8-26-0217 Evaluation Criteria and Proposal Submission.pdf
PDF 127 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- RFP 26-0217
- Issued by
- Tarrant County, Austin City, Texas
About this file
This is an Evaluation Criteria and Proposal Submission document for RFP 26-0217 issued by the City of Arlington, Texas, for a Water Risk Assessment Analysis project. The solicitation seeks a machine learning-based solution to assess and prioritize risk exposure of the water main network managed by Arlington Water Utilities (AWU), with the goal of applying advanced data analytics to support data-driven planning and capital improvement prioritization. The City of Arlington strongly encourages electronic submission of proposals through its exclusive platform, Bonfire, and will not accept late proposals or those submitted through alternative channels. The City reserves the right to conduct oral presentations and interviews with short-listed proposers and may request revisions to proposals before final contract award.
Proposals will be evaluated on a 100-point matrix comprising three weighted criteria: Price (25 points), including detailed cost breakdowns and ongoing support costs; Experience and Qualifications of Firm (30 points), including staff qualifications, resumes, certifications, dedicated availability, company experience with current Texas utilities, and references; and Functionality (45 points), including the system's ability to provide loss of function (LoF) as probability per pipe segment, time-adjusted LoF calculations, incorporation of city-specific data for consequence of failure (CoF) and consequence of repair (TR) calculations, individual weighting factor adjustability for risk determination, and accuracy of claims and success rates. The evaluation committee will rank proposals and invite only the highest-scoring respondents to proceed to the negotiation phase. Negotiations will begin with the highest-ranked proposer and continue sequentially with lower-ranked proposers if agreements cannot be reached, with no provision for reconvening negotiations with previously unsuccessful proposers.
View the file
Other files
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
RFP 26-0217 WATER RISK ASSESSMENT ANALYSIS
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
Price:
Detailed cost breakdown of the overall cost of solution and ongoing to support.
Experience and Qualifications of Firm:
• Qualifications of Staff to include individuals who will supervise work performed. Resumes and experience/certifications of staff assigned to this contract.
• Dedicated availability of staff for this contract
• Experience of Company
• Number of current Texas Utilities employing solution
• List of References
Functionality
• Provides LoF as a probability per individual pipe segment
• Provides a time adjusted LoF (1 year, 5 year, etc.)
• Open to city specific data driven data to determine CoF and TR calculations, such as:
• Economic Impact
• Customer impact
• Roadway type
• Ability to individually adjust weighting factors for determination of TR
• Accuracy of Claims and Success Rates
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 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.
RFP 26-0217 WATER RISK ASSESSMENT ANALYSIS
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .