Att_7_Assessment_Plan.pdf

RFO 25-1042

Attachment 7

ATTACHMENT 7

ASSESSMENT PLAN

1. INTRODUCTION

A multiple phase process will be used to review and/or rate offers. Offers that do not comply with the mandatory components stipulated in this RFO may be deemed non-responsive and the Respondent disqualified. Energy Safety may reject any offer found to be non-responsive at any stage of the review. Energy Safety reserves the right to modify or cancel this procurement in its entirety or in part at any time.

The Respondent is required to thoroughly review the RFO to ensure that its offer is fully compliant with the RFO requirements and thereby avoid the possibility of being ruled non-responsive. If Energy Safety finds that an offer has a material deviation from a specified requirement, the Respondent’s offer may be deemed non-responsive.

2. PHASE 1 – ADMINISTRATIVE ASSESSMENT

Shortly after the submission deadline, the State will conduct an administrative review of each offer for initial responsiveness to the RFO requirements (e.g., timeliness, completeness) to determine that Administrative Assessment requirements have been met.

If deemed necessary, Energy Safety may collect additional documentation (e.g., missing forms, missing appendix items, missing data from RFO forms, etc.) to verify responsiveness to the RFO Phase 1 – Administrative Assessment requirements.

Table 1: Administrative Assessment Summary

PHASE 1 - ADMINISTRATIVE ASSESSMENT SCORING

Table of Contents Pass/Fail Agreement Cover Letter Pass/Fail Respondent’s TDDC MSA with highlighted pricing list Pass/Fail Cost Worksheet Pass/Fail Narrative Response Pass/Fail Consultant Experience Worksheet and Resume Pass/Fail Consultant Reference Form Pass/Fail Understanding and Approach Pass/Fail Bidder Declaration Form GSPD-05-105 Pass/Fail California Civil Rights Law Certification Pass/Fail List of Ineligible Businesses Compliance Pass/Fail

3. PHASE 2 – TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT/SCORING

Offers that meet Phase 1 – Administrative Assessment requirements and contain the required documentation will be submitted to the Energy Safety Assessment Team for Phase 2 – Technical Assessment.

Reviewers will assign a Pass/Fail, a numeric score, or a ranking to each offer based on its adequacy, thoroughness, and the degree to which the offered solution best meets Energy Safety’s needs and represents the best value to Energy Safety.

The Energy Safety Assessment Team will use the following scoring system to assign points. Following this table is a list of the considerations that reviewers may consider when assigning points to a response.

Table 2: Technical Assessment Summary

PHASE 2 - TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT MAXIMUM

SCORE

Applicable TDDC MSA Mandatory Qualifications Pass/Fail Consultant Mandatory Qualifications Pass/Fail Consultant References (Total of three) 60 Consultant Desirable Qualifications 50 Understanding and Approach

Section 1 (50 points) 50 Section 2 (50 points) 50 Section 3 (50 points) 50

Total Possible Technical Points 260

Table 3: Cost Assessment

PHASE 3 - COST ASSESSMENT MAXIMUM

SCORE

Cost Worksheet 300 Total Possible Cost Points 300

Table 4: Interview Assessment

INTERVIEW ASSESSMENT (if held) MAXIMUM

SCORE

Interviews 120 Total Possible Interview Points 120

Table 5: Total Scores

COMBINED TOTALS MAXIMUM SCORE

Total Possible Technical Points 260

Total Possible Cost Points 300 Total Possible Combined Points (no interviews) 560

Total Possible Interview Points 120 Total Possible Combined Points including interviews 680

In assigning points, the Energy Safety Assessment Team may consider issues including, but not limited to, the extent to which one offer, compared to another offer:

1. Lacks information, depth, or breadth, or lacks significant facts and/or details, and/or

2. Contains weaknesses, defects or deficiencies, and/or

3. Demonstrates a complete understanding of the Energy Safety’ needs and the services sought, and/or

4. Adequately illustrates the Respondent’s capability to perform all services and meet all

Statement of Work and performance requirements, and/or

5. Will contribute to the achievement of the Energy Safety’ goals and objectives if implemented, and/or

6. Demonstrates the Respondent’s capacity and/or commitment to exceed regular service needs (e.g., offers enhanced or advanced features, approaches, or methods;

offers creative or innovative business solutions).

4. ADMINISTRATIVE ASSESSMENT

The Administrative Assessment Summary (Table 1) will be scored based on the responsiveness to the requirements listed. Requirements will be given either a “Pass” (e.g., complied with requirement, completed and returned document) or “Fail” (e.g., did not comply with requirement, did not complete or return document). If a Respondent receives a Fail for any of these requirements, the Offer may be rejected.

5. TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT

The technical requirements (Table 2: Technical Assessment Summary) will be scored with a combination of Pass or Fail and points.

6. CONSULTANT EXPERIENCE WORKSHEET AND RESUME

The following describes the assessment and scoring of consultant qualifications. All Contractor staff proposed must meet the minimum experience and education requirements for the classification in the Respondents TDDC MSA.

