Award Letter and Synopsis 12-18-2020.pdf

Version 4 Revised: 8/2019

Award Recommendation Notice of Intent to Award Number: 210000000144

December 18, 2020

The Department of Technology, Management, & Budget’s Procurement office has completed the evaluation of RFP No. 210000000198 Radar and Lidar Speed Measurement Equipment and has recommended an award to the following bidders in the amounts specified below, pending State Administrative Board approval, if applicable. More information on the State Administrative Board can be found at: State Administrative Board.

Awarded Bidder Award Amount Applied Concepts, DBA Stalker Radar $2,098,800.00 Kustom Signals Inc. $200,000.00 D&K Engineering, DBA Decatur Electronics $0.00 (MiDEAL Only) Laser Technology, Inc. $0.00 (MiDEAL Only) MPH Industries, Inc. $0.00 (MiDEAL Only) Total: $2,298,800.00

Bidders who were not recommended for the award are encouraged to schedule a debriefing session with the Solicitation Manager. The debriefing session will provide the bidder with the State’s rationale on why the bidder was not recommended for the award. The Solicitation Manager may be contacted as follows:

Sue Cieciwa, Solicitation Manager cieciwas@michigan.gov 517-249-0458

Background Information:

This Request for Proposal (RFP) was to solicit responses for selection of a Contractor to provide Radar and Lidar Speed Measurement Equipment. The term of this contract is three years, with up to two one-year renewal options.

Bidders:

The RFP was posted on SIGMA VSS on November 16, 2020 for 16 days. The following bidders submitted proposals by the published due date of November 2, 2020.

Bidder Address City, State Zip SDVOB*

Applied Concepts, Inc. DBA Stalker Radar 855 E. Collins Blvd., Richardson, TX 75081 No D&K Engineering Inc. DBA Decatur Electronics 16690 Goldentop Road, San Diego, CA 92127 No Kustom Signals Inc. 9652 Loiret Blvd., Lenexa, KS 66219 No Laser Technology, Inc. 6912 S. Quentin Street, Centennial, CO 80112 No MPH Industries, Inc. 316 E. 9th St., Owensboro, KY 42303 No

STATE OF MICHIGAN PROCUREMENT

Department of Technology, Management, and Budget

525 W. ALLEGAN ST., LANSING, MICHIGAN 48913

P.O. BOX 30026, LANSING, MICHIGAN 48909

https://www.michigan.gov/dtmb/0,5552,7-358-82550_85746_48756---,00.html

*SDVOB: Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Business

Evaluation Synopsis

I. Evaluation Process

A Responsible Vendor is a vendor that demonstrates it has the ability to successfully perform the duties identified by the solicitation. A Responsive proposal is one that is submitted in accordance with the solicitation instructions and meets all mandatory requirements identified in the solicitation.

Proposal Instructions, Mandatory Minimum Requirements

To avoid disqualification, the bidder must provide documentation to support the following:

• The Bidder must be the manufacturer, or an authorized distributor of the speed measurement products proposed to the State. The State reserves the right to independently verify authorized distributor status directly with the manufacturer.

Only proposals meeting the mandatory minimum requirements will be considered for evaluation.

Proposal Instructions, Evaluation Process

The State will evaluate each proposal based on the following factors:

Technical Evaluation Criteria Weight

1. Schedule A, Statement of Work, Section 1. General

Requirements and Section 3. Staffing 30

2. Schedule A, Statement of Work, Section 2. Service Levels 25

3. Schedule A, Statement of Work, Section 5. Ordering, Section 6.

Delivery, Section 7. Acceptance, Section 8. Invoice and Payment and Section 9. Project Plan 20

4. Vendor Questions Worksheet 25 Total 100

Proposals receiving 80 or more technical evaluation points will have pricing evaluated and considered for award.

The full evaluation process is stated in the RFP Proposal Instructions.

II. Evaluation Method

Responses to this solicitation were reviewed by the Solicitation Manager in collaboration with Subject Matter Experts, which consisted of the following individuals:

F/Lt. Steve Temelko Michigan State Police

F/Lt. Thomas Wanless Department of Natural resources

Sgt. Roger Hunt Michigan State Police

Sgt. Mark Papineau Department of Natural Resources

Paula Hurst, Buyer Michigan State Police

Lisa Crozier-Green, Buyer Department of Natural Resources

Sue Cieciwa, Category Specialist DTMB, Central Procurement Services

III. Evaluation Results

A. Applied Concepts, Inc., DBA Stalker Radar The Evaluation Team determined that Applied Concepts, Inc. DBA Stalker Radar based on a score of 100/100, did meet the requirements of this RFP. This determination was accomplished by evaluating their responses to the Technical Evaluation Criteria.

1. Schedule A Statement of Work, Section 1. and Section 3. SCORE 30/30 The Evaluation Team determined that, overall, the responses were satisfactory.

Section 1 General Requirements Section 3. Staffing

2. Schedule A Statement of Work, Section 2. Service Levels SCORE 25/25

3. Schedule A Statement of Work, Section 5, Section 6, Section 7, Section 8, and Section 9.

SCORE 20/20

The Evaluation Team determined that, overall, the responses were satisfactory.

Section 5. Ordering Section 6. Delivery Section 7. Acceptance Section 8. Invoice and Payment Section 9. Project Plan

4. Vendor Questions Worksheet SCORE 25/25

Total Score: 100/100

B. D&K Engineering Inc., DBA Decatur Electronics

The Evaluation Team determined that D&K Engineering Inc. DBA Decatur Electronics based on a score of 98/100, did meet the requirements of this RFP. This determination was accomplished by evaluating their responses to the Technical Evaluation Criteria.

1. Schedule A Statement of Work, Section 1. and Section 3. SCORE 28/30

The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory, but the following deficiency was noted:

1.3 Recall Requirements and Procedures – The bidder described its recall procedures, “If there was a recall for any of the products included in this contract, the Production Operations Manager will communicate it to the State of Michigan and any other agencies/departments involved in this contract within 48 hours of the occurrence.” However, the RFP specifies “The Contractor must notify the State’s Contract Administrator and Program Manager via email and phone call or message within one (1) business day of any recall or safety notices relating to any and all speed measurement equipment and components purchased under the Contract. In addition, this notice must be received in writing within three (3) business days, as specified in Section 2. Notices of the Standard Contract Terms of this Contract.”

The Evaluation Team determined that, overall, the responses were satisfactory.

Section 5. Ordering Section 6. Delivery Section 7. Acceptance

Total Score: 98/100

C. Kustom Signals Inc.

The Evaluation Team determined that Kustom Signals, Inc. based on a score of 100/100, did meet the requirements of this RFP. This determination was accomplished by evaluating their responses to the Technical Evaluation Criteria.

1. Schedule A Statement of Work, Section 1. and Section 3. SCORE 30/30

The Evaluation Team determined that, overall, the responses were satisfactory.

Section 5. Ordering Section 6. Delivery Section 7. Acceptance

Total Score: 100 /100

D. Laser Technology, Inc.

The Evaluation Team determined that Laser Technology, Inc. based on a score of 96/100, did meet the

1. Schedule A Statement of Work, Section 1. and Section 3. SCORE 26/30

Section 1 General Requirements The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory, but the following deficiency was noted:

1.3 Recall Requirements and Procedures – the bidder stated, “See attached Return Policy.”

However, the evaluation team clarified with the bidder the recall procedures were not included in the return policy.

Section 3. Staffing

3.1 Contractor Representative

3.2 Key Personnel

3.3 Customer Service Toll-Free Number

3.4 Technical Support, Repairs and Maintenance

3.5 Disclosure of Subcontractors

3.6 Security

The Evaluation Team determined that, overall, the responses were satisfactory.

Section 5. Ordering Section 6. Delivery Section 7. Acceptance

4. Vendor Questions Worksheet SCORE 2525

Total Score: 96/100

E. MPH Industries, Inc.

The Evaluation Team determined that MPH Industries, Inc. based on a score of 96/100, did meet the

1. Schedule A Statement of Work, Section 1. and Section 3. SCORE 27/30 The Evaluation Team determined that, overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory, but the following deficiency was noted:

Section 3. Staffing

3.1 Contractor Representative

Contractor Representative was not specifically designated.

3.2 Key Personnel

VP Sales, Regional Sales Manager and Customer Service/Technical Manager were not specifically designated.

3. Schedule A Statement of Work, Section 5, Section 6, Section 7, Section 8, and Section 9.

SCORE 20/20

The Evaluation Team determined that, overall, the responses were satisfactory.

Section 5. Ordering Section 6. Delivery Section 7. Acceptance

4. Vendor Questions Worksheet SCORE 24/25 The Evaluation Team determined that, overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory, but the following deficiency was noted:

2. Company Background Information – Private company, did not state gross annual sales for each of the last 5 years.

Total Score: 96/100

IV. Technical Evaluation Summary

Selection Criteria

Applied Concepts

D&K Eng Decatur

Kustom Signals

Laser Technology

MPH

Industries

1 Schedule A, Statement of Work, Section 1. General Requirements and Section 3. Staffing (30)

30 28 30 26 27

2 Schedule A, Statement of Work, Section 2. Service Levels (25)

25 25 25 25 25

3 Schedule A, Statement of Work, Section 5. Ordering, Section 6.

Delivery, Section 7. Acceptance, Section 8. Invoice and Payment and Section 9. Project Plan (20)

20 20 20 20 20

4 Vendor Questions Worksheet (25) 25 25 25 25 24 Total (100) 100 98 100 96 96

V. Pricing Summary Pricing was evaluated for the bidders who passed technical. The RFP specified estimated 3-year quantities for the following categories: radar (in car), radar (hand held) and lidar. Bidders quoted unit prices for various models in the various categories, as specified below. They also quoted options, extended warranties and parts and accessories.

Bidder

Radar and Lidar Speed Measurement Equipment Total Bid Amount

1 Applied Concepts, Inc. DBA Stalker Radar Radar and Lidar N/A 2 D&K Engineering, DBA Decatur Electronics Radar In Car Only N/A 3 Kustom Signals Inc. Radar and Lidar N/A 4 Laser Technology, Inc. Lidar Only N/A 5 MPH Industries, Inc. Radar and Lidar N/A

VI. Negotiations:

The Solicitation Manager requested a reduced price proposal for all line items bid from all bidders. The bidders responded as follows.

Applied Concepts offered tiered pricing (minimum quantity purchases of 10 and 25 units) on six items.

D&K Engineering offered price reductions on one radar (in car) model, Vehicle Interface Portal 2, and the warranty extension to 4 and 5 years.

Kustom Signals did not reduce their price proposal.

Laser Technology did not reduce their price proposal.

MPH Industries did not reduce their price proposal.

Only one of the bidders offered a prompt payment discount as specified in their proposal response to Schedule B – Pricing, Quick Payment Terms. Kustom Signals offered a 2% discount off invoice if paid within 10 days after receipt of invoice.

VII. Award Recommendation:

Award recommendation is made to the responsive and responsible Bidder who offers the best value to the State of Michigan. Best value is based on the proposal meeting the minimum point threshold and offering the best combination of the factors stated in the Proposal Instructions Evaluation Process section, and price.

The Subject Matter Experts confirmed that all models of radars and lidars that the bidders proposed meet the specifications, are included on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) Conforming Product List (CPL), and can be included in the resulting contracts. The Solicitation Manager in collaboration with Subject Matter Experts recommend a multiple award to all bidders, providing the best value to the State, in the amounts specified below for the three year contract term to provide the agencies and MiDEAL members a high level of choices among the various models and budget amounts of speed measurement equipment available. These estimated contract values established by the agencies are projected expenditures, based on historical purchases:

Awarded Bidder Estimated 3-Year Contract Value

Applied Concepts, DBA Stalker Radar $2,098,800.00 Kustom Signals Inc.. $200,000.00 D&K Engineering Inc. DBA Decatur Electronics $0.00 (MiDEAL Only Laser Technology, Inc. $0.00 (MiDEAL Only MPH Industries, Inc. $0.00 (MiDEAL Only Total: $2,298,800.00