Award Recommendation and Synopsis.docx

STATE OF MICHIGAN PROCUREMENT

Award Recommendation The Department of Natural Resources Procurement office has completed the evaluation of Request for Proposal 190000002632 for Rye Planting for Wexford and Missaukee Counties, DNR Wildlife Division and has recommended a split award to the following vendors, in the following amounts:

Highland Forestry and Food Plots: Units 1 and 2, $19,425.00 Green Pastures: Unit 2, $3,580.50

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 Crozier-Green, Solicitation Manager CrozierGreenL@michigan.gov

Background Information:

This Request for Proposal (RFP) was to solicit responses for selection of a Contractor to provide field preparation, fertilizing and planting services in Wexford and Missaukee Counties. The term of this contract is approximately SIX WEEKS.

Bidders:

The RFP was posted on SIGMA VSS on June 27, 2019 for a period of eleven calendar days. The following bidders submitted proposals by the published due date of July 8, 2019.

City, State Zip

SDVOB*

Cadillac, MI 49601 No

Merritt, MI 49667 No

Gladwin, MI 48624 No

*SDVOB: Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Business

Version 2 Revised: 2/2019 Version 2 Revised: 2/2019 Evaluation Synopsis I. Evaluation Process A Responsible Vendor is a vendor that demonstrates 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.

A responsive proposal is one that is submitted in accordance with the proposal instructions and meets all requirements identified in the solicitation. A responsible vendor successfully demonstrates, by the responses contained in a responsive proposal, that the vendor has the ability to perform the duties identified by the solicitation. Proposals which are not submitted in accordance with the solicitation instructions, or which do not provide the information requested, may be considered non-responsive. The State may request vendor clarification on vague or ambiguous responses but cannot request clarification if no response is included. Proposal considered non-responsive may not be considered for award recommendation.

Proposals were to include complete responses to

· Vendor Questions Worksheet

· Schedule A – Statement of Work

· Schedule B1, Part III – Vendor Price Quote

TECHNICAL EVALUATION

The Vendor Questions Worksheet will be evaluated to determine whether the vendor possesses the relevant experience to successfully provide the Contract Activities.

Schedule A – Statement of Work will be evaluated to determine whether the vendor has demonstrated the ability to meet the required specifications and to comply with State requirements, and to determine whether equipment proposal was adequate to complete the Contract Activities.

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

PRICE EVALUATION

Schedule B – Vendor Price Quote will be evaluated to determine whether the price proposed for the Contract Activities is within the State’s anticipated fair market value. Schedule B – Vendor Price Quote must be completed and a price for each service included in the proposal must be submitted as an attachment to the proposal entered in SIGMA VSS.

The State may utilize all bidder information, without regard to a proposal’s technical score, to determine fair market value for the services sought. The State is not obligated to accept the lowest price proposal. If applicable, the State’s evaluation will include consideration of a bidder’s qualified disabled veteran (QDV) status under MCL 18.1261(8). Additional information on the QDV preference is available at: http://michigan.gov/micontractconnect/0,https://www.michigan.gov/dtmb/0,5552,7-358-82550_85746_48677-412612--,00.html,7-225-48677-123519--,00.html.

The State strongly encourages strict adherence to the Contract Terms. The State reserves the right to deem a bid non-responsive for failure to accept the Contract Terms. Nevertheless, the bidder may submit proposed changes to the Contract Terms in track changes (i.e., visible edits) with an explanation of the bidder’s need for each proposed change. Failure to include track changes with an explanation of the bidder’s need for the proposed change constitutes the bidder’s acceptance of the Contract Terms. General statements, such as that the bidder reserves the right to negotiate the terms and conditions, may be considered non-responsive.

The State may conduct an on-site visit to tour and inspect the bidder’s facilities; require an oral presentation of the bidder's proposal; conduct interviews, research, reference checks, and background checks; and request additional price concessions at any point during the evaluation process.

II. Evaluation Method Responses to this solicitation were reviewed by the Solicitation Manager in collaboration with a DNR Subject Matter Expert which consisted of the following individuals:

Evaluators

Lisa Crozier-Green Solicitation Manager DNR Procurement Services

Vernon Richardson, Wildlife Technician DNR Wildlife Division

III. Evaluation Results A. Highland Forestry and Food Plots

Proposal was satisfactory and no deficiencies were noted.

B. Green Pastures Wildlife Food Plots

Proposal was mostly satisfactory however the following deficiencies were noted:

Vendor Questions Worksheet Current Vendor Questions Worksheet was not submitted. Responses were provided on a prior form.

No response was provided for gross annual sales for the last 5 years.

No response was provided for partnerships and strategic relationships that would add significant value.

No response was provided for physical address / place of business / primary responsibility for account.

Proposal did not include a response regarding prior State of Michigan contracts, but did reference relevant experience.

Schedule A – Statement of Work Proposal did not utilize Schedule A – Statement of Work – REVISED 7/2/2019. (No points deducted) Proposal did not include the make and model of disk, fertilizer spreader, seed spreader or cultipacker.

Proposal did not indicate agreement with Section 1.0, General Requirements.

C. Kill Zone Food Plots`

Proposal was mostly satisfactory however the following deficiencies were noted:

Vendor Questions Worksheet No response was provided for gross annual sales for the last 5 years. (New business, no points deducted).

Proposal states a contract award will not increase gross revenue more than 25% from last year’s sales. No annual sales reported therefore award would certainly increase gross revenue more than 25%.

No response was provided for partnerships and strategic relationships that would add significant value.

No response was provided for physical address / place of business / primary responsibility for account.

Proposal did not include any relevant experience.

Schedule A – Statement of Work Proposal did not include the make and model of disk, fertilizer spreader, seed spreader or cultipacker.

IV. Technical Evaluation Summary

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

VI. Second Round Pricing Summary

VII. Award Recommendation:

After reviewing Second Round Pricing, award recommendation is made to the responsive and responsible Bidder who offers the lowest price to the State of Michigan. Low price is determined by the Bidder who meets the requirements and offers the lowest overall price as demonstrated by its proposal. Award Recommendation is a split award to the following vendors, in the following amounts:

Highland Forestry and Food Plots: Units 1 and 2, $19,425.00 Green Pastures: Unit 2, $3,580.50 image1.jpeg