C250202_PP_02-19-26.docx
DOCX document 48 KB Posted
- Attached to
- OC Bus Customer Satisfaction Survey
- Solicitation number
- 250202
- Issued by
- Orange County, California
About this file
This is an interoffice procurement plan memorandum from the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) dated February 19, 2026, regarding RFP 250202 for an OC Bus Customer Satisfaction Survey. The procurement seeks qualified consultants to develop, conduct, analyze, and report on a comprehensive customer satisfaction survey for OC Bus services. The contract is structured as a firm fixed-price engagement with a one-year term and no renewal options specified. The RFP evaluation will be based on four weighted criteria: Qualifications of the Firm (30%), Staffing and Project Organization (20%), Work Plan (25%), and Cost (25%). The procurement plan indicates that an RFP format is appropriate given the requirement to evaluate multiple factors beyond price, particularly the need for demonstrated expertise in creating and conducting both qualitative and quantitative research related to transportation and public policy issues.
The project budget is $150,000 with local funding and no prevailing wage, liquidated damages, or Measure M requirements applicable. An independent cost estimate has been received, and requisition R001352 has been secured. The proposed evaluation committee includes Ryan Maloney as Section Manager for Marketing and Customer Service, Christina Perez from Human Resources, and Kevin Khouri from Transit Service Planning, with a requirement for evaluation committee training completion. The procurement plan notes that no Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) goal applies to this solicitation. Both the Project Manager and the Department Manager for Contracts and Procurement must provide concurrence before the RFP can proceed.
View the file
Other files
Show all 21
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
INTEROFFICE MEMO
Procurement Plan, RFP 250202
Date: February 19, 2026
To: Ryan Maloney, Section Manager, Marketing and Customer Service
From: Rhea Aninzo, Contract Administrator, CAMM
Subject: PROCUREMENT PLAN – RFP 250202 “OC Bus Customer Satisfaction Survey”
Please review the procurement plan for the subject RFP and advise on your concurrence with the evaluation criteria and contract elements. Include suggested evaluation team members and/or comments.
Procurement Type: |X| RFP |_| IFB
Justification (explain the rationale for using the particular procurement type):
An RFP is applicable as the procurement requires evaluation criteria, in addition to price, to be used to select a firm to provide grants administration consultant support services.
Evaluation Criteria:
| PROPOSAL |
| WEIGHT |
| Qualifications of the Firm |
| 30% |
| Staffing/Project Organization |
| 20% |
| Work Plan |
| 25% |
| Cost |
| 25% |
Justification:
Qualifications of the firm is weighted the highest at thirty percent (30%) as firms must have a demonstrated track record in creating, organizing, conducting, analyzing, and reporting both qualitative and quantitative research related to transportation and regional and local public policy issues. Staffing and project organization is weighted at twenty percent (20%) a to ensure the proposed team has demonstrated experience in quantitative research, sampling methodology, and survey development and administration. Work plan is weighted twenty percent (20%) as the firm’s proposed approach should clearly demonstrate how it will successfully complete the scope of work. Cost and price is weighted at twenty-five percent (25%) to ensure OCTA receives the best value for the services.
Contract Type: |_| Time & Expense |_| CTO-Based |X| Firm Fixed Price
Justification (Explain the rationale for using the particular contract type):
The contract type is firm-fixed price as the RFP has a specific Scope of Work detailing individual tasks.
| Retention: |
| |_| Yes |
| % |
| |X| No |
| |_| N/A |
| Prevailing Wages: |
| |_| Yes |
| $ |
| |_| No |
| |X| N/A |
| Liquidated Damages: |
| |_| Yes |
| $ |
| |_| No |
| |X| N/A |
P.M. to provide support documentation identifying how the LD amount was established.
Procurement Schedule: |X| Attached
Suggested Evaluation Team Members:
Internal Evaluators:
Ryan Maloney, Section Manager, Marketing and Customer Service Christina Perez, Senior Employee Relations Representative, Human Resources Comment by Rhea Aninzo: Will need to complete eval committee training. Will let her know to contact Marjorie.
Kevin Khouri, Transportation Analyst, Transit Service Planning
Contract Term: (Include Option Years)
One (1)-year term
Funding Source: |X| Local |_| Measure M |_| Federal
Dollar Amount: $150,000
Independent Cost Estimate Received: |X| Yes |_| No
Requisition Received: |X| Yes #R001352 |_| No
DBE Goal: |_| Yes |X| No
Project Manager Concurrence:
| _______________________________________________ | ______________ | |
| Ryan Maloney, Section Manager, Marketing and Customer Service | Date |
CAMM Section/Department Manager Concurrence:
| ___________________________________________ | ______________ | |
| Georgia Martinez, Department Manager, Contracts and Procurement | Date |
Revised: 07/20/2010 Revised: 0720/2010 image1.png
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .