Award Recommendation and Evaluation Synopsis.docx

Michigan.gov/MiProcurement

Michigan.gov/MiProcurement

AWARD RECOMMENDATION

The Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy’s Procurement office has completed the evaluation of RFP# 240000003127 Aquifer Data Assessment Tool and has recommended an award to Fishbeck Thompson Carr & Huber, Inc. in the amount of $123,670, 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 VanOstran, Solicitation Manager vanostranl@michigan.gov 517-599-7680

Background Information:

This Request for Proposal (RFP) was to solicit responses for selection of a Contractor to provide an Aquifer Data Assessment Tool. The term of this contract is one year, with up to one one-year renewal options.

Bidders:

The RFP was posted on SIGMA VSS on September 24, 2024, for 30 days. The following bidders submitted proposals by the published due date of October 24, 2024.

Grand Rapids MI 49546

Canton MI 48118

*SDVOB: Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Business **GDBE: Geographically Disadvantaged Business Enterprise

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: Evaluation Process

Proposals receiving 80 or more technical evaluation points will have pricing evaluated and be 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 Lisa VanOstran and Lena Pappas, Senior Geologist from the Geologic Resources Management Division.

III. Evaluation Results A. Bidder # 1 – Fishbeck Thompson Carr & Huber, Inc.

The Evaluation Team determined that Fishbeck Thompson Carr & Huber, Inc. based on a score of 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 Requirements The Evaluation Team determined that the responses were satisfactory.

2. Schedule A Statement of Work, Section 3 Staffing The Evaluation Team determined that the responses were satisfactory.

3. Schedule A Statement of Work, Section 4 Project Management The Evaluation Team determined that the responses were satisfactory.

4. Vendor Questions Worksheet The Evaluation Team determined that the responses were satisfactory.

Total Score: 100/100 B. Bidder # 2 – Mannik & Smith Group, Inc.

The Evaluation Team determined that Mannik & Smith Group, Inc. based on a score of 90, 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 Requirements The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory, but the following deficiencies were noted:

a. Bidder’s proposal includes using software that would not be ideal to completing the contract activities.

2. Schedule A Statement of Work, Section 3 Staffing The Evaluation Team determined that the responses were satisfactory.

3. Schedule A Statement of Work, Section 4 Project Management The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory, but the following deficiencies were noted:

a. Bidder’s proposal includes using software that would not be ideal to completing the contract activities.

4. Vendor Questions Worksheet The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory, but the following deficiencies were noted:

a. Bidder disclosed previous labor, antidiscrimination, and/or environmental laws compliance issues.

Total Score: 90/100 IV. Technical Evaluation Summary

V. Pricing Summary Pricing was evaluated for the bidders who passed technical. The following is a summary of their price proposals:

VI. Award Recommendation Fishbeck Thompson Carr & Huber, Inc. provided the best value to the State. Best value factors for Award Recommendation include: the software the bidder proposes for analysis is compatible with EGLE programs and offers future support for additional coding needs beyond the completion of this project. The Program Manager for the subcontractor (Michigan State University) is a subject matter expert in several ongoing programmatic updates and has significant experience and knowledge that will bring added value to this project. The visualization of workflow will facilitate discussions with all technical levels of external parties. The proposed identification of low-confidence prediction areas will provide additional programmatic focus for future data collection efforts. The bidder also proposes presenting this work at the International Association of Great Lakes Research (IAGLR) which will increase program visibility.

As part of the best value determination, overall economic impact to the State of Michigan was considered and is not a determinative factor in making this award.

Award Recommendation is made to Fishbeck Thompson Carr & Huber, Inc. in the amount of $123,670.

Version 2024-2 image1.png