Attachment_15_-_Eval_Scoring_RFPAIC25003_v10.27.25.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 42 KB Posted
- Attached to
- RFP-AIC-25-003 (Arts in Corrections
- Solicitation number
- 0000037096
- Issued by
- Sacramento County, San Francisco City, California
About this file
This is an evaluation and scoring document for RFP-AIC-25-003, the Arts In Corrections program administered by the California Arts Council (CAC). The solicitation seeks proposals from qualified organizations to deliver arts education and rehabilitation programming in correctional institutions throughout California. The evaluation process consists of three sequential phases: Administrative (Pass/Fail), Technical Proposal (70 points), and Cost Proposal (30 points), with bidders required to achieve a minimum score of 85 percent in the Technical phase to advance to cost evaluation. All bid packages must be submitted by the specified deadline in PDF format, except for the Cost Proposal Worksheet which must be submitted in Excel format. Required documentation includes organizational capacity and experience materials, program design and implementation plans, evaluation and reporting methodologies, equity and community impact statements, cost proposals with budgetary narratives, and various mandatory business documents such as California Small Business or Disabled Veteran Business Enterprise certifications where applicable, liability insurance verification, and Secretary of State registration confirmation.
The evaluation committee will assess proposals against specific scoring criteria within each phase. The Technical Proposal phase allocates 20 points for organizational capacity and experience, 25 points for program design and implementation, 15 points for evaluation and reporting, and 10 points for equity, community, and impact considerations. The Cost Proposal phase awards up to 15 points through a comparative cost formula favoring the lowest bidder and 15 points for budget narrative justification. Eligible bidders may receive additional preference points for Small Business or Disabled Veteran Business Enterprise status. The CAC will conduct comprehensive due diligence verification throughout the evaluation process, including confirmation of Secretary of State good standing, tax compliance status, absence of negative contractor evaluations, appropriate liability insurance coverage naming CAC as additional insured, and organizational legal residency and regional presence requirements. The maximum total award score is 100 points, and only responsive and responsible bidders with the lowest approved cost proposals will be selected for contract award.
View the file
Other files
Show all 21
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
Summary
| RFP-AIC-25-003 | version 10/27/2025 |
| Arts In Correction | |
| Summary - Evaluation Plan |
The evaluation process consist of three (3) phases: Administrative, Technical and Cost Plan
| The Evaluation Committee will assess each bid package received by the deadline. Any late submissions will not be accepted. No exceptions. |
| The Evaluation Committee will rate their results based on merit against the rating/scoring criteria and adherence to the instructions and |
| response to the Request for Proposal requirements as outlined for this solicitation. |
| PHASE | EVALUATION | IF THIS, THEN |
| 1 | Administrative: The Evaluation Committee will evaluate the submissions for compliance as outlined for this solicitation. Pass or Fail. | Only the bid(s) that pass this phase |
| will proceed to Phase 2. | ||
| PASS: Responsive Bidder - A bidder is considered responsive if it indicates compliance without material deviation from the requirements of the RFP and the terms and conditions of the proposed agreement. |
| 2 | Technical Proposal: | 70 |
| Organizational Capacity and Experience (20 Points) | ||
| Program Design and Implementation Plan (25 Points) | ||
| Evaluation and Reporting (15 Points) | ||
| Equity, Community and Impact (10 Points) | ||
| Note: Bidders who score 85% or above, will proceed to Phase 3 - Cost Proposal. Bidders who score below 85% will not move on to final cost evaluation. | ||
| 4 | Cost Proposal: | 30 |
| (A) Cost Points Formula = (Lowest Cost Proposal / Bidder's Cost Proposal) x Maximum Points. The responsive and responsible bidder with the lowest cost proposal will receive the maximum points. Other bidders will be based on the Cost Points Formula. If needed, points will be rounded to the nearest thousandth. (15 Points) | ||
| (B) Budget Narrative (15 Points) | ||
| Total Maximum Points for All Phases | 100 |
Initial Points Earned
| Initial Ranking |
| SB Preference Points, if any |
| DVBE Incentive Points, if any |
| ADJUSTED FINAL SCORE |
| FINAL RANKING |
Phase 1 - Admin
| RFP-AIC-25-003 | |||
| Arts In Correction | |||
| Phase 1 - Administrative Criteria (PASS / FAIL) | |||
| A complete bid package will consist of the items listed below (but may not be limited to). For a bid to be responsive and to pass Phase 1, all applicable required attachments (forms), business documents and components of the proposal requirements must be included in the bid package and adhere to the requirements as outlined in this solicitation. All required attachments (forms), business documents and proposal requirements must be submitted in (noneditable) PDF except for Attachment 5: Cost Proposal Worksheet, in which the bidder must use the attached template and submit in Excel format. Bidder is solely responsible for all attachment (forms), if applicable, is completed in full, correctly and contains all the required signatures and dates as needed to be deemed responsive. California Arts Council (CAC) will be conducting due diligence verifications throughout the evaluation process. | |||
| REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS | Received? | Notes / Other Concerns | |
| Attachment 1 : | Required Attachments and Mandatory Business Documents Checklist | Yes / No | |
| Attachment 2 : | Bidder/Proposer Certification Sheet | Yes / No | |
| Attachment 3 : | Bidder Declaration GSPD-05-105 | Yes / No | |
| Attachment 4: | Confidentiality Statement | Yes / No | |
| Attachment 5: | Cost Proposal Worksheet (in Excel) | Yes / No | In Excel? Does not exceed maximum budget? |
| Attachment 6: | Darfur Contracting Act | Yes / No / NA | |
| Attachment 7: | Iran Contracting Act Verification Form | Yes / No / NA | |
| Attachment 8: | Individual & Sole Proprietor (if applicable only) | Yes / No / NA | |
| Attachment 9: | Workers' Compensation Certification (if applicable only) | Yes / No | |
| Attachment 10: | Payee Data Records STD 204 | Yes / No | |
| Attachment 11: | Contractor Certification Clauses CCC 04/2017 | Yes / No | |
| Attachment 12: | GenAI Notification Clause & Reporting | Yes / No | |
| Attachment 13: | DGS PD 843 DVBE Declaration (if applicable) | Yes / No / NA | |
| Attachment 14: | Confirmation Letter Form DVBE Subcontractor (if applicable) | Yes / No / NA | |
| Attachment 15: | Evaluation Plan & Scoring Rubric | Bidder Reference Only | |
| Attachment 16: | CUF Evaluation Worksheet | Bidder Reference Only | |
| Attachment 17: | Prime Contractor's Certification DVBE Subcontractor Report STD 817 (if applicable and upon completion of contract) | Awarded Bidder(s) Only | |
| Attachment 18: | Standard Agreement STD 213 (awarded only) | Bidder Reference Only | |
| Attachment 19: | Exhibit F - Prison Rape Elimination Policy (awarded only) | Awarded Bidder(s) Only | |
| Attachment 20: | Exhibit G - Copyright Assignment (awarded only) | Awarded Bidder(s) Only |
| REQUIRED MANDATORY BUSINESS DOCUMENTS | Received? | Notes / Other Concerns | |
| Copy of the bidder's California Small Business (SB) Certificate, if applicable. | Yes / No / NA | Active; Not expired | |
| Copy of each subcontractor(s) California Small Business (SB) Certificate, if applicable. | Yes / No / NA | Active; Not expired | |
| Copy of the prime/bidder’s California Disabled Veteran Business Enterprise (DVBE) Certificate, if applicable. | Yes / No / NA | Active; Not expired | |
| Copy of subcontractor's California Disabled Veteran Business Enterprise (DVBE) Certificate, if applicable. | Yes / No / NA | Active; Not expired | |
| Copy of bidder’s registration with the California Secretary of State, if applicable. | Yes / No / NA | Active; Not expired | |
| If a nonprofit prime/bidder, copy of IRS designation letter showing your organization has the 501(c)(3) federal tax-exempt status. | Yes / No / NA | Active; Not expired | |
| If prime/bidder is a Joint Powers of Agreement, copy of the agreement. | Yes / No / NA | Active; Not expired | |
| Copy of bidder’s business license or business tax certificate. | Yes / No | Active; Not expired | |
| Copy of the prime/bidder’s liability insurance coverage. (Please review the RFP for complete details on insurance requirements.) | Yes / No | Active; Not expired | |
| Other business document(s) as needed by CAC. | Yes / No / NA | Active; Not expired | |
| PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS | Received? | Notes / Other Concerns | |
| Proposal Requirements: | Refer to Section VII. Proposal Requirements of RFP-AIC-25-003 | ||
| Organizational Capacity and Experience (and all its components) | Yes / No | 3-page section limit | |
| Program Design and Implementation Plan (and all its components) | Yes / No | 5-page section limit | |
| Evaluation and Reporting (and all its components) | Yes / No | 1-page section limit | |
| Equity, Community and Impact (and all its components) | Yes / No | 1-page section limit | |
| Cost Proposal Worksheet (Attachment 5 above; and all its components) | Yes / No | In Excel only - 1 cost proposal only | |
| Budget Narrative (and all its components) | Yes / No | 1-page section limit |
| SUMMARY: |
| All required attachments (forms), business documents, if applicable, and proposal requirements, as outlined in this solicitation, were submitted in sequential order with their bid package? YES / NO |
| Bidder passes all due diligence checks? YES / NO. (See "Other Verification" tab.) |
| If yes, the bidder passes Phase 1: Administrative Criteria and can proceed to Phase 2 - Technical Proposal Review. |
Other Verifications
| RFP-AIC-25-003 |
| Arts In Correction |
| Due diligence to be conducted by California Arts Council |
| 1) If applicable, bidder (or their Do Business As - DBA) must be in good standing with California's Secretary of State. |
| 2) Bidder must not have a negative contractor evaluation on file with Department of General Services Office of Legal Services. Refer to PCC section 10371 and SCM Volume 1, Section 3.02.3. |
| 3) Prohibition on Tax Delinquency: Bidder must not be listed as a tax delinquent with Franchise Tax Board and/or Department of Tax and Fee Administration. |
| 4) Bidder must not have an active state or federal tax liens, suspensions or delinquent filings. |
| 5) CAC will or may be conducting a Commercially Useful Evaluation and Determination and will or may be competed for the bidder and for each subcontractor as listed on their Bidder Declaration GSPD-05-105. |
https://www.dgs.ca.gov/-/media/Divisions/PD/OSDS/Certification/CUF/CUFEvaluationandDeterminationWorksheet.pdf?la=en&hash=7C4EB3152024272CB12D716A34A30FD758DDC7FB
| 6) If applicable, SB/Micro/DVBE must be in active status or not expired. |
| 7) If applicable, 501(c )(3) must be in active status. |
| 8) Bidder must be a legal resident of the State of California, authorized to conduct business within the state, residents of the region and/or demonstrate presence in the region they want to service. |
| 9) Bidder has appropriate liability insurance coverage and is able to name CAC as an additional insured. CAC reserves the right to have Department of General Services Office of Risk and Insurance Management (ORIM) review a bidder's insurance coverage to ensure minimum insurance coverage are met as may be required by the State. Refer to https://www.dgs.ca.gov/ORIM. |
| 10) California Arts Council (CAC) may, at its sole discretion, perform further due diligence, verification or independent research on bidders, as deemed necessary, to ensure compliance and to support a comprehensive evaluation process to assess the bidder's qualifications and capacity to perform the proposed work. |
Phase 2 Tech Proposal
| RFP-AIC-25-003 |
| Arts In Correction |
| Phase 2 - Technical Proposal |
| Note: Bidders who score 85% or above, will proceed to Phase 3 - Cost Proposal. Bidders who score below 85% will not move on to final cost evaluation. |
| ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY AND EXPERIENCE (20 Points Maximum) | Percentage of Points Awarded | Interpretation | General Basis for Points Assigned | |
| Rating/Scoring Criteria | Maximum Points | Over 80% | Exceptional | Category is addressed with the highest degree of confidence in the response. The response exceeds the CAC's needs, requirements or expectations with superior background/experience/expertise. |
| (1) Describe your organization's mission and experience in delivering arts education or reabilitation programming. (a) Include length of experience, populations served, and examples of previous work in correctional, institutional, or community settings. | 5 Points | Up to 80% | Excellent | Response fully meets the CAC's needs, requirements or expectations with a high degree of confidence in the response. Proposal offers one or more enhancing feature, method, or approach exceeding basic expectations. |
| (2) Describe your organization's administrative and fiscal capacity to manage state contracts, including compliance, invoicing and reporting. | 5 Points | Up to 60% | Good | Response fully addresses category being scored. Good degree of |
confidence in the response. Minimal weaknesses are acceptable.
| (3) If your organization has held previous CAC or CDCR contracts, describe performance and lessons learned. | 5 Points | Up to 40% | Adequate | Response (i.e. content and/or explanation offered) is adequate to meet the CAC's needs, requirements or expectations. Any omission(s), flaw(s), or defect(s), are inconsequential and acceptable. |
| (4) Provide resumes/CVs for key staff and Arts Providers. Include institutional assignments for Arts Providers, as well as, artistic samples (no more than 5 examples per provider) that demonstrates their skill and experience working in culturally diverse or trauma-informed contexts. | 5 Points | Up to 20% | Minimally Adequate | Minimally addresses the category being scored, but one or more major considerations of the category are not addressed or are addressed in such a limited way that it results in a low degree of confidence in the response. |
| Under 19% | Inadequate | Fails to address any portion of the category being scored. The omission(s), flaw(s), or defect(s) are significant and unacceptable. | ||
| PROGRAM DESIGN & IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (25 Points Maximum) | ||||
| Rating/ Scoring Criteria | Maximum Possible Points |
| (1) Describe your proposed arts discipline(s) (e.g., visual arts, music, creative writing, theater, dance, interdisciplinary) and how your curriculum aligns with AIC program goals. | 10 Points |
| (2) Explain your instructional approach and schedule. |
-How will you adapt to institutional restrictions, cancellations, or lockdowns?