Refer to Attachment 4 – Consultant Experience Worksheet and Resume for the Minimum Qualifications criteria (Pass/Fail) and Desirable Qualifications (50 points). Resumes must be attached.

A. CONSULTANT MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS

The Respondent’s proposed consultants must meet the Minimum Qualifications as outlined in Attachment 4 – Consultant Experience Worksheet and Resume. The Energy Safety Assessment Team will assess consultant experience to determine if the Consultant meets the mandatory qualifications on a pass/fail basis.

B. CONSULTANT DESIRABLE QUALIFICATIONS

Refer to Table 2: Technical Assessment Summary for the maximum points allocated for Desirable Qualifications (DQ). Submission of DQs is optional and at the discretion of the Respondent and are not considered in Administrative Assessment Summary for submission compliance. During the Technical Assessment, points will be awarded based on the Consultant’s ability to meet the optional DQs.

If Energy Safety is unable to validate that the information supplied qualifies for any desirable scored experience points, no points will be awarded for such experience. If Energy Safety is able to validate that the consultant meets the DQs, the Respondent will earn the points designated for that qualification.

7. CONSULTANT REFERENCE FORM

The purpose of the consultant reference requirement is to provide Energy Safety with the ability to assess the Consultant’s experience in providing similar or relevant services to other organizations through a satisfaction rating provided by the consultant’s previous clients. The description of consultant experiences similar to the needs identified in the scope of work must be detailed and comprehensive enough to permit the Energy Safety to assess the similarity of previous work to the work anticipated for the Contract resulting from this RFO. References must be externally independent from the proposed consultant and the Respondent’s organization and corporate structure.

The consultant’s reference contact should be someone who performed a management or supervisory role on the referenced project and must be willing and able (e.g., familiar with what transpired, not bound by confidentiality, etc.) to answer questions which validate the information on the submitted form.

Three (3) Attachment 5 – Consultant Reference Forms must be completed for the proposed consultant from clients (References) that the Consultant has provided timely and effective services or deliverables working on projects that represent work similar in nature to the services requested in this RFO and are within the last five (5) years of the offer due date for this RFO.

Consultant references will be scored on a pass/fail basis, based upon the ratings provided by the Reference(s). Any conflicting information may result in the response being deemed non-responsive. Any Attachment 5 – Consultant Reference Form that has a reference rating score of “Unsatisfactory" and/or "Marginal" will be deemed non-responsive.

8. UNDERSTANDING AND APPROACH

Respondents must provide a narrative response to prompts 1 through 3, Attachment 6 – Understanding and Approach.

In preparing the response to Attachment 6, do not simply restate or paraphrase information in this RFO and Exhibit A, Statement of Work. Respondents must describe or demonstrate, in the Respondent’s own words, the information required and provide examples from the Respondent’s and/or Consultant’s previous project experience.

Please refer to Table 2: Technical Assessment Summary above and Attachment 6 – Understanding and Approach for details on how points may be achieved. Energy Safety’s Assessment Team will evaluate the Respondent’s Understanding and Approach as follows:

Table 7: Understanding and Approach Scoring Criteria

Points per Prompt Criteria

50 Exceptional

Exceeds expectations with comprehensive, specific, and relevant experience and provides explanation and examples of work performed in a manner easily evaluated. Information provided is detailed and directly applicable to the work described in Exhibit A, Statement of Work. Examples provided document Consultant’s experience. Response documents Consultants dedication and successful outcomes.

40 Strong Meets all expectations with good detail. Information provided is detailed and applicable. Provides explanation and examples of Consultant’s proficiency.

30 Adequate Meets basic expectations with moderate detail. Explains and provides examples but lacks direct relevance.

20 Limited Partially meets expectations, vague or lacking detail. Little explanation and examples are presented which may or may not be relevant.

10 Poor Minimally addresses criterion, lacks relevance.

0 Non- Responsive Not addressed at all.

9. INTERVIEW (If held)

Energy Safety may choose to interview up to the top two (2) highest ranking Respondents.

Additional Respondents may be interviewed depending on the total number of responses received, at the discretion of Energy Safety. Energy Safety may, at its sole discretion, choose not to conduct interviews. Interviews, if held, may be in-person, or via telephone, via teleconference, etc. The purpose of the interview, if held, is to confirm or assess the following:

1. The Respondent’s understanding of Energy Safety’ needs and the project importance.

2. The Respondent’s commitment to provide timely and effective services.

3. The capabilities and strengths of the Respondent’s management team and the

Consultant.

4. The soundness and strengths of the Respondent’s approach to accomplish the objectives and manage the project to ensure successful completion of all Statement of Work requirements.

5. Consultant’s capabilities and understanding of the work as identified in Exhibit A, Statement of Work.

If Energy Safety chooses to conduct interviews, the length of each interview must not exceed one (1) hour, and the same questions will be asked of each interviewee. In addition to the Respondent’s official authorized representative(s), Energy Safety requires the presence of the proposed Consultant to attend the interview. As applicable, Energy Safety will communicate the specific interview requirement information to the affected Respondents via mail, email, or telephone prior to the scheduled interview, only to those Respondents chosen for an interview.

Table 8: Interview

Points Criteria

120 Exceptional

Exceeds expectations with comprehensive, specific, and relevant experience and provides explanation and examples of work performed in a manner easily evaluated. The information provided is detailed and directly applicable to the work described in Exhibit A, Statement of Work. Examples provided document Consultant’s experience. Response documents Consultants dedication and successful outcomes.

90 Strong Meets all expectations with good detail. The information provided is detailed and applicable. Provides explanation and examples of Consultant’s proficiency.

60 Adequate Meets basic expectations with moderate detail. Explains and provides examples but lacks direct relevance.

30 Limited Partially meets expectations, vague or lacking detail. Little explanation and examples are presented which may or may not be relevant.

0 Poor Does not meet expectations, does not provide detail or examples or fails to address question asked.

10. PHASE 3 – COST ASSESSMENT

Energy Safety will review and score Attachment 2 - Cost Worksheet to verify that it is complete and includes the hourly rates the Respondent's proposed Consultant. The hourly rate must be equal or less than the hourly rate for the classification on Respondents TDDC MSA. If the Respondent's Attachment 2 - Cost Worksheet is incomplete or does not conform to the requirements and format outlined in the RFO, the Respondent may be deemed non-responsive and its offer rejected.

Energy Safety will perform the following steps to complete the Cost Assessment:

1. List the Total Base Cost for each Respondent (Total for three (3) years)

2. Arrive at the Combined Total Cost (Base + Optional Contract Years).

3. Calculate each Respondent's percentage by dividing the lowest Combined Total Cost by the Respondent's Combined Total Cost.

4. Multiply the percentage calculated with the maximum cost points to determine the points score.

The lowest Combined Total Cost will receive the maximum Cost Assessment points. All other Respondents will receive a proportionally lower score. The following table is an example of how points are awarded for the Cost Assessment.

https://sb.cityinnovate.com/account/solicitations/documents/54146 https://sb.cityinnovate.com/account/solicitations/documents/54146

Table 9: Cost Assessment Validation Table (example only)

11. RESPONDENT’S TOTAL RESPONSE SCORE

The highest scoring response will be the responsible, responsive Respondent that has the highest combined score. See below for Sample Point Summary.

Table 10: Sample Point Summary

Respondent Administrative Assessment

Technical Assessment

Interview Assessment

Cost Assessment Total Score

A PASS 350 120 180 650

B PASS 200 100 200 500

Award, if made, will be to the Respondent who meets all requirements of the RFO, Phase 1 Administrative Assessment and achieves the highest Total Score which includes points from Phase 2 – Technical Assessment and Phase 3 – Cost Assessment.

12. CHECKLIST

A complete offer package will consist of the required documents identified below.

Complete this checklist to confirm the items in your offer. All required attachments must be returned to be deemed responsive. This checklist is provided for Respondent use only and need not be submitted with the final offer.

Table 11: Checklist Attachment X Name/Description

Table of Contents Agreement Cover Letter Respondents TDDC MSA with highlighted pricing list

Attachment 2 Cost Worksheet Attachment 3 Narrative Response Attachment 4 Consultant Experience Worksheet and Resume Attachment 5 Consultant Reference Form Attachment 6 Understanding and Approach

Link Bidder Declaration Form (GSPD-05-105)

Link Disabled Veteran Business Enterprise Declaration Form DGS PD 843 (if applicable)

Link California Civil Rights Laws Attachment

A B C Respondent’s

Name

Combined Total Cost

Lowest Combined Total Cost Next Lowest Combined

Total Cost

Respondent’s Cost Assessment Score

(B * 200 = C) Response A $1,000,000 $900,000/$1,000,000 = .90

(90%) .9 * 200 = 180

Response B $900,000 $900,000/$900,000 = 1.0 (100%) 1.0 * 200 = 200 https://www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/dgs/fmc/gs/pd/gspd05-105.pdf http://www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/dgs/fmc/gs/pd/pd_843.pdf http://www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/dgs/fmc/gs/pd/pd_843.pdf http://www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/dgs/fmc/dgs/ols004.pdf

NOTE: ENERGY SAFETY MAKES NO WARRANTY THAT THE CHECKLIST IS A FULL,

COMPREHENSIVE LISTING OF EVERY REQUIREMENT SPECIFIED IN THE RFO. CHECKING

OFF THE ITEMS ON THE CHECKLIST DOES NOT CONSTITUTE RESPONSIVENESS TO THE

REQUIREMENT(S). THE CHECKLIST IS ONLY A TOOL TO ASSIST RESPONDENTS IN

COMPILING THEIR SUBMISSION. RESPONDENTS ARE ENCOURAGED TO CAREFULLY READ

THE ENTIRE RFO. THE NEED TO VERIFY ALL DOCUMENTATION PRIOR TO THE

SUBMISSION OF A RESPONSE CANNOT BE OVER EMPHASIZED.