C250014_PP-APPROVED.pdf

Revised: 05/09/2018

INTEROFFICE MEMO

Date: October 13, 2025

To: Alicia Yang, Senior Project Manager, Transportation Modeling

From: Iris Deneau, Section Manager, Procurement, CAMM

Subject: PROCUREMENT PLAN – RFP 250014 “Harbor Boulevard

Transit Signal Priority Deployment”

Please review the procurement plan for the subject RFP 250014 and advise your concurrence with the evaluation criteria and contract elements. Include suggested evaluation team members and/or comments.

Procurement Type: RFP IFB

Justification (explain the rationale for using the particular procurement type):

A Request for Proposals (RFP) is issued as the nature of the procurement demands that an evaluation criteria, in addition to price, be issued to select a firm to deliver the Harbor Boulevard Transit Signal Priority (TSP) Deployment.

Evaluation Criteria:

PROPOSAL WEIGHT

Qualifications of the Firm 20%

Staffing/Project Organization 25%

Work Plan 30%

Cost 25%

Justification:

Several factors were considered in developing the evaluation criteria weightings. Qualifications of the firm is weighted at 20 percent as the firm must demonstrate experience with TSP, signal infrastructure needs, and performance measures of a similar scope and scale. Staffing and project organization is weighted at 25 percent as the firm must demonstrate the level of expertise, resource availability, and involvement for the roles of the proposed project team. The work plan is weighted at 30 percent as the firm’s proposed technology solution must be able to meet the functional and technical requirements and challenges of a corridor with multiple stakeholders operating varying signal systems. Cost and price is weighted at 25 percent to ensure that OCTA receives value for the services provided.

Procurement Plan – RFP 250014

Contract Type: Time & Expense CTO-Based Firm-Fixed Price

Justification (Explain the rationale for using the particular contract type):

The contract type is firm-fixed price because the RFP has a specific Scope of Work detailing specific tasks and deliverables.

Retention: Yes 10% No N/A

Prevailing Wages: Yes $ No N/A

Liquidated Damages: Yes $ No N/A

P.M. to provide support documentation identifying how the LD amount was established.

Procurement Schedule: Attached

Suggested Evaluation Team Members:

5 members are required over $500k

Internal Evaluators:

Iris Deneau, Section Manager, Procurement

Alicia Yang, Senior Project Manager, Transportation Modeling

Timothy Lee, Senior Section Manager, Information Systems

Charles Main, Section Manager, Transit Service Planning

External Evaluators:

Cesar Rodriguez, Senior Civil Engineer, City of Santa Ana

Michael Plotnik, City Traffic Engineer, City of Fullerton

Jane Keely, Principal Traffic Engineer, City of Anaheim

Contract Term: (Include Option Years) Five-and-a-half-year term

Funding Source: State (REAP 2.0)

Procurement Plan – RFP 250014

Dollar Amount: Term $2,349,000

Independent Cost Estimate Received: Yes No

Requisition Received: Yes #R000462 No

DBE Goal: Yes No

Project Manager Concurrence:

Alicia Yang, Section Manager, Transportation Modeling Date

CAMM Section/Department Manager Concurrence:

Georgia Martinez, Department Manager, Contracts and Procurement Date

10/13/2025