7-8. 26-0149 Evaluation Criteria and Proposal Submission.pdf

RFP 26-0149 Kayak and Paddleboard Self-Service Rental Units and Program Management

Evaluation Criteria And Proposal Submission

The City will conduct a comprehensive and impartial evaluation of all responsive proposals received in response to this RFP. The City reserves the right to use any and all reasonable and relevant criteria in making its decision as to the most advantageous proposer. Discussions may be conducted with Vendors determined to be reasonably qualified, and the City reserves the right to reject any and all proposals. The City reserves the right to determine the overall qualifications under the RFP.

A committee comprised of various city staff will evaluate all responsive proposals. At the City’s option or in order to make a final determination, proposers may be invited to a second round of scoring which may include oral presentations or interviews. The evaluation committee will determine the responsiveness and acceptability of each proposal according to established criteria.

Vendors shall be treated fairly and equally with respect to any opportunity for discussion and revision of their offer. To obtain the best and final value offers, revisions may be permitted after submissions and before award of the Contract.

The City will evaluate and score each of the proposal submittals received from responsive respondents based on established criteria listed below. Only the top ranked respondents will proceed to the Negotiation Phase. No order of preference is required during this phase.

Evaluation Criteria:

An evaluation committee will assess the information provided by proposers in response to the criteria established below. The scores of all evaluators will be used to determine the ranking of each proposal. Proposals will be evaluated on a matrix of the following criteria/weights.

Maximum Possible Points

Evaluation Criteria

Experience and Qualifications:

Demonstrated experience operating self-service or automated kayak, paddleboard, or similar recreational rental systems

Experience with municipal, park, or waterfront installations

Qualifications of key personnel and organizational capacity

Technical Approach and System Quality Quality, durability, and functionality of the proposed rental units Ease of use, accessibility, and ADA compliance Safety features, security, and reliability of the system Flexibility of the system, including relocation capability

Operations, Maintenance, and Safety Plan Day-to-day operations and customer service approach Preventive and corrective maintenance procedures Safety protocols, emergency response procedures, and risk mitigation Compliance with applicable laws and regulations

Financial Proposal and Value to the City Proposed revenue-sharing percentage or cost structure Financial sustainability of the proposed model Transparency of assumptions and reporting methodology Overall financial benefit and risk allocation to the City

References and Past Performance Quality of references for similar projects Demonstrated record of successful implementation and operation History of contract compliance and performance

100 TOTAL POINTS

Each vendor is responsible for submitting all relevant, factual, and correct information with their bid. The evaluation committee will assign a ranking score to each vendor based on the available data.

Short-Listing:

The Evaluation Committee at its sole discretion may create a short-list of the highest scored proposals based on the preliminary evaluation against the evaluation criteria. Only those short-listed Proposers would be invited to participate in interviews and/or presentations, demonstrations or product testing. Upon conclusion of any interviews and/or presentations, demonstrations or product testing, the Evaluation Committee will finalize the scoring against the evaluation criteria.

Oral Presentations:

Proposers who submit a PROPOSAL in response to this RFP may be required to give an oral presentation of their PROPOSAL to the City. The City will schedule the time and location of these presentations. Oral presentations are an option of the City and may or may not be conducted.

Notwithstanding the possibility of a request for an on-site interview and presentation, Proposers shall not rely on the possibility of such a request and shall submit a complete and comprehensive written response to this solicitation. Any costs incurred for the interviews and the oral presentation are the responsibility of the Proposer.

The Evaluation Committee will then discuss the oral presentation results and arrive at an overall score for each respondent. Negotiations with the respondent having the highest overall score will then begin.

Negotiations:

If negotiations do not result in a contract, the city will then begin negotiations with the respondent having the second highest overall score. This process will continue until either a contract is awarded or the RFP is cancelled. Once the city and the respondent determine that an agreement cannot be reached and the decision is made to move on to the next highest scoring respondent, negotiations cannot be reconvened with a respondent with whom agreement previously could not be reached.

Other Considerations:

The City reserves the right to consider historical information and facts, whether gained from the proposal, references, or any other source, in the evaluation process, including Proposer’s past working or business relationship with the City, if any.

The City will also consider the impact on the ability of the City to comply with rules, policies, and practices relating to contracting with historically underutilized businesses and nonprofit organizations employing persons with disabilities. The City further reserves the right to consider a Firm’s background, personnel, experience, financial and other references, exceptions to this RFP or subsequent contract, and any working relationships, past or present, a proposer may have with its other clients.