ADSPO15-080717-Award_and_Evaluation_Documents_55.pdf

Page | 2

7. The fifth and final evaluation meeting was held on September 18, 2014. Final consensus scoring was completed.

8. On September 11, 2014 research was conducted to confirm that the potential awarded Offerors were not excluded from providing services.

SCORING TABULATION

The committee evaluated the proposals on a 1000 point scale. Cost scores were determined on a relative scale. Upon initial evaluation of the Offers received, the following scores were assigned:

Initial Proposal Review Method of Approach

Capacity of Offeror Pricing Total

CENTURYLINK d/b/a QWEST COMMUNICATIONS CORP 206 163 304 673

CUSTOM STORAGE 181 100 247 528

Digital Realty Trust, L.P. 194 150 325 669 Phoenix NAP LLC. 119 150 144 413 Viawest 269 200 261 730

The following scoring is the result of the evaluation of final proposal revisions:

Final Proposal Review Method of Approach

Capacity of Offeror Pricing Total

CENTURYLINK d/b/a QWEST COMMUNICATIONS CORP 219 175 304 698

CUSTOM STORAGE 188 125 183 496

Digital Realty Trust, L.P. 200 150 263 613 Phoenix NAP LLC. 156 150 111 417 Viawest 269 200 207 676

CONTRACT AWARD / DETERMINATION

Based on the information provided and consensus from the Evaluation Committee, the recommendations for award of solicitation ADSPO15-00004319, shall be in accordance with A.R.S. § 41-2534 and R2-7-C317. An award shall be made to the following:

CENTURYLINK d/b/a QWEST COMMUNICATIONS CORP

EVALUATION REPORT

Solicitation No. ADSPO15‐00004319

Data Center Services

Total Score 400 Methodology 50 Transmittal Letter Meets Expectations 25 Meets Expectations 25 Meets Expectations 25 Meets Expectations 25 Meets Expectations 25

Comments 50 Executive Summary Meets Expectations 25 Meets Expectations 25 Meets Expectations 25 Meets Expectations 25 Meets Expectations 25

Comments 50 Approach Meets Expectations 25 Above Expectations 37.5 Meets Expectations 25 Meets Expectations 25 Meets Expectations 25

Comments 150 Co‐Location Site Meets Expectations 75 Above Expectations 112.5 Below Expectations 38 Meets Expectations 75 Meets Expectations 75

Comments 50 Service‐Level Agreement (SLA) Above Expectations 37.5 Above Expectations 37.5 Meets Expectations 25 Meets Expectations 25 Below Expectations 12.5

Comments 25 Support Offerings Above Expectations 18.8 Above Expectations 18.75 Below Expectations 6.3 Meets Expectations 12.5 Meets Expectations 12.5

Comments 25 Required/Recommended Training Meets Expectations 12.5 Meets Expectations 12.5 Meets Expectations 13 Meets Expectations 12.5 Meets Expectations 12.5

Comments 350 Capacity of Offeror 100 Capacity of Offeror Meets Expectations 50 Above Expectations 75 Below Expectations 25 Meets Expectations 50 Meets Expectations 50

Comments 100 Experience and Expertise of Key Personnel Meets Expectations 50 Meets Expectations 50 Meets Expectations 50 Meets Expectations 50 Below Expectations 25

Comments

50 Subcontractor Profiles Meets Expectations 25 Meets Expectations 25 Meets Expectations 25 Meets Expectations 25 Meets Expectations 25

Comments

50 Company Expertise Relative to this Solicitation Meets Expectations 25 Meets Expectations 25 Meets Expectations 25 Meets Expectations 25 Below Expectations 12.5

Comments

50 References Meets Expectations 25 Meets Expectations 25 Meets Expectations 25 Unacceptable 0 Below Expectations 12.5

Comments 350 Cost 200 Space Costs 75 Redundant Internet connectivity/pipe to our magnet system 75 Remote Hands

Rating Definitions for Criteria 1 and 2 % of Max Points

(100% Points)

(75% Points)

Meets Expectations = The response meets the requirement(s) outlined in the RFP. (50% of Points) (25% of Points)

(0 Points)

Formula for Scoring Cost, Criteria 3

Offerors

CENTURYLINK d/b/a QWEST

COMMUNICATIONS CORP

Viawest Phoenix NAP LLC. Digital Realty Trust, L.P. CUSTOM STORAGE

698 675 417 613 496 219 269 156 200 188

Formal process to migrate;

detailed process ; DR also offered.

Meets expectations and a number of additional services;

project managers; fuel truck sits in parking lot; on runway at

Deer Valley airport is a concern.

Based on space constraints and availability;

clarification provided that confirms only 5,000 sq.ft space availble until Dec.

2014.

Guaranteed 100% on every key service; if don't service credits are very generous.

Guaranteed 100% on every key service; if don't use service credits are very generous.

Power only guarantee; best effort is ambiguous.

Numerous partnerships;

many options available but restrictive.

Iron Mountain; managed backup services; 4 hrs Tier 1 free.

Clarification provided that tape changing services are available; no dedicated tape storage facility onsite.

175 200 150 150 125

Managed backup services; 4 hrs Tier 1 free.

No space ‐ power issues;

least amount of space and power; no scalability.

Answers provided not applicable to Cstor nor directed to core competencies.

I/O subcontractor Cox and G‐Force ‐ not facility location B&D subcontractor No subcontractors identified. CyrusOne subcontractor

Answers provided not applicable to Cstor nor directed to core competencies.

Not provided, only provided when down selected.

Contact details not provided for references listed.

304 207 111 263 183 200 116 68 128 133 58 15 0 75 0

Exceeds Expectations = The response fully addresses the requirement(s) of the RFP but also provides superior experience, a creative/innovative approach, or an exceptional solution.

Below Expectation = The response minimally addresses the requirement(s) of the RFP, but one or more major considerations of the requirement(s) is not addressed, or the experience and/or solution is so limited that it results in a low degree of confidence in the response or proposed solution.

Unacceptable = The response fails to address the requirement(s) of the RFP or fails to provide any experience related to the requirement(s) of the RFP or elements of the proposal are unacceptable to the state.

46 75 43 60 50

For each of evaluation criteria above, a determination was made regarding how well the proposals satisfied the stated requirements. The rating definitions, found below, formed the basis for determining the scores assigned to each proposal. The comments fields were used to note strengths and weaknesses of the proposal.

Above Expectations = The response fully addresses the requirement(s) of the RFP but also provides above average experience and/or a good quality solution.