanly the system increments major and minor document revisions (e.g., v1.0 to v1.1 vs. v2.0) and maintains superseded archives.

• Template & Formatting Rigor: Evaluators look for built-in template enforcement that locks headers, watermarks ("DRAFT," "EFFECTIVE," "SUPERSEDED"), section numbering, and footers.

• Parent-Child Document Linking: Points are awarded for software that links dependent documents (e.g., if a Master SOP is revised, the system automatically flags associated forms, sub-procedures, or logs for concurrent review).

• Intuitive Organizational Hierarchy: Ease of creating flexible, web-based folder structures that mirror agency divisions without user confusion.

2. Accreditation Mapping & Audit Readiness (Points Possible - 150): Offer must submit a detailed outline of the criteria below

• Deep Hyperlinking Capabilities: Evaluators score higher if the system can link directly from a Quality Manual clause to a specific sub-paragraph or subsection within an SOP, rather than just linking to page 1 of a PDF.

• Clause-to-Artifact Mapping: Ease of embedding external standards (ISO/IEC 17025:2017, ANAB AR3125, FBI QAS) and mapping specific laboratory policies directly to individual requirement subsets.

• Automated Gap Analysis: Scores are awarded for native tools that instantly generate reports showing unmapped standards, missing compliance artifacts, or overdue policy reviews prior to an external audit.

3. Training, Comprehension Testing & Acknowledgment (Possible – 250 points): Offeror to submit a detailed description of the following.

1. Vendor must provide unlimited employee testing- test associated with documents to ensure acknowledgment and comprehension of laboratory policies and procedures.

https://govramp.org/

2. Vendor will implement the out-of-the-box solution to handle the following without additional IT/Programming Personnel:

• Document control life cycle

• Process of revising, tracking, controlling, and distributing documents electronically

• Automated workflows to make routine business processes more efficient and increase their visibility

• Email alerts for notification, reminder, and escalation for all assigned tasks

• Standard-based auditing to ISO standards to associate a document with the specific standard subsets and be able to run a gap analysis to identify any missing documentation

• Creation of standard and custom reports by the user community without IT/Programming involvement.

4. Quality Workflows (Points Possible – 150): Offeror to submit a detailed description of the following.

• Corrective & Preventive Action (CAPA) Engine: Scoring the simplicity of logging quality non-conformances, assigning root-cause analysis tasks, tracking corrective action plans, and logging effectiveness reviews.

• Audit Management Modules: Capabilities for scheduling, conducting, and logging findings during internal and external audits.

• Notification & Escalation Triggers: Automated email alerts, portal reminders, and configurable escalation rules for overdue reviews or pending CAPA tasks.

Costs

Offerors must complete and submit the Cost Submittal Form. Proposed costs must all direct and indirect costs associated with the performance of the contract, including, but not limited to, total number of hours at various hourly rates, direct expenses, payroll, supplies, overhead assigned to each person working on the project, percentage of each person's time devoted to the project, and profit. The costs identified in the cost proposal are the total amount of costs to be paid by the state. No additional charges shall be allowed.

Technical Score 800 points Cost Score 200 points Total Score 1000 points