Award Recommendation and Evaluation Synopsis.docx

Michigan.gov/MiProcurement

Michigan.gov/MiProcurement

AWARD RECOMMENDATION

The Department of Technology, Management, & Budget’s Financial Services office has completed the evaluation of RFP 250000000212 Labor Market Data System and has recommended an award to Chmura Economics & Analytics, LLC in the amount of 187,500.00, 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:

Christopher Martin, Solicitation Manager martinc20@michigan.gov Background Information:

This Request for Proposal (RFP) was to solicit responses for selection of a Contractor to provide a system with labor market information that can help drive recruitment and retention efforts. Able to quantify workforce recruitment efforts and benchmark them against national trends. The solution should provide more detail than what is available through publicly available data sets from the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics and U.S. Census Bureau. The term of this contract is five (5) years, with up to five (5) one-year renewal options.

Bidders:

The RFP was posted on SIGMA VSS on 10/25/2024 for 33 days. The following bidders submitted proposals by the published due date of 11/27/2024.

*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 that received 80 or more evaluation points had pricing evaluated and were considered for award.

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

II. Evaluation Method Responses to this solicitation were reviewed by Joint Evaluation Committee, which consisted of the following individuals:

Christopher Martin, Solicitation Manager DTMB-Financial Services - Operations Josh Groeneveld, Automation Manager MDOT-Enterprise Information Management

Jeff LaBean, State Administrative Manager DTMB-Agency Services supporting MDOT John Scrivens, IT Contract Coordinator DTMB-Agency Services supporting MDOT

James Fults, Workforce Programs and Recruitment Unit Manager MDOT-Office of Organizational Development

III. Evaluation Results A. Economic Modeling, LLC Economic Modeling, LLC has not met the requirements of being responsive and responsible due to incomplete and blank responses throughout the solicitation response.

Total Score: Non-Responsive B. Chmura Economics & Analytics, LLC The Evaluation Team determined that Chmura Economics & Analytics, LLC, based on a score of 99.5, 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 The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were satisfactory, no deficiencies were noted.

2. Schedule A, Table 1 – Business Specification Worksheet The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were satisfactory, no deficiencies were noted.

3. Vendor Question Worksheet/Resume Templates The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory, but the following deficiency was noted:

a. The Security Officer lacked security certifications.

Total Score: 99.5/100 C. Geographic Solutions, Inc.

The Evaluation Team determined that Geographic Solutions, Inc, based on a score of 99, 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 The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory, but the following deficiency was noted:

a. Section 5 – ADA compliance. No PAT or VPAT was provided for the proposed solution. (1 point deduction)

2. Schedule A, Table 1 – Business Specification Worksheet The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were satisfactory, no deficiencies were noted.

3. Vendor Question Worksheet/Resume Templates The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were satisfactory, no deficiencies were noted.

Total Score: 99/100 D. Monster Government Solutions, LLC The Evaluation Team determined that Monster Government Solutions, LLC based on a score of 96.5, 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 The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory, but the following deficiencies were noted:

a. Section 5 – ADA compliance. No PAT or VPAT was provided for the proposed solution. (1 point deduction)

b. Section 15 – Transaction Responsibilities. No Schedule G provided. (1 point deduction)

2. Schedule A, Table 1 – Business Specification Worksheet The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory, but the following deficiencies were noted:

a. Requirement 2 – Only partially meet at the time of evaluation. (1 point deduction)

b. Requirement 5 – Does not export to MS Word (0.5-point deduction)

3. Vendor Question Worksheet/Resume Templates The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were satisfactory, no deficiencies were noted.

Total Score: 96.5/100

IV. Technical Evaluation Summary

V.

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

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.

Chmura Economics & Analytics, LLC provided the best value to the State. Best value factors for Award Recommendation include: No redlines to the Terms or Schedules in addition to lowest cost.

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 Chmura Economics & Analytics, LLC in the amount of $187,500.00.

Version 2024-2 image1.png