Award Letter and Synopsis 200000002242 - Electronic Imaging Equipment and Services 3-2-21.docx

STATE OF MICHIGAN

CENTRAL PROCUREMENT SERVICES

Department of Technology, Management & Budget

525 W. Allegan St., Lansing, MI 48933

Recommendation of Award

The Department of Technology, Management, & Budget’s Central Procurement Services office has completed the evaluation of RFP 200000002242 Medical Imaging, General Health Care and Optical Equipment, Installation and Services and has recommended an award to Radiology Imaging Solutions, Inc. in the amount of $952,281.50, pending State Administrative Board approval, if applicable. More information on the State Administrative Board can be found at: State Administrative Board.

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:

Lisa Spitzley, Solicitation Manager spitzleyl4@michigan.gov

(517) 249-0440

Background Information:

This Request for Proposal (RFP) was to solicit responses for selection of a Contractor to provide Imaging equipment, Picture Archiving Communications System (PACS) imaging system, preventative maintenance (PM) services and repair services for general health care equipment, optical equipment and computerized imaging equipment in MDOC healthcare clinics located inside the MDOC correctional facilities. The term of this contract is 2 years and 9 months, with up to 5 one-year renewal options.

Bidders:

The RFP was posted on SIGMA VSS on October 5, 2020. The following bidders submitted proposals by the published due date of November 9, 2020.

City, State Zip

SDVOB*

*SDVOB: Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Business

Version 1 Revised: 07-28-2017

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.

Solicitation Instructions, Section 8, Evaluation Process.

IMAGING EQUIPMENT, PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR SERVICES;

OR IF BIDDING A COMBINATION OF EQUIPMENT PURCHASES AND PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR SERVICES

EQUIPMENT ONLY (GENERAL HEALTH CARE AND/OR OPTICAL):

PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR SERVICES (GENERAL HEALTH CARE AND/OR OPTICAL):

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 a Joint Evaluation Committee, which consisted of the following individuals:

Voting

Lisa Lehnert, Buyer - MDOC

Angela Hamilton, Medical Tech Supervisor, MDOC

Kelly Short, Dental Aide, MDOC

Bryan Deeren, RN, HUM, MDOC

Lisa Spitzley, Category Analyst DTMB, Central Procurement Services

Non-Voting (Advisory)

Liz Solomon, Health Informatics Manager, MDOC

Jeremy Parker, Administrative Assistant, MDOC BHCS

Karen Keiffer, Contract Monitor, MDOC

Mary Ann Hilton, Contract Monitor, MDOC

Sharene Johnson, Contract Manager, MDOC

III. Evaluation Results Radiology Imaging Solutions (RIS) The Evaluation Team determined that RIS, based on a score of 92/100, 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, Sections 1.1 thru 1.8; 2.1 thru 2.12; 3.1 thru 3.3; 4.1 thru 4.2; 6.3 thru 6.4. (52/55) The Evaluation Team determined that most of the responses were satisfactory; the following deficiencies in this section were noted:

a. Section 1.7, Quality Assurance, Bidder accepted requirement and provided a task check off sheet, however response lacked detail of process.

b. Section 2.2 ADA Compliance, Bidder accepted requirement, however bidder did not provide details on how they would maintain ADA compliance.

c. Section 6.4, Reporting, Bidder accepted requirement, however, Bidder did not provide, in detail their reporting capabilities.

2. Staffing - Schedule A; Statement of Work - Section 5.1-5.11 (19/20) The Evaluation Team determined that most the responses were satisfactory; the following deficiencies were noted.

a. 5.9, Bidder did not provide scope of background checks, lacked detail.

3. Experience - Vendor Questions Worksheet (21/25) The Evaluation Team determined that most of the responses were satisfactory, and the following deficiencies were noted:

a. Experience Section, Experience 1, Results bidder provided lacked detail.

b. Experience Section, Experience 3, Size of provided experience not comparable to this project, the results bidder provided lacked detail, and contact email address was not provided for company listed in experience.

Total Score: 92/100

B. Agilti Health

The Evaluation Team determined that Agilent, based on a score of 75/100, did not meet the requirements of this RFP. This determination was accomplished by evaluating their responses to the Technical Evaluation Criteria listed in Section 8 of the Proposal Instructions. This bidder provided a proposal for Preventative Maintenance and Repair Services (General Health Care and/or Optical).

1. Schedule A; Statement of Work, Schedule A, Statement of Work, Sections 1.2 thru 1.5; 1.7 thru 1.8; 2.2 thru 2.12; 3.3; 4.1 thru 4.2; 6.3 thru 6.4 (40/55) The Evaluation Team determined that some of the responses were satisfactory; the following deficiencies were noted:

a. Section 1.2.B.3, Imaging PM Inspections, Bidder did not supply example of PM findings summary in sample report supplied, only information that PM was completed.

b. 1,3.C, Repair Services, Loaner Equipment – Bidder indicates they will not provide loaner equipment.

c. Section 2.2., IT Policies – Bidder did not agree to IT policies; Equipment to be serviced has IT components, IT policies apply.

2. Staffing - Schedule A; Statement of Work - Section 5.1-5.11 (12/20) The Evaluation Team determined that some of the responses were satisfactory; the following deficiencies were noted.

a. Section 5.2, Contract Administrator, Bidder did not provide a contract administrator.

b. Section 5.3, Contract Manager, Bidder did not provide a contract manager.

c. Section 5.7, Organizational Chart, Organizational chart, Bidder provided lacked company leadership information.

d. Section 5.8. Disclosure of Subcontractors, Bidder did not agree with requirement.

3. Experience - Vendor Questions Worksheet (23/25) The Evaluation Team determined that most of the responses were satisfactory, and the following deficiencies were noted:

a. Section 2, Company Background, - Bidder did not list gross annual sales for last 5 years. Bidder did not indicate if gross revenue will increase sales by more than 25%.

b. Experience Section, Experience 3, Experience Bidder provided lacked details in their results.

Total Score: 75/100

IV. Technical Evaluation Summary

VI. Pricing Summary

Pricing was evaluated for the bidder who passed technical, RIS. The following is a summary of their price proposal:

VII. Negotiations:

Second Round Pricing Second Round Pricing was requested of Bidder who passed technical, RIS, to provide total cost PM Pricing for General Healthcare which RIS provided and is shown below:

VIII. 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 factors stated in Technical Evaluation Criteria, Section 8 Evaluation Process, and price. Radiology Imaging Services, Inc. provided the best value to the State. Award Recommendation is made to Radiology Imaging Services, Inc., in the amount of $952,281.50 to cover base years of contract, this includes annual preventative maintenance costs and EXA Software platform costs listed in Schedule B pricing in the estimated amount of $452,218.50 and an additional estimated amount of $500,000.00 in anticipated new equipment and estimated repair costs for service and parts, based on Schedule B pricing and MDOC anticipated repair and equipment needs.

image1.jpeg image2.png image3.png image4.png image5.png image6.png image7.png image8.png image9.png image10.png image11.png