| -How will you ensure consistency and quality of instruction? | 5 Points | |
| (3) Describe your approach to participant engagement and inclusion. | ||
| How do you support emotional safety, positive group dynamics, and equitable access? | 5 Points | |
| (4) If proposing tablet-based programming, describe how you will ensure comparable engagement, interaction, and learning outcomes to in-person delivery. No points will be deducted if proposer chooses not to propose tablet-based programming into the final proposal. | 5 Points |
| EVALUATION AND REPORTING (15 Points Maximum) | |
| Rating/Scoring Criteria | Maximum Points |
| (1) Describe how you will document, evaluate, and report outcomes. |
-How will you track attendance, participation, and cancellations by institution and class?
| -How will you measure completion rates and collect pre- and post-program data? | 10 Points | |
| (2) Describe how evaluation findings will be used to inform continuous improvement and contribute to statewide learning about arts in rehabilitation. | 5 Points | |
| EQUITY, COMMUNITY, AND IMPACT (10 Points Maximum) | ||
| Rating/ Scoring Criteria | Maximum Possible Points |
(1) Explain how your program integrates equity, inclusion, and cultural relevance.
| -How does your team reflect or honor the identities and experiences of the incarcerated participants served? | 5 Points |
| (2) Describe the intended impact of your program on participants, institutions, and communities. |
-What changes do you expect to see in participants’ behavior, self-expression, and sense of belonging? 5 Points
Phase 3 Cost Proposal
| RFP-AIC-25-003 | ||
| Arts In Corrections | ||
| Phase 3 - Cost Proposal: Comparative Cost Evaluation and Budget Narrative | ||
| COMPARATIVE COST EVALUATION | ||
| The responsive and responsible bidder with the lowest cost proposal will receive the maximum cost points. | ||
| Evaluation Element | Maximum Points | Methodology |
| Comparative Cost Evaluation | 15 | Scores are determined by a standard formula and are therefore not assigned by the Evaluation Committee. |
FORMULA: Cost Points = (Lowest Cost Proposal / Bidder's Cost Proposal) x Maximum Cost Points
Standard review: Assessment of Cost Worksheet (s) and/or other due diligence information/documents.
| BUDGET NARRATIVE EVALUATION | |||||||
| Budget Narrative Elements | Maximum Points | Over 80% of Total Points | Up to 80% of Total Points | Up to 60% Total Points | Up to 40% of the Total Points | Up to 20% of the Total Points | Under 20% of the Total Points |
| -Describe the intended impact of your program on participants, institutions, and communities. |
-Basis of Estimate – How did you estimate hours, rates, and materials?
-Justification – Why the expense is necessary to fulfill the scope of work?
-Cost Allocation – How shared costs (admin, materials, etc.) are distributed across institutions (if applicable)?
-Reporting Costs – Explanation of staff time and tools used to complete evaluation and reporting requirements.
-Canceled Sessions – Procedures for documenting attempted access and obtaining institutional verification.
| NOTE: Narrative justification of costs Prioritizes direct programming, Clear rationale for costs incurred and Sound fiscal systems to ensure tracking of expenditures. | 15 | EXCEPTIONAL |
| Category is addressed with the highest degree of confidence in the response. The response exceeds the CAC's needs, requirements or expectations with superior background/experience/expertise. | EXCELLENT | |
| Response fully meets the CAC's needs, requirements or expectations with a high degree of confidence in the response. Proposal offers one or more enhancing feature, method, or approach exceeding basic expectations. | GOOD | |
| Response fully addresses category being scored. Good degree of confidence in the response. Minimal weaknesses are acceptable. | ADEQUATE | |
| Response (i.e. content and/or explanation offered) is adequate to meet the CAC's needs, requirements or expectations. Any omission(s), flaw(s), or defect(s), are inconsequential and acceptable. | MINIMALLY ADEQUATE | |
| Minimally addresses the category being scored, but one or more major considerations of the category are not addressed or are addressed in such a limited way that it results in a low degree of confidence in the response. | INADEQUATE |
Fails to address any portion of the category being scored. The omission(s), flaw(s), or defect(s) are significant and unacceptable.
TOTAL 30
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .