Captive Financial Award Recommendation and Evaluation Synopsis.docx

DOCX document 77 KB Posted

Attached to
Notice of Intent to Award for RFP #260000002069
Solicitation number
NIA1 651 260000000721 1
Issued by
Michigan

About this file

This is a Notice of Intent to Award and Evaluation Synopsis issued by the Michigan Department of Insurance and Financial Services (DIFS) for Request for Proposal #260000002069 concerning captive insurance company financial examination services. The RFP was posted on SIGMA VSS on May 21, 2026, with a proposal submission deadline of June 22, 2026. Three bidders submitted proposals: INS Regulatory Insurance Services, Inc., Noble Consulting Services, Inc., and Taylor and Mulder, Inc. The contract term is three years with up to three 2-year renewal options. The evaluation was conducted by a team consisting of David Piner (Manager, DIFS Office of Insurance Evaluation), Dennis Dawis (Captive Specialist, DIFS Office of Insurance Evaluation), and Darcie Payne (Purchasing Specialist, DIFS Office of Financial and Administrative Services). Bidders were evaluated on four technical criteria: requirements, project plan and delivery, organizational chart and pricing, and vendor questions, each weighted at 25 points.

INS Regulatory Insurance Services, Inc. and Noble Consulting Services, Inc. both achieved perfect technical evaluation scores of 100 points and met the minimum threshold of 80 points required for pricing evaluation. Taylor and Mulder, Inc. scored 50 points and was deemed non-responsive due to critical deficiencies, specifically the lack of certified public accountants on staff as required by the Statement of Work. Awards totaling $300,000.00 each are recommended to INS Regulatory Insurance Services, Inc. and Noble Consulting Services, Inc., pending State Administrative Board approval. INS Regulatory Insurance Services, Inc. proposed hourly rates ranging from $147.00 to $180.00 for various staff roles, while Noble Consulting Services, Inc. proposed rates from $120.00 to $300.00 depending on position and specialization. Neither recommended bidder qualified as a Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Business or Geographically Disadvantaged Business Enterprise.

View the file

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

Michigan.gov/MiProcurement

Michigan.gov/MiProcurement

AWARD RECOMMENDATION

Notice of Intent to Award Number: 260000000721
Notice of Intent to Award Date: 8/4/2026

The Department of Insurance and Financial Services has completed the evaluation of Request for Proposal 260000002069 Captive Insurance Company Financial Examinations and has recommended an award to INS Regulatory Insurance Services, Inc., in the amount of $300,000.00, and Noble Consulting Services, Inc., in the amount of $300,000.00, 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:

Darcie Payne, Solicitation Manager payned3@michigan.gov 517-930-9402 Background Information:

This Request for Proposal (RFP) was to solicit responses to establish a pre-qualification pool of Contractors to provide captive insurance company financial examination services. The term of this contract is three years, with up to three 2-year renewal options.

Bidders:

The RFP was posted on SIGMA VSS on 5/21/26. The following bidders submitted proposals by the published due date of 6/22/26.

Bidder
Address, City, State, Zip Code
SDVOB*
GDBE**
INS Regulatory Insurance Services, Inc.
100 Crescent Court, Suite 7005, Dallas TX 75201
No
No
Noble Consulting Services, Inc.
211 N. Pennsylvania Street, Suite 2350, Indianapolis IN 46204
No
No
Taylor and Mulder, Inc.
10508 Rivers Bend L, Potomac MD 20854
No
No

*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 could 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 The State will evaluate each proposal based on the following criteria:

Technical Evaluation Criteria
Weight
Requirements – Schedule A, Statement of Work, Number 1-3
25
Project Plan, Delivery, Reporting – Schedule A, Statement of Work, Numbers 4-12 and Key Personnel attachment
25
Organizational Chart, Pricing, Invoicing – Schedule A, Statement of Work, Numbers 13 - 26
25
Vendor Questions Worksheet
25
Total:
100

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

If applicable, the State will also consider whether you qualify as a Qualified Disabled Veteran/Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Business (QDV/SDVOB) under MCL - Section 18.1261 - Michigan Legislature. For more information, visit DTMB - Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Business Preference.

You are strongly encouraged to accept the State’s Contract Terms and Schedules as written. The State may consider your proposal non-responsive if you do not accept these terms.

If you propose changes to the Contract Terms or Schedules, you must:

· Submit them using track changes (i.e., visible edits), and

· Include a clear explanation for each proposed change. Utilize the comment feature in Word.

If you do not include tracked changes and explanations, the State will assume you accept the Contract Terms or Schedules as-is. General statements, such as reserving the right to negotiate terms, may also be considered non-responsive.

· Changes suggested only in the comments and not demonstrated in track changes format may be considered non-responsive for failure to follow directions.

The State may disqualify you if you fail to respond to requests for clarification or negotiation during the evaluation process by the deadline set by the Solicitation Manager.

At any point during the evaluation, the State may, but is not required to:

· Conduct an on-site visit to inspect your facilities

· Request an oral presentation of your proposal

· Conduct interviews, reference checks or background checks

· Request additional price concessions

· Conduct refinement sessions to ensure clarity and alignment with requirements The full evaluation process is stated in the RFP Proposal Instructions.

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

David Piner, Manager DIFS, Office of Insurance Evaluation

Dennis Dawis, Captive Specialist DIFS, Office of Insurance Evaluation

Darcie Payne, Purchasing Specialist DIFS, Office of Financial and Administrative Services III. Evaluation Results Bidder #1 INS Regulatory Insurance Services, Inc.

The evaluation team determined that INS Regulatory Insurance Services, Inc., based on a score of 100, met the requirements of this RFP. This determination was accomplished by evaluating their response to the Technical Evaluation Criteria.

1. Schedule A, Statement of Work, Number 1-3 The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory.

2. Schedule A, Statement of Work, Numbers 4-12 and Key Personnel The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory.

3. Schedule A, Statement of Work, Number 13-26 The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory.

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

Total Score: 100 /100

Bidder #2 Noble Consulting Services, Inc.

The evaluation team determined that Noble Consulting Services, Inc., based on a score of 100, met the requirements of this RFP. This determination was accomplished by evaluating their response to the Technical Evaluation Criteria.

1. Schedule A, Statement of Work, Number 1-3 The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory.

2. Schedule A, Statement of Work, Numbers 4-12 and Key Personnel The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory.

3. Schedule A, Statement of Work, Number 13-26 The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory.

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

Total Score: 100 /100

Bidder #3 Taylor and Mulder, Inc.

The evaluation team determined that Taylor and Mulder, Inc., based on a score of 50, did not meet the requirements of this RFP. This determination was accomplished by evaluating their response to the Technical Evaluation Criteria.

1. Schedule A, Statement of Work, Number 1-3 The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory.

2. Schedule A, Statement of Work, Numbers 4-12 and Key Personnel The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory, but the following deficiencies were noted:

Schedule A, Statement of Work #11 Key Personnel, no CPA’s on staff. Per Schedule A, Statement of Work, Section C, #7. Assign staff who are certified public accountants familiar with Michigan captive insurance laws, regulations, administrative rules and bulletins supervising the examination.

3. Schedule A, Statement of Work, Number 13-26 The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory, but the following deficiencies were noted:

Schedule A, Statement of Work, #13 Organizational Chart, lists no CPA’s. Per Schedule A, Statement of Work, Section C, #7. Assign staff who are certified public accountants familiar with Michigan captive insurance laws, regulations, administrative rules and bulletins supervising the examination.

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

Total Score: 50 /100

IV. Technical Evaluation Summary

Selection Criteria
INS Regulatory Insurance Services, Inc.
Noble Consulting Services, Inc.
Taylor and Mulder, Inc.
1
Requirements – Schedule A, Statement of Work, Number 1-3
25
25
25
2
Project Plan, Delivery, Reporting – Schedule A, Statement of Work, Numbers 4-12 and Key Personnel attachment
25
25
0
3
Organizational Chart, Pricing, Invoicing – Schedule A, Statement of Work, Numbers 13 - 26
25
25
0
4
Vendor Questions Worksheet
25
25
25
Total
100
100
50

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

INS Regulatory Insurance Services, Inc.

Staff/Role (list all who will be included)
Hourly Rate

Supervisor, CPA/CFE (minimal hours anticipated) $175.00

Captive Subject Matter Expert, CPA/CFE (minimal hours anticipated)
$175.00

**Examiner in Charge, CPA/CFE (on-site travel required) $180.00

**Staff Examiner (on-site travel required) $170.00

**Examiner in Charge, CPA/CFE (no on-site travel) $165.00

**Staff Examiner (no on-site travel) $147.00

Noble Consulting Services, Inc.

Staff/Role (list all who will be included)
Hourly Rate
Supervisor (Rick Nelson, Megan Hubbuch)
$175.00
Examiner In-Charge (Barry Armstrong, Juli-Kay Baumann, Emilie Brady, Matthew Jones, Pete Landoll, Carl Richard, Brian Sewell, Joanne Smith, Julie Smith, Kim Stevens)
$160.00
Senior Staff Examiner (Tom Cunningham, Joseph Devries, Charlie Kreske, David Habony, Shelby Lambert, Grant Myers)
$130.00
Staff Examiner (Brent Bostic, David McCauley)
$120.00
Information Technology Specialist (Stefan Obereichholz-Bangert, Michael Nadeau)
$175.00
Actuarial Specialist (Mark Alberts, Rebecca Freitag, Maria Burns, Melissa Greiner)
$250.00
Investment Specialist (Eric Del Monaco)
$300.00

VI. 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.

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 INS Regulatory Insurance Services, Inc., in the amount of $300,000.00, and Noble Consulting Services, Inc., in the amount of $300,000.00.

Version 2024-2 image1.png

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .